Agenda packet — Milpitas City Council, December 2, 2025 (part 7 of 10)

b) If “Yes” was selected in question 14(a), will the
project underground power and
telecommunications lines and/or transformers?
☐ ☐
Please substantiate answer selections for question 14:
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

15. Flooding Impacts (CAP Adaptation Measure 3.2)
a) Is the project located near San Francisco Bay or at
flooding risk from local waterways which discharge
to San Francisco Bay?
☐ ☐
Please substantiate answer selections for question 15:
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________

Yes, the project will have transformers located on the east side of the building, and the routing will be underground, going towards South Milpitas Boulevard.

The project site is approximately 6.75 miles southeast of San Francisco Bay, South.

The nearest receiving water body is Coyote Creek, which is approximately 1.8 miles west of the project site. This site is located in a Flood Zone "X-Shaded" area, which indicates areas with moderate-to-low flood risk.

Appendix A
112

Page 713 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Warehouse
Construction Equipment - Unmitigated 18.5 gal/bhp-hr 0.054 bhphr/gal Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Days bhp-hr gallons Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel Average 4 5.3 33 0.73 30 15321 827 Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 1 7.04 36 0.38 30 2889 156 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1 5.28 367 0.4 30 23253 1256 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 2 7.04 84 0.37 30 13128 709 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3 5.28 367 0.4 3 6976 377 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 2 5.83 84 0.37 3 1087 59 Site Preparation Graders Diesel Average 3 2.97 148 0.41 3 1622 88 Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2 5.28 36 0.38 18 2600 140 Grading Graders Diesel Average 3 6.27 148 0.41 18 20545 1109 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1 3.74 367 0.4 18 9883 534 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 3 7.59 84 0.37 18 12738 688 Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel Average 2 3.74 33 0.73 18 3243 175 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1 1.32 367 0.29 250 35122 1897 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2 6.05 82 0.2 250 49610 2679 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 4 6.05 14 0.74 250 62678 3385 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel Average 1 4.29 84 0.37 250 33333 1800 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 3 3.85 46 0.45 250 59771 3228 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1 7.04 81 0.42 10 2395 129 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 1 7.04 89 0.36 10 2256 122 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 1 7.04 36 0.38 10 963 52
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 3 8 37 0.48 15 6394 345 Architectural Coating Aerial Lifts Diesel Average 3 8 46 0.31 15 5134 277 Appendix A
113

Page 714 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Warehouse

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1 Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Days VMT Vehicle Mix Demolition Worker 20 11.7 30 7020 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 8.4 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 295 20 30 176880 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck HHDT
Site Preparation Worker 20 11.7 3 702 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor 8.4 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0 20 3 0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck HHDT
Grading Worker 28 11.7 18 5792 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 8.4 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 27 20 18 9800 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck HHDT
Building Construction Worker 205 11.7 250 598972 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 80 8.4 250 167815 HHDT,MHDT Building Construction Hauling 0 20 250 0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck HHDT
Paving Worker 8 11.7 10 878 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 8.4 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 68 20 10 13600 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker 41 11.7 15 7188 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Architectural Coating Vendor 8.4 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0 20 15 0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck HHDT
mpg gal/mile EMFAC Vehicle Category Vehicle CatVMT TOTALS

30.86 0.032 LDA LDA,LDT1,LD 620551

25.82 0.039 LDT1 HHDT,MHDT 167815

25.06 0.040 LDT2 MHDT 0

8.5 0.118 MHDT HHDT 200280

5.94 0.168 HHDT
(County-Specific Fuel Efficiency)
Gasoline for Light Duty and Diesel for Heavy Duty - Consistent with CalEEMod Assumptions Santa Clara 2025
Vehicle Category
Fuel
Efficiency
(MPG)
Fuel
(gallons)
LDA,LDT1,LDT2 26.89 23077
HHDT,MHDT 7.22 23243
MHDT 8.50 0
HHDT 5.94 33717
80,038
Appendix A
114

Page 715 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Warehouse

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1 Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Unrefrigerated Warehouse-Rail 27 27 27 9,899 1,302 1,302 1,302 475,141 Refrigerated Warehouse-Rail 3 3 3 1,095 144 144 144 52,581 Parking Lot - - - - - - - - User Defined Industrial 3,779 3,779 3,779 1,379,197 40,713 40,713 40,713 14,860,362 Appendix A
115

Page 716 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Warehouse
Energy Calculations - Operations Fuel Use from Mobile Sources Region Santa Clara
OpYear 2026
Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category - Annual Usage (gallons ; KWh-hr for Electicity) Units All vehicles HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline 528,631 24 124026 280647 74394 0 0 0 49540 0 0 0 0 0 Diesel 79,948 78821 212 109 201 0 0 0 604 0 0 0 0 0 Natural Gas 8,990 8990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Electricity 199,262 10925 159790 14779 6701 0 0 0 7067 0 0 0 0 0 EMFAC Default Mix- County Popuation VMT HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Santa Clara County Population 1304260.777 9,844 685,224 51,163 302,950 30,581 7,605 28,797 169,652 3,274 12,361 1,382 893 535 Vehicle Mix Default 1 0.8% 52.5% 3.9% 23.2% 2.3% 0.6% 2.2% 13.0% 0.3% 0.9% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Vehicle Types /Mix in CalEEMod VMT HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Unrefrigerated Warehouse-Rail 475141 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Refrigerated Warehouse-Rail 52581 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Parking Lot 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
User Defined Industrial 14860362 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Vehicle Percentages Modeled VMT HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Unrefrigerated Warehouse-Rail 475141 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Refrigerated Warehouse-Rail 52581 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Parking Lot 0 0.8% 52.5% 3.9% 23.2% 2.3% 0.6% 2.2% 13.0% 0.3% 0.9% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% User Defined Industrial 14860362 0.0% 29.6% 50.0% 13.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.8% 52.5% 3.9% 23.2% 2.3% 0.6% 2.2% 13.0% 0.3% 0.9% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Null 0 0.8% 52.5% 3.9% 23.2% 2.3% 0.6% 2.2% 13.0% 0.3% 0.9% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Unrefrigerated Warehouse-Rail Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel gal 70967 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 8095 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 9837 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Refrigerated Warehouse-Rail Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel gal 7854 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 896 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 1089 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Parking Lot Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category
Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Defined Industrial Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 0 121913 280371 74099 0 0 0 49357 0 0 0 0 0 Diesel gal 0 212 109 201 0 0 0 604 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 2114 276 294 0 0 0 183 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 0 159790 14779 6701 0 0 0 7067 0 0 0 0 0 Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 20695 3287 3194 0 0 0 1927 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category
Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Null Fuel Consumption by Vehicle Category
Fuel Consumption for CVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Gasoline) gal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fuel Consumption for EVMT Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHD1 LHD2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS Gasoline kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diesel kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Natural Gas kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Electricity kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Plug-in Hybrid (Electricity) kwhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 County and Year Specific - Fuel Efficiency
Fuel Consumption Factors Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS 127 Gasoline gal/mi 0.238 0.032 0.038 0.039 0.099 0.112 0.024 0.047 0.226 0.204 0.203 0.100 0.108 Diesel gal/mi 0.166 0.022 0.041 0.029 0.062 0.074 - 0. 039 0.107 0.117 0.125 0.121 0.109 Natural Gas gal/mi 0.194 - - - - - - - - 0.139 0.127 0.180 0.168 Electricity gal/mi - - - - - - - - - - - - - Plug-in Hybrid gal/mi - 0.034 0.034 0.034 - - - 0.035 - - - - - Fuel Consumption Factors Units HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS 135 Gasoline kwhr/mi - - - - - - - - - - - - - Diesel kwhr/mi - - - - - - - - - - - - - Natural Gas kwhr/mi - - - - - - - - - - - - - Electricity kwhr/mi 1.844 0.386 0.386 0.386 0.655 0.645 - 0. 386 - 1. 095 1.108 1.053 1.743 Plug-in Hybrid kwhr/mi - 0.302 0.302 0.302 - - - 0.302 - - - - - Total VMT Fraction by Fuel and Vehicle Category - Default EMFAC Fuel HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS 144 Gasoline 0% 87% 99% 98% 64% 33% 100% 96% 69% 11% 30% 21% 9% Diesel 90% 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% 34.8% 65.7% 0.0% 1.4% 30.9% 86.4% 68.7% 75.6% 74.2% Natural Gas 9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 0.7% 2.9% 11.8% Electricity 1% 9.4% 0.5% 0.9% 1.2% 1.3% 0.0% 1.7% 0.0% 1.4% 0.3% 0.9% 5.4% Plug-in Hybrid 0% 3.0% 0.3% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% totals 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% CVMT/Total VMT by EMFAC Vehicle Type
Fuel HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS 153 Gasoline 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Diesel 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Natural Gas 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% Electricity 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Plug-in Hybrid 0% 48% 43% 45% 0% 0% 0% 45% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% EVMT/Total VMT by EMFAC Vehicle Type
Fuel HHDT LDA LDT1 LDT2 LHDT1 LHDT2 MCY MDV MH MHDT OBUS SBUS UBUS 161 Gasoline 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Diesel 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Natural Gas 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Electricity 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% Plug-in Hybrid 0% 52.39% 57.34% 55.19% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 54.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Appendix A
116

Page 717 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Warehouse

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1 Unmitigated
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) Natural Gas (kBTU/yr)
Unrefrigerated Warehouse-Rail 4851467 2544560
Refrigerated Warehouse-Rail 76271 6668
Parking Lot 464390 0
User Defined Industrial 0 0
5,392,128 2551228
Appendix A
117

Page 718 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Drive
15164 Addendum to the 1000 Gibraltar Drive Final EIR

FCS
Appendix B:

Biological Resources Supporting
Information

Page 719 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 720 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Drive
15164 Addendum to the 1000 Gibraltar Drive Final EIR

FCS
B.1 - Database Search Results

Page 721 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 722 of 1283 ends

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL
Accipiter striatus
sharp-shinned hawk
ABNKC12020 None None G5 S4 WL
Acipenser medirostris pop. 1
green sturgeon - southern DPS
AFCAA01031 Threatened None G2T1 S1 SSC
Actinemys marmorata
northwestern pond turtle
ARAAD02031 Proposed
Threatened
None G2 SNR SSC
Adela oplerella
Opler's longhorn moth
IILEE0G040 None None G2 S2
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S2 SSC
Ambystoma californiense pop. 1
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
AAAAA01181 Threatened Threatened G2G3T3 S3 WL
Aneides niger
Santa Cruz black salamander
AAAAD01070 None None G3 S3 SSC
Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless lizard
ARACC01020 None None G3 S2S3 SSC
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
AMACC10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Aquila chrysaetos
golden eagle
ABNKC22010 None None G5 S3 FP
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
ABNGA04010 None None G5 S4
Astragalus tener var. tener
alkali milk-vetch
PDFAB0F8R1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
ABNSB10010 None Candidate
Endangered
G4 S2 SSC
Atriplex depressa
brittlescale
PDCHE042L0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Atriplex minuscula
lesser saltscale
PDCHE042M0 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Balsamorhiza macrolepis
big-scale balsamroot
PDAST11061 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Bombus caliginosus
obscure bumble bee
IIHYM24380 None None G2G3 S1S2
Quad IS (Newark (3712251) OR Niles (3712158) OR La Costa Valley (3712157) OR Mountain View (3712241) OR Milpitas (3712148) OR Calaveras Reservoir (3712147) OR Cupertino (3712231) OR San Jose West (3712138) OR San Jose East (3712137))
Query Criteria:

Report Printed on Friday, June 06, 2025

Page 1 of 5 ends

Information Expires 12/1/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Page 723 of 1283 ends

