The URL can be used to link to this page

Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Report STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT IMPLEMENTING PORTIOI�IS OF TWO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY's Txatt,Rou•rES: � STEVENS CREEK TRAIL�ROUTE S-2� AND JUAN BAUTISTA DE ANZA NAT'IONAL HISTORIC TRA[L �ROUTE R-ZA� PREPARED BY: JANA SOKALE, E NVIRONMENTAL PLANNER Fox: CTTY OF CUPERTINO : PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT SANTA CLARA COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT � IN CONJUNCI'ION WiTH THE STEVENS CREEK TRAIL TASIf FORCE �--� r`�./ / � � � ,.._%� 1�� .-- f � � - ---�. �� J ' - ' f/ � ��~�' : '� i � '' . � . � �� ' .�, � i �; � �� . --_ � ,1 �:, ? � .f 4 � j�� _; � �, ` , y _ - � `� _'��.��'' ,� = u �� ----'�e�'�L. ��. �� _ � -� ��yy� • Ac.. � �� . y �� ,1�// ' _' � �.r. ��'.�i� r �,�.. � � . I�� - � �..a. �'4✓Yr� �. SG� �i��u"�...-�� . . / ��W � N " .�_--•� • � 4 � • � y � J w-�T -ti� �� ¢ � 1 .f�-u-' ,.-�-•. _�. . r-�3 .. s� s Aie. � i i STEVENS CREEK TRAIL . FEASIBILITY REPORT IMPLEMENTING PORTIONS OF TWO OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY's TxAtr.Rou�s: STEVENS CREEK TRAIL�ROUTE S-2� AND JUAN BAUTTSTA DE ANZA NAT'IONAL HISTORIC TRAIL�ROUTE R-IA� ACCEPTED BY: CUPERTINO CTTY COUNCIL SEr�'E�BER 23, 2002 SANTA CLARA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DECENtsER 17, 2002 Prepared by: Jana Sokale, Environmental Planner For: City of Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department In conjunction with the Stevens Creek Trail Task Force CONSULTANT TEAM LEAD CONSULTANT Jana Sokale, Principal Environmental Planner Newark, California SUBCONSULTANTS Cotton Shires and Associates Geotechnical Consultants Los Gatos, California Pat Shires, PrincipalGeotechnical Engineer Ted Sayre, Supervising Engineering Geologist David Schrier, Senior Engineering Geologist Hill Associates Landscape Architecture and Plannin� Los Gatos, California Bruce Hill, Principal Landscape Architect Dominic Lopez, Project Landscape Architect Glenn Lyles Trails Specialist Los Gatos, California Lynne Trulio, Ph.D. Wetland and Wildlife Ecologisi Mountain View, California Strick*Land*Design Landscape Architecture Mountain View, California Kathryn Strickland, Principal Landsca}�e Architeci ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT Thomas Reid Associates Environmental Consultants Palo Alto, California Thomas Reid, Principal in Charge Christine Schneider, Project Manager/Senior Associate Janet Cochrane, Senior Associate STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to all who participa�d in the preparation of this Feasibility Report. The study was cornpleted under the direction of the Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department and under the guidance of the Stevens Creek Trail Task Force. The members of the Task Force donated countless hours to learning about the trail aiignments and gathering input from the community. Thanks to the members of the community whose comments helped to shape the trail alignments. f . - x` �- � . -, . : . . -� ' j ' ��. �y }.�� 3 �'�e.�,� ��x��F�Y��+�+aL'��.��?�� '3' rL*.�� : �.: . ..; .,_ . _ , -. _ � ., r, - �� . ., s � David Greenstein, Chair, Cupertino Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Craig Breon,Vice-Chair, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society Jeanne Bradford, Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission Susie Brain, Friends of Stevens Creek Trail John Buenz, Meadows Home Owners Association Ann Cleaver, Meadows Home Owners Association Dave Constant, Cupertino Swim & Racquet Club John Giovanola, Hanson Permanente Cement Mary Jo Gunderson, Linda Vista Neighborhood Scott Hathaway, Deep Cliff Golf Course Steve Haze, Cupertino Historical Society Beez Jones, Stevens Canyon Homeowners John Kolski, Stevens Creek Quarry Richard Lowenthal, Cupertino City Council Chuck Noble, Scenic Circle Homeowners - � CTTY OF CUPER'i'IN� STA�F . David Knapp, City Manager Michael O'Dowd, Project Manager and Blackbeny Farm Supervisor Marie Preston, Administrative Secretary, Parks and Recreation Department Therese Smith, Director, Parks and Recreation Department STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS � ' ` � s ��N��f�O��IL �� ; - ; _ . E, s.�;� , , - . > ._ :.. � ._, ;.. �_ , _ . ��. . _,. Richard Lowenthal,Mayor Michael S. Chang, Ph.D.,Vice-Mayor Sandra james Patrick S. Kwok Dolly Sandoval 1 .. : ,-- . - .. ,, . . . CUP'ER`�1�3 PA�C-��ND.RECRE�iTION�.�OI�MYSSIbN Roger Peng, Chairperson Jeanne Bradford, Vice-Chairperson Rod Brown Frank Jelinch Kris Wang = � : ��. Ct��ARD UF SI��RVI5(,�,RS . : .. � � , . � _ .. ��,.. . : . , � Donald F. Gage, Chairperson, District 1 Blanca Alvarado, District 2 james T. Beall jr., District 4 Liz Kniss, District 5 Pete McHugh, District 3 SANTA CLARA COUNTY:P�IRICS AND RECREATIOI� COMMISSION Fadi Saba, Chairperson Larry Ames Patricia Ciesla jim Foran Robert Levy Gurdev S.Sandhu John Redding STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................ i CHAPT'ER 1 - PURPOSE AND BENEFITS ..................................... 1 Regional Setting Planning Pracess Feasibility Study Goals Methodology Significance and Benefits Inclusion in Regional Plans Recreation Benefits Transportatio n Benefits Environmental Benefits CHAPTER 2 - FEASIBILI'I'Y CRITERIA ....................................... 15 Land Availability Habitat Sensitivity Roadway and Creek Crossings On-Street Connectors CHAP'I'ER 3 - FEATURES OF THE TRAIL .................................... 23 Off-street Trails On-Street Bicycle Facilities Engineered Structures Underpasses Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridges At-Grade Street crossings Points of Interest Destination Points Access Points Staging Areas Interpredve Stations CHAPTER 4 - T`RAIL ALIGNMENT ........................................... 27 STUDY AREA A .................................................................... ZH RANCHOSAN ANTONIO COUNTY PARK TO STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD Location, Land Use and Ownership Cultural History Creek Character, Plant Communities and Animal Life Points of Interest Site Analysis Findings Trail Aligrunent Access Points Staging Areas Interpretive Stations Habitat Enhancement Opportunities STUDY AREA B .............................................................. 46 STEVENS CREEK COUNTY PARK TO LINDA VISTA PARK Location, Land Use and Ownership Cultural History STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Creek Character, Plant Communities and Animal Life Points of Interest Site Analysis Findings Trail Aligtunent � Access Points Staging Areas Interpretive Stations Rejected Alternatives Habitat Enhancement Opportunities STUDYAREA C ............................................................. C72 LINDA VISTA PARK THROUGH MCCLELLAN RANCH TOBLACKBERRY FARM Location, Land Use and Ownership Cultural History Creek Character,Plant CommuniHes and Animal Life Points of Interest Site Analysis Findings Trail Aligrunent Access Points Staging Areas Interpretive Stations Rejected Alternatives Habitat Enhancement Opportunities SruDY AxEA D ........................................................... 88 MCCLELLAN RANCH THROUGHBLACI�ERRY FARM TO STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD Location, Land Use and Ownership Cultural History Creek Character, Plant Communities and Animal Life� Points of Interest Site Analysis Findings Trail Alignment Access Points Staging Areas Interpretive Stations Rejected Alternatives Rejected Petition Alignments Rejected Blackberry Farm Entrance Alignment Habitat Enhancement Opportunities BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................... 113 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDICES .................................................................. 117 Appendix A-Summary of Community Meetings Appendix B-Cupertino Community Congress Summary Report Appendix C-Assessment of Biological Opportunities and Constraints Appendix D- Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation Appendix E-Trail Funding Sources Appendix F-Trail Maintenance and Operations Report Appendix G-Ecological Restoration and Enhancement Report Appendix H -Request to Study Alternative Alignments in Study Area D MAPS Map 1 -Regional Setting Map ....................................................... 3 Map 2-Stevens Cxeek Trail Study Areas ........................................ 9 Map 3-Stevens Cxeek Trail Alignment Map (not in this edition) Map 4-Study Area Habitat Map ................................................. 19 Map 5-Study Area A Trail Alignment-Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard ............................ 35 Map 6-Study Area B Trail Alignment-Stevens Creek County Park to Linda V ista Park ................................................. 53 Map 7-Study Area C Trail Alignment-Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm ..................... 67 Map 8-Study Area C- Linda Vista Park Trail Alignment ................. 71 Map 9-Study Area C- Haul Road Alignment with Boardwalk Cross-Section ............................................................... 73 Map 10-Study Area D Trail Alignment-McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard ......... 95 Map 11 -Study Area D-Blackberry Farm Trail Alignment with Depressed Pathway and Tunnel Crossings........................ 105 Map 12-Study Area D-Blackberry Farm Park Entrance with Central Kiosk and Trail .........................................----... 111 I LLUSTRATIONS Illustration 1 -Stevens Creek Boulevard Trail Crossing at Phar Lap Drive .................................................. 97 Illustration 2-Stockimeir Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge at the 8`�Tee...... 107 FIGURES Figure 1 -Stevens Cxeek Trail Task Force Feasibility Study Goals......... 7 Figure 2 -Santa Clara County Trail Definitions....................... ...... 17 Figure 3 -Points of Interest in Study Area A..................................... 32 Figure 4-Summary of Study Area A Trail Improvements.................... 39 Figure 5 - Points of Interest in Study Area B............................ . ...... 50 Figure 6-Summary of Study Area B Trail Improvements..................... 52 Figure 7 - Points of interest in Study Area C...................................... 65 Figure 8-Summary of Study Area C Trail Improvements..................... 76 Figure 9 - Points of Interest in Study Area D..................................... 90 Figure 10-Summary of Study Area D Trail Improvements................... 101 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 EXECUTIVE S MMARY U . STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Feasibility Report evaluates the Stevens Creek corridor from Stevens Creek County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard and the open space lands adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park to determine the feasibility of constructing pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian trails through these parklands. The Feasibility Report analyzes the benefits of the proposed trail alignments to the community and details the feasible routes. The criteria established for evaluating the trail routes, land availability,habitat sensitivity, roadway crossings and on-street connecfiions, are highlighted.The report also identifies rejected trail alternatives. The project area was divided into four study areas to facilitate the planning process and future trail development. The study areas vary by size, topography and ownership or jurisdiction.Study Areas A and D are linked via bicycle lanes and sidewalks on Stevens Creek Boulevard. The four study areas include: Study Area A Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard Study Area B Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park Study Area C Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm Study Area D McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard This study concluded that 7.70 miles of off-street trails and on-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities could be developed within the four study areas. An all weather, multi-use trail is proposed to approximately parallel Stevens Creek for 3.30 miles.A variety of trail types totaling 3.15 miles are proposed to serve equestrians, hikers and bicyclists through the open space lands near Rancho San Antonio County Park. These two trail areas would be connected using bicycle lanes and the associated sidewalks on city streets for 1.25 miles. These on-street segments link together the trail system to provide a total of 7.70 miles off-street and on-street routes. The trail system will also link Rancho San Antonio County Park with Stevens Creek County Park. The trail system includes one underpass beneath McClellan Road, two at- gxade street crossings on Stevens Creek Boulevard, one pedestrian/bicycle bridge spanning Stevens Creek and one crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The McClellan Road underpass will likely be subject to temporary closures during significant winter storm events. This report also identifies trail access points, staging areas and interpretive stations in each of the study areas. The trails proposed in Study Area A have been reviewed under the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Thomas Reid STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Associates, environmental consultants, prepared the environmental documents for publicreview. The environmental review for Study Areas B, C and D will be prepared under separate cover at a future date. In the process of conducting the feasibility study, the City of Cupertino indicated their intent to prepare a master plan for all of the publicly owned open space lands along the Stevens Creek corridor. As a result, the trail alignment will be integrated into this comprehensive master plan and evaluated through the environmental documentation prepared for this project. �UMMAR� QF '�`A�IL T�FE� A1�I3 1V�ILEA�E SUMMARIES BY STUDY AREA TRAIL SUMMARY Study Area A Miles Trail Types Miles ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path 1.50 All Weather Multi-Use Path 3.25 ♦Soft Surface Hiking and 1.65 Soft Surface Multi-Use Trail 0.25 and Horseback Riding Soft Surface Hiking and 1.65 ♦On-Street Bicycle Lanes .�5 and Horseback Riding Subtotal 3.90 Soft Surface Single Track 1.30 Hiking and Mountain Biking Study Area B On-Street Bicycle Lanes 5 Total Trail Miles 7.70 i►Soft Surface Single Track 1.30 Hiking and Mountain Bikin€ i Soft Surface Multi-Use Trail Q 75 Subtotal 1.55 Study Area C ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path 1.00 Subtotal 1.00 Study Area D ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path � Subtotal 0.75 PAGE ii STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Feasibility Report consists four chapters. An introductory page precedes each chapter to summarize the content. Chapter 1 -Purpose and Benefits provides an introduction to the trail setting, discusses the feasibility study goals and planing process and details the significance and benefits of trail to the community. Chapter 2- Feasibility Criteria describes the methodology and criteria used to evaluate the feasibility of developing trails throughout the study areas. Land availability, habitat sensitivity, roadway crossings and on-street connector routes were reviewed to determine the opportunities and constraints to trail development. Chapter 3 - Features of the Trail describes the terms used throughout the report to describe the trail alignments. The terms describe the various types of trails, on-street bicycle facilities, engineered structures and points of in#erest. Chapter 4-Trail Alignment contains detailed descriptions of the Study Area trail alignments. Maps, cross-sections and drawings are provided to illustrate the design concepts. This chapter also identifies the proposed trail access points, staging areas and interpretive stations. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE iv STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT C HAPTER 1 PURP4S E � AND BENEFITS STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the trail setting, discusses the feasibility study goals and planning process and details the significance and benefits of the trail to the community. The study areas reviewed in this feasibility report include the open space and parklands along Stevens Creek from Stevens Creek County Park to Stevens Cxeek Boulevard in Cupertino. It also includes the open space lands adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park. The North Fork of Permanente Creek flows through this parkland. The trails proposed in this report could be constructed approximately parallel to the Stevens Creek for 3.30 miles and extend through open space lands near Rancho San Antonio County Park for 3.15 miles. These two trail areas would be connected using bicycle lanes and the associated sidewalks on city streets for 1.25 miles. These on-street segments link together the trail system to provide a total of 7.70 miles off-street and on-street routes. Feasibility study goals were established to guide the trail planning process and selection of the trail alignments. The trails are intended to integrate with the natural environment and provided recreation and alternative transportation benefits to residents, schoolchildren and local employees. The development of the trail is also intended to provide an opportunity to enhance the creek corridor as habitat for wildlife and as a scenic open space for trail users. The trail alignment is to be located on public or quasi-public lands wherever possible and coordinated with all relevant jurisdictions. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 1 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS REGIONAL SETTING Stevens Creek is a spring fed perennial stream that flows northeast from the Santa Cruz Mountains to San Francisco Bay through the aities of Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Los Altos and Mountain View. The area evaluated in this feasibility report includes the open space and parklands along Stevens Creek from Stevens Creek County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino. It also includes the open space lands adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park in Cupertino (See Map 1 - Regional Setting Map). Stevens Creek was first identified as a regional recreation asset more than 30 years ago and was included in the Regional Parks, Trails and Scenic Highways Element of the Santa Clara County General Plan. Today, the Stevens Creek corridor is identified as a sub-regional trail route (Route S-2) in the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan and significant portions of the trail have been developed by the City of Mountain View, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Conceptual plans for the Stevens Creek Trail were first defined in a 1980 report commissioned by the City of Mountain View, Santa Clara Valley Water District and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space I}istrict. T`he 1980 report, "Stevens Creek: A Plan of Opportunities," highlighted the corridor as a regional open space and recreation area and proposed that a bicycle and pedestrian trail be developed adjacent to the creek (The Planning Collaborative, 1980). This report stressed the importance of preserving the natural creek corridor while allowing recreational access to the open space land along the creek. Environmental restoration of the creek corridor, including the reintroduction of the steelhead fishery, was proposed in this original report. Only those recreational uses that would integrate with the natural environment of Stevens Creek were recommended. Walking, jogging, bicycling, fishing and nature explorafiion were defined as appropriate passive recreational uses of the creek corridor. The inclusion of the creek corridor in the Santa Clara County General Plan and the preparation of subsequent planning documents encouraged the cities and park and open space districts to include the Stevens Creek corridor and trail in their planning documents. The 1964, 1972 and 1993 Cupertino General Plans have supported the acquisition of the lands adjacent to Stevens Creek to preserve the flood plain as open space and to develop a formal urban trail along the creek corridor. In keeping with this long-range vision the City of Cupertino purchased McClellan Ranch, Blackberry Farm and Golf Course, the Simms property and the Stocklmeir property between 1972 and 1999. As a further step toward developing the trail and restoring the creek corridor, the City of Cupertino commissioned this study to explore the feasibility of constructing a pedestrian and bicycle trail along Stevens Creek. PAGE 2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT C�TY OF �U�ERT�N� - STEVENS CREEK TRA� L - P P1 I PREPARED BY: IANA SOKALE, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING HILL ASSOCIATES , ��#�� , � _ ��, . � =: ��=.-. CU RTIN� ;� - � _� %� �;�� , .� � � .:� ,��,:-�==�� ,i ��.-----.�-�-�-� `�-�..��: _ �" : �� :_._�... � _ � � � � �.�� \ ; / ��!\�� r' , ^ � � � �^\ ' � \ n� � � �. � � � � ` ,� � � 8� � �� n n � � n � /� � � � � n � � � � � � � � � � � � NORTH � PURPOSE AND BENEFITS PLANNING PROCESS The trail feasibility study began in 2000 with technical evaluations of various . site conditions. These feasibility investigations induded assessments of the biological resources and the geotechnical and engineering constraints associated with the streambanks and roadway crossings. T'he results of these technical studies are applied throughout this report and the complete assessments are included in the appendix to this report. In the fall of 2000, a Task Force was recruited to assist with the planning process. The Stevens Creek Trail Task Force was to provide input on the feasibility study, gather public comments on the trail alignment alternatives and review the draft of the trail feasibility report. The Task Force was comprised of residents living along the route, trail user groups, environmental organizations and elected and appointed officials. The Stevens Creek Trail Task Force began meeting in 2001 and has worked directly with City staff and the consultant team. The Task Force has been responsible for gathering public comment on the trail routes through a series of community meetings. The information supplied by the consultants, reviewed by the Task Force and refined through comments made by community members provide the basis for the trail alignments described in this report. A total of 28 meetings have been held with the neighborhood associations, the Stevens Creek Trail Task Force, Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission, County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Commission, Cupertino City Council and the County Board of Supervisors to gather feedback on the trail routes (See Appendix A - Summary of Community Meetings). In addition, numerous technical meetings were also held with regulatory agencies, adjacent landowners and individual stakeholders. The feasibility study is the first step in the trail plaruling process. Study Area A, the open space land adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park, will be jointly developed under the direction by the City of Cupertino and the County of Santa Clara. In Study Area A, the next steps in trail planning will be the preparation of construction documents and search for construction funding. The development of the construction documents will provide opportunities for the public to comment on the design aspects of the equestrian,hiking and bicycle trails proposed for this area. Study Area B, the privately owned closed quarry site, will proceed through the private development process at the initiation of the owner. Trail planning in this area must be coordinated with future development. Opportunities for public involvement will be provided through the review of the development proposal and environmental impact report. The findings of the feasibility study for Study Areas C and D, the stream corridor, will be used in the forthcoming Blackberry Farm Master Plan. In the process of conducting the feasibility study, the City of Cupertino indicated STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 5 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS the intent to prepare a master plan for all of the publicly owned open space lands along the Stevens Creek corridor. As a result, trail feasibilifiy findings will provide significant background documentation for this comprehensive master plan. Two small phases of the master plan process have been undertaken. Cupertino held 8 focus workshops to gather community input in the subject matter to include in the master plan. A telephone survey o# Cupertino residents has also been undertaken to gather community sentiment about the open space lands along the creek. This statistically significant survey will also help to guide the scope of work for the master plan. The entire master plan process will provide opportunities for public input. Ultimately, the Blackberry Farm Master Plan will be evaluated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). All of these planning and environmental review efforts will provide ample opportunity for public involvement in shaping the future of the Stevens Creek corridor. FEASIBILITY STUDY GOALS T'he Stevens Creek Trail Task Force established feasibility study goals that guided the trail planning process and seiection of the trail alignments. The Task Force desired to develop trail routes that integrated with the natural environment and provided recreational and alternative transportation benefits to residents, schoolchildren and local employees. The development of the trails is intended to proceed concurrently with the enhancement of the creek corridor as habitat for wildlife and as a scenic open space for trail users. The feasibility study goals included coordination with all jurisdictions and encouraged public participation in the planning process. As a result, the trail alignments have been presented to many audiences and continue to be evaluated during the public review of the feasibility report and associated environmental documents (See Figure 1 - Feasibility Study Goals). PAGE 6 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PURPOSE AND BENEFITS _ - - - - �.��a - �` s °v �*�,�b 't` ,-s � .�-•s,� ��_ � a "��a�- -. s, � � ��1��i��#r T�:, ��_.��-�u�� ,�� - ^s � �.��`�`n.'��.� � � �,�..; �r- r 4? �s'a,.r' »€ ..f �, ��`��rb'j 4 ;} ::l � �.� i A ..C�'-+�e� Y$r _: £ �I ��+� �i.n,� }, ,g�... ..� .,^' ,� .�,is",F .s.2' �a� .0� 'F 1 � �.sc..,. _ i Preserve and restore the natural environment of the creek corridor for the enjoyment of trail users and as habitat for wildlife. ♦ Engage the community in as many ways as possible throughout the planning, design, construction and operation of the trail. ♦ Identify trail alignment alternatives, staging areas and access points that minimize encroachment on private property. ♦ Provide a trail route through Cupertino to help realize the vision of a San Francisco Bay to Pacific Ocean Trail. ♦ Provide a safe and secure trail that is easy to maintain. # Provide a firail alignment along the to the creek corridor that provides opportunities for passive recreational use and alternative transportation. � Plan,design, construct,operate and publicize the trail as a component of Cupertino's identity. ♦ Make the first reach of the trail a success. ♦ Design a trail alignment that integrates as many public facilities (schools, parks, transportation systems and open space preserves,etc.) as possible. ♦ Idenfiify and preserve historical and cultural resources found along the creek. ♦ Maximize linkages to other trail systems and trail segments. f Encourage educational uses of the creek corridor. ♦ Develop a trail alignment that coordinates the concerns and needs of all public agencies with jurisdiction along Stevens Creek. ♦ Identify a trail alignment that maximizes year-round use. Figure 1 -Feasibility Study Goals METHODOLOGY Background information pertinent to the study areas was reviewed in an effort to become familiar with the projects and processes that created the existing opportunities and constraints posed along Stevens Creek and the associated open space and park lands. Significant time was spent direcdy observing field conditions. Site visits were conducted to verify corridor STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 7 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS feasibility and gather additional data needed to define study areas. During the fieldwork, information was gathered on opportunities including connectivity to the on-street bicycle and pedestrian system, adjacent points of interest and access the bus system. Constraints to trail development including land availability, roadway crossings, environmental factors and institutional issues were analyzed. Preliminary alignment alternatives were identified and presented to the agencies with jurisdiction along creek and over the adjacent lands. Engineering solutions to constrained areas of the corridor were further evaluated and brought forward for discussion with impacted agencies including Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department, Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Deparhnent, Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Union Pacific Railroad. The project area was divided into four study areas to facilitate the planning process and future trail development. The study areas vary by size, topography and ownership or jurisdiction (See Map 2 - Stevens Creek Trail Study Areas Map). The four study areas include Study Area A from Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard, Study Area B from Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park, Study Area C from Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm and Study Area D from McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard. Study Areas A and D are linked via bicycle lanes and sidewalks on Stevens Creek Boulevard. SIGNIFICANCE AND BENEFITS In May 2002, the City of Cupertino held a Community Congress to gather public input on potential policy directions and strategies to be evaluated in the update of the General Plan. The results of the Community Congress are an expression of the community's long-range vision for Cupertino. The Community Congress was attended by nearly 200 participants. "Walk-Ability, Bike-Ability & Trails" was a top issue for residents with 89% in strong agreement/agreement with creating trails along creeks to provide pedestrian and bicycle trail access. Residents voted 92% in strong agreement/agreement with balancing the mobility of the auto with the safe movement of pedestrians and bicyclists. Development of the Stevens Creek Trail provides one strategy for achieving these goals (See Appendix B - Cupertino Community Congress Summary Report). The Stevens Creek Trail will provide a local recreational amenity and will enhance walking and bicycling. The trail connects Cupertino neighborhoods to three city parks, two county parks, three schools and several bus routes. The trail will link Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek County Park. The trail will provide an off-street location for bicycling, walking, jogging and horseback riding. The Stevens Creek Trail will also provide access to downtown Monta Vista via Stevens Creek Boulevard. PAGE 8 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT l' �� PURPOSE AND BENEFITS INCLUSION IN REGIONAL PLANS The Stevens Creek Trail is included in the Environmental Resources Element of the 1993 Cupertino General Plan. The firail also supports Cifiy Council goals for enhanaing walkability throughout the community. The trail will implement elements of the 1998 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan and 2001 Cupertino Pedestrian Transportation Plan. The Stevens Creek Trail was first identified as a streamside corridor of regional significance more than 30 years ago and was included in the Parks, Trails and Scenic Highways Element of the Santa Clara County General Plan. This creek has more recently been considered a stream corridor of importance and is identified as a sub-regional trail in the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan. The entire length of the Stevens Creek Trail is considered a sub-regional trail (Route S-2). The Stevens Creek Trail is recognized regionally by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) as a connector trail to the San Francisco Bay Trail Plan (ABAG, 1989). The inclusion of the Stevens Creek Trail in many regional and local plans further points to its significance as a recreation and alternative transportation corridor and as an open space resource for Cupertino. RECREATION BENEFITS By far, the most significant contribution of the Stevens Creek Trail to the Cupertino community will be the recreation benefits afforded by the trail. The Stevens Creek Trail offers both regional and local recreation benefits. Cupertino residents will benefit from improved pedestrian and bicycle access to parks and open spaces and new opportunities to walk and bicycle to work and school along the creek corridor. The trail will provide a walkable and bikeable route to two Santa Clara County parks and two Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District preserves. The trail will provide a convenient location for fitness activities and for meeting neighbors. The open space land adjacent to the creek will offer opportunities for viewing the native riparian habitat and associated wildlife. CONNECTIONS TO REGIONAL TRAILS AND PARKS The Stevens Creek Trail is identified in the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan. The trail connects to the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail in Cupertino. T'he Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail was placed on the National Trail System Map in 1996. This federally recognized historic trail commemorates the 1775-1776 expedition led by Juan Bautista de Anza, which established an overland route for the Spanish. The route extends through two states and today includes both bicycling and hiking trails and an autoroute. Juan Bautista de Anza's expedition camped in STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 11 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS Cupertino and first sighted San Francisco Bay from the prominent knoll adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park A (Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail Comprehensive Management and Use P1an, 1996). CONNECTIONS TO CITY PARKS,RECREATION FACILTTIES AND ATTRACTIONS Locally, the Stevens Creek Trail will provide children and families with direct access to three city parks, two golf courses and the Cupertino Swim and Racquet Club (private membership facility) located along the oreek corridor. Currently, these sites are accessed primarily by automobile. The trail will provide access to McClellan Ranch and the community garden, environmental education, Rolling Hills 4-H and other programs offered at this historic ranch. The family picnic and pool facilities provided at Blackbeny Farm will be easily reached from the trail. Residents will be able to walk to Deep Cliff Golf Course and Blackberry Farm Golf Course. Members of the Cupertino Swim and Racquet Club may use the firail as an extension of the recreational amenities offered by this private recreation center. TRANSPORTATION BENEFITS The Stevens Creek Trail will enhance walkability and expand the alternative transportation opportunities for residents. Intermodal commute opportunities will be created through connections to the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus routes. All VTA buses are now equipped with bicycle racks. 'I�is will facilitate bus-bike trips to and from work and school. The Stevens Creek Trail will connect to two VTA bus routes. The bus lines that connect with the Stevens Creek Trail in Cupertino include routes 23 and 53 located on Stevens Creek Boulevard. ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFTTS T'he environmental conditions along Stevens Creek will be enhanced by the development of the trail. The trail project provides an opportunity to restore habitat resources and decrease the dependency on the automobile as a primary form of local transportation. The construction of the trail will include the installation of native plants to increase the habitat available for wildlife and to create an inviting place in which to recreate and commute on foot and by bicycle. ENHANCEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES T'he riparian and wetland habitat along Stevens Creek can be enhanced for wildlife and human visitors. Specific suggestions for habitat enhancement are PAGE 12 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PURPOSE AND BENEFITS included in Appendix B - Biological Assessment Report and Appendix F - Ecological Restoration and Enhancement Report. The trail project may also inspire residents, local employees and government staff to work together to build a trail and install native shrubs and trees on all lands that lie directly adjacent to the creek. The addition of indigenous flora would enhance the integrity of the creek corridor and support the riparian habitat. All trail construction prajects will include a habitat enhancement component that includes native plant landscaping, irrigation, maintenance and monitoring to ensure that the goal of enhancing the creek corridor is being achieved simultaneously with the development of the trail. IMPROVED AIR QUALTTY Motor vehicles axe responsible for the roughly 75% of the in the Bay Area. Walking and bicycling transportation trips eliminate auto tailpipe and evaporative emissions, gasoline pumping or oil refining releases and produce zero carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases that contribute to the global warming problem. The development of the trail may encourage more individuals to walk and bicycle to work sites, schools and shops. The creekside section of the Stevens Creek Trail extends approximately 1.75 miles from Linda Vista Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard. Even this short section of trail may eliminate auto trips. According to the 1990 National Personal Transportation Survey, 40% of all trips are two miles or less, and two-thirds are five miles or less. Bicycles are a convenient means of transportation for these short and medium distance trips. Short motor vehicle trips are a significant source of emissions due to the "cold start" problem. There is a higher rate of emissions during the first few miles of driving because the catalytic converter does not function well when tirst started. Even the short creekside section of the Stevens Creek Trail will help to eliminate auto trips by providing a convenient route for students traveling to Monta Vista High School, Kennedy Junior High and Lincoln Elementary School. It will also provide a scenic route for accessing the bus lines that run along Stevens Creek Boulevard and provide service to DeAnza College, employment centers and retail districts. The connection to the bus lines will facilitate intermodal commuting to those sites located a greater distance from the creek corridor. Elimination of even short auto trips (dropping the children at school, picking up the mail, getting milk at the local grocery store) through the use of the trail and/or bus system will help to improve air quality. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) suggests that the construcfiion of an efficient bicycle and pedestrian circulation system can decrease the dependence on the automobile by 2%. The development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities is often recommended as one strategy to mitigate the air quality impacts of large-scale development projects (BAAQMD, 1996). An efficient bicycle and pedestrian system includes sidewalks and Class I, II and III routes. The system also includes bicycle STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 13 PURPOSE AND BENEFITS sensors to active traffic signals, shade trees and amenities to increase the efficiency and appeal of bicycling and walking. The Stevens Creek Trail will provide these capital improvements. An effective alternative transportation system must also be supported by on- site facilities for commuters that indude bicycle racks or lockers, shower facilities, route maps and repair equipment. These on-site support facilities must be constructed in conjunction with private developments and should be required by Cupertino through the building pernut process. Development of a trail network, on-street bicycle system with on-site support facilities and pedestrian oriented developments will enhance walkablity and sustainability in Cupertino. PAGE 14 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT H PTER 2 C .� : _ :FEA IBILITY R ERIA: S C IT STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 FEASIBILITY CRITERIA This chapter describes the methodology and criteria used to evaluate the feasibility of developing trails throughout the study areas. Land availability, habitat sensitivity, roadway crossings and on-street connector routes were reviewed to determine the opportunities and constraints to trail development. The results of this site analysis was then used to develop the trail alignments described in Chapter 4. Land availability explored property ownership and land use and compared this information to the land needed to construct a trail. The amount of land necessary to develop a trail was based upon various trail design guidelines and the operations and maintenance requirements of the Santa Clara Valley Water District. The guidelines used to deterntine adequate trail width included the California Department of Transportation - Highway Design Manual (Caltrans, 1997) and the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan-Design and Management Guidelines (Santa Clara County, 1995). The habitat sensitivity of the creek corridors was evaluated through field surveys and a review of the Federal and State listed species that have the potential to occur in the area. The type and quality of the habitats along the creek corridor are summarized in this chapter and fully detailed in Appendix B: Biological Assessment Report. The potential to construct in-channel underpasses at McClellan Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard was assessed. In-channel underpasses allow the firail alignment to be grade-separated from roadway automobile traffic. The crossing alternatives evaluated at these two roadways are summarized in this chapter and detailed in Appendix C- Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation. An underpass at McClellan Road was retained for further evaluation. The grade- separated crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard was eliminated due to environmental impacts, limited land availability and neighborhood opposition. In areas where the trail could not be aligned along the creek due to lack of land availability, sensitive habitat, constrained roadway crossings or other factors, an on-street alignment is proposed to connect segments of the trail. The criteria for evaluating on-street routes are explained in the chapter. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 15 FEASIBILITY CRITERIA LAND AVAILABILITY The intent of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing the Stevens Creek Trail on existing public lands or on lands that are subject to discretionary development approvals. The land along Stevens Creek is primarily owned by the City of Cupertino. Other public or quasi-public agencies control additional parcels of land along the creek corridor. These agencies include Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department, Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department, San Jose Water Company and Union Pacific Railroad. In general, the trail alignments are proposed within these public and quasi-public lands. In Study Area A trails are proposed on private property that was subject to development agreement. This agreement required the dedicafiion of land for open space preservation and public trail access. These lands are soon to transfer ownership to the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department. In Sfiudy Area B and C trails are proposed on private property subject to future development approvals. Trails through this property have been included in the Cupertino General Plan since 1993. Trail design guidelines were reviewed to determine if sufficient public land existed to accommodate construction of the trails. Guidelines established by the California Department of Transportation and the County of Santa Clara were used to determine the land availability requirement. Caltrans defines three types of trail facilities each with specific trail dimensions. Class I Bike Paths are located off-street and Class II Bike Lanes and Class III Bike Routes are located within the roadway right of way. A Class I Bicycle Pathway serves the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicyclists and is defined as a right-of- way completely separated from motor vehicle street and highway traffic (Caltrans, Highway Design Manual: Chapter 1000, 1997). The minimum trail width for a Class I Bicycle Pathway is 8 feet with minimum 2-foot shoulders on each side of the trail. The Stevens Creek Trail is included in the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan. This plan also includes three definitions of trail types. They include regional, sub-regional and connector trails. These definitions specify the purposes served by the various trail types. The Stevens Creek Trail (Route S-2) is considered a sub-regional trail that will serve shared uses. T'he streamside setting can accommodate walking, bicycling, in-line skating, wheeling and strolling (See Figure 2). Santa Clara County's Trail Easement Dedication Policies and Practices usually require a 25-foot wide easement to accommodate firail development in the urban service areas (Santa Clara County, 1992). The 25-foot wide easement is intended to include the trail tread, shoulders, privacy setback and habitat enhancements or landscaping. This easement width would be necessary when designing for a multi-use path. PAGE 16 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT FEASIBILITY CRITERIA �: '�.a .i,. �.�c':��` -. s'X��` � �; �`�`+ �- �� v� ..%h��i'�� m '�, �_ . _ �x .G -�� <�" �'s� < ,*'sr :� ` .r � -. �£r��, � y - � . 3 �:: �h � �� -'�� ` -�.: �s �+��` r� �: ��a. ��.�� =.�`��'��'�i�� _ � - _ � `"�� :�-��'�`��_s '�..��,T,'"�`'" .�.'' v . ..�r` Regional Trail Routes are those trails of National, State or regional recreation significance. In all cases, Regional trail routes extend beyond the borders of Santa Qara Counfiy. Regional Trails are generally envisioned as shared-use trail routes in that they would accommodate a variety of trail users. In some instances, where topography and other physical constraints dictate, separate trails along the same general trail route may be needed to accommodate different users. Sub-Regional Trail Routes are those that in some way: ♦ Provide regional recreation and transportation benefits such as providing key links for accessing rail stations,bus routes or park-and-ride facilities; ♦ Provide for continuity between cities;generally crossing a city or passing through more than one city;or ♦ Provide convenient long-distance trail loop opportunities by directly linking two or more Regional Trail to create an urban trail network. Connector Trail Routes are those that: ♦ Form convenient means of access and linkages from urban areas, developed areas, and public lands within the county to the primary trail network of Regional and Sub-Regional Trails. Figure 2-1995 Santa Clara Countyuride Trails Master�'lan Definitions Trail Design Guidelines are included as an appendix to the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan. These guidelines suggest that "trail tread widths should be determined by the amount and intensity of trail use and field conditions such as topography, vegetation and sensa�tivity of environmental resources." Several of the Trail Design Guidelines have appiication for evaluating the feasibility of the Stevens Creek Trail in Cupertino. Trail Design Guidelines G-2 through G-5 were used to evaluate trail conditions. Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-2 - Shared Use Trail - Paved Tread Double Track recommends that a trail serving multiple uses meet an optimum width of 12 feet and provide a hard paved surface to accommodate this multi-use. In situations where uses are limited tread width is narrowed. Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-3 - Shared Use Trail - Natural Tread Double Track recommends that a soft-surface trails serving multiple uses meet an optimum width of 12 feet. In situations where uses are limited STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 17 FEASIBILITY CRITERIA tread width is narrowed. Guidelines G2 and G-3 are intended for multi-use paths, which could include horseback riding, bicycling, walking, in-line skating,jogging and other uses on a single trail. Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-4 - Single Track Trail - Natural Tread recommends a trail surface of native material with a 6-foot trail width. Finally, Counfiywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-5 - Single-Use Trails - Nafixral Tread for Hikers recommends a trail surface of native material with a 3-foot trail width for single use trails. In all instances, these recommendafiions are simply guidelines for trail development. They have been applied throughout this study as a screen for evaluafiing trail feasibility in Study Areas A through D. Although these guidelines establish very specific tread width and surfacing types, they do not set a standard for Cupertino trails. They are simply one gage for evaluating the feasibility of trail development. Ulfiimately, Cupertino's firails must be designed to accommodate the intended trail use and intensity planned for each study area. In addition Caltrans and Santa Clara County design recommendations, the Santa Clara Valley Water District maintains guidelines for maintenance access through the creek corridors. T'hese guidelines recommend a minimum 20 to 22 foot clearance for maintenance vehicle movement along the creek channel. These guidelines are important because in many areas both trail users and maintenance vehicles would likely travel the same pathway. HABITAT SENSITIVITY A biological assessment was conducted in the spring of 2000 and 2001 to evaluate the habitat sensitivity and the presence of species of concern throughout the study areas. This biological assessment identified biological constraints to trail development and highlighted potential ecological restoration opportunities early on in the planning process. The bioassessment included the evaluation of existing environmental reports and biological information already collected in the study areas, as well as, the field surveys conducted specifically for this trail feasibility investigation. The field surveys were conducted to deternune the location of sensitive habitats and the presence of species of concern. Nine distinct habitat types were found in the four study areas (See Map 4 - Study Area Habitat Map). They include riparian vegetation, freshwater wetlands, in-stream habitat, oak woodland/grassland, oak woodland/chaparral, open grassland, orchard, golf course and parks and suburban development. Of these habitat types, riparian vegetation, freshwater wetlands, in-stream habitat and oak woodland systems are considered sensitive habitats by the resource agencies, either because they support rare species or because the habitats are protected by law (See Appendix C-Assessment of Biological Opportunities and Constraints). PAGE 18 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT ' t zti- � � ` . � FEASIBILITY CRITERIA Rare species documented or expected to occur in the project area include the western pond turtle, red-legged frog, steelhead trout,birds of prey,valley oak and blue oak. The most important biological constraints to the trail alignment revolve around these rare species and habitats. The recommendations provided in the biological assessment report are designed to avoid impacts to natural resources and minimize the need for environmental permits. ROADWAY AND CREEK CROSSINGS McClellan Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard roadway bridges span Stevens Creek in the project area. Each bridge was individually investigated to determine the feasibility of providing a grade-separated crossing that maintained an uninterrupted trail alignment adjacent to the stream corridor. An underpass at McClellan Road was retained for further evaluation. The grade-separated crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard was eliminated due to environmental impacts, limited land availability and neighborhood opposition. In addition, five pedestrian/bicycle bridges were evaluated in the Blackberry Farm area. These bridges were proposed to span the creek as part of the east and west bank trail alignment alternatives under consideration. The five locations were investigated for feasibility and conceptual designs were proposed. Only one of these bridges is retained for further consideration. This bridge links Blackberry Farm to the Stocklmeir property. The grade-separated crossing alternatives evaluated at the two roadways and the pedesfirian/bicycle bridge sites are detailed in Appendix D - Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation. 'The crossings retained for further consideration are described in Chapter 4-Trail Alignment. ON-STREET CONNECTORS An assessment of on-street alignments was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of linking isolated segments of the trail via city streets. These on- street connectors offer a continuous linear transportation route. This feasibility study reviewed several on-street alternatives and recommended specific city streets to close the gaps between segments of the trail. Several criteria were applied to evaluate the on-street connectors. The ability to provide a continuous and reasonably direct route between the segments of the trail was of utrnost importance. The number of directional movements and turns required to navigate the on-street alignment were kept to a minimum to make the route simple to follow. Ease in returning to the creek corridor and open space lands from city streets was viewed as an important criteria for encouraging the public to find and use the on-street facilities. The varying level of bicycle riding ability of those individuals STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 21 FEASIBILITY CRITERIA attracted to trail facilities was considered in the route recommendations. Streets that accommodate beginner bicyclists were preferred. Finally, convenience and safety were evaluated at all intersections. Roads with right of way that nunimized the need to stop were selected over those routes that were frequently interrupted by stop signs. Major intersections were evaluated for signal lights or the probability of installing new lights which might be required to accommodate the additional pedestrian and bicyde use. PAGE 22 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT � HAPTER 3 . C FEATURES O F THE TRAIL STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 FEATURES OF THE TRAIL Several terms are used throughout the Stevens Creek Trail Feasibility Report The terms describe the various types of trails, on-street bicycle facilities, engineered structures and points of interest. The types of trails vary with the opportunities and constraints posed by the creek corridor and the adjacent landscapes. Combinations of off-street and on-street facilities are proposed for the Stevens Creek Trail. Engineered structures are the unprovements proposed to provide access across the creek and a pathway grade-separated from the roadways and rail lines. Points of interest include destination points, access points, staging areas and interpretive stations. These trail terms are defined below. OFF-STREET TRAILS Three types of off-street trails have been proposed along the Stevens Creek corridor and through the parklands. Each trail type has been selected to best meet the opportunities and constraints posed by the existing conditions, adjacent land uses and pedestrian and bicycle circulation system. Specific surfacing material choices can be determined during design of the trail. Hard Surface Trails are intended to serve multiple uses by providing a sfable, firm and slip-resistant surface. Surfacing materials include concrete, asphalt, and crushed stones or native soil with binders. These trails provide a sufficiently smooth surface to accommodate street bicycles, in-line skates and strollers. These trails may be considered by Caltrans to be Class I - Bicycle Pathways which serve the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicyclists and are defined as a right-of-way completely separated from motor vehicle street and highway traffic (Caltrans, Highway Design Manual: Chapter 1000, 1997). In most areas, the trail corridor meets the minimum requirement of an &foot wide trail with 2-foot wide shoulders to accommodate a Class I bicycle pathway. This trail type is also is described in the Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G2 - Shared Use Trail - Paved Tread Double Track. The guidelines recommend that a trail serving multiple uses meet an optimum width of 12 feet (Santa Clara County, 1995). In situations with limited uses or less intensity of use iread width is narrowed. Soft Surface Trails are intended to serve multiple uses by providing a stable surface on natural soil conditions. These trails have a more rural character. The natural soil conditions can typically accommodate equestrians, hikers and off-road bicycles. All soft-surface multi-use trails will be developed in accordance with Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-3 - Shared Use Trail - Natural Tread Double Track. T'he guidelines recommend that a trail serving multiple uses meet an optimum width of 12 feet (Santa Clara County, 1995). In situations with limited uses or less intensity of use tread width is narrowed. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 23 FEATURES OF THE TRAIL Single-Track Trails are intended to serve several funcfiions. In sensifiive habitats or interpretive areas single-track trails may be used to rrLn' i�e impact and to change the character of the trail experience. All soft-surface single use trails will be developed in accordance with Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-4 — Single Track Trail — Natural Tread. The trail surface will be of native material with a 6-foot trail width. All interpretive trails will be developed in accordance with Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-5—Single-Use Trails—Natural Tread for Hikers. The trail surface will be of native material with a 3-foot trail width (Santa Clara County, 1995). Surfacing materials include native soil, bark chips, crushed shells, decomposed granite, etc. Surfacing materials should reflect the surroundings and enhance the interpretive experience. Single-track trails may also be designated in steep mountainous terrain. In these instances, the single-track trails are used to provide access in difficult areas and �r� i�e the impact of erosion. Single-track trails frequently serve limited uses. ON-STREET BICYCLE FACILITIES Three types of on-street facilities have been proposed as components of the Stevens Creek Trail. These on-street facilities connect discontinuous segments of the creek corridor and open space lands. On-Street Bicycle Lanes, in conjunction with sidewalks, are used in areas to route the trail around constrained segments of the creek corridor. Caltrans Design Guidelines state that a Class II - Bicycle Lane provides a 6-foot wide striped lane adjacent to motor vehide traffic lanes. The trail alignment takes advantage of some existing bicycle lanes and proposes new bicycle lanes to connect portions of the sfireamside trail. On-Street Bicycle Routes,in conjunction with sidewalks, are used as a part of the trail alignment. Caltrans Design Guidelines state that a C1ass III - Bicycle Route is shared by motorist and bicyclists. A street can be designated a bicycle route if the roadway meets minimum width requirements. The trail alignment takes advantage of some existing bicycle routes to connect portions of the streamside trail. Expanded Sidewalks are proposed in a few limited areas to provide connection from the creek corridor to the roadway system and bus lines. These facilities provide access to controlled intersections. These improvements call for the expansion of existing sidewalks to a minimum 10- foot width to accommodate two-way bicycle and pedestrian traffic. PAGE 24 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT FEATURES OF THE TRAIL ENGINEERED STRUCT'URES Engineered firail improvements include underpasses, pedestrian bridges and at-grade street crossings. Several structures have been proposed throughout the trail alignment. In most cases, these engineered improvements retrofit existing roadway bridges and provide an opportunity for human scale transportation. This need is frequently overlooked when designing infrastruch�re for the automobile. Underpasses extend along the creek bank and cross beneath the roadways. In some instances, the underpasses follow existing Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) maintenance access roads. The underpasses retrofit existing roadway bridges to provide grade-separated trail crossings. T'he only underpass retained for consideration with the Stevens Creek Trail is located at McClellan Road. Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridges are proposed to provide connections across the creek corridor. Pedestrian/bicycle bridges are intended to be of equal width to the trail and to completely span the creek without need for an in-channel support. This fiype of a structure is referred to as a clear span bridge. These bridges can also be designed to accommodate vehicle loading should a particularly inaccessible area of the trail require regular maintenance or patrol. A single pedestrian/bicycle bridge is proposed within Blackberry Farm to connect the park to the Stocklmeir property. At-Grade Street Crossings are proposed along the on-street segments of the firail, the Class II - Bicycle Lanes and Class III - Bicycle Routes. Four at-grade street crossings are proposed as a result of limiting conditions within the creek corridor that force the trail onto city streets. The at-grade street crossings are proposed at controlled intersections or require modifications to those intersections that do not currently meet these criteria. The at-grade street crossings retained for consideration are located at McClellan Road near McClellan Ranch, Stevens Creek Boulevard at Phar Lap Drive, Stevens Creek Boulevard at Foothill Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard at Cristo Rey Drive. POINTS OF INTEREST Points of interest include destination points, access points, staging areas and interpretive stations. These features are indicated on the trail alignment maps. Destination points are communifiy activity centers to which trail users may be traveling. Access points are locations that provide a direct connection to the trail system. Staging areas are developed sites along the trail that provide complete trailhead facilities including parking. Interpretive stations are scenic and/or educational overlooks of natural habitats and historical feafiures. These sites are intended to enhance the experience and enjoyment of the trail. To prevent unauthorized vehicle access to the trail from any of these points of STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 25 FEATURES OF THE TRAIL interest,bollards and contxolled access gates will be placed at transition zones between public road right-of-ways and the Stevens Creek Trail, as necessary. Destination Points include employment centers, retail districts, bus stops, educational campuses and recreational facilities. These activity centers are generally located directly along the trail or within a short distance from the trail. Those that are located a short distance from the creek corridor are idenfiified on the trail alignment maps if they can be easily reached on bicycle or on foot from the trail. Access Points provide a direct connection to the trail from employment centers, neighborhoods, recreational facilities and the public transportation and roadway systems. Access points are improved and may include bicycle/pedesfirian bridges, ramps, short segments of trail, gates,bollards and signage. Access points are intended to accommodate trail users wishing to reach the firail by bicycle and on foot. Access points are identified at specific locations to minimize cross traffic and provide safe access to the trail. Staging Areas are planned to accommodate those who wish to drive to a trailhead. A staging area provides access to the trail, automobile parking and trail amenities such as restrooms, drinking fountains, signage, etc. Many of the staging areas for the Stevens Creek Trail are located at existing parks situated along the trail route. Interpretive Stations are trailside enhancements that provide opporfiunities to experience scenic vistas, observe flora and fauna, reflect on local history and illustrate hydraulic, geologic or biological phenomena. These stations include benches, overlooks, interpretive signs and other elements that assist the visitor in experiencing and understanding the natural world and significant historical events and lifestyles. PAGB 26 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT : CH.A.PTER 4 . . TI��.AIL ALI E T GNM N STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 TRAIL ALIGNMENT This chapter describes the 7.70 miles of off-street trails and on-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities that link Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek County Park. The proposed trails would be constructed approximately parallel to the Stevens Creek for 3.30 miles and extend through open space lands near Rancho San Antonio County Park for 3.15 miles. These two trail areas would be connected using bicycle lanes and the associated sidewalks on city streets for 1.25 miles. These on-street segments link together the trail system to provide a total of 7.70 miles off-sfireet and on-street routes. The trail system includes one underpass beneath McClellan Road, two at- grade street crossings on Stevens Creek Boulevard, one pedestrian/bicycle bridge spanning Stevens Creek and one crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The McC:lellan Road underpass will likely be subject to temporary closures during significant winter storm events. The project area was divided into four study areas to facilitate the planiung process and future trail development. T'he study areas vary by size, topography and ownership or jurisdiction. Study Areas A and D are linked via bicycle lanes and sidewalks on Stevens Creek Boulevard (See Map 2 - Stevens Creek Trail Study Areas Map). The four study areas include: Study Area A Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard Study Area B Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park Study Area C Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm Study Area D McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard This chapter contains detailed descriptions of each of the study areas. Maps, cross-sections and drawings are provided to illustrate the design concepts. This chapter also identifies the proposed trail access points, staging areas and interpretive stations within each of the study areas. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 27 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A STUDY AREA A RANCHO SAN ANTONIO COUNTY PARK TO STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD LOCATION, LAND USE AND OWNERSHIP Study Area A encompasses approximately 130 acres of the land currently owned by the Diocese of San Jose. These lands will be transferred to Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Departrnent under the terms of the 1998 . Oak Valley Development Agreement between the City of Cupertino and the O'Brien Group and the 1998 Agreement for Exchange of Property and Easements between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino, the O'Brien Group and the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Jose. The Development Agreement was prepared as mitigation for the Oak Valley Development. The land dedication is for open space purposes and trail development. The land will be transferred to Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department in 2002. The site is bordered by Cristo Rey Drive to the north, the Union Paafic Railroad and Pacific Gas and Electric Company substation to the east and south and Rancho San Antonio County Park to the west. Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department owns a small, 2.83-acre parcel of land located between the Union Pacific Railroad line and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The soon-to-be-acquired parkland encircles a portion of the Oak Valley Residential Development and the Gate of Heaven Cemetery. The historic Hammond-Snyder Home that is owned by the Cupertino Historical Society is located directly adjacent to the new parklands to the west. The site connects to the 165 acres of parkland and 2,135 acres of open space that are respectively owned by Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD). MROSD manages the entire 2,300 acres of trails and other recreational features under a ten-year management agreement with Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department dated July 1, 2000. MROSD will also assume management of 4.8 acres of the 130 acres of new parkland under the terms of the management agreement. This acreage is comprised of three small parcels situated within the existing park and open space lands. The first parcel is situated to the north of The Forum at the end of St. Joseph Avenue near Highway 280. The second parcel is a small parking area at the entrance to the lower Oak Valley development near The Forum. The final parcel is the open space directly adjacent to the upper parking lot at Rancho San Antonio County Park. An existing trail extends through this site to connect the two parking lots. Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Depar�ment will assume management of the remaining 125.2 acres of parkland. The City of Cupertino will enter into an agreement with the County to operate a staging area within this acreage in the vicinity of Stevens Creek Boulevard. PAGE 28 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A CULTURAL HISTORY The Ohlone Indians lived in the Rancho San Antoruo area for over 3,000 years prior to the arrivai of the Europeans. A large village, known as Partacsi, was located in this general area. An expediti.on led by Colonel Juan Bautista de Anza passed through this area in March of 1776. Study Area A is on the overland route taken by the Juan Bautista de Anza expedition. The prominent knoll located within the new parklands is the site of the expedition's first view of the estuary of San Francisco. It was sighted the morning of March 26, 1776 after the expedition departed its 93� encampment on their journey up the peninsula toward San Francisco. Outstanding views of San Francisco Bay and Santa Clara Valley can still be seen today firom this knoll. The entixe route of the Anza expedition from Arizona to California is to be implemented by the National Park Service as a national historic trail. The trail was also one of 16 distinguished by the White House as a National Millennium Trail in 2000. Mission Santa Clara de Asis was founded in October 1776. Many of the Ohlone people were taken to this mission. In 1822, Mexico became independent and the Secularization Act stripped the missions of their holdings. After 1833, land grants were given mainly to army veterans and many ranchos were established. The chief commercial products of the ranchos were cattle hides and tallow. Rancho San Antonio was granted by Governor Alvarado to Juan Prado Mesa in 1839. This 4,440-acre rancho was bounded by Adobe Creek to the north, Stevens Creek to the south and included Permanente Creek. Mesa had been a soldier at the San Francisco Presidio since 1828, served as a corporal in the Santa Clara Guard and had won fame as a soldier and Indian fighter. Mesa died in 1845. California became part of the United States in 1848 and all land grants issued by the Mexican government became subject to review under U.S. law. In 1853, William Dana, a former seafarer and merchant, purchased the Rancho. During this time the original Mexican Land Grants were challenged and six persons laid claim to the Rancho. Two of the claims were patented by the United States in 1857, with Dana retaining 3,542 acres. In 1861, John and Martha Snyder purchased 850 acres of the original Rancho San Antonio lands along Permanente Creek. The Snyder's grain crop of 1862 was the first raised in this area of Santa Clara County without irrigation and was so successful that it inspired others. The Snyder's had about 500 acres under cultivation, including a 16-acre vineyard with a large winery and 25 acres in orchard. John Snyder, born in 1828 in Indiana, arrived in Santa Clara County in 1850 where he was employed on local farms. In 1855 he married Martha Kifer. John Snyder died in 1901 and his wife continued to live on the ranch until her death in 1919. John Snyder built a home on the property for his daughter Martha Bell Snyder. She married the local schoolteacher Dr. W. H. Hammond. The Hammond-Snyder home was built along the banks of the STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 29 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A North Fork of Permanente Creek in 1881. It is now owned by the Cupertino Historical Society and restoration plans are in the works. In 1923, the Catholic Church purchased the Snyder Ranch and in 1926 constructed Saint Joseph's Seminary and Maryknoll Senlinary. St. Joseph's was badly damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and was subsequently demolished. The Maryknoll Seminary, with its oriental motif, stands to the east of Rancho San Antonio County Park across Cristo Rey Drive. The Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Departrnent purch.ased 130 acres in 1977 and another 35 acres in 1981 from St. Joseph's Seminary. In the 1990's the Senunary sold additional parcels that were developed as The Forum, a 400-unit residential senior retirement community and as Oak Valley, a 183-homesite residential neighborhood. CREEK CHARACTER, PLANT COMMUNTTIES AND ANIMAL LIFE A number of plant communities and wildlife habitats exist in Study Area A. Habitat types include open grassland, blue oak woodland interspersed with grassland, freshwater wetland with seeps, willow-dominated riparian vegetation, and suburban development (See Map 4 - Study Area Habitat Map). Rare, sensitive or listed species known to occur in the area include red-legged frog, Loggerhead Shrike, Merlin, blue oak and valley oak. Rare or protected species potentially existing in the area include the western pond turtle, Burrowing Owl and other birds of prey. The annual grassland has been heavily grazed for decades and much of the area is covered by non-native species. Typical non-native grasses include wild oat (Avena spp.) brome (Bromus spp.) and ryegrass (Lolium spp.). Several native grassland species can be observed easily amidst the annual grasses. 'I`hese plants include fiddleneck (Amsinckia spp.), soap plant (Chlvrogalum pomeridianum.), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), lupine species (Lupinus spp.), and blue-eyed grass (Stsyrinchium bellum). Grassland rodents, such as voles, mice and gophers are prevalent, providing a large prey base for a wide variety of raptors. Red-tailed hawks, kestrels, white-tailed kites, and sharp-shinned hawks are easily seen hunting over the grasslands. Great- horned owls, screech owls, and merlin have also been observed in the area. Oak woodland is also a significant habitat in this study area. Blue oaks (Quercus douglassii) dominate the grasslands on the hillsides and down the drainages. Coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and some valley oaks (Quercus lobata) are also found in the area. These trees are keystone species in the habitat. They are essential for supporting many other organisms. Deer and acorn woodpeckers are just two species found in the area that depend on oaks. Three ponded, freshwater wetlands and the associated drainages exist on- site: one on the north side of the study area below Cristo Rey Drive, one on PAGE 30 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A the east side between Rancho San Antonio County Park and the Gate of Heaven Cemetery, and one on the south side near the Whispering Creek Stables paddock area. Each wetland has emergent freshwater vegeta�ion including cattails (Typha spp.) and rushes (Juncus spp.). The wetland zone just south of Cristo Rey Drive is fed by two drainages with wetlands species present in each tributary. This wetland zone is fed by seeps and provides continuous ponding to support the red-legged frog. Riparian vegetation, dominated by willow species (Salix spp.), lines the North Fork of Permanente Creek between the Hammond-Snyder House and Rancho San Antonio County Park. Other tree species in this corridor include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), sycamore (Platanus racemosa), elderberty (Sambucus mexicana), and buckeye (Aesculus califnrnica). Cattails and horsetails grow along some of the exposed stream edges. Coyote bush, horehound, fiddleneck, and mine�'s lettuce grow under and just outside the willow drip- line. In the past, this riparian corridor was damaged by grazing, agriculture practices and grading activities. The in stream habitat of the North Fork of Permanente Creek is maintained by flows from the Hansen-Permanente quarry operation. A holding pond at the edge of the study area is designed to remove sediments before water moves downstream. T'his habitat supports red-legged frogs and may be adequate for western pond turtles, a state species of concern. Elevations within the study area range from 360 feet in the wetland areas to 480 feet on the De Anza Knoll. The most prominent geologic feature in the vicinity is the San Andreas fault zone located three miles west of the study area and the Monta Vista fault, a splinter fault that traverses along Permanente Creek. POINTS OF INTEREST Rancho San Antonio County Park provides both formal and informal recreational opportunities. The most popular activities at Rancho San Antonio County Park are jogging and hiking. The park provides hiking, bicycling and equestrian trails that connect with over twenty-three miles of trails within Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve. Bicycles are restricted to a single paved trail, the Rancho San Antonio Trail, and are not permitted west of Deer Hollow Farm in the Open Space Preserve. Similarly, equestrians are limited to the equestrian staging area, the Coyote Trail and most trails in the Open Space Preserve. One of the most popular destinations for school groups and families within the Qpen Space Preserve is Deer Hollow Farm, which is operated by the City of Mountain View. A variety of environmental and agricultural education programs are conducted at the farm throughout the year (See Figure 3). STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 31 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A s y ��7 ��l' �l.�I��;��i ��F,J�� Y�l'�r �; �s�t s:' . , :: ..� ' � ry * r Recreational Facilities Residential Neighborhoods ♦Rancho San Antonio County Park ♦The Forum !Rancho San Antonio ♦Oak Valley Open Space Preserve ♦Deer Hollow Fazm Historical Sites Institutional Facilities ♦Hammond-Snyder Home ♦Maryknoll Seminary ♦Juan Bautista De Anza Lookout ♦Gate of Heaven Cemetery Figure 3-Points of Interest in Study Area A STTE ANALYSIS FINDINGS Study Area A provides sufficient land for trail development. This positive finding is balanced by several challenges to trail routing. Trails were tentatively identified in the development agreement that dedicated the 130 acres to Santa Clara County. However, these trail alignments were never reviewed for feasibility. As a result, several of the originally proposed trails have been rerouted to avoid impacts and to provide better connections to the community. There are three key challenges to trail design in Study Area A. The first constraint includes crossing the habitat of the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), a species federally listed as threatened by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The second challenge is to provide a trail connection to Stevens Creek Boulevard that must extend through County Roads and Airports Deparhnent property and cross the Union Pacific Railroad tracks which extend to Hanson Permanente Cement. The trains typically run three times per week to and from the quany. The third challenge is to implement improved equestrian access through the site. The original trail routes required that equestrians enter the Oak Valley Development on a trail easement that has been designed as a sidewalk. This easement provides an excellent connection for residents wishing to access the open space, but a poor surface for equestrian use. A new equestrian route is proposed through the Pacific Gas and Electric Company lands. Whispering Creek Stables leases a portion of these lands from Pacific Gas and Electric Company for its stable and paddock areas. PAGE 32 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A TRAIL ALIGNMENT A loop trail circumnavigating the residential development and Gate of Heaven Cemetery was originally proposed in the development agreement between the City of Cupertino and the developers of Oak Valley. The trail alignment in this report retains a loop route but eliminates the trail from red- legged frog habitat and provides additional connections to the neighborhood, points of interest within the park and the on-street bicycle system (See Map 5- Study Area A Trail Alignment- Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard). Two different trail types are proposed to accommodate different user groups and to provide connectivity for these users. Approximately 3.15 miles of different trail types and 0.75 miles of bicycle lanes are proposed within Study Area A. I-�IKING AND EQUESTRIAN�I'RAILS Rancho San Antonio County Park and Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve are jointly managed by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD). The most popular activities in the 2,300 acres of open space are hiking, jogging and horseback riding. In the county park, equestrians are limited to the equestrian staging area and the Coyote Trail. This trail provides access to the open space preserve lands where the vast majority of trails are open to horseback riding, hiking,jogging and walking. Bicycling is prohibited in most of the park. Whispering Creek Stables leases land from Pacific Gas and Electric Company which is located to the east of the existing horseback riding routes and equestrian staging area. Whispering Creek Stables has boarding accommodations (stables, paddocks) for 60 horses. The stable is currently at capacity. One of the goals within Study Area A is to provide a loop trail for hiking and riding through the 130 acres of open space. Another goal is to provide equestrian trail access from the stables to the many horseback riding trails within the open space preserve. The original trail route proposed in the 1998 development agreement extended from the auto circle and paralleled Cristo Rey Drive on an old farm road. This graded roadbed descends into a small blue oak studded ravine and through a permanent freshwater wetland at the base of the ravine (See Map 5- Study Area A Trail Alignment- Rancho San Antonio Counfy Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard). Two drainages contribute runoff to the ravine. The freshwater wetland that supports the State and Federally-listed California Red-legged Frog is at the bottom of the ravine. A bridge was proposed across the drainage at the bottom of the ravine. Two alternative trail routes are proposed in this area to avoid the freshwater wetland. The first alternative extends the trail parallel to Cristo Rey Drive and crosses the ravine approximately 40 feet above the wetland. A sidewalk STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE 33 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A constructed as a cantilevered boardwalk paralleling Cristo Rey Drive was built above the ravine as part of the adjacent residential development. This sidewalk was unsuccessfully designed to accommodate equesixians. It is too narrow. The proposed project will widen this sidewalk, using piles to extend the boardwalk from 6 feet to 12 feet. The second alternative extends the trail down the ravine, but crosses the drainage above the outflow culvert, which keeps the trail away from the freshwater wetland. Upon crossing the ravine area, the trail will continue to parallel Cristo Rey Drive until reaching the construction access road to the Oak Valley development. This access road will be retained for fire access only upon completion of construction. A short 0.12-mile trail will extend along this fire access road to connect a cul de sac in Oak Valley to the main trail. The main hiking and riding trail will begin an ascent up the hill toward the De Anza Knoll. The trail is proposed slightly below the knoll so that the trail users can experience the views of Silicon Valley while simultaneously preserving the knoll in an untrampled state. After swinging around the knoll the trail descends toward the rear of the Oak Valley development and the horse paddock on Pacific Gas and Electric Company lands. This route from the auto circle to the horse paddock is 0.80 miles. All soft-surface trails throughout Study Area A will be developed in accordance with Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-4—Single Track Trail—Natural Tread. The trail surface will be of native material with a 6-foot trail width. The short interpretive trail to the knoll will be developed in accordance with Countywide Trails Master Plan Guideline G-5 — Single-Use Trails — Natural Tread for Hikers. The trail surface will be of native material with a 3-foot trail width. Th original trail planned called for trail users to enter the Oak Valley development on an easement dedicated for trail use. This 0.20-mile section of trail was constructed with the residential development and is currently in use by local equestrians and area residents. Trail users pass through gaps in the stockade fence and walk or ride on a sidewalk through the development. A second gap in the fence provides access to an 11-foot easement located between the Gate of Heaven Cemetery and Pacific Gas and Electric Company lands. Dual chain link fences indicate this easement. The fencing ends where the easement enters another parcel of open space land near the Hammond- Snyder Home. Equestrians riding from Whispering Creek Stables will use an existing path that parallels the paddock to reach the trail segment within Oak Valley from the stables. Two additional routes to this new trail easement are existing paths currently used by equestrians. Each path is approximately 0.65 miles. One path extends across Pacific Gas and Electric Company lands from the Whispering Creek Stables paddock to the beginning of the 11-foot trail easement. This route provides a loop connection for equestrians not wishing to ride along the sidewalk in Oak Valley. A second existing path parallels the Union Pacific PAGE 34 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT i � .. �o Los Aitc�s i�iiis ♦ /�� ' �-�� 1TY �F CUPERTfN� - �T�VENS CREEK TRA1L MAP 5 - STU DY �REA A TRAI L AL1GN M E NT - RANCHO SAN ANT�Nla ��UNTY PARK TO STEVENS CREEK B�ULEVARD PREPARtD BY;JA�A SOlCALE,ENVIRONMFNTAL PLAA;NlIvG 3-il!�ASS�CiATES Tc Los�Itos and M�untai;;Vi2w � = r � ■ �! �� _ � �� C LE�END �eatures �f the Trai� �•�_� Creek Chann�i {Lov��low) ■e�i�i�r��e �ropased Saft Surfac� aaona�000na �xisting Soft Surface s s.s��o s.�s o Propose�Hard Surface oo�Q��o�� Exi�ting HardSurfac� a�••••--•-•� Proposed Single-Track Interpretive Tra�i ��a a.�c.�n n n a �KlStlfl�Slft�{e-T(dCK IRt2f}7r�t1Ve T!'d1! Boa�dwalk Alignment •.•s•■•�•■•■ Sid�wafkAiignmen� .■.■.,s�.■.■ On-Stree#Alignment �•e•o•a,e•oa Wint�r Trail Aiignment � Ramps � Tunnel Underpasses � Crosswaik � Pedestrian I Bicycfe Bridges Naturai Scienc�Interpretive Area � HistoricalJ Cultura!lniemretive Area � Staging Area E- Access Points ■ Mid-Biock Crassing� `�r Propased Signalized Intersection� � Fxisting Signalizea interse�tions • Stop Sign Intersections , At-Grade Rail(0��Ct'GSS?i�� icycle/ T�ansit Systems Bike Lanes ;Z=��=�_� 8ike Routes � � � �. Union Paci�c R�iir�a� �and Uses I Educational Campus �____�____.__�_ R&D(Commercial _ �1:. - �__ : _;� Civic Center J inst+tutional Habitat Types `j`��' K��<`��`� Open Grassiar�d Riparian Vegetation Oak Woadlandl Chaparral Oak Woodland/Grassland °o°c°o°o°o°a Freshwater Wetiands NORTH _s•••�� In-stream Nabitat Qr�hard _ _ _== Parksl Golf Gourse �%',�'�'��,�'�'� Suburban development �s TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Railroad right-of-way and then curves north to avoid an existing wetland. This route is currently used by equestrians from Whispering Creek Stables to reach the county park and open space preserve riding trails. This route is on Pacific Gas and Electric Company property that abuts the 80-foot wide Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Both routes enter the newly dedicated open space land below the Hammond-Snyder Home and will provide access to the existing Coyote Trail that leads equestrians into the Rancho San Antonio Qpen Space Preserve. A new access point in an existing PG&E fence will be required to connect to the 11-foot easement. WALKING AND BICYCLING TRAIL WITH PARALLEL EQUESTRIAN TRAIL Bicycles are restricted to a single paved trail, the Rancho San Antonio Trail, within the park. This existing paved route extends from Los Altos into the park and open space lands. T'he route passes beneath Highway 280 on St. Joseph Avenue and extends along the North Fork of Permanente Creek to both the upper and lower parking lots within the county park. Two extensions are proposed to this bicycling route (See Map 5 - Study Area A Trail Alignment- Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Bou�evard). A short 0.20-mile paved trail is proposed to extend from the upper parking lot to the auto circle on Cristo Rey Drive, which is located at the entrance to the Oak Valley development. T'his paved route will connect to an existing riding and hiking path at the auto circle. This paved trail will also provide access to 0.75 miles of new bicycle lanes proposed along Cristo Rey Drive from the auto circle to Foothill Boulevard. Approximately 1.00 mile of paved trail is also proposed to extend from the upper parking lot, past the Hammond-Snyder Home and across the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to connect to Stevens Creek Boulevard. This route would continue to parallel the North Fork of Permanente Creek. The two sections of trail between the upper parking lot and the Hammond-Snyder Home and the auto circle would also be designed with a soft surface equestrian trail parallel to the paved faci.lity. These soft surface trails provide a connection for horseback riders using the new loop trail or attempting to reach Whispering Creek Stables. Past the Hammond-Snyder Home an at-grade railroad crossing with signal and crossing arms is proposed at the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Currently, trains run three times per week to and from the quarry. Upon crossing the railroad tracks the route enters Santa Clara County Roads and Airports Department properfiy that parallels Stevens Creek Boulevard. A 0.30-mile paved trail for bicyclists and pedestrians is proposed to extend through these lands paralleling Stevens Creek Boulevard until reaching Ridgeway Drive. No accommodations are made for equestrians along this trail. A crosswalk is proposed on Stevens Creek Boulevard to the west of Ridgeway Drive. The crosswalk would be painted a red brick color and include flashing indicator lights installed in the pavement which are activated by a push button. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 37 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Median islands and fenc,ing would be installed in the center of Stevens Creek Boulevard to direct trail users to the crosswalk and to provide some traffic calming in this residential area. The crosswalk would provide a connection to the bicycle lanes on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Bicyclists must follow the rules of the road that include riding with the flow of traffic. The crosswalk provides a transition from the off-street trail to the eastbound bicycle lanes for cyclists wishing to travel toward Foothill Boulevard and Blackberry Farm. ACCESS POINTS Access points are intended to accommodate trail users wishing to reach the trail by bicycle, on foot or on horseback. The access points in Study Area A are improved and may include short segments of trail, gates, bollards and signage. Access points are identified at specific locations to minimize cross traffic and provide safe access to the trail. Trail access is proposed from two roadways and three recreation facilities located adjacent to Study Area A. The trail connects to bicycle lanes on Cristo Rey Drive and Stevens Creek Boulevard. Access is provided from Rancho San Antonio County Park and Whispering Creek Stables. The trail is also conveniently reached from the Hammond-Snyder Home. Several locations within the Oak Valley neighborhood provide direct connections to the trail (See Figure 4). STAGING AREAS Staging areas are planned to accommodate those who wish to drive to a trailhead. A staging area provides automobile parking, access to the trail and amenities such as restrooms, drinking fountains and signage. Several of the staging areas for Study Area A are located at existing parks situated along the trail route. One new staging area is proposed below the Hammond-Snyder Home off Stevens Creek Boulevard (See Figure 4). A twenty-car staging area with restrooms, trail connections, signage and an interpretive kiosk is proposed in Study Area A on the new parklands soon to be transferred to Santa Clara County Parks and Recreafiion Department (See Map 5 - Study Area A Trail Alignment - Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard). This site would be developed and maintained by the City of Cupertino in conjunction with the development of the Stevens Creek Trail. This staging area will be located below the Hammond-Snyder Home on the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Access to the staging area would be off of Stevens Creek Boulevard. This staging area would serve local residents wishing to access the new trails to be developed on the new parklands surrounding the Oak Valley Development and the Gate of Heaven Cemetery. PAGE 38 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A � �=3 �t�i��ta�� t�F �mu�� .t��.� � �`�� t��i�� .�: Trail Routes Miles Trail Crossings ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path 1.50 ♦Union Pacific Railroad ♦Soft Surface Hiking and 1.65 ♦Stevens Creek Boulevard and Horseback Riding i On-Street Bicycle Lanes 0.75 Total 3.90 Access Points Staging Areas � Cristo Rey Drive ♦ Upper Lot in County Park ♦ Fire Access Road from Oak Valley ♦ Equestrian Staging Area in ♦ Upper Parking Lot in County Park County Park # Equestrian Staging Area in County Park ♦ Proposed Staging Area near f Hammond-Snyder Home Hammond-Snyder Home ♦ Proposed Staging Area near ♦ Whispering Creek Stables Hammond-Snyder Home ♦ Whispering Creek Stables ♦ Stevens Creek Boulevard Figure 4-Summary of Study Area A Trail Improvements INTERPRETIVE STATIONS Interpretive stations are trailside way points that provide opportunities to experience scenic vistas, observe the flora and fauna, reflect on local history and/or learn about hydraulic, geologic or biological phenomena. These stations may include benches, overlooks or interpretive signs or monuments. Study Area A includes two interpretive stations (See Map 5 - Study Area A Trai1 Alignment - Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Boulevard). The historical significance of the Juan Bautista De Anza Lookout and the Hammond-Snyder Home are recognized and designated as historical/cultural interpretive sites. Study Area A is on the overland route taken by the Juan Bautista de Anza expedition. The prominent knoll located in the northeastern corner of the new parklands is the site of the expedition's first view of the estuary of San Francisco. It was sighted the morning of March 26, 1776 after the expedition departed its 93rd encampment on their journey up the peninsula toward San STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PacE 39 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Francisco. An interpretive plaque was installed on the knoll in 2001 to commemorate the 225�' anniversary of the expedition. The 1881 Hammond-Snyder home is located in the southern edge of the new parklands. This historic home is owned by the Cupertino Historical Society. This nonprofit organization intends to restore the home and open it to the public. HABITAT ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNTTIES The Cristo Rey wetland drainage is a small basin that provides a number of restoration opportunities. This area is of significance as the red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytoni), a federally-listed threatened species, has been found on-site. The drainage is degraded by a number of impacts that habitat restoration can help correct. Specific prajects that can improve the drainage and wetland are gully repair, non-native species removal, riparian and wetland species planting, oak planting, and community education on reducing the use of pesticides and fertilizers. Parts of this site may be slated to become a storm water retention area for the �ak Valley development. Restoration work must be coordinated with this use. This small drainage is found between Cristo Rey Drive on the north, new homes on the south and two small ridges on the east and west. In 1994, red- legged frogs were found in the small freshwater wetland that exists at the bottom of the ravine and extends from south to north. Red-legged frogs were also found nearby, on the Lands of the Diocese, in 2000. The Cristo Rey wetland is fed by freshwater seeps and run-off from the roads and new houses. Riparian, wetland, and non-native plant species are found in and along the ravine. Blue oak woodland and grassland extend up the slopes on either side of the ravine. An eroding farm road used by hikers and equestrians runs down the west hill and up the east side. The drainage is designated as public open space and is bordered by open space on the northeast and northwest sides. Development surrounds the wetland on the south end. New houses were recently built and others are under construction on the southeast and southwest ends of the ravine. Natural Communities/Habitats ➢ Freshwater wetland community, which includes red-legged frog habitat ➢ Blue oak woodland/non-grassland savanna ➢ Open grassland dominated by non-native species Problems Affecting Habitats in this Drainage ➢ Eroding farm road ➢ Direct wetland impacts of trail users ➢ Invasion by non-native wetland species ➢ Loss of vuetland and riparian habitat PAGE 40 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A ➢ Loss of oak woodland habitat ➢ Run-off impacts from new development Benefits of Restoration in this Region ➢ Protect and improve red-legged frog habitat ➢ Enhance native plant diversifiy ➢ Protect/improve wetland water quality ➢ Provide community restoration prajects Agencies/Experts to Involve in Planning ➢ Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ➢ Experts: Wetland/riparian restoration specialist, red-legged frog expert, geotechnical expert, grassland expert, oak woodland restoration specialist, volunteer coordinator Proiect 1: Re�air Farm Road Description of Problem ➢ Location--along dirt road down the hill on the west side of the wetland ➢ Gully 2 to 3 feet deep down entire slope and hillside erosion next to the road (Figure 3—Farm Road Gully) ➢ Soil erodes directly into the wetland below Project Goals ➢ Stop erosion ➢ Fill gully and recontour slope to remove road and eroded slope next to the road ➢ Redirect trail use to protect the habitat values of the wetland Potential Methods ➢ Back-fill gully and road cut with native soil that has non-native seeds removed, if possible. ➢ Cover with biodegradable stabilizing material;seed with a mix of fast- growing,non-invasive grass or other cover species ➢ Collect local plant material from native annual and perennial plants; have native plant nursery grow seedlings for planting ➢ Plant with seeds and plugs of native annual and perennial plants Timing Issues ➢ Allow 1 year for growing plants in a nursery ➢ Implement gully repair after rainy season ends ➢ Seed or plant in fall/early winter ➢ This is a relatively rapid praject that should be completed within a year. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 41 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/none Experts Needed ➢ Geotechnical specialist for physical gully repair ➢ Native grassland expert for choosing/collecting best species to stabilize slopes ➢ Native plant nursery to grow native plant plugs ➢ Volunteer coordinator Volunteer Opportunities � � ➢ Assist grassland expert with collecting seeds ➢ Assist nursery with growing seedlings ➢ Assist in planting seeds and/or seedlings Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor for development of new gullies ➢ Monitor plant growth;remove non-natives;replant with natives if needed. Project Difficulty: _X_ Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult Pro�ect 2: Improve Wetland Habitat Description of Problem ➢ Location—along the length of the wetland ➢ Non-native wetland species are crowding out native plants (See Figure 4—Non-natives clog the wetland) ➢ Riparian vegetation cover is missing in some areas Project Goals ➢ Reestablish native wetland species throughout wetland ➢ Reestablish riparian species cover, such as willows, where appropriate ➢ Improve the habitat f or red-legged frogs and other wetland/riparian species Potential Methods ➢ Remove non-native species by hand or other effective method as prescribed by restoration experts; use chemical means as a last resort ➢ Collect local plant material trom native wetland and riparian areas; treat and install plant material as recommended by restoration experts ➢ Plant with seeds and plugs of native annual and perennial plants PAGE 42 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Timing Issues ➢ Avoid any potential impacts to red-legged frogs,especially during the breeding season ➢ Install plant material in fall/winter ➢ This is a relatively long-term project, which will take approximately 2- 4 years to complete. Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 Permit ➢ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Federal Endangered Species Act ➢ California Department of Fish and Game/DFG Code Experts Needed ➢ Wetland restoration expert for non-native removal and native species recovery ➢ Riparian restoration expert for reestablishment of riparian species ➢ Red-legged frog expert for advice on providing high-quality frog habitat ➢ Volunteer coordinator Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Assist in removing non-native species ➢ Assist in planting native species materials Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor for invasion by non-native species; remove as needed ➢ Monitor plant survival and replant as needed Project Difficulty: _X_Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult The actual non-native species removal is relatively straightforward. Consultations with agencies may take some time. Pro�ect 3: Enhance Blue Oak Woodland Description of Problem ➢ Location—hillsides adjacent to the wetland ➢ Most endemic California oak species are not regenerating ➢ Most oak habitat in the Bay Area has been lost Project Goals ➢ Establish young blue oaks that could one day replace aging oaks ➢ Create more hillside and wetland shading STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 43 TRAIL �LIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A Potential Methods ➢ Collect acorns on site and within the watershed ➢ Treat acorns to find nonviable ones and to enhance chances of germination ➢ Grow some acorns into seedlings and plant acorns on site as recommended by the restoration expert ➢ Protect acorns and seedlings from herbivores with below-ground cages and above-ground tubes ➢ Water regularly through the first summer Timing Issues ➢ Collect acorns in fall as deternlined by oak restoration specialist ➢ Allow at least 1 year for seedling growth ➢ Install plant material in fall/winter ➢ This is a very long-term project that will take a decade or more of work to produce results Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/None Experts Needed ➢ Oak woodland restoration expert ➢ Native plant nursery to grow saplings ➢ Restoration volunteer coordinator Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Assist in collecting, treating and growing acorns ➢ Assist in planting native species materials ➢ Assist in watering oaks and monitoring oak survival Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor and repair herbivore guards ➢ Monitor plant survival and replant as needed ➢ Water regularly through the first year Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple _X_Moderately Difficult Difficult While oak planfiing projects are easy and fun for volunteers to implement, oak survival is often low and growth is usually very slow. It may take more than a decade to know if the plantings are succeeding. Proiect 4: Inform Local Homeowners about Watershed Protection Measures Description of Problem ➢ Location--Cristo Rey Drainage PAGE 44 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA A ➢ Adjacent land uses can degrade the wetland. In particular,new homes are located directly adjacent to the wetland; storm water runoff is directed into this wetland and pollutants from residents'cars and lawn maintenance are likely to degrade the wetland habitat Project Goals ➢ Determine what pollutants come from new homes and landscaping ➢ Identify solutions homeowners could take to reduce pollutant loading ➢ Inform local homeowners about the solutions Potential Methods ➢ Work with a watershed expert to determine the pollutants likely to come from new homes and develop solutions for homeowners to take. ➢ Develop an informational packet and survey to give to local homeowners to inform them about impacts to wetlands and what they can do. ➢ Deliver the inforn�ation and survey (methods include door-to-door, a community meeting, a mailing). ➢ Follow-up, after art appropriate period, to determine homeowner views and actions. Timing Issues ➢ Can be done any time of the year . ➢ This project can be done quickly, within a year Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/None Maybe use materials already developed by SCVt�VD Experts Needed ➢ Restoration expert to help with developing watershed protection measures ➢ Volunteer coordinator to organize and support volunteers Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Develop questionnaire and administer it ➢ Help with information analysis ➢ Revisit households for follow-up interview Follow-up Needed ➢ Return to households to find out if homeowners implemented any of the recommendations and to assess their views of changing their yard care practices. Project Difficulty: _X_Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult This project is relatively easy to implement, but assessing effectiveness can be difficult. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 45 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B STUDY AREA B STEVENS CREEK COUNTY PARK TO LINDA VISTA PARK LOCATION,LAND USE AND OWNERSHIP Study Area B includes the entrance of Linda Vista Park and a closed quarry that is located between Stevens Creek County Park and Linda Vista Park. The 11-acre Linda Vista Park is owned and operated by the City of Cupertino. A private school, Canyon Heights Academy, is proposed on the 131-acre closed quarty. It is anticipated that a land dedication for park and open space purposes will be a component of any private development project proposed on the closed quarry site. A trail route through the closed quariy is identified in the 1993 City of Cupertino General Plan and the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan Update. Study Area B is bordered by Linda Vista Park and Deep Cli#f Golf Course to the north, Linda Vista Drive to the east, Stevens Creek County Park and Stevens Canyon Road to the west and Fremont Older Open Space Preserve to the south. Trails through Study Area B will provide access to the 1,042-acre Stevens Creek County Park, which offers diverse recreational amenities, including the 92-acre reservoir. The park serves hikers, bicyclists, picnickers, equestrians and wa#er recreationists. Trail connections will also be provided to the 739-acre Fremont Older Open Space Preserve which is owned and operated by Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD). CULTURAL HISTORY The Ohlone Indians lived in and around Santa Clara Valley for over 3,000 years prior to the arrival of the Europeans. The Guemelento Ohlone Indians inhabited the upper reaches of Stevens Creek where a large village, known as Ritocsi, was located along the creek. The Ohlones of this area were named the San Jose Cupertino Indians by the Spanish Missionaries. These people most likely used the present day Study Area B for hun�iing and gathering of food. A portion of Stevens Creek County Park was originally purchased from the US Government under the Homestead Act in 1869 by Catherine Duncan. She later sold 160 acres to Santa C1ara College. The property was purchased as a farming investment and vacation spot for the College. A chapel, villa house, winery and various barns were built. The Jesuit Brothers were responsible for planting the eucalyptus and pines that can still be seen lining the roadways within the park today. The college sold the property in 1945. The new owner ended up selling most of the property for quarrying operations. The Villa Maria chapel was torn down around this time in 1947. PAGE 46 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B Quarrying operations were undertaken by the McDonald-Dorsa family who later sold the property to Kaiser Permanente Cement which was founded by Henry J. Kaiser. Quarrying activifiies ceased in the 1970s. In 1987 the cement plant and surrounding lands were bought by a British holding company called Hanson. The cement plant was renamed Hanson Permanente Cement and non-essential land holdings were sold by the new owner. The closed quany had several interim owners all of whom were interested in developing luxury homes on the 131 acres. In 1999, the property was bought for the purposes of developing a private school, Canyon Heights Academy. Santa Clara County purchased 400 acres in the upper reaches of the canyon (near Mt. Eden Road) in 1924. Under the direction of the Public Works Department, this became the first County park, which today is known as Upper Stevens Creek County Park. In 1935, the Santa Clara Valley Water Conservation District purchased 171.5 acres of land northwest of the county's 400 acres to develop a reservoir. The Stevens Creek dam, one of six built in the county, was completed in 1936. The County's 400 acres were eventually transferred to the newly created Parks and Recreation Department in 1956. Additional parklands have been added since the 1960's to create the 1,042- acre Stevens Creek County Park, which lies adjacent to the 131-acre closed quarty, and the 1,095-acre Upper Stevens Creek County Park. The Linda Vista Park site was purchased by the City of Cupertino in 1969. The 11-acre site was originally a part of the McDonald-Dorsa quarry. T'he park was dedicated in 1970. CREEK CHARACTER, PLANT COMMUNITIES AND ANIMAL LIFE Study Area B is dominated by the 131-acre closed quarry and Linda Vista Park. Six habitat types occur in the area. They include open grassland, oak woodland/chaparral, freshwater wetland (with seeps), willow-dominated riparian vegetation, golf course/park lands and suburban development (See Map 4 - Study Area Habitat Map). Rare, sensitive or listed species potentially existing in the area include steelhead trout, red-Iegged frog, western pond turtle and birds of prey. Stevens Creek flows through the Deep Qi.ff Golf Course and then skirts the northwest corner of the Study Area B. Open grassland is found at the bottom of the old quarry. This non-native grassland is growing on the highly disturbed, unconsolidated and eroding quarry slopes remaining after quarrying activities ceased in the 1970s. As is often the case on mined lands, only the hardiest species can survive such disturbance. The quarry area is eroding severely and large gullies are evident on the slopes and on the quarry floor. This unstable topography prevents many native species from establishing and encourages the spread of invasive, non-native species, such as pampas grass and French broom, both of which are growing in the quarry. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 47 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B Several small flowing rivulets, probably formed by seeps, feed freshwater wetlands in the center and along the southern side of the quarry floor at the base of steep slopes. These drainages converge to form a small stream that flows to Stevens Creek at the mouth of the quarry. Typical wetland species, especially cattails (Typha spp.) and rushes (juncus spp.), are prevalent in both wetlands. The larger wetland along the south edge of the quarry also supports willow riparian vegetation, including cottonwoods and alders. These wetlands represent potential red-legged frog habitat. Red-legged frogs are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are under the jurisdiction of the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Perennial streams and drainages such as the one extending across the quarry floor provide flow to Stevens Creek. The primary purpose of the upstream reservoir is to collect surface runoff, store it and control release of the water for downstream percolation into groundwater sources. Several species of fish occur within the reservoir including rainbow trout (stocked), bass (stocked), sunfish, catfish and crappie. T'he in-stream habitat of Stevens Creek is known to support adult and juvenile steelhead trout along its entire length from the reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park to Shoreline Park in Mountain View, where the creek meets San Francisco Bay. Steelhead are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. 'This anadromous form of rainbow trout lives in streams for some of their life cycle and in the ocean for the rest. Since 1937, water has been impounded in a reservoir at the head of Stevens Creek, resulting in only winter and spring flows. Stevens Creek was allowed to go dry each summer. As a result, the entire creek was used only for migration and rearing habitat was eliminated from the lower reaches. Recently, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which manages flows in the creek, has allowed year round flows (Padley pers. comm. 1999).This new policy was initiated in 1998, and in September of that year, first and second year age class steelhead were observed in Stevens Creek in Mountain View (G. Seeds, pers. comm. 1998). The Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Collaborative Effort (FAC.�) was initiated to research the habitat needs of steelhead, collect information on the effects of different water release policies in Santa Clara County streams, and provide recommendations for managing in-stream habitats for steelhead populations given the constraints of this urban setting. Research shows that Stevens Creek is a viable spawning habitat for adults and summer rearing habitat for juveniles if managed properly. Adult steelhead are limited in their distribution by in-stream fish barriers that impede their upstream movement in Stevens Creek. The survival of juvenile steelhead seems to be most limited by high in-stream water temperatures, which are not tolerated by young fish. Protecting this valuable steelhead habitat is a high priority. Coast live oak woodland interwoven with chaparral occurs on the east and west wall of the quarry, over much of the knoll just above Linda Vista Park, PAGE 48 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B and through the gulch that runs east-west from the quarty to Linda Vista Drive (along the south edge of Linda Vista Park). Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) the dominant tree, is found with a diversity of shrubs especially wild lilac (Ceanothus spp.), chentise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), manzanita {Arctostaphylos spp.), coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) and toyon (Heteromeles arbutcfnlia). Under or around these large shrubs, California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), California sage (Artemesia californica), chaparral current (Ribes sanginium), pearly-everlasting, ferns, monkey flower, and Indian paintbrush are easily found. Black-tailed deer, bobcat, coyote, gray fox, raccoon, opossum and cottontail rabbit are typical mammal residents of this habitat. Over 125 species of birds have been identified in Stevens Creek County Park. Suburban development abuts Study Area B on the east side and some of the west side. Deep Cliff Golf Course borders the west and north edges of Linda Vista Park. The golf course and the park land habitat of Linda Vista Park provided habitat primarily for human-habituated species, such a jays, robins, and California towhees. Herons and egrets may also frequent the golf course ponds and in-stream habitat of Stevens Creek, which flows through the golf course. Study Area B is located within the geologically complex and seismically active Coast Range which is characterized by a series of parallel, northwest trending faults, mountain ranges and valleys. Elevations within the study area range from 400 feet along the floor of the quariy to 720 feet on the knoll located on the northeast corner of the closed quarry above Linda Vista Park. POINTS OF INTEREST Stevens Creek County Park offers a variety of single track and multi-use trails for hikers, bicyclists and equestrians. Many of the trails connect with the adjacent Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. Mountain bicycling is one of the more popular recreational activities at Stevens Creek County Park. The 92-acre reservoir located in the park is for the exclusive use of non-power boating activities such as fishing, sailing and kayaking. First-come, first- served picnic areas are located throughout the park. Three large group picnic areas are available by reservation for weddings, ceremonies or other group functions. Stevens Creek County Park is also one of the most popular birding parks in the San Francisco Bay area(See Figure 5). Linda Vista Park is an 11-acre site that includes a group barbecue facility for 100, two play equipment areas for pre-school and elementary age children, a fitness station, walking trails, a large turf area, and a stream with a waterfall that flows to Stevens Creek. T`he park serves as a neighborhood park for Linda Vista residents and provides group picnic facilities for families and organizations. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE 49 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B - : . � �; �; n � s � ��,r � ��'r�` _ : � .S� .. f "S� t � �. "Y ju�,-�. ,� f . �,.e�'£ 1� �,+SK .� � t +�. � �. _ .��'��'�� fl��''��`��';�� `��1� � �` ,�� = - � .E r� ';;C t � r�''�£ **�. �� ' i .,t S� _ dk �,�� ,�.�,��E.,..: _ ' �'n � ��q�.'-;. Recreational Facilities Residential Neighborhoods ♦Stevens Creek County Park ♦Linda Vista Neighborhood #Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Institutional Facilities ♦Linda Vista Park ♦Canyon Heights Academy (proposed) Figure 5-Points of Interest in Study Area B STTE ANALYSIS FINDINGS Study Area B provides sufficient land for trail development. The closed quarry provides a link between Linda Vista Park and Stevens Creek County Park. However, there are three key challenges to trail design in Study Area B. The challenges include land ownership, steep topography and sensitive species and habitats. The site is privately owned by Canyon Heights Academy. Trail access through the property will likely be a condition of any future development. However, even with access through the property the site topography poses challenges to trail development. The steep, eroding quarry slopes are sparsely vegetated with native and exotic grasses and shrubs. Informal footpaths are found throughout the quarry. These footpaths do not meet the Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas and any fufiure trail routes will encounter the same challenge in meeting accessibility guidelines due to the steepness of the quarry slopes (U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1999). Unconsolidated fill remains along the eastern slope of the quarry. The edge of this fill is eroding and abruptly drops off to the floor of the quarry. This area must be recontoured and compacted to support any trail. A tributary to Stevens Creek flows through the bottom of the quarry. Riparian vegetation, shallow wetlands and grasslands dominate the quarry floor. This habitat may support the red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act. Any trail grading activities rnust not contribute sediment to creek or its tributary that flows across the floor of the quarry for Stevens Creek is the known habitat of the steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act. PAGE 50 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B TRAIL ALIGNMENT A trail connecting Linda Vista Park to Stevens Creek Counfiy Park is proposed through the closed quarry in Study Area B. The route through the quarry is proposed as single-track trail open to mountain bicyclists and hikers only. Several shorter trail segments are also proposed to link the quany trail to existing routes in Stevens Creek County Park. These connecting trails are designated as both single-track and as soft surface,multi-use trails. These trail extensions match the existing trail surfaces and use designations of Stevens Creek County Park (See Map 6 - Study Area B �'rail Alignment - Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park). Approximately 1.30 miles of single-track trail and 0.25 miles of multi-use trail are proposed within Study Area B. 1VIOUNTAIN BICYCLING AND HIKING'1'RAILS The adjacent park and open space lands that are owned and operated by Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department (Stevens Creek County Park) and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (Fremont Older Open Space Preserve) primarily serve hikers, mountain bicyclists and equestrians. Mountain bicycling is one of the more popular recreational activities. The segment of the Stevens Creek Trail that extends along the east bank of creek and reservoir through the park is designated for hiking only. One of the goals within Study Area B is to provide a connection to the Stevens Creek Trail in the county park. Another goal is to provide trail connections to the multi-use Coyote Ridge Trail and to the Chestnut and Villa Maria picnic areas and associated parking. The route between Linda Vista Park and Stevens Creek County Park is proposed to extend from the entrance of Linda Vista Park at Linda Vista Drive up a heavily vegetated ravine to the saddle of the quarry rim between the north and east faces of the cut quarry slopes. This saddle is located near the end of Lindy Lane. This alignment is steep and requires the removal of chaparral vegetation. The route would be located below the oak trees and above the centerline of the ravine to avoid impacting the hillside drainage pattern. The trail descends from the saddle in a southwesterly direction approximately following an existing informal path located on the east slope. The trail descends to a bench of unconsolidated fill. At this point, the trail switchbacks across the top of the fill in a northerly direction and descends to the floor of the quarry. This route avoids the wetlands on the quarry floor and could easily be integrated into the site plans of Canyon Heights Academy. The route does require the recountouring and compaction of some of the unconsolidated fill on the quarry bench. Upon reaching the quarry floor the trail is routed in two directions. One route climbs the west slope of the quarry using an old access road to reach the crest of the quarry. At this location, trail users could connect to the Coyote Ridge Trail to enter either Stevens Creek County Park or Fremont Older Open Space STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 51 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B Preserve. Trails users could also enter Stevens Creek County Park by following an access road into the Villa Maria picnic area. The second route from the quarry floor exits the mouth of quarry and pazallels Stevens Creek until reaching an existing footbridge to cross the stream channel. Once across Stevens Creek, the trail would extend to the Chestnut picnic area and parking lot. This lower elevation alignment may intersect an access road or student footpath proposed for the new school. The trail alignment might dually serve the needs of student and park users. ACCESS POINTS The access points in Study Area B are improved and may include short segments of trail, gates, bollards and signage. Access points are identified at specific locations to minimize cross traffic and provide safe access to the trail. Trail access is proposed from Linda Vista Drive and two recreation facilifiies located adjacent to Study Area B. Access is provided from Stevens Creek County Park and Linda Vista Park. The trail also connects to the Coyote Ridge Trail in Stevens Creek County Park and Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. Access may be provided kom Canyon Heights Academy, the private school proposed within Study Area B (See Figure 6). SUl�I1�ARY OF ST�,TD'Y �REA 'I� 'I'RAiL IMPR(}V�1k+I�E1�T5 Trail Routes Miles ♦Soft Surface Single Track 1.30 Hiking and Mountain Biking ♦Soft Surface Multi-Use Trail 0.25 Total 1.55 Access Points Staging Areas • Linda Vista Drive ! Linda Vista Park ♦ Linda Vista Park • Villa Maria Picnic Area in i Villa Maria Picnic Area in County Park County Park • Chestnut Picnic Area in County Park i Chestnut Picnic Area in • Coyote Ridge Trail County Park • Canyon Heights Academy (proposed) # Canyon Heights Academy (proposed) Figure 6-Summary of Study Area B Trail Improvements PAGE 52 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT CiTY �F CUPERTIN� - STEVENS CREEK TRAIL MAP � - STUQY AREA B TRAf L ALiGN M ENT - STEVENS CREEK C�UNTY PARK TO LiNDA VISTA PARK PREPARED BY:IANA SOKALE,ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING HiLl.ASSOCIATES NORTH i.��V� Feat�res of the �i�ail �•••- �reek Channel �Low Flaw) •••••••,••■ Proposed Soft Surface aaaooana000 �xisting Soft Surfate s��s o�s��s a s �C4��SLi��dCa SURd�'� ��o�o��o�� Existing Hard Surfate �••••••••••• Proposed Single-Track interpretive Traii ��,��a s��,� �xisting Single-Track Interpretive Trail Boardwalk Ali�nmen� •■-■•■•■9■•■ SidewalkAlignment •f�i��+i�i�i On-Street Alignment a•Q•o•a•o•�• 6'Vinter Trdii�lignme;�� am�s � Tunnei Un�er�aasses � Pedestrian 1 Bicy;.le Bridges Natural Science Interpretive Area QHistoricalJ Cultural Interpretive Area � Sta�ing Area � Access Points ■ Mid-Block Cressings � Proposed Signalized{ntersedions =� �cisting Signalized intersectians • St�p Sign In�ersections . At-Grade Railroad Crossing �icy�fe; T�a�sit Syster�� Bike Lanes ii�Z��=i=� Bike Routes ,,,,,,,,,,,�.. , �iti0ii�aC;�'iC�aifrva.:: �and Uses ,_�, �� '�-�� . .� . �- �� rducationai Camp�s �&�i Commercial �,iv;c Center;�in�tizu�icr;a� Oper�Grass��na Riparian Vegetatiar ��><� 4�� Oak Woadland`Cha arral �� p � Oak Woailand/Grass{and 000000QOOOOO Fresh�vater UVetlands _�o„o�o�o�o 0 �•__�— !n-stream Habitat Orchard –_– –= Parksl Gotf Course ,, � , , ; , %-�,%%-�,� %- Suburban De,relopment �'3 TRAIL �LIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B STAGING AREAS Staging Areas are planned to accommodate those who wish to drive to a trailhead. A staging area provides automobile parking, access to the trail and amenities such as restrooms, drinking fountains and signage. Several of the staging areas for Study Area B are located at existing parks situated along the trail route (See Map 6 - Study Area B Trail Alignment- Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park). Additional parking is proposed at Linda Vista Park and Canyon Heights Academy may offer joint use of the school parking facilities during after school hours and on weekends(See Figure 6). Linda Vista Park has 33 parking spaces and 2 handicapped accessible parking areas for a total of 35 parking stalls. The park is infrequently visited on weekdays, but can be very busy on weekends when events are scheduled at the group barbecue facility. A small staging area with 6 new parking spaces is proposed at the entrance to the park for trail users. The small parking area and trail extension would require a 4-foot retaining wall. It is recommended that 6 parking spaces be designated as trail parking with pavement markings and signs. The footprint for the new parking is located on City of Cupertino parkland and property owned by Canyon Heights Academy. Creation of this staging area will require negotiations with the Canyon Heights Academy. This additional parking should be constructed simultaneously with the development of the trail through the quarry. Staging areas are also located at the Chestnut and Villa Maria picnic areas in Stevens Creek County Park. These parking areas will serve as staging areas for trail users wishing to access the new routes proposed through the quarry. A $4.00 per vehicle entrance fee is collected by the County Parks and Recreation Department for parking. No fee is collected for individuals who walk or bicycle into the park. During the development of this trail plan, Canyon Heights Academy indicated that it appeared unlikely sufficient land would be available to accommodate a staging area for the trail adjacent to Stevens Canyon Road. However, it may be possible to share the teacher parking area associated with the school. T'his parking area might be made available to the public during after school hours and on weekends. This potential shared use of the parking area must be evaluated by the project proponents and through the Environmental Impact Report(EIR). INTERPRETIVE STATIONS Interpretive Stations are trailside way points that provide opporiunities to experience scenic vistas, observe the flora and fauna of the creek environment, reflect on local history and/or learn about hydraulic, geologic or biological phenomena. These stations may include benches, overlooks or interpretive signs or monuments. Study Area B includes a single interpretive STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 55 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B station (See Map 6 - Study Area B Trail Aiignment- Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park). The interpretive site is located at the saddle on the quarry rim above Linda Vista Park. This site offers tremendous views of the quarry, Stevens Cxeek County Park and Santa Clara Valley. The location could be used to interpret any number of important natural history topics. REJECTED ALTERNATIVES Two alternatives for reaching the quarry floor from Linda Vista Park were rejected from further consideration. A knoll route was proposed from the upper picnic area in Linda Vista Park to the top of the eastern side of the quany using two long switchbacks. 