Agenda Item D.1
CPMS DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEM
Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM: Jaime A. Valdez, Neighborhood Services Director
CONTACT: JoAnne Plummer, Parks and Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: Stow Grove Park Design Update
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize staff to move forward with the development of a Draft Master Plan for Stow Grove Park, including the creati on of two or more preliminary p lans for new, expanded and/or renovated active and passive recreational park amenities, with at least one plan designed to minimize impacts to habitat values or sensitive spe cies associated with the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas of the park.
BACKGROUND:
The City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan (General Plan), adopted in 2006, requires the preparation of a citywide Park System Master Plan and individual Park Management Plans in Open Space Element Implementation Actions OS-IA-4 and OS-IA-5 respectively.
Since the General Plan adoption, the City is making progress on preparing and implementing these park plans. In 2015, the City’s adopted Recreation Needs Assessment (RNA) identified a lack of available athletic fields for use by youth sports organizations. In January 2020, the City Council adopted the Pa rks, Facilities and Playgrounds Master Plan (PMP). The goal of the PMP’s work effor t was to complete a comprehensive assessment of Goleta’s parks and playgrounds syst em, considering future growth in the community, and to guide maintenance, impro vements, and development for the City of Goleta over the next 10-20 years.
To address the athletic field deficiency and the condition of existing playing fields in the adopted RNA, two field renovation projects were identified and placed in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) in the City’s CIP Budget. Among these projects was the northern field at Stow Grove Pa rk (CIP Project 9074). Initially , the project was limited in scope to the field renovation at Stow Grove Park, to include new turf, irrigation, replacement and/or improvement of existing amenities, etc. Thes e improvements would also trigger mandated ADA upgrades to the parking lot, the play features and possibly the restroom facility, including the creation of accessible pathway s from the parking lot to these amenities.
1 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
Understanding that the community highly values this park, staff looked at more than just a field renovation with the nece ssitated ADA improvements for access. Thus, the public outreach efforts were kicked off in October 2020 with a communi ty survey asking questions that were inclusive of the entire park, providing information and requesting feedback for possible additional i mprovements and future improv ement phases. The initial outreach process resulted in a strong community response with over 750 completed surveys received. The data obtained in this process confirmed t hat there are many elements of the park in need of improvement, and other new amenities potentially desired for the park.
On March 3, 2021, the Parks and Recreation Commission expressed unanimous support to move forward with the developm ent of a conceptual plan for S tow Grove Park that addresses deficiencies throughout the entire park site. This plan would be created so that it could be phased for current and future park improvement projects.
On April 6, 2021, the City Council likewise directed staff to prepare conceptual documents for Stow Grove Park Renovation, for the entire facility, which could be phased, if necessary, for future projects. This process required the solic itation of Requests for Proposals (RFP) for a Landscape Architect to develop one or mor e conceptual plans to address deficiencies in the entire park, which could be separat ed into phases for construction as funding becomes available.
On August 16, 2021, a RFP for outreach and design services for the renovation of Stow Grove Park was released. The RFP closed on Thursday, September 16, 2021 with eleven different firms submitting proposal s for consideration. On Dece mber 7, 2021, the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a Professiona l Design Services Agreement with KTUA for outreach and design services for the renovation of Stow Grove Park in an amount not to exceed $139,939. Since that time, KTUA has been working on site surveying, civil engineeri ng, environmental/biological and tree assessments, and review of pertinent documents. K TUA also began preparing site m apping of potential additional feature opportunities, and site constraints, assets, and limitations/liabilities.
One public workshop was held on Saturday, April 23, 2022. At this meeting, attendees added to the KTUA-identified oppor tunities, constraints, assets, and limitations/liabilities that they were aware of in the park. Attendees were also asked to provide feedback on various amenities along the them es of nature/relaxation (passiv e recreation), social/educational, play/active recreation, general park improv ements, and in what locations they might be preferred, if at all. A second public survey was released following the first workshop. Over 1,000 responses have been received fro m the public, reflecting a strong public response and interest in the renovation of Stow Grove Park.
