Dublin City Council
October 17, 2023

180
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-002458 1981 Overview of Prehistoric Archaeology for the Northwest Region, California Archaeological
Sites Survey: Del Norte, Humboldt,
Mendocino, Lake, Sonoma, Napa, Marin,
Contra Costa, Alameda
Northwest Regional Office,
California Archaeological
Sites Survey,
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Neil Ramiller, Suzanne
Ramiller, Roger Werner,
and Suzanne Stewart
01-000080, 01-000084, 01-000086,
01-000104, 01-000119, 01-000124,
01-000125, 01-000126, 01-000127,
01-000137, 01-000139, 01-002053,
01-002104, 07-000047, 07-000079,
07-000080, 07-000081, 07-000082,
07-000083, 07-000092, 07-000093,
07-000105, 07-000131, 07-000146,
07-000147, 07-000148, 07-000149,
07-000150, 07-000151, 07-000168,
07-000173, 07-000175, 07-000177,
07-000185, 07-000186, 07-000190,
07-000323, 07-000440, 07-000447,
07-000448, 07-000449, 07-000462,
07-000470, 07-000474, 07-000476,
07-000481, 07-000674, 07-000710,
07-000724, 07-004621, 08-000015,
08-000018, 08-000021, 08-000090,
12-000125, 12-000175, 12-000186,
12-000194, 12-000199, 12-000202,
12-000207, 12-000209, 12-000210,
12-000211, 12-000263, 12-000264,
12-000266, 12-000336, 12-000442,
12-000445, 12-000458, 12-000824,
17-000006, 17-000026, 17-000035,
17-000072, 17-000114, 17-000177,
17-000286, 17-000287, 17-000289,
17-000290, 17-000307, 17-000320,
17-000392, 17-000407, 17-000437,
17-000446, 17-000470, 17-000531,
17-000535, 17-000546, 17-000550,
17-000551, 17-000554, 17-000572,
17-000610, 17-000639, 17-000640,
17-000673, 17-000787, 17-000812,
21-000017, 21-000034, 21-000039,
21-000051, 21-000053, 21-000057,
21-000058, 21-000106, 21-000143,
21-000163, 21-000177, 21-000217,
21-000221, 21-000235, 21-000242,
21-000245, 21-000252, 21-000262,
21-000283, 21-000290, 21-000291,
21-000295, 21-000332, 21-000335,
21-000342, 21-000346, 21-000347,
21-000368, 21-000369, 21-000370,
21-000651, 21-000653, 21-002539,
23-000143, 23-000387, 23-000450,

181
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs 23-000475, 23-000478, 23-000492,
23-000534, 23-000535, 23-000536,
23-000537, 23-000539, 23-000590,
23-000786, 23-000789, 23-000790,
23-000791, 23-000792, 23-000793,
23-000796, 23-000835, 23-001034,
23-001060, 23-001063, 23-001520,
23-002898, 23-002915, 23-002936,
23-002945, 28-000015, 28-000027,
28-000028, 28-000029, 28-000032,
28-000045, 28-000061, 28-000063,
28-000066, 28-000077, 28-000088,
28-000092, 28-000093, 28-000097,
28-000123, 28-000125, 28-000150,
28-000199, 28-000209, 28-000218,
28-000222, 28-000310, 28-000311,
28-000329, 28-000330, 28-000362,
28-000418, 28-000419, 28-000420,
28-000421, 28-000422, 28-000428,
28-000828, 28-000912, 49-000073,
49-000079, 49-000087, 49-000112,
49-000135, 49-000194, 49-000228,
49-000264, 49-000265, 49-000271,
49-000291, 49-000292, 49-000295,
49-000318, 49-000329, 49-000330,
49-000340, 49-000342, 49-000360,
49-000362, 49-000363, 49-000369,
49-000371, 49-000423, 49-000424,
49-000434, 49-000483, 49-000512,
49-000521, 49-000548, 49-000620,
49-000653, 49-000671, 49-000682,
49-000683, 49-000730, 49-000731,
49-000732, 49-000733, 49-000846,
49-000860, 49-000887, 49-000913,
49-000914, 49-000915, 49-000916,
49-000917, 49-000959, 49-000970,
49-000976, 49-000978, 49-000981,
49-000982, 49-000983, 49-000990,
49-000992, 49-001081, 49-001082,
49-001083, 49-001084, 49-001085,
49-001086, 49-001087, 49-001109,
49-001121
S-002458a 1982 Prehistoric Archaeology Overview Northwest Region; California Archaeological Inventory,
Volume I: Humboldt and Del Norte Counties
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Suzanne Ramiller

182
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-002458b 1982 Archaeological Overview of Mendocino and Lake Counties
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Roger H. Werner
S-002458c 1982 Prehistoric Archaeology Overview Northwest Region; California Archaeological Inventory,
Volume 3: Napa and Sonoma Counties
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Suzanne Stewart
S-002458d 1982 Archaeological Overview of Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin Counties
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Suzanne B. Stewart
S-002458e 1982 Environmental Overview of the Northwest
Region
Anthropological Studies
Center, Sonoma State
University
Neil Ramiller
S-009462 1977 Identification and Recording of Prehistoric Petroglyphs in Marin and Related Bay Area
Counties
San Francisco State
University
Teresa Ann Miller 07-000323, 21-000087, 21-000376,
21-000378, 21-000379, 21-000380,
21-000381, 21-000382, 21-000383,
21-000384, 21-000386, 21-000387,
21-000388, 21-000389, 21-000390,
21-000391, 21-000392, 21-000393,
21-000394, 21-000395, 21-000396,
21-000397, 21-000398, 21-000399,
21-000400, 21-000401, 21-000402,
21-000546, 23-000434, 23-000789,
23-000790, 49-000629, 49-000785,
49-000787
S-009583 1978 Ecology of the Pre-Spanish San Francisco
Bay Area
San Francisco State
University
David W. Mayfield
S-009795 1986 Late Prehistoric Obsidian Exchange in
Central California
Stanford UniversityThomas Lynn Jackson 06-000025, 07-000047, 07-000080, 07-000188, 07-000440, 17-000320,
17-000601, 21-000163, 21-000218,
21-000235, 21-000242, 21-000283,
21-000290, 21-000368, 21-000423,
21-000628, 23-001589, 23-001659,
23-003068, 23-003119, 28-000015,
28-000068, 28-000116, 28-000199,
28-000205, 28-000828, 49-000135,
49-000360, 49-000423, 49-000424,
49-000518, 49-000521, 49-000533,
49-000536, 49-000558, 49-000801,
57-000114

183
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-016660 1992 Prehistoric Rock Art of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California
California State University,
Hayward
Jeffrey B. Fentress 01-000035, 01-000039, 01-000071,
01-000080, 01-000128, 01-000137,
01-000138, 01-000144, 01-000195,
01-000198, 01-000199, 01-002112,
07-000029, 07-000094, 07-000189,
07-000193, 07-000212, 07-000216,
07-000219, 07-000230, 07-000242,
07-000255, 07-000260, 07-000271,
07-000301, 07-000302, 07-000323,
07-000344, 07-000345, 07-000346,
07-000347, 07-000348, 07-000356,
07-000362, 07-000374, 07-000725,
07-000726, 07-000727, 07-000730,
07-000734, 07-000736, 07-000738,
07-000739
S-017835 1975 Biological Distance of Prehistoric Central California Populations Derived from Non-
Metric Traits of the Cranium
University of California,
Riverside
Judy Myers Suchey 01-000086, 01-000104, 01-000105,
06-000025, 07-000080, 07-000081,
07-000083, 07-000087, 21-000017,
21-000193, 21-000242, 21-000252,
48-000010, 57-000145
S-018217 1996 Cultural Resource Evaluations for the
Caltrans District 04 Phase 2 Seismic Retrofit
Program, Status Report
California Department of
Transportation
Glenn Gmoser 01-000014, 01-000023, 01-000227,
07-000108, 07-000119, 38-000002,
38-000004, 41-000273, 43-000106,
43-000297, 43-000624, 43-001078,
44-000010, 44-000201, 44-000300,
49-000195

184
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-020395 1998 PCNs of the Coast Ranges of California:

Religious Expression or the Result of
Quarrying?
California State University,
Hayward
Donna L. Gillette 07-000094, 07-000323, 12-000050,
17-000071, 17-001315, 21-000087,
21-000376, 21-000378, 21-000379,
21-000381, 21-000382, 21-000383,
21-000384, 21-000386, 21-000387,
21-000388, 21-000389, 21-000390,
21-000391, 21-000392, 21-000393,
21-000394, 21-000395, 21-000396,
21-000397, 21-000398, 21-000399,
21-000400, 21-000401, 21-000402,
21-000419, 21-000433, 21-000546,
21-000620, 21-000621, 21-000624,
21-000661, 23-000434, 23-000809,
23-000810, 23-001698, 23-001725,
23-001792, 23-001798, 23-001799,
23-001803, 23-001804, 23-001930,
23-001942, 23-001950, 23-001963,
35-000013, 43-000067, 43-000080,
43-000287, 43-000289, 43-000504,
49-000046, 49-000240, 49-000533,
49-000550, 49-000629, 49-000785,
49-000787, 49-000868, 49-000960,
49-000975, 49-001004, 49-001087,
49-001239, 49-002121
S-030204 2003 The Distribution and Antiquity of the
California Pecked Curvilinear Nucleated
(PCN) Rock Art Tradition.

University of California,
Berkeley
Donna L. Gillette 01-002148, 21-000384, 23-000810
S-032596 2006 The Central California Ethnographic
Community Distribution Model, Version 2.0,
with Special Attention to the San Francisco
Bay Area, Cultural Resources Inventory of
Caltrans District 4 Rural Conventional
Highways
Consulting in the Past; Far
Western Anthropological
Research Group, Inc.

Randall Milliken, Jerome
King, and Patricia
Mikkelsen
Caltrans - EA No.
447600;
Other - Contract
#04A2098
S-033239 1994 Alameda Watershed, Natural and Cultural
Resources: San Francisco Watershed
Management Plan
Environmental Science
Associates
David Chavez 01-010841

185
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-033600 2007 Geoarchaeological Overview of the Nine Bay Area Counties in Caltrans District 4
Far Western
Anthropological Research
Group, Inc.

Jack Meyer and Jeff
Rosenthal
01-000001, 01-000002, 01-000014,
01-000063, 01-000064, 01-000067,
01-000080, 01-000124, 01-000139,
01-000140, 01-001795, 01-002110,
01-002160, 01-002162, 01-002245,
07-000019, 07-000024, 07-000037,
07-000047, 07-000075, 07-000079,
07-000088, 07-000089, 07-000108,
07-000182, 07-000185, 07-000186,
07-000217, 07-000239, 07-000401,
07-000721, 21-000010, 21-000048,
21-002615, 28-000009, 28-000028,
28-000301, 28-000967, 38-000006,
38-000028, 38-000101, 38-000102,
38-000119, 41-000080, 41-000284,
43-000016, 43-000189, 43-000296,
43-000308, 43-000310, 43-000423,
43-000424, 43-000448, 43-000451,
43-000485, 43-000561, 43-000604,
43-000608, 43-000614, 43-000623,
43-001015, 43-001058, 43-001080,
43-001163, 43-001194, 43-001576,
48-000007, 48-000157
Agency Nbr -
Contract No.
04A2098;
Caltrans - EA No.
447600
S-047983 2011 Section 106 Cultural Resources Assessment, DSRSD Central Dublin Recycled Water
Distribution and Retrofit Project, City of
Dublin, Alameda County, California
Michael Brandman
Associates
Carrie D. Wills 01-011774, 01-011775, 07-004721,
07-004722
Agency Nbr - Bureau
of Reclamation
Tracking #09-CCAO-
165;

OHP PRN -
BUR111208A;
Submitter - 09-
CCAO-165
S-047983a 2012 BUR111208A; Section 106 Compliance for
the Dublin San Ramon Services District
(DSRSD) Central Dublin Recycled Water
Distribution and Retrofit Project in Alameda
County, California (Project #09-CCAO-165)
Office of Historic
Preservation
Milford Wayne Donaldson
S-048567 2016 Zone 7 Water Agency, 2016 Maintenance
Projects, Cultural Resources Survey Report
Environmental Science
Associates
Heidi KoenigSubmitter - ESA
Project #130626.11
S-048927 1997 The Economy and Archaeology of European-
made Glass Beads and Manufactured Goods
Used in First Contact Situations in Oregon,
California and Washington
University of Sheffield,
England
Donald Scott Crull

186
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-049780 2017 San Francisco Bay-Delta Regional Context
and Research Design for Native American
Archaeological Resources, Caltrans District 4
California Department of
Transportation, District 4
Brian F. Byrd, Adrian R.

Whitaker, Patricia J.

Mikkelsen, and Jeffrey S.

Rosenthal
01-000001, 01-000002, 01-000014,
01-000015, 01-000022, 01-000033,
01-000034, 01-000038, 01-000062,
01-000066, 01-000080, 01-000084,
01-000086, 01-000087, 01-000089,
01-000104, 01-000105, 01-000106,
01-000107, 01-000116, 01-000117,
01-000139, 01-000152, 01-000175,
01-000197, 01-000201, 01-000202,
01-000234, 01-000237, 01-001795,
01-002120, 01-002160, 01-002162,
01-002245, 01-002280, 01-010509,
01-010610, 01-011556, 07-000019,
07-000021, 07-000029, 07-000033,
07-000037, 07-000047, 07-000066,
07-000070, 07-000079, 07-000080,
07-000089, 07-000093, 07-000098,
07-000105, 07-000117, 07-000118,
07-000147, 07-000148, 07-000149,
07-000150, 07-000154, 07-000168,
07-000173, 07-000174, 07-000175,
07-000176, 07-000185, 07-000186,
07-000189, 07-000197, 07-000217,
07-000227, 07-000230, 07-000238,
07-000239, 07-000242, 07-000309,
07-000359, 07-000365, 07-000366,
07-000400, 07-000401, 07-000440,
07-000441, 07-000459, 07-000461,
07-000462, 07-000721, 07-000724,
07-000790, 07-000792, 07-002570,
07-002592, 07-002650, 07-004537,
21-000002, 21-000036, 21-000043,
21-000045, 21-000048, 21-000051,
21-000057, 21-000058, 21-000066,
21-000070, 21-000072, 21-000073,
21-000074, 21-000075, 21-000097,
21-000106, 21-000109, 21-000142,
21-000143, 21-000152, 21-000163,
21-000164, 21-000165, 21-000166,
21-000167, 21-000175, 21-000177,
21-000193, 21-000195, 21-000196,
21-000199, 21-000200, 21-000217,
21-000218, 21-000219, 21-000220,
21-000221, 21-000222, 21-000256,
21-000295, 21-000305, 21-000306,
21-000327, 21-000332, 21-000337,
OTIS Report
Number -
FHWA_2016_0615_0
01

187
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs 21-000346, 21-000369, 21-000423,
21-000459, 21-000462, 21-000528,
21-000541, 21-000544, 21-000552,
21-000664, 21-000675, 21-002625,
27-000613, 28-000028, 28-000029,
28-000175, 28-000176, 28-000667,
28-000874, 38-000004, 38-000006,
38-000007, 38-000017, 38-000021,
38-000022, 38-000026, 38-000028,
38-000029, 38-000030, 38-000031,
38-000101, 38-000102, 38-000119,
38-000162, 38-000172, 38-004265,
38-004318, 38-004319, 38-004326,
38-004329, 38-004352, 38-004638,
38-004882, 38-005131, 38-005503,
41-000001, 41-000009, 41-000011,
41-000027, 41-000028, 41-000037,
41-000044, 41-000075, 41-000080,
41-000081, 41-000086, 41-000087,
41-000103, 41-000117, 41-000127,
41-000136, 41-000141, 41-000142,
41-000149, 41-000152, 41-000160,
41-000204, 41-000244, 41-000252,
41-000259, 41-000263, 41-000265,
41-000284, 41-000308, 41-000315,
41-002076, 43-000016, 43-000019,
43-000021, 43-000024, 43-000026,
43-000027, 43-000032, 43-000050,
43-000057, 43-000082, 43-000085,
43-000087, 43-000137, 43-000141,
43-000167, 43-000277, 43-000285,
43-000295, 43-000302, 43-000308,
43-000310, 43-000321, 43-000324,
43-000334, 43-000349, 43-000360,
43-000423, 43-000465, 43-000479,
43-000485, 43-000549, 43-000576,
43-000578, 43-000579, 43-000581,
43-000586, 43-000587, 43-000588,
43-000595, 43-000604, 43-000608,
43-000614, 43-000618, 43-000624,
43-000662, 43-000989, 43-000990,
43-001058, 43-001060, 43-001071,
43-001163, 43-001164, 43-001172,
43-001194, 43-001279, 43-001531,
43-001594, 43-001768, 43-001838,
43-001871, 43-002704, 43-003005,

188
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs 48-000007, 48-000019, 48-000033,
48-000075, 48-000083, 48-000150,
48-000175, 48-000176, 48-000188,
48-000898, 49-000199, 49-001011,
49-001862
S-049780a 2016 FHWA_2016_0615_001, Caltrans District 4
Archaeological Context
California Office of Historic
Preservation
Julianne Polanco

189
Report Detail: S-000727
Citation information
Year: 1977 (Mar)
Title: An Archaeological Reconnaissance of Two New Proposed Waste Water Pipeline Routes, Livermore-Amador Valley Water Management Agency, Alameda County, California
Affliliation: Holman & Chavez Consulting Archaeologists No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 8/6/2020 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Miley Holman and David Chavez
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa
USGS quad(s): Diablo, Dublin, La Costa Valley, Las Trampas Ridge, Newark, Niles, Vine Hill, Walnut Creek Inventory size: c 54 li mi
No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-000727
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/9/2015 rinerg added Affiliation
11/3/2016 simsa Updated GIS: moved all features to rep poly layer and mapped based on project location maps
8/27/2018 zavalat added affiliation

190
Report Detail: S-000848
Citation information
Year: 1976 (Jan)
Title: A Summary of Knowledge of the Central and Northern California Coastal Zone and Offshore Areas, Vol. III, Socioeconomic Conditions, Chapter 7: Historical & Archaeological Resources Affliliation: The Anthropology Laboratory, Sonoma State College; Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers No. pages: 223
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 8/7/2020 neala
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
This report's study area extends outside of the NWIC service area (into San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, & Ventura counties). 9880 prehistoric and historic resources were identified in the 17 counties when the report was written in 1976. There were no location maps in the report. Report is mapped in GIS as an 'other report' for the 14 NWIC counties mentioned in report.

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): David A. Fredrickson
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Management/planning, Other research County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, Other, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma
USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Del Norte Co., ~All quads - Humboldt Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - Monterey Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-000848
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 12/9/2015 hagell edited database
12/5/2016 hagell added note.

Type Name
Agency Nbr Contract AA550-CT6-52

191
Report Detail: S-000934
Citation information
Year: 1978 (Mar)
Title: Upper Alameda Creek Urban Study: Archaeology, History, Contemporary, Ethnic Affliliation: Sonoma State College
No. pages: 114
Associated resources
General notes
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Location information
Author(s): David A. Fredrickson, Marc M. Druckman, Rae Eby-Burroughs, Susan McMurray, and John Hayes Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Other research County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara
USGS quad(s): Altamont, Byron Hot Springs, Calaveras Reservoir, Cedar Mtn, Diablo, Dublin, Eylar Mountain, Hayward, Isabel Valley, La Costa Valley, Las Trampas Ridge, Lick Observatory, Livermore, Lone Tree Creek, Mendenhall Springs, Midway, Mount Boardman, Mount Day, Mount Stakes, Niles, Tassajara Inventory size:

No. maps: 2
Identifiers
Report No.: S-000934
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 27
PLSS:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000044 CA-ALA-000024 [none]
P-01-000045 CA-ALA-000025 Arroyo Mocho #1
P-01-000046 CA-ALA-000026/H Arroyo Mocho #2
P-01-000047 CA-ALA-000027 Arroyo Mocho #3
P-01-000048 CA-ALA-000028 Arroyo Mocho #4
P-01-000049 CA-ALA-000029 Arroyo Mocho #5
P-01-000061 CA-ALA-000041 Mollin
P-01-000062 CA-ALA-000042 Jensen
P-01-000063 CA-ALA-000043 De Avillo
P-01-000064 CA-ALA-000044 Kaiser
P-01-000065 CA-ALA-000045 Derby
P-01-000066 CA-ALA-000046 Nielson Farm; Stoneridge Place P-01-000067 CA-ALA-000047 4 Ala-47
P-01-000075 CA-ALA-000055 Boy Scouts of America (1)
P-01-000076 CA-ALA-000056 Boy Scouts of America (2)
P-01-000114 CA-ALA-000339 Patterson Ranch
P-01-000124 CA-ALA-000394 Pleasanton Meadows Site
P-01-002074 CA-ALA-000360 MISSING
P-07-000323 CA-CCO-000553/H Alvarado Park, Wildcat Regional P-07-000715 CA-CCO-000360H Site B
P-43-000061 CA-SCL-000042 [none]
P-43-000062 CA-SCL-000043 [none]
P-43-000063 CA-SCL-000044 [none]
P-43-000064 CA-SCL-000045 Indian Springs
P-43-000065 CA-SCL-000046 [none]
P-43-000066 CA-SCL-000047 [none]
P-43-000067 CA-SCL-000048 Rancho Paso del Verde

192
Report Detail: S-000934
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 2/13/2019 barnettb
IC actions:

Date User
Record status: Verified
Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/29/2015 rinerg add quads: Byron Hot Springs, Hayward, Las Trampas, Mount Stakes, Mount Boardman (remove Mount Boardman 15')
5/4/2017 bentonb report verified; awaiting verification of 21 resources 9/6/2017 raelync report verified; awaiting verification of 9 resources 2/13/2019 barnettb PDF Verified. Oversized pages have been scanned and added to PDF

193
Report Detail: S-002021
Citation information
Year: 1979 (May)
Title: Archaeological field reconnaissance of the proposed 600 acre Kemco development area in the city of Dublin, California (letter report)
Affliliation: Holman & Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 7/12/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Miley Paul Holman
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size: c 600 ac
No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-002021
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/2/2009 muchb fixed county info
2/18/2019 barnettb PDF Verified. Oversized pages have been scanned and added to PDF 6/28/2019 moored Added collections and corrected author. 7/12/2019 hagell edited title
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
Dublin

194
Report Detail: S-002458
Citation information
Year: 1981 (Jan)
Title: Overview of Prehistoric Archaeology for the Northwest Region, California Archaeological Sites Survey: Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Lake, Sonoma, Napa, Marin, Contra Costa, Alameda Affliliation: Northwest Regional Office, California Archaeological Sites Survey, Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University
No. pages:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Neil Ramiller, Suzanne Ramiller, Roger Werner, and Suzanne Stewart Attributes: Archaeological, Other research
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-002458
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Year: 1982 (Jan)
Title: Prehistoric Archaeology Overview Northwest Region; California Archaeological Inventory, Volume I: Humboldt and Del Norte Counties
Affiliation: Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Suzanne Ramiller
Report type(s): Archaeological, Other research
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 6-59
Year: 1982 (Jan)
Title: Archaeological Overview of Mendocino and Lake Counties Affiliation: Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: Yes
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Roger H. Werner
Report type(s): Archaeological, Other research
Sub-desig.: b
PDF Pages: 60-132

195
Report Detail: S-002458
Associated resources
General notes
Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000080 CA-ALA-000060 Castro Valley
P-01-000084 CA-ALA-000307 West Berkeley Shell Mound
P-01-000086 CA-ALA-000309 Emeryville Shellmound
P-01-000104 CA-ALA-000328 Nelson's 328
P-01-000119 CA-ALA-000389 Site #1
P-01-000124 CA-ALA-000394 Pleasanton Meadows Site
P-01-000125 CA-ALA-000396 Noble's Rest Stop
P-01-000126 CA-ALA-000398 ICR-WR-4
P-01-000127 CA-ALA-000399 ICR-WR-5
P-01-000137 CA-ALA-000410 ICR-WR-16
P-01-000139 CA-ALA-000413 Santa Rita Village
P-01-002053 CA-ALA-000300
P-01-002104 CA-ALA-000397 ICR-WR-3
P-07-000047 CA-CCO-000030 [none]
P-07-000079 CA-CCO-000137 Monument Site; Concord Man Si Year: 1982 (Jan)
Title: Prehistoric Archaeology Overview Northwest Region; California Archaeological Inventory, Volume 3: Napa and Sonoma Counties
Affiliation: Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Suzanne Stewart
Report type(s): Archaeological, Other research
Sub-desig.: c
PDF Pages: 133-266
Year: 1982 (Jan)
Title: Archaeological Overview of Alameda, Contra Costa, and Marin Counties Affiliation: Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Suzanne B. Stewart
Report type(s): Archaeological, Other research
Sub-desig.: d
PDF Pages: 267-345
Year: 1982 (Jan)
Title: Environmental Overview of the Northwest Region
Affiliation: Anthropological Studies Center, Sonoma State University No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Neil Ramiller
Report type(s): Archaeological, Other research
Sub-desig.: e
PDF Pages: 346-420

196
Report Detail: S-002458
P-07-000080 CA-CCO-000138 Hotchkiss Mound
P-07-000081 CA-CCO-000139/H Simone Mound
P-07-000082 CA-CCO-000140 Bethel Tract
P-07-000083 CA-CCO-000141 C-141, Orwood Mound #2
P-07-000092 CA-CCO-000150 Veale Tract #1
P-07-000093 CA-CCO-000151 [none]
P-07-000105 CA-CCO-000222/H Keller Ranch
P-07-000131 CA-CCO-000250 Nelson Survey Map #250a
P-07-000146 CA-CCO-000267 Nelson No. 267
P-07-000147 CA-CCO-000268 Voided, see P-07-000461, P-07- P-07-000148 CA-CCO-000269 Nelson No. 269
P-07-000149 CA-CCO-000270 Nelson No. 270
P-07-000150 CA-CCO-000271 Nelson No. 271
P-07-000151 CA-CCO-000272 Nelson No. 272
P-07-000168 CA-CCO-000290 Nelson No. 290
P-07-000173 CA-CCO-000295 Nelson No. 295
P-07-000175 CA-CCO-000298 Nelson's No. 298, Stege
P-07-000177 CA-CCO-000300 Nelson's 300, Stege
P-07-000185 CA-CCO-000308 Stone Valley Site
P-07-000186 CA-CCO-000309 The Rossmoor Site
P-07-000190 CA-CCO-000352 Diablo Road Site
P-07-000323 CA-CCO-000553/H Alvarado Park, Wildcat Regional P-07-000440 CA-CCO-000259 Barker's Rodeo
P-07-000447 CA-CCO-000389 492-1-A
P-07-000448 CA-CCO-000390 492-2-A
P-07-000449 CA-CCO-000391 492-3-B
P-07-000462 CA-CCO-000655 Nelson's 268B
P-07-000470 CA-CCO-000372 [none]
P-07-000474 CA-CCO-000392 492-4-B
P-07-000476 CA-CCO-000698/H Nelson No. 259
P-07-000481 CA-CCO-000356 [none]
P-07-000674 CA-CCO-000311 Burial Notes
P-07-000710 CA-CCO-000349 Voided, see P-07-000323
P-07-000724 CA-CCO-000377 SL-1
P-07-004621 #1 Claeys Ranch
P-08-000015 CA-DNO-000011/H Ta'gia n te (OHP)
P-08-000018 CA-DNO-000014/H CInya'tLtci (Waterman 1925) P-08-000021 CA-DNO-000017/H MesLteLn
P-08-000090 CA-DNO-000088 Cemetery of Meslteltun
P-12-000125 CA-HUM-000067/H Loud 67
P-12-000175 CA-HUM-000118 Patrick's Point #4
P-12-000186 CA-HUM-000129/H Tsa'hpekw
P-12-000194 CA-HUM-000169 Tsurai
P-12-000199 CA-HUM-000174 Cone Rock, Sea Gull Rock
P-12-000202 CA-HUM-000177 MM-1 -- First Night Out Site; MM P-12-000207 CA-HUM-000182 Shelter Cove, X-1
P-12-000209 CA-HUM-000184 Etter Mound, X-3
P-12-000210 CA-HUM-000185 X-4
P-12-000211 CA-HUM-000186 X-5
P-12-000263 CA-HUM-000245 Stormy Saddle Site
P-12-000264 CA-HUM-000246 Pine Ridge Site
P-12-000266 CA-HUM-000248 Humboldt Gully Site
P-12-000336 CA-HUM-000323 Nooning Creek
P-12-000442 CA-HUM-000435 Mud Springs Site
P-12-000445 CA-HUM-000439 RNP-S-4
P-12-000458 CA-HUM-000452 RNP-S-22; REDW00072
P-12-000824 CA-HUM-000841 Little Black Sand Site; SC-7
P-17-000006 CA-LAK-000261 The Houx Site; Fredrickson "A" P-17-000026 CA-LAK-000510 5A

197
Report Detail: S-002458
P-17-000035 CA-LAK-000753 14A
P-17-000072 CA-LAK-000036/H Borax Lake Archaeological Distri P-17-000114 CA-LAK-000089/H Rattlesnake Island
P-17-000177 CA-LAK-000153 Mauldin 97
P-17-000286 CA-LAK-000267 Mauldin 196
P-17-000287 CA-LAK-000268 Previously CA-LAK-785
P-17-000289 CA-LAK-000271 [none]
P-17-000290 CA-LAK-000272 CA-LAK-272/Full Circle Field 2 P-17-000307 CA-LAK-000291 Mauldin 221
P-17-000320 CA-LAK-000305 Sam Alley Site
P-17-000392 CA-LAK-000380 The Mostin Site
P-17-000407 CA-LAK-000395 GR-11
P-17-000437 CA-LAK-000425/H LAK-S270
P-17-000446 CA-LAK-000435/H Diwi'lem
P-17-000470 CA-LAK-000471 27A
P-17-000531 CA-LAK-000585 2A
P-17-000535 CA-LAK-000589/H Lewis Colony Site
P-17-000546 CA-LAK-000605 G-99
P-17-000550 CA-LAK-000609/H G-103
P-17-000551 CA-LAK-000610 G-104
P-17-000554 CA-LAK-000613/H Ford Flat Site
P-17-000572 CA-LAK-000643 Pirate's Buried Site
P-17-000610 CA-LAK-000711 PBL9
P-17-000639 CA-LAK-000741 [none]
P-17-000640 CA-LAK-000742/H [none]
P-17-000673 CA-LAK-000785 Voided: see P-17-000287
P-17-000787 CA-LAK-000944/H Middle Creek CCC Camp
P-17-000812 CA-LAK-000971/H [none]
P-21-000017 CA-MRN-000266 PB 266
P-21-000034 CA-MRN-000001 Nelson No. 1; Olompali
P-21-000039 CA-MRN-000008 [none]
P-21-000051 CA-MRN-000020 Nelson No. 20
P-21-000053 CA-MRN-000022 Nelson No. 22
P-21-000057 CA-MRN-000026 Nelson No. 26
P-21-000058 CA-MRN-000027 Nelson No. 27
P-21-000106 CA-MRN-000076 Nelson No. 76
P-21-000143 CA-MRN-000115 Nelson No. 115
P-21-000163 CA-MRN-000138 Nelson No. 138
P-21-000177 CA-MRN-000152 Nelson No. 152
P-21-000217 CA-MRN-000192 Nelson No. 192
P-21-000221 CA-MRN-000196 Nelson No. 196
P-21-000235 CA-MRN-000216/H DNG-1
P-21-000242 CA-MRN-000232/H PB 232 b
P-21-000245 CA-MRN-000235/H Beardsley's 301
P-21-000252 CA-MRN-000242/H PB No. 242 - Cauley
P-21-000262 CA-MRN-000275 PB 275
P-21-000283 CA-MRN-000298/H DNG-2
P-21-000290 CA-MRN-000307/H Probably 232 C
P-21-000291 CA-MRN-000308/H [none]
P-21-000295 CA-MRN-000315 Nelson No. 86C
P-21-000332 CA-MRN-000357/H Bayonet Midden
P-21-000335 CA-MRN-000362 Lyon's Site
P-21-000342 CA-MRN-000370 S.A. VIII
P-21-000346 CA-MRN-000374 [none]
P-21-000347 CA-MRN-000375 4-MRN-248
P-21-000368 CA-MRN-000402 [none]
P-21-000369 CA-MRN-000403 [none]
P-21-000370 CA-MRN-000404
P-21-000651 CA-MRN-000358 S.A. II (San Antonio II)

198
Report Detail: S-002458
P-21-000653 CA-MRN-000391 [none]
P-21-002539 CA-MRN-000682 S.A. VII (Northwestern Archaeol.

P-23-000143 CA-MEN-000069 69
P-23-000387 CA-MEN-000320 Voided; See P-23-000590
P-23-000450 CA-MEN-000455 "Digger Post"
P-23-000475 CA-MEN-000483 [none]
P-23-000478 CA-MEN-000486 [none]
P-23-000492 CA-MEN-000500 [none]
P-23-000534 CA-MEN-000583 [none]
P-23-000535 CA-MEN-000584 Matuko
P-23-000536 CA-MEN-000585 [none]
P-23-000537 CA-MEN-000586 [None]
P-23-000539 CA-MEN-000588 [none]
P-23-000590 CA-MEN-000643/H Eel River Work Center
P-23-000786 CA-MEN-000851 [none]
P-23-000789 CA-MEN-000854 Upper Twin Rocks
P-23-000790 CA-MEN-000855 Milling Stone Basin
P-23-000791 CA-MEN-000856 Wagon Trail
P-23-000792 CA-MEN-000857/H White Hawk Top
P-23-000793 CA-MEN-000858 White Hawk Yoostabe
P-23-000796 CA-MEN-000861 Long Doe Petroglyph
P-23-000835 CA-MEN-000900 Upper Coffee Mill Flat
P-23-001034 CA-MEN-001111 Spring Site
P-23-001060 CA-MEN-001154 Neiyi
P-23-001063 CA-MEN-001157 S-6435
P-23-001520 CA-MEN-001633 Olkat
P-23-002898 CA-MEN-000405/H Fenenga 1
P-23-002915 CA-MEN-000482 MEN-482
P-23-002936 CA-MEN-000546 Possibly Barrett's (1908, p. 140) P-23-002945 CA-MEN-000555 [none]
P-28-000015 CA-NAP-000001/H #1; Goddard; Oakville
P-28-000027 CA-NAP-000014 Las Trancas
P-28-000028 CA-NAP-000015/H Suscol Mound #5
P-28-000029 CA-NAP-000016 #16; Suscol Mound #1
P-28-000032 CA-NAP-000021 ACRS-PV-I
P-28-000045 CA-NAP-000039 Tulukai
P-28-000061 CA-NAP-000057 Peripoli
P-28-000063 CA-NAP-000060 UCMA Napa 60-50
P-28-000066 CA-NAP-000063 Usibelli Coal Mine Site
P-28-000077 CA-NAP-000074 #4
P-28-000088 CA-NAP-000089 #23
P-28-000092 CA-NAP-000093 Possibly Kroeber's "Topai"
P-28-000093 CA-NAP-000094 #28
P-28-000097 CA-NAP-000098 #32
P-28-000123 CA-NAP-000129 B-53-GG
P-28-000125 CA-NAP-000131 Genoa Site
P-28-000150 CA-NAP-000158 B-59-Z
P-28-000199 CA-NAP-000234 Roy Pridmore #3
P-28-000209 CA-NAP-000247 ACRS-BD-6
P-28-000218 CA-NAP-000261 D.T.Davis #49; UCAS-B 277
P-28-000222 CA-NAP-000270 CA-NAP-270
P-28-000310 CA-NAP-000410 Querried Quarry Site
P-28-000311 CA-NAP-000411/H [none]
P-28-000329 CA-NAP-000432 T-23
P-28-000330 CA-NAP-000433 T-41 - UCD Files
P-28-000362 CA-NAP-000468 Mudflat Site (2)
P-28-000418 CA-NAP-000535 Tom's Mounds
P-28-000419 CA-NAP-000536 [none]
P-28-000420 CA-NAP-000537 [none]

199
Report Detail: S-002458
P-28-000421 CA-NAP-000538 [none]
P-28-000422 CA-NAP-000539 Klaffke's Mound
P-28-000428 CA-NAP-000545 I
P-28-000828 CA-NAP-000032 #32; Kolb; Rutherford; Pistorias P-28-000912 CA-NAP-000311 Voided - see P-28-000212
P-49-000073 CA-SON-000004/H Carrillo Adobe
P-49-000079 CA-SON-000020 Lithic Scatter
P-49-000087 CA-SON-000030 CA-SON-30/358
P-49-000112 CA-SON-000084 Santa Rosa Creek Site
P-49-000135 CA-SON-000159 Stony Glenn Lane
P-49-000194 CA-SON-000222 Nelson No. 222
P-49-000228 CA-SON-000256 P-30
P-49-000264 CA-SON-000292 The Ranch Site
P-49-000265 CA-SON-000293 Probably Kelly's Site "Tiwut-Huy P-49-000271 CA-SON-000299 "Kili"
P-49-000291 CA-SON-000320 "Loken-Huye" (Kelly)
P-49-000292 CA-SON-000321 Peter's 321
P-49-000295 CA-SON-000324 Peter's 324
P-49-000318 CA-SON-000347 Gleason Beach 1
P-49-000329 CA-SON-000358 VOIDED - see P-49-000087
P-49-000330 CA-SON-000359 Hidden Valley Ranch
P-49-000340 CA-SON-000369 Atcacinateawalli
P-49-000342 CA-SON-000371 Foster's Ranch
P-49-000360 CA-SON-000389 Carriger Creek site
P-49-000362 CA-SON-000391 S.A.1
P-49-000363 CA-SON-000392 King #5
P-49-000369 CA-SON-000400 S.A. VII (Northwestern Archaeol.