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Bombus crotchii
Crotch's bumble bee
IIHYM24480 None Candidate
Endangered
G2 S2
Bombus occidentalis
western bumble bee
IIHYM24252 None Candidate
Endangered
G3 S1
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S4
Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii
Congdon's tarplant
PDAST4R0P1 None None G3T2 S2 1B.1
Charadrius nivosus nivosus
western snowy plover
ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S3 SSC
Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre
Point Reyes salty bird's-beak
PDSCR0J0C3 None None G4?T2 S2 1B.2
Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta
robust spineflower
PDPGN040Q2 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
ABNKC11011 None None G5 S3 SSC
Cirsium fontinale var. campylon
Mt. Hamilton thistle
PDAST2E163 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Clarkia concinna ssp. automixa
Santa Clara red ribbons
PDONA050A1 None None G5?T3 S3 4.3
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1
Collinsia multicolor
San Francisco collinsia
PDSCR0H0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
AMACC08010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Coturnicops noveboracensis
yellow rail
ABNME01010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Danaus plexippus plexippus pop. 1
monarch - California overwintering population
IILEPP2012 Proposed
Threatened
None G4T1T2Q S2
Delphinium californicum ssp. interius
Hospital Canyon larkspur
PDRAN0B0A2 None None G3T3 S3 1B.2
Dicamptodon ensatus
California giant salamander
AAAAH01020 None None G2G3 S2S3 SSC
Dipodomys heermanni berkeleyensis
Berkeley kangaroo rat
AMAFD03061 None None G4T1 S2
Dipodomys heermanni goldmani
Salinas kangaroo rat
AMAFD03065 None None G4T2T3 S2S3
Dipodomys venustus venustus
Santa Cruz kangaroo rat
AMAFD03042 None None G4T1 S1
Dirca occidentalis
western leatherwood
PDTHY03010 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Report Printed on Friday, June 06, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

Information Expires 12/1/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Page 724 of 1283 ends

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Dudleya abramsii ssp. setchellii
Santa Clara Valley dudleya
PDCRA040Z0 Endangered None G4T2 S2 1B.1
Egretta thula
snowy egret
ABNGA06030 None None G5 S4
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP
Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri
Hoover's button-celery
PDAPI0Z043 None None G5T1 S1 1B.1
Euphydryas editha bayensis
Bay checkerspot butterfly
IILEPK4055 Threatened None G4G5T1 S3
Extriplex joaquinana
San Joaquin spearscale
PDCHE041F3 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
ABNKD06090 None None G5 S4 WL
Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4
Fritillaria liliacea
fragrant fritillary
PMLIL0V0C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
saltmarsh common yellowthroat
ABPBX1201A None None G5T3 S3 SSC
Gonidea angulata
western ridged mussel
IMBIV19010 None None G3 S2
Hoita strobilina
Loma Prieta hoita
PDFAB5Z030 None None G2? S2? 1B.1
Lasiurus cinereus
hoary bat
AMACC05032 None None G3G4 S4
Lasthenia conjugens
Contra Costa goldfields
PDAST5L040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
California black rail
ABNME03041 None Threatened G3T1 S2 FP
Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
ICBRA10010 Endangered None G3 S3
Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata
smooth lessingia
PDAST5S062 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
ICBRA06010 None None G2G3 S2S3
Malacothamnus arcuatus var. arcuatus
arcuate bushmallow
PDMAL0Q0E0 None None G2Q S2 1B.2
Malacothamnus hallii
Hall's bushmallow
PDMAL0Q0F0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus
Alameda whipsnake
ARADB21031 Threatened Threatened G4T2 S2
Report Printed on Friday, June 06, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

Information Expires 12/1/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Page 725 of 1283 ends

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Melospiza melodia pusillula
Alameda song sparrow
ABPBXA301S None None G5T2T3 S2 SSC
Microcina homi
Hom's micro-blind harvestman
ILARA47020 None None G1 S2
Monolopia gracilens
woodland woollythreads
PDAST6G010 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Myotis evotis
long-eared myotis
AMACC01070 None None G5 S3
Myotis yumanensis
Yuma myotis
AMACC01020 None None G5 S4
Navarretia prostrata
prostrate vernal pool navarretia
PDPLM0C0Q0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Neotoma fuscipes annectens
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat
AMAFF08082 None None G5T2T3 S2S3 SSC
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
Northern Coastal Salt Marsh
CTT52110CA None None G3 S3.2
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8
steelhead - central California coast DPS
AFCHA0209G Threatened None G5T3Q S3 SSC
Plagiobothrys glaber
hairless popcornflower
PDBOR0V0B0 None None GX SX 1A
Puccinellia simplex
California alkali grass
PMPOA53110 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
California Ridgway's rail
ABNME05011 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S2 FP
Rana boylii pop. 4
foothill yellow-legged frog - central coast DPS
AAABH01054 Threatened Endangered G3T2 S2
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC
Ravenella exigua
chaparral harebell
PDCAM020A0 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Reithrodontomys raviventris
salt-marsh harvest mouse
AMAFF02040 Endangered Endangered G1G2 S3 FP
Riparia riparia
bank swallow
ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S3
Rynchops niger
black skimmer
ABNNM14010 None None G5 S2 SSC
Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 1B.2
Sidalcea malachroides
maple-leaved checkerbloom
PDMAL110E0 None None G3 S3 4.2
Sorex vagrans halicoetes
salt-marsh wandering shrew
AMABA01071 None None G5T1 S1 SSC
Report Printed on Friday, June 06, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

Information Expires 12/1/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Page 726 of 1283 ends

Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Spergularia macrotheca var. longistyla
long-styled sand-spurrey
PDCAR0W062 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2
Spirinchus thaleichthys pop. 2
longfin smelt - San Francisco Bay-Delta DPS
AFCHB03040 Endangered Threatened G5TNRQ S1
Sternula antillarum browni
California least tern
ABNNM08103 Endangered Endangered G4T2T3Q S2 FP
Streptanthus albidus ssp. albidus
Metcalf Canyon jewelflower
PDBRA2G011 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1
Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus
most beautiful jewelflower
PDBRA2G012 None None G2T2 S2 1B.2
Stuckenia filiformis ssp. alpina
northern slender pondweed
PMPOT03091 None None G5T5 S2S3 2B.2
Suaeda californica
California seablite
PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
Sycamore Alluvial Woodland
CTT62100CA None None G1 S1.1
Taxidea taxus
American badger
AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Trifolium hydrophilum
saline clover
PDFAB400R5 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Tryonia imitator
mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail)
IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2
Record Count: 92
Report Printed on Friday, June 06, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

Information Expires 12/1/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database

Page 727 of 1283 ends

Search Results
53 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: , Quad is one of
[3712251:3712158:3712157:3712241:3712148:3712147:3712231:3712138:3712137] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
STATE
RANK
CA
RARE
PLANT
RANK
CA

ENDEMIC
DATE
ADDED
Acanthomintha
lanceolata
Santa Clara
thorn-mint
Lamiaceae Mar-Jun None None S4 4.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Androsace
elongata ssp.
acuta
California
androsace
Primulaceae Mar-Jun None None S3S4 4.2 1994-
01-01
Astragalus
tener var. tener
alkali milk-
vetch
Fabaceae Mar-Jun None None S1 1B.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Atriplex
depressa
brittlescale Chenopodiaceae Apr-Oct None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
Atriplex
minuscula
lesser
saltscale
Chenopodiaceae May-Oct None None S2 1B.1 Yes 1994-
01-01
Balsamorhiza
macrolepis
big-scale
balsamroot
Asteraceae Mar-Jun None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Calandrinia
breweri
Brewer's
calandrinia
Montiaceae (Jan)Mar-Jun None None S4 4.2 1994-
01-01
Centromadia
parryi ssp.
congdonii
Congdon's
tarplant
Asteraceae (Apr)May-
Oct(Nov)
None None S2 1B.1 Yes 1994-
01-01
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory

Page 728 of 1283 ends

Chloropyron
maritimum ssp.
palustre
Point Reyes
salty bird's-
beak
Orobanchaceae Jun-Oct None None S2 1B.2 1974-
01-01
Chorizanthe
robusta var.
robusta
robust
spineflower
Polygonaceae Apr-Sep FE None S1 1B.1 Yes 1980-
01-01
Cirsium
fontinale var.
campylon
Mt. Hamilton
thistle
Asteraceae (Feb)Apr-Oct None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Clarkia
concinna ssp.
automixa
Santa Clara
red ribbons
Onagraceae (Apr)May-
Jun(Jul)
None None S3 4.3 Yes 1994-
01-01
Clarkia lewisii Lewis' clarkia Onagraceae (Feb)May-Jul None None S4 4.3 Yes 1980- 01-01
Collinsia
multicolor
San Francisco
collinsia
Plantaginaceae (Feb)Mar-
May
None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Convolvulus
simulans
small-
flowered
morning-glory
Convolvulaceae Mar-Jul None None S4 4.2 1994-
01-01
Cypripedium
fasciculatum
clustered
lady's-slipper
Orchidaceae Mar-Aug None None S4 4.2 1980-
01-01
Delphinium
californicum
ssp. interius
Hospital
Canyon
larkspur
Ranunculaceae Apr-Jun None None S3 1B.2 Yes 1984-
01-01
Dirca
occidentalis
western
leatherwood
Thymelaeaceae Jan-Mar(Apr) None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Dudleya
abramsii ssp.
setchellii
Santa Clara
Valley dudleya
Crassulaceae Apr-Oct FE None S2 1B.1 Yes 1988-
01-01
Eleocharis
parvula
small
spikerush
Cyperaceae (Apr)Jun-
Aug(Sep)
None None S3 4.3 1980-
01-01
Eriogonum
argillosum
clay
buckwheat
Polygonaceae Mar-Jun None None S3S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01

Page 729 of 1283 ends

Eriogonum
umbellatum var.
bahiiforme
bay
buckwheat
Polygonaceae Jul-Sep None None S3 4.2 Yes 2001-
01-01
Eriophyllum
jepsonii
Jepson's
woolly
sunflower
Asteraceae Apr-Jun None None S3 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01
Eryngium
aristulatum var.
hooveri
Hoover's
button-celery
Apiaceae (Jun)Jul(Aug) None None S1 1B.1 Yes 1984-
01-01
Extriplex
joaquinana
San Joaquin
spearscale
Chenopodiaceae Apr-Oct None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1988-
01-01
Fritillaria
agrestis
stinkbells Liliaceae Mar-Jun None None S3 4.2 Yes 1980- 01-01
Fritillaria liliacea fragrant
fritillary
Liliaceae Feb-Apr None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Galium
andrewsii ssp.
gatense
phlox-leaf
serpentine
bedstraw
Rubiaceae Apr-Jul None None S3 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Hoita strobilina Loma Prieta
hoita
Fabaceae May-Jul(Aug-
Oct)
None None S2? 1B.1 Yes 2001-
01-01
Iris longipetala coast iris Iridaceae Mar-
May(Jun)
None None S3 4.2 Yes 2006-
10-12
Isocoma
menziesii var.
diabolica
Satan's
goldenbush
Asteraceae Aug-Oct None None S3 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Lasthenia
conjugens
Contra Costa
goldfields
Asteraceae Mar-Jun FE None S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01
Leptosiphon
ambiguus
serpentine
leptosiphon
Polemoniaceae Mar-Jun None None S4 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Leptosiphon
grandiflorus
large-flowered
leptosiphon
Polemoniaceae Apr-Aug None None S3S4 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Lessingia
hololeuca
woolly-headed
lessingia
Asteraceae Jun-Oct None None S2S3 3 Yes 1994-
01-01

Page 730 of 1283 ends

Lessingia
micradenia var.
glabrata
smooth
lessingia
Asteraceae (Apr-Jun)Jul-
Nov
None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
Lessingia tenuis spring
lessingia
Asteraceae May-Jul None None S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01
Malacothamnus
arcuatus var.
arcuatus
arcuate
bushmallow
Malvaceae Apr-Sep None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Malacothamnus
hallii
Hall's
bushmallow
Malvaceae (Apr)May-
Sep(Oct)
None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Mielichhoferia
elongata
elongate
copper moss
Mielichhoferiaceae None None S3S4 4.3 2001-
01-01
Monolopia
gracilens
woodland
woollythreads
Asteraceae (Feb)Mar-Jul None None S3 1B.2 Yes 2010-
04-06
Navarretia
prostrata
prostrate
vernal pool
navarretia
Polemoniaceae Apr-Jul None None S2 1B.2 Yes 2001-
01-01
Plagiobothrys
glaber
hairless
popcornflower
Boraginaceae Mar-May None None SX 1A Yes 1974-
01-01
Puccinellia
simplex
California
alkali grass
Poaceae Mar-May None None S2 1B.2 2015-
10-15
Ravenella
exigua
chaparral
harebell
Campanulaceae May-Jun None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
Senecio
aphanactis
chaparral
ragwort
Asteraceae Jan-Apr(May) None None S2 1B.2 1994-
01-01
Sidalcea
malachroides
maple-leaved
checkerbloom
Malvaceae (Mar)Apr-Aug None None S3 4.2 1994-
01-01
Spergularia
macrotheca var.
longistyla
long-styled
sand-spurrey
Caryophyllaceae Feb-May None None S2 1B.2 Yes 2017-
06-16
Streptanthus
albidus ssp.
albidus
Metcalf
Canyon
jewelflower
Brassicaceae Apr-Jul FE None S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01

Page 731 of 1283 ends

}
Streptanthus
albidus ssp.
peramoenus
most beautiful
jewelflower
Brassicaceae (Mar)Apr-
Sep(Oct)
None None S2 1B.2 Yes 1988-
01-01
Stuckenia
filiformis ssp.
alpina
northern
slender
pondweed
Potamogetonaceae May-Jul None None S2S3 2B.2 1994-
01-01
Suaeda
californica
California
seablite
Chenopodiaceae Jul-Oct FE None S1 1B.1 Yes 1988-
01-01
Trifolium
hydrophilum
saline clover Fabaceae Apr-Jun None None S2 1B.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
Showing 1 to 53 of 53 entries
Go to top
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2025. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5.1). Website https:/ /www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 6 June 2025].