'This route was abandoned due to a longer climb and close proxunity to steep drops both into the quarry and off the escarpment above Deep Cliff Golf Course. A trail route that skirted the edge of Deep Cliff Golf Course was evaluated, but eliminated from further considerafiion due to lack of land and impact to habitat. HABITAT ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNTTIES The quarry drainage is a basin formed by former quarry operations. A wetland at the bottom of the quarry is potential red-legged frog habitat. T'he drainage is degraded by a number of impacts especially eroding slopes and loss of chaparral vegetation along those slopes. Specific projects that can improve the region are geotechnical slope stabilization, revegetation with native species and protection of the wetland from sedimentation. This site may be subject to development and any restoration efforts associated with the trail project must be coordinated with future development. This drainage basin is bounded by Linda Vista Park on the north, a bluff with homes on the east, and Stevens Creek County Park on the south. There are several poorly consolidated terraces in the center of the basin that step down to the elevation of Stevens Creek, which passes on the west side of the drainage. The steep topography on three sides of the basin and the terracing are all a result of former quarry operations. The slope on the north side lacks the native chaparral vegetation and is eroding. Erosion is also occurring down the terraces in the basin. Non-native grasses and several invasive non- native plants have colonized the eroding slopes and the bottom of the quarry. Native chaparral and coast live oak woodland occur on the south slope and the east side of the quarry basin. A freshwater wetland, fed by seeps, occurs at the bottom of the drainage in the center and on the south side. Water from the wetlands eventually flows into Stevens Creek. The wetland vegetation is dominated by cattails and rushes; willows, cottonwoods, and alders form a riparian edge. This wetland is potential red-legged frog habitat. Hikers have produced many "social" trails down the north side from Linda Vista Park and up the south face of the drainage to Stevens Creek Caunty Park. The entire quarry is privately owned and development is being considered. PAGE 56 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B Natural Communities/Habitats • Freshwater wetland community, which includes potential red-legged frog habitat • Willow riparian community • Chaparral and coast live oak woodland • Non-native grassland Problems Affecting Habitats in this Drainage � Eroding slope � Sedimentation impacts to the wetland • Invasion by non-native species • Loss of chaparral Benefits of Restoration in this Region • Protect and improve wetland habitat • Enhance chaparral native plant diversity • Provide community restoration projects Agencies/Experts to Involve in Planning a) Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service b) Experts: Wetland restoration specialist, red-legged frog expert, geotechnical expert, chaparral restoration specialist, volunteer coordinator Proiect 1: Recontour and Stabilize Eroding Slopes and Terraces Description of Problem ➢ Eroding slopes ➢ Sedimentation impacts to the wetland ➢ Invasion by non-native species, especially pampas grass and French broom) Project Goals ➢ Stabilize eroding areas with geotechnical methods ➢ Establish cover crop of non-invasive plants to hold soil ➢ Prepare soil for native plant species Potential Methods ➢ Have geotechnical firm assess the current condition of the slopes and terraces, then develop an erosion control/slope stabilization plan using ecologically-sensitive engineering methods ➢ Use historical photos of the site to help detennine final contours ➢ Use heavy equipment, geotechnical materials, or other approaches to produce stable slopes, prepare for trail access, and prepare for native species planting STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 57 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B ➢ Remove non-native invasive species whenever possible ➢ Hydroseed (or other seeding method) with a cover crop, probably non- native but certainly non-invasive,which grows fast,holds soil and improves soil condition(example: red clover);cover crop must allow the future planting of native chaparral species Timing Issues ➢ Grading and earth work must be completed during the dry season ➢ Seeding/planting should occur at the begiruiing of the rainy season Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act,Section 404 Experts Needed ➢ Geotechiucal experts, revegetation specialists Volunteer Opporfunities ➢ Probably none Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Soil stability and gullying must be monitored ➢ Establishment of cover crop must be monitored Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult X Difficult While the methods for slope stabilization are well known and effective, the quarry is a very large and steep area that will require significant work. The geotechnical firm should be familiar with steep slope projects and restoration goals. Project 2: Remove Non-native Vesetation Description of Problem ➢ Non-native species, such as pampas grass and French broom Project Goals ➢ Remove invasive species from the basin ➢ Prepare sites for replanting with natives ➢ Control erosion Potential Methods ➢ Hand pulling or mechanical methods such as "weed wrenches" or pulaskis ➢ Spot application of herbicides by an expert may be used for some species PAGE 58 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B Timing Issues ➢ None for mechanical methods;can be done at any time of the year ➢ Herbicide applications must be timed to protect the environment while having a lethal effect on the invasive plant Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/None for mechanical methods ➢ Herbicide applications must be conducted by a professional with proper licenses Experts Needed ➢ Restoration expert, volunteer coordinator, possibility an herbicide expert Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Removing non-native plants by hand or with simple tools Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Constant removal of non-natives as they reoccur Project Difficulty: _X Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult Proiect 3: Revegetate with Native Chaparral/Oak Woodland Species Description of Problem ➢ Loss of native chaparral and coast live oak woodland vegetation Project Goals ➢ Reestablish a diversity of native chaparral and oak woodland species ➢ Choose species able to survive with minimum maintenance ➢ Allow for natural succession of ecological communities Potential Methods ➢ Determine appropriate species mix by looking at reference sites that provide models for the restoration,such as habitat on Stevens Creek County or Linda Vista Parks ➢ Consult with a chaparral ecologist to determine which early colonizing, hardy species to plant first and which later succession species to plant in the future ➢ Collect plant materials locally, such as in Linda Vista or Stevens Creek County Parks ➢ Treat materials;grow seedlings in a greenhouse, lath house or nursery ➢ Treat soils as needed to prepare them for native species ➢ Plant seeds, seedings, or other materials STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 59 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B ➢ Use above- and below-ground herbivore protectors as recommended by a restoration expert ➢ Weed, water,replant with successful species as needed ➢ When early colonizing plants establish,begin growing and planting species indicative of a more mature chaparral/oak woodland community Timing Issues ➢ Allow at leastl year for growing plants in a greenhouse/nursery ➢ Plant species at the appropriate time in the yearly rainfall cycle Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/None Experts Needed ➢ Chaparral/oak woodland restoration expert, volunteer coordinator Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Collecting plant materials for propagation ➢ Assisting with greenhouse duties and planting seedlings ➢ Monitoring survival and growth rates of plantings ➢ Maintenance such as weeding, putting up herbivore protectors, occasional watering Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitoring survival and growth rates of plantings ➢ Maintenance such as weeding, putting up herbivore protectors, occasional watering . ➢ Replanting with species that survive well or with species that achieve other restoration goals Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult X Difficult This project is more of a true native community restoration than any other project described. Reestablishing species diversity can be difficult; chaparral restoration is not common in the South Bay. PAGE 60 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA B STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE 61 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C STUDY AREA C LINDA VISTA PARK THROUGH MCCLELLAN RANCH TO BLACKBERRY FARM LOCATION, LAND USE AND OWNERSHIP Study Area C includes Linda Vista Park, McClellan Ranch, the Simms property, an abandoned haul road, a floodplain parcel, a well site and a crossing at McClellan Road. The 11-acre Linda Vista Park, 15.6-acre McClellan Ranch and 3.1-acre Simms property are owned and operated by the City of Cupertino. A private school, Canyon Heights Academy, which is proposed on the 131-acre closed quarry in Study Area B also owns the 40 foot abandoned haul road that extends from Linda Vista Park to McClellan Road. It is anticipated that a land dedication for park and open space purposes will be a component of any private development project proposed on the closed quarry site and that the haul road would be a component of any dedication. A trail route across these sites is identified in the 1993 City of Cupertino General Plan and the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Master Plan Update. The 2.55-acre floodplain parcel is owned by Santa Clara Valley Water District and has been leased to the City of Cupertino since 1974. The lease is for the purpose of providing beautification and recreational amenities to residents. The lease expires in 2024. The San Jose Water Company operates the well site, which lies directly adjacent to this leased parcel. McClellan Road is a city facility. Study Area C is bordered by Blackberry Farm to the north, Linda Vista neighborhood to the east, Deep Cliff Golf Course and Scenic Circle neighborhood to the west and Linda Vista Park to the south. Trails through Study Area C will connect Cupertino park and open space resources to neighborhoods and provide an off-street location for recreational bicycling, walking and jogging. CULTURAL HISTORY The Linda Vista Park site was purchased by the City of Cupertino in 1969. The 11-acre site was originally a part of the McDonald-Dorsa quarry. T'he park was dedicated in 1970 and was one of the first parks developed in Cupertino. The old haul road that connected the quany to McClellan Road was retained as a part of the 131-acre quarry. In 1999, the quarry site was bought for the purposes of developing a private school, Canyon Heights Academy. 'The old haul road transferred title to Canyon Heights Academy during this transaction. PAGE 62 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C The City of Cupertino purchased McClellan Ranch in 1972. Additional acreage was added to the park through subsequent purchases. William Taylor McClellan purchased the property in the late 1850s. Several historic buildings have been moved to McClellan Ranch. CREEK CHARACTER, PLANT COMMUNTTIES AND ANIMAL LIFE Study Area C includes Deep Cliff Golf Course, McClellan Ranch and Linda Vista Park. Suburban development abuts this Study Area on east and west sides. Five habitat fiypes occur in the area: in-stream habitat, sycamore-oak riparian vegetation, open grassland, golf course/park lands and suburban development (See Map 4 - Study Area Habitat Map}. Rare, sensitive or listed species potentially existing in the area include steelhead trout, red-legged frog, western pond turtle and birds of prey. Stevens Creek flows through this Study Area. The in-stream habitat of Stevens Creek is known to support adult and juvenile steelhead trout along its entire length from the reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park to Shoreline Park in Mountain View, where the creek meets San Francisco Bay. Steelhead are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. This anadromous form of rainbow trout lives in streams for some of their life cycle and in the ocean for the rest. Since 1937, water has been impounded in a reservoir at the head of Stevens Creek, resulting in only winter and spring flows. Stevens Creek was allowed to go dry each summer. As a result, the entire creek was used only for migration and rearing habitat was eliminated from the lower reaches. Recently, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which manages flows in the creek, has allowed year round flows (Padley pers. comm. 1999). This new policy was initiated in 1998, and in September of that year, first and second year age class steelhead were observed in Stevens Creek in Mountain View (G. Seeds, pers. comm. 1998). The Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Collaborative Effort (FACHE) was initiated to research the habitat needs of steelhead, collect information on the effects of different water release policies in Santa Clara Counfiy streams, and provide recommendations for managing in-stream habitats for steelhead populations given the constraints of this urban setting. Research shows that Stevens Creek is a viable spawning habitat for adults and summer rearing habitat for juveniles if managed properly. Adult steelhead are limited in their distribution by in-stream fish barriers that unpede their upstream movement in Stevens Creek. The survival of juvenile steelhead seems to be most limited by high in-stream water temperatures, which are not tolerated by young fish. Protecting this valuable steelhead habitat is a high priority. The in-stream habitat of Stevens Creek is also potential red-legged frog and western pond turtle habitat. The Red-legged frog is listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are under the jurisdiction of the US STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 63 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Fish and Wildlife Service. The western pond turtle is a California Species of Special Concern. Western pond turtles are found in ponds, marshes, rivers, streams and irrigation ditches containing aquatic vegetation. They are usually seen sunning on logs, banks or rocks near banks. Individuals move up to three or four miles within a creek system, especially during "walk-abouts" before a female lays eggs. Eggs are laid in nest burrows that can be up to several hundred feet away from river or pond banks in woodlands, grasslands, and open forest. Eggs are laid from April-August; time varies with locality. Suitable riverine habitat for western pond turtles occurs within the project area as Stevens Creek contains escape cover such as deep pools, undercut banks, overhanging vegetation and in-sfiream tree roots. There appears to be suitable grassy, upland nesting habitat adjacent to Stevens Creek at the Simms Property, McClellan Ranch and the open grassland parcel just north of McClellan Ranch. T'he open grassland at McClellan Ranch also provides foraging habitat for a wide variety of bird species, including birds of prey. Deer, coyote, and bobcat have all been observed here (C. Breon, pers. comm.;pers. observ.). Sycamore and coast live oaks dominate the riparian vegetation along most of this stretch of the creek. The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society's McClellan Ranch Checklist of Birds notes over 106 species of birds found in the riparian corridor and grasslands of the ranch. Riparian cover is especially good through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm where the understory includes coyote bush, box elder and native blackberry. Non-native invasive species here include periwinkle, German ivy and tree of heaven. The stream is well shaded through this section and the in-stream habitat, which includes riffles, pools and exposed gravel, appears to provide high quality fish habitat. The riparian corridor and in-stream habitats through Deep Qiff Golf Course were not evaluated because this area is not part of a potential trail alignment. POINTS OF INTEREST Linda Vista Park is an 11-acre site that includes a group barbecue facility for 100, two play equipment areas for pre-school and elementary age childrery a fitness station, walking trails, a large turf area, and a stream with a waterfall that flows to Stevens Creek. The park serves as a neighborhood park for Linda Vista residents and provides group picnic facilities for families and organizations (See Figure 7). McClellan Ranch was a horse ranch during the 1930s and 40s.McQellan Ranch was designated as a nature preserve in 1976 by the Cupertino City Council (McClellan Ranch Park Community Advisory Committee, 1993). This site includes the original ranch house, milk barn, livestock barn and two historic buildings moved from other sites in the city. A replica of the Baer's Blacksmith Shop, originally located at DeAnza and Stevens Creek Boulevards, and the old water tower from the Parish Ranch (now the site of Memorial Park)have been integrated onto the ranch setting. McClellan Ranch PAGE 64 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C houses the Rolling Hills 4-H Club,Junior Nature Museum,Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, Friends of Stevens Creek Trail and the community gardens. Tours of the farm buildings and Junior Museum are conducted for school children. - .F Po�� o� ��r��i��s� �� D� A�� C Recreational Facilities Residential Neighborhoods ♦Linda Vista Park ♦Linda Vista Neighborhood #Cupertino Swim and Racquet Club ♦Deep Cliff Golf Course ♦McClellan Ranch Institutional Facilities Historical Sites ♦Monta Vista High School ♦Kennedy junior High School ♦McClellan Ranch ♦Lincoln Elementary School ♦Juan Bautista De Anza Encampment Figure 7-Points of Interest in Study Area C SITE ANALYSIS FTNDINGS More than 35 acres of public open space are available for trail development in Study Area C. The old haul road provides a link between Linda Vista Park and McClellan Ranch. However, there are three key challenges to trail design in Study Area C. The challenges include land ownership, neighborhood privacy and security and the crossing at McClellan Road. The old haul road is privately owned by Canyon Heights Academy. Trail access through the property will likely be a condition of any future development of the property. However, even with access through the old haul road the site poses neighborhood privacy and security challenges to irail development. The old haul road extends behind the backyards of homes located on Linda Vista Drive, Baxley Court, Evulich Court and Rae Lane. The abandoned road is depressed beneath the grade of these backyards. A number of design features are proposed with the trail alignment to enhance the security and privacy in this neighborhood. Stevens Creek flows beneath McClellan Road between the old haul road and Deep Cliff Golf Course. The roadway bridge is low and flooding occurs during significant storm events. Floodwaters backup over Deep Cliff Golf Course and McClellan Road. After passing beneath the road, Stevens Creek flows between the Simms property and McClellan Ranch. These sites are also located in the natural floodplain of the creek and flood during substantial STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 65 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C storm events. T'he low height of the bridge poses a challenge to developing a grade-separated trail crossing that would allow pedestrians and bicyclists to pass beneath the roadway separate from automobile traffic. Any changes to the roadway will require numerous permits from the regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over sensitive species (steelhead, red-legged frog and western pond turtle), waterways and wetlands, and water quality. TRAIL ALIGNNiENT A trail connecting Linda Vista Park to Blackberry Farm is proposed along the old haul road and through Linda Vista Park and McClellan Ranch in Study Area C. Design concepts for the trail through Linda Vista Park and along the old haul road are detailed in this report. The route is proposed as multi-use, all weather trail open to bicyclists, walkers, joggers, sirollers and in-line skaters. The trail is proposed as a 10-foot wide path with 2 1/2-foot gravel shoulders. The trail surfacing could take several forms including asphalt paving, concrete, a pine resin mixed with native soil (recently approved by US Army Corps), wood or recycled materials for the boardwalk sections or other all weather material to be specified during the development of construction drawings. The multi-use trail will support a wide variety of recreational activities. The all weather surface has the lowest long-term maintenance costs (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). Approximately 1.00 miles of multi-use trail is proposed within Study Area C. Study Area C also includes a trail crossing at McClellan Road. Two alternatives are retained for future consideration. The option, preferred almost unanimously by Linda Vista residents, is a grade-separated crossing created through the construction of an off stream tunnel or complete reconstruction of the McClellan Road bridge. Any changes to the roadway will require numerous permits from the regulatory agencies that have jurisdiction over sensitive species (steelhead, red-legged frog and western pond turtle), waterways and wetlands, and water quality. The alternative option is a crosswalk with pedestrian activated, lighted pavement markings and warning lights in either direction on McClellan Road (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). WALKING AND BICYCLING TRAIL The neighborhood parks and open space preserves along Stevens Creek are isolated from each other and from nearby neighborhoods. One of the goals within Study Area C is to provide a non-motorized route that links neighborhoods to existing recreational facilities, community services and schools. The Stevens Creek Trail will give residents the opportunity to walk and bicycle to Deep Cliff Golf Course, McClellan Ranch,Blackberry Farm and PACE 66 STEVEI�IS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT ► , �� _ �'__ . � �_i K��.J,l�� _ ■ _ � .., _ , . .. . .} .. _ . � �, `� r -�,��„ �� : ; - -- � �- , -- � � � � � �� : : : : �1�� - - - �� - - - ��, 1� - � . ..�� r�r . _ , � �t�-• ��I��Z��A .�Il�t�� ._- _ . .. _ i T vr �ur�r�i iivv - J 1 CV CIVJ I.IICCf� � nr►�� - --- --- �a � cT� inv eQ�e � TQnii �! Ir�IM��I� - -------__ __ __ �� •��■ ��0�� 0�a�0S�� n��n � 1 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Golf Course,newly acquired open spaces, nearby schools and colleges, and bus stops. The trail will offer an informal setting for meeting and greeting neighbors who live along the Stevens Creek corridor. Study Area C begins in Linda Vista Park. The trail alignment in Linda Vista Park is approximately 0.25 miles and generally follows the perimeter of the park, but excludes the lower picnic area and stream that is adjacent to Deep Cliff Golf Course. The trail does share the existing park path adjacent to Deep Cliff Golf Course from the haul road to just opposite the par course area. The intersection of the old haul road with Linda Vista Park (area near the old telephone booth) will be closed and vegetated with native trees and shrubs (See Map 8 - Study Area C-Linda Vista Park Trail Alignment). A new 200-foot section of trail is proposed to connect this shared path with the upper park path located behind the par course. T'his section of trail will be built as an elevated trestle to extend through the trees below the par course (See Map 8 - Study Area C - Linda Vista Park Trail Alignment - Section 'A' - Adjacent to Par Course). The trestle is used to meet accessibility guidelines. The trestle will meet the grade of the existing upper park trail. This existing, short section of trail does not currently meet accessibility guidelines. Overlooks will be installed along the trail to provide resting spots for trail users. These overlooks will bring this stretch of trail from the par course to the picnic area (picnic benches in gravel) into compliance with the Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas (U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1999). From trail intersection nearest the picnic area a new section of trail is proposed to extend above and behind the playground. This stretch of trail will begin to climb the hillside to reach the ravine trail proposed on the Canyon Heights Academy property. Boulder gravity and low wooden retaining walls will be used to secure the trail in this erosion prone area (See Map 8 - Study Area C - Linda Vista Park Trail Alignment- Sections 'B' - Adjacent to Play Area and Section 'C' - New Trail in Slope). A vegetated buffer will be planted between the trail and the playground (See Map 8 - Study Area C-Linda Vista Park Trail Alignment - Section 'B' - Adjacent to Play Area). A short stretch of trail is also proposed from the ravine to the entrance of Linda Vista Park. This trail will provide a direct connection to Linda Vista Drive and to a new six car parking area proposed at the entrance to the park. The new parking is proposed on both City of Cupertino and Canyon Heights Academy property. The trail will extend from Linda Vista Park through the 40-foot wide haul road owned by Canyon Heights Academy. Residents expressed concern about privacy and security along this route. The trail alignment that runs approximately 0.30 miles between Linda Vista Park and McClellan Road is located 6 feet down the slope from the existing haul road toward Deep Cliff Golf Course. The trail is situated a minimum of 23 feet from the far edge of the haul road (See Map 9 - Study Area C - Haul Road Trail Alignment with Boardwalk Cross-Section). This distance may be greater in areas where the trail STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PA�E 69 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C swings farther away trom the top of the slope to protect significant, mature trees. The old haul road will be closed and revegetated with native shrubs and/or trees to create additional buffer between the trail and the homes that front Deep Cliff Golf Course. The trail will be constructed using a boardwalk that could be built on drilled and cast piers or driven piles (See Map 9 - Study Area C - Haul Road Trail Alignment with Boardwalk Cross-Section - Boardwalk with Native Plantings). A safety fence will be installed on the down slope side of the trail to prevent golf balls from reaching the trail. A grade-separated crossing at McClellan Road is proposed. Several grade- separated crossing solutions were evaluated at McClellan Road (See Appendix C - Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation). They included a tunnel, an overpass, a channel deepening and a complete bridge replacement. The overpass was rejected to due inconsistency with the neighborhood character and 'unpacts on private residences and Deep Cliff Golf Course. The channel deepening was rejected due to limited trail access periods and the potential to increase downstream erosion. A cut and cover tunnel is a feasible alternative. However, the cost of the tunnel is nearly the same as a full bridge replacement. A new bridge would provide a grade-separated trail crossing and help to alleviate the localized flooding that occurs along McClellan Road. The cross-sectional area beneath the bridge does not handle high flood flows. During high flow periods, flood waters back up at the bridge and flood Deep Cliff Golf Course, McClellan Road, the Simms property and McClellan Ranch. A complete bridge replacement would resolve both the flooding and trail crossing issues. The complete bridge replacement and tunnel options would both include ramps to the roadway underpass. Preliminary engineering studies indicated that these ramps could extend 240 feet into McClellan Ranch and 480 feet up the old haul road (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm}. The length of the southern ramp was based upon maintaining the current elevation of the old haul road. This ramp will be shortened by approximately one fourth as a result of lowering the elevation of the trail by 6 feet along the old haul road. The entire engineered structure would be approximately 0.10 miles. The bridge replacement and tunnel options would both likely require the removal of two redwood trees located at the entrance of McClellan Ranch. The east bank tunnel crossing option should be retained as a comparison to the east bank underpass for purpose of evaluafiing flood flows and hydrology. 'The Linda Vista Neighborhood overwhelmingly supports a grade-separated option. The preferred alternative remains the underpass. In the event neither the bridge replacement with underpass or east bank tunnel are acceptable to the regulatory agencies, an at-grade crossing of McClellan Road is retained. Steep down grades and poor lines of sight along McClellan Road indicate that any at-grade trail crossing should be controlled. A crosswalk with pedestrian activated, lighted pavement markings and warning lights in either direction on McClellan Road is proposed between PAGE 70 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT � 1 1 Park Entry w1 Gate t� Remain . . . . . , . . . . . . . . - - �ITY �F CUPERTIN� - STEVENS �REEK TRAIL MAP 8 - STUDY AREA C - LINDA VlSTA PARK TRAI� ALIGNMENT LINDA VISTA DRIVE T4 HAUL RQAD PREPARED BY:JANA SOKALE,ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN�dING HILL ASSOCIATES 0 Sp k 100 R 190 ft 250 ft � NORTH L�GEND Stevens Creeic ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ i Future Boardwalk ar Cu��vith Reta'rning kVaz� e • a • � • • F�ture irai' �uture Eievated i res}Je Sridge �xisting;r�e i.anoFY � � '�k � Existing�oif�'ourse � volS C��;se P!aying AYe�1 Golf Course Lake PrQ�osed Planti;�g JC�i!V!V t1 -HliJKt�iV i I V t'HiS l.tlUtiJC Jt�I IUIV "t5� -HUJAI,tIV l I v ru�T AKtH 1 LANDSGAPE BU��R c:�::.TiFdG A�G f-',�T�i 10' WIL�,4G f12,41LJ RETAINING YVAt_L SECTION 'C' -NEUV TRAIL IN SLOPE ?I � � � ; RESII LE�E�J� aieve�s Crezk ■ � ■ ■ e ■ ■ Fut�;re Soardrv�.iK��4ut 4vith Retainir�q�la�i • • • • • • • F�ture Trafi Futur�Elevatad T-esti2 BridGe �xisfi�tg Tt'ee Ca�?or�t c�.^z i,�J �� .ry' � �`�� Existing Goif�our5e ' n x' � ioa s� zoo ft �o� soo ft �'-'�` ' �;; ,i-,. �1 t,t': s� S.�Qi��Ci.135°i�i��1��n!a?c �.7�1�3`a�fJ�Li�..[�L�'. C� �"`T��JJ��Id't�i"i� EXI5TitJ�G TR�S—� CITY OF �UPERTINO - STEVENS CREEK TRAiL MAP 9 - STUDY AREA C - HAU L RQAD ALI��M ENT WITH B�ARDWALK CR�SS-SE�TI01� LINDA VfSTA PARK TO McCLELLAN ROA� PREPARED BY:JANA SOKALE,ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING HILL ASSOClATES 73 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Clubhouse Drive and Stevens Creek at the site of the existing crosswalk. This at-grade crossing would be accessed from the old haul road via a pedestrian/bicycle bridge and short segment of trail parallel to McClellan Road on either side of street. Pedestrian bridges existed on both the upstream and downstream side of McClellan Road. The upsiream bridge serves the patrons of Deep Cliff Golf Course by connecting the 17�' and 18�' golf holes. The downstream bridge acts as a sidewalk to McClellan Road. A new bridge would be required on the upstream side of McClellan Road. It is the current desire of Deep Cliff Golf Course management to keep the two recreational uses separate. A new bridge might replace the existing Deep Cliff Golf Course bridge and serve both the trail and golf course users. A lane divider could be installed in the center of this bridge structure to maintain separation between the two recreational uses. A narrower single use bridge could be positioned between the existing golf course pedestrian bridge and McClellan Road bridge. The downstream bridge is adequate to serve the needs of trail users. Upon entering McClellan Ranch the trail parallels the parking lot fence and exits the far end of the parking area to skirt behind the Rolling Hills 4-H farm animal area and communifiy gardens. This route connects to the existing interpretive trail at the bend in Stevens Creek. The Rolling Hills 4-H animal pens will likely need to be reconstructed to accommodate the trail through this area. The trail will extend behind the community gardens and continue past the bend in the Stevens Creek toward Blackberry Farm. In this area, the � trail extends through the old walnut orchard on property owned by Santa Clara Valley Water District and leased to the City of Cupertino through 2024 (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). The trail through McClellan Ranch is approximately 0.35 miles. The existing interpretive trail in McClellan Ranch is located along the creek and beneath the canopy of the sycamore-oak riparian habitat. No changes are proposed to this single-track, �soft surface nature trail. Study Area C ends at the edge of Blackberry Farm. ACCESS POINTS Access Points provide a direct connection to the trail from neighborhoods, recreational facilities and the public transportation and roadway systems. Study Area C access points are intended to accommodate trail users wishing to reach the trail by bicycle or on foot. Access points are improved and may in�lude bicycle/pedestrian bridges, ramps, short segments of trail, gates, bollards and signage. Access points are identified at specific locations to minimize cross traffic and provide safe access to the trail (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). Trail access is proposed from McClellan Road and four recreation STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 75 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C facilities located adjacent to Study Area C. Access is provided from Linda Vista Park, McClellan Ranch and Blackbeny Farm. Access could also easily be integrated into the trail design for the convenience of inembers of the Cupertino Swim and Racquet Club, private recreation center(See Figure 8). STAGING AREAS Staging Areas are planned to accommodate those who wish to drive to a trailhead. A staging area provides automobile parking, access to the trail and amenities such as restrooms, drinking fountains and signage. The staging areas in Study Area C are located at eacisting parks situated along the trail (See Figure 8). Additional parking is planned at Linda Vista Park(See Map 7- Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). Linda Vista Park has 33 parking spaces and 2 handicapped accessible parking areas for a total of 35 parking stalls. The park is infrequently visited on weekdays, but can be very busy on weekends when events are scheduled at the group barbecue facility. A small staging area with 6 new parking spaces is proposed at the entrance to the park for trail users. The small parking area and trail extension would require a 4-foot retaining wall. It is recommended that 6 parking spaces be designated as trail parking with pavement markings and signs. The footprint for the new parking is located on City of Cupertino parkland and property owned by Canyon Heights Academy. Creation of this SUMMARY OF STUDY AR"EA C T:RAIL IMPItOVEMENTS Trail Routes Miles Trail Crossings ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path 1.00 ♦McClellan Road Total 1.00 Access Points Staging Areas # Linda Vista Park • Linda Vista Park • Cupertino Swim and Racquet Club i McClellan Ranch • McClellan Road • McClellan Ranch i Blackberry Farm Figure 8-Summary of Study Area C Trail lmprovements PAGE 76 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C staging area will require negotiations with the Canyon Heights Academy. This additional parking should be constructed simultaneously with the development of the trail through the quarry in Study Area B. INTERPRETNE STATIONS Interpretive Stations are trailside way points that provide opportunities to experience scenic vistas, observe the flora and fauna of the creek environment, reflect on local history and/or learn about hydraulic, geologic or biological phenomeria. These stations may include benches, overlooks or interpretive signs or monuments. Study Area C includes five interpretive stations with three focused on natural science and two on historical subjects (See Map 7 - Study Area C Trail Alignment - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm). An existing nature trail is located along the banks of Stevens Creek in McClellan Ranch. This trail is used in school and after-school environmental education programs. The trail is reco�i�ed and designated as a natural science interpretive area. McClellan Ranch is a historical site. An interpretive feature is recommended to celebrate the past and present workings of the ranch. The Community Gardens provide an outdoor classroom for exploring plant and soil science. The organic gardens are designated a natural science interpretive area. The 4-H Program represents another link to the history of Santa Clara Valley. The program also provides significant educational opportunities for the children who participate. 'The 4-H facilities and program are recognized as a natural science interpretive site. A historical monument that describes the Juan Bautista de Anza Expedition is recognized and designated as historical/cultural interpretive site. This existing monument is located in the parking area of the Monta Vista High School, a short distance from the trail REJECTED ALTERNATIVES An on-street alignment using Linda Vista Drive and McClellan Road was eliminated in preference of off-street route using the old haul road. A route through McClellan Ranch that skirted the meadow side of the community gardens was eliminated in preference of the route located behind the 4-H area. Several grade-separated crossing options at McClellan Road were rejected due to infeasibility (See Appendix C - Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation). HABITAT ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES In Study Areas C and D restoration opportunities can be undertaken in two habitats: the streamside vegetation (riparian forest) and the aquatic (in-stream STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 77 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C habitat). Both zones are closely linked,but enhancement in each zone focuses on different activities and species. The creek habitats are harmed by non- native invasive species, loss of riparian vegetation, in-stream fish barriers and other structures that degrade fish habitat, poor management practices, and some adjacent land uses. Restoration work in these habitats will require close coordination with resource agencies and other existing habitat improvement efforts. The Stevens Creek watershed in Cupertino is the focus of this restoration region. Specifically, restoration/enhancement would occur in and adjacent to the Creek corridor, which runs from Deep Cliff Golf Course to Stevens Creek Boulevard (see Figure 1—Map of the Study Area). The Creek flows from the reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park, which regulates water levels. It is also fed by springs and seeps from the closed quarry. Adult and juvenile steelhead trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss), a federally-listed threatened species, occur along the entire length of the Creek; however, Stevens Cxeek could provide higher quality breeding and rearing habitat, if properly managed. A recent lawsuit to protect and enhance steelhead habitat resulted in a process called the Fish and Aquatic Habitat Collaborative Effort (FAHCE). The Santa Clara Valley Water District is a key player in this process. FAHCE studies have identified high water temperatures and barriers to fish movement as current constraints fish use of the Creek. Other rare species likely to occur in the corridor are red-legged frogs and the western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata), a California species of special concern. The riparian forest, dominated by native sycamores, live oaks, elderberry and box elder, lines the Creek banks. Some stretches, especially through Blackberry Farm and Golf Course have little to no vegetation. Non- native plant species found in the corridor include periwinkle, german ivy, giant reed, and tree-of-heaven. The co'rridor is bordered by public open space including McClellan Farm and the orchard at the Stocklmeir property. Other than these parcels, the Creek is surrounded by suburban development, two golf courses, and the large parking and picnic area of Blackberry Farm, a city- owned park. Natural Communities/Habitats ➢ Freshwater stream community, which includes steelhead habitat ➢ Sycamore/live oak riparian forest ➢ Open grassland dominated by non-native species Problems Affecting Habitats in this Drainage ➢ Invasion by non-native species in the riparian corridor ➢ Riprap along sfiream banks ➢ Loss of riparian habitat ➢ Fish barriers, especially old dams ➢ Low-flow auto crossings through the Creek ➢ Degraded fish habitat PAGE 78 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C ➢ Run-off impacts from golf courses and suburban development Benefits of Restoration in this Region ➢ Protect and improve steelhead habitat ➢ Enhance native plant and animal diversity ➢ Improve shade and cover for trail users and other recreationists ➢ Provide community restoration projects Agencies/Experts to Involve in Planning ➢ Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, Santa Clara Valley Water District ➢ Experts: Riparian restoration specialist, steelhead and western pond turtle experts,geotechnical expert, hydrologist, engineer, volunteer coordinator Project 1: Remove Non-native Species Description of Problem ➢ Location—along the riparian corridor, especially McClellan Ranch (periwinkle, German ivy, tree-of-heaven}, Blackberry Golf Course (German ivy, periwinkle) and Stocklmeir property (giant reed) ➢ Non-native vegetation species are usurping habitat from natives Project Goals ➢ Use mechanical and other non-chemical removal methods whenever possible ➢ Significantly reduce or eliminate the occurrences of non-native plants in target areas and allow more room for native species cover Potential Methods ➢ Focus on specific areas to thoroughly remove the non-native species targeted;move out from there to expand the non-native plant-free zone ➢ Different non-native species will have different methods for removal; work with a restoration expert to develop an effective plan for the target non-natives ➢ Use chemical methods of removal as a last resort; if chemicals are used, develop a plan with an expert in the use of the chemical and consult with DFG and NMFS ➢ Replant areas cleared of non-natives with native riparian species as quickly as possible Timing Issues ➢ If chemicals are used, application may need to be timed to avoid breeding seasons and other sensitive life cycle phases of native animals ➢ This is a very long-term project, which could continue for many years STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 79 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits . ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District for other projects ➢ Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society for map of non native species occurrences ➢ Department of Fish and Game and National Marine Fisheries Service, if chemical plant killers are used Experts Needed ➢ Restoration expert, volunteer coordinator, possibly an herbicide expert Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Mechanical or hand removal of non-natives Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor for regrowth of non-natives ➢ Plant native species as quickly as possible to avoid regrowth of invasives and to avoid erosion Project Difficulty: X_Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult Non-native species removal methods are well established; can be effective when vigorously pursued. Proiect 2: Remove Rip-rap/Resculpt Creek Banks Description of Problem ➢ Location—Rip-rap occurs in Blackberry Farm; creek banks in Blackberry Farm, the Golf Course and Deep Cliff Golf course need resculpting ➢ Installing rip-rap and compacted soil banks resulted in the loss of riparian species, contributing to high water temperatures and degradation of steelhead habitat Project Goals ➢ Reestablish a more natural riparian edge, which allows growth of native species ➢ Provide bank edge habitat for turtles and steelhead ➢ Protect banks from scour and erosion Potential Methods ➢ Examine historical photos of original stream morphology to guide restoration ➢ Have hydrologist develop estimates of scour and erosion rates to determine type of structures that will be adequate PAGE SO STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C ➢ Remove rip-rap with heavy equipment;try to integrate some of the material in the resculpting work to keep costs down ➢ Recreate creek meanders,if possible, to dissipate flow energy and allow more natural stream functioning ➢ Create more gentle bank slopes and soften the consolidated bank soil; add soil that supports native riparian species ➢ Stabilize banks with geotechnical material,root wads,logs, willow wattling or other methods effective in prevenking erosion while promoting the growth of native species and providing bank habitat for native animals ➢ Replant banks as quickly as possible with native riparian species Timing Issues ➢ Conduct construction to avoid impacts to steelhead, pond turtles, and red-legged frogs ➢ Avoid construction in the rainy season, if possible ➢ T'his is a medium length project that will take approxunately 2 to 4 years to complete. Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District/local pernuts, coordinate with FAHCE ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit ➢ Department of Fish and Game/Stream Alteration Agreement, consultation on pond turtle protections ➢ National Marine Fisheries Service/Endangered Species Act, Section 7 consultation Experts Needed ➢ Restorakion expert, permits specialist, geotechnical expert, hydrologist, eng-ineer Volunteer Opportunities ➢ None ➢ Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor scour and erosion around new features;repair if needed Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult X Difficult Heavy equipment and engineering are needed. Getting engineers to use good bioengineering approaches (rather than traditional "hardscape" engineering} can be difficult. These projects are expensive and require many permits. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 81 TRAIL ALIGIVMENT - STUDY AREA C Proiect 3: Reve e�tate with Native Ri,�arian Svecies Description of Problem ➢ Location—along creek corridor through Study Areas C and D,but especially through Blackberry Farm and through both golf courses ➢ Loss of riparian vegetation results in bank erosion,has degraded steelhead habitat through lack of shad.ing,has reduced habitat for riparian species such as migratory birds, and has reduced shading and aesthetic value for people Project Goals ➢ Reestablish a diversity of upper and lower canopy plant species that are native to the corridor ➢ Provide shade over the creek to improve steelhead habitat and shade for the trail, if possible ➢ Provide as wide a riparian buffer as possible between the creek and adjacent land uses, to help protect creek water quality ➢ Reestablish a continuous riparian habitat for resident and migratory species, especially birds Potential Methods . ➢ Pull parking and picnic areas at Blackberry Farm back from the creek edge to allow a 100 foot riparian corridor ➢ Remove Blackberry Farm parking lot and replace with a permeable material that reduces runoff ➢ Collect native plant materials from Stevens Creek corridor, whenever possible, or failing that, from other South San Francisco Bay watersheds ➢ Have a native plant nursery grow seedlings ➢ Collect information on the soil types and water table location along the corridor ➢ Plant species in acceptable locations based on correct soil type, stream bank elevation, frequency of flooding, and water table level ➢ Plant native species after non-natives have been removed and creek bank has been resculpted Timing Issues ➢ Allow 1 year for growing plants in a nursery ➢ Plant seeds and seedlings during the rainy season or when most appropriate for each species ➢ This is a long-term, multi-year project Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District (on potential impediments to creek flow) Experts Needed ➢ Riparian restoration expert,volunteer coordinator, engineer PAGE 82 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Plant material collection ➢ Nursery assistance ➢ Planting, watering, weeding ➢ Monitoring for plant health and growth Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Watering and weeding may be needed ➢ Monitor nwnber of plants of each species surviving and growth rate of survivors Proj ect Difficulty: Relatively Simple _X_ Moderately Difficult Difficult Proiect 4: Remove Fish Barriers and Low-Flow Auto Crossings Description of Problem ➢ Location—A small dam, which is a fish barrier, and several low-flow auto crossings are located in Blackberry Farm. Other barriers and low- flow crossing may be located in the two golf courses. ➢ Structures impede fish passage upstream and reduce habitat quality for adult and juvenile fish Project Goals ➢ Remove these structures that prevent steelhead from having full access to the creek ➢ Prepare creek bed for further fish habitat enhancement Potential Methods ➢ Methods to remove the barriers with the least damage possible to the creek morphology, water quality or vegetation will be determined by a hydrologist, geologist, steelhead expert, and engineer Timing Issues ➢ Avoid impacts to steelhead, pond turtles or red-legged frogs ➢ Removing structures can be done relatively quickly and should be completed in one season. Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District/local permits, coordinate with FAHCE ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit ➢ Department of Fish and Game/Stream Alteration Agreement, consultation on pond turtle protections STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 83 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C ➢ National Marine Fisheries Service/Endangered Species Act,Section 7 consultation Experts Needed ➢ Hydrologist,geotechnical expert, steelhead expert, engineer,permits expert Volunteer Opportunities ➢ None Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ None Project Difficulty: _X_Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult Removing the structures is relatively easy. Receiving permits and approvals from agencies is likely to be the greatest hurtle. Project 5: Enhance Desraded Fish Habitat Description of Problem ➢ Steelhead habitat has been degraded by changes to the creek structure and vegetation. ➢ Water management practices that damage steelhead population Project Goals ➢ Increase survival of adults and juvenile steelhead by providing habitat needed at each phase of their lives ➢ Increase steelhead productivity by increasing breeding habitat Potential Methods ➢ Work with a steelhead expert to determine what habitat needs are lacking in the creek ➢ Work with FAHCE to ensure that enough water i.s released from the dam to support year-round fish habitat ➢ Work with FAHCE to determine which habitat enharicements are being implemented by FAHCE members and which ones remain to be done ➢ Enhancement may include a number of inethods. Several typical enhancement features are: adding appropriately sized gravel to the creek bed to create spawning habitat, installing check dams,gravel and pools to make pool and riffle habitat, installing root wads to create cover habitat for fry and juveniles PAGE 84 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C Timing Issues ➢ Time wvrk to avoid impacts to steelhead ➢ Structures can be put in quickly,within a season. Monitoring fish use and changing or adding structures to meet fish requirements make this a multi-year project. Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District/local pernuts, coordinate with FAHCE ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act,Section 404 permit ➢ Department of Fish and Game/Stream Alteration Agreement, consultation on pond turtle protections ➢ National Marine Fisheries Service/Endangered Species Act,Section 7 consultation Experts Needed ➢ Steelhead expert, engineer, hydrologist, geotechnical expert Volunteer Opportunities ➢ None Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor the use of new habitat by fish; modify or add other features as needed ➢ Monitor the integrity of the new features and fix them if they degrade Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple X Moderately Difficult Difficult Salmon and steelhead biologists have developed and tested a wide range of habitat enhancement features. Appropriate features can be very successful in improving steelhead productivity and survivorship. Close coordination with many agencies will be a challenge for these projects. Proiect 6: Educate Ad�acent Land Owners and Mana�ers about Runoff Impacts Description of Problem ➢ Pesticide and herbicides runoff from residential and golf course land uses into Stevens Creek, reducing water quality and the overall health of the creek and riparian system Project Goals ➢ Determine what pollutants could come from homes, landscaping, and golf courses STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 85 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C ➢ Identify solutions homeowners and golf course managers could take to reduce pollutant use ➢ Inform local homeowners and land managers about the solutions Potential Methods ➢ Work with a watershed expert to deternline the pollutants likely to come from homes and golf courses and develop solutions. ➢ Develop an informational packet and survey to give to local homeowners and golf course managers to inform them about impacts to wetlands and what they can do. ➢ Deliver the information and survey (methods include door-to-door, a community meefiing, a mailing). ➢ Follow-up, after an appropriate period, to determine homeowner/land manager views and actions taken. Timing Issues ➢ Can be done any time of the year ➢ This project can be done quickly, within a year Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ None/None Maybe use materials already developed by SCVWD Experts Needed ➢ Restoration expert to help with developing watershed protection measures ➢ Volunteer coordinator to organize and support volunteers Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Develop questionnaire and administer it ➢ Help with information analysis ➢ Revisit households for follow-up interview Follow-up Needed ➢ Return to households to find out if homeowners implemented any of the recommendations and to assess their views of changing their yard care practices. ➢ Follow-up with golf course managers. Project Difficulty: _X_ Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Difficult T'his project is relatively easy to implement,but assessing effectiveness can be difficult. PAGE 86 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA C STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 87 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D STUDY AREA D MCCLELLAN RANCH THROUGH BLACKBERRY FARM TO STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD LOCATION, LAND USE AND OWNERSHIP Study Area D includes Blackberry Farm and Golf Course, the Blue Pheasant Restaurant, the Stocklmeir property and a crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard. The 33-acre Blackberry Farm and 5.1-acre Stocklmeir property are owned and operated by the City of Cupertino. Stevens Creek Boulevard is a county roadway. Study Area D is bordered by Stevens Creek Boulevard to the north, Monta Vista neighborhood to the east, Meadows of Cupertino and Scenic Circle neighborhoods to the west and McClellan Ranch to the south. Trails through Study Area D will connect Cupertino park and open space resources to neighborhoods and provide an off-street location for recreational bicycling, walking and jogging. CULTURAL HISTORY Captain Elisha Stephens owned and operated his family farm between 1848 and 1864 at the present day location of Blackberry Farm. Stephens was born in South Carolina in 1804 and learned the trade of blacksmithing in Georgia. He later traveled over much of middle and western America. In the spring of 1844, he was selected as Captain of the Stephens-Murphy-Townsend party headed for California. This "wagon train" of 50 people in 11 wagons would be the first party to cross the Sierra Nevada. With the guidance of a Paiute Chief they called Truckee, the party followed a river to a lake which would later become known as Donner Lake. The wagons reached the summit on November 25, 1844. The party left behind a crude log cabin at the lake, which would be used two years later by the Donner-Reed Party. In 1848, Stephens purchased a 160-acre homestead he called Blackberry Farm on the Arroyo de San Joseph Cupertino, which later became known as Stevens Creek. He farmed the property growing Mission grapes, fruit trees and blackberries. In 1859, he purchased an additional 155 acres. By 1864, Stephens had sold his property, claiming that "it's gittin'jist too crowded, too durn civilized." He relocated to Kern County where he started a small ranch in what is now Bakersfield. Stephens died at the age of 83 and is buried in Bakersfield. In the more recent past, Blackberry Farm was a family-owned and operated picnic facility for 37 years over three generations. In 1991 Cupertino residents passed a 25-year bond measure to purchase Blackberry Farm. The City of PAGE 88 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D Cupertino committed to operating Blackberry Farm as a revenue-generating, self-supporting park for 25 years until 2016. Today, this 33-acre recreational facility offers a creekside park setting for family and group picnics, swimming pools, a 9-hole golf course and conference center. The park primarily serves the needs of organized groups wishing to reserve outdoor picnic facilities for speci.al functions. In keeping with Cupertino General Plan open space policies, the Stocklmeir property was purchased in 1999. The 1964, 1972 and 1993 Cupertino General Plans have supported the acquisition of the lands adjacent to Stevens Creek to preserve the flood plain as open space,and to develop a formal urban trail along the creek corridor. The 5.1-acre Stocklmeir property is the most recent of these acquisitions. This site includes two homes and a 3-acre orange orchard, the only orchard remaining along the entire length of Stevens Creek from San Francisco Bay in Mountain View to the foothills in Cupertino. CREEK CHARACTER, PLANT COMMUNITIES AND ANIMAL LIFE Study Area D includes Blackberry Farm and the Stocklmeir site. Suburban development surrounds this study area on all but the south side. Rare, sensitive or listed species potentially existing in the area include red-legged frog, western pond turtle, steelhead and nesting birds of prey. Sycamore-oak riparian vegetation, in-stream habitat, orchard, golf course/park and suburban development are the five habitat types in this study area (See Map 4 - Study Area Habitat Map). A narrow band of riparian vegetation lines Stevens Creek as it flows through Blackberry Farm and the Stocklmeir site. Sycamore and coast live oaks are the dominant trees. Other tree species include California buckeye, black walnut, redwood and non-native pines. The corridor through the golf course has almost no understory or mid-story vegetation layers, which severely reduces the habitat quality of the riparian zone to wildlife. Riparian vegetation becomes very sparse to non-existent at the north end of the golf course. The riparian vegetation corridor becomes wider and much more diverse on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard where large sycamores, coast live oaks, and buckeyes shade several understory layers. While the creek is known steelhead habitat, the poor qualifiy riparian vegetation or the complete lack of vegetative cover in this study area reduces the quality of the in-stream habitat for steelhead and the food chain.they depend upon. Lack of adequate vegetation cover produces little shade, resulting in water temperatures that are too high for the survival of juvenile steelhead. Sparse vegetation also means the nutrient base in the stream is decreased for insects that feed young and adult steelhead. In addition, riparian vegetation adds large woody debris to streams that forms pools and cover for fish. The in-stream habitat in this area is further diminished by three low flow stream crossings (concrete areas where vehicles drive through the STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 89 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D creek channel) and a small dam in the south end of the park. All of these structures are potential barriers to fish passage.Boulders and riprap along the stream banks also reduce habitat quality for adult steelhead. An orchard is found just south of Stevens Creek Boulevard on the Stocklmeir site. This orange orchard is located in the floodplain and provides habitat for a wide range of species, from resident deer to migratory songbirds. This site may also provide nesting habitat for western pond turtles. POINTS OF INTEREST Blackberry Farm offers a creekside park setting for family and group picnics, swimm.ing pools, a 9-hole golf course and conference center. The park primarily serves the needs of organized groups wishing to reserve outdoor picnic facilities for special functions. However, many families enjoy using the pool and snack bar facilities available to the public. McClellan Ranch houses the Rolling Hills 4-H Club, Junior Nature Museum, Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, Friends of Stevens Creek Trail and the community gardens. The original ranch house, milk barn, livestock barn and two historic buildings moved from other sites in the city are found at McClellan Ranch. A replica of the Baer's Blacksmith Shop, originally located at DeAnza and Stevens Creek Boulevards, and the old water tower from the Parish Ranch (now the site of Memorial Park) have been integrated onto the ranch setting. Tours of the farm buildings and Junior Museum are conducted for school children (See Figure 9). P(?INTS QF INT�1tEST` IN STUDY ARE� �.` Recreational Facilities Residential Neighborhoods i Blackberry Farm ♦Scenic Circle Neighborhood i Blackberry Farm Golf Course �Monta Vista Neighborhood #Blue Pheasant Restaurant ♦Meadows of Cupertino ♦Stocklmeir Site Historical Sites Institutional Facilities �Elisha Stephens Monument ♦DeAnza College Figure 9-Points of Interest in Study Area D PAGE 90 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D SITE ANALYSIS FINDINGS More than 38 acres of public open space are available for trail development in Study Area D. All of the land in this study area is in public ownership. Blackberry Farm is a 33-acre, city-owned recreation facility. It contains a 9- hole golf course, a creekside park and small conference center operated by Cupertino. The park primarily serves the needs of organized groups wishing to reserve outdoor picnic facilities for special functions. The park and golf course and the Stocklmeir orchard are situated in the flood plain of Stevens Creek. Winter flooding is not unusual. In 1997 significant winter rains washed away two of the three pedestrian bridges which connect the parking area on the east bank to the picnic grounds on the west bank of Stevens Creek. These two bridges were replaced with temporary bridge structures in time for the spring picnic season. Three low flow stream crossings (concrete areas where vehicles drive through the creek channel) are also located within the park. These stream crossings are still used to access the picnic areas during event set-up and cleanup. On a busy day, Blackbeny Farm hosts 4,000 visitors. T'he Stockmeir property is 5 acres and contains a residence and orange orchard along the stream banks of Stevens Creek. A trail connecting McClellan Ranch to Stevens Creek Boulevard through Blackberry Farm and the Stocklmeir site is feasible from both land ownership and environmental aspects. However, a trail is not feasible under the current park operations. A number of design restrictions limit the options for providing a trail through Blackberry Farm. The first challenge to the design is the separation of the free trail from the enhy fee-based park. The park currently operates as a fee-based recreational facility. All users, individuals to corporations, pay a per person entry fee to use the park. The Stevens Creek Trail is a free recreational amenity and alternative transportation route. All designs within Blackberry Farm entrance area were rejected due to this single constraint. A trail could technically be designed to fit these criteria, but the final product was out of character with the creek setting and the historical context of the farm (See Rejected Alternatives for more detail on these failed solutions). Ultimately, the operations of Blackberry Farm, specifically the fee collection process, must change to create a trail that integrates with the park and provides benefits both to residents and park visitors. A second challenge specific to the entrance of Blackberry Farm is the need to provide for the safe and effective movement of cars and pedestrians. During the busy summer season 1,100 cars per day can enter and park within Blackberry Farm. The movement of automobiles and of park and trail users must be carefully coordinated. A third challenge is neighborhood privacy and security. These issues were addressed in the Scenic Circle, Monta Vista and Meadows of Cuperfiino neighborhoods. Trail routing and design feafiures are proposed to enhance the security and privacy in these neighborhoods. Additionally, the project was challenged to provide privacy and security to a private residence located STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 91 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D within the park. The trail design must work to protect the privacy and security of all neighbors. A topographic survey of the entry kiosk, conference center, private residence, significant trees and entry roads was conducted to develop the concepfival trail and park entrance design in this highly constrained and busy park setting. A fourth challenge to trail design in Study Area D is the crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard. Stevens Creek flows beneath Stevens Creek Boulevard between a private residence and the Blackberry Farm Golf Course on the east bank and the Stocklmeir property on the west bank. The City of Cupertino owns the property immediately downstream of the Stevens Creek Boulevard. The bridge is elevated above the floodplain and the roadway has not flooded in the recent past. However, homeowners downstream of Stevens Creek Boulevard have experienced localized flooding and streambank repairs have been undertaken by the Santa Clara Valley Water District in this area. During significant storm events, flooding does occur at Blackberry Farm and the Stocklmeir property which are located in the natural floodplain of the creek. The geomorphology of the creek and the design of the Stevens Creek Boulevard bridge pose challenges to developing a grade-separated trail crossing that would allow pedestrians and bicyclists to pass beneath the roadway separate from automobile traffic. An underpass was determined to be infeasible. TRAIL ALIGNMENT The preferred trail alignment extends along the east bank of the Stevens Creek through Blackberry Farm. 