Union City City Council
April 28, 2026

356 of 556
RESO # DATE RESOLUTION ACTION
SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS (2018-2025)
5721-21 3/9/2021

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE

EXECUTION OF A PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT AND THE COMMITMENT OF FUNDING FROM THE 2014 MEASURE BB TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN FOR THE UNION

CITY INTERMODAL STATION PROJECT TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
5841-21 10/12/2021
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY ACCEPTING $4.2

MILLION GRANT FROM ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMMISSION (ALAMEDA CTC), PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. A22-0053 FOR FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
5874-21 12/14/2021

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING

AGREEMENT WITH CITY VENTURES, LLC, FOR THE SALE AND DEVELOPMENT OF A

PORTION OF THE GATEWAY PROPERTY, BOUNDED BY ALVARADO-NILES ROAD, OSPREY

DRIVE, OLD ALAMEDA CREEK, AND THE CITY LIMIT LINE WITH FREMONT 5878-22 1/11/2022

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC. FOR THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30% DESIGN) OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR), CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,200,000

SPECIAL
MEETING 7/12/2022

UPDATES ON QLP, INCLUDING DESIGN REFINEMENTS, DRAINAGE SOLUTIONS,

RESOURCE AGENCIES COORDINATION, PERMITTING REQUIREMENT, GATEWAY

DEVELOPMENT INTERFACE AND FUNDING
6045-22 11/22/2022

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR), CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,000,000 6046-22 11/22/2022

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., FOR THE PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING (30% FINAL DESIGN) OF THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR (QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 3 AND 4) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,087,600, AND APPROPRIATING $208,760 FROM THE UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE OF THE SB-1 FUND
6296-24 5/14/2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO THE EXCLUSIVE

NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT WITH CITY VENTURES HOMEBUILDING, LLC, FOR THE SALE

AND DEVELOPMENT OF A PORTION OF THE GATEWAY PROPERTY (CALTRANS SITE)

357 of 556
RESO # DATE RESOLUTION ACTION
SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS (2018-2025)
1/14/2025
CM REPORT: RECEIVE A REPORT ON THE STATUS OF STATION DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT

AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
2025-006 1/14/2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY

TRANSPORATION COMMISSION (ALAMEDA CTC) PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT (PFA) NO. A22-0053, TO ACCEPT AN ADDITIONAL $801,191, FOR A TOTAL PFA OF $5,001,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, AND AMENDING THEFY 2024-2025 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND BUDGET
2025-007 1/14/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN ALLOCATION REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3 DUMBARTON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,507,000, AND ACCEPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S DESIGNATION

OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AS IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR THE UNION CITY QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2025-021 2/11/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $801,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $5,001,191
2025-087 6/24/2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMMISSION PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. A22-0053 TO ACCEPT AN ADDITIONAL $3,995,000, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $8,996,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASE (SEGMENT) 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2025-097 7/8/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN ALLOCATION REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3 DUMBARTON

CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM AND ACCEPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S DESIGNATION OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AS

IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR THE UNION CITY QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04

358 of 556
RESO # DATE RESOLUTION ACTION
SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS (2018-2025)
2025-117 8/12/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,988,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $7,989,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASE (SEGMENT) 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2025-136 10/14/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $200,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $274,500, FOR THE DESIGN OF A HABITAT

MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2025-146 10/28/2025
ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEDICATION OF CITY-OWNED LAND AS RIGHTOF-WAY, LANDSCAPE EASEMENT, AND PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT FOR PHASE (SEGMENT) 2 OF THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ACCEPT SUCH

DEDICATION
2026-017 2/10/2026
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY ACCEPTING $16,728,000 FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3 DUMBARTON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS

PROGRAM OF THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, INCREASING THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS GRANTS FUND BY $16,728,000, AND APPROPRIATING THE $16,728,000 TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2026-027 3/10/2026

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,578,000, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $10,567,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASE (SEGMENT) 1 OF THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04

359 of 556
RESO # DATE RESOLUTION ACTION
5374-18 8/14/2018

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY TO APPROVE

FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMISSION AND THE CITY OF UNION CITY FOR I-880 TO SR 238 (MISSION BLVD) EAST WEST CONNECTOR; APPROVE TWO AGREEMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING

SERVICES WITH UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD IN CONJUNCTION WITH SEGMENT C OF THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000 EACH;

APPROVE DESIGN AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF UNION CITY AND SAN FRANCISCO

BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SEGMENT C OF THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $605,000; APPROVE

CONSULTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF UNION CITY AND TYLIN FOR VALUE ENGINNERING SERVICES FOR THE QUA CITY PROJECT 18-04, IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000; AND APPROPRIATE $2,500,000 FROM THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 4100 TO CITY PROJECT 18-04
5444-19 2/12/2019

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY APPROPRIATING $75,000 OF UNALLOCATED DISPA FUND (FUND 2660) AND APPROVING AN

AGREEMENT WITH MARK THOMAS & COMPANY, INC FOR THE MULTIMODAL STUDY FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04 (INCLUDES AUTHORIZING THE RENAMING OF THE I-880 TO MSSION BOULEVARD/EAST WEST CONNECTOR

PROJECT TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT
5504-19 7/9/2019

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY DECLARING A PUBLIC

PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE A

PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN EXCESS ROUTE 84 PROPERTIES 5720-21 3/9/2021

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE

EXECUTION OF A PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT AND THE COMMITMENT OF FUNDING FROM THE 2014 MEASURE BB TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN FOR

THE DUMBARTON CORRIDOR AREA TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04 5721-21 3/9/2021

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE

EXECUTION OF A PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT AND THE COMMITMENT OF FUNDING FROM THE 2014 MEASURE BB TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN FOR

THE UNION CITY INTERMODAL STATION PROJECT TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
5841-21 10/12/2021
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY ACCEPTING $4.2

MILLION GRANT FROM ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMMISSION (ALAMEDA CTC), PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. A22-0053 FOR FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
SUMMARY OF CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS FOR FUNDING (2018-2026) 360 of 556
2025-006 1/14/2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY

TRANSPORATION COMMISSION (ALAMEDA CTC) PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT (PFA) NO. A22-0053, TO ACCEPT AN ADDITIONAL $801,191, FOR A TOTAL PFA OF $5,001,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASES (SEGMENTS) 1 AND 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18- 04, AND AMENDING THEFY 2024-2025 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND BUDGET 2025-007 1/14/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN ALLOCATION REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3

DUMBARTON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,507,000, AND ACCEPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S

DESIGNATION OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AS IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR THE UNION CITY QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04 2025-087 6/24/2025

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORATION COMMMISSION PROJECT FUNDING AGREEMENT NO. A22-0053 TO ACCEPT AN ADDITIONAL $3,995,000, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $8,996,191, FOR THE FINAL DESIGN OF PHASE (SEGMENT) 2 FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY (EAST WEST CONNNECTOR) PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2025-097
see revised
funding
request
below
7/8/2025

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT AN ALLOCATION REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3 DUMBARTON

CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM AND ACCEPTING ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S DESIGNATION OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY AS

IMPLEMENTING AGENCY FOR THE UNION CITY QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
see original
on
07/08/25
(Reso. No.
2025-097)
9/23/2025

RECEIVE A REPORT ON THE REVISED FUNDING ALLOCATION REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3

DUMBARTON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FOR QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04
2026-017 2/10/2026
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING $16,728,000 FROM THE REGIONAL MEASURE 3

DUMBARTON CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PROGAM OF THE METROPOLITAN

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSSION, INCREASING THE REVENUE PROJECTIONS IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS GRANTS FUND BY $16,728,000 AND APPROPRIATING THE $16,728,000 TO THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 18-04. 361 of 556
Adopt a Resolution Approving the
First Addendum to the Certified
East West Connector Final
Environmental Impact Report for
Quarry Lakes Parkway -Phases
(Segments) 1-4, City Project No.
18-04
Marilou R. Ayupan, Public Works Director
City Manager Report- Item 5.1
April 28, 2026 - City Council Meeting
362 of 556

2 Station District and Quarry Lakes Parkway
363 of 556

3 History of East West Connector/Quarry Lakes Parkway
§ 1986: Caltrans Historic Route 84 project identified in 1986 Measure B § 2003: ACTA becomes Project Sponsor for Route 84 Options, which becomes the East-West Connector (EWC) project.
§ 2009: Alameda CTC certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for EWC § 2018: Alameda CTC approved Union City as new Project Sponsor and Lead Agency for CEQA
§ 2019: Union City executed the Caltrans PSA for development of former Caltrans property (Gateway Site) and CTC approves in 2021 transfer of property to City
§ 2020-2026: The Quarry Lake Parkway, Phases 1-4 roadway design has been revised to improve access for transit, bikes, pedestrians and connections to neighborhoods, parks, businesses, and to reduce environmental impacts 364 of 556

4 Approve the First Addendum of the EWC Final EIR for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4
2009 Certified EWC EIR
The First Addendum to
evaluates changes in the
project related to:
• Roadway Design
• Drainage Infrastructure
• Biological Mitigation
365 of 556

5 QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 1-4
Old Alameda
Creek
Alameda Creek
Flood Control
Channel
Line M
Line M
366 of 556

6 Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 2
Key Changes to Roadway, Drainage and Mitigation
• Relocated Water Quality Treatment
basin next to Old Alameda Creek and
relocated Hydromodification basin to
the underutilized Old Alameda Creek
• Evaluated other onsite mitigation
locations options incl. an offsite
mitigation option
• Realigned QLD closer to Old Alameda
Creek and realigned QLP parallel to
Osprey Drive
Redesign approved by RWQCB, ACWD,
ACFCD and other agencies
367 of 556

7 Approve the First Addendum of the EWC Final EIR for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4
Other Roadway Changes
• Removed street connection
• ANR/Lotus Pond Intersection Mod New multiuse trails along 7 th
Street and Mission Blvd
Foothill
Glen
368 of 556

8 Line M
• Proposed Bypass Pipeline reduced to an Overflow Pipeline • Revised locations for Water Quality Treatment & Hydromod Basins • Construct 3-foot weir at the downstream end of OAC for Hydromod • Combined locations of outfall pipelines into OAC
Drainage Infrastructure Changes
369 of 556

9 Proposed Biological Offsite Mitigation
Location of the High Value
Mitigation Site in
Livermore Foothills (north
of I-580) within Alameda
Creek Watershed
Manning Ranch (Eagle Ridge Preserve) and
Cayetano Creek borders the counties of
Alameda and Contra Costa
370 of 556

10 Proposed Biological Offsite Mitigation
(Manning Ranch and Cayetano Creek)
Create Wetlands
Areas
Create Grassland
Habitat
Creek
Restoration
371 of 556

11 Proposed Biological Offsite Mitigation
• The First Addendum will
address the proposed
biological offsite mitigation
identified in the Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring
Plan dated April 2026
• Rocky Ridge, LLC owner
and developer of high value
mitigation area
372 of 556

12 • The Proposed Resolution contains all the finding
necessary for approval of the First Addendum to the East West Connector Final EIR for Quarry Lakes Parkway,
Phases 1-4
• Approval of the First Addendum will allow the City to proceed with obtaining approvals from the regulatory
agencies necessary to advance the construction of Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1 and 2 and enter into an
Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC for offsite mitigation.

Approve the First Addendum of the EWC Final EIR
for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
373 of 556

13 Approve the First Addendum of the EWC Final EIR
for the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases (Segments) 1-4
Staff Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution Approving the First
Addendum to the Certified East West Connector
Final Environmental Impact Report for Quarry
Lakes Parkway-Phases (Segments) 1-4, City
Project No. 18-04

Questions?
374 of 556
City Council Staff Report Page 1 of 6 April 28, 2026
Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 5.2
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joan Malloy, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC, for the Purchase and Sale of the Mitigation Values, in the Amount of $11,050,000, for the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, Phases 1-4, City Project No. 18-04 – CEQA Review – First Addendum to the East West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report – April 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC for Purchase and Sale of the Mitigation Values in the amount of $11,050,000, for the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, Phases 1- 4, City Project No. 18-04 - CEQA review - First Addendum to the East-West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report – April 2026.

This Agreement will allow the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project to fulfill its obligation to mitigate key environmental impacts (waters/wetlands/riparian effects) identified in the original 2009 Environmental Impact Report and addressed in the First Addendum to the East West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report – April 2026. Mitigation is required to receive permits before the construction of Quarry Lakes Parkway from several state and federal regulatory agencies.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal C, Strategy 2: Economic, Community Development and Public Safety – Facilitate the build-out of the greater Station District Area through the construction of the Quarry Lakes Parkway, completion of the pedestrian rail crossing, and implementation of the recommendations of the Southern Alameda County Regional Rail Integration Study to make the Station District a passenger rail hub served by ACE. 375 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.2
City Council Staff Report Page 2 of 6 April 28, 2026

BACKGROUND
The Alameda County Transportation Authority (“ACTA”), in cooperation with the cities of Fremont and Union City, proposed a 3.0-mile transportation corridor that would provide East West access between I-880 and Mission Boulevard (SR 238) in southern Alameda County. The “East West Connector (“EWC”) Project” would widen existing roads (1.7 miles along Decoto Road and Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont) and construct a new roadway (1.3 miles from Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont to Mission Boulevard in Union City), and upon completion, would provide a continuous bike and pedestrian corridor from I-880 to Mission Boulevard.

ACTA, as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guideline, prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (“Final EIR”) for the East West Connector Project (State Clearinghouse No. 200710278) in compliance with CEQA, to assess the potential environmental impacts, describe the alternatives, and the potential mitigation measures. Section 3.3, Biological Resources, in the Final EIR addresses the project's environmental impacts and potential mitigation measures. On May 28, 2009, the ACTA Board certified the Final EIR, dated April 2009, for the East West Connector Project, located at: Alameda County Transportation Authority East West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report. On June 25, 2009, the ACTA Board considered related Board reports, documents presented by ACTA staff and ACTA’s environmental consultants, including a Finding of Facts and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the East West Connector Project, prepared in accordance with the CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines and adopted Resolution No 2009-004 (“ACTA Resolution”).

In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15096 (h), the City of Union City was named a Responsible Agency for the East West Connector Project. On July 14, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3838-09, making the findings as a Responsible Agency (adopting the same findings as ACTA in their Final EIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the East West Connector Project (Route 84, Option 2) and approving the project.

In July 2010, the Alameda County Transportation Commission (“Alameda CTC”) was created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (“ACCMA”) and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (“ACTIA”), formerly ACTA, to streamline operations, eliminate redundancies, and save taxpayers’ dollars. As a result of the merger, Alameda CTC can implement more cost-effective planning, funding, and delivery methods for programs and projects that benefit Alameda County residents and businesses. Alameda CTC is now the funding agency that will administer the transportation funds for this project.

On March 22, 2018, the Alameda CTC approved the request from the City of Union City to be the Project Sponsor for the remaining phases of the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project and to update the project description eligible for the remaining commitment from the 1986 Measure B Transportation Expenditure Plan to reflect the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project.
376 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.2
City Council Staff Report Page 3 of 6 April 28, 2026
On September 14, 2018, the City of Union City received from Alameda CTC the executed I-880 to SR 238 (Mission Boulevard) East-West Connector Project Funding Agreement (“PFA”) No. A18-0046, in the amount of $2,500,000, identifying Union City to be the Project Sponsor for the Final Design and Construction, and the Lead Agency for CEQA documentation, which included revising the design to include transit, bike, and pedestrian improvements, evaluating the need for a traffic study update, and determining if the 2009 Final EIR was sufficient for project revisions. The City completed all of these tasks.

On February 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5444-19, which authorized renaming the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project to the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project. To better manage the project, the City divided the project into usable segments or phases that included:
• Phase (Segment) 1: 7th Street Connection (7th Street to Mission Boulevard), • Phase (Segment) 2: Gateway Connection (Old Alameda Creek to Alvarado-Niles Road),
• Phase (Segment) 3: 11th Street Connection (11th Street to 7th Street), • Phase (Segment) 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection & Grade Separations (BART and Oakland Subdivision), and
• Phase (Segment) 5: Paseo Padre Parkway & Bike Trail Connection (Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont to Old Alameda Creek in Union City).

The Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04, is funded with 1986 Measure B funds, 2014 Measure BB funds, and other transportation funds administered by Alameda CTC and Regional Measure 3 (“RM3”) Dumbarton Corridor Improvement Program funds administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”).

Mark Thomas and Company, Inc, the Engineering Design Consultant, has completed engineering design for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 1 (65% Plans), Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 2 (95% Plans), Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 3 (35% Plans), and Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 4 (35% Plans). The design work has been sufficient to determine the environmental impacts on wetlands, riparian areas, species, and other environmental resources. ICF, the Environmental Consultant for the past several years, has prepared the required technical studies and coordinated with the regulatory agencies for the permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”) for water quality certification and discharge into Old Alameda Creek; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for wetlands; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services for biological resources impacts; California Department of Fish and Wildlife for stream alteration impacts to Line M Channel and Old Alameda Creek/other biological resources impacts; and the State Historic Preservation Office for cultural resources impacts.

The consultant team and City staff held several technical meetings from 2022 to 2025 with the San Francisco Bay RWQCB, Alameda County Water District (“ACWD”), and the City of Fremont to review and evaluate options for on-site mitigation improvements within Old Alameda Creek. The onsite mitigation options within Old Alameda Creek became challenging, with expected high costs to construct creek improvements and to fund a 10- year mitigation monitoring maintenance program, in addition to maintenance agreements with both ACWD and the city of Fremont. The consultant team and City staff concluded that the off-site environmental mitigation option is likely more feasible and realistic. 377 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.2
City Council Staff Report Page 4 of 6 April 28, 2026
On March 25, 2025, the consultant team and City staff held a technical meeting with San Francisco Bay RWQCB staff to provide an update on on-site mitigation options, project mitigation impact calculations, and off-site mitigation concepts (see Exhibit A for the Meeting Presentation). At the same meeting with the RWQCB staff, the identified off-site mitigation locations were the Manning Ranch (part of Eagle Ridge Ranch) and the Livermore Valley Preserve. Olberding Environmental, Inc., manages these areas.

On April 2, 2025, the consultant team and City staff met with Olberding Environmental, Inc., to discuss the project's off-site mitigation needs and to confirm whether an available area within the Manning Ranch or Livermore Valley preserve was available for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04. At the same meeting, Olberding Environmental, Inc., staff noted that the RWQCB staff had recently visited the mitigation site to observe habitat growth and the site's natural development.

On July 25, 2025, the City entered into a Consulting Services Agreement with Olberding Environmental, Inc., a biological consulting firm, in the amount of $74,500, to begin the design of an initial conceptual Habitat Management and Mitigation Plan (“HMMP”) for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04.

Olberding Environmental, Inc., coordinated with Rocky Ridge, LLC, the owner and developer of the unique, high-value mitigation site known as Manning Ranch, and confirmed that the property is available for offsite mitigation requirements for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04. Alameda CTC also used the Manning Ranch site for off-site mitigation of environmental impacts related to the recently completed I-580 Widening Project in Livermore and Pleasanton.

The consultant team, including Olberding Environmental, Inc., continued to coordinate with regulatory agencies and meet with them to prepare and design the initial conceptual HMMP for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04, dated September 2025, for their review and comments.

On October 14, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-136 authorizing the City Manager to execute First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Olberding Environmental, Inc., in the amount of $200,000, for a total contract amount of $274,500, for the Design of the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (“HMMP”) for Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18-04. The consultant team coordinated the review comments from the regulatory agencies and prepared an updated Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP), dated November 2025, and submitted the HMMP with the initial permit applications to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife in early 2026.

The consultant team has received comments from the permitting agencies and has updated the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, dated April 2026 (see Exhibit B). The HMMP will be resubmitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
378 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.2
City Council Staff Report Page 5 of 6 April 28, 2026

DISCUSSION
The Environmental Consultant has prepared the First Addendum to the certified East West Connector Project 2009 Final EIR for the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases (Segments) 1-4 in Union City, dated April 2026. The First Addendum describes and analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed changes to Phases 1-4 of the Quarry Lake Parkway Project as compared to the project and impacts analyzed in the 2009 Final EIR to determine if future environmental review was required under the CEQA subsequent review standards outlined in Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162.

Section 3.3, Design Changes Since the EWC EIR (referred to herein as the 2009 Final EIR) in the First Addendum, identifies the project changes in detail. Below is a summary of these changes related to this proposed action. The complete description in the First Addendum of all the proposed changes to the project analyzed in the 2009 Final EIR is incorporated herein by reference.

Mitigation for Waters/Wetlands/Riparian Effects
The planned mitigation area identified in the EWC EIR was located within the project limits, as onsite mitigation, in the area of Old Alameda Creek adjacent to Quarry Lakes Drive. When the design and cost for onsite mitigation were determined to be unfeasible, offsite mitigation sites were evaluated, with the Eagle Ridge East and Manning Ranch sites in Livermore, as identified in the Habitat Mitigation & Monitoring Plan (“HMMP”) dated April 2026, which the regulatory agencies have conditionally approved.

Rocky Ridge, LLC, the owner and developer of the Manning Ranch Mitigation Site, will provide Mitigation Values to the City of Union City and will prepare and process the HMMP for approval to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements.

The City Council is considering the Addendum in connection with the proposed approval of the work relating to the new proposed off-site mitigation for biological impacts under this Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC and the City of Union City.

On February 10, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-017, accepting $16,728,000 from the Regional Measure 3 Dumbarton Corridor Improvements Program of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, increasing the revenue projections in the Capital Projects Grants Fund by $16,728,000, and appropriating $16,728,000 to the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18, with $13,000,000 programmed for the environmental mitigation.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of the Mitigation Values for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4, City Project No. 18-04, between Rocky Ridge, LLC, and the City of Union City, in the amount of $11,050,000, will be funded with FY 2025-2026 Capital Project Grants (Account Number 410-91804-57115).
379 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.2
City Council Staff Report Page 6 of 6 April 28, 2026

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC for Purchase and Sale of the Mitigation Values in the amount of $11,050,000, for the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, Phases 1- 4, City Project No. 18-04 - CEQA review - First Addendum to the East-West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report – April 2026.

Prepared by: Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
Submitted by: Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
Attachments

1. Attachment 1 – Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of Mitigation Values

2. Attachment 2 – Environmental Off-Site Mitigation (Location Exhibit)

3. Draft Resolution

4. Exhibit A – RWQCB Mitigation Meeting 03.25.25

5. Exhibit B – Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan – April 2026

6. Exhibit C – Manning Ranch Mitigation Site
380 of 556
REVISED Dated April 22, 2026
Confidential

AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE OF MITIGATION VALUES
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1 through 4
Union City, Alameda County, California
City Project No. 18-04
This Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Mitigation Values (“Agreement”), dated for reference purposes only as of May 8, 2026, is entered into by and between Rocky Ridge, LLC, a California limited liability company (“Seller”) and City of Union City (“Project Proponent”). Seller and Project Proponent are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” Recitals
A. Project. Project Proponent is seeking to implement a project in Alameda County commonly referred to as the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project Phases 1 through 4 City Project No. 18-04 (“Project”) from Old Alameda Creek to Mission Boulevard (State Route 238).

B. Project Approvals. Project Proponent has obtained, or expects to obtain, approvals for the Project (collectively, the “Project Approval”) from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (collectively, the “Permitting Agencies”)
C. Project Impacts. Project Proponent expects that the Project Approvals will identify permanent impacts that the Project will have on certain resources, species, and/or habitat, including impacts to: (i) seasonal wetland habitat; (ii) channel habitat; (iii) riparian habitat; and (iv) upland habitat for California tiger salamander and California red-legged frog (collectively, the “Project Impacts”).