Page 732 of 1283 ends

IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
Santa Clara County, California
Local office
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
Federal Building
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC

Page 733 of 1283 ends

2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846

Page 734 of 1283 ends

Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.

Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site- specific and project-specific information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce. 1 2

Page 735 of 1283 ends

The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:

Mammals
Birds

NAME STATUS
Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys raviventris
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/613
Endangered
San Joaquin Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis mutica
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2873
Endangered

NAME STATUS
California Condor Gymnogyps californianus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8193
Endangered
California Least Tern Sternula antillarum browni
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8104
Endangered
California Ridgway's Rail Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4240
Endangered
Western Snowy Plover Charadrius nivosus nivosus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8035
Threatened
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911
Threatened
----------
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------

Page 736 of 1283 ends

Reptiles
Amphibians
Insects

NAME STATUS
Alameda Whipsnake (=striped Racer) Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5524
Threatened
Northwestern Pond Turtle Actinemys marmorata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1111
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891
Threatened
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
Foothill Yellow-legged Frog Rana boylii
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5133
Threatened
Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.

Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------

Page 737 of 1283 ends

Crustaceans
Flowering Plants
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

There are no critical habitats at this location.

Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8246
Endangered
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2246
Endangered

NAME STATUS
Contra Costa Goldfields Lasthenia conjugens
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7058
Endangered
Robust Spineflower Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9287
Endangered
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------

Page 738 of 1283 ends

You are still required to determine if your project(s) may have effects on all above listed species.

Bald & Golden Eagles
There are Bald Eagles and/or Golden Eagles in your project area.

Measures for Proactively Minimizing Eagle Impacts
For information on how to best avoid and minimize disturbance to nesting bald eagles, please review the
National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. You may employ the timing and activity- specific distance recommendations in this document when designing your project/activity to avoid and minimize eagle impacts. For bald eagle information specific to Alaska, please refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity.

The FWS does not currently have guidelines for avoiding and minimizing disturbance to nesting Golden Eagles. For site-specific recommendations regarding nesting Golden Eagles, please consult with the appropriate Regional
Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office.

If disturbance or take of eagles cannot be avoided, an incidental take permit may be available to authorize any take that results from, but is not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity. For assistance making this determination for Bald Eagles, visit the Do I Need A Permit Tool. For assistance making this determination for golden eagles, please consult with the appropriate Regional Migratory Bird Office or Ecological Services Field Office.

Ensure Your Eagle List is Accurate and Complete
Bald and Golden Eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) . Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to Bald or Golden Eagles, or their habitats, should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures, as described in the various links on this page.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservation- measures.pdf
Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden- eagles-may-occur-project-action
2 1
•
•
•
•

Page 739 of 1283 ends

If your project area is in a poorly surveyed area in IPaC, your list may not be complete and you may need to rely on other resources to determine what species may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). Please review the Supplemental Information
on Migratory Birds and Eagles, to help you properly interpret the report for your specified location, including determining if there is sufficient data to ensure your list is accurate.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to bald or golden eagles on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these bald or golden eagles are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

Review the FAQs
The FAQs below provide important additional information and resources.

BREEDING SEASON
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

NAME
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
---- ---- ----------
--- - -------
■

Page 740 of 1283 ends

no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season (
)
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
■
■ ■
++++ + ++ ++ + +++
+ + +

Page 741 of 1283 ends

Bald & Golden Eagles FAQs
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are an eagle (Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements may apply).

Proper interpretation and use of your eagle report
On the graphs provided, please look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical line) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal line). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort line or no data line (red horizontal) means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list and associated information help you know what to look for to confirm presence and helps guide you in knowing when to implement avoidance and minimization measures to eliminate or reduce potential impacts from your project activities or get the appropriate permits should presence be confirmed.

How do I know if eagles are breeding, wintering, or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating, or resident), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and view the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If an eagle on your IPaC migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it (indicated by yellow vertical bars on the phenology graph in your “IPaC PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY” at the top of your results list), there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

Interpreting the Probability of Presence Graphs
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated.

This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

Page 742 of 1283 ends

Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range.

If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Migratory birds
Measures for Proactively Minimizing Migratory Bird Impacts Your IPaC Migratory Bird list showcases
birds of concern, including Birds of Conservation
Concern (BCC), in your project location. This is not a comprehensive list of all birds found in your project area. However, you can help proactively minimize significant impacts to all birds at your project location by implementing the measures in the Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds document, and any other project-specific avoidance and minimization measures suggested at the link Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds for the birds of concern on your list below.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the take (including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). The incidental take of migratory birds is the injury or death of birds that results from, but is not the purpose, of an activity. The Service interprets the MBTA to prohibit incidental take.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds Nationwide avoidance and minimization measures for birds Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and-golden- eagles-may-occur-project-action
1 •

Page 743 of 1283 ends

Ensure Your Migratory Bird List is Accurate and Complete If your project area is in a poorly surveyed area, your list may not be complete and you may need to rely on other resources to determine what species may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). Please review the Supplemental Information on Migratory
Birds and Eagles document, to help you properly interpret the report for your specified location, including determining if there is sufficient data to ensure your list is accurate.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the "Probability of Presence Summary" below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

Review the FAQs
The FAQs below provide important additional information and resources.

BREEDING SEASONNAME
Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637
Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591
Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31
Black Skimmer Rynchops niger
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5234
Breeds May 20 to Sep 15
--- - -------
--- - -------
--- - -------

Page 744 of 1283 ends

Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093
Breeds May 15 to Aug 20
Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
Brandt's Cormorant Urile penicillatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Apr 15 to Sep 15
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jan 1 to Jul 31
Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Elegant Tern Thalasseus elegans
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8561
Breeds Apr 5 to Aug 5
- ---
- ---
- ---

Page 745 of 1283 ends

Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Lawrence's Goldfinch Spinus lawrencei
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9464
Breeds Mar 20 to Sep 20
Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481
Breeds elsewhere
Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8350
Breeds Apr 1 to Sep 15
Nuttall's Woodpecker Dryobates nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914
Breeds May 20 to Aug 31
Red Knot Calidris canutus roselaari
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8880
Breeds elsewhere
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------
--------

Page 746 of 1283 ends

Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia graminea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5513
Breeds Mar 1 to Sep 5
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds elsewhere
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743
Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Western Gull Larus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Apr 21 to Aug 25
Willet Tringa semipalmata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Yellow-billed Magpie Pica nuttalli
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9726
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
- ---
- ---
- ---
- ---
- ---

Page 747 of 1283 ends

Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data (
)
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Page 748 of 1283 ends

no data survey effort breeding season probability of presence

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Allen's
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Belding's
Savannah
Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Black
Oystercatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Black Skimmer
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Black Tern
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Black Turnstone
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Brandt's
Cormorant
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bullock's Oriole

BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
California
Thrasher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Common
Yellowthroat

BCC - BCR
■
+++
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
++++ ++++ ++++ +++ I
■
+ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
++++ + tt tt I t +t+
++++ ++++ ++++ + ++ + ++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ + + ++++ ++++ +++
+ I
+++ ++ I+ +I+

Page 749 of 1283 ends

Elegant Tern

BCC - BCR
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Lawrence's
Goldfinch
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Marbled Godwit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Northern Harrier

BCC - BCR
Nuttall's
Woodpecker

BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Olive-sided
Flycatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Red Knot
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Santa Barbara
Song Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Tricolored
Blackbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
++ I+ I + I ++ I + +
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
++++ ++++ ++++ ~+++ HI-++ +t++ ++ + + + +++ ++++ ++++ ++ I + ++++ ++ + ttt It ++ I+

Page 750 of 1283 ends

Willet
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Yellow-billed
Magpie
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Migratory Bird FAQs
Tell me more about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Avoidance & Minimization Measures for Birds describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year-round. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is one of the most effective ways to minimize impacts. To see when birds are most likely to occur and breed in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary.

Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location, such as those listed under the Endangered Species Act or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and those species marked as “Vulnerable”. See the FAQ “What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?” for more information on the levels of concern covered in the IPaC migratory bird species list.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) with which your project intersects. These species have been identified as warranting special attention because they are BCC species in that area, an eagle (
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, and to verify survey effort when no results present, please visit the Rapid Avian Information
Locator (RAIL) Tool.

Why are subspecies showing up on my list?
Subspecies profiles are included on the list of species present in your project area because observations in the AKN for the species are being detected. If the species are present, that means that the subspecies may also be present. If a subspecies shows up on your list, you may need to rely on other resources to determine if that subspecies may be present (e.g. your local FWS field office, state surveys, your own surveys). + + I+++ ++ ++++ +++ ++++ ++++
---

Page 751 of 1283 ends

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go to the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating, or resident), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and view the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your IPaC migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it (indicated by yellow vertical bars on the phenology graph in your “IPaC PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY” at the top of your results list), there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).

Although it is important to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially BCC species. For more information on avoidance and minimization measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts, please see the FAQ “Tell me more about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds”.

Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Proper interpretation and use of your migratory bird report

Page 752 of 1283 ends

The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical line) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal line). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list does not represent all birds present in your project area. It is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list and associated information help you know what to look for to confirm presence and helps guide implementation of avoidance and minimization measures to eliminate or reduce potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about avoidance and minimization measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about avoidance and minimization measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds".

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated.

Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range.

If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Page 753 of 1283 ends

Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuge lands at this location.

Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

This location did not intersect any wetlands mapped by NWI.

NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

Page 754 of 1283 ends

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.

Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.

These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.

Page 755 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 756 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Drive
15164 Addendum to the 1000 Gibraltar Drive Final EIR

FCS

B.2 - Tree Survey

Page 757 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 758 of 1283 ends

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
11 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
916.365.8714 tel
619.462.0552 fax
www.helixepi.com
April 1, 2019
Michael Johnson
Vice President - Development
Overton-Moore Properties
19300 South Hamilton Ave, Suite 200
Gardena, CA 90248

Subject: Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, City of Milpitas, California Dear Mr. Johnson:

At your request, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) conducted a tree survey of the property at 1001 Gibraltar Drive in the City of Milpitas, California. The property consists of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel Number 08642033 and is approximately 30 acres in size.

Under Section 4.02 of the City of Milpitas Code of Ordinances (code), it is unlawful for any person other than City personnel in the performance of their duty to remove a protected tree or street tree without applying for a permit issued by the Public Works Department. Chapter 201.5 of the code defines protected trees on commercial/industrial properties as “all trees which have a 37-inch or greater circumference of any trunk measured 4.5 feet from the ground.” The code defines street trees as those “located in the public right-of-way between the curb and the sidewalk.” The purpose of our work was to inventory and conduct a rapid visual inspection of protected trees on the property. Trees rooted on the street side of the sidewalk on the sides of the property bordering Gibraltar Drive and South Milpitas Boulevard were included in the survey and noted as possible street trees.

METHODS
The tree inventory/assessment was conducted by HELIX Biologist and International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist George Aldridge (ISA Certification No. WE-11778A). All trees on the site with a trunk circumference of at least 37 inches at 4.5-feet above grade were located and assessed. Trees with a circumference between 36 and 37 inches were included in the survey and are reported separately in this letter, as they may reach the threshold to qualify as protected under the City code in the next 12 – 18 months.

The health assessment consisted of a rapid visual inspection of the trees from the ground based on the observed conditions at the time of the survey and did not include an in-depth health HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 759 of 1283 ends

Letter to Mr. Michael Johnson Page 2 of 4
April 1, 2019

inspection of the crown or roots. All trees on the property were identified with numbered aluminum tree tags placed during previous tree inventories.