'This route requires a single pedestrian/bicycle bridge to connect the park on the east bank with the Stocklmeir site on the west bank. The alignment also includes the reconfiguration of the 8�' golf tee, removal and relocation of several maintenance buildings and storage spaces and the relocation or reduction in size of the basketball, volleyball and softball fields. T'he Stocklmeir site is situated on the west bank of Stevens Creek. The Stevens Creek Trail is proposed through the Stocklmeir site between the creek and the orange orchard. The creekside alignment provides views into Stevens Creek, but is also in close proximity to the golf course. This route will require enhancement of the riparian vegetation to shade the creek and screen trail users from errant golf balls. Additional screening from golf balls may be required in specific locations along the trail. The trail would exit the Stocklmeir property between the existing driveway and the creek to reach Stevens Creek Boulevard. Trail users would cross the creek on the existing pedestrian/bicycle bridge. A short section of trail would be built parallel to Stevens Creek Boulevard to extend the trail from the Stocklmeir property to the trail crossing proposed at the Stevens Creek PAGE 92 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D Boulevard/Phar Lap Drive intersection. The Task Force and community supported all of these general trail concepts. A trail crossing is proposed at Stevens Creek Boulevard. A crosswalk with pedestrian activated pavement lighting and warning signals in either direction on Steven Creek Boulevard is proposed to connect trail users to the on-street bicycle system. The trail crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard is required to assist residents living to the north to safely access the trail and to provide a connection to the roadway for bicyclists who must follow the rules of the road which include riding with the flow of traffic. Bicyclists wishing to head west on Stevens Creek Boulevard, toward Foothill Boulevard and Rancho San Antonio County Park, must cross the street to enter the existing bicyde lanes. A three-leg crosswalk with pedestrian activated pavement lighting and approaching traffic warning signals is proposed at Phar Lap Drive and Stevens Creek Boulevard (See Map 10- Study Area D Trail Alignment -McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard). The crosswalk on Stevens Creek Boulevard will be located on the west side of the intersection to minimize trail users movements. The remaining two legs would cross Phar Lap Drive and the entrance to Blackbeny Farm Golf Course and the Blue Pheasant Restaurant. The crosswalk would be complete with safety and traffic calming measures. The crosswalk on Stevens Creek Boulevard would include flashing indicator lights in the pavement identical to those installed at Monta Vista High School. All the crosswalks would be painted a red brick color, similar to the crosswalks near the Cupertino Post Office. Median islands with fencing and pedestrian refuges will be installed in the center of Stevens Creek Boulevard to direct trail users to the crosswalks and to provide some traffic calming in this residential area. Motorist warning lights would also be installed on Stevens Creek Boulevard on both down grades that approach the crossing (See Illustration 1 - Stevens Creek Bouievard Trail Crossing at Phar Lap Drive). This trail crossing solution maintains the connection to Stevens Creek Boulevard in the most logical location, near the trail exit from the Stocklmeir site and close to the local bus stops. It minimizes neighborhood concerns regarding safety, noise and air quality impacts. The route is proposed as a multi-use, all weather trail open to bicyclists, walkers, joggers, strollers and in-line skaters. The trail is feasible with a change in the fee collection operation at Blackberry Farm. A 10-foot wide path with 2 1/2-foot gravel shoulders was deemed feasible through the 33-acre farm. The trail surfacing could take several forms including asphalt paving, concrete, a pine resin mixed with native soil or other all weather material to be specified during the development of construction drawings. The multi-use trail will support a wide variety of recreational activities and alternative transportation modes. The all weather surface has the lowest long-term maintenance costs. Approximately 0.75 miles of multi-use trail could be developed within Study Area D. A multi-use trail was preferred by the majority of the Task Force members. A narrower, natural surface trail was presented as an alternative to the multi-use trail. This style of trail was STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 93 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D supported by some residents. The Cupertino Parks and Recreation Commission supported a multi-use trail constructed of a non-asphalt based surfacing material. A�cESS PonvTs Access points provide a direct connection to the trail from neighborhoods, recreational facilities and the public transportation and roadway systems. Study Area D access points are intended to accommodate trail users wishing to reach the trail by bicycle or on foot. Access points are improved and may include short segments of trail, gates, bollards and signage. Access points are identified at specific locations to minimize cross traffic and provide safe access to the trail (See Map 10 - Study Area D Trail Alignment- McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard). Trail access is proposed from Stevens Creek Boulevard and Byrne Avenue. Study Area D can also be reached from McClellan Ranch, Blackberry Farm and the Stocklmeir site (See Figure 10). STAGING AREAS Parking was a concern of the neighborhoods surrounding the trail alignment. Cupertino has suffered from a significant lack of parking as the population has grown and become further reliant upon the automobile as the primary form transportation even for short distance trips. Parking has overflowed from the local schools as more students individually drive, instead of walk, bike or bus, to school. The traffic congestion and parking associated with Blackberry Farm has been a long-standing concern of the Monta Vista neighborhhod. Shared parking has been implemented by Blackberry Farm to handle the overflow of parking when the park hosts large events. On these special occasions, park visitors use the school parking lots during non-school times and are shuttled to Blackberry Farm. Parking has also been a concern at the Blue Pheasant Restaurant and Golf Course. During busy times, patrons were parking in local neighborhoods. Homeowners along the trail route feel that any additional attraction will only add to the already significant parking concern. This concern was relayed by the Meadows of Cupertino Homeowners Association, Scenic Circle neighborhood and Monta Vista neighborhood. In order to prepare a response to the parking concern, the consultant team evaluated trail use findings from the Stevens Creek Trail in Mountain View � and several locations of the San Francisco Bay Trail (Marin, Redwood Shores, and Mountain View) to understand parking demand at similar facilities. Trail use figures and prajected figures were also examined for the San Tomas Aquino/Saratoga Creek Trail, Los Gatos Creek Trail and Coyote Creek Trail. In reviewing these reports, it is also important to evaluate the how these trail settings compare to Cupertino. PAGE 94 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT To , � � ■ i�� i, � — �� 71� 7�� ■ AT-GRADE CROSSING WITH LIGHTED CROSSWALK CITY �F �UPERTINO - STEVENS CREEK TRAIL MAP 10 - STUDY AREA D TRAIL ALI�NMEN� - Mc�LELLAN RANCH THR�UGN BLACKBERRY FARM TO STEVEI�S CREEK BOULEVARD PREPARED BY:JANA SQKALE,ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING HILL ASSOCIATES N4RTH LEGEND Features of the Trai! -••�� Creek Channel (Low Flow� ■s i s:e o�s a s pjop�sed Soft Surface oaaooa00000 ��sting Soft Surface •••••••••••• Proposed Hard Surface �o��o�o�o o� Existing Hard Surface •••••••••�•• Proposed Single-Track Interpretive Trai{ n c n n n n n a o n n n Existing Singie-Track Interpretive Trail Boardwalk Alignmen� •■.■•■•■•■.■ SidewalkAlignment •■•■•■•■.■.■ On-Street Alignment c-o-a-a-a-o• Winter Trail Alignment � Ramps � Tunne� Underpasses � Pe�estrian/Bicycle Bridges � Crosswalk Natural Science Interpretive Area Q Historical/Cultura{Interpr�tive Area � Staging Area � Access Points ■ Mid-Biodc Crossings � PropQSed Signalized Intersections � Existing Signalized Intersections � Stop Sign IntersectiQns � At-Grade Railroad�rossing Bicycle� Transit Systems &ike Lanes iZ=��'�ii�Z Bike Routes � �� Union Pacific Railroad Land Uses , Edutational Campus � ��'; R�Q 1 Commercial _ _r...; Civic Center(lnstitutional Habitat Typ�s �1:._�. "?'�7k.��-��X` Jpen Grassland r�iparian Vegetation ��. �' Oak Woodland/Chaparral h ; Qak Woodland/Grassland °o°o°o°o°o°o Freshwater We�ands —•••-� In-stream Habitat � Orchard _ ----= Parksi Golf Course %%;%%�';%-'� Suburban Development TRAIL ALIGNME�TT - STUDY AREA D 1 ! � � � i I � i ` IjII � I � � I I ' � � � � � ' ► � ( ' I � � � ; ; � j � , i � � � � i � j I , ! � , � � � j { ! , i ! � ; , � : � f i � I � i + � ' � ; i J � � I � � � ; t � � ' � � � + ' ; � � � � ' I ' ( ; � { � . : ' � ' I ; � � � ; � , � , t . I ; I + , � ! I ' I ; � : i � 1 ( ; ; � i I ? 1 i ! � i i � } � Illustration 1 - Stevens Creek Boulevard Trail Crossing at Phar L.ap Drive PRE-PRINT FINAL STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 97 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D The Stevens Creek Trail in Cupertino is surrounded primarily by residential neighborhoods (similar to the Bay Trail in Redwood Shores). It does not link with major transit hubs such as CalTrain, Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) or Capital Corridor commuter rail lines or Light Rail (such as the Coyote Creek Trail in San Jose and Milpitas, Stevens Creek Trail in Mountain View and San Tomas Aquino/Saratoga Creek Trail in Santa Clara). The Stevens Creek Trail will be part of a 54-mile trail connecting the San Francisco Bay to the Pacific Ocean. However, the vast majority of trail users will traverse only short segments of this route. The trail will be primarily used by local residents. T'he land uses surrounding the Stevens Creek Trail in Mountain View are residential, high tech/research and development and commercial/retail. There are 30,000 jobs located within one mile of the trail (North Bayshore, NASA/Ames Research Center and Downtown Mountain View) and most of Mountain View's 70,000 residents live within two miles of the trail. Given this setting, it is not surprising to learn that 65% of the trail use is purely recreational while 35% of the use is utilitarian. T'he trail serves several utilitarian functions. It connects homes to jobs, children to schools and residents to the post office, local shops, medical offices, etc. via an auto-free pathway. It also provides a route to many of Mountain View's recreational destinations, as is the case in Cupertino. Trail use is generally higher on the weekends than the weekdays. The peak usage periods are from 10:30 AM to 1:30 PM on Saturdays and Sundays and from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM (dusk) on summer weeknights. During a May 1999 weekday, approximately 1,000 trail users were counted over a 14-hour survey period. The following weekend in May 1999, approximately 1,250 trail users were counted over the same 14-hour period. During the peak periods on both days approximately 100 trail users passed the survey point per hour (City of Mountain View, 1999). These numbers might be compared to the Bay Trail in Redwood Shores, a primary residential area. During the peak weekend and weekday periods at Redwood Shores approximately 15 trail users passed the survey point per hour (Sokale and Trulio, 2001). It is likely that the Stevens Creek Trail in Cupertino will not reach the trail use numbers seen in Mountain View due to the lack of connections to major transit and employment centers. However, it is likely that the numbers will be higher than those experienced at Redwood Shores due to the proximity to the open space lands surrounding the creek and the truly beautiful scenery and vistas afforded by the proposed trail routes. Mountain View has conducted numerous surveys on trail use and parking. Throughout these surveys, it appears that approximately 7% of users reach the trail via a car that must be parked at a staging area. The vast majority of users (93%) reached the trail under their owned power by walking, cycling, jogging or in-line skating. Parking demand varies by location, but was similar on weekends and weekdays. The parking demand was the greatest at schools STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PaGE 99 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D that are located directly adjacent to the trail. At two school sites between 20 and 30 cars parked, over the course of the 14-hour survey period, to use the trail. In several locations of lower parking demand between 0 and 5 cars parked during the 14 hour observation period (Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, 2001). The Mountain View surveys demonstrate that parking demand is relatively small. Incorporating numerous pedesfirian/bicycle access points along the trail and providing a variety of staging areas along the route can diffuse the an already limited parking demand create by a pedestrian and bicycle trail. Staging areas are planned to accommodate those who wish to drive to a trailhead. A staging area provides automobile parking, access to the trail and amenities such as restrooms, drinking fountains and signage. The staging areas in Study Area D are located at existing parks situated along the trail (See Figure 10). Additional parking is planned at Blackberry Farm Golf Course and the Blue Pheasant Restaurant. A staging area is proposed at the Blue Pheasant Restaurant/Golf Course parking area. Currently, this parking area has 84 public parking spaces,3 staff parking spaces and 4 handicapped accessible parking areas for a total of 91 parking stalls. The abandoned Stevens Creek Road frontage that lies directly in front of the Blue Pheasant is proposed to be formally added to this parking area and the entire site reconfigured to accommodate additional vehicles and a trail connection. Reconfiguration of the parking area covld yield an additiona122 parking spaces with the use of a low retaining wall. It is further recommended that 5 of the spaces be designated as trail parking with pavement markings and signs. The remaining new spaces would be incorporated into the Blue Pheasant parking area to provide additional vehicle space at this busy Cupertino location. INTERPRETIVE STATIONS Interpretive Stations are trailside way points that provide opportunities to experience scenic vistas, observe the flora and fauna of the creek environment, reflect on local history and/or learn about hydraulic, geologic or biological phenomena. These stations may include benches, overlooks or interpretive signs or monuments. Study Area D includes two historical interpretive stations (See Map 10 - Study Area D Trail Alignment - McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevarc�. The historical monument that details the life of Elisha Stephens is recognized and designated as historical interpretive site. This existing monument is located in the parking area of the Blue Pheasant Restaurant. An interpretive site is also recommended at the Stocklmeir site. PAGE 100 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D � ��°'S�, isr` .a��r.�'+��,a'�i�"�t'-� �` ' �� .�� ::� ,. ��y.. �� -� �� . r �.� .�"'� � "$ � � � ,`�� ,t��,d��`�` ��y,��: 8.. i,�. z b' ,�" .; % Y,� c '�r '� .�y T�� 5 "�'�� `�� ,4�1"X � .. .�� '�� h � t � .�' +t � A �+. '�„�'.. �c �a',� � 3rz.�,,��'ar` f'�-,�"�: .� ,��i,� ,�. �-��m�� ,� �,,�� .� �- �$ �'�t-�''�t.�a '�s. x --r � _ s 4" �°i:, r .�,�c'«^. ,-' � ._.a�.v „��-y �'w, , i ,� °?'`e r ' � '^'� � �- � ; _ ,.,f .. . .. e_r . - � � .:. � �: .' �,: . _ � „ Trail Routes Miles Trail Crossings ♦All Weather Multi-Use Path 0.75 ♦Stevens Cxeek Boulevard Total 0.75 Access Points Staging Areas ♦ McClellan Ranch • Blackberry Farm ♦ Blackberry Farm • Blackberry Farm Golf Course # Byrne Avenue and Blue Pheasant Restaurant � Stockimeir Site ♦ Stevens Creek Boulevard Figure 10-Summary of Study Area D Trail lmprovements REJECTED ALTERNATIVES A west bank alignment which required five pedestrian/bicycle bridges, reconfiguration of the 8�' golf tee, relocation of barbecue facilifiies at the Hillside and Sycamore picnic sites and reduction or reconfiguration of the Horseshoe Bend picnic areas was presented. This alternative was rejected from further analysis due to environmental impacts associated with the multiple bridge crossings and neighborhood privacy and security concerns. A pedestrian/bicycle bridge with a gated entry intended to serve as an access point for the Scenic Circle neighborhood was rejected by residents. A grade-separated tunnel crossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard was rejected due to lack of land availability, environmental impacts and neighborhood privacy and security concerns. A signalized intersection at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Phar Lap Drive was eliminated from further consideration due to neighborhood concerns regarding safety, noise and air quality impacts. A spur trail connection from Stevens Creek Boulevard to Varian Park was rejected due to lack of land ownership or recreational easements in the area. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 101 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D REJECTED PETITION ALIGNMENTS Qn October 2, 2001 the Stevens Creek Task Force received a petition from area residents requesting the equivalent evaluation of alternative trail routes that were not located within the Stevens Creek corridor (See Appendix H - Request to Study Alternatives Alignments in Study Area D). This petition was also brought to the Cupertino City Council on October 1, 2001. These route indicated in the petition were ultimately rejected by the Task Force after review of additional information provided on these alignments. A description of the alignments and reasons for rejection are provided as part of this feasibility report. Three alternative alignments were indicated in the petition. The petition authors were also open to the review of other routes that might be identified by the Task Force, public or consultant team. It should be noted that the goal of the feasibility study was to determine if the Stevens Creek Trail could be developed within the Stevens Creek corridor. A review of the alignments identified in the petifiion follows. Alternate Alignment #1 would connect the closed quarry in Study Area B via an on-street route to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alternate alignment would follow Linda Vista Drive to McClellan Road to Stevens Canyon Road/Foothill Boulevard to Stevens Creek Boulevard to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alignment is comprised of existing bicycle lanes and routes. These on-street facilities had been indicated on the trail alignment maps since March 27, 2001. These routes would provide an on-street connection should a route through the creek corridor be determined to be infeasible. This alternative route exclusively uses, busy collector streets. McClellan Road offers steep windy grades. This route does not provide access to the Stevens Creek corridor or the approximately 60 acres of publicly owned open space located along the creek. Alternate Alignment #2 would connect the closed quarry in Study Area B via an off-street route through the privately owned Hanson Permanente Cement to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alternate alignment would follow existing trails in Stevens Creek County Park to a street crossing of Stevens Canyon Road to an �off-street,alignment through the privately owned and actively managed Hanson Permanente Cement to an alignment along the active Union Pacific Railroad corridor to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alignment concept was brought to the attention of the Task Force on July 24, 2001. An off-street connection between Stevens Creek County Park and Rancho San Antonio County Park was explored on lands west of Stevens Canyon Road. The lands west of Stevens Canyon Road are located in the City of Cupertino and in the County of Santa Clara. Properties west of Stevens Canyon Road are in private ownership. Large landowners include Hanson Permanente Cement. Haul roads exist through this active quarry. The lack of public land is one obstacle to providing a trail route through the hills. If trail easements could be secured from the private property owners, the current PAGE 102 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D quarry operations in the hills present a second obstacle to a trail route. Heavy equipment traffic is ongoing through these areas. These operations are not necessarily compatible with trail use and public access. A crossing of Stevens Canyon Road also possess significant challenges. The 1995 Countywide Trails Master Plan does indeed show a link connecting Rancho San Antonio County Park and Stevens Creek County Park. It is indicated in the county trail plan as the DeAnza Trail (Route R1-A). The county trail plan indicates a trail corridor trom the southern edge of the San Jose Diocese property through the area of the active quarty to the northwest corner of Stevens Creek County Park. This hillside trail route may become a reality when Hanson Permanente Cement changes functions in fifteen to twenty years. In addition to the ownership and safety issues associated with an active quarry route, the feasibility of using all or part of the Union Pacific Railroad right of way was investigated by Cupertino as part of the Union Pacific Rail Trail Feasibility Study (Alta Transportation Consulting, October, 2001). This feasibility study which was coordinated with the Union Pacific Railroad indicates that a trail from Hanson Permanente Cement to Stevens Creek Boulevard is infeasible until rail operations desist. T'he proposed trail alignment does not meet the criteria required by Union Pacific Railroad. In summary, it is unlikely that a trail could be routed through the quarry or this section of the railroad right of way until which time a land use change occurs. Alternate Alignment #3 would connect the closed quarry via an on-street route to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alignment was the petitioners' preferred choice of route. This alternate alignment would follow existing trails in Stevens Creek County Park to a street crossing of Stevens Canyon Road to a widened and improved Stevens Canyon Road/Foothill Boulevard to Stevens Creek Boulevard to Rancho San Antonio County Park. This alignment is identified in the 1998 Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan (City of Cupertino, 1998). Bicycle lanes have been marked on the pavement from Santa Lucia Road to Stevens Creek Boulevard. However, to date no unprovements have been made south of Santa Lucia Road. The City of Cupertino has completed construction documents to widen the roadway from Santa Lucia Road to the entrance to Stevens Creek County Park. This construction project would add sufficient pavement to allow for shared bicycle and vehicular traffic (Class IIIA - Shared Roadway). Two 12-foot vehicular traffic lanes and two 4-foot shoulders are planned with this construction praject. A Class IIIA designation is indicated where bicycle lanes would be preferable, but are infeasible due to right of way and topographical constraints. No facilities for pedestrians are currently planned in this constrained area. A contract for these roadway improvements was awarded November 19, 2001. The route exclusively uses, busy collector streets which are all traversed by heavy quarry trucks. The route provides no facilities for pedestrians and is likely too challenging for beginner bicyclists and family outings. This route does not provide access to the Stevens Creek corridor or STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 103 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D the approximately 60 acres of publicly owned open space located along the stream. REJECTED BLACKBERRY FARM ENTRANCE ALIGNMENT A technically feasible, but heavily engineered and ultimately rejected trail alignment that separates the free trail from the fee-based park was proposed near the entrance to Blackberry Farm. This trail route is documented below for future reference in the development of the Blackberry Farm Master Plan. Although the engineered elements of the trail were rejected, it is hoped that future efforts will learn from this feasibility investigation. Several successful elements of this study might be carried forth into the Blackberry Farm Master Plan. These include the new park entrance with central kiosk and trail access from Byrne Avenue. The trail extends from McClellan Ranch into Blackberry Farm along the eastern edge of the softball, volleyball and basketball play areas (See Map 10 - Study Area D Trail Alignment - McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard). As the trail approaches the existing restrooms and maintenance buildings, the alignment begins to descend in order to provide a grade-separated crossing of the entry road that serves the southern end of Blackberry Farm. This 160-foot section of trail is proposed as an open air, depressed pathway (See Map 11 - Study Area D - Blackberry Farm Trail Alignment with Depressed Pathway and Tunnel Crossings). The collection of maintenance buildings and storage spaces will be demolished and consolidated elsewhere within the park. These facilities may be relocated below the conference center and adjacent to the golf course. This area is less subject to flooding. Public restrooms will be rebuilt in the southern end of the park for the convenience of patrons and trail users. The restrooms may be designed to provide back-to-back facilities to serve both park users and trail enthusiasts. The open air, depressed pathway will be excavated into the ground. The depression of the pathway will vary from 0 to 8 feet. The pathway will be the deepest beneath the two entry roads. The pathway will be 10 feet wide at the base and slightly wider at the top as a result of angled retaining walls. The retaining walls would be faced in stone. Vines would cascade over the retaining walls from planters. A safety fence would be installed on either side of the depressed pathway (See Map 11 - Study Area D - Blackberry Farm Trail Alignment with Depressed Pathway and Tunnel Crossings - Section 'A' - Adjacent to Private Residence and Section 'B' -Adjacent to Conference Center). At the southern entry road the irail is located 8 feet below grade in short, 40- foot tunnel. The depressed pathway is located horizontally 25 feet from the property line of the private residence situated inside Blackberry Farm. The PAGE 104 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT � � � EXISTING DEGIG o��i�A� �i�� /�r�;^�Sc� / fi'!AN?1Nb5 -s�� r�c� RAMP TO � i Itl(1 �� " 12� I� a�r�ox. �,,.�s � �xop. f LINE � � � 5i0iVP Y�"t�fiZ i'YALL, TYP. �.c�� • 308.14 i¢ECA1�It5UREi� �R4!�D 1 . �TION A-AQIACENT TO PRIVkTE RE�IDENCE NTS SECTION B-ADIACENT TO CONFERENCE CENTER NTS �� Stevpns Creek � ■ ■ ■ ! ! ■ Future Boardwalk s • i • • +� • Future Trai!on Grade � t=uture Tunnel Future Rarnp Fu�ure Elevaied Trestle Bridg� Existing Tree Canopy r"^-'r�, >:., �: "` �A�� txisting Galf Caurse �� Golf Course Playing Areas Golr Course Lake aECTION C-TRAIL ADJACENT TO GOLF COURSE NT$ / � � CITY �F CUPERTIND - STEVENS �REEK TRAIL MAP 11 - STUDY AR�A D - BLA�KBERRY ��iRf� iRAiL ��iGN�iEN� 1�iiTH D��RESSED PAiHWAY AND TUN�lEL �ROSSINGS PREPARED BY:JANA SOKALE,ENVIRONMEPlTAL PLANNING HILL ASSOCIATES o �oo rt zoo ff soo n soo n N OR TH — s / TRAIL ALIGNIVIENT – STUDY AREA D �`� �—. � �� %/ ��,�'r1 � }'`�- . � � � , a .�^�� •• � j� � � / .; �`� ___ � /, IZlustration 2 - Stoeklmeir Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge at the Sth Tee _ � Y---� � 'j � _� ; , � _, �.�.- � ��i ; (', � � � _ �: ;: ' `M t� .� �" , �r � � -�,,,i. T _..:� PRE-PRINT FINAL STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 107 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D elevation of the southern entry road is raised 2 feet to accommodate the tunnel. Upon exiting this tunnel the trail is at-grade for a short distance before again descending toward the northern entry road located near the conference center. This segment of the depressed pathway extends across the highest portion of the sloped lawn area that surrounds the swimming pools. The trail � is depressed approximately 5 feet below the elevation of the lawn. It crosses the northern entry road in a second short, 42-foot tunnel near the site of the existing entry kiosk. All of the existing oak trees around the park entrance are preserved with this design. After passing beneath the northern entry road, the trail is at grade and parallels the conference center retaining�wall before jogging north toward the golf course. The entire length of the depressed pathway and two tunnels is 452 feet. The trail extends at grade along the mesh net fencing that separates the park from the golf course. The trail crosses Stevens Creek on a pedestrian/bicycle bridge near the 8�` Tee to reach the south end of the Stocklmeir orange orchard. The bridge will be located 100 feet from the edge of the Meadows of Cupertino property liine. The bridge will be sited to avoid impacting the large sycamores that line t:he creek (See Illustration 2 - Stocklmeir Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge at the 8t" Tee). A trail connection is proposed to extend in the opposite direction toward the conference center. This alignment will connect to Byrne Avenue to provide a neighborhood access point (See Map 10 - Study Area D Trail Alignment - McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard). All of the at-grade segments of trail through Blackberry Farm will be fenced from the fee-based park through the use of stone columns and wire screen panels that will be covered in perennial vines. Three foot high wire screen panels are proposed although the fencing height co�uld easily be increased for additional separation (See Map 11 - Study Area D - Blackberry Farm Trail Alignment with Depressed Pathway and Tunnel Crossings - Section C - Trail Adjacent to Gotf Course). Several features are added to enhance thf�privacy and security of the adjacent private residence. The existing stone wall that separates the entry road and the home will be rebuilt as a result of the raising the road 2 feet to accommodate the grade-separated tunnel. The stone retaining wall will be lengthened to provide additional securiity behind the home. The retaining wall will wrap around the home site to meet the hillside in the rear of the home. The height of the wall along the eritry road may be increased 1 to 2 feet depending upon the owner's interest. The height of the remaining portions of the wall will be designed to meet the E�xisting grade of the backyard. The nearby maintenance buildings will be removed from behind the home to make way for the trail. The trail will be located 25 feet from the property line. Native trees and shrubs will be planted between the edge of the trail and the property line to enhance privacy and visual appeal. The native trees and shrubs will be selected to fit the homeov�mer's request. This planting concept is similar to the revegetation proposed along the old haul road in Study Area STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 109 TRAIL ALIGNMENT - STUDY AREA D C. The depressed pathway located in this area will be fenced to prevent park users from entering the trail in undesignated locations (See Map 11 - Study Area D - Blackberry Farm Trail Alignment with Depressed Pathway and Tunnel Crossings-Section 'A'-Adjacent to Private Residence). The entrance to Blackberry Farm has been reconfigured to provide a better sense of entry, more efficiently accommodate park traffic and conveniently route trail users into the park without sacriticing user fees. The existing reservations building is removed and replaced with central entry kiosk similar to those used in county, state and national parks. Two entry lanes and a single exit lane provide for efficient traffic flow. A direct trail route provides a connection to the entry kiosk for trail users wishing to use the rec�reational amenities at Blackberry Farm (See Map 12 - Study Area D- Blackberry Farm Park Entrance with Central Kiosk and Trail). HABTTAT ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIfiS See Chapter 4 - Study Area C for habitat enhancement opportunities relevant to the restoration of the riparian and aquatic habitats of the Stevens Creek corridor. PAGE 110 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT � a , RAISE OF R ��i+V T� ELEV.=� ��U�� . �,.��'�f PLAN VIE�I OF RECONFIGURED PARK �NTRANCE SCALE 1"= 20' CITY �F CUP�RTIN� - �TEVENS �REEK TRAIL MAP 12 - STUDY AREA D - BLACKBERRY FARM ENTRANCE INITH �ENTRAL KI�SK AND TRAIL PREPARED BY:JANA SOKALE,ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING HILL ASSOCIATES o ,�ft �ft �� NORTH _ � �� : : B IBLI l�:APHY OG STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alta Transportation Consulting. Union Pacific Rail Trail Feasibility Study. October, 2001. Colorado State Parks. Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind, A Handbook for Trail Planners. 1998. Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan. City of Cupertino, 1998. Cupertino Community Congress Summary Report. City of Cupertino, May 3, 2002. Cupertino General Plan. City of Cupertino. 1993. Cupertino Pedestrian Tr.ansportation Plan. City of Cupertino, 2001. Cupertino Residential Hillside Ordinance. Cupertino Flood Zone Map. Flink, Charles A., Kristine Olka, and Robert M. Searns;Rails-to-Trails Conservancy. Trails for the Twenty-First Century (Second Edition): Planning, Design, and Management Manual for Multi-Use Trails. Washington, D.C.� Island Press, 2001. Flink, Charles A. and Robert M. Searns. Greenways, A Guide to Planning, Design, and Development. Washington, DC: Island Press,The Conservation Fund, 1993. Habitat Restorafiion Group. The Riparian Corridor Policy Study. City of San Jose, San Jose, CA, 1994. Heritage and Specimen Tree Preservation. City of Cupertino. Hiss,Tony. T'he Experience of Place. New York: Alfred A.Knopf, Inc., 1990. Lands of the Diocese of San Jose-Draft Environmental Impact Report for Request to Amend the General Plan. City of Cupertino.June 24, 1994. Lands of the Diocese of San Jose -Final Environmental Impact Report for Request to Amend the General Plan. City of Cupertino. August 31, 1995. Little, Charles E.Greenways for America. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990. McClellan Ranch Park Master Plan.McClellan Ranch Park Community Advisory Committee. May 19, 1993. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 113 BIBLIOGRAPHY Meyer, Mohaddes Associates, Inc. Stevens Creek Trail Transportation Study for the City of Mountain View, March 2001. Mountain View, City of. Final Stevens Creek Trail Monitoring Report for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, 1999. Rancho San Antonio County Park Master Plan. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department. May, 1992. Rancho San Antonio County Park Master Plan Negative Declaration Package. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Departtnent. Apri18, 1992. Santa Clara Countywide Bicycle Plan. County of Santa Clara, 2000. Smith,Daniel S. and Paul C.Hellmund eds Ecology of Greenways: Design and Function of Linear Conservation Areas. Minneapolis: Universifiy of Minnesota Press, 1993. Sokale,Jana and Lynne Trulio. Wildlife and Public Access Study: Preliminary First Year Analyses, 2001. Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department. September 7, 1993. Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan Environmental Impact Report. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department. February 1994. Seymour, R. and M. Westphal. Results of a one-year survey .for amphibians on lands managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,Mountain View, CA, 2000. The Conservation Fund and Colorado State Parks State Trails Program. The Effect of Greenways on Property Values and Public Safety. March 1995. The Conservation Fund and Colorado State Parks State Trails Program. The Impacts of Rail-Trails, A Study of Users and Nearby Property 4wners from Three Trails. Washington,DC: U.S.Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Rivers,Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program, February 1992. The Planning Collaborative Inc., Stevens Creek: A Plan of Opportunities,June 1980. U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (1999). Recommendations for Accessibility Guidelines: Outdoor Developed Areas Final Report. Washington, DC. PAGE 114 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT BIBLIOGRAPHY U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Admirtistration. Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access -Part II of II:Best Practices Design Guide,September 2001. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE 115 BIBLIOGRAPHY PAGE 116 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT � : APPE DI E N C S STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS MEETING TYPE AND CONTENT DATE SCT Task Force- Kick-off Meeting Jan. 16, 2001 SCT Task Force -Technical Reports Meeting Feb. 27, 2001 � SCT Task Force - Study Area A Study Session Mar. 27, 2001 P&R Commission- Praject Update and Study Area A Review Apr. 5, 2001 SCT Task Force - Study Area B Study Session Apr. 24, 2001 SCT Task Force - Study Area C Study Session May 22, 2001 Linda Vista Neighborhood Meeting June 20, 2001 McClellan Ranch Task Force Meeting June 21, 2001 SCT Task Force-Study Area D Study Session June 26, 2001 P&R Commission-Project Update on Study Areas A,B, � &D July 12, 2001 SCT Task Force- Area D Recommendations July 24, 2001 Linda Vista Neighborhood Meeting Sept.19, 2001 Linda Vista Neighborhood Meeting Sept.26, 2001 SCT Task Force - Area C Recommendations Oct. 2, 2001 Blackberry Farm Neighborhood Meeting Oct. 23, 2001 SC'T Task Force- Study Area D Trail Design Study Session, Oct. 30, 2000 Presentation of the Operations and Maintenance Report and Trail Funding Report SCT Task Force-Presentations of the Trail Safety and Security Nov. 27, 2001 Report and the Habitat Restoration Report SCT Task Force Workshop Dec. 4, 2001 SCT Task Force-Study Area D Trail Design Recommendations Jan. 22, 2002 SCT Task Force- Present Draft Feasibility Report May 21, 2002 P&R Commission Meeting to Review Draft Feasibility Report June 6, 2002 SCT Task Force - Review Draft Feasibility Report Comments June 18, 2002 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE A-1 APPENDIX A - SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY MEETINGS P&R Commission Meeting to Review Draft Feasibility Report July 11, 2002 Circulate Draft Initial Study far Public Review Environmental Review Committee Meeting to Review Aug. 14, 2002 Draft Feasibility Report and Draft Initial Study for Study Area A Planning Commission Meeting to Present Final Initial Aug. 26, 2002 Study under the Guidelines of CEQA for Study Area A and Review the Feasibility Study for Conformance with the General Plan County P&R Commission Meeting to Review Draft Feasibility Sept. 4, 2002 Report and Draft Initial Study for Study Area A City Council Meeting to Present Final Feasibility Study and Sept. 23, 2002 Environmental Reports for Adoption and Certification County Housing, Land Use, Environment and Transportation Oct. 23, 2002 Committee Meeting to Review Draft Feasibility Report Report and Draft Initial Sfiudy for Study Area A County Board of Supervisors Meeting to Present Final Nov. 19, 2002 Feasibility Study and Environmental Reports for Adoption and Certification PAGE A-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX B - CUPERTINO COMMUNITY CONGRESS SUMMARY REPORT STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 PAGE B-1 APPENDIX B - CUPERTINO COMMUNITY CONGRESS SUMMARY REP4RT PAGE B-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 CITY OF CUPE1�TiN�► Comm � ' u n it Con re Y � �� May 3, 2002 Summary Report P�ar� U BUILDING COMMUNITY Community Congress May 3, 2002 Summary Report - General Plan Update ITY OF BUILDING COMMUNITY CUPE�TINO Sponsored by the Cupertino City Councii Mayor Richard Lowenthal Vice Mayor Michael Chang Council Member Sandra James Council Member Patrick Kwok Council Member polly Sandoval Contents Tonic Area page# • Introduction ------------------------------- 1 • Walk-Ability,Bike-Ability and Trails ------------------------------- 5 • Neighborhoods _______________________________ � • Circulation ------------------------------- 11 • Environmental Resources/Sustainability ------------------------------- 15 � Development Nodes ------------------------------- 17 • Commercial and Office Development ------------------------------- 21 • Housing ------------------------------- 23 • Open Space and Pazks ------------------------------- 25 Prepared by: MIG, Inc. 800 Hearst Avenue Berkeley, CA 94710 City of Cupertino • City Manager's Office • Department of Community Development lntraduction As the City of Cupertino prepares to update its General Plan,community residents came together to consider,discuss and make recommendations on potential policy directions or strategies that preserve and enhance the City's environmental, residential, and commercial assets while improving the quality of life for those who live and work here. The directions presented in this report resulted from community participation and will guide and inform the City in updating the General Plan and implementing it over time. This document summarizes the Community Congress that took place on May 3, 2002 at the De Anza College Campus Center. It describes the activities and purpose of the event and documents community feedback on a set of potential strategies proposed by the City and presented at the Congress for public review. Ovenriew of the Objectives of the Congress In preparing for the Congress, staff from various City departments created a list of potential strategies pertaining to eight different areas related to Cupertino's growth and development,community character,transportation and natural resources, including the following topic areas: ■ Walk-Ability,Bike-Ability and Trails ■ Neighborhoods ■ Circulation ■ Environmental Resources/Sustainability ■ Development Nodes ■ Commercial and Office Development ■ Housing ■ Open Space and Parks Congress attendees expressed their opinions on the potential strategies along a spectrum ranging from strong agreement to strong disagreement. Possible pros and cons were listed next to each potential strategy, that is,the implications or trade-offs that could be associated with the implementation of each. The idea behind these potential strategies was to provide a structured yet wide range of options participants could consider, as well as their benefits and costs. Participants voted using sticky dots indicating their level of agreement on the strategies shown on each poster, organized by the topics listed above. The dots were later tallied and are summarized in this report. City of Cupertino Communiry Con ress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 1 The General Plan Update The General Plan is a statement of goals,policies, and programs that guides Cupertino's long-range development. It is an expression of our community's vision and priorities and provides a sense of direction. California state law requires each � city to adopt a General Plan. Cupertino adopted its General Plan in 1993. It encompasses a set of long-range goals for the City's physical and social development—goals that best meet the needs of its residents. The Plan contains five elements: land use�ommunity chazacter, housing,transportation,environmental resources and public health and safety. It embodies a vision for the City, stating: "The General Plan foresees a future for Cupertino in which our growth is carefully managed, thus maintaining and enhancing our quality of life,protecting our natural heritage and ensuring long-term economic vitality."� The City initiated a series of planning events in early 2002 that will culminate in the formulation of a General Plan Update later this year,that echoes the collective vision of the citizens of Cupertino and responds to contemporary demands and issues. Therefore, the Update is an important step in maintaining a strong, safe,and prosperous City. Congress The Community Congress began at three o'ciock in the afternoon of May 3, 2002, at De Anza College and lasted until approximately eight o'clock that evening. Nearly 200 participants attended. The event began with an open house in which attendees circulated freely to review the different issue stations and become acquainted with the policy areas and potential strategies listed on the charts. Participants were given "topic cards" and received stickers on visiting each of the eight stations. Completed cards were than returned and entered into a drawing that occurred at the end of the evening. The Congress officially commenced with welcoming remarks from Mayor Richard Lowenthal. Steve Piasecki,the City's Director of Community Development, gave an overview of the General Plan Update and stressed the importance of community participation in its creation. Doug Suisman of Suisman Urban Design then presented a Powerpoint slide show and talk entitled"Building Community and Creating a Sense of Place,"which examined some of the concepts and history of community planning and placed them in the context of Cupertino's history,current assets, opportunities and challenges. Doug Suisman stressed that if residents want high quality"places"where people can gather and comfortably interact then the community must balance the needs of roads, referred to as "paths,"in relation to "place." The presentation was followed by a preview of the evening's activities by Carolyn Verheyen of Moore Iacofano Goltsman,Inc. (MIG), who briefed participants with instructions for the upcoming dot exercise,small group sessions and final reporting of group conclusions. �City of Cupertino website www.cupertino.org City of Cupertino Community Conqress, May 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 2 The Dot Exercise and Smali Group Sessions The dot exercise collected and gauged input on potential strategies to be incorporated into the General Plan Update. Participants were given one dot for each strategy with which to cast their opinion. They placed the dots according to their level of agreement or disagreement with each strategy. The exercise encouraged participants to analyze and"weigh in"on optional policy directions as well as to generate a tally of support for each of the identified azeas, a collective memory of the event and results to guide future policy. Following the dot exercise,participants broke into two,hour-long, small group sessions on the eight issue areas and discussed the results of the dot exercise and suggested new strategies that should be considered in the overall General Plan Update process. Participants chose which issue groups to attend based on their personal interests. Each small group was supported by a representative of the City,to record remarks on lazge flip charts and a representative from MIG, to facilitate the discussion. The City representatives also helped clarify questions and concerns on the specifics of the potential strategies. During the fust part of the small group sessions,participants discussed policy strategies and interpreted the results of the dot exercise. The discussion was focused on the potential strategies and the reasons why they received or did not receive support. Participants also proposed new and revised strategies. Participant input was recorded and is listed later in this report. This general discussion was then transitioned into a more specific group task: Participants were asked to generate"One Bold Step,"a concrete and straightforward action that could be implemented as a practical step in the direction agreed upon by the groups. It could be short or long-term in nature. Because the groups had to debate and compromise on the issues,the Bold Steps were not necessarily a full group consensus but rather a single,discrete recommendation for action to the City. The groups were assigned to formulate a Bold Step, write it as a large poster and nominate a group representative to present it to the Congress as a whole. The first and second small group sessions were separated by a dinner for all participants. At the conclusion of the small group sessions,the entire Congress reassembled and each of the sixteen small groups sent its representatives to present the Bold Steps. Representatives were given the floor and microphone and used creativity and humor to present their groups' ideas to the audience. The Bold Steps were all received with applause. The night concluded on this note of optimism and a feeling that everyone had participated actively in discussion,deliberation and imagining an even better future for Cupertino. A drawing was held and winners were awarded prizes for their involvement. The Congress concluded with final remarks by the City Council on next steps in the creation of the General Plan Update. City of Cupertino Communify Conqress, May 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 3 Report Organization The remainder of this report summarizes the information generated at the Congress. In order to preserve the conceptual sequence in which the ideas were voted on and discussed,the information is presented by issue area. First,a summary chart of the � dot exercise is shown for each issue azea. Each chart contains the various potential strategies as proposed by the City on the large charts. In order to summarize and easily compare the data,the dot tallies were converted to percentages and the neutral votes were excluded. Therefore,the numbers appearing in the bar charts represent the percentages of people who either: 1) Strongly Agree, 2)Agree, 3)Disagree or 4) Strongly Disagree witli each strategy. In analyzing the charts,it is important to take into account the level of agreement or disagreement and consider why this might have been the case. The"Post-It Note"comments from the dot boards aze listed directly under the dot exercise tally. Each small group session began with general discussion on the topic and ultimately culminated in the formation of the Bold Step statements. The comments that were recorded on the flip charts appear below for each group,followed by the groups' respective Bold Steps. The single"Bold Step"is highlighted in yellow. Two of the written comments did not address any of the subject areas but instead focused on the organization of the congress. These comments are listed below: ❖ Well organized,but nothing for seniors. I think you want me to move out of Cupertino so you can get more tax$$for stupid things. ❖ Make sure people who live,rent,and/or own a business(not employees)to these meetings only. They actually own and work in person there.(Not people who own property and live somewhere else) The people who live here are the heart of Cupertino. City of Cupertino Community Conqress,May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 4 C�J�� .• dk-Ability, B ike-Ability & T rals ;Y S .�R � i } . 5F �F aF%` � �-.: � ' A '. Y " L `".' * .}# r'. .'+f�1 � �y 'v'a.,��'.t4� h� A .t < " . - Z„t 'x:"s£. 4 P`'" ? ( ;� . .;�. � . : .r: ._: ' Balancin mobili of auto with safe -�,� � �� ,; 9 �Y � �"_��"� ,� ��` � �, . . - "�t moveme�t of pedestrians&cyclists ��- � _z � +-'�,,��`� f ' - �� 3: . . „ . i I `41r� � J� �� . �}�,,v 4.,.�..` � � i f �1 .� r' I - ;,�.E.-s'KS'F,�et.� s�v, " Calm traffic(I.e.sfow speeds)on alI crty .'--�f�,�� ,;'.�'± ,; �� F 14 1 g�. . 1: streets ` '� � `,i�. r� .�� _ sc;�i l c . _ � .. r -.-.s � -� � y ��' .� « � 3',s��': . . �, _ %_ 7 � ,dr-rF`�--�°�'r�� ,�i� ..i� , ��Require that new development is integrated Y-�- �- 4: '3x"`�} ,., � .0�+� r,,, into neighborhoods and accessible to the ,�;�� ' :�. . 32' 3 � communiry. �y � , _ , � v .:..�r�...!-'`-ca�`�rt9,.r �-�,�.i�. ,,�°; < f`"�,�,�a �' ,,�� '"`�€'^`yy.�'��ss �..-�t� -..-� '�y�,'°F N �'�i�a��`'.'�3 4{,n'�� s 4�1c:-. �a � � r t �:[ �*"'j��, �� :f� �•~�.d.�a.�,�.,f�� r �_'. .� 3 6�� 5; z3 Y'e'},`°. '.x?y "..�s rz f 2. L.�t�`.�e�-��-+;-5..<�.�� :_� ..�+�..r>4s E�?'a�": 3'La-..- � Create a�k mile walk-able grid that serves ; � ' � h�, s�,� z �A C alt neighborhoods and stitches open '�`�'��^��i��'4�� 19' �° - �:: *�> -�' '�: x � 8 � spaces and parks together. � ,, � g �; r „� O , }� �j �' � �; 1 , y �� ,�-c �, � a - ��'' Y,'�?*. - _ . .� rs� 3' .�`. rr;�L-�.y �v.ak,�'��-��`.�. �: , <.�- ' �. Create trails along creeks and provide -'�t� - 6 :�� , , �.r 8 .., ped/bike trail access to/through hillsides ' "' ��` � - ' � ,' , � `.<: i, -.e c T_;.: ; :�� s F -� i ��'6 ��T`�°��`,�.�� e'�r,. - s'n' � .� � ��;�-e� � .� `s` i ' .�_ � -��y�'S^s - . g;-` - .53�. .tS_� .'��'< �5-? 7 5.-� '� ..... . . < : , . . -., �. - _ -_ ;e..:�...ar.'^ '_ Provide convenience commercial uses � '�� within 5 minute walki�g distance(1/4 mile) ��,3 ;� ?. 16`. 1 of all neighborhoods. _._. ._. ,.>. ,: .,...,.. , � , _ � ,.. � .�..,.t.... . . . . . t �:x ��.�� _ :.y.:. 'x '",` . I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% �Strongly Agree ❑Agree �Disagree ■Strongly Disagree "Sticky-Note" comments from the �alk-Ability,Bike-Ability & Trails Dot Board: ❖ Need to make bicyclists feel safe—so people with get out of their cars. °:• More pedestrian crosswalks. Should have a pedestrian controlled stoplight. ❖ Do not force owners to sell or donate land&lose their privacy. •;• 1/2 of a mile is adequate. ❖ Need a pedestrian light at Hyde and Bollinger. The Safeway is not really nice to go to because of the traffic. ❖ Reduce width of"neighborhood arteries" like Columbus Avenue to slow traffic. ❖ Speed bumps! Horrid in nei�hborhoods. ❖ Well-designed speed bumps are good. Not big,bumpy ones. City of Cupertino _ Community Con ress, May 3, 2002 �eneral Plan Update Page 5 Walk-Ability, Bike-Ability & Trails � Group 1 ❑ Add policy to fill in sidewalk gaps—cutback landscaping,lights"flicker". ❑ Soften convenience commercial policy ❑ Create"true"bike lanes 0 Some neighbors don't want connections to pazks ❑ Ped/bike as viable as the car ❑ Too much development resulEing in neighborhood traffic 0 Make safe to cross ❑ Need safer crosswalks ❑ Need more pedestrian overpasses ❑ Residential streets are too wide 0 Narrow streets like SCB ❑ People speed in neighborhoods ❑ Make Stevens Canyon Road bikeable ❑ Narrow travel lanes and reduce speed limits One Bold Step ❑ Shorten distance between stops ❑ Need better enforcement that favors ped/bikers Connect entire city for walking and ❑ Ped/r/w city/ped only crosswalks(San Mateo) biking.Making pedestrian/cycling as ❑ Orange posts @ stop intersections viable as the automobile. ❑ Traffic signals @ school hours Demonstrate the viability of this goal ❑ Traffic speed machines by completing one trail that connects D Ped Island @ Sedgwick School several major destinations. ❑ More bus routes to encourage walking ❑ Need signage for peds 0 SCB more walkable thru design Group 2 ❑ Have to slow traffic down O Do one trail that goes somewhere One Bold Step ❑ SCB/DAB is "harrowing" ❑ Add no r/t on red Connect paths to places by ❑ Encourage parents to let kids walk to school completing ASAP a O Need continuous trails demonstration project utilizing ❑ Design Rec. trails to they don't attract cars creeks and trails connecting two ❑ Stevens Canyon Road needs to be fixed focal points in the city. ❑ Connect to hills/library etc. ❑ LGCT is positive asset to neighbors BOLD STEPS D Access out of"dead-end"neighborhood ❑ One trail that works ❑ Utilize creeks/RR ❑ Walkable/bikeable around schools ❑ Point"A"to"B"demo project ❑ Connect entire city(walk&bike) ❑ Utility&recreation ❑ Peds/bikes as viable as auto ❑ Complete all sidewalks ❑ Street festival to close Stevens Creek Blvd. or De Anza Blvd. each year ❑ "Walk Cupertino"campaian net walk ❑ No right on red at major intersections ❑ Speeding enforcement City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 6 �ycf��'�.��` � Neighborhoods n y _�s,�`4+�,`�a�i�>.� s��¢ 3�;�{*��-�_��i #_.r-�� ,�.a. �T '� ; � �5'� � y�°.: �.. >>�T�--t ��;� € <� .-�x. � s, ifi. ��s:e 't 3`..,r' F ,. - ' : ' �_s��Q., Evaluats nslgfibwtaod coru�sctivity vla school.Pef�,�PP��9 and other � 3s` ;a`� nelghborhoods. �� Y. , , ``� JLL' s ; " ,. '�: � `,} � '�'- " `` dt � , � �: ��:. _ :..r„K = ...o Idetrti}y distinct nelghborhoods and potential ' .' ''_ ,. N gateways.Devebp gateway signage and 3O �g•° � monuments. �� _ �� ; ,�_ � }+ 13,.� � ... > ¢__#�� _ ... �„ _ �;-,�.v- ..x.. � _ � Encourage nelghDorfiood retall center�wlthin s� �`��-` 2�. i3: � walldng dlstanea of ths neighborhoods. ,` � . . � _ .,` � ° :� -r � x�-�'^,3-y-�`""T.��,¢,�{ ,�i�..a . C ✓F :4 `S � 't`�- k Y �i r ; � . - .- .,t:.:. - F"-�t� __ �.,s'�r�„;:4,S� - . � �+ - � -�'-. _ " _ � � �. Dluo�rsge the ereatlon oi tlag bt land - 4 - � ' ,��. dlNsbns in non-hillside areas. � '}�r r,,..r _ ��.v;��m °�-S ,Y�`Cf.fl�l4+�..�-+ `x . _ �. �'x �, ' �ti Y ,✓ . . .. �j.s?'��{� =,..x�.,� ��t� � � j }'n .,6 - :�' -�''a.:fCj.,, 3 - � . . R - +� c ,.._ � . . .r.= ,.� .., _ . _ �`.- II _ . .-..� .. ,,':.�..',. � ��rs�� . Develop unHorm street planttng plans for the � '� '' � 'J zy �3 � nelghborhoods. `� ; ` `�,�,-;_'� ' -.,�..-.__.��,..,__ r :< r <ys � -,� _ , . - _ _�.� s�,-- �z,--2o . , � . i 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% ■Strongiy Agree O Agree 0 Disagree ■Strongly Disagree "Sticky-Note"comments from the Neighborhoods Dot Board: ❖ Encourage cyberspace connectivity for neighborhoods. ❖ A major grocery store. (Neighborhood) City of Cupertino Communit Con ress, May 3, 2002 Genera!Plan Update Page 7 Neighborhaods Group 1 NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIVITY ❑ Improve connections to places o Easy physical access to schools,pazks,Senior Center,Nimby issues o Need sidewalks on Stelling throughout ci�. Some areas don't want sidewalks o Hard to get on Bubb Road in the morning(school traffic) o Hazd to get on McClellan Road in the morning(school traffic) o Crosswalks for children(Vai&Bubb) o Need police at school when it opens o Safety for kids(fast cazs) o Why don't kids walk to school? o Only 1 child per caz o Does resident parking permit zone conflict w/school traffic o Kennedy has great connections o Railroad conflicts with school traffic? o Magnet school a major problem? o Increase safety for bicyclists o Bazrier at Pacifica not needed o RR as a bike/ped.Path o HWY 85/RR big barriers o Orange Avenue major ped.Route—"no sidewalks" o McClellan Road neaz from De Anza—Byrne needs sidewalks ❑ Uniform street planting o Different street trees looks bad o Afraid street trees—(lead to)sidewalks o Unique neighborhood identity o Maintenance problems w/certain trees (roots) o Neiahbors(disagreement on point)need to choose tree—weigh pros&cons, look at long-term growth o Should replacement trees be the same as the rest? o Problem with overgrown shrubs One Bold Step BOLD STEPS Empower neighborhood ❑ People should replace cars in the community:people>cars decision-making!! 0 Neighbors should define their neighborhoods ❑ Enhance differences between neighborhood identities o Different light standards o Monuments? ❑ Respect neighborhood wishes/nei�hborhood nlannin�bv nei�hbors ❑ Realign San Jose/Cupertino boundaries to include W. San Jose ❑ Can neighborhoods work together? Cooperation ❑ RR row as a bike/ped path � City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3, 2002 Genera!Plan Update Page 8 Neighborhoods . Group 2 NEIGHBORHOOD CONNECTIVITY ❑ Connections to schools o Improve kid/ped safety ❑ Pazents blocking driveways/congestion(streets—parking lots during school time) o Faria(option Portal)—Miller o Monta Vista o Portal o Kennedy ❑ Have to be in a car—can't walk to anything o Need closer proximity to services. Bank,store,dentist,library,etc. ❑ Can we reduce traffic? ❑ Ped. Signal timing needs to be lonnnngerm.... ❑ Alternative transportation to popular destinations. Shuttle,Jitney,etc.,public trans(fee&free) ❑ Neighborhood retail centers o Within walking distance 1/a mile? o Seniors cannot walk distances o Mixed-use a good use of land o Profitable to build neighborhood retail? o Traffic regulations preventing retail development ❑ Street tree planting o Damage to sidewalks—Liquid Ambers o Uniformity okay,but shouldn't damage improvements o Existing street tree program good o Choices with range o Not a single tree o Trees vs. smooth sidewalks o Graph dots to gage agreement(strongly agree/agree)vs.disagreement(disagree/strongly disab ee) ❑ Neighborhood identity o Identity strong already—don't need to spend money o Concern it would divide City One Bold Step BOLD STEPS ❑ Leave us alone Encourage neighborly ❑ Steady as she goes communication and ❑ Address school traffic issue—children's safety cooperationl! ❑ Monster homes need to be controlled ❑ City needs to be pre-active in enforcement ❑ Encourage neiQhborlv communication &cooueration 0 Beautify, increase safety,reduce vehicle traffic offer attractive transportation alternatives ❑ Publicize Neighborhood Watch&Emergency Preparedness in Cupertino Scene City of Cupertino Communi Conqress, May 3 2002 General Plan Update Page 9 This page was intentionally left blank City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3 2002 Genera!Plan Update Page 10 �y��E� �' Circulation :k i _ � �x-X.s ,�w.t. z f,:y F.y�,Y:y . _ .'.,i � �t' y=t 1��g£,�- - �.ry- .��e�Y4.i.SAF 1 '�y S -� }'rf'Y ,..._ . . . � ,. �.'�'#�..,: Consider reducing the rtreet width on certsin four 39 $ti� .a f �,.z 25 g 6 lane streeta b addin medians or � , Y 9 parking lanes. �'�.": �"'K _ a-_.�`: y - ��.�'- I Eveluate reducing the street width in the - �� "'v�` �R . , ' Co-t�'., �z .' .: < �= %�s a'' T{ �V �"' .. Crossroads aree of Stevena Creek Boulevard +�7 a r s- 3 � y adding medians or parking lanes to err.ate� �_�'...-,�-:: , ��.'� `� ' { ; ,�` 21 B � pedestriarrfriendly'DowMown Yllage.' � �r��+ ,-,x� �. �� . , x y.N; � � ' , - 'r.: . _ _ �x � _��r''Y a.,i _ _ - � --':�9t.t'3 i.:t��_ _� r i�.• Develop bus and/or IigM reil repid transit ,,.s��'" �' - � st,�. �� ,. .i� .�: � 18 7- � xrvices in the Stevena Creek and north De Anza '�� :_� �� Boulevard corridors. - i-� �, . ,` °' y�. $ �` _ � " _. �k, 'Y L 5... . ^` � � W � � ' ��.- �¢,�,+".%n �:'t . a� Provide more time for estrians to cross '�� '.^�"#�' � ' V � 54 a'� 5j'r s s ��' .- 21� � 13�- � atreeta at specific intersedions,even if LOS fw ,r. 3 _ �,� �.� , . _ ,. �;; F ,', suto traHic is reduced. - � � ' . __ . . . ' � - V "'. . ' . . . _ �t� �. '� _ ' . . �� 4i,�` ' �:�k` � Develop traHic manegemeM plana for � � �` r 4� � � �� s. ,�' I neighborhoods aHeded by unacceptable levels of � � �� i�'� $3+�?�f 3� 4 `'� x a��'� 24 6 ' � - through traHic. �� ' � � `+�...i.�f . .