D. Compensatory Mitigation Requirements. Project Proponent expects that, in connection with issuance of the Project Approvals by the Permitting Agencies, certain compensatory mitigation requirements will be imposed on the Project with respect to Project Impacts all as more particularly described in the anticipated Project Approvals (the “Compensatory Mitigation Requirements”).

E. Compensation for Project Impacts. Project Proponent desires to compensate for the Project Impacts by purchasing sufficient Mitigation Values (as hereinafter defined) to satisfy the Compensatory Mitigation requirements. Accordingly, Project Proponent wishes to acquire at certain Mitigation Values from Seller as described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Mitigation Values”). The Parties acknowledge Seller is not responsible for fulfilling any of Project Proponent’s mitigation obligations other than those expressly purchased by Project Proponent as provided in this Agreement.
381 of 556
2 F. Mitigation Site. Seller owns land located in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California (the “Mitigation Properties”). The Mitigation Values provided in this Agreement will be provided by Seller (a) partially from the Eagle Ridge Preserve East or “Manning Ranch” owned by Seller and located on all or a portion of Assessor’s Parcel Number 903-0002-001-01 (the “Manning Ranch Mitigation Site”); and (b) partially from other site(s) to be provided by Seller (the “Secondary Mitigation Site,” and together with the Manning Ranch Mitigation Site, collectively, the “Mitigation Site”). The Manning Ranch Mitigation Site is more particularly described in attached Exhibit B.

G. HMMP. Seller, in coordination with Project Proponent, intends to prepare and process for approval by the Permitting Agencies, a Habitat Management and Mitigation Plan (“HMMP”), that will address how the habitats at the Mitigation Site will be preserved and managed in perpetuity to meet the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements. The HMMP will include, among other things, generalized mapping of habitats, a long-term management plan, monitoring requirements, and a description and calculation of a long-term funding mechanism to allow for the management of the habitat at the Mitigation Site. In addition, Seller, in coordination with Project Proponent, intends to prepare and process for approval by the Permitting Agencies, a Conservation Easement (as hereinafter defined) that will encumber applicable portions of the Manning Ranch Mitigation Site and, at Seller’s discretion, may also encumber other lands controlled by Rocky Ridge (“Seller’s Remaining Land”).

H. Creation of Mitigation Values. Implementation of the HMMP is intended to create Mitigation Values that will benefit Project Proponent by enabling Project Proponent to meet its Compensatory Mitigation Requirements.

I. Purchase of Mitigation Values. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Project Proponent wishes to purchase the Mitigation Values at the Mitigation Site, for the purpose of satisfying the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and the mutual covenants contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

Agreement

1. Effective Date. For the purposes of this Agreement, the date on which the last Party executes this Agreement and delivers it to the other Party shall be referred to herein as the “Effective Date.”

2. Sale of Mitigation Values. Pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Seller agrees to sell for the benefit of Project Proponent and Project Proponent agrees to purchase from Seller, the Mitigation Values at the Mitigation Site.

Project Proponent understands and agrees that it is acquiring the Mitigation Values, subject to Seller’s reservation of rights to existing uses of the Mitigation Site and Seller’s Remaining Land, so long as such uses do not conflict with the requirements of the HMMP.

3. Purchase Price. The purchase price for the Mitigation Values shall be Eleven Million Fifty Thousand Dollars ($11,050,000), as described on attached Exhibit 382 of 556
3 A, subject to adjustment pursuant to Sections 8(a) and 8(d) below (collectively, the “Purchase Price).

4. Payment of Purchase Price.
(a) Payment by Purchaser to Seller. City of Union City is the lead agency responsible for design and construction of Quarry Lakes Parkway – Phases 1 through 4 and the project is funded with transportation grant funds from Alameda County Transportation Commission (“Alameda CTC”) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”).
(i) Initial Deposit. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, Project Proponent shall pay to Seller, the amount of One Million One Hundred Five Thousand Dollars ($1,105,000) (i.e., ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, referred to herein as the “Initial Deposit”), in immediately available funds. The Initial Deposit shall thereafter be nonrefundable to Project Proponent and deemed fully earned by Seller, except as provided in Section 11 below.
(ii) Draft HMMP Approval Deposit. Within thirty (30) days after Project Proponent’s approval of the Draft HMMP (as set forth in Section 8(a) of this Agreement) Project Proponent shall pay to Seller the additional sum in the amount of twenty-five percent (25%) of the Purchase Price, referred to herein as the “Draft HMMP Approval Deposit,” subject to payment approval per Section 4. The Draft HMMP Deposit shall thereafter be nonrefundable to Project Proponent and deemed fully earned by Seller, except as provided in Section 8(b) or 11 below.
(iii) Final HMMP Approval Deposit. Within thirty (30) days after approval of the Final HMMP by the Permitting Agencies as demonstrated in written correspondence or inclusion into Project Proponent’s permit approval (as set forth in Section 8(a) of this Agreement), Project Proponent shall pay to Seller the additional sum in the amount of twenty-five percent (25%) of the Purchase Price, referred to herein as the “Final HMMP Approval Deposit,” subject to payment approval per Section 4. The Final HMMP Deposit shall thereafter be nonrefundable to Project Proponent and deemed fully earned by Seller, except as provided in Section 11 below. (b) Application Progress Deposits. The Progress Deposits and, if applicable, any Extension Deposits (as defined below), shall be applied to the Purchase Price at the Closing (as hereinafter defined).
(c) Balance of Purchase Price. On or before the Closing, the balance of the Purchase Price shall be paid by Project Proponent to Seller subject to payment approval per Section 4.

5. Closing.
(a) Closing. The term “Closing” or the “Closing Date” shall mean the date that the Mitigation Values are sold by Seller to Project Proponent in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The Closing Date shall occur on a date 383 of 556
4 designated by Seller in at least thirty (30) days’ advanced written notice to Purchaser, after approval of the Final HMMP by the Permitting Agencies, but in no event later than December 1, 2026 (the “Outside Closing Date”). If the Project Approvals have not been issued by the Permitting Agencies by the Closing Date, then the following alternative courses of action shall be available:
(i) Project Proponent shall have the right to extend the Closing Date for one period of twelve (12) months. Project Proponent shall exercise such extension by giving notice to Seller at least sixty (60) days prior to the then-current Closing Date and concurrently paying to Seller an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the Purchase Price, referred to herein the “Extension Deposit,” in immediately available funds, and the Extension Deposit shall thereafter be nonrefundable and be deemed fully earned by Seller, except as provided in Section 11 below; or (ii) Project proponent shall have the right to pay to Seller the balance of the Purchase Price in immediately available funds and any other documents or money required by Project Proponent pursuant to Section 6(b), and the Parties will diligently seek the required approvals so that the Closing can occur no later than the Outside Closing Date; or
(iii) Project Proponent shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, in which event the Parties shall thereafter have no further rights, duties or obligations under this Agreement and in that event, Seller shall retain the Initial Deposit and the Progress Deposits, which shall be deemed fully earned by Seller.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Seller and Purchaser mutually agree, each in their sole and absolute discretion, to proceed with multiple phased Closings for partial transfers of the Mitigation Rights (as opposed to a single Closing for all of the Mitigation Rights), then any such arrangement shall be addressed and memorialized in an amendment to this Agreement, including any adjustment to the Purchase Price that may be agreed to as a result of such phasing.

6. Closing Documents.
(a) Deposits By Seller. At the Closing, Seller shall undertake the following actions:
(i) Bill of Sale. Seller shall deliver to Project Proponent a Bill of Sale in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by this reference (the “Bill of Sale”), executed by Seller, evidencing the sale of the Mitigation Values to Project Proponent.
(ii) Conservation Easement. If the Conservation Easement (defined in Section 8(a) below) has not already been recorded against the Mitigation Site prior to the Closing, Seller shall cause the Conservation Easement based on direct approval to record by CDFW, to be executed and acknowledged by the parties thereto, and recorded in the Official Records of Alameda County, California, at the Closing. 384 of 556
5 (iii) Miscellaneous. Seller shall deliver such other documents and instructions as may be reasonably required in order to consummate the Closing in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
(b) Deposits By Project Proponent. At the Closing, Project Proponent shall undertake the following actions:
(i) Balance of Purchase Price. Project Proponent shall pay to Seller the balance of the Purchase Price (as adjusted pursuant to Sections 8(a) and 8(d)), including any increase in the amount of any required endowment in excess of $450,000 pursuant to Section 8(d) below), subject to payment approval per Section 4a, and all Closing costs and expenses that are required to be paid by Project Proponent pursuant to Section 7 of this Agreement.
(ii) Miscellaneous. Project Proponent shall deliver such other documents and instructions as may be reasonably required to consummate the Closing in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.

7. Costs and Expenses. All fees and costs associated with the Closing shall be borne by Project Proponent. Project Proponent and Seller shall each pay their own legal and professional fees and fees of other consultants engaged by them.

8. Seller’s Pre-Closing Obligations.
(a) HMMP. Seller, in coordination with Project Proponent, shall prepare a draft HMMP for the Mitigation Site and submit it to Project Proponent for Project Proponent’s review and approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Project Proponent shall have ten (10) days in which to review and approve the draft HMMP. Project Proponent’s failure to provide Seller written notice of Project Proponent’s disapproval of the draft HMMP within such ten (10)-day period, shall be deemed to constitute Project Proponent’s approval of the draft HMMP. In the event that Project Proponent disapproves the draft HMMP, Project Proponent and Seller shall use their good faith, commercially reasonable efforts to promptly resolve Project Proponent’s reasonable concerns. If Project Proponent and Seller are unable to resolve Project Proponent’s reasonable concerns regarding the draft HMMP, within thirty (30) days, then either Party may terminate this Agreement by providing written notice to the other Party, in which event the Parties shall have no further rights, duties or obligations under this Agreement and in that event, Seller shall retain the Initial Deposit, the Progress Deposits, and any paid Extension Deposit. The HMMP that is approved by Project Proponent pursuant to the foregoing provisions is referred to herein as the “Draft HMMP.” Upon obtaining such approval from Project Proponent, Seller shall process the Draft HMMP with the Permitting Agencies and shall use its good faith, commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the Permitting Agencies’ approval of the Draft HMMP, as soon as reasonably practicable. Project Proponent shall reasonably support Seller’s efforts to obtain approval of the Draft HMMP and shall have the right to participate in discussions with the Permitting Agencies regarding the Draft HMMP. The HMMP that is actually approved by the Permitting Agencies is referred to herein as the “Final HMMP.” All conditions imposed 385 of 556
6 by the Permitting Agencies (and associated costs to comply with such conditions) on Seller under the Final HMMP, shall be subject to Seller’s approval, which may be given or withheld in Seller’s sole and absolute discretion. Should conditions on the Final HMMP increase any costs compared to the anticipated costs of implementing the Draft HMMP, Seller reserves the right to increase the Purchase Price accordingly on a dollar-for-dollar basis (in which event this Agreement shall be deemed automatically amended to account for the same) and Project Proponent agrees to such increase. Seller makes no representations or warranties concerning whether the Draft HMMP will be approved by the Permitting Agencies or concerning the timing for such approval. In no event shall refusal by the Permitting Agencies to approve the Draft HMMP by the Outside Closing Date, or at all, constitute a default by Seller or Project Proponent under this Agreement.

The HMMP shall provide for preparation of one or more conservation easements (collectively, the “Conservation Easement”) for the Mitigation Site and, at Seller’s election, any Seller’s Remaining Land, which conforms to legal requirements imposed by the Permitting Agencies. Seller shall use its good faith, commercially reasonable efforts to obtain approval by the Permitting Agencies of the Conservation Easement as soon as reasonably practicable and in conjunction with obtaining approval by the Permitting Agencies of the Draft HMMP. Seller shall cause the Conservation Easement to be recorded in the Official Records of Alameda County, California, on or before the Closing and concurrently with funding of the endowment. The terms and conditions of the Conservation Easement shall be subject to Seller’s approval, which may be given or withheld in Seller’s sole and absolute discretion. (b) Seller’s Disapproval of Final HMMP. In the event that the conditions imposed by the Permitting Agencies in connection with its/their approval of the Final HMMP are not acceptable to Seller (which approval may be given or withheld in Seller’s sole and absolute discretion), and Seller and Project Proponent are unable to resolve Seller’s concerns to the satisfaction of Seller, in its sole and absolute discretion, or Seller is otherwise not able to obtain approval of the Final HMMP, then Seller shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, and the Parties shall thereafter have no further rights, duties or obligations under this Agreement and in that event, Seller shall retain the Initial Deposit and any paid Extension Deposit, and Seller shall return the Draft HMMP Approval Deposit to Purchaser.
(c) Protection and Habitat Improvement. In the event that the Closing occurs, Seller shall at its cost and expense implement all protection and habitat conservation activities and all long-term maintenance, monitoring and other management activities, as required in the Final HMMP. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, Project Proponent shall post all financial assurances required by the Permitting Agencies in connection with its/their approval of the Final HMMP. (d) Endowment. Seller shall fully fund any and all endowments required by the Permitting Agencies to be funded in connection with the recordation of the Conservation Easement and for the monitoring and maintenance of the Mitigation Site in accordance with the requirements of the Final HMMP. The cost of the endowment is estimated at $450,000, which is distributed in Items 1-4 in Exhibit A. However, in the event 386 of 556
7 that the total endowment exceeds $450,000 the Purchase Price shall be increased on a dollar-for-dollar basis for each dollar that the total endowment exceeds $450,000 subject to payment approval per Section 4a. Item 5. Endowment Increase in amount of $150,000 is included in Exhibit A to cover such cost increase if needed. In the event that the total endowment is less than $450,000 the Purchase Price shall be decreased on a dollar-fordollar basis for each dollar that the total endowment is less than $450,000.

9. Limitation of Obligations; Project Approvals.
(a) Limitation of Obligations. Project Proponent’s obligations shall be limited to the payments and other undertakings expressly provided in this Agreement.

Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, Project Proponent shall have no obligation by reason of the taking the benefit of the Mitigation Site and the Mitigation Values, to support, pay for, monitor, report on, sustain, continue in perpetuity or otherwise be obligated or liable for the success or continued expense, monitoring, management or maintenance in perpetuity of the Mitigation Site.
(b) Limitation of Rights to Mitigation Site. Nothing in this Agreement shall result in Project Proponent having any right, title or interest in the Mitigation Site.

Project Proponent’s sole right shall be to have the Mitigation Values serve as the required mitigation for the Project approved by the Permitting Agencies, provided that Project Proponent satisfies all of its obligations under this Agreement. Project Proponent acknowledges and agrees that Seller intends to reserve for itself and/or to allocate for use by one or more third parties, those mitigation values associated with the Mitigation Site and Seller’s Remaining Property which do not conflict with the Final HMMP. In no event shall Project Proponent have any right, title or interest in any mitigation values other than the Mitigation Values that are created on the Mitigation Site. Further without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Seller reserves the right to sell mitigation values in and around the Mitigation Site on Seller’s Remaining Land.
(c) Project Approvals. Project Proponent shall be solely responsible to the Permitting Agencies for obtaining the approval to use the Mitigation Values to meet the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements. In that regard, Seller has made and makes no representation, warranty or guaranty that the Permitting Agencies will approve the Mitigation Site as meeting the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements or that the Mitigation Values will be sufficient to fully mitigate the Project Impacts.

The Parties expressly agree that any mitigation or activities of Project Proponent not covered by this Agreement and any other mitigation set forth in the Project Approvals, other Project permits or any Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Project approved by any regulatory agency, remain solely and entirely Project Proponent’s responsibility. The Parties further agree that Seller shall not be liable, in law or equity, if the Mitigation Values are determined in any way, by any person or agency, to be insufficient for mitigation or regulatory compliance purposes under applicable statutes, laws and regulations. If any court or regulatory agency later determines that the Mitigation Values are insufficient to meet the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements, Project Proponent shall be entirely responsible for satisfying any and all further obligations that 387 of 556
8 may be imposed upon such determination. In that event, no responsibility or liability shall accrue to Seller.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, Seller shall reasonably cooperate with Project Proponent’s efforts to obtain approval by the Permitting Agencies of the use of the Mitigation Values to meet the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements by providing information and executing documents reasonably required by the Permitting Agencies.

Other than Seller’s obligations in Section 8 above, Seller shall not be obligated to bear any third-party cost or to incur any additional liability in connection with such cooperation. (d) Other Project Impacts. Project Proponent acknowledges and agrees that:
(i) Seller is only providing the Mitigation Values required to satisfy the Compensatory Mitigation Requirements;
(ii) The Mitigation Values described in this Agreement are limited to the Mitigation Site.
(iii) The Mitigation Values described in this Agreement are not intended to offset the Project’s impacts to any type of species or habitat not described herein; and
(iv) Project Proponent shall be solely responsible for mitigating the Project’s impacts to such other types of species and habitat.

10. Default by Project Proponent; Liquidated Damages. PROJECT

PROPONENT RECOGNIZES THAT THE MITIGATION VALUES WILL BE REMOVED

BY SELLER FROM THE MARKET DURING THE TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT, AND

THAT IF THE CLOSING DOES NOT OCCUR BECAUSE OF PROJECT
PROPONENT’S DEFAULT, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT AND IMPRACTICAL TO ASCERTAIN THE EXTENT OF THE DETRIMENT TO SELLER.

THE PARTIES HAVE DETERMINED AND AGREED THAT THE ACTUAL AMOUNT OF

DAMAGES THAT WOULD BE SUFFERED BY SELLER AS A RESULT OF ANY SUCH

DEFAULT IS DIFFICULT OR IMPRACTICABLE TO DETERMINE AS OF THE DATE

OF THIS AGREEMENT AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE INITIAL DEPOSIT, THE

PROGRESS DEPOSITS, AND ANY PAID EXTENSION DEPOSIT IS A REASONABLE ESTIMATE OF THE AMOUNT OF SUCH DAMAGES. FOR THESE REASONS, THE

PARTIES AGREE THAT, IF THE CLOSING DOES NOT OCCUR BECAUSE OF PROJECT PROPONENT’S DEFAULT, THAT AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO THE INITIAL

DEPOSIT, THE PROGRESS DEPOSITS, AND ANY PAID EXTENSION DEPOSIT SHALL BE RETAINED BY SELLER AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. UPON ANY SUCH

BREACH OR DEFAULT BY PROJECT PROPONENT HEREUNDER, THIS

AGREEMENT SHALL BE TERMINATED AND NEITHER PARTY SHALL HAVE ANY

FURTHER RIGHTS OR OBLIGATIONS HEREUNDER, EACH TO THE OTHER, EXCEPT FOR THE RIGHT OF SELLER TO RETAIN SUCH LIQUIDATED DAMAGES;

PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL IN ANY 388 of 556
9 MANNER LIMIT THE ATTORNEYS’ FEES RECOVERABLE PURSUANT TO THIS AGREEMENT. DELIVERY TO AND RETENTION OF THE INITIAL DEPOSIT, THE

PROGRESS DEPOSITS, AND ANY PAID EXTENSION DEPOSIT SHALL BE SELLER’S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDY AGAINST PROJECT PROPONENT, IN

THE EVENT OF A DEFAULT OR BREACH BY PROJECT PROPONENT RESULTING

IN THE FAILURE TO CLOSE, AND SELLER WAIVES ANY AND ALL RIGHT TO SEEK

OTHER RIGHTS OR REMEDIES AGAINST PROJECT PROPONENT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. THE PAYMENT AND

RETENTION OF SUCH AMOUNT AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES IS NOT INTENDED AS

A FORFEITURE OR PENALTY WITHIN THE MEANING OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTIONS 3275 OR 3369, BUT IS INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES TO SELLER PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTIONS 1671, 1676 AND 1677. SELLER HEREBY WAIVES THE PROVISIONS OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 3389.

Seller Project Proponent

11. Default by Seller. In the event the Closing does not occur solely due to a material default by Seller, and provided that Seller fails to cure such default a reasonable period of time after Project Proponent’s delivery of written notice to Seller stating the nature of the default, Project Proponent sole and exclusive remedy shall be to terminate this agreement and recover the Initial Deposit, the Progress Deposits and all paid Extension Deposits from Seller.

12. Waiver of Damages. Each Party waives all claims against each other Party hereto, and all of their respective affiliates, contractors and agents, together with all those persons acting through or on behalf of any and all such parties, for special or punitive damages of any kind allegedly suffered by such Party or any related parties.

13. Limitation of Liability. No officer, director, shareholder, manager, member or other partner of either Party shall have any personal liability with respect to this Agreement whatsoever.

14. Limitations on Assignment; Transfer. The Mitigation Values shall be nontransferable and non-assignable. The Mitigation Values shall not be used as mitigation for any project site or purpose other than the Project.

15. Miscellaneous Provisions.
(a) Ownership of Documents. All work papers, drawings, internal memoranda of any kind, photographs, and any written or graphic material, however produced, prepared by Seller in connection with its performance of services hereunder shall be, and shall remain after termination of this Agreement, the property of Seller, and may be used by Seller for any purpose whatsoever. All copies of the documents produced for this project shall be provided to Purchaser in an electronic format. Seller agrees to return to Project Proponent upon termination of this Agreement all documents, drawings, photographs and other written or graphic material, however produced, received from 389 of 556
10 Project Proponent and used by Seller in the performance of its services hereunder, except for copies of Conceptual, Draft, and Final Mitigation Plan submitted to the agencies. (b) Notices. All notices, demands, consents, requests or other communications required to or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing, shall be given only in accordance with the provisions of this Section, shall be addressed to the Parties in the manner set forth below, and shall be conclusively deemed to have been properly delivered: (i) upon receipt or rejection, when hand delivered during normal business hours (provided that notices which are hand delivered shall not be effective unless the sending Party obtains evidence that the notice has been received); (ii) upon receipt when sent electronically prior to 5:00 p.m. on a given business day (otherwise such receipt is deemed as of the following business day) to the e-mail address set forth below (provided, however, that notices given electronically shall not be effective unless the notice has also been deposited in an authorized receptacle of the United States Postal Service as first-class, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, with a return receipt requested (provided that the sender has in its possession the return receipt to prove actual delivery); (iii) upon the day of delivery or rejection on the day of receipt or rejection, if the notice has been deposited in an authorized receptacle of the United States Postal Service as first-class, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, with a return receipt requested (provided that the sender has in its possession the return receipt to prove actual delivery); or (iv) one (1) Business Day after the notice has been deposited with either FedEx or United Parcel Service to be delivered by overnight delivery (provided that the sending Party receives a confirmation of actual delivery from the courier). The addresses of the Parties to receive notices are as follows:

To Seller: Rocky Ridge, LLC
193 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Attention: Jeff Olberding
Email: [email protected]
To Project Proponent: City of Union City
Marilou R. Ayupan, PE
Public Works Director
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587
Email: [email protected]
Any Party may change its address for purposes of this section by giving the other Party written notice of the new address in the manner set forth above. (c) Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or 390 of 556
11 unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each such term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid, and shall be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. (d) Waivers. No waiver of any breach of any covenant or provision herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach thereof, or of any other covenant or provision herein contained. No extension of time for performance of any obligation or act shall be deemed an extension of time for performance of any other obligation or act except those of the waiving Party, which shall be extended by a period of time equal to the period of the delay. (e) Successors and Assigns. Subject to the restrictions on assignment set forth herein, this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the permitted successors and assigns of the Parties hereto. (f) Attorneys’ Fees. In the event any of the Parties shall commence legal proceedings for the purpose of enforcing any provision or condition hereof, or by reason of any breach arising under the provisions hereof, then the successful Party in such proceeding shall be entitled to court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. (g) Entire Agreement. This Agreement (including all Exhibits attached hereto) is the final expression of, and contains the entire agreement between, the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior understandings with respect thereto. This Agreement may not be modified, changed, supplemented, superseded, canceled or terminated, nor may any obligations hereunder be waived, except by written instrument signed by the Party to be charged or by its agent duly authorized in writing or as otherwise expressly permitted herein. The Parties do not intend to confer any benefit hereunder on any person, firm or corporation other than the Parties hereto and lawful assignees.
(h) Time of Essence. Seller and Project Proponent hereby acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition, obligation and provision under this Agreement and that failure to timely perform any of the terms, conditions, obligations or provisions hereof by either Party shall constitute a material breach of and a non-curable (but waivable) default under this Agreement by the Party so failing to perform.
(i) Relationship of Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed by the Parties to create the relationship of principal and agent, a partnership, joint venture or any other association between Project Proponent and Seller, except as provided in this Agreement.
(j) Construction. Headings at the beginning of each paragraph and subparagraph are solely for the convenience of the Parties and are not a part of the Agreement. Whenever required by the context of this Agreement, the singular shall include the plural, and the masculine shall include the feminine and vice versa. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the Parties, but rather as if both Parties had prepared the same. Unless otherwise indicated, all 391 of 556
12 references to paragraphs, sections, subparagraphs and subsections are to this Agreement.
(k) Recitals/Exhibits. The Recitals set forth in this Agreement and the exhibits referenced herein are incorporated herein by this reference. (l) Choice of Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any suit, action or proceeding brought under the scope of this Agreement shall be brought and maintained to the extent allowed by law in the Superior Court of the County of Alameda, California. (m) Counterpart Originals, Facsimile and Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original, but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Facsimile or electronic signatures may be used in place of original signatures on this Agreement. The Parties intend to be bound by the signatures on any facsimile or electronic document and hereby waive any defenses to the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement based on the use of a facsimile or electronic signature; provided, however, that the Parties hereby agree to execute and provide to each other original signatures, upon request made by either Party to the other. (n) Representation by Counsel. Notwithstanding any rule or maxim of construction to the contrary, any ambiguity or uncertainty shall not be construed against either Project Proponent or Seller based upon authorship of any of the provisions hereof.