During this public process, the results have indicated that there is a strong desire to add a few new amenities, expand and/or improve the existing facilit ies and to maintain the mature trees, including the redwoods at the park. Staff and the consultant have been moving forward in the planning process of a draft master plan with this important community input, but the process is not yet complete.
2 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
Existing Deed Restrictions
Stow Grove Park was developed when Edgar Stow first planted redwood trees for a beautiful, shaded picnic area to share with his family, friends and neighbors. This space has remained a public picnic ground since 1920. In January of 1965, the Stow Company initially deeded an undi vided 1/3 interest in the 11.1 acres no w known as Stow Grove Park to the County of Santa Barbara. In February of 1967, the Stow Company deeded its remaining undivided interest in the 11.1 acres now known as Sto w Grove Park to the County of Santa Barbara. The City of Goleta received this property interest upon incorporation in 2002. The Stow Company included several deed r estrictions and stipulations in the conveyance of the property to the County wh ich dictate how the property is used. These are summarized as follows:
1. That the property be used solely and exclusively for the ben efit of the public as and for a public park which shall be named and known as Stow Gr ove, for the recreation and pleasure of the public;
2. Use of the park shall not be permitted between the hours of 12 midnight and 6:00 A.M.;
3. The sale of food, drinks, nov elties or any other goods or merchandise shall not be permitted upon the property except ing that single permits may b e issued to non- profit organizations; and
4. No buildings other than sma ll park maintenance buildings and caretaker’s cottage shall be erected, placed or maintained upon the property.
The deed conveyances also estab lished an easement for the benef it of the Stow Company that reserved the right to:
“enter upon, survey, excavate for, construct, reconstruct, install, lay, re-lay, replace, maintain, operate, increase the size of, and remove a water pipe line or lines, together with all fixt ures, devices and appurtenances used or useful in the operation of said pipe line or lines, and to remove objects interfering therewith, at any and all points within, through, over, and across those strips of land, being portions of the property herein conveyed, ten (10) feet in width and lying five (5) feet on each side of the center lines.”
The deed transfers further stipulated that a breach of any of the foregoing conditions shall cause the property to revert to the Stow Company or its successors or assigns.
The construction of restrooms by the County some time in the 19 70s exceeded the number and type of buildings a llowed on the property per the de eds. Other existing buildings include the caretaker’s house and a large maintenance shed which are consistent with those allowed by the deed conveyances. City staff have been discussing a potential modification of the deed restrictions with the Stow Company to allow for the restrooms and potentially other dev elopment. The Stow Company/F amily also has an 3 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
interest in constructing a new water line and possibly moving t he location of the ten-foot easement for this.
Relevant General Plan Policies and Zoning Regulations
The General Plan and implementing zoning regulations establish the vision for open space, parks, and recreation facilities, detail development sta ndards, and require the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) among other things. Policies relevant to the possible future Stow Grove Park Renovation are included within the Land Use Element, Open Space Element and the Conservation Element. A summary of guiding policies and regulations is provided below and presented in more detail in Attachment 1 to this staff report.
The Land Use Element Figure 2- 1 Land Use Plan Map designates St ow Grove Park as Open Space / Active Recreation. The Open Space Element establis hes six park types within the City and includes criteria and standards applicable to each category. More specifically, Stow Grove Park is listed as a Community Park in Open Space Element Table 3-1 Existing and Planned Pa rks and Open Space Areas and s imilarly mapped in Open Space Element Figure 3-2 Park and Recreation Plan Map. Thi s park type is intended for active recreational a ctivities with large natural areas suited for passive outdoor recreation, or a combinat ion of both, consistent with the underlying land use designation.