P-49-000371 CA-SON-000402 TC-1
P-49-000423 CA-SON-000455/H Gables Site
P-49-000424 CA-SON-000456 [none]
P-49-000434 CA-SON-000466 [none]
P-49-000483 CA-SON-000518 SDA-30
P-49-000512 CA-SON-000547/H H-51
P-49-000521 CA-SON-000556/H H-41
P-49-000548 CA-SON-000583/H SRI-3001
P-49-000620 CA-SON-000670/H SDA-1
P-49-000653 CA-SON-000710 SDA-61
P-49-000671 CA-SON-000729 SDA-104
P-49-000682 CA-SON-000740 G.E.- 8
P-49-000683 CA-SON-000741 G.E.- 9
P-49-000730 CA-SON-000789 Geyser Fourty-Four
P-49-000731 CA-SON-000790 Geyser Fourty-Five
P-49-000732 CA-SON-000791 Geyser Fourty-Six
P-49-000733 CA-SON-000792 Geyser Fourty-Seven
P-49-000846 CA-SON-000906 Miller's Garden Site
P-49-000860 CA-SON-000920 [none]
P-49-000887 CA-SON-000948 [none]
P-49-000913 CA-SON-000976 [none]
P-49-000914 CA-SON-000977 [none]
P-49-000915 CA-SON-000978 [none]
P-49-000916 CA-SON-000979 [none]
P-49-000917 CA-SON-000980 [none]
P-49-000959 CA-SON-001025 Redwood Thompson Site
P-49-000970 CA-SON-001036 Soledad
P-49-000976 CA-SON-001042 [none]
P-49-000978 CA-SON-001044 Walnut Orchard Site
P-49-000981 CA-SON-001047 Rosehip Site
P-49-000982 CA-SON-001048 Laguna Grande
P-49-000983 CA-SON-001049 Willow Marsh Site

200
Report Detail: S-002458
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 4/15/2021 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, Sonoma USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Del Norte Co., ~All quads - Humboldt Co., ~All quads - Lake Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Has informals: No
No. resources: 262
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 8/29/2016 hagell edited titles, affiliations of additional citations 4/11/2017 raelync Report verified; awaiting verification of 55 resources. 10/16/2018 rinerg report GIS verified; 40 resources pending verification; marked 'db complete' 12/3/2020 hagell edited affiliation
P-49-000990 CA-SON-001058 [none]
P-49-000992 CA-SON-001060 Madrone Knoll
P-49-001081 CA-SON-001154 Site No. 1
P-49-001082 CA-SON-001155 Site No. 2
P-49-001083 CA-SON-001156 Site No. 3
P-49-001084 CA-SON-001157 Site No. 4
P-49-001085 CA-SON-001158 Site No. 5
P-49-001086 CA-SON-001159/H Site No. 6
P-49-001087 CA-SON-001160 Site No. 7
P-49-001109 CA-SON-001182 Doberman Terrace
P-49-001121 CA-SON-001195 Covert Lane Site

201
Report Detail: S-009462
Citation information
Year: 1977 (Jun)
Title: Identification and Recording of Prehistoric Petroglyphs in Marin and Related Bay Area Counties Affliliation: San Francisco State University
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Masters Thesis. Unrecorded petroglyph locations are included.

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Teresa Ann Miller
Attributes: Thesis/dissertation
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-009462
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 34
Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-07-000323 CA-CCO-000553/H Alvarado Park, Wildcat Regional P-21-000087 CA-MRN-000057 Nelson No. 57
P-21-000376 CA-MRN-000414 Deer Island Area #1
P-21-000378 CA-MRN-000416 Deer Island Area #3
P-21-000379 CA-MRN-000417 Deer Island Area #4
P-21-000380 CA-MRN-000418 Deer Island Area #5
P-21-000381 CA-MRN-000419 Deer Island Area #6
P-21-000382 CA-MRN-000420 17 Novato
P-21-000383 CA-MRN-000421 Novato #18
P-21-000384 CA-MRN-000422 Novato #19
P-21-000386 CA-MRN-000425 Tiburon 3 Field #3
P-21-000387 CA-MRN-000426 Tiburon 4 Field #4
P-21-000388 CA-MRN-000427 Tiburon 5 Field #5
P-21-000389 CA-MRN-000428 Tiburon 6 Field #6
P-21-000390 CA-MRN-000429 Tiburon 7 Field #7
P-21-000391 CA-MRN-000430 Tiburon 8 Field #8
P-21-000392 CA-MRN-000431 Tiburon 9, 10, 11
P-21-000393 CA-MRN-000432 Tiburon 12
P-21-000394 CA-MRN-000433 Tiburon 13 Field #13
P-21-000395 CA-MRN-000434 Tiburon 14 & 15 Field #14 & #15 P-21-000396 CA-MRN-000435 Tiburon 16 Field #16
P-21-000397 CA-MRN-000436 Tiburon 17 Field #17
P-21-000398 CA-MRN-000437 Tiburon 18 Field #18
P-21-000399 CA-MRN-000438 Tiburon 19 Field #19
P-21-000400 CA-MRN-000439 Tiburon 20A
P-21-000401 CA-MRN-000440 Tiburon 21 Field #21
P-21-000402 CA-MRN-000442 Tiburon 1
P-21-000546 CA-MRN-000424 Tiburon 2
P-23-000434 CA-MEN-000433 Bell Springs Petroglyph Rock
P-23-000789 CA-MEN-000854 Upper Twin Rocks
P-23-000790 CA-MEN-000855 Milling Stone Basin
P-49-000629 CA-SON-000682 Steward's 9 PT.

P-49-000785 CA-SON-000844 Petaluma #1
P-49-000787 CA-SON-000846 Petaluma #3

202
Report Detail: S-009462
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 1/20/2021 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma
USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Lake Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/5/2010 muchb updated county list as per thesis content 7/2/2015 rinerg marked Verified
7/13/2016 reguindinr edited database
7/14/2016 simsa Updated GIS: deleted point and poly features; retained other report features for each county involved in report
4/11/2017 raelync Report verified, awaiting verification of 28 resources. 4/14/2017 grahams resources verified
1/20/2021 hagell edited notes.

203
Report Detail: S-009583
Citation information
Year: 1978 (Dec)
Title: Ecology of the Pre-Spanish San Francisco Bay Area Affliliation: San Francisco State University
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 2/1/2021 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Masters Thesis. A study of the ecological setting of part of the San Francisco Bay Area as it existed prior to Spanish colonization. Contact the author for permission to reproduce the thesis (see page 4).

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): David W. Mayfield
Attributes: Other research, Thesis/dissertation
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz USGS quad(s): Altamont, Antioch North, Antioch South, Benicia, Big Basin, Brentwood, Briones Valley, Byron Hot Springs, Calaveras Reservoir, Castle Rock Ridge, Clayton, Cupertino, Diablo, Dublin, Farallon Islands, Franklin Point, Half Moon Bay, Hayward, Honker Bay, Hunters Point, Jersey Island, La Costa Valley, La Honda, Las Trampas Ridge, Lick Observatory, Livermore, Los Gatos, Mare Island, Mendenhall Springs, Milpitas, Mindego Hill, Montara Mtn, Morgan Hill, Mount Day, Mountain View, Newark, Niles, Oakland East, Oakland West, Palo Alto, Petaluma Point, Pigeon Point, Redwood Point, Richmond, San Francisco North, San Francisco South, San Gregorio, San Jose East, San Jose West, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Quentin, Santa Teresa Hills, Tassajara, Vine Hill, Walnut Creek, Woodside Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-009583
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 7/16/2015 rinerg set Collections=No; set Status=Verified 3/10/2016 rinerg add quads: Farallon Islands, Petaluma Point. 9/6/2017 hagell added Point Bonita quad
6/12/2018 rinerg remove quad: Point Bonita
2/1/2021 hagell edited notes

204
Report Detail: S-009795
Citation information
Year: 1986 (Jun)
Title: Late Prehistoric Obsidian Exchange in Central California Affliliation: Stanford University
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
This report contains copyrighted material. Do not release until client has contacted Thomas Lynn Jackson, received permission, and the NWIC has received written verification. PhD dissertation.

Collections: Yes
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Thomas Lynn Jackson
Attributes: Other research, Thesis/dissertation
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-009795
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-06-000025 CA-COL-000001 S-1 Miller
P-07-000047 CA-CCO-000030 [none]
P-07-000080 CA-CCO-000138 Hotchkiss Mound
P-07-000188 CA-CCO-000312 Franks
P-07-000440 CA-CCO-000259 Barker's Rodeo
P-17-000320 CA-LAK-000305 Sam Alley Site
P-17-000601 CA-LAK-000702 1
P-21-000163 CA-MRN-000138 Nelson No. 138
P-21-000218 CA-MRN-000193/H Rancho Olompali
P-21-000235 CA-MRN-000216/H DNG-1
P-21-000242 CA-MRN-000232/H PB 232 b
P-21-000283 CA-MRN-000298/H DNG-2
P-21-000290 CA-MRN-000307/H Probably 232 C
P-21-000368 CA-MRN-000402 [none]
P-21-000423 CA-MRN-000471 San Jose Village
P-21-000628 CA-MRN-000201 Jesse Peter 201
P-23-001589 CA-MEN-001704 Tciya
P-23-001659 CA-MEN-001844 Men. X
P-23-003068 CA-MEN-001809 Men-1704S
P-23-003119 CA-MEN-001929 [none]
P-28-000015 CA-NAP-000001/H #1; Goddard; Oakville
P-28-000068 CA-NAP-000065 #65
P-28-000116 CA-NAP-000118 Glass Mt. III; Glass Mt. II
P-28-000199 CA-NAP-000234 Roy Pridmore #3
P-28-000205 CA-NAP-000240 Big Basin No. 1
P-28-000828 CA-NAP-000032 #32; Kolb; Rutherford; Pistorias P-49-000135 CA-SON-000159 Stony Glenn Lane
P-49-000360 CA-SON-000389 Carriger Creek site
P-49-000423 CA-SON-000455/H Gables Site
P-49-000424 CA-SON-000456 [none]
P-49-000518 CA-SON-000553 [none]
P-49-000521 CA-SON-000556/H H-41
P-49-000533 CA-SON-000568 Smiley
P-49-000536 CA-SON-000571 Poolside Cupule Rocks
P-49-000558 CA-SON-000593/H Son 3 (SFSC); Son 4 (SFSC); H-

205
Report Detail: S-009795
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 8/4/2017 raelync
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Colusa, Contra Costa, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, San Francisco, Solano, Sonoma, Yolo USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Colusa Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co., ~All quads - Yolo Co., Aetna Springs, Albion, Altamont, Asti, Bartlett Mtn, Bartlett Springs, Benmore Canyon, Big Foot Mtn, Boonville, Burbeck, Clearlake Oaks, Cloverdale, Cold Spring, Comptche, Cow Mountain, Crockett Peak, Detert Reservoir, Dublin, Elk Mountain, Elledge Peak, Eureka Hill, Fort Bragg, Foster Mountain, Fouts Springs, Glascock Mtn, Greenough Ridge, Gualala, Gube Mountain, Hayward, Highland Springs, Hopland, Hough Springs, Hunters Point, Jericho Valley, Lake Pillsbury, Lakeport, Las Trampas Ridge, Laughlin Range, Leesville, Livermore, Lucerne, Mallo Pass Creek, Mathison Peak, Mcguire Ridge, Middletown, Midway, Mount St Helena, Northspur, Noyo Hill, Oakland East, Oakland West, Ornbaun Valley, Philo, Point Arena, Potato Hill, Potter Valley, Purdys Gardens, Redwood Point, Richmond, San Leandro, Saunders Reef, St John Mtn, The Geysers, Upper Lake, Van Arsdale Reservoir, Whispering Pines, Wilbur Springs, Willits, Wilson Valley, Yorkville, Zeni Ridge
Has informals: No
No. resources: 37
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/21/2015 rinerg add quads: 'all Yolo', 'all Solano', 'all Napa', 'all Sonoma', 'all Marin'; remove quad: Las Trampas Ridge; add about 75 more quads based on GIS portions in Mendocino, Lake, Colusa, ContraCosta counties
11/30/2016 neala added SFR & ALA county areas, fixed northern boundary, & added all appropriate quads
4/11/2017 raelync Report verified, awaiting verification of 17 resources.

P-49-000801 CA-SON-000860/H 82-12
P-57-000114 CA-YOL-000139 Elation Hill

206
Report Detail: S-016660
Citation information
Year: 1992 (Jul)
Title: Prehistoric Rock Art of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California Affliliation: California State University, Hayward
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Jeffrey B. Fentress
Attributes: Archaeological, Other research, Thesis/dissertation Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-016660
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000035 CA-ALA-000014 Mortar Rock Park
P-01-000039 CA-ALA-000019/H [none]
P-01-000071 CA-ALA-000051 Vargas Road Petroglyph
P-01-000080 CA-ALA-000060 Castro Valley
P-01-000128 CA-ALA-000400 ICR-WR-6
P-01-000137 CA-ALA-000410 ICR-WR-16
P-01-000138 CA-ALA-000412 DOT-04-92-1
P-01-000144 CA-ALA-000418 [none]
P-01-000195 CA-ALA-000477/H Drove Right To It Site
P-01-000198 CA-ALA-000480 Site 1
P-01-000199 CA-ALA-000481/H HBR-1 & 2
P-01-002112 CA-ALA-000505 [none]
P-07-000029 CA-CCO-000009 Los Vaqueros #24 (LV-24)
P-07-000094 CA-CCO-000152 [none]
P-07-000189 CA-CCO-000320/H Los Vaqueros #2 (LV-2)
P-07-000193 CA-CCO-000375 YBL-7; Live Oak Camp
P-07-000212 CA-CCO-000417 LOCUS 11: Cl, C2, C3, C4, CS, P-07-000216 CA-CCO-000428 [none]
P-07-000219 CA-CCO-000434/H Vasco Caves
P-07-000230 CA-CCO-000450/H Los Vaqueros #16, 21, 22 (LV-1 P-07-000242 CA-CCO-000462 Los Vaqueros #31 (LV-31)
P-07-000255 CA-CCO-000482 YBL-1
P-07-000260 CA-CCO-000487 YBL-6
P-07-000271 CA-CCO-000500 Site 1
P-07-000301 CA-CCO-000530 Fossil Ridge #1
P-07-000302 CA-CCO-000531 Fossil Ridge 2
P-07-000323 CA-CCO-000553/H Alvarado Park, Wildcat Regional P-07-000344 CA-CCO-000577 AR Site 2
P-07-000345 CA-CCO-000578 Peter Banks Rock
P-07-000346 CA-CCO-000579 Amos Site
P-07-000347 CA-CCO-000580 Amos Rock
P-07-000348 CA-CCO-000581 Star Rock/Stair Rock
P-07-000356 CA-CCO-000590 Old Stump Site BRMs #3
P-07-000362 CA-CCO-000597 Kellogg Unit #4 (K-4)
P-07-000374 CA-CCO-000609 Site 1 (Keller Landfill)
P-07-000725 CA-CCO-000382 Rock City #1
P-07-000726 CA-CCO-000383 Rock City #2

207
Report Detail: S-016660
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 7/31/2017 moored
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa
USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co.

Has informals: No
No. resources: 43
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/2/2009 muchb updated county information
9/18/2015 rinerg fill out the lists of counties and quads based on map coverage 4/21/2017 raelync Report verified; awaiting verification of 21 resources. 6/2/2017 raelync Report verified; awaiting verification of 11 resources. 7/31/2017 moored Resources Verified
P-07-000727 CA-CCO-000384 Rock City #3
P-07-000730 CA-CCO-000395 Rock City #4
P-07-000734 CA-CCO-000416 MD-2
P-07-000736 CA-CCO-000424 [none]
P-07-000738 CA-CCO-000429 Artist Point
P-07-000739 CA-CCO-000430 Shotstar

208
Report Detail: S-017835
Citation information
Year: 1975 (Dec)
Title: Biological Distance of Prehistoric Central California Populations Derived from Non-Metric Traits of the Cranium Affliliation: University of California, Riverside
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 7/17/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Burials from Santa Cruz Island and Sacramento, San Joaquin, & Los Angeles counties were also examined. The GIS contains report polygons from the paper maps. This report extends outside the NWIC service area (into San Joaquin, Sacramento, & Los Angeles counties).

Date User
Address:

Collections: Yes
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Judy Myers Suchey
Attributes: Thesis/dissertation
County(ies): Alameda, Colusa, Contra Costa, Marin, Other, Solano, Yolo USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Colusa Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Yolo Co.

Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-017835
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 14
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 4/11/2017 raelync Report verified, awaiting verification of 8 resources. 4/21/2017 moored Resources verified
Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000086 CA-ALA-000309 Emeryville Shellmound
P-01-000104 CA-ALA-000328 Nelson's 328
P-01-000105 CA-ALA-000329/H Nelsons 329; Ryan Mound
P-06-000025 CA-COL-000001 S-1 Miller
P-07-000080 CA-CCO-000138 Hotchkiss Mound
P-07-000081 CA-CCO-000139/H Simone Mound
P-07-000083 CA-CCO-000141 C-141, Orwood Mound #2
P-07-000087 CA-CCO-000145 Byron Tract
P-21-000017 CA-MRN-000266 PB 266
P-21-000193 CA-MRN-000168 Nelson No. 168
P-21-000242 CA-MRN-000232/H PB 232 b
P-21-000252 CA-MRN-000242/H PB No. 242 - Cauley
P-48-000010 CA-SOL-000002 Peterson 2
P-57-000145 CA-YOL-000013 Mustang Site

209
Report Detail: S-018217
Citation information
Year: 1996 (Apr)
Title: Cultural Resource Evaluations for the Caltrans District 04 Phase 2 Seismic Retrofit Program, Status Report Affliliation: California Department of Transportation
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 6/15/2017 raelync
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Status report of the evaluation of bridge structures. There were no location maps in the report.

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Location information
Author(s): Glenn Gmoser
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Other research County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sonoma USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-018217
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 16
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 10/13/2014 hagell edited database
7/14/2015 rinerg set status=Verified
Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000014 CA-ALA-000483 Site 2
P-01-000023 CA-ALA-000002/H Ohlones Cemetery
P-01-000227 CA-ALA-000548/H Vallejo Mill
P-07-000108 CA-CCO-000225 Anaclario Site
P-07-000119 CA-CCO-000237 Loud's 422
P-38-000002 CA-SFR-000002 Shellmound No. 439
P-38-000004 CA-SFR-000004/H Yerba Buena Island
P-41-000273 CA-SMA-000321 Hamilton #2; San Mateo Shellmo P-43-000106 CA-SCL-000092/H Sargent Ranch; US-1
P-43-000297 CA-SCL-000289 GP-1
P-43-000624 CA-SCL-000677 The 237/880 Site
P-43-001078 CA-SCL-000699/H The Dollhouse Site; Dollhouse Si P-44-000010 CA-SCR-000002/H Aptos Creek
P-44-000201 CA-SCR-000199H Cactus Gardens
P-44-000300 CA-SCR-000313 Granite Ck. Rd./Highway 17 Inter P-49-000195 CA-SON-000223 Nelson No. 223

210
Report Detail: S-018217
Record status: Verified
4/11/2017 raelync report verified, awaiting verification of 7 resources. 4/21/2017 moored Resources Verified

211
Report Detail: S-020395
Citation information
Year: 1998 (May)
Title: PCNs of the Coast Ranges of California: Religious Expression or the Result of Quarrying? Affliliation: California State University, Hayward
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Masters Thesis. This report extends outside the NWIC service area (into Fresno, Kern, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, & Trinity counties; and into Oregon.).

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Donna L. Gillette
Attributes: Other research, Thesis/dissertation
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-020395
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-07-000094 CA-CCO-000152 [none]
P-07-000323 CA-CCO-000553/H Alvarado Park, Wildcat Regional P-12-000050 CA-HUM-000983 Squaw Rock
P-17-000071 CA-LAK-000034 Bachelor Valley No. 4; Smith's 1 P-17-001315 CA-LAK-001577 Lakeport PCN Boulder
P-21-000087 CA-MRN-000057 Nelson No. 57
P-21-000376 CA-MRN-000414 Deer Island Area #1
P-21-000378 CA-MRN-000416 Deer Island Area #3
P-21-000379 CA-MRN-000417 Deer Island Area #4
P-21-000381 CA-MRN-000419 Deer Island Area #6
P-21-000382 CA-MRN-000420 17 Novato
P-21-000383 CA-MRN-000421 Novato #18
P-21-000384 CA-MRN-000422 Novato #19
P-21-000386 CA-MRN-000425 Tiburon 3 Field #3
P-21-000387 CA-MRN-000426 Tiburon 4 Field #4
P-21-000388 CA-MRN-000427 Tiburon 5 Field #5
P-21-000389 CA-MRN-000428 Tiburon 6 Field #6
P-21-000390 CA-MRN-000429 Tiburon 7 Field #7
P-21-000391 CA-MRN-000430 Tiburon 8 Field #8
P-21-000392 CA-MRN-000431 Tiburon 9, 10, 11
P-21-000393 CA-MRN-000432 Tiburon 12
P-21-000394 CA-MRN-000433 Tiburon 13 Field #13
P-21-000395 CA-MRN-000434 Tiburon 14 & 15 Field #14 & #15 P-21-000396 CA-MRN-000435 Tiburon 16 Field #16
P-21-000397 CA-MRN-000436 Tiburon 17 Field #17
P-21-000398 CA-MRN-000437 Tiburon 18 Field #18
P-21-000399 CA-MRN-000438 Tiburon 19 Field #19
P-21-000400 CA-MRN-000439 Tiburon 20A
P-21-000401 CA-MRN-000440 Tiburon 21 Field #21
P-21-000402 CA-MRN-000442 Tiburon 1
P-21-000419 CA-MRN-000465 Whit's Rock
P-21-000433 CA-MRN-000481 ARS 78-72-Rock 1
P-21-000546 CA-MRN-000424 Tiburon 2
P-21-000620 CA-MRN-000636 Petroglyph site south of Ring Mo P-21-000621 CA-MRN-000637 Petroglyph site on small north sl

212
Report Detail: S-020395
Database record metadata
Entered: 4/7/2005 nwic-main
Last modified: 6/25/2020 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Humboldt, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Other, San Benito, Santa Clara, Sonoma USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Humboldt Co., ~All quads - Lake Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - San Benito Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 71
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2005 jay Appended records from NWICmain bibliographic database. 9/14/2016 hagell edited notes
3/27/2017 hagell added note
4/11/2017 raelync Report verified, awaiting verification of 26 resources. 6/6/2017 castrom Verification Process is In Progress.
6/14/2017 castrom Resources all verified. Report Marked Verified.

P-21-000624 CA-MRN-000640 Petroglyph site near Taylor Road P-21-000661 CA-MRN-000452 Pat's Rock
P-23-000434 CA-MEN-000433 Bell Springs Petroglyph Rock
P-23-000809 CA-MEN-000874 Knight's Valley 2
P-23-000810 CA-MEN-000875 Knight's Valley Baby Rock
P-23-001698 CA-MEN-001912 Spyrock Road Petroglyphs
P-23-001725 CA-MEN-001941 Genesis #4,5,6,7,8; "V" Greenfie P-23-001792 CA-MEN-002020 Potter Valley Petroglyphs
P-23-001798 CA-MEN-002028 Genesis #9
P-23-001799 CA-MEN-002029 Genesis #10
P-23-001803 CA-MEN-002034 Genesis #16
P-23-001804 CA-MEN-002035 Infinity #1
P-23-001930 CA-MEN-002200 Keystone Petroglyph Site
P-23-001942 CA-MEN-002213 Huntley Peak Petroglyphs
P-23-001950 CA-MEN-002221 Hidden Hill Petroglyph
P-23-001963 CA-MEN-002235 Watershed Down Petroglyph Sit P-35-000013 CA-SBN-000012
P-43-000067 CA-SCL-000048 Rancho Paso del Verde
P-43-000080 CA-SCL-000063 SFSU-SCL-6
P-43-000287 CA-SCL-000279 ARS 77-97-1
P-43-000289 CA-SCL-000281 ARS 77-97-3
P-43-000504 CA-SCL-000503 COE-29
P-49-000046 CA-SON-000929 Jan's Rock
P-49-000240 CA-SON-000268 Steward's 8 Pt.

P-49-000533 CA-SON-000568 Smiley
P-49-000550 CA-SON-000585 Yorty Cupule Rock
P-49-000629 CA-SON-000682 Steward's 9 PT.

P-49-000785 CA-SON-000844 Petaluma #1
P-49-000787 CA-SON-000846 Petaluma #3
P-49-000868 CA-SON-000928 Mike Whitson Rock I
P-49-000960 CA-SON-001026 Nana's Rocks
P-49-000975 CA-SON-001041 Lee's Rock
P-49-001004 CA-SON-001075 Kellies Rock
P-49-001087 CA-SON-001160 Site No. 7
P-49-001239 CA-SON-001319 Kathleen's Rock
P-49-002121 CA-SON-001383 Banded Rock Petroglyph Rock

213
Report Detail: S-020395
Record status: Verified

214
Report Detail: S-030204
Citation information
Year: 2003 (Jun)
Title: The Distribution and Antiquity of the California Pecked Curvilinear Nucleated (PCN) Rock Art Tradition.

Affliliation: University of California, Berkeley
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 7/12/2005 kellyn
Last modified: 1/20/2021 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
This report extends outside of the NWIC service area (into Fresno, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, & Kern counties).

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Donna L. Gillette
Attributes: Archaeological, Other research
County(ies): Alameda, Colusa, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, Other, San Benito, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, Yolo USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Colusa Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Del Norte Co., ~All quads - Humboldt Co., ~All quads - Lake Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - Monterey Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Benito Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co., ~All quads - Yolo Co.

Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-030204
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 3
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
12/5/2016 hagell added counties to note
4/28/2017 hagell edited note
5/12/2017 raelync Report verified; awaiting verification of 2 resources.

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-002148 CA-ALA-000571 Alameda PCN
P-21-000384 CA-MRN-000422 Novato #19
P-23-000810 CA-MEN-000875 Knight's Valley Baby Rock

215
Report Detail: S-032596
Citation information
Year: 2006 (Dec)
Title: The Central California Ethnographic Community Distribution Model, Version 2.0, with Special Attention to the San Francisco Bay Area, Cultural Resources Inventory of Caltrans District 4 Rural Conventional Highways Affliliation: Consulting in the Past; Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.

No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 3/1/2007 hagell
Last modified: 11/7/2017 raelync
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
The study extends outside the NWIC service area (into Calaveras, Amador, Tuolomne, Mariposa, Madera, & Tulare counties).

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Randall Milliken, Jerome King, and Patricia Mikkelsen Attributes: Archaeological, Other research
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Lake, Marin, Monterey, Napa, Other, San Benito, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, Yolo
USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Monterey Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Benito Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., Aetna Springs, Allendale, Annapolis, Arched Rock, Asti, Bird Valley, Bodega Head, Brooks, Calistoga, Camp Meeker, Cazadero, Clarksburg, Clearlake Highlands, Cloverdale, Cotati, Courtland, Cuttings Wharf, Davis, Detert Reservoir, Duncans Mills, Eldorado Bend, Esparto, Fort Ross, Geyserville, Glascock Mtn, Glen Ellen, Grays Bend, Guerneville, Guinda, Healdsburg, Jericho Valley, Jimtown, Kelseyville, Kenwood, Knights Landing, Knoxville, Lake Berryessa, Liberty Island, Madison, Mare Island, Mark West Springs, Merritt, Middletown, Monticello Dam, Mount St Helena, Mt Vaca, Novato, Petaluma, Petaluma Point, Petaluma River, Point Reyes Ne, Rutherford, Sacramento West, Santa Rosa, Saxon, Sears Point, Sebastopol, Sonoma, Taylor Monument, The Geysers, Tombs Creek, Two Rock, Valley Ford, Warm Springs Dam, Whispering Pines, Wilson Valley, Winters, Woodland, Zamora Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-032596
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
3/30/2015 neala data review; added Lake county quads
6/12/2015 mikulikc corrected Yolo County quad locations from "all quads" to quads intersecting the GIS feature for S-032596
10/20/2015 rinerg remove '~All quads - Sonoma', replace with Sonoma quads intersecting report feature
7/20/2016 moored GIS edited shape
Type Name
Other Contract #04A2098
Caltrans EA No. 447600

216
Report Detail: S-033239
Citation information
Year: 1994 (Jun)
Title: Alameda Watershed, Natural and Cultural Resources: San Francisco Watershed Management Plan Affliliation: Environmental Science Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 6/15/2007 guldenj
Last modified: 2/10/2020 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Unrecorded prehistoric, ethnohistoric, and historic resources are within the study area. There were no USGS maps in the report showing the location of the Alameda watershed.

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): David Chavez
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Management/planning, Other research County(ies): Alameda, Santa Clara
USGS quad(s): Calaveras Reservoir, Dublin, La Costa Valley, Mount Day, Niles Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-033239
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 1
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
10/29/2015 rinerg add affiliation
3/13/2017 hagell added attributes
5/29/2019 vickeryn Additional pages added.
2/10/2020 hagell added quad names
Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-010841 CA-ALA-000704/H Sunol Division Headquarters Co

217
Report Detail: S-033600
Citation information
Year: 2007 (Jun)
Title: Geoarchaeological Overview of the Nine Bay Area Counties in Caltrans District 4 Affliliation: Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc.

No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
9 unrecorded prehistoric resources.

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Jack Meyer and Jeff Rosenthal
Attributes: Archaeological, Other research
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-033600
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000001 CA-ALA-000554 Castlewood Site
P-01-000002 CA-ALA-000555 Meadowlark Dairy Site
P-01-000014 CA-ALA-000483 Site 2
P-01-000063 CA-ALA-000043 De Avillo
P-01-000064 CA-ALA-000044 Kaiser
P-01-000067 CA-ALA-000047 4 Ala-47
P-01-000080 CA-ALA-000060 Castro Valley
P-01-000124 CA-ALA-000394 Pleasanton Meadows Site
P-01-000139 CA-ALA-000413 Santa Rita Village
P-01-000140 CA-ALA-000414 Iverson Site
P-01-001795 CA-ALA-000566 Hayward Bypass Site
P-01-002110 CA-ALA-000467 H&A-HBP-1
P-01-002160 CA-ALA-000574 Bernal/680
P-01-002162 CA-ALA-000576 Curtner Site
P-01-002245 CA-ALA-000586 Hwy 238-1
P-07-000019 CA-CCO-000696 Burial Site
P-07-000024 CA-CCO-000004 Slater site
P-07-000037 CA-CCO-000018/H Marsh Site; Marsh House; The P P-07-000047 CA-CCO-000030 [none]
P-07-000075 CA-CCO-000133 Ader site
P-07-000079 CA-CCO-000137 Monument Site; Concord Man Si P-07-000088 CA-CCO-000146 Holland Tract
P-07-000089 CA-CCO-000147 CCO-147
P-07-000108 CA-CCO-000225 Anaclario Site
P-07-000182 CA-CCO-000305 Prehistoric Archaeological Site C P-07-000185 CA-CCO-000308 Stone Valley Site
P-07-000186 CA-CCO-000309 The Rossmoor Site
P-07-000217 CA-CCO-000431 Murwood School Site
P-07-000239 CA-CCO-000459 Los Vaqueros #15 (LV-15)
P-07-000401 CA-CCO-000637 Dam Site
P-07-000721 CA-CCO-000368 Dutra 1
P-21-000010 CA-MRN-000249/H 4-MRN-249
P-21-000048 CA-MRN-000017 Nelson No. 17
P-21-002615 CA-MRN-000674 Pelican site
Type Name
Agency Nbr Contract No. 04A2098
Caltrans EA No. 447600

218
Report Detail: S-033600
Database record metadata
Entered: 9/24/2007 guldenj
Last modified: 6/20/2017 moored
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Contra Costa Co., ~All quads - Marin Co., ~All quads - Napa Co., ~All quads - San Francisco Co., ~All quads - San Mateo Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Solano Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 68
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
7/16/2015 rinerg set Status=verified
8/22/2016 paganob updated other identifiers
4/11/2017 raelync report verified, awaiting verification of 1 resource. 6/19/2017 bentonb all resources verified, report record status = verified P-28-000009 CA-NAP-000863 Adams Street Site
P-28-000028 CA-NAP-000015/H Suscol Mound #5
P-28-000301 CA-NAP-000399 B- 55- V V
P-28-000967 CA-NAP-000916 Double Whoa!
P-38-000006 CA-SFR-000006 Loud's Presidio Mound
P-38-000028 CA-SFR-000028 BART Burial
P-38-000101 CA-SFR-000112 49 Stevenson
P-38-000102 CA-SFR-000113 5th & Market
P-38-000119 CA-SFR-000114 [none]
P-41-000080 CA-SMA-000077 University Village Site (Gerow) P-41-000284 CA-SMA-000273 Coyote Pt. Marina
P-43-000016 CA-SCL-000755 SCU/Old Alameda Burial site
P-43-000189 CA-SCL-000178 MH-22
P-43-000296 CA-SCL-000288 [none]
P-43-000308 CA-SCL-000300 CA-Scl-300
P-43-000310 CA-SCL-000302 CA-Scl-302
P-43-000423 CA-SCL-000418/H [none]
P-43-000424 CA-SCL-000419/H 441 N. 1st
P-43-000448 CA-SCL-000447/H formerly known as CA-SCL-6E P-43-000451 CA-SCL-000450 Rosendin 1
P-43-000485 CA-SCL-000484 [none]
P-43-000561 CA-SCL-000566 [none]
P-43-000604 CA-SCL-000609 Ronald McDonald House
P-43-000608 CA-SCL-000613/H Stanford Man II
P-43-000614 CA-SCL-000619 Elk Site
P-43-000623 CA-SCL-000675 "Coyote Creek Site"
P-43-001015 CA-SCL-000553 Orchard 1001-1
P-43-001058 CA-SCL-000674 DC-1
P-43-001080 CA-SCL-000702 Waste Management Site
P-43-001163 CA-SCL-000828 Fuel Farm Site
P-43-001194 CA-SCL-000832 Iowa Avenue and Sunnyvale Ave P-43-001576 CA-SCL-000849 152/156-5
P-48-000007 CA-SOL-000391 Fairfield PEC-1
P-48-000157 CA-SOL-000324 [none]

219
Report Detail: S-047983
Citation information
Year: 2011 (Oct)
Title: Section 106 Cultural Resources Assessment, DSRSD Central Dublin Recycled Water Distribution and Retrofit Project, City of Dublin, Alameda County, California
Affliliation: Michael Brandman Associates
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Pages 46 & 47 are missing from this copy of the report.

Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Location information
Author(s): Carrie D. Wills
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-047983
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 4
PLSS:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-011774 DSRSD 1 Unnamed Railroad Gr
P-01-011775 DSRSD 2 S. San Ramon Creek
P-07-004721 Voided; see P-01-011774
P-07-004722 Voided: See P-01-011775
Year: 2012 (Feb)
Title: BUR111208A; Section 106 Compliance for the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) Central Dublin Recycled Water Distribution and Retrofit Project in Alameda County, California (Project #09-CCAO-165) Affiliation: Office of Historic Preservation
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Unrestricted
Author(s): Milford Wayne Donaldson
Report type(s): OHP Correspondence
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 88-94
Type Name
OHP PRN BUR111208A
Submitter 09-CCAO-165
Agency Nbr Bureau of Reclamation Tracking #09-CCAO-165

220
Report Detail: S-047983
Database record metadata
Entered: 8/3/2016 cabrala
Last modified: 7/12/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Record status: Verified
Date User Action taken
8/3/2016 cabrala Unprocessed records
2/16/2017 grahams records processed by kliewerk on 2/8/17 5/4/2017 rinerg Recode "Concurrence Correspondence" in additional citation title to Type=OHP Correspondence
7/12/2019 hagell added other identifier & note

221
Report Detail: S-048567
Citation information
Year: 2016 (Apr)
Title: Zone 7 Water Agency, 2016 Maintenance Projects, Cultural Resources Survey Report Affliliation: Environmental Science Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 2/11/2017 cabrala
Last modified: 7/11/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Heidi Koenig
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Field study County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Altamont, Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-048567
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Type Name
Submitter ESA Project #130626.11

222
Report Detail: S-048927
Citation information
Year: 1997 (Sep)
Title: The Economy and Archaeology of European-made Glass Beads and Manufactured Goods Used in First Contact Situations in Oregon, California and Washington
Affliliation: University of Sheffield, England
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 6/1/2017 richterl
Last modified: 2/8/2019 neala
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
This report contains copyrighted material. Do not release until client has contacted Donald Scott Crull, PhD., received permission, and the NWIC has received written verification. Incomplete copy of report: missing maps, photos and illustrations.

Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Donald Scott Crull
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Thesis/dissertation County(ies): Alameda, Mendocino, Monterey, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Sonoma USGS quad(s): ~All quads - Alameda Co., ~All quads - Mendocino Co., ~All quads - Monterey Co., ~All quads - Santa Clara Co., ~All quads - Santa Cruz Co., ~All quads - Sonoma Co.

Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-048927
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
6/1/2017 richterl partial print out of copyrighted document 6/13/2017 richterl Incomplete copy of report: missing maps, photos and illustrations 7/19/2017 rinerg sites within the NWIC region possibly mentioned by this report are: P-01- 00022, P-23-00492, P-27-00128, P-27-00339, P-43-00050, P-44-01031, P-49- 00164

223
Report Detail: S-049780
Citation information
Year: 2017 (Jun)
Title: San Francisco Bay-Delta Regional Context and Research Design for Native American Archaeological Resources, Caltrans District 4
Affliliation: California Department of Transportation, District 4 No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
A portion of this report extends outside the NWIC service area (into Sacramento County). According to the report, 1,798 Native American archaeological resources are within the study area.

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Brian F. Byrd, Adrian R. Whitaker, Patricia J. Mikkelsen, and Jeffrey S. Rosenthal Attributes: Archaeological, Management/planning, Other research Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-049780
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-000001 CA-ALA-000554 Castlewood Site
P-01-000002 CA-ALA-000555 Meadowlark Dairy Site
P-01-000014 CA-ALA-000483 Site 2
P-01-000015 CA-ALA-000565/H Síi Túupentak
P-01-000022 CA-ALA-000001/H Mission San Jose
P-01-000033 CA-ALA-000012 [none]
P-01-000034 CA-ALA-000013/H SFSC-ALA-1
P-01-000038 CA-ALA-000017 [none]
P-01-000062 CA-ALA-000042 Jensen
P-01-000066 CA-ALA-000046 Nielson Farm; Stoneridge Place P-01-000080 CA-ALA-000060 Castro Valley
P-01-000084 CA-ALA-000307 West Berkeley Shell Mound
P-01-000086 CA-ALA-000309 Emeryville Shellmound
P-01-000087 CA-ALA-000310 Nelson's 310
P-01-000089 CA-ALA-000312 Nelson's 312
P-01-000104 CA-ALA-000328 Nelson's 328
P-01-000105 CA-ALA-000329/H Nelsons 329; Ryan Mound
P-01-000106 CA-ALA-000330 Nelson's 330
P-01-000107 CA-ALA-000331 Nelson's 331
P-01-000116 CA-ALA-000342 Voided: see P-01-002162
Year: 2016 (Aug)
Title: FHWA_2016_0615_001, Caltrans District 4 Archaeological Context Affiliation: California Office of Historic Preservation No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Unrestricted
Author(s): Julianne Polanco
Report type(s): OHP Correspondence
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 489-510
Type Name
OTIS Report Number FHWA_2016_0615_001

224
Report Detail: S-049780
P-01-000117 CA-ALA-000343 M.H. Podell Presidio Apartments P-01-000139 CA-ALA-000413 Santa Rita Village
P-01-000152 CA-ALA-000428/H Geary Ranch
P-01-000175 CA-ALA-000453 Alvarado-Niles 1
P-01-000197 CA-ALA-000479 Dowe Ave Site
P-01-000201 CA-ALA-000485 SL1
P-01-000202 CA-ALA-000486/H SL2
P-01-000234 CA-ALA-000424 Ardenwood Estates (AE) #1
P-01-000237 CA-ALA-000466 Olympia #1
P-01-001795 CA-ALA-000566 Hayward Bypass Site
P-01-002120 CA-ALA-000514 Hidden Valley Ranch
P-01-002160 CA-ALA-000574 Bernal/680
P-01-002162 CA-ALA-000576 Curtner Site
P-01-002245 CA-ALA-000586 Hwy 238-1
P-01-002280 CA-ALA-000621 Central Chevrolet
P-01-010509 CA-ALA-000604 Mandela-1
P-01-010610 CA-ALA-000613/H Canyon Oaks
P-01-011556 CA-ALA-000684 Fremont Blvd South
P-07-000019 CA-CCO-000696 Burial Site
P-07-000021 CA-CCO-000001 CCO-1
P-07-000029 CA-CCO-000009 Los Vaqueros #24 (LV-24)
P-07-000033 CA-CCO-000014 Sherwood
P-07-000037 CA-CCO-000018/H Marsh Site; Marsh House; The P P-07-000047 CA-CCO-000030 [none]
P-07-000066 CA-CCO-000124 [none]
P-07-000070 CA-CCO-000128 Dal Porto Mound
P-07-000079 CA-CCO-000137 Monument Site; Concord Man Si P-07-000080 CA-CCO-000138 Hotchkiss Mound
P-07-000089 CA-CCO-000147 CCO-147
P-07-000093 CA-CCO-000151 [none]
P-07-000098 CA-CCO-000156 Garden Road Cul-de Sac Site
P-07-000105 CA-CCO-000222/H Keller Ranch
P-07-000117 CA-CCO-000235 Loud's 423a
P-07-000118 CA-CCO-000236 Buchan, Jones Mound, Loud #42 P-07-000147 CA-CCO-000268 Voided, see P-07-000461, P-07- P-07-000148 CA-CCO-000269 Nelson No. 269
P-07-000149 CA-CCO-000270 Nelson No. 270
P-07-000150 CA-CCO-000271 Nelson No. 271
P-07-000154 CA-CCO-000275 Nelson No. 275
P-07-000168 CA-CCO-000290 Nelson No. 290
P-07-000173 CA-CCO-000295 Nelson No. 295
P-07-000174 CA-CCO-000297 Nelson's No. 297
P-07-000175 CA-CCO-000298 Nelson's No. 298, Stege
P-07-000176 CA-CCO-000299 Nelson's No. 299
P-07-000185 CA-CCO-000308 Stone Valley Site
P-07-000186 CA-CCO-000309 The Rossmoor Site
P-07-000189 CA-CCO-000320/H Los Vaqueros #2 (LV-2)
P-07-000197 CA-CCO-000397 CCO 1(SFSC)
P-07-000217 CA-CCO-000431 Murwood School Site
P-07-000227 CA-CCO-000447/H Los Vaqueros #9 (LV-9)
P-07-000230 CA-CCO-000450/H Los Vaqueros #16, 21, 22 (LV-1 P-07-000238 CA-CCO-000458/H Los Vaqueros #13 (LV-13)
P-07-000239 CA-CCO-000459 Los Vaqueros #15 (LV-15)
P-07-000242 CA-CCO-000462 Los Vaqueros #31 (LV-31)
P-07-000309 CA-CCO-000538 Big Break Regional Shoreline
P-07-000359 CA-CCO-000593 HT-6
P-07-000365 CA-CCO-000600 [none]
P-07-000366 CA-CCO-000601 Voided, see P-07-000461
P-07-000400 CA-CCO-000636 Hopper Mortar Site

225
Report Detail: S-049780
P-07-000401 CA-CCO-000637 Dam Site
P-07-000440 CA-CCO-000259 Barker's Rodeo
P-07-000441 CA-CCO-000284 Nelson No. 284
P-07-000459 CA-CCO-000474/H PRC #1
P-07-000461 CA-CCO-000654 Nelson No. 268
P-07-000462 CA-CCO-000655 Nelson's 268B
P-07-000721 CA-CCO-000368 Dutra 1
P-07-000724 CA-CCO-000377 SL-1
P-07-000790 CA-CCO-000725 Road 3A Site
P-07-000792 CA-CCO-000726/H Powerline Site
P-07-002570 CA-CCO-000750 MP20; Mile Post 20 Site (UPDA P-07-002592 CA-CCO-000755/H Gas Line Site
P-07-002650 CA-CCO-000767 Biggs Mound
P-07-004537 CA-CCO-000832 PATP Site
P-21-000002 CA-MRN-000003 Nelson No. 3
P-21-000036 CA-MRN-000005/H Nelson No. 5
P-21-000043 CA-MRN-000012 Nelson No. 12
P-21-000045 CA-MRN-000014 Nelson No. 14
P-21-000048 CA-MRN-000017 Nelson No. 17
P-21-000051 CA-MRN-000020 Nelson No. 20
P-21-000057 CA-MRN-000026 Nelson No. 26
P-21-000058 CA-MRN-000027 Nelson No. 27
P-21-000066 CA-MRN-000035 Nelson No. 35
P-21-000070 CA-MRN-000039 Nelson No. 39
P-21-000072 CA-MRN-000042 Nelson No. 42
P-21-000073 CA-MRN-000043 Nelson No. 43
P-21-000074 CA-MRN-000044 Nelson No. 44
P-21-000075 CA-MRN-000045 Nelson No. 45
P-21-000097 CA-MRN-000067/H Nelson No. 67
P-21-000106 CA-MRN-000076 Nelson No. 76
P-21-000109 CA-MRN-000080 Nelson No. 80
P-21-000142 CA-MRN-000114 Nelson No. 114
P-21-000143 CA-MRN-000115 Nelson No. 115
P-21-000152 CA-MRN-000127 Nelson No. 127
P-21-000163 CA-MRN-000138 Nelson No. 138
P-21-000164 CA-MRN-000139 Nelson No. 139
P-21-000165 CA-MRN-000140 Nelson No. 140
P-21-000166 CA-MRN-000141 Nelson No. 141
P-21-000167 CA-MRN-000142 Nelson No. 142
P-21-000175 CA-MRN-000150/H Nelson No. 150
P-21-000177 CA-MRN-000152 Nelson No. 152
P-21-000193 CA-MRN-000168 Nelson No. 168
P-21-000195 CA-MRN-000170 Nelson No. 170
P-21-000196 CA-MRN-000171 Nelson No. 171
P-21-000199 CA-MRN-000174 Nelson No. 174
P-21-000200 CA-MRN-000175 Nelson No. 175
P-21-000217 CA-MRN-000192 Nelson No. 192
P-21-000218 CA-MRN-000193/H Rancho Olompali
P-21-000219 CA-MRN-000194 VOID, see P-21-000220
P-21-000220 CA-MRN-000195 Nelson No. 195
P-21-000221 CA-MRN-000196 Nelson No. 196
P-21-000222 CA-MRN-000197 Nelson No. 197
P-21-000256 CA-MRN-000254 The Dominican College Site
P-21-000295 CA-MRN-000315 Nelson No. 86C
P-21-000305 CA-MRN-000327 Nelson No. 195e
P-21-000306 CA-MRN-000328 S.A. II (San Antonio II)
P-21-000327 CA-MRN-000352 ARS 05-018
P-21-000332 CA-MRN-000357/H Bayonet Midden
P-21-000337 CA-MRN-000365 [none]; Miwok Park

226
Report Detail: S-049780
P-21-000346 CA-MRN-000374 [none]
P-21-000369 CA-MRN-000403 [none]
P-21-000423 CA-MRN-000471 San Jose Village
P-21-000459 CA-MRN-000526 VOID, see P-21-000218
P-21-000462 CA-MRN-000529 Lost Luggage Site
P-21-000528 CA-MRN-000601 Burdell Spring #1
P-21-000541 CA-MRN-000255 [none]
P-21-000544 CA-MRN-000406 [none]
P-21-000552 CA-MRN-000507/H VOID, see P-21-000218
P-21-000664 CA-MRN-000495 Irma's Site
P-21-000675 CA-MRN-000644/H Mission Avenue Midden
P-21-002625 CA-MRN-000678 ARS 05-018
P-27-000613 CA-MNT-000530 H-28
P-28-000028 CA-NAP-000015/H Suscol Mound #5
P-28-000029 CA-NAP-000016 #16; Suscol Mound #1
P-28-000175 CA-NAP-000189/H "Possibly one of Vallejo's sites" P-28-000176 CA-NAP-000190 Hageman #1
P-28-000667 CA-NAP-000795 Hageman #3
P-28-000874 CA-NAP-000265 Fagan Creek
P-38-000004 CA-SFR-000004/H Yerba Buena Island
P-38-000006 CA-SFR-000006 Loud's Presidio Mound
P-38-000007 CA-SFR-000007 Bayshore Mound
P-38-000017 CA-SFR-000017 Nelson 394
P-38-000021 CA-SFR-000021/H Sutro Bath Sites
P-38-000022 CA-SFR-000022H Mission San Francisco de Asis; P-38-000026 CA-SFR-000026 Void, see P-38-000006
P-38-000028 CA-SFR-000028 BART Burial
P-38-000029 CA-SFR-000029 AC-28
P-38-000030 CA-SFR-000030 AC-29
P-38-000031 CA-SFR-000031 AC-30
P-38-000101 CA-SFR-000112 49 Stevenson
P-38-000102 CA-SFR-000113 5th & Market
P-38-000119 CA-SFR-000114 [none]
P-38-000162 CA-SFR-000129 Crissy Field Site
P-38-000172 CA-SFR-000135 560 Mission St.

P-38-004265 CA-SFR-000136/H 1166-1188 Howard Street Afford P-38-004318 CA-SFR-000147 Site JSG-1
P-38-004319 CA-SFR-000148/H Central Freeway Touchdown Ra P-38-004326 CA-SFR-000151/H Tehama Street Site
P-38-004329 CA-SFR-000154/H SFWBA Block 10
P-38-004352 CA-SFR-000155 Site JSG-2
P-38-004638 CA-SFR-000171 Quint Street Site
P-38-004882 CA-SFR-000175 ASC 71/10-1
P-38-005131 CA-SFR-000191/H Schlage Lock
P-38-005503 CA-SFR-000205 Transbay Burial 1
P-41-000001 CA-SMA-000151 Nelson's 412, 413, 414; UC-ARF P-41-000009 CA-SMA-000004 Nelson's 372; Sewell 1; San Mat P-41-000011 CA-SMA-000006/H Nelson's #364; Sewell 3
P-41-000027 CA-SMA-000022 Half Moon Bay
P-41-000028 CA-SMA-000023 San Bruno
P-41-000037 CA-SMA-000033 Nelson 372b
P-41-000044 CA-SMA-000040 SM-1
P-41-000075 CA-SMA-000072 [none]
P-41-000080 CA-SMA-000077 University Village Site (Gerow) P-41-000081 CA-SMA-000078 [none]
P-41-000086 CA-SMA-000083 Fair Oaks Site
P-41-000087 CA-SMA-000084 [none]
P-41-000103 CA-SMA-000100 [none]
P-41-000117 CA-SMA-000115 Montara Beach Site

227
Report Detail: S-049780
P-41-000127 CA-SMA-000125 Filoli
P-41-000136 CA-SMA-000134 Probably Nelson #406
P-41-000141 CA-SMA-000139 [none]
P-41-000142 CA-SMA-000140 Nelson #415
P-41-000149 CA-SMA-000147 3 College of San Mateo
P-41-000152 CA-SMA-000150 1050 Ralston Ave
P-41-000160 CA-SMA-000160 Hiller Mound
P-41-000204 CA-SMA-000204 Jasper Ridge Site
P-41-000244 CA-SMA-000248 Tarlton Site
P-41-000252 CA-SMA-000256 SLAC-2
P-41-000259 CA-SMA-000263/H Oak Knoll
P-41-000263 CA-SMA-000267 1416 Bay Road
P-41-000265 CA-SMA-000269 Stanford Man I
P-41-000284 CA-SMA-000273 Coyote Pt. Marina
P-41-000308 CA-SMA-000314 San Mateo Shellmound #3; Ham
P-41-000315 CA-SMA-000335/H Davey Glen Site
P-41-002076 CA-SMA-000368/H Carnduff Farmstead and prehist P-43-000016 CA-SCL-000755 SCU/Old Alameda Burial site
P-43-000019 CA-SCL-000134/H WVC-3
P-43-000021 CA-SCL-000001 Castro-Ponce Mound
P-43-000024 CA-SCL-000004/H Spartan Stadium
P-43-000026 CA-SCL-000006 Marcello's Enclosure
P-43-000027 CA-SCL-000007/H Lick Mill
P-43-000032 CA-SCL-000012/H Smaller Ynigo Mound
P-43-000050 CA-SCL-000030/H The Third Location of Mission Sa P-43-000057 CA-SCL-000038 Alms House Mound
P-43-000082 CA-SCL-000065 West Valley College 2
P-43-000085 CA-SCL-000068 WVC-6
P-43-000087 CA-SCL-000070/H 10-17-73-1; WVC-19
P-43-000137 CA-SCL-000124 ARS 77-21
P-43-000141 CA-SCL-000128/H Holiday Inn Site; West San Carlo P-43-000167 CA-SCL-000155/H Jose Maria Alviso Adobe
P-43-000277 CA-SCL-000268/H 4-SCL-268
P-43-000285 CA-SCL-000276 Rincon 1
P-43-000295 CA-SCL-000287/H Sand Hill Road Site
P-43-000302 CA-SCL-000294 ARS 77-21
P-43-000308 CA-SCL-000300 CA-Scl-300
P-43-000310 CA-SCL-000302 CA-Scl-302
P-43-000321 CA-SCL-000314 [none]
P-43-000324 CA-SCL-000317/H Pueblo de San Jose de Guadalu P-43-000334 CA-SCL-000327 [none]
P-43-000349 CA-SCL-000343 Ernst Site
P-43-000360 CA-SCL-000354 FC-1
P-43-000423 CA-SCL-000418/H [none]
P-43-000465 CA-SCL-000464 Stanford-EIP
P-43-000479 CA-SCL-000478 Temporary Site # AES-1
P-43-000485 CA-SCL-000484 [none]
P-43-000549 CA-SCL-000548 [none]
P-43-000576 CA-SCL-000581 [none]
P-43-000578 CA-SCL-000583 Greer Road
P-43-000579 CA-SCL-000584 Creekbank Site
P-43-000581 CA-SCL-000586/H Golf Course Site
P-43-000586 CA-SCL-000591 Downstream Site
P-43-000587 CA-SCL-000592/H Area A
P-43-000588 CA-SCL-000593 Berryessa Creek Site
P-43-000595 CA-SCL-000600 Alma Adobe
P-43-000604 CA-SCL-000609 Ronald McDonald House
P-43-000608 CA-SCL-000613/H Stanford Man II
P-43-000614 CA-SCL-000619 Elk Site

228
Report Detail: S-049780
Database record metadata
Entered: 1/18/2018 vickeryn
Last modified: 2/1/2021 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Location information
County(ies): Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, Other, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma USGS quad(s): Ano Nuevo, Antioch North, Antioch South, Benicia, Birds Landing, Bolinas, Bouldin Island, Brentwood, Briones Valley, Byron Hot Springs, Calaveras Reservoir, Castle Rock Ridge, Clayton, Cordelia, Cupertino, Cuttings Wharf, Denverton, Diablo, Dublin, Elmira, Fairfield North, Fairfield South, Glen Ellen, Half Moon Bay, Hayward, Honker Bay, Hunters Point, Isleton, Jersey Island, La Costa Valley, La Honda, Las Trampas Ridge, Livermore, Los Gatos, Mare Island, Milpitas, Mindego Hill, Montara Mtn, Mountain View, Mt George, Napa, Newark, Niles, Novato, Oakland East, Oakland West, Palo Alto, Petaluma, Petaluma Point, Petaluma River, Point Bonita, Redwood Point, Richmond, Rio Vista, San Francisco North, San Francisco South, San Geronimo, San Jose East, San Jose West, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Quentin, San Rafael, Santa Teresa Hills, Sears Point, Sonoma, Tassajara, Vine Hill, Walnut Creek, Woodside, Woodward Island
Has informals: Yes
No. resources: 289
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
7/17/2018 vickeryn Added additional citation 'a'.
11/16/2018 SalazarM Added general note
11/27/2018 akmenkalnsj Corrected author and affiliation on addl citation 'a' (Polanco 2016); added San Rafael, Los Gatos, Santa Teresa Hills quads; database complete P-43-000618 CA-SCL-000623 Children's Hospital
P-43-000624 CA-SCL-000677 The 237/880 Site
P-43-000662 CA-SCL-000628 Lockhead Site
P-43-000989 CA-SCL-000806 Buchanan Property
P-43-000990 CA-SCL-000807/H Woolen Mills Chinatown
P-43-001058 CA-SCL-000674 DC-1
P-43-001060 CA-SCL-000678 ARCO Burials
P-43-001071 CA-SCL-000690 CA-SCL-Lick
P-43-001163 CA-SCL-000828 Fuel Farm Site
P-43-001164 CA-SCL-000829 VOIDED: duplicate of P-43-0009 P-43-001172 CA-SCL-000830 Evelyn and Fair Oaks Isolated B P-43-001194 CA-SCL-000832 Iowa Avenue and Sunnyvale Ave P-43-001279 CA-SCL-000846/H PL-1
P-43-001531 CA-SCL-000894H Fox California Theatre
P-43-001594 CA-SCL-000851 MST Site; 195 Tully Road
P-43-001768 CA-SCL-000861 Sanborn Avenue
P-43-001838 CA-SCL-000867 Coolidge Avenue Site
P-43-001871 CA-SCL-000870 971 Schiele Ave., San Jose
P-43-002704 CA-SCL-000919 Penitencia Creek Site
P-43-003005 CA-SCL-000928 Milpitas Great Mall Site
P-48-000007 CA-SOL-000391 Fairfield PEC-1
P-48-000019 CA-SOL-000011 Siebe, Lucchetti
P-48-000033 CA-SOL-000025/H [none]
P-48-000075 CA-SOL-000069 A
P-48-000083 CA-SOL-000236 Nelson No. 236
P-48-000150 CA-SOL-000315 Green Valley 'B'
P-48-000175 CA-SOL-000355/H Lynch Ranch Site
P-48-000176 CA-SOL-000356 Green Valley Creek Site
P-48-000188 CA-SOL-000364/H Rockville/Suisun Roads
P-48-000898 Hale Site
P-49-000199 CA-SON-000227 Nelson No. 208A
P-49-001011 CA-SON-001082/H 1-Lane Site
P-49-001862 CA-SON-002226 Spring Site

229
Report Detail: S-049780
Record status: Verified
12/4/2018 akmenkalnsj Verified
8/9/2019 rinerg add quads: 'Ano Nuevo', 'Castle Rock Ridge' 12/12/2019 hagell added P#s, note, & 'Isleton' to quads.

230
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-037500 2010 Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit for T-Mobile West Corporation, a
Delaware Corporation Candidate BA22803-A
(DSA Dublin High School), 8151 Village
Parkway, Dublin, Alameda County, California
(letter report)
Michael Brandman
Associates
Carrie D. Wills
S-037985 2011 Archaeological Testing Report for the Arroyo Vista Project, City of Dublin, Alameda
County, California
William Self Associates, Inc.Paul FarnsworthSubmitter - WSA Project 2011-11;
Submitter - WSA
Project 2011-13
S-040758 2012 A Cultural Resources Study for a Proposed Recycled Water Expansion Project, Dublin,
Alameda County, California
Tom Origer & AssociatesVirginia Hagensieker and
Janine M. Loyd

OHP PRN -
BUR_2015_0615_001
S-040758a 2013 A Cultural Resources Study for a Proposed Recycled Water Expansion Project, Dublin,
Alameda County, California (revised)
Tom Origer & AssociatesVirginia Hagensiker and
Janine M. Loyd
S-040758b 2015 BUR_2015_0615_001; National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106
Consultation for the Western Dublin Recycled
Water Expansion Project, Alameda County,
California (15-MPRO-110)
Office of Historic
Preservation
Julianne Polanco
S-046220 2015 Zone 7 Water Agency, 2015 Maintenance
Projects, Cultural Resources Survey Report
Environmental Science
Associates
Heidi KoenigSubmitter - ESA
Project #130626.04
S-046220a 2015 Archaeological Monitoring Results - Zone 7 Water Agency 2015 Maintenance Projects
(ESA #130626.04) (letter report)
ESAHeidi Koenig
S-052657 2006 Cultural Resources Study of the Dublin High School Project Sprint/Nextel Site No.

FN99XCO72, 8151 Village Parkway, Dublin,
Alameda County, California 94568
Historic Resource
Associates
Dana E. Supernowicz

231
Report List
Report No. Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s) ResourcesOther IDs S-053003 2019 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency 2018-2019 Channel Bank
Repair Projects – Phase 2
Environmental Science
Associates
Katherine Cleveland and
Heidi Koenig
01-001776, 01-011774, 01-011775,
01-012186, 01-012187
Agency Nbr - Corps
File Number 2018-
00434S;
OTIS Report
Number -
COE_2018_1221_00
1;
OTIS Report
Number -
COE_2018_1221_00
1;
Submitter - ESA
#160463.31;
Submitter - ESA
Project #170544
S-053003a 2019 COE_2018_1221_001, Section 106
Consultation for the proposed Zone 7 Water
Agency Repair of 26 Bank Failures in Dublin
and Pleasanton, Alameda County, California
(Corps File Number 2018-00434S).

Office of Historic
Preservation
Julianne Polanco
S-053003b 2019 Archaeological Monitoring Results for 2018- 2019 Channel Bank Repair Projects Phase 2
(ESA #160463.31) (letter report)
Environmental Science
Associates
Heidi Koenig

232
Report Detail: S-037500
Citation information
Year: 2010 (May)
Title: Cultural Resources Records Search and Site Visit for T-Mobile West Corporation, a Delaware Corporation Candidate BA22803-A (DSA Dublin High School), 8151 Village Parkway, Dublin, Alameda County, California (letter report) Affliliation: Michael Brandman Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 10/28/2010 guldenj
Last modified: 7/11/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Carrie D. Wills
Attributes: Archaeological, Architectural/historical, Field study County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-037500
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
7/10/2019 hagell edited title
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
8151 Village Parkway Dublin 94568

233
Report Detail: S-037985
Citation information
Year: 2011 (Apr)
Title: Archaeological Testing Report for the Arroyo Vista Project, City of Dublin, Alameda County, California Affliliation: William Self Associates, Inc.

No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 6/15/2011 ballesterosr
Last modified: 7/11/2019 moored
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Paul Farnsworth
Attributes: Archaeological, Excavation
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-037985
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
6/28/2019 moored Added collections. Corrected attributes. Removed 'cross reference' to S- 47805 as I'm unsure why they were associated to one another. 7/10/2019 neala added 'other IDs' & city
7/10/2019 hagell edited affiliation
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
Dublin
Type Name
Submitter WSA Project 2011-11
Submitter WSA Project 2011-13
T2S R1E

234
Report Detail: S-040758
Citation information
Year: 2012 (Oct)
Title: A Cultural Resources Study for a Proposed Recycled Water Expansion Project, Dublin, Alameda County, California Affliliation: Tom Origer & Associates
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Location information
Author(s): Virginia Hagensieker and Janine M. Loyd
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-040758
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Year: 2013 (Mar)
Title: A Cultural Resources Study for a Proposed Recycled Water Expansion Project, Dublin, Alameda County, California (revised)
Affiliation: Tom Origer & Associates
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Virginia Hagensiker and Janine M. Loyd
Report type(s): Archaeological, Field study
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 30-60
Year: 2015 (Jul)
Title: BUR_2015_0615_001; National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 Consultation for the Western Dublin Recycled Water Expansion Project, Alameda County, California (15-MPRO-110) Affiliation: Office of Historic Preservation
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Unrestricted
Author(s): Julianne Polanco
Report type(s): OHP Correspondence
Sub-desig.: b
PDF Pages: 61-69
Type Name
OHP PRN BUR_2015_0615_001

235
Report Detail: S-040758
Database record metadata
Entered: 6/10/2013 baileyl
Last modified: 8/16/2016 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Record status: Verified
Date User Action taken
2/29/2016 paganob Added additional citations 'a' and 'b' 8/16/2016 hagell edited title
5/4/2017 rinerg Recode "Concurrence Correspondence" in additional citation title to Type=OHP Correspondence

236
Report Detail: S-046220
Citation information
Year: 2015 (Mar)
Title: Zone 7 Water Agency, 2015 Maintenance Projects, Cultural Resources Survey Report Affliliation: Environmental Science Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 5/5/2015 guldenbreinj
Last modified: 7/11/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Heidi Koenig
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-046220
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
11/5/2015 paganob added additional citation 'a'
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
Dublin
Pleasanton
Year: 2015 (Oct)
Title: Archaeological Monitoring Results - Zone 7 Water Agency 2015 Maintenance Projects (ESA #130626.04) (letter report)
Affiliation: ESA
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Heidi Koenig
Report type(s): Archaeological, Monitoring
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 35-44
Type Name
Submitter ESA Project #130626.04
T3S R1E

237
Report Detail: S-052657
Citation information
Year: 2006 (Mar)
Title: Cultural Resources Study of the Dublin High School Project Sprint/Nextel Site No. FN99XCO72, 8151 Village Parkway, Dublin, Alameda County, California 94568
Affliliation: Historic Resource Associates
No. pages:

Database record metadata
Entered: 6/20/2019 shuddec
Last modified: 5/28/2021 rinerg
IC actions:

Associated resources
General notes
Date User
Address:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Record status: Verified
Location information
Author(s): Dana E. Supernowicz
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-052657
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Has informals: No
No. resources: 0
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
4/7/2020 neala added 'no' to 'recorded resources'
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
8151 Village Parkway Dublin 94568

238
Report Detail: S-053003
Citation information
Year: 2019 (Jan)
Title: Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7 Water Agency 2018-2019 Channel Bank Repair Projects – Phase 2 Affliliation: Environmental Science Associates
No. pages:

Associated resources
General notes
Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Katherine Cleveland and Heidi Koenig
Attributes: Archaeological, Field study
Inventory size:

No. maps:

Identifiers
Report No.: S-053003
Other IDs:

Cross-refs:

Primary No. Trinomial Name
P-01-001776 Arroyo Mocho Canal
P-01-011774 DSRSD 1 Unnamed Railroad Gr
P-01-011775 DSRSD 2 S. San Ramon Creek
P-01-012186 Alamo Canal
Year: 2019 (Mar)
Title: COE_2018_1221_001, Section 106 Consultation for the proposed Zone 7 Water Agency Repair of 26 Bank Failures in Dublin and Pleasanton, Alameda County, California (Corps File Number 2018-00434S).

Affiliation: Office of Historic Preservation
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Unrestricted
Author(s): Julianne Polanco
Report type(s): OHP Correspondence
Sub-desig.: a
PDF Pages: 66-68
Year: 2019 (Oct)
Title: Archaeological Monitoring Results for 2018-2019 Channel Bank Repair Projects Phase 2 (ESA #160463.31) (letter report)
Affiliation: Environmental Science Associates
No. pages:

Inventory size:

Collections: No
Disclosure: Not for publication
Author(s): Heidi Koenig
Report type(s): Archaeological, Field study, Monitoring Sub-desig.: b
PDF Pages: 69-88
Type Name
Submitter ESA Project #170544
OTIS Report Number COE_2018_1221_001
Agency Nbr Corps File Number 2018-00434S
Submitter ESA #160463.31
OTIS Report Number COE_2018_1221_001
See also S-053652

239
Report Detail: S-053003
Database record metadata
Entered: 8/13/2019 vickeryn
Last modified: 7/14/2021 rinerg
IC actions:

Date User
Address:

Record status: Verified
Location information
County(ies): Alameda
USGS quad(s): Dublin
Has informals: No
No. resources: 5
PLSS:

Date User Action taken
8/13/2019 vickeryn Unprocessed resources-2 new. Partial print-out-resources not printed.

Shapefiles
12/19/2019 VickeryN Added additional citation 'a'. Shapefiles. 5/22/2020 rinerg add OTIS Report# (UAID) COE_2018_1221_001; Resources=Yes 7/14/2021 rinerg remove quad location: 'Altamont'
P-01-012187 Tassajara Creek Canal
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
Dublin
Pleasanton
Livermore

240
Primary No. Trinomial
Resource List
Other IDs ReportsType Age Attribute codes Recorded by
P-01-011774 Resource Name - DSRSD 1
Unnamed Railroad Grade;
Voided - P-07-004721
S-047983, S-053003Structure Historic AH07 2010 (Carrie D. Wills, Michael Brandman Associates)

241
Resource Detail: P-01-011774
P-01-011774
Identifying information
Primary No.:

Trinomial:

Attributes
General notes
Other IDs:

Recording events
Associated reports
Location information
County: Alameda
Address:

Database record metadata
Entered: 2/16/2017 kliewerk
Last modified: 7/11/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Collections: No
Management status
Cross-refs:

Disclosure: Not for publication
DSRSD 1 Unnamed Railroad GradeName:

Resource type:

Age:

Information base:

Accession no(s):

Facility:

PLSS:

UTMs:

Record status: Verified
Structure
Historic
Survey
AH07 (Roads/trails/railroad grades)Attribute codes:

USGS quad(s): Dublin
Type Name
Resource Name DSRSD 1 Unnamed Railroad Grade
Voided P-07-004721
Date Recorder(s) Affiliation Notes
Carrie D. Wills Michael Brandman Associates6/4/2010a
Report No. Year Title Affiliation
2011 Section 106 Cultural Resources Assessment,
DSRSD Central Dublin Recycled Water
Distribution and Retrofit Project, City of Dublin,
Alameda County, California
S-047983 Michael Brandman Associates
2019 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency 2018-2019 Channel Bank
Repair Projects – Phase 2
S-053003 Environmental Science Associates
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
6693 Amador Valley Boulevard San Ramon/Dublin 94568
Date User Action taken
2/16/2017 kliewerk record processed from S-47983
6/28/2019 moored Corrected disclosure, and added 'Voided' identifier. 7/11/2019 hagell edited other identifier
Subsumes 07-004721
T2S R1W Sec. MDBM

242
Primary No. Trinomial
Resource List
Other IDs ReportsType Age Attribute codes Recorded by
P-01-011775 Resource Name - DSRSD 2 S.

San Ramon Creek Section;
Other - Section of S. San Ramon
Creek;
Voided - P-07-004722
S-047983, S-
053003, S-054205,
S-054881
Structure Historic HP20 2010 (Carrie D. Wills, Michael
Brandman and Associates)
P-01-012186 Resource Name - Alamo Canal S-053003Structure Historic HP20 2017 (Heidi Koenig, ESA)

243
Resource Detail: P-01-011775
P-01-011775
Identifying information
Primary No.:

Trinomial:

Attributes
General notes
Other IDs:

Recording events
Associated reports
Location information
County: Alameda
Address:

Collections: No
Management status
Cross-refs:

Disclosure: Unrestricted
DSRSD 2 S. San Ramon Creek SectionName:

Resource type:

Age:

Information base:

Accession no(s):

Facility:

PLSS:

UTMs:

Structure
Historic
Survey
HP20 (Canal/aqueduct)Attribute codes:

USGS quad(s): Dublin
Type Name
Resource Name DSRSD 2 S. San Ramon Creek Section
Other Section of S. San Ramon Creek
Voided P-07-004722
Date Recorder(s) Affiliation Notes
Carrie D. Wills Michael Brandman and
Associates
6/4/2010a
Report No. Year Title Affiliation
2011 Section 106 Cultural Resources Assessment,
DSRSD Central Dublin Recycled Water
Distribution and Retrofit Project, City of Dublin,
Alameda County, California
S-047983 Michael Brandman Associates
2019 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency 2018-2019 Channel Bank
Repair Projects – Phase 2
S-053003 Environmental Science Associates
2020 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency, Phase 3 Channel Bank Repair
Projects
S-054205 Environmental Science Associates
2020 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency 2020 Maintenance Projects
S-054881 Environmental Science Associates
Address City Assessor's parcel no. Zip code
6693 Amador Valley Boulevard Dublin 94568
Subsumes 07-004722
Prop. ID OHP Unit Unit Activity ID Status Criteria Evaluator DateOTIS ID Review and Com 6Y Jessica T 3/19/2019684829
Review and Com 6Y Jessica T 3/19/2019684829

244
Resource Detail: P-01-011775
Database record metadata
Entered: 2/16/2017 kliewerk
Last modified: 7/11/2019 hagell
IC actions:

Date User
Record status: Verified
Date User Action taken
2/16/2017 kliewerk record processed from S-47983
6/28/2019 moored Added Voided identifier
7/11/2019 hagell edited recording event

245
Resource Detail: P-01-012186
P-01-012186
Identifying information
Primary No.:

Trinomial:

Attributes
General notes
Other IDs:

Recording events
Associated reports
Location information
County: Alameda
Address:

Database record metadata
Entered: 9/4/2019 surgeonj
Last modified: 7/14/2021 rinerg
IC actions:

Date User
Collections: No
Management status
Cross-refs:

Disclosure: Unrestricted
Alamo CanalName:

Resource type:

Age:

Information base:

Accession no(s):

Facility:

PLSS:

UTMs:

Record status: Verified
Structure
Historic
Survey
HP20 (Canal/aqueduct)Attribute codes:

USGS quad(s): Dublin
Type Name
Resource Name Alamo Canal
Date Recorder(s) Affiliation Notes
Heidi Koenig ESA11/1/2017
Report No. Year Title Affiliation
2019 Cultural Resources Survey Report, Zone 7
Water Agency 2018-2019 Channel Bank
Repair Projects – Phase 2
S-053003 Environmental Science Associates

246
P-01-011774
247
P-01-011774 248
P-01-011774 249
P-01-011775
250
P-01-011775 251
P-01-011775 252
P-01-011775 253
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date

P1. Other Identifier:
*P2. Location:  Not for Publication  Unrestricted *a. County Alameda and
*b. USGS 7.5' Quad Dublin, Calif. Date 1979 Unsectioned Santa Rita landgrant; Mt. Diablo B.M. c. Address City Zip
d. UTM: Zone 10; North end 595616 mE/ 4174496 mN - South end 596494 mE/ 4168914 mN e. Other Locational Data:

*P3b. Resource Attributes: HP20. Canal/aqueduct
*P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo:

View of Alamo Canal, looking
south

*P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Sources: Historic
Prehistoric Both

*P7. Owner and Address:

Zone 7 Water Agency

*P8. Recorded by:

Heidi Koenig, ESA
1425 North McDowell Suite 200
Petaluma, California 94954

*P9. Date Recorded:

November 2017

*P10. Survey Type:

Intensive surface survey

*P11. Report Citation: Koenig, Heidi and Katherine Cleveland, Zone 7 2018-2019 Channel Bank Repair Projects – Phase 2 Cultural Resources Survey Report. Prepared for Zone 7 Water Agency, January 2019. *Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record  Other

DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information
*P3a. Description: The Alamo Canal extends from the southern end of the South San Ramon Creek Canal, where the canal turns from a northwest to southeast direction to a northeast to southwest direction. The canal extends for approximately 4,300 feet , where it crosses below Interstate 580 and continues south along the east side of Interstat e 680 for nearly 3 miles. The trapezoidal canal varies in width from 75–100 feet at the top and 15–25 feet at the bottom with banks approximately 15–20 feet high.

