Santa Cruz City Council
March 20, 2023

CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
809 Center Street
Santa Cruz, California 95060

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Special Meeting – March 20, 2023
6:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING, ZOOM/COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The meeting may be viewed remotely, using any of the following sources:
 Click on Zoom link (no time delay): https://zoom.us/j/94684401344  Online at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council/council-meetings  Online at Watch – Community Television of Santa Cruz County  Comcast Channel 25
Or: Call any of the numbers below. If one is busy, try the next one.  1-833-548-0276 (Toll Free)
 1-833-548-0282 (Toll Free)
 1-877-853-5247 (Toll Free)
 1-669-900-9128
 Enter the meeting ID number: 946 8440 1344
 When prompted for a Participant ID, press #.
 Press *9 on your phone to “raise your hand” when the Mayor calls for public comment.  It will be your turn to speak when the Mayor calls on you. Press *6 to unmute yourself.

The timer will then be set.

Correspondence to be included in the agenda packet must be received by 10:00 am on Monday, March 20th
PLEASE NOTE:

Requests for extra speaking time must be made by 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, March 19th by emailing the Mayor and the City Clerk. Approval will be confirmed via email.
[email protected] [email protected]
The City of Santa Cruz does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. Out of consideration for people with chemical sensitivities we ask that you attend fragrance free. Upon request, the agenda can be provided in a format to accommodate special needs. Additionally, if you wish to attend this public meeting and will require assistance such as an interpreter for American Sign Language, Spanish, or other special equipment, please call the City Clerk’s Department at 420-5030 at least five days in advance so that we can arrange for such special assistance, or email [email protected]. The Cal-Relay system number: 1-800-735-2922.

Si desea asistir a esta reunión pública y necesita ayuda - como un intérprete de lenguaje de señas americano, español u otro equipo especial - favor de llamar al Departamento de la Secretaría de la Ciudad al 420-5030 al menos cinco días antes para que podamos coordinar dicha asistencia especial o envié un correo electrónico a [email protected]. El número del sistema Cal-Relay es: 1-800-735-2922.
3/20/2023 City Council Special Meeting 2
Agenda and Agenda Packet Materials: The City Council agenda and the complete agenda packet containing public records, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, are available for review on the City’s website:
www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council-meetings and at the Office of the City Clerk located at 809 Center Street, Room 9, Santa Cruz, California, during normal business hours.

Agenda Materials Submitted after Publication of the Agenda Packet: Pursuant to Government Code §54957.5, public records related to an open session agenda item submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available at the same time they are distributed or made available to the legislative body on the City’s website at: www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-council-meetings and are also available for public inspection at the Office of the City Clerk, 809 Center Street Room 9, Santa Cruz, California, during normal business hours, and at the council meeting.

Need more information? Contact the City Clerk’s office at 831-420-5030.

Call to Order
Roll Call
Public Hearing

1. Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Slope Variance, and Watercourse Variance to Construct Segments 8 and 9 of the Coastal Rail Trail, a 2.2-Mile Bicycle and Pedestrian System Extending Along the Railroad Corridor (Owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission) from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue Roundabout on the West, to the Eastern Side of 17th Avenue on the East, and Excluding the Recently-Constructed San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge Improvements (Environmental Review: Environmental Impact Report) (PL)
Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
2) Adopt a resolution adopting Findings of Fact, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and a Statement of Overriding Conditions; and
3) Adopt a resolution approving the Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit, Slope Variance, and Watercourse Variance.

Adjournment
City Council

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 03/17/2023
AGENDA OF: 03/20/2023
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Community Development
SUBJECT: Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Slope Variance, and Watercourse Variance to Construct Segments 8 and 9 of the Coastal Rail Trail, a 2.2-Mile Bicycle and Pedestrian System Extending Along the Railroad Corridor (Owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission) from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue Roundabout on the West, to the Eastern Side of 17th Avenue on the East, and Excluding the RecentlyConstructed San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge Improvements (Environmental Review: Environmental Impact Report) (PL) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Adopt a resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and 2) Adopt a resolution adopting Findings of Fact, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), and a Statement of Overriding Conditions; and
3) Adopt a resolution approving the Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit, Slope Variance, and Watercourse Variance.

BACKGROUND: The project requests several entitlements, including a Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Slope Variance, and Watercourse Variance to allow development of Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9, one element of the overall 32-mile Coastal Rail Trail that, once constructed, will traverse the entire coastline of Santa Cruz County and comprise the spine, or primary alignment, of the 50-mile Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network (MBSST), a bicycle and pedestrian transportation facility intended to promote appreciation for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. The proposed multi-use trail would extend from the Wharf Roundabout (intersection of Pacific Avenue and Beach Street), located within City limits, to 17th Avenue, located within the jurisdiction of Santa Cruz County.

The “Proposed Project: Trail next to Rail line (Ultimate Trail Configuration)” is the recommended design and would encompass the following general features:
• Segment 8: Improvement of existing bicycle pathway (“bikeway”) and pedestrian sidewalk

1.1 • Segment 9: Construction of a new 12-foot-wide multi-use trail placed on the inland side of existing railroad tracks along its westerly extent, crossing the railroad tracks and then continuing on the coastal side along its easterly extent Development of the proposed project would align with the provisions of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Network Master Plan (Master Plan), including the following:

1. Provide a continuous public trail with continuity in design along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County (Master Plan objective 1.1)

2. Develop the trail so future rail transportation service along the corridor is not precluded (Master Plan Policy 1.2.4)

3. Maximize ocean views and scenic coastal vistas along a coastal alignment for experiencing and interpreting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (“sanctuary”), coastal environment, local history, and affected communities (Master Plan Policy 1.1.2 and 1.1.4, objective 2.1)

4. Maximize safety and serenity for experiencing and interpreting the sanctuary and landscapes by providing a trail separate from roadway vehicle traffic (Master Plan Goal 1)

5. Minimize trail impacts to private lands, including agricultural, residential, and other land uses (Master Plan Objective 1.5)

6. Minimize trail impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plant and animal species (Master Plan Objective 1.4, Policy 1.4.1)

7. Comply with requirements of local, state, and federal agencies with jurisdiction (Master Plan Policy 1.4.2 and 1.4.4)
On March 3, 2023, following the March 2 Planning Commission hearing, City Councilmember Sonja Brunner noticed the City Clerk of her intent to advance the proposed Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8, 9 project to review by the City Council at a Special Meeting of March 20, 2023, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 24.04.175. Municipal Code Section 24.04.175 authorizes any member of the City Council to direct that any permit application processed pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance be referred to the Council for consideration and final action. The City Council will therefore consider the decision of the Planning Commission and render anew a decision regarding the totality of the project (de novo).

Planning Commission Hearing
On March 2, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing, during which the Commission accepted the staff report and considered the proposed project. During the hearing, staff described the two options to development of the project, both reviewed at an equal level of detail in the EIR, including the “Ultimate Trail Configuration: Trail Next to Rail Line” approach and three-part phased “Optional First Phase: Trail on the Rail line (Interim Trail)” approach and underscored that staff recommended approval of the Ultimate Trail Configuration, the preferred approach, as the environmentally superior option requiring one period of construction instead of three, with more certainty regarding overall construction timeframe (without extended duration between periods of construction) and likely lower overall cost. At that hearing, the Commission confirmed that no active rail activity currently occurs on the existing Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line within City limits and received comments from members of the public.

During the public comment period, members of the public expressed both concern and support for the project, and provided feedback related to the impacts of proposed tree removal, necessary width

1.2 of the proposed multi-use trail, cost of the project, the reduction in number of Vehicle Miles Traveled that could be achieved with operation of the trail, and potential alternative design option to eliminate the need for retention of the existing tracks, among others. The Planning Commission asked questions and expressed support for the project as proposed, highlighting the scope of public outreach conducted to date, degree of effort and interagency coordination exercised, and multitude of benefits associated with the project, emphasizing its status as a landmark project of generational, long-range significance.

Following discussion, Commissioner Dawson suggested an addition to the recommended conditions of approval, introducing the following for Commission consideration:

Prior to installing permanent pavement markings and accompanying signing, the City shall monitor bicycle/motor vehicle interactions after the new dual bike lane/right turn lane on Murray Street is in use during high use periods to determine the most effective permanent measures to install to prevent bicycle/motor vehicle conflict.

Commissioner Mesiti-Miller expressed concern regarding the practicality of implementation of the proposed condition and asked staff for clarification about the potential for alteration of striping, if necessary, once delineated. The Director of Public Works described standard applications of pavement markings corresponding to travel patterns and relayed that limited options remain available for modification of pavement markings to correspond to travel behavior, once such markings have been established. The Commission discussed the implications for pedestrian and bicyclist safety associated with the proposed condition of approval in light of preparation of plans by professional engineers with expertise in design of infrastructure responsive to travel patterns.

After brief dialog, Commissioner Dawson withdrew the condition from further consideration but requested that staff implement circulation design to respond to travel behavior of pedestrians and cyclists to the degree possible.

Overall, the Commissioners expressed enthusiasm and anticipation for the proposed project, and, following brief deliberation, voted unanimously (6-0-1, Commissioner Maxwell absent) to certify the project EIR, approve the proposed project entitlements, and adopt the Findings of Fact pursuant to CEQA, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, providing full endorsement of the project.

Draft minutes of the March 2, 2023 Planning Commission hearing are included as an attachment to this report.

DISCUSSION: For a thorough description and discussion of the proposed project, please refer to the Planning Commission staff report dated March 2, 2023 and associated documents, available via link:
https://ecm.cityofsantacruz.com/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/ViewMeeting?id=2079&docty pe=1
The report includes discussion of the improvements included in the Ultimate Trail Configuration beginning on page 11; necessary entitlements on page 19; and content of the Environmental Impact Report and associated documents prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act on page 27 and subsequent pages. No new topics were raised during the March 2, 2023 Planning Commission hearing which require further discussion.

Health in all Policies (HiAP)

1.3 HiAP is a collaborative approach to improving the health of all people by incorporating health considerations into decision-making across sectors and policy areas. HiAP is based on 3 pillars:
equity, public health, and sustainability. The goal of HiAP is to ensure that all decision-makers are informed about the health, equity, and sustainability impacts of various policy options during the policy development process. The project supports the pillar of equity by providing a multi-use bicycle and pedestrian transportation facility accommodating use by residents and visitors of all ages and levels of mobility, including the disabled, to include improvements to existing pathways and new infrastructure, such as viaducts and bridges, enhanced by new signage, lighting, and similar improvements, providing an equitable and sustainable alternative to coastal access for pedestrians, bicyclists and the disabled in close proximity to surrounding public transportation, commercial goods and services, and recreational areas. The development of the proposed uses along the Rail Trail Corridor, an attractive coastal destination, encourages a sustainable and healthy lifestyle by promoting alternative forms of transportation, including travel by foot and by bicycle, reducing transportation-related energy use, emission of greenhouse gases, and Vehicle Miles Traveled. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with the three pillars of the HiAP and is recommended as an efficient use of the land.

Public Correspondence
The subject application has elicited much correspondence, including expressions of concern and support. Public correspondence has been attached to this report and included in the public record for the project.

SUMMARY
Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 will respectively constitute the fourth and fifth sections of the Monterey Bay Scenic Sanctuary Trail network to be permitted in the City. The proposed scope of work will provide for continuity with the previously-approved Segment 7 of the Rail-Trail network and the constructed San Lorenzo Trestle Bridge crossing. Segments 8 and 9 will maximize safe and convenient opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian travel, separated from roadway vehicular traffic, while providing connectivity to existing local and regional bicycle and pedestrian facilities and integrating ideal start and end points from adjacent neighborhoods. Trail access along the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary will enhance appreciation, understanding, and protection of the Sanctuary while promoting awareness of the trail, including its opportunities and user responsibilities, while reducing transportation-related energy use and emission of greenhouse gases. This project will provide an equitable and sustainable alternative to coastal access for pedestrians, bicyclists and the disabled.

The project site lies along an established rail corridor, a linear conveyance path currently developed for rail service. The preferred approach, the “Ultimate Trail Configuration (Trail Next to Rail Line)” would host a range of access and travel options for pedestrians, bicyclists, nature enthusiasts, and others, while minimizing potential conflict between dissimilar land uses through separation of the rail line from trail but offering flexibility for maintenance of continued rail service, in keeping with the intent of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan. The project would additionally advance fulfillment of the vision of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan, which, when complete, will form a continuous and separated bicycle/pedestrian path spanning the entire 32-mile length of the County, fostering access to the coast, cultivating in trail users

1.4 a deeper appreciation for the ocean, and encouraging long-term community environmental protection efforts and creating a lasting amenity for area residents and visitors.

FISCAL IMPACT: Should the City Council certify the EIR and adopt the Findings of Fact, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations and grant approval of the Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Variance, and Watercourse Variance, actions necessary for full entitlement of the Coastal Rail-Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project (CP22-0118), the approved Active Transportation Program grant funding will become available for financing of the Project. The project, if approved by the City Council, will also enhance a recreational and transportation amenity in the City and generate additional pedestrian and bicyclist traffic to existing establishments, thereby contributing to increased property tax and potentially increased sales tax revenue to the City.

Prepared By:

Timothy Maier
Senior Planner
Submitted By:

Lee Butler
Director of Planning and
Community Development
Approved By:

Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Draft Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report

2. Draft Resolution adopting the Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

3. Draft Resolution, including Findings and Conditions of Approval

4. Errata to Final EIR

5. Councilmember Brunner’s Email Dated Mach 3, 2023 Requesting Council Review of Item

6. Schematic Project Plans, Dated 9/21/22 and 7/22/22

7. Santa Cruz Rail Trail Arts Master Plan

8. March 2, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Draft Minutes

9. Public correspondence
Online links:

1. Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report Volumes which together constitute the project EIR (available on City website at http://www.cityofsantacruz.com/CEQA under the two “Rail Trail Segments 8 & 9” headings)

2. Link to Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated March 2, 2023:
https://ecm.cityofsantacruz.com/OnBaseAgendaOnline/Meetings/ViewMeeting?id=2079 &doctype=1

1.5 RESOLUTION NO. ____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ CERTIFYING

THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE COASTAL RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 AND 9 PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz (“City”), in coordination with the County of Santa Cruz (“County”) and the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (“RTC”), proposes to construct the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project (“Project”), along the RTCowned rail corridor that generally parallels the coastline in central Santa Cruz County; and WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City prepared and circulated a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) for a 30- day public review and comment period starting on September 14, 2021, and ending on October 15, 2021; and
WHEREAS, a public scoping meeting was held on October 6, 2021 to receive comments regarding the scope of analysis of the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, thereafter, the City directed the preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project pursuant to and in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA” or the “Act”) as set forth at Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was circulated for a duly noticed 53-day public review period from September 23, 2022 to November 14, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR informed the public of the details of the City’s proposed Project, informed the public of the City’s efforts in addressing the environmental effects and adopting feasible mitigation measures associated with the Project, and invited the public to examine the Draft EIR in support of such findings; and
WHEREAS, the City received both written and oral comments on the Draft EIR during the public review period from individuals, organizations and public entities; and WHEREAS, upon review of these comment letters, City staff determined that none of them provided any basis for identifying any significant new information that would require substantial revisions or recirculation of some or all of the Draft EIR pursuant to section 15088.5, subdivision (a), of the CEQA Guidelines (found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations); and WHEREAS, the City directed the preparation of the Final EIR to respond to such comments in accordance with the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City’s Final EIR and all accompanying documents (attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein) were made available to the public on January 23, 2023; and

1.6 RESOLUTION NO.

WHEREAS, the City’s Final EIR consists of the NOP, the Draft EIR, all written and oral comments received in regard to the Draft EIR during the public review period, all responses prepared to the written and oral comments received in regard thereto, text revisions, errata, appendices, and other accompanying documents which are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth therein, in accordance with the provisions of CEQA, including, but not limited to Section 21167.6 of the Public Resources Code; and
WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by City pursuant to this Resolution are based on the City’s record of proceedings for the Project, including the oral and written evidence presented to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City finds the Final EIR to be legally and factually adequate and complete for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and WHEREAS, on March 2, 2023, at a duly-noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission, as the decision-making body on the Project, noted its review of the Final EIR in its entirety and determined that the document reflects the City’s independent judgment; and WHEREAS, on March 3, 2023, City Councilmember Sonja Brunner advanced review of the project to the City Council at a Special Meeting of March 20, 2023, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 24.04.175; and
WHEREAS, on March 20, 2023, at a duly-noticed public hearing, the City Council, as the final decision-making body on the Project, after reviewing the Final EIR in its entirety, has determined that the document reflects the City’s independent judgment; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz:

SECTION 1: The above recitals are true and correct and hereby incorporated as substantive findings of this Resolution.

SECTION 2: The City hereby certifies that (1) the Final EIR is accurate, complete and has been prepared in accordance with all requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and local procedures adopted pursuant thereto; (2) the Final EIR was presented to the City, which has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR and the rest of the record prior to considering adoption of the Project, and (3) the Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis, as required by Public Resources Code Section 21082.1.

1.7 RESOLUTION NO.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of March 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED:
__________________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: ________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

1.8 RESOLUTION NO. ____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ ADOPTING

FINDINGS OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR SEGMENTS 8 AND 9

OF THE COASTAL RAIL TRAIL PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Cruz (“City”), by adoption of Resolution No. ___, has certified the Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for the proposed Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project (“Project”), which consists of the following: the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), text changes to the Draft EIR, all comments received on the Draft EIR, responses to those comments, errata, appendices, and other accompanying documents incorporated by reference as if fully set forth therein; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR identified certain significant effects on the environment that, absent the adoption of mitigation measures, would be caused by the construction and operation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City is required, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091 (found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations), to adopt all feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that can substantially lessen or avoid any significant project-related environmental effects; and
WHEREAS, as demonstrated by the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, the Project will cause a number of significant environmental effects or impacts, not all of which can be rendered less-than-significant through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subdivision (a), to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program to ensure that the mitigation measures adopted by the City are carried out; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the City has studied the proposed Project and the Final EIR and considered all public comments on the Project; and
WHEREAS, all the Findings and conclusions made by the City pursuant to this Resolution are based upon the oral and written evidence contained in the whole record and are not based solely on the information provided in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the certified Final EIR has been determined by the City to be legally and factually adequate and complete for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and

1.9 WHEREAS, none of the comments made during the public review period, the oral or written testimony presented during the public hearings on the Project, or other information presented to the City on the Project and the EIR have produced significant new information requiring recirculation of the EIR under CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5, subdivision (a); and WHEREAS, the City has determined it is appropriate to approve both the Project as presented and recommended in the Staff Report for the Project and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, despite the fact that the Project will cause some significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, because in the judgment of the City all, and any, of the Project’s individual benefits independently, outweigh and override its environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ:

SECTION 1: The recitals set forth above are true and correct and hereby incorporated as substantive findings of this Resolution.

SECTION 2: The City has considered the Final EIR, all staff reports pertaining to the Project, and all other pertinent documents in the administrative record of proceedings relating to the Project.

SECTION 3: The City, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, finds that the proposed mitigation measures as set forth in Exhibits A and B are feasible, and will therefore become binding upon the City when the City Council approves the Project (see Section 5 below). The City hereby adopts the CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 4: The City hereby adopts, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subdivision (a), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contained in the Final EIR, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. The City further determines that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is designed to ensure that, during the implementation of the Project, the City and any other responsible parties will implement the components of the Project and comply with the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

SECTION 5: The City hereby approves the Project as presented and recommended in the accompanying Staff Report
SECTION 6: The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the Findings set forth in this Resolution and attached hereto within Exhibit A have been based are located at the City of Santa Cruz City Hall, Public Works Department, 809 Center St., Room 201, Santa Cruz, California 95060, and online, at

1.10 https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/coastalrailtrail. The custodian for these records is Nathan Nguyen, P.E., Director of Public Works. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6.

SECTION 7: The City hereby authorizes and directs City staff to draft, execute, and file a Notice of Determination with the City Clerk within five (5) working days of the adoption of this Resolution, in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21152.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of March 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: _____________________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: ________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

1.11 EXHIBIT A

CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, STATEMENT OF OVERRIDNG CONSIDERATIONS, AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This document includes the following sections:

I. Introduction to CEQA Findings
II. Location and Custodian of the Record
III. Findings for Impacts Identified as Less than Significant IV. Findings for Impacts Identified as Significant but Mitigated to a Less than Significant Level
V. Findings for Impacts that are Significant and Unavoidable VI. Findings Regarding Alternatives
VII. Findings Regarding Mitigation Measures and Alternatives Proposed in NOP and Draft EIR Comments
VIII. Findings on Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR and Revisions to the Draft EIR IX. Statement of Overriding Considerations
X. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
I. INTRODUCTION TO CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
These Findings of Fact are made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §21000 et seq., “CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs. title 14, §15000 et seq.) by the City of Santa Cruz (City), as the lead agency for the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project (Project).

These Findings of Fact pertain to the Final Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”), State Clearinghouse #2021090262.

A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
The Project is a 2.2-mile bicycle and pedestrian system proposed to extend along the railroad corridor, owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC), from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout on the west in the City to the eastern side of 17th Avenue on the east in the County, excluding the recently constructed San Lorenzo River (SLR) Trestle Bridge Improvements.

Segment 8 (0.6 mile) is composed of improving an existing Class IV on-street bicycle system and pedestrian sidewalk. Segment 9 (1.6 miles) is composed of a new multi-use bicycle and pedestrian trail on the inland side of the railroad tracks, except for the short portion on the eastern end of the Project where the trail would switch to the coastal side. The typical width of the paved trail would be 12 feet with striping in the middle to separate eastbound and westbound. Appendix A.1 of the EIR includes the schematic design plans for the Proposed Project (Ultimate Trail Configuration).

The EIR evaluates the Proposed Project (Trail Next to Rail Line or Ultimate Trail Configuration) in Chapter 3.0, Environmental Impact Analysis. Additionally, the EIR evaluates Alternative 1 (Trail Only) and Alternative 2 (Interim Trail with Rail Preservation) in Chapter 5.0, Project Alternatives. Under Alternative 1, the railroad tracks and ties would be permanently removed, and a 26-foot-wide multiuse

1.12 trail would be located on the rail bed. Under Alternative 2, a 16-foot-wide Interim Trail composed of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) decking would be built over the existing tracks and ties and later removed, and the Ultimate Trail Configuration would be constructed alongside the rail. The other alternative evaluated in Chapter 5.0 is Alternative 3 (No Project), as required by CEQA.

These Findings of Fact pertain to the Proposed Project (Trail Next to Rail Line or Ultimate Trail Configuration) only, which is the City’s preferred project and the staff’s recommendation for approval.

These Findings are part of the package of documents by which the City is approving the Project, subject to additional necessary approvals by other public agencies such as the RTC, County, California Coastal Commission, California State Department of Parks and Recreation, and other agencies.

B. PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City published the Draft EIR on September 23, 2022, and the Final EIR on January 23, 2023, in compliance with CEQA requirements. As allowed for in CEQA Guidelines §15084(d)(2), the City retained consultants to assist with the preparation of the environmental documents. Acting as lead agency, the City has directed, reviewed and edited as necessary all material prepared by the consultants, and such material reflects the City’s independent judgment. In general, the preparation of the EIR included the following key steps and public notification efforts.
 A 30-day scoping process began with the City’s issuance of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR on September 14, 2021. The NOP was filed with the State Clearinghouse on September 14, 2021, which started a 30-day comment period that ended October 15, 2021. The City noticed and held a virtual scoping meeting during the 30-day comment period to receive perspective and input from agencies, organizations and individuals on the scope and content of the environmental information to be addressed in the EIR. The virtual scoping meeting was held on October 6, 2021.

The NOP and scoping meeting date were published in the Santa Cruz Sentinel on September 13, 2021.
 A Public Open House was held on March 31, 2022, to share the draft schematic design plans for the Project.
 Other design progress meetings that were open to the public included meetings with the Santa Cruz Port District in November 2021; the RTC Bicycle Advisory Committee, RTC Elderly and Disabled Advisory Committee, and City Transportation and Public Works Commission in April 2022; and City Council in May 2022.
 The City issued the Draft EIR by distributing a Notice of Availability (NOA) and filing a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Clearinghouse on September 14, 2022. The Draft EIR NOA was published in the Santa Cruz Sentinel and distributed to a variety of government agencies, organizations and interested parties, including: local jurisdictions, tribal governments, state and federal agencies, resource agencies, water districts and boards, transportation agencies, community groups and organizations, business organizations, chambers of commerce, universities and school districts, senior/aging organizations, interested parties and members of the public. The NOA and Draft EIR were also posted on City, County, and RTC websites; promoted on the City’s social media platforms; and made available for review at the Downtown Library (224 Church Street) and at the City’s Public Works Department (809 Center Street, Room 201).

Additionally, notices were posted at several locations along the rail corridor, including the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout; San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge; and Seabright Avenue, 7th Avenue, and 17th Avenue intersections.

1.13  The Draft EIR was available for a 53-day public review period starting September 23, 2022, and ending November 14, 2022. The City hosted a virtual public hearing on the Draft EIR on October 19, 2022.
 Following close of the public review period, the City revised the Draft EIR in response to comments received during the public review period and provided written responses addressing all significant environmental issues raised. Revisions made to the Draft EIR are shown throughout the Final EIR in strikethrough (deleted) and underlined (added) text.  The City published the Final EIR on January 23, 2023. The City provided written responses to all public agencies that commented on the Draft EIR on that date, consistent with the legal requirement that such agencies receive such responses at least 10 days prior to lead agency action certifying the EIR. The City held a public hearing on March 2, 2023, to consider certification of the Final EIR and approval of the Project.

C. INCORPORATION OF FINAL EIR BY REFERENCE
The Final EIR is hereby incorporated by reference into these Findings of Fact. The Final EIR consists of three volumes:

1. Comments and Responses on the Draft Environmental Impact Report,

2. Draft Environmental Impact Report, September 2022 (Revised January 2023), and

3. Draft EIR Appendices, September 2022 (Revised January 2023).

D. REQUIREMENTS FOR CEQA FINDINGS
Pursuant to Public Resources Code §21081 and CEQA Guidelines §15091, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project, unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant impact.

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.

Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR.

For purposes of the third of these possible findings, the CEQA Guidelines define “feasible” as “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15364.) Thus, a decision-making body may reject a mitigation measure or project alternative as infeasible if the measure or alternative fails to meet this definition. Importantly, the courts understand the legal concept of infeasibility to encompass both (i) the ineffectiveness of a particular alternative or mitigation measure in promoting the agency’s underlying project purpose and objectives and (ii) the desirability of the measure

1.14 or alternative from a policy standpoint, as reasonably determined by the decisionmakers. (See City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1000-1001; San Diego Citizenry Group v. County of San Diego (2013) 2129 Cal.App.4th 1, 17-18.)
The City has made one or more of these specific written findings regarding each significant impact associated with the Project. Those findings are presented below, along with a presentation of facts in support of the findings. The City certifies that these findings are based on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these findings, concerning the environmental issues identified and discussed. These findings are based on substantial evidence contained in the totality of the administrative record before the City, including, but not limited to, the Final EIR supporting evidence cited herein.

A full explanation of the environmental findings, conclusions, and mitigation measures referenced herein can be found in the Draft EIR and Final EIR; and these Findings hereby incorporate by reference the discussions and analyses in those documents. In making these Findings, the City hereby ratifies, adopts, and incorporates those discussions and analyses, adopting them as the City’s own.

II. LOCATION AND CUSTODIAN OF THE RECORD
The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the City’s Findings of Fact are based are located at 809 Center Street, Room 201, Santa Cruz, California. The custodian of these documents is Nathan Nguyen, P.E., Director of Public Works. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code § 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines § 15091(e).

For purposes of CEQA and these Findings of Fact, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists of the following documents, at a minimum:
 The Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Master Plan EIR (2013).  The Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project.
 The Draft and Final EIRs, including appendices and technical studies included or referenced in the Draft and Final EIRs.
 All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public comment period on the Draft EIR.
 All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the Project.  The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project.  All Findings and resolutions adopted by City decision makers in connection with the Project and all documents cited or referred to therein.
 All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the RTC, City and consultants to the City, including RRM Design, Harris & Associates, Rincon, and EcoSystems West.

1.15  All documents and information submitted to the City by responsible, trustee, or other public agencies, or by individuals or organizations, in connection with the Project, up through the date that the City approved the Project.
 Minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City, in connection with the Project.  Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings.
 Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
 Any documents expressly cited in these Findings of Fact, in addition to those cited above.  Any other materials required to be in the Record of Proceedings by Public Resources Code § 21167.6(e).

The City, as decisionmaker, has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decisions on the Project, even if not every document was formally presented to the decisionmaker as part of the files generated in connection with the Project. Without exception, any documents set forth above not found in the Project files fall into one of two categories.

First, many of them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions of which the City was aware in approving the Project. (See City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administration (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, fn. 6.)
The second category are other documents that influenced the expert advice provided to the City’s staff or the environmental consultants who prepared the EIR, who then provided advice to the final decisionmakers. For that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City’s decisions relating to the approval of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21167.6, subd. (e)(10); Browning-Ferris Industries v. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 852, 866; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 153, 155.) III. FINDINGS FOR IMPACTS IDENTIFIED AS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15091 do not require findings of fact for impacts that are less than significant. Nevertheless, for the sake of completeness, the City hereby finds that the following environmental impacts of the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 either have no impact or are less than significant. Under CEQA, no mitigation measures are required for impacts that are less than significant (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.4(a)(3)).

Section 3.15 of the EIR explains why certain impacts were not found to be significant and therefore were not discussed in detail in the EIR, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15128. The findings below are for impacts that were considered in detail in the EIR, but determined to be less than significant. These findings are based on the detailed discussions of impacts in Chapter 3, Sections 3.1 through 3.14, and Chapter 4, Section 4.1, of the EIR. The references to portions of the EIR as supportive evidence for the findings are intended to be helpful guidance to the decisionmakers and the public but they are not necessarily the only such evidence in the record supporting the findings.

1.16 A. AESTHETICS

1. Impact AES-3. The Project would not adversely affect daytime or nighttime views. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would involve installation of minor light sources along the 0.6-mile (Segment 8) and 1.6-mile (Segment 9) segments of the Coastal Rail Trail where needed for safety. However, any new lighting would be “dark sky compliant” in that it would minimize light pollution and offensive glare by directing light downward so it would not spill beyond the trail, and thus would have a minimal effect on the existing lighting conditions. Additional public use of adjacent streets by trail visitors could incrementally increase glare from car windows and headlights during operating hours; however, this would be minimal and limited to operating hours. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.1-26 through 3.1-27 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

B. AIR QUALITY

1. Impact AIR-1. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the adopted Monterey Bay Air Resources District Air Quality Management Plan. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project does not contain a residential or commercial component and would therefore not increase the residential population or employment in the area. Construction of the Proposed Project would generate temporary employment opportunities, which would likely be filled by the existing workforce in Santa Cruz County.

Therefore, no direct growth inducement is expected to result from implementation of the Proposed Project, and the Proposed Project would be consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan growth assumptions and emissions reduction goals. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.2-12 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact AIR-2. The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is designated non-attainment. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would not generate emissions above applicable health-based significance thresholds. This impact would be less than significant. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.2-14 through 3.2-16 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact AIR-3. The Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

1.17 a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would not result in any stationary sources of emissions, significantly contribute to a potential CO hotspot, or result in emissions of other pollutants at levels that could reasonably be determined to result in health effects. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. This impact would be less than significant. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.2-18 through 3.2-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact AIR-4. The Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Due to the linear nature of the Project, very few existing receptors would be located within a few hundred feet of the active construction area on any given day.

Following construction, the Proposed Project would accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists, who typically do not generate odors. The Proposed Project would involve frequent emptying of trash receptacles along the trail, which would reduce potential emissions and odors.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.2-20 through 3.2-21 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

5. Impact AIR-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative air quality impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would be consistent with the AQMP and help implement the plan. The Project would not result in new vehicle trips and would not result in impacts related to CO hotspots. Further, the Project would provide an alternative transportation corridor for bicyclists, pedestrians, and other users, which is expected to reduce vehicular travel and associated emissions. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 4-9 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

C. CULTURAL RESOURCES

1. Impact CR-3. Ground-disturbing activities during project construction may disturb human remains.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Northwest Information Center records search did not identify any known cemeteries or burial sites on or within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project corridor.

There is always potential for previously unrecorded or unidentified human remains to exist

1.18 below ground surface. However, compliance with existing regulations protects human burial remains from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction and provides, including: Chapter 24.12 of the City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 16.40 of the County’s Municipal Code, PRC Section 5097, and California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7054. PRC Section 5097.98 also addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects such remains, and establishes the NAHC as the entity to resolve any related disputes. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.4-16 through 3.4-17 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Impact GEO-1. The Project would not exacerbate the existing exposure of people or structures to risks from strong ground shaking.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of the Proposed Project would not include housing or other structures that would result in long-term exposure of people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.5-14 through 3.5-15 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact GEO-2. The Project may exacerbate exposure of the public to liquefaction or landslide hazards and may be located on a geological unit or soil that would become unstable as a result of lateral spreading, landslides, and liquefaction.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would not include habitable structures and therefore would not expose residents to a risk of injury or death from landslides or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Portions of the trail alignment are mapped as an area with very high susceptibility for liquefaction, and the Project area is susceptible to moderate lateral spreading. Some portions of the Project could potentially be subject to a landslide hazard that could undermine the trail. Construction of the Project would introduce uninhabited built features that could be damaged from liquefaction, landslides, and/or lateral spreading. Implementation of the Project would incrementally increase the number of recreational users in the Project corridor, and those users could be exposed to an increased risk of injury or death from liquefaction or lateral spreading. However, the risks including those associated with liquefaction would be reduced with implementation of recommendations from the project Geotechnical Investigation Reports. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.5-17 through 3.5-18 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact GEO-3. The Project may result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

1.19 a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The subsurface soils identified along the Project corridor have a moderate potential for erosion. Construction of the Project could result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil due to earthmoving activities such as excavation, grading, soil compaction and moving, soil stockpiling, slope modification, and culvert installation. However, the Project includes BMPs to be implemented during construction, which would reduce impacts related to runoff and erosion. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.5-19 through 3.5-20 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact GEO-4. The Project would not exacerbate the existing risk to life or property resulting from expansive soils.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project corridor is underlain by varying areas of moderately expansive clay. Although the Project would not include habitable structures and therefore would not expose residents to a risk of injury or death from expansive soils, seasonal shrinking and swelling of expansive clay soils could result in heave or settlement damage to proposed improvements. However, the risk associated with expansive soils would be reduced with implementation of the recommendations in the project Geotechnical Investigation Reports. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.5-22 through 3.5-23 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

5. Impact GEO-C. Cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative geology and soils impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Any future development along the Project corridor would be required to address potential seismic and soil issues on a case-by-case basis. Cumulative buildout of the Santa Cruz County and City General Plans could expose new residents and structures to seismic and other geologic hazards in the county. However, these seismic and soil issues are specific to each project and would be addressed through adherence to existing local and state laws and regulations, including the applicable California Building Standards Code (CBSC) standards and requirements. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 4-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

E. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS/CLIMATE CHANGE

1. Impact GHG-1. The Project would not result in greenhouse gas emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.

1.20 b. Findings and Rationale – Temporary impacts related to construction activities would result in a nominal one-time contribution to regional GHG emissions. Operation of the Project would increase the feasibility of non-motorized transportation and would contribute to a regional net decrease in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Further, the Project would provide an alternative transportation corridor for bicyclists, pedestrians, and other users, which is expected to reduce vehicular travel and associated emissions. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.6-14 through 3.6-15 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact GHG-2. The Project would be consistent with applicable greenhouse gas reduction plans. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The project would result in a net decrease in GHG emissions by implementing alternative transportation infrastructure to decrease regional VMT. The Project would contribute to an ongoing net decrease in GHG emissions and would be an investment in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in the City and County by implementing two segments (Segments 8 and 9) necessary for the completion of the MBSST Network.

Therefore, the Project would be consistent with applicable GHG reduction plans. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.6-17 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact GHG-3. The Project would not expose people or structures to substantial risk of loss, injury, or death from projected sea level rise or erosion. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The trail, including Segment 8 and the portion of Segment 9 that crosses Santa Cruz Harbor, is in potential future tidal inundation and flood hazard areas, and the portion of Segment 9 that crosses Leona Creek and Stream 1545 (which flow to Schwan Lagoon in Twin Lakes Beach State Park) is in the potential storm flooding area. However, the trail would not introduce any new structures for human occupancy that would potentially require protection from sea level rise as part of climate adaptation efforts or that would result in displacement of residents in the event of storm flooding. Additionally, the Project would be subject to routine maintenance. Through routine maintenance and inspections, it is anticipated any areas of the trail that are experiencing excessive erosion or inundation would be identified. If necessary, appropriate actions would be taken to minimize the risk to trail users. Such actions could include trail segment closure and detour, structural improvements, or trail relocation, for which appropriate environmental review would be conducted.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.6-18 through 3.6-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact GHG-C. The Project would not result in greenhouse gas emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.

1.21 b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would provide a new alternative transportation facility and would not contribute to an increase in GHG emissions from cumulative projects. The Project’s contribution to cumulative GHG emissions impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 4-15 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

1. Impact HAZ-1. Construction of the project would involve use, disposal, or transportation of hazardous materials, which could be accidentally released. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Construction activities associated with the Project would involve the use of heavy equipment, which would contain fuels and oils, and various other products. Small quantities of potentially toxic substances would be used along the Project corridor and transported to and from the site during construction.

However, the Project contractor would be required to comply with policies in the California Health and Safety Code and the City and County’s Municipal Codes pertaining to hazardous materials. With adherence to federal, state, and local regulations, potential impacts from construction activities and hazardous material transfer during Project construction would be reduced. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.7-18 through 3.7-20 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

1. Impact HYD-1. The Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality nor conflict with water quality control plan.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Adherence to the General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities, the City and County’s Grading Ordinances, and Project BMPs would reduce impacts to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.8-17 through 3.8-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact HYD-2. The Project would not deplete groundwater supplies nor substantially interfere with groundwater recharge.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.

1.22 b. Findings and Rationale – Construction and operation of the Proposed Project would not use groundwater. The small amount of new impervious surface area that the Project would introduce relative to the total surface area of each groundwater basin impacted by the Project would be minimal. Due to the limited and dispersed impervious surfaces, there would be no adverse effects to groundwater recharge. This impact would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to page 3.8-22 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact HYD-3. The Project would not substantially alter drainage patterns in the Project corridor or vicinity.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Project BMPs during Project construction and use of existing or planned storm drain infrastructure during Project operation would minimize potential alteration to drainage patterns in the Project corridor or vicinity. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.8-25 through 3.8-26 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact HYD-4. The Project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Once constructed and in use, the trail would not involve the use of hazardous materials or other pollutants that could be inadvertently released due to Project inundation in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.8-28 through 3.8-29 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

5. Impact HYD-C. Cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Planned development would not result in significant cumulative impacts concerning violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, decreased groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge, alterations to existing drainage patterns, or conflicts with water quality or groundwater plans. The Project’s contribution to hydrology and water quality impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-16 through 4-17 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

H. LAND USE AND PLANNING

1. Impact LUP-1. The Project would not physically divide an established community.

1.23 a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would utilize an existing railroad right-ofway surrounded by developed communities. Construction would occur within the right-ofway and would not physically divide the community. Further, the Project would increase connectivity across established communities by providing a pedestrian and bicycle trail using an existing corridor without disturbing existing residential, commercial, and industrial uses along the Project corridor. Impacts would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.9-8 through 3.9-10 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact LUP-2. The Project would not conflict with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project corridor extends through developed communities zoned for trails and recreational facilities with applicable use permits. Although the Proposed Project is exempt from local land use planning policies and regulations, Project implementation would generally support the goals, objectives, and policies identified in the Santa Cruz City and County General Plans, Local Coastal Plan, Santa Cruz City and County Bicycle Plans, and Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Master Plan. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.9-11 through 3.9-13 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact LUP-C. Cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative land use impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Because the majority of land near the project corridor is already developed, future development would be limited to redevelopment or infill projects. Although overall use of the lands surrounding the Project corridor would increase, the land use impact of the Project would be less than significant, would not result in a substantial contribution to an existing cumulative land use impact, and thus would not be cumulatively considerable.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-17 through 4-18 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

I. NOISE

1. Impact N-2. Operation of the Project would not expose persons to or generate excessive noise levels.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Operational noise along the proposed trail alignment may include the sound of trail users talking and maintenance workers collecting garbage or maintaining

1.24 project features, but would be minimal and intermittent. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.10-7 through 3.10-10 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact N-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative noise impacts to ambient vehicle noise. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project, in combination with cumulative development, would not result in a significant cumulative impact related to construction noise and vibration, or stationary noise sources. Cumulative development would have the potential to result in cumulatively considerable increases in ambient vehicle noise; however, the Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-18 through 4-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

J. PUBLIC SAFETY AND SERVICES

1. Impact PUB-1. The Project would not result in the need for additional emergency response or fire protection facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios or response times. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would introduce a paved multi-purpose trail which would increase human activity in the Project corridor and could result in increased calls for emergency response and fire protection services to the Santa Cruz area. The Proposed Project would not construct buildings or other facilities that present unique challenges for fire protection and emergency response services. The trail would generally improve emergency access along the railroad tracks by providing paved access along the corridor. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.11-10 through 3.11-11 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact PUB-2. The Project would not result in the need for additional police protection or law enforcement facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios or response times. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Increased human activity along the Project corridor, including the potential for increased persons who are unhoused, loitering, or trespassing onto adjacent lands, could result in additional calls from the public for police protection or law enforcement service. However, the Project would not require the construction of additional SCPD or County Sheriff’s stations or the expansion of services currently provided by the SCPD or the County Sheriff’s Office to respond to additional calls, and because the Project would not result in an increase in population. Existing police services; project features such as lighting,

1.25 fencing, and signage; and improved access to the Project corridor are expected to minimize potential illegal activities such as vandalism, trespassing, and the establishment of illegal encampments. The Project is not anticipated to adversely affect service ratios or response times, nor result in the need for additional police protection or law enforcement facilities.

Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.11-13 through 3.11-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact PUB-3. The Project would not result in the need for the construction of new or additional park facilities, nor the degradation of existing facilities. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would not increase the permanent population, creating a demand for new parks or expanded park facilities in the City.

Introducing an estimated 3,500 trail users on a peak summer day could result in increased use of adjacent park facilities, but is not anticipated to result in substantial degradation of existing park resources above existing conditions; and many riders will pass through park facilities without stopping to use the facilities. Further, with respect to the new trail, the Project includes development of an Operations & Maintenance Plan including inspections and maintenance of trail facilities. Furthermore, improving access to park facilities is considered a beneficial effect; and the Project would provide a new transportation and recreational facility that would improve access to Twin Lakes State Beach, Santa Cruz Harbor, Simpkins Swim Center, Santa Cruz Boardwalk, and other park and recreation facilities. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.11-16 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact PUB-4. The Project would not result in the need for the construction of new or additional health service facilities.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The potential increase in the use of health service facilities from trail users (as a result of the Proposed Project) would not be substantial enough to require construction of new health care facilities, nor would existing facilities need to be expanded, resulting in potential physical effects on the environment. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.11-18 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

5. Impact PUB-C. Cumulative development could result in significant cumulative impacts to public safety and services. The project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project could have the cumulative effect of attracting more visitors to the Santa Cruz region. However, buildout of the Coastal Rail Trail would not introduce a permanent population to the Santa Cruz region. Increased use of the rail corridor by trail users is not expected to adversely affect response times or generate a need for

1.26 additional public services personnel that warrants expansion of existing facilities or construction of new facilities. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to emergency service response times would not be cumulatively considerable. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-19 through 4-20 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

K. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

1. Impact T-1. The project would meet the screening criteria set by California Office of Planning and Research (OPR), which developed the CEQA Guidelines; Caltrans; City of Santa Cruz; and Santa Cruz County and thus would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.3(b).
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The project would meet screening criteria related to VMT analysis, would be consistent with the 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments, and would satisfy the conditions of several OPR example projects that would not require induced demand analysis for potential operational impacts related to VMT. Further, the Project would provide the option for alternative transportation modes along the Project corridor, resulting in an overall reduction in VMT that would ultimately improve the existing circulation system. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.12-12 through 3.12-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact T-2. Neither construction nor operation of the Project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Potential construction-related hazards would be temporary.

Construction signage and, as a necessary, a flagger, would minimize hazards. Operationally, the project would include improved safety features such as interconnected traffic signals, chicanes, and rapid-flashing beacons. Further, the Project would implement high visibility striping and surface improvements along Segment 8, reducing user conflicts along Beach Street where existing pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic is heavily congested.

Therefore, the Project would minimize potential conflicts. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.12-16 through 3.12-18 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact T-C. Cumulative development would result in significant cumulative traffic impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.

1.27 b. Findings and Rationale – Planned development would result in significant cumulative impacts associated with increased VMT, traffic, and potential hazards during construction, and emergency access. However, the Project would not result in increased VMT, traffic and potential hazards; thus, the Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-20 through 4-21 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

L. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

1. Impact UTIL-1. Sufficient water supplies are available to serve the Project, and the Project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would generate minor demand for water during construction and no demand for water during operation. Construction activities would use water to prepare concrete, control dust, wash equipment, tires and parts as needed, and reseed disturbed areas. However, water demand would be incremental. This impact would be less than significant.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.14-11 through 3.14-12 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact UTIL-2. The Project would not generate wastewater in excess of existing treatment capacity and would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would not result in the addition of bathrooms or otherwise generate wastewater, and thus would not require or otherwise affect wastewater treatment facilities. This impact would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.14-14 through 3.14-15 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact UTIL-3. The Project would not require or result in the relocation of new or expanded stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of the Proposed Project could alter stormwater drainage as it relates to surface water runoff from the paved trail. However, the Implementation of Project BMPs during Project construction and use of existing or planned storm drain infrastructure during Project operation would minimize potential alteration to drainage patterns in the Project corridor or vicinity. The Project could require limited use of electricity for power tools during construction and would require a minor amount of electricity for the new lighting for trail operation if solar is not used, but would not result in substantial demand on the existing supply. The Project would not require use of natural gas or telecommunication facilities. This impact would be less than significant.

1.28 c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.14-17 through 3.14-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact UTIL-4. The Project would not generate solid waste in excess of local landfill capacity. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Proposed Project would generate approximately 17,945 CY of construction-related solid waste, which would be sufficiently accommodated by the available permitted capacity of existing City and County landfills or the regional Monterey Peninsula Landfill in Marina if necessary. This impact would be less than significant. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.14-21 through 3.14-22 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

5. Impact UTIL-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative impacts to utilities and service systems. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – No mitigation is required.
b. Findings and Rationale – Planned development or buildout of cumulative projects would increase demands on utilities infrastructure. However, there are no cumulative significant impacts anticipated from cumulative projects, and the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-22 through 4-24 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

IV. FINDINGS FOR IMPACTS IDENTIFIED AS SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGATED TO A

LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL
The City hereby finds that the following mitigation measures, which are identified in the EIR and will reduce the following otherwise significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level, have been required in or incorporated into the Project. Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions.

Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion. The findings below are for impacts where implementation of the Project would result in significant environmental impacts that would be reduced to less than significant following mitigation. These findings are based on the discussion of impacts in the detailed impact analyses in Section 3.1 through Section 3.14 and Section 4.1 of the EIR, as well as relevant responses to comments in the Final EIR.

The following statutory finding applies to all of the impacts described in this section (IV):

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects on the environment (to less than significant levels). (See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1).)

1.29 A. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. Impact BIO-1. The Project could adversely affect State Endangered and Federally Threatened Santa Cruz tarplant.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.1
BIO-1a Implement Protections for the Santa Cruz tarplant population in Twin Lakes State Park. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on implementing agency/jurisdiction) shall coordinate to ensure the following measures are implemented to protect the federally Threatened and California State Endangered Santa Cruz tarplant at Twin Lakes State Beach:
 Prior to construction activities adjacent to Twin Lakes State Beach open space, identify the Santa Cruz tarplant occurrence in Twin Lakes State Beach on project plans and mark the edge of the population in the field with flagging to avoid construction-related impacts,
 Prior to trail use, enclose the coastal terrace prairie grassland occupied by Santa Cruz tarplant with protective wildlife-friendly (e.g., spit-rail) fencing,
 Add interpretative signage with Santa Cruz tarplant life history and rarity information, and
 Coordinate with State Parks biologists to monitor and enhance tarplant population using techniques identified by the Arana Gulch Adaptive Management Working Group2. These may include seeding, out-planting, cardboard mulch, mowing, and/or hand weeding.

BIO-1b Install Permanent Fencing between Interim Trail and Twin Lakes State Beach near Santa Cruz Tarplant Habitat. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on implementing agency/jurisdiction) shall coordinate to ensure final project design includes installation of fencing (wildlife friendly3) between the Trail and Twin Lakes State Beach near the tarplant population. The fencing shall extend for approximately 1,100 linear feet, from Leona Creek to the Simpkins Swim Center parking lot, to discourage trail users from entering Twin Lakes State Beach and creating new trails that could result 1 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.
2 The Arana Gulch Adaptive Management Working Group (AMWG) is a collection of scientists, regulators, City of Santa Cruz representatives, and the public working to improve habitat conditions for the Santa Cruz tarplant at Arana Gulch Open Space as required by the Arana Gulch Habitat Master Plan (2013).
3 Wildlife-friendly fencing provides a 17-inch clearance between the bottom wire and ground, which provides adequate room for most small to medium wildlife to pass and has a maximum height of 4.5 feet to allow larger wildlife (e.g., deer) pass over the top wire. Options include splitrail fencing or post and smooth wire fencing. Fencing shall be marked to be visible to wildlife.

1.30 in disturbance to the protected species. Additionally, signage shall be placed on the fencing, indicating the adjacent habitat protection area and directing users to the existing trail access near Simpkins Swim Center with arrow pointing eastward.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures:
 To the extent feasible, all trail construction activities, including access routes, staging areas, stockpile areas, and equipment maintenance are to be located outside the limits of mapped sensitive habitats. Sensitive habitat areas shall be mapped by a qualified biologist and clearly shown on construction plans. Sensitive habitat areas include, but may not be limited to: Santa Cruz tarplant habitat in coastal prairie grassland at Twin Lakes State Beach, monarch butterfly roosting habitat near Woods Creek and the Santa Cruz Harbor riparian habitat along Pilkington Creek and Leona Creek, and coast live oak woodland and forest along to the rail corridor.  During construction, temporary fencing (e.g., silt fencing) shall be installed at the outermost edge of sensitive habitats and shall not be disturbed except as required for trail construction. Vegetation removal shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary to achieve project objectives. Mature trees will be retained wherever feasible and limbing of trees and shrubs in arroyo willow and mixed riparian forest, coast live oak woodland and forest, and potential and/or known monarch roost habitat should be favored in lieu of removal.

When possible, in temporary impact areas, stumps and burls of native coast live oaks, coast redwoods, Pacific wax myrtle, and arroyo willows shall be retained to allow for re-sprouting following project completion.
 Limbing and removal of coast live oak trees located in coast live oak woodland and forest habitat shall be minimized to maintain canopy cover, nesting and roosting habitat for bird and bat species, and understory habitat for wildlife, including woodrats and other small mammals.

BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures.

A qualified (USFWS- and CDFW-approved) biologist shall prepare a Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP) to compensate for direct and indirect impacts to sensitive habitats, including ESHA, and other sensitive biological resources resulting from trail construction and operation. The MMP shall

1.31 compensate for permanent loss of sensitive habitats, through the creation, restoration, and enhancement of in-kind sensitive habitat, as close to impacted areas as possible within the study area.

To protect against the loss of ecological functions and values, compensatory mitigation shall re-create the following features of existing sensitive habitat that would be impacted by the Proposed Project: habitat mosaic, edge habitats, and proximity to wetlands and other waters. A portion of compensatory mitigation shall re-create the linear aspect and provision for wildlife dispersal of existing habitats, where these features are potentially lost as a result of the Proposed Project. This feature shall be designed to protect against fragmentation of remaining habitat patches adjacent to the rail corridor. Due to limited available space remaining within the corridor after trail construction and minor railbed realignment, these wildlife corridor improvements will likely occur north and south of the study area to connect the existing disjunct open spaces utilized by wildlife within the urbanized portion of Santa Cruz including Woods Creek, Arana Gulch, Twin Lakes Beach State Park, and Rodeo Gulch.

In addition, the Biological Resources MMP shall include the following:
 Description of the trail alignment including as-built acreage of temporary and permanent impacts to arroyo willow and mixed riparian forest, coast live oak woodland and forest, and monarch butterfly roost sites, including the number and type of trees slated for removal City and County status as Heritage or Significant trees, respectively.
 Ecological functions and values assessment of sensitive habitats, including monarch butterfly habitat to determine suitable mitigation ratios (at a minimum, no net loss) in consultation with USFWS, CDFW, and California Coastal Commission (CCC).
 Goals of compensatory mitigation, including types and areas of sensitive habitat to be created, restored, enhanced and/or preserved; number and type of trees to be replaced, specific functions and values of mitigation habitat types, mitigation ratios
(created/restored/enhanced/preserved: impacted), and performance criteria, including:
 Conservation of functions and values of monarch autumnal and overwintering roost habitat and nectaring sites (including maintaining suitable grove structure, wind protection, and water sources);
 Conservation of edge habitats; and
 Conservation of functions and values for wildlife movement including habitat mosaics, links between creeks, open spaces and safe passage across the proposed alignment, with perennial water sources, diverse food sources, cover, and shelter.

1.32  Such compensatory mitigation must occur as close to impacted areas as feasible and result in no net loss (minimum 1:1 replacement ratio) of sensitive habitat types, or their functions and values. In the Coastal Zone, mitigation ratios for ESHA typically start at 3:1 (creation/substantial restoration: impact) for ESHA. This ratio is doubled for enhancement (6:1) and tripled for preservation (9:1); however, a minimum of 1:1 must include creation of in-kind ESHA habitat.
 Location and acreage of sensitive habitat, including monarch roost habitat, mitigation areas including ownership status, and existing functions and values of restored and/or enhanced sensitive habitats.  All trees will be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio. All City Heritage trees, County Significant trees, and native trees will be replaced “in kind” at a location and ratio to be determined by the City Forester, County Environmental Coordinator, and/or other responsible regulatory agencies.
 One on-site mitigation area has been identified immediately north of the rail corridor at Woods Creek, currently a buffer habitat for the known roost site immediately north. This area would be enhanced for the roosting western monarch butterfly by planting native trees and understory plants (with fall/winter blooming for nectaring) and configuring the plantings to create a permeable tiered canopy that slopes down to the north.
 Project stakeholders including the City, County, and RTC would identify undeveloped public and private properties as potential offsite mitigation areas. Acquisition could include direct purchase or placement of conservation easements on portions of parcels that are otherwise constrained from development due to existing protected resources (e.g., County and City aquatic and riparian setbacks, ESHA, steep slopes, etc.). Where potentially restricted from development, suitable areas for mitigation would not be precluded from habitat creation, restoration, enhancement, or preservation as needed to fulfill mitigation acreage and proximity requirements.

Mitigation sites may include local parks, such as Moran Lake, where existing monarch roost habitat could be enhanced through plantings of trees and nectar plants if a qualified biologist determines plantings would be beneficial to the park’s resources. Mitigation at local parks shall be authorized by the City, the County, and/or other relevant stakeholders. Plantings of roost trees or nectar plants at Moran Lake would supplement those plantings already identified in the Moran Lake Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan. Mitigation sites may also include private properties adjacent to the rail corridor with the agreement of the City, County, and/or private property owner and if determined to be feasible.
 Detailed sensitive habitat creation and/or restoration construction and planting techniques.

1.33  Description and design of habitat requirements for sensitive wildlife known to occur in the study area and immediate surroundings (including monarch roost sites, federally listed fish species, potential Santa Cruz black salamander, western pond turtle, bald eagle, American peregrine falcon, native nesting bird species, potential roosting bat species, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, and marine mammals).
 In sensitive habitats, including in or near aquatic features, mMaintenance activities during operation shall include replanting native vegetation found within similar habitats within the same watershed and weed eradication that avoids take of sensitive wildlife species (e.g., woodrat, breeding birds). Trail maintenance activities in sensitive habitats shallwould employ hand-tools only. The use of pesticides or herbicides shallwould be prohibited in sensitive habitats, including in or near aquatic features. Management activities in monarch overwintering habitat shall be conducted between March 16 and September 14 (outside the monarch roost season) in coordination with a monarch biologist.
 Strategies to protect remaining sensitive habitats along the trail corridor and surroundings from direct and indirect impacts from trail users and illegal camping, such as:
 Split-rail and wire fencing
 Interpretive signage including specific information about sensitive habitats and species and “leave no trace” content  “Green fencing” (dense vegetative buffers consisting of woody and plant species that deter human passage such as poison oak, Pacific blackberry, and stinging nettle)
 Strategies to protect wildlife movement, both across and along the trail corridor, as well as north and/or south of the corridor to connect open spaces, supported by complex and mature sensitive habitat mosaics, including perennial water sources.
 Long-term quantitative and qualitative monitoring and reporting, including consideration of carrying capacity analysis and alternative approaches, and documenting the ability to meet or surpass performance criteria. Monitoring will include fall and wintering monitoring, including arrival and departure dates, of monarch roost sites by a qualified biologist.
 Adaptive management strategies to:
 Identify shortcomings in meeting performance standards;  Ensure long-term viability of existing, enhanced, restored, and/or newly created sensitive biological resources;

1.34  Enhance ecological functions and values of sensitive habitat mitigation areas, including monarch butterfly habitat and habitat for wildlife movement;
 Ascertain the sufficiency of trail access, facilities development and management, and interpretive design features associated with the project to protect biological resources.

Mitigation area locations and final replacement ratios (e.g., potentially above the minimum “no net loss” ratio set here) shall be determined in consultation with the relevant agencies, as follows.
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Monarch butterfly (presently FESA Candidate species, likely Threatened or Endangered by 2024)
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Sensitive habitats, work below the break in bank of stream corridors, riparian habitat, CESA Endangered and Fully Protected species, Species of Special Concern
 California Coastal Commission (CCC). Environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA)
 California State Parks. Sensitive resources and habitats on Twin Lakes State Beach property
 Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Non-wetland riparian habitat
The draft MMP shall be submitted to USFWS, NOAA Fisheries, CDFW, CCC, and California State Parks for review prior to formal adoption.

Monitoring reports will be provided to these agencies.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall ensure the following best management practices (BMPs), to protect water quality and biological resources during project construction activities, are included in the construction specifications and implemented during Project construction:
 Minimize removal or disturbance of existing vegetation outside the footprint of project construction activities.
 Limit site access and parking, equipment storage and stationary construction activities to the designated staging areas to the maximum extent feasible.
 Prior to staging any equipment or vehicles within or adjacent to the rail corridor, clean all equipment caked with mud, soils, or debris

1.35 from off-site sources or previous project sites to avoid introducing or spreading invasive exotic plant species. When feasible, remove invasive exotic plants from the Project area. All equipment used on the site should be cleaned prior to leaving the site for other projects.  Position all stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, generators, and/or compressors over drip pans. At the end of each day, move vehicles and equipment as far away as possible from any water body adjacent to the Project site in a level staging area. Position parked equipment also over drip pans or absorbent material.
 Check under all equipment for wildlife before use. If any listed or special-status wildlife is observed under equipment or in the work area, do not disturb or handle it. Cease Project activities and contact the biological monitor or resource agencies for further guidance, if the animal continues to be encountered in the Project area.  If security fencing is installed around the construction site, allow for passage of wildlife to maintain a link between inland and coastal habitats including stream corridors during construction activities.

Prohibit the use of plastic mesh safety fencing to prevent wildlife entrapment.
 Avoid working at night or during rain events when special-status amphibians and mammals are generally more active. Consult weather forecasts from the National Weather Service at least 72 hours prior to performing work.
 Properly contain and remove all food trash that may attract predators into the work area and construction debris and trash from the work site on a regular basis.
 Refuel and perform all vehicle and/or equipment maintenance off site at a facility approved for such activities.
 To the greatest extent feasible, stabilize all exposed or disturbed areas in the Project area. Install erosion control measures as necessary such as silt fences, jute matting, weed-free straw bales, plywood, straw wattles, and water check bars, and broadcasting weed-free straw wherever silt-laden water has the potential to leave the work site and enter the nearby streams. Prohibit the use of monofilament erosion control matting to prevent wildlife entanglement. Modify, repair, and/or replace erosion control measures as needed.
 Revegetate with native vegetation found within similar habitats within the same watershed to minimize erosion, prevent the establishment of invasive weeds, and accelerate the recovery of native vegetation communities.

1.36  Whenever feasible, certain construction activities will be timed to avoid impacts to sensitive habitats and wildlife species, as presented in Table 3.3-7. Ideally, most if not all vegetation clearing will be done in the fall.

Table 3.3-7 Preferred Timing for Construction Activities Listed by Biological Resource Biological
Resource
Preferred Period of
Avoidance
Preferred
Construction
Window
Life
Events/Functions/
Values to be
Protected
Construction
Activity to Be
Avoided
Arroyo Willow and
Mixed Riparian/
Habitats below the
break in bank
Rainy season,
approximately October
15–May 31
June 1–October 15 Stable banks, slopes,
and soil
All construction
Sensitive Fish
Species/Western Pond
Turtle/
Potential SC Black
Salamander/Marine
Mammalsa
Rainy season,
approximately October
15–May 31
June 1–October 15 Fish migration/critical
habitat functions and
values
Work in or near aquatic
features and riparian
vegetation
Monarch Butterfly Autumnal and
Overwintering roost
season, approximately
September 15–March 31
April 1–September 15 Autumnal roosting,
overwintering and
nectaring activities
All construction within
designated buffers;
cutting, limbing, and
tree removal, noise and
vibration within 300 feet
of roost sites prior to
temperature reaching
55o F
Bird Species February 1–August 31 September 1–January 31 Nesting activities All construction within designated buffers from
active nest sites
Bat Species November 1–February
15 and May 1–August
31 February 15–April 30
and September 1–
October 31
Roosting, especially
maternity roosts and
winter hibernacula
Pruning, limbing, and
tree removal
San Francisco DuskyFooted Woodrat October 15–July 31 August 1–October 15 Houses, especially during breeding and
rearing
Vegetation/tree removal
and woodrat relocation
Tree removal October 15–
August 31
Sept 1–Oct 15 (this is
during the beginning of
the monarch autumnal
roost period)
Breeding birds, bats,
roosting monarchs,
slope stability
Cutting, limbing, tree
removal, monarch roost
encroachment
a
Central California coast coho salmon, central California coast steelhead, tidewater goby, and Pacific lamprey.

Note: Each “preferred” time frame or construction window indicates the type of construction activity to be avoided, if possible, and not all windows apply to all resources. Ideally, most if not all vegetation clearing and tree removal will be done during the fall, whereas there is more flexibility with the other timeframes.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c would reduce the potential impacts on Santa Cruz tarplant (and other sensitive biological resources) by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, fencing, signage, BMPs, coordination with State Parks, monitoring); minimizing construction in sensitive habitats; installing a permanent fence between the trail and Twin Lakes State Beach near the tarplant population; and developing a Project-specific mitigation and management plan (MMP). These measures would reduce potential impacts to the State Endangered and Federally Threatened Santa Cruz tarplant to a less than significant level.

1.37 c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-56 through 3.3-58 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact BIO-3. The Project could adversely affect sensitive fish species (tidewater goby, central California coast coho salmon, and central California coast steelhead), critical habitat, and coho Essential Fish Habitat (EFH).
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required4.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall conduct construction monitoring for sensitive wildlife species, as specified below:
 Prior to initiation of construction activities, a USFWS- and CDFWapproved biologist shall prepare a construction monitoring plan that identifies all areas to be protected with exclusion fencing on a 1:1500 scale map (or similar scale determined to be practicable), and all areas requiring monitoring by a USFWS-, NOAA Fisheries, and/or CDFW-approved biologist or trained construction monitor.  Prior to initiation of construction activities, a USFWS-, NOAA Fisheries, and/or CDFW-approved biologist shall conduct an environmental training for all construction personnel. The training shall include a description of the sensitive wildlife species known or with potential to occur in the Project alignment and surroundings [monarch butterfly, sensitive fish species, western pond turtle, potential Santa Cruz black salamander, sensitive and native nesting bird species (including bald eagle and peregrine falcon), roosting bats species (including western red bat), San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, and marine mammal species (including southern sea otter)].  Prior to initiation of construction activities, the construction contractor shall install temporary exclusion fencing (solid silt fencing) in specified areas along the project boundaries, approximately 6 inches below grade and 3.0 feet above grade, with wooden stakes at intervals of not more than 8.0 feet. The fence shall be maintained in working order for the duration of construction activities. The agency-USFWS-approved biologist or trained construction monitor shall inspect the fence daily and notify the construction foreman when fence maintenance is required. The fence shall allow for wildlife passage across the alignment at regular intervals to be determined in conjunction with USFWS and CDFW. 4 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.

1.38  Construction activities shall be timed to minimize impacts to sensitive biological resources, as shown in Table 3.3-7.  The agency-approved biologist shall be present on-site, to direct and inspect all ground disturbing activities (including but not limited to tree removal, vegetation removal, grading, grubbing, and exclusion fence installation and removal, and for construction activities located in or near sensitive wildlife resources). Any vegetation removed shall be placed directly into a disposal vehicle. Vegetation shall not be piled on the ground unless later transferred, piece by piece, under the direct supervision of an approved biologist.
 The approved biologist shall train a designated construction monitor who shall oversee implementation of all protective mitigation measures when the biologist is not present. This representative shall be trained in the identification of special-status wildlife. This representative shall not have the authority to handle special-status species.
 Once ground disturbance activities have been completed, the approved biologist or trained construction monitor shall conduct regular inspections of the work area. Prior to the start of work each day, the biologist or monitor shall check for wildlife underneath any vehicle or heavy equipment within the construction site.  The biologist will remain on call. In the event that the construction monitor identifies a sensitive wildlife species in or near the Project area, the approved biologist will be available to confirm the identification and, depending on the species, and with agency authorization, relocate the animal out of harm’s way. Suitable relocation sites shall be identified in advance with the approval of the relevant agencies.
 The approved biologist and construction monitor shall have the authority to stop work that may result in the “take” of a special-status species.
 At the end of each workday, excavations (i.e., trenches, holes) shall be secured with a cover (preferably) or a ramp to prevent wildlife entrapment.
 All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar structures shall be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling.  With agency approval, the approved biologist shall remove invasive aquatic species such as bullfrogs and crayfish from suitable aquatic habitat in and near the construction impact area, if present.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

1.39 BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10a Minimize Construction-related Activities in Palustrine Emergent Wetlands and Aquatic/Riverine Habitats. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall minimize construction-related activities including, but not limited to, access routes, staging areas, stockpile areas, and equipment maintenance, within or adjacent to the limits of palustrine emergent wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats, to the extent feasible. Wetlands and aquatic/riverine areas shall be clearly shown on construction plans. In coordination with a qualified biologist, temporary fencing (e.g., silt fencing) shall be installed at the outermost edge of all features not directly affected by trail construction.

BIO-10b Develop and Implement Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures.

A qualified biologist shall be retained to prepare an Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP) for all direct and indirect impacts to wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats resulting from trail construction, resulting in no net loss (minimum 1:1 replacement) of these sensitive habitat types. The mitigation area locations and replacement ratios shall be determined in consultation with the USACE, RWQCB, CCC, and/or CDFW, as required USFWS, NOAA Fisheries, USACE, Central Coast RWQCB, California Coastal Commission, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is expected that mitigation requirements shall be based on the determination by the CCC California Coastal Commission that the trail is a resource-dependent use by providing safe pedestrian and bicycle access to the recreation (e.g., beaches, open spaces, scenic viewpoints) along the central Santa Cruz coast and based on its capacity for “nature study” pursuant to Section 30233(a)(7) of the Coastal Act.

The Wetland MMP shall include the following:
 Description of the Project including acreage of temporary and permanent impacts to palustrine emergent wetlands, Coastal Act wetlands including arroyo willow riparian forest, and
aquatic/riverine features as identified in a forthcoming formal delineation of jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters of the U.S.

1.40  Ecological functions and values assessment of wetlands, including a determination of regulatory status and permitting requirements to determine suitable mitigation ratios.
 Goals of compensatory mitigation project including types and areas of wetland and aquatic/riverine habitat to be created, restored, and/or enhanced; specific functions and values of mitigation habitat types; and mitigation ratios (created/restored/enhanced/preserved:
impacted). Based on a recent memo by the Coastal Commission for a project at Gleason Beach in Sonoma County, mitigation ratios for permanent wetland impacts will likely begin at 4:1 for creation or substantial restoration. For wetland enhancement, this ratio is doubled (8:1) and tripled for habitat preservation (12:1). For all mitigation strategies, at least 1:1 must include creation of new sensitive habitat.
 Location and acreage of wetland and riparian mitigation areas including size, ownership status, and existing functions and values of restored and/or enhanced sensitive habitats. At least a portion of wetland mitigation will occur in newly constructed drainage swales north (inland) of the proposed trail. These features will be lined with clay soils and planted with a palette of agency-approved native hydrophytic vegetation and will connect directly to storm drains or watercourses along the Segment 9 alignment.
 Detailed wetland and aquatic/riverine construction and planting techniques.
 Description and design of habitat requirements for special-status plants and wildlife potentially occupying wetland and
aquatic/riverine habitats.
 Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including replanting native wetland and riparian vegetation and weed removal, that will not result in take of aquatic wildlife species.  Long-term quantitative and qualitative monitoring and reporting, documenting ability to meet or surpass performance criteria.  Adaptive management strategies to ensure long-term viability and enhance ecological functions and values of sensitive habitat mitigation areas.
 Strategies to protect remaining wetland and aquatic/riverine habitats along the trail alignment from direct and indirect impacts from trail users. Strategies may include split-rail fencing, interpretive signage, and green fencing (dense vegetative buffers).

1.41 The draft MMP shall be submitted to regulatory agencies USFWS, CDFW, CCC, and California State Parks for review, as required, prior to formal adoption:.
 USACE. Work below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of stream corridors or in jurisdictional (3 parameter) wetlands.  CDFW. Work below the break in bank of stream corridors, riparian habitat.
 CCC. Aquatic features, Coastal Act wetlands.
 RWQCB. Work below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of stream corridors, jurisdictional (3 parameter) wetlands, other waters, or riparian habitat.

Monitoring reports will be provided to relevant agencies. The Aquatic Resources MMP may be consolidated with the Biological Resources MMP in consultation with the regulatory agencies.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c, BIO-10a, BIO-10b would reduce the potential impacts on sensitive fish species, critical habitat, and Coho Essential Fish Habitat by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, BMPs, monitoring, inspections); minimizing construction in sensitive areas and aquatic/riverine habitats; developing a Project-specific MMP for biological resources and MMP specifically for aquatic resources; and requiring compensation for loss of habitat. Further, no work would occur within the waters of the San Lorenzo River or on the embankments; and the construction BMPs would include erosion and sediment control measures to be installed and maintained during construction to reduce sediment, other materials, and chemical-laden runoff introductions to the river. These measures would reduce potential impacts to sensitive fish species and their critical habitat to a less than significant level.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-68 through 3.3-70 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact BIO-4. The Project could adversely affect western pond turtle and Santa Cruz black salamander, if present.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting

1.42 from Trail Construction and Operation. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10a Minimize Construction-related Activities in Palustrine Emergent Wetlands and Aquatic/Riverine Habitats. Please refer to Impact BIO3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10b Develop and Implement Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c, BIO-10a, and BIO-10b would reduce potential impacts to black salamander, western pond turtles, and their habitat by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, BMPs, monitoring); minimizing construction in sensitive areas and aquatic/riverine habitats; developing a Project-specific MMP for biological resources and MMP specifically for aquatic resources; and requiring compensation for lost habitat. These measures would reduce potential impacts to sensitive and reptile and amphibian species to a less than significant level.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-72 through 3.3-74 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

4. Impact BIO-5. The Project would adversely affect sensitive and native nesting bird species during construction and operation.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-5 Conduct Breeding Bird Surveys and Identify Protective Buffers prior to Construction, if Construction occurs between February 1 and August 31. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures:
 The avian breeding season occurs from February 1 through August 31 with a peak in breeding/nesting activity between April and June for most raptors and/or other birds.
 If feasible, Project activities will be initiated outside the breeding season in order to avoid impacts to breeding birds. Should Project activities be initiated between September and February, no avian breeding surveys would be required.

1.43  If Project activities are to be initiated during breeding season, or if Project activities lapse for 1 week or more during breeding bird season, prior to construction/resumption of construction activities, an approved biologist will conduct avian breeding surveys for all birds (and their nests) protected under the MBTA. According to current CDFW permit conditions, the survey area will encompass tree stands and structures within the Project corridor and the following buffers (where accessible):
 250 feet for passerines/non-raptors;
 500 feet for small raptors such as accipiters; and
 1,000 feet for larger raptors such as buteos.

Surveys will be conducted within 1 week (per current CDFW permit conditions), prior to beginning/resuming Project activities including, but not limited to, staging equipment, tree removal, vegetation clearing, and/or ground disturbing activities.
 In the event nesting bird species are observed, postpone Project activities until a qualified biologist has determined young birds have fledged or implement buffers appropriate to the construction activity and the species, such as those recommended in PG&E’s Nesting Bird Management Plan (PG&E et al. 2015)5:
 Raptors (platform nesting): 300 feet (90 meters)
 Cavity-nesters (depending on species): 50 feet (15 meters)  Bridge/building, tree, and ground/understory nesters: 75 feet (23 meters)
 Sensitive bird species, if nesting in or near the Project corridor, will be given special consideration and may require additional protective measures as determined through consultation with the relevant agency (USFWS or CDFW). The standard protective buffers recommended in PG&E et al. (2015) for sensitive birds that are known to nest in or near the corridor are as follows:
 Bald eagle – consultation required [standard buffer: 1320 feet (402 meters)]
 Peregrine falcon – consultation required [standard buffer: 500 feet (152 meters)]
5 PG&E’s Nesting Bird Management Plan (2015) was based on a literature review of the effects of nest disturbance on reproductive success and consultation with subject experts and takes into account the nesting habits of the bird and the bird’s sensitivity to disturbance, as well as the type of activity, duration, and noise level of disturbance (including direct and indirect effects), to develop disturbance categories (low, medium, or high) and associated buffers.

1.44  Olive-sided flycatcher – standard buffer: 75 feet (23 meters)  Oak titmouse – standard buffer: 50 feet (15 meters)
Other sensitive bird species have the potential to nest in or near the Project corridor.
 Protective buffers will be clearly marked for avoidance by construction activities.
 The approved biologist will document pre-construction baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize “normal” behavior. If approved by the agencies, the biologist may have the discretion to reduce the buffer and monitor the nest for disturbance. If the birds show signs of abnormal behaviors (e.g., defensive
flights/vocalizations, standing up from brooding, and flying away from the nest) that are associated with construction activity, the biologist will reinstate the larger buffer. Work within the setback will be delayed until after the young have fledged.
 The biologist will have the authority to stop work if breeding birds exhibit behaviors that may cause nest failure.
 If postponing Project activities and/or installing buffers are not feasible, further discussions with the appropriate resource agencies (USFWS and/or CDFW) will be necessary to develop alternative requirements.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-5, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, and BIO-9c would reduce potential impacts on sensitive and native nesting avian species by implementing protective measures during construction (worker training, BMPs, monitoring); conducting preconstruction surveys and identifying protective buffers; minimizing construction in and adjacent to breeding habitats; and incorporating breeding bird habitat into the Project-specific Biological Resources MMMP. These measures would reduce potential impacts to sensitive and native nesting bird species to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-76 through 3.3-79 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

1.45 5. Impact BIO-6. Project construction could adversely affect sensitive and common roosting bat species that may use coast live oak woodland and other trees along the alignment. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-6 Conduct Bat Surveys and Implement Measures to Protect Roosting Bats during Construction. In Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures. To avoid impacts to individual roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity roosts, during all months, throughout the Segment 9 corridor and especially in mature coast live oak woodland and riparian habitats, prior to limbing/tree removal, an approved biologist shall conduct a pre‐construction survey for bats to determine if cavity, crevice or foliageroosting bats are present, as follows:
 Bat maternity roosting occurs typically between May 1 and August 31, and winter hibernacula (shelter occupied during the winter by a dormant animal) for many bat species are found between November 1 and February 15.
 All trees and limbs proposed for removal, topping or pruning should be marked in the field by the Project proponent in advance of the Project start date.
 A qualified biologist shall determine if bats are utilizing the Project corridor for roosting. For any trees/snags/structures (bridges) that could provide roosting habitat for cavity, crevice, or foliage‐roosting bats, potential bat roost features shall be thoroughly evaluated to determine if bats are present. Visual inspection, emergence, and/or acoustic surveys shall be utilized as initial techniques.  If established maternity colonies are found, in coordination with CDFW, a buffer shall be established around the colony to protect pre‐volant young from construction disturbances until the young can fly; or implement other measures acceptable to CDFW.  If individual roosting bats or winter hibernacula are found, in consultation with CDFW or based on CDFW recommendations, the qualified biologist shall develop and implement acceptable passive exclusion methods. If feasible, exclusion shall take place during the appropriate windows (between September 1 and November 1) (Authorization from CDFW is required to evict winter hibernacula for bats).
 If a tree is determined not to be an active roost site for cavityroosting bats, it may be immediately limbed or removed as follows:

1.46  If foliage-roosting bats are determined to be present, limbs shall be lowered, inspected for bats by a bat biologist, and chipped immediately or moved to a dump site. Alternately, limbs may be lowered and left on the ground until the following day, when they can be chipped or moved to a dump site. No logs or tree sections shall be dropped on downed limbs or limb piles that have not been in place since the previous day.
 If the tree is not limbed or removed within 4 days of the survey, the survey efforts shall be repeated.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-6, BIO-9a, and BIO-9c would reduce potential impacts to roosting bat species from construction-related impacts by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, BMPs, monitoring); conducting preconstruction surveys and implementing protective measures for bat maternity roosts and roosting bats; and minimizing construction activities in and adjacent to sensitive habitats providing bat roosting habitat. These measures would reduce potential impacts to roosting bats to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-82 through 3.4-84 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

6. Impact BIO-7. The Project would adversely affect San Francisco Dusky-footed woodrat. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-7 Implement Dusky-Footed Woodrat Protection Measures During Construction. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for woodrat houses, and clearly flag all houses within the construction impact area and immediate surroundings.

The construction contractor shall avoid woodrat houses to the extent feasible by installing a minimum 10-foot (preferably 25-foot) buffer with silt fencing or other material that shall prohibit encroachment. If this buffer and avoidance is not feasible, the qualified biologist shall allow encroachment into the buffer, but preserve microhabitat conditions such as shade, cover and adjacent food sources.

1.47 Additionally, if avoidance is not possible, a qualified biologist shall develop and implement a Woodrat Relocation Plan, in consultation with CDFW, that allows for the relocation of woodrats and their houses. The plan shall include the following (or similar and CDFW-approved) criteria:
 Relocation will occur when vulnerable young are least likely to be present in the woodrat houses (ideally between August 1 and October 30).
 During dismantling of woodrat houses, woody debris, food caches, and nesting materials will be retained and relocated to reconstructed or artificial shelters.
 Relocation sites will be in the nearest suitable habitat outside the Project footprint.
 Sites for artificial shelters shall be located in proximity to the original house location and no closer than 20 feet from existing woodrat houses and other artificial shelters. Choose the best available microhabitat, ideally in a location with sun and shade and, if possible, under the same species of tree or shrub as was present at the original house location. Relocation sites shall contain biologically suitable habitat features (e.g., stands of poison oak, coast live oaks, and dense native brush).
 Monitoring shall be conducted for 30 days after relocation is completed and include infrared and motion activated cameras and an occupancy assessment.
 A report on San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat house monitoring shall be provided to CDFW, within 30 days following the end of the monitoring period and shall include the methods and results of relocation, occupancy determinations, and discussion of any remedies that may be needed.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-7, BIO-9a, and BIO-9c would reduce potential impacts to the San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat from construction-related impacts by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, BMPs, monitoring); conducting preconstruction surveys for woodrat houses and implementing protective measures (clearly flag all houses, prepare a Woodrat Relocation Plan if they cannot be avoided, additional monitoring); and minimizing construction activities in habitats that support woodrats. These measures would reduce potential impacts to duskyfooted wood rat to a less than significant level.

1.48 c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-86 through 3.3-87 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

7. Impact BIO-8. The Project could adversely affect marine mammals, including southern sea otter. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-2 Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10b Develop and Implement Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9c, and BIO-10b would reduce potential impacts to marine mammals, including southern sea otter, by implementing protection measures during construction (worker training, BMPs); minimizing construction in sensitive areas and aquatic/riverine habitats; and developing a Project-specific MMP specifically for aquatic resources to protect water quality, prevent erosion and sedimentation, and protect marine mammal habitat. This measure also identifies the preferred construction window (the dry season) for work in or near aquatic features which would minimize sediment-laden runoff into aquatic features. Further, no work would occur within the waters of the San Lorenzo River or within the Santa Cruz Harbor; and a debris containment device would span several feet beyond the edge of the proposed cantilever to ensure construction debris and materials do not enter the Santa Cruz Harbor. These measures would reduce potential impacts to marine mammals, including southern sea otter, to a less than significant level.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-89 through 3.3-91 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

8. Impact BIO-9. The Project would result in adverse effects to riparian habitat, other sensitive natural communities, and Coastal Act ESHA.
b. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting

1.49 from Trail Construction and Operation. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
c. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9a, BIO-9b, andBIO-9c would reduce potential impacts to sensitive habitat during construction to the greatest extent feasible, and mitigate permanent and temporary losses where possible through avoidance, minimization, and construction-related BMPs. Mitigation Measure BIO-9b would reduce permanent impacts on sensitive habitats by developing a Project-specific resource management plan to further deter encroachment into sensitive habitats with fencing, dense vegetative barriers, and interpretative panels, and through the creation and restoration of inkind habitats with similar or greater ecological functions and values to those displaced by the Project. These measures would reduce potential impacts to riparian habitat, other sensitive natural communities, and Coastal Act ESHA, to a less than significant level. d. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-93 through 3.3-944 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

9. Impact BIO-10. The Project would result in adverse effects to palustrine emergent wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats.
b. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-9a Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9b Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-9c Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction. Please refer to Impact BIO-1 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10a Minimize Construction-related Activities in Palustrine Emergent Wetlands and Aquatic/Riverine Habitats. Please refer to Impact BIO3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.

BIO-10b Develop and Implement Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Please refer to Impact BIO-3 in Section IV.A, Biological Resources, above.
c. Findings and Rationale – Mitigation Measures BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c, BIO-10a, and BIO-10b would reduce potential impacts to palustrine emergent wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats by implementing protection measures during construction (BMPs to protect water quality, protective fencing); minimizing construction in sensitive areas including wetlands

1.50 and aquatic/riverine habitats; developing a Project-specific MMP for biological resources and MMP specifically for aquatic resources; and requiring compensation for loss of wetlands and other sensitive habitats thus protecting the edge habitats and ecological functions and values of adjacent wetlands and aquatic features. These measures would reduce potential impacts to palustrine emergent wetlands and aquatic/ riverine habitats to a less than significant level. d. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-105 through 3.3-108 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

B. CULTRAL RESOURCES

1. Impact CR-1. The Project may adversely affect historical resources, including the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required6.

CR-1a Install Historical Interpretive Exhibits prior to Trail Use. Consistent with Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan Design Guidelines, the City and/or County, depending on the jurisdiction, shall develop an on-site interpretive exhibit with materials concerning the history and engineering features of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line and its character-defining features. Prior to or within the first year of trail use, the exhibits shall be installed where there is adequate room at key locations along the trail or trail entrances to specifically highlight the importance of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. Interpretation of the site’s history shall be supervised by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, and may engage additional consultants to develop the display.