The Conservation Element Figure 4-1 Special-Status Species and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas identifies two types of ESHA within Sto w Grove Park: native upland woodland and monarch butterfly and/or raptor roosting ha bitat. As such, Conservation Element Policy CE 4 Protection of Monarch Butterfl y Habitat Areas, CE 8 Protection of Special-Status Spec ies, and CE 9 Protection of Na tive Woodlands will continue to guide development at St ow Grove Park. Please refer to Attachment 2 for a Baseline Environmental Habitat Map, as prepared by KTUA for the purpose of assisting with the park planning process and potential location of new am enities. Note that the Baseline Environmental Habitat Map is not a Site-Specific Biolo gical Study, as required in General Plan sub policy CE 1.3 and Chapter 17.30 of the Gole ta Municipal Code (GMC). The master plan process for Stow Grove Park would include a more detailed, site-specific biological assessment conducted by a qualified biologist.
General Plan policy and zoning regulations will guide future development at the park and will minimize negative impacts to ESHA to the maximum extent fe asible and serve to mitigate any unavoidable impacts where allowed. Both the Genera l Plan and Chapter
17.30 (Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas) of the GMC state that new development is mostly limited to public roads and trails, utility lines, re source restoration and enhancement projects, nature educat ion, and biological research . However, Conservation Element sub policy CE 1.6(d) states that Public Works projects identified in the CIP may be allowed, only where there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives. Chapter 17.53.020(X)(1) of the GMC only exempts C ity Projects, including CIPs, from Zoning Permits and discr etionary approvals if locate d outside of ESHA. As such, a permit (Development Plan) and discretionary review would be necessitated if new
4 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
development is proposed in ESHA and it can be demonstrated that there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives.
DISCUSSION:
City Council direction at the meeting of April 6, 2021, was to essentially expand the scope of the Stow Grove Park CIP project beyond that of a field renovation to that of an individual park master plan for Stow Grove Park consistent with the General Plan Open Space Element’s Implementation Action OS-IA-5 Preparation of Individu al Park Development and/or Management Plans . Similar to the Parks and Playgr ounds Master Plan for the entire City, these plans are intended to be used to determine r esource development, expansion, maintenance, operation, and/or capital improvements and as a basis for pursuing funding opportunities f or individual parks. Moving beyond a simple field renovation with ADA improvement s has generated a higher level o f complexity in reviewing potential park improvements against various General Plan policies and zoning regulations given the existence of two ESHAs within the park’s boundaries. These factors must also be considered against the historical background of th e park’s development going back to the site improvements made over 100 years ago by members of the Stow Family. These included installation of various types of landscaping and tree plantings over the years, and group picnic areas for the benefit of the commun ity, dating back over a century.
Although Stow Grove Park is par tially designated as ESHA in two areas, these areas, and protective buffers, contain significant existing developmen t, including three group picnic areas, horseshoe pits, so ftball or multi-use turf field, volleyball courts, restrooms, parking lot and walking/biking trails. Repair and maintenance of existing facilities in ESHA and ESHA buffers is allowed under Chapter 17.30 of the GMC. New development, however, would be subject to a number of policies and regulations, as previously stated.
While not exempt, park design in ESHA or ESHA buffer could still be permitted if significant impacts are avoided or mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. Conservation Element sub policy CE 1.6(d) states that Public Works projects identified in the CIP may be allowed, only where there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives.
As mentioned in the background sect ion of this report, Chapter 17.53.020(X)(1) of the GMC only exempts City Projects, including CIPs, from Zoning Permits and discretionary approvals if located outside of ESHA. As such, a permit (Develo pment Plan) and discretionary review would be necessitated if new development is proposed in ESHA and it can be demonstrated that there are no feasible, less environ mentally damaging alternatives.
Given the unique nature of this community park, the history of its development, its humanmade creation (as opposed to undeveloped native habitat/op en space) and considerable existing active rec reation features and existing c onstruction, staff believes it is appropriate to consider park design, including potentially new development, in the ESHA and / or ESHA buffers, as may be allowed under Conservation Element sub policy CE 1.6(d) and Chapter 17.53.020(X)(1) of the GMC. This would al low for consideration of
additional amenities that may be desired by the Goleta community and park users.