Project Proponent and Seller each hereby warrant, represent and certify to the other as follows: (i) that the contents of this Agreement have been completely and carefully read by the representing Party and counsel for the representing Party; (ii) that the representing Party has been separately represented by counsel and the representing Party is satisfied with such representation; (iii) that the representing Party’s counsel has advised the representing Party of, and the representing Party fully understands, the legal consequences of this Agreement; and (iv) that no other person (whether a Party to this Agreement or not) has made any threats, promises or representations of any kind whatsoever to induce the execution hereof, other than the performance of the terms and provisions hereof.
[SIGNATURES FOLLOW]
392 of 556
13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the dates set forth below.

SELLER:

Rocky Ridge, LLC,
a California limited liability company
By:

Name: Jeff Olberding
Its: Managing Partner
Date: April 22, 2026

PROJECT PROPONENT
City of Union City
By:

Name: Joan Malloy
Its: City Manager
Date:

Attest:

By:
_________________________________
Thai Nam N. Pham, City Clerk
Approved as to Form
By:
_________________________________
Kristopher J. Kokotaylo, City Attorney
393 of 556
Exhibit A-1
Exhibit A

MITIGATION VALUES TO BE ACQUIRED BY PROJECT PROPONENT

AND PRICING
394 of 556
Exhibit A-2

EXHBIT A

COST OF MITIGATION
ITEM
No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL
1 SEASONAL WETLAND AC
(Acre) 3.4 $1,750,000 $5,950,000
2 CHANNEL RESTORATION
(OLD ALAMEDA CREEK/LINE

M CHANNEL)
LF
(Linear
Feet)
1,800 $1,800
$3,240,000
3 RIPARIAN (OLD ALAMEDA

CREEK/LINE M CHANNEL)
AC
(Acre) 1.0 $900,000 $900,000
4 HABITAT PRESERVATION
(UPLAND)
AC
(Acre) 18 $45,000 $810,000
5 ENDOWMENT INCREASE - - - $150,000
TOTAL= $11,050,000
395 of 556
Exhibit B-1
Exhibit B

DESCRIPTION OF MITIGATION SITE
(To Be Attached)
396 of 556
Proposed
Easement
Area 1
Proposed
Easement
Area 2
Proposed
Easement
Area 3
Proposed
Easement
Area 4
Proposed
Easement
Area 5
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 6: Off-Site Mitigation Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
Existing Cayetano Creek Corridor
Quarry Lakes Proposed Mitigation
Annual Grassland Preservation (18.00 ac)
Drainage Creation (0.20 ac, 1,800 lf)
Riparian Creation (1.00 ac)
Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement (0.38 ac) Seasonal Wetland Creation (3.40 ac)
Upland Swale Preservation (0.04 ac)
Ponded Portion of Seasonal Wetland Creation
Map Revision Date: 3/26/2026
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig6_OffSiteMitigation_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03262026.mxd 0 800 1,600
Feet
I Scale: 1:9,600 1 in = 800 feet
Print at 8.5" x 11"
397 of 556
Exhibit C-1
Exhibit C
BILL OF SALE (Subject to change. To be updated)
In consideration of receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Rocky Ridge, LLC a California limited liability company (“Seller”), does hereby bargain, sell and transfer to Union City (“Project Proponent”), the following mitigation values (“Mitigation Values”):

Habitat Type Acreage of Allocated
Mitigation
Total Price
Compensatory Mitigation
Values for Seasonal
Wetland Habitat

3.4 acres $ 5,950,000
Compensatory Mitigation
Values for Channel
Habitat
1,800 linear feet $3,240,000
Compensatory Mitigation
Values for Riparian
Habitat

1.0 acres $900,000
Compensatory Mitigation
Values for Upland
Species Habitat
18 acres $ 810,000
Endowment Increase - $150,000
TOTAL: $ 11,050,000
Seller represents and warrants that it has good title to the Compensatory Mitigation Values, has good right to sell the same, and they are free and clear of all claims, liens, or encumbrances.
398 of 556
Exhibit C-2
Seller covenants and agrees with Project Proponent to warrant and defend the sale of the Compensatory Mitigation Values against all and every person and persons whomsoever lawfully claiming the same.

SELLER:

Rocky Ridge, LLC,
a California limited liability company
By:

Name:

Its:

Date:
399 of 556
11 Environmental Off-Site Mitigation
(Construction& Permits)
Line M
• Sites Approved by RWQCB (Regional
Water Quality Control Board)
• Meets Mitigation requirements for
Wetland, Riparian, Species and Waters
and other Alameda CTC projects
• Developers also want these sites
Proposed Location (Livermore)
1) Manning Ranch (part of Eagle Ridge)
2) Livermore Valley Preserve
Revised RM3 Request- Mitigation
Cost: $13 million
400 of 556

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT

WITH ROCKY RIDGE, LLC, FOR THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF THE MITIGATION VALUES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,050,000, FOR THE QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY PROJECT, PHASES 1-4, CITY PROJECT
NO. 18-04 – CEQA REVIEW – FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE EAST WEST CONNECTOR PROJECT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT –
APRIL 2026
WHEREAS, the Alameda County Transportation Authority (“ACTA”) in cooperation with the Cities of Fremont and Union City, had proposed the construction of the East West Connector Project, a 3.0-mile roadway that would provide east-west access between I880 and Mission Boulevard (“SR 238”) in southern Alameda County; and WHEREAS, the East West Connector (“EWC”) Project would widen existing roads (1.7 miles along Decoto Road and Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont) and construct a new roadway (1.3 miles from Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont to Mission Boulevard in Union City), and upon completion, provide a continuous bike and pedestrian corridor from I-880 to Mission Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, ACTA, as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines, prepared the Final Environmental Impact Report (“2009 Final EIR”) for the East West Connector Project (State Clearinghouse No. 200710278) in compliance with CEQA, to assess the potential environmental impacts, describe the alternatives, and the potential mitigation measures; and
WHEREAS, Section 3.3, Biological Resources, in the 2009 Final EIR addresses the environmental impacts of the project and potential mitigation areas; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2009, the ACTA Board certified the Final EIR, dated April 2009, for the East West Connector Project, which is located at https://www.alamedactc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/00703- 07_RevisedFEIR_V1_2009_Web.pdf; and
WHEREAS, on June 25, 2009, the ACTA Board considered related Board reports, documents presented by ACTA staff and the ACTA’s environmental consultants, including a Finding of Facts and the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the East West Connector Project, prepared in accordance with the CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines and adopted Resolution No 2009-004 (“ACTA Resolution”); and WHEREAS, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15096(h), the City of Union City is a Responsible Agency for the East West Connector Project and
WHEREAS, on July 14, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3838-09, making the findings as a Responsible Agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the East West Connector Project (Route 84, Option 2) and approving the project; and
401 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

WHEREAS, in July 2010, the Alameda County Transportation Commission (“Alameda CTC”) was created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (“ACCMA”) and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (“ACTIA”), formerly ACTA, to streamline operations, eliminate redundancies, and save taxpayers’ dollars. As a result of the merger, Alameda CTC can implement more cost-effective methods for planning, funding, and delivering programs and projects that benefit Alameda County residents and businesses; and
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2018, the Alameda CTC approved the request from the City of Union City to be the Project Sponsor for the remaining phases of the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project and to update the project description eligible for the remaining commitment from the 1986 Measure B Transportation Expenditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2018, the City of Union City received from Alameda CTC the executed I-880 to SR 238 (Mission Boulevard) East West Connector Project Funding Agreement (“PFA”) No. A18-0046, in the amount of $2,500,000, identifying Union City as the Project Sponsor for the Final Design and Construction, and the Lead Agency for CEQA documentation, which included revising the design to include transit, bikes, and pedestrian improvements, evaluating the need for a traffic study update, and determining if the 2009 Final EIR was sufficient for project revisions; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5444- 19, which authorized renaming the I-880 to Mission Boulevard/East West Connector Project to the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project; and
WHEREAS, to better manage the project, the City divided the project into usable segments or phases that included Phase (Segment) 1: 7th Street Connection (7th Street to Mission Boulevard), Phase (Segment) 2: Gateway Connection (Old Alameda Creek to Alvarado-Niles Road), Phase (Segment) 3: 11th Street Connection (11th Street to 7th Street), Phase (Segment) 4: Alvarado-Niles Connection & Grade Separations (BART and Oakland Subdivision) and Phase (Segment) 5: Paseo Padre Parkway & Bike Trail Connection (Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont to Old Alameda Creek in Union City); and WHEREAS, the Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04, is funded with 1986 Measure B funds, 2014 Measure BB funds, and other transportation funds administered by Alameda CTC and Regional Measure 3 (“RM3”) Dumbarton Corridor Improvement Program funds administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”); and
WHEREAS, Mark Thomas and Company, Inc, the City’s Engineering Design Consultant, has completed sufficient engineering design for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 1 (95% Plans), the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 2 (65% Plans), the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 3 (35% Plans) and Quary Lakes Parkway, Phase 4 (35% Plans) which were used to determine the areas of environmental impacts to wetlands, riparian, specifies and waters and other environmental resources; and WHEREAS, ICF, the City’s current Environmental Consultant, has prepared the required technical studies and coordinated with the regulatory agencies for the permits 402 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (“RWQCB”) for water quality certification for wetlands and discharge into Old Alameda Creek, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for wetlands, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services for biological resources impacts, California Department of Fish and Wildlife for stream alteration impacts to Line M Channel and Old Alameda Creek/other biological resources impact, and the State Historic Preservation Office for cultural resources impacts; and
WHEREAS, the consultant team and city staff held several technical meetings from 2022 to 2025 with the RWQCB, Alameda County Water District (“ACWD”), and the City of Fremont, reviewing and evaluating options for onsite mitigation improvements within Old Alameda Creek; and
WHEREAS, onsite mitigation options within Old Alameda Creek became challenging to implement due to permitting, high construction costs, 10-year maintenance and monitoring costs, and securing maintenance agreements with both ACWD and the City of Fremont. The consultant team and city staff concluded that the off-site environmental mitigation option is likely more feasible and realistic; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2025, the consultant team and city staff held a technical meeting with RWQCB staff to provide an update on the challenges of onsite mitigation options, the project mitigation impact calculations, and the offsite mitigation concepts (see Exhibit A for Meeting Presentation); and
WHEREAS, at the same meeting with RWQCB, the offsite mitigation location identified was the Manning Ranch (part of Eagle Ridge Ranch) and the Livermore Valley Preserve area; and
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2025, the consultant team and city staff met with Olberding Environmental, Inc., a biological consulting firm, to discuss the project offsite mitigation needs and to confirm if there was an available area within the Manning Ranch or Livermore Valley preserve for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04; and WHEREAS, at the same meeting, Olberding Environmental, Inc., staff noted the RWQCB staff had recently visited the Manning Ranch mitigation site to observe the habitat growth and natural development of the site; and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2025, the City entered into a Consulting Services Agreement with Olberding Environmental, Inc., in the amount of $74,500, to begin the design of an Initial Conceptual Habitat Management and Mitigation Plan for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04; and
WHEREAS, Olberding Environmental, Inc. coordinated with the Rocky Ridge, LLC owner and developer of the unique high-value mitigation site, Manning Ranch, in the Livermore area, and confirmed that the property is available for offsite mitigation requirements for Quarry Lakes Parkway, City Project No. 18-04; and WHEREAS, the consultant team, including Olberding Environmental, Inc., continued to coordinate and meet with the regulatory agencies to prepare and design the initial conceptual Habitat Management and Mitigation Plan for Quarry Lakes Parkway, 403 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

City Project No. 18-04, dated September 2025, for their review and comments; and WHEREAS, on October 14, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025- 136 authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Olberding Environmental, Inc., in the amount of $200,000, for a total contract amount of $274,500, for the Design of the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (“HMMP”) for Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18-04; and WHEREAS, the consultant team coordinated the review comments from the regulatory permitting agencies, prepared an updated Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP), dated November 2025, and submitted the HMMP with the initial permit applications to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife in early 2026; and
WHEREAS, the consultant team has received additional comments from the permit agencies and has updated the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, dated April 2026 (Exhibit B), and plans to resubmit the HMMP to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife; and
WHEREAS, Rocky Ridge, LLC, the owner and developer of the Manning Ranch Mitigation Site (Exhibit C), will provide Mitigation Values to the City of Union City and will prepare and process for approval the HMMP to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements; and
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026- 017, accepting $16,728,000 from the Regional Measure 3 Dumbarton Corridor Improvements Program of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, increasing the revenue projections in the Capital Projects Grants Fund by $16,728,000, and appropriating $16,728,000 to the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, City Project No. 18 with $13,000,000 programmed for the environmental mitigation; and WHEREAS, on April 28, 2026, the City Council of Union City adopted a resolution approving the First Addendum to the certified East-West Connector Project Final Environmental Impact Report for Quarry Lakes Parkway, for Phases (Segments) 1-4, City Project No. 18-04 (“First Addendum”), The First Addendum describes and analyzes the environmental impacts of the proposed changes to Phases 1-4 of the Quarry Lake Parkway as compared to the project and impacts analyzed in the 2009 Final EIR to determine if future environmental review was required under the CEQA subsequent review standards outlined in Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162; and
WHEREAS, Section 3.3, Design Changes Since the EWC EIR (referred to herein as the 2009 Final EIR) in the First Addendum identifies the project changes in detail, and below is a summary of these changes related to the purchase of Mitigation Values by the City of Union City. The complete description in the First Addendum of all the proposed changes to the project analyzed in the 2009 Final EIR is incorporated herein by reference. 404 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

Mitigation for Waters/Wetlands/Riparian Effects
The planned mitigation area identified in the EWC was located within the project limits as onsite migration within the area of Old Alameda Creek adjacent to Quarry Lakes Drive. When the design and cost for onsite mitigation were determined to be unfeasible, offsite mitigation sites were evaluated, with the Eagle Ridge East and Manning Ranch sites in Livermore, as identified in the Habitat Mitigation & Monitoring Plan (“HMMP”) dated April 2026, which the regulatory agencies have conditionally approved.

WHEREAS, the First Addendum analyzed the environment impacts of the offsite mitigation under the Agreement; he First Addendum found that the offsite mitigation would not cause any new or substantially more severe significant impacts than disclosed in the certified 2009 EWC EIR and would not trigger any other standards requiring environmental review under CEQA; and based on the First Addendum, no further environmental review for the Agreement is required under CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Agreement for the Purchase and Sale of the Mitigation Values for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1 through 4, City Project No. 18-04, between Rocky Ridge, LLC, and the City of Union City (“Agreement”), in the amount of $11,050,000, will be funded with Capital Project Grants (Account Number 410-91804-57115); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Agreement for Purchase and Sale of Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC, in a form approved by the City Attorney in the amount of $11,050,000 for the Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1 through 4, City Project No. 18-04.
405 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

406 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXXX
Execute PSA for Mitigation Values with Rocky Ridge, LLC

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

GARY SINGH
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
Attachments:

1. Exhibit A – RWQCB Mitigation Meeting 03.25.25

2. Exhibit B – Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan – April 2026

3. Exhibit C – Manning Ranch Mitigation Site
407 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4
Proposed Mitigation Approach
SF Regional Water Quality Control Board
Coordination Meeting
Tuesday, March 25, 2025
408 of 556
2 Proposed Mitigation Approach-Quarry Lakes Parkway
AGENDA
Meeting Purpose: To update RWQCB on the Mitigation
Approach for the Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) project
1) Project Purpose, History and Overview
2) Onsite Mitigation Evaluation and Conclusion
3) QLP 1-4 Area of Impacts Calculations
4) QLP 1-4 Proposed Mitigation Calculations
5) Offsite Mitigation Concept
6) Next Steps
409 of 556
3 Quarry Lakes Parkway Update
2 410 of 556
34 411 of 556
5 QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 1-4
412 of 556
36 Fremont
Union City
413 of 556
7 QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY, PHASES 1 & 2
414 of 556
8 Onsite Options Explored (Old Alameda Creek)
Union City
Union City
Fremont
415 of 556
9 Onsite Options Explored (Old Alameda Creek)
Union City
Fremont
(ACWD)
416 of 556
10 Onsite Options Evaluation - Conclusion
✓Original OAC Concept
▪City of Fremont cannot support onsite mitigation west of OAC.
▪Area east of OAC inadequate to provide wetland mitigation ✓ACWD property
▪ACWD will not allow the use of the land for Options 5A/5B without market rate acquisition cost, making this site
infeasible
✓Union City OAC property
▪Only limited opportunity for riparian mitigation and little to no opportunity for wetland mitigation
✓Offsite Mitigation Necessary for QLP 1-4
▪Need for much larger wetland and riparian mitigation options 417 of 556
11 Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phase 1- 4 Overview
418 of 556
12 Existing Wetlands & Line M Open Channel Alignment
419 of 556
13 Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1-4 Drainage Design
420 of 556
14 QLP, Phase 1 - Line M Open Channel Realignment
421 of 556
15 QLP 1- 4 Impact on Waters, Wetlands, Riparian
422 of 556
16 QLP Impact on Waters, Wetlands, Riparian
Permanent Impacts to Waters and Wetlands and Potential Mitigation, Quarry Lakes Parkway Jurisdictional Feature QLP, Phases
Permanent Impacts
Temporary
Impacts
Acres Linear Feet Acres
Wetlands (Waters of the U.S. and State)
Old Alameda Creek 2 0.010 0.136
Other isolated wetlands 3 0.014
Basin 2C 1 1.066
Total Wetlands 1.090 0.136
Waters
Old Alameda Creek 2 See riparian
Line M Channel (not restored onsite) 1 0.000 709
New Basin (Pipe Connection to Line M)
(Waters of the State Only) 1 & 3 2.732
Total Waters 2.732 709 0.000
Riparian
Old Alameda Creek 2 0.279 100 0.114
423 of 556
17 QLP Proposed Mitigation
Permanent Impacts to Waters and Wetlands and Potential Mitigation, Quarry Lakes Parkway Jurisdictional Feature Phase
Permanent
Impacts Proposed
Mitigation Ratios
Temporary
Impacts Proposed
Mitigation Ratio
Mitigation
Requirement
Acres Linear
Feet Acres Acres
Linear
Feet
Wetlands (Waters of the U.S. and State)
Old Alameda Creek 2 0.010 3.0 0.136 0.1 0.044
Other isolated wetlands 3 0.014 3.0 0.1 0.042 `
Basin 2C 1 1.066 3.0 0.1 3.198
Total Wetlands 1.090 0.136 3.284
Waters
Old Alameda Creek 2 See riparian
Line M Channel 1 0.000 709 2.0 0.1 0.000 1,418
New Basin (Pipe to Line M)
(Waters of the State Only) 1 & 3 2.732 1.0 0.1 2.732
Total Waters 2.732 709 0.000 2.732 1,418
Riparian
Old Alameda Creek 2 0.279 100 3.0 0.114 0.1 0.848 300
424 of 556
18 Impact and Mitigation Timing
• Construction in 2026
• Planting in 2026 - 2027
• Benefits; 3.3 ac wetlands, 3.3 ac riparian, 1,400 LF channel Offsite Mitigation
• Construction 2027 – 2028
• Perm Impacts: 0.010 ac wetlands; 0.257 ac riparian; 100 LF Old Alameda Creek Construction Impact
• Construction Mid-2027 - 2029
• Perm Impacts: 1.08 ac wetlands; 709 LF channel, 2.7 ac basin Basin 2C/New Basin Construction Impact
425 of 556
19 Offsite Mitigation Location
Proposed locations for QLP Mitigation:
1) Manning Ranch (part of Eagle Ridge
Ranch)
2) Livermore Valley Preserve
426 of 556
20 Offsite Mitigation Location
Olberding has
successfully:
✓Created wetlands
✓Restored Creek
Channels
✓Created/enhanced
riparian habitat
✓Created CTS breeding
habitat
✓Increased CRLF
population
427 of 556
21 Offsite Mitigation: Manning Ranch
428 of 556
22 Offsite Mitigation: Manning Ranch
Existing Condition
429 of 556
23 Offsite Mitigation: Example Created Wetland Habitat
430 of 556
24 Offsite Mitigation: Examples of Channel Habitat
431 of 556
25 Offsite Mitigation: Livermore Valley Preserve
432 of 556
26 Offsite Mitigation: Livermore Valley Preserve
433 of 556
27 Offsite Mitigation: Livermore Valley Preserve
434 of 556
28 Quarry Lakes Parkway- Off Site Development Process
• Mitigation
Amounts
and
Location
• Spring
2025
Agency
Concurrence
Summer
2025
Conceptual
Mitigation
Plan
Fall 2025
Draft
Mitigation
Plan Winter 2025
Final
Mitigation
Plan
Spring/
Summer
2026
Mitigation
Construction
Start
435 of 556
29 Proposed Mitigation Approach-Quarry Lakes Parkway
436 of 556
30 Proposed Mitigation Approach-Quarry Lakes Parkway
Next Steps for Project Funding (Alameda CTC & MTC funds):
1) Guidance and Support by RWQCB & other agencies
2) Documentation (Letter) on Mitigation Approach to request funding 437 of 556
31 Discussion
438 of 556

HABITAT MITIGATION & MONITORING PLAN

FOR THE

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MANAGEMENT AREA
Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California
Applicant/Permittee:

CITY OF UNION CITY
Public Works 34009 Alvarado Niles Rd.