An EOS Systems Arrow 100 Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver was used to record the location of each tree assessed for the survey. The circumference of each tree was measured at approximately 4.5 feet above grade using a U.S. Tape Company forester’s tape measure. For multi-trunked trees with at least one trunk of 37 inches circumference at 4.5 feet, the circumference of each trunk was measured. The drip line and the height of each tree were visually estimated. The drip line is defined as “an area of the ground delineated by the vertical projection of the outside periphery of the crown area of a tree down to the ground surface.” Each tree’s drip line was determined by estimating the distance from the trunk to the outermost extent of the canopy. Each tree was evaluated for health and structure and assigned a rating of 0 (dead), 1 (severe decline), 2 (declining), 3 (fair), 4 (good), or 5 (excellent). Notes such as irregularities, scars, or other growth characteristics or vigor indicators were recorded for all trees rated 3 or less.

RESULTS
The property is currently developed with a vacant corporate campus including office buildings and research/development facilities. The entire property is landscaped with a large number and variety of ornamental trees, most of which are smaller than 37 inches in circumference. Trees observed during the survey include valley oak, olive, paloverde, pittosporum, coast redwood, coast live oak, queen palm, spruce, crape myrtle, zelkova, strawberry tree, plum/cherry, yellow birch, Chinese pistache, London plane tree, sweetgum, Chinese fringe tree, and shamel ash.

Most trees on the property were leafless at the time of the survey and were identified by characteristics of fruit, bark, and growth form.

A total of 183 protected trees were inventoried and assessed (Table 1). These trees are identified by red dots on the Tree Location Map in Attachment A; non-protected trees are identified by green dots on the map. Survey data for all trees inventoried are tabulated in Attachment B. Representative photos of the property are provided in Attachment C.

Of the 183 protected trees, 82 are large shamel ashes and another 26 are large sweetgums located along the edges of the property next to Gibraltar Drive and South Milpitas Boulevard.

Most of the remaining 75 protected trees are Chinese fringe trees, Chinese pistache trees, and London plane trees planted around the office buildings and in the parking lots.

Because the sidewalks along the edges of the property meander in a wide grassy strip, there is no clear public right-of-way between the curb and the sidewalk, and trees equidistant from the street may be on one side of the sidewalk or the other arbitrarily. Consequently, it is unclear if trees rooted on the street side of the sidewalk qualify as street trees while those rooted on the property side do not. Trees rooted on the street side of the sidewalk are included in the data as HELIX Envrronmen1a1 Plannrng

Page 760 of 1283 ends

Letter to Mr. Michael Johnson Page 3 of 4
April 1, 2019

possible street trees. All 29 possible street trees are also protected trees; these include 27 shamel ash, 1 sweetgum, and 1 valley oak (indicated by shading in Attachment B).

Table 1. Summary of Protected Trees on the Property at 1001 Gibraltar Drive Common Name Scientific Name Count Total Circ. (in.)
Chinese fringe tree Chionanthus retusus 14 622.5
Chinese pistache Pistacia chinensis 16 652.5
Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 3 *351.0
Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 4 223.0
Japanese zelkova Zelkova serrata 6 274.0
London plane tree Platanus x acerifolia 14 722.5
Plum/cherry Prunus cerasifera 1 *69.5
Queen palm Syagrus romanzoffiana 1 41.0
Shamel ash Fraxinus uhdei 82 6,722.5
Spruce Picea sp. 6 338.0
Strawberry tree Arbutus unedo 8 395.0
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua 26 1,334.0
Valley oak Quercus lobata 1 181.5
Yellow birch Betula alleghaniensis 1 57.5
Total 183 11,984.5
*Includes trees with multiple trunks at 4.5 feet above ground, at least 1 of which was 37 inches or greater circumference; total is the sum of all trunks at 4.5 feet above ground.

Trees on the property were mostly in good health (168 trees [92%] rated Good for health); however, structural issues are common (68 trees [37%] rated Fair or Poor for structure). Criteria for rating the health and structure of trees are summarized in Attachment D. The most common structural issue was lean and 1-sided canopy development caused by shading from neighboring trees. No protected trees were rated 0 (dead) or 1 (severe decline); five trees were rated 2 (declining): 1 plum/cherry, 1 sweetgum, and 3 shamel ashes (Table 2). The remaining 178 protected trees were rated 3 (Fair; 35), 4 (Good; 142), or 5 (Excellent; 1).

Table 2. Trees Rated in Declining Condition
Tree # Common Name Circ. (in.)
287 Shamel ash 85
291 Shamel ash 44.5
603 Plum/cherry 43, 26.5
624 Shamel ash 107
710 Sweetgum 52
Total 358.0

Nine trees had measured circumference between 36 and 37 inches and so were within one inch of the size threshold for protected trees (Table 3). These trees are included in this report as they may reach the threshold size in the next 12 – 18 months.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 761 of 1283 ends

Letter to Mr. Michael Johnson Page 4 of 4
April 1, 2019

Table 3. Trees within 1 inch of the threshold for protected status Tree # Common Name Circ. (in.)
120 Chinese pistache 36.5
248 Chinese pistache 36.5
690 Sweetgum 36.0
722 Sweetgum 36.0
724 Sweetgum 36.0
736 Chinese pistache 36.5
756 Chinese pistache 36.0
759 Chinese pistache 36.0
1012 Yellow birch 36.5
Total 326.0

SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATIONS
HELIX conducted an inventory of trees located at 1001 Gibraltar Drive that are protected by the City of Milpitas Code of Ordinances. A total of 183 trees on the property of sufficient size to quality as protected trees were inventoried and assessed. This tree inventory and assessment is based on conditions at the time of the survey; site conditions and tree conditions are subject to change. A proposed site plan for the property was not available at the time of the survey; therefore, it is unknown which, if any, trees will be retained or removed. No trees on the property were judged to be a hazard to existing development. General recommendations for protection of trees during and after construction are provided in Attachment E. Please contact me at (916) 365-8700 x 102 or [email protected] should you have any questions or would like any further assistance with this project.

Sincerely,

Stephen Stringer, M.S.

Senior Biologist, Certified Arborist
Attachment A. Tree Location Map
Attachment B. Arborist Survey Data
Attachment C. Site Photos
Attachment D. Health and Structure Rating Criteria
Attachment E. General Recommendations for Tree Protection

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 762 of 1283 ends

6 58
65 69
71 74
77 38
728
734
283282
279
278
277
148
272
119
938
120
121 143
263
262
261
260
259
258
264
266
267
948
247
949
950
240
239
163 933
726 149
150
152
157158
690
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
884
704
705
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
788
789
790 793
792
794
795
993
994
992 995
997
998
802
716
787
774
772
762
759
757
756
754
722
724
746
737
736
735
766
767 768
803
804
805
806807
808
809810811813814815816817818
819
820
821822
823
674
899
676
677
678
679
680
681
194195
197
198
199
662661
652
649
647 644
643
640
237
218
219
220
221 222
228
636
624
623
621 620
619
617
616
615
614
612
611
609
608
607
606 605
604
287288289
291
293
296
298
299
297
601
603
248 249
250
133
257
286
1000
1015
1025
1008
1003
1004
1014
1012
1011
151
706
300
285
Figure 1
Arborist Survey
S:\PROJECTS\O\OMP-ALL\OMP-07_TreeSurveryGibraltar1001\GIS\MXD\Tree Survey.mxd OMP-07 3/29/2019 - DanielV Source: Base Map Layers (Esri, USDA, USGS) Data: HELIX Field Data 2019, Kier & Wright K
1001 Gibraltar Drive
0 225 Feet
South Milpitas Boulevard
Protected Trees
Unprotected Trees
Ames AvenueGibraltar Drive
E------3 E------3
HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 763 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment B B-1

Table B-1. Tree Inventory Data

Tag # Species Circ.
(in.)
Dripline
(ft.)
Height
(ft.) Health1 Struct1 Rating2 Notes3
6 Coast live oak 80 18 45 G G 5

38 Chinese fringe tree 43 20 30 G G 4

58 Spruce 58 10 40 G F 4

65 Coast redwood 47 10 35 F G 3 SC
69 Coast redwood 58 10 50 F G 3 SC
71 Coast redwood 60 10 50 F G 3 SC
74 Coast redwood 58 10 50 F G 3 SC
77 Spruce 51 12 50 G G 4

119 Coast live oak 54, 57 20 30 G G 4

120 Chinese pistache 36.5 10 25 G G 4

121 Chinese pistache 37 10 25 G G 4

133 Chinese pistache 42 16 25 G F 4 EG; IB
143 Coast live oak 81, 51, 28 21 30 G G 4

148 London plane tree 60 18 30 G G 4

149 Chinese fringe tree 45 12 30 G G 4

150 Chinese fringe tree 42 12 30 G G 4

151 Chinese fringe tree 41 8 30 G F 3 topping cuts
152 Chinese fringe tree 38.5 8 30 G F 3 topping cuts
157 Chinese fringe tree 60 15 35 G G 4

158 Chinese fringe tree 40 10 30 G F 4 topping cuts
163 Strawberry tree 45 20 20 G F 4 overloaded limb
194 Strawberry tree 50 10 20 G F 4 leans
195 Strawberry tree 43 10 20 G G 4

197 Strawberry tree 53.5 12 25 G G 4

198 Strawberry tree 48.5 15 30 G G 4

199 Strawberry tree 56 12 30 G G 4

218 Chinese fringe tree 44.5 12 15 G G 4

219 Spruce 54 15 50 G G 4

220 Spruce 60 15 50 G F 3 leans
221 Spruce 56 15 50 G G 4

222 Spruce 59 15 50 G G 4

228 Queen palm 41 12 50 G G 4

237 Chinese fringe tree 41.5 16 25 G F 3 leans
239 Chinese fringe tree 53 18 30 G F 4 topping cuts
240 Chinese fringe tree 55.5 15 30 G F 4 topping cuts
247 London plane tree 44.5 12 30 G G 4

248 Chinese pistache 36.5 14 20 F F 3 EG; 1-sided
249 Chinese pistache 38 12 25 G G 4

250 Chinese pistache 42 15 25 G G 4

257 Chinese pistache 39 18 20 G F 4

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 764 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment B B-2

Tag # Species Circ.
(in.)
Dripline
(ft.)
Height
(ft.) Health1 Struct1 Rating2 Notes3
258 London plane tree 47 12 30 G G 4

259 London plane tree 49 12 30 G G 4

260 London plane tree 51 15 30 G G 4

261 London plane tree 52.5 10 30 G G 4

262 London plane tree 45 18 40 G F 3 leans; 1-sided
263 London plane tree 56.5 18 40 G G 4

264 Chinese pistache 38 12 20 G G 4

266 Chinese pistache 49 18 25 G G 4

267 Chinese pistache 42.5 12 15 G G 4

272 London plane tree 53 20 40 G G 4

277 Shamel ash 65 15 30 G G 4

278 Shamel ash 58 10 35 G G 4

279 Shamel ash 45.5 10 30 G G 4

282 London plane tree 43.5 12 35 G G 4

283 London plane tree 48.5 20 35 G F 3 leans; overloaded limbs 287 Shamel ash 85 20 50 F P 2 topping cuts; EG
288 Shamel ash 99.5 25 50 G F 4 leans; 1-sided; IB
289 Shamel ash 87.5 25 55 G G 4

291 Shamel ash 44.5 12 20 F P 2 topped; bent leaders
293 Yellow birch 57.5 10 12 G P 3 crossing CDLs; MD @
base
296 Shamel ash 88 25 50 G G 4

297 Shamel ash 89 25 60 G F 4 1-sided
298 Shamel ash 80.5 30 55 G F 4 leans; 1-sided
299 Shamel ash 78 20 60 G F 4 1-sided
300 Shamel ash 91 20 55 G F 4 CL
601 Shamel ash 75 25 60 F P 3 leans; 1-sided
603 Plum 43, 26.5 15 30 F F 2 dead main branches;
EG; IB
604 Shamel ash 86.5 25 50 G F 4 leans
605 Shamel ash 81.5 25 50 G P 3 crossing CDLs; fused
bark; ESR; IB
606 Shamel ash 82 25 50 G G 4 slight lean
607 Shamel ash 73 25 50 G F 4 crossing CDLs w/ fused
bark
608 Shamel ash 81 25 50 G F 3 leans; crossing CDLs w/
fused bark
609 Shamel ash 77 25 50 G F 4 leans
611 Shamel ash 95 30 40 F G 3 SC; dieback
612 Shamel ash 59 30 40 G G 4