254
DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information
State of California  The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD

*Resource Name or #: Alamo Canal

B1. Historic Name:

B2. Common Name:

B3. Original Use: Canal B4. Present Use: Canal
*B5.Architectural Style: Vernacular
*B6.Construction History:

TheAlamo Canal was channelized to its current configuration in the mid-1960s when Interstate 680 and the surrounding residential, commercial, and business areas were developed. The historic natural drainage on the northern end of the APE has been channelized and modified for flood control purposes to a uniform w idth and shape, allowing for maintenance and repair, and is surrounded by modern development.

*B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location:
*B8. Related Features:

B9a. Architect: NA b. Builder: NA
*B10. Significance: Theme Water conveyence Area
Period of Significance Property Type Applicable Criteria None B11. Additional Resource Attributes:
*B12. References:

B13. Remarks:

*B14. Evaluator: Katherine Cleveland, M.A.

*Date of Evaluation: January 2019
Archival review has determined that the Alamo Canal does not reflect and significant associations with historic events (Criterion A) or individuals (Criterion B). While the canal was used for flood control and irrigation purposes as early as the 1960s, the canal is not significant for this association. Additionally, no individuals associated with Zone 7 appear to have achieved significance fo r their association with the canal. The Alamo Canal is a typical vernacular water conveyance, and does not appear eligible for listing in the National Register under Criterion C (for distinctive characteristics or engineering features). The canal is also not eligible for listing under Criterion D, for the ability to yield information important to history. The Alamo Canal is a common example of flood co ntrol engineering in California. ESA recommends that the Alamo Canal is not eligible for listing in the National Register. see Location Map, page 3
(This space reserved for official comments)
255
S t a t e o f C a lif o rn ia  N a t ura l R e so urce s A g e n cy L O C A T I O N M A P
D E P A R T M E N T O F P A R K S A N D R E C R E A T I O N P rim a ry #
H R I #
T rin o m ia l:
P a g e 3 of 3 * R e so urce N a m e o r N um b e r: Alamo Canal * M a p n a m e : Dublin, CA * S ca le : 1:30000 D P R 5 2 3 J ( R e v. 1 / 1 9 9 5 ) ( W o rd 9 / 2 0 1 3 )* R e q uire d I n f o rm a t io n 0 3,000
Feet
N
0 1,000
Meters
* D a t e o f M a p : 1965
256

Appendix F
PHOTOS

257

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

258
Date Frame Number Site Number Description View
4/13/2022 IMG_6609 P-01-011774 APE overview on west side of railroad embankment NW 4/14/2022 IMG_6638 P-01-011774 APE overview on west side of railroad embankment SE 4/14/2022 IMG_6639 P-01-011774 APE overview on top of railroad embankment SE 4/18/2022 IMG_6699 P-01-011774 APE overview on top of railroad embankment NW 4/18/2022 IMG_6707 P-01-011774 APE overview on east side of railroad embankment S 4/18/2022 IMG_6708 P-01-011774 APE overview on east side of railroad embankment looking at trestle W

CULTURAL RESOURCES PHOTOGRAPH RECORD
Project Name: Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project Project Number: 891.06.55
259
Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project: 891.06.55 Photo Log Page 1/1
IMG_6609
IMG_6638
IMG_6639
IMG_6699
IMG_6707
IMG_6708
260
Attachment 3
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted 10/17/23 Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. XX - 23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, WAIVING A MINOR BID IRREGULARITY, AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO GOODFELLOW BROS. CALIFORNIA, LLC FOR THE IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE PROJECT – PHASE 1, CIP NO. PK0422
WHEREAS, on October 1, 2013, the City Council approved the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan to construct a 12.13-acre nature park and open space adjacent to the existing Iron Horse Regional Trail from the Dublin/San Ramon city limit to the confluence of Alamo and South San Ramon Creeks; and
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2021, the City Council approved the filing of an application for the Local Assistance Specified Grant from the State of California, Natural Resources Agency, Department of Parks and Recreation, and the Office of Grants and Local Services in the amount of $2,294,000; and
WHEREAS, the design team has completed the plans and specifications for Phase 1 of the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space project, CIP No. PK0422, (Project) which will construct approximately 2,000 linear feet of new trail and park amenities from Amador Valley Boulevard to Stagecoach Park with spur trails connecting the Project to Stagecoach Park and to the existing Iron Horse Regional Trail; and
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin did, on September 13, 2023, publicly open, examine, and declare all sealed bids for doing the work described in the approved plans and specifications for the Project, which plans and specifications are hereby expressly referred to for a description of said work and for all particulars relative to the proceedings under the request for bids; and WHEREAS, Goodfellow Bros. California, LLC’s bid contained a minor bid irregularity in that there was one document submitted that was missing a signature, however, the signed document has since been submitted and the Public Contract Code and the City’s bid documents authorize the City to waive any minor irregularity and proceed with the award of the contract; and WHEREAS, the bids were submitted to Staff and Goodfellow Bros. California, LLC was determined to be the lowest, responsive, and responsible bidder for doing said work.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby approves the Plans and Specifications for the Project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDthat the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby waive the minor bid irregularity in the proposal submitted by Goodfellow Bros. California, LLC.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDthat the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby award the Contract for the Project to the lowest, responsive, and responsible bidder, Goodfellow Bros.

California, LLC. at a base bid of three-million three-hundred twenty-four thousand four-hundred 261
Reso. No. XX-23, Item X.X, Adopted 10/17/23 Page 2 of 2 ninety-one dollars and zero cents ($3,324,491.00), the particulars of which bids are on file in the Office of the Public Works Director.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby authorize the City Manager or designee to approve the Project Contract Change Orders based on the appropriated funds designated for the Project up to the contingency amount of three- hundred thirty-five thousand dollars and zero cents ($335,000.00).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager or designee is authorized to execute the Construction Agreement with Goodfellow Bros. California, LLC and make any necessary, non- substantive changes to carry out the intent of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
City Clerk
262
Number PK0422 Program PARKS
PRIOR
YEARS
2022-2023
BUDGET 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027
FUTURE

YEARS TOTALS
9100 $1,096 $173,704 $52,000 $52,000 $278,800
9200 $181,315 $848,685 $610,000 $196,505 $1,836,505
9400 $2,294,000 $384,100 $6,229,595 $8,907,695
9500 $110,500 $255,000 $255,000 $620,500
$182,411 $3,426,889 $1,301 ,100 $6,733,100 $11,643,500
PRIOR
YEARS
2022-2023
BUDGET 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027
FUTURE

YEARS TOTALS
4100 $182,411 $1,132,889 $1, 251,100 $4,514,600 $7,081,000 2403 $2,294,000 $2,294,000
9998 $2,218,500 $2,218,500
1001 $50,000 $50,000
$182,411 $3,426,889 $1,301 ,100 $6,733,100 $11,643,500

ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT
2022-2027 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE
TOTAL
State Park Grant
General Fund
Miscellaneous

ESTIMATED COSTS

FUNDING SOURCE
TOTAL
Public Facility Fees
Unidentified
Salaries & Benefits
Contract Services
Improvements

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project provides for the planning, design, and construction of 12.13 acres of a nature park and open space adjacent to the Iron Horse Trail, from the Dublin/San Ramon city limit to the confluence of Alamo and South San Ramon Creeks, that may be developed in partnership with Zone 7 Water Agency. The park size could increase to over 20 acres of usable parkland when combined with adjacent Zone 7 Water Agency property. The park will be designed in accordance with the Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Master Plan, which was approved by City Council on October 1, 2013. The City has already acquired the 12.13 acres and the balance of the parkland would be accessible through an easement and operational agreement with Zone 7 Water Agency. The City will continue to pursue the acquisition of the Alameda County portion of the Iron Horse Trail corridor to add to the City's portion of the parkland. Planning and design for Phase 1 began in Fiscal Year 2021-22 and construction of the first phase will begin in Fiscal Year 2022-23.

In addition to the Public Facility Fee, possible funding sources are additional statewide grants or federal grants for projects that provide non-motorized infrastructure and enhancements that promote new or alternate access to parks, waterways, outdoor recreational pursuits, and forested or other natural environments to encourage health-related active transportation and opportunities for residents and trail users to reconnect with nature, such as Active Transportation Program grants or Proposition 68.

ANNUAL OPERATING IMPACT: To be determined
MANAGING DEPARTMENT: Public Works
Attachment 4
263
Iron Horse Nature Park and Open Space Project: Phase 1 PK0422
Bid Date:

ITEM Qty. UNIT Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension 11 LS $165,000.00 $165,000.00 $172,000.00 $172,000.00 $170,000.00 $170,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $218,205.00 $218,205.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 21 LS $70,000.00 $70,000.00 $250,000.00 $250,000.00 $137,000.00 $137,000.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $21,024.00 $21,024.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 31 LS
$80,000.00 $80,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $85,000.00 $85,000.00 $32,409.00 $32,409.00 $8,115.00 $8,115.00 $33,000.00 $33,000.00 42 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $13,000.00 $26,000.00 $1,800.00 $3,600.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $8,615.00 $17,230.00 $19,000.00 $38,000.00 51 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $39,800.00 $39,800.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $36,256.00 $36,256.00 $33,800.00 $33,800.00 61 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $95,000.00 $95,000.00 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 $2,920.00 $2,920.00 $37,100.00 $37,100.00 71 LS
$18,000.00 $18,000.00 $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $13,433.00 $13,433.00 $14,845.00 $14,845.00 83 EA $1,400.00 $4,200.00 $1,500.00 $4,500.00 $1,750.00 $5,250.00 $1,825.00 $5,475.00 $751.00 $2,253.00 $830.00 $2,490.00 9 3,046 SF $8.00 $24,368.00 $8.00 $24,368.00 $10.00 $30,460.00 $7.00 $21,322.00 $7.00 $21,322.00 $7.50 $22,845.00 10 17 EA $500.00 $8,500.00 $1,000.00 $17,000.00 $1,100.00 $18,700.00 $1,350.00 $22,950.00 $676.00 $11,492.00 $747.00 $12,699.00 11 576 LF $6.00 $3,456.00 $17.00 $9,792.00 $10.00 $5,760.00 $35.00 $20,160.00 $3.50 $2,016.00 $4.00 $2,304.00 12 30 LF $50.00 $1,500.00 $35.00 $1,050.00 $50.00 $1,500.00 $7.50 $225.00 $15.00 $450.00 $17.00 $510.00 13 23 LF $70.00 $1,610.00 $50.00 $1,150.00 $25.00 $575.00 $8.00 $184.00 $169.00 $3,887.00 $22.00 $506.00 14 110 LF $180.00 $19,800.00 $270.00 $29,700.00 $250.00 $27,500.00 $125.00 $13,750.00 $293.00 $32,230.00 $437.00 $48,070.00 15 4,500 TON $95.00 $427,500.00 $65.00 $292,500.00 $70.00 $315,000.00 $115.00 $517,500.00 $360.00 $1,620,000.00 $220.00 $990,000.00 16 3,830 CY $56.00 $214,480.00 $48.00 $183,840.00 $60.00 $229,800.00 $100.00 $383,000.00 $48.00 $183,840.00 $214.00 $819,620.00 17 765 CY
$50.00 $38,250.00 $110.00 $84,150.00 $35.00 $26,775.00 $125.00 $95,625.00 $65.00 $49,725.00 $220.00 $168,300.00 18 1,500 CY $50.00 $75,000.00 $82.00 $123,000.00 $114.00 $171,000.00 $100.00 $150,000.00 $73.00 $109,500.00 $178.00 $267,000.00 19 500 CY $100.00 $50,000.00 $140.00 $70,000.00 $80.00 $40,000.00 $175.00 $87,500.00 $144.00 $72,000.00 $237.00 $118,500.00 20 2,550 SF $32.00 $81,600.00 $17.00 $43,350.00 $26.00 $66,300.00 $30.00 $76,500.00 $20.00 $51,000.00 $29.00 $73,950.00 21 965 SF $18.00 $17,370.00 $20.00 $19,300.00 $35.00 $33,775.00 $25.00 $24,125.00 $24.00 $23,160.00 $35.00 $33,775.00 22 4,165 SF $35.00 $145,775.00 $45.00 $187,425.00 $55.00 $229,075.00 $40.00 $166,600.00 $39.00 $162,435.00 $79.00 $329,035.00 23 10 CY $1,200.00 $12,000.00 $6,200.00 $62,000.00 $7,000.00 $70,000.00 $7,500.00 $75,000.00 $9,531.00 $95,310.00 $4,550.00 $45,500.00 24 48 CY
$1,850.00 $88,800.00 $2,800.00 $134,400.00 $3,300.00 $158,400.00 $3,000.00 $144,000.00 $3,355.00 $161,040.00 $2,789.00 $133,872.00 25 6,200 SY $7.00 $43,400.00 $5.10 $31,620.00 $5.00 $31,000.00 $35.00 $217,000.00 $34.00 $210,800.00 $16.00 $99,200.00 26 5,900 SY $7.00 $41,300.00 $7.50 $44,250.00 $7.00 $41,300.00 $25.00 $147,500.00 $7.00 $41,300.00 $12.00 $70,800.00 27 5,800 TON $60.00 $348,000.00 $32.00 $185,600.00 $50.00 $290,000.00 $80.00 $464,000.00 $74.00 $429,200.00 $63.00 $365,400.00 28 600 TON $250.00 $150,000.00 $160.00 $96,000.00 $180.00 $108,000.00 $150.00 $90,000.00 $213.00 $127,800.00 $193.00 $115,800.00 29 200 SF $40.00 $8,000.00 $32.00 $6,400.00 $30.00 $6,000.00 $75.00 $15,000.00 $51.00 $10,200.00 $88.00 $17,600.00 30 138 LF $300.00 $41,400.00 $165.00 $22,770.00 $290.00 $40,020.00 $500.00 $69,000.00 $148.00 $20,424.00 $171.00 $23,598.00 31 40 LF $310.00 $12,400.00 $210.00 $8,400.00 $355.00 $14,200.00 $775.00 $31,000.00 $281.00 $11,240.00 $205.00 $8,200.00 32 40 LF $380.00 $15,200.00 $300.00 $12,000.00 $580.00 $23,200.00 $800.00 $32,000.00 $323.00 $12,920.00 $446.00 $17,840.00 33 1 LS $475,000.00 $475,000.00 $450,000.00 $450,000.00 $485,000.00 $485,000.00 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $406,099.00 $406,099.00 $587,000.00 $587,000.00 34 2,500 LF $7.00 $17,500.00 $6.40 $16,000.00 $12.00 $30,000.00 $3.50 $8,750.00 $13.00 $32,500.00 $3.50 $8,750.00 35 2,000 LF $25.00 $50,000.00 $25.00 $50,000.00 $6.50 $13,000.00 $32.50 $65,000.00 $16.00 $32,000.00 $9.00 $18,000.00 36 83 LF $75.00 $6,225.00 $75.00 $6,225.00 $76.00 $6,308.00 $85.00 $7,055.00 $87.00 $7,221.00 $127.00 $10,541.00 37 210 LF $98.00 $20,580.00 $100.00 $21,000.00 $112.00 $23,520.00 $85.00 $17,850.00 $113.00 $23,730.00 $127.00 $26,670.00 38 208 LF $150.00 $31,200.00 $380.00 $79,040.00 $186.00 $38,688.00 $150.00 $31,200.00 $172.00 $35,776.00 $635.00 $132,080.00 39 6 EA $1,150.00 $6,900.00 $1,200.00 $7,200.00 $2,450.00 $14,700.00 $2,875.00 $17,250.00 $1,322.00 $7,932.00 $2,921.00 $17,526.00

BASE BID

REMOVE CONCRETE FLATWORK

REMOVE CONCRETE PAD AND PICNIC TABLE

TRAFFIC CONTROL AND CONSTRUCTION AREA
SIGNS

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL

CLEARING, GRUBBING, AND TREE PROTECTION

CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT AND STAKING

CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS

REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCE

REMOVE RAILROAD BRIDGE AND ABUTMENTS

REMOVE TREE AND ROOT BALL

CONCRETE SEATWALL

CONCRETE HEADWALL AND WINGWALLS FOR
30" RCP CULVERTS
McGuire and HesterO.C. Jones & Sons, Inc.Goodfellow Bros. LLC

EXCAVATE, STOCKPILE, AND DISPOSE SOIL
MATERIALS – CLASS II

REMOVE CHAIN LINK GATES

EXCAVATION AND GRADING IN STAGECOACH

PARK AND WETLAND MITIGATION AREA

EXCAVATION TO TRAIL SUBGRADE
RELOCATE 6" HDPE RECYCLED WATER LINE

SUBGRADE PREPARATION

GEOGRID
CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE
HOT MIX ASPHALT PAVEMENT (3-INCH)

ENGINEERED FILL

REMOVE IRON FENCE

COBBLES
12" RCP CULVERTS

TOPSOIL

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

CONCRETE DRIVEWAY

PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE PAVING

DOUBLE RAIL WOOD FENCE

CITY OF DUBLIN

ENGINEERING DIVISION

BID SUMMARY
9/13/2023, 2:00 pm
Project Name:

Project No. :

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

DESCRIPTION

MOBILIZATION

METAL RAILING

METAL BOLLARDS
18" RCP CULVERT
30" RCP CULVERTS

ARCH BRIDGE

SILT FENCE

TEMPORARY FENCE

CHAIN LINK FENCE WITH GATE
Buhler CommercialCarone and Company, Inc. Suulutaaq Inc.

Attachment 5
264
ITEM Qty. UNIT Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension 40 1 EA $105,000.00 $105,000.00 $115,000.00 $115,000.00 $93,650.00 $93,650.00 $125,000.00 $125,000.00 $22,403.00 $22,403.00 $104,902.00 $104,902.0 0 41 1 EA $32,000.00 $32,000.00 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $7,189.00 $7,189.00 $32,545.00 $32,545.00 42 3 EA $5,600.00 $16,800.00 $5,800.00 $17,400.00 $4,750.00 $14,250.00 $2,500.00 $7,500.00 $5,278.00 $15,834.00 $4,344.00 $13,032.00 43 3 EA $1,500.00 $4,500.00 $5,200.00 $15,600.00 $3,240.00 $9,720.00 $8,500.00 $25,500.00 $2,566.00 $7,698.00 $6,500.00 $19,500.00 44 1 EA $65,000.00 $65,000.00 $37,000.00 $37,000.00 $50,378.00 $50,378.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,883.00 $10,883.00 $44,120.00 $44,120.00 45 1 EA $500.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $582.00 $582.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,402.00 $1,402.00 $2,654.00 $2,654.00 46 1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,990.00 $10,990.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $7,051.00 $7,051.00 $12,280.00 $12,280.00 47 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 $2,100.00 $4,200.00 $967.00 $1,934.00 $1,750.00 $3,500.00 $2,217.00 $4,434.00 $2,440.00 $4,880.00 48 3 TON $1,900.00 $5,700.00 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 $1,594.00 $4,782.00 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $3,725.00 $11,175.00 $1,549.00 $4,647.00 49 9 EA $650.00 $5,850.00 $350.00 $3,150.00 $520.00 $4,680.00 $2,000.00 $18,000.00 $750.00 $6,750.00 $707.00 $6,363.00 50 5 EA $3,400.00 $17,000.00 $2,900.00 $14,500.00 $4,000.00 $20,000.00 $4,000.00 $20,000.00 $3,908.00 $19,540.00 $2,225.00 $11,125.00 51 - -
52 1 EA $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,275.00 $1,275.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,690.00 $1,690.00 $2,654.00 $2,654.00 53 3 EA $800.00 $2,400.00 $1,600.00 $4,800.00 $651.00 $1,953.00 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 $814.00 $2,442.00 $1,549.00 $4,647.00 54 1 EA $3,200.00 $3,200.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,740.00 $2,740.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $2,342.00 $2,342.00 $3,606.00 $3,606.00 55 5,500 SY $2.00 $11,000.00 $1.50 $8,250.00 $2.00 $11,000.00 $4.50 $24,750.00 $1.75 $9,625.00 $2.00 $11,000.00 56 8,220 SF $1.40 $11,508.00 $1.50 $12,330.00 $1.25 $10,275.00 $1.75 $14,385.00 $1.75 $14,385.00 $2.00 $16,440.00 57 34 EA $360.00 $12,240.00 $480.00 $16,320.00 $307.00 $10,438.00 $325.00 $11,050.00 $322.00 $10,948.00 $356.00 $12,104.00 58 93 EA $150.00 $13,950.00 $70.00 $6,510.00 $128.00 $11,904.00 $85.00 $7,905.00 $86.00 $7,998.00 $95.00 $8,835.00 59 4,085 SF $2.00 $8,170.00 $2.70 $11,029.50 $2.00 $8,170.00 $4.00 $16,340.00 $4.00 $16,340.00 $4.00 $16,340.00 60 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $57,600.00 $57,600.00 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 $34,474.00 $34,474.00 $38,100.00 $38,100.00 61 500 FT $26.00 $13,000.00 $15.00 $7,500.00 $22.00 $11,000.00 $28.75 $14,375.00 $29.00 $14,500.00 $32.00 $16,000.00 62 1,500 FT $5.00 $7,500.00 $12.00 $18,000.00 $4.50 $6,750.00 $16.00 $24,000.00 $16.00 $24,000.00 $18.00 $27,000.00 63 1 EA $270.00 $270.00 $500.00 $500.00 $226.00 $226.00 $500.00 $500.00 $460.00 $460.00 $508.00 $508.00 64 4 EA $780.00 $3,120.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 $661.00 $2,644.00 $1,500.00 $6,000.00 $1,551.00 $6,204.00 $1,715.00 $6,860.00 65 5 EA $630.00 $3,150.00 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 $534.00 $2,670.00 $1,100.00 $5,500.00 $1,092.00 $5,460.00 $1,205.00 $6,025.00 66 1 EA $830.00 $830.00 $200.00 $200.00 $703.00 $703.00 $850.00 $850.00 $839.00 $839.00 $927.00 $927.00 67 21 EA $62.00 $1,302.00 $50.00 $1,050.00 $53.00 $1,113.00 $50.00 $1,050.00 $52.00 $1,092.00 $57.00 $1,197.00 68 32 EA $81.00 $2,592.00 $110.00 $3,520.00 $69.00 $2,208.00 $150.00 $4,800.00 $138.00 $4,416.00 $152.00 $4,864.00 69 300 SF $20.00 $6,000.00 $10.00 $3,000.00 $17.00 $5,100.00 $18.00 $5,400.00 $17.00 $5,100.00 $19.00 $5,700.00 70 500 FT $10.00 $5,000.00 $15.00 $7,500.00 $8.00 $4,000.00 $11.50 $5,750.00 $11.50 $5,750.00 $13.00 $6,500.00 71 1 EA $375.00 $375.00 $500.00 $500.00 $316.00 $316.00 $375.00 $375.00 $369.00 $369.00 $406.00 $406.00 72 18 EA $40.00 $720.00 $65.00 $1,170.00 $32.00 $576.00 $30.00 $540.00 $29.00 $522.00 $32.00 $576.00 TOTAL $3,324,491.00 $3,480,559.50 $3,540,833.00 $4,395,000.00 $4,611,300.00 $5,459,063.00 ITEM Qty. UNIT Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension Unit Cost Extension 11 L S $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $96,000.00 $96,000.00 $49,500.00 $49,500.00 $67,500.00 $67,500.00 $17,225.00 $17,225.00 $30,375.00 $30,375.00 2 240 LF $145.00 $34,800.00 $175.00 $42,000.00 $188.00 $45,120.00 $125.00 $30,000.00 $172.00 $41,280.00 $155.00 $37,200.00 3 2,100 LF $125.00 $262,500.00 $235.00 $493,500.00 $250.00 $525,000.00 $225.00 $472,500.00 $230.00 $483,000.00 $150.00 $315,000.00 48 E A $16,000.00 $128,000.00 $1,850.00 $14,800.00 $2,070.00 $16,560.00 $10,000.00 $80,000.00 $1,823.00 $14,584.00 $3,500.00 $28,000.00 TOTAL ADDITIVE ALTERNATES $485,300.00 $646,300.00 $636,180.00 $650,000.00 $556,089.00 $410,575.00 Goodfellow Bros. LLC O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc. McGuire and Hester Carone and Company, Inc. Suulutaaq Inc. Buhler Commercial

DESCRIPTION

WOOD ROUNDS
BENCH

NOT USED

PET WASTE STATION

BIKE RACK

BIKE REPAIR STATION

INTERPRETIVE SIGNS B, C AND D

ENTRY SIGN

RESET SIGN AND POST

ADDITIVE ALTERNATES

APPARENT LOW BIDDER
Goodfellow Bros. LLC O.C. Jones & Sons, Inc. McGuire and Hester

SHADE STRUCTURE A

SHADE STRUCTURE B

PICNIC TABLE

INTERPRETIVE SIGN A

PARK RULES SIGNS AND POST

BOULDERS

BASE BID

HYDROSEEDING
MULCH

PLANTINGS - TREES

PLANTINGS - SHRUBS

PLANTINGS - LAWN

LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE
IRRIGATION 2" MAIN LINE

IRRIGATION LATERAL LINES
2" GATE VALVE

DESCRIPTION

BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE POTHOLING

PULL BOXES
2-2" CONDUITS
6-2" CONDUITS
TWO WIRE/1.25" CONDUIT

QUICK COUPLING VALVE

1.5" REMOTE CONTROL VALVE
1" REMOTE CONTROL VALVE
1" REMOTE CONTROL VALVE (DRIP)

POP UP SPRINKLER

POP UP ROTOR

DRIPLINE RING

BUBBLER
Buhler CommercialCarone and Company, Inc. Suulutaaq Inc.

265
RESOLUTION NO. 166 - 13

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN

ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REZONE WITH A RELATED STAGE 1/ 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR

THE FUTURE IRON HORSE NATURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE PROJECT PLPA- 2013- 00044
WHEREAS, the City Council has entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement to acquire approximately 12.13 acres of land from Union Pacific Railroad with the intent of developing a public park; and
WHEREAS, Zone 7 Water Agency owns approximately 22. 8 acres adjacent to the proposed future park site that may be restored for and enhanced for open space and stream corridor uses; and
WHEREAS, the implementation of the future park project requires a General Plan Amendment to re-designate the proposed park site from having no General Plan land use designation to Parks/Public Recreation and to re-designate the Zone 7 parcels from having a split General Plan land use designation of Undesignated/ Stream Corridor to Open Space/ Stream Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the implementation of the future park project requires that the park site be rezoned from " Unclassified" to " Planned Development" while the Zone 7 parcels do not require any rezoning action; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act certain projects are required to be reviewed for environmental impacts and when applicable, environmental documents prepared; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared for the Project, which includes a General Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone, amendment to the citywide Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and construction of a linear park, potential South San Ramon Creek realignment, and potential Iron Horse Regional Trail realignment on approximately 35 acres of land (12 acres to be owned by the City of Dublin as the public park and 23 acres owned by Zone 7 Water Agency) and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the Initial Study it was determined that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures identified in the document will reduce impacts to a less then significant level. A Mitigated Negative Declaration dated August 2, 2013 was prepared and circulated with the Initial Study; and WHEREAS, the Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (" Mitigated Negative Declaration") was circulated for public review from August 5, 2013 to September 4, 2013 Exhibit A); and

Attachment 6
266
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin received two comment letters during the public review period that have been incorporated into the Response to Environmental Comments dated September 5, 2013 ( Exhibit B); and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on the Proposed Project on September 10, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and adopted Resolution 13-24 ( incorporated herein by reference) recommending that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on the Project on October 1, 2013 at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report ( incorporated herein by reference) was submitted recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did review and consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration, all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth prior to taking action on the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related project and environmental documents, and all of the documents incorporated herein by reference, are available for review in the City Planning Division a Dublin City Hall, file PLPA-2013-00044 during normal business hours. The location and custodian of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration and other documents that constitute the record of proceedings for the Project is the City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA, 94568, file PLPA- 2011- 00050.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED as follows:

A. The Dublin City Council has reviewed and considered the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration including comments received during the public review period, prior to acting on the Project.

B. The Mitigated Negative Declaration adequately describes the environmental impacts of the Project. On the basis of the whole record before it, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project as mitigated will have a significant effect on the environment.

C. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines.

267
D. The MitigatedNegativeDeclarationis completeand adequateand reflectsthe City's independent judgment and analysis as to the environmental effects of the Project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that based on the above findings, the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration for PLPA- 2013- 00044, consisting of the Initial Study/ Negative Declaration ( attached as Exhibit A) and the Response to Environmental Comments ( attached as Exhibit B), and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( attached as Exhibit C), all of which are incorporated herein by reference.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
1st
day of October, 2013, by the following
vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Biddle, Gupta, Hart, and Mayor Sbranti NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Haubert
ABSTAIN: None
Mayor
ATTEST:

City Clerk
Reso No, 166- 13, Adopted 10- 1- 13, Item 6. 1 Page 3 of 3 268
MINI'm
100 00c Plaza
Dublin, Caffornia 94568
Phone ( 925) 833- 6650
Fax: ( 925) 833- 6651
City Council
925) 833- 6650
City Manager
925) 833- 6650
Community Development
925) 833- 6610
Economic Development
925) 833- 6650
Fiji ance/ Ad rnin services
925) 833- 664: 0,
Fire Prevention
925) 833- 6606
Human Resources
925) 833- 6605,
Parks & Community services
925) 556- 4500
Police
925) 833- 6670
Public Works/ Engineering
925) 833 - 6` 30
Dublin
kmad
201- 1
www. dublin. ca. gov
City of Dublin
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construction of a linear park, potential South San Ramon Creek realignment,, and potential iron Horse Regional Trail realignment on approximately 35 acres of land (12 acres to be owned by the City of Dublin as the public park and 23, acres owned by Zone 7 ' Water Agency). Proposed uses are primarily passive, but would also include some areas of higher activity recreation uses. Pedestrian and bicycle connections would be made with surrounding neighborhoods and Dublin High School. The development of the park may also include realignment of the Iron Horse Trail and the existing Zone 7 watercourse within the park. Construction of the park would require approval of a General Plan Amendment and rezoning by the City of Dublin as well as an amendment to the City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

LOCATION. East side of the iron Horse Regional Trail, generally between Amador Valley Boulevard and the northern City limits,
APPLICANT/ LEAD AGENCY., Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner, City of Dublin Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568 DETERMINATION: Staff recommends that although the above project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made and incorporated into the project, and because a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be adopted that mitigates any projkt- related 'impacts of this project to a level of insignificance through the adoption of mitigation measures and a Mitigation Monitoring Program. l( ristilBascom Date
Principal Planner
A copyof the InitialStudydocumentingthe reasonsto supportthe abovefindingis available at the City of Dublin, Community Development Department, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin, CA 94568, or by calling (925) 833-6610 during normal businesshours.

Date Published: August 7, 2013
Date Mailed to County Clerk for Posting: August 2, 2013 Date Notice Mailed: August 2, 2013
Considered by: Dublin City Council
Ow
NOD filed:

Council Resolution No.:
269
f'.

I
Project:

Iron Horse Linear Park
Lead Agency:

City ® f Dublin
270
Table of Contents
Introduction..................................................................................... .............................. 2 Contact Person & Sponsor ............................................................. .............................. 2 Project Location and Context ........................................................ .............................. 2 ProjectDescription .......................................................................... .............................. 3 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................ .............................10 Determination................................................................................... ............................. 10 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .......................................... ............................. 12 EarlierAnalyses ................................................................................ ............................. 13 Discussion of Checklist ................................................................... ............................. 24

1. Aesthetics .................................................................. ............................. 24

2. Agricultural Resources ............................................ ............................. 25

3. Air Quality/ Greenhouse Gas Analysis ................ .............................25

4. Biological Resources ................................................ ............................. 27

5. Cultural Resources ................................................... ............................. 30

6. Geology and Soils .................................................... .............................32

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................... ............................. 33

8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................... ............................. 33

9. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................... .............................35

10. Land Use and Planning ........................................... .............................37

11. Mineral Resources .................................................... ............................. 37

12. Noise .......................................................................... ............................. 37

13. Population and Housing ......................................... .............................42

14. Public Services .......................................................... ............................. 42

15. Recreation .................................................................. ............................. 43

16. Transportation/ Traffic ............................................ ............................. 43

17. Utilities and Service Systems .................................. ............................. 44

18. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................... .............................45 InitialStudy Preparers .................................................................... .............................47 Agencies and Organizations Consulted ....................................... ............................. 47 References......................................................................................... ............................. 47 Attachment 1- Biological Reconnaissance ..........................

Attachment 2- Preliminary Wetland Determination .................. .............................49 Attachment 3- Acoustic Report., ................................................................................. 50 List of Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Regional Location .......................................................... .............................. 6 Exhibit2: Site Context .................................................................... .............................. 7 Exhibit3: Park Parcel ...................................................................... .............................. 8 271
City of Dublin
Environmental Checklist/
Initial Study
Introduction
This Initial Study hasbeen prepared in accord with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) and assessesthe potential environmental impacts of implementing the proposed project describedbelow. The Initial Study consistsof a completed environmental checklist and a brief explanation of the environmental topics addressed in the checklist.

Project Sponsor & Contact Person
City of Dublin
Parks and Community ServicesDepartment
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin CA 94568
925) 833 6646
Attn: Rosemary Alex, Parks and Facilities Development Coordinator Project Location and Context
The City of Dublin is comprised of approximately 14.59 squaremiles of land area lying in easternAlamedaCounty, alsoknown astheLivermore - Amador Valley, or the Tri- Valley area. Surrounding jurisdictions include the City of SanRamon and unincorporatedContraCostaCounty to thenorth, unincorporatedAlamedaCounty to the east and west and the cities of Pleasanton and Livermore to the south.

Exhibit 1 showsthelocationof Dublin in relation to surrounding communitiesand other major features.

The proposed Iron Horse Linear Park would be located in the approximate center of Dublin, generally located between Amador Valley Boulevard and the Dublin -San Ramon City Limit Line along the Iron Horse Trail and former Union Pacific Railroad tracks. Thecurrentlocationof theSouthSanRamonCreekformsthewesterlyboundary of the proposed municipal park. Another long, linear parcel of land owned by Alameda Countyis adjacentto the easterlyboundaryof theproposedpark site. Thereis a portion of the proposed park that is on the south side of Amador Valley Boulevard.

Theproposedpark is approximately5,900feetin lengthwith awidth rangingfrom approximately 100to 150feet. The total size of the park site is approximately 12.13 acres. The park site is Assessor Parcel Number 941 - 2768 - 006 -02.

City of Dublin Page 2
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
272
To the west of the proposed park site is a linear parcel of land owned by the Alameda County Flood Control District ( "ACFCD" or " Zone 7 Water Agency "). This property is occupiedby SouthSanRamonCreek, which is aflood controlfacility owned and operated by the District, and to the eastof the creek lies the Iron Horse RegionalTrail, which is operatedby theEastBayRegionalParkDistrict. Thetotal size of the land owned by Zone 7 is 22.82acresand includes AssessorParcel Numbers 941 - 0190 - 001 -01, 941 - 0190 - 001 --05, 941- 0191 - 095 -00, 941 -0205- 001 -12, and 941 - 0205 - 001 --63 ( partial).

The park site is vacant and was formerly a Union Pacific railroad track. The tracks were located on a small berm in the approximate center of the site with embankments on either side leading to small depressions. A railroad trestle remains on the site from the previous railroad use.

Vegetation on the site consistsprimarily of non - native grasses, including but not limited to wild oats, ryegrass and ripgut brome. A number of oak and willow trees grow on the site. Due to previous grading of the corridor, a number of jurisdictional wetlands exist on the proposed park site, totaling 0.51 acres.

Existing vehicle accessto the proposed park site is limited to a gate on the north side of Amador Valley Boulevard. A number of informal pedestrian connectionsexist along the corridor from adjacentneighborhoods.

An east -west underground gasoline and petroleum line maintained by Kinder - Morgan runs along the eastside of the site, but outside the proposed park area. A fiber optic underground conduit extendsalongthewestsideof the sitewithin the proposedpark area. Additionally thereareoverheadtransmissionlinesoperatedby PGandEthat run north and southalongtheproperty line sharedby Zone7andthe proposed park site.

Surrounding land usesinclude single and multi- family residential dwellings and the City' s Stagecoach Park to the east. The Iron Horse regional multi-- use trail and south San Ramon Creek/ Zone 7 Drainage canal to the west, with residential uses and Dublin High School further to the west. Residential and light industrial uses lie to the north within San Ramon. Residential uses have been constructed south of the proposed park site.

Exhibit 2 shows the location of project site with surrounding usesand other features.