Union City, California 94587
Prepared by:

OLBERDING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
3160 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 150
San Ramon, CA 94583
Phone: (916) 985-1188 | Email: [email protected]
APRIL 2026
439 of 556
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 SUMMARY................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Summary............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Responsible Parties............................................................................................................. 2

1.2.1 Permittee ................................................................................................................. 2

1.2.2 Land Manager......................................................................................................... 2

1.2.3 Project Biologist...................................................................................................... 3

2.0 OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................................................. 3

2.1 Habitat Establishment (Creation)........................................................................................ 4

2.1.1 Drainage Establishment .......................................................................................... 4

2.1.2 Riparian Establishment ........................................................................................... 4

2.1.3 Seasonal Wetland Establishment ............................................................................ 4

2.2 Habitat Enhancement.......................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1 Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement ............................................ 5

2.3 Habitat Preservation............................................................................................................ 5

2.3.1 Annual Grassland Preservation............................................................................... 5

3.0 BASELINE INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 8

3.1 Location .............................................................................................................................. 8

3.2 Landscape Position ............................................................................................................. 8

3.3 Topography and Elevations ................................................................................................ 9

3.4 Watershed Description........................................................................................................ 9

3.5 Climate and Precipitation.................................................................................................... 9

3.6 Soils ................................................................................................................................. 9

3.7 Historic, Existing, and Surrounding Land Uses................................................................ 10

3.8 Cultural ............................................................................................................................. 10

3.9 Vegetation......................................................................................................................... 10

3.10 Wetlands/Waters of the U.S.............................................................................................. 11

3.11 Special-Status Species ...................................................................................................... 11

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................................... 17

4.1 Implementation Approach and Sequence ......................................................................... 17

4.2 Site Preparation................................................................................................................. 18

4.2.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Creation......................................... 18

4.2.2 Riparian Habitat Creation ..................................................................................... 18

4.2.3 Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement .......................................... 18

4.3 Grading ............................................................................................................................. 18

4.4 Revegetation of Disturbed Areas...................................................................................... 19

4.4.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Creation......................................... 19

4.4.2 Riparian Creation and Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement...... 20 440 of 556
2 4.5 Implementation Schedule.................................................................................................. 21

4.6 Documentation of As-Built Conditions............................................................................ 21

5.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN........................................................................................................... 22

5.1 Pest Plant and Wildlife Species ........................................................................................ 22

5.2 Fencing.............................................................................................................................. 23

5.3 Irrigation Plan ................................................................................................................... 23

6.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS............................................................................................. 23

6.1.1 Seasonal Wetland Performance Standards............................................................ 24

6.1.2 Drainage Establishment and Caytano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement Performance Standards ......................................................................................... 24

6.1.3 Riparian Establishment Performance Standards................................................... 26

7.0 MONITORING AND REPORTING......................................................................................... 27

7.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Monitoring ................................................ 32

7.2 Riparian Creation and Enhancement Monitoring ............................................................. 33

7.3 Non-Native Invasive Vegetation Monitoring ................................................................... 33

7.4 Photo Documentation........................................................................................................ 33

7.5 Annual Report................................................................................................................... 33

8.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT/REMEDIAL MEASURES...................................................... 35

9.0 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CONSULTED .............................................................. 37 441 of 556
3 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1 ~ FIGURES
Figure 1 Regional Map
Figure 2 Project Vicinity
Figure 3 USGS Topographic Map
Figure 4 Mitigation Property Aerial Photo
Figure 5 Eagle Ridge East Preserve - Jurisdiction Delineation Figure 6 Off-Site Mitigation Plan
Figure 7 Nearby Special-Status Species Occurrences
ATTACHMENT 2 ~ REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS
ATTACHMENT 3 ~ LANDSCAPE PLAN SET
ATTACHMENT 4 ~ HYDROLOGY REPORT
______________________________________________________________________________ This report should be cited as: Olberding Environmental, Inc. April 2026. Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for the Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area, Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, California. Prepared for the City of Union City, Union City, California.
442 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 1 1.0 SUMMARY

1.1 Summary
Olberding Environmental, Inc. (Olberding Environmental) has prepared this Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) on behalf of the City of Union City (Permittee) to provide compensatory off-site mitigation for impacts to habitats resulting from the Quarry Lakes Parkway (QLP) Project, Phases 1 to 4 (Phase 1 - Mission Blvd. to 7th Street, Phase 2 - Alvarado Niles Road to Old Alameda Creek, Phase 3 - 7th Street to 11th Street, and Phase 4 - 11th Street to Alvarado Niles Road) (Project).

This project included 0.9 mile of new four lane roadway which would extend from Old Alameda Creek in the west to Mission Boulevard in the east through a corridor that is primarily undeveloped because it has been reserved for a roadway. The undeveloped area includes Old Alameda Creek, transit and railroad tracks, two detention basins, and the Line M Stormwater Channel. The design standard for a new four-lane roadway complies with the recommendations of the Urban Street Design Guidelines of the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and would not be designed as a Caltrans’ freeway or expressway.

The Project will result in the permanent fill of federal and state jurisdictional wetlands/waters that total approximately 1.8 acres. This includes 0.3 acres of riparian impacts, 1.1 acres of wetland impacts, and 0.4 acres of other waters (channel) impacts. A portion of these impacted jurisdictional features will be mitigated on site, while the remainder of the required mitigation will occur within a designated portion of the nearby Eagle Ridge Preserve East Property (Mitigation Property).

The proposed Mitigation Property contains existing aquatic features that will be enhanced as part of this MMP, in addition to existing annual grassland habitat where new aquatic features will be constructed. In addition, the Mitigation Property contains known occurrences of numerous specialstatus species including Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), and burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia). This MMP includes summary information about the Mitigation Property; objectives for the compensatory replacement, implementation specifications, including underlying rationale for expecting success; maintenance and monitoring provisions, and contingency measures.

The MMP presented herein is subject to approval by the regulatory agencies, which includes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
443 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 2 1.2 Responsible Parties

1.2.1 Permittee
The Permittee is:

City of Union City Public Works
34009 Alvarado Niles Rd.

Union City, California 94587
The Permittee responsibilities in the Mitigation Property include the following:
• The implementation of all construction and management activities associated with the achievement of performance standards and as described in the MMP. • Ensuring that all activities associated with establishing the Mitigation Property are funded and implemented, including recordation of a Conservation Easement, start-up activities (signage, infrastructure development, as applicable), construction of the wetlands, etc. • Providing long-term funding to ensure long-term management as described in the MMP.

Any subsequent grading, or alteration of the topography and/or hydrology of the Mitigation Property by the Permittee or its representatives must be approved by the USACE, USFWS, CDFW, and RWQCB; and the necessary environmental permits, such as a Section 404 permit, must be obtained, if required.

1.2.2 Land Manager
The Permittee has designated Olberding Environmental, Inc. as the Land Manager to oversee mitigation habitat construction, plant installation, and maintenance during the habitat establishment period. It is anticipated that the wetland and intermittent drainage features will take 5 years to establish, while the woody riparian vegetation will take 10 years.

The Land Manger is:

Olberding Environmental Inc.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 165
Folsom, California 95630
Contact: Jeff Olberding
[email protected]
444 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 3 The Land Manager responsibilities in the Mitigation Area include the following:
• Coordinating mitigation site implementation,
• Assist the contractor with grading and plant installation. • Coordinate maintenance activities with the landscape maintenance contractor. • Conducting management activities to preserve and enhance habitat and conservation values in accordance with this MMP.
• Implementing management activities as described in this MMP, including but not limited to:
o Maintaining and replacing signs and other infrastructure, as needed. o Collecting and removing trash.
o Preparing and submitting annual reports.

1.2.3 Project Biologist
The Permittee shall implement this MMP for biological impacts and monitor the mitigation program in accordance with this MMP.

The Project Biologist will monitor habitat on the impact sites. The Land Manager and Project Biologist can be the same entity. The Project Biologist will be a professional botanist, biologist, or restoration ecologist familiar with California flora and fauna, and will have a working knowledge regarding protected habitats and species as defined by the resource agencies. The Project Biologist must also be familiar with vegetation management practices for maintaining the created habitats.

The Project Biologist will have demonstrated experience in monitoring sensitive resource issues on construction and/or mitigation projects. Specifically, the monitor will have at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification and life history of the listed species and natural history of sensitive resources in the vicinity of the Project.

2.0 OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the Mitigation Property is to provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable impacts through the establishment of new drainage features, seasonal wetlands, and riparian habitat, in addition to enhancement of existing riparian habitat and preservation of existing annual grassland habitat. A conceptual map of the off-site mitigation is included in Attachment 1, Figure 6, and a detailed landscape plan set is included in Attachment 3. A Hydrology Assessment which includes an estimate of available water to sustain the various vegetation communities proposed for the Mitigation Property is included as Attachment 4. A summary of mitigation activities is included below in Table 1.
445 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 4 2.1 Habitat Establishment (Creation)
Establishment (creation) means the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics present to develop a natural resource that did not previously exist at an upland site.

Successful establishment results in a gain in natural resource area and functions.

2.1.1 Drainage Establishment
Drainage features will be established (created) by excavating and grading sinuous, linear channels in formerly upland areas. Excavation and grading will expose the soils to direct precipitation and storm water flows that will occur seasonally during the late winter through early spring months.

Construction of the drainage features in these areas will include compaction of the top layer to reduce infiltration. The goal is to provide the characteristic interception of precipitation and overland flow into drainages that will help to replicate natural water flow and ensure habitat diversity and ecosystem health. The drainage features will be constructed so that they intercept surface runoff that flows across these slopes. These drainage features will then feed into seasonal wetlands that will be constructed on-site. A minimum of 1,800 linear feet of new channel will be established with at least 1 acre total of new channel and riparian estimation (see discussion below).

2.1.2 Riparian Establishment
Riparian habitat will be established (created) by planting native riparian woody vegetation and accompanying herbaceous cover along the top of the bank of the existing and constructed drainage features. The riparian plantings will be contiguous with current native riparian vegetation occurring on the Property, creating a larger mosaic of riparian habitat on the Property. This will be accomplished through active revegetation, which includes a combination of plant installation and maintenance, irrigation, and weed control. Within the riparian Mitigation Areas, oaks, shrubs, and forbs will be revegetation on suitable terraces and slopes within the existing drainages. A mix of oak and shrub species will be revegetated along the top of bank, where the topography and soils are suitable.

2.1.3 Seasonal Wetland Establishment
Seasonal wetlands will be established (created) by excavating and grading depressions in formerly upland areas. Excavation and grading will expose the clay soils to rainfall and storm water flows that will typically pond and/or saturate the root zone on a seasonal basis during the late winter through early spring months. Construction of the wetland features in these areas will include compaction of the clay layer to reduce infiltration. The goal is to provide the characteristic interception of precipitation and overland flow into seasonal wetlands that will help to ensure habitat diversity and ecosystem health. The mitigation site that has been selected for this project 446 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 5 includes a portion of Cayetano Creek. Most of the seasonal wetland features will be established along the banks of the Creek, or drain directly into the Creek, thereby fulfilling the goal of increasing the habitat diversity and ecosystem health of the surrounding landscape. Monitoring and performance standards for the established wetlands are discussed in Section 7 of this document.

A minimum of 3.4 acres of seasonal wetland will be established. Of that, at least 0.4 acres will provide aquatic habitat for the California tiger salamander, at least 1.8 acres would provide aquatic habitat for California red-legged frog.

2.2 Habitat Enhancement
Enhancement includes the manipulation of the physical, chemical, and/or biological characteristics of an aquatic resource to heighten, intensify, or improve specific aquatic resource function(s).

Enhancement results in the gain of selected aquatic resource function(s) but does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area.

2.2.1 Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement
The portion of Cayetano Creek that flows south, through the northern portion of the Mitigation Area contains steeply incised banks with sporadic riparian vegetation. Despite the incised nature of the banks, the Creek appears to be in relative equilibrium, in that there are no signs of sediment deposits within the bed of the feature and the banks are vegetated with grasses and other forb species. The banks of this feature will be enhanced and stabilized through the installation of native riparian plantings, with the plantings extending beyond the top of bank to create an extended riparian canopy. These plantings will allow for a more natural erosion and sedimentation regime within the feature. This work will not require any geomorphological work.

2.3 Habitat Preservation
Habitat preservation includes maintaining existing habitat areas in their current state. This typically includes maintaining previous habitat management practices such as grazing or mowing and ensuring that there is no degradation of the habitat areas through the introduction of invasive species.

2.3.1 Annual Grassland Preservation
Annual grassland habitat that occurs throughout the upland portions of the Mitigation Area will be preserved in their current state. This will include the continued use of cattle grazing to control thatch levels and annual surveys for the introduction of any problematic invasive species. A 447 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 6 minimum of 18 acres of upland grassland habitat will be preserved and managed for the benefit of California tiger salamander, and California red-legged frog. If Crotch’s bumble bee is encountered on the Quarry Lakes Parkway Project, Phases 1 to 4, then a portion of the 18 acres would also be preserved for the benefit of this species. If western bumble bee is encountered during construction of the mitigation on the offsite mitigation area, then a portion of the 18 acres would also be preserved for the benefit of this species.
448 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 7 Table 1: Mitigation Activity Summary
Pre-Construction
Site Conditions Post-Construction Site Conditions
Habitat Types1
Habitat
Types1
Vegetation2 Hydrology Mitigation
Method Acres Cowardin
3 HGM4
Aquatic Features
Annual Grassland Intermittent
Drainage
A mix of hydric grasses, graminoids, and
forbs.

Seasonally
flooded Establishment 0.20 (1,800
linear feet)
R4SB7 Riverine
Annual Grassland Riparian
Woodland
A mix of willows, oaks, and shrubs similar
to existing native riparian habitat on site.

Seasonally
saturated Establishment 1 (1,120
linear feet)
R4SB7 Riverine
Annual Grassland Seasonal
Wetland
A mix of hydric grasses, graminoids, and
forbs.

Seasonally
flooded Establishment 3.40 PEM1 Depressional
Riparian Woodland Riparian
Woodland
A mix of willows, oaks, and shrubs similar
to existing native riparian habitat on site.

Seasonally
flooded Enhancement 0.38 (1,120
linear feet)
R4SB7 Riverine
TOTAL 4.98

1. Habitat Types: Habitat types are general common qualitative descriptions such as riparian, marsh, tidal wetlands, open water, seasonal wetlands, vernal pool, or annual grassland.

2. Vegetation Classification: Vegetation community types are based on the most recent widely accepted classification system, the communities used are from A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009)

3. Cowardin: Use the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States to identify the System, Subsystem, and Class.

4. HGM: Use the Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Classification of Wetlands to identify the appropriate class. There are seven HGM classes: Riverine, Slope, Mineral Soil Flats, Organic Soil Flats, Depressional, Estuarine Fringe, and Lacustrine Fringe. 449 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 8 3.0 BASELINE INFORMATION

3.1 Location
The Mitigation Property is located on the north and south sides of Manning Road and the east and west sides of Highland Road, approximately 3.5 miles north of I-580 (Attachment 1, Figures 1-5). The Mitigation Area consists of five separate proposed easement areas located within the Preserve. These proposed easement areas do not have any current easements placed on them. Besides the two active residences, the remainder of the Preserve property falls under several active conservation easements which are collectively managed for habitat creation, preservation and special-status species mitigation. The Mitigation Area discussed in this Plan will be managed with these other conservation easement areas.

Proposed Easement Area 1 consists of the western most mitigation area where seasonal wetland creation will occur. Proposed Easement Area 2 consists of the northwestern mitigation area where seasonal wetland creation and annual grassland preservation will occur. Proposed Easement Area 3 consists of the northeastern mitigation area along Highland Road where seasonal wetland, intermittent drainage, and riparian creation, in addition to Cayetano Creek corridor preservation/enhancement will occur. Proposed Easement Area 4 is located south of Manning Road where seasonal wetland, intermittent drainage, and riparian creation will occur. Proposed Easement Area 5 consists of the easternmost mitigation area where annual grassland preservation will occur. These five Proposed Easement Areas are shown in Attachment 1, Figures 4 and 6.

Representative photographs of the Mitigation Property can be found in Attachment 2.

Access to the Mitigation Property is provided by taking Interstate-580 East from Interstate-680.

Take exit 52B for North Livermore Avenue toward Livermore. Turn left (north) at North Livermore Avenue and follow it for 3.6 miles. Turn left (west) at Manning Road and follow it for

1.2 miles before turning left (south) onto the Eagle Ridge Preserve – East Property.

3.2 Landscape Position
The Mitigation Property is located within the hills north of Livermore Valley. Proposed Easement Area 1 consists of a flat floodplain at the base of a set of hills. Proposed Easement Area 2 consists of several low, rolling hills with a flat area in the northeast corner where seasonal wetlands will be constructed. Proposed Easement Areas 3 and 4 consist of a portion of Cayetano Creek and its adjacent banks and upland habitat where aquatic feature creation will occur. Proposed Easement Area 5 also consists of rolling hills where annual grassland habitat will be preserved. 450 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 9 3.3 Topography and Elevations
The topography within Proposed Easement Area 1 is relatively flat with elevation around 730 feet above sea level throughout the easement area. Topography within Proposed Easement Area 2 consists of rolling hills with elevation sloping to the east. Elevation within this easement area ranges from 810 feet above sea level in the northwest corner to 690 feet above sea level near the northeast corner. Proposed Easement Area 3 ranges from 710 feet above sea level in the northeast corner to 680 above sea level in the southwest corner within the creek bed. Elevation within Proposed Easement Area 4 ranges from 710 feet above sea level along the western boundary to 645 feet above sea level along the eastern boundary within the creek bed. Elevation within Proposed Easement Area 5 ranges from 785 feet above sea level on the hilltop to 660 feet above sea level along the downhill slope.

3.4 Watershed Description
The Mitigation Property is located within the San Francisco Bay 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC 18050004). This HUC includes all of the South San Francisco Bay, eastward to include most of Alameda County. More locally, the Property is within the Lower Arroyo Las Positas 12- digit hydrologic unit code (HUC 18050040203). This HUC includes most of the Livermore area, north and south of I-580.

A Hydrology Analysis has been completed for the Mitigation Property and is included as Attachment 4.

3.5 Climate and Precipitation
The Livermore Valley of California is characterized by a Mediterranean climate of hot, dry summers and a mild, wet winter. In a typical year, two thirds of the precipitation falls during the “rainy season” of November through February. The valley runs in an east to west direction with hills and low mountains surrounding it. The valley is located approximately 12 miles inland from the San Francisco Bay and approximately 25 miles south of the Suisun Bay.

The annual 20-year average rainfall for the Livermore area is 13.35 inches (NOAA 2025). Mean maximum temperatures range from a low of 68 degrees Fahrenheit in December and January and a high of 104 degrees Fahrenheit in July (NOAA 2025).

3.6 Soils
The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) mapped soil types within the County (NRCS 2025). The Mitigation Property contains five soil 451 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 10 types:
• CdA & CdAaa: Clear Lake clay, drained, 0 to 2 percent slopes MLRA 14 • DbD & DdE: Diablo clay, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 • DdDcc: Diablo clay, 9 to 15 percent slopes
• LaD & LbE: Linne clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, MLRA 15 • Pb: Pescadero clay loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes, MLRA 14 The Clear Lake clay, Linne clay loam, and Pescadero clay loam soils are classified as Hydric soils, but the Diablo clay soils are not (NRCS 2025). Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anoxic conditions in the upper part.

3.7 Historic, Existing, and Surrounding Land Uses
The Mitigation Property has existed in a similar state for many decades, consisting of open grassland habitat regularly grazed by cattle. Due to its location within old Spanish territory, cattle have likely been grazed on the Mitigation Property for centuries. The surrounding properties consist of open grazing land with individual homesteads.

3.8 Cultural
A cultural study was conducted by Peak & Associates, Inc. in 2021 and the report concluded that there are no known historical sites within the Preserve. If archeological discoveries are encountered during the course of habitat construction, various mitigation measures will be implemented, and an archeological mitigation plan will be prepared.

3.9 Vegetation
A wetland delineation of the Mitigation Property was conducted in 2021 and 2025 and found that the Mitigation Property supports two habitat types that consist of annual grassland and a portion of Cayetano Creek (an intermittent drainage). The banks of Cayetano Creek contain existing areas of riparian vegetation. Generalized plant community classifications were used to classify the habitat types found on the Property. The final classification and characterization of the habitat types of the Project Area and Mitigation Property were based on field observations.

Annual Grassland
Most of the Mitigation Property consists of annual grassland habitat that is regularly grazed by cattle. This annual grassland habitat is dominated by non-native annual grasses and forbs such as wild oat (Avena fatua), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), wall barley (Hordeum murinum), Italian 452 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 11 ryegrass (Festuca perennis), black mustard (Brassica nigra), milk thistle (Silybum marianum), heron bill filaree (Erodium cicutarium), and California burclover (Medicago polymorpha).

Cayetano Creek
A portion of Cayetano Creek flows through Proposed Easement Areas 3 and 4. The intermittent drainage features flows into the Mitigation Area through the northern portion of Proposed Easement Area 3, where it flows south before entering a large 4 ft. concrete box-culvert located under Manning Road. Upon entering Proposed Easement Area 4 on the southside of Manning Road, the feature turns to the east and forms a serpentine channel that flows parallel to Manning Road before flowing out of the eastern boundary of Proposed Easement Area 4.

Riparian vegetation adjacent to the channel consists of woody species such as redgum eucalyptus, valley oak (Quercus lobata), California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), with an understory of hedge nettle (Stachys ajugoides), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), ripgut brome, wild oat, Italian ryegrass, bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), and other herbaceous species.

3.10 Wetlands/Waters of the U.S.

Hydrological characteristics, flow, and connectivity of the Mitigation Property were determined in 2021 and 2025 during a wetland delineation following USACE standard protocol on the Property and surrounding areas under the same ownership. A copy of the delineation map which was submitted for verification is included in Attachment 1, Figure 5).

3.11 Special-Status Species
A Biological Resource Assessment was completed by Olberding Environmental in 2022 for the Mitigation Property. This assessment has been updated based on recent CNDDB occurrences (CDFW 2025) and updates to listing status of species. A map showing the location of specialstatus species observations in the vicinity of the Mitigation Property is included in Attachment 1, Figure 7. The Mitigation Property has the potential to support numerous special status plant and animal species. Special-status species with the potential to occur are listed below. • Congdon’s Tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii). CNPS List 1B. This species typically occurs in valley and foothill grasslands in moist alkaline soils. This species is known to occur within the Mitigation Property and the adjacent mitigation lands to the west and south. Hundreds of individuals have been observed growing within the annual grassland habitat of the Mitigation Property, particularly surrounding Proposed Easement Area 1. Therefore, this species is considered present within the Mitigation Property. 453 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 12 • Crotch’s Bumble Bee (Bombus crotchii). California Candidate for Endangered. This native species of bee occurs primarily in California, including the Mediterranean climate region of the state, Pacific coast, western desert, the Great Valley, and adjacent foothills throughout most of southwestern California. Habitat for this species includes open grassland and scrub areas, and this species is able to persist in semi-natural habitats surrounded by intensely modified landscapes. This species usually nests underground.

Food plants for the Crotch’s bumble bee include Asclepias, Chaenactis, Lupinus, Medicago, Phacelia, and Salvia (Kockh, et al 2012). While the crotch’s bumble bee has not been observed on the Mitigation Property, there are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and several of the required food plants for this species are known to occur throughout the annual grassland habitat. Therefore, this species may occur within the Mitigation Property. • Western Bumble Bee (Bombus occidentalis). California Candidate for Endangered.