614 Shamel ash 130 30 50 G F 4

615 Shamel ash 87 30 50 G G 4 slight lean
616 Sweetgum 47.5 12 25 G F 4 1-sided
617 Sweetgum 46 15 25 G G 4

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 765 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment B B-3

Tag # Species Circ.
(in.)
Dripline
(ft.)
Height
(ft.) Health1 Struct1 Rating2 Notes3
619 Sweetgum 52 15 35 G P 3 leans; 1-sided; bend in
trunk
620 Shamel ash 113 35 50 G P 3 leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb
621 Shamel ash 72 25 45 F G 3 SC; dieback; fungal
fruiting bodies at roots
623 Shamel ash 80.5 25 50 G G 4

624 Shamel ash 107 30 50 F F 2 CL; IB; SC; dieback
636 Chinese fringe tree 39.5 15 20 G G 4

640 Zelkova 42 9 20 G G 4

643 Zelkova 41 10 20 G G 4

644 Zelkova 48 10 20 G G 4

649 Zelkova 49 10 30 G G 4

652 Zelkova 53 10 30 G G 4

661 Zelkova 41 10 35 G G 4

674 Shamel ash 68.5 18 40 G F 4 leans
676 Shamel ash 77 25 40 G F 4 slight lean; ESR
677 Shamel ash 66 25 40 G G 4

678 Shamel ash 89.5 30 50 G G 4

679 Shamel ash 73 30 50 G F 4 1-sided
680 Shamel ash 80.5 30 50 G F 4 slight lean; 1-sided
681 Shamel ash 81.5 20 50 G G 4

690 Sweetgum 36 12 30 G G 4

693 Sweetgum 39.5 10 35 G G 4

694 Sweetgum 55.5 12 40 G G 4

695 Sweetgum 55 9 40 G G 4

696 Shamel ash 66.5 15 40 G G 4

697 Shamel ash 66.5 15 40 G G 4

698 Shamel ash 83 20 45 G G 4

699 Shamel ash 95 25 45 G G 4 cabled
700 Shamel ash 78 20 45 G F 3 leans; 1-sided
701 Sweetgum 49 12 45 G G 4

702 Sweetgum 45 12 40 G G 4

704 Sweetgum 41.5 10 35 F G 3 SC; dieback
705 Sweetgum 53 15 40 G G 4

706 Shamel ash 89 25 50 G G 4

707 Shamel ash 80.5 16 50 G F 3 leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb; CDL
708 Sweetgum 55 20 45 G G 4

709 Sweetgum 57 12 40 G G 4

710 Sweetgum 52 8 25 P F 2 overloaded limb; OPC;
dieback; SC
711 Sweetgum 65 12 30 G G 4

712 Sweetgum 63.5 20 30 G F 3 leans; 1-sided; OPC
HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 766 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment B B-4

Tag # Species Circ.
(in.)
Dripline
(ft.)
Height
(ft.) Health1 Struct1 Rating2 Notes3
713 Shamel ash 111 25 50 G G 4

714 Shamel ash 70 24 35 G F 3 1-sided; suppressed
715 Sweetgum 60 15 35 G G 4

716 Sweetgum 51 12 40 G G 4

722 Sweetgum 36 10 30 G G 4

724 Sweetgum 36 12 28 G G 4

726 Chinese fringe tree 37 12 35 G G 4

728 Sweetgum 54 15 40 G G 4

734 Shamel ash 49.5 15 35 G G 4

735 Shamel ash 64 15 30 G G 4

736 Chinese pistache 36.5 9 15 G G 4

737 Chinese pistache 44.5 10 15 G G 4

746 Chinese pistache 39 10 12 G G 3 dieback
754 Chinese pistache 41 12 25 G G 4

756 Chinese pistache 36 18 25 G F 3 overloaded limbs
757 Chinese pistache 37.5 18 25 G F 4 overloaded limb
759 Chinese pistache 36 15 25 G G 4

762 Chinese pistache 37 18 25 G G 4

766 Shamel ash 53 15 30 G G 4

767 Shamel ash 42 10 20 G G 4

768 Shamel ash 45 10 25 G G 4

772 Chinese pistache 38.5 15 25 G G 4

774 Chinese pistache 46 20 30 G G 4

787 Sweetgum 37 15 20 G F 3 leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb
788 Sweetgum 50.5 15 35 G G 4

789 Sweetgum 48.5 18 35 G F 3 overloaded limbs
790 Sweetgum 46.5 15 35 G G 4 1-sided
792 Shamel ash 50 15 30 G F 3 1-sided
793 Shamel ash 85 20 40 G G 4

794 Shamel ash 83.5 25 40 G F 4 1-sided
795 Shamel ash 82 25 40 G F 3 leans; overloaded limbs
802 Shamel ash 115.5 20 40 G G 4

803 Shamel ash 100 20 50 G G 4 slight lean
804 Shamel ash 77 25 55 G G 4

805 Shamel ash 87 30 55 G G 4 slight lean
806 Shamel ash 89 20 50 G G 4 IB
807 Shamel ash 77.5 20 50 G G 4

808 Shamel ash 90 20 50 G G 4

809 Shamel ash 67 20 50 G G 4

810 Shamel ash 79 30 50 G P 3 severe lean; 1-sided
811 Shamel ash 123 20 50 G G 4 slight lean
813 Shamel ash 107.5 30 50 G F 4 1-sided
HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 767 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment B B-5

Tag # Species Circ.
(in.)
Dripline
(ft.)
Height
(ft.) Health1 Struct1 Rating2 Notes3
814 Shamel ash 90 18 45 G G 4

815 Sweetgum 58 15 30 G G 4

816 Sweetgum 50 15 30 G F 3 leans; 1-sided; DBF
817 Sweetgum 58 12 30 F G 3 large decayed wound in
trunk
818 Shamel ash 97 20 45 G G 4

819 Shamel ash 63 15 40 G G 4

820 Shamel ash 52 15 40 F F 3 IB; 1-sided, dieback; SC
821 Shamel ash 92 25 50 G F 4 leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb
822 Shamel ash 108 25 55 G F 4 leans; CL; IB
823 Shamel ash 83 18 50 G F 4 leans
884 Sweetgum 44 10 40 G G 4

899 Shamel ash 73 40 40 G F 3 leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb
933 Strawberry tree 49 15 20 G G 4

938 Chinese pistache 41.5 10 25 G G 4

948 London plane tree 42.5 20 30 G F 4 leans; overloaded limbs 949 London plane tree 69 20 30 G F 3 leans; overloaded limbs 950 London plane tree 60.5 15 35 G F 4 bend in trunk
992 Shamel ash 70 20 40 G G 4 slight lean
993 Shamel ash 106 20 40 G G 4

994 Shamel ash 86.5 25 40 G F 3 leans; 1-sided
995 Shamel ash 95 20 45 G G 4

997 Shamel ash 97 18 40 G F 4 overloaded limb
998 Valley oak 181.5 25 40 G F 4 cabled; overloaded
limb; OPC
1000 Shamel ash 74 18 40 G G 4 slight lean
1003 Shamel ash 82 35 40 G G 4 leans; 1-sided
1004 Shamel ash 89 30 50 G F 4

1008 Chinese fringe tree 42 12 20 G F 4 CL w/ fused bark; multiple CDL
1011 Shamel ash 111.5 30 50 G F 4 leans; 1-sided
1012 Yellow birch 36.5 8 12 G F 3 MD to main trunk;
multiple CDL
1014 Shamel ash 93.5 25 50 G G 4

1015 Shamel ash 107 20 50 G F 4 1-sided
1025 Strawberry tree 50 12 25 G G 4

Shaded lines are trees rooted on the street side of the sidewalk = possible street trees Gray font indicates trees less than, but within 1 inch of, 37 inches circumference 1G=Good; F=Fair; P=Poor
22=declining – may die within 5 years; 3=fair – health or structural issues but likely to survive more than 5 years; 4=good; 5=excellent 3CDL=co-dominant leaders; CL=crossing limbs; DBF=decayed branch failures; EG=epicormic growth; ESR=exposed structural roots; IB=included bark; MD=mechanical damage; OPC=old pruning cuts; SC=sparse canopy; 1-sided=asymmetrical canopy development

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 768 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment C C-1

Photo 1: Shamel ashes along Gibraltar Drive.

Photo 2: Chinese pistache trees in the parking lot at Gibraltar and South Milpitas.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 769 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment C C-2

Photo 3: Japanese zelkovas at the north end of the property.

Photo 4: Crape myrtles on the east side of the northern building.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 770 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment C C-3

Photo 5: Shamel ashes and a large valley oak at the southeast corner of the property.

Photo 6: Sweetgums and shamel ashes along South Milpitas Blvd near Ames Avenue.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 771 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment C C-4

Photo 7: Small olive and paloverde trees in the interior of the property.

Photo 8: Spruces and coast redwoods in the interior of the property.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 772 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment D D-1

The following tables provide summaries of the criteria used for rating the health and structure of trees in the survey. Overall tree ratings were based on the individual ratings for health and structure.

Health
Health is an indication of the overall vigor and vitality of the tree expressed as a rating of Good, Fair, or Poor. Ratings for health were based on the criteria in Table D-1.

Table D-1. Criteria for Rating Tree Health
Good Little or no Evidence of Stress, Disease, Infestation, or Nutrient Deficiency.

Foliage (if present on deciduous species) is of average or better density, size, and color for the species; foliage in the canopy is evenly distributed; twig elongation and bud density are normal for the species; there is no evidence of dieback; there is little or no epicormic growth (water sprouts); there are not excessive numbers of galls or excessive evidence of herbivory; callusing, if present, is vigorous; bark is healthy and intact; there are no signs of senescence.

Fair Moderate Evidence of Stress, Disease, Infestation, or Nutrient Deficiency. Foliage is below average density, size, or color for the species; foliage density may be lower in some parts of the canopy; twig elongation and bud density may be moderately reduced; some evidence of dieback may be present; some epicormic growth may be present; gall or herbivore load is higher than average for the species; callusing of old wounds is not well-developed; there may be evidence of small areas of infection such as bark swelling or sloughing; the tree may be over- mature or beginning to senesce.

Poor Abundant Evidence of Stress, Disease, Infestation, or Nutrient Deficiency. Foliage and/or buds are sparse; leaves are reduced in size or of unhealthy color; the canopy is sparse and underdeveloped; there is widespread evidence of dieback; twig elongation is severely reduced; there is abundant epicormic growth; gall load, insect exit holes, or evidence of herbivory is severe; old wounds are not callused; there is widespread evidence of bark swelling, splitting, or sloughing in the root crown, trunk, or major limbs; the tree is senescent.

Structure
Structure is an indication of the structural stability and failure potential of the tree expressed as a rating of Good, Fair, or Poor. Ratings for structure were based on the criteria in Table D-2.

Table D-2. Criteria for Rating Tree Structure
Good Low Potential for Failure. No wounds, cavities, decay, or indications of hollowness evident in the root crown, trunk, or major limbs; no exposed anchor roots or circling roots; no codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments; no HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 773 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment D D-2

crossing limbs; little or no included bark at branch attachments; no dead major limbs; no major limb failures; no overburdened limbs; no excessive or unnatural lean; proper development of trunk taper; structure is more or less symmetrical.

Fair Moderate Potential for Failure. Small to moderate wounds, cavities, decay, or indications of hollowness may be present in the root crown, trunk, or major limbs; minor exposure of anchor roots; no circling roots; codominant trunks or multiple trunk attachments are present but included bark is absent or not well-developed; no large crossing limbs are present; small or medium-sized dead limbs may be present in the canopy; no large limb failures; limbs may be slightly overburdened; natural or only minor lean is evident with well-developed reaction wood; canopy development may be slightly to moderately asymmetrical.

Poor High Potential for Failure. Significant wounds, cavities, decay, or indications of hollowness evident in the root crown, trunk, or major limbs; anchor roots are exposed or the tree has lost anchorage; circling roots are present; codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments are present; large crossing limbs are present; significant amounts of included bark are present at trunk and branch attachments; large dead limbs are present in the canopy; evidence of past large limb failures; overburdened limbs; poor trunk taper; excessive or unnatural lean or drastically unbalanced canopy development.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 774 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-1

General Protection Guidelines for Trees Planned for Preservation To prevent soil compaction:
• 6-8 inches of wood chips should be spread inside the dripline of trees where temporary construction traffic or staging would occur. Chips should be removed after project completion, or the depth reduced to no more than 4 inches. Alternatively, bridging root areas with steel plates would reduce damage to roots within construction traffic areas. o A circle with a radius measurement from the trunk of the tree to the tip of its longest limb, plus one foot, constitutes the critical root zone protection area of each protected tree. Limbs must not be cut back in order to change the dripline.