Exhibit 3 shows the proposed park parcel of land.

Project Description
Background. Based on the City' s Parks and RecreationMaster Plan, the central portion of Dublin is currently underservedwith localparks. TheCity'sadoptedratio of parkland to population is 5 acres of parks per 1,000 residents. There is an estimated deficitof 12acresof parkland in the centralportion of Dublin. Theavailability of the City of Dublin Page 3
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
273
vacant former Union Pacific property to becomea City park would reduce this identified deficit.

Proposed Park. Although no specific park design has been formally selectedby the City of Dublin, the City has been exploring multiple conceptsfor future usesthat could occur in the park and has developed a conceptsite plan with community participation and support. The City is aware of the closeproximity of residential usesalong the corridor andthe conceptsiteplan hasanumberof low - intensity usesthatinclude amix of quieter, passive uses near residential areas with a few nodes of more active uses. A limited number of small structures would be constructed on the park site, and several of the following usesare likely to be included in the future park plan:

Re- aligned Iron Horse Regional Trail
Realigned South San Ramon Creek
Expanded Wetland Areas with Boardwalk Trails and Wildlife Viewing Platforms Children' s play area
Gathering space/ outdoor classroom(s)
A nature interpretative area
Picnic areas
Community garden
Children' s garden
A riparian forest
Protected and / or preserved wetlands
Public restrooms
Parking area
The City is currently undertaking a comprehensive community outreach program to identify park designs and additional usesmay ultimately be selected. The proposed park will likely include providing pedestrianandbicyclelinkageswith surrounding residential areas east and west of the site as well as a connection to Dublin High School and StagecoachPark, a local City park.

The park also is also expected to include realignment of the South San Ramon Creek and relocation of the Iron Horse Trail so that the creek and the trail could have a curvilinear route and pathway through the park rather than being linear and adjacentto the park ( as currently exists). If the final park plan were to include the realignment of the creek and trail, the parcels that currently comprise the creek channel and regional trail would continue to be owned by the Zone 7, although they would be integrated into the park development and would function as an extension of the space.

A smallvehicleparking lot is expectedto beprovided adjacentto Amador ValleyBlvd.

Potable water and sewer lines would need to be extended to portions of the future park to support public restrooms. Recycled water lines would also be extended into portions of the project site for irrigation of future landscaped areas.

Theoperationalhoursof thepark areexpectedto bedaily, sunriseto sunset.

City of Dublin Page 4
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
274
City Approvals. The park site doesnot currently have a land use designation on the City' s General Plan Land Use Map. The Zone 7 parcels are partially designated Stream Corridor," but a portion of the parcels are also without a land use designation.

An Amendment to the General Plan will be required to designate the park site as Parks/ Public Recreation," and the currently undesignated Zone 7 parcelsshould be designated " Open Space." Rezoning to the Planned Development (PD) Zoning District is alsoproposed to ensure consistencybetween the amended General Plan and site zoning.

The new zoning district and new land use designation will allow Zone 7 to continue to operate and maintain South SanRamon Creek asa flood control facility and will allow the Iron Horse Regional Trail to exist in its current location, including maintenance activities for the channel and accessroads, and any future needs although none are currently planned) for small facilities such asnew gagehousesor floodplain areas.

The project also includes an amendment to the City' s Park and RecreationMaster Plan to include the proposed park in the Master Plan.

City of Dublin Page 5
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
275
a
d
0c
O
U
9? m
u
0 Half
Moon
Bay

CITY OF DUBLIN

IRON HORSE PARK PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY
Redwood
City
Palo
Alto
Sunnyvale
Santa Clara
Livermore
Pleasanton
San
Jose
Exhibit 1

REGIONAL LOCATION
0 2 4 6 8 10 Milos
Martinez4 4.

CA
San seo
Concord
Rafael
Richmond
500
Mill lot
Valley
24 Creekt
Berkeley
4 Oakland
San Francisco 4id
ead
s
5 A N7 San
Leandro
DUBLIN
FRANCISC0
6 0
DalyCity
BAY
n
101
Hayward
92 zaa
San Mateo
Fremont
n ea
t L Newark
Half
Moon
Bay

CITY OF DUBLIN

IRON HORSE PARK PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY
Redwood
City
Palo
Alto
Sunnyvale
Santa Clara
Livermore
Pleasanton
San
Jose
Exhibit 1

REGIONAL LOCATION
0 2 4 6 8 10 Milos
276

CITY OF DUBLIN

IRON HORSE PARK PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY
Exhibit 2

LOCAL CONTEXT
277
LU
Cl)
cc
LU
W
CL
cc
IL
LU
cc
co w
0 M
278

1. Project description: Construction of a linear park, potential South San Ramon Creek realignment, and potential Iron Horse
Regional Trail realignment on approximately 35acres
of land (12acresto be owned by the City of Dublin as
the public park and 23 acres owned by Zone 7 Water
Agency). Proposed usesare primarily passive, but
would also include some areasof higher activity
recreation uses. Pedestrian and bicycle connections
would be made with surrounding neighborhoods and
Dublin High School. The development of the park
may also include realignment of the Iron Horse Trail
and the existing Zone 7 watercourse within the park.

Construction of the park would require approval of a
General Plan Amendment and rezoning by the City of
Dublin aswell asan amendment to the City of Dublin
Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

2. Lead agency: City of Dublin

3. Contact persons: Rosemary Alex, Parks & Facilities Development Coordinator

4. Project location: Eastsideof theIron HorseMulti- UseTrail, generally between Amador Valley Boulevard and City Limit

5. Project sponsor: City of Dublin

6. General Plan designation: Existing: " Stream Corridor" ( Zone 7 Water Agency parcels) and Undesignated ( A portion of Zone 7
parcels and Union Pacific — future City of Dublin -
parcels)
Proposed: " Open Space" ( A portion of Zone 7 parcels)
and " Parks/ Public Recreation" ( Union Pacific --
future City of Dublin - parcels)

7. Zoning: Existing: Unclassified
Proposed: PD- Planned Development
S. Other public agency required approvals:

Zone7WaterAgency (encroachmentontoDistrict property)
California Department of Fish & Wildlife ( potential Streambed Alteration Agreement)
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Clean Water Certification) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( 404 Wetland Permit)
City of Dublin Page 9
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
279
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checkedbelow would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "potentially significant impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

X Aesthetics Agricultural X Air Quality/ GHG
Resources Emissions
X Biological X Cultural Resources X Geology / Soils
Resources
X Hazards and X Hydrology/ Water Land Use/
Hazardous Quality Planning
Materials
Mineral Resources X Noise Population/
Housing
Public Services Recreation X Transportation/
Circulation
X Utilities/ Service Mandatory
Systems Findings of
Significance
Determination ( to be completedby LeadAgency):

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.

X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier documentpursuantto applicablelegalstandards, and2) hasbeenaddressedby mitigation measures based on earlier analysis as described on the attached sheets, if the effectis a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required, but must only analyze the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, therewill not be asignificanteffectin this casebecauseall potentially City of Dublin Page 10
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
280
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and ( b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measuresthat are imposed on the proposed. project.
f
Signature: Y- I S . Gt.(: r_._ Date:

Printed Name: P? r- SC0,,- For: '- t a 4
City of Dublin
Initial Study / iron Horse Park Project

August 2013
M1
281
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except " no impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sourcesa lead agency citesin the parenthesis following eachquestion. A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sourcesshow that the impact simply doesnot apply to projects like the one involved ( e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A " no impact" answer should be explained where it is basedon project- specific factors aswell asgeneral factors (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project - specific screening analysis).
2) In someinstances, an `ZS, Less - than- Significant Impact" responsemay reflect that a specific environmental topic has been analyzed in a previous CEQA document and appropriate mitigation measures have been included in a previous CEQA document to reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.

In a few instances, somepreviously analyzed topics have been determined to be significant and unavoidable and mitigation of such impact to a less- -than- significant level is not feasible.
3) All answersmust take account of the whole action, including off -site aswell as on - site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
4) " Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are oneor more "potentially significant impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 5) " Negative Declaration: Less - Than - Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" implies elsewhere the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effectfrom " potentially significant effect" to a "less than significant impact." The leadagencymust describethemitigation measuresandbriefly explainhow they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

City of Dublin page 12
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project August 2013
282
Environmental Impacts ( Note: Source of determination listed in parenthesis. Seelisting of sourcesused to determine eachpotential impact at the end of the checklist)
Earlier Analyses
Earlier analysesmay be used where, pursuant to tiering, a program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effectshave beenadequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration. Reference CEQA Guideline Section 15063 ( c)( 3)( d). This Initial Study does not rely on earlier CEQA analyses.

City of Dublin Page 13
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
283
Environmental Impacts ( Note: Sourceof determinationlistedin parenthesis. Seelistingof sources used to determine each potential impact at the end of the checklist) Note: A full discussion of eachitem is found following
the checklist.

1. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? ( Source: 1, 9)
b) Substantially damagescenic resources, including
but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a statescenic highway?
Source: 1, 9)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of the site and its surroundings?
Source: 9)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area? ( Source: 9)

2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or
Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California ResourcesAgency, to a non-
agricultural use? ( Source: 1, 9, 11)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agriculture use,
or a Williamson Act contract? ( Source: 1, 1.1)
c) Involve other changesin the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could
result in conversion of farmland to a non-
agricultural use? ( Source: 1, 9)
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non - forest use? ( 7)
c) Involve other changesin the existing environment
that, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of farmland to a non - agricultural
use or conversion of forestland to a non - forest
use? ( 7)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mi ti - ation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
284

3. Air Quality ( Where available, the significance
criteria establishedby the applicable air quality
management district may be relied on to make
the following determinations). Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ( Source: 2, 11)
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation? ( Source: 2)
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non - attainment under an applicable
federal or stateambient air quality standard
including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? ( 2)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ( Source: 2, 11)
e) Createobjectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people? ( Source: 9 )

4. Biological Resources. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service ?( Source: 3, 9)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies or
regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service? ( Source: 3, 4, 9)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Miti ation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
285
c) Have a substantial adverseeffect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act ( including but not limited to
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption or
other means?
Source: Source: 3, 4)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites? ( Source: 3, 9)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as tree
protection ordinances? ( Source: 1, 11)
f) Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?
Source: S)

5. Cultural Resources. Would the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse impact in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Sec. 15064. 5? ( Source: 1, 11)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archeological resource
pursuant to Sec. 15064. 5 ( Source: 1, 4)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource, site or unique geologic
feature? ( Source; 1, 9)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of a formal cemetery? (1, 9)

6. Geology and Soils. Would the project
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issuedby the State Geologist or basedon other
substantial evidence of a known fault ( Source: I,
11)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
286
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking (1, 11)
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including
liquefaction? ( 1, 11)
iv) Landslides? ( 1, 2, 4, 5)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? ( Source: 1, 9, 11)
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project and potentially result in on-
or off -site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or similar hazards
Source: 9)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
Source: 11)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater? ( Source: 10)

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may havea significant
impact on the environment? ( Source: 5)
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purposeof reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases? ( Source: 5)

8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials
Source: 6)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upsetand accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment? ( Source: 6)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
materials or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school? ( Source: 6, 11)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Miti .- ation
Lass than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
287
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Sec. 65962. 5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment? ( Source: 11)
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted
within two miles of a public airport of public use
airport, would the project result in a safety
hazardfor people residing or working in the
project area? ( Source: 11)
f) For a project within the vicinity of private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazardfor
people residing or working in the project area?
Source: 11)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with the adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Source: 108)
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands? ( Source: 10)

9. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would theproject:
a) Violate any water quality standardsor waste
discharge requirements? ( Source: 10, 11)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level (e.g. the production rate of existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land usesor planned uses
for which permits have been granted? ( 17)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off - site? ( Source: 10)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Miti Qation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
288
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or
off - site? ( Source: 9, 10)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Source: 4, 7)
f) Otherwise substantially degradewater quality?
Source: 10, 11)
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood delineation map? (Source: 11)
h) Place within a 100 - year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows? ( Source: 11)
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, and death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam? ( 11)
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow? ( 9)

10. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Source: 1)
b) Conflict with anyapplicablelanduseplan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, or zoning ordinance)
adoptedfor the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect? ( Source: 1)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
11)

11. Mineral Resources. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? ( Source: 1)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signi ficant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
289
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resourcerecovery site
delineated on a local general Plan, specific plan
or other land use plan? ( Source: 1)

12. Noise. Would the proposal result ire:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? ( 7)
b) Exposure of persons or to generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels? ( Source: 7)
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above existing
levels without the project? ( 7)
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increasein
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project? ( 7)
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing
or working n the project area to excessive noise
levels? ( 11)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? ( Source: 11)

13. Population and Housing. Woundthe project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly or indirectly ( for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? ( Source: 1, 9)
b) Displacesubstantialnumbersof existinghousing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere? (9)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement of
housing elsewhere? ( Source: 9)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
290

14. Public Services. Would the proposal:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, needfor new or physically altered
government facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service rations,
response times or other performance objectives
for any of the public services? ( Sources: 10)
Fire protection
Police protection
Schools
Parks
Other public facilities
Solid Waste

15. Recreation:
a) Would the project increasethe use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated ( Source: 8, 11)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Source: 8, 11)

16. Transportation and Traffic. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness for
the performance of the circulation system, taking
into account all modes of transportation,
including masstransit and all non - motorized
travel and relevant components of the circulation
system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit?
10)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
County Congestion Management Agency for
designated roads or highways? ( 10)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
291
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increasein traffic levels or a
change in the location that results in substantial
safety risks? ( 11)
d) Substantially increasehazardsdue to a design
feature (e.g. sharpcurves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses, such as farm
equipment? ( 10)
e) Result in inadequateemergency access? (10)
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle or pedestrian
facilities or otherwise decrease the performance
of safety of suchfacilities ?( 10)

17. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board? ( 10)
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
10)
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects? ( 10)
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing water entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed? ( 10)
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequatecapacity to serve
the project' s projected demand in addition to the
providers existing commitments? ( 10)
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project' s solid
waste disposal needs? ( 11)
g) Comply with federal, state and local statutesand
regulations related to solid waste? ( 11)
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

August 2013
292

18. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
causea fish or wildlife population to drop below
self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially reduce
the number of or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (" Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects and the effects of probable
future projects).
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Miti -- ation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
X
X
X
Sources used to determine potential environmental impacts 1) City of Dublin GeneralPlan, updatedthroughFebruary, 2013 2) BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines
3) LSA, Biological ResourcesReconnaissance, February, 2013 4) WRA, Wetland Delineation Report, May 2013
5) City of Dublin Climate Action Plan, October 2010
6) Treadwell & Rollo, Phase I ESA, March 2013
7) RGDL Acoustic Report, August 2013
8) City of Dublin Parks and Recreation Master Plan, 2006 9) Site Visit
10) Discussion with City staff or service provider
11) Other Source
City of Dublin Page 23
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
293
Attachment to Initial Study
Discussion of Checklist
Legend
PS: Potentially Significant
LS / M: Less Than Significant After Mitigation
LS: Less Than Significant Impact
NI: No Impact

1. Aesthetics
Project Impacts
a) Have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista? NI. The site provides limited views of the Dougherty Hills area just east of the site. Most views from the site are limited by existing fencesalong the corridor. If approved and constructed, there would be no changes to scenic vistas or views to or from the future park site since there only limited and small -scalerecreation structures constructed on the site that would not significantly block existing views. The future park would expand opportunities for residents and visitors to accessviews of the Dougherty Hills and no impact would occur with respect to this topic.
b) Substantiallydamagescenicresources, including statescenichighway? NI. Although a park development plan has yet to be finalized, the intent of the park is to preserve natural features, including wetlands and trees, to the fullest extent feasible.

Stateand County designated scenichighways in the Dublin Planning areainclude TassajaraRoad and the 1 -580freeway. The project site is not located adjacentto or near either of these two roadways.

There would therefore be no impact with substantial damane to scenic resources, including any adjacent to a scenichighway.
c)
Substantiallydegradeexistingvisual characteror theduality of thesite? NI. The intent of the proposed project is to enhance the condition of the former railroad area throughenhancedlandscaping, installationof recreationalfacilitiesandimproving vehicular and pedestrian access to the park. This would not represent a degradation of the visual character of the site and no impacts would result. d) Createnewsourcesof significantamountsof light or glare? LS/ M. No lights currently exist within the proposed park property. Although a final design of the park is not completed, exterior lighting fixtures for safety and security could be installed. If not properly mitigated, light fixtures could castunwanted light and glare onto adjacent properties. This would be a significant impact and will be reduced to a level of less - than - significance be adherence to the following measure:

City of Dublin Page 24
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
294
Mitigation Measure AES - 1 ( light and glare impacts). As part of the Building Permit submittal, the City shall submit lighting details and a photometric plan for review and approval. At minimum, the submittal shall include:
a) A lighting plan illustrating the approximate location of all exterior light fixtures to be placed on the project site.
b) Design details for cut - off lenses on the fixtures or other similar techniques to directed light to the intended area of illumination and to prevent off -- site glare impacts on project site and adjacent buildings and properties.
c) A photometric plan demonstrating lighting levels required to provide adequatesafety and security onsite and also demonstrating that light will not spill over the site onto adjacent streets or properties.

2. Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Project Impacts
a - c) ConvertPrime Farmland, conflictwith agricultural zoningor uses, conflictwith a Williamson Act contract or convert prune farmland to a non - agricultural use? NI. The project site is a former railroad corridor and was not historically used or zoned for agricultural production. No Williamson Act Land Conservation contracts are present on the site. There would be no impacts with respect to this topic. d) Resultin thelossofforestlandor conversionofforest land to a nonforest use? NI. No forested lands are present on the project and no impact would result with respect to this topic.
e)
Involveotherchangeswhich, dueto their locationor nature, couldresultofforest landto a non forest use? NI. See item " d," above.

3. Air Quality
Project Impacts
a) Would theprojectconflictor obstructimplementationof an air quality plan? LS.

Although the proposed park is not currently designated on the Dublin General Plan which serves as the basis of the regional Clean Air Plan, the proposed park would further goals of the Clean Air Plan by encouraging bicycle and pedestrian use in Dublin. The proposed park would not increase the population of Dublin or add other uses that would be associated with significant vehicle trips. No impacts are therefore anticipated with respect to conflicts to or obstructions of the Clean Air Plan.
b, c) Wouldtheprojectviolateany air quality standardsor result in cumulativelyconsiderable air pollutants? LS / M. Although the operation of the proposed park, once City of Dublin Page 25
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project August 2013
295
constructed, would not generate significant air emissions since minimal vehicle trips would be generated ( see Transportation and Circulation section of this Initial Study), construction activities could generate potentially significant emissions.

Theseimpactswould includegenerationof fugitive dustfrom sitegradingand from construction equipment that could impact nearby residents, usersof Iron Horse Trail and Stagecoach Park and students at Dublin High School. Adherence to the following measure will reduce this impact to a less -than- significant level:

Mitigation Measure AIR - 1. The project construction contractor shall adhere to the following measuresto reduce fugitive dust and construction equipment fumes. These measures shall be included within project plans and specifications that arereviewed through the Building Permit and Site Improvement Permit process.
1) During gradingandconstruction, all exposedsurfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day, asnecessary, to prevent wind - blown dust.
2) Stockpiled earthern material shall be covered.
3) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loosematerial off -site shall be covered.
4) All visible mud or dirt track - out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed.
5) Vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or areas shall be limited to 15 mph. 6) Idling times shall be minimized by either shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes. Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. 7) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer' s specifications. All equipment shall be checkedby a certifiedmechanicanddeterminedto berunning in proper condition prior to operation.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations? LS/ M. Adherence to Mitigation MeasureAIR-1will reduceshort -term constructionair quality impacts to a less - than - significant level. No significant pollutants are anticipated to be generatedwith respect to long -term operational use of the proposed since proposed useswould be primarily passive recreational uses. e) Createobjectionableodorsaffectinga substantialnumberof people? NI. None of the proposed uses within the park would generate substantial amounts of odors that could affect nearby residents. No impacts are therefore anticipated with respect to this topic.

City of Dublin Page 26
Initial Study /Iron Worse Park Project August 2013
296

4. Biological Resources
Project Impacts
a) Have a substantial adverse innpact on a candidate, sensitive, or special- status species? LS /M. The following analysis is basedon a biological reconnaissanceof the site conducted by LSA biological consultants ( "Results of Reconnaissance - level BiologicalSurveyfor Union PacificRailroadParcels, Dublin, AlamedaCounty," dated February 26, 2013). This report is included as Attachment 1 to this Initial Study. This report is incorporatedhereinby referenceandis availablefor review at the Dublin Community Development Department during normal businesshours Site conditions. The dominant topographical feature on the site is an abandoned UPRR railroad grade topped with crushed gravel and cobble. Both embankments of the grade are covered in non -native annual grassland dominated by wild oat Avena fatua), rye grass ( Festuca perennis), and ripgut grass ( Brotnus diandrus).

Beardless wild rye ( Elyrnus triticoides), a native grass, is present in small amounts.

Non -nativeruderal forbsgrowing throughouttheparcelincludebristly ox- tongue Picris ecliioides), prickly lettuce ( Lactuca serriola), and mustard ( Brassicasp.). Several linear depressions in the borrow ditches on both sides of the railroad grade were full of water during the January 2013survey. The largest of thesewas an approximately 450- foot -long by 50 -foot -wide pool in the easternborrow ditch approximately 765feet north of Amador Valley Boulevard. Seasonalwetland plant speciesobserved growing in and around thesedepressionsinclude spiny cocklebur ( Xanthiian spinosion), salt grass ( Distichlis spicata), curly dock (Rumex crispus), fat - hen ( Atriplex prostrate), nutsedge ( Cyperus eragrostis), and swamp prickle grass ( Crypsis schoenoides).

A standof woody vegetationdominatedby arroyowillow (SalixIasiolepis) and sandbar willow ( Salix exigua) is present on the western side of the railroad grade approximately300feetnorth of Amador ValleyBoulevard. A few immaturevalley oaks (QuercusIobata) and coastlive oaks (Q. agrifolia) grow alongthetop of the grade adjacent to the willow stand. Several oaks and willows are also present on the eastern side of the grade north of the larger stand of riparian woodland. A few smalltreesand shrubsof variousnative andnon -nativespeciesgrow alongthe western site boundary at the southern end of the parcel near Alamo Creek. Species observed in this areainclude walnut Uuglanssp.), Italian buckthorn ( Rharnnus alaternus), coyote brush ( Baccharis pilularis), silver wattle ( Acacia dealbata), and coast Iive oak.

Special-status plants. Based on the results of the CNDDB search and observed habitatconditionsin October2006andJanuary2013, LSAidentified four special - status plant speciesas potentially occurring in the vicinity ( seeTable A located in Attachment 1). Twoofthesehavebeenrecordedin thegeneralvicinityofthe parcel: Diablo helianthella ( Helianthella castanea) and Congdon' s tarplant Centromadiaparryi ssp. congdonii). Diablo helianthella is not expected to occur due to the absence of chaparral and oak woodland. Congdon' s tarplant ( rare plant rank 1B) is known to occurwithin the CampParksReserveForcesTrainingArea, less than1mileeastof theparcel, andalsoalongDoughertyRoad, approximately1 City of Dublin Page 27
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project August 2013
297
mile north - northeast of the parcel. This speciestypically occurs in annual grassland, but is also known to occur in ruderal vegetation adjacent to annual grassland or that were once annual grassland. Habitat for this species is present in the grassland along the railroad grade. Sincethe January 2013survey was conducted outside the blooming period for the species (May to October), there is somepotentialfor this speciesto occuron theparcel. Focusedsurveysduring the blooming period arenecessaryto confirm the presenceor absenceof this species Special- status animals. The CNDDB contains records for 9 special- status animal speciesin the vicinity of the parcel and habitat is present for another (loggerhead shrike [ Lanius ludoviciamts]) ( Table A of Attachment 1). Seven of these species are not expected to occur due to the lack of habitat and/ or surrounding development.

This group includes the following four listed species: California tiger salamander Arnbystoinacaliforniense), California red - legged frog (Ranadraytonii), Alameda whipsnake ( Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) and San Joaquin kit fox ( Vulpes fnacrotis inutica).

Californiatiger salamanderhasbeenrecordedatCampParksless than one mile east of the site. The seasonal pools adjacent to the railroad grade resemblemoderate- quality breeding habitat for the species. However, historic and ongoing disturbance on the parcel (e.g., railroad maintenance, vegetation management, pedestrians and pets) its small size and the parcel' s isolation from themoreextensivegrasslandseastof DoughertyRoadmakeit highly unlikely that the speciesis present. California red - legged frog has been recorded from the upper reachesof Alamo Creek in the SanRamon Valley, but hasnot beenobservedin the lower, urbanizedreachwestof DoughertyRoaddueto decreasedhabitatquality from surrounding urbanization. SanJoaquinkit fox havenot beenfound during several intensive surveys in the Dublin/ San Ramon area, and are presumed absent from the area. The parcel is completely isolated from the closestoccupied Alameda whipsnake habitat which is located over seven miles from the site.

Although not detected during either survey, loggerhead shrike (California Species of SpecialConcern) could potentially nest in the oaks and willows northwest of Amador Valley Boulevard and the grasslandon either side of the railroad grade providesforaging habitat. Othernativebird speciesmay alsobepresenton the site, including white - tailed kite, Anna'shummingbird, westernscrub -jay, chestnut- backed chickadee, bushtit, American robin, California towhee, and house finch. Two California ground squirrel burrow complexes provide marginal habitat for burrowing owl ( Athenecunicularia; California Speciesof SpecialConcern), althoughdenseweedcovermay limit their suitability for nesting. Bothof these speciesareknown to occurin the extensivegrasslandseastof DoughertyRoad i.e., Camp Parks) and in the Dougherty Valley. Construction of the proposed park and disturbance of the ground could result in significant impacts to a number of special- statusplant andwildlife species, including Congdoris tarplant, burrowing owl, loggerheadshrikeand othernativebird species. Adherenceto thefollowing measures will reduce this impact to a less- than - significant level.

Mitigation Measure BIO - 1. A qualified botanist shall conduct a focused Congdon 'starplantbotanicalsurveyduringitsbloomingperiod (Mayto October) in accordance with CDFW protocols and as recommended in the EACCS. If Congdon' s tarplant species are found on the site, no City of Dublin Page 28
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
298
construction shall occur on that portion of the site containing tarplants and a 50 -foot wide buffer area shall be maintained around the perimeter of tarplants. The width and location of the buffer may be adjusted by a qualified biologist in consultation of California Fish & Wildlife ( CDFW) staff. Alternatively, if avoidanceis not feasible, alternative areasshall be identified, on or off of the site, with the same hydrological conditions as the site. Tarplant seeds shall be collected from the park site prior to grading and replanted in the alternative location.

Mitigation Measure BIO -2. Further surveys for burrowing owl shall be completed prior to grading in accordancewith the recently revised ,Staff Reporton Burrowing Owl Mitigation issued by the CDFW in March 2012. If burrowing owls arefoundbreedingand/ or wintering on the site, burrows shall be avoided during the breeding seasonand a suitable buffer area shallbeestablishedround eachnest, asdeterminedby aqualified biologist, or suitable off -site habitat shall be provided such as easements asrecommended in the EACCS. In addition, any occupied burrows shall beavoidedthrough theestablishmentof exclusionzonesduring construction. The location and widths of such exclusion zones shall be determined by a qualified biologist.

Mitigation Measure BI0- 3. If future development plans include tree removals, such activities should be conducted during the non - nesting season (September 1 to January 31), if feasible. Depending on the nature andlocationof proposedwork, pre - constructionsurveysmaybe necessaryto avoid impacts to nesting birds, asdetermined by a qualified biologist. Such surveys shall be conducted within 7 days prior to the start of work from February to May (since there is a higher potential for birds to initiate nesting during this period), and within 15 days prior to the start of work from Juneto August. If nestingbirds arefound, abuffer area around each nest shall be established under the direction of a qualified biologist andthebuffer areashallremainasdirectedby thebiologist. b, c) haveasubstantialadverseinzpactonriparianhabitatorfederallyprotectedwetlands? LS /M. Approximately 0.51 acresof the proposed park site have beenidentified asjurisdictional wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This is based on a wetlands delineation prepared by the firm of WRA biological consultantsin May, 2013. Thisreport is included asAttachment2 to this Initial Study. Riparian vegetation identified within wetland areas included wild oat, ripgut brome, bristly ox- tongue, prickly lettuce, curly dock, fat hen and rabbitsfoot grass.

Grading, filling or other actions that could be taken aspart of the project to disturb this jurisdictional wetland would beapotentially significantimpact.

Adherence to the following will ensure that impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and riparian habitat are reduced to a less - than - significant level:

Mitigation Measure BIO -4. Jurisdictional wetlands on the site shall be avoided during construction and operation of the proposed park. A suitablebufferandprotectiondevicesshallbeincorporatedintothefinal City of Dublin Page 29
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
299
park plan. If avoidance is not feasible, on- site jurisdictional wetlands shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as recommended in the EACCS, as close to the park aspracticable and where suitable habitat exists. Alternatively, the City may purchase credits in an off -site wetland mitigation bank at a 3:1 ratio.

In accordancewith existing regulatory requirements for protection of sensitive speciesandhabitats, necessarypermitsshallbeobtainedby theCity from appropriate biological regulatory agencies, including but not limited to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
d) Interferesubstantiallywith movementof nativefish or wildlife species? LS/ M. The proposedpark sitepresentlyallowsfull north -southaccessfor wildlife traversing the areaaswell asfor native fish speciesusing the Zone 7 watercourse. Future park improvements could substantially block or impeded existing fish or wildlife movement. Adherence to the following measure will ensure that substantial movement of native fish or wildlife will not be blocked.

Mitigation Measure BI0- 5. Prior to the preparation of construction documents, final park design plans shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist to ensure that substantial blockage of native fish or wildlife will not occur. If necessary, park plans shall be required to be changedto ensure that fish and wildlife movement is maintained.
e, f) Conflictwith localpoliciesor ordinancesprotectingbiologicalresourcesor anyadopted HabitatConservationPlansorNatacralCommunityConservationPlans? LS. TheCity of Dublin lies within theEasternAlamedaCountyConservationStrategy EACCS) planning area. The EACCS is not a Habitat Conservation or Natural Community Conservation Plan. The General Plan revisions will be consistent with local City of Dublin biological resourceprotection policies, aswell as applicable objectives, policies, and programs contained in the EACCS document. Key objectives of the EACCSinclude comprehensive conservation of special - statusspeciesin easternAlamedaCounty, contributionto recovery of threatened species, establishing mitigation thresholds, and others. Future development is required to comply with all City policies, ordinances and requirements protecting biological resources, including impacts to heritage trees. A less- -than- significant impact would therefore result with respect to this topic.

5. Cultural Resources
Project Impacts
a) Cause substantial adverse change to significant historic resources? LS. With one exception, the project site contains no structures. The one exception is an older City of Dublin Page 30
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
300
railroad trestle that servesto bridge an existing drainage channel in the approximate center of the proposed park site.

The existing trestle structure is expected to be incorporated into the final park design and could become a crossing for the realigned Iron Horse Regional Trail. If the trestle is maintained, it will needto be assessedfor safety purposes and examined for potential toxicity due to the fact that it haslikely beentreated with creosote and other chemical wood preservatives over its lifetime. If the trestle remains and is incorporated into the park, this could result in a significant health risk to the public. Adherence to the following measurewill ensure that the trestle is suitable for public use:

Mitigation Measure CULT -1. Prior to reuse of the existing trestle, the structure shall be examined by a RegisteredEnvironmental Assessor REA) to ensure that the level of chemicals and other substances on and adjacent to the structure are below applicable local, state and federal exposure standards for human and animals. The REA shall recommend specific feasible measures to reduce the level of risk from identified hazards to the public. These measures shall be incorporated into the final park development plan. If the level of risk cannot be reduced to a generally recognized safe level, the trestle structure shall be removed and any areanear the trestle shall be safely remediated. Necessary permits and approvals shall be obtained asnecessaryfrom the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Alameda County Environmental Health ServicesDepartment or others. Necessaryclearancesshall be secured from appropriate regulatory agenciesprior to issuanceof a grading plan for this portion o the project site.

Should the trestle not be able to be retained, the removal of the trestle would not result in a significant impact to a historic structure, and the impact would be less than significant.

Therefore, removal of the trestle would not result in a significant impact to a historic structure.
b -d) Cause a substantial adverse impact or destruction to archeological or paleontological resources, or humanremainsthat inaybeinterredoutsideof aformal cemetery? LS /M.

Theproject site is located on relatively flat topography near Alamo Creek and other local watercourses. Typically, Native American villages are located closeto suchwatercourses. Therefore, thereis amediumto high potentialfor encountering historic, prehistoric, NativeAmericanorsimilarculturalresourceduringgrading for theproposedpark and othergrounddisturbing activities, Thiscouldinclude paleontological resources. Adherence to the following measure will reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.

Mitigation Measure CULT -2. Wording shall be added on final construction plans and specifications for the proposed park to the effect that if archeological or Native American materials or artifacts are identified, work on that portion of the project shall cease until a resource City of Dublin page 31
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park project August 2013
301
protection plan conforming to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and the Dublin Zoning Ordinance is prepared by a qualified archeologist and /or paleontologist and approved by the City of Dublin Community DevelopmentDirectoror anauthorizedrepresentative. Projectwork may be resumed in compliance with such plan. If human remains are encountered, the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately and the provisions of State law carried out.

6. Geology and Soils
Project Impacts
a) Exposepeopleorstructurestopotentialsubstantialadverseimpacts, includingloss, injury ordeathrelatedtogroundrupture, seismicgroundshaking, groundfailure, or landslides? LS. A small number of structures would be constructed as part of the proposed park, asidentified in the ProjectDescription of this Initial Study! since the park would primarily contain passive recreational facilities. The park is also not envisioned by the City to provide major recreational facilities, as does other parks in Dublin. such as Emerald Glen Park in Eastern Dublin.

Therefore, future exposure of a substantial number of people or major structuresto injury or deathfrom groundrupture, seismicground shaking, ground failure or landslide is considered less- than - significant. b) Is thesitesubjecttosubstantialerosionand /or thelossof topsoil? LS. Future developmentof theproposedpark will beregulatedby Section7.2 ( "Stream Corridors and Riparian Vegetation ") of the Conservation Element of the Dublin General Plan that requires protection of Stream Corridors and Riparian Vegetation to minimize erosion into local creeks. The same Element includes Guiding and Implementing Policies to minimize erosion into local bodies of water and to undertake erosion control methods.

In addition, developmentprojects, including theproposedpark, arerequiredto adhereto BestManagementPractices (BMPs) asrequiredby theAlameda CountyCleanWaterprogram andenforcedby the City of Dublin aspart of normal and customary review of individual development projects. This will ensureinsignificant impacts regarding substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

TheseBMPs typically include, but arenot limited to, installation of silt fences, sandbags and similar measures to minimize substantial erosion and loss of topsoil. With adherencestandard City requirements, this impact will beless - than- significant.
c -d) Is thesite locatedon soil that is unstable or expansiveand that could result in potential lateralspreading, liquefaction, landslideor collapse? LS /M. The site is located near local streamcourses, including Alamo Creek and South SanRamon Creek.

Generally, alluvial soils can be subject to liquefaction in the event of a seismic event, which could lead to damage to any permanent buildings on the site and other improvements, including, but not limited to, water and sewer pipes, sidewalks, retaining walls and other improvements. These improvements could City of Dublin Page 32
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
302
be damaged in the event of loss of soil strength due to liquefaction or other soil hazards. Adherenceto thefollowing measurewill reducethis impactto aless - than- significant level.

Mitigation Measure GEO - 1. A soils and geotechnical report shall be commissioned by the City to identify the presenceof liquefaction, expansive soils, the potential for differential settlement and other potential soil hazards that could damage park improvements. If such soil characteristics are found on the site, the report shall include detailed recommendations on how to reduce the risk of soil hazards to a less- than - significant level. This would typically include recommendations for enhancedbuilding foundations, removal of incompetent soils, and similar measures. The recommendations of the soils report shall be implemented in final park development and construction plans.
e)
Havesoilsincapableofsupportingon -siteseptictanksif sewersarenotavailable? NI.

All new projects are required by the City of Dublin to connect to the local sewer system, maintained by the Dublin SanRamon ServicesDistrict. No impacts would therefore result with regard to septic systems.

7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project Impacts
a, b Generategreenhousegasemissions, eitherdirectlyor indirectly, thatmayhavea significantimpactontheenvironmentorconflictwith anapplicableplan, policyor regulationadoptedfor thepurposeof reducingtheemissionsofgreenhousegases? NI. The proposed park would be a locally oriented park in the central areaof Dublin, intendedto servethe existingpopulationin this portion of thecommunity.

Proposed useswould be largely passive and not intended to attract a large number of users. One small vehicle parking lot would be provided, however, it is anticipated that the majority of future users would accessthe park via bicycle or on foot. The amount of greenhouse gas emissions would be below the thresholds of significancepublishedby theBayAreaAir Quality ManagementDistrict, which is 600acresfor a city park (source: Table3 -1, BAAQMD GHGscreeningcriteria, May 2010). Therefore, the project would have no impact with respect to generation of greenhouses gasses.