Staff anticipates creation of at least two preliminary plans fo r new, expanded and/or 5 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
renovated active and passive rec reational park amenities, with one plan designed to minimize impacts to habitat values or sensitive species associated with the ESHA areas.
Use of the property for active recreation and group picnicking by the public was memorialized in the conveyances of an ultimately undivided interest in the property to the County by the Stow Company in 1965 and 1967 (see Attachment 3). These deed conveyances stipulated that the property be used exclusively for the benefit of the public as a public park for the “recreation and pleasure of the public.” In speaking with members of the Stow Family, it was clearly the family’s intent to convey this as a recreation space for the public that contained, and could contain, a mixture of passive and active recreation uses.
In the 57 years since the deed conveyances, most of that time being under Santa Barbara County jurisdiction, the site park has undergone many changes. Some of these, such as the addition of a restrooms building by the County in the 1970s , went beyond the conditions allowed through the deed conveyances which limited the number of buildings in the park. One of the features frequently requested by the pu blic during public workshops and through the public i nput surveys is a second restroom building to be placed in the southern portion of the site. This would not be a llowed under the current deed restrictions.
The City is also contemplati ng additional or expanded use of th e caretaker’s cottage to include a community space in addition to a defined residential space to be occupied by a park ranger assigned to Stow Grove Park or some other type of live-in, onsite caretaker.
This would also require revision to the deed conditions. In add ition, the Stow Family has an interest in modifying the existing easement reservation to facilitate construction of a new water line for the La Patera Ranch. Depending on the outcome of the individual park master plan process for Stow Gro ve Park, there may be other changes that would also require approval by the Stow Company and a change in the deed conveyance conditions.
City staff will continue to work with the Stow Family as the master plan process moves forward and will ultimately seek to negotiate revised deed cond itions as necessary to allow for existing and potentially new or different uses, and a s requested by the Stow Family to facilitate construction of a new water line for La Patera Ranch.
Next Steps
Staff anticipates holding a third public workshop in September at which time three draft preliminary plans will be presented to the public for input. St aff will also release a third public survey at that time to get input from members of the com munity who might be unable to attend the workshop, and to provide an additional opportunity to provide more detailed comments. Ult imately, KTUA, with input from City staff, will take the public feedback and synthesize it into tw o draft plans. An additional public workshop may be conducted at that time, or the tw o plans will be presented to t he Parks and Recreation Commission for review and recommendation. This meeting would provide the community with another opportunity to provide input into the draft plans. Following the Park and Recreation Commission’s review, revisions may be made to the pl ans, or they may be sent on to the City Council with recommendations. At that point , City staff will complete CEQA review and return to City Council with the Development Pla n approval request in 6 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
addition to seeking approval of the draft plan and Council direction to move forward with construction documents for one or more phases of the project.
It is important to note that staff is not asking City Council t o approve a particular design currently, but to allow the process of developing a Draft Master Plan for Stow Grove Park to continue, without restrictions both within and outside of ESHA. This public process will allow the public to share what they would like to see and not see in this park and determine if new or expanded opportunities are the right fit for this park location. Staff would like to direct KTUA to continue the public process, allowing for consid eration of the universal possibilities available in the creation of two or more preliminary plans for new, expanded and/or renovated active and passive recreational park amenities.
GOLETA STRATEGIC PLAN:
City-Wide Strategy: 2. Support Community Vitality and Enhanced Recreational Opportunities
Strategic Goal: 2. Support programs that enhance quality of life in the Goleta community such as recreation, public safety, human services, and cultural arts
FISCAL IMPACTS:
There are no additional funds requested for this phase of the p roject, as current allocations are adequate for the design and preliminary environmental needs.