The western bumble bee occurs in Canada and the USA from southern British Columbia to central California, northern Arizona and northern New Mexico, and east into southern Saskatchewan and northwestern Great Plains. This species is found in a range of habitats including mixed woodlands, farmlands, urban areas, montane meadows, and into the western edge of the prairie grasslands. This species usually nests underground. Food plants include Ceanothus, Centaurea, Chrysothamnus, Cirsium, Geranium, Grindellia, Lupinus, Melilotus, Monardella, Rubus, Solidago, and Trifolium (Koch, et al 2012). While the western bumble bee has not been observed on the Mitigation Property, there are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and several of the required food plants for this species are known to occur throughout the annual grassland habitat. Therefore, this species may occur within the Mitigation Property.
• California Red-Legged Frog (CRLF) (Rana draytonii). Federally Threatened, California Species of Special Concern. This species is found in lowlands, foothill woodland and grasslands, near marshes, lakes, ponds, or other water sources. These amphibians require dense shrubby or emergent vegetation closely associated with deep still or slow-moving water. Generally, these frogs favor intermittent streams with water at least two and a half feet deep and where the shoreline has relatively intact emergent or shoreline vegetation. CRLF is known from streams with relatively low gradients and those waters where introduced fish and bullfrogs are absent. This species is known to occur within the western branch of Cayetano Creek that flows along the western edge Eagle Ridge Preserve East, south of Proposed Easement Area 1 (Attachment 1, Figure 7). Additionally, the portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through the Mitigation Property provides ideal aquatic habitat for the species with many pools, undercut banks and abundant foraging areas. The grassland habitat within the site contains structural features such as small mammal burrows that provide suitable upland habitat within a close proximity to known CRLF breeding ponds. This species has been observed annually for over 10+ years, in all 454 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 13 life stages during monitoring of the West Branch of Cayetano Creek which forms the western boundary of the mitigation area. The site is located in USFWS designated Critical Habitat for CRLF. Over 50+ ponds occurring within recognized CRLF dispersal distances surrounding the Mitigation Property offering abundant breeding habitat opportunities.

Numerous CNDDB occurrences have been recorded in addition to staff biologist sightings on surrounding properties.
• California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Federally Threatened, State Threatened. This species prefers vernal pools and other temporary ponds as breeding pools. However, they may also use permanent manmade ponds as breeding habitat. The larval state of the CTS usually lasts three to six months, with metamorphosis beginning in late spring or early summer (USFWS 2017). The annual grassland habitat found throughout the Mitigation Property provides structural features such as small mammal burrows that provide suitable upland habitat for this species within a close proximity to known CTS breeding ponds (Attachment 1, Figure 7). Annual survey results within the CTS breeding ponds in the adjacent Cayetano Creek Mitigation Bank show thousands of CTS larvae, indicating the landscape supports amble breeding habitat for the species. This species has been observed annually for over 5+ years, in all life stages during monitoring of the Cayetano Creek Mitigation Bank which forms the western boundary of the mitigation area.

The site is located directly adjacent to USFWS designated Critical Habitat for CTS. As mentioned above, there are over 50+ ponds occurring within recognized CTS dispersal distances surrounding the Mitigation Property offering abundant breeding habitat opportunities. Numerous CNDDB occurrences have been recorded in on surrounding properties in addition to staff biologist monitoring observations. • Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum). California Species of Special Concern. The grasshopper sparrow occurs in California primarily as a summer resident from March to September. The winter status of this species is unknown. Within California, it is found from Mendocino and Shasta Counties south through the Central Valley and surrounding foothills, and along the South Coast to the Mexico border. Within California the species prefers short to middle-height, moderately open grasslands with scattered shrubs. The sparrows build nests domed with grasses and with a side entrance, typically well concealed in depressions at the base of grass clumps (Shuford and Gardali 2008).

While this species has not been observed within the Mitigation Property, the annual grassland habitat found throughout the Mitigation Property provides potential foraging and nesting habitat for this species. Therefore, this species may occur within the Mitigation Property.
• Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). California Candidate for Endangered.

Burrowing owls are ground dwelling members of the owl family and are small brown to 455 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 14 tan colored birds with bold spots and barring. Burrowing owls generally require open annual grassland habitats in which to nest, but can be found on abandoned lots, roads, airports, and other urban areas. Burrowing owls generally use abandoned California ground squirrel holes for their nesting burrow but are also known to use pipes or other debris for nesting purposes. Burrowing owls prefer annual grassland habitats with low vegetative cover. As is shown in Attachment 1, Figure 7, there have been numerous observations of burrowing owl adjacent to the Mitigation Property and surrounding preserve properties (this includes Eagle Ridge Preserve, Eagle Ridge Preserve North, Cayetano Creek Mitigation Bank, Cayetano Creek Preserve, and the Collier Canyon Preserve).

Additionally, the grassland areas within the Mitigation Property provide suitable foraging habitat, and the ample active ground squirrel burrow complexes onsite create suitable breeding habitat for burrowing owls. While species-focused surveys have not occurred within the Mitigation Property, this species is assumed to be present within the Mitigation Property due to the abundance of ideal habitat and numerous observations within surrounding properties.
• Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis). California Watch List. The ferruginous hawk is a large, broad-winged hawk sometimes mistaken for an eagle due to its size, proportions, and behavior. This is the largest hawk species within the Buteo family. It is an uncommon winter resident and migrant at lower elevation and open grasslands in the Modoc Plateau, Central Valley, and Coast Ranges. However, it is a fairly common winter resident of grasslands and agricultural areas in southwestern California. It frequents open grasslands, sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills surrounding valleys, and fringes of pinyonjuniper habitats. They roost in open areas, usually in a lone tree or utility pole. But there are no breeding records from California (Zeiner et al. 1999). While this species has not been observed within the Mitigation Property, it has been observed within the adjacent Cayetano Creek Mitigation Bank and Cayetano Creek Preserve, and there are nearby CNDDB occurrences. Therefore, it is assumed that the annual grassland habitat found within Mitigation Property provides potential foraging habitat for this species and this species may occur in a foraging capacity.
• Northern Harrier (Circus hudsonius). California Species of Special Concern. Northern harriers require open annual grassland habitats and prefer dense ground vegetation or grasses in which to build nests. They are distinguished from other similar species by their prominent white rump patch. Males are pale gray in color, while females are brown with dark streaking on the breast. These birds are ground nesters and utilize habitats ranging from annual grassland to seasonal wetland for this purpose. This species breeds once per season, with primary females breeding from April to July, and secondary females breeding from May through September. Northern harriers nest on the ground usually preferring dense vegetation clumps for cover such as willows, grasses, sedges, reeds, bulrushes, and 456 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 15 cattails (Shuford and Gardali 2008). This species has been observed foraging throughout the Eagle Ridge Preserve East, and due to abundant habitat, likely nests within the Preserve as well. Therefore, this species is known to occur in a foraging capacity and is likely to nest within the Mitigation Property as well.
• California Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) California Watch List. California horned larks are common to abundant resident in a variety of open habitats, usually where trees and large shrubs are absent. They are found from grasslands along the coast and deserts near sea level to alpine dwarf-shrub habitat above the tree line. Their nests are grass-lined, cup-shaped, and located in depressions on the ground in the open. While this species has not been observed within the Mitigation Property, there are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and the annual grassland habitat found throughout the Mitigation Property provides potential habitat for the species. Therefore, California horned lark may occur within the Mitigation Property.
• Prairie Falcon (Falco mexicanus). California Species of Special Concern. This raptor is known to inhabit dry open terrain either in level or hilly habitats. Prairie falcons nest on cliffs, but will forage far afield. Similar in appearance to the female of the smaller merlin (Falco columbarius), it shows a darker facial stripe than the merlin. The wings and tail are pale brown and the underside is cream-colored and heavily spotted. Prey species are birds and small mammals. While this species has not been observed within the Mitigation Property, there are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and the annual grassland habitat provides potential foraging habitat for the species. Therefore, this species may occur in a foraging capacity across the Mitigation Property, but there is no potential for nesting. • White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus), California Fully Protected. This small hawk is found among various grassland habitats, including undisturbed, open grasslands, meadows, farmlands, and emergent wetlands. Nests are typically placed near the top of dense tree stands such as oak or willow and are located near foraging areas. White-tailed kites have been frequently observed foraging in and around the Mitigation Property during survey events. There are several large willow trees within the riparian habitat near to the Mitigation Property that could be suitable nest sites for white-tailed kite. Therefore, whitetailed kite is known to occur in a foraging capacity throughout the Mitigation Property and may occur in a nesting capacity.
• Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). California Species of Special Concern. This small to medium sized bird prefers open habitats with scattered shrubs, trees, posts, fences, utility lines, or other perches. It occurs only rarely in heavily urbanized areas, but is often found in open cropland. These birds use shrubs, dense trees, and thickets of vegetation for nesting sites. This species has been observed foraging in the Mitigation Property, and 457 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 16 riparian vegetation along Cayetano Creek provides potential nesting habitat. Therefore, this species is known to occur in the Mitigation Property in a foraging capacity and may occur in a nesting capacity.
• Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor). California Threatened, California Species of Special Concern. Often found in large flocks of red-winged blackbirds, this species is highly colonial. They breed near fresh water, preferably in emergent wetlands with tall, dense cattails or tules, but also in thickets of willow, blackberry, wild rose, and tall herbs.

Nests may be located a few feet over freshwater or hidden on the ground among low vegetation. They forage among grassland and cropland habitats (Zeiner, et al 1999). There are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and foraging opportunities exist across the Mitigation Property for this species. However, the Mitigation Property is lacking the large marshy habitat that this species requires for nesting. Therefore, this species may occur in a foraging capacity in the Mitigation Property.
• Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). California Fully Protected. The golden eagle is typically found in open grasslands, pastures, and oak woodland, often near lakes and rivers.

Their plumage is dark brown overall, with some white at the base of the tail, and goldento-blonde feathers on the nape of the neck. The bill and talons are black and the cere (soft membrane that covers the nostrils) and feet are yellow. There are three CNDDB occurrences of this species located near the Mitigation Property. Additionally, golden eagles have been observed foraging within the adjacent Eagle Ridge Preserve during several survey events over the last 10 years, and the large eucalyptus trees at the corner of Highland Road and Manning Road provide potential nesting habitat for this species.

Therefore, the golden eagle is likely to occur throughout the Mitigation Property in a foraging capacity and may nest within or adjacent to the Mitigation Property. • San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens). California Species of Concern. The San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat is one of 11 subspecies of the dusky-footed woodrat (N. fuscipes). This subspecies can be found throughout the San Francisco Bay Area in grasslands, scrub, and wooded areas. Evergreen or live oaks and other thick-leaved trees and shrubs are important habitat components for dusky-footed woodrats. Their stick houses are large and are generally placed on the ground against or straddling a log or exposed roots of a standing tree, often in dense brush (CSU Stanislaus 2024). While this species has not been observed on the Mitigation Property, there are nearby CNDDB occurrences, and there is potential habitat within the riparian vegetation along Cayetano Creek. Therefore, this species may occur within the Mitigation Property. • American Badger (Taxidea taxus). California Species of Special Concern. This large member of the weasel family has a flat body with short legs ideally suited to digging 458 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 17 burrows. Found in open plains, prairies, forests and grasslands, this species feeds on ground squirrels, mice, and gophers. Badgers mate between July and August, but do not give birth until March. While badgers have not been observed within the Mitigation Property, badgers have been observed within the southern portions of Eagle Ridge Preserve East in addition to the adjacent preserve properties. Additionally, the annual grassland habitat found through Proposed Easement Areas 2 and 5 provide suitable habitat for the species.

Therefore, this species may occur within the Mitigation Property. • San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotis). Federally Endangered, California Threatened. The San Joaquin kit fox (SJKF) has a slim body with large, conspicuous ears, and a long, bushy, black tipped tail. It is the smallest canid species in North America. The SJKF lives in annual grassland habitats where friable soils are present in which they may excavate den sites. The general habitat requirement for the kit fox is annual grasslands or grassy open habitat stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Food requirements for the SJKF are rodents, insects, and even garbage in urbanized areas. Grassland habitats with a large rodent prey base and loose textured soils are thought to provide the best habitat for the SJKF.

There are two historic CNDDB occurrences in the vicinity of the Mitigation Property, dated 1975 and 1989. The grassland habitat is considered to be somewhat suitable for SJKF, especially considering the abundance of ground squirrel burrow complexes. However, due to the lack of recent sightings within the Livermore Valley area, SJKF will most likely occur in the Mitigation Property in a dispersal capacity only.

4.0 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
This section presents the Implementation Plan for the mitigation habitat. Habitat creation (establishment) will include the construction of intermittent drainage channels, and seasonal wetland habitat. The construction activities will not have any negative impact on any existing aquatic features. Grading and other ground disturbing work will be conducted in such a manner to avoid impacting these existing wetland features with the exception of several wetland inlets consisting of bio-engineered soil/willow lifts.

Prior to implementation of the wetland construction activities, a qualified biologist will conduct surveys to assess the possible presence of species that may be impacted by construction activities.

Work onsite may occur during avian nesting periods; if active nests are observed during wildlife surveys, a suitable buffer will be established to ensure that active nests are not negatively impacted during implementation of construction activities.

4.1 Implementation Approach and Sequence
This section summarizes aquatic feature creation and enhancement activities and sequencing and identifies the responsibilities of the Project Biologist and Restoration Contractor. References to 459 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 18 sections providing more detailed information on topics covered are included. The Off-Site Mitigation Plan (Attachment 1, Figure 6) and the Landscape Site Plan (Attachment 3) show the areas where habitat creation will occur within the nearby Eagle Ridge Preserve East Property.

Upon completion of construction, installation of fencing, gates and signs will also occur where needed along the perimeter of the Mitigation Property. As-built plan survey activities and reporting will also be conducted at completion of work.

4.2 Site Preparation

4.2.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Creation The intermittent drainage and seasonal wetland creation sites will first be mown close to the ground and the upper 4 to 6 inches of soil will be excavated and stockpiled at designated upland locations; this soil will subsequently be spread on the newly created wetlands to provide organic matter and, depending on the timing, may include wetland plant seed material, which would be incorporated into the newly created wetland.

4.2.2 Riparian Habitat Creation
The riparian planting sites will first be mown close to the ground, and any existing non-native invasive vegetation will be removed. Planting locations will be identified by the Project Biologist.

Following the creation of the planting hole, a watering basin will be constructed, all plant material will be installed, and drip irrigation will be connected.

4.2.3 Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement
The portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 3 currently contains steeply incised banks with sparse riparian vegetation. The banks of the creek will be planted with native riparian vegetation to provide bank stabilization. This riparian vegetation will be planted to supplement the existing riparian vegetation within this area.

4.3 Grading
The created intermittent drainages and seasonal wetlands will be mass-graded/excavated using a rubber-tired earth mover to form bottom microtopography and side slopes. The top three inches of native soil will be stockpiled onsite and then spread over the surface of the finished created wetlands, to help retain the existing vegetation. The remaining excavated material will be temporarily stockpiled onsite and will be mounded as a balanced cut-and-fill project.

Finish grading will involve grading along the edges of an excavated area to tie into existing 460 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 19 topography and grading the bottom of the created wetland areas to provide the appropriate flat topographic relief (<1-2 percent slope) for wetland hydrology, soil, and plant development.

Grading activities will be monitored by a grade checker using a hand level to ensure that the constructed wetlands meet the design criteria. The grade checker will be under the supervision of the Project Biologist.

4.4 Revegetation of Disturbed Areas

4.4.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Creation The created aquatic features will be seeded with a native seed mix to enhance wetland vegetation growth. Seeding with an appropriate native seed mix (Table 2), coupled with natural colonization by hydrophytic species in close proximity to the created wetland, will eventually bring in a vegetative assemblage of both native and non-native species. The established aquatic features are expected to show significant vegetative growth within 3 to 4 years.

Species selected for the wetland and upland seed mixes were chosen based on their respective wetland indicator statuses and should originate from San Francisco Bay Area ecotypes.

Hydrophytic plant species, or those with an indicator status of FAC, FACW, or OBL, were chosen for the wetland seed mix as they are more suited to frequent saturation and/or inundation. Most of the species selected for the upland seed mix have a wetland indicator status of FAC, FACU, or UPL as they are more suited to dry conditions.

The areas to be seeded will be harrowed after finish grading to achieve a one to two-inch deep friable seed bed. The seed mix will be broadcast at the specified rates and lightly harrowed into the seed bed to achieve good seed to soil contact. Any erosion control BMPs including fabric and straw wattle installation will occur after broadcast of seed but before application of hydromulch.

A mixture of hydromulch, tackifier, and water at appropriate rates will be sprayed with a trailer or truck mounted hydroseeder over the top of the seeded soil bed. Seeding is planned to occur right before the rainy season (i.e., September/October) or early in the rainy season (i.e., November). It is anticipated that wetland plant species will colonize rapidly during the winter/spring following construction.

Table 2. Constructed Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Seed Mix Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Status Pounds Per
Acre *
Cyperus eragrostis Tall flat-sedge FACW 4
Eleocharis macrostachya Common spikerush OBL 4
Euthamia occidentalis Western goldenrod FACW 3
Festuca microstachys Pacific fescue FAC 6
461 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 20 Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow barley FACW 6
Juncus patens Spreading rush FACW 2
Lasthenia californica California goldfields FAC 2
Plagiobathrys nothofulvus Rusty popcorn flower FAC 1
Total 28
* The final seed mix and pounds per acre will be based on native seed availability and pure live seed rates on available stock.

The disturbed upland areas within the Mitigation Property will be subject to seeding with a native seed mix as shown below in Table 3.

Table 3. Preserve Upland Seed Mix (for Upland Disturbed Areas) Scientific Name Common Name Wetland Status Pounds Per
Acre*
Aeclepias fascicularis narrow-leaved milkweed FAC 3
Bromus carinatus California brome UPL 5
Deschampsia
danthonioides annual hair grass FACW 3
Eschoscholzia californica California poppy UPL 2
Elymus triticoides creeping wildrye FAC 3
Festuca microstachys small fescue UPL 5
Hordeum
brachyantherum meadow barley FACW 3
Lupinus bicolor miniature lupine UPL 2
Trifolium willdenovii tomcat clover FACW 1
Total 27
* The final seed mix and pounds per acre will be based on native seed availability and pure live seed rates
on available stock.

4.4.2 Riparian Creation and Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement The areas of riparian creation and enhancement will be planted with a mix of native plants from container stock and seed mix to enhance vegetation growth. The dominant plant species within the planting mix were chosen to mimic the composition of riparian habitats occurring within the vicinity of the Mitigation Property. All propagules for container stock and willow cuttings will be obtained from populations onsite or from nearby watersheds to ensure that the plant material is adapted to the climatic conditions of the general area. Riparian creation and enhancement areas will be planted with a mix of native species shown in Table 4. 462 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 21 Table 4. Mitigation Property Riparian Plant Palette
Scientific Name Common Name Wetland
Status
Container
Size Quantity*
Acer negundo box elder FACW 5-gal 13
Aesculus californica California buckeye UPL 5-gal 25
Juglans californica California black walnut FACU 5-gal 19 Quercus agrifolia coast live oak UPL 5-gal 13
Quercus lobata valley oak FACU 5-gal 25
Salix lasiolepis, S.
laevigata arroyo willow, red willow FACW 5-gal 31
Tree Sub-Total 126
Baccharis pilularis coyote brush UPL 1-gal 9
Rosa californica California rose FAC 1-gal 43
Rubus ursinus California blackberry FAC 1-gal 43
Sambucus nigra caerulea blue elderberry FACU 1-gal 9
Shrub Sub-Total 104
TOTAL 230
* The final planting pallet mix will be based on native seed availability and pure live seed rates on available stock.

4.5 Implementation Schedule
Construction of the mitigation habitat is planned for 2026 depending on receipt of permits and authorizations. Because the established wetlands will not receive supplemental irrigation water, the seeding timing is important. Due to the unpredictability of the rainy season, the Project Biologist will schedule the seeding. After initial planting and seeding is complete, the site will be maintained and managed by activities described in this MMP.

4.6 Documentation of As-Built Conditions
Within 60-days after wetland construction is complete; a post-construction as-built survey will be prepared and submitted to USACE. This report will include:
• The as-built plan based on the post-construction survey. • Description of construction activities, paying particular attention to any adjustments to the installation plan.
• Photo-documentation of construction activities, as well as identification of permanent photo point locations.
463 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 22 5.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN
Maintenance will be required in order for the ecological functions and values of the site to meet and/or exceed performance expectations. Maintenance shall be considered habitat management where an adaptive management strategy is employed, and multiple aspects of the Mitigation Property are evaluated in order to determine the most feasible and desirable maintenance pathway.

Maintenance activities will be conducted during the establishment period and include invasive species management, installation of exclusion fencing around the mitigation areas, and irrigation.

These maintenance activities are discussed in more detail below.

5.1 Pest Plant and Wildlife Species
Plant and wildlife species considered to be a threat to mitigation will be subject to monitoring and control. Control of nuisance plants may include the use of specific herbicides. Herbicide application is allowed, but only to control small, localized stands of nuisance vegetation. Manual or mechanical control activities will be considered first and will be evaluated for reduced species impacts compared to herbicides. They may also be utilized if an herbicide application is determined not to be feasible or desirable by the Land Manager. Manual methods include hand pull or the use of handheld tools to remove nuisance vegetation. Mechanical methods may include mowing with string trimmer or deck mower as determined by the Land Manager.

The following specifications must be adhered to prior to application of herbicides within the Mitigation Property.
• Herbicide application is allowable but should only be considered feasible after manual and mechanical methods have been ruled out. Application of herbicides will be accomplished in accordance with the following standards:
o Herbicides will be used only by a qualified and licensed applicator (QAL) and only applied according to a licensed pest control advisor (PCA) recommendation. o Under the direction of the Land Manager, a biological monitor will accompany sprayers to prevent impacts to non-target native vegetation that is to be retained. o Target vegetation will only be sprayed using EPA-approved herbicides which are recommended for use in wetlands.
o Small spot treatments will be prioritized over large-scale broadcast methods to minimize the footprint of the herbicide application.
• Manual or mechanical control activities will be considered first and will be evaluated for reduced species impacts compared to herbicides. If manual and mechanical efforts are not 464 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 23 effective, herbicide may be used to target nuisance plant species found on the Property.

Nuisance species are defined as Cal-IPC high species and moderate broadleaf species (CalIPC 2025). Nuisance species found within the Property include yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), black mustard, bull thistle, and stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens).

Studies have shown chlorsulfuron (Telar brand) to be a highly effective pre-emergent herbicide that specifically targets broadleaf species, such as yellow star thistle. Utilizing a selective herbicide such as chlorsulfuron should be prioritized above using a non-selective herbicide such as glyphosate; however, glyphosate may be a viable option as a last resort if all other control efforts are ineffective, or if otherwise determined by adaptive management.

5.2 Fencing
Fencing to exclude unwanted human activity from the Mitigation Property will be maintained in good condition to prevent unauthorized encroachment. Site fencing will consist of five-strand barb wire with t-posts installed at ten feet on center. All new fencing that is constructed will be wildlife friendly in that the top and bottom strands will be smooth, and the bottom strand will be no less than 16 inches above the ground.

5.3 Irrigation Plan
The irrigation system shall be checked regularly, as much as weekly immediately following planting, for malfunction and vandalism. All drip lines and filters shall be flushed as needed.