8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Project Impacts
a) Createsignificant hazards to thepublic or the environment through the routine transport, useordisposalhazardousmaterials? NI. CityofDublincrewswouldnormallyand customarily use fertilizers, herbicides and similar materials to maintain park landscaping. Similarly, therecouldalsobelimitedquantitiesofbuilding City of Dublin Page 33
Initial Study /Iron Norse Park Project August 2013
303
maintenance materials stored on the site, such as paints, solvents and similar materials. This is typical of all City of Dublin parks. No hazardous materials would be disposed on the project site. Overall, there would be no impact with respect to the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous material that would posea significanthazardto thepublic or surroundingneighborhoods. b) Createasignificanthazardto thepublicortheenvironmentthroughreasonablyforeseeable upsetandaccidentconditionsinvolving thereleaseofhazardousmaterialsinto the environment? LS /M. This portion of the Initial Study is based on an updated Phase I EnvironmentalSiteAssessmentpreparedonMarch6, 2013by thefirm of Treadwell & Rollo ( " UpdatedPhaseI EnvironmentalSiteAssessment, Countyof Alameda and Union Pacific Right of Way, Dublin, California." This report is herebyincorporatedby referenceinto this Initial Study. ThePhaseI EnvironmentalSiteAnalysisis availablefor review at theDublin Community Development Department during normal businesshours. Basedon the findings of the Phase I report, there is one potential hazard on or adjacent to the site that could cause a significant hazard to the public and the environment as a result of project construction. This condition is deposit of chemicals and contaminants into site soils and possibly groundwater as a result of previous land uses and activities on the site.

The PhaseI Environmental Site Assessmentidentifies a history of previous depositsof pesticides, herbicides, dieselfuel, creosoteandheavymetalson thesite as a result of previous uses on the site, primarily railroad uses. The Phase I report alsonotes that there is a recorded history of hydrocarbon leaks into the soil and groundwater from a nearby Kinder Morgan large - diameter gasoline and petroleum transmission pipeline located approximately 40feet to the eastof the proposed park site and parallel to the site. Grading of the park site to install park improvements could result in a release of hazardous materials into the environment that would be a potentially significant impact. Adherence to the following measure will reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.

Mitigation Measure HAZ- 1. Prior to park construction, additional soil sampling shall be conducted to determine if contaminants above Environmental ScreeningLevels are present in the soil. If found, a remediation plan shall be prepared and approved by appropriate regulatory agencies, which may include the Regional Water Quality ControlBoardor the AlamedaCountyEnvironmentalHealthServices Department. Remediation of contaminated material could include removal of contaminated material to an approved off - site location or similar measure. Remediation shall be completed per the approved plan and carried out by licensed contractors. The remediation plan shall includesafetyplansforworkersandusersof theIronHorseTrail, asmay be required. Necessaryclearancesshall be secured from appropriate regulatory agenciesprior to the issuanceof a grading plan. c)
Emithazardousmaterialsorhandlehazardousmaterialsoracutelyhazardousmaterials, substances, or wastewithin one - quarter 7nileof an existing or proposedschool? NI.

Although Dublin High Schoolis locatedimmediatelywestof theproposedpark, City of Dublin Page 34
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
304
approval and implementation of the project would have no impact with regard to this topic, since the future park is not anticipated to handle, store or release significant quantities of hazardous materials.
d) Belistedona sitethat is includedona list of hazardousmaterialssitescompliedon the Cortese List and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or environment? NI. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control ( DISC) CorteseList of hazardoussitesdoesnot identify theproposedpark siteas contaminated as of July 3, 2013
with respect
v.
this topic.
dtsc. ca.gov/ public/ search). No impact is anticipated e -f) Is thesitelocatedwithin anairportlanduseplanofapublicairportorprivateairstrip? NI. The proposed park site is located well north of the Livermore Municipal Airport andis not within theAirport InfluenceArea (AIA) of thisfacility (see LivermoreMunicipal Airport LandUseCompatibilityPlan, 8/ 12). No other public or private airports or airstrips are located near the site. g) Interferencewith an emergencyevacuationplan? NI. Development and operation of the proposed park will be required to be consistentwith the City' s ComprehensiveEmergencyManagementPlanthat alsoaddressesemergency evacuation. The proposed park would include multiple access points to and from adjacent neighborhoods as well as Stagecoach Park and Dublin High School, to facilitateemergencyevacuation. No impactsareanticipatedwith regard to this topic.
h) Exposepeopleandstructurestoasignificantriskofloss, injury ordeathinvolving wildland fires or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? NI. The site is located within a developed portion of Dublin and is not subject to wildland fires. No impacts are anticipated with respect to this topic.

9. Hydrology and Water Quality
Pr. ofectImpacts
a)
Violateanywaterdualitystandardsorwastedischargerequirements? NI.

Construction and future operation of the proposed park would generate a small increase in wastewater from a small number of restroom facilities within the park. Wastewater collection, treatment and discharge of wastewater is provided by the Dublin San Ramon Services District ( DSRSD). The District holdsnecessarywastedischargepermitsfromtheRegionalWaterQuality Control Board and other applicable agencies. Approval and implementation of the proposed park would not exceed waste discharge requirements imposed on DSRSDby the Regional Water Quality Control Board (source: StanKolodzie, DSRSD, 7/ 10/ 13). No impacts are expected with respect to this topic. b) Substantiallydepletegroundwaterrechargeareasor loweringofwatertable? NI. The park site is currently undeveloped and allows for groundwater recharge. The City of Dublin page 35
Initial Study /iron Morse Park Project August 2013
305
proposed park would not include a substantial amount of impervious surfaces, such asmajor buildings, parking lots or similar improvements, but would primarily remain as a passive, open space park. This would allow continued groundwater recharge on the site. Similarly, the proposed park would not generate a substantial demand for additional water sources that could deplete the local water table, since irrigation is proposed to be from recycled water not potable water. Therefore, the proposed project would not lower the local water table or substantially change the status of groundwater recharge areas and no impacts would occur.
c)
Substantiallyalter drainagepatterns, includingstreambedcoursessuchthatsubstantial siltation or erosionwould occur? LS /M. The existing Zone 7 channel within the project areamay be rerouted into a more curvilinear route from the current linear channel to improve the character of the proposed park. The channel relocation may change the flow rate, amount of sediment deposited in the creekbottom and/ or incise adjacent banks. These could be significant impacts with respect to existing streambed courses such that substantial siltation could occur. This impact would bereducedto a less - than - significantlevel with adherenceto thefollowing measure:

Mitigation Measure HYD -1: If the existing Zone 7 channel is to be changedfrom it' spresentcourse, theCity of Dublin shallhavea qualified hydrologist prepareahydrologyandhydraulic analysisof theproposed rerouting to analyze the potential for a changed flow rate, deposition of erosion or incising of adjacent creek banks. Specific methods to reduce such effects shall be included in the report. The findings of the report shall be approved by the Zone 7 District Engineer and the recommendation of the report shall be incorporated into final park design plans. d, e) Substantiallyalterdrainagepatternsorresultinflooding, eitheronorofftheprojectsite, createstormwaterrunoff thatwould exceedthecapacityof drainagesystemsoradd substantial amounts of polluted runoff? LS /M. Refer to item " c," above with respect to changes in stream course impacts. There would be no impact with respect to polluted runoff from the proposed park as noted in subsection " b." f) Substantiallydegradewaterduality? NI. TheCity of Dublin requiresall individual development projects, including the proposed park, to meet BestManagement Practicesto ensure that water quality would be protected. BestManagement Practicesaredescribedabovein Section8cof this Initial Study. No impactis anticipated with regard to this topic.
g -i) PIacehousingwithin a 100 -yearfloodhazardareaasmappedbyaFloodInsuranceRate Map, orimpedeorredirectfloodflow, includingdarnfailure? NI. Nohousingis proposed as part of the project and no impacts would occur with respect to this topic.
j) Resultin inundationby seiche, tsunamior rnudflows? NI. There are expectedto be no impacts with regard to seiche, tsunami or mudflows, since the project site is be locatedinlandfrommajorbodiesofwater, primarilySanFranciscoBay, andno _ Y _ Page 36
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
306
major steeply sloping areasarefound within or adjacentto the park. Therefore, no impacts would occur with respect to this topic.

10. Land Use and Planning
Project Impacts
a) Physically divide an establishedcommunity? NI. The proposed park site is presently vacant and does present a barrier between neighborhood east and west of the site. The proposed park would include a number of pedestrian and bicycle linkages with surrounding neighborhoods, Dublin High School and Stagecoach Park. The proposed park would provide new linkages that would strengthen ties with established neighborhoods and no impacts are anticipated with respect to this topic.
b) Conflictwith any applicablelanduseplan, policyor regulation? NL Although a General Plan Amendment is being considered aspart of the underlying project, the purpose of the Amendment is to designate the site as a public park in the absence of an existing General Plan land use designation. No other General Plan policies affecting environmental protections are proposed to be changed and no impacts would result with respect to this topic.
c) Conflictwith a habitatconservationplan or natural communityconservationplan? NI. See Checklist Item. 4 f.

11. Mineral Resources
Project Impacts
a, b) Resultin thelossofavailabilityofregionallyor locallysignificantmineralresources? NI.

No impacts would occur to any mineral resources, sinceno such resourcesare identified in the Dublin General Plan for this site.

12. Noise
Project Impacts
a)
Would theprojectexposepersonsor generationof noiselevelsin excessofstandards establishedby theGeneralPlan or otherapplicablestandard: LS /M. Potential noise impacts of the proposed park has been analyzed in a report entitled Environmental Noise Impact Report for the Iron Horse Linear Park, Dublin CS" dated July 11, 2013prepared by Rosen, Goldberg, Der & Lewitz. This report is attached to the Initial Study asAttachment 3. Following is a summary of the findings of the RDGL report.

Existing Noise Conditions. The proposed park would extend along the Iron Horse RegionalTrail and include theformer Union PacificRight of Way. Residencesare located on both sides of the proposed park with backyards that abut the project City of Dublin Page 37
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
307
site. Along the western side of the site, backyards are approximately 100feet from the Iron Horse Trail. On the eastern side, backyards are about 200 feet from the Iron Horse Trail.

To quantify the existing noise environment, long -term noise measurementswere made by RGDL staff for seven consecutive days at two locations ( A and B on Figure 1 of the attached acoustic report) and short term, 15- minute noise measurements were made at four locations ( 1 through 4 on Figure 1). The measurement locations were primarily chosento represent the existing conditions at residences near the proposed project.

In general, average noise levels toward the north ( location A) ranged from 45 to 55 dBA ( Le ,,) whereas noise levels on the southern end ( location B), near Amador Valley Boulevard, were slightly higher and ranged from about 45 to 60 dBA.

Table 1 shows the results of the short term noise measurements.

Table 1. Summary of Short -Term, 15 Minute Noise Measurements CNEL calculated based on comparison with simultaneous measurement at 24 -hour noise monitor location.

Source: RGDL, 2013
At location3, adjacenttohomesonthewestsideoftheprojectsite, adogbarking generated a maximum noise level of 51 dBA, whereas a voice on the Iron Horse Trail was 49 dBA. An airplane flyover generated a maximum noise level of 60 dBA.

At location 4, a distant truck generated a noise level of 52 dBA whereas a motorcycle generated a maximum level of 58 dBA. At Location 4 the sound of kids in thenearbyparkwere56to58dBAthoughtheyweresomewhatmaskedbywind noise which was about 55 dBA. At location 5, near the southern end of the site, distant traffic had a maximum noise level of 52 dBA.

City NoiseS .tandards. TheNoiseElementof the City'sGeneralPlanhaspolicies regarding noise and land use compatibility. Table 2 provides guidelines for the compatibility of land useswith various noise exposures. The City usesthe Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) descriptor. A CNEL of 60 dBA or less is considered normally acceptablefor residential land use. It should be noted that City of Dublin page 38
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
A- weighted Sound Level, dBA
Location Date / Time
L,
n Lio L50 L'90 CNEL*
1 1- May -13
11: 34 a. m.
39 41 37 35 51
2 1- May -13
12: 33 a. m.
47 49 44 38 52
3 8- May - 13
2: 17
47 48 45 43 51
j2.m.
4 8- May - 13
2: 36 53 54 52 51 57
p. m.
5 8- May -13
3:17 p.m.
52 54 52 51 56
CNEL calculated basedon comparisonwith simultaneous measurementat 24 - hour noise monitor location.

Source: RGDL, 2013
At location3, adjacentto homeson the westsideof the projectsite, a dog barking generateda maximumnoise levelof 51 dBA, whereasa voiceon the Iron Horse Trail was 49 dBA. An airplane flyover generateda maximumnoise levelof 60 dBA.

At location4, a distant truck generateda noise levelof 52 dBA whereasa motorcycle generateda maximumlevelof 58 dBA. At Location4 the soundof kids in the nearbyparkwere56to 58 dBA thoughtheywere somewhatmaskedby wind noise which was about55 dBA. At location5, near the southernend of the site, distant traffic hada maximumnoise levelof 52 dBA.

City NoiseS . tandards. The Noise Elementof the City's GeneralPlanhas policies regardingnoiseand landuse compatibility. Table2 provides guidelinesfor the compatibilityof land uses with variousnoise exposures. The City usesthe CommunityNoise EquivalentLevel ( CNEL) descriptor. A CNELof 60 dBAor less is considerednormally acceptablefor residentiallanduse. It shouldbe notedthat Cityof Dublin page38
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
308
the City' s compatibility standards arenormally intended to be used for traffic and transit noise.

Table 2. City of Dublin Land Use/Noise Compatibility Standards (decibels) Land Use Normally
Acce table
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacce table
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential 60 or less 60 -70 70 - 75 75+
Lodging Facilities 60 or Iess 61 - 80 71 - 80 Over 80
Schools, churches,
nursing homes
60 or less 61 - 70 71 - 80 Over 80
Neighborhood
arks
60 or less 61 - 65 66 - 70 Over 70
Office / Retail 70 or less 71 -75 76 - 80 Over 80
Industrial 70 or less 71 -75 Over 75
Source: Dublin General Plan Noise Element, ' Fable 9 -1 Chapter 5.28 of the City of Dublin' sMunicipal Code prohibits "... loud, or disturbing, or unnecessary, or unusual or habitual noise or any noise which annoysor disturbsor injuresor endangersthehealth, repose, peaceor safetyof any reasonable person of normal sensitivity present in the area." The noise ordinance states that it is appropriate to consider the level and character of the noiseaswell asthelevel andcharacterof thebackgroundnoise. SincetheCity's Noise Ordinance does not contain quantifiable noise level limits, it is not possible to apply the noise ordinance asa threshold for assessingproject generatednoise in the context of this noise study.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines require a determination of whether a project will generate a substantial increase in noise levelsin theprojectvicinity abovelevelsexistingwithout the project. CEQAdoes not specify a method for determining when a project would causea significant increasein noise. Likewise, the City of Dublin does not have criteria for determining when a noise increaseis significant.

A recent FAA Draft Policy discussesscreening and 'impact thresholds for increases in aircraft noise. These FAA thresholds are consistent with the thresholds that were adopted in CEQA document for the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan.

Therefore, these thresholds are used to assess the significance of noise increases due to the project as follows -- an increase in CNEL is significant if it is:
5 dBA or greater and future CNEL is less than 60 dBA
e
3 dBA or greater and future CNEL is 60 dBA or greater and less than 65 dBA
a

1.5 dBA or greater and future CNEL is 65 dBA or greater.

Potential noise impacts. Noise sources associated with the proposed project would range from those that aretypical for the existing trail such aspeople walking, jogging or biking to new usessuch as children' s play areas, outdoor City of Dublin Page 39
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
309
classrooms and outdoor picnic areas.

Typical maximum noise levels from trail users ( joggers, bikers and people strolling) range from 43 to 60 dBA at a distance of 10 feet. With the proposed project, the trail would meander and be ascloseas25feet from existing homes.

Table 2 shows the estimated noise levels from the trail use at backyards of existing residences.

Table 3. Estimated Noise Levels from Trail at the Nearest Backyards Noise Source L.;, x ( dBA)
Bike* 44
44jogger*
Voice — normal ** 40
Voice — raised ** 47
Voice — shout** 70
Noise Study for Alamo CreekBike Path, 30 June2003
Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control ", 3' Ed., Cyril Harris 1998.

Based on the noise measurements that were made for the Alamo Creek Bike Trail project, the Le due to the trail users would be 43 dBA at a distance of 10 feet from the centerof thetrail. Thiscorrespondsto anL „nof 35dBA at a distanceof 25feet.

If this level of activity occursfrom 7 AM to 9 PM, then the DNL would be 34dBA at the nearest backyards, estimated to be about 25 feet from the trail.

For group activities, the level of noise would depend on the number of usersand theproximity to homes. Forexample, agroup activity, suchasuseof aplay area wherefive childrenareplaying continuouslyfor 12hoursa day would generatean L,qof 52dBA at a distanceof 100feet. ThecorrespondingCNELwould be49dBA.

The Noise Element of the City of Dublin' s General Plan considers a CNEL of 60 dBA or less to be "normally acceptable” for neighborhood parks and residential development. The City' s of Dublin' s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 5.28) doesnot contain quantitative noise level limits.

Existing noise levels along the project site range from a CNEL of 51 to 57 dBA due to ambient noise and trail use. This is considered "normally acceptable" for both park and residential uses. In the future, the noise from the proposed project will vary, depending upon the specific use and ultimate location of that usewith respect to existing residences.

For the purposes of this assessment, the uses are divided into two types: Trail use biking, walking, jogging) andoutdoor classrooms /play /picnic areas.

The use of the bike trail would be similar to current use though the distance of the main trail to homeswould decreasesincethetrail would likely meanderfrom east to west ( as opposed to its current location about 100 to 200 feet from homes).

City of Dublin Page 40
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
310
Under the scenario where a trail comes within about 25 feet from a residential backyard, the CNELwould be34dBA. A CNELof 34dBA is well within the City's normally acceptable" level of 60 dBA for residential use and would not result in a significant noise impact.

The precise location of the outdoor classroom /play / picnic areasis not known at this time, but the conceptsite plan indicates that a likely distance would be about 100feetfrom existinghomes. An outdoorclassroom, play or picnic areaswith five children playing continuously, throughout the day, would generate a CNEL of 49 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. If the number of children increased to 10, the CNEL would increase to 52 dBA. Both theselevels are considered "normally acceptable" for residential use according to the City' s General Plan and would alsonot result in a significant noise impact.

In order to generatenoise levels greater than those considered normally acceptable e.g. greater than 60 dBA (CNEL)) there would need to be approximately 75 childrenusing the outdoorareaif it is located100feetfrom thehomesor theplay areawould need to be closerthan 37 feet from the homes if there were only 10 children playing. In these instances, noise from the outdoor classroom / play / picnic area would be considered a significant impact. Adherence to the following measure will reduce this impact to a less - than - significant level.

Mitigation Measure NOISE - 1. The final development plan for the park shall include a restriction of classrooms, play areasand picnic areasto a minimum distance of 37 feet from the rear yard of existing residences adjacent to the park.

Potential permanent noise increases are addressed in item " a." above.

Construction of the proposed park could result in substantial temporary increases in noise as a result of site grading and construction of structures on the site.

Temporaryconstructionnoisecouldbeconsideredsignificantto existingtrail usersand due to the closeproximity of residencesalong major portions of the park site. Adherence to the following measurewill reduce this impact to a less -than- significant impact by limiting hours and days of construction to normal daytime periods.
b) Exposureof peopleto excessivegroundborne vibration or groundborne noiselevels? NI.

Theproposedpark is anticipatedto largely consistof natural usesratherthan locatedin structures. Structuresanticipatedfor thepark will likely besmall - scale, low - rise buildings that would not generate significant groundborne noise or vibration and no impacts would result.
c, d) Substantialpermanentor temporaryincreasesin permanentin ambientnoiselevels? LS / M. Potential permanent noise increases are addressed in item " a." above.

Constructionof the proposedpark couldresultin substantialtemporaryincreases in noise as a result of site grading and construction of structures on the site.

Temporary construction noise could be considered significant due to the close proximity of residences along major portions of the park site. Adherence to the City of Dublin Page 41
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
311
following measurewill reducethisimpactto aless - than - significantimpactby limiting hours and days of construction to normal daytime periods.

Mitigation Measure NOISE - 2. Construction activities shall be limited to thehours of 7:30amto 6p /m, Mondaythrough Saturday, excludingstate or federalholidays. Hoursof constructionshallinclude deliveryof materials and tune up of equipment. Hours of operation shall be included on construction plan and specifications.
e,f) Belocatedwithin an airport land useplanarea, within two 3nilesofa publicor private airport orairstrip? Nl. The proposed park is not located within a 2 -mile radius of any public or private airport or airstrip.

13. Population and Housing
Project Impacts
a)
Inducesubstantialpopulationgrowth in an area, eitherdirectly or indirectly? NI. The site is currently vacant and no housing units areproposed for site aspart of the new park. No impacts are anticipated.
b, c) Wouldtheprojectdisplacesubstantialnumbersofexistinghousingunitsorpeople requiring replacementhousing? NI. The site is vacant and no housing units or people would be displaced should the project be approved and constructed, No impacts are anticipated.

14. Public Services
Project Impacts
a)
Fireprotection? LS. TheCity of Dublin contractswith AlamedaCountyFire Department for fire suppression, emergencymedical, rescue and fire inspection services. The closest fire station is located at 7494 Donohue Drive ( Station # 16), and this station would provide primary response to fire or rescue calls for service within the proposed park. Construction and operation of the proposed park would increasethe calls for fire and emergency services to the Department, but not require any new fire stations or the expansion of an existing station ( Bonnie Terra, ACFD, 7/ 3/ 13) so there would be a less -than- significant impact with respect to this topic.
b) Police protection? LS. There could be a small increase in the number of calls for service to the Dublin Police Services Department based on future use of the proposed park. However, based on a discussion with the Dublin Police Services Department, there would not be a need for new police facilities to serve the proposed park or a need to expand existing police facilities ( Tom McCarthy, Dublin Police Services, 7/ 10/ 13). A less - than - significant impact is anticipated with respect to police service.

City of Dublin Page 42
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
312
c) Schools? NI. No residences would be constructed as part of the proposed park project so that no school - aged children would be generated that would require new classroom space or other educational facilities. No impacts would result with respect to this topic.
d) Maintenanceofpublicfacilities, including roads? LS. The proposed park would be maintained by City of Dublin park maintenance crews. The park would be constructed to City engineering and construction standards to minimize the need for excessive maintenance so that a less than - significant impact would occur with respect to this topic.
e) Solid waste generation? LS. See item 17, below.

15. Recreation
Pro' ect Impacts
a) Would theprojectincreasetheuseof existingneighborhoodor regionalparks? NI. The proposed project would consistof a new City park in an existing underserved portion of Dublin. The proposed park would increase the number and types of parks for Dublin residents and would therefore not increase the use of other existing neighborhood and regional parks. No impacts would occur with respect to this topic.
b) Doestheprojectincluderecreationalfacilities or requiretheconstructionof recreational facilities? NI. The proposed project does include construction of recreation and park facilities; the potential physical impacts of the proposed facilities are addressed in the resource topics throughout this IS. No impacts beyond those addressedelsewhere in the Initial Study would occur with respect to this topic.

16. Transportation/ Traffic
Protect Impacts
a, b) Causean increasein traffic which issubstantialrelativeto existingtraffic loadand street; or exceed ,SOSstandards establishedby the County CMA for designatedroads? LS. Construction of the proposed park would result in increases in traffic on local roads, as Dublin residents travel to and from the park. Based on standard trip generation rates for parks published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers ( ITE) ( 9`h edition), the proposed park is anticipated to generate the following number of vehicle trips:

Daily weekday trips: 28trips
Weekday morning peak trips: 0.25 trips
Weekday evening peak trips: 1.1 trips
Saturday daily trips: 147trips
Sunday daily trips: 50trips
City of Dublin Page 43
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
313
Basedon a discussion with the City of Dublin traffic engineer, the addition of the abovetrips to the local roadway system, there would be aless -than- significant impact with respectto congestion on nearby local or regional roads or CMA- designated roadways ( source: Obaid Khan, Dublin traffic engineer, 7/ 8/ 13). Sincethe proposed park would be located near the existing Iron Horse Trail, the number of vehicles accessingthe proposed park could be lessthan anticipated using standardized rates, since a number of future users would be bicyclists or pedestrians. it is also anticipated that some park usage would comefrom nearby neighborhoods, whereby park userswould walk or bicycle to the proposed park. This impact would therefore be less -- than - significant. c) Result in a changeof air traffic patterns? NI. The proposed park would have no impact on air traffic patterns sinceit would not include any airport or other features that could change air traffic patterns.
d) Substantiallyincreasehazardsdiretoadesignfeatureor incompatibleuse? LS /M. A finalized site plan for the proposed park has not been prepared. It is unknown if the park development plan could increase traffic hazards, result in an incompatible use or createpotential conflicts with existing driveways or nearby intersections. Since this is not known, such conditions could be created which would result in a potentially significant impact. Adherence to the following measure will reduce this impact to a less - than -- significant level.

Mitigation Measure TRANS - 1. The final park development plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Dublin Traffic Engineer to assure that no traffic design hazards are created and that circulation for bike, jogging, walking and other park usesare not incompatible. e) Resultin inadequateemergencyaccess? NI. No impacts would occur with regard to emergency access. The preliminary description for the proposed park would include several pedestrian and bicycle connections with surrounding neighborhoods, Stagecoach Park and Dublin High School to ensure that adequateemergency accesswould be provided.
f) Conflictwith adoptedpolicies, plansorprogramsregardingpublictransit, bicycleor pedestrianfacilities or otherwisedecreasetheperformanceor safetyof suchfacilities? NI. The proposed park is intended to be neighborhood oriented, with minimum off - street parking and maximum walkways and bicycle paths.

Therefore, theproposedprojectwould further City policiesto promotenon- automobile uses and no impacts would result with respect to this topic.

17. Utilities and Service Systems
Project Impacts
a)
Exceedwastewatertreatinentrequirenientsof theRWQCB? LS /M. The Dublin San RamonServicesDistrict (DSRSD) basesexistingand future wastewaterflows on land uses included in the Dublin General Plan. Since the proposed park use City of Dublin Page 44
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
314
is not included in the General Plan Land Use Map, future wastewater flows are not currently included in the District' s wastewater master planning. Basedon a recent discussion with District staff ( source: Stan Kolodzie, 7/ 10/ 13), the small incremental amount of wastewater generatedfrom the park would likely not be considered significant that would exceedRegional Water Quality Control Board discharge standards; however, restroom facilities will need to include low- flow fixtures to limit the amount of future wastewater flow. This is included as a mitigation measure. With adherenceto the following measure, this impact would be less - than - significant.

Mitigation Measure UTIL - 1: Future restrooms within the park shall be limited to " low flow" toilets. Water faucets shall be equipped with flow restrictors.
b) Requirenewwateror wastewatertreatmentfacilities or expansionof existingfacilities? LS / M. Based on recent discussions with DSRSD staff ( Stan Kolodzie, 7 / 10 / 13), the District can provide adequate water and wastewater service to the proposed park without the need for new or expanded facilities, with adherence to Mitigation Measure UTIL - 1.

C) Requirenewstormdrainagefacilities? NI. Referto Section9c of this Initial Study. d) Are sufficientwatersuppliesavailable? NI. The Dougherty Pipeline crossesAlamo Canaljust eastof theprojectlocation, which is critical for providing potable water to DSRSDfor useby Dublin residents. If any park - related work is to be performed along the pipeline right of way, an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the District. However, based on discussions with DSRSD staff, as noted above, the District has adequate water supplies to serve the proposed park and no impact would result with respect to this topic. e) Adequatewastewatercapacityto servetheproposedproject? LS /M. Seeitem " a," above.
f) Solidwastedisposal? NI. Sincetheproposedpark would include largelypassive uses with minimal numbers of users, the amount of solid waste anticipated to be generated would be less - than - significant.
g) Coynplywith federal, stateandlocalstatutesandregulationsrelatedto solidwasteNI. The existing service provider, Amador Valley Industries, will ensure adherenceto federal, state and local solid waste regulations. No impact would result with respect to this topic.

18. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a)
Doestheprojecthavethepotential to degradethequality of theenvironment, substantiallyreducethehabitatof afish or wildlife species, causeafish or wildlife populationto dropbelowself-sustaininglevels, threatento eliminatea plant oranimal City of Dublin Page 45
Initial Study /iron Horse Park Project August 2013
315
community, reducethe number of or restrict the range of a rare or endangeredplant or animaloreliminateimportantexamplesofthemajorperiodsofCaliforniahistoryor prehistory? No. The preceding analysisindicates that the proposed park would not have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources or have the potential to restrict the range of rare or endangered species, based on mitigation measures included in the Initial Study.
b) Doestheprojecthaveinzpactsthatareindividually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( " Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effectsof a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects). No, cumulative impacts of the proposed park would be minimal, sincefuture users of the park would largely be local residents and trips to the park is anticipated to be primarily by non - automotive modes of transportation.

This would substantially limit impacts of the project on traffic, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise generations and similar potential ' impacts. c) Does the project have environnzental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects onhumanbeings, eitherdirectlyorindirectly? No. Basedon theprecedingInitial Study, no substantialeffectsto humanbeings, either directly or indirectly have been identified from the proposed project.

City of Dublin Page 46
Initial Study /Iron Morse Park Project August 2013
316
Initial Study Preparers
Jerry Haag, Urban Planner, project manager and principal author Jane Maxwell, report graphics
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agenciesand organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:

City of Dublin
Kristi Bascom, Principal Planner
Rosemary Alex, Parks and Facilities Development Coordinator Obaid Khan, Senior Civil Engineer, Traffic
Bonnie Terra, Fire Marshal
Tom McCarthy, Police Chief
Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney
Dublin ScanRanzon Services District
Stan Kolozdie, Staff Engineer
Zone 7 Water Agency
Elke Rank, Water Resources Planner
References
California Department of Toxic SubstancesControl, website, July 2013 Final Urban Water Management Plan, 2010 Update, Dublin San Ramon Services District, June 2011
Dublin General Plan City of Dublin, Updated through 3/ 13 Dublin Historic Resources Identification Project Page & Turnbull, 2004 Livermore Municipal Airport, Airport Land Use CgmpatibilityCompatibility Plan Alameda County Airport Land Use Commission, August 2012 Parks and Recreation_ Master Plan, City of Dublin, 2006update Sewer System Management Plan Dublin San Ramon Services District, updated September 2005
City of Dublin - Page 47
Initial Study /Iron Horse Paris Project August 2013
317
City of Dublin Page 48
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
318
LIA AISOCIATES, INC.

S A
157 PARK PLACE'
h' r. RICHMOND. CALIFORNIA 74801
Via Epmail
February 26, 2013
Robin Donoghue
Meyers Nave
401 Mendocino Avenue, 9100
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
iCIIKELFiY FRESNO RIVERSIDE
510. 43G. GAFO " rEL CARLSRA IRVINE ROCKLIN
5111. 23G. 34A0 FAX FORT < 10I . NS PALM SPRINGS SAN LUIS OBISPO Subject: Results of Reconnaissance -level Biological Survey Union Pacific Railroad Parcels, Dublin, Alameda County
Dear Mr. Donoghue:

LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) hascompleteda reconnaissance -level biological surveyof thetwo formerUnion Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right -of -way parcelsin Dublin. LSA previouslysurveyedthe northern parcel between Amador Valley Boulevard and the Alameda County line in October 2006 and presentedthe results in a letter report dated October 16, 2006. The purpose of the current survey wasto confirm that habitatconditionsonthe northernparcelhadnot substantiallychangedsince2006 and to identify existing biological resources on the southern parcel between Interstate 580 (I -580) and Dublin Boulevard. Specifically, we evaluated both parcels' potential to support special - status plant and /or animal species and determined if any sensitive habitats such as wetlands or drainages are present.

This letter report includes the following: ( 1) a summary of relevant federal and State regulations pertaining to biological resources; (2) a description of the methods used to conduct the survey; ( 3) a discussion of biological resources and constraints on the northern parcel, and ( 4) a discussion of the same topics on the southern parcel. The biological resources discussion for each parcel is comprised of three components: ( 1) a description of the existing vegetation and wildlife, ( 2) a discussion of special- status plant and animal species known to occur in the area and their potential to occur on the parcel, and (3) a description of any jurisdictional waters and /or sensitive vegetation types observed on the parcel.

REGULATORY CONTEXT
The project site is located within the general geographical range of several sensitive plant communities and special - status plant and wildlife species. Biological resources on the project site may fall under the agency jurisdictions and regulations of the agencies listed below and described in more detail in Attachment A:

I. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS). Species listed under the federal Endangered SpeciesAct, migratory birds.

2. California Department of Fish and Wildlife ( CDFW). Species listed under the California Endangered Species Act. California Species of Special Concern, Streambed Alteration Agreements, migratory birds.
2! 26113 ( PAML- Y1301UoRpLdor)
PLANNING 3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I DESIGN
319
LSA nssaciATRS, rNo.

3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps). Fill of waters /wetlands subject to the jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

4. Regional Water Quality Control Board, ( RWQCB). Water quality certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act,

5. National Marine Fisheries Service ( NMFS). Marine and anadromous species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act.

METHODS
Prior to visiting the parcels, LSA searchedthe California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for records of special- status species within the Dublin U.S. Geological Survey ( USGS) 7.5- minute quadrangle and reviewed the previous report prepared for the northern parcel ( LSA 2006). LSA biologist Matt Ricketts visited both parcels on January 24, 2013 to assesscurrent habitat conditions and evaluate the parcels' potential to support special- status plant and / or animal species. For the purposes of this report, special - status species are defined as follows:

Speciesthat arelisted, formally proposed, or designatedascandidatesfor listing asthreatenedor endangered under the federal ESA
Speciesthatarelisted, or designatedascandidatesfor listing, asrare, threatened, or endangered under CESA
Plant species assigned to California Rare Plant Ranks IA, I B, and 2 Animal species designated as Species of Special Concern Species that meet the definition of rare, threatened, or endangered under Section 15380 of the CEQA guidelines
Considered to be a taxon of special concern by local agencies

NORTHERN PARCEL
Existing Conditions
Most of the below information is adapted from our previous 2006 report since habitat conditions observed in January 2013 appeared relatively unchanged from our previous visit.

Vegetation. The dominant topographical feature on the northern parcel is an abandoned UPRR railroad grade topped with crushed gravel and cobble. Both embankments of the grade are covered in non - native annual grassland dominated by wild oat (Avenafatua), rye grass (Festuca perennis), and ripgut grass ( Bromus diandrus). Beardless wild rye ( Elynnis triticoides), a native grass, is present in small amounts. Non - nativeruderalforbs growing throughouttheparcelincludebristly ox- tongue Picris echioides), prickly lettuce (Lactucaserriola), andmustard (Brassicasp.). Several linear depressionsin the borrow ditcheson bothsidesof the railroadgradewerefull of waterduringthe January 2013 survey. The largest of these was an approximately 450- foot -long by 50- foot -wide pool in theeasternborrow ditch approximately765feetnorthof AmadorValley Boulevard (seeattached photo). Seasonal wetland plant species observed growing in and around these depressions include spiny cocklebur ( Xanthium spinosum), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), curly dock ( Rumex crispus), fat- 2! 26113 ( NMCY1301\ BioRpt. doc)
2 320
i. 5A ASSq Cf ATE3. INC.
hen (Atriplex pi•ostrata), nutsedge (Cyperus eragrostis), and swamp prickle grass (Crypsis schoenoides).

A stand of woody vegetation dominated by arroyo willow ( Salix lasiolepis) and sandbar willow ( Salix exigua) is presentonthe westernsideof therailroadgradeapproximately300feetnorthof Amador Valley Boulevard. A few immature valley oaks (Queircuslobata) and coast live oaks (Q. agrifolia) grow along the top of the grade adjacent to the willow stand. Several oaks and willows are also present on the eastern side of the grade north of the larger stand of riparian woodland. A few small trees and shrubs of various native and non - native species grow along the western site boundary at the southern end of the parcel near Alamo Creek. Species observed in this area include walnut ( Juglans sp.), Italian buckthorn ( Rhamnus alaternus), coyote brush ( Bacchai- is pilularis), silver wattle ( Acacia dealbota), and coast live oak.

Wildlife. Most of the wildlife species observed on October 3, 2006 and/or January 24, 2013 were birds, with the following species observed within or flying over the parcel: ring- necked pheasant Phasianus colchicus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), turkey vulture ( Cathai•tes aura), Cooper' s hawk ( Accipitei• cooperii), red - shouldered hawk ( Buteo lineatus), rock pigeon ( Columba livia), mourning dove (Zenaida niacroura), Anna' s hummingbird ( Calypte anna), belted kingfisher ( Ceryle alcyon), red - breasted sapsucker ( Sphyrapicus ruber), northern flicker ( Colaptes auratus), American kestrel (Falco spa?-verius), black phoebe (Sayornisnigricans), westernscrubjay ( Aphelocoma californica), American crow ( Corvus bi-achyrhynchos), ruby- crowned kinglet ( Regulus calendula), hermit thrush ( Catha)- us guttatus), American robin ( Turdus migratorius), northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos), yellow- rumped warbler ( Setophaga coronata), common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas), Lincoln' s sparrow ( Melospiza lincolnii), white- crowned sparrow ( Zonotrichia leucophrys), golden - crowned sparrow ( Zonotrichia atricapilla), red - winged blackbird ( Agelaius phoeniceus), lesser goldfinch ( Spinus psaltria), and house finch ( Haemorhous mexicanus).