� ��. I _ I I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% I �Strongly Agree 0 Agree �Disagree ■Strongly Disagree � "Sticky—Note"corrir�ents from the Circulation Dot�oard; •:• Bury highest density through traffic underground. ❖ Where is the survey that people will walk? T'hey don't now. ❖ Challenae the premise that"Downtown Village" should be a the Crossroads. ❖ Would like to see a lot of pedestrian overpasses. ❖ Each neighborhood problem is unique and should be dealt with a special solution. ❖ Reduce width of"neighborhood arteries"like Columbus Avenue to slow traffic. City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 11 Circulation Group 1 NEIGHBORHOODS LEVEL OF TRAFFIC ❑ Need to look at neighborhood tr�c with cut thru traffic ❑ School traffic to get there from other azeas ❑ Safetv because of illeeal parking other alt.to driving in children O Too much tra�c around schools. How is it measured to come w/solution 0 Diversion lanes w/island. Drog off for school off road _ 0 Traffic situation should be reported One Bold Step REDUCE#OF LANES ON 4 LANES Addressing intra-city vs. Bollinger Road&Homestead Rd ❑ Balance road use to be equal for ped/bike&veh. i7ttel'-cily circulation! ❑ Take an 8 lane to 61ane does make cozy street ❑ Con-neighborhood traffic increase ❑ Public transportation form other cities need to improve. Cut through community. Needs to stop at nodes to shop or dine O Depress De Anza under SCB -commute traffic ❑ How many ped. will use the area? Things aze spread out too faz. Not feasible to walk. ❑ Growth—need to look at how to mix use and keep balance keep level of service but be ped friendly 0 De Anza College—more parking on street would cause huge traffic issues of movement ❑ Re-visit the public transportation viability ❑ Higher density will put more stress on environment and create more congestion. Don't allow higher density 0 No land to build on ❑ Flow model—need to look at breaking it into pass through traffic and neighborhood traffic ❑ Increase of students at De Anza will effect traffic ❑ Slow growth will push people out of the area and require people to commute farther. D Time is valuable people may not want to stop in Cup to shop or dine 0 Work with other cities to handle the traffic issues 0 How long will we add lanes to handle additional traffic ❑ Cut through traffic still a problem/not using HWY 85 O NO DOWNTOWN—Cannot walk comfortably because of traffic. No meeting destinations. What will it take to improve this round-about at De Anza&SCB ❑ Intra-City vs.Inter-City traffic values Ci of Cupertino Communiry Conqress, May 3,2002 General Plan Updafe Page 12 Circulation Group 2 LANE REDUCTION ❑ If reducing lanes then we need to gain from it. Lazger pazkway slow travel lanes for businesses ❑ SCB is more the inter street ❑ De Anza is only access to HWY 280&HWY 85—reduction will be restrictive to access hwy ❑ Cannot do just one thing without a ripple effect ❑ City Center or pown Town needs to be started now ❑ De Anza moves traffic to other cities (] Street too unfriendly to want to walk—not enough going on even if streets are reduced ❑ Why do we want to change? ❑ Need to create an envir to keep people in City and attract them ❑ Multi-phase develop and restrict traffic ❑ Shuttles to helu move ueopte from Vallco to Oaks etc -need to route around to residenNal areas—FREE SOLAR ❑ To reduce lanes very costly,what if you did the reduction and no one came? We have looked at before. LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM Down SCB—General Plan ❑ Cheap means of transportation they work ❑ Busses—free—at least one line TIME FOR PED.CROSSING 0 Change times to help ped.get across as needed if possible o May cause longer wait but may get people out of car 0 Install countdown timer to tell ped remaining time to cross ❑ Mary @ SCB changes that were made were not ped friendly but to benefit cars ❑ City does not seem serious about ped friendly 0 We have removed some destinations ie: SCB @ Blaney ❑ Need to have the places to go to make us want to walk ❑ Avg. person will not walk 2miles one way ❑ Forcing the choking of traffic to get ped will force into neighborhood ❑ Depress SCB ❑ Ped overcrossing De Anza& SCB ❑ School traffic -need a strategy to handle this problem,encourage bike use ❑ School busses—where did they go? ❑ Children should walk—Safety One Bold Step ❑ Busses to expensive and pazents will not pay ❑ District parking—centralize then bus ❑ Need to re-survey parent about bussing Focus on Intra-city circulation 0 Bus pollution increases with more busses ❑ Pollution due to traffic sitting longer at signals ❑ School zones—people will travel longer distances to get around the congestion ❑ Look at City as a"blank slate"for when "Big One"happens that we can rebuild the city the way we want if planned in advance ❑ Our roads are for Cupertino and not for travel thru. Don't focus on getting people thru town. City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 13 This page was intentionally left blank City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 14 �Y��'��;�� . E nvironmentd R esourc�s & S ustancf�ility �,` *--. s�„�, ,,�z "�' r � Y >,. .n �i��}`'�t�.?�� Y �!5��7�.��'��;y`f�+� 4 ` }Vet b'�� ..J. � T it- �.)#3S i. � �,` �a"{�`T t�`^ 'q' '� . : ±� - wr�'a'3.yr i,�.. :��a�. ,k'E#a _.�'-,-� �°*�� • �� , "�F'f'- .d'�`,:.sx.'�r.c.a:... _ .. .. v 1 S. - a�_ Encounga Grean Building Design � g r�� .� `�� , . _ (buildings that operete in sn ecologial end ��-��` ; �- .� � ; . n: g resourceeffieientway). s�t�..=.,_._-� , ' . �� ".�8��;`_".. Ec:..� - .r.. - ° - 1 "� �'�:`� �= � t >,� .e`� G-�`b.. „ -,�°i � -. r ;��F, s �3�q . �i 4;..,I tr�[.d�` x 7 kt t"lT� ` S.� a'-.f �"s �:��4��'r.`i.-�'w�?: ' ,�rY .3'" } �i� , f t��.4 �;��,�� ..�� .�} t �-_� � �. �S�Y.{a,4 n�`S� ,r�,� 1 _. , .. . . , s`"t"� .�b��' f f �.a�.��_�.a�,Yi.�"'��,c��'. � ��-. ^ >� ��. -ra�i` "�";aAs-� `i'tki:a3S��^.�'x'TgF'-' N �� r,.��`k='� - '�'v�" = �''�} a x_. Q� ' �� {�"�� ;� � . Encourage the use of solar energy and other g-� �� »� ��'�� 27, - ;.ci •� altemate renewable energy sourees �-� � .-�, ;�, f � "�d�.+�. `g ' k�' '' � . •-.t.s.� �,t,� a _ d 'Y 'r . � � �, i � 3 �• �Y xi' . . � :..�r _� �� , +' �"�2 �r�a k `"a fr$�«w� [�#-a-�2' � .� ,� f $'.�'�t's .a�L. `"F' S Y `�_,�i"�'�-s-� > i (n �'�-�'��,��¢-� ;3Y�-��q s,tC��'`"'��.� Y�:,e�„� ,f"��-c..+��*,�:'Y`k t��;;.�� '.�'.c��..x+?� ��.I'`��e.`�z:�' `t.r.�;'g��s'r+ '� ��.�"��m �i %tF+'�,�t.a�. 'c � ��h i.�-`.�'�'.�.r .ac=�:'� }� _ �`b<+'c� A„+k�ic._ v.�% �3-r�' _r .�.;; � Reduca the amount of sotid wasts by � � ��.f��, . ' O requlring building materiais to ba recycled - ��:;�� .;;�,�� :��.- g� - a for all projects ` `: � �,� ��,�''�,'',�"��-�z�'�_��' �-�� `��.� �� - �°��t�,£�_�4�'�-,�+. �,�,�'F��..,`f,°�` e��h��L�� "�"�'`�.,r��`� P _,� , i.,.. _ . ,F,,-.7 r�,p3� _ t 1 �."' �r :�'L ,✓S{.�.._t�d'.*� r' �`��.�.:i� -�5.-3-, ,.:.�w_rt:r, w.�s c-V-w:t±:-t-r.�,z.,y.{`�7h�::,Y.;p t Require the reduction of impervious surface ��s S c��t�'� ��h�-��+��..R� i+�y. ` r � , �4 � F�� materlals 6 investigate ways to retain run- ��, �' ' ��' �'�,�� ` �� as.'r y'� ott on new developments ``" -".�� L..s:�t� `-�� y� f� _ �a�*; :r.s� .-,- . , s" . .;_ �a�,..r�..'�.• -��d':r...�...aw+r:`'-T a�-; -� �'3u- LiB i� �,- a ��3.�..ia"'^"`.. � Ya.l�""�"e ..."�tir.�f y��%�'� �`-_ ��..� �{�-,g..��fs�g�'. �+S�iw�r+�... ,�.ri..w..ra....r �-=�;T'.�'-� � :v�� -;.�aF�Y�� _ '�,�� r �... �$�'�-`�"f �.?.- � - - - 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% ■Strongiy Agree ❑Agree 0 Disagree �Strongly Disagree `��ky-l�t��" co�rne�ts fro� t��Enviro�nenta� ��s��r��s/��s��in�bili�y��ar�: ❖ Address pesticide use,especially in parks. ❖ Should encourage conservation. Should encouraae efficient niaht lighting that doesn't light up the sky. °:• "All"is a bad word. You can consume more resources in recycling than yc�u save. ❖ Never say"all". ':• Should make it easier to return deposit bottles and cans. ':• An agency to report water wasters after there is enormous wasted water in streets. _City of Cupertino Community Congress, May 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 15 Ena�rQnme��a! [�es��r�es E S�s��n�bi�i� � Group 1 � GREEN BUII.,DING SOLAR ❑ Loss of energy ❑ Sell back energy—revenue ❑ Greenhouse effect . ❑ Rebates in bills O Cost of energy ' ❑ Encourage hybrid vehicles ❑ Healthier to work in ❑ Clean air ❑ Cost is down in the long run ❑ Enhance pub.Info on solar �t ❑ Enhance public info on G.B./seminazs ❑ Decrease construction costs in ' o Energy efficiency the long run,utility/construction o Pesticides o Buildings SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING BUII.,DING MATERIAL Qne Bold Step ❑ Large scale food waste collection for composting ❑ Putting solar on new librarv • Put snlarpanels on the ❑ Cover the whole penn.W/geodesic dome new library!! 0 Recycling/reuse of historically significant building materials • And Pa�sive Solar ❑ Pemut fee rebates for recycling of demo waste like San Jose ADDRESS PESTICIDE USE ❑ Public education on this ❑ Reduce pesticide use on public places/parks/landscaping/horticulture w/respect to allergents Group 2 GREEN BUII,DING SOLAR ❑ Less pollution ❑ Cost savings ❑ Natural resources benefits ❑ Natural resources conservation ❑ Water conservation ❑ Always there ❑ Less smog/better indoor/outdoor air quality One Bold Step ❑ Create a creek restoration program in the City esp.SCB • Make aU city buildings ❑ Recycle old comp.Parts showcases for"Green Building"design!! BOLD STEPS • Starting with library ❑ Create a nublic info/education uroEra� ❑ Partnership with De Anza ❑ All new uublic buildings(new librarv)shall iaastall env Best�rac ❑ Public/private incentives for utilizing env.Best practices New librarv as show case for�reen build'en�design& re¢eewabie energv tech City of Cupertino Communiry Con ress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 16 �'��?��'�'j�� Development Nodes fr�ly�i� .�f`3 ;6 � ., rf„`� ,x �3i�s� -° '� },�. ��`�.n5" � ` 'C;f b '-�`-�. -`r - � s�;. �� ;�'`� a i �,. �,� s.. �i.��+.# '� r'4 y�z '� :� 3'-x��v,�e�vT.., .,,� 'Z'. �y. � an „��. �c. ,-.r-.�" �, '.'.3c, .'s; .�_..�^�`"�;��T, �,_ =t:�i'.;a�e�.,.:'°.��'.� � Ff::-�a.�?'Sw v ;3�-� �'� �t. .., , "�:�� ..� -� '-,.�- - .,. Val l co:R edev el op as an - - Ri,� .,.c _ , enfertainment/res.node. ,�, � D - Q Provideout-door sireef- ;� �' - oriented stores&piaza �� Y �- 5�' �`�3 -� a��{ r � r -� _ ��' °'�`o� '� t _ - �" .=� ��t' ';�a .�'��,�r�-'.�- �'.:' -F� s +.*.ic�"f�. .�' j� � .a�` , bc � < e '}.n.� �.. ,p' �" ��c 3 � }3 a 4'•,i s R�.:� i;.h� Ar,�y7�j Y _: 4._ � .. �4.. �'�� -'`y .r-d�t� 1.. ��b "Y-�?�-�^-`�'r�-i�r.�x s�„�,,,� y� s�r:":, �-.�r�t' �� -- �z �u, Downtown Viliage:Develop � mixed-usewith 1)Buildings 1 i �, . ..� 4 '� closer tostreet,2)wider - « sidewalks,sireetlight,3)active ��u,�� ,�,.- � ..c;3` `t,.� $;.� a}�t=-r� ^n.i�...2 kF:�`I a�� , . .- t f-*7�'`.� ,t �� .2r.�.. L 9►ound tloor s -�,�s ,�. � x: �� K � �,� � ��:^ ++ �.�ay��,.t �..} :`�s"; 9 �y. � �. ��y .� ^�r ^r`�� 3' �,��s '?`.��`_ � ��3 r; Y e' �.€r,�� '��.��' ��t' � �„ � � �' %��„�� `�'s�3�' �' "Y e _�'.�r .a :u..�,- �£' �`;`s..�;.a��i� .n��.�� _�N x�'_.��-- ��` ��'��'t��'��. �C City Center:Provide gateway � �� C Piaza/park at Intersection or �; � ,":-; ..�.� S t evens Creek d�De Anz : � � 5 aRedevelopas mixed-use f ,- a�a.� -.c, � ,Y, ��`rF��s��,-�� s� � ,�,� . -�,{ ��`� connecting to Civic Cent . �"�`" 's,°`''�3 '�x x� g- �E'' w � �„r�1��.s�� ',�,r�s� �,`y*��s r -'y`€t t��S�?s„M£ rv�,.�-�r��,�:" � � :�e-7 ti` r .: �`*�5, � l`s i�.'� _ - t x ' ., t��-3:. � � �,4 ...� �,.r �,� :-.�F r.r�.,"�s �i s'=*s S�{ � a.ti�,�� .> � � ..,<Yf€�tA'�-�i�z�'; s+- r<�s.G.�.x� '4 .� �'>,t., r ,,r{��' }��..�,� ��. 5 �' ��.�`��{�,:�... .ass?��='�, c<wy..v _ Nodes�Linkages:Develop ; � - pedesi rian-orient ed e � . �, streetscapes to slitch di((ereM - �� nodes t o 9t�16f - '<<' �Y-�e`�� .{ s}� E'e 'f�;-s*.l fit°'�=3�.a�";� +�r, _�°-N �. ; y 9 �s a, c.- '---��-T — „�,,,,.� . s�� . ��.��'7��r��-��3 i�,'F�" �,. ,.�«�S��a�r�.�.:, ,�4��&rt.� .s ��,v�.��-s�` f� i 4 �� s' v� 'r 1 - 'e� _. 'er -,_#`. `� ... d" •F . , € . , ..:;'_,� / 1 0% 25% 50% %5% 100% �Strongfy Agree❑Agree p Disagree ■Strongly Disagree "Sticky-Note"comments from the Development Nodes Dot Board: ❖ Something must be done. The City loses sales tax revenues. Vallco is easier to access than Hwy 280,so it really should be more desirable. °:• What is the height on all buildings?(Downtown Village) ❖ (Downtown Village)Yes,but not necessarily at the Crossroads. (De Anza Boulevard&Stevens Creek Boulevard) °:• Needs to be a real walking environment. Not just more buildings closer to the street. Sidewalks big enough for outside cafes and restaurant seating. °:• Mention was made of entertainment at Vallco. One concern I have is the cost. However, I have an idea—make the entertainment be relatively cheap to produce and be unique. Make it a comedy club and/or improv.club. City of Cupertino Community Congress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 17 Development Nodes Group 1 ❑ Walkable Stevens Creek corridor connecting new&old centers o Identifiable o Transit friendly o Sense of place o New building/bus. o Pedestrian Friendly o Street Enclosure VALLCO DOWNTOWN VILLAGE ❑ Is this practical since it is privately owned O Love towri center idea ❑ Strong vision to influence Vallco ❑ Perfect location—center ❑ � Residential may not fit—traffic&services ❑ Have existing retail—build on ❑ Restaurants/movies will add life O Keep traffic through ❑ Residential will add life ❑ Not as big as Vallco—better place 0 Tax incentives to convert dream to reality D ❑ Totally differendunique to compete with ❑ Would like a place PA/LG to"hang out". Valley Fair O Include HP/Compaq in dev.Plan ❑ Expensive to change building formats 0 Concentrate our"center"in Vallco— O Divert traffic azound&make it ped/bike pedestrian place friendly 0 Concerned about entertainment ❑ Stevens Creek can't be diverted o Has not succeeded in other azeas _ __ (SJ/Palo Alto) One Bold Step ❑ May be something like Westgate 0 More restaurants/food court/Applebee's Make Oaks Shopping Center the etc. $$here! center of a pedestrian-oriented ❑ Redo existing&turn inside out(Galleria, Cupertino LA) ❑ Include teens Bring back a bookstore 0 Skateboazd park ❑ Theater in Rose Bowl - CITY CENTER—Park NODES &LINKAGES ❑ Can't be achieved because too much ❑ Light rail on SCB—median development already connecting to SJ/Caltrain ❑ New developments should maintain the ❑ Shazed parking bet.uses. Keep quality so people keep coming parking free corporate lots ❑ Should have uses that `finish the puzzle' ❑ BOLD STEPS ❑ Teaz down Vallco&start fresh ❑ Light rail ❑ Connect our centers for residents,bikes&peds. (SCB—De Anza/Oaks,Target,Vallco) ❑ Create a sense of unique place(beautiful,walkable,restaurants,benches, more trees) ❑ Markers on Ped.Paths—miles walked and calories burned ❑ Places- destination(microbrewery) 0 Residential w/mixed use ❑ Connect continuous businesses 0 New businesses—bookstores ❑ Have somethinD to look at Ciry of Cupertino Community Con ress, Ma 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 18 Development Nodes Group 2 VALLCO ❑ Better department stores as anchors to compete ❑ Look at city's needs when redeveloping Vallco O Make Cupertino a destination to spend$$-conf/restaurants ❑ Place to"hang out"/walk � ❑ Cunently"user-hostile"change ❑ Develop more residential since location is not conducive to downtown ❑ . Revitalize w/entertainment&compete with Valley Fair. Build on current O Family-friendly ❑ Use current infrastructure ❑ Redevelopment azeas gives city more influence—use it ❑ Use city resources aggressive to create a place it wants 0 Opportunity to provide affordable housing—dense 5-6 stories ❑ Of access to freeways ❑ Tear down—put IKEA ❑ Consider HP/Compaq when redeveloping Vallco DOWNTOWN VILLAGE ❑ Encourage ex. &new businesses/bookstores/shoemaker ❑ Don't take lanes or bring buildings close—create traffic prob. ❑ SCB—not the place ❑ Don't concentrate on Vallco—create centers that aze connected ❑ Oaks is a good location—downtown ❑ Already thought of—rejected. Don't try again—will create hodge podge 0 Need model of any azea that would fit ❑ Need to expand SCB ❑ Need 2-3 stories—don't over build One Bold Step ❑ Strolling bridges to walk above streets ❑ Could create"bad development" Walkable!!Stevens Creek Boulevard-- ❑ Already have"Cupertino Village"—enhance Connecting new and old City centers CITY CENTER—Park • Idenh;fiable ❑ Open space w/happy sculpture • Sense of place ❑ Apricot/cherry trees—orchazd idea • Pedestrian friendly ❑ Too much traffic for usable park • Transit(light rail)friendly TOWN CENTER • New businesses ❑ Notice entire city for meetings • Built to edge, street enc� LINKAGES ❑ No connections—too much traffic ❑ Need too much critical mass to be successful—not Cupertino ❑ Oaks—Great location—MGM PKT,sports center/De Anza ❑ Town Center/Civic Center better location ❑ Use money(to reduce lanes)&get book store instead ❑ Provide enjoyable pedlbike routes ❑ Walk anywhere safely/seamlessly ❑ Distinguish type of work neighborhoods&connect trails o Trails to hillsides,consider horse/bikes etc. City of Cupertino Community Conqress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 19 T'his page was intentionally left blank Ci of Cupertino Communit Conqress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 20 Ci j� . ��Q�� Commercid & Office Development �� K d �i-i-•b�,a`� � ^�r+,S__. �i.� � �'�`� �.<i ^S-.� �'t°`;� ;� s . �" :�+'S �� .�a��''.t:�.�r.§��#.'.�m.. ?.e+�;', �.3'�''�-�' s,?_'�"�� -st y-,i;: .3.. �,�T�'�� i � - '` :� :^��.�- A - `.r. � f Raduw commsrclal,otticdlndustrlal and hotei ;��: •?� pMentlal ckywlde. ' - ' - - .i�� a .:�'�s`*oa€ ._.-�� "r�-,� f 3�,+'��,�fc yi.,.=.`z�,��1�` e"{�r�Y� ,y r�'?5;�`} =#S,s .,. .,,i 's_ - ° i� V : ; � - ' . .,: ., ' 7 : a ` � ' �:r . �, .... ��:_r � �� : . '+. .._ .. 3"JS�„G�` �� .._'.✓' " v. � .. -' - .-r;v-` _yt�.r,<<..t.,5 '�`�af.'- �'y.m�i d !�f� i.��'-�� £� ;4 w y'LP_"' . -.�h-'."�!r_ Requlrs ma�or offlea proJects to build housing(2 37 36 t6' t� y units for every 1,000 sq,tt.o}ottice spacs). � - l z . > ' r% ( : � � a 3�� t' r .�� ^v'1 � .�via-.^�T`�"P �',�'F-� 'f r w` �y�..g� �a. £e v ,� � _K � � ,�r 4 a "-p S : ��„� y:' f° � rf 3 W "7P'� � �� f F:: {' .1 �2 -L ��v r�Y� � �� - ;.:i �w �� ; .?�'tp-".�'al��' _�'r+ .cF-.�S :1' _ " . f� L� � Increass tM numbsr of housing units relative to �` � ; N z2� ��ts�' �� obs. - � �`��`�� ' f ��t�� 3�� ,��+9F 3 a� -F.. ry� -a�f y�_ �..KSU � ++L -4.�;-s..�445�.. ,�3 3{3 ,U ; ;-"! - '� . � — 2.'� ��<�i�-�;��. �"��.��i�t� �'��,��f.�� s�'�"�'��`� :� � s.�'� s z�.�'.:;_ � .-�. ��, - � .,�.,_ �. � _" d CoMinue to co�eentrote developmenf along ma�or -m�, ;;�� *4; roadwaya �'�`�_r' y�' 'a - ��K��1� *��x�,,�r�a� �.. � e � �� x��7��7-; �m ��r,�:; �A-� ` ��`•.?�.'� ,� � ✓� - N� �L� -r i- • '��"�b�`�"� . ..�`L�>Y�{�5.«.'1'•`h':�� _ '`4�) #.* #�� - ..�� y'.'��.§-... -'r_ �'{°S:_�� }N-�`�. ,.�` �z'Y.-. •.k^. + � -... � . +'�. ..,.. . ..x_. . 4!^." Retaln(do not s:pan�small nslghborhood ; r -- : , commsrcial aroes,fl offer thass areas mlzed ° - �; commerciaVresldentisl development '�� " � opportunitfas. " � � �. t :. � �. _ . �' ,.� . �. �`` .��.��5,- ' � -_ �. z` . . . � � I 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% ■Strongly Agree ❑Agree 0 Disagree ■Strongly Disagree "Sticky-Note" comments from the Commercial & Office Development Dot Board: ❖ Consider connecting existing commercial to mixed-use or high density resiciential with preference for affordable housing with teacher/police/fire department priority. °:• Whatever you do,make sure there is enough parking—perhaps undergrounci. ❖ De-annex land. Give land north of 280 to Sunnyvale, Santa Clara,San Jose or county. ❖ Specific#of housing??Need individual evaluation. °:• How high will buildings be? City of Cupertino Community C;ongress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 21 Commercial & Office Development Group 1 RETAIN,DO NOT EXPAND NEIGH.COM KEEP DEV.ON MAJOR ROADS O What is a small neighborhood? ❑ Could attract light rail ❑ Keep small businesses ❑ Keep out of neighborhood ❑ Mixed-use—retail&residential ❑ Light rail—employment,not stopping ❑ Strike a good balance • ❑ Potentially have employees live above O Want to expand retail—consider mixed for vacantland One Bold Step REDUCE DEV.POTENTIAL ❑ Maintain or slightly increased—NOT reduce Create a destination in partriership ❑ Improve existing dev,take of what we have with all stake holders while O Balance—don't be a bedroom comm. maximizing the potential of current O Hotel w/conf.Centers boost small restaurants resources-balanced growth BOLD STEPS ❑ Balanced growth (Commercial, ❑ Build housing over retail—vertical office,residential) mixed ❑ Vallco park—live up to potential ❑ Make unique shops—something they (make it a park) can't get elsewhere—identity ❑ Homes then offices ❑ Max potential of current comm.prop. ❑ Create destination ❑ Partnership—City&Business ❑ Density needed to get critical mass ❑ Public&Private Partnershin Group 2 RETAIN.DO NOT EXPAND NEIGH.COM ❑ Support mixed use One Bold Step ❑ Ties community to exisiing areas Building Community ❑ Tough to get loans(home purchase). Rental units,not ownership Promote Incentives for Mixed Use DEV.ON MAJOR ROADS in Commercial Development ❑ Market takes caze of it ❑ Focus on Stevens Creek ❑ Focus on Vallco azea BOLD ST'EPS ❑ Reduce dev potential 0 Build diverse community o RDA makes$-focus there � Commercial services neaz jobs ❑ Office tied to housing ❑ Mixed use o Bad to mix too much res w/non-res. � $incentive—private/public win win o Convert office to res. situation 0 Don't lock into J/H ratio ❑ Flexibility ❑ In-lieu fees instead of new units � Build community ❑ Promote inc. for mixed use in com City of Cupertino Communiry Con ress, Ma 3, 2002 General Plan Update Page 22 �£��:�� ' Housin g �'p��- r �"�'S, a �e _;-K .,ts�.t3'r �-:.�4` r�°'�r" m'Pca�y�� :j s r- . �:: x�;. 's"`ia ��' - -'�.` 8��. �`'��'�'�:' � �.,'€�.�i' - s.,�ae�:;§ r.��?-+e�3�`+P:i�=x'-�R. , ,_+e,.. _..-��"�E-'�'�.2.'. k�cr�ase number i h�tensity of nsldsrRial unris T�i �2s �,��.' i abng mabr corrldors oi the ctry .> Y '_ �.*-°: ��c , ��z. �, ? _s �c . _ � `� 4q:L s �i. S s � t a Y`! ,.y - �r, ��_..' ),. k. ��i �.. S: _ I . "Y} . , �'3 �?� - ,� - �iYAA.°-�:.�':3�q_ '-1-.r':". "' - ' Enco�aage productlon o1 mwe second- _ �'�_. dwelling units on single-famlly resldeMial 27 �7:; 3 N parcels '� � 4� � b � � Y�t„ $_Y L``r ::i K . �:,� :�, �,4 z� � . �s ,� � �. k axs`� ),�;�t��`�w:;,��-`��' �s h:- A ;#��i�,- � . � �� _ � ;��-�-.•.�_ z,� _ � ---�.;- � Requlre rwrfresidentlal devebpment in c� - j da�'.� e=;' , selected areas of the city to Include housing � - -.. 4 . . �� - � C :�,� �, r}x�,..`,�'s, z.,�� -s`�.xy-°;sz�, �'��`� _' p °t7 #- ¢f 3�f��y�,r� a`� s ,."�''�&;�� ,•�.�1� ' C 'i Q� L4s.%-'-. } . .}{�5��_��'t�.3.r 4'�- �i��='�;€� '�`� *�'. '�f��''i„_d � . ._: -- . � , _ , . � .. . a-.., . _- � .�-,.��€a�:�s�.. a Develop housing that Is attordabis to a dlversA - T populatlon(Young famlles,senlors,Physlcally '� 3t:. 8 �t .,...,,, , „ ; _ t� ..� 2� .�� M_ _ <--� . . =r -r4 �.: 4 �°`a3` � ��`x-'4.�� 3�'��;.� ��` . ' �+ .�. z�., F : �'''��=�?��.>�� , -� r,� :< I '�� ni'� Requtre irrlleu fees to support attordable untts 29� ,,t 5' � }or new commerclal(retail)development �si x= � . . - Y �' ��'�'L j ::3',f _ . . (...._� _I .. ... . f . .. ... . i 0% 25% 50°/a 75% 100% ■Strongly Agree OAgree �Disagree ■Strongly Disagree Additional comments frorr� the Housing Dot Board: ❖ Affordable housing should be located in walkable,high-density areas. City of Cupertino Community Congress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 23 Ho�sing _ Group 1 ❑ Mixed use tied to Downtown Village ❑ Developers have fewer rules ❑ Design is not important ❑ Second units may impact o Not too high neighborhoods negatively 0 Traffic may increase ❑ Tr�c and parking ❑ Quality of life—environmental concerns ❑ Redevelop Vallco as mixed-use w/res. ❑ Smaller units more affordable ❑ Add units to Hanson/Kaiser site ❑ Schools impacted by more units ❑ Variety of housing choices needed ❑ Teachers need housing in community ❑ Co-housing ❑ Some housing for public service employees ❑ Cluster new housing together One Bold Step o Does not increase density in neighborhoods Stevens Creek Boulevard/De Anza v Short-term Vallco w/low&very-low �'eQ� housing w/entertainment center ❑ More zoning code enforcement Integrate mixed-use development with o More proactive transu and a.�liated housing with ❑ Afraid of looking too much like LA, considerahion givera to environment, Santa Monica quality of life and infrastructure. ❑ Long-term:Hanson/Kaiser site for housing w/variety of housing choices Group 2 ❑ Problem is low wages One Bold Ste ❑ Balance jobs&housing p ❑ Balance of schools,housing&parks ❑ Residents can't afford to buy home today Short-term:Develop Vallco with mixed-use ❑ Trade-off b/t housing&good quality of life including low and very low income housing ❑ More housing ruins quality of life with entertainment/mis. centers. 0 Public service employee can live elsewhere �ng-term: Utilize the future Hanson/Kaiser 0 Limit growth ❑ Public service employees are valuable site to satisfy greater housing needs with ❑ Scatter affordable units � variety of housing choices. ❑ Provide variety of housing choices ❑ Job turnover with P/S employees o Can't afford homes ❑ Buy large homes&convert to 4-plexes,etc. ❑ SCB/De Anza—integ.Mixed-use dev.W/transit&aff. Hsg.With consideration to environ. & quality of life&needed infrastructure City of Cupertino Community Con ress, May 3 2002 General Plan Update Page 24 ��P�� o s P pen pac� & ar ks � � �k- : . � :;z,�- ° :��.'�, � � � ,� ��; �� .:?: 7.'- }�'� �;,,. L.'�_�i.,,Y{ ��; Y e� .�°�', "r'�r}�z .-s ��3�'t; �� x �"a Acqulre land In amourts bss than 3.5 ecres In 72 �24 {3 park defkient areas - - - v �r�, � Z ,� y..._�"'.� :� ��'�.„�' ,-,s �'��r '��.x.�y'.z�,,tas.-��X'.?s.s� .� ��',f. �-�..' : - � '�.2��.z.��.-k�.• a�=" e� .,s.t��'��:. s-.�, s. ..�-�"'.�fi ..�g" a:'E'�. � . ' % � -=`t:�ah- v.-��a.�- 'k •> , ,'�r+�3'n„*- i..a 5'. f �.,�a � � -�- ' � �. i...--..:;� . .-.� �...,4x.*_.. r.- ... .; Dewlop portbns of e�dsting nsigl�bortwod or '° . � - a�.�_-,- .. .;:-.,. community parks to mes!needs oi speciflc � � �0` t populatbns(e.g.teens arx!senbrs) �, �/�� 4 z �� :r 2 z��u� ° 4 ? (� � W i. ' �_.�:.�i..� * �r � F- Y1 � -. � j �)C�Saz�� e-r5F��ra i`}a.n,xC+�a"lJ�`7� t y a-�� a ,. . , n. Q�j Seaae and develop nll corrldws and creeks � ��' ` � _ _ '�: Q� � as linear parks snd tralls. � +�+ p��.�.,r3�""Q'� ;e.-�ti a x€; +�.pA t.: �,s� c �'�.-� �.ee.. �y� a- -' ��"��.��„ : `�, :d�z'�� t,��-�c ..P a ,i� ,�, � �» �,, tt�, �.,�r ;-a .� ,t�_ � ��' fi� .'��t� � �:',r� ?��,s �'a��.;�"�"��<��,�.` ,�s�^�� °'�'' , - ''��.- � Requtre new,largs-arq resldential � �,_.. C dsvsb merrts to ovlds parWupen P p► publlc � ': 76 `- 5'� O� epaee ,s� ' ` �' � ,r..� v_ �.e� .;- ._�.s i . �... f'�'-'�'��ri.�, s�'z�ts��>"�-,r�'., �,�.t r°�'N:�� .; F �s; .. .x �4 � ,e,� tt.—�} '� � t Y.L'�fi 'i-.'3"fi�Y ��,fir °��.r Q. ��4 ._�+ _ ,� �. s �r?x ,.,r-.�,�` ..5 .c�.;.�'t#��`- �"'��::`2�.'3"�Ebs,`��`-''*s �>��r=�-3F..,'`5.!c�?�' Evaluats facliity use to determine H more _ - �� -- 6� �p"-��. - residents can be served - _ f�:�-.'- " . r, F ia :_ j T 1 ��; r� �T 3' S x'..k �r �� . �-��`i�y+ •r.. `� r��f��'��nr �.. -_ �� r �x � ��_�� ,,� #��.�� -'�, ,.�. �s� � c� r ,�� ;. .�„�' - -c n s *��,+ '�� _ �'�4;�:3`�; '¢c��°'�;` e`�•�,�,.�.�=. � Establlsh JolrK ventiaes wlth sc►qol dlsVkts to ,Y. .� - bWld or operate new ree.}aclittiss on schooi T � '23: `a; lands - ' �-i� 4- ,u.+^�Y=t �� '��-� , ,, . 1 ti � � ' y 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Strongly Agree 0 Agree D Disagree ■Strongiy Disagree Additional comments from the Open Space and Parks Dot Board: ❖ Small parks can be used for specific population services. Example: Teen Center. This may address the maintenance issue. ❖ Consult with teachers in plans. Let schools use the property during school hours and after for school activities. _City of Cupertino Community Congress, May 3,2002 Generai Plan Update Page 25 Open Space and Parks Group 1 ❑ Everybody loves pazks o People walk in parks o People use the pazks ■ Meeting place . «S�ge» . ■ Memorial Pazk&other pazks successful ❑ Require develop.to provide o Integrate open space into new developments o Increase density to preserve open space ❑ Buy open space w/o density ❑ Preserve natural areas o Wildlife corridors o Rec.trails in city o Wildlife in regional pazks One Bold Step o Keep McClellan as a preserve ❑ Re-think exist.Parks to be more natural Go Native! o Native landscaping (Park landscape, wildlife habitat, o Environmental ed. environmental education) 0 Joint Venture w/schools o Teach stewardship at schools o Teach leadership w/park stewazdships o Consult with teachers on planning O Connect green space o Stevens Creek Trail o Sazatoga Creek o Street trees City of Cupertino Communi Conqress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 26 Open Space and Parks Group 2 ❑ People support parks o They move here for: open space,schools,climate , o Peace of mind , o Pazks for all age groups(Everybody) ❑ Require open space from developers or enough money o Most effective contribution o Add space at Biltmore ❑ Add space—more dispersed green space ❑ Pazks for SR&young kids o Teens community need—neighborhood problem ❑ Teahouse in pazks o Sister city garden o Library ❑ Multigenerational pazks o Gym instead of Teen Center o Gym provides physical exercise&social interaction ❑ Joint Venture w/schools o Community use off-hours ❑ Trails o Stevens Creek trail One Bold Step ❑ Need more land—not enough left ❑ Shutde bus to pazks on the hour Create communiiy through parks o Extend bus service to parks/open space Concessions! ❑ Walking routes Gardens! o Map Gathering! o Cross town trail � o Streets more friendly ❑ Connections o BBF to McClellan o Stevens Creek Trail o Public transit connections o Cross town trail to public transit ❑ Community garden o Let people garden azeas that are cunently vacant o Add gazdens to high density areas o Bamboo garden(classic Chinese garden) ❑ Joint venture/De Anza to create a beautiful park on campus ❑ More trees ❑ Pazks in park def. Area ❑ Pazk concessions o In many parks o Bocce balUhorseshoes o Games like checkers 0 Create the feelina of community in pazks 0 Welcome to Cupertino City of Cupertino Communit Con9ress, May 3,2002 General Plan Update Page 27 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REP�RT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY T'his biological assessment is designed to identify biological constraints and highlight potential ecological restoration opportunities for the Cupertino Stevens Creek Trail alignment early on in the planning process. The praject area extends from Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek County Park in the City of Cupertino. This bioassessment included evaluation of existing environmental reports and biological information already collected in the project area, as well as field surveys conducted specifically for this feasibility report. The field surveys were conducted between January 28, 2000 and March 17, 2001 to determine the location of sensitive habitats and the presence of species of concern. Tlvis bioassessment found nine distinct habitat types in the four Study Areas: riparian vegetation, freshwater wetlands, in-stream habitat, oak woodland/ grassland, oak woodland J chaparral, open grassland, orchard, golf course and parks, and suburban development. Of these habitat types, riparian vegetation, freshwater wetlands, in-stream habitat, and oak woodland systems are considered sensitive habitats by the resource agencies, either because they support rare species or because the habitats themselves are protected by law. Rare species documented or expected to occur in the project area include the western pond turtle, red-legged frog, steelhead trout, birds of prey (raptors), valley oak, and blue oak. The most important biological constraints to the trail alignment revolve around these rare species and habitats. The recommendations provided in this report are based on the identified biological constraints and are designed to avoid impacts and minimize the need for environmental permits. The most central recommendations are: • Avoid impacts to riparian vegetation. Place trail alignment outside the edge of the riparian vegetation to avoid human disturbance effects in the riparian corridor and to avoid the need to replace native species. • Avoid im�acts to oaks. Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the oak trees to avoid the need to mitigate for impacts to oak trees. • Avoid im�acts to wetlands. Place trail alignment outside wetlands to avoid the need for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. • Avoid impacts to protected s�ecies es�eciallv red-leg�ed fro and steelhead trout. Place trail alignment outside red-legged frog and steelhead habitat and protect these habitats from direct and indirect trail impacts to avoid the need for project redesign or mitigation consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Numerous opportunities to improve habitats and restore ecological communities exist in the praject area. Significant restoration work could include: SfiEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-1 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT - Provide earthen "stock" ponds for red-le eg� d fro�s. Create and maintain earthen ponds, modeled after livestock ponds, in terrestrial uplands near known frog habitat to increase breeding habitat for this rare species. • Remove fish barriers in Stevens Creek. Fish barriers are a key factor limiting the movement of adult steelhead up stream: • Remove non-native invasive species. Pampas grass (Cortaderia selloanu), periwinkle (Vinca major), giant reed (Arundo donax) and other non-native, invasive species are growing throughout the praject and should be removed to prevent their spread and allow revegetation by native plants. • Replant the riparian corridor with native s�ecies. Many stretches of the stream corridor are missing some or all of their riparian cover. Restoring the native riparian community will have significant benefits for steelhead and other wildlife that depends on riparian vegetation for cover, nesting, and foraging. Overall, this study found that a trail alignment through the project area is feasible from an ecological perspective. However, the sensitive species and habitats in the area and the laws applicable to them will limit the location of the trail alignment in some areas. A range of ecological restoration opportunities exist and these will be described in more detail in a subsequent report. Pu�rosE This biological assessment is designed to identify biological constraints and potential ecological restoration opportunities for the Cupertino Stevens Creek trail alignment early on in the planning process. This report contains an overall assessment of the existing biological conditions in the project area for the Stevens Creek Trail, describes the locations and ecology of any rare or listed species that are found or may potentially be found in the project area, identifies protected habitats, and lists the laws and regulations that apply to fhese rare species and habitats. Constraints to the trail alignment and restoration opportunities are described for each of the four Study Areas that comprise the project area. METHODOLOGY Guidelines Applied for this Biotic Assessment The field survey, identification of the habitat types, evaluation of the potential trail impacts on the biological resources, and recommendations to reduce or avoid impacts to the riparian corridor were performed in accordance with accepted practice for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} review and recommended policies and practices established by the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to mitigate impacts to sensitive and listed species. PAGE C-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Focus of this Biotic Assessment This assessment focused on the bioiogical resources of the Stevens Creek and Permanente Creek riparian corridors and the adjacent uplands. The Riparian Corridor Policy Study conducted for the City of San Jose (1994) describes riparian corridors as "defined stream channels including the area up to the bank full-flow line, as well as all streamside vegetation in contiguous adjacent uplands."This biotic assessment considered both the year-round and seasonal use of habitats in the study by wildlife. The Riparian Corridor Policy Study notes that riparian zones are often considered "sensitive resource areas" or "sensitive wildlife habitat" by wildlife agencies and under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These corridors support hundreds of bird, mammal, reptile, amphibian, fish and invertebrate species. This field survey evaluated the biological conditions in nine habitat types found in the project area: • Riparian Vegetation • Freshwater Wetlands • In-siream Habitat • Oak Woodland/Gr�ssland • Oak Woodland/Chaparral Scrub • Open Grassland • Orchard • Golf Course/Parks • Suburban Development . The bioassessment focused on the presence of sensitive habitats and rare or listed species in the project area as follows (See Study Area Habitat Map): 1) Sensitive habitats, which are either protected, rare, or decreasing, in the project area include: All weflands and In-stream Habitat: Wetlands and in-stream habitats are protected from dredging or filling by Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. Impacts to wetlands will require a Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and will require mitigation as deternuned by the Corps. In addition, wetlands and in-stream habitat are known to protect a number of rare or listed species. In Santa Clara County, the red-legged trog, listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act, is found in ponded or slow moving freshwater wetlands. Steelhead trout, another threatened species (federal), breeds in streams in Santa C1ara County, including Stevens Creek. Any impacts to these species or their habitat requires consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service, depending on the agency with jurisdiction. . Riparian vegetation: Streamside vegetation zones are recognized as sensitive habitats by the California Department of Fish and Game and the County of Santa Clara. Both agencies recommend setbacks from the vegetated STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-3 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT riparian corridor. Large riparian trees may serve as nest sites for birds of prey such as red-tailed hawks or kestrels; these birds and their nests are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treafiy Act and California Departrnent of Fish and Game Code. In addition, the City of Cupertino has a heritage tree ordinance that protects trees 31 inches in circumference or greater (as measured 3 feet above grade) or other trees of special significance. Removing trees and native riparian vegetation may require pernlits from these agencies and generally requires mifiigation. Oak woodlands/grasslands: Oaks, in particular valley oaks and blue oaks, are declining in number and protecting them from human impact is common practice. Impacts to oak roots or trees themselves typically requires mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and most heritage tree ordinances. Oak woodland/chaparral: Deer, quail, bobcat and other native species live in this habitat. Some, such as deer, are migratory and fragmentation of their habitat can disrupt migratory routes. Impacts to migratory corridors generally requires mitigation under CEQA. Open grasslands: This habitat type is rapidly decreasing in Santa Clara County. Declining species such as the Burrowing Owl and Loggerhead Shrike require this habitat. Impacts to these rare grassland species requires mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and California Department of Fish and Game Code. 2) Sensitive and listed species of wetlands, riparian vegetation, oak woodlands, chaparral, and grassland habitats, with specific emphasis on those known to occur in the project area and listed in the Natural Diversity Database for Santa Clara County are listed in Table 1. Species on this list are protected by the federal Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, or California Department of Fish and Game Code. In addition to these species, all birds of prey and their nests are protected by California Departrnent of Fish and Game Code and by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Impacts to these organisms, their breeding or nesting habitat, or foraging habitat will require consultation with the appropriate agencies and may require mitigation. PAGE C-4 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Table 1-Special Status Speoies occurring or likely to occur in the Project Area. Animal Species �gal Status* California Tiger Salamander(Ambystoma californiense) CSC, FC California Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora draytoni) FT Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) CSC Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) �' Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) CSC Merlin(Falco columbarius) C� Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) CSC Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludoricianus) C� Monterey Dusky-footed Wood Rat (Neotoma fuscipes luciana) CSC Pallid Bat (Antrozous pallidus) CSC Plant Species Valley Oak (Quercus lobata) none Blue Oak (Quercus douglasii) none FT= Listed as T'hreatened by the Federal Government FC = Candidate for Federal listing CSC =Listed as a Species of Concern by the State of California Field Survey Methods Field surveys were conducted between and January 28, 2000 and March 17, 2Q01 to capture different seasons and evaluate the length of the study area. A total of 16 hours of field work was conducted by Lynne Trulio on January 28, July 31, 2000, and March 16 and 17, 2001. On each trip, surveys focused on specific Study Areas of the creek corridors. Additional visits were made to previously surveyed portions of the creek to verify findings and evaluate the corridor over time. All observafiions were made on foot using 10 x 42 binoculars. Adjacent fields, trees, perching sites, and the undersides of bridges were examined for nests or other bird or mammal activity. Other Information Sources In addition to field surveys, these sources were consulted for biological informafiion on the area and particular species: b) Lands of the Diocese of San Jose, Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports c} Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan Environmental Impact Report d} California State Fish and Game Natural Diversity Database e) Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society (SCVAS) f� Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-5 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT PROJECT SETTING Regional Setting The project area is located in the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains and follows the Stevens Creek corridor from Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek County Park. The praject area also borders a segment of Permanente Creek as it flows through Rancho San Antonio County Park. The project area is bounded by the Santa Cruz Mountain foothills to the west, Highway 280 to the north, suburban development to the east, and Stevens Creek County Park/Fremont Older Open Space Preserve to the south. The general topography of rolling hills and flood plain provides a range of natural habitats from oak woodland to grassland to riparian vegetation. The potential trail alignment passes through theses habitats as well as two golf courses and suburban development. Parts of this area have been quarried in the past and a closed quarry exists in the project area. Active quarries, run by Hansen- Permanente and by Stevens Creek Quarry, operate just west of the project area. Stevens Creek flows from the Stevens Creek reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park through the cities of Cupertino, Sunnyvale, Los Altos, and then into the City of Mountain View, where it joins the San Francisco Bay in Shoreline Park in Mountain View. Proj ect Area The project area is divided into four Study Areas, as described below. Nine habitat types were found in the four Study Areas. They include the natural communities of riparian vegetation, in-stream habitat, freshwater wetland, oak woodland/grassland oak woodland/chaparral, and open grassland and the human-developed habitat provided by golf courses/parks, orchard, and suburban development. BIOLOGICAL CONDTTIONS, CONSTRAINTS AND RESTORATION OPPORTUNITES BY STUDY AREA Study Area A: Cristo Rey Drive to Stevens Creek Boulevard Existing Conditions. Study Area A is located at the most northwestern end of the project area. It is bounded by Rancho San Antonio County Park and Cristo Rey Drive on the north and Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south. This Study Area includes the "Lands of the Diocese" development, Gates of Heaven Cemetery, and a large PG&E substation. Several parcels in this area will soon be transferred to Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation as part of the "Lands of the Diocese" development agreement. The Hammond-Synder House, a historic site owned by the Cupertino Historical Society, is also found here. Habitats in Study Area A include open grassland, blue oak woodland interspersed with grassland, freshwater wetland (with seeps), willow- dominated riparian vegetation, and suburban development (See Study Area PAGE C-6 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Habitat 1V1Ap). Rare, sensitive, or listed species known to occur in the area include red-legged frog, Loggerhead Shrike, Merlin, blue oak, and valley oak. Rare or protected species potentially exisfiing in the area include the western pond turtle, Burrowing Owl, and other birds of prey. Several extensive searches for the California tiger salamander, a candidate for listing as a federally-threatened species, have not found the salamander in the study area. Much of this area is covered by non-native annual grassland that had been heavily grazed for decades. Typical non-native grasses include Avena spp., brome (Bromus spp.}, and ryegrass (Lolium spp.). Several native grassland species can be observed easily amist the annual grasses, plants such as fiddleneck, soap plant, California poppy (Escholtizia califnrnica), lupine species (Lupinus spp.), and blue-eyed grass. Grassland rodents, such as voles, mice, and gophers are prevalent, providing a large prey base for a wide variety of birds of prey. Red-tailed Hawks, Kestrels, White-tailed Kites, and Sharp- shinned Hawks are easily seen hunting over the grasslands. Great-horned Owls, Screech Owls, and Merlin have also been observed in the area. This open grassland habitat with existing ponds appears to present likely habitat for the California tiger salamander, a rare species. This species requires vernal pools for breeding and can be found with red-legged frogs in the same habitat and breeding pools. However, the only known the tiger salamander population on the peninsula is found at Lake Lagunita, on the Stanford University campus (Seymour and Westphal, 2000). In addition, Seymour and Westphal (2000) found no tiger salamanders in the amphibian the 217 amphibian survey routes they visited in Mid-peninsula Regional Open Space Disfirict (MROSD) preserves in the Santa Cruz Mountains and the foothills. Since the MROSD preserves are similar to the habitat in Study Area A, and the entire praject area, it is very unlikely that California tiger salamanders are present in the praject area. Oak woodland is also a significant habitat in this area. Blue oaks (Quercus dougiassii} dominate the grasslands on the hillsides and down the drainages.. Coast live oaks (Quercus agrif�lia) and some valley oaks (Quercus lobata} are also found in the area. These trees are keystone species in the habitat, that is, they are essential for supporting many other organisms. Deer and acorn woodpeckers are two species found in the area that depend on oaks. Oaks are sensitive to disturbances in their root zone, which extends the distance of the tree's canopy. Disturbances that impact the oaks include overcovering, overwatering, earth removal or tilling, and root damage from vehicles. Three ponded freshwater wetlands and their drainages exist on-site: one on the north side of the Study Area below Cristo Rey Drive, one on the east side between Rancho San Antonio County Park and the Gate of Heaven Cemetery, and one on the south side near the Whispering Creek stable and horse paddock. Each wetland has emergent freshwater vegetation including cattails {Typha spp.) and rushes (Juncus spp.). Wetlands are protected from dredging or filling by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Impacts to wetlands require a STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-7 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, the agency with immediate jurisdiction over wetlands. The wetland zone just south of Cristo Rey Drive is fed by two drainages (with wetlands down each drainage) and this is an important complex. This wetland complex was surveyed for the "Lands of the Diocese" EIR by Mark Jennings, an amphibian specialist with H. T. Harvey and Associates. On Apri18, 1994, he identified a red-legged frog in this freshwater wetland zone. This wetland zone is fed by seeps and provides continuous ponding to support the red-legged frog. This species is listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has jurisdiction over federally-listed species, considers impacts to this species or its habitat to include loss of habitat, changes to local hydrology, harming or harassing individual frogs, and introducing predators (including dogs and cats) into the wetland. This list is not inclusive of all potential impacts to this species, but highlights those relevant to the Cupertino Stevens Creek Trail. Riparian vegetation, dominated by willow species (Salix spp.), lines Permanente Creek between the Hammond-Snyder House and Rancho San Antonio County Park. Other tree species in this corridor include coast live oak, sycamore, elderberry, and buckeye. Cattails and horsetails grow along some of the exposed stream edges. Coyote bush, hoarhound, fiddleneck, and miner's lettuce grow under and just outside the willow drip-line. In the past, this riparian corridor was damaged by grazing, agriculture, and other activities of the Diocese. Today, runoff from the Hansen-Permanente quarry still introduces sediments into the Creek and alters the hydrology. Despite these impacts, Mike Wes#phal, biologist for Coyote Creek Riparian Station, found juvenile and adult red-legged frogs in Permanente Creek in 1994 and he found red-legged frogs in 1997 in ponds just south of Hansen-Permanente and within 1 mile of the project area (M. Westphal and L. Trulio, pers. observ.). Most recently, Westphal and Seymour conducted an amphibian survey of all Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District lands. Their report, dated June 1, 2000, noted that red-legged frogs were found on the Diocese property just adjacent to Rancho San Antonio County Park. In-stream habitat is maintained by flows from the Hansen-Permanente quarry operation. A holding pond at the edge of the study area is designed to remove sediments before water moves downstream. This habitat supports red-legged frogs and may be adequate for western pond turtles, a state species of concern. Constraints for the trail alignment in Study Area A include: • Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the willow riparian vegetation along Permanente Creek to avoid human disturbance impacts to riparian species and the need to replace native vegetation. • Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the oak trees to avoid the need for mitigation. � Place trail alignment outside wetlands to avoid the need for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. PAGE C-8 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT • Place trail alignment outside red-legged frog habitat and protect frog habitat from direct and indirect trail impacts to avoid the need for praject redesign or mitigation. A Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the federal Endangered Species Act may still be required as since the project will be directly adjacent to red-legged frog habitat. Restoration opportunities in Study Area A include: • Revair road cut from Cristo Rey Drive down the hill toward red-leg�ed fro� wetland: Regrade the road cut to match topography and stop erosion. Plant with native grasses, if possible, and native grassland species. This is a reasonably simple and inexpensive project. • Plant vallev, blue, and coast live oak trees �rown from locally collected acorns: Collect acorns in the fall and grow them in a nursery unti.l they have developed a taproot. Newly planted oaks require some maintenance and irrigation for the first few years. This is an project of intermediate cost and complexity. • Provide earthen "stock" ponds for red-le��ed fro�s: Create and maintain earthen ponds, modeled after livestock ponds, with adequate vegetation and ponding in terrestrial uplands near known frog habitat to increase breeding habitat for this rare species. Potential sites include the parcels being deeded from the Diocese to Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation. This is a reasonably complex praject that may require habitat management to keep the ponds attractive to frogs. Study Area B: Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park Existing Conditions. Study Area B is dominated by a closed quarry and Linda Vista Park. Six habitat types occur in the area: open grassland, oak woodland/chaparral, freshwater wetland (with seeps), willow-dominated riparian vegetation, golf course/park lands, and suburban development (See Study Area Habitat Map). Rare, sensitive, or listed species potentially existing in the area include red-legged frog, western pond turtle, and birds of prey. Stevens Creek flows through the golf course and then skirts the northwest corner of the Study Area. Open grassland is found at the bottom of the quariy. This non-native grassland is growing on the highly disturbed, unconsolidated, and eroding surfaces left after quarrying ended. As is often the case on mined lands, only the hardiest species can survive such disturbance. 'The quarry area is eroding severely and large gullies are evident on the slopes and on the quarry floor. This unstable topography prevents many native species from establishing and encourages the spread of invasive, non-native species, such as pampas grass and French broom,both of which are growing on the quarry slopes. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-9 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Several small flowing rivulets, probably formed by seeps, feed freshwater wetlands in the center and along the southern side of the quarry at the base of a steep hill. These drainages converge to form a small stream that flows to Stevens Creek at the mouth of the quarry. Typical wetland species, especially cattails (Typha spp.) and rushes (juncus spp.), are prevalent in both wetlands. The large wetland along the quarry's south edge also supports willow riparian vegetafiion, including cottonwoods and alders. These wetlands represent potential red-legged frog habitat. Coast live oak woodland interwoven with chaparral occurs on the east and west wall of the quarry, over much of the knoll just above Linda Vista Park, and through the gulch that runs east-west from the quarry to Linda Vista Drive (along the south edge of Linda Vista Park). Coast live oak, the dominant tree, is found with a diversity of shrubs especially Ceanothus spp., chemise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.), coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) and toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia). Under or around these large shrubs, California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum}, California sage (Artemesia californica), chaparral current (Ribes sanginium), pearly-everlasting, ferns, monkey flower, and Indian paintbrush are easily found. Deer, California Quail, and the gray fox are typical mammal residents of this habitat. Suburban development abuts Sfiudy Area B on the east side and some of the west side. The Deep Cliff Golf Course borders the west and north edges of Linda Vista Park. The golf course and the park land habitat of Linda Vista Park provided habitat primarily for human-habituated species, such a jays, robins, and California towhees. Herons and egrets may also frequent the golf course ponds and in-sfiream habitat of Stevens Creek, which flows through the golf course. Constraints for the trail alignment in Study Area B include: • Place trail alignment outside the edge of the willow-cottonwood riparian vegetation to avoid human impacts and the need for replacing native species. • Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the oak trees to avoid the need to mitigate for impacts to oak trees. • In conformance with the City of Cupertino Heritage Tree Ordinance, do not remove any trees larger than 31 inches in circumference (measured at 3 feet above grade) to avoid the need to mitigate. • Place trail alignment outside wetlands to avoid the need for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. • � Place trail alignment outside red-legged frog habitat and protect frog habitat from direct and indirect trail impacts to avoid the need for praject redesign or mitigation. A Section 7 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the federal Endangered Species Act may still be required as since the project will be directly adjacent to red-legged frog habitat. PAGE C-10 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Restoration opportunities in Study Area B include: a) Control quarrv erosion: Recontour the unconsolidated fill on the eastern floor of the quarry to reduce erosion and the resulting sediment load to Stevens Creek. Use ecologically sensitive engineering methods and stabilize the recontoured slopes by planting native vegetation to control eroding areas on the slopes and around the edges of the quarry. This work will prepare the area for more complete revegetation with native plants. b) Remove non-native s�ecies, especiallY from quarry slopes: Non- nahve pampas grass and French broom are two invasive species that crowd out native species. They are both growing on the eroding slopes of the quarly and are found in some of the other habitats. Remove these few plants before they become well- established in the quarry habitat. Remove non-native, invasive species to prepare the area for recolonization by native plants or for planting native species. c) Plant native species along all feasible quarry slopes: Using less disturbed sites as models for the local native vegetation �ommunity, plant the appropriate diversity and abundance of native plant species to restore the native, indigenous vegetation community. Study Area C: Linda Vista Park to Blackberry Farm Existing Conditions. Study Area C includes Deep Cliff Golf Course, McClellan Ranch Park, and an open grassland parcel just north of McClellan. Suburban development abuts this Study Area on east and west sides. Linda Vista Park is found at the south end and Blackberry Farm (golf course) borders the north. Five habitat fiypes occur in the area: in-stream habitat, Sycamore-oak riparian vegetation, open grassland, golf course/park lands, and suburban development (See Study Area Habitat Map). Rare, sensitive, or listed species potentially existing in the area include red-legged frog, western pond turtle, steelhead, and other birds of prey. Stevens Creek flows through this Study Area. The in-stream habitat of Stevens Creek is potential red-legged frog and western pond turtle habitat. It is also known to support adult and juvenile steelhead trout along its entire length from the reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park to Shoreline Park in Mountain View, where it meets the Bay. Steelhead are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act and are under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service. This anadromous form of rainbow trout lives in streams for some of their life cycle and in the ocean for the rest. They spawn in freshwater streams and are sensitive to high temperatures, sediment, loss of in-stream structures, and loss of appropriate spawning gravel. Since 1937, water has been impounded in a reservoir at the head of Stevens Creek, resulting in only winter and spring flows. Stevens Creek was allowed to go dry each summer. As a result, STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-11 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT the entire Creek was used only for migration and rearing habitat was eliminated from the lower reaches. Recently, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which manages flows in the Creek, has allowed year round flows (Padley pers. comm. 1999). This new policy was initiated in 1998, and in September of that year, first and second year age class steelhead were observed in Stevens Creek in Mountain View (G. Seeds, pers. comm. 1998). The Fisheries and Aquatic Habitat Collaborative Effort (FACHE) was initiated to research the habitat needs of steelhead, collect information on the effects of different water release policies in Santa Clara County streams, and provide recommendations for managing in-stream habitats for steelhead populations given the constraints of this urban setting. Research shows that Stevens Creek is a viable spawning habitat for adults and summer rearing habitat for juveniles if managed properly. Adult steelhead are limited in their distribution by in-stream fish barriers that impede their movement up stream. The survival of juvenile steelhead seems to be most limited by high in-stream water temperatures, which are not tolerated by young fish. Protecting this valuable steelhead habitat is a high priority. The potential trail alignment in Study Area C could include replacing the McClellan Road bridge, replacing a tunnel parallel to the stream channel under McClellan Road, and installing new or replacement pedestrian bicycle bridges. Any trail development activifiy in the channel or in jurisdiction wetland would require: a) a Stream Alteration Agreement with the California Departrnent of Fish and Game, b) a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for wetland impacts, and/or c) an Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service for impacts to steelhead trout and their habitat. Sycamore and coast live oaks dominate the riparian vegetation along most of this stretch of the Creek. The Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society's McClellan Ranch Park Checklist of Birds notes over 106 species of birds found in the riparian corridor and grasslands of the Park. Riparian cover is especially good through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm where the understory includes coyote bush, box elder, and native blackbeny. Non- native invasive species here include periwinkle, german ivy, and tree of heaven. The stream is well shaded through this section and the in-sfiream habitat, which includes riffles, pools, and exposed gravel, appears to provide high quality fish habitat. The riparian corridor and in-stream habitats through Deep Cliff Golf Course were not evaluated because this area is not part of a potential trail alignment. The open grassland at McClellan Ranch Park and between the Park and Blackberry Farm provides foraging habitat for a wide variety of bird species, including birds of prey. Deer, coyote, and bobcat have all been observed here (C. Breon, pers. comm.; pers. observ.). Grassland adjacent to the Creek corridor may also provide the breeding habitat required by western pond PAGE C-12 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT turtles. These turtles move into grassy uplands adjacent to creeks to lay their eggs. Constraints for the trail alignment in Study Area C include: • Place trail alignment outside the edge of the riparian vegetation to avoid the need for mitigating human disturbance effects in the riparian corridor and to avoid the need to replace native species. • Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the oak trees to avoid the need to mitigate for impacts to oak firees. • To comply with the Cifiy of Cupertino Heritage Tree Ordinance, do not remove any trees larger than 31 inches in circumference (measured at 3 feet above grade) to avoid heritage tree impacts. • Place trail alignment outside wetlands to avoid the need for a pernut from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. • Place trail alignment outside steelhead habitat and protect in-stream habitat from direct and indirect trail impacts to avoid the need for project redesign or mitigation. A Section 7 consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service under the federal Endangered Species Act will be required as the project will be directly adjacent to steelhead habitat. Restoration opportunities in Study Area C include: • Remove non-native, invasive species from the ri�arian corridor: At least three non-native, invasive species, Vinca, german ivy and tree of heaven, could be removed to provide room for native plants. • Stabilize bank and reve�etate: Several opportunities exist to stabilize creek bank slopes using ecologically sensitive engineering methods and native species. Study Area D: Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Boulevard/Varian Park Existing Conditions. Study Area D begins at the south end of Blackberry Farm Golf Course and follows Stevens Creek to Varian Park, just north of Stevens Creek Boulevard. Suburban development surrounds this Study Area on all but the south side. Rare, sensitive, or listed species potentially existing in the area include red-legged frog, western pond turtle, steelhead, and nesting birds of prey. Sycamore-oak riparian vegetation, in-stream habitat, orchard, golf course/park, and suburban development are the five habitat types in this zone (See Study Area Ha�itat Map). A narrow band of riparian vegetation lines Stevens Creek as it flows through Blackberry Farm and Golf Course. Sycamore and coast live oaks are the dominant trees. Other tree species include California buckeye, black walnut, redwood, and pines. The corridor through the golf course has almost no understory or mid-story vegetation layers, which severely reduces the habitat quality of the riparian zone to wildlife. Riparian vegetation becomes very sparse to non-existent at the north end of the golf course. The riparian STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT Pa�E C-13 APPENDIX G - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT vegetation corridor becomes wider and much more diverse on the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard where large sycamores, coast live oaks, and buckeyes shade several understory layers. While this area is considered steelhead habitat, the poor quality riparian vegetation or the complete lack of vegetative cover in this study area reduces the quality of the in-stream habitat for steelhead and the food chain they depend upon. Lack of adequate vegetation cover produces little shade, resulting in water temperatures that are too high for the survival of juvenile steelhead. Sparse vegetation also means the nutrient base iri the stream is decreased for insects that feed steelhead young and adults. In addition, riparian vegetation adds large woody debris to streams that forms pools and cover for fish. The in-stream habitat in this area has a fish barrier at the south end of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course and boulders or rip-rap along the stream bank—structures that reduce habitat quality for adult steelhead. Orchards are found just south of Stevens Creek Boulevard and in Varian Park. The orchard south of Stevens Creek provides habitat for a wide range of species, from resident deer to migratory song birds. This site may also provide nesting habitat for western pond turtles. The smaller orchard at Varian Park is on the bluff high above the Creek and so does not provide turtle habitat. The potential trail alignment in Study Area D may have between one and five pedestrian/bicycle bridges crossing Stevens Creek and possibly an undercrossing at Stevens Creek Boulevard. The trail alignment may require access ramps to the Stevens Creek Boulevard underpass or tunnel. These structures would result in the loss of riparian corridor trees and vegetation just north of the Boulevard. Any trail development activity in the channel or in jurisdiction wetland would require: a) a Stream Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game, b) a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for wetland impacts, and/or c) an Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service for impacts to steelhead