Emitters must be checked regularly for malfunctions, position of emitter over rootball, and vandalism. Flushing end caps must also be checked regularly. Irrigation for plantings is a temporary tool to help establish the constructed vegetation association. Water shall be decreased every year, and ideally shall not be needed after the third year. Caution shall be exercised not to create lush plants, which would become dependent on regular watering. Deep watering, spaced at the longest time possible before plants show signs of stress, shall be used. This type of watering will encourage plant roots to travel downward into the appropriate water zones in the soil.

6.0 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
This section presents the performance standards that need to be achieved before the compensatory mitigation activities can be deemed successful. Annual monitoring results will be compared with performance standards to indicate the extent to which the Mitigation Property is developing suitable wetland and riparian habitat. If annual monitoring results fall below performance standards, the cause will be investigated by the Project Biologist and adaptive management recommendations will be proposed to remediate the deficit and attain compliance with the final performance standards.
465 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 24 6.1.1 Seasonal Wetland Performance Standards
The intermittent drainage and seasonal wetland habitat will be monitored, and the results will be compared against performance standards below to ensure the site provides high quality ecological functions and values. There will be six performance standards for the created habitat within the Mitigation Area (Table 5):
• PS-1 - The frequency of inundation and/or saturation will be a minimum of 18 continuous days per year within the established (created) seasonal wetland habitat. • PS-2 - The established (created) wetland habitat will show evidence of ponding in photographs.
• PS-3 – The established (created) habitats will show an increase in vegetative cover over 5 years. The wetland habitats will have at least 75% relative cover by Year 5. In addition to the measurement of relative cover, the percentage of bare ground will be estimated during all monitoring events with results provided in the annual report. • PS-4 – The established (created) habitat will have a minimum of 51 percent relative cover of OBL, FACW, and FAC species by Year 5.
• PS-5 – The established (created) seasonal wetland habitat will meet all three Corps criteria in years that a wetland delineation is performed (Years 3 and 5). The intermittent drainage will have evidence of a defined bed and bank, meeting the Corps requirements for a water feature in years that a wetland delineation is performed (Years 3 and 5). By Year 5, the wetland delineation will show a minimum total of 3.40 acres of seasonal wetland. • PS-6 – Nuisance plant species cover within the seasonal wetland features and constructed intermittent drainage features will not be greater than 5 percent. Nuisance plant species will be those that have a “high” rating by Cal-IPC or are “moderate” broadleaf species.

6.1.2 Drainage Establishment and Caytano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement Performance Standards
The established and enhanced drainage habitat will be monitored, and the results will be compared against performance standards below to ensure the site provides high quality ecological functions and values. The drainage establishment and Cayetano Creek corridor preservation/enhancement areas will be monitored and maintained for a period of 10 years (Years 1-6, 8, and 10). There will be nine performance standards for the established and enhanced drainage habitat within the Mitigation Area (Table 6):
• PS-7 – The established (created) drainages and the preserved/enhanced portions of the Cayetano Creek corridor will show evidence of flow in photographs. • PS-8 – The established (created) drainages and the preserved/enhanced portions of the Cayetano Creek corridor will show an increase in vegetative cover over 10 years. The drainages will have at least 75% relative cover by Year 10. In addition to the measurement 466 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 25 of relative cover, the percentage of bare ground will be estimated during all monitoring events with results provided in the annual report.
• PS-9 – The established (created) drainages and the preserved/enhanced portions of the Cayetano Creek corridor will have evidence of a defined bed and bank, meeting the Corps requirements for a water feature in years that a wetland delineation is performed (Years 3, 5 and 10). By Year 10, the wetland delineation will show a minimum total of 1,800 linear feet of intermittent drainage establishment.
• PS-10 – The established (created) drainages and the preserved/enhanced portions of the Cayetano Creek corridor will have stable banks and not show signs of an uncharacteristic amount of erosion or sedimentation. An annual survey will be conducted utilizing the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM) Channel Stability methodology, as is described within the CRAM Riverine Wetlands Field Book ver. 6.1. Each established and enhanced drainage feature will show a predominance of indicators of channel equilibrium. • PS-11 – Turbidity monitoring will occur annually after a large rain event (<1 inch in 24 hours) within each of the established (created) drainages and the preserved/enhanced portions of the Cayetano Creek corridor. Due to the shallow depths of the drainage features, water turbidity will be measured using a t-tube. A t-tube is a 60-centimeter-long transparent tube with a stopper and release valve at the bottom and a black and white symbol at the bottom. To measure clarity, the tube is filled with water from the sampling location and as the user looks down into the tube, they gradually release water through the valve until the black and white symbol is visible. The depth of the water when the symbol becomes visible is recorded in centimeters. For transparency, a water body is out of compliance with a 25 nephelometric turbidity unit (NTU) standard if a t-tube value is less than 20 centimeters. • PS-12 – The riparian plantings within the Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement areas will have 80% establishment rate by Year 3. • PS-13 – An annual botanical survey will be conducted throughout the Cayetano Creek corridor preservation/enhancement planting areas. The survey will determine the number of live, dead, and missing plants from those originally installed. Each plant will be assigned a health and vigor ration of healthy, unhealthy, or dead. In Years 1-6 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 90 percent to be alive and healthy. In Year 8 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 85 percent to be alive and healthy. In Year 10 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 80 percent to be alive and healthy. • PS-14 – Average height of each tree species installed in the Mitigation Area will exhibit an increasing trend overtime. By Year 10 the average height for each tree species will meet the success criteria shown below:
o Coast live oak – 6 FT
o Valley oak – 8 FT
o Red willow – 10 FT
o Arroyo willow – 10 FT
• PS-15 – An annual botanical survey will be conducted throughout the riparian planting 467 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 26 areas. The survey will determine the approximate percent cover of the riparian plantings in relation to the mitigation area. In Year 6, the riparian plantings shall attain 40% cover. This percentage will increase to 75% cover in Year 10. In addition to the measurement of relative cover, the percentage of bare ground will be estimated during all monitoring events with results provided in the annual report.

6.1.3 Riparian Establishment Performance Standards
The riparian planting areas will be monitored, and the results will be compared against performance standards below to ensure the site provides high quality ecological functions and values. The riparian Mitigation Areas will be monitored and maintained for a period of 10 years (Years 1-6, 8, and 10). This duration is necessary because of the naturally slow growth rate of many of the planted trees and shrubs. There will be four performance standards for the created habitat within the Mitigation Area (Table 7):
• PS-16 – The planted areas will have 80% establishment rate by Year 3 • PS-17 – An annual botanical survey will be conducted throughout the riparian planting areas. The survey will determine the number of live, dead, and missing plants from those originally installed. Each plant will be assigned a health and vigor ration of healthy, unhealthy, or dead. In Years 1-6 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 90 percent alive and healthy. In Year 8 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 85 percent alive and healthy. In Year 10 the riparian plantings will show a minimum of 80 percent alive and healthy
• PS-18 – Average height of each tree species installed in the Mitigation Area will exhibit an increasing trend overtime. By Year 10 the average height for each tree species will meet the success criteria shown below
o Coast live oak – 6 FT
o Valley oak – 8 FT
o Red willow – 10 FT
o Arroyo willow – 10 FT
• PS-19 – An annual botanical survey will be conducted throughout the riparian planting areas. The survey will determine the approximate percent cover of the riparian plantings in relation to the mitigation area. In Year 6, the riparian plantings shall attain 40% cover. This percentage will increase to 75% cover in Year 10. In addition to the measurement of relative cover, the percentage of bare ground will be estimated during all monitoring events with results provided in the annual report.
468 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 27 7.0 MONITORING AND REPORTING
Monitoring and reporting for performance will occur for a minimum of 5-years for wetlands, and 10-years for drainages and riparian habitat or until attainment of performance standards. If performance standards are not met by the end of the stated monitoring and management period for a given habitat type, then monitoring can be extended into future years until performance standards are attained, remedial actions may occur, or compensatory mitigation may be required through another mitigation mechanism to make up the difference.

The monitoring objectives:

1. Track habitat progress towards meeting the performance standards, and

2. Identify and remedy any problems that could impact the success of the mitigation effort and/or compromise the ecological functions and values of the site.

The monitoring protocol and results will be reviewed annually. Adjustments to monitoring procedures may be required as the site changes over time, or if logistical problems render a procedure unduly difficult to conduct. Such adjustments will be discussed with the regulatory agencies as necessary. After reviewing the monitoring reports, the regulatory agencies may also have suggestions for adjusting the monitoring program. Regulatory agency suggestions will be reviewed and, if appropriate, incorporated into the following year's monitoring program. The key is to anticipate that the monitoring program may need occasional adjustments to remain accurate, complete, and feasible.
469 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 28 Table 5: Seasonal Wetland Performance Standards
Category Performance Standard Establishment Year
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
PS-1 Wetland
Hydrology
The wetlands will show evidence
of wetland hydrology through
inundation (ponding) and/or
saturated soil conditions.

The seasonal wetland habitats will be saturated or inundated for at least 18 days during an average rainfall year.

PS-2
Wetland
Hydrology
Data will be collected by direct
observation, photo
documentation, and/or water
measurement devices (staffgauges) placed in the selected The established (created) wetland habitat will show evidence of ponding in photographs.

PS-3
Vegetation
Percent Cover
The wetlands will have
germination and growth of a
variety of plant species and at
appropriate overall cover levels.

Total area coverage
may be sparse after
first year. Presence
of young shoots for
seeded species.

The wetlands will
have at least 50%
relative vegetative
cover.

The wetlands will
have at least 60%
relative vegetative
cover.

The wetlands will
have at least 70%
relative vegetative
cover.

The wetlands will have
at least 75% relative
vegetative cover.

PS-4
Wetland
Species
The seasonal wetlands will be
dominated by hydrophytic
vegetation (OBL, FACW, and
FAC).

A minimum of 51
percent relative cover
of OBL, FACW, and
FAC species.

PS-5
Wetland
Verification
A wetland delineation will be
conducted with a sufficient
number of paired sampling
points to differentiate the
boundary between upland and
wetland.

Conduct a wetland
delineation.

Conduct a wetland
delineation.

Demonstrate that at
least 3.40 acres of
seasonal wetland occur
within the mitigation
area.

PS-6
Invasive
species
The constructed features will not
be dominated by non-native
invasive vegetation.

Total relative cover of non-native invasive plant species (all plant species with “High” impact rankings by Cal-IPC and all broadleaf species with “moderate” rating) is no more than 5 percent within newly constructed features. 470 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 29 Table 6: Established Drainage and Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement Performance Standards Category Performance Standard
Establishment Year
Years 1-6 Year 8 Year 10
PS-7 Drainage
Hydrology
Data will be collected by direct
observation or photo
documentation.

The established (created) drainages and Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement areas will show evidence of flow in photographs
PS-8 Vegetation
Percent Cover
The drainages will have
germination and growth of a
variety of plant species at
appropriate relative cover levels.

Coverage may be sparse in first
year, but presence of young
shoots for seeded species. Seeded
species will have at least 50%
relative cover.

Seeded species will have at least
70% relative cover.

Seeded species will have at least
75% relative cover.

PS-9 Wetland
Verification
A wetland delineation will be
conducted with a sufficient
number of transects to determine
the ordinary high water mark.

A wetland delineation will be
conducted in Years 3 and 5.

Conduct a wetland delineation.

Demonstrate that at least 1,800
linear feet of intermittent
drainages were created.

PS-10 Bank
Stabilization
The established and enhanced
drainages will be monitored
utilizing CRAM methodology for
bank stabilization.

Annual surveys will show a predominance of indicators of channel equilibrium.

PS-11 Turbidity
Monitoring
Turbidity within the established
and enhanced drainages will be
monitored annually after a large
rain event (<1 inch in 24 hours).

Annual monitoring for turbidity monitoring will have a t-tube value of 20 centimeters or greater.

PS-12 Plant
Establishment
Annual monitoring to ensure the
health of riparian plantings.

The riparian plantings within the
Cayetano Creek Corridor
Preservation/Enhancement areas
will have 80 percent
establishment rate by Year 3.

PS-13 Riparian
Species Survival
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine number
of live, dead, and missing plants
from those originally installed.

Each plant that is alive during the
survey will be assigned a health
and vigor rating of healthy,
A minimum of 90 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.

A minimum of 85 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.

A minimum of 80 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.
471 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 30 unhealthy, or dead.

PS-14 Tree
Height
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine the
approximate height of each
planted tree.

Average height of each tree species installed in the Mitigation Area will exhibit an increasing trend overtime.

Average height for each species
as follows: coast live oak (6 FT),
valley oak (8 FT), red willow (10
FT), arroyo willow (10 FT).

PS-15 Riparian
Species Cover
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine the
approximate relative cover of all
riparian plantings.

Approximate relative cover will
exhibit an increasing trend
overtime.

A minimum of 40 percent
relative cover of riparian species.

A minimum of 75 percent
relative cover of riparian species.
472 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 31 Table 7: Riparian Habitat Establishment Performance Standards Category Performance Standard Establishment Year
Years 1-6 Year 8 Year 10
PS-16 Plant
Establishment
Regular monitoring during the
first three years to ensure the
health of riparian plantings.

Total establishment rate of
planted riparian species will have
80 percent establishment rate by
Year 3.

PS-17
Riparian
Species
Survival
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine number
of live, dead, and missing plants
from those originally installed.

Each plant that is alive during
the survey will be assigned a
health and vigor rating of
healthy, unhealthy, or dead.

A minimum of 90 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.

A minimum of 85 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.

A minimum of 80 percent of
plantings alive and healthy.

PS-18
Tree
Height
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine the
approximate height of each
planted tree.

Average height of each tree species installed in the Mitigation Area will exhibit an increasing trend overtime.

Average height for each species as
follows: coast live oak (6 FT),
valley oak (8 FT), red willow (10
FT), arroyo willow (10 FT).

PS-19 Riparian
Species Cover
Annual botanical surveys will be
conducted to determine the
approximate cover of all riparian
plantings.

Approximate relative cover will
exhibit an increasing trend
overtime.

A minimum of 40 percent relative
cover of riparian species.

A minimum of 75 percent relative
cover of riparian species.
473 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 32 7.1 Intermittent Drainage and Seasonal Wetland Monitoring Hydrology data will be collected from the established (created) habitat to coincide with the California rainy season (i.e., typically recognized as occurring between Sept/Oct to Apr/May). The first hydrology data collection event will occur with the onset of fall rains no more than two weeks after the first soaking rain event (i.e., one inch of rain in 24 hours). Hydrology monitoring will occur at least monthly during the rainy season and will not end until bankfull ponding is documented with a photograph and/or at least 18 days of ponding/saturation has occurred. Monthly hydrology monitoring events will occur until the wetlands are totally dry, presumably early- or mid-summer.

At each data collection event, water depths will be estimated or recorded from staff gauges which will be marked at one-inch increments and placed in the bottoms of the habitat features they are intended to provide data for or collected by hand with a measuring stick or ruler.

Monitoring of wetland vegetation using randomly placed one square meter quadrats will occur during the spring monitoring event. Quadrats will be placed randomly within the seasonal wetland habitats with five quadrats placed within each wetland feature. Due to the relatively small size of each of the wetland features, this should provide an adequate sample size to determine vegetation composition. Each plant species occurring within the quadrat will be recorded and assigned a relative cover value. The relative percent cover of bare ground and thatch will also be recorded from each quadrat. Photos will be taken of the quadrats and a representative sample will be included in annual monitoring reports.

Photographic monitoring will also occur at each wetland data collection event from fixed photo points and any other relevant areas. Photos of actively ponded wetlands will be taken and provided in monitoring reports. Annual precipitation data will be obtained from the closest climatological station and included in monitoring reports. These photo points will be established after construction of the features, to ensure that they accurately capture the features that are created. A minimum of 30 photo points will be established to sufficiently characterize the mitigation features.

Vegetation, soil, and hydrologic conditions will be monitored using the USACE’ 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual, the Corps’ September 2008 Regional Supplement to Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West (Version 2.0) (Arid West Supplement), and relevant USACE guidance documents whereby field observations will be made in the wetlands during the rainy season until the wetland soil and hydrology criteria are met. The percentage and depth of ponded water and/or soil saturation will be noted during monitoring visits. This information will be recorded on the Arid West field data sheet.
474 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 33 7.2 Riparian Creation and Enhancement Monitoring
Surveys to identify the health and vigor of the riparian plantings will be conducted annually each summer or fall. The surveys will identify the species of each riparian planting and assign it a health rating of “healthy”, “unhealthy”, or “dead”. If a riparian planting appears to be unhealthy, then possible remedies will be identified and implemented. If the number of living and healthy plantings falls below the performance standards then replanting efforts will be explored.

7.3 Non-Native Invasive Vegetation Monitoring
Plant species designated by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC - https://www.calipc.org/plants/inventory/) to be plant pests (impact rating of “high”) will not be allowed to colonize and become established within the Mitigation Property. The relative percent cover of non-native invasive species will come from wetland delineation vegetative data, direct observation, and/or photo documentation. Any problematic or new stands of non-native invasive vegetation will be photographed and described in the monitoring report along with recommendations for control and/or eradication.

7.4 Photo Documentation
Photo documentation will occur during all monitoring years from permanent photo stations that will be established during construction and shown on the as-built plan drawings. Photo station locations will be selected to illustrate year-to-year progress in relation to the existing habitat. Photo locations will be recorded with GPS equipment to ensure photos will be taken from the same location each year. Photographs will also be taken to record any events that may have a significant effect on the success of restoration, such as flood, fire, or vandalism. The location and direction of view of the photo stations will be provided with all monitoring reports. Color photocopies of the permanent photo stations will be included as an attachment in monitoring reports. These photo points will be established after construction of the features, to ensure that they accurately capture the features that are created. A minimum of 30 photo points will be established to sufficiently characterize the mitigation features.

7.5 Annual Report
Habitat establishment monitoring reports summarizing the results of the monitoring effort will be submitted to the regulatory agencies by December 31 every year for Years 1-6, 8, and Year 10.

The annual report will document the degree to which the Mitigation Property is meeting the performance standards. The monitoring reports will describe any deficiencies in attaining and maintaining performance standards and any remedial action proposed, approved, or performed. If 475 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 34 remedial action(s) have been completed, the annual report will also evaluate the effectiveness of that action.

A final monitoring report summarizing the mitigation project and evaluating the site's overall performance will be prepared and submitted at the end of monitoring (Year 10). The final annual report will include a count and assessment of species. A final field visit will be conducted to verify that onsite conditions are consistent with information documented in the annual report.

The annual report will include the following information.

Project Overview (1 page)
a. Agency Permit Numbers
b. Name of party responsible for conducting the monitoring and the date(s) the inspection was conducted.
c. A brief paragraph describing the purpose of the approved project, acreage and type of resources impacted; and mitigation acreage and type of resources authorized to compensate for the impacts.
d. Written description of the location, any identifiable landmarks of the compensatory mitigation project including information to locate the site perimeter(s), and coordinates of the mitigation site (expressed as latitude, longitudes, UTMs, state plane coordinate system, etc.).
e. Dates the compensatory mitigation project commenced and/or was completed. f. The time period covered (i.e., the dates “from” and “to”). g. Short statement on whether the performance standards are being met. h. Dates of any recent corrective or maintenance activities conducted since the previous report submission.
i. Specific recommendations for any additional corrective or remedial actions.

Requirements (1 page)
a. List the monitoring requirements and performance standards specified in the approved mitigation plan or special conditions of agency permits. b. Evaluate whether the compensatory mitigation project site is successfully achieving the approved performance standards or trending towards success. (Use a table to present this information).
c. Management tasks accomplished during the year shall be identified. All herbicide use shall be reported. The type of herbicide, target species, frequency and duration of use, and minimization measures will be reported.
476 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 35 Summary Data (4 pages maximum)
a. Present summary data to substantiate the success and/or potential challenges associated with the compensatory mitigation project.
b. Include photo documentation to support the findings and recommendations in the monitoring report and to assist the Project Biologist in assessing whether the compensatory mitigation project is meeting applicable performance standards for that monitoring period.  Format submitted photos to print on a standard 8 ½” x 11” paper.  Show date and clearly label photos with the direction from which the photo was taken.
 Identify the photo stations on the appropriate maps.

Maps and Plans (3 pages maximum)
a. Provide maps that show location of compensatory mitigation site relative to other landscape features; mitigation site perimeter; habitat types; locations of photo reference points, transects, sampling data points, and other pertinent features.  Format maps/diagrams to print on 8.5” x 11’ paper.
 Include a legend and photo locations.

Conclusions (1 page)
a. Include statement that describes the conditions of the compensatory mitigation project. b. If performance standards are not being met, explain the difficulties and potential remedial actions together with a timetable for correction.

8.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT/REMEDIAL MEASURES
Adaptive management is a strategy to deal with unexpected changes in site conditions, responsibilities, or performance of the site so that the compensatory mitigation project achieves its objectives and ecological performance standards.

Potential problems that may trigger a need for adaptive management include failure to attain performance standards, fire, substantial infestation by non-native plants and animals, and unanticipated anthropogenic problems such as large-scale trespassing and vandalism.

The Project Biologist will regularly analyze site progress as part of monitoring and reporting and will suggest remedial measures to address unforeseen changes in site conditions or other components of the mitigation project.
477 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 36 If the annual monitoring results indicate that the site is falling below performance threshold values, then remedial actions will be implemented and funded by the Permittee of the mitigation project.

Remedial actions may include but are not limited to: hiring an alternative hydrological, geotechnical, or civil engineer to redesign the wetlands, replacement planting, additional watering, nuisance plant control and eradication, monitoring for additional years, and mitigating for the project at an alternative site.
478 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area Habitat Mitigation Monitoring Plan 37 9.0 REFERENCES AND LITERATURE CONSULTED
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 2025. Computer listings and map locations of historic and current recorded occurrences of special-status species and natural communities of special concern for USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle maps.

California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 2025. Inventory of Invasive Plants. Available online at https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/. Accessed September 19, 2025.

California State University (CSU) Stanislaus. 2024. San Francisco Dusky-Footed Woodrat.

Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species Manual. Available online at https://esrp.csustan.edu/projects/lsm2/. Accessed on January 22, 2024.

Koch, J., J. Strange, and P. Williams. 2012. Bumble Bees of the Western United States. A product of the U.S. Forest Service and the Pollinator Partnership with funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Available online
at https://www.xerces.org/sites/default/files/2018-05/12- 053_01_Western_BB_guide.pdf.

Accessed January 23, 2024.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2025. Climatological precipitation summary for San Francisco Bay Area. National Weather Service. Monterey, CA. Available online at https://www.weather.gov/wrh/Climate?wfo=mtr. Accessed September 19, 2025.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2025. Web Soil Survey. Available online at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/survey/.

Accessed on September 19, 2025.

Sawyer J. T. Keeler-Wolf, and K. Evans. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society.

Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer, Fr., K.E. Mayer, and M. White, eds. 1988- 1990 (Updated 1999).