There shall be at least two major exhibits and three minor exhibits, including signage and salvaged materials (e.g., small segments of original ballast, ties, and rail) to be placed intermittently along the trail route as space allows and as approved by the lead agency and Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. The historical interpretive exhibits shall be designed in conjunction and compatible with interpretive exhibits for nature education and exhibits along other rail trail segments for continuity.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1a would reduce the impact to the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line (SCBRL) through installation of interpretive exhibits, which would preserve and convey the significance of this historic resource during project operations. Although the project already includes installing educational signage regarding the history of the SCBRL, Mitigation Measure CR-1a would require the signage include historic and educational interpretive exhibits and be placed along the trail at strategic locations to offer a variety of information to trail users about the cultural history of the area, including insight into the history of the rail line and its construction and design. This measure would reduce potential impacts to historic resources to a less than significant level. 6 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.

1.51 c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.4-9 through 3.4-11 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact CR-2. Ground-disturbing activities during Project construction may unearth or adversely impact subsurface historical resources or unique archaeological resources. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required6.

CR-2 Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of
Cultural Resources. In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during ground-disturbing construction activities, the construction contractor shall halt work within 100 50 feet of the find, and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (National Park Service 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the find is determined by the qualified archaeologist to be prehistoric, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the find. If necessary, archaeological testing for California Register of Historical Resources eligibility shall be completed.

If the discovery proves to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources and impacts to the resource cannot be avoided via project redesign, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare a data recovery plan tailored to the physical nature and characteristics of the deposit, per the requirements of California Public Resources Code, Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C). The data recovery plan shall identify data recovery excavation methods, measurable objectives, and data thresholds to reduce any significant impacts to cultural resources. Pursuant to the data recovery plan, the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative, as appropriate, shall recover and document the scientifically consequential information that justifies the resource’s significance. The City and/or County depending on the jurisdiction shall review and approve the treatment plan and archaeological testing as appropriate, and the resulting documentation shall be submitted to the regional repository of the CHRIS, per California Public Resources Code, Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C).
b. Findings and Rationale – Compliance with the Chapter 24.12 of the City’s Municipal Code and Chapter 16.40 of the County’s Municipal Code, depending on where resources are discovered, would reduce impacts to archaeological resources. However, while the ordinances address actions to be taken if archaeological resources are encountered during ground disturbance and the potential development of a mitigation plan, there is still the potential for the Project to impact unanticipated cultural resources because the ordinances do not address the evaluation of these resources. This mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.4-13 through 3.4-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

3. Impact CR-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative cultural resource impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable.

1.52 a. Mitigation – the following mitigation is required.

CR-1a Install Historical Interpretive Exhibits prior to Trail Use. Please refer to Impact CR-1 in Section IV.B, Cultural Resources, above.

CR-2 Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of
Cultural Resources. Please refer to Impact CR-2 in Section IV.B, Cultural Resources, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1a would provide signage along the rail line that would compensate for the partial material impairment of the SCBRL by providing users with insight into the history of the rail line and significance of the resource in a manner that may not be readily available otherwise. Mitigation Measure CR-2 would reinforce the City and County protocol for unanticpated discovery of cultural resources and require evaluation of any discovered resources. Therefore, although the cumulative development of the Coastal Rail Trail could result in a significant cumulative impacts to existing and unidentified resources, including historical rail resources, the Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable with implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1a and CR-2.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-12 through 4-13 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

C. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Impact GEO-5. Ground-disturbing activities during Project construction may directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required7.

GEO-5 Implement Paleontological Resources Protection Measures during Construction in High Sensitivity Areas. The following measures shall be implemented during project excavation activities in Segment 9 on geologic units that have high sensitivity to paleontological resources (Purisima Formation and Quaternary marine terrace deposits). Areas along Segment 9 that do not have high sensitivity for paleontological resources and would not require the following mitigation include construction of the cantilever/bridge over Santa Cruz Harbor and excavation in drainages and creek channels north of the Twin Lakes State Beach.

1. Retain Qualified Professional Paleontologist. Prior to excavation, the implementing agency (City or County of Santa Cruz) shall retain a qualified professional paleontologist who is defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) as an individual, preferably with an MS or PhD in paleontology or geology, who is experienced with paleontological procedures and techniques, who is knowledgeable in the geology of California, and who has worked as a paleontological 7 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.

1.53 mitigation project supervisor for at least 2 years. The qualified professional paleontologist shall direct all mitigation measures related to paleontological resources.

2. Prepare Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to the start of construction, the qualified professional paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff.

3. Monitor for Paleontological Resources during Construction. As determined appropriate by the qualified professional paleontologist, paleontological monitoring shall be conducted during initial excavations within sediments assigned high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., Quaternary marine terrace deposits and Purisima Formation). Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a paleontological monitor with experience with collection and salvage of paleontological resources and who meets the minimum standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) for a
paleontological resources monitor. The duration and timing of the monitoring will be determined by the qualified professional paleontologist based on the observation of the geologic setting from initial ground disturbance and subject to the review and approval by the City or County of Santa Cruz, depending on the jurisdiction of the work. The qualified professional paleontologist may determine that full-time monitoring is not warranted based on the specific geologic conditions once the full depth of excavations has been reached, and may recommend that monitoring be reduced to periodic spot-checking or ceased entirely. The qualified professional paleontologist may determine that monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required, and reduction or suspension shall be reconsidered by the qualified professional paleontologist at that time.

In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease, and a qualified professional paleontologist shall evaluate the find before construction activity in the area resumes. If it is determined that the fossil is scientifically significant, the qualified professional paleontologist shall complete the following conditions to mitigate impacts to significant fossil resources:

A. Fossil Salvage. If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to halt or temporarily divert construction equipment within 50 feet of the find until the paleontological monitor and/or qualified professional
paleontologist evaluate the discovery and determine if the fossil may be considered significant. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontological monitor and not

1.54 disrupt construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. Bulk matrix sampling may be necessary to recover small invertebrates or microvertebrates from within paleontologically sensitive deposits.

B. Fossil Preparation and Curation. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes, photographs, data, and maps.

Fossils of undetermined significance at the time of collection may also warrant curation at the discretion of the qualified professional paleontologist.

4. Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. Upon completion of ground-disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary), the qualified professional paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts associated with the Project. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be submitted to the City or County of Santa Cruz. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report shall also be submitted to the designated museum repository.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-5 would reduce the potential impact to paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features by establishing training, monitoring, and salvaging protocols for resources that may be encountered during project work. This measure would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features to a less than significant level.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.5-24 through 3.5-26 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact GEO-C -- Cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative geology and soils impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

GEO-5 Implement Paleontological Resources Protection Measures during Construction in High Sensitivity Areas. Please refer to Impact GEO-5 in Section IV.C, Geology and Soils, above.
b. Findings and Rationale: With implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-5 to protect paleontological resources, the Project’s contribution to any cumulative geology and soils

1.55 impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
d. Suppportive Evidence – Please refer to page 4-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

D. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

1. Impact HAZ-2. Ground disturbance during construction could release soil contaminants. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required8.

HAZ-2a Conduct Soil Sampling and Implement Necessary Remediations9.

Prior to Project construction, the City, and County, and RTC shall coordinate to prepare and submit Work Plan(s) for a Supplemental Soils Investigation to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health. Following notification that Santa Cruz County Environmental Health has received, reviewed, and accepted these Work Plan(s), the City, County, and RTC shall conduct a Supplemental Soils Investigation, which shall include soil sampling at selected locations within the limits of the Project corridor under the supervision of a professional geologist or professional civil engineer to identify the concentrations of anticipated contaminants, which may include: pesticides, herbicides, TPHs, heavy metals, PAHs, and other reasonably anticipated contaminants of concern, such as arsenic.

The City, and County, and RTC shall coordinate with Santa Cruz County Environmental Health to develop and implement a program to remediate or manage known contaminated soil during construction. If necessary, any additional information gathered from the Supplemental Soil Investigation shall be used to identify locations along the Project corridor that may require remedial action in order to prevent exposure of construction workers, Shoreline Middle School attendees, and the public to these contaminants. The environmental data collected shall also be used to identify the appropriate disposal options for those soils or demolished materials that require off-site disposal.

Disposal shall occur at an appropriate facility licensed to handle such contaminants, and remedial excavation shall proceed under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation. Where possible, potentially contaminated soils and rail ballast shall be stockpiled and characterized to determine the appropriate means and location for proper storage and disposal. The remediation/disposal program shall be approved by Santa Cruz County Environmental Health. The City and County shall submit any required correspondence to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health prior to 8 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.
9 This is Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(a) (Soil Sampling and Remediation) from the Master Plan EIR (RTC 2013), refined to account for projectspecific conditions. The Phase I ISA prepared for the Project corridor recommended conducting a limited shallow soil screening across the length of the Segments 8 and 9, to identify the naturally occurring background concentration for arsenic and potentially other contaminants, to assist with special handling required during construction activities (WHA 2022).

1.56 issuance of grading permits. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed in accordance with applicable DTSC and CalOSHA regulations. Upon completion of the Supplemental Site Investigation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report presenting the findings of the additional assessment. The report shall be submitted to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health and include figures depicting the boring locations, summary tables of analytical data, conclusions, and recommendations.

HAZ-2b Prepare and Implement Soils Management Plan10. The City, and County, and RTC shall ensure a Soils Management Plan (SMP) is developed by a qualified engineer. The SMP shall be implemented to protect workers and persons at Shoreline Middle School during grounddisturbing activities and to remove and/or mitigate exposure to hazardous-material-containing soil and ballast, where present in the Project corridor. Laboratory data for the impacted soil, identified as part of the soils and ballast assessment report prepared under Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a, shall be used to profile excavated soil prior to transport, treatment, and recycling at a licensed treatment facility.

Additional profiling of the export soils shall be performed as needed to satisfy requirements of the receiving facility. Removal, transportation, and disposal of impacted soil shall be performed in accordance with applicable DTSC and CalOSHA laws, regulations, and ordinances. The SMP shall include health and safety information for workers and the general public with an emphasis on potential adverse health effects and how to seek proper help if an accident is suspected and inform the various contractors and workers of the presence of shallow soil impacted with contaminants and the appropriate measures to avoid exposure to contaminants. These measures may include but would not be limited to the following:

1. Installing temporary security fencing around the construction site and flag/cone off the areas of contaminated soils (hotspots) until the contaminants are removed

2. Providing all personnel entering a hotspot with site-specific awareness training

3. Requiring that all personnel whose work will involve the excavation or disturbance of soils in and around the hotspot must have successfully completed 40-hour Hazardous Worker (HAZWOPER) training

4. Requiring a HAZWOPER supervisor to be on-site at all times during the excavation or disturbance of soils in a hotspot
10 This is a modified version of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1(b) (Arsenic Management Plan) from the Master Plan EIR (RTC 2013) that includes arsenic-containing soils management as well as other potential contaminants. The Phase I ISA prepared for the Project corridor further recommended completing a soil management plan to identify soil excavation, stockpiling, and disposal procedures, and construction monitoring guidelines.

1.57 5. Prohibiting personnel who cannot prove that they are authorized to enter a hotspot or do not have the appropriate personal protective equipment from entering a hotspot

6. Prohibiting eating, drinking, smoking, chewing gum or tobacco in hotspots, and requiring consumable items and activities be confined to designated worker break areas
In the event that contaminated soil and/or groundwater are identified where not previously anticipated during construction, the SMP shall also require that construction cease and that appropriate handling and disposal procedures be implemented. Contaminated soils and/or groundwater can be identified by discoloration or stains, distinctive odors, absence of plants and animals, subsequent erosion from the absence of plant life, or the presence of paint chips or other materials known to contaminate soils.

Procedures for properly handling, storing, and disposing contaminated soils may include but are not limited to the following:

1. Placing contaminated soils in properly labeled drums or lined hazardous waste storage/transportation conveyance units (i.e., rolloff waste boxes) in preparation of transportation and disposal

2. Avoiding temporary stockpiling of contaminated soils or hazardous materials

3. If temporary stockpiling is necessary:
a. Covering the stockpile with plastic sheeting or tarps b. Installing a berm around the stockpile to prevent runoff from leaving the area
c. Avoiding stockpiling in or near storm drains or watercourses

4. Monitoring the air quality during excavation operations at locations potentially exhibiting elevated concentrations of hazardous material

5. Collecting water from decontamination procedures and treating and/or disposing of it at an appropriate disposal site

6. Collecting non-reusable protective equipment and disposing of the equipment at an appropriate disposal site
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-2a and HAZ-2b would reduce the impact of exposing construction workers and the public to health hazards associated with contaminated soils released during ground-disturbing activities, by conducting soil sampling for hazardous materials and, if necessary, soil management plan and remediation. These measures would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.7-22 through 3.7-25 of the Final EIR.

1.58 2. Impact HAZ-C. Cumulative development would not result in significant cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

HAZ-1a Conduct Soil Sampling and Implement Necessary
Remediations. Please refer to Impact HAZ-1 in Section IV.D, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, above.

HAZ-1b Prepare and Implement Soils Management Plan. Please refer to Impact HAZ-1 in Section IV.D, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, above.
b. Findings and Rationale – Planned development could result in significant cumulative impacts concerning transport of hazardous materials, release of hazardous materials, and exposure to soil contaminants. The Project would not generate and thus would not contribute to significant cumulative impacts concerning the transport or release of hazardous materials.

With implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1a and HAZ-1b to protect construction workers and the public from exposure to soil contaminates through soil sampling and remediation, the Project’s contribution to a cumulative impact from exposure to soil contaminants would not be cumulatively considerable.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-15 through 4-16 of the Final EIR.

E. NOISE

1. Impact N-1. Construction may result in a substantial temporary increase in noise levels. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

N-1 Implement Noise-Reducing Measures for Construction Equipment Used within 275 Feet of Residences or Hotels11. During construction, the construction contractor shall employ the following noise-reducing measures where use of construction equipment occurs within 275 feet of residences or hotels:
(1) Use acoustical shelters around any air compressors, generators, and any other stationary construction equipment not fitted with baffled enclosures;
(2) Use baffling around stationary construction equipment to reduce noise and vibration levels;
(3) Properly muffle and maintain all construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines;
11 This mitigation measure is a refinement of Mitigation Measure N-1(b) (Acoustical Shelters) and Mitigation Measure N-1(c) (Construction Equipment) from the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Network Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (RTC 2013). The original measures have been revised to consider Project-specific details, the specific locations of nearby sensitive receptors, and specific local noise concerns and regulation (County of Santa Cruz Noise Ordinance).

1.59 (4) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; and (5) Whenever feasible, use electrical power to run air compressors and similar power tools.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would reduce impacts related to construction noise by requiring noise-reducing measures for construction equipment (e.g., acoustical shelters, baffled enclosures, proper muffler and maintenance), such that noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors would not exceed applicable thresholds.

This mitigation measure would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.10-7 through 3.10-10 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

2. Impact N-3. Construction would potentially expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

N-3 Provide Notification of Construction Vibration to Residential Units within 50 Feet. The construction contractor shall provide written notification at least 1 week prior to the start of any construction activities involving the use of vibratory equipment to all residential units located within 50 feet of the construction area that will produce the vibration.

The notice shall inform residents of the estimated start date and duration of daytime vibration-generating construction activities and provide a point of contact for vibration exposure complaints.
c. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measure N-3 would reduce impacts regarding excessive groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels by notifying residents at least a week prior to the use of vibratory equipment (thus allowing surrounding uses time to prepare) and providing a point of contact for vibration exposure complaints. This mitigation measure would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.10-12 through 3.10-14 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

F. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

1. Impact TCR-1. The Project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.
a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required12.

TCR-1a Conduct Native American Monitoring during Construction in Previously Undisturbed Native Soils. A Native American monitor shall be retained and remain present during excavation activities within 12 Revisions made to mitigation measures between publication of the Draft EIR and Final EIR are show in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions. Additional minor revisions made after publication of the Final EIR are shown in double underline and strikeout. All revisions are minor and were made to strengthen the mitigation measure or provide further clarification or detail about the measure, but do not change the resulting impact conclusion.

1.60 previously undisturbed native soils.

In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during construction, the Native American monitor shall have the authority to halt and redirect ground disturbance away from the find.

The implementing agency (City or County) and/or Tribal Liaison, as appropriate, shall consult with a qualified archaeologist and begin or continue Native American consultation procedures. If the City/County and/or Tribal Liaison, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. The mitigation plan may include but would not be limited to avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon measure.

TCR-1b Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources, if Native American Monitor is Not Present. If cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during Project construction while the Native American monitor is not present, all earthdisturbing work within 100 50 feet of the find shall cease and desist until an archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find as a cultural resource and an appropriate local Native American representative is consulted. Staking of the area of discovery shall be implemented with stakes no more than 10 feet apart, forming a circle having a radius of no less than 100 feet from the point of discovery. If the City/County, in consultation with local Native American tribes, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s). The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include but are not limited to protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.
b. Findings and Rationale – Implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1a and TCR-1b would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources by requiring Native American monitoring of previously undisturbed native soils and implementing protocol for unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural resources if a Native American monitor is not present. Together, these measures would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.13-5 through 3.13-6 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

1.61 2. Impact TCR-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative tribal cultural resource impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation –The following mitigation is required.

TCR-1a Conduct Native American Monitoring during Construction in Previously Undisturbed Native Soils. Please refer to Impact CR-1 in Section IV.F, Tribal Cultural Resources, above.

TCR-1b Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources, if Native American Monitor is Not Present. Please refer to Impact CR-1 in Section IV.F, Tribal Cultural Resources, above. b. Findings and Rationale – No tribal cultural resources have been identified within the Project corridor. Potential impacts to previously unidentified tribal cultural resources would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1a and TCR-1b, which requires Native American construction monitoring, avoidance if feasible, and preservation of any resources discovered during construction. As implementation of this measure would minimize adverse effects on any potential tribal cultural resources, the Project’s contribution to this impact would not be cumulatively considerable. c. Supporting Evidence – Please refer to page 4-22 of the Final EIR (Volume 2).

V. FINDINGS FOR IMPACTS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE The City hereby finds that the following mitigation measures, which are identified in the EIR and will lessen the following significant environmental impacts but not to a less than significant level, have been required in or incorporated into the Project. The findings below are for impacts where implementation of the Project may result in the following significant, unavoidable environmental impacts. These findings are based on the discussion of impacts in the detailed impact analyses in Section 3.1 through Section

3.14 and Section 4.1 of the EIR, as well as relevant responses to comments in the Final EIR.

A. AESTHETICS

1. Impact AES-1. The Project would have an adverse effect on scenic resources and vistas through the removal of mature trees.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is available.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would remove approximately 381 trees that add to the scenic quality of enjoyed vistas near the Project corridor. Although the trail would facilitate public access to viewing points of scenic vistas in both segments of the project corridor, and although regulations require tree replacement/compensation, the exact location of replacement trees is uncertain at this time, and timing of growth to maturity equivalent to the trees that would be removed cannot be predicted with certainty. Therefore, despite improved access provided by the trail and required tree replacement, the required tree removal would affect public views of the Project corridor, degrade existing local scenic resources that include mature trees, and disrupt existing scenic vistas of mature vegetation. The tree removals are determined by the physical space needed to construct the trail infrastructure and maintain required offsets, grading extents for excavation and/or fill, drainage ditches, retaining walls, and similar features. The trail design team revisited the alignment several

1.62 times to minimize the tree removal to the extent feasible, while still meeting Caltrans ADA Class 1 requirements for trail width and CPUC requirements for distance from the rail, which is why the proposed trail includes several sections designed as viaducts instead of retaining walls. The Project has been designed to avoid trees where feasible, but due to the need to meet state standards and to locate it primarily adjacent to the existing railroad tracks, it is not possible to avoid enough trees to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts to scenic resources and vistas due to tree removal would be significant and unavoidable.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.1-9 through 3.1-19 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).)

2. Impact AES-2. The Project would be inconsistent with policies that pertain to tree and vegetation removal.
a. Mitigation – No mitigation is available.
b. Findings and Rationale – While the Project would be consistent with most applicable regulations governing scenic quality, the Project would be inconsistent with County General Plan Policies 5.10.3 and 5.18.8, which pertain to removal of trees and vegetation.

Inconsistency with these policies would lead to the Project having a significant and unavoidable impact regarding consistency with applicable regulations that govern scenic quality, as explained further for Impact AES-1 above.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 3.1-21 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).)

3. Impact AES-C. Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative aesthetic impacts.

The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable except for cumulative impacts to scenic quality due to the removal of mature trees.
a. Mitigation – BIO-C. Please refer to Impact BIO-C below.

1.63 b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would remove approximately 381 trees that add to the scenic quality of enjoyed vistas near the Project corridor. Although the trail would improve access to scenic resources and vistas and removed trees would be replaced at ratios determined in coordination with the regulatory permitting agencies and jurisdictional authorities, the exact location of replacement trees is uncertain at this time, and timing of growth to maturity equivalent to the trees that would be removed cannot be predicted with certainty. Therefore, although the Project impacts would be partially offset by implementing Mitigation Measure BIO-C (Include Cumulative Conservation Goals and Objectives in the Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan), the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the identified significant cumulative impact to scenic quality.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to page 4-8 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact: :

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).) B. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. Impact BIO-2. The Project could adversely affect monarch butterfly and autumnal and/or wintering roost sites.
a. Mitigation – BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, and BIO-9c.
b. Findings and Rationale – To accommodate Segment 9 of the Ultimate Trail Configuration and meet CPUC safety requirements and Caltrans Class 1 trail width requirements, tree removal would occur in known and potential monarch roost sites. Therefore, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable impact on monarch butterfly autumnal and/or wintering roost sites. Known and potential monarch roost habitat would be protected to the greatest extent feasible through trail design. Where sensitive resources exist, the trail has been designed to the minimum width requirements. In addition, the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, and BIO-9c will protect monarch butterflies to the extent possible during construction activities. While the Project MMP would include provisions for the enhancement of monarch habitat, the permanent loss of mature monarch roost trees, including buffer trees, cannot be adequately mitigated. Therefore, this construction-related impact is significant and unavoidable.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-60 through 3.3-65 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the

1.64 significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).)

2. Impact BIO-11. The Project would interfere with wildlife movement. a. Mitigation – BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c, BIO-10a, and BIO-10b. b. Findings and Rationale – Segment 9 of the Project corridor serves as a corridor for local wildlife movement, and the Project would interfere with wildlife movement in the corridor through tree removal and trail installation, resulting in the permanent loss of 1.94 acres of wildlife movement habitat, including coast live oak woodland, riparian habitat, non-native forest, and understory vegetation. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the trail would be more limited at night when wildlife species are most likely to use the corridor for movement; therefore, some nighttime functions of the corridor would be retained. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2, BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-10(a), and BIO-10(b) will protect biological resources during construction and compensate for the loss of trees and habitat to the extent feasible. However, these mitigation measures would not reduce this impact to a less than significant level, and the impact would be significant and unavoidable. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-111 through 3.3-113 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).)

2. Impact BIO-12. The Project would conflict with policies and ordinances protecting trees, including the City of Santa Cruz Heritage Tree Ordinance and County of Santa Cruz Significant Tree Ordinance.
a. Mitigation – BIO-9a, BIO-9b, BIO-9c.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would result in the removal of 381 trees, which conflicts with City and County plans, policies and ordinances, which call for tree protection and replacement, including but not limited to: Santa Cruz County General Plan and LCP, Section 5.10.8 Significant Tree Removal Ordinance (LCP); Santa Cruz Urban Forest Master Plan; County of Santa Cruz Significant Tree Ordinance; City of Santa Cruz General Plan, and City of Santa Cruz Heritage Tree Ordinance. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9a, BIO-9b, and BIO-9c will reduce construction-related impacts and develop a Project-specific biological resources mitigation and management plan that includes tree replacement.

However, due to the substantial number of trees planned for removal, including a large percentage of trees regulated by City and County ordinances, the inability to mitigate the

1.65 majority of tree removal on-site, and the number of years required for trees to mature, this construction impact would conflict with City and County policies and ordinances that regulate tree removal and thus would be significant and unavoidable. c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 3.3-115 through 3.3-118 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact: :

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).)

3. Impact BIO-C. Cumulative development would result in significant cumulative biological resources impacts. The Project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable. a. Mitigation – The following mitigation is required.

BIO-C Include Cumulative Conservation Goals and Objectives in the Project-Specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (Mitigation Measure BIO-9b). When developing the Projectspecific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP) required for Mitigation Measure BIO-9(b), the City and/or County shall include specific goals, objectives, and qualitative performance criteria to maintain functional connectivity between habitat patches and open spaces, including the functions and values of the existing linear feature composed of non-native forest, sensitive habitats, and aquatic features, for movement, dispersal, migration, and genetic exchange of native plants and animals through conservation of the following.  Sensitive habitats and edge habitats
 Ecosystems services and water quality associated with wetlands, creeks, drainages, riparian habitat
 Wildlife movement habitat, including resources for foraging; hydration; cover, shelter, aestivation/hybernacula; nesting and breeding; and movement, dispersal, migration.

The MMP shall include adaptive management strategies and shall include an evaluation of (and adaptive management as needed for) the effects of illegal camping, litter (including human foods), urine and fecal matter, and illegal off-leash dogs on biological resources.
b. Findings and Rationale – The Project would contribute to cumulative impacts by removing trees (381 trees) and disrupting/displacing sensitive habitats and wildlife movement corridors.

Mitigation for biological impacts identified in this EIR include the preparation of a Project1.66 specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP) that includes tree replacement and the development of alternate corridors for wildlife movement. However, there is a lack of available undeveloped land in locations that would allow for a reduction in habitat fragmentation or replacement of wildlife movement corridors. Additionally, it would take several decades for replacement trees to establish, mature, and create habitat with multitiered canopy, understory vegetation, established duff/soil/micro-organism environment and nutrient cycling, and the associated ecological attributes. To help mitigate for the Project’s contribution to significant cumulative impacts, Mitigation Measure BIO-C has been identified to require the Project-specific MMP (Mitigation Measure BIO-9b) to also include cumulative conservation goals. However, even with mitigation incorporated, the Project’s contribution to the loss of trees and fragmentation of habitat and wildlife corridors would be cumulatively considerable.
c. Supportive Evidence – Please refer to pages 4-9 through 4-12 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and Master Response B (Tree Removal) at pages 9 through 15 of the Final EIR (Volume 1).

The following statutory findings apply to this impact:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that mitigate the significant effect on the environment, but not to a less than significant (i.e., less than cumulatively considerable) level. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
(See Pub. Resources Code § 21081(a)(1), (3); CEQA Guidelines, § 15091(a)(1), (3).) VI. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
A. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTERNATIVES
Public Resources Code § 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives…which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects.” “Feasible” means “capable of being accomplished in a reasonable period of time taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social and technological factors” (CEQA Guidelines § 15364). The concept of feasibility also encompasses whether a particular alternative promotes the Project’s underlying goals and objectives, and whether an alternative is impractical or undesirable from a policy standpoint. (See City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001 (CNPS).) The consideration of alternatives feasibility arises twice in the CEQA process, once when the EIR is prepared and again when CEQA findings are adopted. When initially assessing feasibility in an EIR, the EIR preparer evaluates whether an alternative is “potentially” feasible. Potentially feasible alternatives are suggestions by the EIR preparers that may or may not be adopted by lead agency decision makers. When CEQA findings are made after EIR certification, the lead agency decision making body independently evaluates whether the alternatives are actually feasible, including whether an alternative is impractical or undesirable from a policy standpoint. (See CNPS, supra, 177 Cal.App.4th at p. 999.) If a significant impact can be substantially lessened (i.e., mitigated to a less than significant level) by adoption of mitigation measures, lead agency findings need not consider the feasibility of alternatives to reduce that impact. (See Laurel Hills Homeowners Association v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 521.) Nevertheless, Section 5.0 of the Final EIR (Volume 2) and these Findings of Fact do consider the

1.67 effectiveness of the potentially feasible alternatives set forth in the EIR to substantially reduce all of the Project’s significant impacts.

The proposed alternatives were selected for review in the EIR because of their potential to avoid or substantially lessen certain Project impacts, because they were required under CEQA Guidelines (e.g., the No Project alternative),, or because they were suggested during scoping and also represented the trail width proposed in a citizen initiative pending during the scoping period that, if it had passed, could have provided further guidance or requirements for the Project (Alternative 1 Trail Only). The Project and alternatives are described in more detail in the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Final EIR (Volume 1, Master Response A: Alternatives Analysis, and Volume 2, Chapter 5.0, Project Alternatives).

The three alternatives considered for the proposed Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project are:
 Alternative 1: Trail Only, which includes permanently removing railroad tracks and ties and locating a 26-foot-wide multiuse trail (separating bicycles and pedestrians) on the rail bed;  Alternative 2: Interim Trail with Rail Preservation, which includes locating a 16-foot-wide trail composed of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) decking over the existing tracks and ties, later removing the Interim Trail, and constructing the Ultimate Trail Configuration alongside the rail;  Alternative 3: No Project Alternative, which includes no changes to existing conditions along the Project corridor and thus no trail.

Alternative 3 was determined to be environmentally superior to the Proposed Project and Alternatives 1 and 2. However, If the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project alternative, CEQA requires the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6). The Proposed Project (Ultimate Trail Configuration), without the optional first phase (Interim Trail), is determined to be the Environmentally Superior project for most Resource Topics.

B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
An EIR must only evaluate reasonable alternatives to a project that could feasibly attain most of the project objectives and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(a)). The primary objective of the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project is to provide an accessible bicycle/pedestrian path for active transportation, recreation, and environmental and cultural education alongside the existing rail corridor, consistent with the MBSST Network Master Plan.

Additional project objectives include:

1. Provide a continuous public trail with continuity along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County (Master Plan objective 1.1)

2. Develop the trail so future rail transportation service along the corridor is not precluded (Master Plan policy 1.2.4)

3. Maximize ocean views and scenic coastal vistas along a coastal alignment for experiencing and interpreting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (sanctuary), coastal environment, local history, and affected communities (Master Plan policy 1.1.2 and 1.1.4, objective 2.1)

4. Maximize safety and serenity for experiencing and interpreting the sanctuary and landscapes by providing a trail separate from roadway vehicle traffic (Master Plan goal 1)

1.68 5. Minimize trail impacts to private lands, including agricultural, residential, and other land uses (Master Plan objective 1.5)

6. Minimize trail impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plant and animal species (Master Plan objective 1.4, policy 1.4.1)

7. Comply with requirements of local, state, and federal agencies with jurisdiction C. FINDINGS ON ALTERNATIVES

1. Alternative 1: Trail Only
a. Description – Under Alternative 1, the railroad tracks and ties would be permanently removed in Segment 9, and a multi-use trail would be constructed on the rail bed. The typical trail width would generally be 26 feet in urban areas (which includes the Project corridor by definition), 16 feet in areas with grade constraints (such as Leona Creek and Stream 1454 embankments), and 12 feet over the Woods Lagoon Railroad Bridge. Bicyclists and pedestrians would be separated with pavement markings where the trail is 16 feet or wider.

This trail description is consistent with an alternative identified in the RTC Unified Corridor Investment Study (Appendix B, Table B-13), as requested during the EIR scoping process, and the trail width is consistent with the Greenway initiative that was on the local ballot in June 2022.
b. Findings and Determination of Infeasibility – As noted in Section V above, significant and unavoidable effects of the Proposed Project (Ultimate Trail Configuration) are adverse effects to aesthetics and biological resources due to tree removal. Notably, Alternative 1 would not reduce the severity of those impacts, as indicated on pages 5-17 through 5-20 of the Final EIR (Volume 2). Thus, the CEQA policy of reducing significant environmental effects to the extent feasible would not be satisfied through the adoption of Alternative 1. In fact, because Alternative 1 would require more tree removal and impacts to sensitive resources than the proposed project, approval of the proposed project (Ultimate Trail Configuration) better serves the environmentally protective policies of CEQA than would approval of Alternative 1.

The Trail Only alternative would result in a 26-foot-wide trail in Segment 9, which would connect to the existing 10-foot-wide trail along the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge in Segment 8 and the planned 12-foot-wide trail in Segment 10. Because of the substantial difference in widths, Alternative 1 would not meet the objective of “[p]rovid[ing] a continuous public trail with continuity in design along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County” (objective 1) as well as the proposed project would.

The Trail Only alternative would result in greater impacts to sensitive habitat, particularly on the south side of the rail corridor in the Twin Lakes State Beach area. For this reason, Alternative 1 would not meet the objective of “[m]inimiz[ing] trail impacts to sensitive habitat areas and specialstatus plant and animals species” (objective 6) as well as the proposed project would. As described in Section 3.3, Biological Resources (Final EIR Volume 2), there is sensitive habitat on both sides of the rail corridor with more on the south side. The trail alignment under Alternative 1 would be on both the north and south sides of the existing rail bed, whereas the trail alignment of the proposed project (Ultimate Trail Configuration) would be entirely on the north side.

The Trail Only alternative would result in permanent removal of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. For this reason, Alternative 1 would not meet the objective of “[d]evelop[ing] the trail so

1.69 future rail transportation service along the corridor is not precluded” (objective 2). As described in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources (Final EIR Volume 2), the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line is considered a historical resource. The removal of the tracks and ties would result in the removal of the physical features which convey the significance of the resource and meet the definition of material impairment as defined in Section 15064.5(b)(2)(A) of the CEQA Guidelines Therefore, Alternative 1 would have a significant unavoidable impact to historical resources. Consequently, compared to the proposed project (Ultimate Trail Configuration), the Trail Only alternative would have greater overall impacts to cultural resources. This alternative would also result in more severe impacts with regard to hazards/hazardous materials, as well as elevated noise, dust and debris associated with removal of the rail tracks and ties. Please refer to Section 5.0, Project Alternatives, of the Final EIR (Volume 2) for additional detail.

Additionally, the Trail Only alternative requires contractual and regulatory approvals. Although the RTC owns the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line right-of-way (ROW), the RTC does not own the freight rail operation rights. The RTC has an Administration, Coordination, and License Agreement with a rail operator that owns a freight easement over all the tracks and is designated as the common carrier by the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB), which is the federal agency with regulatory jurisdiction over the interstate freight railroad network. The freight easement extends 10 feet on either side of the centerline of the tracks and includes rights of access along the length of the easement. As stated in the deed for the Freight Easement, the easement is for purposes of conducting freight rail operations and fulfilling rights and obligations as a common carrier freight railroad under applicable federal laws and regulations. Provided that the RTC’s contractual agreement with its rail operator is terminated or expires, no termination would be effective until the STB approves transfer or abandonment of freight service. Obtaining approval from the STB to abandon freight may be challenged in court, which could cause delays to project implementation.

In light of all of these factors, the City concludes that the delays associated with the Trail Only Alternative would render the alternative infeasible, given the definition of “feasible” as “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15364 [italics added].) The City concludes that, in light of the considerations described above, a reasonably prudent public agency ought not to pursue such an alternative. (See Flanders v. City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 603, 622.)
Therefore, in addition to the Trail Only alternative being environmentally inferior because it would be no better than the project with respect to substantial and unavoidable impacts to aesthetic and biological resources and would have greater impacts to sensitive habitats, as well as the additional substantial and unavoidable impact to the historic resources, the City finds that the specific regulatory and contractual or other considerations set forth above make the Trail Only alternative infeasible. After balancing competing policy considerations, the City also finds that implementation of Alternative 1 would represent an undesirable policy outcome. One of many bases for this latter conclusion is the fact that Alternative 1 would not meet the project objective of “[p]rovid[ing] a continuous public trail along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County” and “[m]inimiz[ing] trail impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plant and animals species” as well as the proposed project would. For all the reasons set forth above, any one of which by itself would be sufficient, the City rejects Alternative 1 as infeasible.

2. Alternative 2: Interim Trail with Rail Preservation

1.70 a. Description – Under Alternative 2, all or a portion of the multiuse trail in Segment 9 would be constructed in approximately the same location of the railroad tracks by constructing the trail with Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) decking that would be installed over the existing rail tracks and ties, rather than removing the tracks and ties, to preserve the rail. The typical width of the FRP trail would be 16 feet wide with striping in the middle to separate eastbound and westbound. The width could narrow to between 12 and 16 feet at roadway crossings, the Harbor crossing, and Leona Creek crossing.

The FRP trail would be structurally supported under the panels and on the edges by low retaining walls, offset a minimum of 6–8 feet from the track centerline and running parallel to the rails. The retaining walls would require excavation 2–3 feet deep and would extend 1–2 feet above the rail so the FRP decking clears the rail tracks. To construct the low retaining walls, a small amount of ballast would need to be removed on each side of the rail. When edge conditions or right-of-way do not allow for an edge slope, safety railing would be installed to address any grade differential. At roadway crossings, the FRP decking would extend or curve off the railbed and descend for the at-grade roadway crossing, and then ascend and curve back above the railbed. At the Santa Cruz Harbor crossing, the FRP decking would continue over the rail on the Woods Lagoon Railroad Bridge.

If and when freight rail service is re-activated, the Interim Trail would be removed; and the Ultimate Trail Configuration would be constructed alongside the tracks. When the Interim Trail is removed, the FRP decking would be removed, and the retaining walls would be reduced in height to at-grade level, so they continue to support the ballast and tracks which could be structurally compromised if the retaining walls are removed entirely. The Ultimate Trail Configuration alongside the tracks would be constructed as described in Sections 2.4.1 and

2.6.1 of the Draft EIR (Final EIR Volume 2). The typical width of the paved at-grade Ultimate Trail Configuration would be 12 feet and could narrow to between 9.5–12 feet at water crossings and constrained areas.

Thus, the Interim Trail with Rail Preservation includes three parts: (1) implementation of the Interim Trail, which includes installation of the FRP decking and supporting retaining walls; (2) removal of the Interim Trail FRP decking and reducing the height of the retaining walls to grade level; and (3) construction of the Ultimate Trail Configuration alongside the rail. b. Findings and Determination of Infeasibility – As noted in Section V above, significant and unavoidable effects of the Proposed Project (Ultimate Trail Configuration) are adverse effects to aesthetics and biological resources due to tree removal. Notably, when considering the whole of Alternative 2 with all three parts (including part 3 construction of the Ultimate Trail Configuration), Alternative 2 would not reduce the severity of those impacts , as indicated on pages 5-28 through 5-30 of the Final EIR (Volume 2). When considering just parts 1 and 2 (installing and removing the Interim Trail FRP decking), there would be less tree removal (124 trees instead of 381 trees); but the impacts to aesthetics and biological resources would still be substantial and unavoidable, as indicated on pages 3.1-19 and 3.3-119 (which evaluates a 16-foot-wide trail on the rail bed), because removing 124 trees includes removal of 51 Heritage and Significant trees which is approximately 25% of all trees in these categories along Segment 9.

Compared to the proposed project’s optional first phase (Interim Trail), Alternative 2 would reduce the severity of the significant and unavoidable impact on cultural resources by preserving instead of removing the railroad tracks and ties, which are considered a historical resource, as indicated on pages 5-30 through 5-31 of the Final EIR (Volume 2). Compared to

1.71 the Proposed Project (UltimateTrail Configuration), Alternative 2 would have similar but greater potential impacts to cultural resources because it requires two additional construction periods, thus increasing the risk of inadvertent discovery.

This alternative would not meet the Project objectives to the same extent as the project. In particular, Alternative 2 would be less successful than the project in meeting the following two project objectives: “[d]evelop[ing] the trail so future rail transportation service along the corridor is not precluded” (objective 2) because rail transportation service would be precluded while the Interim Trail with FRP decking is covering the rails; and “[p]rovid[ing] a continuous public trail with continuity in design along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County” (objective 1) for the following reasons. The Interim Trail with Preservation would result in a 16-foot-wide trail comprised of FRP Decking in Segment 9, which would connect to the existing 10-foot-wide trail along the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge in Segment 8 (6 feet narrower but also comprised of FRP decking) and the planned 12-foot-wide trail in Segment 10 (4 feet narrower and comprised of at-grade asphalt). At the four roadway crossings in Segment 9 (Moss, Seabright, 7th and 17th Avenues), the FRP decking would extend or curve off the railbed and descend for the atgrade roadway crossing, and then ascend and curve back above the railbed.

Additionally, the Interim Trail with Rail Preservation requires contractual and regulatory approvals similar to that described above for Trail Only. The RTC has an Administration, Coordination, and License Agreement with a rail operator that owns a freight easement over all the tracks and is designated as the common carrier by the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB). Provided that the RTC’s contractual agreement with its rail operator is terminated or expires, no termination would be effective until the STB approves transfer or abandonment of freight service. Obtaining approval from the STB to abandon freight may be challenged in court, which could cause delays to project implementation.

Further, installing 1.6 miles of FRP decking and two additional construction phases (to implement the 3-part alternative) would increase construction costs, substantially compared to the proposed project, making this alternative challenging from both an engineering and fiscal standpoint. The FRP deck panels would need to cantilever out approximately 5.5 feet from each rail to allow for a 16-foot-wide trail (or 3.5 feet from each rail for a 12-foot-wide trail). To support the deck panel edges, continuous edge support, such as a continuous low wall (in some cases a retaining wall) or some other form of continuous support, would be required. The FRP deck system would rely on the rails and continuous edge support for its structural integrity; however, but the wood ties are organic and subject to decay over time. The voids created by the decayed wood would allow the rails to sink, causing differential panel settlement along the trail.

This differential settlement could affect the accessibility along the trail without corrective measures and associated maintenance cost to keep the trail ADA compliant. Since the deck panels would sit on top of the rails and are approximately 15-18 inches thick, the trail edge will be elevated, which in turn would require fencing on both sides of the trail to prevent trail users from accidentally rolling or walking off the edge of the trail. In addition to these engineering challenges that introduce additional costs, FRP decking panels are more costly per square foot than asphalt, and continuous fencing on both sides of the elevated trail is an added cost over an asphalt trail placed close to existing grade.

In summary, the Interim Trail with Rail Preservation would not reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts to aesthetics and biological resources to a less than significant level when the whole of the project is considered and would not meet Project objectives to the same extent as the project while the Interim Trail is in place. There would be contractual/regulatory challenges that could delay the project. This alternative presents engineering challenges, requires two additional construction phases, and would cost substantially more. After balancing competing policy considerations, the City rejects Alternative 2 as infeasible for all of the foregoing reasons, although any of them individually are also sufficient reasons for rejecting

1.72 it.