and their habitat. The restoration opportunities listed below provide potential mitigation measures for impacts to wetland habitat and riparian vegetation. Constraints in Study Area D include: � Place trail alignment outside the edge of the riparian vegetation to avoid human disturbance effects in the riparian corridor and to avoid the need to replace native species. • Place trail alignment outside the drip-line of the oak trees to avoid the need to mitigate for impacts to oak trees. PAGE C-14 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT • In conformance with the City of Cupertino Heritage Tree ardinance, do not remove any trees larger than 31 inches in circumference (measured at 3 feet above grade) to avoid heritage iree impacts. • Place trail alignment outside wetlands to avoid the need for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. • Place trail alignment outside steelhead habitat and protect in-stream habitat from direct and indirect trail impacts to avoid the need for praject redesign or mitigation. A Section 7 consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service under the federal Endangered Species Act may still be required as since the project will be directly adjacent to steelhead habitat. Restoration opportunities in Study Area D include: • Remove rip-rap and boulders lining the Creek banks: At the south end of Blackberry Farm, creek bank armoring with boulders and rip-rap could be replaced with an ecologically-sensitive bank stabilization method that allows riparian vegetation to grow and shade the Creek. • Remove the fish barrier at the south end of Blackberry Farm Golf Course• Remove the barrier and replace with pool and riffle habitat, which is attractive to steelhead. This project is relatively expensive as it will require environmental permits and engineering work. However, the long-term benefits to steelhead are great. • Remove low flow vehicle crossines: There are several places along the Creek in Blackberry Farm and golf course where vehicles cross the Creek in the channel. These could be removed and the in-stream habitat restored for aquatic species, especially steelhead. • Remove non-native invasive species: Periwinkle (Vinca major) and giant reed (Arundo donax), two highly invasive species, are growing along the corridor and should be removed to prevent their spread. • Replant the riparian corridor with native species grown from locallX collected stock: Much of the corridor in this Study Area is missing some or all of its riparian cover. Restoring the native riparian community, including trees, shrubs, and vegetative understory, will have significant benefits for steelhead and other wildlife species that depend on riparian vegetation for cover, nesting, and foraging. APPLICABLE SPECIES LAWS AND REGULATIONS Federal Laws The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq., as amended) prohibits federal agencies from authorizing, permitting or funding any action that would result in biological jeopardy to a species listed as Threatened or Endangered under the Act. Listed species are taxa for which proposed and final rules have been published in the Federal Register (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 1998a, 1998b). If a proposed project may jeopardize listed species, Section 7 of the ESA requires consideration of those species through formal consultations with the USFWS. Federal Candidate STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE C-15 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT species are "taxa for which [USFWS] has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to support issuance of a proposed rule to list, but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded" (USFWS 1997). Federal Candidate species are not afforded formal protection, although USFWS encourages other federal agencies to give consideration to Candidate species in environmental planning. The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (1918, 1972, 1976) protects species listed in the Act under the Code of Federal Regulations, 50 CFR 10.12. In essence, all migratory birds and their nests are protected by this Act. Wetlands are "waters of the U.S." and are therefore regulated under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (1972). The Army Corps of Engineers must issue a permit for projects that result in the dredging or filling of jurisdictional wetlands. Consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers is recommended if a project may cause direct or indirect impacts to wetlands or other waters of the U.S. State of California Laws and Codes Project permitting and approval requires compliance with the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the 1984 California Endangered Species Act (CESA). CESA authorized the California Fish and Game Commission to designate Endangered, T'hreatened and Rare species and to regulate the taking of these species (i3 2050-2098, Fish & Game Code). The California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Section 670.5) lists animal species considered Endangered or Threatened by the state. The CDFG maintains lists of designated Endangered, Threatened and Rare plant and animal species (CDFG 1996, 1997). The CDFG also maintains a list of animal "species of special concern (SSC)," most of which are species whose breeding populations in California may face extirpation. Although these species have no legal status, the CDFG recommends considering these species during analysis of proposed project impacts to protect declining populations and avoid the need to list them as endangered in the future. Under provisions of Section 15380(d} of CEQA, the project lead agency and CDFG must mitigate significant impacts to rare species, such as federal candidate species or SSC species, as well as significant impacts to listed species. In accordance with Fish and Game Code 1601-1603, the CDFG has the authority to oversee work that occurs in streams and riparian zones. A Streambed Alteration Agreement with the CDFG is required if a project will substantially divert the natural flow of a stream, substantially alter its bed or bank, or use any material from the streambed. PAGE C-16 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT SPECIES DESCRIPTIONS Summary of Special-Status Wildlife Species Special-status amphibians, reptiles, and fish known to occur in the riverine habitat of Santa Clara Counfiy in the vicinity of the project site include the western pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata), a California Species of Special Concern, the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), a federally- listed threatened species, and the steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), a federally-listed threatened species. Rare species that may occur in or near the study area include nesting raptors (hawks, falcons and owls) and Monterey dusky footed wood rats (Neotoma fuscipes luciana). Raptors and raptor nests are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game code; the wood rat is a California Species of Special Concern. State or Federally-Listed Species California Red-Legged Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) California red-legged frogs are listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Federal Endangered Species Act, and they are a state Species of Special Concern. California red-legged frogs are known to occupy and breed in marshy habitats, springs, ponds (both natural and artificial), and slack water pools of rivers and streams (Stebbins 1985}. Frogs may lay their eggs as early as November, but typically egg-laying occurs in central California from January 1 to April 1. Rivers subject to high flows and flushing with no calm pools to escape, such as characterizes Stevens Creek, will flush out egg masses and are not suitable nesting habitat. After breeding, adults may move from pool to pool along stream bank or in riparian vegetation. Juvenile red-legged frogs appear to have different habitat needs from adults. Most sites where juvenile red-legged frogs occur have shallow water and limited shoreline or emergent vegetation (Jennings and Hayes 1988). It is important for juvenile red-legged frogs that there be small one-meter breaks in the vegetation or clearings in the dense riparian cover to allow juveniles to sun themselves and forage, but also to have close escape from predators (Jennings and Hayes 1988). Tadpoles also have different habitat needs. Optimal habitat for this life stage is characterized by emergent willow stems, grasses, filamentous algae, cattails, and submerged weeds and stems (Wiens 1970). In addition to vegetation cover, jennings and Hayes (1988) note that tadpoles use mud. It is speculated that red-legged frog larvae are algae grazers; however, larval foraging ecology remains unknown (Jennings, Hayes, and Holland 1993). It is estimated that California red-legged frogs have disappeared from over 99 percent of the inland and southern California localities within the historic range of the species and from at least 75 percent of the entire historic range of STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE C-17 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT the species (jennings, Hayes, and Holland 1993). Populations of California red-legged frogs have declined due to exotic aquatic predators, habitat degradation from agricultural and grazing practices, a decrease in water quality from human manipulation of habitats, and water diversion. Steelhead Trout(Oncorhynchus mykiss) 'The steelhead trout of the central California coast are considered an "evolutionarily significant unit" by the National Marine Fisheries Service and are federally listed as Threatened in the Study Area. As an anadromous form of rainbow trout, steelhead hatch in freshwater streams, migrate out to the ocean and later return to their natal streams to spawn. Steelhead live in their natal streams for up to four years before migrating to the ocean. They spend between two to five years in the ocean where the trout are bluish-gray above with black spots on their back and fins, silver below. When steelhead are in fresh water they are often greenish and less silvery in color. Other identifying marks include a pink to red stripe on their side. When they are ready to spaw� the fish return to their natal streams where they lay eggs in gravelly substrates. Along the central California coast, migration upstream and spawning occurs from October 15 to June 15. Unlike most other salmon species, the adults survive after spawning. Juveniles remain in their natal streams and are especially sensitive to high water temperatures between May and October. This species eats a varied diet of crustaceans, small fish, tadpoles and insects. Steelhead are sensitive to water levels, water temperature and poor water quality. Removing trees that overhang spawning streams can inorease water temperatures, which decreases the amount of oxygen in the water and reduces the survival of eggs, fiy and adults. Sedimentation--a primary form of water quality degradation--will smoother and kill eggs and fry and destroy spawning areas by covering gravels with fine particles. Rare, Non-Listed Species Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) The western pond turtle is a California Species of Special Concern. Western pond turtles are found in ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches containing aquatic vegetation. They are usually seen sunning on logs, banks, or rocks near banks. Individuals move up to three or four miles within a creek system, especially during "walk-abouts" before a female lays eggs. Eggs are laid in nest burrows that can be up to several hundred feet away from river or pond banks in woodlands, grasslands, and open forest. Eggs are laid from April-August; time varies with locality. Suitable riverine habitat for western pond turtles occurs within the project area as Stevens Creek contains escape cover such as deep pools, undercut banks, overhanging vegetation and in-stream tree roots. There appears to be suitable grassy, upland nesting habitat adjacent to Stevens Creek at the Simms Property orchard, McClellan Ranch, and the open grassland parcel just north of McClellan Ranch. PAGE C-18 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT Monterey Dusky-footed Wood Rat(Neotoma fuscipes luciana) This subspecies of the dusky-footed wood rat is a California Species of Special Concern. It occurs in the coastal foothills and mountains from Monterey Bay to Morro Bay. It is common to abundant in deciduous and evergreen woodland habitat that provides dense overstory and understory cover. It is also commonly found in chaparral, coastal scrub, and riparian habitats (Zeiner et al. 1990b). Wood rats build houses of sticks, bark, leaves, and other forest debris at the base of, or within the canopy of, a shrub, tree, or other structure. Suitable habitat for wood rats occurs in the dense chaparral habitat in Study Area B. Searches for wood rat nests were not conducted during this bioassessment. Birds of Special Concern in California The Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) and Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) are two grassland species of special concern in California. The shrike forages for insects, reptiles and amphibians and other small creatures in open grasslands and nests in scrubs, viney thickets, or trees adjacent to open grassland. They often occur in grasslands adjacent to creek corridors. T`he burrowing owl is a prairie bird which nests underground in burrows. In the South Bay, burrowing owls live on open, flat sites such as vacant fields, golf courses and airports where ground squirrels provide the owls' nest burrows. Raptors (birds of prey) which occur in the area include American Kestrel (Falco sparverius), Red-shouldered Hawk (Buteo lineatus), Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo �amaicensis) Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii), Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus), White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus), Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia), Great Horned Owl (Bubo virginianus), and Barn Owl (Tyto alba}. Potential nest trees for raptors exist along the riparian corridor of Stevens Creek. Large oaks and sycamore snags with cavities along the upper boundaries of the riparian corridor provide potential nesfiing habitat for several owl species. However, foraging areas to support resident raptors and their young is limited due to the constrained area of the riparian corridor. Raptors and their nests are protected by California Department of Fish and Game Code. Nesting raptors are likely to be disturbed if there is a change in human activities levels during their nesting seasory but may habituate to human acfiivity if those activity levels are constant (Lee 1981). A pre- construction survey for nesting raptors should occur prior to the nesting season, which begins in March and at least 30 days prior to construction activities. If a nest tree will be removed or construction activity is within 150 feet of an active nest, appropriate mitigation measures must be developed with the California Department of Fish and Game. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE G19 APPENDIX C - BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT REFERENCES CITED Habitat Restorafiion Group. 1994. The Riparian Corridor Policy Study. City of San jose, San jose,CA. Heritage and Specimen Tree Preservation. City of Cupertino. Lands of the Diocese of San Jose - Draft Environmental Impact Report for Request to Amend the General Plan. City of Cupertino.June 24, 1994. Lands of the Diocese of San Jose - Final Environmental Impact Report for Request to Amend the General Plan. City of Cupertino. August 31, 1995. McClellan Ranch Park Master Plan. McClellan Ranch Park Community Advisory Committee. May 19, 1993. Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Departrnent. September 7, 1993. Stevens Creek County Park Master Plan Environmental Impact Report. County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Departrnent. February 1994. Seymour, R. and M. Westphal. 2000. Results of a one-year survey for amphibians on lands managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,Mountain View, CA. PAGE C-ZO STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX D - GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY EVALUATION STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 PAGE D-1 APPENDIX D - GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY EVALUATION PAGE D-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS February 21, 2001 E3359 Ms.Jana Sokale ENVIRONMENTAL PL�►NIVING 7788 Hazelnut Drive Newark, California 94560 SUBJECT: Geotechnical Feasibility Evaluation RE: Stevens Creek Trail,Cupertino Segment Dear Ms. Sokale: We have completed a geotechnical feasibility evaluation for the construction of a pedestrian/bicycle trail adjacent to geotechnically constrained segments of the Stevens Creek corridor situated within the City of Cupertino. In addition, we have prepared preliminary engineers construction cost estimates for portions of the trail system. Specifically we have evaluated the geotechnical feasibility of: 1) An engineered structure and/or graded trail alignment from Varian Park down to the creek level at Stevens Creek Boulevard; 2) An undercrossing of Stevens Creek Boulevard located immediately northwest of Blackberry Farm Golf Course; 3) Pedestrian bridges across the creek within Blackberry Farm; 4) A trail underpass/overcross at McClellan Road;and a) Alternative trail alignments to and through the closed quarry located immediately northeast of Stevens Creek County Park. Various alternative trail design options were considered at Varian Park, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Blackberry Farm and McClellan Road as indicated below. Only the preferred grade-separated options are discussed in detail for this document. Varian Park Ram� Alternatives a) 8%Ramp -Preferred Option b) 10% Ramp c) 14.8% Ramp - Existing Slope d)Concrete Column Supported Overpass Stevens Creek Boulevard Crossin� Alternatives a)Bore and jack Tunnel with Ramps-Preferred Grade-Separated Option b)In-Stream Underpass c) Overpass d)Signalized Intersection Boulevard Crossing-Prefened At-Grade Option lorthern California Office Southern California Office Z30 Village Lane 5245 Avenida Encinas • Suite A Los Gatos, CA 95030-7218 Carlsbad, CA 92008-4374 ,408) 354-5542 • Fax (408) 354-1852 (760) 931-2700 • Fax: (760) 931-1020 �-mail: losgatosQcottonshires.com www.cottonshires.com e-mail: carlsbad@cottonshires.com Ms.Jana Sokale February 21, 2001 Page 2 E3359 Blackberr,y Farm Alternatives a)East Bank Alignment- 1 Bridge with Optional Neighborhood Connection at the 'Tank'Bridge-Preferred Option b)West Bank Alignment-5 Bridges McClelland Road Crossin� Alternatives a) Replacement Bridge with Trail Head Clearance and Increased Flood Capacity Preferred Grade-Separated Option b) Tunnel East of Existing Bridge Abutment with Associated 5% Ramps c)Channel Deepening Beneath Existing Bridge d) Roadway Overpass e) Signalized Intersection-Preferred At-Grade Option EVALUATION OF GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY Our evaluation has been based on field reconnaissance and measurement of cross sections completed to portray topographic and engineering geologic conditions at each site noted above. Cross sections were completed using Brunton Cornpass, measuring tape and hand-level techniques. Collected data was analyzed and conceptual engineering design solutions were identified and illustrated on the field measured cross sections. The following trail elements were determined to be geotechnically feasible. 1.0 VARIAN PARK RAMP/TRAIL CONNECTION From the elevation of Varian Park, a decent of 38.5 foot is necessary to reach creek grade north of Stevens Creek Boulevard. An existing 14.8 percent ramp descends from the southern terminus of Amelia Court to the creek (SCVWD maintenance access ramp). Approximately 500 lineal feet separates the top of the existing ramp and Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south. This distance constraint limits the length of any proposed ramp. With a length of 500 feet, the minimum achievable ramp slope is roughly 8 percent. An existing house located adjacent to the ramp alignment, combined with locally very steep slopes,will constrain the final ramp design and alignment. 1.1 Cost Estimate The preliminary engineers construction cost estimate for an 8 percent ramp is $1.5 million. The 8 percent ramp would include a single, downhill retaining wall to approximately 6 feet in height and grading to establish the new ramp surface (Figure 1). Unit costs utilized in the above estimate include grading at $30/cubic yard, retaining wall construction at$120/square foot of wall face, AC paving at $25/square foot, and a protective downslope fence at$10/lineal foot. 1.2 Alternatives Other design options that were considered included a 10 percent ramp ($1.0 million estimated cost)and minor upgrade of the existing 14.8 percent ramp for trail use ($10,000 estimated cost). In addition, a concrete, cassion supported ramp was evaluated at 8 percent with an engineers construction cost estimate of$2.0 million. COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. Ms.Jana Sokale February 21, 2001 Page 3 E3359 2.0 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD TRAIL UNDERPASS From the existing pavement elevation of Stevens Creek Boulevard, a 5 percent circular ramp combined with a bore and jack tunnel could be constructed to provide a trail connection from the west-bound lane of Stevens Creek Boulevard. The trail would then pass beneath the roadway to an alignment extenciing south along the creek through the Stocklmeir property. A second 5 percent linear ramp would be needed to bring the trail back up to the top of bank south of Stevens Creek Boulevard in the Stockimeir property. A vertical elevation drop of 12 feet is necessary from the existing roadway pavement to the bottom of the tunnel to provide an 8-foot diameter tunnel with a minimum of 4-foot of cover(Figure 2). 2.1 Cost Estimate The preliminary engineers construction cost estimate for this trail element (including tunnel and access ramps) is $800,000 if an 8 percent ramp is constructed from Varian Park down to the creek, and 1.0 million if an 8 percent Varian Park ramp is not constructed. Unit costs utilized for the above cost estimate include$4,000 per lineal foot of bore and jack tunnel (minimum 50-foot tunnel required), $30/cubic yard for grading, $120/square foot of wall face, $30/square foot for concrete ramp surfacing, and an assumption that one third of the circular ramp will require elevated structural support at $3,000 per lineal foot. 3.0 BLACKBERRY FARM PEDESTRIAN BRIDGES The west bank alignment of the trail through Blackberry Farm would require a total of 5 pedestrian bridges. Because occasional flood events may jump the relatively low, local creek banks, the final design for pedestrian bridges my incorporate a break- away bridge design. This type of design will allow the bridge to detach at one abutment and swing on a hinge at the opposite abutment. 3.1 Cost Estimate Advancing through Blackberry Farm from north to south, the first (60-foot) bridge would be required to connect the end of the Stocklmeir property with the eighth hole of the Blackberry Farm Golf Course. The preliminary engineers cost estimate for this bridge is $125,000. The second (60-foot) bridge would be required at the east bank maintenance shed with a preliminary engineers construction cost estimate of $125,000 (Figure 3). The third bridge at Horseshoe Bend,the fourth bridge at Scenic Circle and the fifth bridge near an existing above ground water tank (Figure 4), would all have lengths of approximately 45 feet. The preliminary engineers construction cost estimate for each of these 3 bridges is$100,000. The cost estimates for these bridges are based on known costs for other similar bridges in the general bay area, and recent construction cost estimates provided by a commercial pedestrian bridge vendor. Brid¢e Length Cost Eighth Hole 60 ft $125,000 Maintenance Shed 60 ft $125,000 Horseshoe Bend 45 ft $100,000 Scenic Circle 45 ft ' $100,000 Water Tank 45 ft $100,000 COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC. Ms.Jana Sokale February 21, 2001 Page 4 E3359 4.0 McCLELLAN ROAD UNDERPASS AND REPLACEMENT BRIDGE A cut and cover tunnel to extend the trail beneath McClellan Road to the east of the creek alignment is geotechnically feasible (Figure 5). This design alternative would include 5 percent ramps to the tunnel from the north and south. The southern ramp is estimated at twice the typical length because it must ascend an easement/right-of-way extending to the south of the roadway. This design option would also require measures to pump-out water from the base of the tunnel below the local creek level. Maintenance of a sump pump system would also be required. Replacement of the existing bridge with one providing additional flood flow capacity, adequate trail head clearance (minimum of 8 feet) and associated trail ramping beneath the bridge is also geotechnically feasible. An existing pedestrian bridge, available right-of-way-width, local slope gradients and the required radius of trail curvature will constrain the final selected trail alignment immediately south of McClellan Road. An existing golf cart bridge will constrain the alignment to the north of the bridge. 4.1 Cost Estimates The preliminary engineers construction cost estimate is$1.2 million for the tunnel and ramps. The impacts of the tunnel and ramps to existing redwood trees near the east side of the creek should be evaluated by an arborist. Unit costs utilized in the above cost estimate include$2,750/lineal foot of cut and cover tunnel (40 feet length), a total of 720 lineal feet of ramp at $1,375 per lineal foot (includes concrete surfacing), and an estimated $50,000 for necessary drainage measures. The preliminary engineers construction cost for a replacement bridge and associated trail ramping is $1.0 million. This cost estimate is based on consultation with multiple local contractors who have been involved with similar bridge construction projects. The above estimated cost may increase if there is a need to secure an easement to allow an adequate radius of curvature for the trail south of McClellan Road. The above estimates also do not contain a provision for any costs potentially associated the golf cart bridge to the north of the road. 4.2 Other Alternatives Other alternatives considered included a roadway overpass (estimated $850,000 cost). In addition, we evaluated a potential option of locally deepening the channel beneath the existing bridge to provide adequate vertical trail clearance. Our preliminary opinion regarding this option is that it may result in adverse downstream erosional impacts due to focusing of channel flow, and that shallow ground water conditions could result in migration of water into the locally deepened channel reducing the annual duration of useable trail conditions. 5.0 QUARRY TRAIL ALIGNMENTS Geotechnically, expanded use of the quarry is constrained by very steep to precipitous cut slopes and fill slopes which may be unstable under adverse rainfall or seismic conditions. A significant volume of non-engineered fill is present at the base of the quarry which is subject to long-term settlement and erosion. Providing an adequate trail gradient from the quarry fill to the lower drainage basin would require removal, COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC. Ms.Jana Sokale February 21, 2001 Page 5 E3359 reposifioning and recompaction of approximately 37,000 cubic yards of fill. The preliminary engineers construction cost estimate for this corrective grading is $370,000 (utilizing a grading cost of $10/cubic yard). Potential equestrian or mountain bike use of the quarxy area appears feasible if adequate trail width and/or multiple trails are established to allow mixed use of this area. Access to the quarry across the knoll from Linda Vista Park is currendy constrained by precipitous cliffs, very steep slopes and eroding soils. An alternative, undeveloped gulch trail alignment to the quarry from Linda Vista Park is constrained by dense brush, uncertain property ownership and potential habitat impact issues. Additional,more detailed study would be required to develop preferred trail alignments across the knoll or through the local gulch. Either of these routes would bring pedestrians to a topographic saddle where connection to a quarry trail system is possible. LIMITATIONS Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance with generally accepted engineering geology and geotechnical engineering principles and practices. No warranty, expressed or implied, or merchantability of fitness,is made or intended in connection with our work, by the proposal for consulting or other services,or by the furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. Depicted designs for the improvements are preliminary and conceptual. Site- specific topographic surveys and investigations will be necessary to finalize improvement designs. Preliminary construction costs have been estimated by roughly calculating quantities based on conceptual design and then applying unit costs to those quantities. It should be understood that these numbers are of only "ballpark" accuracy for comparison purposes and that more precise cost figures should be estimated once final designs are formulated. We appreciate the opportunity to have provided you with our geotechnical services on this project. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, COTTON, SHIRES AND ASSOCIATES, INC. <;_��' Ted Sayre Senior Engineering Geologist CEG 1795 _-- • (� . David T. Schrier Senior Geotechnical Engineer GE 2334 DTS:TS:rb Attachments: Figures 1, 2, 3,4, and 5 COTTON, SHIRES& ASSOCIATES, INC. Proposed Ramp Continues for 240' to Stevens Creek Boulevard to Meet Tunnel Existing Ramp at 14.8 Percent Grade Proposed Ramp at 8 Percent Grade Begins in Vicinity of Crescent Court Chainlink Fence-� � A' =1--- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - �_�LY�iii+ _ _ _ ° - - - A- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Creek Flood Plane Level = _ ° - � — L__ _ - � � p_ p = o o a o0 o v v oo a o v o0 0 0 0 00 0 o v o0 0 o a a = D= - - _ SOUTH r1 PrnnnSPr� Ramn A' EAST WEST NORTH 38.5' � COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS VARIAN PARK ACCESS RAMP to STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD CUPERTINO,CALIFORNfA TS DTS SCALE PROJECT NO. 1"=10' E3359 DATE FICiURE NO. FEBRUARY, 2001 1 �_� e Stevens Cr� Blvd. Surf; � --- - -- - - - - � � � � � � ,� � � ,� �----1'-- - .� . Tunnel � COTTON,SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTAVG ENGINEERS AND GBOLOGISTS STEVENS CREEK TRAIL TUNNEL at STEVENS CREEK BLVD BRIDGE CUPERTINO,CALIFORNIA TS � 1°=10' � E3359 DTS � FEBRUARY,2001 � 2 P�nr�necrl C�orlcetri�n/Rin��nle Rri.�1.�.� � COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENCINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS MAINTENANCE SHED PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE BRIDGE at BLACKBERRY FARM GEO/ENG.BY TS APPROVED BY DTS CUPERTINO,CALIFORNIA Sca�E PROJECT NO. 1"=10' E3359 DATE FIGURE NO. FEBRUARY, 2001 3 1 _� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Proposed Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Fill Approach 45' Ramp . � � 2' � - - - - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - - - - -_-- — v o0 0 0 oa o v 9' a o o v000 o voo - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - =?=?— - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � oo a o v o0 0 0 o do 0 0 0 00 o v v 00 0 o a o0 o v v oQ o v v o O� O O a 00 O O a 00 O � a �p O O v 00 O 0 p 00 O O O O� O p Q DO �-► 20' to Scenic , Circle � COTTON,SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTIN(3 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS WATER TANK PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE BRIDGE at BLACKBERRY FARM CUPERTINO,CALIFORNIA GEO/ENG.BY SCALE PROJECT NO. TS 1"=10' E3359 APPROVED BY DATE FIGURE NO. DTS FEBRUARY, 2001 4 9" I ron Pipe Proposed Tunnel-� � 0 Existing Bridge � McClellan Road Surface — — — — — — — — 'QO� p O O O vOQO 0 a < �,3„ 6,8» - - - - - - - - - - - ��;-.,,�; ?- -?� - .. ��`:, _ a O� O O Q O� p D a OD p p v 00 O �� v 00 p � a v C • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a O o O(� O O a �0 O O v O� O O a O� O O a O� O � a a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - - - � - - - - - - - - - - EAST WEST � COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS STEVENS CREEK TRAIL TUNNEL at McCLELLAN ROAp BRIDGE CUPERTINO,CALIFORNIA GEO/ENO.BY SCALE PROJECT N� TS 1"-10' E3359 APPROVED BY DATE FIQURE NC DTS FEBRUARY, 2001 5 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Be creative in your search for trail funding. Remember that trails provide a variety of benefits to your community including economic development, health opportunities, open space preservation, iransportation links, recreation, historic preservation, education and much more. As a resul� funding for the your trail will come in many different forms. Much of the fund.ing for bicycle and pedestrian projects flows through state and regional transportation agencies. Proposition 12 and 40 have provided millions of dollars to the many grant programs administered by the California Department of Parks and Recreation. The California Office of Historic Preservation may fund the rehabilitation of historic properties and sites along the trail. This report provides a comprehensive list and description of the grant programs that provide funding for trails. Most trails meet the guidelines of all of these grant programs. A summary of the grant application deadlines is located in the back of the report. The following is a listing of the potential trail funding sources described in this Trail Funding Report. FEDERAL SOURCES • Art and Cultural Funding for Trails and Greenways • Community Development Block Grant Program • Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program ' TEA-21 -Transportation Enhancement Activities Funding STATE SOURCES Department of Parks and Recreation • California Heritage Fund Program • California Recreational Trails Program • Habitat Conservafiion Fund Program • Land and Water Conservation Fund Program • Murray-Hayden Youth Services Grant Program • Per Capita Grant Program • Riparian and Riverine Habitats Grant Program • Roberti-Z'Berg-Harris Grant Program Department of Transportation (Caltrans) • Bicycle Lane Account • Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program • Safe Routes to Schools STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-1 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES REGIONAL SOURCES Bay Area Air Quality Management District • Transportation Fund for Clean Air 60% (TFCA) Metropolitan Transportation Commission • Transportation for Livable Communities (T'LC) • Neighborhood Planning and Capital Grant Program • Housing Incentive Program (HIP) San Francisco Bay Trail • Regional Development Fund COUNTY SOURCES Santa Clara County Park and Recreation Department • Park Charter Fund Santa Clara County Open Space Authority • 20% Funding Progr'am Valley Transportation Authority • Local Streets and County Roads Program • Measure A/B Bicycle Expenditure Program • TEA 21 -Enhancements to VTA • Transportation Development Act (TDA) • Transportation Fund for Clean.Air 40% (TFCA) LOCAL SOURCES • Impact Fees • Growth Impact Ordinances • Mitigation Fees FOUNDATION, CORPORATION AND NONPROFIT SOURCES • American Greenways Kodak Awards Program • Bikes Belong • California Greenways Creative Grants Program • Fish America Foundation • North American Wetlands Conservation Council • Oracle Corporate Giving Program • PowerBar's Direct Impact on Rivers and Trails Program (D.I.R.T.) PAGE E-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES FOUNDATION, CORPORATION AND NONPROFIT SOURCES (CONT.) • Recreational Equipment Incorporated (REI) • The Design Arts Program • T'he Global Relief Heritage Forest Program • Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program LEGISLATIVE SOURCES PARTNERSHIP SOURCES • Developer Agreements • Santa Clara Valley Water District-Enhancement Programs � Friends of Stevens Creek Trail STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE E-3 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES Community Development Block Grant Program The CDBG program directly funds cities and towns for prajects with community-wide benefits. Trails can qualify for CDBG money, particularly those with documentable economic, cultural and historic merits. Generally, information on CDBG grants is available through your mayor's office. Art and Cultural Funding for Trails and Greenways Many organizations seek ways to incorporate more of their community into their trail and greenway design. One way to do this is to celebrate the cultural and historic uniqueness of communities. There are many funding opportunities for these types of projects. The National Endowment of the Arts funds arts programs, and provides many links to other federal departments and agencies that offer funding opportunities for arts and culfiural programs, as well as brownfields, sustainable community and transportation funcling programs. On their site, you will also find case studies about programs and how they have accessed funding for programs. Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program RTCA is a program of the National Park Service. The program does not provide funding for projects, but rather it provides valuable on-the-ground technical assistance - from strategic consultation and partnership development to serving as liaison with other government agencies. - Communities must apply for assistance. To learn more about this program, visit their web site at http://www.ncrc.nps.gov/rtca/. TEA-21 - Transportation Enhancement Activities Funding In 1991, Congress enacted the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), a six-year bill authorizing a wide range of federal-aid transportation programs, including programs that fund trail acquisition and development. In June of 1998, the Transportation Equity Act for the Twenty- first Century (TEA-21) was enacted and expands on those programs that have proven to be a boon to trails. Transportation Enhancement Activities fund: 1. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities 2. Pedestrian and bicycle safety and education activities 3. Acquisition of scenic easements and historic easements and sites 4. Scenic or historic highway programs including tourist and welcome centers 5. Landscaping and scenic beautificafiion 6. Historic preservation PAGE E-4 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES 7. Rehabilitation and operakion of historic transportation buildings, structures or facilities 8. Preservation of abandoned railway corridors 9. Control and removal of outdoor advertising 10. Archaeological planning and research 11. Mitigation of highway runoff and provision of wildlife undercrossings 12. Establishment of transportation museums In the Bay Area, Transportation Enhancement Activities funds are programmed both regionally,. through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Program , and locally through the Valley Transportation Authority's TEA-21 Program. See Regional Sources and County Sources sections for more detail on these two funding programs. STATE FUNDING SOURCES Department of Parks and Recreation State Parks and Recreation funding sources generally fall into two broad categories — per capita grants and competitive grants. Some of California's � grant programs even allocate funding using both techniques. The passage of Proposition 12 — Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 has provided funding to many of California's park and recreation funding programs and has also created some new programs. It should be noted that much of the $2.1 billion in funding from Proposition 12 was directed toward specific projects at the writing of the proposition. As a result, only $388 million will be available to fund the per capita programs and an additional sum will be available to fund the competitive grant programs of the State. A description of each of the applicable funding programs available for the Stevens Creek Trail are detailed below. California Heritage Fund The Office of Historic Preservation has prepared this summary information on the Parks Bond 2000 in response to inquiries from the general public requesting information on the historic preservation component of the bond measure. The Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 (Villaraigosa-Keeley Act) is a $2.1 billion general obligation bond measure approved by the voters of California in the March 7, 2000 general election. The bond measure will finance the acquisition, development, improvement, restoration, enhancement and protection of state and local parks, recreational, cultural, historical, fish and wildlife, lake, river, reservoir, coastal, and clean air resources. Generally, projects will be selected STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE E-5 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES on a competitive basis; however, specific projects by name, location, and dollar amounts are also identified in the language of the bond proposal. The bond measure specifically dedicates a sum of$10 million to the California Heritage Fund to be administered by the Office of Historic Preservation. The funds shall be available as statewide grants on a competitive basis to cities, counties, districts, local agencies formed for park purposes, and nonprofit organizations for the acquisition, development, rehabilitation, restoration, and interpretation of historical and archeological resources. By definifiion in the language of the bond measure, "a historical resource includes, but is not limited to,any building, structure, site area,place, artifact, or collection of artifacts that is historically or archeologically significant in the cultural annals of California." The language of the California Heritage Fund further defines "a historical resource preservation project as a product, facility, or praject designed to preserve an historical resource that is listed, or formally deternlined eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register, or designated as an Historical Landmark or Point of Historical Interest." The California Heritage Fund stipulates that grants shall be awarded on a competitive basis and may not exceed one million dollars or 50 percent of the cost of the project. The State Historical Resources Commission shall deterrnine the amount of matching funds required, if any, for a grant administered in the Cultural Heritage Fund. Federally recognized California Indian tribes may apply for competitive grants to the extent funds are available to local governmental entities. The Office of Historic Preservation anticipates that the bond money would become available to d.istribute as grants in fiscal year 2001-2002 beginning July 1, 2001. It is anticipated that application materials would be available in early 2001. If you wish to receive application information for Heritage Fund grants when it becomes available, or have further questions please contact: Contact: Dennis Weber, Grants Manager Fiscal and Information Management Unit PO Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-653-5789 FAX: 916-653-9824 E-mail: dwebe@oh��arks.ca.gov PACE E-6 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES California Recreational Trails Program The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) provides funds for recreational trails and trails-related prajects. The procedural guide contains program information and application materials. The RTP is administered, at the federal level, by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). It is administered at the state level, by the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR). Nonmotorized projects are administered by the DepartmenYs Planning and Local Services Section. Motorized projects are administered by the Department's Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division. California's allocation for the 2001-2002 grant cycle will be approximately $3.2 million. About $2.2 million will be available for non-motorized trails projects and $1.0 million for motorized trails prajects. Cities, counties, districts, state agencies, and nonprofit organizations with management responsibilities over public lands are eligible to apply. The RTP is a matching program that provides up to 80% of the praject costs. Applications for the next cycle of the Recreational Trails Program (RTP) must be received or post marked no later than October l, 2001. The current procedural guide is dated March 1999. Contacr BillOrme California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8573 E-mail: borme@,parks.ca.gov or localservices�arks.ca. ov Habitat Conservation Fund Program The Habitat Conservation Fund (HCF) Grant Program was initiated under the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990. This competitive grant program awards $2 million dollars annually to local public agencies. The HCF Program requires a dollar for dollar match from a non-state source. T'hese funds will be provided annually from july 1, 1990 to july 1, 2020. This grant program is administered by the California Departrnent of Parks and Recreation (DPR}. The following categories will be funded during 2002/03 FY grant cycle: Anadromous Fish, Wetlands Habitat, Riparian Habitat and Trails Programs. Applications must be postrnarked or delivered to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, no later than October 1, 2001. Contact: I}ian Chun California State Parks Local Services Section PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8600 E-mail: dchun@parks.ca.�ov STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-7 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Land and Water Conservation Fund Program The Land and Water Conservation Fund Program provides funds to federal agencies, and to the 50 states and 6 territories. The money allocated to the states may be used for statewide planning, and for acquiring and developing outdoor recreation areas and facilities. The program, which is administered nationally by the National Park Service (NPS), became effective in January 1965, was initially authorized for a 25-year period, and has been extended for another 25 years, to January 2015. Under the provisions of the California Outdoor Recreation Resources Plan Act of 1967, the expenditure of funds allocated to California is administered by the State Liaison Officer (SLO),who is the Director of the State Department of Parks and Recreation. Funds for the program are derived from federal recreation fees, sales of federal surplus real property, the federal motorboat fuels tax and the Outer Continental Shelf mineral receipts. Eligible projects are limited to outdoor recreation purposes, and to indoor facilities which support outdoor recreation activities. The types of projects most often funded by local agencies are acquisition or development of neighborhood, community, and regional parks that include top priority recreation projects or acquisitions of wetlands. Combination acquisition and development projects are not eligible. Projects ineligible for funding include restoration or preservation of historic structures, construction of employee residences, interpretive facili�ies which go beyond interpreting the praject site and its immediate surrounding area, development of convention facilities, commemorative exhibits, construction of facilities marginally related to outdoor recreation, indoor facilities such as community centers and gymnasiums, and facilities used primarily for spectator sports. , California's allocation for the 2001-2002 fiscal year is $7.7 million. Approximately $4.3 million is available for grants to local agencies: $2.6 million for Southern California and $1.7 million for Northern California. The program requires a dollar for dollar match. Applications must be postmarked or delivered to the California Department of Parks and Recreation, no later than May 01, 2001. Contach Dian Chun California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8600 or (916) 653-7423 FAX: 916-653-6511 E-mail: dchun@parks.ca.,�ov or localservices@�arks.ca.�ov PAGE E-8 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Murray-Hayden Urban Youth Services Grant Program Murray-Hayden Urban Youth Services competitive grant program is directed at developing or improving parks, park faci.lities or environmental youth centers that are within the immediate proximity of a neighborhood that has been identified by the California Departrnent of Parks and Recreation as having a critical lack of park or open space lands or deteriorated park facilities that are in an area of significant poverty and unemployment, and that have a shortage of services for youth. Priority shall be given to capital projects that employ neighborhood residents and at-risk youth. Grant applications are due May 1, 2002. Eligible applicants: Public agencies, non profit organizations, and federally recognized California lndian tribes Total funds available: Approximately $100,000,000 $50,000,000 for projects specified in the proposition and $50,000,000 for the Competitive Program. Allocation of funds for specific types of projects (if any): 50% of the available funds shall be allocated to heavily urbanized counties and cities or nonprofit organizations or park districts in those counties and cities. Of this 50%, no more than 10% shall be allocated to fund grants to nonprofit youth serving agencies for acquisition, renovation, or construction of youth centers (pursuant to Sect. 990 of Welfare and Institutions Code). Of this 10%, at least 50% shall be granted to youth service organizations eligible for tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501(c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code that are chartered by a national youth service organization. Note: Matching requirements from Roberti.-Z'berg-Harris Act apply to these funds, i.e., at least 30% of the total project costs must be provided by local applicants, with at least one-third coming from private or non-state sources. Contac�t: john Hart California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8578 E-mail: jhart@�arks.ca.gov or localservicesC�arks.ca.gov Per Capita Grant Program Proposition 12 provides that the funds allocated for the Per Capita Grant Program I to be used for projects that accomplish the following: A. Rehabilitate facilities at existing local parks that will provide for more efficient management and reduced operational costs. This may include grants to local agencies for the renovation of recreational facilities STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PA�E E-9 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing and decommissioning of federal military installations B. Develop facilities that promote positive alternatives for youth and that promote cooperation between local park and recreation service providers and youth-serving nonprofit organizations C. Promote family oriented recreation, including art activities D. Provide for open, safe, and accessible local park lands, facilities, and botanical gardens Eligible projects: Acquisition, development, improvement, rehabilitation, restoration, enhancement, and interpretation of local park and recreation lands and facilities, induding renovation of recreation facilities conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing or decommissioning of federal military installations Eligible applicants: Cities, counties and districts Total funds available: Approximately $338,000,040 A. 60% of the total funds available shall be allocated to cities and to districts, other than a regional park district, regional park and open-space district, or regional open-space district (each city or district to be allocated a minimum of$30,000) B. 40% of the total funds available shall be allocated to counties and regional park districts, regional park and open-space districts, or regional open- space districts (each county to be allocated a minimum of$150,000). Contact: john Hart California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8578 E-mail: jhart@parks.ca.�ov or localservices@�arks.ca.�ov Riparian and Riverine Habitats Grant Program Eligible projects: Improvement or acquisition and restoration of riparian habitat, riverine aquatic habitat, and other lands in close proximity to rivers and streams for river and stream trail prajects undertaken in accordance with Section 78682.2 of the California Water Code, and for purposes of Section 7048 of the Water Code Eligible applicants: Cities, counties, districts, local agencies formed for park purposes, other districts, and federally recognized California lndian tribes Note: For this grant program, a "local agency" is any local agency formed for park purposes pursuant to a joint powers agreement between two or more local entities, excluding school districts, and "other district" is any district PAGE E-10 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES authorized to provide park, recreational, or open-space services, or a combination of those services, except school districts Total funds ava.ilable: Approxunately $10,000,000 for Competitive Grant Program. Grant applications are due February 1, 2�U2. Contact: Dave Smith California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8576 FAX: 916-653-6511 � E-mail: dsmit@parks.ca.�ov or localservices@parks.ca.�ov Roberti-Z'Berg-Harris Grant Program Funds for this grant program are to be allocated for projects pursuant to the Roberti-Z,berg-Harris Urban Open-Space and Recreation Program Act (Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 5620)) and are to be used for projects that accomplish the following: A. Rehabilitate facilities at existing local parks that will provide for more efficient management and reduced operational costs. This may include grants to local agencies for the renovation of recreational facilities conveyed to local agencies resulting from the downsizing and decommissioning of federal military installations. B. Develop facilities that promote positive alternatives for youth and that promote cooperation between local park and recreation service providers and youth-serving nonprofit organizations. C. Promote family oriented recreation, including art activities. D. Provide for open, safe, and accessible local park lands, facilities, and botanical gardens. Eligible projects: Acquisition, development, rehabilitation and restoration of park and recreation areas and facilities pursuant to the Roberti-Z'berg-Harris Urban Open-Space and Recreation Program Act (Chapter 3.2 (commencing with Section 5620)) Eligible applicants: Cities, counties disfiricts and federally recognized California lndian tribes Total funds available: $200,000,000 Type of grant allocation (competitive or per capita): Both competitive and per capita (block). Applications for competitive, needs basis grants are due November 1, 2001. Allocation of funds for specific type of projects (if any): The Roberti-Z'berg- Harris Grant Program is divided into three sub-programs: A. Block (Per Capita) Grants, B. Non-urban Need Basis Grants, and C. Urban Need Basis Grants. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-11 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Contact: Deborah Viney California State Parks Office of Grants and Local Services PO Box 943896 Sacramento, California 94296-0001 Telephone: 916-651-8572 E-mail: dvineC�arks.ca.�ov or localservicesC�arks.ca.�,ov Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Bicycle Lane Account The Bicycle Lane Account (BLA) is administered by the Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit in Sacramento. BLA funding has increased over the past few years due to the concerted efforts of bicycle advocates and legislative acts. Updated grant guidelines will be available in March of 2001. The program has typically favored cost effective on-street bicycle improvements such as Class II and Class III facilities, loop detectors, bike lockers, storage racks on transit vehicles, etc. Caltrans anticipates awarding $7.2 million dollars in the late spring of 2001. The fund will award $5 million dollars annually after this funding cycle. State Contac�t: Ken McGuire, Senior Planner Caltrans Bicycle Facilities Unit 1120 N Street, MS #1 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916-653-2750 FAX: 916-654-2409 E-mail: ken_mcguire@dot.ca.us Local Contact: Julian Carroll,Senior Transportation Planner Caltrans, District 4 P.O.Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623-0660 Telephone: 510-286-5598 FAX: 510-286-5559 E-mail: julian carroll@dot.ca.us Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP) Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP) funds are distributed to public agencies to mitigate environmental impacts caused by new or modified state transportation facilities. EEMP funds are directed at highway landscaping, urban forestry, roadside recreation and resource land projects. The California Resources Agency reviews and ranks projects for submission to the California Transportation Commission for funding consideration. The program awards $10 million dollars annually. Grants PAGE E-12 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES typically do not exceed $250,000.00. The Resources Agency grant application is generally mid-November of each calendar year. Contach The Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street,Room 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: 916-653-5656 Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to School funds are provided by the Federal government and administered by Caltrans. Safe Routes to School funds are directed at bicycle and pedestrian safety and traffic calming projects that unprove access to local schools. This is a construction program. However, l0% of the project costs can be directed at education, enforcement and encouragement programs that support the construction improvement project. Project categories include Sidewalks, traffic calming and speed reduction, pedestrian/bicycle crossings, on-street bicycle facilities, off-street pedestrian/bicycle facilities and traffic diversion improvements. Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol reviews and ranks projects. The program will award $20 million in fiscal year 2000/2Q01, the second year of this demonstration project. Grants typically do not exceed $500,000.00. The second year applications are due May 22, 2001. Contact: Rich Munroe Caltrans, District 4 P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623-0660 Telephone: 510-286-5226 FAX: 510-286-5559 E-mail: rich_munroe@dot.ca.us REGIONAL FUNDING SOURCES Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA)-Regiona160% Share TFCA funds are distributed to public agencies to implement projects to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. TFCA funds are for cost-effective projects that reduce motor vehicle emissions and support implementation of the transportation control measures (TCMs) and mobile sources measures contained in the Clean Air Plan. Nine categories of projects are eligible to receive funding. Bicycle facility projects that are included in an adopted countywide bicycle plan or congestion management plan, like the Stevens Creek Trail, are eligible for funding. All TFCA funds are managed by the Bay Area Air Quality District. However, two separate and disfiinct application processes are used. Forty percent of the funds are awarded by the local STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-13 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Program Manager (Valley Transportation Authority) and the remaining 60% are distributed through a regional competitive grant application process. The BAAAQMD grant application is generally June 30 of each calendar year. Contac�t: David Burch—Bicycle Projects Bay Area Air Quality Management District 939 Ellis Street San Francisco, CA 94109 Telephone: 415-749-4641 FAX: 415-928-8560 Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) In recent months, MTC has embraced a number of programs and policy goals that foster livability and enhance alternatives to auto travel. Most recently, MTC expanded its portfolio of programs that link transportation and land- use decisions by launching a Housing Incentive Program (HIl'). The housing program is designed to maximize public investments in transit infrastructure and encourage transit use while also addressing the region's housing shortage. Following are summaries of MTC's various smart growth efforts. Transportation for Livable Communities Program (TLC) In 1998, MTC launched the Transportation for Livable Communities program. The program`s acronym, "TLC," is no accident: It indicates MTC's intent to lavish some tender loving care on town centers, public transit hubs, key streets and the like as a way of fostering community vitality and recapturing some of that small-town atmosphere that has been lost in many Bay Area cities. Initially, the program provided planning grants, technical assistance and capital grants to help cities and nonprofit agencies develop transportation-related projects fitting the TLC profile. In November of 2000, the program was revamped and expanded to include a Housing Incentive Program. The TLC initiative now has two main components. Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Neighborhood Capital and Planning Grant Program Small-scale transportation investments can sometimes make a big difference in a community's vitality and identity. Streetscape improvements, transit-, pedestrian-, and bicycle-oriented developments, and related strategies can bring a new vibrancy to downtown areas, commercial cores and neighborhoods, enhancing their amenities and ambience and making them places where people want to live and visit. The TLC program encourages redevelopment efforts that add housing and economic vitality to older business and community centers throughout the region. Projects that provide pedestrian, bicycle and transit links to these centers are a part of this program. PAGE E-14 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) offers two kinds of financial assistance through the Neighborhood Grant Program. Local governments, community-based organizations and transportation service providers may receive funding. Prajects in the early or conceptual stage of their development are eligible for TLC Planning Grants, which are awarded to help sponsors refine and elaborate promising project ideas. Prajects with completed plans are eligible for Capital Grants, which directly support construction and help turn plans into reality. Capital Grants MTC allocates $9 million annually for TLC projects from funds made available through the federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21). MTC may fund TLC capital prajects at $9 million per year from a portion of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program funds (at approximately $5 million per year) and the Transportation Enhancements Program (at approximately $4 million per year). Capital grants range in size from $150,000 to $2 million per project. MTC adopted new capital grant criteria in November 2000. Eligible TLC capital projects include transportation-related improvements including streetscapes, transit villages, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian plazas. Planning Grants MTC can provide funding for planning efforts that aim to improve a community's connection with the regional transportation system. Up to $50,000 per project is available. Technical experts can jump-start a project by helping define its general concept, assisting with planning and implementation, or facilitating community input. Providers of technical assistance include urban design, architecture and transportation planning firms. Up to$10,000 per project is available. No formal application is required for planning grants. Rather, organizations having prajects that meet TLC planning grant criteria should send a letter of interest to: Lawrence D. Dahms, Executive Director, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 101 Eighth Street, Oakland, CA 94607. The letter should include a description of the project, its sponsors, how the praject fulfills the criteria, a planning timetable, a preliminary construction schedule, the amount of funds requested, and the level of local match. MTC reviews letters of interest twice a year. The next round of planning grant applications will be accepted in mid-2001. Contach Karen Frick-TLC Project Manager Metropolitan transportation Commission 101 Eighth Sfireet Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: 510-464-7704 FAX: 510-464-7848 E-mail: kfrick@mtc.ca.gov STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-15 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Housing Incentive Program (HIP) In March 2000, MTC staff began working with members of its Advisory Council to develop an incentive program to encourage the location of compact, transit-oriented. housing at key transit stops throughout the region. After reviewing the San Mateo Transit Oriented Development Incentive Program (winner of the MTC Grand Award in 2000) MTC staff developed a regional proposal that is similar in nature, offering seed money for compact communities in the vicinity of public transit hubs. This proposal for a Housing Incentive Program was presented in July and again in September to the Advisory Council for review, comment and endorsement. 'The full MTC Commission approved the Housing Incentive Program at its November 2000 meeting, allocating $9 million in TLC capital grant money for the first round of prajects. Contact: Trent Lethco Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: 510-464-7737 FAX: 510-464-7848 E-mail: tlethco@mtc.ca.