The area beneath the dripline is a critical portion of the root zone and defines the minimum protected area of each protected tree. Removing limbs that make up the dripline does not change the protected area.

To reduce damage due to raising the existing grade:
• Grading within the protected zone of a protected tree should be minimized. Cuts within the protected zone should be maintained at less than 20% of the critical root zone area.

Grade cuts should be monitored by the project Arborist. Any damaged roots encountered should be root pruned and properly treated as deemed necessary by the Project Arborist.
• Construct an open-joint wall of shell, brick, rock or masonry in a circle around the tree trunk, with at least 1 to 2 feet between the wall and trunk. This wall should be as high as the top of the new grade. This opening is commonly referred to as a tree well. • If fills exceed 1 foot in depth up to 20% of the critical root zone area, aeration systems may serve to mitigate the presence of the fill materials as determined by the Project Arborist.
• Construct an aeration system using 4-inch agricultural clay tile or 4-inch perforated plastic pipe arranged in five to six horizontal lines radiating from the tree well like spokes in a wheel to a point beyond the branch spread. Allow excess moisture to drain away by installing the radial lines so they slope away from the trunk. Connect the outer ends of the radiating system with a circle of tile or perforated plastic pipe. • To provide vents, place 4- or 6-inch plastic pipe or bell tile upright over the junction of the radial lines with the circle. They should extend to the surface of the planned grade level. Extend the lower end of the aeration system to a curb or storm drain to carry excess moisture away from the root system.
• Cover the exposed soil and tile system with rock or coarse gravel to a depth of 6 to 18 inches, depending on the amount of fill. Follow this with a covering layer of gravel. Place a thin layer of straw, woven plastic or other porous material over the gravel to prevent soil from filtering into the gravel and stone. Fill with good topsoil to the desired grade.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 775 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-2

• When fill materials are deemed necessary on two or three sides of a tree it is critical to provide for drainage away from the critical root zone area of the tree (particularly when considering heavy winter rainfalls). Overland releases and subterranean drains dug outside the critical root zone area and tied directly to the main storm drain system are two options.
• The construction of impervious surfaces within the dripline of a protected tree should be minimized. When necessary, a piped aeration system should be installed under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist.
• Preservation devices such as aeration systems, tree wells, drains, special paving and cabling systems must be installed in conformance with approved plans and certified by the Project Arborist.
• To discourage rodents, fill the tree well with enough coarse gravel to cover the ends of the lines opening into the well. Also fill the upright bell tile and cover with a screen or grill.
• Minor roots less than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may be cut, but damaged roots should be traced back and cleanly cut behind any split, cracked or damaged area as deemed necessary by the Project Arborist.
• Major roots greater than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may not be cut without approval of the Project Arborist.

Depending upon the type of improvement being proposed, bridging techniques or a new site design may need to be employed to protect the roots and the tree. • Cut faces, which will be exposed for more than 2-3 days, should be covered with dense burlap fabric and watered to maintain soil moisture at least on a daily basis (or possibly more frequently during summer months). If any native ground surface fabric within the protected zone must be removed for any reason, it should be replaced within 48 hours. • In cases where a permit has been approved for construction of a retaining wall(s) within the protected zone of a protected tree the applicant will be required to provide for immediate protection of exposed roots from moisture loss during the time prior to completion of the wall. The retaining wall within the protected zone of the protected tree should be constructed within 72 hours after completion of grading within the root protection zone.

General Construction Site Recommendations:
• A minimum 4-foot tall, brightly colored, synthetic fence should be installed around the limits of the work area or around outermost edge of the protected zone of trees that are designated for retention on-site. Encroachment into the fenced areas should be restricted to the minimum amount feasible and fencing should remain in place until all construction activities have ceased. The protected zone is defined as the “dripline” (which is an imaginary line that is drawn on the ground around the tree at the HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 776 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-3

outermost limit of the canopy) or in cases where construction is encroaching on the dripline of a retained tree, the protected zone is the portion of the tree’s dripline that is being protected. Fencing should be installed in accordance with an approved fencing plan prior to the commencement of any grading operations or such other time as determined by the review body.
• Signs should be installed on the protective fence in four equidistant locations around each individual tree. The size of the sign should be a minimum of two by two feet and contain the following language “Warning: This Fence Shall Not Be Removed or Relocated Without Written Authorization From *insert governing body*”. Protective fencing should remain in place throughout the entire construction period and should not be removed, relocated, taken down or otherwise modified without prior written authorization.
• All portions of permanent fencing that will encroach into the protected zone of a protected tree should be constructed using posts set no closer than ten feet on center.

Posts should be spaced in such a manner as to maximize the separation between the tree trunks and the posts in order to reduce impacts to the trees(s). • The fenced area should be kept clear of building materials, waste, and excess soil. • No digging, trenching, compaction, or other soil disturbance should be allowed in the fenced area.
• The storage of construction equipment or hazardous materials such as gasoline, oil, or other toxic chemicals should not be allowed in or adjacent to the fenced area. • Storage areas for equipment, soil, and construction materials as well as burn sites (if permitted), cement washout pits, and construction work zones should be kept away from protected trees and outside the fenced in area.
• Cable, chain, rope or signage should not be attached to retained trees. • Designated roads and parking areas should be established. All construction personnel should be restricted to driving and parking in designated areas. Discharge of exhaust from construction vehicles and equipment should not be allowed near the protected zone of trees.
• Grade changes should be avoided near fenced areas to the maximum extent possible. • No sprinkler or irrigation system should be installed in such a manner that sprays water or required trenching within the dripline of a protected tree. An above ground drip irrigation system is recommended. An independent low-flow drip irrigation system may be used for establishing drought tolerant plants within the protected zone of a protected tree. Irrigation should be gradually reduced and discontinued after a 2-year period.
• Landscaping beneath native oak trees may include non-plant materials such as bark mulch, wood chips, boulders, etc. Planting live material under protected native oak trees is generally discouraged and is not recommended within 6 feet of the trunk of a native oak tree with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 18 inches or less, or within 10 HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 777 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-4

feet of the trunk of a native oak tree with DBH of more than 18 inches. The only plant species which should be planted with the dripline of native oak trees are those which are tolerant of the natural, semi-arid environs of the tree(s).

Recommendations for Construction Activities in the Vicinity of Retained Trees:
• Any protected trees on site which require pruning should be pruned by an ISA Certified Arborist prior to the start of construction work. All pruning should be in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards, ANSI Standard 2133.1-2000 regarding safety practices, and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) “Tree Pruning Guidelines” and Best Management Practices. • Trenching within the dripline of retained trees should be avoided to the maximum extent practicable and kept a minimum distance of 10 times the diameter of the tree away from its trunk. If necessary, this trenching should be conducted using hand excavation or compressed air to reduce impacts to tree roots. Machine trenching should not be allowed within the dripline of retained trees. Trenching inside the dripline should be monitored by a certified arborist who may direct the construction crew to use hand tools rather than heavy equipment. Hand saws, pass-through pruners, shovels and trowels, burlap cloth, and water should be available at all times during trenching inside the dripline. If pipes must be installed closer to the tree than a distance of 10 times the diameter of the tree away from its trunk, they should be bored beneath the tree a minimum of 3 feet below the ground surface to reduce impacts to roots. • Excavation should also be minimized within the dripline of retained trees. Construction within the dripline of retained trees should be conducted in a manner that minimizes excavation and provides for the best preservation of roots as determined by the Project Arborist.
• If tree roots are severed outside of the fenced area, they should be severed cleanly and kept moist. All exposed roots outside of fenced areas should be covered with protective material during construction such as mulch or plywood sheets to reduce soil compaction. Protective material should be removed upon completion of construction activities.
• Construction activities involving soil disturbance should be avoided during hot, dry, weather and trees should be watered before, during, and after trenching and excavation within the dripline of retained trees to offset water loss due to cut roots. • Grading within the driplines of retained trees should be avoided wherever feasible. • Any removal of paving or structures (i.e. demolition) that occurs within the dripline of a protected tree should be done under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist. • No sign, ropes, cables (except those which may be installed by an ISA Certified Arborist to provide limb support) or any other items should be attached to the protected trees.

Small metallic numbering tags for the purpose of identification in preparing tree reports and inventories should be allowed.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 778 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-5

• No vehicles, construction equipment, mobile homes/office, supplies, materials or facilities should be driven, parked, stockpiled or located within driplines of protected trees.
• Drainage patterns on the site should not be modified so that water collects, stands or is diverted across the dripline of any protected tree.
• No trenching should be allowed within the driplines of protected trees, except as specifically approved by the Planning Department as set forth in the project’s Conditions of Approval and/or approved tree permit. If it is absolutely necessary to install underground utilities within the dripline of a protected tree the utilizing hand tools to avoid root injury under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist.

Recommendations for Protection of Trees Post-Construction:
• Post-construction inspections of the trees should be conducted by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker to determine if retained trees are stressed (e.g., water stress, nutrient stress) or damaged (e.g., broken branches, trunk damage). Appropriate corrective actions should be implemented as necessary. Such corrective actions may include remediation of severe soil compaction through vertical mulching or a similar technique, remedial pruning to repair damaged or broken limbs, application of mulch, application of root stimulant to encourage new root growth in trees that have a significant portion of their roots lost due to cutting or soil compaction, etc. • Aeration of soil by vertical mulching or similar technique should be implemented around retained trees to offset the impacts of soil compaction that has already occurred due to construction activities and other site uses.
• All trees that will be preserved following project construction should be periodically monitored by a qualified tree care professional for the life of the project. The project (i.e., homeowners association/property owner) should be responsible for providing for monitoring and ongoing care and maintenance of all preserved trees on the site.

HELIX
Environmental Planning

Page 779 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 780 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Drive
15164 Addendum to the 1000 Gibraltar Drive Final EIR

FCS
B.3 - Tree Survey Report Addendum

Page 781 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 782 of 1283 ends

Stringer Biological Consulting, Inc.

June 6, 2025

Todd Chandler | Development Manager
Panattoni Development Company, Inc.
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2040 | Sacramento, CA 95814
Office: 916.379.3105 |
[email protected]

Subject: Arborist Report Addendum for 1001 Gibraltar Drive, City of Milpitas, CA.

Mr. Chandler:

Stringer Biological Consulting, Inc. (SBC) conducted an arborist survey and prepared this Arborist Report Addendum for the property located at 1001 Gibraltar Drive in the City of Milpitas, California. An arborist report was previously prepared for the property by HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX) in 2019, under the supervision of SBC Principal Biologist/Arborist Stephen Stringer who was employed at HELIX at the time. The purpose of the arborist report addendum is to provide an updated inventory of trees on the property protected by the City of Milpitas.

Existing Conditions

Project Location and Site Description
The property is located at 1001 Gibraltar Drive in the City of Milpitas, California. The property consists of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel Number 08642033 and is approximately 30 acres in size. The approximate center of the property is at latitude 37°25’05.08” N and longitude 121°53’28.73” W (NAD 83) at an elevation of 45 feet above mean sea level.

The property contains a vacant corporate campus including office buildings and research/development facilities. The entire property was previously landscaped with a large number and variety of ornamental trees, the majority of which were smaller than 37 inches in circumference (HELIX 2019). Many of the ornamental trees in the landscaped areas around the buildings were no longer present at the time of the survey conducted in in May 2025 in support of this addendum report (See Results Section).

Regulatory Background and Arborist Report History

An arborist report was prepared for the property by HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc., dated April 1, 2019 (HELIX 2019). HELIX (2019) identified roughly 500 trees on the property including a total of 183

Page 783 of 1283 ends

1001 Gibraltar Drive Arborist Report Addendum Page 2 of 4 protected trees as defined by City code with a total circumference of 11,984.5 inches. Nine additional trees were identified that were within 1 inch of protected status.

Methods and Surveyor Qualifications

In support of this report, an arborist survey was conducted at the property on May 22-23, by SBC Principal Biologist/Arborist Stephen Stringer, M.S. with assistance from an SBC biological technician.