Stow Grove Park Renovation Desi
gn (CIP 9074)
Fund Type Account Description Existing
Budget
Project to
Date Actuals
Total Budget
Remaining
PARK DIF 221-90-
9074-57070
Design $190,000 $55,641 $134,359
PARK DIF 221-90-
9074-57071
Construction $760,000 $0 $760,000
Total $950,000 $55,641 $894,359
ALTERNATIVES:
If the project is restricted to the current footprint of amenities, staff will direct KTUA to utilize the information provided by the public thus far and develop one conceptual plan to address only the existing deficie ncies (ADA, pathways, aging infrastructure) and new amenities outside of ESHA and ESH A buffers and eliminate the po tential concept of a Master Plan for Stow Grove Park.
7 Meeting Date: August 16, 2022
Reviewed By: Legal Review By: Approved By:
___________________ ______ _____________ ______ ___________ Kristine Schmidt Megan Garibaldi Michelle Greene
Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Relevant General Plan Polic ies and Zoning Regulations
2. Stow Grove Park Baseline Environmental Habitat Map
3. Stow Grove Park Deeds of Gift Recorded March 4, 1965, and Fe bruary 9, 1967 8 Attachment 1
General Plan Policies and Zoning Regulations Relevant to Stow Grove Park 9 General Plan Policies and Zoning Regulations Relevant to Stow Grove Park Figur
e 2 -1 Land Use Map designates Stow Grove Park as “Open Space / Active Recreation” (as opposed to “Open Space / Passive Recreation”). Open Space / Active Recreation is further defined below:
LU
6.3 Open Space/Active Recreation. This designation is intended to identify existing or planned areas for public parks and active recreational activities and facilities, such as playgrounds, picnic areas, tennis courts, ballparks, and sports fields.
This use category is also intended to apply to significant private outdoor recreational facilities, such as golf courses and privately owned parks. Individual recreational areas may include a mix of passive and active recreational features or improvements.
Appropriate caretaker facilities and residences may also be allowed if consistent with the character of the planned uses. The designation may also include storm drainage facilities.
Tabl
e 3-1 of the Open Space Element designates Stow Grove Park as a Community Park.
An Excerpt of Table 3- 1 is shown below followed by a detailed definition of Community Parks under Policy OS 6.6, and Design and Management of Public Parks and Open Space under Policy OS 6.10.
Op
en Space Element, Table 3-1 Existing and Planned Parks and Open Space Areas Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
Map#1 Name Park Type Acres Description
077-160-009 13 Stow
Grove
Park
Community
Park
11.10 0.45-acre lawn; soccer field; ball
diamond, volleyball courts;
horseshoe pits; swing sets;
reservation group BBQ areas;
children’s picnic tables; redwood
groves
OS
6.6 Community Parks. Community parks include developed areas suited for intense active recreational activities, large natural areas suited for passive outdoor recreation, or a combination of both. These parks may contain special amenities, facilities, or features that attract people from throughout the surrounding community. The following standards apply to community parks:
a. The
typical service area radius shall be 1 to 2 miles.
b. The
typical size shall be 10 or more acres.
c. Com
munity parks should be easily accessible from the surrounding neighborhoods and by automobile from more distant neighborhoods. Since these facilities are intended to serve areas beyond their immediate neighborhoods, onsite parking and restroom facilities may be provided.
10 d. Multiple facilities for various types of users are typically provided in community parks, including both active and passive recreational facilities. Active facilities may include a range of formal and informal athletic fields (i.e., the play areas are less developed and generally not designed to support competitive play), tennis courts, play areas, developed picnic areas, and meeting and gathering spaces. Passive facilities may include areas for rest and relaxation with a mix of bot h improved areas (lawns and informal play areas) and unimproved natural areas.
OS
6.10 Design and Management of Public Parks and Open Space. The following are among the criteria that shall apply to the design and management of public parks and open space areas (please refer to OS 6.10 for the complete list):
c.