3. Alternative 3: No Project
a. Description –Under the No Project alternative, the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 project would not be constructed in the Project corridor, which is the portion of the rail corridor between the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue Roundabout and 17th Avenue. Along Segment 8, there would be no improvements to the existing bicycle lanes and sidewalk between the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue Roundabout and the SLR Trestle Bridge; and along Segment 9 there would be no new multi-use path between the SLR Trestle Bridge and 17th Avenue. The Project corridor would remain “as is” with no planned development of a trail for alternative transportation, recreation, or other uses. Additionally, there would also be no improvements at the Seabright Avenue/Murray Street intersection to add a dedicated right turn from westbound Murray Street to northbound Seabright Avenue to improve traffic flow, although the City could modify the intersection as a stand-alone project to improve safety and congestion.
b. Findings and Determination of Infeasibility – The No Project alternative would result in the rail corridor remaining “as is” with no planned development of a trail for alternative transportation, recreation, or other uses. Because of the reduced development, there would generally be less than significant or no environmental impacts under Alternative 3. In particular, construction-related impacts associated with earth movement and tree removal would not occur. However, air quality (criteria pollutant) and GHG emissions associated with vehicular traffic would increase, because the trail as an alternative transportation project is expected to result in less vehicular transportation and thus reduced emissions. Additionally, with no project, there would not be benefits to public safety and access, such as improved emergency access to the rail corridor in Segment 9 and bikeway (cycle track) and sidewalk improvements along Beach Street where there are user conflicts in Segment 8.

Further, this alternative would not meet the project objectives to provide a continuous public trail with continuity in design along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and connecting spur trails in Santa Cruz County (Objective 1); maximize ocean views and scenic coastal vistas along a coastal alignment for experiencing and interpreting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, coastal environment, local history, and affected communities (Objective 3); or maximize safety and serenity for experiencing and interpreting the sanctuary and landscapes by providing a trail separate from roadway vehicle traffic (Objective 4), to the same extent as the Project. Nor would it fulfill the City’s commitment to implement the approved Monterey Bay Scenic Sanctuary Trail Master Plan, or the City’s goals and policies to enhance the community and provide open space with an alternative transportation and recreation trail that provides connectivity and reduces vehicular use.

After balancing competing policy considerations, the City finds that implementation of Alternative 3 would represent an undesirable policy outcome. For all of these reasons and any of them individually, the City rejects the No Project Alternative as infeasible.

VII. FINDINGS REGARDING MITIGATION MEASURES AND ALTERNATIVES

PROPOSED IN NOP AND DRAFT EIR COMMENTS
Some comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) and on the Draft EIR suggested Project alternatives. The Findings regarding the suggested alternatives are provided under “A. Suggested Project Alternatives” below.

1.73 In response to Draft EIR comments, Mitgation Measure BIO-9b, Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation, was revised to provide additional detail and clarification regarding tree replacement, potential mitigation sites, and timing for monitoring (refer to pages 19-22 above). The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) associated with this EIR is referenced in Section XI.

A. SUGGESTED PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The following discussion includes references to chapters and sections in the Draft EIR, which is included in the Final EIR, Volume 2.

1. Interim Trail
Comments on the NOP suggested analysis of an “Interim Trail” or “Railbank with Interim Trail” and renaming what was presented in the NOP as “Alternative 1: Railbank with Trail” to include the term “Interim.”
Findings and Rationale – The City, in coordination with the County and RTC, included an Interim Trail as an Optional First Phase of the Proposed Project (as opposed to a separate standalone alternative) and called it Optional First Phase: Trail on the Rail line (Interim Trail). The optional Interim Trail includes three parts: (1) implementation of the Interim Trail, which includes removal of the rail and construction of the trail on the rail line; (2) demolition of the Interim Trail and rebuilding the rail line; and (3) construction of the Ultimate Trail Configuration alongside the rail. Refer to Chapter 2, Project Description, of the Draft EIR for additional detail.

Accordingly, it is evaluated as part of the Proposed Project analysis in Chapter 3.

As described in Section 2.4.2, Optional First Phase: Trail on the Rail Line (Interim Trail), this option could occur if the common carrier files for abandonment of freight operations along the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line with the Surface Transportation Board (STB), or if the RTC files for adverse abandonment. If this occurs, all or a portion of the SCBRL would likely be railbanked to preserve the corridor for future freight re-activation, and then could be used for a multi-use trail as an interim condition. Refer to Chapter 1, Introduction; Section 1.2.4, Subsequent Actions and Considerations; Railbanking; for additional information regarding railbanking.

2. Inclusion of the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge
Comments on the NOP include suggestions that the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge be part of Segment 9 and be included in the railbanking or Interim Trail analysis.

Findings and Rationale – According to the MBSST Network Master Plan, the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge is part of Segment 8, not Segment 9. The Proposed Project, including the Optional First Phase (Interim Trail), excludes the San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge because this portion of Segment 8 has already been constructed. As stated in Section 2.4.1, there would be no improvements to the portion crossing the SLR Trestle Bridge because this section was completed in 2019, when the City replaced the existing 4-foot-wide wooden walkway with a new light weight, 10-foot-wide bicycle/pedestrian bridge along the inland side of the railroad tracks.

This alternative or design option has been dismissed from further consideration and evaluation in this EIR because: this portion of the Coastal Rail Trail is already constructed; this alternative would not likely reduce the severity of any of the significant effects of the Proposed Project; and

1.74 this alternative could result in additional construction-related impacts to the San Lorenzo River (designated critical habitat), permanent impacts to the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line, and impacts to trail users by disrupting use of the existing bicycle/pedestrian path on the trestle bridge if it needs to be closed for safety during construction. Further, the bridge is used by Roaring Camp Railroad when there is an emergency on the Boardwalk to clear the area for emergency responders.

3. Trail Next to another Transit Option
Comments on the NOP include a suggestion that the alternatives analysis include a trail along with another type of transit option in place of existing freight rail line (e.g., a dedicated trolley or bus lanes).

Findings and Rationale – As described in Chapter 1, the RTC has conducted extensive studies regarding transit options along the rail corridor, including the Rail Transit Feasibility Study (2015), Unified Corridor Investment Study (2019), and Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis (2021). The preferred scenario adopted by the RTC includes protecting the rail line in public ownership for high-capacity public transit use by maintaining the tracks and allowing freight and excursion service. Commuter rail remains in the RTC’s Regional Transportation Plan, but on the financially unconstrained list of projects, due to the lack of identified funding to the region for a rail project.

This alternative to analyze a trail alignment along a transit alignment has been dismissed from further consideration and evaluation in this EIR for the following reasons: The alignment of future transit services in the rail corridor has not been defined, and funding for transit services in the rail corridor has not been identified; therefore, it is too speculative. This alternative would not likely reduce the severity of any of the significant effects of the Proposed Project. Therefore, future transit use is not the focus of the environmental analysis. The focus is the difference in environmental impacts as they relate to constructing the trail. However, consistent with the project objectives, the Proposed Project does not preclude future rail transportation service along the corridor.

4. Grade Separations at Railway Crossings (Multiple Commenters) Comments on the NOP include a suggestion to analyze alternatives to grade separate the trail at roadways crossings for improved safety.

Findings and Rationale – As described in Sections 2.4.1 and 2.4.2, the Project includes several safety features at the four roadway crossings, such as bulb outs, chicanes on the trail (curves added to slow trail users before the intersection), raised median along the road centerline providing a midpoint refuge for trail users, signage and striping on the trail and roadway, and rectangular rapid-flashing beacons (RRFBs) on the roadways. Adding more substantial grading or structurally separating the trail from roadway (e.g., a bike/ped bridge or overpass over the roadway) would create additional construction-related and visual impacts.

Grade separated crossing have been dismissed from further consideration and evaluation in this EIR for the following reasons. The Project includes several safety features at roadway crossings.

This alternative would not likely reduce the severity of any of the significant effects of the Proposed Project. This alternative would result in additional construction-related impacts and visual impacts due to the required size. A grade separation structure would need to be large enough to meet ADA requirements and bicycle access, which would not fit within the rail

1.75 corridor. Further, it is anticipated that, because it is a relatively short distance across the roadway, trail users would simply cross the street and avoid the use of the large structure which would take longer and require ascent/descent.

5. Coastal Side (Maximize Coastal Access)
Comments on the NOP include a suggestion to evaluate alternatives to maximize access from the trail to coastal destinations such as East Cliff Drive, the Harbor, Twin Lakes State Beach trails, and Simpkins Swim Center.

Findings and Rationale – As described in Section 2.4.1, the Proposed Project includes several trail connections to adjacent roadways and trails, including a connection to the West Harbor, a connection to Twin Lakes State Beach near El Dorado Avenue, and two connections to Simpkins Swim Center. Additionally, the City included an East Harbor Connection as a design option of the Proposed Project. These trail connections are included in the analysis of the Proposed Project in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIR.

The City, in coordination with the County and RTC, considered an alternative that would maximize or facilitate coastal access by locating the trail on the coastal side of the tracks because the majority of the Ultimate Trail Configuration is on the inland side of the tracks, and there could be safety fencing between the tracks and the trail that could inhibit direct access to the coastal side of the tracks at some locations. There are substantial constraints to locating the trail on the coastal side of the tracks including, but not limited to, the need for new CPUC-approved rail crossings, reducing neighborhood access, removing connections to the Santa Cruz Harbor, and right-of-way constraints, as described below. Further, it would not reduce any of the significant impacts. Therefore, locating the trail on the coastal side of the tracks has been dismissed from further consideration and evaluation in this EIR.

6. Trail Only
Comments on the NOP include a suggestion to analyze the “Trail Only” alternative as described in Appendix B, Table B-13, of the Unified Corridor Investment Study (RTC 2019) in terms of width. The trail would be 26 feet wide in urban areas (including the Project corridor) and 16 feet wide in areas with grade constraints. The Trail Only alternative described and analyzed in the Draft EIR includes removal of the rail, construction of the trail on the rail line, and separating bicyclists from pedestrian using pavement markings where the trail is 16 feet or wider.

Findings and Rationale – This Trail Only alternative differs from the Interim Trail, which is described above and included as an Optional First Phase of the Proposed Project, because it is wider (26 feet instead of 16 feet); it separates bicyclists from pedestrians with striping; and would result in permanent removal of the rail (i.e., it does not include future rebuilding the rail and building the trail alongside the rail).

The City, in coordination with the County and RTC, decided to evaluate this Trail Only alternative in Section 5.2, Alternatives Evaluated in Draft EIR, of the Draft EIR (Final EIR Volume 2) because it was anticipated it could reduce at least one impact of the Ultimate Trail Configuration and of the optional first phase Interim Trail (e.g., less tree removal, earth movement and associated emissions). Additionally, it would provide for a broader range of reasonable alternatives to consider.

1.76 VIII. FINDINGS ON RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR AND REVISIONS

TO THE DRAFT EIR
Findings and Rationale – Volume 1 of the Final EIR includes the comments received on the Draft EIR and responses to those comments. The focus of the responses to comments is on the disposition of significant environmental issues as raised in the comments, as specified by CEQA Guidelines § 15088(b), as well as to provide clarification regarding environmental issues raised. Volume 2 (Draft EIR) and Volume 3 (Draft EIR Appendices) of the Final EIR also incorporates information obtained after publication of the Draft EIR and revisions made for clarification and to provide additional detail.

The City has reviewed and considered the Final EIR and all of the information contained therein. The City finds that the responses to comments made on the Draft EIR and the revisions made to the Draft EIR merely clarify, amplify, or make insignificant modifications to the analysis presented in the document and do not trigger the need to recirculate per CEQA Guidelines §15088.5(b). The Draft EIR has been reproduced in its entirety with revisions shown in underline for additions and strikeout for deletions (Final EIR Volume 2).

IX. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City adopts and makes this statement of overriding considerations concerning the Project’s unavoidable significant impacts to explain why the Project’s benefits override and outweigh its unavoidable impacts. In the City’s judgment, the Project and its benefits outweigh its unavoidable significant effect to aesthetics and biological resources from tree removal. The following statement identifies the specific reasons why, in the City’s judgment, the benefits of the Project as approved outweigh its unavoidable significant effects. Any one of these reasons is sufficient to justify approval of the Project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City would stand by its determination that each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits can be found in the preceding Findings, which are incorporated by reference into this Section IX, and in the documents found in the Record of Proceedings, as defined in Section II.

The EIR has identified and discussed significant effects that may occur as a result of the Project. As set forth in these CEQA Findings, the City has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate the impacts resulting from the Project and has made specific findings on each of the Project’s significant impacts and on mitigation measures and alternatives. With implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the EIR, most of the Project-level effects can be mitigated to a level of less than significant. However, the Project will result in significant and unavoidable Project-level and cumulative impacts as follows:

1. Impact to Scenic Resources and Vistas (Impact AES-1). The Project would have an adverse effect on scenic resources and vistas through the removal of mature trees.

2. Impact to Policies Pertaining to Tree and Vegetation Removal (Impact AES-2). The Project would be inconsistent with policies that pertain to tree and vegetation removal.

3. Impact to Monarch Butterflies (Impact BIO-2). The Project could adversely affect monarch butterfly and autumnal and/or wintering roost sites.

4. Impact to Wildlife Movement (Impact BIO-11). The Project would interfere with wildlife movement.

1.77 5. Cumulative Aesthetics Impact (Impact AES-C). Cumulative development may result in significant cumulative aesthetic impacts. The Project’s contribution would not be cumulatively considerable except for cumulative impacts to scenic quality due to the removal of mature trees.

6. Cumulative Biological Resources Impact (Impact BIO-C). Cumulative development would result in significant cumulative biological resources impacts. The Project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable.

In accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, and having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the Project to the extent feasible, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the City hereby finds that the following legal, economic, social and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh its unavoidable adverse impacts and render them acceptable based upon the following considerations. Each benefit set forth below constitutes an overriding consideration warranting approval of the Project, independent of the other benefits, despite each and every unavoidable impact.
a. The implementation of the Proposed Project would provide a continuous public trail with continuity in design along the Santa Cruz Branch Line railroad corridor and provide a connection to various spur trails in Santa Cruz County, consistent with the approved Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Master Plan and City and County goals and policies to provide additional recreational opportunities including the rail trail. This includes, but is not limited to:

City General Plan (policies M2.1.4, M2.1.4, M4.1, M4.2, M4.3.2, PR3.1.1, PR4.1, PR4.2); City Local Coastal Plan (policy 3.5.5); City 2030 Climate Action Plan (Measure T1.2 to complete all portions of Rail Trail); and County General Plan (policies AM-1.2b, AM-1.21, AM-1.2.2, AM4.1, AM-4.1.1, AM-4.1.2). b. The Proposed Project would increase active transportation facilities and recreation facilities and improve accessibility and connectivity within the and the greater Santa Cruz region. This is consistent with and would help to fulfill several City and County goals and policies. This includes, but is not limited to: City General Plan (CD4.1.4, CD5.1, CD5.1, LU4, M1.1.1, M1.1.2, M1.1.3, M1.4.2, M1.5.1, M2.1.2, M2.1.3, M3.3.5, M4.1, M4.1, M.4.2, M4.4.3, M4.4, PR3.1); City Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities and Programs; City Active Transportation Plan; City 2030 Climate Action Plan (Measure T1.2 to complete all portions of Rail Trail); County General Plan (AM-1.1, AM-1.1.4, AM-1.1.5, AM-1.2.1, AM-1.2b, AM-3.2.1, AM-3.2.3, AM-3.2.5, AM-4.1, AM-4.1.1, AM-4.1.2); and Santa Cruz County Active Transportation Plan which lists the Rail Trail as a priority project. By providing an alternative transportation facility, the Project would also be consistent with goals and policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and associated emissions, consistent with the City General Plan (LU4.2, NCR4.4.2); City Climate Action Plan 2030; County 2022 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (Transportation goal 7); and County General Plan (AM-1.1, AM-1.1.4, AM-1.1.5).
c. The Proposed Project would develop the trail so future rail transportation along the corridor is not precluded, consistent with the MBSST Master Plan; City 2030 Climate Action Plan (Measure T1.2 to work with partners to plan active and public transportation to rail line); City General Plan (CD4.1.4, LU4.2.3, M2.2, M2.2.1, M2.2.2, M4.3.2); and County General Plan (AM-1.1.6, AM7.1.2). d. Implementation of the Proposed Project would maximize ocean views and scenic coastal vistas along a coastal alignment for experiencing and interpreting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, consistent with goals and policies of the California Coastal Commission and State

1.78 Parks and Recreation Department. The Project would follow the coastal alignment of the rail corridor and provide educational and interpretive signage about the marine sanctuary and natural resources, including special-status plant and wildlife species such as the Santa Cruz tarplant, monarch butterfly, and San Francisco dusky footed woodrat. e. The Proposed Project would maximize safety and serenity for experiencing and interpreting the sanctuary and landscapes by providing a trail separate from roadway vehicle traffic. The Proposed Project (Segment 9) would be entirely separated from the roadway with only four roadway crossings (Mott, Seabright, 7th, and 17th Avenues) and supports relevant City and County goals and policies, including City General Plan (PR3.1, PR3.1.1, PR3.3, PR3.3.4); City Local Coastal Plan (3.5 and 3.5.5) and County General Plan (AM-2.2.1, AM-2.2.2, AM-2.2.3). f. The Proposed Project would utilize lands owned by various government entities to develop the trail, in order to minimize taking private property, and Segment 9 is almost entirely within the RTC right-of-way.

X. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The City finds that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project has been prepared for the project and hereby adopts the MMRP concurrently with these Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Public Resources Code, § 21081.6(a)(1)).

CEQA requires that an agency adopt an MMRP that includes mitigation measures prior to approving a project. The MMRP for the Project has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code and Sections 15091(d) and 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines.

The purpose of the MMRP is to ensure the implementation, in accordance with CEQA requirements, of the mitigation measures adopted by the City and under its control. The mitigation measures adopted in the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project EIR Findings are listed in Sections IV and V of this document. The MMRP is bound separately as a stand-alone document and hereby incorporated by reference.

1.79 EXHIBIT B

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
COASTAL RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 AND 9
Application # CP22-0118
Address: Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line, from Pacific Avenue/Beach Street to 17th Avenue Applicant: City of Santa Cruz
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for Application No. CP22-0118, Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 located on the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line from Pacific Avenue/Beach Street to 17th Avenue, has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA – Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15074 and 15097). A master copy of this MMRP shall be kept in the office of the City of Santa Cruz Zoning Administrator and shall be available for viewing upon request.

Project Description:

The Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Project (Project) is a 2.2-mile bicycle and pedestrian system proposed to extend along the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)-owned railroad corridor from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout on the west to the eastern side of 17th Avenue on the east, excluding the recently constructed San Lorenzo River (SLR) Trestle Bridge Improvements. Segment 8 (0.6 mile) is composed of improving an existing Class IV on-street bicycle system and pedestrian sidewalk. Segment 9 (1.6 miles) is composed of a new multi-use bicycle and pedestrian trail.

The Project is proposed by the City of Santa Cruz (City), in coordination with the RTC and County of Santa Cruz (County). The Project purpose is to provide an accessible bicycle/pedestrian path for active transportation, recreation, and environmental and cultural education along the rail corridor, consistent with the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Network Master Plan.

This MMRP includes mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Matrix on the following pages that correspond to the measures proposed in the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Project. The matrix lists each mitigation measure or series of mitigation measures by environmental topic. For each mitigation measure, the frequency of monitoring and the responsible monitoring entity is identified. Mitigation measures may be shown in submittals and may be checked only once, or they may require monitoring periodically during and/or after construction. Once a mitigation measure is complete, the responsible monitoring entity shall date and initial the corresponding cell, and indicate how effective the mitigation measure was.

If any mitigation measures are not being implemented, the City may pursue corrective action. Penalties that may be applied include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) a written notification and request for compliance; (2) withholding of permits; (3) administrative fines; (4) a stop-work order; (5) forfeiture of security bonds or other guarantees; (6) revocation of permits or other entitlements.

Monitoring Program Cost:

1.80 I HEREBY AGREE TO PAY THE CITY MONITORING FEES, AND IMPLEMENT THESE

MITIGATION MEASURES, AT A MINIMUM, IN THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROJECT.

Nathan Nguyen, PE, Director of Public Works, City of Santa Cruz Date

1.81 Mitigation Measure Implementation
Actions
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing
Requirements
Reporting
Requirements
Verification of
Compliance
Notes: A list of acronyms is provided at the end of this matrix.

Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: Implement
Protections for the Santa Cruz tarplant
population in Twin Lakes State Park

4. During construction of
Segment 9, the City and/or
County (depending on
implementing
agency/jurisdiction) shall
coordinate to ensure the
following measures are
implemented to protect the
federally Threatened and
California State Endangered
Santa Cruz tarplant at Twin
Lakes State Beach:

Prior to construction activities adjacent to
Twin Lakes State Beach open space,
identify the Santa Cruz tarplant
occurrence in Twin Lakes State Beach
on project plans and mark the edge of
the population in the field with
flagging to avoid construction-related
impacts,
Prior to trail use, enclose the coastal terrace
prairie grassland occupied by Santa
Cruz tarplant with protective wildlifefriendly (e.g., spit-rail) fencing, Add interpretative signage with Santa Cruz
tarplant life history and rarity
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

The implementing
jurisdiction shall
coordinate with
other agencies
(USFWS,

CDFW, CA
State Parks, as
applicable), to
protect the
federally
Threatened and
California State
Endangered
Santa Cruz
tarplant at Twin
Lakes State
Beach by
implementing
the
recommendation
s listed in the
measure.

The implementing
jurisdiction is
required to
coordinate with
others (as
applicable).

The implementing
jurisdiction shall
install required
fencing, and
signage.

Fencing shall be
installed prior to
construction.

Interpretive signage
shall be posted
prior to operation
of the trail.

Document fence
posting prior
to
construction.

Signage should
be posted
before
opening of
the trail
segment.

Photo
documentatio
n of location
of fencing.

Photo
documentatio
n of
interpretive
signage.

Identify Santa
Cruz tarplant
enhancement
and/or
restoration
activities
implemented
by State Parks
or other
entities at
Twin Lakes
State Beach
in the annual
MMP
monitoring
report
required for
Mitigation
Measure BIO9b (below).

1.82 13 The Arana Gulch Adaptive Management Working Group (AMWG) is a collection of scientists, regulators, City of Santa Cruz representatives, and the public working to improve habitat conditions for the Santa Cruz tarplant at Arana Gulch Open Space as required by the Arana Gulch Habitat Master Plan (2013). 14 Wildlife-friendly fencing provides a 17-inch clearance between the bottom wire and ground, which provides adequate room for most small to medium wildlife to pass and has a maximum height of

4.5 feet to allow larger wildlife (e.g., deer) pass over the top wire. Options include split-rail fencing or post and smooth wire fencing. Fencing shall be marked to be visible to wildlife. information, and
Coordinate with State Parks biologists to
monitor and enhance tarplant
population using techniques identified
by the Arana Gulch Adaptive
Management Working Group13. These
may include seeding, out-planting,
cardboard mulch, mowing, and/or
hand weeding.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: Install
Permanent Fencing between Trail and
Twin Lakes State Beach near Santa
Cruz Tarplant Habitat

5. During construction of
Segment 9, the City and/or
County (depending on
implementing
agency/jurisdiction) shall
coordinate to ensure final
project design includes
installation of fencing
(wildlife friendly14) between
the Trail and Twin Lakes
State Beach near the tarplant
population. The fencing shall
extend for approximately
1,100 linear feet, from Leona
Creek to the Simpkins Swim
Center parking lot, to
discourage trail users from
entering Twin Lakes State
Beach and creating new trails
that could result in
disturbance to the protected
species. Additionally, signage
shall be placed on the
fencing, indicating the
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

The implementing
jurisdiction shall
coordinate with
other agencies
(as applicable),
to install wildlife
friendly fencing
between the trail
and the tarplant
population at
Twin Lakes State
Beach.

Signage shall also be
installed to
indicate a habitat
protection area
with directions to
existing trail
access as
described in the
measure.

The applicable
jurisdiction is
required to
coordinate with
others (as
applicable).

The applicable
jurisdiction shall
install required
fencing, and
signage.

Fencing shall be
installed prior to
construction.

Interpretive signage
shall be posted
prior to operation
of the trail.

Document fence
posting prior
to
construction.

Signage should
be posted
before
opening of
the trail
segment.

Photo
documentatio
n of location
of fencing.

Photo
documentatio
n of
interpretive
signage.

1.83 adjacent habitat protection
area and directing users to the
existing trail access near
Simpkins Swim Center with
arrow pointing eastward.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Conduct
Biological Monitoring for Sensitive
Wildlife Species

6. During construction of
Segment 9, the City and/or
County (depending on the
implementing
agency/jurisdiction) and the
construction contractor shall
conduct construction
monitoring for sensitive
wildlife species, as specified
below:

Prior to initiation of construction activities,
a USFWS- and CDFW-approved
biologist shall prepare a construction
monitoring plan that identifies all
areas to be protected with exclusion
fencing on a 1:1500 scale map (or
similar scale determined to be
practicable), and all areas requiring
monitoring by a USFWS-, NOAA
Fisheries, and/or CDFW-approved
biologist or trained construction
monitor.

Prior to initiation of construction activities,
a USFWS-, NOAA Fisheries, and/or
CDFW-approved biologist shall
conduct an environmental training for
all construction personnel. The
training shall include a description of
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Prepare a
construction
monitoring plan,
conduct
environmental
training for
construction
personnel, and
install exclusion
fencing.

Prepare and
implement a
WEAP.

Conduct construction
activities during
the dry season,
as specified in
the measure.

Conduct biological
monitoring of
construction
activities, as
described in the
measure.

City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
conduct the
WEAP.

City/County and
construction
contractor shall
comply with the
activities
specified if the
measure.

City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
conduct the
monitoring as
described.

Prior to construction.

On-going throughout
Project
construction.

The WEAP shall
be prepared
prior to any
construction
activities.

Document
monitoring
activities
during
construction.

Provide the
WEAP.

Monitoring logs
shall be kept
and sent on a
weekly basis.

1.84 the sensitive wildlife species known or
with potential to occur in the Project
alignment and surroundings [monarch
butterfly, sensitive fish species,
western pond turtle, potential Santa
Cruz black salamander, sensitive and
native nesting bird species (including
bald eagle and peregrine falcon),
roosting bats species (including
western red bat), San Francisco duskyfooted woodrat, and marine mammal species (including southern sea otter)].

Prior to initiation of construction activities,
the construction contractor shall install
temporary exclusion fencing (solid silt
fencing) in specified areas along the
project boundaries, approximately 6
inches below grade and 3.0 feet above
grade, with wooden stakes at intervals
of not more than 8.0 feet. The fence
shall be maintained in working order
for the duration of construction
activities. The agency-approved
biologist or trained construction
monitor shall inspect the fence daily
and notify the construction foreman
when fence maintenance is required.

The fence shall allow for wildlife
passage across the alignment at regular
intervals.

Construction activities shall be timed to
minimize impacts to sensitive
biological resources, as shown in
Table 3.3-7 (at the end of this matrix).

The agency-approved biologist shall be
present on-site, to direct and inspect
all ground disturbing activities

1.85 (including but not limited to tree
removal, vegetation removal, grading,
grubbing, and exclusion fence
installation and removal, and for
construction activities located in or
near sensitive wildlife resources). Any
vegetation removed shall be placed
directly into a disposal vehicle.

Vegetation shall not be piled on the
ground unless later transferred, piece
by piece, under the direct supervision
of an approved biologist.

The approved biologist shall train a
designated construction monitor who
shall oversee implementation of all
protective mitigation measures when
the biologist is not present. This
representative shall be trained in the
identification of special-status wildlife.

This representative shall not have the
authority to handle special-status
species.

Once ground disturbance activities have
been completed, the approved
biologist or trained construction
monitor shall conduct regular
inspections of the work area. Prior to
the start of work each day, the
biologist or monitor shall check for
wildlife underneath any vehicle or
heavy equipment within the
construction site.

The biologist will remain on call. In the
event that the construction monitor
identifies a sensitive wildlife species
in or near the Project area, the
approved biologist will be available to

1.86 confirm the identification and,
depending on the species, and with
agency authorization, relocate the
animal out of harm’s way. Suitable
relocation sites shall be identified in
advance with the approval of the
relevant agencies.

The approved biologist and construction
monitor shall have the authority to
stop work that may result in the “take”
of a special-status species.

At the end of each workday, excavations
(i.e., trenches, holes) shall be secured
with a cover (preferably) or a ramp to
prevent wildlife entrapment.

All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar
structures shall be inspected for
animals prior to burying, capping,
moving, or filling.

With agency approval, the approved
biologist shall remove invasive aquatic
species such as bullfrogs and crayfish
from suitable aquatic habitat in and
near the construction impact area, if
present.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Conduct
Breeding Bird Surveys and Identify
Protective Buffers prior to Construction,
if Construction occurs between
February 1 and August 31
During construction of Segment 9, the City
and/or County (depending on the
implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the
construction contractor shall implement the
following measures:

Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Conduct breeding
bird surveys as
described in the
measure.

If breeding birds are
identified,
City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
conduct the
survey as
described in the
measure.

City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
Prior to start of
construction
activities if such
activities are
initiated between
February 1 and
August 31
(during breeding
bird season), or
if construction
Document results
from
breeding
survey.

Provide logs
demonstrating
the various
survey
conducted as
part of the
measure.

1.87 The avian breeding season occurs from
February 1 through August 31 with a
peak in breeding/nesting activity
between April and June for most
raptors and/or other birds.

If feasible, Project activities will be
initiated outside the breeding season in
order to avoid impacts to breeding
birds. Should Project activities be
initiated between September and
February, no avian breeding surveys
would be required.

If Project activities are to be initiated
during breeding season, or if Project
activities lapse for 1 week or more
during breeding bird season, prior to
construction/resumption of
construction activities, an approved
biologist will conduct avian breeding
surveys for all birds (and their nests)
protected under the MBTA. According
to current CDFW permit conditions,
the survey area will encompass tree
stands and structures within the
Project corridor and the following
buffers (where accessible):
o 250 feet for passerines/nonraptors;
o 500 feet for small raptors such as
accipiters; and
o 1,000 feet for larger raptors such
as buteos.

Surveys will be conducted within 1 week
(per current CDFW permit conditions),
prior to beginning/resuming Project
establish buffers
appropriate to
the observed
nesting species,
as described in
the measure.
establish buffers,
in consultation
with USFWS
and/or CDFW.
activities lapse
for a period of
two weeks or
more during
breeding bird
season.

Throughout
construction
upon
identification of
nesting birds.

1.88 15 PG&E’s Nesting Bird Management Plan (2015) was based on a literature review of the effects of nest disturbance on reproductive success and consultation with subject experts and takes into account the nesting habits of the bird and the bird’s sensitivity to disturbance, as well as the type of activity, duration, and noise level of disturbance (including direct and indirect effects), to develop disturbance categories (low, medium, or high) and associated buffers. activities including, but not limited to,
staging equipment, tree removal,
vegetation clearing, and/or ground
disturbing activities.

In the event nesting bird species are
observed, postpone Project activities
until a qualified biologist has
determined young birds have fledged
or implement buffers appropriate to
the construction activity and the
species, such as those recommended in
PG&E’s Nesting Bird Management
Plan (PG&E et al. 2015)15:
o Raptors (platform nesting): 300
feet (90 meters)
o Cavity-nesters (depending on
species): 50 feet (15 meters)
o Bridge/building, tree, and
ground/understory nesters: 75 feet
(23 meters)
Sensitive bird species, if nesting in or near
the Project corridor, will be given
special consideration and may require
additional protective measures as
determined through consultation with
the relevant agency (USFWS or
CDFW). The standard protective
buffers recommended in PG&E et al.
(2015) for sensitive birds that are
known to nest in or near the corridor
are as follows:
o Bald eagle – consultation
required [standard buffer: 1320
feet (402 meters)]
o Peregrine falcon – consultation

1.89 required [standard buffer: 500
feet (152 meters)]
o Olive-sided flycatcher – standard
buffer: 75 feet (23 meters)
o Oak titmouse – standard buffer:
50 feet (15 meters)
Other sensitive bird species have the
potential to nest in or near the Project
corridor.

Protective buffers will be clearly marked
for avoidance by construction
activities.

The approved biologist will document preconstruction baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize “normal”
behavior. If approved by the agencies,
the biologist may have the discretion
to reduce the buffer and monitor the
nest for disturbance. If the birds show
signs of abnormal behaviors (e.g.,
defensive flights/vocalizations,
standing up from brooding, and flying
away from the nest) that are associated
with construction activity, the
biologist will reinstate the larger
buffer. Work within the setback will
be delayed until after the young have
fledged.

The biologist will have the authority to
stop work if breeding birds exhibit
behaviors that may cause nest failure.

If postponing Project activities and/or
installing buffers are not feasible,
further discussions with the
appropriate resource agencies

1.90 (USFWS and/or CDFW) will be
necessary to develop alternative
requirements.

Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Conduct Bat
Surveys and Implement Measures to
Protect Roosting Bats during
Construction
In Segment 9, the City and/or County
(depending on the implementing
agency/jurisdiction) and the construction
contractor shall implement the following
measures. To avoid impacts to individual
roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity
roosts, during all months, throughout the
Segment 9 corridor and especially in
mature coast live oak woodland and
riparian habitats, prior to limbing/tree
removal, an approved biologist shall
conduct a pre‐construction survey for bats
to determine if cavity, crevice or foliageroosting bats are present, as follows:

Bat maternity roosting occurs typically
between May 1 and August 31, and
winter hibernacula (shelter occupied
during the winter by a dormant
animal) for many bat species are found
between November 1 and February 15.

All trees and limbs proposed for removal,
topping or pruning should be marked
in the field by the Project proponent in
advance of the Project start date.

A qualified biologist shall determine if bats
are utilizing the Project corridor for
roosting. For any trees/snags/structures
(bridges) that could provide roosting
habitat for cavity, crevice, or
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Schedule
limbing/tree
removal
activities to
avoid impacts to
bats, as
described in the
measure.

Conduct preconstruction
survey for bats
as described in
the measure.

City/County and
construction
contractor shall
schedule the
limbing/tree
removal
activities.

City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
construct the preconstruction
survey.

Project design phase.

Conduct surveys
prior to Project
construction.

Document
preconstructi
on surveys
for bats and
results.

Provide logs from
any bat
surveys
completed as
part of the
measure.

1.91 foliage‐roosting bats, potential bat
roost features shall be thoroughly
evaluated to determine if bats are
present. Visual inspection, emergence,
and/or acoustic surveys shall be
utilized as initial techniques. o If established maternity colonies are found, in coordination with
CDFW, a buffer shall be
established around the colony to
protect pre‐volant young from
construction disturbances until the
young can fly; or implement other
measures acceptable to CDFW.
o If individual roosting bats or
winter hibernacula are found, in
consultation with CDFW or based
on CDFW recommendations, the
qualified biologist shall develop
and implement acceptable passive
exclusion methods. If feasible,
exclusion shall take place during
the appropriate windows (between
September 1 and November 1)
(Authorization from CDFW is
required to evict winter
hibernacula for bats).

If a tree is determined not to be an active
roost site for cavity-roosting bats, it
may be immediately limbed or
removed as follows: o If foliage-roosting bats are
determined to be present, limbs
shall be lowered, inspected for
bats by a bat biologist, and
chipped immediately or moved to

1.92 a dump site. Alternately, limbs
may be lowered and left on the
ground until the following day,
when they can be chipped or
moved to a dump site. No logs or
tree sections shall be dropped on
downed limbs or limb piles that
have not been in place since the
previous day.
o If the tree is not limbed or
removed within 4 days of the
survey, the survey efforts shall be
repeated.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Implement
Dusky-Footed Woodrat Protection
Measures During Construction
During construction of Segment 9, the City
and/or County (depending on the
implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the
construction contractor shall implement the
following measures. Prior to construction,
a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey for woodrat houses, and clearly flag all houses within the
construction impact area and immediate
surroundings.

The construction contractor shall avoid
woodrat houses to the extent feasible by
installing a minimum 10-foot (preferably
25-foot) buffer with silt fencing or other
material that shall prohibit encroachment.

If this buffer and avoidance is not feasible,
the qualified biologist shall allow
encroachment into the buffer, but preserve
microhabitat conditions such as shade,
cover and adjacent food sources.

Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Conduct
preconstruction
survey for
woodrat houses.

Install protective
fencing for
woodrats.

If necessary, develop
and implement a
Woodrat
Relocation Plan,
as specified in
the measure.

The City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
conduct the
preconstruction
survey.

The City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
monitor
maintenance of
fencing on an
ongoing basis as
part of
construction
inspections.

The City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
develop within a
span of thirty
days after
relocation, as
Conduct survey prior
to construction.

Install fencing prior
to construction.

Prior to construction.

Document results
from the
preconstructi
on survey
and
relocation
activities if
relocation is
required.

Document
placement of
fencing.

Provide results of
the survey
and relocation
plan if
relocation
occurred.

Provide
photographic
evidence of
placement of
fencing.

1.93 Additionally, if avoidance is not possible, a
qualified biologist shall develop and
implement a Woodrat Relocation Plan, in
consultation with CDFW, that allows for
the relocation of woodrats and their
houses. The plan shall include the
following (or similar and CDFWapproved) criteria:

Relocation will occur when vulnerable
young are least likely to be present in
the woodrat houses (ideally between
August 1 and October 30).

During dismantling of woodrat houses,
woody debris, food caches, and
nesting materials will be retained and
relocated to reconstructed or artificial
shelters.

Relocation sites will be in the nearest
suitable habitat outside the Project
footprint.

Sites for artificial shelters shall be located
in proximity to the original house
location and no closer than 20 feet
from existing woodrat houses and
other artificial shelters. Choose the
best available microhabitat, ideally in
a location with sun and shade and, if
possible, under the same species of
tree or shrub as was present at the
original house location. Relocation
sites shall contain biologically suitable
habitat features (e.g., stands of poison
oak, coast live oaks, and dense native
brush).

Monitoring shall be conducted for 30 days
after relocation is completed and
described in the
measure (if
necessary).

1.94 include infrared and motion activated
cameras and an occupancy assessment.

A report on San Francisco dusky-footed
woodrat house monitoring shall be
provided to CDFW, within 30 days
following the end of the monitoring
period and shall include the methods
and results of relocation, occupancy
determinations, and discussion of any
remedies that may be needed.

Mitigation Measure BIO-9a: Minimize
Construction in Sensitive Habitats and
Install Temporary Protective Fencing
Coordinating agencies (City, County,
and/or RTC) constructing portions of
Segment 9 and the construction contractor
shall implement the following measures:

To the extent feasible, all trail construction
activities, including access routes,
staging areas, stockpile areas, and
equipment maintenance are to
be located outside the limits of
mapped sensitive habitats. Sensitive
habitat areas shall be mapped by a
qualified biologist and clearly shown
on construction plans. Sensitive
habitat areas include, but may not be
limited to: Santa Cruz tarplant habitat
in coastal prairie grassland at Twin
Lakes State Beach, monarch butterfly
roosting habitat near Woods Creek and
the Santa Cruz Harbor riparian habitat
along Pilkington Creek and Leona
Creek, and coast live oak woodland
and forest along to the rail corridor.

During construction, temporary fencing
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Minimize impacts to
sensitive habitats
from
construction
activities, as
specified in the
measure.

The City/County and
qualified
biologist shall
monitor fencing
throughout
project
construction.

During construction. Documentation
of the
sensitive
areas and
activities
completed to
minimize
impacts.

Provide logs of
the activities
to minimize
impacts.

1.95 (e.g., silt fencing) shall be installed at
the outermost edge of sensitive
habitats and shall not be disturbed
except as required for trail
construction. Vegetation removal shall
be limited to the minimum extent
necessary to achieve project
objectives. Mature trees will be
retained wherever feasible and limbing
of trees and shrubs in arroyo willow
and mixed riparian forest, coast live
oak woodland and forest, and potential
and/or known monarch roost habitat
should be favored in lieu of removal.

When possible, in temporary impact
areas, stumps and burls of native coast
live oaks, coast redwoods, Pacific wax
myrtle, and arroyo willows shall be
retained to allow for re-sprouting
following project completion.

Limbing and removal of coast live oak
trees located in coast live oak
woodland and forest habitat shall be
minimized to maintain canopy cover,
nesting and roosting habitat for bird
and bat species, and understory habitat
for wildlife, including woodrats and
other small mammals.

Mitigation Measure BIO-9b: Develop
Project-specific Biological Resources
Mitigation and Management Plan for
Impacts to Biological Resources
Resulting from Trail Construction and
Operation.

Coordinating agencies (City, County,
and/or RTC) constructing portions of
Segment 9 and the construction contractor
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Prepare draft and
final MMP as
described in the
measure.

Implement final
City/County and
agency-approved
biologist shall
prepare and
implement the
MMP.

Draft MMP: During
Project
permitting and
prior to Project
construction.

Final MMP: Timing
as determined by
the resource
A draft MMP
shall be
prepared and
provided to
the resource
and
regulatory
agencies
(USFWS,
Consultation with
regulatory
and resource
agencies on
draft MMP
and approval
of final MMP
by the
regulatory

1.96 shall implement the following measures.

A qualified (USFWS- and CDFWapproved) biologist shall prepare a Projectspecific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP) to
compensate for direct and indirect impacts
to sensitive habitats, including ESHA, and
other sensitive biological resources
resulting from trail construction and
operation. The MMP shall compensate for
permanent loss of sensitive habitats,
through the creation, restoration, and
enhancement of in-kind sensitive habitat,
as close to impacted areas as possible
within the study area.

To protect against the loss of ecological
functions and values, compensatory
mitigation shall re-create the following
features of existing sensitive habitat that
would be impacted by the Proposed
Project: habitat mosaic, edge habitats, and
proximity to wetlands and other waters. A
portion of compensatory mitigation shall
re-create the linear aspect and provision for
wildlife dispersal of existing habitats,
where these features are potentially lost as
a result of the Proposed Project. This
feature shall be designed to protect against
fragmentation of remaining habitat patches
adjacent to the rail corridor. Due to limited
available space remaining within the
corridor after trail construction and minor
railbed realignment, these wildlife corridor
improvements will likely occur north and
south of the study area to connect the
existing disjunct open spaces utilized by
wildlife within the urbanized portion of
Santa Cruz including Woods Creek, Arana
MMP, as
described in the
measure.