During the site visit, all of the trees on and overhanging the property were measured as well as assessed for health and structure and given an overall condition rating following the methodology described in HELIX 2019. All of the existing trees in Attachment B (Table B-1) of the HELIX report (HELIX 2019) were assessed. The tree inventory map from HELIX (2019) was used to locate trees on the property and numbered aluminum tree tags placed on the trees during the HELIX arborist survey were used for identification of each tree. The health assessment consisted of a rapid visual inspection of the trees from the ground based on the observed conditions at the time of the survey and did not include an in-depth health inspection of the crown or roots. As such, the health assessment is a general assessment of the health of each tree and is not intended to constitute a thorough analysis of the health/condition of the trees.

The circumference of each tree was measured at approximately 4.5 feet above grade using a U.S. Tape Company forester’s tape measure. For multi-trunked trees, the circumference of each trunk was measured and added. The drip line of each tree was measured with a tape measure and the height of each tree was visually estimated. The drip line is defined as “an area of the ground delineated by the vertical projection of the outside periphery of the crown area of a tree down to the ground surface.” Each tree’s drip line was determined by measuring the distance from the trunk to the outermost extent of the canopy. Each tree was then evaluated for health and structure and assigned a rating of 0 (dead), 1 (severe decline), 2 (declining), 3 (fair), 4 (good), or 5 (excellent). Notes such as irregularities, scars, or other growth characteristics or vigor indicators were recorded for all trees rated 3 or less.

Mr. Stringer is an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certified Arborist (WE-7129A) and holds a B.S. and M.S. Degree in Biology from California State University, Sacramento. Mr. Stringer has been a Certified Arborist since 2004 and has worked as a consulting arborist on hundreds of projects throughout California. He conducts arborist inventories, tree impact assessments, develops tree preservation and avoidance measures, and monitors work around trees during construction in compliance with project permits.

Results:

Current data for all of the protected trees remaining on and overhanging the site is included as a table in Attachment A, with previously inventoried trees that are no longer present noted as “removed” in the comments. A total of 98 trees large enough to qualify as protected trees according to the City of Milpitas code were present on or overhanging the property at the time of our survey in May 2025 and were alive. Six of the protected trees are sweetgum trees (Liquidambar styraciflua) along the northern property line that are large enough to qualify as protected trees that were not identified as protected trees in 2019. These six sweetgum trees are numbered 2000 to 2005 in Attachment A. Seven additional protected trees were present but dead. None of the other protected trees previously inventoried on the property were present at the time of our survey. Additionally, no trees were present with a circumference between 36 and 37 inches that may grow to become protected trees in the next 12-18 months. Representative photos are included in Attachment B.

Page 784 of 1283 ends

1001 Gibraltar Drive Arborist Page 3 of 4 A summary of the live protected trees on the property is included as Table 1. The majority of the protected trees are Shamel ash (71) and sweetgum (20), as well as 1 valley oak, 5 London plane trees, and 1 Chinese pistache.

Table 1: Summary of live protected trees
Common Name Scientific Name Count Total Circ. (in.)
Chinese pistache Pistacia chinensis 1 44
London plane tree Platanus x acerifolia 5 251
Shamel ash Fraxinus uhdei 71 6,009
Sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua 20 1,016.5
Valley oak Quercus lobata 1 187
Totals 98 7,507.5
*Includes trees with multiple trunks at 4.5 feet above ground, at least 1 of which was 37 inches or greater circumference; total is the sum of all trunks at 4.5 feet above ground. Dead trees are not included in this table.

The majority of the trees have declined since the survey in 2019, with the majority of the trees in fair condition versus the majority of the trees being in good condition in 2019 (HELIX 2019). No trees were rated as 5 (“Excellent”). A total of 16 trees were rated as 4 (“Good”), 54 trees were rated as 3 (“Fair”), 20 trees were rated as 2 (“Declining”), and 8 rated as 1 (“Severe Decline”). Criteria for rating the health and structure of trees are summarized in Attachment C. Many of the trees exhibited moderate to severe crown dieback, sparse canopy, and broken limbs. The most common structural issue was lean and 1- sided canopy development caused by shading from neighboring trees. Table 2 is a summary of trees rated as 2 (Declining) or 1 (Severe Decline).

Table 2: Trees rated as 2 (Declining) or 1 (Severe Decline) Tree # Condition Common Name Circ. (in.)
291 1 Shamel ash 48
611 1 Shamel ash 94
621 1 Shamel ash 73
680 1 Shamel ash 81
618 1 Sweetgum 37
701 1 Sweetgum 51
712 1 Sweetgum 50
715 1 Sweetgum 58
258 2 London plane tree 49
259 2 London plane tree 50
260 2 London plane tree 52
282 2 London plane tree 48
283 2 London plane tree 52
300 2 Shamel ash 91
601 2 Shamel ash 77
606 2 Shamel ash 82
620 2 Shamel ash 116

Page 785 of 1283 ends

1001 Gibraltar Drive Arborist Page 4 of 4 Tree # Condition Common Name Circ. (in.)
624 2 Shamel ash 110
698 2 Shamel ash 84
797 2 Shamel ash 51
807 2 Shamel ash 80.5
809 2 Shamel ash 67
821 2 Shamel ash 93
617 2 Sweetgum 47
708 2 Sweetgum 56
716 2 Sweetgum 52
816 2 Sweetgum 50
817 2 Sweetgum 58
Total 1,857.5

Summary and Recommendations:

SBC conducted an inventory of trees located at 1001 Gibraltar Drive that are protected by the City of Milpitas Code of Ordinances. A total of 98 trees on the property of sufficient size to quality as protected trees were inventoried and assessed. Seven additional protected trees were present but dead. This tree inventory and assessment is based on conditions at the time of the survey; site conditions and tree conditions are subject to change. Trees rated as 2 (Declining) or 1 (Severe Decline) are generally not suitable for retention on the property and could pose a hazard when the site is redeveloped due to the potential for trunk or limb failure. General recommendations for protection of trees during and after construction are provided in Attachment D.

Thank you for the opportunity to work on this project. If you need further information, please contact me at (916) 996-9374 or [email protected] to discuss the results of this report.

Sincerely,

Stephen Stringer, M.S.

Principal Biologist/ISA Certified Arborist WE-7129A

Attachments:

Attachment A – Arborist Survey Data
Attachment B – Representative Site Photos
Attachment C – Health and Structure Rating Criteria (From HELIX 2019) Attachment D – General Recommendations for Tree Protection (From HELIX 2019)

Page 786 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-1 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Project Name: 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA
Arborist Name: Stephen Stringer (WE-7129A)
Survey Date: May 22-23, 2025
________________________________________________________________________________________ Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
6 Coast live oak 80 Removed
38 Chinese fringetree 42 Removed
58 Spruce 58 Removed
65 Coast redwood 47 Removed
69 Coast redwood 58 Removed
71 Coast redwood 60 Removed
74 Coast redwood 58 Removed
77 Spruce 51 Removed
119 Coast live oak 54, 57 Removed
120 Chinese pistache 36.5 Removed
121 Chinese pistache 37 Removed
133 Chinese pistache 42 Removed
143 Coast live oak 81, 51,

Removed
148 London plane tree 60 Removed
149 Chinese fringetree 45 Removed
150 Chinese fringetree 42 Removed
151 Chinese fringetree 41 Removed
152 Chinese fringetree 38.5 Removed
157 Chinese fringetree 60 Removed
158 Chinese fringetree 40 Removed
163 Strawberry tree 45 Removed
194 Strawberry tree 50 Removed
195 Strawberry tree 43 Removed
197 Strawberry tree 53.5 Removed
198 Strawberry tree 48.5 Removed
199 Strawberry tree 56 Removed
218 Chinese fringetree 44.5 Removed
219 Spruce 54 Removed

Page 787 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-2 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
220 Spruce 60 Removed
221 Spruce 56 Removed
222 Spruce 59 Removed
228 Queen palm 41 Removed
237 Chinese fringetree 41.5 Removed
239 Chinese fringetree 53 Removed
240 Chinese fringetree 55.5 Removed
247 London plane tree 44.5 Removed
248 Chinese pistache 36.5 Removed
249 Chinese pistache 38 Removed
250 Chinese pistache 42 Removed
257 Chinese pistache 39 Removed
258 London plane tree 49 12 30 F-P F-P 2 Severe dieback 259 London plane tree 50 12 30 F-P F-P 2 Severe dieback 260 London plane tree 52 15 30 F-P F-P 2 Severe dieback 261 London plane tree 52.5 Removed
262 London plane tree 45 Removed
263 London plane tree 56.5 Removed
264 Chinese pistache 38 Removed
266 Chinese pistache 49 Removed
267 Chinese pistache 42.5 Removed
272 London plane tree 53 Removed
277 Shamel ash 65 Removed
278 Shamel ash 58 Removed
279 Shamel ash 45.5 Removed
282 London plane tree 48 12 35 F-P F-P 2 Severe dieback 283 London plane tree 52 20 35 F-P F-P 2 Leans; overloaded limbs; dieback
287 Shamel ash 85 Removed
288 Shamel ash 99.5 Removed
289 Shamel ash 90 25 55 F F 3 CDLs with included
bark
291 Shamel ash 48 12 20 P P 1 Topped; bent
leaders; crown
dieback

Page 788 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-3 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
293 Yellow birch 57.5 Removed
296 Shamel ash 94 25 50 F F 3 CDLs; dieback
297 Shamel ash 91.5 25 60 F F 3 1-sided; CDLs; BF
298 Shamel ash 81 30 55 F F 3 Leans; 1-sided; SC;
dieback
299 Shamel ash 79 20 60 F F 3 1-sided; CDLs
300 Shamel ash 91 20 55 F-P P 2 CL; SC; dieback
601 Shamel ash 77 25 60 F-P P 2 Leans; 1-sided; SC;
dieback
603 Plum 43, 26.5 Removed
604 Shamel ash 87 25 50 F F 3 Leans; CDLs with
included bark
605 Shamel ash 82.5 25 50 F P 3 Crossing CDLs; fused
bark; ESR; IB
606 Shamel ash 82 25 50 F P 2 Light lean; CDLs with
included bark; SC
607 Shamel ash 75 25 50 F F 3 Crossing CDLs with
fused bark; SC
608 Shamel ash 82 25 50 F F 3 Leans; crossing CDLs
with fused bark
609 Shamel ash 78 25 50 F F 3 Leans; roots
crowded by sidewalk
611 Shamel ash 94 30 40 P P 1 SC; severe dieback;
broken limbs
612 Shamel ash 62.5 30 40 F F 3 SC; epicormic roots
crowded by sidewalk
614 Shamel ash 139 30 50 F-G F 4 Trunk wound with
decay
615 Shamel ash 89 30 50 F F 3 Slight lean; SC
616 Sweetgum 49 12 25 F F 3 Slight lean; SC
617 Sweetgum 47 15 25 F-P F 2 Moderate to severe
dieback
618 Sweetgum 37 12 15 P P 1 Prior failure
619 Sweetgum 57 15 35 F P 3 Leans; 1-sided; bend
in trunk; dieback
620 Shamel ash 116 35 50 F-P P 2 Leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb;
severe dieback

Page 789 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-4 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
621 Shamel ash 73 25 45 P P 1 SC; dieback; fungal
fruiting bodies at
roots
623 Shamel ash 84 25 50 F F 3 Broken limbs
624 Shamel ash 110 30 50 F-P F 2 CL; IB; SC; dieback
636 Chinese fringetree 39.5 Removed
640 Zelkova 42 Removed
643 Zelkova 42 Removed
644 Zelkova 48 Removed
649 Zelkova 49 Removed
652 Zelkova 53 Removed
661 Zelkova 41 Removed
674 Shamel ash 68.5 Removed
676 Shamel ash 77 Removed
677 Shamel ash 68 25 40 F F 3 SC; dieback
678 Shamel ash 90 30 50 F F 3 IB
679 Shamel ash 76 30 50 F F 3 1-sided; dieback
680 Shamel ash 81 30 50 F-P P 1 Slight lean; 1-sided;
dieback; SC;
epicormics
681 Shamel ash 84 20 50 F F 3 SC
690 Sweetgum 36 Removed
693 Sweetgum 39.5 0 Dead
694 Sweetgum 55.5 Removed
695 Sweetgum 55 Removed
696 Shamel ash 68 15 40 F F 3 SC; dieback
697 Shamel ash 66.5 Removed
698 Shamel ash 84 20 45 F-P P 2 DBF; dieback
699 Shamel ash 97 25 45 G G 4 Cabled; SC; dieback;
BF; DBF; CDLs; fused
bark
700 Shamel ash 79.5 20 45 F F 3 IB; leans; 1-sided
701 Sweetgum 51 12 45 P P 1 Severe dieback
702 Sweetgum 45 0 Dead
704 Sweetgum 41.5 0 Dead