The types of improvements and facilities at each site should be based on the recreation and leisure needs of the targeted user groups and the physical opportunities and constraints of the site.
g. Adeq
uate off-street parking to serve the intended uses shall be provided in order to minimize the burden placed on onstreet parking in the neighborhood.
In
addition to the Open Space Element’s designation of Stow Grove Park as a Community Park, Figure 3- 5 designates Stow Grove Park as “Active Park” and also shows an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) designation overlay on two are as of the park. Pursuant to the Open Space Element, all ESHAs are protected open space and shall be managed by the City in accord with the policies described in the Conservation Element.
The obj
ective of Policy CE 1: Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area Designations and Policy is to identify, preserve, and protect the city’s natural heritage by preventing disturbance of ESHAs. ESHAs include any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and that could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments, and those habitat types of limited distribution recognized to be of particular habitat value, including wetlands, riparian vegetation, eucalyptus groves associated with monarch butterfly roosts, oak woodlands, and savannas.
Figur
e 4-1 (Special-Status Species and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas) of the Conservation Element designates areas of Stow Grove Park ESHA for Monarch Butterfly and/or Raptor Roosting Habitat (windrow of eucalyptus along east side of N. La Patera Lane), and Native Upland Woodlands/Savannah (snow cone- shaped area described above). The following policies from the Conservation Element are not all inclusive but are demonstrative of the primary development standards within and adjacent to ESHAs. Please refer to the Conservation Element of the General Plan for a comprehensive listing and analysis.
Cons
ervation Element Policy CE 1.6 (Protection of ESHAs) states that “ESHAs shall be protected against significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses or 11 development dependent on and compatible with maintaining such resources shall be allowed within ESHAs or their buffers.” Pursuant to CE 1.6, the following standards shall apply:
a. No dev
elopment, except as otherwise allowed by this element, shall be allowed within ESHAs and/or ESHA buffers.
b. A s
etback or buffer separating all permitted development from an adjacent ESHA shall be required and shall have a minimum width as set forth in subsequent policies of this element. The purpose of such setbacks shall be to prevent any degradation of the ecological functions provided by the habitat area. c. Publ
ic accessways and trails are considered resource- dependent uses and may be located within or adjacent to ESHAs. These uses shall be sited to avoid or minimize impacts on the resource to the maximum extent feasible. Measures — such as signage, placement of boardwalks, and limited fencing or other barriers— shall be implemented as necessary to protect ESHAs.
d. The f
ollowing uses and development may be allowed in ESHAs or ESHA buffers only where there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives and will be subject to requirements for mitigation measures to avoid or lessen impacts to the maximum extent feasible: 1) public road crossings, 2) utility lines, 3) resource restoration and enhancement projects, 4) nature education, 5) biological research, and 6) Public Works projects as identified in the Capital Improvement Plan, only where there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging alternatives.
CE
1.7 Mitigation of Impacts to EHSAs. New development shall be sited and designed to avoid impacts to ESHAs. If there is no feasible alternative that can eliminate all impacts, then the alternative that would result in the fewest or least significant impacts shall be selected. Any impacts that cannot be avoided shall be fully mitigated, with priority given to onsite mitigation. Offsite mitigation measures shall only be approved when it is not feasible to fully mitigate impacts on site. All mitigation sites shall be monitored for a minimum period of 5 years following completion, with changes made as necessary based on annual monitoring reports.
CE 1
.8 ESHA Buffers. Development adjacent to an ESHA shall minimize impacts to habitat values or sensitive species to the maximum extent feasible. Native vegetation shall be provided in buffer areas to serve as transitional habitat. All buffers shall be of a sufficient size to ensure the biological integrity and preservation of the ESHA they are designed to protect.