Prepare annual
mitigation
monitoring
reports.
agencies.

Annual Report:

Following
Project
completion, each
year during the
determined
mitigation
monitoring time
period, per
resource agency
consultation.

CDFW,

CCC, CA
State Parks,
RWQCB).

Final MMP.

Following Project
completion,
an annual
monitoring
report shall
be prepared
each year
(for the
number of
years
determined
in
consultation
with the
resource
agencies)
describing all
mitigation
activities and
whether
mitigation
has met
established
performance
criteria
identified in
the MMP.
agencies.

Submission of
annual
monitoring
report to the
appropriate
regulatory
agencies.

1.97 Gulch, Twin Lakes Beach State Park, and
Rodeo Gulch.

In addition, the Biological Resources MMP
shall include the following:

Description of the trail alignment including
as-built acreage of temporary and
permanent impacts to arroyo willow
and mixed riparian forest, coast live
oak woodland and forest, and monarch
butterfly roost sites, including the
number and type of trees slated for
removal City and County status as
Heritage or Significant trees,
respectively.

Ecological functions and values assessment
of sensitive habitats, including
monarch butterfly habitat to determine
suitable mitigation ratios (at a
minimum, no net loss) in consultation
with USFWS, CDFW, and California
Coastal Commission (CCC).

Goals of compensatory mitigation,
including types and areas of sensitive
habitat to be created, restored,
enhanced and/or preserved; number
and type of trees to be replaced,
specific functions and values of
mitigation habitat types, mitigation
ratios
(created/restored/enhanced/preserved:
impacted), and performance criteria,
including: o Conservation of functions and
values of monarch autumnal and
overwintering roost habitat and
nectaring sites (including

1.98 maintaining suitable grove
structure, wind protection, and
water sources);
o Conservation of edge habitats;
and
o Conservation of functions and
values for wildlife movement
including habitat mosaics, links
between creeks, open spaces and
safe passage across the proposed
alignment, with perennial water
sources, diverse food sources,
cover, and shelter.

Such compensatory mitigation must occur
as close to impacted areas as feasible
and result in no net loss (minimum 1:1
replacement ratio) of sensitive habitat
types, or their functions and values. In
the Coastal Zone, mitigation ratios for
ESHA typically start at 3:1
(creation/substantial restoration:
impact) for ESHA. This ratio is
doubled for enhancement (6:1) and
tripled for preservation (9:1); however,
a minimum of 1:1 must include
creation of in-kind ESHA habitat.

Location and acreage of sensitive habitat,
including monarch roost habitat,
mitigation areas including ownership
status, and existing functions and
values of restored and/or enhanced
sensitive habitats.

All trees will be replaced at a minimum 1:1
ratio. All City Heritage trees, County
Significant trees, and native trees will
be replaced “in kind” at a location and

1.99 ratio to be determined by the City
Forester, County Environmental
Coordinator, and/or other responsible
regulatory agencies.

One on-site mitigation area has been
identified immediately north of the rail
corridor at Woods Creek, currently a
buffer habitat for the known roost site
immediately north. This area would be
enhanced for the roosting western
monarch butterfly by planting native
trees and understory plants (with
fall/winter blooming for nectaring) and
configuring the plantings to create a
permeable tiered canopy that slopes
down to the north.

Project stakeholders including the City,
County, and RTC would identify
undeveloped public and private
properties as potential off-site
mitigation areas. Acquisition could
include direct purchase or placement
of conservation easements on portions
of parcels that are otherwise
constrained from development due to
existing protected resources (e.g.,
County and City aquatic and riparian
setbacks, ESHA, steep slopes, etc.).

Where potentially restricted from
development, suitable areas for
mitigation would not be precluded
from habitat creation, restoration,
enhancement, or preservation as
needed to fulfill mitigation acreage
and proximity requirements.

Mitigation sites may include local
parks, such as Moran Lake, where

1.100
existing monarch roost habitat could
be enhanced through plantings of trees
and nectar plants if a qualified
biologist determines plantings would
be beneficial to the park’s resources.

Mitigation at local parks shall be
authorized by the City, the County,
and/or other relevant stakeholders.

Plantings of roost trees or nectar plants
at Moran Lake would supplement
those plantings already identified in
the Moran Lake Monarch Butterfly
Habitat Management Plan. Mitigation
sites may also include private
properties adjacent to the rail corridor
with the agreement of the City,
County, and/or private property owner
and if determined to be feasible.

Detailed sensitive habitat creation and/or
restoration construction and planting
techniques.

Description and design of habitat
requirements for sensitive wildlife
known to occur in the study area and
immediate surroundings (including
monarch roost sites, federally listed
fish species, potential Santa Cruz
black salamander, western pond turtle,
bald eagle, American peregrine falcon,
native nesting bird species, potential
roosting bat species, San Francisco
dusky-footed woodrat, and marine
mammals).

In sensitive habitats, including in or near
aquatic features, maintenance
activities during trail operation shall
include replanting native vegetation

1.101
found within similar habitats within
the same watershed and weed
eradication that avoids take of
sensitive wildlife species (e.g.,
woodrats, breeding birds). Trail
maintenance activities in sensitive
habitats shall employ hand-tools only.

The use of pesticides or herbicides
shall be prohibited in sensitive
habitats, including in or near aquatic
features. Management activities in
monarch overwintering habitat shall be
conducted between March 16 and
September 14 (outside the monarch
roost season) in coordination with a
monarch biologist.

Strategies to protect remaining sensitive
habitats along the trail corridor and
surroundings from direct and indirect
impacts from trail users and illegal
camping, such as: o Split-rail and wire fencing o Interpretive signage including specific information about
sensitive habitats and species and
“leave no trace” content
o “Green fencing” (dense vegetative
buffers consisting of woody and
plant species that deter human
passage such as poison oak,
Pacific blackberry, and stinging
nettle)
Strategies to protect wildlife movement,
both across and along the trail
corridor, as well as north and/or south
of the corridor to connect open spaces,

1.102
supported by complex and mature
sensitive habitat mosaics, including
perennial water sources.

Long-term quantitative and qualitative
monitoring and reporting, including
consideration of carrying capacity
analysis and alternative approaches,
and documenting the ability to meet or
surpass performance criteria.

Monitoring will include fall and
wintering monitoring, including arrival
and departure dates, of monarch roost
sites by a qualified biologist.

Adaptive management strategies to:
o Identify shortcomings
City/County in meeting
performance standards;
o Ensure long-term viability of
existing, enhanced, restored,
and/or newly created sensitive
biological resources;
o Enhance ecological functions and
values of sensitive habitat
mitigation areas, including
monarch butterfly habitat and
habitat for wildlife movement;
o Ascertain the sufficiency of trail
access, facilities development and
management, and interpretive
design features associated with
the project to protect biological
resources.

Mitigation area locations and final
replacement ratios (e.g., potentially above

1.103
the minimum “no net loss” ratio set here)
shall be determined in consultation with
the relevant agencies, as follows.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

Monarch butterfly (presently FESA
Candidate species, likely Threatened
or Endangered by 2024)
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW). Sensitive habitats,
work below the break in bank of
stream corridors, riparian habitat,
CESA Endangered and Fully Protected
species, Species of Special Concern
California Coastal Commission (CCC).

Environmentally sensitive habitat
areas (ESHA)
California State Parks. Sensitive
resources and habitats on Twin Lakes
State Beach property
Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB). Non-wetland riparian
habitat
The draft MMP shall be submitted to
USFWS, CDFW, CCC, and California
State Parks for review prior to formal
adoption. Monitoring reports will be
provided to these agencies.

Mitigation Measure BIO-9c: Implement
Best Management Practices to Protect
Biological Resources during
Construction
During construction of Segment 9, the City
and/or County (depending on the
implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the
construction contractor shall ensure the
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Include the BMPs
listed in the
measure in the
construction
City/County and
construction
contractor.

City/County and
construction
contractor.

Project design phase.

During construction.

Include the BMPs
in
construction
plans.

Document all
BMPs in
plans and
provide
verification of
BMP
activities,
potential

1.104
following best management practices
(BMPs), to protect water quality and
biological resources during project
construction activities, are included in the
construction specifications and
implemented during Project construction:

Minimize removal or disturbance of
existing vegetation outside the
footprint of project construction
activities.

Limit site access and parking, equipment
storage and stationary construction
activities to the designated staging
areas to the maximum extent feasible.

Prior to staging any equipment or vehicles
within or adjacent to the rail corridor,
clean all equipment caked with mud,
soils, or debris from off-site sources or
previous project sites to avoid
introducing or spreading invasive
exotic plant species. When feasible,
remove invasive exotic plants from the
Project area. All equipment used on
the site should be cleaned prior to
leaving the site for other projects.

Position all stationary equipment such as
motors, pumps, generators, and/or
compressors over drip pans. At the end
of each day, move vehicles and
equipment as far away as possible
from any water body adjacent to the
Project site in a level staging area.

Position parked equipment also over
drip pans or absorbent material.

Check under all equipment for wildlife
before use. If any listed or specialplans.

Implement BMPs, as
described in the
measure.
violations,
and activities
to remediate
violations.

1.105
status wildlife is observed under
equipment or in the work area, do not
disturb or handle it. Cease Project
activities and contact the biological
monitor or resource agencies for
further guidance, if the animal
continues to be encountered in the
Project area.

If security fencing is installed around the
construction site, allow for passage of
wildlife to maintain a link between
inland and coastal habitats including
stream corridors during construction
activities. Prohibit the use of plastic
mesh safety fencing to prevent wildlife
entrapment.

Avoid working at night or during rain
events when special-status amphibians
and mammals are generally more
active. Consult weather forecasts from
the National Weather Service at least
72 hours prior to performing work.

Properly contain and remove all food trash
that may attract predators into the
work area and construction debris and
trash from the work site on a regular
basis.

Refuel and perform all vehicle and/or
equipment maintenance off site at a
facility approved for such activities.

To the greatest extent feasible, stabilize all
exposed or disturbed areas in the
Project area. Install erosion control
measures as necessary such as silt
fences, jute matting, weed-free straw
bales, plywood, straw wattles, and

1.106
water check bars, and broadcasting
weed-free straw wherever silt-laden
water has the potential to leave the
work site and enter the nearby streams.

Prohibit the use of monofilament
erosion control matting to prevent
wildlife entanglement. Modify, repair,
and/or replace erosion control
measures as needed.

Revegetate with native vegetation found
within similar habitats within the same
watershed to minimize erosion,
prevent the establishment of invasive
weeds, and accelerate the recovery of
native vegetation communities.

Whenever feasible, certain construction
activities will be timed to avoid
impacts to sensitive habitats and
wildlife species, as presented in Table

3.3-7. Ideally, most if not all
vegetation clearing will be done in the
fall.

Mitigation Measure BIO-10a: Minimize
Construction-related Activities in
Palustrine Emergent Wetlands and
Aquatic/Riverine Habitats
During construction of Segment 9, the City
and/or County (depending on the
implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the
construction contractor shall minimize
construction-related activities including,
but not limited to, access routes, staging
areas, stockpile areas, and equipment
maintenance, within or adjacent to the
limits of palustrine emergent wetlands and
aquatic/riverine habitats, to the extent
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

In final design plans,
include
minimization of
construction
activities
adjacent to
palustrine
emergent
wetlands and
aquatic/riverine
habitats, and
City/County and
construction
contractor.

City/County and
qualified
biologist.

Prior to construction
activities.

During construction.

Show final
impacts to
palustrine
emergent
wetlands and
aquatic/riveri
ne habitats.

Final design plans.

Documentation of
activities
described in
the measure.

1.107
feasible. Wetlands and
aquatic/riverine areas shall be clearly
shown on construction plans. In
coordination with a qualified biologist,
temporary fencing (e.g., silt fencing) shall
be installed at the outermost edge of all
features not directly affected by trail
construction.
installation of
temporary
protective
fencing.

Ensure that
protections
occurred as
described in the
measure.

Mitigation Measure BIO-10b: Develop
and Implement Aquatic Resources
Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
Coordinating agencies (City, County,
and/or RTC) constructing portions of
Segment 9 and the construction contractor
shall implement the following measures.

A qualified biologist shall be retained to
prepare an Aquatic Resources Mitigation
and Monitoring Plan (MMP) for all direct
and indirect impacts to wetlands and
aquatic/riverine habitats resulting from trail
construction, resulting in no net loss
(minimum 1:1 replacement) of these
sensitive habitat types. The mitigation area
locations and replacement ratios shall be
determined in consultation with the
USACE, RWQCB, CCC, and/or CDFW,
as required. It is expected that mitigation
requirements shall be based on the
determination by the CCC that the trail is a
resource-dependent use by providing safe
pedestrian and bicycle access to the
recreation (e.g., beaches, open spaces,
scenic viewpoints) along the central Santa
Cruz coast and based on its capacity for
“nature study” pursuant to Section
30233(a)(7) of the Coastal Act.

Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Prepare draft and
final MMP as
described in the
measure.

Implement final
MMP, as
described in the
measure.

Prepare annual
mitigation
monitoring
reports.

City/County and
agency-approved
biologist shall
prepare and
implement the
MMP.

Draft MMP: During
Project
permitting and
prior to Project
construction.

Final MMP: Timing
as determined by
the resource
agencies.

Annual Report:

Following
Project
completion, each
year during the
determined
mitigation
monitoring time
period, per
resource agency
consultation.

A draft MMP
shall be
prepared and
provided to
the resource
and
regulatory
agencies
(USACE,
RWQCB,
CCC, and/or
CDFW).

Final MMP.

Following Project
completion,
an annual
monitoring
report shall
be prepared
each year
(for the
number of
years
determined
in
consultation
with the
Include measure
as Condition
of Approval.

Prepare draft and
final MMP as
described in
the measure.

Implement MMP,
as described
in the
measure.

Prepare annual
mitigation
monitoring
reports.

1.108
The MMP shall include the following:

Description of the Project including
acreage of temporary and permanent
impacts to palustrine emergent
wetlands, Coastal Act wetlands
including arroyo willow riparian
forest, and aquatic/riverine features as
identified in a forthcoming formal
delineation of jurisdictional wetlands
and other Waters of the U.S.

Ecological functions and values assessment
of wetlands, including a determination
of regulatory status and permitting
requirements to determine suitable
mitigation ratios.

Goals of compensatory mitigation project
including types and areas of wetland
and aquatic/riverine habitat to be
created, restored, and/or enhanced;
specific functions and values of
mitigation habitat types; and
mitigation ratios
(created/restored/enhanced/preserved:
impacted). Based on a recent memo by
the Coastal Commission for a project
at Gleason Beach in Sonoma County,
mitigation ratios for permanent
wetland impacts will likely begin at
4:1 for creation or substantial
restoration. For wetland enhancement,
this ratio is doubled (8:1) and tripled
for habitat preservation (12:1). For all
mitigation strategies, at least 1:1 must
include creation of new sensitive
habitat.

Location and acreage of wetland and
resource
agencies)
describing all
mitigation
activities and
whether
mitigation
has met
established
performance
criteria
identified in
the MMP.

1.109
riparian mitigation areas including
size, ownership status, and existing
functions and values of restored and/or
enhanced sensitive habitats. At least a
portion of wetland mitigation will
occur in newly constructed drainage
swales north (inland) of the proposed
trail. These features will be lined with
clay soils and planted with a palette of
agency-approved native hydrophytic
vegetation and will connect directly to
storm drains or watercourses along the
Segment 9 alignment.

Detailed wetland and aquatic/riverine
construction and planting techniques.

Description and design of habitat
requirements for special-status plants
and wildlife potentially occupying
wetland and aquatic/riverine habitats.

Maintenance activities during the
monitoring period, including
replanting native wetland and riparian
vegetation and weed removal, that will
not result in take of aquatic wildlife
species.

Long-term quantitative and qualitative
monitoring and reporting,
documenting ability to meet or surpass
performance criteria.

Adaptive management strategies to ensure
long-term viability and enhance
ecological functions and values of
sensitive habitat mitigation areas.

Strategies to protect remaining wetland and
aquatic/riverine habitats along the trail

1.110
alignment from direct and indirect
impacts from trail users. Strategies
may include split-rail fencing,
interpretive signage, and green fencing
(dense vegetative buffers).

The draft MMP shall be submitted to
regulatory agencies, for review, as
required, prior to formal adoption:

USACE. Work below the Ordinary High
Water Mark (OHWM) of stream
corridors or in jurisdictional (3
parameter) wetlands.

CDFW. Work below the break in bank of
stream corridors, riparian habitat.

CCC. Aquatic features, Coastal Act
wetlands.

RWQCB. Work below the Ordinary High
Water Mark (OHWM) of stream
corridors, jurisdictional (3 parameter)
wetlands, other waters, or riparian
habitat.

Monitoring reports will be provided to
relevant agencies. The Aquatic Resources
MMP may be consolidated with the
Biological Resources MMP in consultation
with the regulatory agencies.

Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure CR-1a: Install
Historical Interpretive Exhibits along
Trail prior to Trail Use
Consistent with Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Scenic Trail Network Master Plan Design
Guidelines, the City and/or County,
depending on the jurisdiction, shall
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Develop and install
interpretive
exhibits along
the trail, as
City/County to
develop
interpretive
exhibit materials
Construction
contractor to
install
Prior to and during
construction.

Document topics
to be used in
interpretive
exhibits.

Document
installation
of exhibits.

Interpretive
exhibit
materials.

Photo
documentatio
n of the
placement of

1.111
develop an on-site interpretive exhibit with
materials concerning the history and
engineering features of the Santa Cruz
Branch Rail Line and its character-defining
features. Prior to or within the first year of
trail use, the exhibits shall be installed
where there is adequate room at key
locations along the trail or trail entrances to
specifically highlight the importance of the
Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line.

Interpretation of the site’s history shall be
supervised by an architectural historian or
historian who meets the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards, and may engage additional
consultants to develop the display. There
shall be at least two major exhibits and
three minor exhibits, including signage and
salvaged materials (e.g., small segments of
original ballast, ties, and rail) to be placed
intermittently along the trail route as space
allows and as approved by the lead agency
and Santa Cruz County Regional
Transportation Commission. The historical
interpretive exhibits shall be designed in
conjunction and compatible with
interpretive exhibits for nature education
and exhibits along other rail trail segments
for continuity.
specified in the
measure.
interpretive
exhibit materials.

Maintain exhibits
placed along
the trail.
the
interpretive
exhibits.

Mitigation Measure CR-2: Implement
Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of
Cultural Resources

7. In the event that
archaeological resources are
unexpectedly encountered
during ground-disturbing
construction activities, the
construction contractor shall
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Follow protocol for
discovery of
cultural
resources, as
described in the
City/County to retain
qualified
archaeologist.

Construction
contractor to halt
work in the event
an
archaeological
Ongoing throughout
Project
construction.

Include discovery
protocol into
design plans
and/or
construction
specification
s.

Prepare data
Final design plans
or
specifications.

Data Recovery
Plan, if
applicable.

Treatment Plan
and

1.112
halt work within 100 feet of
the find, and an archaeologist
meeting the Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for
archaeology (National Park
Service 1983) shall be
contacted immediately to
evaluate the find. If the find
is determined by the qualified
archaeologist to be
prehistoric, then a Native
American representative shall
also be contacted to
participate in the evaluation
of the find. If necessary,
archaeological testing for
California Register of
Historical Resources
eligibility shall be completed.

If the discovery proves to be
eligible for the California
Register of Historical
Resources and impacts to the
resource cannot be avoided
via project redesign, a
qualified archaeologist shall
prepare a data recovery plan
tailored to the physical nature
and characteristics of the
deposit, per the requirements
of California Public
Resources Code, Section
15126.4(b)(3)(C). The data
recovery plan shall identify
data recovery excavation
methods, measurable
objectives, and data
measure.

Include discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
specifications.

Prepare Data
Recovery Plan,
Treatment Plan,
Archaeological
Testing Plan, and
documentation
of archaeological
resources
significance, if
applicable.
resource is
discovered.

Qualified
archaeologist to
assess the
archaeological
resource and
prepare Data
Recovery Plan,
Treatment Plan,
and
Archaeological
Testing Plan.

Qualified
archaeologist
and Native
American
representative, as
appropriate, to
recover and
document. the
significance of
the
archaeological
resource.

Project engineer to
include
discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
specifications.
recovery
plan,
treatment
plan,
archaeologic
al testing
plan, and
documentati
on of
archaeologic
al resources
significance,
if applicable.

Archaeologic
al Testing
Plan, if
applicable.

Documentation of
significance
of
archaeologica
l resources, if
applicable.

Proof of document
submittal to
the regional
repository of
the CHRIS, if
applicable.

1.113
thresholds to reduce any
significant impacts to cultural
resources. Pursuant to the
data recovery plan, the
qualified archaeologist and
Native American
representative, as appropriate,
shall recover and document
the scientifically
consequential information
that justifies the resource’s
significance. The City and/or
County depending on the
jurisdiction shall review and
approve the treatment plan
and archaeological testing as
appropriate, and the resulting
documentation shall be
submitted to the regional
repository of the CHRIS, per
California Public Resources
Code, Section
15126.4(b)(3)(C).

Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure GEO-5: Implement
Paleontological Resources Protection
Measures during Construction in High
Sensitivity Areas
The following measures shall be
implemented during project excavation
activities in Segment 9 on geologic units
that have high sensitivity to
paleontological resources (Purisima
Formation and Quaternary marine terrace
deposits). Areas along Segment 9 that do
not have high sensitivity for
paleontological resources and would not
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Retain a qualified
professional
paleontologist.

Include discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
The City/County to
hire a qualified
professional
paleontologist.

The qualified
professional
paleontologist to
conduct the
WEAP and
paleontological
monitoring and
prepare a
Ongoing throughout
Project
construction.

Include discovery
protocol into
design plans
and/or
construction
specification
s.

Document
WEAP
preparation.

Document
worker
Final design plans
or
specifications.

Final WEAP.

Training logs.

Monitoring logs.

Final
Paleontologic
al Mitigation
Report.

1.114
require the following mitigation include
construction of the cantilever/bridge over
Santa Cruz Harbor and excavation in
drainages and creek channels north of the
Twin Lakes State Beach.

Retain Qualified Professional
Paleontologist. Prior to excavation,
the implementing agency (City or
County of Santa Cruz) shall retain a
qualified professional paleontologist
who is defined by the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) as an
individual, preferably with an MS or
PhD in paleontology or geology, who
is experienced with paleontological
procedures and techniques, who is
knowledgeable in the geology of
California, and who has worked as a
paleontological mitigation project
supervisor for at least 2 years. The
qualified professional paleontologist
shall direct all mitigation measures
related to paleontological resources.

Prepare Paleontological Worker
Environmental Awareness Program.

Prior to the start of construction, the
qualified professional paleontologist
or their designee shall conduct a
paleontological Worker Environmental
Awareness Program training for
construction personnel regarding the
appearance of fossils and the
procedures for notifying
paleontological staff should fossils be
discovered by construction staff.

Monitor for Paleontological Resources
during Construction. As determined
specifications.

Prepare and
implement a
Worker
Environmental
Awareness
Program
(WEAP).

Conduct
paleontological
monitoring as
described in the
measure.

Prepare a final
Paleontological
Mitigation
Report.

Paleontological
Mitigation
Report.

Project engineer to
include
discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
specifications.
training in
training log.

Document
monitoring
activities and
results in a
monitoring
log.

Develop a final
Paleontologi
cal
Mitigation
Report.

1.115
appropriate by the qualified
professional paleontologist,
paleontological monitoring shall be
conducted during initial excavations
within sediments assigned high
paleontological sensitivity (i.e.,
Quaternary marine terrace deposits
and Purisima Formation).

Paleontological monitoring shall be
conducted by a paleontological
monitor with experience with
collection and salvage of
paleontological resources and who
meets the minimum standards of the
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
(2010) for a paleontological resources
monitor. The duration and timing of
the monitoring will be determined by
the qualified professional
paleontologist based on the
observation of the geologic setting
from initial ground disturbance and
subject to the review and approval by
the City or County of Santa Cruz,
depending on the jurisdiction of the
work. The qualified professional
paleontologist may determine that fulltime monitoring is not warranted based on the specific geologic
conditions once the full depth of
excavations has been reached, and
may recommend that monitoring be
reduced to periodic spot-checking or
ceased entirely. The qualified
professional paleontologist may
determine that monitoring shall be
reinstated if any new ground
disturbances are required, and

1.116
reduction or suspension shall be
reconsidered by the qualified
professional paleontologist at that
time.

In the event of a fossil discovery by
the paleontological monitor or
construction personnel, all work in the
immediate vicinity of the find shall
cease, and a qualified professional
paleontologist shall evaluate the find
before construction activity in the area
resumes. If it is determined that the
fossil is scientifically significant, the
qualified professional paleontologist
shall complete the following
conditions to mitigate impacts to
significant fossil resources:

A. Fossil Salvage. If fossils are
discovered, the paleontological
monitor shall have the authority to
halt or temporarily divert
construction equipment within 50
feet of the find until the
paleontological monitor and/or
qualified professional
paleontologist evaluate the
discovery and determine if the
fossil may be considered
significant. Typically, fossils can
be safely salvaged quickly by a
single paleontological monitor
and not disrupt construction
activity. In some cases, larger
fossils (such as complete
skeletons or large mammal
fossils) require more extensive
excavation and longer salvage

1.117
periods. Bulk matrix sampling
may be necessary to recover small
invertebrates or microvertebrates
from within paleontologically
sensitive deposits.

B. Fossil Preparation and
Curation. Once salvaged,
significant fossils shall be
identified to the lowest possible
taxonomic level, prepared to a
curation-ready condition, and
curated in a scientific institution
with a permanent paleontological
collection along with all pertinent
field notes, photographs, data, and
maps. Fossils of undetermined
significance at the time of
collection may also warrant
curation at the discretion of the
qualified professional
paleontologist.

Final Paleontological Mitigation Report.

Upon completion of ground-disturbing
activity (and curation of fossils if
necessary), the qualified professional
paleontologist shall prepare a final
report describing the results of the
paleontological monitoring efforts
associated with the Project. The report
shall include a summary of the field
and laboratory methods, an overview
of the project geology and
paleontology, a list of taxa recovered
(if any), an analysis of fossils
recovered (if any) and their scientific
significance, and recommendations.

The report shall be submitted to the

1.118
City or County of Santa Cruz. If the
monitoring efforts produced fossils,
then a copy of the report shall also be
submitted to the designated museum
repository.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a: Conduct
Soil Sampling and Implement Necessary
Remediation
Prior to Project construction, the City,
County and RTC shall coordinate to
prepare and submit Work Plan(s) for a
Supplemental Soils Investigation to Santa
Cruz County Environmental Health.

Following notification that Santa Cruz
County Environmental Health has
received, reviewed, and accepted these
Work Plan(s), the City, County and RTC
shall conduct a Supplemental Soils
Investigation, which shall include soil
sampling at selected locations within the
limits of the Project corridor under the
supervision of a professional geologist or
professional civil engineer to identify the
concentrations of anticipated contaminants,
which may include: pesticides, herbicides,
TPHs, heavy metals, PAHs, and other
reasonably anticipated contaminants of
concern, such as arsenic.

The City, County and RTC shall
coordinate with Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health to develop and
implement a program to remediate or
manage known contaminated soil during
construction. If necessary, any additional
information gathered from the
Supplemental Soil Investigation shall be
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Retain a professional
geologist or civil
engineer.

Prepare a Work Plan
for Supplemental
Soils
Investigation.

Submit Work Plan
for Supplemental
Soils
Investigation to
the County
Environmental
Health
Department for
approval.

Coordinate with
Santa Cruz
County
Environmental
Health to
develop and
implement a soil
remediation and
management
City/County, in
coordination
with RTC, to
retain a
professional
geologist or civil
engineer, submit
Work Plan for
Supplemental
Soils
Investigation to
the County
Environmental
Health
Department for
approval, and
coordinate with
Santa Cruz
County
Environmental
Health to
develop and
implement a soil
remediation and
management
program to
remediate.

Professional
geologist or civil
engineer to
Prior to start of
construction
activities.

Prepare Work
Plan for
Supplementa
l Soils
Investigation
.

Keep logs
documenting
soil
sampling.

Prepare
Supplementa
l Soils
Investigation
report.

Develop soil
remediation
program
specifying
plan for
remediation/
management
activities of
contaminated
soils.

Prepare soil
remediation
report to
document
Work Plan for
Supplemental
Soils
Investigation.

Soil sampling
logs.

Supplemental
Soils
Investigation
report.

Soil remediation
program.

Soil remediation
report.

Documentation of
soil disposal
at a licensed
facility

1.119
used to identify locations along the Project
corridor that may require remedial action
in order to prevent exposure of
construction workers, Shoreline Middle
School attendees, and the public to these
contaminants. The environmental data
collected shall also be used to identify the
appropriate disposal options for those soils
or demolished materials that require offsite disposal.

Disposal shall occur at an appropriate
facility licensed to handle such
contaminants, and remedial excavation
shall proceed under the supervision of an
environmental consultant licensed to
oversee such remediation. Where possible,
potentially contaminated soils and rail
ballast shall be stockpiled and
characterized to determine the appropriate
means and location for proper storage and
disposal. The remediation/disposal
program shall be approved by Santa Cruz
County Environmental Health. The City
and County shall submit any required
correspondence to Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health prior to issuance of
grading permits. All proper waste handling
and disposal procedures shall be followed
in accordance with applicable DTSC and
CalOSHA regulations. Upon completion of
the Supplemental Site Investigation, the
environmental consultant shall prepare a
report presenting the findings of the
additional assessment. The report shall be
submitted to Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health and include figures
depicting the boring locations, summary
tables of analytical data, conclusions, and
program. prepare and
oversee
implementation
of a Work Plan
for Supplemental
Soils
Investigation,
prepare soil
remediation
report, and
ensure
contaminated
soils are
disposed at a
licensed facility.
remediation
activities and
completion
of
remediation.

Document
disposal of
soil at
facility
licensed to
handle
contaminated
soil.

1.120
recommendations.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2b: Prepare
and Implement Soils Management Plan
The City, County and RTC shall ensure a
Soils Management Plan (SMP) is
developed by a qualified engineer. The
SMP shall be implemented to protect
workers and persons at Shoreline Middle
School during ground-disturbing activities
and to remove and/or mitigate exposure to
hazardous-material-containing soil and
ballast, where present in the Project
corridor. Laboratory data for the impacted
soil, identified as part of the soils and
ballast assessment report prepared under
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a, shall be used
to profile excavated soil prior to transport,
treatment, and recycling at a licensed
treatment facility. Additional profiling of
the export soils shall be performed as
needed to satisfy requirements of the
receiving facility. Removal, transportation,
and disposal of impacted soil shall be
performed in accordance with applicable
DTSC and CalOSHA laws, regulations,
and ordinances. The SMP shall include
health and safety information for workers
and the general public with an emphasis on
potential adverse health effects and how to
seek proper help if an accident is suspected
and inform the various contractors and
workers of the presence of shallow soil
impacted with contaminants and the
appropriate measures to avoid exposure to
contaminants. These measures may include
but would not be limited to the following:

1. Installing temporary security fencing
around the construction site and
 Include measure
as Condition of
Approval.
 Retain a
qualified
engineer.
 Develop and
implement an
SMP.

The City/County, in
coordination
with RTC, to
retain a qualified
engineer.

Qualified engineer to
prepare an SMP.

The construction
contractor to
implement all
actions and
recommendation
s provided in the
SMP.

Prior to issuance of
grading permits
and during
construction.

Provide an SMP
that meets all
requirements
listed in the
measure.

Soil Management
Plan.

1.121
flag/cone off the areas of contaminated
soils (hotspots) until the contaminants
are removed
Providing all personnel entering a hotspot
with site-specific awareness training
Requiring that all personnel whose work
will involve the excavation or
disturbance of soils in and around the
hotspot must have successfully
completed 40-hour Hazardous Worker
(HAZWOPER) training
Requiring a HAZWOPER supervisor to be
on-site at all times during the
excavation or disturbance of soils in a
hotspot
Prohibiting personnel who cannot prove
that they are authorized to enter a
hotspot or do not have the appropriate
personal protective equipment from
entering a hotspot
Prohibiting eating, drinking, smoking,
chewing gum or tobacco in hotspots,
and requiring consumable items and
activities be confined to designated
worker break areas
In the event that contaminated soil and/or
groundwater are identified where not
previously anticipated during construction,
the SMP shall also require that
construction cease and that appropriate
handling and disposal procedures be
implemented. Contaminated soils and/or
groundwater can be identified by
discoloration or stains, distinctive odors,
absence of plants and animals, subsequent

1.122
erosion from the absence of plant life, or
the presence of paint chips or other
materials known to contaminate soils.

Procedures for properly handling, storing,
and disposing contaminated soils may
include but are not limited to the
following:

1. Placing contaminated soils in properly
labeled drums or lined hazardous
waste storage/transportation
conveyance units (i.e., roll-off waste
boxes) in preparation of transportation
and disposal
Avoiding temporary stockpiling of
contaminated soils or hazardous
materials
If temporary stockpiling is necessary:
a. Covering the stockpile with
plastic sheeting or tarps
b. Installing a berm around the
stockpile to prevent runoff from
leaving the area
c. Avoiding stockpiling in or near
storm drains or watercourses
Monitoring the air quality during
excavation operations at locations
potentially exhibiting elevated
concentrations of hazardous material
Collecting water from decontamination
procedures and treating and/or
disposing of it at an appropriate
disposal site
Collecting non-reusable protective
equipment and disposing of the

1.123
equipment at an appropriate disposal
site
Noise
Mitigation Measure N-1: Implement
Noise-Reducing Measures for
Construction Equipment Used within
275 Feet of Residences or Hotels
During construction, the construction
contractor shall employ the following
noise-reducing measures where use of
construction equipment occurs within 275
feet of residences or hotels:
(1) Use acoustical shelters around any air
compressors, generators, and any other
stationary construction equipment not
fitted with baffled enclosures;
(2) Use baffling around stationary
construction equipment to reduce
noise and vibration levels;
(3) Properly muffle and maintain all
construction equipment powered by
internal combustion engines;
(4) Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal
combustion engines; and
(5) Whenever feasible, use electrical
power to run air compressors and
similar power tools.

Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Include
recommendation
s of the noise
reducing
measures (listed
in Mitigation
Measure N-1) in
the construction
specifications.

Identify construction
areas within 275
feet of residences
or hotels.

The construction
contractor is
responsible for
incorporating the
noise
recommendation
s into
construction
activities
occurring within
275 feet of
residences or
hotels.

Prior to construction
include
recommendation
s into the
construction
specifications.

Implement noise
reduction
measures for the
duration of all
construction
requiring
operation of
heavy equipment
within 275 feet
for residences or
hotels.

List activities and
recommenda
tions
provided in
the
construction
specification
s.

Provide the
construction
specifications.

Mitigation Measure N-3: Provide
Notification of Construction Vibration
to Residential Units within 50 Feet
The construction contractor shall provide
written notification at least 1 week prior to
the start of any construction activities
involving the use of vibratory equipment to
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Develop a
notification list
of residences
The implementing
agency shall
provide a copy
of the mailing
list and
correspondence
to the city/county
Notification shall
occur at least one
week prior to use
of vibratory
equipment.

Contractor to
provide
notices to
affected
residences.

Documentation of
the notices
prepared and
provided to
the
residences.

1.124
all residential units located within 50 feet
of the construction area that will produce
the vibration. The notice shall inform
residents of the estimated start date and
duration of daytime vibration-generating
construction activities and provide a point
of contact for vibration exposure
complaints.
within 50 feet of
the construction
area that will be
affected by
vibration.

Notices shall inform
residents at least
one week prior
to the start of any
construction
activities, and
include the start
date and duration
of vibrationgenerating
activities and
provide a point
of contact for
complaints.
for confirmation.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure TCR-1a: Conduct
Native American Monitoring during
Construction in Previously Undisturbed
Native Soils
A Native American monitor shall be
retained and remain present during
excavation activities within previously
undisturbed native soils.

In the event that cultural resources of
Native American origin are identified
during construction, the Native American
monitor shall have the authority to halt and
Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Retain a qualified
Native American
monitor and a
Native American
monitor.

Include a Native
American
monitor in the
City/County to retain
a qualified
Native American
monitor and hire
a Native
American
monitor.

Qualified
archaeologist
Native American
monitor to
conduct Tribal
Ongoing throughout
Project
construction.

Document daily
monitoring
activities and
any potential
resources
discovered.

Prepare Tribal
Cultural
Resources
Mitigation
Plan.

Monitoring logs.

Tribal Cultural
Resources
Mitigation
Plan.

1.125
redirect ground disturbance away from the
find. The implementing agency (City or
County) and/or Tribal Liaison, as
appropriate, shall consult with a qualified
archaeologist and begin or continue Native
American consultation procedures. If the
City/County and/or Tribal Liaison, in
consultation with local Native Americans,
determines that the resource is a tribal
cultural resource and thus significant under
CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared
and implemented in accordance with state
guidelines and in consultation with Native
American groups. The mitigation plan may
include but would not be limited to
avoidance, capping in place, excavation
and removal of the resource, interpretive
displays, sensitive area signage, or other
mutually agreed upon measure.
orientation
meeting required
by MM-CR-2
and in
monitoring of
ground
disturbing
activities.

Prepare Tribal
Cultural
Resource
Mitigation Plan,
if applicable.
cultural
resources
monitoring and
develop and
implement a
Tribal Cultural
Resources
Mitigation Plan,
if needed.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1b:

Implement Protocol for Unanticipated
Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources,
if Native American Monitor is Not
Present
If cultural resources of Native American
origin are identified during Project
construction while the Native American
monitor is not present, all earth-disturbing
work within 100 feet of the find shall cease
and desist until an archaeologist has
evaluated the nature and significance of the
find as a cultural resource and an
appropriate local Native American
representative is consulted. Staking of the
area of discovery shall be implemented
with stakes no more than 10 feet apart,
forming a circle having a radius of no less
than 100 feet from the point of discovery.

Include measure as
Condition of
Approval.

Include discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
specifications.

Follow protocol for
discovery of
Tribal cultural
resources, as
described in the
measure.

Contact and consult
with Native
Construction
contractor to halt
earth disturbing
work within 100
feet in the event
a Tribal cultural
resource is
discovered.

Project engineer to
include
discovery
protocol in
design plans
and/or
construction
specifications.

City/County to
contact and
During construction. Include discovery
protocol into
design plans
and/or
construction
specification
s.

Document any
discoveries
made on site.

Document
consultation
with Native
American
representativ
es.

Final design plans
or
specifications.

Documentation of
any
discoveries
including
notification of
and
consultation
with Native
American
representative
s.

1.126
If the City/County, in consultation with
local Native American tribes, determines
that the resource is a tribal cultural
resource and thus significant under CEQA,
a mitigation plan shall be prepared and
implemented in accordance with state
guidelines and in consultation with local
Native American group(s). The plan shall
include avoidance of the resource or, if
avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the
plan shall outline the appropriate treatment
of the resource in coordination with the
appropriate local Native American tribal
representative and, if applicable, a
qualified archaeologist. Examples of
appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural
resources include but are not limited to
protecting the cultural character and
integrity of the resource, protecting
traditional use of the resource, protecting
the confidentiality of the resource, or
heritage recovery.

American
representatives
in the event a
Tribal cultural
resource is
discovered
consult with
Native American
representatives
in the event a
Tribal cultural
resource is
discovered.

BMP – Best Management Practice; CA State Parks – California State Parks; CalOSHA – California Division of Occupational Safety and Health; CCC – California Coastal Commission; CDFW – California Department of Fish and Wildlife; CEQA – California Environmental Quality Act; CESA – California Endangered Species Act; CHRIS – California Historical Resources Information System; City – City of Santa Cruz; County – County of Santa Cruz; DTSC – California Department of Toxic Substances Control; ESHA – Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas; FESA – Federal Endangered Species Act; HAZWOPER – Hazardous Worker; MBTA – Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918; MMP – Mitigation and Management Plan; MS – Master of Science Degree; NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; OHWM – Ordinary High Water Mark; PG&E – Pacific Gas & Electric; PhD – Doctor of Philosophy Degree; RTC – Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission; RWQCB – Regional Water Quality Control Board; SMP – Soils Management Plan; USACE – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; USFWS – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; WEAP – Worker Environmental Awareness Program

1.127
Table 3.3-7 Preferred Timing for Construction Activities Listed by Biological Resource Biological Resource
Preferred Period of
Avoidance
Preferred Construction
Window
Life Events/Functions/
Values to be Protected
Construction Activity to Be
Avoided
Arroyo Willow and Mixed
Riparian/
Habitats below the break in bank
Rainy season, approximately
October 15–May 31
June 1–October 15 Stable banks, slopes, and soil All construction Sensitive Fish Species/Western
Pond Turtle/
Potential SC Black
Salamander/Marine Mammalsa
Rainy season, approximately
October 15–May 31
June 1–October 15 Fish migration/critical habitat
functions and values
Work in or near aquatic features
and riparian vegetation
Monarch Butterfly Autumnal and Overwintering
roost season, approximately
September 15–March 31
April 1–September 15 Autumnal roosting, overwintering
and nectaring activities
All construction within designated
buffers; cutting, limbing, and tree
removal, noise and vibration
within 300 feet of roost sites prior
to temperature reaching 55o F
Bird Species February 1–August 31 September 1–January 31 Nesting activities All construction within designated buffers from active nest sites
Bat Species November 1–February 15 and
May 1–August 31
February 15–April 30 and
September 1–October 31
Roosting, especially maternity
roosts and winter hibernacula
Pruning, limbing, and tree
removal
San Francisco Dusky-Footed
Woodrat
October 15–July 31 August 1–October 15 Houses, especially during breeding and rearing
Vegetation/tree removal and
woodrat relocation
Tree removal October 15–
August 31
Sept 1–Oct 15 (this is during the
beginning of the monarch
autumnal roost period)
Breeding birds, bats, roosting
monarchs, slope stability
Cutting, limbing, tree removal,
monarch roost encroachment
a
Central California coast coho salmon, central California coast steelhead, tidewater goby, and Pacific lamprey.

Note: Each “preferred” time frame or construction window indicates the type of construction activity to be avoided, if possible, and not all windows apply to all resources. Ideally, most if not all vegetation clearing and tree removal will be done during the fall, whereas there is more flexibility with the other timeframes.