California’s Wildlife. Vol I -III. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, California.
479 of 556
Attachment 1
Figures
480 of 556
^_
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 1: Regional Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California Revision Date: 03/27/2026 0 2 4 8
Miles I Scale: 1:253,440 1 in = 4 miles
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig1_RegionalMap_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03272026.mxd Print at 8.5" x 11" ^_ Preserve Location
481 of 556
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 2: Vicinity Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California Revision Date: 09/19/2025 0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet I Scale: 1:24,000 1 in = 2,000 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig2_VicinityMap_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03272026.mxd Print at 8.5" x 11"
Eagle Ridge East Preserve Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
482 of 556
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 3: USGS Topographic Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California Revision Date: 01/16/2025 0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet I Scale: 1:24,000 1 in = 2,000 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig3_TopoMap_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03272026.mxd Print at 8.5" x 11"
Eagle Ridge East Preserve Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
Tassajara 7.5' USGS Quad

37.756400°, -121.789800°
S18, T2S, R2E
483 of 556
Manning Road
Highland Road
Manning Road
Proposed
Easement
Area 1
Proposed
Easement
Area 2
Proposed
Easement
Area 3
Proposed
Easement
Area 4
Proposed
Easement
Area 5
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 4: Aerial Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California Revision Date: 03/27/2026 0 350 700 1,400
Feet I Scale: 1:8,400 1 in = 700 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig4_AerialMap_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03272026.mxd Print at 8.5" x 11"
Eagle Ridge East Preserve Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
484 of 556

ED 3
ED 2
ED 1
ID 1b
ID 1d
ID 2
ID 1c
ID 1a
SW 1
SW 2
SW 3
SW 4 SW 5
SW 6
SW 7
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 5:

Corps Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Created on: 10/02/2025
Revised on: 01/29/2026
0 175 350 700
Feet
Scale: 1:4,200 1 in = 350 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig5_JDMap_cover_ERE_01292026.mxd Print at 11" x 17"
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Survey Area
Map Pages
Potential Aquatic Features
Ephemeral Drainage (0.09 ac, 695 lf)
Intermittent Drainage (0.56 ac, 3,711 lf)
Seasonal Wetland (1.19 ac)
Made in accordance with the Updated Map and Drawing
Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by: Jason Deters, Project Manager Enforcement and Special Projects UnitU.S. Army
Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Coordinate System:

NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Ft US Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Datum: NAD 1983 2011 // Units: Foot US
µ
4 3
1 2
485 of 556
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
ID 2
(0.14 ac, 974 lnft)
SW 3
(0.21 ac)
SW 4
(0.25 ac)
SW 5
(0.21 ac)
SW 6
(0.19 ac)
SW 7
(0.16 ac)
13A
16A
17A
21A
21B
22A
22B
23B 23A
24A 24B
25A
25B
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 5:

Corps Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Created on: 10/02/2025
Revised on: 01/29/2026
0 75 150 300
Feet
Scale: 1:1,800 1 in = 150 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig5_JDMap_pages_ERE_01292026.mxd Print at 11" x 17"
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Survey Area
Culverts
Sample Points
!( Upland Sample Point
!( Wetland Sample Point
Transect Locations
Potential Aquatic Features
Ephemeral Drainage (0.09 ac, 695 lf)
Intermittent Drainage (0.56 ac, 3,711 lf)
Seasonal Wetland (1.19 ac)
Made in accordance with the Updated Map and Drawing
Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by: Jason Deters, Project Manager Enforcement and Special Projects UnitU.S. Army
Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Coordinate System:

NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Ft US Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Datum: NAD 1983 2011 // Units: Foot US
µ
4 3
1 2

486 of 556
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
ID 1a
(0.07 ac, 844 lnft)
SW 2
(0.11 ac)
ID 1b
(0.19 ac, 1,253 lnft)
ID 1c
(<0.01 ac, 25 lnft)
ID 1d
(0.16 ac, 615 lnft)
ED 1
(0.01 ac, 242 lnft)
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
6A
6B
6C
8A
9A
10A
11A
7A
15A
18A
14A
3B
5B
4B
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 5:

Corps Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Created on: 10/02/2025
Revised on: 01/29/2026
0 75 150 300
Feet
Scale: 1:1,800 1 in = 150 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig5_JDMap_pages_ERE_01292026.mxd Print at 11" x 17"
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Survey Area
Culverts
Sample Points
!( Upland Sample Point
!( Wetland Sample Point
Transect Locations
Potential Aquatic Features
Ephemeral Drainage (0.09 ac, 695 lf)
Intermittent Drainage (0.56 ac, 3,711 lf)
Seasonal Wetland (1.19 ac)
Made in accordance with the Updated Map and Drawing
Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by: Jason Deters, Project Manager Enforcement and Special Projects UnitU.S. Army
Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Coordinate System:

NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Ft US Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Datum: NAD 1983 2011 // Units: Foot US
µ
4 3
1 2

487 of 556
!(
ED 3
(0.03 ac, 242 lnft)
20A
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 5:

Corps Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Created on: 10/02/2025
Revised on: 01/29/2026
0 75 150 300
Feet
Scale: 1:1,800 1 in = 150 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig5_JDMap_pages_ERE_01292026.mxd Print at 11" x 17"
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Survey Area
Culverts
Sample Points !( Upland Sample Point !( Wetland Sample Point Transect Locations
Potential Aquatic Features
Ephemeral Drainage (0.09 ac, 695 lf)
Intermittent Drainage (0.56 ac, 3,711 lf)
Seasonal Wetland (1.19 ac)
Made in accordance with the Updated Map and Drawing
Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by: Jason Deters, Project Manager Enforcement and Special Projects UnitU.S. Army
Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Coordinate System:

NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Ft US Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Datum: NAD 1983 2011 // Units: Foot US µ4 31 2

488 of 556
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
ID 1d
(0.16 ac, 615 lnft)
ED 1
(0.01 ac, 242 lnft)
ED 2
(0.04 ac, 211 lnft)
SW 1
(0.06 ac)
12B
12A
10A
11A
18A
19A
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 5:

Corps Jurisdictional Delineation Map
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Created on: 10/02/2025
Revised on: 01/29/2026
0 75 150 300
Feet
Scale: 1:1,800 1 in = 150 feet
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig5_JDMap_pages_ERE_01292026.mxd Print at 11" x 17"
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Survey Area
Culverts
Sample Points
!( Upland Sample Point
!( Wetland Sample Point
Transect Locations
Potential Aquatic Features
Ephemeral Drainage (0.09 ac, 695 lf)
Intermittent Drainage (0.56 ac, 3,711 lf)
Seasonal Wetland (1.19 ac)
Made in accordance with the Updated Map and Drawing
Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program, as amended on February 10, 2016, by: Jason Deters, Project Manager Enforcement and Special Projects UnitU.S. Army
Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922
Coordinate System:

NAD 1983 2011 StatePlane California III FIPS 0403 Ft US Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Datum: NAD 1983 2011 // Units: Foot US
µ
4 3
1 2

489 of 556
Proposed
Easement
Area 1
Proposed
Easement
Area 2
Proposed
Easement
Area 3
Proposed
Easement
Area 4
Proposed
Easement
Area 5
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 6: Off-Site Mitigation Map
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
Existing Cayetano Creek Corridor
Quarry Lakes Proposed Mitigation
Annual Grassland Preservation (18.00 ac)
Drainage Creation (0.20 ac, 1,800 lf)
Riparian Creation (1.00 ac)
Cayetano Creek Corridor Preservation/Enhancement (0.38 ac) Seasonal Wetland Creation (3.40 ac)
Upland Swale Preservation (0.04 ac)
Ponded Portion of Seasonal Wetland Creation
Map Revision Date: 3/26/2026
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig6_OffSiteMitigation_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_03262026.mxd 0 800 1,600
Feet I Scale: 1:9,600 1 in = 800 feet
Print at 8.5" x 11"
490 of 556
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_ ^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_^_^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste. 165
Folsom, CA 95630
Phone: (916) 985-1188
Figure 7: Nearby Special-Status Species Occurrences
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area
Eagle Ridge Preserve East
Contra Costa & Alameda Counties, California
Eagle Ridge Preserve East Boundary
Nielson Property
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Boundary
Adjacent Preserve Properties
Olberding Special-Status Species Observations
^_ Badger
^_ Burrowing Owl
^_ California Red-Legged Frog
^_ California Tiger Salamander
CNDDB Occurrences
burrowing owl
California red-legged frog
California tiger salamander - central California DPS
Map Revision Date: 9/30/2025
Document Path: C:\Project Work\Eagle Ridge East\GIS\mxd\Fig7_TargetSpecies_ERE_QuarryLakesMitigation_09302025.mxd 0 2,000 4,000
Feet I Scale: 1:24,000 1 in = 2,000 feet
Print at 8.5" x 11"
491 of 556
Attachment 2
Representative Photographs
492 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area – March 2026

1. Photo one is taken from a hill slope near the northwestern portion of Eagle Ridge East Preserve, facing northeast. The photo shows the area that will be Proposed Easement Area 1 and the surrounding habitat. Photo taken November 13, 2024.

2. Photo two is taken from the eastern portion of Proposed Easement Area 2, facing west. The photo shows the grazed annual grassland habitat that makes up this Proposed Easement Area. Photo taken September 16, 2025. 493 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area – March 2026

3. Photo three shows a portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 3, facing north. The photo shows the box culvert that flows under Highland Road, hydrologically connecting Proposed Easement Area 2 with Cayetano Creek. Photo taken December 17, 2025.

4. Photo four shows the existing bank above the portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 3, facing north. It is proposed to construct seasonal wetlands and intermittent drainages adjacent to the channel in this area. Photo taken September 16, 2025.
494 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area – March 2026

5. Photo five shows a portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 4, facing east. Photo taken April 8, 2021.

6. Photo six shows a portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 4, facing west. It is proposed to construct seasonal wetlands and intermittent drainages adjacent to the channel in this area. Photo taken April 8, 2021.
495 of 556
Quarry Lakes Parkway Management Area – March 2026

7. Photo seven shows a portion of Cayetano Creek that flows through Proposed Easement Area 4, facing southwest. Photo taken March 6, 2025.

8. Photo eight shows the annual grassland habitat that makes up Proposed Easement Area 5, facing east. Photo taken December 17, 2025.
496 of 556
Attachment 3
Landscape Plan Set
497 of 556
© 2026 Microsoft Corporation © 2026 Maxar ©CNES (2026) Distribution Airbus DS DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

COVER SHEET
L-001 1
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

AREA MAP

MANNING RANCH SHEET INDEX

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY

HABITAT DEVELOPMENT

PROJECT

LIVERMORE, CA
FEBRUARY, 2026

NOT TO SCALE
N

LOCATION MAP
SAN

FRANCISCO

LOS ANGELS

MITIGATION AREA 'A'

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

SHEET INDEX
SHEET
NUMBER

SHEET TITLE
L-001 COVER SHEET
L-002 OVERVIEW PLAN
L-101 CONCEPT HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN
L-102 CONCEPT HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN
L-301 TYPICAL SECTIONS
L-302 TYPICAL SECTIONS
L-501 CONSTRUCTION NOTES & DETAILS
L-502 PLANTING NOTES, DETAILS, & SCHEDULES

ALAMEDA COUNTY

MANNING ROAD

HIGHLAND ROAD

ALAMEDA & CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

MITIGATION AREA 'B'

MITIGATION

AREA 'C'

MANNING RANCH
APN: 903-0002-001-01
132.67 AC

BASE DATA SOURCE INFORMATION

AERIAL IMAGERY MICROSOFT BING MAPS, ONLINE SATELLITE

IMAGERY STREAM USING AUTODESK CONNECTION
EXISTING CONTOURS 2019 - 2021 USGS LIDAR: ALAMEDA COUNTY, Ca

POINT CLOUD DATA SOURCE
ESTIMATED POINT SPACING: 0.1 m
HORIZONTAL ACCURACY: 14 cm
VERTICAL ACCURACY: 2 cm (OPEN TERRAIN)
BOUNDARY LAND TITLE MAP, DATED NOVEMBER 9, 2023
RICHARD MADDOCK, PLS 8131

EAGLE RIDGE

PRESERVE

CAYETANO
CREEK

MITIGATION
BANK

PRIMARY SOIL FILL /

SPOIL LOCATION

PRIMARY SOIL FILL /

SPOIL LOCATION

SECONDARY SOIL FILL /

SPOIL LOCATION

CARNEAL ROAD

COLLIER CANYON ROAD
498 of 556
© 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS © 2025 TMAP MOBILITY Earthstar Geographics SIO

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE

SOIL FILL LOCATIONS

WETLAND POND AREA
6" TALL BERM

STAGING AREAS

EXISTING DRAINAGES

3.4 AC

1.0 AC

0.38 AC

7.8 AC
1,800 LF
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

OVERVIEW PLAN
L-002 2
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

RIPARIAN AND WETLAND MITIGATION AREA 'B'
HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - SHEET L-101
WETLAND SECTION B1 - B1 - SHEET L-301
WETLAND SECTION B2 - B2, B3 - B3 - SHEET L-302

WETLAND MITIGATION AREA 'C'
HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - SHEET L-102
WETLAND SECTION C1 - C1 - SHEET L-302

MANNING ROAD

WETLAND MITIGATION AREA 'A'
HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN - SHEET L-101
WETLAND SECTION A1-A1 - SHEET L-301
N
0 400 feet
1" = 200'
200 600 800

HIGHLAND ROAD

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ALAMEDA COUNTY
499 of 556

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE

SOIL FILL LOCATIONS

WETLAND POND AREA
6" TALL BERM

STAGING AREAS

EXISTING DRAINAGES
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:36 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ens e No. 5873

ST A T E OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature Renewal Date Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

CONCEPT HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN
L-101 3
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

N HIGHLAND ROAD

MANNING ROAD

RIPARIAN MITIGATION AREA 'B'
0 100 feet
1" = 50'
50 150 200

RIPARIAN MITIGATION AREA 'A'

MANNING ROAD

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

ALAMEDA COUNTY

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

ALAMEDA COUNTY
6" TALL BERM, TYP.

A1
L-301
B1
L-301
B2
L-302
B3
L-302

ROCK ARMORED SPILLWAY

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY

10.00 5.00

10.00 5.00

35.00 10.00
500 of 556

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE

SOIL FILL LOCATIONS

WETLAND POND AREA
6" TALL BERM

STAGING AREAS

EXISTING DRAINAGES
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:36 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ens e No. 5873

ST A T E OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature Renewal Date Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

CONCEPT HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PLAN
L-102 4
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

MANNING ROAD
N
0 100 feet
1" = 50'
50 150 200

RIPARIAN MITIGATION AREA 'C'
C1
L-302

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY

10.00 25.00

25.00 10.00

10.00 30.00

10.00 30.00

30.00 10.00

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY
501 of 556

WETLAND GRADING
- CUT SLOPE -

EXISTING GRADE

SPILLWAY SHELF

SEASONAL WETLAND ESTABLISHMENT
- 0 INCHES TO 0.5 FOOT DEEP -

SEASONAL WETLAND ESTABLISHMENT
- 0 INCHES TO 0.5 FOOT DEEP -

ALL SEASONAL WETLAND ESTABLISHMENT SHALL BE OVER
EXCAVATED BY 3" TO ALLOW FOR PLACEMENT OF TOPSOIL SOIL
TO MEET FINISHED GRADES. SUBSOIL SHALL BE COMPACTED
ACCORDING TO SPECIFICATION PRIOR TO TOPSOIL BACKFILL.

ALL AREAS OUTSIDE OF SEASONAL WETLAND ESTABLISHMENT BASINS SHALL BE ROUGH GRADED TO 3" BELOW FINISHED GRADE TO ALLOW FOR PLACEMENT OF TOPSOIL. PONDING WATER SURFACE ELEVATION -

ELEVATION TO MATCH CONTROLLED OUTFLOW

SPILLWAY TO CREATED WETLAND SWALE OR
OUTFALL TO EXISTING DRAINAGE.

EXISTING GRADE

UPLAND SEPARATING PROPOSED WETLAND BASINS AND

EXISTING SEASONAL WETLAND SWALE SHALL MATCH
EXISTING GRADE. CREATED WETLANDS SHALL RANGE IN
DEPTH BETWEEN 0.0' TO 0.5' BELOW SPILLWAY ELEVATION.

LIMIT OF GRADING

UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EXCAVATE THE
WETLAND BASIN TO A DEPTH OF 3" BELOW FINISH
GRADE. ALL EXCAVATED SUBSOIL SHALL BE

PLACED AS FILL BASE MATERIAL AT A LOCATION

AGREED UPON BETWEEN THE CONTRACTOR AND
OWNER. ALL GRADED SURFACES SHALL BE CUT OR
FILLED TO 3" BELOW FINISHED GRADE TO ALLOW
FOR REAPPLICATION OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL.

AFTER WETLAND OVER-EXCAVATION (ROUGH

GRADE) THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HARROW AND
SCARIFY EXISTING SUBSOIL. AFTER THE

SUBSOIL IS SCARIFIED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
GRADE THE SUBSOIL TO A SMOOTH SURFACE 3"

BELOW FINISHED GRADE, WATER-CONDITION,
AND COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE DENSITY.

FOLLOWING SUBSOIL COMPACTION, A 3" LAYER

OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL SHALL BE EVENLY
PLACED TO MEET FINISHED GRADE AS PER PLAN.

PLACED TOPSOIL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 85%
RELATIVE DENSITY.

PROPOSED FINISHED GRADES: ALL PROPOSED GRADES ARE TO MEET AND BLEND IN WITH EXISTING GRADES AT PROJECT LIMITS OF GRADING AND EXISTING CONTOURS.

ELEVATIONELEVATION
718
720
730
740
718
720
730
740
-0+12 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 4+12
-0+12 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+12

ELEVATIONELEVATION
688
690
700
710
688
690
700
710
-0+12 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 3+62
-0+12 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 3+62
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

TYPICAL SECTIONS
L-301 5
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

TYPICAL WETLAND SPILLWAY SECTION

EXISTING GRADE SPILLWAY SHELF AND SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

TYPICAL WETLAND GRADING SECTION

WETLAND OVER EXCAVATION AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
SECTION A1
SECTION B1
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH
MAX 3' CUT EXISTING GRADE

WETLAND POND
3'-4' PONDING DEPTH

SPILL AT EXISTING GRADE
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT
MAX 3' CUT
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT

SPILL AT EXISTING GRADE

EXISTING GRADE SPILL AT EXISTING GRADE WETLAND POND
3'-4' PONDING DEPTH
502 of 556

ELEVATION

ELEVATION

STATION
668
670
680
690
700
668
670
680
690
700
-0+12 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 4+00 5+00 5+12
-0+12 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 5+12

ELEVATIONELEVATION
668
670
680
690
700
710
668
670
680
690
700
710
-0+12 0+00 1+00 2+00 3+00 3+12
-0+12 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 3+00 3+12

ELEVATIONELEVATION

STATION
PROFILE VIEW OF CL-8
638
640
650
660
670
638
640
650
660
670
-0+12 0+00 1+00 2+00 2+62
-0+12 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50 2+00 2+50 2+62
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

TYPICAL SECTIONS
L-302 6
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED
SECTION B2
SECTION B3
SECTION C1
MAX 3' CUT
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH

EXISTING GRADE
6" TALL BERM
6" TALL BERM
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH 6" TALL BERM 6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT

BOUNDARY /

EASEMENT

WETLAND POND
5'-6' PONDING DEPTH
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH
6" WETLAND PONDING DEPTH
MAX 3' CUT
MAX 3' CUT

FLOOD ELEVATION

ORDINARY HIGH WATER
503 of 556
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT:

CONSTRUCTION NOTES & DETAILS
L-501 7
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

SITE PREPARATION NOTES

1. INITIAL SITE PREPARATION: PRIOR TO GRADING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE PROJECT LIMIT OF WORK. FOLLOWING LIMIT OF WORK STAKING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MOW THE ENTIRE AREA WITHIN THE STAKED LIMITS. ALL NON-VEGETATED MATERIAL SHALL BE DISPOSED OFF SITE IN A LEGAL MANNER AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.

2. SITE STAKING: FOLLOWING SITE MOWING AND NON-VEGETATION CLEARING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IDENTIFY AND STAKE LIMIT OF GRADING, THE STAGING AND ACCESS ROUTES, AND THE TOPSOIL STOCKPILE AREA (LOCATION SHALL BE MUTUALLY AGREED ON BY CONTRACTOR AND CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE). STAKING SHALL BE PLACED NO MORE THAN FIVE FEET OUTSIDE THE LIMIT BOUNDARIES AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. STAKING SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST AND CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO GRADING OPERATIONS.

3. PROTECTIVE FENCING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN THE FOLLOWING PROTECTIVE FENCING FOR THE FOLLOWING SITUATIONS. THE FENCING SHALL BE THE TYPE DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR THE TIME PERIODS INDICATED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE FENCING PRIOR TO ANY CLEARING AND GRUBBING OR SITE GRADING.

3.1. EXISTING WETLANDS AND WATERS OF THE US: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL BIODEGRADABLE STRAW WATTLES A MINIMUM TWO FEET INLAND FROM EXISTING TOP OF BANK FOR ALL WATERS OF THE US ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT LIMIT OF GRADING. IF REQUIRED, A SILT FENCE SHALL BE KEYED ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH BASED ON MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES FOR THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.

3.2. ADJACENT OPEN SPACE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL LATH WITH ORANGE FLAGGING ALONG THE STAKED LIMIT OF WORK.

4. FUELING AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT GENERAL SITE AND MATERIAL MANAGEMENT BMPS FOR MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT THAT ARE IMPORTED TO THE SITE, SUCH AS PREVENTION OF LUBRICATION LEAKS FROM EQUIPMENT, FUEL, HYDRAULIC FLUID, AND TRANSMISSION FLUID. ALL EQUIPMENT FUELING SHALL BE DONE WITHIN THE STAGING AREA. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE A SPILL CONTROL PLAN APPROVED BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST.

5. EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL DOCUMENTATION: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DOCUMENT ALL MATERIALS BEING IMPORTED TO THE SITE TO DETERMINE APPLICABLE GENERAL SITE AND MATERIAL MANAGEMENT BMPs. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROPERLY STORE IMPORTED MATERIAL (BOTH HAZARDOUS AND NON-HAZARDOUS) IN A PROTECTED STORAGE AREA WITH SECONDARY CONTAINMENTS AND SHALL MAINTAIN AND INSPECT PORTABLE TOILETS AND ENSURING ALL WASTE CONTAINERS OR DUMPSTERS HAVE COVERS.

6. WATER TRUCK FILL STATION AND REQUIREMENTS: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NEGOTIATE A WATER TRUCK FILL LOCATION WITH THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST. THIS LOCATION MAY BE AN OFFSITE WATER HYDRANT. IF OFFSITE FILLING IS REQUIRED THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A WATER METER FROM THE APPROPRIATE ENTITY. A WATER TRUCK SHALL BE USED ON-SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION IN ORDER TO TOP DAMPEN THE SOIL TO PREVENT WIND EROSION, CONTROL DUST, AND TO OPTIMIZE SOIL MOISTURE FOR COMPACTION PURPOSES.

7. STAGING AND VEGETATION DISPOSAL AREA: PRIOR TO TOPSOIL SALVAGE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DEMARCATE THE STAGING AREA. THE STAGING AREA SHALL BE RELATIVELY LEVEL AND CLEAR OF ALL WOODY AND NON-VEGEGETATED DEBRIS.

1. TOPSOIL SALVAGE PREPARATION: PRIOR TO WETLAND EXCAVATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DISC THE TOP 3" OF TOPSOIL (INCLUDING VEGETATION) ACROSS ALL AREAS WITHIN THE LIMIT OF GRADING.

2. TOPSOIL STOCKPILE: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE THE TOP 3" OF TOPSOIL FROM ALL AREAS WITHIN THE LIMIT OF GRADING AND STOCKPILE AT THE APPROVED TOPSOIL STOCKPILE LOCATIONS.

STOCKPILED TOPSOIL SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 50' FROM EXISTING JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND SHALL HAVE APPROPRIATE PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL AND EROSION CONTROL AS REQUIRED BY THE PROJECT RELATED PERMITS.