Page 790 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-5 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
705 Sweetgum 53 0 Dead
706 Shamel ash 89 25 50 G F 4 IB
707 Shamel ash 82 16 50 F F 3 Leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb;
CDL; BF
708 Sweetgum 56 20 45 F-P P 2 Severe crown
dieback
709 Sweetgum 59 12 40 F P 3 SC; DBF; dieback
710 Sweetgum Removed
711 Sweetgum 65 0 Dead
712 Sweetgum 63.5 20 30 P P 1 Leans; 1-sided; OPC;
DBF; severe dieback,
nearly dead
713 Shamel ash 113 25 50 F F 3 Dieback; CDLs with
IB; decay
714 Shamel ash 70 Removed
715 Sweetgum 63 15 35 P P 1 IB; severe dieback
716 Sweetgum 52 12 40 P P 2 DBF; severe dieback
722 Sweetgum 36 Removed
724 Sweetgum 36 Removed
726 Chinese fringetree 37 Removed
728 Sweetgum 54 Removed
734 Shamel ash 49.5 Removed
735 Shamel ash 74 15 30 F F 3 Dieback
736 Chinese pistache 36.5 Removed
737 Chinese pistache 44.5 Removed
746 Chinese pistache 39 Removed
754 Chinese pistache 41 Removed
756 Chinese pistache 36 Removed
757 Chinese pistache 37.5 Removed
759 Chinese pistache 36 Removed
762 Chinese pistache 37 Removed
766 Shamel ash 61 15 30 F F 3 CDL with IB
767 Shamel ash 48 10 20 F F 3 Dieback; SC
768 Shamel ash 52 10 25 G G 4

Page 791 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-6 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
769 Shamel ash 39 16 25 F F 3 Dieback
772 Chinese pistache 38.5 Removed
774 Chinese pistache 46 Removed
787 Chinese pistache 44 15 20 F F 3 Leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb;
dieback
788 Chinese pistache 50.5 0 Dead
789 Sweetgum 48.5 0 Dead
790 Shamel ash 48 15 35 F F 3 1-sided; SC
792 Shamel ash 51 15 30 F-P P 2 1-sided, dieback
793 Shamel ash 87 20 40 F-G F 4 Several pruning cuts
794 Shamel ash 85.5 25 40 F F 4 1-sided; SC; CL
795 Shamel ash 82 25 40 F F 3 Leans; overloaded
limbs; SC; dieback
802 Shamel ash 118 20 40 G G 4 OPC; epicormics
803 Shamel ash 104 20 50 F P 3 Slight lean; split
limbs; DBF
804 Shamel ash 78 25 55 F F 3 Dieback; MD to roots
805 Shamel ash 89 30 55 F F 3 Slight lean; DBF;
epicormics
806 Shamel ash 91 20 50 F F 3 IB; SC
807 Shamel ash 80.5 20 50 F P 2 Dieback
808 Shamel ash 95 20 50 F F 3 SC; dieback
809 Shamel ash 67 20 50 F-P F 2 SC; dieback
810 Shamel ash 81 30 50 F P 3 Severe lean; 1-sided;
SC
811 Shamel ash 124 20 50 F F 3 Slight lean; CDLs
with fused bark; BF;
SC
813 Shamel ash 107.5 Removed
814 Shamel ash Removed
815 Sweetgum 61 15 30 F F 3 Dieback
816 Sweetgum 50 15 30 F-P P 2 Leans; 1-sided; DBF;
dieback
817 Sweetgum 58 12 30 F P 2 Large decayed
wound in trunk

Page 792 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-7 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
818 Shamel ash 98.5 20 45 G F 4 IB
819 Shamel ash 64 15 40 F F 3 Dieback; BF
820 Shamel ash 53.5 15 40 F F 3 IB; one-sided;
dieback; SC
821 Shamel ash 93 25 50 F P 2 Leans; 1-sided;
overloaded limb; BF
822 Shamel ash 111.5 25 55 G F 4 Leans; IB; CL
823 Shamel ash 86 18 50 F P 3 Leans; CDLs with IB
884 Sweetgum 46.5 10 40 F F 3 SC
899 Shamel ash 73 Removed
933 Strawberry tree 49 Removed
938 Chinese pistache 41.5 Removed
948 London plane tree 42.5 Removed
949 London plane tree 69 Removed
950 London plane tree 60.5 Removed
992 Shamel ash 71 20 40 F-G F 4 Slight lean;
epicormics
993 Shamel ash 109 20 40 F-G F 4 Several old pruning
t 994 Shamel ash 86.5 25 40 F F 3 Leans; 1-sided; SC
995 Shamel ash 97 20 45 G G 4
997 Shamel ash 99.5 18 40 F-G F 4 Overloaded limb; IB
998 Valley oak 187 25 40 F F 3 Cabled; overloaded
limb; OPC; dieback
1000 Shamel ash 75 18 40 F-G F 3 Slight lean; SC
1003 Shamel ash 83 35 40 F F 3 Leans; 1-sided; SC;
dieback
1004 Shamel ash 91 30 50 F F 3 SC; lean
1008 Chinese fringetree 42 Removed
1011 Shamel ash 113.5 30 50 F P 4 Leans; 1-sided; decay 1012 Yellow birch 36.5 Removed
1014 Shamel ash 95 25 50 F P 3 Pruning cuts;
epicormics
1015 Shamel ash 110 20 50 F F 3 1-sided; MD; IB
1025 Strawberry tree 50 Removed
2000 Sweetgum 52.5 17 60 F-G G 4

Page 793 of 1283 ends

Attachment A – Tree Table

Arborist Report Addendum A-8 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025 Tag # Species Circ.
(in)
Dripline
(ft)
Height
(ft)
Health1 Struct.1 Rating2 Notes3
2001 Sweetgum 43 15 50 F-G G 4
2002 Sweetgum 43 15 50 F F 3 SC
2003 Sweetgum 41 15 50 F F 3 SC
2004 Sweetgum 46 15 50 F F 3 SC
2005 Sweetgum 41 10 50 F F 3 SC
Shaded lines are trees rooted on the street side of the sidewalk = possible street trees Gray font indicates trees less than, but within 1 inch of, 37 inches circumference 1G=Good; F-G =Fair to Good; F=Fair; F-P=Fair to Poor; P=Poor 20=dead; 1=severely declining; 2=declining – may die within 5 years; 3=fair – health or structural issues but likely to survive more than 5 years; 4=good; 5=excellent
3BF=branch failures; CDL=co-dominant leaders; CL=crossing limbs; DBF=decayed branch failures; EG=epicormic growth; ESR=exposed structural roots; IB=included bark; MD=mechanical damage; OPC=old pruning cuts; SC=sparse canopy; 1-sided=asymmetrical canopy development

Page 794 of 1283 ends

Attachment B. Site Photos
Arborist Report Addendum B-1 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025

Photo 1. View of buildings and parking areas in the northeast portion of the site. Some trees have been removed from parking lot islands and around the vacant buildings.

Photo 2. View from the east side of the property looking north along South Milpitas Blvd. showing a dead tree (693) that was previously considered to be a protected tree and a row of Shamel Ash (678-681).

Page 795 of 1283 ends

Attachment B. Site Photos
Arborist Report Addendum B-2 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025

Photo 3. View of landscaped areas in the southern portion of the property where some protected trees inventoried in 2019 (58, 65, 69, 71, 74, and 77) are no longer present.

Photo 4. View of parking areas in the southeast portion of the site. Some trees have been removed from parking lot islands, while some remain.

Page 796 of 1283 ends

Attachment B. Site Photos
Arborist Report Addendum B-3 1001 Gibraltar Drive June 6, 2025

Photo 5. View of trees remaining in landscaping within the parking areas in the southern portion of the site.

Photo 6. View along Gibraltar Drive in the southern portion of the site showing a row of Shamel ash and sweetgum trees (815-823) along Gibraltar Drive and smaller trees within the parking areas.

Page 797 of 1283 ends

Attachment C
The following tables provide summaries of the criteria used for rating the health and structure of trees in the survey. Overall tree ratings were based on the individual ratings for health and structure.

Health
Health is an indication of the overall vigor and vitality of the tree expressed as a rating of Good, Fair,
or Poor. Ratings for health were based on the criteria in Table C-1.

Table C-1. Criteria for Rating Tree Health
Good Little or no Evidence of Stress, Disease, Infestation, or Nutrient Deficiency.

Table C-2. Criteria for Rating Tree Structure
Good Low Potential for Failure. No wounds, cavities, decay, or indications of hollowness evident in the root crown, trunk, or major limbs; no exposed anchor roots or circling roots; no codominant branching or multiple trunk attachments; no C-1

Page 798 of 1283 ends

C-2

Page 799 of 1283 ends

Attachment D
General Protection Guidelines for Trees Planned for Preservation To preve
nt soil compaction:
• 6-8 inches of wood chips should be spread inside the dripline of trees where temporary construction traffic or staging would occur. Chips should be removed after project completion, or the depth reduced to no more than 4 inches. Alternatively, bridging root areas with steel plates would reduce damage to roots within construction traffic areas. o A circle with a radius measurement from the trunk of the tree to the tip of its longest limb, plus one foot, constitutes the critical root zone protection area of each protected tree. Limbs must not be cut back in order to change the dripline.

D-1

Page 800 of 1283 ends

• When f
ill materials are deemed necessary on two or three sides of a tree it is critical to provide for drainage away from the critical root zone area of the tree (particularly when considering heavy winter rainfalls). Overland releases and subterranean drains dug outside the critical root zone area and tied directly to the main storm drain system are two options.
• The construction of impervious surfaces within the dripline of a protected tree should be minimized. When necessary, a piped aeration system should be installed under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist.
• Preservation devices such as aeration systems, tree wells, drains, special paving and cabling systems must be installed in conformance with approved plans and certified by the Project Arborist.
• To discourage rodents, fill the tree well with enough coarse gravel to cover the ends of the lines opening into the well. Also fill the upright bell tile and cover with a screen or grill.
• Minor roots less than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may be cut, but damaged roots should be traced back and cleanly cut behind any split, cracked or damaged area as deemed necessary by the Project Arborist.
• Major roots greater than one inch in diameter encountered during approved excavation and/or grading activities may not be cut without approval of the Project Arborist.

Page 801 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-3 outermo
st limit of the canopy) or in cases where construction is encroaching on the dripline of a retained tree, the protected zone is the portion of the tree’s dripline that is being protected. Fencing should be installed in accordance with an approved fencing plan prior to the commencement of any grading operations or such other time as determined by the review body.
• Signs should be installed on the protective fence in four equidistant locations around each individual tree. The size of the sign should be a minimum of two by two feet and contain the following language “Warning: This Fence Shall Not Be Removed or Relocated Without Written Authorization From *insert governing body*”. Protective fencing should remain in place throughout the entire construction period and should not be removed, relocated, taken down or otherwise modified without prior written authorization.
• All portions of permanent fencing that will encroach into the protected zone of a protected tree should be constructed using posts set no closer than ten feet on center.

Page 802 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-4 feet of the tr
unk of a native oak tree with DBH of more than 18 inches. The only plant species which should be planted with the dripline of native oak trees are those which are tolerant of the natural, semi-arid environs of the tree(s).

Small metallic numbering tags for the purpose of identification in preparing tree reports and inventories should be allowed.

D-4

Page 803 of 1283 ends

Tree Survey at 1001 Gibraltar Drive, Milpitas, CA | April 1, 2019 | Attachment E E-5 • No vehi
cles, construction equipment, mobile homes/office, supplies, materials or facilities should be driven, parked, stockpiled or located within driplines of protected trees.
• Drainage patterns on the site should not be modified so that water collects, stands or is diverted across the dripline of any protected tree.
• No trenching should be allowed within the driplines of protected trees, except as specifically approved by the Planning Department as set forth in the project’s Conditions of Approval and/or approved tree permit. If it is absolutely necessary to install underground utilities within the dripline of a protected tree the utilizing hand tools to avoid root injury under the direct supervision of the Project Arborist.

D-5

Page 804 of 1283 ends

1000 Gibraltar Drive
15164 Addendum to the 1000 Gibraltar Drive Final EIR

FCS
Appendix C:

Cultural Resources Supporting
Information

Page 805 of 1283 ends

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Page 806 of 1283 ends