1.128
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ

APPROVING A DESIGN PERMIT, SLOPE MODIFICATION PERMIT/VARIANCE, AND A WATERCOURSE VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT SEGMENTS 8 AND 9 OF THE COASTAL RAIL TRAIL, A 2.2-MILE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM EXTENDING ALONG

THE RAILROAD CORRIDOR (OWNED BY THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION) FROM THE BEACH STREET/PACIFIC AVENUE ROUNDABOUT ON THE WEST, TO THE EASTERN SIDE OF 17TH AVENUE ON THE

EAST AND EXCLUDING THE RECENTLY-CONSTRUCTED SAN LORENZO RIVER TRESTLE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS (APPLICATION NO. CP22-0118) WHEREAS, On August 10, 2022, the City of Santa Cruz submitted an application for a Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Variance, and a Watercourse Variance to construct Segments 8 and 9 of the Coastal Rail Trail, a 2.2-mile bicycle and pedestrian system extending along the railroad corridor (owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission) from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout on the west, to the eastern side of 17th Avenue on the east and excluding the recently-constructed San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the project site and its development is governed by the standards and guidelines contained in the Municipal Code Title 24, the Zoning Ordinance; Municipal Code Chapter 9.56 pertaining to Preservation of Heritage Trees and Shrubs; and the City of Santa Cruz General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the project site crosses multiple jurisdictional boundaries within the Coastal Zone, including the City of Santa Cruz and unincorporated areas of the County of Santa Cruz, as well as areas where the California Coastal Commission retains Coastal Permitting authority. As such, a Consolidated Coastal Permit will be processed by the California Coastal Commission in accordance with Section 30601.3 of the California Coastal Act; WHEREAS, the project is subject to the provisions of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Network Master Plan, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2013 and amended in February 2014; and
WHEREAS, the project is subject to the goals and vision of the Santa Cruz Rail Trail Arts Master Plan, which was adopted by the City Council on September 25, 2018; and WHEREAS, the application has undergone environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, more specifically, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and circulated for a 53-day review period which ended on November 14, 2022 and a Final EIR was prepared and then made available to the public in January 2023; and

1.129
RESOLUTION NO.

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 2, 2023 as the decision-making body on the project and, after hearing public testimony, voted 6-0-1 to certify the environmental determination and approve the Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Variance, and Watercourse Variance; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2023, City Councilmember Sonja Brunner advanced review of the project to the City Council at a Special Meeting of March 20, 2023, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 24.04.175; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on March 20, 2023 to consider the application; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted separate resolutions to certify the EIR and adopt environmental findings and a Mitigation Monitoring Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council now makes the following findings:

Design Permit, Section 24.08.430

1. The site plan and building design are consistent with design and development policies of the General Plan, any element of the General Plan, and any area plan, specific plan, or other city policy for physical development. If located in the Coastal Zone, the site plan and building design are also consistent with policies of the Local Coastal Program.

The site plan has been designed to be consistent with the physical development policies of the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Beach South of Laurel area plan, which seek to enhance neighborhood character and quality and ensure compatibility of infill development.

Proposed structures, including retaining walls, bridge, and viaducts, and street improvements provide for functionality of pedestrian and bicyclists conveyance while achieving aesthetic compatibility to the existing locations and surrounding environment. Retaining wall colors and texture will complement the adjacent topography, blending into the natural environment to the extent possible. Final designs will be selected to achieve complementarity to the surrounding and achieve a design aesthetic in keeping with the high standards of the Santa Cruz visual environment and community expectations. Viaducts in Segment 9, with FRP exterior, will maintain a sleek, minimalist appearance in order to remain inconspicuous against the backdrop of the natural environment. Physical separation of infrastructure by distance and the presence of ample existing vegetation minimizes impacts associated with placement of new structures and the resulting visual departure from existing conditions, in keeping with standards of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan.

A guiding principle in the 2030 General Plan promotes the provision of an accessible, comprehensive, and effective transportation system that integrates automobile use with sustainable and innovative transportation options, including enhanced bicycle and pedestrian

1.130
RESOLUTION NO.
networks throughout the community. The staff report cites General Plan Goals, Policies and actions supporting development of the Rail-Trail, as further described below:

The proposed Project facilitates objectives of Community Design related to arrangement of physical infrastructure, including transportation conveyances, as below:
 CD4.1.4 Protect and enhance historic street patterns, rail lines, walls, and pedestrian walkways to emphasize historic routes and help define districts and neighborhoods.  CD5.1 Create a well-connected street and pedestrian network.  CD5.1.1 Implement the Master Transportation Study’s recommendations for improving the city’s pedestrian network.

The proposed Project would improve access to the coast, advancing the following provisions of the Land Use Element:
 LU2.3.1 Protect, maintain, and enhance publicly accessible coastal and open space areas.
 LU3.11 Protect open spaces that provide scenic, recreational, educational, and environmental benefits.
 LU3.11.1 Continue to recognize and protect the Pacific Ocean, Monterey Bay, and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary as natural resources and valuable open space.

The Project offers alternatives to automobile travel, fulfilling the following goals and policies related to transportation:
 Goal LU4 Land use patterns should facilitate alternative transportation and/or minimize transportation demand.
 Policy LU4.2 Encourage land use changes that reduce the need for autos.

The Project fosters achievement of the following General Plan Policies supporting use of the railway for transit purposes and retention of the existing rail line:
 LU4.2.3 Prepare a Rail Transit Land Use Plan and recommend land use changes at and near proposed transit stops in anticipation of local rail service.  LU4.5 Seek opportunities to secure land for transit center development along rail lines.  LU4.5.1 Consult with the Regional Transportation Commission on land dedications or land use changes related to future transit centers.

The proposed Project advances the following goals and policies of the Mobility Element:
 Goal M1 Land use patterns, street design, parking, and access solutions that facilitate multiple transportation alternatives.
 M1.1.1 Create walk-able, transit-oriented activity centers throughout the city.  M1.1.2 Connect activity centers with pedestrian and bicycle paths.  M1.1.3 Implement pedestrian and bicycle improvements that support transit ridership.  M1.4.2 Allow for future multi-modal use of future rights-of-way by protecting them from development.
 M1.5.1 Increase land use efficiency and the walkability of activity centers.  Goal M2 A safe, sustainable, efficient, adaptive, and accessible transportation system.

1.131
RESOLUTION NO.
 M2.1 Provide leadership on sustainable regional mobility.  M2.1.2 Encourage use of alternative modes of transportation.  M2.1.3 Implement pedestrian, bike, mass transit, and road system improvements through the Capital Improvements Program.
 M2.1.4 Support regional funding and implementation of key regional Projects that can significantly benefit Santa Cruz and further the City’s mobility policies.

The proposed scope of work assists with attainment of the following General Plan objectives related to rail:
 M2.2 Encourage passenger rail transit or other alternative transportation options via the continued support, acquisition, and expansion of railroad rights-of-way.  M2.2.1 Protect existing and potential railroad lines and rights-of-way, and other potential rights-of-way, from land uses that would prevent the development of rail or fixed-guide way services or other transportation-related uses in the future.  M2.2.2 Encourage the continued transport of goods by rail.

The Project’s proposed design and location facilitate attainment of the following goals, policies, and actions of the Mobility Element:
 M3.3.5 Require new development to be designed to discourage through traffic in adjacent neighborhoods and to encourage bicycle or pedestrian connections.  Goal M4 A citywide interconnected system of safe, inviting, and accessible pedestrian ways and bikeways.
 M4.1 Enable and encourage walking in Santa Cruz.
 M4.1.1 Update and implement the Pedestrian Master Plan for development of a complete, continuous, and structurally adequate system of pedestrian paths and walkways.
 M4.1.4 Encourage walking in Santa Cruz through educational outreach and promotional programs. M4.2 Provide and maintain a complete, interconnected, safe, inviting, and efficient citywide bicycle network.
 M4.2.2 Work with appropriate agencies to seek funding for pedestrian and bicycle Projects.
 M4.2.3 Facilitate bicycling connections to all travel modes.  M4.3 Require pedestrian and bicycle improvements in major activity centers and activity areas.
 M4.3.2 Develop bike commute routes along railroad rights-of-way (while ensuring the ability to develop rail transit) and along West Cliff Drive, Broadway, King, and other streets.
 M4.4 Assure a high level of bicycle user amenities.
 M4.5 Support pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements.  M4.5.1 Design and also modify intersections using striping, pedestrian crossing signs, pedestrian islands, and pedestrian-friendly signal phasing.  M4.5.3 Develop a schedule and comprehensive funding program for proposed bike system improvements within the Capital Improvements Program.

The proposed Project furthers the following goals and polices of the Parks and Recreation Element:

1.132
RESOLUTION NO.
 Goal PR3 Well managed, clean, and convenient public access to open space lands and coastline.
 PR3.1 Enhance the outdoor educational and recreational experience in appropriate open space lands and coastline.
 PR3.1.1 Provide recreational and educational opportunities within the open space lands and coastline consistent with adopted master or management plans.  PR3.2 As opportunities arise and when economically feasible, consider acquiring undeveloped parcels that provide access to City-owned open space lands and coastline.
 PR3.3 Protect, maintain, and enhance publicly accessible coastal and open space areas.
 PR3.3.3 Require new development and public works Projects to provide public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coast, except where it is inconsistent with public safety or protection of fragile coastal resources, or where adequate access exists nearby.
 PR3.3.4 Maximize public access and enjoyment of recreation areas along the coastline.  Goal PR4 An integrated system of citywide and regional trails.  PR4.1 Provide and maintain an accessible citywide trail system within the city and connect it to regional trails.
 PR4.1.1 Provide trails for a range of uses.
 PR4.1.2 Update and maintain trails in accordance with the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans.
 PR4.1.4 Create a continuous pathway along the coast by enhancing the physical links between West Cliff and East Cliff Drives and the Beach Promenade.  PR4.2 Provide and maintain trails within parks and appropriate open space areas.  PR4.2.1 Use public or quasi-publicly-owned lands for trails.  PR4.2.2 Obtain trail easements through private donations and by public purchase, where required for critical links.

The project advances the below provisions of the Natural Resource and Conservation Element:
 NRC4.4.2 Establish an Alternative Sustainable Transportation and Land Use Team to produce a transportation plan that defines alternative transportation options (not associated with autos, busses or carpools) to address the Santa Cruz mobile emission reduction goals of 30 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050.  NRC6.1 Manage and enhance open space and the coastline.  NRC6.2 Support protection of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and its environs.

Additionally, the project promotes the following policies of the Local Coastal Program:
 LCP Policy 3.5 Protect coastal recreation areas, maintain all existing coastal access points open to the public, and enhance public access, open space quality and recreational enjoyment in a manner that is consistent with the California Coastal Act.  LCP Policy 3.5.5 Develop and implement plans to maximize public access and enjoyment of recreations areas along the coastline.

1.133
RESOLUTION NO.
 LCP Policy 3.7 Recognize and protect the Pacific Ocean and Monterey Bay as a valuable open space, natural resource, and National Marine Sanctuary.

The project corridor occurs on land within the Beach and South of Laurel Area Plan. The project fosters achievement of the following goals of the Area Plan:
 To facilitate access to the Beach and South of Laurel while reducing reliance upon the automobile
 To propose a staging of development activity which both allows for expansion and encourages alternatives modes of transportation
 To devise a management approach which
o Manages the streets, public rights of way, and gateways as an irreplaceable resource

2. For non-residential projects, the project’s location, size, height, operations, and other significant features and characteristics are compatible with and do not adversely affect or further degrade adjacent properties, the surrounding neighborhood, or the public health, safety, and welfare. For residential projects, the project complies with the objective standards and requirements of the zoning district in which it is located, as well as any objective standards of any area plan or other regulatory document that applies to the area in which the project is located.

The site design, including placement of proposed structures, including retaining walls, bridge, and viaducts, street improvements, lighting, and the like, aligns to the existing rail corridor, a developed linear transportation conveyance. All new structures would be located within the width of the rail corridor, placed adjacent to the existing rail line, minimizing visible bulk and mass. New bridges and viaducts would retain a low profile and utilize exterior colors and treatment to ensure compatibility with surrounding structures and features. Retaining wall color and texture will complement adjacent topography to blend into the natural environment to the extent possible, in conformance to the appearance of the surroundings to achieve a design aesthetic in keeping with the high standards of the Santa Cruz visual environment and community expectations. The retaining wall design includes timber or concrete lagging to ensure that aesthetic wall treatments are implemented to improve project aesthetics, reduce the visual intrusion of retaining walls in the landscape, and be consistent with the railroad theme. Locations of new lighting would generally correspond to the locations of existing light fixtures, while new fencing and guardrails would remain limited in height and would include materials and colors, such as painted metal, complementary in appearance to the existing surroundings. In total, such features provide compatibility with adjacent properties and neighborhoods in the vicinity and would not impart adverse consequences to public health, safety, or welfare. As a new path intended for use by bicyclists and pedestrians, the trail would host primarily non-motorized travel with minimum operational impacts to surrounding uses related to increased generation of noise, light, vibration, or other such nuisance effects.

3. For non-residential projects, the project provides for an arrangement of uses, buildings, structures, open spaces, and other improvements that are compatible with the scale and character of the adjacent properties and surrounding neighborhood.

1.134
RESOLUTION NO.

The project includes construction of approximately 2.2 miles of new multi-use paved trail adjacent to the rail. Smooth wire fencing with metal posts, 54-inches in height will be built between edge of rail and trail. New viaducts and bridges would provide for waterway crossings, with the design of new infrastructure compatible with those of existing roadway infrastructure of a similar scale. Way-finding, directional, and safety signage, and pavement markings at street crossings as well as storm drain infrastructure and retaining walls will be constructed throughout the project limits. The retaining wall design includes timber or concrete lagging to ensure that aesthetic wall treatments are implemented to improve project aesthetics, reduce the visual intrusion of retaining walls in the landscape, and provide for consistency with the railroad theme of existing conditions.

For the viaducts and cantilever on the Woods Lagoon Railroad Bridge, the FRP decking, and side fencing/guard rails will maintain a sleek, minimalist appearance in order to remain inconspicuous against the backdrop of the surrounding natural environment. For the clear span bridge over Pilkington Creek, the conceptual design is a Pratt truss bridge, similar to the Arana Gulch Bridge for the multiuse trail across the north Harbor. Physical separation of infrastructure by distance and the presence of ample existing vegetation minimizes the prominence of new structures and the visual departure from existing conditions, in keeping with standards of the General Plan, Municipal Code, Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan, and Beach and South of Laurel Area Plan. Proposed improvements would maintain a high standard for project aesthetics, reduce the visual intrusion of retaining walls in the landscape, and provide for consistency with the existing railroad theme.

Through use of concrete, FRP, steel, and wood, proposed colors and materials would advance the General Plan Land Use Element goals LU3.11, for protection of open spaces that provide scenic, recreational, educational, and environmental benefits; and LU3.11.1, for continued recognition and protection of the Pacific Ocean, Monterey Bay, and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary as natural resources and valuable open space. The proposed project plan has been designed for consistency with the physical development policies of the General Plan, which seek to enhance neighborhood character and quality and ensure compatibility of development to existing features of the natural and built environments.

4. The exterior design and appearance of buildings and structures and the design of the site plan shall be compatible with design and appearance of other existing buildings and structures in neighborhoods which have established architectural character worthy of preservation.

The designs of proposed structures, including retaining walls, bridge, and viaducts, are intended to provide for functionality of pedestrian and bicyclists conveyance while achieving aesthetic compatibility to the existing locations and surrounding environment. Retaining walls colors and texture proposed will complement the adjacent topography to blend into the natural environment to the extent possible. Viaducts, with concrete foundations and FRP surface panels, will remain minimally visible due to their general alignment with the horizontal plane of the existing railbed and would remain inconspicuous against the backdrop of the natural environment surroundings. Physical separation of infrastructure by distance and the presence of ample existing vegetation minimizes impacts associated with placement

1.135
RESOLUTION NO.
of new structures and the resulting visual departure from existing conditions, in keeping with standards of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan.

Significant new infrastructure will remain separated from residential neighborhoods and maintain compatibility with the scale of adjacent buildings and structures.

5. Design of the site plan respects design principles in terms of maintaining a balance of scale, form and proportion, using design components which are harmonious, and materials and colors which blend with elements of the site plan and surrounding areas.

Location of structures takes into account maintenance of public views; rooftop mechanical equipment is incorporated into roof design or screened from public rightsof-way to the extent possible. Utility installations such as trash enclosures, storage units, traffic-control devices, transformer vaults and electrical meters are accessible and screened.

The designs of proposed structures, including retaining walls, bridge, and viaducts, provide for functionality of pedestrian and bicyclist conveyance while achieving aesthetic compatibility to the existing locations and surrounding environment. As a continuous alignment of infrastructure, Rail-Trail improvements would retain a linear configuration and seamless arrangement, with all new infrastructure providing a single pathway paralleling the existing rail line, complemented by intersecting spurs connecting to desirable destinations along the new Rail-Trail line. Signage would educate pedestrians and cyclists about the surrounding natural environment, enhancing the experience of trail use and providing for harmonious appearance. All structures would retain synergy of appearance, with FRP treatment applied to viaducts and bridges, and both metal and wood comprising material integrated throughout. The project has been designed to minimize obstructions to existing vistas. With new trail infrastructure in place, bicyclists and pedestrians would gain opportunities to experience views from a 2.20-mile path of new vantage points. Through placement of the new trail, the currently underutilized and unimproved rail line, will experience revitalization through placement of new infrastructure offering views to pedestrians and cyclists and will improve views of the coast through removal of existing visual barriers.

6. Where a site plan abuts, or is in close proximity to, uses other than that proposed, the plan shall take into account its effect on other land uses. Where a nonresidential use abuts or is in close proximity to a residential use, the effect of the site plan should maintain the residential quality of adjacent or nearby areas.

The project includes construction of approximately 2.2 miles of new multi-use paved trail adjacent to the existing rail line. The trail will provide safe and convenient opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian uses on a trail separate from roadway vehicle traffic while providing connectivity to other existing local and regional bicycle and pedestrian facilities from residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial areas. As a new path intended for use by bicyclists and pedestrians, the trail would host primarily non-motorized travel with minimum impacts to surrounding uses related to increased generation of noise, light, vibration, or other such nuisance effects.

1.136
RESOLUTION NO.

7. To the extent feasible, the orientation and location of buildings, structures, open spaces and other features of the site plan maintain natural resources including significant trees and shrubs, minimize impacts to solar access of adjacent properties, and minimize alteration of natural land forms; building profiles, location, and orientation must relate to natural land forms.

The project has been carefully designed to meet the Caltrans Standards for a Class 1 bikeway, as well as CPUC requirements for a trail along the rail, while minimizing tree removal to the extent feasible. Through iterative design changes, the original concept for the Ultimate Trail Configuration was revised to include construction of viaducts, instead of retaining walls, in areas on the west and east sides of the Santa Cruz Harbor to ensure preservation of existing trees and prevent adverse impacts to naturel resources to the degree possible.

A recommended mitigation measure requires that all trees be replaced in a minimum 1:1 ratio, with Heritage Trees replaced in a 2:1 ratio. The location and species of the replacement trees will be reviewed and approved by the City Urban Forester. A condition of approval requires the replacement trees to be planted prior to commencement of operation (use of the trail by members of the public) of the project.

8. The site plan ensures that the scale, bulk, and setbacks of new development preserves important public views along the ocean and of designated scenic coastal areas. Where appropriate and feasible, the project shall restore and enhance visual quality of visually degraded areas.

To accommodate both the railroad tracks and proposed trail, the scope of work includes realignment of 1,670 linear feet of existing railroad track up to 7.5 feet southward within the RTC-owned rail corridor. The track realignment extends from approximately 500 feet west of 7th Avenue to approximately 1,100 feet east of the 7th Avenue Right-of-Way (ROW).

New viaducts and bridges are proposed to cross existing waterways, while the scope of work additionally includes improvements to the existing roadway network. Proposed modifications would include removal of existing trees, which, in some cases, would enhance views of the coast and ocean through the removal of visual obstructions. Existing view of the ocean would remain largely unaffected, and, in many cases, improved, as placement of new infrastructure for conveyance of pedestrians and bicyclists would create new opportunities for ocean views, and from various vantage points, not currently available.

9. The site plan shall reasonably protect against external and internal noise, vibration and other factors which may tend to make the environment less desirable. The site plan should respect the need for privacy of adjacent residents.

Project construction will generate temporary noise and vibration impacts; however, such impacts will abate with cessation of physical development of the Rail-Trail project. Minor increase in noise levels would result through access of the trail, consistent with activity in a developed setting resulting from conversation, footsteps, operation of bicycles, and the like.

However, implementation operation of the project will not generate external or internal noise,

1.137
RESOLUTION NO.
vibration and other nuisance phenomena to a degree which may tend to make the environment less desirable.

10. Building and structures shall be designed and oriented to make use of natural elements such as solar radiation, wind, and landscaping for heating, cooling, ventilation, and lighting.

The above finding remains inapplicable to the proposed project.

Slope Modification Permit, Section 24.08.820

11. Measures have been included within the design of the project to mitigate impacts on environmental constraint areas identified in the Environmental Quality Element of the General Plan and the Local Coastal Program.

The project’s objectives require placement of a multi-use trail immediately adjacent to sensitive habitat types, such as coast live oak woodland, coastal prairie grassland, monarch roost sites, and riparian environments. Various trail alignments have been considered, intended to minimize environmental impacts associated with encroachment of the project into sensitive habitat. In accordance with objective 6 of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) Network Master Plan (Master Plan Objective 1.4, Policy 1.4.1), which specifies that a project effecting the Master Plan shall “minimize trail impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plant and animal species”, the trail design would reduce potentially adverse impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plants and animals to the extent feasible while still meeting requirements of applicable regulatory agencies, including Caltrans and CPUC and of pertinent legislation, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. Construction timing avoids and minimizes impacts to biological resources, while placement of fencing and retention of existing dense plantings along the trail where feasible would reduce effects of unpermitted off-trail access into sensitive habitats, and the application of mitigation measures would protect the ecological functions and values of the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). For example, the City of Santa Cruz identifies the overwintering habitat of the monarch as a sensitive habitat area, and General Plan Goal NRC2 specifies that any project or action shall ensure “protected, enhanced, and sustainable native and natural plan and animal communities and habitats.” Policy NRC2.2.1. requires, as part of the CEQA review process for development projects, the preparation of an evaluation and assessment of potential impacts to sensitive habitat (including special-status species) for sites located within or adjacent to sensitive areas.

Mitigation Measure BIO-9b and Mitigation Measure BIO-10b, require the implementation of adaptive management strategies to “ensure long-term viability of existing, enhanced, restored, and/or newly created sensitive biological resources;” and “enhance ecological functions and values of sensitive habitat mitigation areas, including monarch butterfly habitat and habitat for wildlife movement.” The project’s scope of work incorporates placement of fencing to discourage trail users from entering Twin Lakes State Beach; implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9b would provide additional protective measures intended to effect the long-term protection of sensitive habitat harboring special-status species, such as the

1.138
RESOLUTION NO.

Santa Cruz tarplant. Further, Mitigation Measure BIO-9b requires the development of a project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP), which would minimize temporary disturbance and permanent loss of sensitive habitats and mitigate impacts to other sensitive biological resources, including Santa Cruz tarplant, known to occur within the Project corridor. The MMP would include provisions for protections and enhancement of coastal terrace prairie habitat including splitrail or wire fencing and interpretive signage to inform trail users of the presence of sensitive resources in order to discourage activity which may otherwise result in the occurrence of detrimental impacts.

The MMP would describe and require the effectuation of strategies to protect and enhance the function of sensitive habitat, including known and potential monarch roost and nectar habitat, and would identify enhancement plans to effect wind buffering at Woods Creek, intended to shelter roosting monarch butterflies. Mitigation Measure BIO-10b requires that a qualified biologist be retained to prepare an Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP) for all direct and indirect impacts to wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats resulting from trail construction, resulting in no net loss (minimum 1:1 replacement) of sensitive habitat types.

Any overwater crossing will also make use of appropriate bridge coloration and railing design to minimize impacts to public views and the character of the area and employ appropriate best management practices (BMPs) during construction, to protect water quality and sensitive marine and terrestrial/avian species. The Geotechnical Investigation performed by Pacific Crest Engineering, dated September 2021, recommends drainage facilities to be utilized during grading operations in order to protect groundwater resources as a result of construction activities. Additionally, a hydrology/water quality study will be prepared by Balance Hydrologics based on the 30% project designs. Recommendations from these reports will be included in the project’s drainage design features and construction specifications to minimize impacts to drainage patterns, water quality, and surface and groundwater resources.

The proposed project will facilitate pedestrian and bicycle access to coastal recreation areas and would incorporate nature study of these unique coastal habitats through interpretative signs, as described in Section 2.4. Fencing and existing dense plantings along the trail would minimize impacts of unpermitted off-trail access into sensitive habitats, while identified mitigation would protect the ecological functions and values of the ESHA.

12. Landscaping of an appropriate type, size and quality is proposed to mitigate any adverse environmental effect.

The project scope of work currently encompasses no new landscaping; however, adjustment to irrigation currently in place will support existing vegetation, and replacement of foliage removed will occur. The final plans will include removal of non-native vegetation and replacement with native, drought-tolerant planting on areas of the slope that have been disturbed.

13. Usable open space is proposed in an amount equal to that normally required.

1.139
RESOLUTION NO.

This project addresses public access via construction of a new multi-use trail in locations currently restricting public access, and, thus, increases usable open space.

14. To conform with existing land forms and topography, streets, buildings, and other manmade structures have been designed by a registered civil engineer or other qualified professional.

The plans were developed by a registered civil engineer and other qualified professionals pursuant to recommendations from the City of Santa Cruz Public Works Department.

15. Adequate fire safety measures as required by the city fire department have been incorporated into the design of the proposed development, when located in a designated fire hazard area.

Due to placement of a new 12-foot-wide multi-use path allowing for emergency vehicular passage and unimpeded circulation along the Rail-Trail corridor, the project will enhance access for purposes of emergency response. The City’s Fire Department has reviewed and approved the proposed project design.

16. The proposed project employs architectural and design elements which in total serve to reduce the mass and bulk of structures. Such elements may include:
a. Multiple floor levels which follow natural slopes;
b. Multiple roof lines;
c. Decks and balconies;
d. Foundation types such as poles, piles, or stepped levels which minimize cut and fill and need for retaining walls;
e. Fence lines, walls, and other features which blend with the terrain rather than strike off at an angle against it.

The designs of proposed structures, including retaining walls, bridge, and viaducts, provide for functionality of pedestrian and bicyclist conveyance while achieving aesthetic compatibility to the existing locations and surrounding environment. Retaining walls colors and texture proposed will complement adjacent surfaces to blend into the natural environment as practicable, while a variety of options for treatment of railways of the Pilkington Creek bridge are presented, with final design selected to achieve complementarity to the surrounding and achieve a design aesthetic in keeping with the surrounding environment. Viaducts, with FRP exterior, will maintain a sleek, minimalist appearance in order to remain inconspicuous against the backdrop of the natural environment. Physical separation of infrastructure by distance and the presence of ample existing vegetation minimizes impacts associated with placement of new structures and the resulting visual departure from existing conditions, in keeping with standards of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan. Design of all new infrastructure incorporates environmentally-sensitive exterior treatments to reduce visual intrusion and provide for overall consistency with the present railroad theme.

1.140
RESOLUTION NO.

17. If a project proposed for construction is in a designated landslide area, before granting a modification to Section 24.14.030, subsection (1)(d), findings must be made that mitigation measures necessary to fulfill the purpose of this part have been incorporated into project design, based on the project's environmental review.

The Rail-Trail Corridor of Coastal Rail-Trail Segments 8 and 9 remain outside designated landslide areas; however, the plans have been developed by a registered civil engineer in conjunction with geotechnical engineer and recommendations from the City of Santa Cruz Public Works Department.

Variance, Section 24.08.130

18. That a hardship peculiar to the property, not created by any act of the owner, exists. In this context, personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring violations, are not hardships justifying a variance.

Existing conditions present a diverse landscape with challenges for placement of a new trail pathway. The existing rail spans an existing urbanized area in Segment 8 and, in Segment 9, transitions to a setting of waterways featuring steep embankments, challenging topography requiring placement of physical barriers to accommodate a trail separated from the existing rail line, and an environment of dense vegetation. Various trail alignments have been considered, intended to obtain project objectives while minimizing environmental impacts.

The proposed project requires approval of a variance to construct retaining walls, bridges, and viaducts, which, by necessity, would include components placed within 10-feet of 30% or greater slopes, in order to facilitate the placement of proposed infrastructure and maintain public safety.

In accordance with project objective 6 (Master Plan Objective 1.4, Policy 1.4.1), the trail was designed to minimize impacts to sensitive habitat areas and special-status plants and animals to the extent feasible while still meeting requirements of applicable regulatory agencies including Caltrans and CPUC and of pertinent legislation, including the Americans with Disabilities Act. Due to the physical character of existing watercourses and slopes, placement of infrastructure, such as bridge and viaduct support structures, proves necessary to provide overwater crossings required for construction of a continuous trail network. Trail design minimizes impacts to existing topography and natural resources, while mitigation measures ensure ongoing compliance with General Plan policies and Code provisions which diminish impacts to the environment to the extent possible.

19. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity; and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.

The granting of a variance for placement of retaining walls, bridges, and viaducts would not constitute a special privilege, as the project serves to increase access to the coast for all through construction of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network, providing no

1.141
RESOLUTION NO.
benefit to any one party compared to another. Additionally, placement of retaining walls diminish bluff retreat which would otherwise eventually deny access to the existing rail line, the proposed trail improvements as well as service and emergency vehicles.

The Geotechnical Investigation performed by Pacific Crest Engineering, dated September 2021, recommends drainage facilities to be utilized during grading operations in order to protect groundwater resources as a result of construction activities. Additionally, a hydrology/water quality study will be prepared by Balance Hydrologics based on future project designs. Recommendations from these reports will be included in the project’s drainage design features and construction specifications to minimize impacts to drainage patterns, water quality, and surface and groundwater resources.

20. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purpose and intent of this title or the public interest, nor adversely affect the General Plan.

Granting this variance will not be detrimental to adjacent properties in that a registered civil engineer has developed the plans. A grading, drainage and erosion control plan will be required to be prepared and submitted, and the construction will be supervised and inspected by the Public Works Department.

Watercourse Variance, Section 24.08.2240

21. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the subject watercourse site that do not generally apply to other watercourse parcels.

The project provides for consistency with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Land Use Plan, except where significant and unavoidable impacts would occur. The project design ensures the protection of coastal resources and views, enhances public access, provides maintenance for the use and promotes a safe and reasonable use of an existing railroad ROW.

The intended goal of the proposed project remains construction of a linear network providing pedestrian and bicycle access to foster appreciation for the Monterey Bay. The existing rail line, as an existing path, provides the ideal location for placement of a new trail minimizing impacts to the environment and adjacent land uses. Because the rail line traverses existing watercourses, accommodating of trail infrastructure requires placement of overwater infrastructure to afford waterway crossings. Such infrastructure, including bridges and viaducts, features vertical support posts which necessarily require siting within existing riparian corridors to for safety of design. Thus, the proposed project presents unique challenges which require exceptions for location of work not generally applicable throughout the City.

22. Granting the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant and to prevent unreasonable property loss or unnecessary hardship. In allowing a reduction to the minimum setback, the variance is

1.142
RESOLUTION NO.
allowed only to the point at which a principal permitted use (which has been modified as much as is practical from a design standpoint) can be accommodated.

The project has been carefully designed to meet the Caltrans Standards for a Class 1 bikeway, as well as CPUC requirements for a trail along the rail, while minimizing impacts to the aquatic and riparian environments to the extent feasible. Among other efforts to minimize the removal of existing trees, the original design of the Ultimate Trail Configuration was modified to incorporate construction of viaducts, instead of retaining walls, in areas on the west and east sides of the Santa Cruz Harbor in order to minimize required tree removal and avoid placement of new vertical wall surfaces within the proximity of existing streams. Viaducts require physical supporting members necessarily located beneath upper spans within the areas of existing streams and within riparian corridors. The intent to minimize tree removal thus results in the requirement for application for a Watercourse Variance for the proposed project’s scope of work.

Mitigation Measures BIO-9a and BIO-9c would minimize construction in sensitive habitats, install temporary protective fencing, and include other BMPs that would protect remaining trees, saplings and mature trees to the extent feasible. Compliance with City and ordinances, as well as other agency permit requirements for tree replacement and implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-9b, would additionally result in replanting of trees at a minimum 1:1 ratio.

23. In granting a variance to allow a reduction in the minimum setbacks provided in the City-Wide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan, the setbacks have only been reduced to the point at which a principal permitted use (modified as much as is practical from a design standpoint) can be accommodated.

Design of bridges and viaducts include intentional placement of infrastructure to maximize the span between vertical supports and avoid location within sensitive riparian habitats to the extent possible.

24. Granting the variance would not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity of the subject site or to the health, safety and welfare of the watercourse directly affected by this application.

Request for a Watercourse Variance to support the proposed project derives form the proposal for placement of physical waterway crossings, including a bridge and viaducts, to span existing watercourses, characterized as primarily natural environments. Although construction would include impacts of limited duration, mitigation measures have been applied to minimize both temporal impacts and long-term operational consequence to the degree possible. The proposed project would not result in detrimental or injurious effects to property or improvements, as design of all proposed fixtures accounts for avoidance of health, safety and welfare of properties adjacent to the watercourse.

25. Granting the variance is in conformance with all other goals, policies and objectives of City-Wide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan.

1.143
RESOLUTION NO.

The City-Wide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan, declares its intended purpose as protection, enhancement, and management of the City’s riparian and wetland resources and water quality, while providing consistency and predictability of the City’s permitting process. The Management Plan further identifies its goals as the following:
 Protect and enhance the existing natural resources of the watercourses and wetlands within the City;
 Recognize the presence of existing land uses that are consistent with current land use designations;
 Protect and improve water quality in the City’s watercourses and wetlands;  Protect and restore existing vegetated watercourses as wildlife movement corridors;  Evaluate existing and/or potential resource values of the watercourse and wetland habitats and the type of land uses that exist and/or are expected under current zoning; and
 Provide incentives to landowners to improve the natural qualities of the City’s watercourses and wetland areas.

The City of Santa Cruz can be characterized as a composition of urban, light industrial, and residential development. Intersecting drainages and associated open space and parks provide small and disjunct naturalized areas.

Proposed placement of new infrastructure associated with the trail system, including retaining walls, bridge, viaducts, guardrails, lighting, and associated infrastructure would not impart modifications to existing stormwater treatment and/or drainage patterns. The harbor currently receives stormwater from the City and County via the rail corridor.

As analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report, the analysis under Impact HYD-3 concludes that the project would not alter existing drainage patterns or exceed the capacity of existing stormwater drainage. Additionally, installation of stormwater treatment devices (e.g., gross solids removal device, hydrodynamic separators, trash screens, and flow through water quality treatment devices), will treat storm drainage prior to discharge to any waterway.

These stormwater drainage features and treatment devices would minimize the potential for water quality criteria standards to be exceeded, thereby protecting existing watercourses. The introduction of the trail system would not change historical stormwater flows and would not result in land use patterns or aquatic habitats and would uphold the goals of the City-Wide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santa Cruz that it hereby approves the Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Variance, and Watercourse Variance to construct Segments 8 and 9 of the Coastal Rail Trail, a 2.2-mile bicycle and pedestrian system extending along the railroad corridor (owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission) from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout on the west, to the eastern side of 17th Avenue on the east and excluding the

1.144
RESOLUTION NO.
recently-constructed San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge Improvements subject to the Findings listed above and the Conditions of Approval listed in Exhibit “A,” attached hereto and made a part hereof.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of March 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

DISQUALIFIED:

APPROVED: ______________________
Fred Keeley, Mayor
ATTEST: _________________________________
Bonnie Bush, City Clerk Administrator

1.145
EXHIBIT "A"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT ON PROPERTY AT
Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 & 9 – CP22-0118
Design Permit, Slope Modification Permit/Variance, and Watercourse Variance to construct Segments 8 and 9 of the Coastal Rail Trail, a 2.2-mile bicycle and pedestrian system extending along the railroad corridor (owned by the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission) from the Beach Street/Pacific Avenue roundabout on the west, to the eastern side of 17th Avenue on the east and excluding the recently-constructed San Lorenzo River Trestle Bridge Improvements

1. If one or more of the following conditions is not met with respect to all its terms, then this approval may be revoked.

2. All plans for future construction which are not covered by this review shall be submitted to the City Planning and Community Development Department for review and approval.

3. The use shall meet the standards and shall be developed within limits established by Chapter 24.14 of the Santa Cruz Municipal Code as to the emission of noise, odor, smoke, dust, vibration, wastes, fumes or any public nuisance arising or occurring incidental to its establishment or operation.

4. The applicant shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Any errors or discrepancies found therein may result in the revocation of any approval or permits issued in connection therewith.

5. Grading, drainage and erosion control plans shall be prepared by a professional engineer in conjunction with a soils engineer to minimize erosion and risks of construction on sloping topography.

6. Conformance to all recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared for the project, and all relevant provisions of applicable plans, such as the General Plan, and City-Wide Creeks and Wetlands Management Plan, shall be ensured before, during, and after construction.

7. All final working drawings shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval.

8. The development of the site shall be in substantial accordance with the approved plans submitted and on file in the Department of Planning and Community Development of the City of Santa Cruz.

1.146

9. Grading shall be done during periods of dry weather and protective measures shall be incorporated during grading to prevent siltation from any grading project halted due to rain.

EIR/Environmental Conditions

10. The applicant shall be required to implement all mitigation measures and implementation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the recommended timing and reporting requirements.

11. Mitigation Measure BIO-1a: Implement Protections for the Santa Cruz tarplant population in Twin Lakes State Park
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) shall coordinate to ensure the following measures are implemented to protect the federally Threatened and California State Endangered Santa Cruz tarplant at Twin Lakes State Beach:
b. Prior to construction activities adjacent to Twin Lakes State Beach open space, identify the Santa Cruz tarplant occurrence in Twin Lakes State Beach on project plans and mark the edge of the population in the field with flagging to avoid construction-related impacts,
c. Prior to trail use, enclose the coastal terrace prairie grassland occupied by Santa Cruz tarplant with protective wildlife-friendly (e.g., spit-rail) fencing, d. Add interpretative signage with Santa Cruz tarplant life history and rarity information, and
e. Coordinate with State Parks biologists to monitor and enhance tarplant population using techniques identified by the Arana Gulch Adaptive Management Working Group. These may include seeding, out-planting, cardboard mulch, mowing, and/or hand weeding.

12. Mitigation Measure BIO-1b: Install Permanent Fencing between Trail and Twin Lakes State Beach near Santa Cruz Tarplant Habitat
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) shall coordinate to ensure final project design includes installation of fencing (wildlife friendly) between the Trail and Twin Lakes State Beach near the tarplant population. The fencing shall extend for approximately 1,100 linear feet, from Leona Creek to the Simpkins Swim Center parking lot, to discourage trail users from entering Twin Lakes State Beach and creating new trails that could result in disturbance to the protected species.

Additionally, signage shall be placed on the fencing, indicating the adjacent habitat protection area and directing users to the existing trail access near Simpkins Swim Center with arrow pointing eastward.

13. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Conduct Biological Monitoring for Sensitive Wildlife Species

1.147
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall conduct construction monitoring for sensitive wildlife species, as specified below:

1. Prior to initiation of construction activities, a USFWS- and CDFWapproved biologist shall prepare a construction monitoring plan that identifies all areas to be protected with exclusion fencing on a 1:1500 scale map (or similar scale determined to be practicable), and all areas requiring monitoring by a USFWS-, NOAA Fisheries, and/or CDFW-approved biologist or trained construction monitor.

2. Prior to initiation of construction activities, a USFWS-, NOAA Fisheries, and/or CDFW-approved biologist shall conduct an environmental training for all construction personnel. The training shall include a description of the sensitive wildlife species known or with potential to occur in the Project alignment and surroundings [monarch butterfly, sensitive fish species, western pond turtle, potential Santa Cruz black salamander, sensitive and native nesting bird species (including bald eagle and peregrine falcon), roosting bats species (including western red bat), San Francisco duskyfooted woodrat, and marine mammal species (including southern sea otter)].

3. Prior to initiation of construction activities, the construction contractor shall install temporary exclusion fencing (solid silt fencing) in specified areas along the project boundaries, approximately 6 inches below grade and 3.0 feet above grade, with wooden stakes at intervals of not more than 8.0 feet.

The fence shall be maintained in working order for the duration of construction activities. The agency-approved biologist or trained construction monitor shall inspect the fence daily and notify the construction foreman when fence maintenance is required. The fence shall allow for wildlife passage across the alignment at regular intervals. b. Construction activities shall be timed to minimize impacts to sensitive biological resources, as shown in Table 3.3-7of t.
c. The agency-approved biologist shall be present on-site, to direct and inspect all ground disturbing activities (including but not limited to tree removal, vegetation removal, grading, grubbing, and exclusion fence installation and removal, and for construction activities located in or near sensitive wildlife resources). Any vegetation removed shall be placed directly into a disposal vehicle. Vegetation shall not be piled on the ground unless later transferred, piece by piece, under the direct supervision of an approved biologist.
d. The approved biologist shall train a designated construction monitor who shall oversee implementation of all protective mitigation measures when the biologist is not present. This representative shall be trained in the identification of specialstatus wildlife. This representative shall not have the authority to handle specialstatus species. e. Once ground disturbance activities have been completed, the approved biologist or trained construction monitor shall conduct regular inspections of the work area.

Prior to the start of work each day, the biologist or monitor shall check for wildlife underneath any vehicle or heavy equipment within the construction site.

1.148
f. The biologist will remain on call. In the event that the construction monitor identifies a sensitive wildlife species in or near the Project area, the approved biologist will be available to confirm the identification and, depending on the species, and with agency authorization, relocate the animal out of harm’s way.