CE
4.5 Buffers Adjacent to Monarch Butterfly ESHAs. A buffer of a sufficient size to ensure the biological integrity and preservation of the monarch butterfly habitat, including aggregation sites and the surrounding grove of trees, shall be required. Buffers shall not be less than 100 feet around existing and historic roost sites as measured from the outer 12 extent of the tree canopy. The buffer area shall serve as transitional habitat with native vegetation and shall provide physical barriers to human intrusion. The buffer may be reduced to 50 feet in circumstances where the trees contribute to the habitat but are not considered likely to function as an aggregation site, such as along narrow windrows.
Grading and other activities that could alter the surface hydrology that sustains the groves of trees are prohibited within or adjacent to the buffer area.
CE
8.4 Buffer Areas for Raptor Species. Development shall be designed to provide a 100-foot buffer aro und active and historical nest sites for protected species of raptors when feasible. In existing developed areas, the width of the buffer may be reduced to correspond to the actual width of the buffer for adjacent development. If the biological study described in CE 8.3 determines that an active raptor nest site exists on the subject property, whenever feasible no vegetation clearing, grading, construction, or other development activity shall be allowed within a 300- foot radius of the nest site during the nesting and fledging season.
Ch
apter 17.30 (Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas) of the Goleta Municipal Code is intended to implement the General Plan policies relating to ESHAs. Section
17.30.040 (Development and Mitigation of Impacts) states in part that no new development is allowed within an ESHA or ESHA buffer, except for new Capital Improvement Program projects, public accessways and trails, habitat restoration and enhancement projects , and nature education and research activities. Furthermore, it states that:
New
development must minimize impacts to habitat values or sensitive species to the maximum extent feasible. Native vegetation must be provided in buffer areas to serve as transitional habitat. All ESHA buffers must be of a sufficient size to ensure the biological integrity and preservation of the ESHA they are designed to protect.
New
development must be sited and designed to avoid impacts to ESHAs. If there is no feasible alternative that can eliminate all impacts, then the alternative that would result in the fewest or least significant impacts must be selected. Any impacts that cannot be avoided must be fully mitigated, with priority given to on- site mitigation.
17.3 0.180 Protection of Monarch Butterfly ESHA:
C. Required ESHA Buffer. A buffer of a sufficient size is required to ensure the biological integrity and preservation of the monarch butterfly ESHA, including aggregation sites and surrounding grove of trees.
1. Buffers shall not be less than 100 feet around existing and historic aggregation and roost sites, as measured from the outer extent of the tree canopy. The required buffer area must include native vegetation and provide physical barriers to human intrusion.
13 2. The required buffer may be reduced to 50 feet only in circumstances where the trees contribute to the habitat but are not considered likely to function as an aggregation site, such as along narrow windrows.
17.3 0.190 Protection of Other Areas Designated as Sensitive Habitat:
C. Buffer Areas for Raptor Species. Active and historical raptor nests are to be protected.
1. New
development must be designed to provide a 100-foot buffer around active and historical nesting sites for protected species of raptors when feasible.
2. I
f a biological study determines that an active raptor nest exists on a development site, no vegetation clearing, grading, construction, or other development activity is permitted within a 300 feet of the nest site during the nesting and fledging season to the extent feasible.
14 Attachment
6WRZ*URYH3DUN%DVHOLQH6SHFLHV+DELWDW0DS
5 15
LANDSCAPED CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE - COAST LIVE
OAK RIPARIAN WOODLAND
LEGEND
LANDSCAPED CANARY ISLAND PINE STAND
LANDSCAPED COAST LIVE OAK WOODLAND
AND FOREST
LANDSCAPED EUCALYTPUS GROVE
LANDSCAPED ISLAND LIVE OAK WOODLAND
LANDSCAPED MYOPORUM GROVES
LANDSCAPED NON-NATIVE WOODLAND
LANDSCAPED REDWOOD FORESTS AND
WOODLANDS
LANDSCAPED TREE OF HEAVEN GROVES
NSCALE: 1" = 60'
03 0 6 0 1 2 0
STOW GROVE PARK
BASELINE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT MAP
16 Attachment 3
Stow Grove Park Deeds of Gift 1965 & 1967
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25