The densegrass and ruderal herbaceous cover of the abandoned right -of -way provides thermal and protectivecoverfor a variety of native amphibiansandreptiles. Although Sierrantreefrog Pseudacrissiei °ra) andwesternfencelizard (Sceloporusoccidentalis) weretheonly speciesdetected during LSA' s surveys, habitat is present for several other species that typically occur in or adjacent to residential neighborhoods, such as slender salamander ( Batrachoseps attenuatos), western toad ( Bufo boreas), southern alligator lizard ( Flgaria multicarinalus), gopher snake ( Pituophis catenifer), and common garter snake ( Thamnophis sirtalis).

California ground squirrel ( Spermophilus beecheyi) activity was observed at two locations during the January 2013 survey: a small burrow complex in the western embankment of the west borrow ditch approximately2,500 feetsoutheastof theAlameda/ContraCostacounty line, anda largerburrow complex in the western embankment of the west borrow ditch approximately 450 feet northwest of Alnador Valley Boulevard and below the stand of oaks (seeattached photo). Evidence ( burrows or runways) of Botta' s pocket gopher ( Thomomys bottae) and California vole ( Microtus californica) was also observed throughout the grassland. Other common mammal species expected to occur include house mouse ( Mus musculus), fox squirrel ( Sciurus niger), northern raccoon ( Procyon lotor), striped skunk ( Mephitis mephitis), and black - tailed deer ( 4docoileus hemionus). 2126113 ( P:WEY1391\ BioRpt. doc)
321
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Special - status Species
Plants. Based on the results of the CNDDB search and observed habitat conditions in October 2006 and January 2013, LSA identified four special - status plant species as potentially occurring in the vicinity ( seeattached Table A). Two of these have been recorded in the general vicinity of the parcel:

Diablo helianthella ( Helianthella castanea) and Congdon' s tarplant ( Centronaadiaparlyi ssp. congdonii) ( CDFW 2013). Diablo helianthella is not expected to occur due to the absence of chaparral and oak woodland. Congdon' s tarplant ( rare plant rank I B) is known to occur within the Camp Parks Reserve Forces Training Area, lessthan 1 mile east of the parcel, and also along Dougherty Road, approximately 1 mile north - northeast of the parcel. This speciestypically occurs in annual grassland, but is also known to occur in ruderal vegetation adjacent to annual grassland or that were once annual grassland ( Preston 1999, LSA obs.). Habitat for this species is present in the grassland along the railroad grade. Since the January 2013 survey was conducted outside the blooming period for the species (May to October), there is some potential for this species to occur on the parcel. Focused surveys during the blooming period are necessaryto confirm the presence or absence of this species.

Animals. The CNDDB contains records for 9 special- status animal species in the vicinity of the parcel and habitat is present for another ( loggerhead shrike [ Lanius ludovicianus]) ( Table A). Seven of these species are not expected to occur due to the lack of habitat and /or surrounding development.

This group includes the following four listed species: California tiger salamander (Ainbystoma californiense), California red - legged frog ( Rana draytonii), Alameda whipsnake (Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus) and San Joaquin kit fox ( Vulpes macrotis mutica). California tiger salamander has been recorded at Camp Parks less than one mile eastof the site. The seasonal pools adjacent to the railroad grade resemble moderate - quality breeding habitat for the species. However, historic and ongoing disturbance on the parcel (e.g., railroad maintenance, vegetation management, pedestrians and pets) its shall size and the parcel' s isolation from the more extensive grasslands east of Dougherty Road make it highly unlikely that the species is present. California red - legged frog has been recorded from the upper reaches of Alamo Creek in the San Ramon Valley, but has not been observed in the lower, urbanized reach west of Dougherty Road due to decreasedhabitat quality from surrounding urbanization. San Joaquin kit fox have not been found during several intensive surveys in the Dublin/ San Ramon area, and are presumed absent from the area ( Sproul and Flett 1993). The parcel is completely isolated from the closest occupied Alameda whipsnake habitat which is located over seven miles from the site.

Although not detected during either survey, loggerhead shrike (California Species of Special Concern) could potentially nest in the oaks and willows northwest of Amador Valley Boulevard and the grassland on either side of the railroad grade provides foraging habitat. The two California ground squirrel burrow complexes provide marginal habitat for burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia; California Species of Special Concern), although denseweed cover may limit their suitability for nesting. Both of these species are known to occur in the extensive grasslands east of Dougherty Road i.e., Camp Parks) and in the Dougherty Valley ( LSA obs.).

Other Sensitive Biological Resources
Jurisdictional Waters. Based on the presence of standing water and seasonal wetland plant species, severalareasalongthebottomsof the borrow ditcheson eithersideof the railroadgradearelikely subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and RWQCB jurisdiction under the Porter- Colognc Water Quality Control Act as wetlands of the United States and /or State. 20- 6113 ( PAMEY 130 1UoRptdoc)
4 322
LSA ASSOCFA7£ S, INC.

Other portions of the ditches that do not support wetland plants but show evidence of seasonal saturation may be considered other waters of the United Statesby these agencies.

Sensitive Natural Communities. The CDFG tracks the occurrences of plant communities that are eitherknownor believedto beof high priority for inventoryin the CNDDB. The CNDDB contains no recordsof sensitivenaturalcommunitiesin thevicinity of the parcel, nor did LSA identify any such communities during its 2006 and 2013 reconnaissance surveys.

Biological Constraints
Congdon' s Tarplant. As mentioned above, the parcel contains habitat for Congdon' s tarplant. To confirm the presence or absence of this species, a qualified botanist would need to conduct a focused botanical survey during its blooming period (May to October) in accordance with CDFW protocols CDFG 2009). The results of the survey could facilitate the avoidance of any on -site occurrences during project design.

Burrowing Owl. Although habitat quality for burrowing owls on the parcel is marginal, its presence cannot entirely be ruled out without conducting additional surveys for this species in accordance with the recently revised Staff Report on Furrowing Owl Mitigation issued by the CDFW in March 2012 CDFG 2012). If burrowing owls were found breeding and /or wintering on the parcel, loss of occupied burrows or suitable foraging habitat would likely be considered a significant impact under CEQA and mitigation ( e.g., preservation of suitable on- or off -site habitat) may be warranted. In addition, any occupied burrows would have to be avoided through the establishment of exclusion zones during construction.

Loggerhead Shrike and Other Native Birds. Nests of all native bird species are protected under the federal MBTA and Section 3503 the California Fish and Game Code, which prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird. The trees in the southern half of the parcel provide suitable nesting habitat for one special - status bird species (loggerhead shrike) as well as other native bird species such as white - tailed kite Anna' s hummingbird, western scrubjay, chestnut- backedchickadee, bushtit, Americanrobin, California towhee, andhousefinch, among others. If conductedduringthe nestingseason (typically definedby CDFW asFebruary15to September 1), removal of the trees could directly impact nesting birds by destroying active nests.

Prolongedloud constructionnoisecouldalsodisturbnestingbirds, resultingin nestabandonmentor failure. If future development plans include tree removals, such activities should be conducted during the non - nesting season (September 1 to January 31), if feasible. Depending on the nature and location of proposedwork, pre - constructionsurveysmaybenecessaryto avoid impactsto nestingbirds. Such surveys should be conducted within 7 days prior to the start of work from February to May ( since thereis a higherpotentialfor birdsto initiate nestingduringthis period), andwithin 15daysprior to the start of work from June to August.

Jurisdictional Waters. As mentioned above, the numerous pools within the borrow ditches on either side of the railroad grade, and potentially other areaswithin the ditches, are likely under Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction. Any fill or modification of these areaswould require a Clean Water Act Section404 permit from the CorpsandSection401 waterqualitycertification from the RWQCB. To clarify the extent of Corps jurisdiction and more accurately depict jurisdictional boundaries, a formal wetland delineation in accordance with Corps methodology ( Environmental Laboratory 1987, Corps 2008) would needto beconductedbeforeapplying for permitsor designingprojectfeaturesaround 2126113 ( PAIMEY 1301 UoRpt. doc)
323
I. SA A% 90CIATES, INC.
existing wetlands. Alternatively, if future development is limited to uplands (i. e., top of railroad grade), a formal delineation would not be required.
091111 42-83
1111MMITI-
MG-M
Existing Conditions
The southern UPRR parcel is an approximately 1,700 - foot -long by 40- foot -wide strip of ruderal grassland located between Dublin Boulevard and the Iron Horse Regional Trail trailhead. The majority of the propertyis a concaveborrowditch, likely createdduring constructionof the former railroad grade to the northeast which runs the length of the entire parcel. The parcel is bordered to the northeast by the Iron Horse Regional Trail and to the southwest by industrial development.

Vegetation. The bottom of the ditch supports a mix of hydrophytic plant species typical of seasonal wetlands, annual grasses, and ruderal forbs. Seasonal wetland plants such as annual beard grass Polypogon inonspeliensis), spiny cocklebur, nutsedge, curly dock, salt grass, and fat -hen occur as densepatches in seasonally wet depressions and are also interspersed with ruderal plants and grasses in drier portionsof the ditch. The banksof theditch aredominatedby wild oat andrye grasswith scattered patches of prickly lettuce, a ruderal forb. Native vegetation on the parcel includes an approximately 100 - foot -long by 30- foot -wide stand of beardless wild rye approximately 200 feet northwest of the southern end of the parcel and a small stand of willows ( Salix sp.) next to a culvert in the central portion of the parcel.

Wildlife. Wildlife activity on the southern parcel is lower than on the northern parcel due to its smaller size and increased disturbance levels associated with adjacent development. Species observed duringLSA' sJanuary24, 2013surveyincludeSierrantreefrog (heardcalling), blackphoebe, western scrubjay, northern mockingbird, savannah sparrow, white - crowned sparrow, and western meadowlark ( Sturnella neglecta). Botta' s pocket gopher burrows were observed on the embankment northeast of the ditch.

Special- status Species
Of the threespecial - statusplantor animal speciesdiscussedaboveaspotentiallyoccurringonthe northern parcel ( Congdon' s tarplant, burrowing owl, and loggerhead shrike), only Congdon' s tarplant has any potential to occur on the southern parcel. The lack of California ground squirrels and their burrowsprecludesuseof the southernparcelby burrowingowls, andthe paucityof nestsitesand opengrasslandfor foragingreducesthe likelihood of loggerheadshrike nesting. The narrowwidth of the parcel and consequent exposure to higher noise levels and disturbance from trail users also reduces habitat suitability for shrikes. None of the remaining special - status species in Table A are expectedto occurdueto the disturbedconditionof the parcelandits proximity to regularhuman activity. As on the northernparcel, focusedsurveysduringthe Congdon'starplantbloomingperiod May to October) would be needed to confirm its presence or absence.

Other Sensitive Biological Resources
Jurisdictional Waters. The ditch that runs the length of the parcel may be under Corps jurisdiction as an "other water" of the United States. At a minimum, the depressions dominated by seasonal wetland plant species are likely wetlands of the State. 2126113 ( P :\MEY 1301 \ BioRpt. doc)
324
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Sensitive Natural Communities. Although the CNDDB contains no records of sensitive natural communities in the area, stands of beardless wild rye such as the one observed on the southern parcel are sometimes considered sensitive under CEQA. " Creeping rye grass turfs" is recognized as a sensitive natural community in the list of vegetation alliances recognized by CDFW ( CDFG 20 10) and impacts to high - quality examples of this community could be considered significant under CEQA. For a stand to be included in this vegetation alliance, beardless wild rye must comprise greater than 50 percent relative cover in the herbaceous layer ( Sawyer et al. 2009). The stand on the southern UPRR parcel is comprised of only about 20 percent relative cover of beardless wild rye, with the remaining portions comprised of rye grass, salt grass, and other annual grasses. Given the relatively low coverof beardlesswild rye andthegenerallydisturbedconditionof the stand, it is unlikely to qualify as a sensitive natural community under CEQA.

Biological Constraints
The primary biological constraints to development of the southern parcel include Congdon' s tarplant, nesting birds (protected under Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code), and jurisdictional wetlands and/ or other waters of the United States. Focused botanical surveys to determine presence /absenceof Congdon' s tarplant would need to be conducted between May and October. A formal wetland delineation could be conducted to clarify the extent of Corps and RWQCB jurisdiction on the parcelat anytime. A nestingbird surveywould only needto beconductedif construction activities occurred during the nesting season (February 1to August 31).

We hopethe aboveinformation will beusefulin evaluatingthe landusepotentialof thetwo parcels.

Pleasecontactme or Malcolm Sproul, Principal -in- Charge, if you haveanyquestionsor require further information.

Sincerely,
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

S • . t. -tic
Matt Ricketts
Senior Wildlife Biologist
Attachments: Table A — Special- status Species
Attachment A — Regulatory Context
Site Photographs
The commonandscientific nameof this specieswasrecentlychangedfrom creepingrye grass (Leymustriticoides) to beardless wild rye ( Elymus triticoides), as per Baldwin et al. ( 2412), 2126113 ( P:NEY13011BioRpt. doc)
325
LSA ASSOCTATF: S. INC.

REFERENCES
Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, and T. J. Rosatti, eds. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley.

California Departmentof Fish andGame (CDFG). 2009. Protocolsfor surveyingandevaluating impacts to special status native plant populations and natural communities. November 24.

CDFG. 2010. List of VegetationAlliancesandAssociations. VegetationClassificationandMapping Program, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. September 2010, CDFG. 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, March 7.

California Departmentof FishandWildlife (CDFW), 2013. CaliforniaNaturalDiversity Database CNDDB), Commercial Version dated January 1, 2013. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical report Y -87 -1, U.S. Army EngineerWaterwaysExperimentStation, Vicksburg, MS.

LSA Associates, Inc. ( LSA). 2006. Results of Biological Reconnaissance Survey, Union Pacific /Alameda County Parcels, Dublin. Prepared for City of Dublin Community Development Department. October 16.

Preston, R.E. 1999. Preliminary Report on the Conservation Statusof Congdon' s Spikeweed Hemizonia par ryi subsp. congdonii) in the South and East San Francisco Bay Area and Monterey County, California. Unpubl. report prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura, CA. 23 February.

Sproul, M. J. and M. A. Flett. 1993. Status of the San Joaquin kit fox in the northwest margin of its range. 1993 Transactions of the Western Section of The Wildlife Society 29:61 -69.

U.S. Array Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers WetlandDelineationManual: Arid WestRegion (Version2.0). U.S. Army EngineerResearch and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
2126113 ( PAMEY130 I TjoRpt. doc)
326
L5A ASSOCIATES, fN0.

Table A: Special- status Species Evaluated for the Union Pacific Railroad Parcels, Dublin, Alameda County, California
Status*
Federal/ State/
Species Other) Habitat / Blooming Period Discussion
Plants
Congdon' s tarplant
Centronaadia parryi ssp.
congdonii
Diablo helianthella
Helianthella castanea
Hairless popcorn - flower
PlagioboMiys glaber
Oregon polemonium
Polemonhun carneunt
Amphibians and Reptiles
California tiger salamander
Ambystoma californiense
Rana draylonii
Western pond turtle
Actinemys marmorata
Alameda whipsnake
Masticophis lateralis
einyxanthus
PWEY13011BioRPl. doc ( 02/ 26113)
I B
I B
A
2 FT / — / CSC
CSC
Alkaline soils in valley and
foothill grassland. Also
known to occur in ruderal
habitats. Elevation: 1 -230
m. Blooms May to
October.

Rocky soils in
chaparral / oak woodland
interface. Elevation 60-
1, 300 m. Blooms March to
June.

Coastal salt marshes and
alkaline meadows.

Elevation: 5 - 180 m.

Blooms Marcy to May.
scrub, and lower montane
coniferous forest.

Elevation: 0 - 1, 830 m.

Blooms April to
Sentember.

Grasslands and foothills
that contain small mammal
burrows ( for dry - season
retreats) and seasonal
ponds and pools ( for
breedingduring therainy
season).

Ponds, streams, drainages
and associated uplands;
requires areas of deep, still,
and/ or slow- moving water
for breeding
Ponds, streams, drainages,
and associated uplands.

FT / ST /— Chaparral and sage scrub
with rock outcrops and an
abundance of prey species
such as western fence
lizard ( Sceloporus
occidentalis).

May occur. Annual
grassland provides habitat.

Known to occur at Camp
Parks less than I mile east
of northern parcel.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of rocky soils and
chaparral.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of salt marsh and / or
alkaline meadows. Likely
extirnated in California.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of habitat.

Not expected to occur due to
history of disturbance and
isolation from large blocks
of undisturbed grassland
e.g., Camp Parks).

Not expected to occur due to
lack of aquatic habitat.

Reach of Alamo Creek at
southern end of northern
arcel too disturbed.

Unlikely to occur due to
lack of aquatic habitat.

Reach of Alamo Creek at
southern end of northern
parcel too disturbed.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of chaparral.
327
c. sA nssaCATrs. rNC.

Birds
Athene cunicularia
Loggerhead shrike
Lanius ludovicianus
Tricolored blackbird
Agelaius tricolor
Mammals
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
San Joaquin kit fox
Yulpes macrons mutica
American badger
Taxidea taxes
Status*
Federal/ State/
CSC
CSC
CSC
Stattts Codes
FE = federally endangered
FT = federally threatened
ST = State threatened
IA= California Rare Plant Rank lA
I B = Cal ifornia Rare Plant Rank 113
2 = Califomia Rare Plant Rank 2
CSC = California Species of Special Concern
PAMEY1301TioRpt. doc ( 02126113)
Period
Open habitats (e.g.,
grasslands, agricultural
areas) with mammal
burrows or other features
e.g., culverts, pipes, debris
piles) suitable for nesting
and roosting.

Open grasslands and
woodlands with scattered
shrubs, fence posts, utility
lines, or other perches.

Nests in dense shrubs and
lower branches of trees.

Nests in dense vegetation
near open water, forages in
grasslands and agricultural
Roosts in caves, tunnels,
buildings, under bridges,
and in tree hollows; forages
over variety of habitats.

Annual grasslands with
scattered shrubby
vegetation. Loose - textured
soils required for digging
burrows.

Open, dry habitats (e.g.,
grasslands) with friable
soils.

Discussion
May occur in northern
parcel. Burrows and
foraging habitat present.

May occur in northern
parcel. Willows and oaks
provide nest sites and
grassland along railroad
grade suitable for foraging.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of dense emergent
marsh or other vegetation
suitable for nesting.

Not expected to occur due to
lack of roosting habitat.

Not expected to occur due to
history of disturbance and
species' absence from
Dublin/ San Ramon area.

Not expected to occur due to
surrounding disturbance
lack of connectivity to
grassland habitat. No
burrows observed during
2006 or 2013 surveys.
328
LSA ASSOCIATES. INC.

ATTACHMENT A: REGULATORY CONTEXT
Federal Endangered Species Act
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) hasjurisdiction over federally listed threatened and endangered plant and animal species. The federal Endangered Species Act ( ESA) protects listed species from harm or " take," broadly defined asto " harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engagein any such conduct." An activity can be defined as a take" evenif it is unintentionalor accidental. TheUSFWShasjurisdiction over federallylistedplant and animal species with the exception of migratory fish which are under thejurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service ( NMFS) ( formerly known asNOAA Fisheries).

An endangered species is one that is considered in danger of becoming extinct throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. Any activity that could result in the take of a federally listed speciesrequires an ESA Section 10 take permit from the USFWS, or an ESA Section 7 consultation with the USFWS in conjunction with a federal permit process. Section 7 of the ESA requires other federal agencies involved in permitting projectsthat mayresultin takeof federally listedspecies (e.g., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) to consult with the USFWS prior to allowing any activities that may result in take.

Clean Water Act
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps) is responsible under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act to regulate the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States. Waters of the United States and their lateral limits are defined in 33 CFR Part 328. 3(a) and include streams that are tributaries to navigable waters and their adjacent wetlands. The lateral limits of jurisdiction for a non - tidal stream are measured at the line of the ordinary high water mark (33 CFR 328.3[e]) or the limit of adjacent wetlands ( 33 CFR 328. 3[ 6]).

Waters of the United States fall into two broad categories: wetlands and other waters. Wetlands includemarshes, wet meadows, seeps, floodplains, basins, andotherareasexperiencingextended seasonalsoil saturation. Seasonally or intermittently inundated features, such as seasonalponds, ephemeral streams, and tidal marshes, are categorized as wetlands if they have hydric soils and support wetland plant communities. Other waters include waterbodies and watercourses such as rivers, streams, lakes, springs, ponds, coastalwaters, andestuaries. Seasonallyinundatedwaterbodies or watercourses that do not exhibit wetland characteristics are classified as other waters of the United States.

In general, a project proponentmustobtaina Section404 permit from the Corpsbeforeplacingfill or gradingin wetlandsor otherwatersof theUnitedStates. Prior to issuingthe permit, the Corpsis required to consult with the USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA if the project may result in the take of federally listed species.

All Corps permits require water quality certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. In the SanFranciscoBay Area, this regulatoryprogramis administeredby the SanFranciscoBay Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). Project proponents who propose to fill wetlands or other waters of the United States must apply for water quality certification from the RWQCB. The PAMZY13011BioRpt. dou ( 42126113)
329
LSA ASSOCIATES. FNC.

RWQCB has adopted a policy requiring mitigation for any loss of wetland, streambed, or other jurisdictional area.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
ThefederalMigratory Bird TreatyAct (MBTA), which is enforcedby the USFWS, prohibitsthe taking, hunting, killing, selling, purchasing, etc. of migratorybirds, partsof migratory birds, or their eggs and nests. As used in the MBTA, the term " take" is defined as " to pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, kill, or attempt to pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, or kill, unless the context otherwise requires." Most bird speciesnativeto North Americaarecoveredby this act.

California Endangered Species Act
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife' ( CDFW) has jurisdiction over State - listed endangered, threatened, and rare plant and animal species under the California Endangered Species Act ( CESA). CESA is similar to the federal ESA both in process and substance; it is intended to provide additional protection to threatened and endangeredspecies in California. Species may be listed as threatened or endangered under both acts ( in which case the provisions of both State and federal laws apply) or under only one act. A candidate speciesis one that the Fish and Wildlife Commission has formally noticed as being under review by CDFW for addition to the State list.

Candidate species are protected by the provisions of CESA.

Porter - Cologne Water Quality Control Act
Under this Act ( California Water Code Sections 13000- 14920), the RWQCB is authorized to regulate the discharge of waste that could affect the quality of the State's waters. The RWQCB asserts jurisdiction over isolated waters and wetlands, as well as waters and wetlands that are regulated by the Corps. Therefore, even if a project does not require a federal permit, it may still require review and approval by the RWQCB if isolated waters or wetlands are present. When reviewing applications, the RWQCB focuses on ensuring that projects do not adversely affect the " beneficial uses" associated with watersof the State. In mostcases, theRWQCBseeksto protectthesebeneficialusesby requiring the integration of waste discharge requirements ( WDRs) into projects that will require discharge into waters of the State. For most construction projects, the RWQCB requires the use of construction and post - construction best management practices ( BMPs).

California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) applies to " projects" proposed to be undertaken or requiringapprovalby Stateandlocal governmentagencies. Projectsaredefinedashavingthe potential to have physical impact on the environment. Under Section 15380 of CEQA, a species not included on any formal list " shall nevertheless be considered threatened or endangered if the species can be shown by a local agency to meet the criteria" for listing. With sufficient documentation, a species could be shown to meet the definition of threatened or endangered under CEQA and be considered a " de facto" threatened or endangered species.

California Fish and Game Code
The CDFW is also responsible for enforcing the California Fish and Game Code, which contains several provisions potentially relevant to construction projects. For example, Section 1602 of the Fish andGameCodegovernsthe issuanceof Lakeor StreambedAlteration Agreementsby CDFW. Lake 1 PriortoJanuary1, 2013, theCDFWwasknownastheCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandGame (CDFG). Forthe purposesof this report, the "CDFG" abbreviation is only usedto referencedocumentsissuedby the agencyprior to 2012.

PAMEY 130 118 ioRpt. doc ( 02126! 13) 2
330

LSA ASSOCIATES, IVC,
or StreambedAlteration Agreementsarerequiredwheneverprojectactivities substantiallydivert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated as such by CDFW.

The Fish and Game Code also designates animal species as Fully Protected or Protected. Fully Protected animals and Protected animals may not be taken or possessedat any time. CDFW does not issue licenses or permits for take of these speciesexcept for necessaryscientific researchor live capture and relocation pursuant to a permit for the protection of livestock. Fully Protected species are listed in Sections 3511 ( birds), 4700 ( mammals), 5050 ( reptiles and amphibians), and 5515 ( fish) of the Fish and Game Code, while Protected amphibians and reptiles are listed in Chapter 5, Sections 41 and 42.

Section 3503 of the Fish and Game Code prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird. Subsection 3503.5 specifically prohibits the take, possession, or destruction of any birds in the orders Falconiforines ( hawks and eagles) or Strigiformes ( owls) and their nests.

These provisions, along with the federal MBTA, essentially serve to protect nesting native birds.

Non - native species, including European starling, house sparrow, and rock pigeon, are not afforded any protection under the MBTA or California Fish and Game Code.

California Species of Special Concern
The CDFW maintains an administrative list of Species of Special Concern, defined as a " species, subspecies, or distinct population of an animal native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following ( not necessarily mutually exclusive) criteria:
is extirpatedfrom the State, or, in the caseof birds, in its primaryseasonalor breedingrole; is listed as federally, but not State -, threatened or endangered; meets the State definition of threatened or endangeredbut has not formally been listed; is experiencing, or formerly experienced, serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions ( not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for State threatened or endangered status;
hasnaturallysmall populationsexhibiting high susceptibilityto risk from any factor($), that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for State threatened or endangered status." Species of Special Concern are generally included in a CEQA document analysis of project impacts.

In contrast to species listed under the federal ESA or CESA Species of Special Concern have no formal legal status.

California Rare Plant Ranks
Special - statusplantsin California areassignedto oneof five "California RarePlantRanks" by a collaborative group of over 300 botanists in government, academia, non - governmental organizations, and the private sector. This effort is jointly managed by the CDFW and the non -profit California Native PlantSociety (CNPS). Thefive California RarePlantRankscurrentlyrecognizedby the CNPS include the following:

Rare Plant Rank IA — presumed extinct in California.

Rare Plant Rank I B — rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere.

Rare Plant Rank 2 — rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere.

NMEY 1301 kBi oRpt. doe ( 02126113)
331

LSA ASSOCIATES, INC,
Rare Plant Rank 3 — a review list of plants about which more information is needed.

Rare Plant Rank 4 — a watch list of plants of limited distribution.

Substantialimpactsto plantsrankedIA, IB, and2 aretypically consideredsignificantbasedon Section15380of the CEQA Guidelinesdependingonthe policy of theleadagency. Plantsranked3 and 4 may be evaluated by the lead agency on a case -by -casebasis to determine significance thresholds under CEQA.

PAMEY 13011QioRpt. doc ( 02126113)
332
Large seasonal pool on northern parcel, approximately 765 feet north of Amador Valley Boulevard.

California ground squirrel burrow complex on northernparcel, approximately450 feetnorth of Amador Valley Boulevard.

L S A
Dublin UPRR Parcels
Site Photographs
P:\ MEY1301\ g\SiIc Photographs. cdr ( 02/ 21/ 2013)
333
Seasonal wetland vegetation in central portion of southern parcel, Willows in central portion of southern parcel.

L S A
Dublin UPRR Parcels
Site Photographs
P :WEY 13011g1Sitc Photographs. cdr ( 02! 21! 2013)
334
City of Dublin Page 49
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project August 2013
335
l•,

DUBLIN IRON NORSE TRAIL

DUBLIN, ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared For:
terry Haag
2029 University Ave.

Berkeley, California 94704
Contact:

Tom Fraser
fraser@wra- ca. com
Date:

May 2013

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
2169 - G East Francisco Blvd., Son Rafael, CA 94901 ( 419) 454 - 8868 lei ( 415) 454 - 01129 fox lnfo@v., ro- ca. com www. wra- ca. com 336
This page intentionally left blank
337

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. 0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................... ..................... .... . . . . .. 1

1. 1 Study Background ........................................................................... ............................... 1

1. 2 Regulatory Background ........................................................--------------- .......................... 1

2. 0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS ...................... .............................. 2

3. 0 METHODS ................................................. .......................................................................... 2

3. 1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U. S ..................................... ............................... 2

3. 1. 1 Wetlands ............................. ......................... . . . . .. .......•... ............................... 2

3. 1. 2 Other Waters of the U. S ............................................................. ................ ........... 5

3. 2 Difficult Wetland Situations in the Arid West ............................... ............................... 6

3. 3 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction ............................... .............................. 6

4. 0 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION .............................................................. ........................... . .. 6

5. 0 RESULTS .................................................................................................. .......................... 9

5. 1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U. S ..................................... ............................... 9

5. 1. 1 Wetlands .................... ......................... . . . . .. ..................... ............................... 9

5. 1. 2 Other Waters of the U. S ............................

5. 3 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction ............................ ............................... 10

6. 0 POTENTIAL CORPS OF ENGINEERS JURISDICTION ...................... ............................. 10

7. 0 REFERENCES ---------------•-......................... ........ ...................... --....----. ............................. 11

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary of Potential Section 404 Jurisdictional Areas Within the Study Area .............2

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A - Figures
Figure 1. Study Area Location Map
Figure 2. Aerial Photo of Study Area
Figure 3. Soils Map
Figure 4. Preliminary Delineation of Waters of the U.S.

Appendix B - Wetland Data Forms
Appendix C - Representative Photographs of the Study Area Appendix D - Plant Species Observed Within the Study Area 338

1. 0 INTRODUCTION

1. 1 Study Background
The Dublin Iron Horse Trail site ( Study Area) consists of 27.47 acres in Alameda County, California ( Appendix A, Figure 1). The Study Area is bounded on the north by the City of Dublin /City of San Ramon City Limit Line, and on the south by Alamo Creek. Amador Valley Boulevard divides the Study Area into two parts, a northern and a southern parcel.

The property is owned by the City of Dublin, is comprised of two former Union Pacific Railroad UPRR) right -of -way parcels, andnowservesas the popularIronhorseTrailcorridorconnecting Dublin with neighboring areas to the north. The paved multi - use trail and abandoned railroad bed, as well as aerial and underground utility lines, run adjacent to the relatively narrow Study Area.

The City of Dublin is considering to expand park resources within the Study Area. WRA, Inc. was hired to conduct a routine wetland delineation within the Study Area as part of the City's due diligence process. On May 17, 2613, WRA conducted a routine wetland delineation in the Study Area to determine the presence of potential wetlands and waters subject to federal jurisdiction under Section 464 of the Clean Water Act. This report presents the results of this delineation.

1. 2 Regulatory Background
Section 464 of the Clean Water Act
Section 464 of the Clean Water Act gives the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps) regulatory and permitting authority regarding discharge of dredged or fill material into " navigable waters of the United States ". Section 562( 7) of the Clean Water Act defines navigable waters as " waters of the United States, including territorial seas." Section 328 of Chapter 33 in the Code of Federal Regulations defines the term waters of the United States" as it applies to the jurisdictional limits of the authority of the Corps under the Clean Water Act. A summary of this definition of "waters of the U.S." in 33 CFR 328. 3 includes ( 1) waters used for commerce; ( 2) interstate waters and wetlands; ( 3) " other waters" such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams, and wetlands; ( 4) impoundments of waters; ( 5) tributaries to the above waters; ( 6) territorial seas; and ( 7) wetlands adjacent to waters.

Therefore, for purposes of the determining Corps jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, navigable waters" as defined in the Clean Water Act are the same as " waters of the U. S." defined in the Code of Federal Regulations above.

The limits of Corps jurisdiction under Section 464 as given in 33 CFR Section 328. 4 are as follows: ( a) Territorial seas: three nautical miles in a seaward direction from the baseline; ( b) Tidal waters of the U. S.: high tide line or to the limit of adjacent non - tidal waters; ( c) Non - tidal waters of the U.S.: ordinary high water mark or to the limit of adjacent wetlands; ( d) Wetlands: to the limit of the wetland.
339

2. 0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
Appendix A depicts the extent of Corps jurisdiction within the Study Area based on a wetland delineation conducted by WRA on May 17, 2013. The acreage of potential Section 404 jurisdictional areas is summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Summary of Potential Section 404 Jurisdictional Areas Within the Study Area

3. 0 METHODS
Prior to conducting field surveys, reference materials were reviewed, including the Soil Survey of Alameda County ( USDA 2013), the Alameda USGS 7. 5' quadrangle, and aerial photographs of the site.

A focused evaluation of indicators of wetlands and waters was performed in the Study Area on May 17, 2013. The methods used in this study to delineate jurisdictional wetlands and waters are based on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual ( "Corps Manual "; Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Arid West Region ( " Arid West Supplement"; Corps 2008). The routine method for wetland delineation described in the Corps Manual was used to identify areas potentially subject to Corps Section 404 jurisdiction within the Study Area. A general description of the Study Area, including plant communities present, topography, and land use was also generated during the delineation visits. The methods for evaluating the presence of wetlands and other " waters of the U. S." employed during the site visit are described in detail below.

3. 1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U. S.

3. 1. 1 Wetlands
The Study Area was evaluated for the presence or absence of indicators of the three wetland parameters described in the Corps Manual ( Environmental Laboratory 1987) and Arid West Supplement ( Corps 2008).

Section 328. 3 of the Federal Code of Regulations defines wetlands as:

Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water of a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal 4 Potentially
Potential
Habitat Type Size ( acres) Isolated" Areas Jurisdictional acres)
Waters of the
U. S. ( acres)
Wetlands:

Seasonal Wetlands ( PEMS) 0. 51 N/ A 0. 51
TOTAL 0. 51 NIA 0. 51

3. 0 METHODS
Priorto conductingfield surveys, reference materialswere reviewed, includingthe Soil Survey of Alameda County ( USDA 2013), the Alameda USGS7. 5' quadrangle, and aerial photographs of the site.

A focused evaluationof indicatorsof wetlandsand waterswas performedin the StudyAreaon May17, 2013. The methodsusedin this studyto delineate jurisdictional wetlandsand waters are basedon the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers Wetlands DelineationManual ( "Corps Manual "; Environmental Laboratory1987) and the Regional Supplementto the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Arid West Region ( " Arid West Supplement"; Corps 2008). The routine methodfor wetland delineation describedin the Corps Manualwas usedto identify areas potentiallysubjectto Corps Section404 jurisdictionwithinthe Study Area. A general descriptionof the Study Area, includingplant communitiespresent, topography, and land use was also generatedduringthe delineationvisits. The methodsfor evaluatingthe presenceof wetlands and other " waters of the U. S." employedduringthe site visit are describedin detail below.

3. 1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U. S.

3. 1. 1 Wetlands
The StudyArea was evaluatedfor the presenceor absenceof indicatorsof the three wetland parameters describedin the Corps Manual ( Environmental Laboratory1987) and Arid West Supplement ( Corps 2008).

Section328.3 of the Federal Codeof Regulations defines wetlandsas:

Those areas that are inundatedor saturatedby surfaceor ground waterof a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal 4 340
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas."
EPA, 40 CFR 230. 3 and CE, 33 CFR 328. 3 ( b)
The three parameters used to delineate wetlands are the presence of: ( 1) hydrophytic vegetation, ( 2) wetland hydrology, and ( 3) hydric soils. According to the Corps Manual, for areas not considered " problem areas" or " atypical situations ":

Evidence of a minimum of one positive wetland indicator from each parameter ( hydrology, soil, and vegetation) must be found in order to make a positive wetland determination."
Data on vegetation, hydrology, and soils collected at sample points during the delineation site visit was reported on Arid West Supplement data forms. Once an area was determined to be a potential jurisdictional wetland, its boundaries were delineated using GPS equipment and mapped on a topographic map. The areas of potential jurisdictional wetlands were measured digitally using ArcG1S software. Indicators described in the Arid West Supplement were used to make wetland determinations at each sample point in the Study Area and are summarized below.

Vegetation
Plant species observed in the Study Area were identified using Baldwin et al. ( 2012). Plants were assigned a wetland indicator status according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers list of plant species that occur in wetlands ( Lichvar 2012). Where differences in nomenclature occur between Baldwin et al. ( 2012) and Lichvar ( 2012), the species name as it occurred in Lichvar 2012) is listed in brackets. Wetland indicator statuses are based on the expected frequency of occurrence in wetlands as follows:

OBL Always found in wetlands 99% frequency
FACW( f) Usually found in wetlands 67 - 99%
FAC Equal in wetland or non - wetlands 34 - 66%
FACU Usually found in non - wetlands 1 -33%
UPUNL Upland / Not listed ( upland) 1%
The presence of hydrophytic vegetation was then determined based on indicator tests described in the Arid West Supplement. The Arid West Supplement requires that a three -step process be conducted to determine if hydrophytic vegetation is present. The procedure first requires the delineator to apply the " 50120 rule" ( Indicator 1; Dominance Test) described in the manual. To apply the " 50120 rule ", dominant species are chosen independently from each stratum of the community. Dominantspeciesaredeterminedfor eachvegetationstratumfrom a samplingplot of an appropriate size surrounding the sample point. Dominants are the most abundant species that individually or collectively account for more than 50 percent of the total vegetative cover in the stratum, plus any other species that, by itself, accounts for at least 20 percent of the total vegetative cover. If greater than 50 percent of the dominant species has an OBL, FACW, or FAC status, ignoring f and - qualifiers, the sample point meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion.
3 341
if the sample point fails Indicator 1 and both hydric soils and wetland hydrology are not present, then the sample point does not meet the hydrophytic vegetation criterion, unless the site is a problematic wetland situation. However, if the sample point fails Indicator 1 but hydric soils and wetland hydrology are both present, the delineator must apply Indicator 2.