Suitable relocation sites shall be identified in advance with the approval of the relevant agencies.
g. The approved biologist and construction monitor shall have the authority to stop work that may result in the “take” of a special-status species. h. At the end of each workday, excavations (i.e., trenches, holes) shall be secured with a cover (preferably) or a ramp to prevent wildlife entrapment. i. All trenches, pipes, culverts or similar structures shall be inspected for animals prior to burying, capping, moving, or filling.
j. With agency approval, the approved biologist shall remove invasive aquatic species such as bullfrogs and crayfish from suitable aquatic habitat in and near the construction impact area, if present.

14. Mitigation Measure BIO-5: Conduct Breeding Bird Surveys and Identify Protective Buffers prior to Construction, if Construction occurs between February 1 and August 31 a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures:

1. The avian breeding season occurs from February 1 through August 31 with a peak in breeding/nesting activity between April and June for most raptors and/or other birds.

2. If feasible, Project activities will be initiated outside the breeding season in order to avoid impacts to breeding birds. Should Project activities be initiated between September and February, no avian breeding surveys would be required.

3. If Project activities are to be initiated during breeding season, or if Project activities lapse for 1 week or more during breeding bird season, prior to construction/resumption of construction activities, an approved biologist will conduct avian breeding surveys for all birds (and their nests) protected under the MBTA. According to current CDFW permit conditions, the survey area will encompass tree stands and structures within the Project corridor and the following buffers (where accessible):
a. 250 feet for passerines/non-raptors;
b. 500 feet for small raptors such as accipiters; and
c. 1,000 feet for larger raptors such as buteos.

4. Surveys will be conducted within 1 week (per current CDFW permit conditions), prior to beginning/resuming Project activities including, but not limited to, staging equipment, tree removal, vegetation clearing, and/or ground disturbing activities.

5. In the event nesting bird species are observed, postpone Project activities until a qualified biologist has determined young birds have fledged or implement buffers appropriate to the construction activity and the species,

1.149
such as those recommended in PG&E’s Nesting Bird Management Plan (PG&E et al. 2015):
a. Raptors (platform nesting): 300 feet (90 meters)
b. Cavity-nesters (depending on species): 50 feet (15 meters) c. Bridge/building, tree, and ground/understory nesters: 75 feet (23 meters)
d. Sensitive bird species, if nesting in or near the Project corridor, will be given special consideration and may require additional protective measures as determined through consultation with the relevant agency (USFWS or CDFW). The standard protective buffers recommended in PG&E et al. (2015) for sensitive birds that are known to nest in or near the corridor are as follows:
e. Bald eagle – consultation required [standard buffer: 1320 feet (402 meters)]
f. Peregrine falcon – consultation required [standard buffer: 500 feet (152 meters)]
g. Olive-sided flycatcher – standard buffer: 75 feet (23 meters) h. Oak titmouse – standard buffer: 50 feet (15 meters)

6. Other sensitive bird species have the potential to nest in or near the Project corridor.

7. Protective buffers will be clearly marked for avoidance by construction activities.
b. The approved biologist will document pre-construction baseline monitoring of the nest to characterize “normal” behavior. If approved by the agencies, the biologist may have the discretion to reduce the buffer and monitor the nest for disturbance.

If the birds show signs of abnormal behaviors (e.g., defensive flights/vocalizations, standing up from brooding, and flying away from the nest) that are associated with construction activity, the biologist will reinstate the larger buffer. Work within the setback will be delayed until after the young have fledged.
c. The biologist will have the authority to stop work if breeding birds exhibit behaviors that may cause nest failure.
d. If postponing Project activities and/or installing buffers are not feasible, further discussions with the appropriate resource agencies (USFWS and/or CDFW) will be necessary to develop alternative requirements.

15. Mitigation Measure BIO-6: Conduct Bat Surveys and Implement Measures to Protect Roosting Bats during Construction
a. In Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and construction contractor shall implement the following measures. To avoid impacts to individual roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity roosts, during all months, throughout the Segment 9 corridor and especially in mature coast live oak woodland and riparian habitats, prior to limbing/tree removal, an approved biologist shall conduct a pre‐construction survey for bats to determine if cavity, crevice or foliage-roosting bats are present, as follows:

1.150

1. Bat maternity roosting occurs typically between May 1 and August 31, and winter hibernacula (shelter occupied during the winter by a dormant animal) for many bat species are found between November 1 and February

15. 2. All trees and limbs proposed for removal, topping or pruning should be marked in the field by the Project proponent in advance of the Project start date.

3. A qualified biologist shall determine if bats are utilizing the Project corridor for roosting. For any trees/snags/structures (bridges) that could provide roosting habitat for cavity, crevice, or foliage‐roosting bats, potential bat roost features shall be thoroughly evaluated to determine if bats are present. Visual inspection, emergence, and/or acoustic surveys shall be utilized as initial techniques.
a. If established maternity colonies are found, in coordination with CDFW, a buffer shall be established around the colony to protect pre‐volant young from construction disturbances until the young can fly; or implement other measures acceptable to CDFW.
b. If individual roosting bats or winter hibernacula are found, in consultation with CDFW or based on CDFW recommendations, the qualified biologist shall develop and implement acceptable passive exclusion methods. If feasible, exclusion shall take place during the appropriate windows (between September 1 and November 1) (Authorization from CDFW is required to evict winter hibernacula for bats).

4. If a tree is determined not to be an active roost site for cavity-roosting bats, it may be immediately limbed or removed as follows:

5. If foliage-roosting bats are determined to be present, limbs shall be lowered, inspected for bats by a bat biologist, and chipped immediately or moved to a dump site. Alternately, limbs may be lowered and left on the ground until the following day, when they can be chipped or moved to a dump site. No logs or tree sections shall be dropped on downed limbs or limb piles that have not been in place since the previous day.

6. If the tree is not limbed or removed within 4 days of the survey, the survey efforts shall be repeated.

16. Mitigation Measure BIO-7: Implement Dusky-Footed Woodrat Protection Measures During Construction
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for woodrat houses, and clearly flag all houses within the construction impact area and immediate surroundings. b. The construction contractor shall avoid woodrat houses to the extent feasible by installing a minimum 10-foot (preferably 25-foot) buffer with silt fencing or other material that shall prohibit encroachment. If this buffer and avoidance is not

1.151
feasible, the qualified biologist shall allow encroachment into the buffer, but preserve microhabitat conditions such as shade, cover and adjacent food sources. c. Additionally, if avoidance is not possible, a qualified biologist shall develop and implement a Woodrat Relocation Plan, in consultation with CDFW, that allows for the relocation of woodrats and their houses. The plan shall include the following (or similar and CDFW-approved) criteria:

1. Relocation will occur when vulnerable young are least likely to be present in the woodrat houses (ideally between August 1 and October 30).

2. During dismantling of woodrat houses, woody debris, food caches, and nesting materials will be retained and relocated to reconstructed or artificial shelters.

3. Relocation sites will be in the nearest suitable habitat outside the Project footprint.

4. Sites for artificial shelters shall be located in proximity to the original house location and no closer than 20 feet from existing woodrat houses and other artificial shelters. Choose the best available microhabitat, ideally in a location with sun and shade and, if possible, under the same species of tree or shrub as was present at the original house location. Relocation sites shall contain biologically suitable habitat features (e.g., stands of poison oak, coast live oaks, and dense native brush).

5. Monitoring shall be conducted for 30 days after relocation is completed and include infrared and motion activated cameras and an occupancy assessment.

6. A report on San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat house monitoring shall be provided to CDFW, within 30 days following the end of the monitoring period and shall include the methods and results of relocation, occupancy determinations, and discussion of any remedies that may be needed.

17. Mitigation Measure BIO-9a: Minimize Construction in Sensitive Habitats and Install Temporary Protective Fencing
a. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures:

1. To the extent feasible, all trail construction activities, including access routes, staging areas, stockpile areas, and equipment maintenance are to be located outside the limits of mapped sensitive habitats. Sensitive habitat areas shall be mapped by a qualified biologist and clearly shown on construction plans.

Sensitive habitat areas include but may not be limited to: Santa Cruz tarplant habitat in coastal prairie grassland at Twin Lakes State Beach, monarch butterfly roosting habitat near Woods Creek and the Santa Cruz Harbor riparian habitat along Pilkington Creek and Leona Creek, and coast live oak woodland and forest along to the rail corridor.

2. During construction, temporary fencing (e.g., silt fencing) shall be installed at the outermost edge of sensitive habitats and shall not be disturbed except as required for trail construction. Vegetation removal shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary to achieve project objectives. Mature trees will be retained wherever feasible and limbing of trees and shrubs in arroyo willow and mixed riparian

1.152
forest, coast live oak woodland and forest, and potential and/or known monarch roost habitat should be favored in lieu of removal. When possible, in temporary impact areas, stumps and burls of native coast live oaks, coast redwoods, Pacific wax myrtle, and arroyo willows shall be retained to allow for re-sprouting following project completion.

3. Limbing and removal of coast live oak trees located in coast live oak woodland and forest habitat shall be minimized to maintain canopy cover, nesting and roosting habitat for bird and bat species, and understory habitat for wildlife, including woodrats and other small mammals.

18. Mitigation Measure BIO-9b: Develop Project-specific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan for Impacts to Biological Resources Resulting from Trail Construction and Operation.
a. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures.

1. A qualified (USFWS- and CDFW-approved) biologist shall prepare a Projectspecific Biological Resources Mitigation and Management Plan (MMP) to compensate for direct and indirect impacts to sensitive habitats, including ESHA, and other sensitive biological resources resulting from trail construction and operation. The MMP shall compensate for permanent loss of sensitive habitats, through the creation, restoration, and enhancement of in-kind sensitive habitat, as close to impacted areas as possible within the study area.

2. To protect against the loss of ecological functions and values, compensatory mitigation shall re-create the following features of existing sensitive habitat that would be impacted by the Proposed Project: habitat mosaic, edge habitats, and proximity to wetlands and other waters. A portion of compensatory mitigation shall re-create the linear aspect and provision for wildlife dispersal of existing habitats, where these features are potentially lost as a result of the Proposed Project. This feature shall be designed to protect against fragmentation of remaining habitat patches adjacent to the rail corridor. Due to limited available space remaining within the corridor after trail construction and minor railbed realignment, these wildlife corridor improvements will likely occur north and south of the study area to connect the existing disjunct open spaces utilized by wildlife within the urbanized portion of Santa Cruz including Woods Creek, Arana Gulch, Twin Lakes Beach State Park, and Rodeo Gulch.

3. In addition, the Biological Resources MMP shall include the following:
(a) Description of the trail alignment including as-built acreage of temporary and permanent impacts to arroyo willow and mixed riparian forest, coast live oak woodland and forest, and monarch butterfly roost sites, including the number and type of trees slated for removal that meet City and County status as Heritage or Significant trees, respectively.
(b) Ecological functions and values assessment of sensitive habitats, including monarch butterfly habitat to determine suitable mitigation ratios (at a minimum, no net loss) in consultation with USFWS, CDFW, and California Coastal Commission (CCC).

1.153
(c) Goals of compensatory mitigation, including types and areas of sensitive habitat to be created, restored, enhanced and/or preserved; number and type of trees to be replaced, specific functions and values of mitigation habitat types, mitigation ratios (created/restored/enhanced/preserved: impacted), and performance criteria, including:

1. Conservation of functions and values of monarch autumnal and overwintering roost habitat and nectaring sites (including maintaining suitable grove structure, wind protection, and water sources);

2. Conservation of edge habitats; and

3. Conservation of functions and values for wildlife movement including habitat mosaics, links between creeks, open spaces and safe passage across the proposed alignment, with perennial water sources, diverse food sources, cover, and shelter.

4. Such compensatory mitigation must occur as close to impacted areas as feasible and result in no net loss (minimum 1:1 replacement ratio) of sensitive habitat types, or their functions and values. In the Coastal Zone, mitigation ratios for ESHA typically start at 3:1 (creation/substantial restoration: impact) for ESHA. This ratio is doubled for enhancement (6:1) and tripled for preservation (9:1); however, a minimum of 1:1 must include creation of in-kind ESHA habitat.

5. Location and acreage of sensitive habitat, including monarch roost habitat, mitigation areas including ownership status, and existing functions and values of restored and/or enhanced sensitive habitats.

6. All trees will be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio. All City Heritage trees, County Significant trees, and native trees will be replaced “in kind” at a location and ratio to be determined by the City Urban Forester, County Environmental Coordinator, and/or other responsible regulatory agencies.

7. One on-site mitigation area has been identified immediately north of the rail corridor at Woods Creek, currently a buffer habitat for the known roost site immediately north. This area would be enhanced for the roosting western monarch butterfly by planting native trees and understory plants (with fall/winter blooming for nectaring) and configuring the plantings to create a permeable tiered canopy that slopes down to the north.

8. Project stakeholders including the City, County, and RTC would identify undeveloped public and private properties as potential off-site mitigation areas. Acquisition could include direct purchase or placement of conservation easements on portions of parcels that are otherwise constrained from development due to existing protected resources (e.g., County and City aquatic and riparian setbacks, ESHA, steep slopes, etc.).

Where potentially restricted from development, suitable areas for mitigation would not be precluded from habitat creation, restoration, enhancement, or preservation as needed to fulfill mitigation acreage and proximity requirements. Mitigation sites may include local parks, such as Moran Lake, where existing monarch roost habitat could be enhanced through plantings of trees and nectar plants if a qualified biologist determines plantings would be beneficial to the park’s resources.

1.154
Mitigation at local parks shall be authorized by the City, the County, and/or other relevant stakeholders. Plantings of roost trees or nectar plants at Moran Lake would supplement those plantings already identified in the Moran Lake Monarch Butterfly Habitat Management Plan. Mitigation sites may also include private properties adjacent to the rail corridor with the agreement of the City, County, and/or private property owner and if determined to be feasible.

9. Detailed sensitive habitat creation and/or restoration construction and planting techniques.

10. Description and design of habitat requirements for sensitive wildlife known to occur in the study area and immediate surroundings (including monarch roost sites, federally listed fish species, potential Santa Cruz black salamander, western pond turtle, bald eagle, American peregrine falcon, native nesting bird species, potential roosting bat species, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, and marine mammals).

11. In sensitive habitats, including in or near aquatic features, maintenance activities during trail operation shall include replanting native vegetation found within similar habitats within the same watershed and weed eradication that avoids take of sensitive wildlife species (e.g., woodrats, breeding birds). Trail maintenance activities in sensitive habitats shall employ hand-tools only. The use of pesticides or herbicides shall be prohibited in sensitive habitats, including in or near aquatic features.

Management activities in monarch overwintering habitat shall be conducted between March 16 and September 14 (outside the monarch roost season) in coordination with a monarch biologist.

12. Strategies to protect remaining sensitive habitats along the trail corridor and surroundings from direct and indirect impacts from trail users and illegal camping, such as:
a. Split-rail and wire fencing
b. Interpretive signage including specific information about sensitive habitats and species and “leave no trace” content
c. “Green fencing” (dense vegetative buffers consisting of woody and plant species that deter human passage such as poison oak, Pacific blackberry, and stinging nettle)
d. Strategies to protect wildlife movement, both across and along the trail corridor, as well as north and/or south of the corridor to connect open spaces, supported by complex and mature sensitive habitat mosaics, including perennial water sources.
e. Long-term quantitative and qualitative monitoring and reporting, including consideration of carrying capacity analysis and alternative approaches, and documenting the ability to meet or surpass performance criteria. Monitoring will include fall and wintering monitoring, including arrival and departure dates, of monarch roost sites by a qualified biologist.
f. Adaptive management strategies to:

1. Identify shortcomings in meeting performance standards;

1.155

2. Ensure long-term viability of existing, enhanced, restored, and/or newly created sensitive biological resources;

3. Enhance ecological functions and values of sensitive habitat mitigation areas, including monarch butterfly habitat and habitat for wildlife movement;

4. Ascertain the sufficiency of trail access, facilities development and management, and interpretive design features associated with the project to protect biological resources.
b. Mitigation area locations and final replacement ratios (e.g., potentially above the minimum “no net loss” ratio set here) shall be determined in consultation with the relevant agencies, as follows.

1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Monarch butterfly (presently FESA Candidate species, likely Threatened or Endangered by 2024)

2. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Sensitive habitats, work below the break in bank of stream corridors, riparian habitat, CESA Endangered and Fully Protected species, Species of Special Concern

3. California Coastal Commission (CCC). Environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA)

4. California State Parks. Sensitive resources and habitats on Twin Lakes State Beach property

5. Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Non-wetland riparian habitat c. The draft MMP shall be submitted to USFWS, CDFW, CCC, and California State Parks for review prior to formal adoption. Monitoring reports will be provided to these agencies.

19. Mitigation Measure BIO-9c: Implement Best Management Practices to Protect Biological Resources during Construction
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall ensure the following best management practices (BMPs), to protect water quality and biological resources during Project construction activities, are included in the construction specifications and implemented during Project construction:

1. Minimize removal or disturbance of existing vegetation outside the footprint of Project construction activities.

2. Limit site access and parking, equipment storage and stationary construction activities to the designated staging areas to the maximum extent feasible.

3. Prior to staging any equipment or vehicles within or adjacent to the rail corridor, clean all equipment caked with mud, soils, or debris from off-site sources or previous Project sites to avoid introducing or spreading invasive exotic plant species. When feasible, remove invasive exotic plants from the Project area. All equipment used on the site should be cleaned prior to leaving the site for other projects.

4. Position all stationary equipment such as motors, pumps, generators, and/or compressors over drip pans. At the end of each day, move vehicles and equipment as far away as possible from any water body adjacent to the Project site in a level

1.156
staging area. Position parked equipment also over drip pans or absorbent material.

5. Check under all equipment for wildlife before use. If any listed or special-status wildlife is observed under equipment or in the work area, do not disturb or handle it. Cease Project activities and contact the biological monitor or resource agencies for further guidance, if the animal continues to be encountered in the Project area.

6. If security fencing is installed around the construction site, allow for passage of wildlife to maintain a link between inland and coastal habitats including stream corridors during construction activities. Prohibit the use of plastic mesh safety fencing to prevent wildlife entrapment.

7. Avoid working at night or during rain events when special-status amphibians and mammals are generally more active. Consult weather forecasts from the National Weather Service at least 72 hours prior to performing work.

8. Properly contain and remove all food trash that may attract predators into the work area and construction debris and trash from the work site on a regular basis.

9. Refuel and perform all vehicle and/or equipment maintenance off site at a facility approved for such activities.

10. To the greatest extent feasible, stabilize all exposed or disturbed areas in the Project area. Install erosion control measures as necessary such as silt fences, jute matting, weed-free straw bales, plywood, straw wattles, and water check bars, and broadcasting weed-free straw wherever silt-laden water has the potential to leave the work site and enter the nearby streams. Prohibit the use of monofilament erosion control matting to prevent wildlife entanglement. Modify, repair, and/or replace erosion control measures as needed.

11. Revegetate with native vegetation found within similar habitats within the same watershed to minimize erosion, prevent the establishment of invasive weeds, and accelerate the recovery of native vegetation communities.

12. Whenever feasible, certain construction activities will be timed to avoid impacts to sensitive habitats and wildlife species, as presented in Table 3.3-7 of the MMRP. Ideally, most if not all vegetation clearing will be done in the fall.

20. Mitigation Measure BIO-10a: Minimize Construction-related Activities in Palustrine Emergent Wetlands and Aquatic/Riverine Habitats
a. During construction of Segment 9, the City and/or County (depending on the implementing agency/jurisdiction) and the construction contractor shall minimize construction-related activities including, but not limited to, access routes, staging areas, stockpile areas, and equipment maintenance, within or adjacent to the limits of palustrine emergent wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats, to the extent feasible.

Wetlands and aquatic/riverine areas shall be clearly shown on construction plans. In coordination with a qualified biologist, temporary fencing (e.g., silt fencing) shall be installed at the outermost edge of all features not directly affected by trail construction.

21. Mitigation Measure BIO-10b: Develop and Implement Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan

1.157
a. Coordinating agencies (City, County, and/or RTC) constructing portions of Segment 9 and the construction contractor shall implement the following measures.

1. A qualified biologist shall be retained to prepare an Aquatic Resources Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMP) for all direct and indirect impacts to wetlands and aquatic/riverine habitats resulting from trail construction, resulting in no net loss (minimum 1:1 replacement) of these sensitive habitat types. The mitigation area locations and replacement ratios shall be determined in consultation with the USACE, RWQCB, CCC, and/or CDFW, as required. It is expected that mitigation requirements shall be based on the determination by the CCC that the trail is a resource-dependent use by providing safe pedestrian and bicycle access to the recreation (e.g., beaches, open spaces, scenic viewpoints) along the central Santa Cruz coast and based on its capacity for “nature study” pursuant to Section 30233(a)(7) of the Coastal Act.
b. The MMP shall include the following:

1. Description of the Project including acreage of temporary and permanent impacts to palustrine emergent wetlands, Coastal Act wetlands including arroyo willow riparian forest, and aquatic/riverine features as identified in a forthcoming formal delineation of jurisdictional wetlands and other Waters of the U.S.

2. Ecological functions and values assessment of wetlands, including a determination of regulatory status and permitting requirements to determine suitable mitigation ratios.

3. Goals of compensatory mitigation project including types and areas of wetland and aquatic/riverine habitat to be created, restored, and/or enhanced; specific functions and values of mitigation habitat types; and mitigation ratios (created/restored/enhanced/preserved: impacted). Based on a recent memo by the Coastal Commission for a project at Gleason Beach in Sonoma County, mitigation ratios for permanent wetland impacts will likely begin at 4:1 for creation or substantial restoration. For wetland enhancement, this ratio is doubled (8:1) and tripled for habitat preservation (12:1). For all mitigation strategies, at least 1:1 must include creation of new sensitive habitat.

4. Location and acreage of wetland and riparian mitigation areas including size, ownership status, and existing functions and values of restored and/or enhanced sensitive habitats. At least a portion of wetland mitigation will occur in newly constructed drainage swales north (inland) of the proposed trail. These features will be lined with clay soils and planted with a palette of agency-approved native hydrophytic vegetation and will connect directly to storm drains or watercourses along the Segment 9 alignment.

5. Detailed wetland and aquatic/riverine construction and planting techniques.

6. Description and design of habitat requirements for special-status plants and wildlife potentially occupying wetland and aquatic/riverine habitats.

7. Maintenance activities during the monitoring period, including replanting native wetland and riparian vegetation and weed removal, that will not result in take of aquatic wildlife species.

8. Long-term quantitative and qualitative monitoring and reporting, documenting ability to meet or surpass performance criteria.

1.158

9. Adaptive management strategies to ensure long-term viability and enhance ecological functions and values of sensitive habitat mitigation areas.

10. Strategies to protect remaining wetland and aquatic/riverine habitats along the trail alignment from direct and indirect impacts from trail users. Strategies may include split-rail fencing, interpretive signage, and green fencing (dense vegetative buffers).
c. The draft MMP shall be submitted to regulatory agencies, for review, as required, prior to formal adoption:

1. USACE. Work below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of stream corridors or in jurisdictional (3 parameter) wetlands.

2. CDFW. Work below the break in bank of stream corridors, riparian habitat.

3. CCC. Aquatic features, Coastal Act wetlands.

4. RWQCB. Work below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of stream corridors, jurisdictional (3 parameter) wetlands, other waters, or riparian habitat. c. Monitoring reports will be provided to relevant agencies. The Aquatic Resources MMP may be consolidated with the Biological Resources MMP in consultation with the regulatory agencies.

22. Mitigation Measure CR-1a: Install Historical Interpretive Exhibits along Trail prior to Trail Use
a. Consistent with Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Network Master Plan Design Guidelines, the City and/or County, depending on the jurisdiction, shall develop an on-site interpretive exhibit with materials concerning the history and engineering features of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line and its character-defining features. Prior to or within the first year of trail use, the exhibits shall be installed where there is adequate room at key locations along the trail or trail entrances to specifically highlight the importance of the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line. Interpretation of the site’s history shall be supervised by an architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, and may engage additional consultants to develop the display. There shall be at least two major exhibits and three minor exhibits, including signage and salvaged materials (e.g., small segments of original ballast, ties, and rail) to be placed intermittently along the trail route as space allows and as approved by the lead agency and Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. The historical interpretive exhibits shall be designed in conjunction and compatible with interpretive exhibits for nature education and exhibits along other rail trail segments for continuity.

23. Mitigation Measure CR-2: Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources
a. In the event that archaeological resources are unexpectedly encountered during ground-disturbing construction activities, the construction contractor shall halt work within 100 feet of the find, and an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology (National Park Service 1983) shall be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the find is determined by the qualified archaeologist to be prehistoric, then a Native American representative shall also be contacted to participate in the evaluation of the find. If

1.159
necessary, archaeological testing for California Register of Historical Resources eligibility shall be completed. If the discovery proves to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources and impacts to the resource cannot be avoided via project redesign, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare a data recovery plan tailored to the physical nature and characteristics of the deposit, per the requirements of California Public Resources Code, Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C). The data recovery plan shall identify data recovery excavation methods, measurable objectives, and data thresholds to reduce any significant impacts to cultural resources. Pursuant to the data recovery plan, the qualified archaeologist and Native American representative, as appropriate, shall recover and document the scientifically consequential information that justifies the resource’s significance. The City and/or County depending on the jurisdiction shall review and approve the treatment plan and archaeological testing as appropriate, and the resulting documentation shall be submitted to the regional repository of the CHRIS, per California Public Resources Code, Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C).

24. Mitigation Measure GEO-5: Implement Paleontological Resources Protection Measures during Construction in High Sensitivity Areas
a. The following measures shall be implemented during project excavation activities in Segment 9 on geologic units that have high sensitivity to paleontological resources (Purisima Formation and Quaternary marine terrace deposits). Areas along Segment 9 that do not have high sensitivity for paleontological resources and would not require the following mitigation include construction of the cantilever/bridge over Santa Cruz Harbor and excavation in drainages and creek channels north of the Twin Lakes State Beach.

1. Retain Qualified Professional Paleontologist. Prior to excavation, the implementing agency (City or County of Santa Cruz) shall retain a qualified professional paleontologist who is defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) as an individual, preferably with an MS or PhD in paleontology or geology, who is experienced with paleontological procedures and techniques, who is knowledgeable in the geology of California, and who has worked as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor for at least 2 years. The qualified professional paleontologist shall direct all mitigation measures related to paleontological resources.

2. Prepare Paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program. Prior to the start of construction, the qualified professional paleontologist or their designee shall conduct a paleontological Worker Environmental Awareness Program training for construction personnel regarding the appearance of fossils and the procedures for notifying paleontological staff should fossils be discovered by construction staff.

3. Monitor for Paleontological Resources during Construction. As determined appropriate by the qualified professional paleontologist, paleontological monitoring shall be conducted during initial excavations within sediments assigned high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., Quaternary marine terrace deposits and Purisima Formation). Paleontological monitoring shall be conducted by a paleontological monitor with experience with collection and salvage of

1.160
paleontological resources and who meets the minimum standards of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (2010) for a paleontological resources monitor. The duration and timing of the monitoring will be determined by the qualified professional paleontologist based on the observation of the geologic setting from initial ground disturbance and subject to the review and approval by the City or County of Santa Cruz, depending on the jurisdiction of the work. The qualified professional paleontologist may determine that full-time monitoring is not warranted based on the specific geologic conditions once the full depth of excavations has been reached, and may recommend that monitoring be reduced to periodic spot-checking or ceased entirely. The qualified professional paleontologist may determine that monitoring shall be reinstated if any new ground disturbances are required, and reduction or suspension shall be reconsidered by the qualified professional paleontologist at that time. b. In the event of a fossil discovery by the paleontological monitor or construction personnel, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease, and a qualified professional paleontologist shall evaluate the find before construction activity in the area resumes. If it is determined that the fossil is scientifically significant, the qualified professional paleontologist shall complete the following conditions to mitigate impacts to significant fossil resources:

1. Fossil Salvage. If fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to halt or temporarily divert construction equipment within 50 feet of the find until the paleontological monitor and/or qualified professional paleontologist evaluate the discovery and determine if the fossil may be considered significant. Typically, fossils can be safely salvaged quickly by a single paleontological monitor and not disrupt construction activity. In some cases, larger fossils (such as complete skeletons or large mammal fossils) require more extensive excavation and longer salvage periods. Bulk matrix sampling may be necessary to recover small invertebrates or microvertebrates from within paleontologically sensitive deposits.

2. Fossil Preparation and Curation. Once salvaged, significant fossils shall be identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level, prepared to a curation-ready condition, and curated in a scientific institution with a permanent paleontological collection along with all pertinent field notes, photographs, data, and maps.

Fossils of undetermined significance at the time of collection may also warrant curation at the discretion of the qualified professional paleontologist. c. Final Paleontological Mitigation Report. Upon completion of ground-disturbing activity (and curation of fossils if necessary), the qualified professional paleontologist shall prepare a final report describing the results of the paleontological monitoring efforts associated with the Project. The report shall include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the project geology and paleontology, a list of taxa recovered (if any), an analysis of fossils recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. The report shall be submitted to the City or County of Santa Cruz. If the monitoring efforts produced fossils, then a copy of the report shall also be submitted to the designated museum repository.

1.161

25. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a: Conduct Soil Sampling and Implement Necessary Remediation
a. Prior to Project construction, the City, County and RTC shall coordinate to prepare and submit Work Plan(s) for a Supplemental Soils Investigation to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health. Following notification that Santa Cruz County Environmental Health has received, reviewed, and accepted these Work Plan(s), the City, County and RTC shall conduct a Supplemental Soils Investigation, which shall include soil sampling at selected locations within the limits of the Project corridor under the supervision of a professional geologist or professional civil engineer to identify the concentrations of anticipated contaminants, which may include: pesticides, herbicides, TPHs, heavy metals, PAHs, and other reasonably anticipated contaminants of concern, such as arsenic.
b. The City, County and RTC shall coordinate with Santa Cruz County Environmental Health to develop and implement a program to remediate or manage known contaminated soil during construction. If necessary, any additional information gathered from the Supplemental Soil Investigation shall be used to identify locations along the Project corridor that may require remedial action in order to prevent exposure of construction workers, Shoreline Middle School attendees, and the public to these contaminants. The environmental data collected shall also be used to identify the appropriate disposal options for those soils or demolished materials that require off-site disposal.
c. Disposal shall occur at an appropriate facility licensed to handle such contaminants, and remedial excavation shall proceed under the supervision of an environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation. Where possible, potentially contaminated soils and rail ballast shall be stockpiled and characterized to determine the appropriate means and location for proper storage and disposal. The remediation/disposal program shall be approved by Santa Cruz County Environmental Health. The City and County shall submit any required correspondence to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health prior to issuance of grading permits. All proper waste handling and disposal procedures shall be followed in accordance with applicable DTSC and CalOSHA regulations. Upon completion of the Supplemental Site Investigation, the environmental consultant shall prepare a report presenting the findings of the additional assessment. The report shall be submitted to Santa Cruz County Environmental Health and include figures depicting the boring locations, summary tables of analytical data, conclusions, and recommendations.

26. Mitigation Measure HAZ-2b: Prepare and Implement Soils Management Plan a. The City, County and RTC shall ensure a Soils Management Plan (SMP) is developed by a qualified engineer. The SMP shall be implemented to protect workers and persons at Shoreline Middle School during ground-disturbing activities and to remove and/or mitigate exposure to hazardous-material-containing soil and ballast, where present in the Project corridor. Laboratory data for the impacted soil, identified as part of the soils and ballast assessment report prepared under Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a, shall be used to profile excavated soil prior to transport, treatment, and recycling at a licensed treatment facility. Additional profiling of the export soils shall

1.162
be performed as needed to satisfy requirements of the receiving facility. Removal, transportation, and disposal of impacted soil shall be performed in accordance with applicable DTSC and CalOSHA laws, regulations, and ordinances. The SMP shall include health and safety information for workers and the general public with an emphasis on potential adverse health effects and how to seek proper help if an accident is suspected and inform the various contractors and workers of the presence of shallow soil impacted with contaminants and the appropriate measures to avoid exposure to contaminants. These measures may include but would not be limited to the following:

1. Installing temporary security fencing around the construction site and flag/cone off the areas of contaminated soils (hotspots) until the contaminants are removed

2. Providing all personnel entering a hotspot with site-specific awareness training

3. Requiring that all personnel whose work will involve the excavation or disturbance of soils in and around the hotspot must have successfully completed 40-hour Hazardous Worker (HAZWOPER) training

4. Requiring a HAZWOPER supervisor to be on-site at all times during the excavation or disturbance of soils in a hotspot

5. Prohibiting personnel who cannot prove that they are authorized to enter a hotspot or do not have the appropriate personal protective equipment from entering a hotspot

6. Prohibiting eating, drinking, smoking, chewing gum or tobacco in hotspots, and requiring consumable items and activities be confined to designated worker break areas
b. In the event that contaminated soil and/or groundwater are identified where not previously anticipated during construction, the SMP shall also require that construction cease and that appropriate handling and disposal procedures be implemented. Contaminated soils and/or groundwater can be identified by discoloration or stains, distinctive odors, absence of plants and animals, subsequent erosion from the absence of plant life, or the presence of paint chips or other materials known to contaminate soils. Procedures for properly handling, storing, and disposing contaminated soils may include but are not limited to the following:

1. Placing contaminated soils in properly labeled drums or lined hazardous waste storage/transportation conveyance units (i.e., roll-off waste boxes) in preparation of transportation and disposal

2. Avoiding temporary stockpiling of contaminated soils or hazardous materials

3. If temporary stockpiling is necessary:

4. Covering the stockpile with plastic sheeting or tarps

5. Installing a berm around the stockpile to prevent runoff from leaving the area

6. Avoiding stockpiling in or near storm drains or watercourses

7. Monitoring the air quality during excavation operations at locations potentially exhibiting elevated concentrations of hazardous material

8. Collecting water from decontamination procedures and treating and/or disposing of it at an appropriate disposal site

9. Collecting non-reusable protective equipment and disposing of the equipment at an appropriate disposal site

1.163

27. Mitigation Measure N-1: Implement Noise-Reducing Measures for Construction Equipment Used within 275 Feet of Residences or Hotels
a. During construction, the construction contractor shall employ the following noisereducing measures where use of construction equipment occurs within 275 feet of residences or hotels:

1. Use acoustical shelters around any air compressors, generators, and any other stationary construction equipment not fitted with baffled enclosures;

2. Use baffling around stationary construction equipment to reduce noise and vibration levels;

3. Properly muffle and maintain all construction equipment powered by internal combustion engines;

4. Prohibit unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; and

5. Whenever feasible, use electrical power to run air compressors and similar power tools.

28. Mitigation Measure N-3: Provide Notification of Construction Vibration to Residential Units within 50 Feet
a. The construction contractor shall provide written notification at least 1 week prior to the start of any construction activities involving the use of vibratory equipment to all residential units located within 50 feet of the construction area that will produce the vibration. The notice shall inform residents of the estimated start date and duration of daytime vibration-generating construction activities and provide a point of contact for vibration exposure complaints.

29. Mitigation Measure TCR-1a: Conduct Native American Monitoring during Construction in Previously Undisturbed Native Soils
a. A Native American monitor shall be retained and remain present during excavation activities within previously undisturbed native soils.
b. In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during construction, the Native American monitor shall have the authority to halt and redirect ground disturbance away from the find. The implementing agency (City or County) and/or Tribal Liaison, as appropriate, shall consult with a qualified archaeologist and begin or continue Native American consultation procedures. If the City/County and/or Tribal Liaison, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with Native American groups. The mitigation plan may include but would not be limited to avoidance, capping in place, excavation and removal of the resource, interpretive displays, sensitive area signage, or other mutually agreed upon measure.

30. Mitigation Measure TCR-1b: Implement Protocol for Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources, if Native American Monitor is Not Present a. If cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during Project construction while the Native American monitor is not present, all earth-disturbing work within 100 feet of the find shall cease and desist until an archaeologist has

1.164
evaluated the nature and significance of the find as a cultural resource and an appropriate local Native American representative is consulted. Staking of the area of discovery shall be implemented with stakes no more than 10 feet apart, forming a circle having a radius of no less than 100 feet from the point of discovery. If the City/County, in consultation with local Native American tribes, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s). The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, the plan shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist.

Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include but are not limited to protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

1.165
COASTAL RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 AND 9

ERRATA TO THE FINAL EIR
State Clearing House Number # 2021090262
1 Errata to Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Final EIR Volume 1: Comments and Responses

1. Master Response B, Tree Removal, page 9 (pdf page 13). The title of Caltrans Class 1 Bikeway facilities is hereby corrected as follows.
“The trail design team revisited the alignment several times to minimize tree removal to the extent feasible, while still meeting Caltrans ADA Class 1 Bikeway requirements for trail width and CPUC requirements for distance from the rail requirements for distance from the rail, which is why the proposed trail includes several sections designed as viaducts instead of retaining walls.

2. Master Response B, page 10 (pdf page 14). The description of allowable uses within the rail operator freight easement is hereby clarified as follows. “The current rail operator owns a 20-foot easement, 10 feet from the centerline of track on either side, for freight service on the tracks owned by the RTC. RTC may construct facilities within the freight easement if the facilities do not materially interfere with the RTC’s Administration Coordination and License Agreement and federal freight rights and obligations. The easement results in a side clearance of 10 feet from centerline of track to posts, poles, signs, walls, and similar facilities. However, Tthe CPUC allows the trail to be as close as 8 feet, 6 inches, minimum in constrained areas of tangent track and 9 feet, 6 inches, minimum for curved track.

3. Master Response B, page 12 (pdf page 16). The language added to Mitigation Measure Bio-9b is hereby underlined to indicate new text.

All trees will be replaced at a minimum 1:1 ratio. All City Heritage trees, County Significant Trees, and native trees will be replaced “in-kind” at a location and ratio to be determined by the City Forester, County Environmental Coordinator, and/or other responsible regulatory agencies.

4. Master Response F, Rail Operation and Railbanking, page 21 (pdf page 25). The reference to comment 23.5 is hereby corrected to correspond with the text in Response 23.5 as follows. “Comment 23.5 notes the Project does not include rail, even though the RTC describes the SCBRL as An active rail and is in contract with the rail operator who owns a 10-foot freight easement.”

5. Master Response F, page 21 (pdf page 25). The title of agreement between RTC and Rail Operator should be capitalized and is hereby corrected as follows. “The rail operator is also the common carrier for the SCBRL as designated by the Surface Transportation Board (STB). In addition, the rail operator entered into an Aadministration Ccoordination and Llicense (ACL) agreement with the RTC for its operations.”

1.166
COASTAL RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 AND 9

ERRATA TO THE FINAL EIR
State Clearing House Number # 2021090262
2 6. Response 23.2, page 120 (pdf page 124). The estimated construction start year is hereby updated as follows.
“Furthermore, implementing the Project 25 years from now would not be consistent with the planned construction timeline for the Project, which aims to begin constructing Segments 8 and 9 of the MBSST by 20232024.”

7. Response 23.3, page 121 (pdf page 125). The following text regarding bicycle and pedestrian trips estimated in the RTC’s Unified Corridor Study is hereby revised to clarify that the total trips are for the entire 32-mile Coastal Rail Trail.
“Regarding a comparison of trail utilization on various widths, the estimates in RTC’s Unified Corridor Study considered level of service. Total weekday combined bicycle and pedestrian trips for Trail Only, which was defined as 26 feet wide in urban areas where there were no constraints, were estimated to be 22,518 for the entire 32-mile Coastal Rail Trail. For trail next to rail, which was defined as 12–16 feet in urban areas, estimated total weekday combined bicycle and pedestrian trips were 20,910 for the entire 32-mile Coastal Rail Trail.”

8. Response 25.1, page 127 (pdf page 131). The text regarding Interim Trail consistency with voter approved Proposition 116 is hereby clarified as follows. “The commenter may be is correct in that the Interim Trail (or any alternative involving track removal) could would be inconsistent with Proposition 116. The voter-approved Proposition 116 (Clean Air and Transportation Improvement Act of 1990 – CPUC Section 99600 et seq.) stipulates that the rail line be used for “rail projects within Santa Cruz County which facilitate recreational, commuter, intercity and intercounty travel.”

9. Response 25.1, page 127 (pdf page 131). The text regarding Interim Trail and potential rail service is hereby clarified as follows.
“Development of the Proposed Project: Optional Interim Phase does not preclude recreational passenger rail service on portions of the SCBRL or reactivation of freight service.”

10. Response 34.1, page 149 (pdf page 153). The estimated construction start year is hereby updated as follows.
“As described in DEIR Section 2.6.2, Optional First Phase: Trail on the Rail Line (Interim Trail), it is estimated trail construction would occur between 2025–2027, whereas construction of the Proposed Project without the optional first phase, is estimated to begin in 2023 or 2024, as described in Section 2.6.1.”

1.167
1 Bonnie Bush
To: Sonja Brunner
Subject: RE: City Council Review - Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Environmental Impact Report From: Sonja Brunner <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 9:49 AM
To: Laura Schmidt <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Nguyen <[email protected]>; Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Lee Butler <[email protected]> Subject: Re: City Council Review ‐ Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Environmental Impact Report Good morning,
Thank you for the update, and yes, I would like to call this item forward to Council.

Thank you so much!

Sonja Brunner
Councilmember, City of Santa Cruz
she/her/hers
831‐420‐5027 office
831‐291‐5281 mobile
[email protected]
809 Center St. Room 10
Santa Cruz, California  95060
www.cityofsantacruz.com
From: Sonja Brunner <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2023 7:10 PM
To: Bonnie Bush <[email protected]>; Laura Schmidt <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>
Cc: Nathan Nguyen <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council Review ‐ Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Environmental Impact Report

Bonnie and Laura,
I understand that the Coastal Rail Trail Segments 8 and 9 Environmental Impact Report is being considered for certification at the March 2 Planning Commission. After their decision, I plan to request that the City Council review the item per muni code 24.04.175.

Thank you!