� San Francisco Bay Trail Regional Development Program The San Francisco Bay Trail Praject evaluates applications to the Regional Development Program, a grant program intended to speed development of the Bay Trail. This year $7.5 million has been earmarked for the Bay Trail from Proposition 12, the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air, and Coastal Protection Bond of 2000. The grant program is administered by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Local, state and Federal government agencies, special districts and qualified nonprofit organizations are eligible to apply. The program favors construction of high priority trail segments; use of matching or in-kind contributions; innovative solutions and partnerships, and planning efforts to overcome obstacles to future trail development. Separate applications are available for construction projects and planning/feasibility studies; in addition, a short "praject inquiry" form is provided for potential future projects that are not ready to submit a formal application. Contact: Laura Thompson San Francisco Bay Trail Praject P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94604 Telephone: 510-464-7909 FAX: 510-464-7970 E-mail: LauraT@aba .ca.�ov PACE E-16 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES COUNTY FUNDING SOURCES Santa Clara County Park and Recreation Department Park Charter Fund The Santa Clara County Park Charter Fund was established by the voters and funds the operations and maintenance the capital improvement and acquisition program of the County Parks and Recreation Department. The County Parks and Recreation Commission makes recommendations to Board of Supervisors regarding expeditures of the fund. Trail projects that are indentified in the 1995 Santa Clara Countywide Trails Muster Plan have received funding from the Park Charter Fund. Agencies seeking contributions from the Park Charter Fund are encouraged to discuss their prajects with the County Parks and Recreation Department staff prior to making a formal request to the County. Parks and Recreation Commission. These formal requests generally coincide with the Capital Improvement Program budget process that begins in January each year. Contac�t: Lisa Killough, Deputy Director Parks and Recreation Department 298 Garden Hill Drive Los Gatos, CA 95032 Telephone: 40&358-3741 FAX: 40&358-3245 E-mail: Lisa.Killough@mail.prk.CO.Santa-C1ara.CA.US Santa Clara County Open Space Authority 20% Funding Program The Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority was established in 1992. A benefit assessment funding mechanism was approved by voters in 1994. The 20% Funding Program was established to assist agencies participating in the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority with their own open space programs. Funding for the program is based upon 20% of the Authority's capital fund. The objectives of the 20% Funding Program are acquisition and site development and restoration projects that are consistent with Authority's criteria for acquisition and open space policies and goals. Funding to the participating agencies is related to the revenues generated within each of these jurisdictions. A simple application form is required for prajects. Contact: Lloyd Wagstaff, General Manager Santa Clara County Open Space Authority 6146 Camino Verde Drive,Suite P San Jose, CA 95119-1460 Telephone: 408-224-7476 FAX: 40&224-7548 E-mail: lwagstaff@openspaceauthority.org STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-17 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Local Streets and County Roads Program The Valley Transportation Authority is revising the Local Streets and County Program funding guidelines. The revisions are intended to: 1. Increase connectivity of local streets and county roads as a means to (a) shorten trips by all modes, (b) improve pedestrian and bicycle access, (c) improve transit routing and (d) keep shorter trips off the freeway and expressway system. 2. Provide funding for local transportation projects not directly connected to, or inadequately funded,by new development. 3. Expeditiously create and support a multi-modal local street/county road system. Several of the eligible project categories are components of the Stevens Creek Trail Master Plan. The Local Streets and County Roads Program will fund new sidewalks, new Class II &III bicycle lanes, major sidewalk and Class II & III bicycle facility upgrades, pedestrian/bicycle connections and overcrossings and local streets and county roads landscaping. Contact: Marcella Rensi Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134-1906 Telephone: 408-321-5717 FAX: 408-321-5723 E-mail: rensi_m@vta.org Measure A/B Bicycle Expenditure Program Measure A and Measure B approved by voters providing funding for bicycle projects. The Valley Transportation Authority has worked with the County Bicycle Advisory Committee to generate tiered prioritization list of bicycle projects in Santa Clara County. The City of Cupertino submitted the San Tomas Aquino/Saratoga Creek Trail projects for this ranking. This trail project was placed Tier 1. Funding will become available over the next 10 years and will be granted to prajects on a first-come first-serve basis. Contach Celia Chung Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management&Highways Program 3331 North First Street,Bldg.B San Jose, CA 95134 Telephone: 40&321-5716 FAX: 408-321-5723 E-mail: celia.chung@vta.org PAGE E-18 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES TEA-21-Transportation Enhancement Activities (local share) Santa Qara Countywide Transportation Enhancement Activities Funds are made available through the federal Transportation Equity Act of the Twenty- first Century (TEA-21). These competitive grant funds are to be used for transportation-related capital improvement prajects that enhance the quality- of-life by improving transportation choices and the built environment in and around transportation facilities in Santa Qara County. Projects are evaluated. and ranked in priority order based upon the selection criteria established by the federal legislation and guidelines developed by the Valley Transporta�ion Authority. The VTA is proposed to award $4.41 million dollars in the 2nd and final funding cycle. It is recommended that prajects be of sufficient size to warrant the significant paperwork associated with Federal grant funds. A suggested minimum grant request is $150,000.00. The VTA grant application deadline for the 2nd and final funding cycle is likely to occur spring/summer 2001 and will follow the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's award of regional Transportation Enhancement Activities Funds through the Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Program. Contact: Marcella Rensi Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street San jose, CA 95134-1906 Telephone: 408-321-5717 FAX: 408-321-5723 E-mail: rensi_m@vta.org Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Funds are made available in the nine-county Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) region for pedestrian and bicycle purposes. All cities and counties are eligible to claim funds under TDA Article 3. Each agency receives their "guarantee" and can apply for additional funds through the Competitive Program. Seventy percent (70%) of the funding is dedicated to the "Guarantee Program" and 30% is directed at the "Competitive Program." The VTA Board of Directors approves local criteria for establishing praject priorities. Applicant agencies must have an adopted bicycle plan or Circulation Element of the General Plan that covers bicycle transportation. Agencies must also have established a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) in order to be eligible to apply for funds. The VTA grant application deadline is generally January 30 of each year. Contact: Marcella Rensi Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134-1906 Telephone: 408-321-5717 FAX: 408-321-5723 E-mail: rensi_m@vta.org STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-19 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Transportation Fund for Clean Air(TFCA)—Loca140% Share 'TFCA funds are distributed to public agencies to implement projects to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. TFCA funds are for cost-effective projects that reduce motor vehicle emissions and support implementation of the transportation control measures (TCMs) and mobile sources measures contained in the Clean Air Plan. Nine categories of projects are eligible to receive funding. Bicycle facility prajects that are included in an adopted countywide bicycle plan or congestion a management plan, like the Stevens Creek Trail, are eligible for funding. All TFCA funds are managed by the Bay Area Air Quality District. However, two separate and distinct application processes are used. Forty percent of the funds are awarded by the local Program Manager (Valley Transportation Authority) and the remaining 60% are distributed through a regional competitive grant application process. The VTA grant application deadline is generally March 30 of each calendar year. Contact: Sylvia Star-Lack Valley Transportation Authority 3331 North First Street San Jose, CA 95134-1906 Telephone: 40&321-5719 FAX: 408-321-5723 E-mail: Sylvia.Star-Lack@vta.org LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES Growth Impact Ordinances Growth impact ordinances are enforced by counties and cities to estimate the impact of all residential, industrial and commercial development on public park and recreational facilities within a development project's local and regional service zones. The ordinance makes provisions whereby the project developer will set aside the lands or moneys necessary to offset the project's specific park and recreational impacts. Again, your city or county planner should have more information about this in your area. Impact Fees Many communities have raised money through self-imposed increases in taxes and bonds. Some communities provide for impact fees that require residential, industrial and commercial development praject leaders to provide sites, improvements and/or funding for developing public unprovements like open space and trails. Impact fees may be allocated to a parfiicular trail from land development projects in all other areas of a county or city if the fund is a dedicated set-aside account established to help develop a county- or city-wide system of trail projects. Call your county or city planner to find out more about impact fees for your area. PAGE E-20 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Mitigation Fees Mitigation fees are imposed by local communities through the environmental review process conducted. under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). These fees and/or land dedications attempt to offset negative impacts caused by either public or private development prajects that impact t�Yte trail corridor and the alternative transportation experience. These fees may also be used to mitigate unacceptable levels of services on roadways caused by the increased traffic associated with large-scale developments. FOUNDATION, CORPORATE AND NONPROFIT GRANT FUNDING SOURCES Obtaining grants for your project can be labor intensive and at times, exhausting experience. However, with proper planning, thorough research and commitrnent your hard work will be rewarded. Below are a few examples of foundation, corporate and nonprofit grant funding sources. American Greenways Kodak Awards Program American Greenways Kodak Awards Program, administered by The Conservation Fund, provides grants of $500 to $2500 to local greenways projects. Grants can be used for almost any activity that serves as a catalyst for local greenway plaruiing, design or development. Contact: The Conservation Fund 1800 North Kent Street, Suite 1120 Arlington,VA 22209 EMail: dswol@conservationfund.org Bikes Belong Bikes Belong Coalition seeks to assist local organizations, agencies, and citizens in developing bicycle facilities projects that will be funded by TEA- 21, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Cenhuy. Bikes Belong Coalition will accept applications for grants of up to $10,000 each, and will consider successor grants for continuing prajects. Funding decisions are made on a rolling basis. Contact: Bikes Belong 368 Beacon Street, Suite 102 Brookline, MA 02446-2800 Phone: 617-734-2800 EMail: Mail@Bikesbelon .�org Website: www.bikesbelong.org STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE E-21 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES California Greenways Creative Grants Program The California Trails and Greenways Foundation and The Conservation Fund, a national land and water conservation organization, provide small grants from $500 to $2,500 to California nonprofit organizations and government agencies to help develop new action oriented greenway projects. The Creafiive Grants Awards provide seed money to spark creativity in conservation, outdoor recreation, and greenway development. Local, regional or statewide non-profit organizations and local public agencies may apply. Grants must be used for activities such as mapping, surveying and design ac�ivities; land acquisition; access improvements; brochures; interprefiive displays; audio visual productions or public opinion surveys; hiring consultants; incorporating land trusts;building a foot bridge; planning a bike path; or other creative projects. In general, grants can be used for all appropriate expenses needed to complete a greenway praject including plaruung, technical assistance, legal and other costs. Grants may not be used for academic research, general institutional support, lobbying or political activities. Awards recognize creative strategies or problem solving by local groups. Program Goals Develop new, creative action-oriented greenway and trail projects Assist grassroots greenways organizations Leverage additional money for conservation and greenway development and acquisition Recognize and encourage greenway proponents and organizations Grant Criteria Recipients are selected according to: Importance of the project to local greenway development or acquisition efforts. Demonstrated community support for the praject . Extent to which the grant will result in matching funds or other support from public or private sources. Likelihood of tangible results. Capacity of the organization to complete the project. How the project serves as a model for plaruung and developing greenways. Contact: California Greenways Board 633 Los Palos Drive Lafayette, CA 94549 Phone: EMail: Website: PAGE E-22 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Fish America Foundation Fish America Foundation provides funding to public and private organizations for projects that enhance or conserve water and fisheries resources, including community efforts. The grant award is approximately $10,000. Contact: Fish America Foundation 1033 N. Fairfax Street,Suite 200 Alexandria,VA 22314 North American Wetlands Conservation Council The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the North American Wetl�nds Conservation Council (Council), are currently entertaining proposals that request match funding for wetland and wetland-associated upland conservation prajects under the Small Grants program. Projects must meet the purposes of the North American Wetlands Conservafiion Act of 1989, as amended. Contact: Dr. Keith A. Morehouse, Small Grants Coordinator Ms. Heather Poindexter, Office Secretary North American Waterfowl and Wetlands Office 4401 North Fairfax Drive,Suite 110 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: 703-358-1784 FAX: 703-358-2282. Oracle Corporate Giving Program Oracle provides grants to medical research, endangered animal protection, environmental protection, and K-12 math, science, and technology education. Past recipients have included trail groups. Website: www.oracle.com/corporate/giving/community/i PowerBar's Direct Impact on Rivers and Trails Program (D.I.R.T.) PowerBar's Direct Impact on Rivers and Trails Program (D.I.R.T.) provides grants ranging from $2,000 - $5,000 in support of efforts to protect, preserve and restore recreational lands and waterways. Contac�t: Powerfood, Inc. Attn: DIRT Program 2150 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley, CA 94710 Website: http://www.powerbar.com/whoweare/ STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE E-23 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Recreational Equipment Incorporated (REI) Recreational Equipment Incorporated (REI) awards seed grants of $200 to $2,000 to state and local conservation groups for projects that enhance river protection. Contac�t: National Rivers Coalition American Rivers, Inc. 801 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Washington,DC 20003 The Design Arts Program The Design Arts Program of the National Endowment fox the Arts funds projects that promote excellence in urban design, historic preservation, planning, architecture and landscape planning. Contac�t: The Design Arts Center, Room 625 Nancy Hanks Center 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,DC 20506 The Global Relief Heritage Forest Program 'The Global Relief Heritage Forest Program, American Forestry Association, provides funding for planting tree seedlings on public lands. Emphasis is placed on diversifying species, regenerating the optimal ecosystem for the site and implementing the best forest management practices. Contact: American Forestry Association P.O. Box 2000 Washington, DC 20013 Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program The purpose of the Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP) is to fund grants and research to investigate and - address the relationship between transportation and community and system preservation. States, local governments, MPOs, tribal governments, and other local and regional public agencies are eligible for discretionary grants for plaruting and implementation. Applications for Fiscal Year 2002 grants and research recommendations are due at your FHWA Division Office by close of business on Jan. 31, 2001. Website: tcsp-fhwa.volpe.dot.gov/index.html Contach Federal Highways PAGE E-24 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES LEGISLATIVE FUNDING Trail prajects can also receive funding directly through the legi.slative process. Funding can be directed to your trail through additions to legislative bills and through the inclusion of specific line item prajects in the language of ballot measures. Legislative funding is typically directed at trail projects with strong community support and demonstrated track records for achieving success. Community involvement is a critical element to raising the public's and correspondingly, the politicians' awareness of the trail. Agency staff inembers and community activists must maintain excellent communication with the legislative staff to learn about legislative funding opportunities. PARTNERSHIP FUNDING One, often overlooked, method of funding trails is to partner with public agencies, private companies and nonprofit organizations. Partnerships enable your community to complete the trail praject and engender a spirit of cooperation, civic pride and community participation. Be willing to accept in- kind donations of supplies like stone and other paving materials, benches, signs, flowers and amenities. These gifted project components will go a long way toward reducing actual costs for completing the trail. Examples of partn.erships include: • Working with a local youth group to build or maintain a section of project. • Working with a local college or university to incorporate the Stevens Creek Trail into their curriculum, such as bridge design, engineering, landscaping, trail signage, art along the trail, habitat restoration and firail monitoring projects. • Partnering with your local army reserve to build or maintain sections of your praject. • Working with a local land trust to obtain land for greenways. • Working with flood control agency to develop joint greenway and floodway. • Working with private developers toward trail connectivity and traffic mitigation. Developer Agreements Private real estate developments can make contributions to the trail. Private developments are subject to discretionary permits and agreements between the local agency and the developer. These agreements can detail development benefits to be provided to the developer and trail improvements or trail funding from the developer to be provided as part of the development approval process. Every development proposal should be evaluated for its connections to the trail and potential to assist in developing the Stevens Creek Trail. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-25 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES Public Agency Joint Ventures Public agencies can combine efforts to facil.itate joint prajects. Trail projects are frequently combined with flood control improvements and utility corridor projects. In these instances, environmental documents, constructions plans and specification and construction management services can be combined to reduce overhead and facilitate implementation. Praject cost sharing is also a common technique used to implement projects that serve multiple goals. Friends of the Stevens Creek Trail The Friends of Stevens Creek Trail (FOSCT) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting community pride and involvement in the completion, enhancement and enjoyment of the Stevens Creek Trail and Wildlife Corridor. The following are examples of what the Friends have recently accomplished toward the implementation of their mission. • FOSCT raised about $10,000 annually from the Gift Catalogs. The proceeds go toward the installation of footbridges, benches, signage and habitat enhancements. • FOSCT raised about $63,000 annually from Trailblazer Race. The proceeds go to support staff and events. • FOSCT hosts many trail workdays to install native plantings, build fences, clean up the creek after winter storms and promote State and National Trails Days. � FOSCT published the "trailblazer," a quarterly newsletter. Other Fundraising Ideas People are always looking for ideas on how to raise money for their trail or greenway project. Holding fundraising events can help generate public interest in the praject and attract positive media coverage. • "Sell" pieces of trail for each linear foot. • Hold a fundraising race along the trail. • Hold a river regatta. • Hold a community festival that celebrates your culture and heritage and promotes local businesses. Charge an entry fee that goes toward upkeep of the greenway or trail. • Hold an auction to allow companies and individuals to bid on sponsorships of the trail. • Hold a raffle of donated items. PAGE E-2b STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES IMPORTANT GRANT APPLICATION DEADLINES This chart summarizes the most current grant application deadlines. Many of the agencies which make annual grant awards follow this schedule each year. However, it is important to make contact with the funding agencies early in your search for trail dollars to learn about potential changes to the application guidelines and deadlines. Funding Program Deadline Per Capita Grant Program to CA P&R Now-June 30, 2003 Roberti-Z'Berg-Harris Grant Program to CA P&R Now-June 30, 2003 Transporation Development Act to VTA January 30, 2003 Riparian and Riverine Habitats Program to CA P&R February 1, 2002 Transportation Fund for Clean Air 40% to VTA February 12, 20Q2 Regional Development Fund to Bay Trail Project April 6, 2002 Land and Water Conservation Fund to CA P&R May 1, 2002 Murray-Hayden Youth Services Grant to CA P&R May 1, 2002 Safe Routes to Schools to Caltrans May 21, 2002 T'LC - Capital Grant Program to MTC June 26, 2002 TLC -Housing Incentive Program to MTC June 26, 2002 TLC -Neighborhood Planning Grant Program to MTC June 26,2002 Transportation Fund for Clean Air 6Q% to BAAQMD June 30, 2002 Measure A/B Bicycle Expenditure Program to VTA July 5, 2002 based upon County BAC Ranked Prioritization List California Heritage Fund Program to the August 1, 2002 California Office of Historic Preservation California Recreational Trails Program to CA P&R October 1, 2002 Habitat Conservation Fund Program to CA P&R October 1, 2002 Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program November 15, 2002 to The Resources Agency Bicycle Transportation Account to Caltrans December 1, 2002 Other Programs with Past Dates (may be refunded in the future) Safe Routes to Schools to Caltrans May 22, 2001 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE E-27 APPENDIX E - TRAIL FUNDING SOURCES PAGE E-28 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT . APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT INTRODUCTION The Trail Maintenance and Operations Report was develop as an introduction to residents, political leaders and City staff on the maintenance and operational (M&O) tasks and functions involved when trails are developed in Cupertino. The report includes estimated costs and City organizational impacts associated with adding trails to the City's facility inventory. In addition to introducing M&O tasks and service levels associated with managing urban hard surtace (paved) and rural soft surface (dirt) trails, the report also addresses trail management objectives, maintenance and operational tasks and assignment options. At this time the report does not address a review of codes and or ordinances that will, in the future, play an important role in management of the proposed six miles of trails in Cupertino. The report includes management information and trail budgets from Mountain Views, Santa Clara Counfiy, Los Gatos, San Jose, Campbell and the East Bay Regional Park District. In developing the Maintenance and Operations Report the following sections were included in order to logically move from broad management objectives, management tasks and responsibility to operational costs: Section 1 -Trail Management Objectives Prior to proceeding with maintenance and operational tasks, responsibilities and budget information it is critical for all program elements to conform to a consistent list of objectives which can be measured and evaluated as trails are � developed. The list of objectives provided in this section are the results of operafiional goals and philosophy of other regional trail agencies, possible mitigation requirements imposed by regulatory agencies, neighborhood and environmental concerns, current maintenance and operational standard of Cupertino's park system, and design standards currently being considered in the Feasibility Study. Section 2 - Major Maintenance and Operating Tasks and Standards In order to achieve Trail Management Objectives (Section 1) major trail maintenance and operating tasks and standards have been developed similar to Stevens Creek, Los Gatos Creek, Coyote Creek, Los Alamitos Creek and for the trails in the East Bay Regional Park District. This section includes discussion and recommendations on which department within the City should be responsible for overall trail management in Cupertino. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE F-1 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Section 3- Summary of Trail Areas This section reviews the four trail study areas addressed in the Feasibility Study, type of trail surface, special design amenities, landscaping requirements and probable usage. Maintenance and operational requirements are reviewed for each study area. Section 4-Trail Maintenance and Operational Cost Estimates Cost estimates have been prepared with service level alternatives based on trail management objectives, standards, tasks and a review of the four trail study areas addressed in the Feasibility Study. PAGE F-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REP�RT SECTION 1. - TRAIL MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS OBJECTIVES The overall objective of maintenance and operations is to provide visitor safety/security, minimi�e trail impact to adjacent property owners, protect the City's capital investment and maintain public access. Maintenance of the trail and creek corridor will b� provided at a sufficient level to maintain the trail at or near its original construction and/or design level. All trail maintenance and operation elements will reflect the City's commitment to preserve and enhance creek and upland wildlife and natural resources and to meet mitigation requirements of regulatory agencies. Since the trail ulfiimately has the potential to link to other regional trails, the trail management plan reflects a regional approach that could be easily adopted by other agencies for management consistency throughout the regional trail system. Although the trail is located within an urban area, its management should reflect an unmanicured level of maintenance, generally consistent with other County hard surface trails such as Stevens Creek, Los Gatos, Los Alamitos and Coyote Creek trails. To minimize trail maintenance and operating costs and to promote positive public interest in the trail, use of volunteers and alternative labor sources should be incorporated into management of the trail wherever and whenever appropriate. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE F-3 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT SECTION 2 - MAjOR MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING TASKS AND STANDARDS The Major Maintenance and Operating Tasks and Standards seckion provides City officials with a list of major task and functions that are required to insure that trail management objectives are being met (Section 1). The tasks listed represent an overall level of service and not necessarily detailed instructions of how each task will be performed or task frequency. It does, however, attempt to identify the necessary skill level required of the task and primary positions and/or group in Cupertino responsible for achieving the task objective. Overall Trail Management Although the City of Cupertino organization chart lists a Parks and Recreation Department, in reality park maintenance is handled under a division within Public Works. City officials should consider who will have responsibility for overall trail management when approving the Feasibility Study. Although the City's current organization structure is working, there are merits, to consolidating the overall management of urban trails within a single department such as Parks and Recreation with assistance from Public Works. Cupertino may develop four separate trail sections in the future; consistency in trail development, maintenance levels, standards, enforcement, environmental sensitivity and property owner complaint resolution can best be served when those responsibilities are under the control of a single department and manager. The Cupertino trail system is likely to have mitigation requirements imposed by agencies such as the Santa Clara Valley Water District, California Department of Fish and Game, US Fish and Wildlife Services and the US Army Corps of Engineers, as well as grant funding agencies. It is important that a single manager be responsible for overseeing and complying with mitigation requirements in order to meet conditions imposed by regulatory agencies. The Feasibility Study includes trail connections to areas managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (trail from Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Blvd.) and by Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department (trail from Linda Vista to Stevens Creek County Park). It may be desirable and practical to have these public agencies manage a part of Cupertino's trail system. The department responsible for overall trail operations should be, in the eyes of the public, the department they would naturally expect to manage trails PAGE F-4 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT within the City. It should also be a departrnent that routinely works with volunteers and can support and encourage volunteers working on Cifiy trails. Trail Operations In consideration of the above, it is recommended that the City's Parks and Recreation Department be given overall responsibilities for the management of trails within Cupertino as they are developed. If it is determined that Parks and Recreation should manage trails within the City, then the Parks and Recreation Director should begin evaluating work load priorities. A position will be needed that can devote approximately 10 hours per week to managing the trails once they are developed. Such a position would be responsible for overall trail coordination within the City (once they are developed) with tasks such as: budget preparation; administration of contract ranger services, neighborhood complaint resolution, coordinating maintenance work, overseeing contractors and interacting with Sheriff Deputies. The position would also be responsible for regulatory agency and mitigation requirements (For a detailed list of responsibilities normally assigned to an individual responsible for trails see Attachment A - Urban Trail Maintenance and Operations Task/Responsibility List) Trail Supervision—Paid Rangers With approximately six miles of trails being considered for development in the future, it is recommended that contract rangers be used in a similar manner as in Mountain View. Although Mountain View uses a contract ranger service to patrol over ten miles of trail along Stevens Creek and Shoreline Park they do not have code enforcement responsibilities. Instead, the Mountain View Police Department works closely with the rangers in responding to trail code violations such as homeless encampments, after hour use by teenagers, graffiti, vandalism etc. If contract rangers are used, it is important that County Sheriff Deputies, who police Cupertino support the rangers and respond to calls for assistance in a similar manner as in Mountain View. Trails in Cupertino should be patrolled at least once per day during the winter and twice per day during summer months by contract rangers with code enforcement assistance from the Sheriff Deputies. While on patrol the rangers main objective should be trail safety and security, code enforcement, responding to neighborhood complaints and inquiries, visitor information and education, litter control and minor maintenance as further defined in this report. In addition to routine daytime patrol by rangers, periodic shift changes and or additional ranger patrols may be required during evening hours if there is significant unauthorized evening use of trails when closed (For a detailed list of responsibilities normally assigned to an individual STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE F-5 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT responsible for trails see Attachment A - Urban Trail Maintenance and Operations Task/Responsibility List). Community Involvement- Trail Supervision/Volunteers To supplement paid rangers, trained. adult uniformed volunteers should be used to supplement the frequency and patrol duration of paid rangers. Volunteer rangers main objective is visitor information and education, litter control, trail safety and security. Volunteer ranger� should patrol trails on foot or bicycle, preferably in pairs, and should carry radios and or cell phones for emergency communication. Community Involvement—'"Trail and Creek Clean Up Days" The maintenance focus is on the trail surface and corridor area. However, at times, special litter and debris clean up is necessary along the creek and in environmentally sensitive areas. In most cities the Santa Clara Valley Water District is responsible for the maintenance of the creek bed and slope. To further enhance the work performed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District, annual creek cleanup days should be scheduled and organized in cooperation with volunteer groups such as the Friends of Stevens Creek Trail. In addition to large cleanup days, scouting, civic, church, business or similar groups should be organized periodically to supplement the annual cleanup. Volunteer cleanup days require supervision and coordination by paid rangers or City staff responsible for urban trails. Trail Maintenance Trail Surface Care Besides normal litter and debris control, routine patrols by paid and volunteer rangers should keep the trail free from obstacles or hazards such as broken glass, fallen limbs and rocks. In addition, eroded, rutted and washout areas along trail shoulders should be repaired as part of normal patrol duties and or part of assignments given to other park maintenance staff. Leaves, grass, small pebbles, base rock fines, etc. should not be removed from trail surface unless they impose a hazard. Naturally occurring debris, such as branches and limbs, should be removed to adjacent areas and allowed to decompose naturally unless they impose a fire and or safety hazard. Annually, during late summer months, any area in which a paved asphalt surface is employed should be inspected for cracks, upheavals and potted areas. These locations should be repaired by City crews and or contractors familiar with such work. In addition to normal repairs, any asphalt paved trail surface should be slurry sealed every 8-10 years by a paving contractor. PAGE F-6 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Trail Landscape Maintenance Landscape maintenance within the City-owned trail corridor, or areas for which the City has assumed maintenance responsibilities, generally consist of irrigated areas that were planted as mitigation, natural non-irrigated areas and special small irrigated entry points with upscale landscaping. Unless natural non-irrigated landscaping becomes a fire or safety hazard, restricts public access or line of site or damages the Cifiy's trail section, no maintenance should be performed. For safety hazards such broken overhanging tree limbs, removal should be performed by City crews experienced in such removal, unless the limb can be safely removed by an experienced paid ranger. Line of site brush and or shrub clearing adjacent to trails can be performed by volunteer or school organizations with supervision and coordination coming from rangers and/or City park workers. Since the trees and shrubs selected for the irrigated areas are mainly native or hardy species, that have been selected to enhance wildlife value within the corridor, maintenance shall generally consist of restocking trees, pruning, trimming growth intruding into the trail corridor, and removal and replanting dead or dying trees and shrubs. Unless such maintenance is of a nature that requires skilled pruning, work should be performed by paid rangers, volunteers and or seasonal part time employees. The water conservation bubbler irrigation system should be adjusted, tested and repaired as needed by either experienced park maintenance crews or seasonal part time employees trained and supported by park maintenance employees. Inspection of the system and performance of non-technical repairs should be handled by paid rangers during normal patrols, with a special emphasis placed on summer periods. Weed Control Grasslands adjacent to buildings and structures are a potential fire hazard. In the past, these areas were normally disked by every spring. However, due to environmental concerns over destroying habitat and disrupting the natural succession of grasses, a more conservative approach has been taken by many cities. Rather than disking entire fields, perimeter disking or mowing of fire breaks near buildings and structures is now the common practice. Since sperialized equipment is normally needed for weed abatement, most cities hire mowing and disking contractors when weed abatement is deemed necessary by the local Fire Marshall. To minimize the need to abate weeds, some cifiies are using spreading readily available bark chips along trails to assist in fire management. In addition to reducing fire danger the chips also reduce the need to clear weeds that infringe into the trail surface and retain soil moisture around native plantings. STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE F-7 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Amenities Amenities are signs, bollards, benches, drinking fountains, trash receptacles, gates, railings, fences and other trail elements requiring minor maintenance that may be located along the trail. Except for repair and replacement of items such as steel gates, fences, drinking fountains, (which should be maintained by City crews or contractorsj the maintenance of most amenities is within the skill level of the paid Rangers or trained seasonal part-time employees that have normal household "handy man" skills. Additional resources may be found in county work furlough programs supervised by paid rangers or assigned park maintenance workers. Graffiti Graffiti occurring within the trail corridor should be removed in accordance with the City's maintenance guidelines (usually with in 48 hours). Minor removal should be accomplished by paid Rangers as part of their normal duties, volunteer groups or court referral personnel. Time involved with graffiti removal can be significantly reduced by pre-painting concrete walls and support columns with Caltrans standard color and by having rangers carry "paint over kits" utilizing the same Caltrans color (Alum Rock Gray) during normal patrols. Winter Storm Closure Since several sections of the trail between Linda Vista Park and Blackberry Farm are within the Stevens Creek flood zone, the Santa Clara Valley Water Ilistrict (SCVWD) may require that the City establish a detailed storm closure plan that identifies dosure responsibilities, criteria for closure, areas to be closed during flood events and conditions under which the trail is reopened. Since Mountain View has several areas along Stevens Creek Trail that require periodic winter closure Cupertino may seek assistance from Mountain View officials in preparing the plan. PAGE F-8 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT SECTION 3 - SUMMARY OF TRAIL AREAS This section of the report addresses each study area as it relates to the type of trail, landscaping and special maintenance and operation requirements and challenges above those listed in the previous section of the report (Section 2). The trail areas include: Feasibility Report Study Areas Area A-Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Blvd. Area B-Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park Area C-Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm Area D-McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Blvd. Study Area A - Rancho San Antonio County Park to Stevens Creek Blvd. Study Area A is south of Hwy 280 and includes Maryknoll Seminary, Gates of Heaven Cemetery, Whispering Creek Stables, Rancho San Antonio County Park and the Forum Housing development. Included in the area is the Hammond — Snyder historical home, Permanente Creek and Deer Hollow Farm. Public areas are mostly open grasslands and oak woodlands. When developed there will be 1.0 mile of hard surface/multi-use trail and 1.5 mile natural surface/multi-use trail for equestrians and pedestrians. Special Maintenance Considerations: Weed abatement and dust control Special O�erations Considerations: Conflicts between equestrians, bicyclists and pedestrians and emergency response to isolated areas Multi-facility operational coordination with MROSD, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreakion Department, Deer Hollow Farm and Hammond — Snyder historical home, Union Pacific R.R. and Kaiser Cement Company (i.e. code enforcement,parking and use of land, right-of-way and facilities) Wildlife protection and removal/relocation of domestic and injured wildlife Unauthorized vehicles Regulatory requirements associated with freshwater wetlands STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE F-9 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Study Area B- Stevens Creek County Park to Linda Vista Park This area includes Stevens Creek County Park, a closed privately owned quarry, Deep Cliff Golf Course, Linda Vista Park and residential areas along Linda Vista Drive. Public areas include Stevens Creek County Park and Linda Vista Park (City). When developed there will be 1.25 mile of natural surface/single-track trail for mountain bikes and hikers through the old quarry (steep terrain} and .25 mile natural surface/multi-use trail for mountain bikes, equestrians and hikers to link existing PG&E maintenance fire access road. �ecial Maintenance Considerations: Maintenance of natural surface trail damaged by winter erosion and use Weed abatement Sign vandalism and damage to trash receptacles, gates and fences Special O�erations Considerations: Potential conflict between bicyclists and hikers Response to emergencies in isolated and steep terrain Wildlife protection and removal/relocation of domestic and injured wildlife Unauthorized vehicles (motorcycles and ATV's) Study Area C - Linda Vista Park through McClellan Ranch to Blackberry Farm This study area includes a portion of Stevens Creek, which flows between Deep Cliff Golf Course (private), Linda Vista Park, McClellan Ranch Park and Blackberry Farm (City). Residential areas near the proposed trail alignment include Linda Vista Drive, McClellen Road and the Scenic Blvd. neighborhood. Public areas include Linda Vista Park and McClellan Ranch Park. When developed there will be .33 mile of off-street boardwalk style trail alignment within the 40-foot haul road right of way that parallels Linda Vista Drive or 1.0 mile of on-street bike route and sidewalk to McClellan Road. In addition, there will be a .33 mile natural or hard surface multi-use trail through McClellan Ranch and a grade-separated underpass at McClellan Road. PAGE F-10 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAiL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Special Maintenance Considerations• Trimming and damage to large trees Line of site shrub clearing Graffiti removal Native plant and mitigation landscaping along old haul road Special O�erations Considerations• Residential complaints from homeowners which live adjacent to old haul road alignment Use of parking lots at McClellan Ranch and Linda Vista Park by trail users. Wildlife protection and removal/relocation of domestic and injured wildlife High use of section by trail users Study Area D- McClellan Ranch through Blackberry Farm to Stevens Creek Blvd. This study area begins at McClellan Ranch extends though Blackberry Farm and connects to Stevens Creek Blvd. Public areas include Blackberry Farm Picnic Area and Golf Course. The trail when developed will include .66 mile of natural or hard surface multi-use trail through Blackberry Farm and an at- grade intersection at Stevens Creek Blvd. Special Maintenance Considerations• Repair of flood damaged trail sections along Stevens Creek Repair of trestle bridge decking Damage to landscaping and irrigation system Trimming and damage to large trees near trail Special Operations Considerations: Conflicts between trail users and Blackberry Farm Golf Course users Monitoring safety and use of at-grade crossing STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PAGE F-11 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT SECTION 4 - MAINTENANCE AND OPERATTONS COST ESTIMATES Like all public facilities, trails once they are built have annual costs associated with maintenance and operations. There is also a periodic need to fund capital expenditures for major renovation, retrofitting and design modifications to meet changing needs, safety or regulatory agency requirements. Although most individuals think of trails as narrow dirt pathways "through the woods" (which require little to no upkeep), urban trails through populated areas such as Los Gatos Creek Trail, Stevens Creek Trail, Coyote Creek Trail and the routes being studied in Cupertino, are designed, and in many ways function, as long, narrow, passive linear city parks requiring similar per acre M&O budgets as neighborhood parks. There are similarities between the proposed trail in Cuperfiino and the developed sections of Stevens Creek Trail in Mountain View. Consequently, the Mountain View 2001/2002 FY budget for Stevens Creek Trail was used as a basis for creating the $149,335 budget estimate for maintaining and operating the six miles of trail proposed in Cupertino. The budget information provided should be viewed as approximate and does not differentiate differences in maintenance and operations between the four study sites and misc. work by park and street crews. The information also is based on all four study areas being constructed and opened simultaneously. Annual Budget Comparison Cost Per Mile: Cupertino 6 miles @$24,889/mile Mountain View 3.5 miles @$19,480 /mile Note: Mountain View's budget information does not include the cost for an adminisirator responsible for managing trails. If the Mountain View administrator salary and one time purchase of Cupertino's patrol vehicle were factored into the cost per mile, comparisons between the cities would be similar. PAGE F-12 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT Annual M&O Budget Estimate Detail Personnel: 25% Trail Manager(1) $ 26,285 3000 Hrs. Contract Ranger (2) 57,000 800 Hrs. Part-time Laborer @$15.00 12,000 Total Personnel Services $ 95,285 Non-Personnel: Misc. Office Supplies (Paper,pens, pencils etc) $ 300 Supplies and Materials (litter bags,paint, hand tools, tree 8,500 stakes, shrub and tree replacement) Uniforms and Clothing (unif orm rental/cleaning, hats, 1,500 name tags etc. Gas and Electric (irrigation controllers, security lighting) 1,000. Water (drinking fountains and irrigation) 7,500 Rental of Equipment (trenches, chippers, generators etc.) 1,500 Trail Conferences and Mtgs. 250 Vehicle Maintenance(gas, oil and service) 5,000 Weed Abatement Services (5 acres @$100) 500 Total Non-Personnel Services: $26,050 Initial Capital Outlay: Electric Utility Vehicle (includes light bar, radio and winch) $28,000 Total Initial Capital Outlay $28,000 Total Cost $149,335 Notes: Trail Manager costs is based on top step of Cupertino Recreation Supervisor salary range and includes 38% for fringe benefits. Ranger per hour rate ($19.00)based on California Land Management rate in Mountain View. Except for Weed Abatement Services all Non-Personnel costs reflect Mountain Views 2001/2002 FY budget information. Service Level Alternatives: Replace contract ranger with 1.5 full fiime code enforcement rangers - add approx. $150,000 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PACE F-13 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT APPENDIX A - URBAN TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS TASIC�RESPONSIBILITY LIST The list represents those tasks and responsibilities required to operate and maintain Stevens Creek Trail in Mountain View and is intended to be used for discussion purposes as the City of Cupertino begins to develop urban trails and how these trails will be managed. OPERATIONS Trails Administrator/Mana�er • Member of trail planning and development team � Review trail plans and specifications • Contact person for neighborhood complaints and resolution alternatives • Establishes City M&O standards • Write staff reports related to trail M&O • Meets with neighborhood, civic and trail organizations, commissions, and City Council • Establishes trail related forms and monitoring reports • Drafts codes and policy recommendations • Coordinate repair to trail(non routine)by other City departments • Prepares annual trail budget and long term CIl'projections • Attend trails conferences • Establishes patrol frequency and enforcement standards with enforcement • Meets with SCVWD, County and MROSD Rangers over common issues and problems • Establish emergency access points and communication plan in cooperation with fire officials • Coordinate volunteer work days • Routinely inspect and identify trail M&O deficiencies • Coordinate posting of special signs and notices • Establish and maintain trail signage standards and maps • Responsible for trail regulatory pernut and grant condition reports Public Safet,y/Patrol Personnel • Respond to injuries, crime and fires • Patrols trail on routine basis as well as periodic night and special purpose patrols • Educate and enforce trail codes and policies • Advise trail administrator/manager on M&O deficiencies • Recommend trail code and policy changes � Maintain required equipment and vehicles • Maintain trail patrol logs and monthly activity reports • Meet routinely with City trail M&O staff and provide special training • Post warning and special condition signs and notices • Close and open trail under emergency conditions • Remove/relocate injured or threatened wildlife • Assist with trail surveys PAGE F-14 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT MAINTENANCE Landscapin�and General Maintenance • Maintain water lines and irrigated landscaped areas as designed , • Plant trees and shrubs as directed • Remove/clear vegetation alongside and above trail corridor. (Includes line of sight pruning) • Maintain growth within trail corridor as required by fire marshal • Assist/coordinate volunteer planting projects • Remove litter and graffiti-empty trash receptacles � Maintain required equipment and vehicles • Maintain drinking fountains,fences,bollards,posts, headboards, signs and gates • Post safety signs when working Trail Surface • Remove gravel, rocks and slip hazards • Crack seal (AC} • Repair chuck holes and uneven surface areas (Includes root removal) • Stripe center delineator makings • Overlay and or slurry coat(AC) • Post safety signs when working • Maintain required equipment and vehicles STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT PA�E F-15 APPENDIX F - TRAIL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REPORT PAGE F-16 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT APPENDIX G - ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT REPORT STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 PAGE G-1 APPENDIX G - ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT REPORT PAGE G-2 STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 City of Cupertino STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY: ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT REPORT Report Date: July 20, 2002 Prepared by: Lynne Trulio,Ph.D., Wildlife and Wetlands Ecologist INTRODUCTION This report is a supplement to the earlier ecological document provided to the City of Cupertino titled,Asse.ssmenf of Biological Opportunitie.s and Conslraints: Report for the City of Cupertino, Stevens Creek Trail Fearsibility Study(dated May 10, 2001}. In the Biolvgical Assessment document, a number of ecological restoration opportunities in the Stevens Creek Trail corridar were identified. This�'cological Re,storation arrd Enhancement Report provides more specific details on restoration locations and implementation. Restoration and Enhancement Regions. Restoration work along the Stevens Creek Trail route can be divided into discrete projects and this report will identify such projects. However,the restoration literature makes it very clear tha.t for projects to be successful,the condition of the regiUn in which the projects are located must be considered. With this larger landscape scale in mind, the restoration projects and practices identified here are organized around three regions,defined by drainages, which include major habitat or natural community types. Each project will contribute to the overall ecological health of the region and the habitats existing there. The three restoration regions a,re(see Figure 1-Map of the Study Area): • Cristo Rey Wetland Drainage—Study Area A • Riparian Corridor/In-stream Habitat Study Areas C and D • Quarry SlopelWetland Drainage--Study Area B For each restoration region,the fotlowing information is provided: I. Region Summary • Location/characteristics of the restoration region • Conditions in need of attention � Benefits of restora.tion • Experts required for planning and implementation • Agencies to be consulted during planning II. Specifrc Restoration Projects For each restoration project,basic information is provided on potential implementation methods,timing issues, likely agency consultation and expertise needed,volunteer opportunities,and monitoring. These descriptions indicate the basic scope and difficulty of each project, The ultima.te specifications for each project ca.n be determined only through a process involving the city, the permitting agencies,the restoration experts,and the public. Page F- 1 What is Restoration? Ecologic restoration is a relatively new scientific and practical field that has emerged from disciplines such as ecology,hydrdogy,and geology. The purpose of restoration is to reestablish the structures and functions of the native, indigenous ecosystem of an area to the greatest e�ent feasible. For creeks,this definition includes restoring not only the native species,but also the original hydrology and morphology of the stream and its associated natural communiti�s. Of course, restoring the native ecosystem of our area as the European settlers first saw it is impossible. Rather, restorationists seek to improve the quality of existing habitats,protect and increase biodiversity,and improve overall ecological health within the ex�cting corrstraints of time,money,and adjacent land uses. Because full ecosystem restoration along the Stevens Creek trail is not possible, restoration in the context of this report is more often means habitat enhancement and/or reuegetati�n. These terms indicate that activities will focus on improving existing habita.t conditions and reestablishing native vegetation. Conditians in Need of Attention. T'he Biological Assessment for the Cupertino Stevens Creek Trail corridor identified sev�ral major conditions that result in ecological degradation of the comdor. These include loss of native habitat, invasion by non-native species, impacts from adjacent land uses, and damaging resource management practices. The direct loss of habitat to human land uses is the single greatest cause of habitat loss and degradation, and is the prirnary reason species become rare or extinct. The corridor through Blackberry Farm and Golf Course is a.n area.with tremendous restoration potential,as a significant amount of the riparian habitat has been lost or degraded but could be reestablished. Another major problem for native habitats is invasion by non-native species. California has shown itself to be very susceptible to invasion by species fram other parts of the world. For example, non-narive grasses from Mediterranean Europe ha.ve virtually replaced native California grasses; onty 1%of the historic native grassland remains. Many restoration projects have the remaval of non-native species as a major component of the work. Riparian corridors are especially vulnerable to non-native invaders. Significant plant invaders throughout the Stevens Creek comdor include giant reed (Arundo donax), periwinkle(Yinca major),Gertnan ivy (Senecio mikaniodes), and tree-of-heaven(Ailanthus ultissimu). Adjacent land uses directly degrade riparian and wetland zones as a result of pollutant runoff. Pesticides, herbicides,fertilizers,oil,grease,and hea�y metals to name a few pollutants,run directly off adjacent houses,landscaging, and roads into watercourses. Adjacent land uses can also be sources of non-native invasive plants and animals, especiatly domestic animals. Along the Cupertino Stevens Creek Trail corridor, adjacent land uses, such as the golf courses,present opportunities to effect changes to land management that could benefit the creek. Finally,resowce management practices themselves can destroy habitat value. For example,restricting water flows in creeks and using rip-rap to armor banks are two stream management methods used in Stevens Creek tha.t are damaging to the native ecosystem. Removing or changing Page F-2 these practices to a1low natural processes to operate can, in some instances, be nearly all that is needed to restore a degraded habitat or system. Restoration Benefits for Trails and Vise Versa. The benefits of ecological restoration are so significant that non-profit organizations, for-profit entities, and governments at all levels devote funding,time and personnel to the practice. The most obvious benefit of restoration is that it reestablishes or improves na.tive habitats to protect natural biodiversity. In particular,habitat restoration is essential to protecting rare species, such as steelhead trout(Onchor}mchus mykiss), from becoming extinct. Restoration attracts wildlife by reestablishing or enhancing native plant communities to provide cover, shade, and forage. Establishing natural plan# communities along a trail provides habitat continuity and sense of identity to the trail. Restoration is also well known for the community involvement it fosters. Around the U.S.,hundreds of grass-roots restoration groups have come together to improve the qua.lity of their local environment. Such groups foster stewardship for the area, involve people in nature,and are community-building experiences. Because of strong citizen commitrnent to the environment, the San Francisco Bay area is one of the nation's most active centers of restoration. While it is clear that restoration ef�orts benefit traii corridors, it is also true that trails can promote restoration. Trails bring people to places, such as creek corridors, that they might never have visited. Many trail users develop a sense of stewardship for the area and can become enthusiastic restoration volunteers. Trail projects focus interest and money on degraded azeas; as a result, restoration of the natural environment is a typical component of tra.il projects. It is important to realize that trails can have negative impacts on natural communities. Therefore, any impacts of the Stevens Creek Trail must not only be adequately mitigated,but mitigated in such a way that the functioning of the local natural communities are improved over pr�trail conditions. Including restoration as part of the trail project will achieve this environmentally important goal. Experts and Ageneies. Restoring natural ecosystems is both technically and socially complex. Such projects often involve a number of experts who work together to identify the conditions resulting in degradation of the natural system and to develop methods to rectify those problems. Successful restoration in the Stevens Creek Trail area in Cupertino will require hydrologists, geotechnical experts,native plant restorationists,rare species experts, engineers,planners, and regulatory experts. Regulatory experts are essential members of restoration teams because, in the Bay Area,projects must comply with a number of laws. While it is true that the purpose of restoration is to benefit the environment, not destroy it,sueh projects may still require a number of permits, some which are difficult to obtain. Beca.use wetlands, rare species, and sensitive habitats all occur in the Stevens Creek Trail corridor,many resowce agencies will be involved Early consulta.tion with the agencies will help projects progress as smoothly as possible. Restoration work for the Stevens Creek Page F-3 Trail is iikely to involve the Army Corps of Engineers,U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,National Marine Fisheries Service,the California Department of Fish and Game,and Santa Clara Valley Water District. Planning and Integration. Successful restoration projects are dependent on good planning. In determining wluch restoration projects to implement, restoration planners must be fully informed of the trail plans and the impacts that require mitigation. Planners must also investigate what restaration-type activities already being planned or implemented by ot�er organizations. For example, the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society is cunently mapping the occunences of non-native vegeta.tion along the Stevens Creek corridor; such information could be very valuable in planning Stevens Creek Trail restoration projects. Also,the Santa.Claza Valley Water District will, in the future,be implementing a number of steelhead trout habitat improvement projects in Stevens Creek as a result of the Fish and Aquatic Habitat Collaborative Effort(FAHCE). Any fish habita.t enhancement projects Cupertino would like to implement should be coordinated with the FAHCE process. Also in the planning stage, goals and measurable objectives must be set to a11ow assessment of the extent to which projects were successful. Restoration projects should be integrated into the overall trail planning and should be built into trail plans and specificarions for implementaxion; restoration projects ta.cked onto the back end of trail work as a after-thought are less likely to be successful and will probably be more expensive than they need to be. In the planning stage,be sure to consult with agencies that may require permits, agreements,or involvement. Finally, restoration planning, implementation,monitoring and maintenance all require money. Sufficient funds for short and long-term phases of restoration projects should be secured in the planning stage, if possible. Guiding Principtes. Ecolagical restoration is a very rewarding and worthy enterprise. However, such work is often difficult, requiring dediea.ted staff, voiunteers,and financial support to be successful. For each project described,these principles apply: • Restoration requires planning, which must include goals and measurable objectives. • Landscape-level planning is needed in order to have successful local projects. • Agencies must be involved early in the process. • Maintenance and rnonitoring will be necessary. � Restoration is a teain effort including project managers,restoration experts, and the community. • Long-term funding for habitat management must be included. See Appendix A for a list of 10 important guiding principles that apply to restoration projects, in general. Below are severat references that are useful in understanding how to undertake restoration in the types of habita.ts found along the Cupettino Stevens Creek Trail. An especially pertinent source is Ann Riley's Restoring Streums in Cities: A Guide fvr Planners, P�licymakers, unc�Citi�ens. Page F-4 Selected References Federal InteragenGy Stream Restoration i�Vorking Group. 1998. Stream Corridor Re.s�tnrativn: Prrnciples, Proee.s,��s, und Pructices. http:Ifww��.u�da.�ovistream restoration/ne��ra hrinl. Manei, Karen M. 1989. Riparian ecosystem creati4n and restoration, A litera#ure summary. U.S. �'ish and Wildlife Service Biological Repvrt 89(2�):1-59. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research�enter Home Page. http:/l��vwtiv.npwrc.us�s.go�.�/resourceiliteratrlripareco;riparecc►.html {Version 16JUL97}. Petts, �'r. and P. Calow, eds. 199b. River R�storation. Blackwell Science, Cambridge, I��assachusetts. Riley,Ann. 1998. �Ze,storin�;Strearrzs in C:'ities: 14 Guide for}'lanner.s, Policymaker.s, and Citi.