Indicator 2 is known as the Prevalence Index. The prevalence index is a weighted average of the wetland indicator status for all plant species within the sampling plot. Each indicator status is given a numeric code ( OBL = 1, FACW = 2, FAG = 3, FACU = 4, and UPL = 5). Indicator 2 requires the delineator to estimate the percent cover of each species in every stratum of the community and sum the cover estimates for any species that is present in more than one stratum. The delineator must then organize all species into groups according to their wetland indicator status and calculate the Prevalence Index using the following formula, where A equals total percent cover:

E
AoBL + 2AFAcw + 3AFAc + 4AFAcu + SAUPL
AoBL + AFAcw + AFAC + AFAcu + AUPL
The Prevalence Index will yield a number between 1 and 5. If the Prevalence Index is equal to or less than 3, the sample point meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion. However, if the community fails Indicator 2, the delineator must proceed to Indicator 3.

Indicator 3 is known as Morphological Adaptations. If more than 50 percent of the individuals of a FACU species have morphological adaptations for life in wetlands, that species is considered to be a hydrophyte and its indicator status should be reassigned to FAC. If such observations are made, the delineator must recalculate Indicators 1 and 2 using a FAC indicator status for this species. The sample point meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion if either test is satisfied.

Hydrology
The Corps jurisdictional wetland hydrology criterion is satisfied if an area is inundated or saturated for a period sufficient to create anoxic soil conditions during the growing season (a minimum of 14 consecutive days in the Arid West region). Evidence of wetland hydrology can include primary indicators, such as visible inundation or saturation, drift deposits, oxidized root channels, and salt crusts, or secondary indicators such as the FAC - neutral test, presence of a shallow aquitard, or crayfish burrows. The Arid West Supplement contains 16 primary hydrology indicators and 10 secondary hydrology indicators. Only one primary indicator is required to meet the wetland hydrology criterion; however, if secondary indicators are used, at least two secondary indicators must be present to conclude that an area has wetland hydrology.

The presence or absence of the primary or secondary indicators described in the Arid West Supplement was utilized to determine if sample points within the Study Area met the wetland hydrology criterion.
1l
342
Soils
The Natural Resource Conservation Service ( NRCS) defines a hydric soil as follows:

A hydric soil is a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part.,'
Federal Register July 13, 1994,
U. S. Department of Agriculture, NRCS
Soils formed over long periods of time under wetland ( anaerobic) conditions often possess characteristics that indicate they meet the definition of hydric soils_ Hydric soils can have a hydrogen sulfide ( rotten egg) odor, low chroma matrix color, generally designated 0, 1, or 2, used to identify them as hydric, presence of redox concentrations, gleyed or depleted matrix, or high organic matter content.

Specific indicators that can be used to determine whether a soil is hydric for the purposes of wetland delineation are provided in the NRCS Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the U. S. ( USDA 2010). The Arid West Supplement provides a list of 23 of these hydric soil indicators which are known to occur in the Arid West region. Soil samples were collected and described according to the methodology provided in the Arid West Supplement. Soil chroma and values were determined by utilizing a standard Munsell soil color chart (Gretag Macbeth 2000).

Hydric soils were determined to be present if any of the soil samples met one or more of the 23 hydric soil indicators described in the Arid West Supplement.

3. 1. 2 Other Waters of the U. S.

This study also evaluated the presence of " waters of the U.S." other than wetlands potentially subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Other areas, besides wetlands, subject to Corps jurisdiction include lakes, rivers and streams including intermittent streams) in addition to all areas below the HTL in areas subject to tidal influence. Jurisdiction in non -tidal areas extends to the ordinary high water mark ( OHW) defined as:
that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impresses on the bank, shelving, changes in the characteristics of the soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas." Federal Register Vol. 51, No. 219,
Part 328. 3 ( e). November 13, 1986
Identification of the ordinary high water mark followed the Corps Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05 -05, Ordinary High Water Mark Identification ( Corps 2005). 5 343

3. 2 Difficult Wetland Situations in the Arid West
The Arid West Supplement (Corps 2008) includes procedures for identifying wetlands that may lack indicators due to natural processes ( problem areas) or recent disturbances ( atypical situations). " Problem area" wetlands are defined as naturally occurring wetland types that periodically lack indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, or wetland hydrology due to normal seasonal or annual variability. Some problem area wetlands may permanently lack certain indicators due to the nature of the soils or plant species on the site. " Atypical situations" are defined as wetlands in which vegetation, soil, or hydrology indicators are absent due to recent human activities or natural events.

The list of difficult wetland situations provided in the Arid West Supplement includes wetlands with problematichydrophyticvegetation, problematichydricsoils, andwetlandsthat periodically lack indicators of wetland hydrology_ In addition, the problem area and atypical situation sections of the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) were utilized to determine if any sample points taken within the Study Area met the criteria for a problem area or atypical situation. If any determination was based on less than three parameters, the rationale for the wetland determination was explained on the data sheets included in Appendix B. Although the CorpsManualandAridWestSupplementwere utilizedin thewetlanddetermination, theydo not provide exhaustive lists of the difficult situations that can arise during delineations in the Arid West. As a result, WRA interpreted the gathered data using best professional judgment and our knowledge of the ecology of the wetlands in the region.

3. 3 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction
Some areas that meet the technical criteria for wetlands or waters may not be jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. Included in this category are some man - induced wetlands, which are areas that have developed at least some characteristics of naturally occurring wetlands due to either intentional or incidental human activities. Examples of man - induced wetlands may include, but are not limited to, irrigated wetlands, impoundments, or drainage ditches excavated in uplands, dredged material disposal areas, and depressions within construction areas.

In addition, some isolated wetlands and waters may also be considered outside of Corps jurisdiction as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (531 U.S. 169 (2001)). Isolated wetlands and waters are those areas that do not have a surface or groundwater connection to, and are not adjacent to a " navigable waters of the U. S. ", and do not otherwise exhibit an interstate commerce connection.

4. 0 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
The Study Area is approximately 27.47 acres, located in Alameda County, California (Appendix A, Figure 1)_ Elevations range from approximately 330 to 350 feet NGVD. The property is approximately 6,000 feet north of the intersection of Interstates 580 and 680. The Study Area is relatively flat and narrow, approximately 5,800 linear feet in length and 150 linear feet to 200 linear feet in width. It is bounded by Alamo Creek to the south, and the City of Dublin /City of on
344
San Ramon City Limit Line to the north. While outside of the Study Area, the Iron Horse Trail forms the boundary of the Study Area' s western edge, and fencelines associated with residential housing developments form the eastern edge. The Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation District ( ACFWD) Zone 7 Drainage Channel is located immediately west of Iron Horse Trail and is also outside of the Study Area.

The entire Study Area consists predominantly of ruderal herbaceous vegetation typically associated with disturbed areas. Land use adjacent to the Study Area consists mostly of single - family and multi - family residential housing, and associated infrastructure. Dublin High School is located generally west of the Study Area, opposite the ACFWCD Zone 7 Drainage Channel, and several small parks are located in close proximity to the trail corridor marking the Study Area' s western edge. Rolling hills associated with the Dougherty Valley are located generally east of the Study Area.

An elevated earthen berm topped with gravel and debris runs along the center of the Study Area. This berm was constructed to support the UPRR railroad bed. A trestle crossing, approximately 50 feet in length, is located approximately 1,400 linear feet north of Amador Valley Boulevard. A linear borrow ditch is located immediately west of the former railroad bed.

This feature contains several small linear depressions that may pond water during winter. A similar linear depression, also possibly a former borrow ditch, is located east of the abandoned railroad in the southernmost portion of the parcel located north of Amador Valley Boulevard.

There are a number of underground and overhead utilities within the Study Area. An underground petroleum pipeline just east of the former UPRR railroad bed and extends along the entire length of the Study Area. An underground fiber -optic cable line is located immediately west of the railroad bed in the linear borrow ditch. An overhead power line also runs the length of the Study Area, just east of the Iron Horse Trail on a second, slightly elevated berm. Several storm drain lines cross the Study Area and discharge directly to the ACFWD Zone 7 Drainage Channel. Adjacent residential properties and Stagecoach Park, located immediately east of the Study Area, also have storm drainage lines that discharge directly onto the ground surface of the Study Area.

Vegetation
Vegetation within the Study Area consisted primarily of non - native annual grassland_ Dominant vegetation in areas determined to be uplands include wild oat ( Avena fatua, NL), rye grass Festuca perennis, FAC), ripgut brome ( Bromus diandrus, NL), bristly ox- tongue Helminthotheca echioides, FACU), prickly lettuce (, Lactuca serriola, FACU), common mustard Brassica nigra, NL), wild radish ( Raphanus sativa, NL), Italian thistle ( Carduus pycnocephalus, NL), and fennel ( Foeniculum vulgare, FACU).

Potential seasonal wetlands growing in the linear depressions within the borrow ditch were dominated by hydrophytic plants, including nutsedge ( Cyperus eragrostis, FACW), swamp prickle grass ( Crypsis shoenoides, OBL), rough cocklebur ( Xanthium strumarium, FAC), salt grass ( Distichlis spicata, FAC), curly dock ( Rumex crispus, FAC), fat hen ( Atriplex prostrate, FACW), and rabbitsfoot grass ( Polypogon monspeliensis, FACW).

Hydrology
Natural hydrological sources for the Study Area include precipitation and surface run -off from adjacent single - family and multi - family residential housing areas to the east. Several large hills 7 345
located east of the Study Area contribute drainage to these neighborhood areas, which is then conveyed across the Study Area mostly as sheet flow toward the ACFWCD Zone 7 Drainage Channel. Two culverts were observed along the eastern edge of the Study Area near the Stagecoach Park. These culverts connect directly to a drainage feature that crosses the abandoned railroad grade under a remnant trestle and discharges into the ACFWCD Zone 7 Drainage Channel through another culvert under the Iron Horse Trail. However, these culverts appeared to be partially blocked with sediment. A small, concrete - lined drainage ditch runs the length of Iron Horse Trail and discharges to the ACFWCD Zone 7 Drainage Channel.

Soils
The Alameda County Soil Survey ( USDA 2013) indicates that the Study Area has four native soil types: Clear Lake clay, drained, 0 to 3 percent slopes; Sunnyvale clay loam over clay; Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, and Diablo clay, 7 to 15 percent slopes. These soil types are described in detail below and are shown in Appendix A, Figure 3:

Clear Lake. The Clear Lake series consists of very deep, poorly drained soils that formed in fine textured alluvium derived from sandstone and shale. These soils occur in basins and in swales of drainageways. Permeability is slow to very slow and runoff is negligible to high.

Depth to water table can vary greatly in these soils.

A representative profile for this series consists of a dark gray ( N 410)) clay surface layer 1945 inches thick. This layer is underlain by grayish -brown clay that extends to a depth of 72 inches.

These soils are listed as partially hydric on the US national hydric soils list ( USDA 2005).

Sunnyvale Clay Loam Over Clay. The Sunnyvale series consists of poorly drained soils on nearly level flood plains and basins. These soils formed in alluvium from mixed, but dominantly sedimentary rocks. Permeability and runoff are slow, though pumping has lowered water table in most areas so that now soil management is similar to somewhat poorly or moderately well drained soils.

A representative profile for this series consists of dark gray (N14) silty clay to 34 inches. This is underlain by gray ( 5Y 511) silty clay with yellowish brown ( 2. 5 Y 614) mottles to 60 inches.

These soils are listed as hydric on the US national hydric soils list ( USDA 2005).

Linne Clay Loam. The Linne series occur extensively and consists of moderately deep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from fairly soft shale and sandstone. These soils are on mountainous uplands and foothills, and have slopes of five to 75 percent.

Permeability is moderately slow and runoff is very rapid.

A representative profile for this series consists of very dark grayish -brown (2.5Y 312) silty clay to eight inches. This is underlain by very dark gray (10YR 511) clay with dark grayish brown (10YR 4/ 2) mottles to 19 inches. These soils are listed as partially hydric on the US national hydric soils list ( USDA 2005).

Diablo. The Diabloseries consistsof well drainedsoilson complexundulating, rollingto steep uplands with slopes of five to 50 percent. These soils formed in residuum weathered from shale, sandstone, and consolidated sediments. Permeability is slow and water runoff is slow when the soil is dry, medium to rapid when soils are moist. 346
A representative profile for this series consists of dark gray (5Y 411) silty clay to 15 inches. This is underlain by finely mixed gray ( 5Y 511) and olive gray ( 5Y 512) silty clay to 32 inches. These soils are listed as partially hydric on the US national hydric soils list ( USDA 2005).

5. 0 RESULTS
Vegetation, soils and hydrology data collected during delineation site visits are reported on standard Corps Arid West Region data forms in Appendix B. Potential Section 404 jurisdictional areas are described in the following sections and depicted in Appendix A, Figure 4.

Photographs of representative portions of the Study Area and sample points are shown in Appendix C. A list of plant species observed during the site visits is included in Appendix D.

5. 1 Potential Section 404 Waters of the U. S.

5. 9. 1 Wetlands
Seasonal wetlands ( NWI classification = PEMC, palustrine emergent wetland, seasonally flooded) identified as potentially jurisdictional wetlands were present within linear depressional areas in the borrow ditches. Seasonalwetlandswithin the Study Area were dominatedby facultative to obligate wetland species including nutsedge , swamp prickle grass, rough cocklebur, salt grass, curly dock, fat hen, and rabbitsfoot grass. Soils in areas identified as seasonal wetlands generally consisted of clay to clay loam textures. Redoximorphic features were few, faint to distinct sometimes within the upper 6 inches. Oxidized root channels were found along living roots in the deeper depressions, particularly located near the trestle drainage feature just east of Stagecoach Park ( W -4; Appendix A, Figure 4). Sediment deposits and biotic crust were observed in areas prone to ponding, such as in the location of the trestle drainage feature. Surface soil cracks were also observed in the trestle bridge crossing area and linear depressions within the borrow ditch, however, these soil cracks were also observed in upland areas atop the elevated berm, within the petroleum line utility easement east of the elevated berm, and in disturbed areas adjacent residential housing along the eastern edge of the Study Area. Vegetation in seasonal wetlands also passed the F'AC- neutral test.

The border betweenseasonalwetland and uplandcommunitieswas determinedprimarilyby vegetation and hydric soil field indicators: areas dominated by upland vegetation species, and lacking sufficient redoximorphic features to meet hydric soil indicators were not included in the areas identified as potentially jurisdictional wetlands. Soils in the areas identified as uplands lacked facultative wetland and obligate plants as well as hydric soil indicators. These upland areas also lacked strong indicators of wetland hydrology.

All wetlands mapped and presented in this report are likely to be considered jurisdictional by the Corps as they are directly connected to a " navigable waters of the U.S. ". Study Area waters flow ultimately into Arroyo de la Leguna.

5. 1. 2 Other Waters of the U. S.

No features identified as other waters of the U.S. were observed within the Study Area.

Potential wetland features in deeper depressions and within the trestle drainage area were characterized as having ponded conditions for a significant duration due to presence of sediment deposits and areas comprised of bare ground. However, these wetland features exhibited vegetation coverage greater than five percent, and are therefore not considered other waters of the U. S.
9 347

5. 2 Areas Exempt from Section 404 Jurisdiction
There are no isolated wetlands or man - induced wetlands within the Study Area. All wetlands mapped and presented in this report are likely to be considered jurisdictional by the Corps as they were not created by human activities and are directly connected to a " navigable waters of the U. S." ( Arroyo de la Laguna).

6. 0 POTENTIAL CORPS OF ENGINEERS JURISDICTION
The 27.47 acre Study Area has 0.51 acre of seasonal wetlands that may be considered jurisdictional under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The potential seasonal wetlands dominated by hydrophytic vegetation with FAC, FACW and OBL classified plants and contained hydric soil and wetland hydrology indicators. In addition, these areas are tributary to a navigable waters of the U. S." and therefore meet the definition of jurisdictional wetlands for Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

The conclusion of this delineation is based on conditions observed at the time of the field surveys conducted on May 17, 2013.
10 348

7. 0 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual_ Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180 -0631.

Federal Register. November 13, 1986. Department of Defense, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army, 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Vol. 51, No_ 219; page 41217.

GretagMacBeth. 2000. Munsell Soil Color Charts, revised washable edition.

Lichvar, RW. 2012. The National Wetland Plant List. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center.

Hanover, NH. October 2012.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps). 2005. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05 -05. Ordinary High Water Mark Identification. December 7.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( Corps). 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region ( Version 2. 0). September.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service ( USDA). 2013. Web Soil Surrey of Alameda County, California. Website accessed May 16, 2013.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service ( USDA). 2005. Official List of US Hydric Soils.

U. S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service ( USDA). 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7. 0. In cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

U.S. Geological Survey ( USGS). 1980. Alameda. 7.5 minute topographic map. 11 349
This page intentionally left blank
350
Appendix A - Figures
351
This page intentionally [ eft blank
352
N
E
S

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
Dublin lronhorse Trail 0 0. 75 1. 5
Map Date; May 2013
Alameda County, California Map By: CHrisZurnNaltY Miles Base Source; ESRI Worfd Topo Path: BAcad 2000 Files1230001231011GISNArcMapTi9 1 Localion. mxd 353
354
355
356
357
358
2 R
D
o\
o
as
E ct
7 © G b m
r E @k
w
E
359
This page intentionally left blank
360
Wetland Determination Data Form - Arid West Region
Project/ Site Dublin Iron Horse Trail City Dublin County Alameda Sampling Date 5/17/2013 Applicant/ Owner City of Dublin former UPRR parcels) State CA Sampling Point SP -U -1 Investigator( s) Mark Kalnins Section, Township, Range
Landform ( hillslope, terrace, etc.) terrace Local Relief ( concave, convex, none) flat Slope( %) 0 to 3 Subregion( LRR) LRR C ( Medit. CA) Lat: 37. 724852 Long: - 121. 924366 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name Clear Lake Clay NWI classification NIA Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on - site typical for this time of year? ® Yes No ( If no, explain in remarks) Are any of the following significantly disturbed? Vegetation Soil Hydrology Are " Normal Circumstances" present? ® Yes No Are any of the following naturally problematic? Vegetation Soil Hydrology ( If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Q1 Ennnnnov nl= r1& 1n1nrr_ c A44- - ti -: 4- Q ,. -- 4 ------ 6- -'- Hydrophytio Vegetation Present? Yes ® No Is the Sampled Area El Yes ONOHydric Soil Present? Yes ® No within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No
Remarks: Photos 9359- 9362MK. The sample point is located in alignment with underground oil pipeline, with evidence of compacted, variable soils.

UPRR abandoned railroad is located immediately west, residential housing is located immediately east. GPS Point SP -U -1. The sample point is located in uplands.

VEGETATION ( use scientific names)
TREE STRATUM Plot Size:

Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 1 ( A)
1 that are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
2• Total number of domiinan!
2 ( B)

3. species across all strata?
4• of dominant species that 50 ( A/ B)
Tree Stratum Total Cover: are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
Prevalence Index Worksheet
SAPLING / SHRUB STRATUM Plot Size:

1. Total % cover of: — Multiply , f3y_

2. OBL species x1
3 FACW species x2
4 FAC species x3
FACU species x4
Sapling/ Shrub Stratum Total Cover:

UPL species x5
HERB STRATUM Plot Size:

Column Totals ( A) ( B)
1, Festuca perennis 600 Y FAC

2. Helminthotheca echioides 20 Y FACU Prevalence Index = B/ A =

3. Distichlis spicata 10 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators

4. Dominance Test is X50%

5. Prevalence Index is < I= 3. 0'
s.

Morphological adaptations ( provide
7 supporting data in remarks)

8. Problematic hydrophytic vegetation' ( explain)
Herb Stratum Total Cover: 90
WOODY VINE STRATUM Plot Size: Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology

1. must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.

2. Woody Vines Total Cover: Hydrophytic
Yes ® NoVegetation Present ?
0to Bare ground in herb stratum 10 o o cover of biotic crust t Remarks: Distichlis under Festuca. Festuca has 100% coverage immediately upslope of this sample point location on sideslope of earthen berm. The sample point does not contain a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
361
SOIL Sampling Point SP - U - 1
Profile description: ( Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features .

Primary Indicators ( any one indicator is sufficient) . inches) Color ( moist) % Color ( moist) % Type, Loc' Texture Remarks 0 - 8 10YR 311 100 Clay loam no redoximorphic features
8 - 14 10YR 311 100 Clay loam no redoximorphic features observed T e: C= Concentration, D = De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix. 2Location: PL =Po €e Lining, RC =RootChannel, M= Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: ( Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':

Histosol ( Al) Sandy Redox ( 85) 1cm Muck ( A9) ( LRR C) Histic Epipedon ( A2) Stripped Matrix ( S6) 2cm Muck ( A10)( LRR B) Black Histic ( A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral ( F1) Reduced Vertic ( F18) Hydrogen Sulfide ( A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix ( 172) Red Parent Material ( TF2) Stratified Layers ( A5)( LRR C) Depleted Matrix ( F3) F3) Other ( explain in remarks) 3 1cm Muck (A9)(LRR D) Redox Dark Surface ( Ffi)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery ( C9)
Depleted Below Dark Surface ( A11) Depleted Dark Surface ( F7) Shallow Aquitard ( D3)
Thick Dark Surface ( Al2) Redox Depressions ( F8)
FAC- Neutral Test ( 05)
Sandy Mucky Mineral ( S1) Vernal Pools ( F9) Indicators of hydric vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix ( S4)
Surface water present? Yes ® No
wetland hydrology must be present.

Restrictive Layer ( if present):

Water table present? Yes ® No
Type:

Depth ( inches):

Depth ( inches):

Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No
Remarks: No redoximorphicfeatureswereobservedinthesoil pit. Nohydricsoildfieldindicatorsarepresentat thissamplepointlocation.

HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators ( 2 or more required) Primary Indicators (any one indicatoris sufficient) .

Water Marks ( B1)( Riverine)
El
i
face Water ( 1 ) II t Crust ( 11311) El Sediment Deposits (B2)(Riverine) El Hg Water A2 ) B t c Crust ( 1312) Drift Deposits ( 133)( Riverine) Saturation ( A3) Aquatic Invertebrates ( B13) Drainage Patterns ( 1310) Water Marks ( B1)( Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor ( Cl) Dry- Season Water Table ( C2) Sediment Deposits ( 132)( Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots ( C3) Thin Muck Surface ( C7) Drift Deposits ( 133)( Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron ( C4) Crayfish Burrows ( C8) Surface Soil Cracks ( 136) Recent Iron Reduction in PLowed Soils ( C6) SaturationVisibleon Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery ( 137) Other ( Explain in Remarks) Shallow Aquitard ( D3) Water - Stained Leaves ( 139) FAC- Neutral Test ( 05)
Field Observations:

Surface water present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Water table present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Saturation Present? Yes ® No
includes capillary fringe)
Depth ( inches):

Wetland Hydrology Present ? Yes ® No
Describe recorded data ( stream guage, monitoring well, aerial photos, etc.) if available.

Remarks: Nohydrologyindicatorsarepresentatthis samplepointlocation. Soilssurfacecrackswereobserved, however, thesesoilcracksoccuralso on sideslopes of the adjacent earthen berm, and within disturbed portions of the buried utility line.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
362
Wetland Determination Data Form - Arid West Region
Project/ Site Dublin Iron Horse Trail City Dublin County Alameda I
Sampling Date 5/17/2013
Applicent/ Owner City of Dublin ( former UPRR parcels) .. w
State CA Sampling Point SP -U -2
Investigator( s) Mark Kalnins Section, Townsh1p, Range
Landform ( hillslope, terrace, etc.) terrace Local Relief ( concave, convex, none) flat Slope( %) 0 to 3 Subregion( LRR). LRR C ( Medit. CA) Lat: 37. 724852 Long: - 121. 924366 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name Clear Lake Clay NWI classification NIA Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on - site typical for this time of year? ® Yes No ( If no, explain in remarks) Are any of the following significantly disturbed? Vegetation Soil Hydrology Are " Normal Circumstances" present? ® Yes No Are any of the following naturally problematic? Vegetation Soil Hydrology ( If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No
Is the Sampled Area
El Yes ® NoHydric Soil Present? Yes ® No within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No
Remarks: Photos9366- 9369MK. The samplepointis locatedin alignmentwithundergroundcable, withevidenceof nearbydisturbancein recent aerial imagery. UPRR abandoned railroad is located immediately east, Iron Horse Trail is located immediately west. GPS Point SP -U -2.

The sample point is located in uplands.

VEGETATION fuse scientific names)
TREE STRATUM Plot Size:

Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 1 ( A)
1 that are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
2• Total number of dominant 2 ( B)

3. species across all strata?

4. of dominant species that 50 ( A/ B)
Tree Stratum Total Cover: are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
Prevalence Index WorksheetSAPLING / SHRUB STRATUM Plot Size:

1. Igtal % cover of: MuItiPIv bv:
2 OBL species x1
3 FACW species x2
4 FAC species x3
FACU species x4
Sapling/ Shrub Stratum Total Cover:

UPL species x5
HERB STRATUM Plot Size:

1. Festuca perennis 50 Y FAC
Column Totals ( A) ( B)

2. Lactuca serriola 20 Y FACU Prevalence Index = B/ A =

3. Distichiis spicata 15 N FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators 4, Meidilotus indicus 5 N FACU
Dominance Test is > 50 ° J°
6'
Prevalence Index is a/= 3. 0'
6,
Morphological adaptations ( provide

7. supporting data in remarks)
8' El hydrophytic vegetation' ( explain)
Herb Stratum Total Cover: 90
WOODY VINE STRATUM Plot Size: Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology

1. must be present, unless disturbed or problematic.

2. Woody Vines Total Cover: Hydrophytic
Yes J@No
Bare ground in herb stratum 10 cover of biotic crust
Vegetation Present ?
Remarks: Avena fatua has 100% coverage immediately upslope of this sample point location on sideslopes of earthen berm. The sample point does not contain a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
363
SOIL Sampling Paint SP - U -2
Profile description: ( Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
Primary Indicators ( any one indicator is sufficient)
inches) Color ( moist) % Color ( moist) % _ Type' Loo' Texture Remarks 0 -14 10YR 311 100 Clay loam no redoximor hic features
Type-, C= Concentration, D = De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix. zLocation: PL =Pore Lining, RC =Root Channel, M= Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: ( Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils':

Histosol ( Al) Sandy Redox ( S5) 1cm Muck ( A9) ( LRR C) Histic Epipedon ( A2) Stripped Matrix ( S6) 2cm Muck ( A10)( LRR B) Black Histic ( A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral ( F1) Reduced Vertic ( F18) Hydrogen Sulfide ( A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix ( F2) Red Parent Material { Tks) Stratified Layers A5 LRR Cy ( )( } Depleted Matrix F3p { } Other ( explain in remarks) 1c Muck ( A9)( LRR D) Redox Dark Surface ( F6)
Presence of Reduced Iron ( C4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface ( A11) Depleted Dark Surface ( F7) Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils ( C6)
Thick Dark Surface ( Al2) Redox Depressions ( F8)
Other ( Explain in Remarks)
Sandy Mucky Mineral ( S1) Vernal Pools ( F9) 3Indicatorsof hydric vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix ( S4)
Field Observations:
wetland hydrology must be present.

Restrictive Layer ( if present):

Surface water present? Yes ® No
Type:

Depth ( inches):

Depth ( inches):

Hydric Soil Present ? Yes ® No
Remarks: Noredoximorphicfeatureswereobservedinthesoilpit. Nohydricsoildfieldindicatorsarepresentatthissamplepointlocation.

HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators ( 2 or more required) Primary Indicators (any one indicatoris sufficient)
Water Marks ( B1)( Riverine)
Surface Water ( Al) Salt Crust ( 811) Sediment Deposits ( B2)( Riverine) High Water Table ( A2) Biotic Crust ( BI 2) Drift Deposits ( B3)( Riverine) Saturation ( A3) Aquatic Invertebrates ( B13) Drainage Patterns ( B10) Water Marks ( 81)( Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor ( Cl) Dry - Season Water Table ( C2) Sediment Deposits ( B2)( Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots ( C3) Thin Muck Surface ( C7) Drift Deposits ( B3)( Nondverine) Presenceof Reduced Iron ( C4) Crayfish Burrows ( C8) Surface Soil Cracks ( B6) Recent Iron Reductionin Plowed Soils ( C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery ( 67) Other ( Explainin Remarks) Shallow Aquita € d ( D3) Water - Stained Leaves ( B9) FAC- Neutral Test ( D5)
Field Observations:

Surface water present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Water table present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Saturation Present? Yes ® No
includes capillary fringe)
Depth ( inches):

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ® No
Describe recorded data ( stream guage, monitoring well, aerial photos, etc.) if available.

Remarks: Nohydrologyindicatorsarepresentatthis samplepointlocation.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
364
Wetland Determination Data Farm - Arid West Region
ProjectlSite Dublin iron Horse Trail City Dublin County Alameda Sampling Date 5/1712013 Applicantlowner City of Dublin ( former UPRRparcels) State CA Sampling Point SP -W -3 Investigator( s) Mark Kainins Section, Township, Range
Landform ( hillslope, terrace, etc.) terrace Local Relief ( concave, convex, none) flat Slope( %) 0 to 3 Subregion(LRR) LRR C (Medit. CAI Lat: 37. 722460 Long: - 121. 922256 Datum: NAD83 Soil Map Unit Name Clear Lake Clay NWI classification NIA Are climatic/ hydrologic conditions on - site typical for this time of year? ® Yes No ( If no, explain in remarks) Are any of the following significantly disturbed? Vegetation Soil Hydrology Are " Normal Circumstances" present? ® Yes No Are any of the following naturally problematic? © Vegetation Soil Hydrology ( If needed, explain any answers in remarks) Cr IRBhAADV nl: 1= 11kInINif3C _ Aff — k ­+- ... -. ar. oF... i..:.... v. i., --;- 1. 1..-- *;.. ... a.- Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? ® Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
Yes NoHydrio Soil Present? ® Yes No within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? ® Yes No
Remarks: Photos9371- 9375MK. Thesamplepointislocatedin alignmentwith undergroundcable, withevidenceof nearbydisturbancein recent aerial imagery. UPRR abandoned railroad is located immediately east, Iron Horse Trail is located immediately west. GPS Point SP -W -2.

The sample point is located in wetlands.

VEGETATION ( use scientific names)
TREE STRATUM Plot size:

Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test Worksheet
cover Species? Status
Number of Dominant Species 3 ( A)

1. that are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
2• Total number of dominant
3 ( B)

3. species across all strata?

4. of dominant species that 100 ( AIB)
Tree Stratum Total Cover: are OBL, FACW, or FAC?
Prevalence Index Worksheet
SAPLING / SHRUB STRATUM Plot Size:

1. Total °/ a cover of: - Multiply bv:

2. OBL species x1
3 FACW species x2
4 FAC species 0
Sapling/ Shrub Stratum Total Cover:

FACU species x4
UPI_ species x5
HERB STRATUM Plot Size:

1. Polypogon monspeliensis 30 Y FAC
Column Totals ( A) ( B)

2. Festuca perennis 20 Y FACW Prevalence Index = BIA =

3. Leymus triticoides 20 Y FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators

4. Avena fatua 10 N NL
Dominance Test is X50%
g, Mehlotus indicus 10 N FACU
Prevalence Index is <= 3.01
i6. Rumex crspus 5 N FAC
7 Morphological adaptations ( provide
supporting data in remarks)
8'
El hydrophytic vegetation' ( explain)
Herb Stratum Total Cover: 95
WOODY VINE STRATUM Plot Size: Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology

1. must be present, unless disturbed or problematic,

2. Woody Vines Total Cover: Hydrophytic
El Yes ® No
o Bare ground in herb stratum 0 a1° cover of biotic crust Vegetation Present ?
Remarks: The sample point contains a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
365
SOIL Sampling Point SP - W - 3
Profile description: ( Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
Primary Indicators ( any one indicator is sufficient
inches) Color ( moist) % Color ( moist) % Tyee' _ Loc' Texture Remarks 0 -7 10YR 411 70 7. 5YR 416 30 C M Loam ORs on live roots 7 - 14 10YR 311 100 Clay loam no redoximor hic features observed Type: C= Concentration. D = De letion, RM= Reduced Matrix. ZLocation: PL =Pore Lining, RC =Root Channel, M= Matrix Hydric Soil Indicators: ( Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:

H €stosol ( Al) Sandy Redox ( S5) 1 c Muck ( Ag) ( LRR C) Histic Epipedon ( A2) Stripped Matrix ( S6) 2cm Muck ( A10)( LRR B) Black Histic ( A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral ( F1) Reduced Vertic ( F18) Hydrogen Sulfide ( A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix ( F2) Red Parent Material ( T Stratified Layers ( A5)( LRR C) Depleted Matrix ( F3) Other ( explain in remarks) 1cm Muck ( A9)( LRR D) Redox Dark Surface ( F6)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery ( 97)
Depleted Below Dark Surface ( A11) Depleted Dark Surface ( F7) Water - Stained Leaves ( B9)
Thick Dark Surface ( Al2) Redox Depressions ( F8)
Field Observations:

Sandy Mucky Mineral ( S1) Vernal Pools ( 179) 3Indicato €s of hydric vegetation and Sandy Gleyed Matrix ( S4)
Depth ( inches):
wetland hydrology must be present.

Restrictive Layer ( if present):

Water table present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Type:

Saturation Present? Yes ® No
includes capillary fringe)
Depth ( inches):

Wetland Hydrology Present? ® Yes No
Hydric Soil Present ? Yes No
Remarks: Redoximorphicfeatureswereobservedintheupperpartofthesoilpit. ThesamplepointmettheF3DepletedMatrixhydricscildfield indicators.

HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary__ Indicators ( 2 or more required) Primary Indicators (any one indicatoris sufficient
Water Marks niverine)
Surface Water ( Al) ( ) Salt Crust B11 oohsSediment Deposits ( 132)( Riverine) High Water Table ( A2) Biotic Crust ( 1312) Drift Deposits ( 83)( Riverine) Saturation ( A3) Aquatic Invertebrates ( 1313) Drainage Patterns ( 1310) Water Marks ( 131)( Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor ( C1) Dry- Season Water Table ( C2) Sediment Deposits ( 132)( N on river! ne) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots ( C3) Thin Muck Surface ( C7) Drift Deposits ( 133)( Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron ( C4) Crayfish Burrows ( C8) Surface Sol] Cracks ( 136) Recent Iron Reduction in PLowed Solis ( C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) InundationVisibleon Aerial Imagery (97) Other ( Explain in Remarks) Shallow Aquitard ( D3) Water - Stained Leaves ( B9) FAC- Neutral Test ( D5)
Field Observations:

Surface water present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Water table present? Yes ® No Depth ( inches):

Saturation Present? Yes ® No
includes capillaryfringe)
Depth ( inches):

Wetland Hydrology Present? ® Yes No
Describe recorded data ( stream guage, monitoring well, aerial photos, etc_) if available.

Remarks: HydrologyindicatorsB6SurfaceSoilCracks, andC3OxidizedRhizospheresAlongLivingRootsweremet.

US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West
366
Appendix C - Representative Photographs of the Study Area 367
This page intentionally left blank
368
Above: Photo shows railroad trestle crossing drainage
feature, looking west.

Below Photo shows evidence of ponding under railroad
trestle crossing.

Photographs taken May 17, 2013
wra
369
Above: Photo showing sample point SP -U -1 in
foreground, looking south. This sample point is located within a buried pipeline easement.

Below: Photo showing sample point SP -U -2 in
foreground, looking north. Abandoned UPRR earthen
berm is on the right.

Photographs taken May 17, 2013
6NVtDONMENIAL CONSULTANTS
370
Above: Photo showing seasonal wetland feature W -3,
looking south- southwest.
q9wra
CtIVIRONMERIAL CpLSUUANTS
Photographs taken May 17, 2013
371
This page intentionally [ eft blank
372
Appendix D — Plants Observed Within the Study Area
373
This page intentionally left blank
374
Appendix D. Plants observed by WRA at the Dublin Iron Horse Trail Study Area, May 17, 2013.

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

WETLAND

INDICATOR

STATUS - AW
Atriplex prostrate fat hen FACW
Avena fatua wild oats NL
Brassica nigra black mustard NL
Bromus diandrus npgut brume NL
Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle NL
Crypsis schoenoides swamp pricklegrass OBL
Cyperus eragrostis nutsedge FACW
Distichlis spicata salt grass FAC
Festuca perennis Italian rye FAC
Foeniculum vulgare fennel FACU
Helminthotheca echioides bristly ox- tounge FAC
Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum Mediterranean barley FAC Lactuca serriola prickly lettuce FACU
Lepidium latifolium broadleaved pepperweed FACW
Leymus triticoides beardless lyme grass FAC
Mefflotus indicus indian sweet - clover FACU
Polypogon monspeliensis rabbitsfoot grass FACW
Raphanus sativa wild radish NL
Rumex crispus curly dock FAC
Xanthium strumarium rough cocklebur FAC
D - 1
375
376
City of Dublin
Initial Study /Iron Horse Park Project
in MON