Sonja Brunner
Councilmember, City of Santa Cruz
she/her/hers

1.168
2 831‐420‐5027 office
831‐291‐5281 mobile
[email protected]
809 Center St. Room 10
Santa Cruz, California  95060

www.cityofsantacruz.com

1.169
REFERENCES DRAWING #: FIELD BOOK: DESIGN DATE DRAWN VAULT NO. SCALE P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ C I T Y O F CHECKED KS/EK/MMS MS/KS KS/EK/MMS 09/21/22 AS SHOWN VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX TS-1.01 TITLE SHEET PROJECT DIRECTORY SEGMENT 8, BETWEEN THE ROUNDABOUT AND THE EXISTING RAMP TO THE SAN LORENZO RIVER TRESTLE TRAIL, THE PROJECT GENERALLY INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING CLASS IV CYCLE TRACK FOR BICYCLES AND SIDEWALK FOR PEDESTRIANS THAT EXTEND ALONG BEACH STREET, ADJACENT TO THE SANTA CRUZ BEACH BOARDWALK AMUSEMENT PARK. FOR SEGMENT 9, CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-USE TRAIL WILL BE LOCATED ON THE SANTA CRUZ BRANCH RAILROAD BANK BETWEEN THE EAST SIDE OF THE SAN LORENZO TRESTLE BRIDGE TO THE EAST SIDE OF 17TH AVENUE. PROJECT DESCRIPTION TS-1.01 FINAL SCHEMATIC DESIGN SUBMITTAL Pacific Avenue to 17th Avenue STATE PROJECT TITLE: STATE PROJECT NUMBER: OWNER SANTA CRUZ COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CONTACT: GRACE BLAKESLEE PHONE: (831) 460-3200 RAIL CONTACT: TOMMY TRAVERS FAX: (831) 460-6178 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT RRM DESIGN GROUP 3765 SOUTH HIGUERA, SUITE 102 PHONE: (949) 361-7950 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 FAX: (949) 361-7955 CONTACT: KAYLA SZUBIELSKI CIVIL ENGINEER RRM DESIGN GROUP 325 DAVIS STREET PHONE: (510) 751-4910 SAN LEANDRO, CA 94577 FAX: (510) 686-4910 CONTACT: DARREN CHOY ELECTRICAL ENGINEER THOMA ELECTRIC 3562 EMPLEO ST. PHONE: (805) 543-3850 SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA CONTACT: CHRIS PATCHIN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER PACIFIC CREST ENGINEERING 444 AIRPORT BLVD PHONE: (831) 722-9446 WATSONVILLE, CA 95076 CONTACT: CHRIS JOHNSON STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MESITI-MILLER ENGINEERING 224 WALNUT ST, SUITE B PHONE: (831) 426-3186 SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060 CONTACT: DALE HENDSBEE TRAFFIC ENGINEER WHITLOCK & WEINBERGER (W-TRANS) 1276 LINCOLN AVE, SUITE 204 PHONE: (510) 444-2600 SAN JOSE, CA 9525 CONTACT: STEVE FITZSIMMONS RAIL ENGINEER ZEPHYR UAS/RAIL (ZUI) 725 W TOWN & COUNTRY RD, SUITE 550 PHONE: (714) 835-6355 ORANGE, CA 92868 CONTACT: ALFRED YALDA NOT TO SCALE KEY MAP N SCALE: 1"=1000' N PROJECT SITE CLIENT CITY OF SANTA CRUZ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PHONE: (831) 420-5160 CONTACT: NATHAN NGUYEN FAX: (831) 420-5161 SECONDARY CLIENT COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PHONE: (831) 454-2160 CONTACT: ROB TIDMORE FAX: (831) 454-2385 RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 - 9 TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) SEGMENT 8 SEGMENT 9 CP-1.01-1.07 SEGMENT 8 REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS CP-1.08-1.22 SEGMENT 9 REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS CD-2.01-2.04 SEGMENT 8 SECTIONS CD-3.01-3.13 SEGMENT 9 SECTIONS BP-1.01 STRUCTURAL COVER SHEET BP-2.01 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-2.02 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE IMAGES BP-3.01 WOODS CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-4.01 WOODS LAGOON BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-5.01 EAST HARBOR VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-6.01 LEONA CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-7.01 LIVE OAK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET WD-1.01 RETAINING DETAIL SHEET WD-1.02 RETAINING WALL DETAIL SHEET WD-2.01 RETAINING WALL AT EAST CLIFF DR UNDERCROSS WD-3.01 CONCRETE SPREAD FOOTING RETAINING WALLS RS-1.01 GENERAL NOTES TS-1.01 TITLE SHEET RS-1.01 GENERAL NOTES & ABBREVIATIONS CP-1.01-1.07 SEGMENT 8 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS CP-1.08-1.22 SEGMENT 9 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS CD-2.01-2.04 SEGMENT 8 SECTIONS CD-3.01-3.13 SEGMENT 9 SECTIONS BP-1.01 STRUCTURAL COVER SHEET BP-2.01 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-2.02 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE IMAGES BP-3.01 WOODS CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-4.01 WOODS LAGOON BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-5.01 EAST HARBOR VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-6.01 LEONA CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-7.01 LIVE OAK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET WD-1.01 RETAINING DETAIL SHEET WD-1.02 RETAINING WALL DETAIL SHEET WD-2.01 RETAINING WALL AT EAST CLIFF DR UNDERCROSS WD-3.01 CONCRETE SPREAD FOOTING RETAINING WALLS TS-1.01 TITLE SHEET RS-1.01 GENERAL NOTES & ABBREVIATIONS CP-1.01-1.07 SEGMENT 8 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS CP-1.08-1.22 SEGMENT 9 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS CP-1.10S TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODS SEABRIGHT/MURRAY CD-2.01-2.04 SEGMENT 8 TRAIL SECTIONS CD-3.01-3.13 SEGMENT 9 TRAIL SECTIONS BP-1.01 STRUCTURAL COVER SHEET BP-2.01 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-2.02 PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE IMAGES BP-3.01 WOODS CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-4.01 WOODS LAGOON BRIDGE GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-5.01 EAST HARBOR VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-6.01 LEONA CREEK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET BP-7.01 LIVE OAK VIADUCT GENERAL PLAN SHEET WD-1.01 RETAINING DETAIL SHEET WD-1.02 RETAINING WALL DETAIL SHEET WD-3.01 CONCRETE SPREAD FOOTING RETAINING WALLS SHEET 1 OF 53 1.170
REFERENCES DRAWING #: FIELD BOOK: DESIGN CHECKED DATE DRAWN VAULT NO. SCALE 809 Center Street, Room 201 Santa Cruz, CA 95060 REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C
A L I F O R N I A 1866 P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DIG ALERT DIAL TOLL FREE AT LEAST 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG GENERAL NOTES & ABBREVIATIONS MULTI-USE TRAIL RAIL TRAIL SEGMENT 7 TS-0193-04-RWT-S8+9 KS/MS MS KS/MMS/EK AS SHOWN AB AGGREGATE BASE OR ANCHOR BOLT ABV ABOVE AC ASPHALTIC CONCRETE ADJ ADJACENT ALT ALTERNATE APPROX/APPX APPROXIMATE BC/BOC BACK OF CURB BEL BELOW BF / BOF BOTTOM OF FOOTING BLDG BUILDING BLK BLOCK BOT BOTTOM BOW BACK OF WALK BR BOTTOM OF RAMP CB CATCH BASIN CF CUBIC FOOT CIP CAST IN PLACE C/L CENTERLINE CL CENTERLINE CLR CLEAR CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CO CLEAN OUT COL COLUMN CONC CONCRETE CONST CONSTRUCTION CONT CONTINUOUS, CONTINUE CP CENTER POINT CR CURB RETURN CTR CENTER DET DETAIL DI DRAIN INLET DIA DIAMETER DIM DIMENSION DS DOWN SPOUT DWG DRAWING EA EACH ELECT ELECTRICAL ELEV ELEVATION ENCL ENCLOSURE EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT EQ EQUAL EX EXISTING EXIST EXISTING (E) EXISTING FC / FOC FRONT OF CURB FFE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FG FINISHED GRADE FL FLOWLINE FOW FACE OF WALL FND FOUNDATION FS FINISHED SURFACE OF PAVING/SURFACING FTG FOOTING FUT FUTURE GA GAUGE GB GRADE BREAK GALV GALVANIZED GR GRATE HC HANDICAPPED HOR, HORZ HORIZONTAL HP HIGH POINT HT HEIGHT ID INSIDE DIAMETER INV INVERT IR, IRR, IRRG IRRIGATION

L LENGTH LB LAG BOLT LOC LOCATION, LOCATE LIP LIP OF GUTTER PAN LF LINEAR FEET LP LOW POINT MAS MASONRY MAX MAXIMUM MFR MANUFACTURE(R) MIN MINIMUM MISC MISCELLANEOUS ML MAINLINE (N) NEW NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NO NUMBER NOM NOMINAL NTS NOT TO SCALE OC ON CENTER OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER OPT OPTIONAL PA PLANTING AREA PC POINT OF CURVE PERF PERFORATE (D) PERP PERPENDICULAR PL PROPERTY LINE POB POINT OF BEGINNING POC POINT OF CONNECTION PRC POINT OF REVERSE CURVE PROP PROPOSED PT POINT, POINT OF TANGENCY PVMT/PVNG PAVEMENT OR PAVING R, RAD RADIUS REBAR REINFORCING BAR REF REFERENCE REM REMOVE REQ'D REQUIRED REV REVISION(S), REVISED ROW RIGHT OF WAY

S SLOPE SCH SCHEDULE SD STORM DRAIN SF SQUARE FEET SHT SHEET SIM SIMILAR SL SLOPE SPEC SPECIFICATION(S)SQ SQUARE SS SANITARY SEWER S/S STAINLESS STEEL ST STREET STA STATION STD STANDARD STL STEEL STRUC STRUCTURE/ STRUCTURAL SURF SURFACE SWCL SIDEWALK CENTERLINE SYS SYSTEM TBC TOP BACK OF CURB TC TOP OF CURB TF / TOF TOP OF FOOTING TR TOP OF RAMP TW TOP OF WALL TYP TYPICAL UON UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED VAR VARIES VERT VERTICAL

W WATER W/ WITH W/O WITHOUT WL WATERLINE
@ AT
CL CENTERLINE 1. EXISTING TREE NOTES Existing trees over 3-inches in diameter within the Limit of Work were field surveyed and numbered from 2769 to 3594. The construction documents employ the following tree number coding system: · #27XX denotes an existing tree with a numbered metal forestry tag affixed to its trunk. · #27XX* denotes an existing tree with an assigned number, but with no metal forestry tag affixed to its trunk. · #27XX N/H/S denotes an existing tree that qualifies as a Regional Native, Heritage or Significant Tree as defined by the City/County of Santa Cruz. TREE NOTES ABBREVIATIONS · CITY PARKING LOT 18 (PACIFIC AVENUE ROUNDABOUT) · SEABRIGHT AVENUE / WATSON STREET PARKING LOT· EATON STREET· SIMPKINS SWIM CENTER PARKING LOT· 901 7TH AVENUE· 2700 BROMMER STREET· 835 BAY AVENUE POTENTIAL STAGING AREAS RS-1.01 SHEET 2 OF 53

CONSTRUCTION KEYNOTE PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9

1.171

R R R R
YIELD
YIELD
WHARF
BEACH
PED
YIELD
X X
X X
X
X
SL 1'4"
E
STOP
PACIFIC AVE.

BEACH ST.

BEACH ST.

SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SS
SS
SS

SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
GAS
GAS

GAS GAS

GAS GAS GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
RTS7 Phase 2 Improvements
Shown for Reference
16 17
13 14
16 R R
R R

YIELDYIELD
YIELD
R R
R
R
R
R
R R
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
WHARF
BEACH
PED
YIELD
YIELD
10+00

LOADING
ZONE
2-12
4-06
2-05
4-06
2-19
3-01
2-09
10'
10'
5'
2-24
4'
2-24
2-25
2-25
2-30
2-27
2-25
2'
2-27
2-25
2-07
2-35
2-09
TYP.
6'-9"
2-15
2-13
2-24
2-13
2-24
2-06
2-05
4-04

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT

MARKING ARROW

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENT

MARKING RAILROAD LEGEND

WHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDSYELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

CONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLANDPEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-24
2-252-26
4-01
4-04
2-22
2-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-32
2-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-30
2-43
4-06

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.02
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.01
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 3 OF 53 1.172

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLANDPEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-322-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-302-43
4-06
BEACH ST.

MAIN ST.

BEACH ST.

SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
E
E
E
E
E
E
SD
SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD SD
W
W
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
16 17
20 25
30 17
18 19
21 22
23 24
26 27
28 29
16 16
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD

NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING
10+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00

ZONE LOADING
2-15 2-07
CD-2.01
13+63
2-24 2-24
2-27
2-07 2-15
2-13
2-27
2-07
2-25
2-35 2-25 2-26 2-25 2-34
2'
6'
TYP.
2-06 2-06
TYP.
2-13
2-13
2-06
2-05
4-04

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.03
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.02
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.01
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 4 OF 53 1.173

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLANDPEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-322-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-302-43
4-06
WESTBROOK ST.

BEACH ST.

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD
SD
SD

W W W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
15 15
17 18
19 21
17 16
16 15
YIELD
YIELD

NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING NO PARKING 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00
2-07 2-07 2-15
CD-2.0119+50
2-24 2-24
2-13
2-26 2-25 2-34
6' 2-34 2-26 2-25
6' 2-34
2-34
2-25
2-26
TYP.
2-06 2-06
TYP.

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.04
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.03
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.02
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 5 OF 53 1.174

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLAND

PEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-32
2-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-30
2-43
4-06
CLIFF ST.

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD

SD SD SD
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
GAS
15 14
13 14
12 12
15 SS
SS
BEACH ST.

YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD

NO PARKING

COMMERCIAL

LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY COMMERCIAL LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY XING
PED
SLOW
SLOW
PED
XING
20+00
21+00
22+00
23+00
24+00
25+00 26+00

PASSENGER

LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY

PASSENGER

LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
2-15
CD-2.02
23+72
2-24
10' 10'
10'
2-15
2-15
2-15
2-24
2-24
2-13
TYP. 2-40
2-41
2'
2-34
2-25
2-26
2-25
2-25
2-26
6'
2'
6'
6' 2-25 2-34 2-26 2-34
2-30
2-25 2-28 2-35 2-41
2-30
6'
2-32

PIP EXISTING CONCRETE

ISLAND TO REMAIN
TYP.
2-06
2-06
2-06
CD-2.02
24+68

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.05
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.04
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.03
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 6 OF 53 1.175
RIVERSIDE AVE.

RAYMOND ST.

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS

SS SS SS SS SS

SS SS SS
E
E
E
SD SD

SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
GAS

GAS GAS

GAS GAS
W
W
W
11 11
16 15
13 14
12 14
13 BEACH ST.

YIELD

COMMERCIAL
YIELD
YIELD

YIELD LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
SLOW
PED
XING
XING
PED
SLOW
27+00
28+00 29+00 30+00 31+00 32+00
6'
6'
2-09
2-09
2-05
4-01
2-09

RETAINING WALL
HT=1.2'±

RETAINING WALL
HT=1.0'±
RETAINING WALLHT=0.5'±

RETAINING WALL
HT=1.0'±
6'
3-01
3-01
CD-2.0330+87
CD-2.03
26+82
1-03 1-03
2-06
RETAINING WALLHT=1.5'±
2-24
2-06
3-01 3-01
2-24
PROTECT EXISTINGPALMS, TYP.

ADJUST IRRIGATIONAS NEEDED

ADJUST IRRIGATIONAS NEEDED

ADJUST IRRIGATIONAS NEEDED

ADJUST IRRIGATIONAS NEEDED

PROTECT EXISTING
PALMS, TYP.
1-03
2-36
2-15 2-24
2-13
2-41
2-40 TYP.
2-35 2-25
2-28
2-30
2-25
6'
2-26
2-29
2-32
2-42 2-43 2-15
2-06
2-06
TYP.
2-18

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLAND

PEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-32
2-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-30
2-43
4-06

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.04
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.06
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.05
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 7 OF 53 1.176

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLAND

PEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT 1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-32
2-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-30
2-43
4-06
LEIBRANDT AVE.

PARK PL.

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
W W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
15 12
13 14
16 17
19 18
13 21
22 15
20 12
13 14
16 17
18 19
21 22
10 20
21 22
BEACH ST.

YIELD
YIELD

COMMERCIAL AND PASSENGER

LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY COMMERCIAL LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY

COMMERCIAL

LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
33+00
34+00 35+00
36+00
37+00
2-15
2-15
2-09

RETAINING WALL
HT=0.9'±
2-20
6'
6'
2-20
CD-2.04
36+50
3-01
1-03
2-24
2-24
2-24
2-24
2-01 2-24
TYP. 2-40
2-41
2-40 TYP.
2-25
2-28
2-26
6' 2-35
2-28 2-25 2-35 2-25
2-28
2-35 2-41
6'

PROTECT EXISTING

CURB RAMP IN PLACE
2-09
2-09

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.07
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.05
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.06
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 8 OF 53 1.177

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

POST AND WIRE FENCE

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" CURBCURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

TAPERED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCLASS IV BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS

BIKESHARE STATION
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAYPAVERS

CONCRETE BAND

THERMOPLASTIC

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC

COATING
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
YELLOW 8" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 6-1)
WHITE 6" THERMOPLASTIC TRAFFIC
STRIPE (BROKEN 17-7)

WHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING ARROWWHITE THERMOPLASTIC PAVEMENTMARKING RAILROAD LEGENDWHITE PAVEMENT MARKING WORDS

YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING

WORDSCONCRETE STAIRS

PIP EXISTING VULCANIZED RUBBERDIVIDER

VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER

RAISED CONCRETE ISLANDPEDESTRIAN GUARDRAIL

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

STRUCTURAL
RETAINING WALL - TYPE 1
CONDITION 1

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENT

RELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHT
1-032-01
2-052-062-09
2-12
2-132-15

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

CITY RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

X X X X
FENCE

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE

RETAINING WALL
2-23
CURB WITH VERTICAL FACE ADJ.

PARKING & TAPERED ADJ. CLASS IV
2-242-252-26
4-014-04
2-222-27
2-182-19
2-282-29
2-322-332-342-352-402-412-42 VULCANIZED RUBBER DIVIDER
3-01
2-11
2-21
2-07
2-36
2-20
2-302-43
4-06
PARK PL.
3RD ST.

SS
SS

SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS SS
SS
E
E
E
E
E
SD SD
SD
W
W
W
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E

TRESTLE BRIDGE

SAN LORENZO RIVER
15 20
12 13
14 16
17 18
19 21
22 13
11 10
15 20
26 21
18 16
17 10
14 12
15 12
13 14
16 17
18 25
23 21
8 13
12 9
11 (E) RESTROOMS
E E BEACH ST.

YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
37+00
38+00 39+00 40+00
41+00
42+00
42+24

SANTA CRUZ RAIL TRAIL PLAZA

SANTA CRUZ

RAIL TRAIL PLAZA

TO PEDS BIKES YIELD

SANTA CRUZ RAIL TRAIL PLAZA

BIKES YIELD

TO PEDS
2-09 2-05
2-06
2-15
2-20
6'
2-21 RELOCATED STORM DRAIN 2-22
2-23
CD-2.04
38+70
2-24

ADJUST EXISTING UTILITY BOXES, VALVES,AND APPURTENCES TO FINISH GRADE TYP.
2-25
TYP. 2-40
2-06
2-01
2-23
2-23

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S8
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.06
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.08
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.07
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 9 OF 53 1.178

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

X X X X X
X X X

X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X

X X X X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
X

X X X X X X X
X

X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X
X X
X X X
X X
X X

X X X X X X X X X X
X X
33 46
40 33
39 45
50 33
34 35
36 37
32 31
33 35
34 36
49 45
40 #2770*H
#2771*
#2783 N
#2787
#2796
#2797
#2781 N
#2782 H
#2784 H
#2785
#2786 #2788 #2789 #2790 H
#2791 H
#2798 H
#2806
#2780 N
#2792
#2794 H #2795 H
#2799 H
#2769 H
#2793
#2800
#2802
#2801
#2805 #2804
#2803
#2807

E CLIFF DRIVE

TRESTLE BRIDGE

SAN LORENZO RIVER

E CLIFF DRIVE

MURRAY STREET
YIELD
YIELD
STOP
START
START

INSTALL NEW SURFACE MOUNTED
FIXTURE UNDER ROAD OVERPASS.PROVIDE MOTION DETECTORS WITHFIXTURES.

INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURES.POLYCARBONATE WALL PACK
(VANDAL RESISTANT). ONE ON

EACH PILLAR
EXISTING STREET LIGHT. ADD NEWLED LIGHT FIXTURE AND MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING. MOUNT
NEW HARDWARE 180° FROM EXISTING
SYSTEM.

CD-3.01
12+50
CD-3.01
10+50
2-11
3-01
3-01
1-08 1-06 4-02 TYP.
4-08
10' 16'-3"
13'-3"
14'-3" 10'
12' 10+00
11+00
12+00
13+00

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.07
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.09
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.08
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT CONCRETE TRACK PANEL SEPARATION FENCE CHAINLINK FENCE GUARDRAIL SYSTEM PROPOSED SIGN CONCRETE WHEEL STOP TRASH RECEPTACLES BENCH WOOD FENCE BIKE RACKS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL 6" WIDE CURB 8" WIDE CURB CHICANE CURB RAMP DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE ROLLED CURB CONCRETE SIDEWALK HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD) HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL) CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGS CONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPING CROSSBIKE MARKINGS SHARROW MARKINGS 6" CURB AND GUTTER DRIVEWAY CONCRETE BAND BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING PROPOSED STAIRS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS ABUTMENT SYMBOL DESCRIPTION UTILITIESPIP EXISTING EQUIPMENT PROPOSED LIGHT RELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENT RELOCATED LIGHT POST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB) NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLE NEW MAST ARM POLE RELOCATED MAST ARM POLE PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA RELOCATED UTILITY POLE COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND SIGN 1-01 2-01 2-02 REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE 2-04 2-05 2-06 SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY LEGEND EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAIL SEPARATION FENCE 1-03 2-09 1-05 2-10 2-11 1-06 RETAINING WALL 1-08 1-09 2-13 2-14 2-16 2-19 2-20 4-01 4-04 4-06 4-07 4-08 4-11 4-12 4-15 3-01 3-05 PROPOSED NEW TRACK SYMBOL DESCRIPTION LEGEND CONCRETE PAVEMENT HMA PAVEMENT VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS REINFORCED POLYMER DECK BRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASS REINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL SIGNS EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED #28XX* EXISTING TREE #28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK #28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK #28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE AS DEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON) DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PROPOSED LIGHTS LIGHT ON EX. FIXTURE ROADWAY LIGHT TRAIL LIGHT SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1) SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2) RECESSED LIGHT IN POST IN-GROUND LIGHT DECOMPOSED GRANITE 2-08 2-12 4-02 4-16 4-17 4-18 FRENCH DRAIN 1-10 1-11 1-12 1-13 2-22 2-24 2-37

X X X X X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X X

X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X
X X 33 46 40 33 3945 50
33 34
35 36
37 32
31 33
34 #2770*H #2771* #2783 N #2787 #2796 #2797 #2781 N #2782 H #2784 H #2785 #2786 #2788 #2789 #2790 H #2791 H # #2780 N #2792 #2794 H #2795 H #2769 H #2793

E CLIFF TRESTLE BRIDGE SAN LORENZO RIVER

E CLIFF DRIVE

MURRAY STREET
YIELD
YIELD
STOP START START INSTALL NEW SURFACE MOUNTED FIXTURE UNDER ROAD OVERPASS. PROVIDE MOTION DETECTORS WITH FIXTURES. INSTALL NEW LIGHT FIXTURES. POLYCARBONATE WALL PACK (VANDAL RESISTANT). ONE ON EACH PILLAR EXISTING STREET LIGHT. ADD NEW LED LIGHT FIXTURE AND MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING. MOUNT NEW HARDWARE 180° FROM EXISTING SYSTEM. CD-3.01 12+50 CD-3.01
10+50 2-11 3-013-01 1-08 1-06 4-02 TYP. 4-08
10' 16'-3"
13'-3"
14'-3" 10'
12' 10+00 11+00 12+00
13+00 REFERENCES DRAWING #: FIELD BOOK: 809 Center Street, Room 201 Santa Cruz, CA 95060 REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C
A L I F O R N I A 1866 P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950
32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9 CP-0193-04-RWT-S9 MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.07 KEY MAP
SHEET 10 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.179
X

X X X X X
X

X X X X X X X X
X
X
X

X X X X X
X
X
X X X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X X
35 36
49 45
40 51
50 3839
49 4344
39 45
49 46
42 43
44 #2806 #2808
42 43
#2811 H #2815 H #2816 H #2817 H #2818
#2810 H
#2809 H
#2812 H
#2813 H
#2814 H
#2800 #2802
#2801
#2805
#2804
#2803
#2807

MURRAY STREET

HIAWATHA AVENUE

CAYUGA STREET

MOUNTAIN VIEW
AVENUE

ALHAMBRA
AVENUE

PILKINGTON
AVENUE

BROOK AVENUE

PILKINGTON CREEK
3362

46.48 RES
#3579 N
#3580 N
#3578 N
#3577 N
#3575 N
#3576 N
#3571 HN
#3570 HN
#3572 HN
#3569 HN
#3581 HN
#3582 H
#3583 N
#3584 H
#3585 H
#3586 H
#3587 H #3589
#3590 N #3591 HN

PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE

END STOP

START END START
START
END
CD-3.02
17+50
CD-3.03
18+66
CD-3.02
14+25 BP-2.01
SEE 3-05 3-05
2-11

EXISTING STREET LIGHT (POLE
#5021). ADD NEW LED LIGHT FIXTUREAND MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING. MOUNT NEW HARDWARE
180° FROM EXISTING SYSTEM.
4-08
3-01
1-06
2-37
3-01
3-01
3-01
1-08
3-01 3-01
3-01
3-01
3-01
2-06
TYP. 4-02
4-02 TYP.

TYP.
10'
10'
12'
14'-3"
12'
10'
12'
14+00
15+00
16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.10
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.08
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.09
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0"
X

X X X X X
35 36
49 45
40 51
50383949
4344 3945 49 46 #2806 #2808 #2811 H #2815 H #2816 H #2817 H #2818 #2810 H #2809 H #2812 H#2813 H #2814 H 800 #2802
#2801
#2805
#2804
#2803
#2807 MURRAY STREET HIAWATHA AVENUE

ALHAMBRA
AVENUE

PILKINGTON
AVENUE

BRO PILKINGTON
3362

46.48 RES #3579 N #3580 N#3578 N #3577 N #3575 N #3576 N #3571 HN #3570 HN #3572 HN #3569 HN #3581 HN #3582 H #3583 N #3584 H #3585 H #3586 H #3587 H #3589 #3590 N #3591 HN PILKINGTON CREEK BRIDGE END STOP START END END CD-3.02 17+50 CD-3.03 18+66 CD-3.02
14+25 BP-2.01 SEE 3-05 2-11 EXI #50 ANEXI 180 4-08 3-01 2-37 3-01 1-08 3-01 3-01 3-01 3-01 3-01 2-06 TYP. 4-02 10'
10'
12'
14'-3"
12'
10'
12'
14+00
15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19 SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT CONCRETE TRACK PANEL SEPARATION FENCE CHICANE CURB RAMP DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PROPOSED STAIRS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA RELOCATED UTILITY POLE 1-01 REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE 2-04 2-05 2-06 SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY LEGEND EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X SEPARATION FENCE 1-03 4-15 3-01 SYMBOL DESCRIPTION LEGEND 4-16 4-17 2-37 MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.08 0 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
SHEET 11 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.180

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X

X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X X X

X X X X
X
X

X X X X X X
44 44
45 46
47 47
48 49
50 48
48 51
48 MURRAY STREET

MOTT AVENUE

SEABRIGHT AVENUE
T

MOTT AVENUE

MURRAY STREET
WV
10'
19'-1"
19'-10"
CLEAR
KEEP
STOP
STOP
CLEAR
KEEP
CLEAR
KEEP
CLEAR
KEEP
"DO NOT ENTER.

EXCEPT FOR BICYCLES."
"NO RIGHT
ON RED"
END TYP.

END
TYP.

TYP.

TYP.

CD-3.03
22+00
CD-3.04
23+50

COORDINATE

MOVING CONTROLHUT WITH RR
COMPANY. INSTALL
U.G. PULL BOX(S)

AND EXTEND

CIRCUITS TO NEW
LOCATION.
2-05
2-06
2-05
2-14
2-14
2-11

EXISTING STREET LIGHT (POLE
#5022). ADD NEW LED LIGHT FIXTUREAND MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING. MOUNT NEW HARDWARE
180° FROM EXISTING SYSTEM.
4-08
4-02
MATCH EXISTING STREET LIGHTS.

SINGLE HEAD UNIT ONLY.

EXISTING STREET LIGHT (POLE #5023).

ADD NEW LED LIGHT FIXTURE AND
MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING.MOUNT NEW HARDWARE 180° FROMEXISTING SYSTEM. 2-19
1-08
4-08
1-03 4-04
2-01
1-08
4-01
2-09
2-19 2-19
1-10
2-06
4-11
4-124-15
4-15
2-05
2-06
2-10
3-01
3-01
1-08
4-06
4-162-12
2-05
1-08
2-16
2-06
1-08
2-06 2-06
2-19
4-174-18
4-01
4-11
4-11
2-06
4-11
4-18
2-09
3-01
1-03
2-22
2-24
2-13
13'-2"
10'-6" 10' 10'-6" 5'
9'
12'
13'-4"
12'
2-02
2-01 4-15
4-15
2-02
1-03
2-02
12'-6"
20+00 21+00 22+00
23+00 24+00 25+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.09
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.11
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.10
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0"

X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X
X

X X X X X X
7 47
48 49
50 48
48 51 MURRAY STREET

MURRAY STREET
19'-1" "NO RIGHT ON RED" TYP. TYP. CD-3.03 22+00 CD-3.04 23+50 2- HTS. 2-11 EXISTING STREET LIGHT (POLE #5023). ADD NEW LED LIGHT FIXTURE AND MOUNTING ARM TO MATCH EXISTING. MOUNT NEW HARDWARE 180° FROM EXISTING SYSTEM. 4-08 2-01 1- 4-02- 4-1 2-05 1-08 4-1 4-1 4-01 4-11 2-06 4-12-3- 1-03 13'-2"
12' 2-02 1-03 2-02 22+00 23+00 PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA RELOCATED UTILITY POLE COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON AND SIGN SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY LEGEND EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X SEPARATION FENCE RETAINING WALL 5 SYMBO LEGEND VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL678 FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS

WATSON STREET
SHEET 12 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.181

WV CLEAR KEEP CLEAR KEEP CLEAR KEEP

MURRAY ST
SEABRIGHT AVE REFERENCES DRAWING #: FIELD BOOK: DESIGN CHECKED DATE DRAWN VAULT NO. SCALE 809 Center Street, Room 201 Santa Cruz, CA 95060 REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C
A L I F O R N I A 1866 P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DIG ALERT DIAL TOLL FREE AT LEAST 2 DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 30% DESIGN OR OR CP-1.10S TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION SEABRIGHT AVE/MURRAY ST TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9 SFACJ 1" = 20' w-trans.com | (510) 444-2600 414 13th St, Floor 5 Oakland, CA 94612 SHEET 13 OF 53 1.182

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
1-06 RETAINING WALL1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

PROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37
X X X
X X X

X X X X
X X X
X X

X XX X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X X
X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X X X
X X

X X X X X X X
X X X
X X X

X X X X X X
X
X
X X
X X
X X
45 50
49 MURRAY STREET

WATSON ST

WATSON STREET

BRONSON
STREET
START
START
CD-3.04
26+67
MOVING CONTCOMPANY. INS
U.G. PULL BOX

CIRCUITS TO
3-01 3-01
2-19 2-19
2-19
2-19
2-16 2-16
2-09
3-01
2-10
1-08
3-01
1-09
2-01
2-01
4-01
2-24
4-02 TYP.
40'-3" 13'-2" 19'-1" 33'
12'
2'-6" 14' 16'-6" 10'
12'
12'-6" 10'-6" 10'-6"
2-11
26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.10
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.12
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.11
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS POST AND WIRE FENCE SEPARATION FENCE SHEET 14 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.183
X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X
37 36
39 35
34 33
30 20
15 10
#2957 N
#2919 H
#2933 H
#2934 HN
#2936 HN
#2935 HN
#2937 H
#2940 HN
#2958
#2938 N
#2939 N

MURRAY STREET
OWEN
STREET

WOODS CREEK
#2925 H
#2922 N
#2921 N #2931 H
#2923 HN
#2924 HN
#2932 N
#2929 #2930 N
#3559 HN
#3560* HN
#3561* N
#3562* H

WOODS CREEK VIADUCT
END
END
CD-3.05
35+50
CD-3.05
31+00
2-11
2-19
2-16
3-01 3-01
2-10
3-01
2-12
3-01
3-05
TYP. 4-02
4-02
1-06 TYP.

TYP.
12'
10'-7" 10'-6" 12'-6" 10'
16'
14'
2'-11"
6'
3-01
2-19
4-08
BP-3.01
SEE
12'
31+00
32+00
33+00
34+00
35+00
36+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.11
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.13
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.12
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS
X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 39 #
CD-3.05
31+00 2-19 2-16 3-01 2-10 3-01 2-12 TYP. 4-02
10'-7" 10'-6" 12'-6" 10'
16'
14'
2'-11"
6' 3-01 2-19
12'
31+00
32+00 YMBOL DESCRIPTION TE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT CONCRETE TRACK PANEL SEPARATION FENCE CHICANE CURB RAMP DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE ROLLED CURB PROPOSED STAIRS SYMBOL DESCRIPTION STRUCTURAL RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS -01 REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE 2-04 2-05 -03 2-06 4-15 3-01 4-16 4-17 2-37 POST AND WIRE FENCE SEPARATION FENCE SHEET 15 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.184

X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X
X X X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X X X X X X
X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
25 20
15 10
15 20
14 16
17 18
19 21
22 23
10 11
15 20
25 28
29 30
#2980 N
#2981*N
#2982*SN
#2983*N
#2984*N
#2991*S
#2996*
#2997*S #2998*
#2999*
#3003*
#2953 N
#2943*HN
#2944 N
#2945 HN
#2940 HN
#2946 N
#2951 N
#2952 N
#2955 N
#2956*N
#2960 N #2961 N
#2941 H
#2942 H
#2959 HN
#2962 HN

EATON STREET

WOODS LAGOON

SANTA CRUZ HARBOR

WOODS CREEK
#2963* N
#2964* N
#2965 #2966
#2971 N
#2972 N
#2973 N
#2974 N
#2975 N
#2977 SN
#2976 N

MURRAY STREET

WOODS CREEK VIADUCT WOODS LAGOON RAIL ROAD BRIDGE START T HARBOR VIADUCT

START END
BP-4.01
SEE
3-05 3-05
1-06
3-01
3-01
3-01
3-01 3-05
TYP. 4-02
4-02 TYP.

TYP.

TYP. 4-02
TYP. 1-06
12'
4-08
4-08
4-08
BP-5.01
SEE
2-11
10'
10'
8'

HARBOR CONNECTION
37+00 38+00 39+00 40+00 41+00 42+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.14
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.12
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.13
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0"

EAST FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS POST AND WIRE FENCE SEPARATION FENCE SHEET 16 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.185
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X
X
X
X
35 #3018
#3044*
#3046*S
#3053*
#3011 N
#3013
#3014 S
#3015
#2981*N
#2982*SN
#2983*N
#2984*N
#2985*N
#2986*N
#2987*N
#2988*S
#2989 S
#2990 S
#2991*S
#2996*
#2997*S
#2998*
#2999*
#3003*
#3006*
#3017
#3020
#3019
#3021
#3023
#3016
#3022
#3027 N
#3028 N
#3036
#3029 S
#3039
#3038 N
#3043*N
#3048*
#3049*
#3047 S
#3045*
#3071 N
#3065 N
#3054*
#3055*
#3056*S
#3057*N
#3059*
#3061*N
#3060
#3058*
#3084 S
#3083
#3085 S
#3086
#3087 S
#3089 SN
#3090
#3091 SN
#3092 SN
#3096 N
#3088 S

LAGO LANE

ALTA LOMA
LANE

ALTA LOMA

EATON STREET
#2963* N
#2964* N
#2965
#2966
#2967
#3010*
#3012 N
#3024 #3025
#3026
#3030
#3031
#3032
#3033
#3034
#3037
#3040
#3041 N
#3042
#3050 S
#3051
#3052
#3093
#3094

EAST HARBOR VIADUCT

EAST HARBOR VIADUCT
END
START
CD-3.06
46+60
CD-3.06
43+15
2-11
3-01
3-01
3-05
TYP. 4-02
TYP.
4-02
1-06
TYP.
4-02
1-06
TYP.TYP.
11'-3"
13'-8" 9'-7" 33'
9'-7" 19'-2"
BP-5.01
SEE
BP-5.01
SEE
3-01 START
10'
21'
6'-9"
12'
43+00
44+00
45+00
46+00
47+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB

CHICANECURB RAMP

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEROLLED CURB

CONCRETE SIDEWALK

HMA PAVEMENT (ROAD)HMA PAVEMENT (TRAIL)

CLASS II BIKE CROSSING MARKINGSCONTINENTAL CROSSWALK STRIPINGCROSSBIKE MARKINGS

SHARROW MARKINGS
6" CURB AND GUTTER

DRIVEWAY

CONCRETE BAND

BIKE LANE, GREEN ACRYLIC COATING

PROPOSED STAIRS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSTRUCTURAL

RETAINING WALL, SEE WP SHEETS

ABUTMENT

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

UTILITIES

PIP EXISTING EQUIPMENTPROPOSED LIGHTRELOCATED RAIL EQUIPMENTRELOCATED LIGHTPOST MOUNTED SOLAR RECTANGULARRAPID FLASHING BEACON (RRFB)NEW LIGHT FIXTURE ON EXISTING POLENEW MAST ARM POLERELOCATED MAST ARM POLE

PED PUSH BUTTON WITH LEAN RAIL

VIDEO DETECTION CAMERA

RELOCATED UTILITY POLE

COMBINED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON

AND SIGN
1-01
2-01
2-02

REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
2-042-052-06

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SCCRTC RIGHT OF WAY
LEGEND

EXISTING FENCE X X X X X X X X X X

RETAINING WALL WITH GUARDRAILPOST AND WIRE FENCE
1-03
2-09
1-05
2-102-11
RETAINING WALL 1-06
1-081-09
2-132-142-162-192-20
4-014-044-064-074-084-114-12
4-15
3-013-05

PROPOSED NEW TRACK

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LEGEND

CONCRETE PAVEMENT

HMA PAVEMENT

VIADUCT WITH FIBERGLASS

REINFORCED POLYMER DECKBRIDGE WITH FIBERGLASSREINFORCED POLYMER DECK 3"-5" COBBLE

VIADUCT/BRIDGE GUARDRAIL
SIGNS

EXISTING RELOCATED PROPOSED
#28XX*

EXISTING TREE
#28XX: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH A NUMBERED METAL FORESTRY TAG AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK#28XX*: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE WITH AN ASSIGNED NUMBER, WITHOUT A METAL FORESTRY TAG

AFFIXED TO ITS TRUNK
#28XX N/H/S: DENOTES AN EXISTING TREE THAT QUALIFIES AS A NATIVE, HERITAGE OR SPECIMAN TREE ASDEFINED BY THE CITY/COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ #28XX #28XX N/H/S

RRFB (RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACEPROPOSED LIGHTS
LIGHT ON EX. FIXTUREROADWAY LIGHT
TRAIL LIGHTSURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 1)SURFACE MOUNTED WALLPACK (TYPE 2)

RECESSED LIGHT IN POSTIN-GROUND LIGHT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
2-082-12 4-02
4-164-174-18

FRENCH DRAIN
1-101-111-121-13
2-222-24
2-37

REFERENCES
DRAWING #:FIELD BOOK:

DESIGN

CHECKED
DATE
DRAWN
VAULT NO.

SCALE
809 Center Street, Room 201
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

REVISIONS

C I T Y
O
F
S
A
N
T
A

C R U Z
C

A L I F O R N I A
1866

P U B L I C W O R K S D E P A R T M E N T SANTACRUZ

C I T Y
O
F
TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS - 09/21/2022 09/21/22 rrmdesign.com | (949) 361-7950 32332 Camino Capistrano, Ste. 205 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

DIG ALERT

DIAL TOLL FREE
AT LEAST 2 DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG

REFINED SCHEMATIC PLANS

TRAIL NEXT TO THE RAIL LINE (ULTIMATE TRAIL CONFIGURATION) RAIL TRAIL SEGMENTS 8 & 9
CP-0193-04-RWT-S9
KS/MS
MS
KS
1" = 20'-0"
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.15
MATCHLINE, SEE SHEET CP-1.13
0 10 20 40 60
CP-1.14
KEY MAP SCALE: 1" = 1500'-0" FINAL SCHEMATIC PLANS POST AND WIRE FENCE SEPARATION FENCE SHEET 17 OF 53 SIGNIFICANT TREE AS 1.186
X X X
X
X
X
X X X
X
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X X
X
X

X XX X X X X X

X X X X X X X
X X X
X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X X X X X

X X X X
X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
55 X
50 56
50 50
49 54
49 53
49 5253
51 53 54 55
53 54
#3096 N #3097*N
#3098*SN #3099*
#3132 N
#3134*N
#3135*N

ALTA LOMA

ALTA LOMA
LANE
5TH AVENUE
6TH AVENUE
#3095 SN
#3133 S
15'-6"
9'-6"
START
END
CD-3.07
51+50
CD-3.07
48+00
3-01
2-11
2-11
3-01
3-01 2-01
4-02 TYP.
13'-8"
9'-6" 11' 13'-8" 4'-8" 3-01
6'-7"
12'
12'
12'
48+00 49+00 50+00
51+00
52+00 53+00

SYMBOL DESCRIPTIONSITE FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT

CONCRETE TRACK PANEL

SEPARATION FENCE

CHAINLINK FENCEGUARDRAIL SYSTEM

PROPOSED SIGN

CONCRETE WHEEL STOP

TRASH RECEPTACLES
BENCH

WOOD FENCE

BIKE RACKS

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
6" WIDE CURB
8" WIDE CURB