�ens. Island Press, Co�elo, California. __-- ---- � � �� ,� �; t,. a�< � � ,�,: .. .�� x� � w �,� ,°��S �f,�`�'��,.� x. E, �.2. i `�� .��1 � � > �+ . ��',�y� ��.�,� I t' - -`f, x. �'�Cfi� 's S> ,S � �� - �� ✓��`�� q� t_. � . 3 � �, �. �j��r�3 �� F �'`� �Ym.�� '�S,�{f'�`_, .�.'� } �,. �. � .. � o -:iN6 y�,�'� . #' d-^E�.s ! i7��'.. �� , C�!,_ � s��. ��y I� I ��k.� .R� 1jr. �t� } ` .Y y�-'�t � .� ._. _ ��'T�.FV�. 4 `8�' .t� t _ ��"A��F�� 3 C � }�� +. �" #:` if'., ��! � I i,, �r f� � � �� U ,< <, _ ��;. � ,� , , R��-Ic;��;ci t� o�(1'�c��tci crt��uf�cr clr�uytv�t�) _ _ Page F-5 RESTORATION REGION 1: Cristo Rey Wetland Drainage►—Study Area A I. REGION 1 SLTMMARY The Cristo Rey Wettand Drainage is a small basin that provides a number of restoration opportunities. This area is of significance as the red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytoni), a federally-listed threatened species, has been found on-site. The drainage is degraded by a number of impacts that habitat restoration can help conect. Specific projects that can improve the drainage and wetland are gully repair, non- native species removal, riparian and wetland species planting, oak planting, and community education on reducing use of pesticides and fertilizers. Parts of this site may be slated to be a storm water retenrion area. for the new development. Restoration work must be coordinated with this use. • LOCATI4N/CHARACTERISTICS This sma11 drainage is found between Cristo Rey Drive on the north, new homes on the south and two small ridges on the east and west (see Figure 2—Cristo Rey Drainage Looking South). In 1994, red-legged frogs were found in the small freshwater wetland that exists at the bottom of the draw and extends from south to north. Red-legged frogs were also found nearby, on the Lands of the Diocese, in 2000. The Cristo Rey wetland is fed by freshwater seeps and run-off from roads and new houses. Riparian, wetland, and non-native plant species are found in and along the wetland. Blue oak woodland and grassiand extend up the slopes on either side of the wetland. An eroding farm road used by hikers and equestrians runs down the west hill and up the east side. The drainage is designated as public open space and is bordered by open space on the northeast and northwest sides. Development surrounds the wetland on the south end New houses were recently built and others are under construction on the southeast and southwest ends of the draw. • NATURAL COMMUIYITIES/HABITATS � Freshwater wetland community,which includes red-legged frog habitat Y Blue oak woodland/non-grassland savanna � Qpen grassla.nd dominated by non-native species • PROBLEMS AFFECTING HABITATS IN THIS DRAINAGE r Eroding farm road ➢ Direct wetland impacts of trail users �- Invasion by non-native wetland species �= Loss of wetland and riparian habita.t ➢ Loss of oak woodland habitat t Run-off impacts from new development � BENEFITS OF RESTURATION IN THIS REGION Y Protect and improve red-legged frog habitat � Enhance native plant diversity Y Protecbimprove wetland water quality � Provide community restoration projects Page F-6 • AGENCIES/EXPERTS TO INVOLYE IN PLANNING ➢ �4gencies: Army Gorps of Engineers,California Department of Fish and Game,U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ➢ Experts: Wetland/riparian restoration specialist, red-legged frog expert, geotechnical expert, grassland e�ert,oak woodland restoration specialist, volunteer coordinator II. SPECIFIC RESTORATION PROJECTS Proiect 1: Reaair Farm Road • Description of Problem ➢ Location--along dirt road down the hill on the west side of the wetiand � Gu1iy 2 to 3 feet deep down entire slope and hillside erosion next to the road (Figure 3 Farm Raad Gully) Y Soil erodes directly into the wetland below • Project Goals ➢� Stop erosion Y Fill gully and recontour slope to remove road and eroded slope ne�ct to the road ➢- Redirect trail use to protect the habitat values of the wetland • Potential Methads ➢ Back-fill gully and road cut with native soil that has non-native seeds removed, if possible. � Cover with biodegradable stabilizing material; seed with a mix of fast- growing,non-invasive grass or o#her cover species ➢ Collect local plant material from native annual and perennial plants;have native plant nursery grow seedlings for plaxiting y Ptant with seeds and plugs of native annual and perennial plants • Timing Issues ➢ Allow 1 year for growing plants in a nursery ➢ Implement guily repair after rainy season ends y= Seed or plant in falUearly winter ➢ This is a relatively rapid project that should be completed within a year. • Agencies to Consutt/Potentiai Permits ➢ None/none � Experts Needed ➢ Geotechnical specialist for physical gully repair � Native grassland expert for choosing/coliecting best species to stabilize slopes ➢ Native plant nursery to grow native plant plugs y- Volunteer coordinator Page F-7 • Volunteer Opportunities Y Assist grassland expert with collecting seeds ➢ Assist nursery with growing seedlings ➢ Assist in planting seeds and/or seedlings • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor for development of new gullies � Monitor plant growth;remove non-natives; replant with natives if needed. • Project Difficulty: _X Relativety Simple Moderately Difficutt Difficult Proiect 2: Imurove Wetland Habitat • Description of Problem ➢ Locatiorr—along the length of the wetland Y Non-native wetland species are crowding out native plants (See Figure 4 Non-natives clog the wetland) ➢ Riparian vegetation cover is missing in some areas • Praject Go�ls Y Reestablish native wetiarid species throughout wetland ➢ Reestablish riparian species cover, such as willows,where appropriate Y Improve the habitat for red-legged frogs and other wetlandlriparian species • Potential Methods � Remove non-native species by hand or other effecrive method as prescribed by restoration experts; use chemical means as a last resort y- Collect local plant material from native wetland and riparian areas; treat and install plant material as recommended by restoration experts ➢ Plant with seeds and plugs of native annual and perennial plants • Timiog Issues ➢ Avoid any potential impacts to red-legged frogs, especially during the " breeding season r Instali plant material in falUwinter 'v' This is a relatively lang-term project, which will take approximately 2-4 years to complete. • Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Army Corps of EngineerslClean Water Act, Section 404 Permit ➢ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Federal Endangered Species Act ➢ California Department of Fish and Game/DFG Code Page F-8 • Ezperts Needed ➢ Wetland restoration expert for non-native removal and native species recovery ➢ Riparian restoration expert for reestablistunent of riparian species ➢ Red-legged frog expert for advice on providing high-quality frog habitat A Volunteer coordinator � Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Assist in rernoving non-native species y Assist in planting native species materials • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Monitor for invasion by non-native species; remove as needed ➢ Monitor plant survival and replant as needed • Project Difficulty: _X Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Di�cult The actual non-native species removal is relatively straightforward. Consultations with agencies may take some time. Proiect 3: Enhance Blue Oak WoodIand • Description of Problem ➢ Locat�on hillsides adjacent to the wetland ➢ Most endemic California oak species are not regenerating ➢ Most oak habitat in the Bay Area has been lost(see Figure 4—Oaks seem to be missing} • Prnject Goals ➢ Establish young blue oaks that could one day replace aging oaks ➢ Create more hillside and wetland shading • Potential Methads � Coliect acorns on site and within the watershed ➢ Treat acorns to find nonviable ones and to enhance chances of germination � Grow some acorns into seedlings and plant acorns on site as recommended by the restoration expert �- Protect acorns and seedlings from herbivores with below-ground cages and al�ve-ground tubes � Water regulazly through the first summer • Timing Lssnes Y Collect acorns in fall as determined by oak restoration specialist ➢ Allow at least 1 year for seedling growth Y Install plant material in falllwinter Page F-9 ➢ This is a very long-term project that will take a decade or more of work to produce results • Agencies to Consnit/Potential Permits ➢ None/None • Ezperts Needed � Oak woodland restoration expert ➢ Native plant nursery to,grow sa.plings ➢ Restoration volunteer coordinator • �olunteer Opportunities ➢ Assist in cdlecting,treating and growing acorns i> Assist in planting native species materials Y Assist in watering oaks and monitoring oak survival • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed Y Manitor and repair herbivore guards ➢ Monitor plant survival and replant as needed Y Water regularly through the first year � Praject Difficulty: Relatively Simple X_Moderately Difficult Difficult While oak planting projects are easy and fun for volunteers to implement, oak survival is often low and growth is usually very slow. It may take more than a decade to know if the plantings are succeeding. Proiect 4: Inform Locai Homeowners about Watershed Protection Measures • Description of Problem � Location—Cristo Rey Drainage � Adjacent land uses can degrade the wetland. In particular,new homes are located directly adjacent to the wetiand; storm water runoff is directed into this wetland and pollutants from residents' cars and lawn maintenance are likely to degrade the wetland habitat{See Figure 2) • Project GoaLs Y Determine what pollutants could come from new homes and landscaping y Identify solutions homeowners could take to reduce pollutant loading S- Inform local homeowners about the solutions • Potential Methods y Work with a watershed expert to determine the pollutants likely to come from new homes and develop solutions for homeovmers to take. Page F-10 ➢ Develop an informational�cket and survey to give to local homeowners to infonn them about im�to wetlands and what they can do. ➢ Deliver the information and survey (methods include door-to-door, a community meeting,a mailing). � Follow up,after an appropriate period,to determine homeowner views and actions. • Timing Lssues ➢ Can be done any time of the year ➢ This project can be done quickly,within a year • Agencies to CansnitlPotential Permits ➢ None/None Maybe use materials already developed by SCVWD • Experts Needed y Restoration expert to help with developing watershed protection measures ➢ Yolunteer coordinatar to organize and support volunteers • Volunteer Opportunities ➢ Develop questionnaire and administer it Y Help with information analysis ➢ Revisit households for follow-up interview • Fo11ow up Needed � Return to households to find out if homeowners implemented any of the recommendations and to assess their views of changing their yard care practiees. • Projert Di�culty: X Relatively simple Moderately difficult Difficult This project is relatively easy to implemen�, but assessing ef�ectiveness can be difficult. Page F- 11 * t� � t:- � y.� V 1 6S" �� FT �t.4:1+:Y :/k rl.;f .��r,r f l� �� 5'. yct ��y.�af�'k`�ur",} 1��'4'`}� � i 1: t� _, {'. 1 u .+ in i� 7y�`a'S iF ar�e'.y�� . r _ � r 70 ina��- 't� xs i 4j '9 � f' � Y zt ,C i-s itiy�}Yf� 3'�' a,�„� .L r �5i'14( �f.� ]: V,�ri-hF,'�s�'� �';� 7 r - t z ��f � � '�.�iY��r;�s�� ; - �;r 4 ��..' �'*'J!'�.'lCy;{', �� S� I/ � �Yia . f �..:t�{)�`�1F-'� � t � _ {� � .�� . , . . . . , �, _ �� `� �'�� ,,," -��,, - �� ,� �� _ , , ...:, . 3 � `�� - �_4� tti.r 4z'F iM <� .``� ,�,,�s w . _ . . . ry'��+�f�$' Y- titi #�e'�` �°"h :h `� � �t ""�� '.. � � u ,. � �y`�.'1f"� 4� � �}, t i•. ' t"`�ry�w ,�'�"{`,.�: 's� ,}�"*'3',(K'B!5`'v � Nr�'y.-a�-:fig�iTS. P{ .P '� 1?„ r 4' u. �.''4�� .J '� :) "'� f . 2�+'� Y ii� +ph j.. . .. . C � 4� �" S z -24,�`£,,�, �' i��t�,' a,,z�3 - ' ..L. �J�..`. S}':- ��`i�' *�°;:�C,$ �+t�.'r�..'�.r 4 '` t 3� 2 ""�"a. :� � " , xs 2 t Y,f� �.. 'S . '.b`"i _ 4 i '�` �� 5 `�','r ��,� 4 ''_. ,x� F � � � '}�,�' � p � '�� S; �2 �'.`�' E,r J `+3.��w,,;, y-a �`' ��P'��8 7�3.<" t5 w- �'�"a'y�Vv}'Y � f.-t�` ti+ ' v� �. �`.a.. � `� � �� _ ��° .i , 1i'� .;�� _ 7 �' ,":i,�? e ;� x t� ��, ��F - �'�j�:y;,,'� . � ��. .. -s � . Figwe 2—Looking south up the Cristo Rey d�-ainage. ��;;3x��a. �. �i t �'�� ' s� �r a�."� �ti .;;._ ' '., - �,.. � r.. . �a .� .�, , - � �y�s �'�r; >. ...: '� .. . � � . t r 3 , ,#��.. w � �4 k z� f .� k F'"6'? �t ,t } �:� � F � .. r�• . : � .. F r ^c , t� 'te�' J,� t��,t�C�{ �.:� .,. � W :x L F :t�'• � F 1�. t Y�r 1 fl ?� � . �.^Y ..( ��,3� � .: ♦��1,l"-.� r}x� ,�.K �� y .�'. fu r.""a�x i�.Yr"°�fif l �S Y.'. �q, " v�-. . s�,y� �t ts�;. C p, Y . � .�,` '�► ' �-� � 4,'. �`' ! .��,1 :µ '�* eG: ,. . .. . 'k .: '.�S 'i�f.�'Y..x t -k4 n . . � V'a .SV ,�� ••� ; ' .Z. � ��_ � � .� � ��7.'- y ._'"_ .. �n j �✓. .. ',i�,` .�- � j ..Y�� ^�`. +'., 1'�,,�.-�;,� ,r= r � 4 '�£ . T'�., k i�j,g 8 •�r ;�'=� s �l� .�' ,� �j c� ��a� "t 3`"�t� \� t 'y�✓ .: `'(d . � t, �' < �' "Y' .° c' ..� t? fi;c,,,y w''�t - � .� '� � ; 4� 41��x n:x� r"" � � '�' ��ra�i' € .�`"�+"k �' � [ y�Y�g �;t 1 ��.� : {`i'' v' �'^� ....�'*l��v .�' ; ..r r Y ye c.� x.�t 1 �r&. . "``'�' � a,F ; & ,z,._ ;i y� � '.� ��-..l`�.,�^tP"�'��'k�,�,:s:��i-;',�e °� 'Y wq�ri'r'�-;. q 5 t-uS-r^„t �� .+T�(,'- J !'{,� .� 1 y. 1.��.,y4 Snf`s,':tF .1' ,. ,�s' �". d "'�,�K � t "`Y �;(�f�� "n � k »��.+� } ��t��R .�.a � ' }�. �C , : � � . .-.. y �� ; 'C:::,`\�. :�, �'��..'�. � � � h�. � 3 y� �r.� �.-.�j��; x� Gt. -.} �-�y . �+ ,�.. � H� . { . ,S�` . �,"'y��`4 !#�� t ' t�.'.� - ' �i �`t '��:k ..�r . '�� ,� z�-� ��.1"�r ns"��a� � � t �:'� �y � y � �. � �*t�:�i a : r,l.:�a� d:�._a ..�,,;R",�'� >,3y'..:4. E a `�,�f$ �`�-` �,��? � �. � r� �� t�� `�, �s�` � �= � �� "�'�r,�� '-�. ��.�� . f� ,� c� � dk � � � 3 y� v. i ?�s•3�a, �� ?r +4 ��e�.� } s,i tY%'� ',�'y.k., ,�� ` :9r`�' '�d'a�'n.. �$.„a•�. � ,, ¢ - ' � .:�{�� ,: `z. }�'�6 g� �a� .., s �i�� ,�y i„� n. . �:'�wr �I . #�,y ) n lc t .. �y�Yy, P: Y ix , H 5 .tr� d r tf .a "�k+ir.� 3 � � 'F'L'�r�{ ,� � F��5��:T a �' ° � �� `" � �`9^ �'?�� g"�t�s ^�`d��`r'9� rC � � } � ��'�k� z� yy� �.,,a�* �y,�-�i��#; 'Yo�,`t�}y t�,a' ��.,.'^?.�r+'k�?� . .`,� .� .. � J irt.h� �,"1�.. ..r._'f�' } . . �a... X'arLG'.�`� �w.1T�l�cc__ . i t • � � � . Figure 3—Erasion resulting from the farm raad enters the�vetland. Page F-12 �v y � il '�, y i �i � ��.� � i!' ,,,: f � �r��, � %� �� z„,,x�kE� . : � wv �*` �� .e . ;;'+�� ,,�,°"�`"� ?. ,� � o f �5, . ;�� :.'� t .i '+�a�1 '�� t � ��'yt e h�' : 't.y.}�"F". ,h ti4 . I 'i'fk`.t {��. �s` x�f a< � }�;_ a � r ;,r y; a � �,� n. �� c"�.Y;. -v T'�.�� s, Al �� ' s-'#C . � ,�' S Y ;,- �"^�.�`-+?�2� � a�i-' �.�'f' '`�F�• c ti 3 � . F;��.u� �y� � � �,.�, �.: �� `�+p�; � �-"�r �'� � 5.' -�Y`,!s, i�� Y`F.��'�' �, �ro�. ��T�s-.�.' s° �� +�`t�` "` +��Y�'� yae��k �^r�-°:} .,ry ''�� a""y'S=d�-�.,,�`�kr-r�'AV�s�4'y�'✓��' �C'" 's�.�t '��'�} �!- s�:,:��3t�,+� . t i' .- � �� J F� �++2- ��i r �' , . �W_��'+P �i �"'i �. +�`�.. ��YKV yt�� ,• . �� Y�� "r;^�`�S .x � .� �S, .fq �i. �. 'n"R �'r t � ro� r ��'"�r"� r _ '��a'�"�'�.v�-:�,��' �"� ek �.:��?�s-� s �t,s� . °, �� .,-3 x?an. ;� ��. '�'+'y,�s"$,�..;. n. f�. 3 _ 1""�'"".��'y- r '�� a n.r r,i,• � t ��; � .i� - � yd'��£'k��.;--�C .', � ..,. r� . � �`'��:��i:P�.�a�.��,�"4N�� ,.?,_`,�,�:_{`�� .�««,I.,�k�^._ -��'�5'�,,��y''�'. - k.-�,,-•r`��'��-�`� "}z'v� '*r��E�� , ��` .e�'��t,' ��i . -: x k �=�>�'��S` .�`,� "� a 4 L�rj @�,,_ �°� �+ c'� ��•,*as -:. } `•w� s�'�aT�n..'a+N s�" �"'G-.. '��' ��y' �,*�,�i�'cSi � ��""'°' �' � �+d ,�,�.af ,�,.��„4 "�85��`r�,�:l�i ..:, �-w^i�,.�.� �,+.}��3'° y �,R+� t .,t �r'� .. �;5d .� A' y q�� 3- -�.a' ..so'.�''��^•'-i� ``i _�:.r a�y:�'.eT. :�ti� �tw� � ��-.L � ��' .c °��y��a��.. .�.g`'��.,,C t�y"'.5.4 _-.a . 2�.• � ��r�5.', < �"'� .Y�-D��;.��`�.�� "-��' ais s�'2� � .r �+47" 4 �-R.1. ;,rq_ '-'S-,ay�.� 3,- �E�Y.:.�F�� '_ � .. ;�� _..ewR ,�V � �.,� � ��, y t�.� �y� ��# � s , �'�i`;i��'�'"` ,��sS`a'- �� s}� a`'1`r.�4 3 � f ��.v-�T�'� ,�3,,�`' �s � .,�..��- .�^ t, ti .�,�u - � �, a r�` �ta�+c&" ��,. .. sfi ,�,y.. �.�w .t� .�` �� ,r �. . x ...'4E ie:r .�- c. '�`-��r�„_ ,pt f w�`�� ,�.yCg��.�a..v�`��,,,��,�#,�",'�"x`�.`4��F�' ��s� � �i s�� ` `��.�+�ih `'� r�='_ :.��'�X�`t,�k:��'3',;:Q-., . , .k ,»v�^n-y� 'z,,e -ao.v �S --.� x � .a „,.�'�'r -C.��.� _ .. ir. y-�:, eEa;�k ''�`s. . �, , ... , <.�,.evr-.�_"�'��:;"r,'o . Figure =�--Non-natiW�vegeta.tion clogs the wetland. RESTQRA�'IfliV REGIO�VT Z: Riparian Corridorlln-stre�m Habitat Study Areas C and D I. REGI+QN 2 SLTIVIMARY For restoration purposes, Stevens Greek can be vievved as a �orrfdor of s�-eamside vegetation (t�e riparian forest corridor) and the a.qua�ic o� in-stream habitat. Both zQnes are ctosely linked, but enhancement in each zane focuses on different activities and species. The Creek habitats are harmed by non-nat�ve invasive species, loss of riparian vegeta.tion, in-stream �sh barriers and other structures that degrade fish habitat, povr management practices, and some adjacent land uses. Restoration work in these hahitats v�i11 require elase eoordination with resaurce agencies and other existing habita.t impro�e�nent effarts. • LOCATIUNlCHARACTERISTICS The Stevens Creek watershed in Cupertino is the focus of this restoration region. Speeifically, restoration/enhancement woutd occur in and adjacent to the Creek corridor, which runs from Deep �liff Golf Course to St�vens Creek Boule��ard (see Figure I—Map of the Study Area). The Creek flows from the reservoir in Stevens Creek County Park, u�hich regulates �Tater levels. It is also fed by springs and seeps from the closed quarry. Adult and juvenile steelhead#rout(Dnclir�r�iy�ncliu.s myki.s•s), a federally-list�d threa:tened spec�es, occur along the entire length of �he Creek; however, Stevens Creek couid provide higher quality breed.ing and rearing habitat, if properly martaged. A recent laz�suit to protect and enhance steelhead habitat resutted in a process called t�e Fish and Aquatic Habitat Cotiaborative Effort (FAHCE). The Santa Clara Valley Water District is a key player in this pracess. FAHCE stu.dies have identified high water temperatures and barriers to fish movement as current constraints fish use of the Creek. Qther rare species likely to occur in the corridor are red-legged frogs and the western pand turtle (CI�1�'ll?�1�s mu�rrrvrut�r), a Califarnia sgecies of special �oncern. The riparian forest, dominated by native sycamores, live Page F- 13 oaks, elderberry and box elder, lines the Creek banks. Some stretches, especially through Blackberry Fann and Golf Course have little to no vegetation. Non-native piant species found in the corridor include periwinkle, german ivy, giant reed, and tree-of-heaven. The corridor is bordered by public open space including McClellan Farm and the orchar+d at the Stocklmeir property. 4ther than these parcels, the Creek is surrounded by suburban development, two golf courses, and the large parking and picnic area of Blackberry Farm,a city-owned park. � NATURAL COMMITrTITIESJHABITATS ➢ Freshwater stream community, wluch includes steelhead habitat ➢ Sycamorellive oak riparian forest Y �pen grassland dominated by non-native species • PROBLEMS AFFECTING HASITATS IN THIS DRAINAGE ➢ Invasion by non-native species in the riparian corridor �- Riprap along stream banks i� Loss of riparian habitat � Fish barriers,especially old dams Y Low-flow auto crossings through the Creek �- Degraded fish habitat , � Run-off impacts from golf courses and suburban development • BEI�tEFITS OF RESTORATION IN THIS REGION � Protect and improve steelhead habitat S> Enhance native pla.nt and animal diversity ir Improve shade and cover for trail users and other recreationists Y Provide community restoration projects • AGENCIES/EXPERTS TO INVOLVE IN PLANNING � Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, Califomia Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,National Marine Fisheries Service, Santa Clara Valley Water District 3- �rpert,c: Riparian restoration specialist, steelhead and western pond turtle experts, geotechnical expert, hydrologist,engineer,volunteer coordinator Page F-14 II. SPECIFIC RESTORATION PROJECTS Proiect 1: Remove Non-native Suecies • Description of Problem ➢ Location—along the riparian corridor,especially McClellan Ranch {periwinkle, german ivy,tree-of-hea.ven),Blackberry Golf Course(gerntan ivy,periwinkle)and Stocklmeir property (giant t�eed}(see Figure 5 Periwinkle). Y Non-native vegetation species are usurping habitat from narives • Project GoaLs Y Use mechanical and other non-chemical removal methods whenever possible ➢ Significa.ntly reduce or eliminate the occunences of non-native plants in target areas and allow more room for native species cover • Potential Methods ➢ Focus on specific areas to thoroughly remove the non-native species targeted; move out from there to e�and the non-native plant-free zone ➢ Different non-native species will have different methods for removal; work with a restoration expert to develop an effective plan for the target non-natives ➢ Use chemical methods of removal as a last resort; if chemicais are used, develop a plan with an expert in the use of the chemical and consult with DFG and NMFS ➢ Replant areas cleared of non-natives with native riparian species as quickly as possible • Timing Issues ➢ If chemicals are used, application may need to be timed to avoid breeding seasons and other sensitive life cycle phases of native a.nimals � This is a very long-term project,which could continue for many years • Agencies to ConsultJPotential Permits � Santa Clara Va11ey Water District for other projects ➢ Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society for map of non-native spe,cies occurrences ➢ Department of Fish and Game and National Marine Fisheries Service, if chemical plant killers are used • Eacperts Needed ➢ Restoration expert, volunteer coordinator, possibly an herbicide expert • Volunteer Opportnnities ➢ Mechanical or hand removal of non-natives Page F- 15 • Monitoring/1Viaintenance Nceded ➢ Monitor for regrowth of non-natives ➢ Plant native species as quickly as possible to avoid regrowth of invasives and to avoid erosion • Project Difficnity: X Reiativeiy Simple Moderately Difficult Difficutt Non-native species removat methods are well established; can be effective when vigorously pursued. Page F-16 Proiect 2: Remove Riu-raDlResculnt Creek Banks • Descrip�ion of Problem ➢ Location—Rip-rap occurs in Blackberry Farm; creek banks in Blackberry Farm, the Golf Course and Deep C1ii�Golf course need resculpting ➢ Installing rip-rap and compacted soil banks resulted in the loss of riparian species,contributing to high water temperatures and degradarion of steelhead habitat ' Project Goals � Reestablish a more natural riparian edge,which allows growth of native species � Provide bank edge habitat for turtles and steelhead � Protect banks from scour and erosion • Potentiat Methods 5� Examine historica.l photos of original stream morphoiogy to guide restoration ➢ Have hydrologist develop estimates of scour and erosion rates to determine type of structures tha.t will be adequate ➢ Remove rip-rap with heavy equipment;try to integrate some of the material in the resculpting work to keep costs down Y Recreate creek meanders, if possible,to dissipate flow energy and allow more natural stream functioning Y Create more gentle bank slopes and soften the consolidated bank soil; add soil that supports native riparian species r Stabilize banks with geotechnical material, root wads, logs, willow wattling or other methods effective in preventing erosion while promoting the growth of native species and providing bank habitat for native animals Y Replant banks as quickly as possible with native riparian species • Timing Issues ➢ Conduct construction to avoid impacts to steelhead, pond turtles,and red- legged frogs i Avoid construction in the rainy season,if possible � This is a medium length project that will take approximately 2 to 4 years to complete. � Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District/local permits, coordinate with FAHCE Y Army Corps of Engineers/Ciean Water Act, Section 404 permit � Department of Fish and GameJStream Alteration Agreement, consultation on pond turtle protections y National Marine Fisheries Service/Endangered Species Act, Section 7 cvnsuitation Page F- 17 • Eacperts Needed � Restoraiion expert,permits specialist, geote�hnical expert,hydrologist, engineer • Volunteer Opportunities ➢ None • MonitoringJMaintenance Needed 3> Monitor scour and erosion around new features; repair if needed • Prnject Di�culty: Relatively Simpie Moderately Difficult X Di�cult Hea.vy equipment and engineering a.re needed. Getting engineers to use good bioengineering approaches (rather than traditional "hardscape" engineering) can be difficult. These projects are expensive and requ.ire many permits. Proiect 3: Reve�etate with Native Riparian Suecies • Description of Problem ➢ Location—along creek corridor through Study Areas C and D, but especially through Blackberry Farm and through both golf courses ➢ Loss of riparian vegetation results in bank erosion, has degraded steelhead habitat through lack of shading,has reduced habitat for riparian species such as migratory birds, and has reduced shading and aesthetic value for people • Prnject Goals � Reestablish a diversity of upper and lower canopy plant species that are native to the corridor � Provide shade ovzr the creek to improve steelhead habitat and shade for the trail, if possible r Provide as wide a riparian bufFer as possible between the creek and adjacent land uses,to help protect creek water quality Y Reestablish a continuous riparian habitat for resident and migratory species, especially birds � Potential Methods Y Pull parking and picnic areas at Blackberry Farm back from the creek edge to allow a 100 foot riparian corridor ➢ Remove Blackberry Fazm parking lot and replace with a permeable material that reduces runoff ➢ Collect native plant materials from Stevens Creek corridor,whenever possible, or failing that,from other South San Francisco Bay watersheds ➢ Have a native plant nursery grow seedlings Y Collect information on the soil types and water table location along the corridor Page F-18 ➢ Plant species in acceptable locations based on correct soil type, stream bank elevation, frequency of floading,and water tabie level ➢ Plant native species ai�er non-natives have been removed and creek bank has been resculpted � Timing Issues � Allow 1 year for growing plams in a nursery ➢ P)ant seeds and seedlings during the rainy season or when most appropriate for each species � This is a long-term, multi-year project • Agencies to ConsnitlPotential Permits y Santa Clara Va11ey Water District(on patential impediments to creek flow) • Experts Needed � � ➢ Riparian restoration expert,volunteer coordinator,engineer � Volunteer Oppartunities � Piant material collection ➢ Nursery assistance r Planting, watering, weeding ➢ Monitoring for plant health and growth � Monitoring/Maintenance Nceded � Watering and weeding may be needed � Monitor number of plants of each species surviving and growth rate of survivors • Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple X Moderately Difficult Difficult Page F- 19 Prniect 4: Remove Fish Barriers and Low Flow Auto Crossin�s • Description of Problem ➢ Location—A small dam,which is a fish barrier,and several low-flow auto crossings are located in Blackberry Farm. Qther baniers and low-flow crossing may be located in the two golf courses. � Structures impede fish passage upstream and reduce habitat quality for adult and juvenile fish • Project GoaL� � Remove these stxuctures that prevent steelhead from having full access to the creek Y Prepare creek bed for further fish habitat enhancement • Potential Methods Y Methods to remove the barriers with the least damage possible to the creek morphology,water quality or vegetation will be determined by a hydrologist, geologist, steelhead expert, and engineer • Timing Issues ➢ Avoid impacts to steelhead,pond turtles or red-legged frogs ➢ Removing structures can be done relatively quickly and should t�completed in one season. • Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits ➢ Santa Clara Valley Water District/local permits,coordinate with FAHCE ➢ Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit :� Department of Fish arid Game/Stream Alteration Agreement,consultation on pond turtle protections Y Nationa.l Marine Fisheries Service/Endangered Species Act, Section 7 consultation � Experts Needed .� � i� Hydrologist,geotechnical expert, steelhead expert, engineer, permits expert � • Volunteer Opportunities � None • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed y None • Project Difficalty: _X Relatively Simpie Moderately Dit�"icnit Difficuit Removing the structures is relatively easy. Receiving permits and approvals from agencies is likely to be the greatest hurtle. Page F-20 Proiect 5: Enhance De�raded Fish Habitat � Description of Problem ➢ Steelhead habitat has been degraded by changes to the creek structure and vegetation. ➢ Water management practices that damage steelhead population • Prnject Goals ➢ Increase survival of adults and juvenile steelhead by providing habitat needed at each phase of their Iives ➢ Increase steelhead productivity by increasing breeding habitat • Potential Methods ➢ Work with a steelhead expert to de7ermine wha.t habitat needs are lacking in the creek S� Work with FAHCE to ensure that enough water is released from the dam to support year-round fish habitat ➢ Work with FAHCE to determine which habitat enhancements are being implemented by FAHCE members and which ones remain to be done Y Enhancement may include a number of inethods. Several typical enhancement features are: adding appropriately sized gravel to the creek bed to create spawning habitat, installing check da.ms, gravel and pools to make pool and riffle habitat, installing root wads to create cover habitat for fry and juveniles � Timing Lssues ➢ Time work to avoid impacts to steelhead ➢ Structures can be put in quickly, within a season. Monitoring fish use and changing or adding structures to meet fish requirements make this a multi- year project. • Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits � Santa Clara Valley Water District/local permits, coordinate with FAHCE Y Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit Y Department of Fish and GamelStream Alteration Agreement, consultation on pond turtle protections Y National Marine Fisheries ServicelEndangered Species Act, Section 7 consultation • Eapec�c Needed S' Steelhead expert, engineer; hydrologist, geotechnical expert • Volunteer Opportuniti� ➢ None Page F-21 • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed � Monitor the use of new habitat by fish;modify or add other featwes as needed ➢ Monitor the integrity of the new features and fix them if they degrade • Project Difficulty: Relativety Simple X Moderately Difficult Di�cult Salmon and steelhead biologists have developed and tested a wide ra.nge of habita.t enhancement fea,tures. Appropriate features can be very successful in improving steelhead productivity and survivorship. Close coordination with many agencies will be a challenge for these projects. Proiect 6: Edncate Adiacent Land Owners and Managers about Rnnof�Imnacts • Description of Problem ➢ Pesticide and herbicides runoff from residential and golf course land uses into Stevens Creek, reducing water quality and the overall health of the creek and riparian system • Project Goals � Determine wha.t pollutants could come from homes, landsca.ping,and golf courses i� Identify solutions homeowners and golf course managers could take to reduce pollutant use ➢ Inform local homeowners and land managers about the solutions • Potential Methods ➢ Work with a watershed expert to determine the pollutants likely to come from homes and golf courses and develop solutions. v Develop an informational packet and survey to give to local homeawners and golf course managers to inform them about impacts to wetlands and what they can do. �- Deliver the information and survey (methods include door-to-door, a community meeting, a maiting). ➢ Follow-up,after an appropriate period,to determine homeowner/land manager views and actions taken. • Timing Issues i> Can be done any time of the year y This project can be done quickly, within a year � Agencies to ConsultlPotentiai Permits � NonelNone Maybe use materials already developed by SCVWD • Experts Needed ➢ Restoration expert to help with developing watershed protection measures ➢ Volunteer coordinator to arganize and support volunteers Page F-22 • Volunt�er Upp�rtunilies � De�velop questionnaire and admini�ter it Y Help with informatian analysis � �evisit households for follow-up interview • Fo11ow up Ne�+ded Y Return ta households to f nd out if homeowners implemented any of the recommendations and to assess their views of changing their yard care practices. Y Follow up v�rith golf course managers. • Project Difficulty; i�Retatively simpie Moderately difficult Difficult This project is relatively easy to implement, but assessing effectiveness can be difficult. � �� - `�:��"`�� .�,� - _ ^."w ..�.,::� -a� ¢-�;,.� , e�-.;,_ ' �' :�.� a,.� � ;wf �' � li '� n t� �'��'`�4 ;�... ,�� ;,_,� �.=��, � � �' l, � � .�� :::� -� s =,�� » ;,�� .� � . , r . . �� . . �. �sf �"`?yEdE a ,:,�, . v �� =P ; � , �:. a _ �„&,.,,r'. �S t� � . ,��1 t �, �� __�� r„�; �, _ � � '-�,.�. r �� ,,,�,�. � T�� . � � �. ��`I ��,� �. -:. � W,:� . , � ,R �j �I .0 - - L <� .♦ �� " �� 11� �� ,�{, ;. � � ,�� ;�: � �y��... � , ��. .t �i, - - i iE ,1• I� J 'll II I ,,r- :.M1 �. S� � , ��j�l�l � p � �� w �. �., y"` � r` ..�. I� a � I I � � I II I .,.. „ � �" � ! ' � •��-�� .w�. � � �. d''.-, .� ..,;� ' � ,�4 .k.��.- ''��.�� ...s�- � ;�xA Y'�L �*' �t i.^` "` .�w R.� `s;+�.,.... "'�".ai. ;��v'' ,jR,<a•-, , ,}ii�K.� "��. �r � - ;�V�^ s;;-e. a,' �`�� ,� � " � �� o f ° � a x .. �'��.- x�"��'t.s� ,'`�. '��, �;, _ ,.�wst'��.��."�`� �'.� ��.� Figure 5—Peri��ii�k�e (l�'�dr��r ��c��u��} is a c��n�l�on non-n�ative, invas�ve species of the S#evens Creel�corridor. Page F-23 . . iY��,._^ R. ..6 f +�_ > _ . f . . j�1�Y' �.!��t'�"t ��,�"�C �� '��.�V'r F r��' y'Ys , �'�' �- . ..- �r .r�,.Y;�y'�'� � 7r� '.� -�" ��,�. . ;}. .' v.... _ 3 �M1f �� a'�'. ... . �s �" '�+s. � � �� `� � dr� .; � :, y��., „� �- r r �..N ,. .� �' s��= °�"iGs+;: ..� � ��"° £- . . . y� -::t� � iF i 5��; iF��: , /. .. �% �, -I �Y r.'��"i w . ��.� g+`f. �� 1. ,�CF .' �� ' � 4 ��X� . . 4.� . � ., �a�.. �_ .. _. ..:.-. 7?'t 4 +� ..° +j�. _ rd $-.. .. . •.�„r t, ..ai . .�f . . ' . , . ..�. r :i�"s. ��zM� ��..'+:�. - .:� r� v# + ' F - _ .". �(y. q�.. ' '.�� .. .��.�- � �'" ..'��;'�yw�2'..' .. ; � r :. A � .�. 7:� �`��.��' ..� � ��i c..�� 1 '�' '.`�,r: 0" . �� 9tl . . ' T. t :_1 � :Y, '.'_.. . - �.:� ::�. .. I . .., .. II ._ ��,Y :,t y� R� � _ { ..-�q ykvH�,.-. - ��: _ ��'_ . . I . a - . � }lts.t.4. .I .. ' '. .,.. �',f�Y.� F e. .. . F �� _ y, � � � � • � • � � s � � � • �� • � r � � • � � � .g '" Y, �"'f'$ +w ..r *. �" �i • , «�` �°` -"'�"4 # a 'FT ' +NC' a �•,. a �lrta.,, ��/�r * �et r '�!„�'. 1a ro. � 4��, � �� i��*'~�7�� .:' i 3 ��p��' ? �'� .�� '� r��'v� �.. ��.+'�, d y,�"_ .� ��. h � < :� "-0 s 'r "' �`,`(� -n' ,.�..�la. � t P+'�i`'k"' s � '� .�: �� lr r tic"1t 'a� *r'{'.^ t; �. 'C i� +� a :�% �-:•. '°�1` ~ .''�r .x a� �.�:Y v-" . a.� `� ,7c , ..; 1"►�'1�^�� f'�-' . �'yR� '�s-�'��•. 3E�, �'; . :' (.� s�i�X_� ' '��rq{�.4x f �;Y'�" � :. �'` _�`- j�.y�ic� 8- `5 fi�.'77" +��JP��°'�-F� � y ,�`X"� � +�,�[ dY.�... `w'.Y�r..�_� �.s' :2 rt .: y� .a. � � i . -'� r.�T i '.1��. { ��`L'� ' Yl �� r .wI�F�� f��f 4 ' . �� L- a .1 '}A4C�. �" '� 4�L.� �.a 4. i' f �. t K �9 _��'". ��'+� 54.�', ;� �fe .�, 3. x5�.w.�� 11 '. �, .x�� { .� f�,� T�y .',adt �`/ Sr."c -k. � "� k 1 � .�` �� c.. ' i�t� �s� �.h ` 7S^ t„�`' ��1�`, «.t'; F ;��x�'�� .' ,� .., � �r : r�c - e,�_ .t�aa.�a.. ' $: ��"� s" .�� .- � �y'�t r :y, , .� ' ..�i ; � k.g '�'" �' `,.-" °ny S E '► b ;'y � �r �� s {� J�i_• u �.; r :' . ,� i,�. , ,.� �,�x� � : �-� � ��+�� ;, ��r-} ..�9;� .... - - ;- � : �*'"z ,�..- .,. ....�3.�' �.�r�:..°_ _,,�„ ,�: �,_- =„y.-_, . r �.y �� .�:. �s-�# �"�" ` ��'4 0 `; �, .w. a`T}^ t.;: �} s:, ,. L-��i' 4 �y -;;Ly �.�. �: `.Y _ ...:r :.._ �� '� � f� � �r i � S / � � � � s � � �� t � � � RESTORATION REGION 3: Quarry Slope/Wetland Drainag�—Study Area B I. REGION 3 SUMMARY The Quarry Drainage is a basin formed by former quarry operations. A wetland at the bottom of the quarry is potential red-legged frog habitat. The drainage is degraded by a number of impacts especially eroding slopes and loss of chaparral vegeta.tion along those slopes. Specific projects that can improve the region are geotechnical slope stabilization, revegetation witli native species, and protection of the wetland from sedimentation. Thi.s site may be subject to future development; restoration work must be coordinated with this po#ential use. • LOCATIONICHARACTERISTICS This drainage basin is bounded by Linda Vista Park on the north, a bluff with homes on the east, and Stevens Creek County Park on the south. There aze several poorly cansolidated temaces in the center of the basin that step dawn to the elevation of Stevens Creek, which passes on the west side of the drainage. The steep topography on three sides of the basin arid the terracing are all a result of former quarry operations. The slope on the north side lacks the native chaparral vegetation and is eroding. Erosion is atso occurring down the terraces in the basin. Non-native grasses and several invasive non- native plants have colonized the eroding slopes and the bottom of the quarry. Native chaparral and coast live oak woodland occur on the south slope arid the esst side of the quarry basin. A freshwater wetland, fed by seeps, occurs at the bottom of the drainage in the center and on the south side. Water from the wetlands eventually flows into Stevens Creek_ The wetland vegetation is dominated by cattails and rushes; willows, cottonwoods, and alders form a ripas-ian edge. This wetland is potential red-legged frog habitat. Hikers have produced many "social" trails down the north side from Linda Vista and up the south face of the drainage to the County Park, probably contributing to erosioa The slopes of the quarry are public open space. 'The bottom of the quarry is privately owned and development is being considered. • NATURAL COMMUIYITIES/HABTTATS � Freshwater wetland community,which includes potential red-legged frog habitat i� Willow riparian community i� Chapan-al and coast live oak woodland(see Figures 8&9—Native chapamaUoak woodland) y Non-native grassland � PR4SLEMS AFFECTING HABITATS IN THIS DRAINAGE � Eroding slope � Sedimentation impacts to the wetland i� Invasion by non-native species Y Loss of chaparral • BENEFITS OF RESTORATION IN THIS REGION � Protect and improve wetland habitat Y Enhance chaparral native plant diversity y Provide community restoration projects • AGENCIES/EXPERTS TO INVOLVE IN PLAi�TNING ➢ Ageneies: Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service � Ex erts: Wetland restoration s ialist red-le ed fro ex rt eotechnical ex rt cha arral P � , gg g Pe �g P� , P restoration specialist, volunteer coordinator PaaP F_ 7 5 II. SPECIFIC RESTORATION PROJECTS Proiect 1: Recontour and Stabilize ErodinQ Slones and Terraces • Description of P'robtem ➢ Eroding slopes ➢ Sedimenta.tion impacts to the wetland Y Invasion by non-narive species,especially pampas grass and French broom) • Project Goals S> Stabilize eroding areas with geotechnical methods � Establish cover crop of non-invasive plants to hold soil i� Prepare soil for native plant species � Potential Methods ➢ Have geotechnical firm assess the current condition of the slopes and terraces, then develop an erosion controUslope stabilization plan using ecotogically- sensitive engineering methods y Use historical photos of the site to help determine final contours ➢ Use heavy equipment,geotechnical materials,or other approaches to produce stable slopes,prepare for trail access, and prepare for native species planting � Remove non-native invasive species whenever possible r Hydroseed(or other seeding method)with a cover crop,probabty non-native but certa.inly non-invasive,which grows fast,holds soil and improves soil condition(example: red clover); cover crop must a11ow the future planting of native chaparral species • Timing Issues Y Grading and earth work must be c+ampleted during the dry season � Seedinglplanting should occur at the beginning of the rainy season • Agencies to Consult/Potential Permits y Army Corps of Engineers/Clean Water Act, Section 404 • Experts Needed ➢ Geotechnical experts, revegeta.tion specialists � • Volunteer Upportunities ➢ Probably none • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed 5> Sail stability and gullying must be monitored y Establishment of cover crop must be monitored PaaP F-�fi � Project Difficulty: Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult X Difficult — — While the methods for slope stabilization are well known and efFective, the quarry is a very large and steep area that will require significant work. The geotechnical firm should be familiar with steep slope projects and restoration goals. Proiect 2: Remove Non-native Ve�etation • llescription of Problem ➢ Non-native species, such as pampas grass and French broom • Project Goals � Remove invasive species from the basin ➢ Prepare sites for replanting with natives i� Control erosion � Potential Methods ➢ Hand pulling or mechanical methods such as"weed wrenches"or pulaskis � Spot applicarion of herbicides by an e.Ypert may be used for some species • Timing Issues � None for mechanical methods; can be done at any time of the year ➢ Herbicide applications must be timed to protect the environment while having a lethal effect on the invasive plant • Agencies to ConsultlPotential Permits ➢ None/None for mecha.nical methods ➢ Herbicide applications must be conducted by a professional with proper licenses • Ezperts Needed ➢ Restoration expert, volunteer coordinator, possibility an herbicide expert • Valunteer Opportunities ➢ Removing non-native plants by hand or with simple toots • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed ➢ Constant removal of non-natives as they reoccur • Project Difficulty: X Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult Di�cult PaaP F_77 PaaP F-�R Proiect 3: Revegetate with Native ChaparraV4ak Woodland Suecies • I}escriptian of Problem ➢ Loss of na�ive chaparral a.nd coast live oak woodland vegetation • Project Goats � Reesta.blish a diversity of native chaparral and oak woodland species � Choose species able to survive with minimum maintenance � Allow for natural succession of ecological communities • Potential Methods r Determine appropriate species mix by looking at reference sites that provide models for the restoration,such as habitat on Stevens Creek County or Linda Vista Parks(Figwes 8 &9) Y Consult with a chapanal ecologist to determine which early colonizing,hardy species to plant first and which later succession species to plant in the future ➢ Coilect plant materials Iocally, such as in Linda Vista or Stevens Creek County Parks Y Treat materials; grow seediings in a greenhouse,lath house or nursery Y Treat soils as needed to prepare them for native species Y Plant seeds, seedings,or other materials � Use above-and below-ground herbivore protectors as recommended by a restoration expert � Weed,water,replant with successful species as needed i�► When early colonizing plants establish,begin growing and planting species indicative of a more mature chaparraUoak woodland community • Timing Issues ➢ Allow at leastl year for growing plants in a greenhouselnwsery ➢ Plant species at the appropriate time in the yeazly rainfail cycle • Agencies to Consult/Potentiat Permits Y None/None • Experts Needed � ChapazraUoak woodland restoration expert,volunteer eoordinator • Volunteer Opportunities Y Collecting plant materials for propagation � Assisting with greenhouse duties and planting seedlings Y Monitoring swvival and growth rates of plantings ;� Maintenance such as weeding,putting up herbivore protectors, occasional watering • Monitoring/Maintenance Needed PaaP F_79 � Monitoring survival�nd gr4wth rates of plantings 5� Maintenance such as weeding,putting up herbivore protectars, occasianal watering r Replanting��ith spe�ies th,at survive well ar u�ith species that achieve ather restoration gaals � Project Di�culty: Relatively Simple Moderately Difficult X Difficu it This project is tnore of a true native community restoration than any other project described. Reestabiishing �pecies diversity can he diff'icult; ehaparra� restoration is not common in the South Bay. ��e .� � ' '* x � �. � ,.-4 w�9�. �� x . / .x�� 4� .. ...`. �� R ��,� �.�.�TST �{V'w�i 7as�`�. � �' } �"Y . '�-� � . �' y�' � � a � � � ��.1.n. .�`�,. .. ��"`�.. #+ Y wy',r��'�t a��.r-� �'� � � � .i� �� I ��`�J7�+lK,s.`",�'`.'�.q,,,��„"`',� � •�0,.3�'� � �^�"� 9 �. �,�z..1'��f F�.�'� ,t�,-7� �'+c �� cvs ��"":`� d"�y,y�,� .oi 4�: � ,r>�H �M*� � • .�im� �a`� q,q��t � a�' p� °�y � �4�. � '3�yk` ,�+te ��',�., ".; �+.;.. Ys � �.v,�: g �df,��,y,.�' �.- e�',.a`s�� x'w... � 4.. r: �',� "'t�,,��`{ g; �k.�' . 4 �`4 9 �[ � � A�'�� .�t�� C9C '�y, �^� �� '� , i? A' T� � � c�� p�. ✓�y?,� � yN � �n.s'�r'��<�y'�( *w ;r� � �.'F Y '+'�'Y� . }` ..� ,w_Y.1^'S� `'S�'�+g` �'"_""�w�y�A�� .s� � � .. ; ._ q o�,�y'�rx §� '��`g� �F'� 1 h..�kp' -..'1tY�'�Fr. �� :; �y �,^� �'! �.� 5� �� }��}< ��`k .r,��r �' , . �: Z �° .. �5�' f�Sy� ai r >'f'� �� r�,��` � �� k'�J j ��t^��W�,v y,a +�r t'� 'F't rC" ��iM v .�' � ts�� '�' ��,lf �%��t�, '0; ¢�Na k„�� _�. � �i ;'�v �`� � 9".�� ,- F y.�r f nr�.,'y. N� � � �=�. g ��r�"L p�� '1.s�n��.,c��..� �,,�J r1 -� z� i� :� �� ' t�,�C�' a} _�'��,A��'r��. "T�x. �, �'� ..�'F't" �. f-�� -k�'��'"w � T, �� t � h �. 'S :f P „�t� �S'j � !" ��r � � ,? � f �y�.�5, �t� �,��.��'�: ,�Y � � S 'S J" � �n y ::4 � g �Y, � ��- �h °,�r�y� .a'�� .� k #� ; �� 7 4 ry�. .• ��, r xi.�u�A`�,�,�''t'. � 'y�.' y H. �+7� �� r- ` ir if �.� , ��r� ��r f A�''��`�_f.y� ��"� Y 3'F ��'F ��' z��,. ,`- �$r''� �, � i .a. t', � .� � 1 r f .:� 3" �n h� . � �,.,U��a,`�y� �.'.,�� ,y�.a :��F.+yp� . : '!�°" � �� '-�� `"` �,"'+�"�,.oc' g - '^P�� , ss y t: � �"� 3 �'�f�C'��x.,� � ;��q'`�� '`tq� r� � 4 i �`f� � �: . �,, . � �-� �, .. E ,�. : ,4 .* i �a� a � 'i-=� a -��K.� � .. � , y� '� � �K �' �;-f�' ��fi'�rz. � . F{' 4 1 � e i � �f' r�t � , � ' "' '�.� s .,� ��r e�� ti.� '��. - �°C{,+ ,� �y �� F rb� :�v x�„< ��,��' �._�4�' 'N' ��'.� s . �� r.�i� � y : '' '� �..{``�RL ��a M :�`�� s .x"��- C � T �' t„ r "r��7 ,,��k,f'� �.. � �_ a��: � Y -f' � ��# a � � �# �'c,s.. :4' S �,f �.� �?.r�;r rr.?-�� =� � � r�° � :'f�x°.��:x, �+�� , � - '� 4 .,��Gd�. 4 �� ._a° '�''�"' f ��_,.� ,�-''��ac � F .s �,�{F. ;, ✓"`qd ,,. �A��; ;�.. �r�}��°.=y�',�* - �� }v� '.�.y �A �' '�'� t � s :r±�q ��° �� 4 v1 r S� -t- a-� �.ze �.A�•.3"�` � yr a��,��r�p _�- . <'� - _ 'x � aL �d -p .r� �T�" ��,, �� g .-' . 1� '�` � � � � .._..3F,.. .��. -w� n ti.. ,e�.�'� �� `� .��`«.4„ %�.�'' y,.�q+ n - Figure 8—Native chaparrai community Stevens Creek County Park. Pa�P F-'��} � S .,a _ s 47s�,��-`� b t t ��fi{�� ;�� !:' � 4�' 1� ,� i�'K�ar1 "ai.'��*,F�t � 1. r �� k -'� Y t t�*jL��:. n� ,t�� ,�. _ � ,: 1 t t y- ��a� . t� � 5 f '� 3 �1� 1 L '��h��,�,��h � � 1;, r� 1k,�y�,' �Y #i� � � �r� , k ! rl a �� " y�tn, .��. +y . 5 t i}g� . . _ _ . :6�r �� . . . � n'�1+� n_r� � �� c�t��,�•y ' ��,,y,,,, t�-�r�q>:� ,�.n . �'' T� � �.. yj$��;�� '� � i-��x s.�, ��a��z��b,.� .,� t Z ��.� s � �_,. _ � �D i� �,, '��K�','�. i!: z b�a ��P�� . � �, r.. t.f ��.� e�,�K .� � �` ` ,� . ' �-. �� • �'$ ' �a� � :, �i � ; �+.,., Y'� K K' 3�:� ,f.� �R�q� :�. ��.,�� „ ��,'r �. �. '�-��,�' � " r�„¢ '4 7�+a y ; ,..� '�g;�,. r� ��,�. �* '��" �'�` � ro* '�'.e- ", �'�' �'��'.,� ,:. Y, ..x� �+ka s �`f�b,7`.q ';d �� f �Y� ( �r�'. $� � � /,� .�, ✓ 'z n � '.t` � i - �` �; � � ��„4 � r�. � :�.��,fi'` �'� . l p� s t x' }" r y.gr' �'^� py, rz -" < 'k � ' oa��`^'� ��Y f 'Y; f �� . �a .��. Kr` �`g� ��+�t� ,.=�� ,. . * K"�'�¢ ��"�'s:�r c;,� �" �. }:., .�'�. .''� �y'� ,{t �'�4�� '�� 4� f' �.- },�� .�, ��^," t°��y�, i,�*r �p�s t � �'��. .� -�. Y+1 _�. f � � �II k- f' W.� 'I ', �. . .•. , .. � , < s'� ..r.. i�:,��^°,,._�,rr� 1: .yi � . : . Figure 9—Native chaparral and coast live oak woodland at Linda Vista Park. Pa�P F_�1 APPENDIX 1. Restoration Guidinq Principles Prepared by: Watershed Eco%gy Team, US EPA �ce of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersh�►s Preserve and protect aquatic resources. Existing, relatively intact ecosystems are the keystone for conseiving biodiversity, and provide the biota and other natu�al mate�ials needed for the recovery of impaired systems. Thus, restoration does not replace the need to protect aquatic resou�es in the first place. Rathe�, restoration is a complementary activity that, when combined with prote�tion and preservation, can help achieve overall improvements in a greater percentage of the Nation's waters. Even with waterbadiss for which restoration is planned,the first objective should be to p�event further degradation. Restore ecological integrity. Restoration should reestablish insofar as possibls the ecological integrity of degraded aquatic ecosystems. Ecological integrity refers to the condition of an ecosystem --particularly the structure, composition, and natural processes of its biotic communities and physical environment.An ecosystem with integrity is a resilient and self-sustaining natural system able to acxammodate str�ess and change. Its key ecosystem processes, such as nu#rient cyc{es, succession, water levels and flow pattems, and the dynamics of sediment erosion and deposition, are functioning properfy within the naturaE range of variability. Biologically, its plant and animal cammunities are good examples of the native communities and diversity found in the region. StructuraUy, physical features such as the dimensions of its stream channels are dynamically stable. Restoration strives for the greatest progress toward ecological integrity achievable within the current limits of the watershed, by using designs that favor the natural pracesses and communities that have sustained native ecosystems through fime. Restore natural structure. Many aquatic resources in need of restoration have problems that originated with harmfut alteration of channet form or other physical characteristics, which in turn may have led to problems such as habitat degradation, changes in flow regimes, and siltation. Stream channelization, ditching in wetlands, disconnection from adjacent ecosystems, and shore{ine mod�ca#ions are examples of structural aiterations that may need to be addressed in a restoratian project. In sucfi cases, restoring the origina( site morpho(ogy and other physical attributes is essential to the success of other aspects of the project, such as improving water quality and txinging back native biota. Resto�e natural function. Structure and funetion �e closety linked in nver corridors, lakes, wetlands, estuaries and other aquatic resources. Reestablishing the appropriate natural structure can bring back beneficial functians. For example, restoring the bottom elevation in a wetland can be critical for reestablishing the hydrological regime, natural distufiance cycles, and nutrierrt fluxes. !n order to maximize the societal and ecological ben�ts of the restoration project, it is essential to identify what functions shou{d be present and make missing or impaired functions priorities in the restoration. Verifying whether desired functions have been reestablished can be a good way to determine whether the restoration project has succeeded. Work within the watershed and broader tandscape context Restoration requi�es a design based on the entire watershed, not just the part of the waterbody that may be the most degraded site. Activities throughout the watershed can have adverse effects on the aquatic resource that is being restored. A localized restoration project may not be able to change what goes on in the whole watershed, but it can be designed to better accommodate watershed effects_ New and future urban deveiopmer�t may, for example, increase runoff vo(umes, stream dawncutting and bank erosion, and pollutant loading. By cansidering the watershed corrte�ct in this case, restoration pfanners may be able to design a project for the desired ben�ts of restoration, while also withstanding or even helping to remediate the PaoP F_�7 effects of adjaceM land uses on runoff and nonpoint poliution. For example, in choosing a site for a wetland restoration project, ptaru�ers should consider how the proposed project may be used fo further other reiated effarts in the watershed, such as increasing riparian habitat continuity, reducing flooding, and/or enhancing downsVeam water quaiity. Beyond the watershed, the broader landscape corrtext also ir�tluences restoration through factors such as interaetions w�h teRestriat habitats in adjacent wa#ersheds, or the deposition af airbome pollutants from other regions. Understand the natura! potential of the watershed. A watershed has the capacity to become onty what its physical and biological setting — its ecoregion's climate, geology, hydrology, and biological characteristics — will suppo�t. Establishing restcxation goals for a wate�dy tequires knowledge of the historical range of conditions that existed on the site prior to degradation and what future conditions might be. This information can then be used in deteRnining appropriate goats for the restoration projeet. In some cases, the exterrt and magnitude of changes in the watershed may constrain the ecological potential of the site. Accordingiy, restoration planning should take into acc�unt any irreversible changes in the watershed that may affect the system being restored, and focus on restvring its remaining natural potential. Address ongoing causes of degradation. Restoration efforts are iikely to fai{ if the sources of degradation persist. Therefor�e, it is essential to identify the causes of degradation and e{iminate or remediate ongoing stresses wherever possible. While degradation can be caused by one direct +mpact such as the filling of a wetland, much degradation is caused by the cumulative effect of numerous, indirect impacts, such as changes in surfac:e flow caused by gradual increases in the amount of impervious su�faces in the watershed. In identifying the sources of deg�adation, it is impartant to look at upstrnam and up-slope activi#ies as well as at direct impacts on the immediate project site. Further, in some situations, it may also be necessary to consider downstream mod�cations such as dams and channeiization. Develop ctear, achievable, and measurable goals. Restoration may not succeed without good goals. Goals direct implementation and provide the standards for measuring success: Simple conceptual madels are a useful starting point to define the problems, identify the type of solutions needed, and deveiop a strategy and goals. Restoration teams shouid evaluate different altematives to assess which can best acxomplish project goals. The chosen goals should be achievable ecologicaify, given the natural potential of the area, and sacioeconomically, given the available resources and the extent of community support for the project. Also, all parties affected by the restoration should understand each projeet goal clearly to avaid subsequent misunderstandings. Goad gaals provide fncus and inc�ease project efficiency. Focus on feasibiiity. Particularty in the planning stage, it is critical to focus on whether the proposed restoration activity is feasible, taking into account scient�c, financial, social and other oonsiderations. Remember that solid oommunity support for a project is nesded to ensure its long-term viability. Ecalogical feasibility is also cxitical. For exampfe, a wetlands restoration project is not likely to succeed if tt�e hydrological regime that existed prior to degradation cannot be reestablished. Use a reference site. Reference sites are areas that are comparable in structure and function to the proposed restoration site befare it was degraded. As such, reference sites may be used as models for restoration projects, as wetl as a yardstidc for measuring the progress of the projeck. While it is possible to use historic information on sites that have been altered or destroyed, historic conditions may be unknown and it may be most useful to identify an existing, reiatively heafthy, simifar site as a guide for your project. Remember, however, that each restoration project wiA present a unique set of circumstances, and no two aquatic systems are truly identical. Therefore, it is important to tailor your project to the given situation and account for any differences between the reference site and the area being restored. PaaP F_�'� Anticipate future chanc,�:s. The environment and our communities are both dynamic. Atthough it is impossible to ptan for the future precisety, many foreseeable ecological and societal changes can and should be factored into restoration design. For example, in repairing a stream channel, it is important to take inta acxount potential changes in runoff resutting from projected increases in upstream impervious surFace area due to development. In addition to potential impacts from changes in watershed land use, natural changes such as plant community succession can afso influence restoration. For instance, (ong-term, post- project monitoring should take successional processes such as forest regrowth in a stream corridor into account when evaluating the outcome of the restoration project Involve the skitls and insights of a multi-disciplinary team. Restoration can be a complex undertaking that irrtegrates a wide range of discip{ines including ecolagy, aquatic btology, hydrology and hydraulics, geomorpholc�y, engineering, planning, communications and social science. It is importarrt that, to the extent that resources a{low, the planning and implementafion of a r+estoration project involve peaple with experience in the disciplines needed for the particular project. Universities, govemmen# agencies, and private organizations may be able to provide useful information and expertise to help ensure that restoration projects are based on well-balanced and thorough plans. With more complex restoration projects, efFective leadership wili also be needed to bring the various discipfines, viewpoints, and styles together as a functional team. Design for self-sustainability. Pefiaps the best way to ensure the long-term viability af a restored ar�ea is to minimize the need for continuous maintenance of the site, such as supplying art�cial sources of water, vegetafion management,or frequent repairing of damage dane by high water events. High maintenance approaches not only add costs to the restoratian project, but also make its long-term success dependent upon human and financial resources that may not always be available. in addition to limiting the need for maintenance, designing for self-sustainability also involves favoring ecological integrity, as an ecosystem in goa!condition is more likely to have the ability to adapt to changes. Use passive restoration, when appropriate. 'Time heals all wounds" applies to many restoration sites. Before activefy altering a �estoration site, determine whether passive restoration (i.e., simply reducing or eliminating the sources of degradation artd allanivving recovery time)will be enough to allow the site to naturally regenerate. Many times there are reasons for resto�ing a waterbody as quickfy as possible, but ther�a are other situations when immediate r1esults are not cfitical. For some rivers and streams, passive restoration can reestablish stable channels and floadplains, regrow riparian vegetation, and improve in- stream habitats without a specif'�c restaration project. With wettands that have been drained or othen�vise had thei� natural hydroiogy altered, restoring the original hydrological regime may be enough to let time reestablish the native plarrt community, with its associated habitat value. It is important to note that, while passive restoration relies on natural processes, it is still necessary to analyze the s�e's recovery needs and determine whether time and natural processes can meet them. Restore native species and avoid non-native species. American natural areas are experiencing significant �oblems with invasive, non-native {exotic) species, to the great detriment of our native ecosystems and the beneftts we've lor�g enjoyed from them. Many invasive species outcorr►pete natives because they ar� expert calonizers of disturbed areas and iack natural controls. The temporary disturbance present during restoration projects invites co{onization by invasive species which, once established, can undermine restoration efforts and lead to further spread of these harmful species. Invasive, non-native species should not be used in a restoration project, and special attention should be given to avoiding the uninterrtional introduction of such species at the restoration site when the site is most vuinerabte to invasion. In some cases, removal of non-native species may be the primary goal of fhe restoration project. PaaP F_�d Use naturai fixes and bioengineering techniques, where possible. Bioengineering is a method of construction c:ombining tive plants with dead plants or inorganic materiaEs, to produce living, functioning systems to�everrt erosion, cor�trol sediment and other pollutarrts, and provide habitat. Bioe�ineering techniques can often be successful for erosion corrtrol and bank stabilizatia�,flc�od mitigation, and even wa#er treatment. Specific projeds can range from the creation of wetland systems for tr�e treatment of storm wate�, to the restoration af vegetation on river banks to enhance natura! decorrtamination of runoff before it enters the river. Monitor and adapt wher�e changes are necessary. Every combination af watershed characteristics, sources of stress, and restoration techniques is unique and, therefore, �estoration efforts may not proceed exactly as planned. Adapting a project to at (east some change or new irrformation stmuld be considered normal. Monitoring before and during the project is crucial for finding out whether goals are being achieved. If they are not, "mid- course" adjustmenfs in the projecf shoutd be undertaken. Posf-praject monitoring will help determine whether �ditional actions or adjustmen#s are needed and can provide useful infoRnatian for future restoration efforts. This pracess of monitonng and adjustment is known as adaptive management. Monitoring plans should be feasible in terms of costs and technology, and should always prov'ide information relevant to meeting the project goals. �.*** Notice: This dacumerrt is intended to promote effective resioration approaches and practices. This document does nat substitute for the Clean Water Act or EPA's regulations; nor is it a regulation itsetf. Thus, it cannot impose legally-binding requirements on EPA, States, or the regulated community, and may not apply to a particular situation based upon the circumstances. EPA retains the discretion to adopt approaches on a case-by�ase basis that differ from this guidance where appropriate. EPA may c�ange this guidance in the future. This publication should be cited as: USEPA, 2000. Princip/es for the Ecoloaical Restoration of Aquatic ReSOUroes. EPA841-F-00-003. Office of Wate�(4501F), United States Environmenta! Protection Agency, Washington, �C. 4 pp. PaaP F_�S Paap F_�F► APPENDIX H - REQUEST TO STUDY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS IN STUDY AREA D STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 PAGE H-1 APPENDIX H - REQUEST TO STUDY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS IN STUDY AREA D PAGE H-Z STEVENS CREEK TRAIL FEASIBILITY REPORT 2002 � , , � . urql �c�vv�v� ��-�--►4-+�n-,� T3 I n c� oL�w�ct r�. � � uest t�� tu ternat e . ��ment� or t � u rea � � that the Steven� Creek Trail Task F o rce h as s��c� that it has no authorit to deviate from v predefine� ali nm�nts in erformin it ' g p g s stud�es , this petition and r�sentation re uests th p q at the City Council of Cu ertino direct the T � as k Fo rce to stud� al�=ernate ��li nments. . g 9is�el 1 Request to Study Alte�rnate Alignments for Study Area D • The signers of the r�ferenced petition support the concept of the Steven:� Creek Trail. • We also have serious concerns about the fact that the only alignments in Study Area D go through Blackberry Farm, along environmentally sensitive portions of Stevens Creek, and adjacent to private homes. • The in-stream , creek bank, streamside and flood plain areas of the Stevens Creek corridor through Cupertino contain unique, sensit�ve, and fragile environmental , historical, and geologi�al resources which would be damaged by the construction and operation of a public thoroughfare. 9/8/U 1 2 Request to Study Alternate Alignments for Stud Area D y • The homeowners anong the Stevens Creek corridor within Cupertino woulc� face im acts to the safet p y, privacy, and security af their homes and families to th , e setting and character af their nei hborhoods and to th g , e value and enjoyment af their pro erties from the p construction and operation of a major multi ur ose p p regional trail. • Because of this, we request that alternate ali nments . g be cons�dered for Study Area D. • The alternate alignments that we are askin to be . g considered are consistent with those recommended b Y the Sunnyvale and Los Altos Cit Councils for the v Stevens Creek Trail. 9/8/O1 � Petition We, the undersigned citizens of Cupertino, request the City to include in the feasibility study of Stevens Creek Trail additional surface street and alternate routes which will reduce negative impacts on nearby residences. Current proposals to extend a regional hiking, bicycling, and multi-use throughway from Rancho San Antonio Park to Stevens Creek Park envision using land adjacent to the banks of Stevens Creek. Homeowners along the Stevens Creek corridor would face impacts to the safety, security, and privacy of their homes and families. While recreational amenities are desirable in a community, routing a trail through the creek corridor also threatens the sensitive and fragile environmental and historical resources of the area. Due to the extent of urban development along :�imilar stretches of the creek, the Cities of Los Altos and Sunnyvale llave already determined that the trail should not be constructed adjacent to or on private property, and that the needs of the regional trail system could be satisfied using existing surface streets. 9isioi 4