3. ROUGH WETLAND EXCAVATION AND UPLAND SUBSOIL PLACEMENT: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OVER-EXCAVATE THE WETLAND BASIN TO A DEPTH OF 3". ALL GRADED SURFACES SHALL BE CUT OR FILLED TO 3" BELOW FINISHED GRADE TO ALLOW FOR RE-APPLICATION OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL.

4. SUBSOIL TREATMENT: AFTER WETLAND OVER-EXCAVATION (ROUGH GRADE) THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY EXISTING SUBSOIL TO A DEPTH OF 3". AFTER THE SUBSOIL IS SCARIFIED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GRADE THE SUBSOIL TO A SMOOTH SURFACE 3" BELOW FINISHED GRADE, WATER-CONDITION, AND COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE DENSITY. FOLLOWING SUBSOIL COMPACTION, A 3" LAYER OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL SHALL BE EVENLY PLACED TO MEET FINISHED GRADE AS PER PLAN. PLACED TOPSOIL SHALL BE COMPACTED TO 85% RELATIVE DENSITY.

5. PROPOSED FINISHED GRADES : ALL PROPOSED GRADES ARE TO MEET AND BLEND IN WITH EXISTING GRADES AT PROJECT LIMIT OF GRADING AND EXISTING CONTOURS. PRECISE ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON THE PLANS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN FIELD AND RECORDED TO ON AS-BUILT PLANS.

6. TOPSOIL STOCKPILE AREA: AFTER RE-APPLICAITON OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL AND FINISHED GRADES HAVE BEEN MET, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RIP AND FLOAT OUT ANY REMAINING TOPSOIL WITHIN THE STOCKPILE AREA TO MEET, AS BEST AS POSSIBLE, THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION ELEVATIONS AND WATERSHEDS. AFTER TOPSOIL HAS BEEN SPREAD THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIGHTLY RIP AND SCARIFY THE AREA TO CREATE A FRIABLE LOOSE TOPSOIL PLANTING MEDIUM PRIOR TO SEEDING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SEED AND HYDRO-MULCH THE AREA PER THE SEEDING PALETTE AND NOTES SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS.

7. CONTRACT AGREEMENT: NO CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE SHALL BE ALLOWED FOR ACTUAL OR CLAIMED DISCREPANCY BETWEEN EXISTING GRADE AND THOSE SHOWN ON THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AFTER CONTRACTOR HAS ACCEPTED EXISTING GRADES AND MOVED ONTO THE SITE.

8. FINISH GRADES: FINISH GRADES AND FINAL PRE-SEEDING GRADING SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST AND THE CONTRACTOR'S ECOLOGIST IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO SEEDING.

9. SEEDBED PREPARATION: PRIOR TO SEEDING AND INSTALLATION OF EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THE TOP 1" - 2" OF TOPSOIL IS LOOSE AND FRIABLE WITH NO CLODS LARGER THAN 3" IN DIAMETER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HARROW SEEDBED SURFACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SEEDING NOTES.

10. COMPACTION TESTING: COMPACTION MAY BE SPOT CHECK BY A THIRD PARTY. CLIENT TO PROVIDE SPOT CHECKING. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW FOR A MIN. 48 HOURS PRIOR TO TOPSOIL BACKFILL OR SEEDING TO ALLOW FOR CLIENT TO SPOT CHECK COMPACTION.

TOPSOIL SALVAGE, GRADING, AND SEED BED PREPARATION

1. VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY: LOCATION AND EXTENT OF EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE SPILLWAYS INTO EXISTING DRAINAGES ARE TO BE DETERMINED. SEE DETAIL ON THIS SHEET FOR TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS. THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST SHALL STAKE LOCATIONS AND EXTENTS OF VEGETATED SOIL LIFTS, CLEAN COBBLE ROCK SPILL WAY, AND CLEAN COBBLE ROCK ENERGY DISSIPATER IN THE FIELD AND SHALL REVIEW WITH THE CONTRACTOR'S ECOLOGIST.

2. WETLAND TO WETLAND SPILLWAYS: ALL WETLAND TO WETLAND SPILLWAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED USING BIODEGRADABLE EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS. THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST SHALL STAKE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET BOUNDARY IN THE FIELD AND SHALL REVIEW WITH THE CONTRACTOR'S ECOLOGIST.

WATER CONTROL FEATURES
4" - 8" CLEAN

COBBLE ROCK

ENERGY DISSIPATER

WILLOW CUTTING OR ROOTED
BACHARRIS SP. BRUSH LAYER,
PLACED MIN. 3' O.C. BETWEEN
LIFTS. CUTTINGS SHALL BE 5' - 7'
LONG SET MIN. 12" INTO
UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL.

DRIVE WILLOW
STAKE 5' - 10' O.C.

VERTICALLY ALONG

BOTTOM LIFT SET
MIN. 24" INTO

UNDISTURBED
NATIVE SOIL.

NATIVE SOIL WRAPPED IN DOUBLE LAYER OF
LONG-LASTING (3 YEAR) BIODEGRADABLE

GEOTEXTILE FABRIC OR GRID OF GEOTEXTILE

BURLAP SACKS FILLED WITH NATIVE SOIL AND
STAPLED SHUT. SEED WITH RIPARIAN SEED
MIX PRIOR TO WRAPPING / STAPLING. KEY-IN

TOP LAYER OF FABRIC INTO EXISTING SOIL
MIN. 8". NUMBER OF LIFTS DEPENDENT ON

SPILLWAY LOCATION (ELEVATION CHANGE
AND DISTANCE).
2" LAYER OF NATIVE SOIL PLACED BETWEEN LIFTS WITH BRUSH MAT ANCHOR IN FABRIC WITH MIN. 4" WOOD STAKE
AT FRONT AND BACK OF LIFTS SPACED 1' O.C.

KEY LIFTS MIN. 1

FOOT INTO

EXISTING
CHANNEL BANK.

PLACE CLEAN
COBBLE MIN. 2' - 3' UP
SIDE OF CHANNEL BANK.
8 OZ. NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC KEYED IN ON ALL SIDES BELOW ALL ROCK. 2" LAYER SOIL BETWEEN
FABRIC AND ROCK. SEED WITH

WETLAND SEED MIX PRIOR TO
FABRIC PLACEMENT.

EXISTING GRADE

SPILLWAY, GRADED TO

ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS

BIODEGRADABLE

EROSION CONTROL
BLANKET (20 OZ/SY

WOVEN COIL MAT -

BLRD-MAT OR EQUAL)

KEYED IN ON ALL
SIDES. INSTALL PER

MANUFACTURER'S

RECOMMENDATION

VEGETATED SOIL LIFTS

EXTEND FOR FULL WIDTH
OF SPILLWAY.

CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY

WITH OWNER THE LIMITS

OF THE WIDTH AND

LENGTH OF EACH

STRUCTURE AT EACH

OUTFALL LOCATION AS
IDENTIFIED ON THE PLAN.

VEGETATED SOIL LIFT SPILLWAY
12" LAYER OF LOOSELY PLACED 4" - 8" CLEAN
COBBLE ROCK. FILL ALL VOID WITH NATIVE SOIL.
1 CREATED EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
8 OZ. NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
KEYED IN ON ALL SIDES BELOW ALL ROCK.

EXISTING GRADE

ROCK ARMORED SPILLWAY
12" LAYER OF LOOSELY PLACED 4" - 8" CLEAN
COBBLE ROCK. FILL ALL VOID WITH NATIVE SOIL.
12" LAYER OF LOOSELY PLACED 4" - 8" CLEAN
COBBLE ROCK. FILL ALL VOID WITH NATIVE SOIL.
2 8 OZ. NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
KEYED IN ON ALL SIDES BELOW ALL ROCK.

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE CREATION
12" LAYER OF LOOSELY PLACED 4" - 8" CLEAN COBBLE
ROCK. FILL ALL VOID WITH NATIVE SOIL. PLACED
WHERE RUNNING SLOPE IS 30:1 OR STEEPER
5:1 SLOPE
3 504 of 556
DRAFT
This document shall not be used for
construction unless signed and sealed for
construction. Sheet No.

Original Size
Title
Project
Client
Drawn Designer
Scale
Plot Date: 27 February 2026 - 11:20 AM Filename: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Roseville\Projects\561\12679153\Digital_Design\ACAD\Sheets\12679153_CONCEPT PLAN.dwg ANSI D
Date
Plotted By: Lucas Piper
Project No.

Sheet of
Reuse of Documents
This document and the ideas and designs incorporated
herein, as an instrument of professional service, is the property of GHD and shall not be reused in whole or in part for any other project without GHD's written authorization. © 2026 GHD
Drafting
Check
0 1"
Bar is one inch on
original size sheet
Design
Check
No. Issue Drawn Approved Date
Project
Manager

CONCEPT DESIGN
ROCKY RIDGE, LLC.

MANNING RANCH HABITAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
12679153
8 GHD Inc. L. PIPER SEPTEMBER 2025 No.

NOTE:

PLANSET CONTENT
COLOR-DEPENDENT;

PLANSET TO BE PLOTTED

IN FULL COLOR

L ICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC
L
T
UCA S R. PIPER Lic ense No. 5 873

STA TE OF CA LIFORNIA
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
10/31/2026
xx/xx/xxxx 201 Creekside Ridge Court, Ste 100
Roseville, CA 95678
T: 1 916 918 0626
Rocky Ridge, LLC.
193 Blue Ravine Road, Ste 165
Folsom, CA 95630
T: 1 916 985 1188
CLIENT: PLANTING NOTES, DETAILS, & SCHEDULES
L-502 8
L. GOLLER E. PONTE
E. PONTE L. PIPER

AS NOTED

1. FIELD VERIFY: CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING

CONDITIONS, IF ANY PART OF THIS PLAN CANNOT BE FOLLOWED DUE TO SITE

CONDITIONS, CONTACT THE CLIENT'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR DIRECTION AS TO HOW TO PROCEED.

2. SOIL BACKFILL: CONTRACTOR SHALL BACKFILL THE PLANTING PITS WITH IMPORTED TOPSOIL THAT MEETS THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:
· AMENDED USDA CATEGORIZED LOAM, SANDY CLAY LOAM, OR SANDY LOAM CONTAINING BETWEEN 15% AND 25% CLAY WITH A COMBINED CLAY/SILT CONTENT OF MAX. 55%
· SOIL PH BETWEEN 6.0 AND 7.0
· LESS THAN 3 MMHO/CM SOLUBLE SALT
· SOIL SHALL BE AMENDED WITH ORGANIC, WEED-FREE COMPOST TO ENSURE 5% MINIMUM ORGANIC MATTER BY DRY WEIGHT (SOIL WILL BE MADE UP OF 20% - 30% COMPOST, TYP.
· SOIL SHALL CONTAIN SUFFICIENT PORE SPACE TO PERMIT ADEQUATE

SPACE FOR ROOT PENETRATION AND ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE

PERCOLATION

3. PLANTING PITS: PLANTING PITS SHALL BE THE DEPTH AND DIAMETER AS SHOWN PER THE DETAILS THIS SHEET. IF PLANTING PITS ARE EXCAVATED

USING A POWER AUGER, BREAK VERTICAL SIDES WITH A METAL ROD OR SPADE TO INTERRUPT CONTINUOUS CURVE INFLUENCE IN ROOT DEVELOPMENT.

4. COMPLIANCE: CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL

LAWS AND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE INSPECTION FOR PLANT DISEASES AND INSECT INFESTATION.

5. IDENTIFICATION: CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY CORRECT SPECIES OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL. ALL CONTAINERIZED PLANTS SHALL HAVE WELL-DEVELOPED BRANCH AND/OR ROOT SYSTEMS.

6. INSPECTION: PLANTS ARE SUBJECT TO PROJECT BIOLOGIST AND CLIENT'S

INSPECTION AND APPROVAL FOR SIZE, VARIETY, CONDITION, ROOT

DEVELOPMENT DEFECTS, AND INJURY UPON DELIVERY TO THE PROJECT SITE OR AT ANY TIME BEFORE AND DURING PROGRESS OF WORK.

7. REJECTION: CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE REJECTED PLANTS FROM THE SITE IMMEDIATELY AND REPLACE WITH ACCEPTABLE MATERIALS AS SPECIFIED.

8. SUBSTITUTION: PLANT SIZE, SEED QUANTITIES, AND/OR SPECIES

SUBSTITUTIONS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHOUT THE CLIENT'S AND THE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE'S WRITTEN APPROVAL.

9. QUANTITIES: CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING ALL PLANT COUNTS BY SPECIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT CORRECT NUMBER OF TREES AND SHRUBS ARE INSTALLED.

10. CONTAINER SIZES: ALL PLANT CONTAINER SIZES SHALL BE VERIFIED AND

PLANTED IN THE APPROPRIATE PLANTING POLYGONS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS AND PLANT PALETTES.

11. TAG REMOVAL: CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE TAGS, LABELS, NURSERY STAKES

AND TIES FROM ALL PLANTS AFTER DELIVERY INSPECTION AND LOCATION APPROVAL BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST AND PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

12. LOCATION: EXACT PLANT LOCATION AND FLAGGING/STAKING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST. THE CONTRACTOR'S ECOLOGIST

SHALL WORK WITH THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST TO ENSURE THAT FLAGGING AND STAKING LOCATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL PLANT SPECIES ARE ADHERED TO. EXACT

LOCATIONS STAKED IN THE FIELD BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST SHALL NOT BE MOVED UNLESS APPROVED BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST.

13. SPACING: ALL CONTAINER PLANTS ARE TO BE ALIGNED AND SPACED IN ALL DIRECTIONS AS STAKED IN THE FIELD BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST.

14. STAKING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MARK THE PLANTING BOUNDARIES PRIOR TO INDIVIDUAL PLANT STAKING. FOLLOWING BOUNDARY MARKING, THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST SHALL STAKE PLANT LOCATIONS BY SPECIES. PLANTING

LOCATIONS FOR CONTAINER PLANTS SHALL BE MARKED WITH COLOR-CODED AND LABELED PIN FLAGS BY THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST. THE PROJECT BIOLOGIST

SHALL ENSURE THAT PLANT QUANTITIES FOR SHRUBS AND TREES MATCH THE

QUANTITIES LISTED ON THE PLANTING AND IRRIGATION PLANS AND AS INDICATED IN ON THE PLANT PALETTE. PLANTING MAY BEGIN AFTER REVIEW

AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE THE FLAGGED LAYOUT AND IRRIGATION SYSTEM INSTALLATION.

15. INSTALLATION OF CONTAINER PLANTS: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATE

PLANT HOLES TO A MINIMUM OF THREE FEET DEEP AND THREE TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE CONTAINER SIZE. THE SIDES OF THE HOLES SHALL BE SCARIFIED TO ELIMINATE SMOOTH SURFACES PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION. THE PLANT

HOLES SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH IMPORTED SOIL THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AS STATED ON THESE PLANS. ONCE INSTALLED, IRRIGATE TO SETTLE LOOSE SOIL. BEFORE THE PLANTS ARE SET IN, A SHALLOW WATER RETENTION BASIN 36" IN DIAMETER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND EACH

WOODY PLANTING SUCH THAT IRRIGATION WATER MAY FILL AROUND THE PLANT BUT NOT SUBMERGE THE CROWN OF THE ROOT AREA. FILL BASIN WITH WOOD MULCH TO A DEPTH OF 3" FOLLOWING BERM CREATION. AFTER INSTALLATION

ALL CONTAINER PLANTS SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY WATERED-IN TO AVOID TRANSPLANT SHOCK AND SETTLING.

16. INSTALLATION INSPECTION: CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 24

HOURS AFTER PLANTING PIT CREATION, BACKFILL, AND WATERING IN, TO

ALLOW FOR PROJECT BIOLOGIST TO INSPECT PLANTING PITS PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY PROJECT BIOLOGIST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO INSPECTION.

17. CROWN: WOODY CONTAINER PLANTS SHALL BE PLACED SO THAT THE CROWN IS SET 1
2 " TO 1" ABOVE EXISTING GRADE TO ENSURE POSITIVE DRAINAGE FROM THE CROWN TO THE WATERING BASIN AND ALLOW FOR SETTLING. A SLOW-RELEASE 20-10-5 AGRIFORM FERTILIZER TABLET SHALL BE SET ADJACENT TO THE ROOT BALL APPROXIMATELY HALFWAY UP FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOT BALL.

THREE TABLESPOONS OF MYCORRHIZAE IN GRANULAR FORM SHALL BE

SPRINKLED INTO THE PLANTING PIT AFTER ENOUGH BACKFILL HAS BEEN ADDED TO MAKE THE PIT READY TO ACCEPT THE PLANT. THE WATERING BERM IS A RIM

OF SOIL DESIGNED TO HOLD WATER NEAR THE PLANT WITHIN THE WATERING BASIN. PLANTS THAT SETTLE BELOW THE BASIN BOTTOMS SHALL BE RAISED

BACK TO REQUIRED LEVEL, WITH ADDITIONAL SOIL ADDED IF NECESSARY AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE CLIENT.

PLANTING NOTES

PLANT PALETTES

TREE AND SHRUB CONTAINER PLANTINGS

BOTANICAL NAME / COMMON NAME
AREA 1.38 AC
SIZE
QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA / COAST LIVE OAK 15 GALLON

BACCHARIS PILULARIS / COYOTE BRUSH

ROSA CALIFORNICA / CALIFORNIA ROSE

JUGLANS CALIFORNICA / CALIFORNIA BLACK WALNUT
1 GALLON
1 GALLON
SALIX LASIOLEPIS / S. LAEVIGATA / ARROYO OR RED WILLOW

QUERCUS LOBATA / VALLEY OAK
5 GALLON
15 GALLON
5 GALLON
5 GALLON

CUTTING
QTY. REQ.
13 13
25 25
9 43
31 31

RUBUS URSINUS / CALIFORNIA BLACKBERRY

SAMBUCUS NIGRA CAERULEA / BLUE ELDERBERRY
1 GALLON
1 GALLON
43 10
5 GALLON 19
AESCULUS CALIFORNICA 5 GALLON 25 / CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE
ACER NEGUNDO 5 GALLON 13 / BOX ELDER

QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA / COAST LIVE OAK

QUERCUS LOBATA / VALLEY OAK
SALIX LASIOLEPIS / S. LAEVIGATA / ARROYO OR RED WILLOW

SEED BED PREPARATION AND SEEDING

FOLLOWING FINISH GRADING AND TOPSOIL PLACEMENT, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BROADCAST SEED AND HYDRO-MULCH ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING 2-STEP METHOD PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FABRIC:

1. BROADCAST APPROPRIATE SEED MIX AT RATES SHOWN WITH MYCORRHIZAL INOCULUM MIXED IN BROADCASTER AT A RATE OF 15 LBS PER ACRE. FOLLOWING SEEDING

HARROW ENTIRE SEEDED AREA TO ENSURE PROPER SEED TO SOIL CONTRACT WITHIN THE TOP 1 - 2 INCHES OF SOIL.

2. FOLLOWING SEEDING, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HYDRO-MULCH THE ENTIRE SEEDED AREA. HYDRO SLURRY SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING COMPONENTS AND MINIMUM RATES:

2.1. COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE WEED FREE HYDRO-WOOD FIBER MULCH (MUST BE APPROVED BY PROJECT BIOLOGIST) AT A RATE OF 2,000 LBS / ACRE.

2.2. GREEN DYED CELLULOSE FIBER MULCH AT A RATE OF 500 LBS/ACRE (UNLESS

INCLUDED IN WOOD FIBER MULCH)

2.3. ORGANIC TACKIFIER AT 125 LBS/ACRE

2.4. CLEAN WATER (TO CREATE AN ADEQUATE SLURRY FOR HYDRAULIC APPLICATION) 1" 1'-0"Ԁ

TREE PLANTING (STAKE AND BROWSE PROTECTION FENCE)

PLANT PIT DETAIL STAKING DETAIL
1 P-MA-03
505 of 556
Attachment 4
Hydrology Report
506 of 556

GEOTECHNICAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

WATER RESOURCES

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

COASTAL/MARINE GEOTECHNICS
2633 Camino Ramon, Suite 250  San Ramon, CA 94583  (925) 866-9000  [email protected] www.engeo.com
Project No.
11134.000.005
October 3, 2025
Revised April 3, 2026
Mr. Jeff Olberding
Olberding Environmental, Inc.
3170 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 260
San Ramon, CA 94583
Subject: Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area
Livermore, California

WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS
Dear Mr. Olberding:

We have completed our water availability analysis for the proposed Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area located in Livermore, California. The mitigation area is primarily located within the greater Eagle Ridge Preserve, which is being developed as a mitigation bank. The Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area is situated in both Alameda County and Contra Costa County on either side of the Contra Costa/Alameda County line, surrounding the intersection of Manning Road and Highland Road, north of the City of Livermore, as shown in Figure 1 (attached). The proposed mitigation area plans to develop four wetland complexes to create a total of 3.41 acres of wetlands.

Historically, the property has been used for dry farming and grazing. The purpose of this analysis was to develop an understanding of the typical flow volumes that could be expected in several proposed seasonal wetland areas. The flow-volume results of the analysis were then used to develop an estimate of available water to sustain the typical wetland vegetation types, which are proposed for the wetland areas.

1.0 HYDROLOGIC SETTING
There are three wetland complexes proposed for the mitigation area, as shown in the Vicinity Map in Figure 1. Wetland Complex A drains southwesterly towards Collier Creek, while the other wetland complexes (B and C) drain into Manning Creek to the east. Watershed maps are included in Figures 2 through 6 (attached). The isohyetal map of Contra Costa County mean annual precipitation indicates that approximately 17 inches of annual precipitation occurs per year in the area of the proposed mitigation bank (Contra Costa Public Works, 1977). The isohyetal map prepared by the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (2016) indicates approximately 16 inches of annual precipitation in the area, which is assumed to more accurately reflect the changed rainfall conditions due to climate change at the site. The area generally exhibits a mild, Mediterranean-type climate with warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. 507 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

2.0 GEOLOGY
The Cayetano Creek watershed is located in the Mount Diablo fold-and-thrust belt on the southern flank of the Mount Diablo uplift. The bedrock formations in the area south of Mount Diablo and north of the Livermore Valley have been folded and cut by thrust faults that typically dip toward the north, according to recent geologic mapping by Crane (1995) and Graymer, et al. (1996). The site is underlain by Pliocene non-marine sedimentary rock consisting of weakly indurated claystone, siltstone, and thin beds of sandstone and pebble conglomerate.

Soil mapping of the watershed prepared by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) indicates that surficial soil materials primarily consist of montmorillonitic clay soil with a hydrologic group rating of ‘D.’ Group ‘D’ soil is defined as having a very slow infiltration rate when thoroughly saturated. As a result, the watershed is characterized by rapid run-off characteristics after saturation has occurred.

3.0 CLIMATE
This study uses average monthly data to determine the water balance of the studied system.

ENGEO is unaware of any current or historical precipitation study performed at or near the site that could be used to estimate the mean monthly precipitation amounts for the site. Therefore, data from a weather station located at the Livermore Municipal Airport, which is approximately 6 miles south of the site, was utilized to estimate the values shown in Table 3-1. Historical daily precipitation data for water years 1991 to present were obtained from the Livermore Municipal Airport weather station from the joint National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) website (NOAA and NCDC, 2025); this website identifies this weather station as Weather Station Number 724927. The site has approximately the same precipitation and temperature characteristics as the Livermore Municipal Airport in terms of annual expected rainfall and temperature intensities. Table 3.0-1 summarizes the mean monthly precipitation amounts for the site.

TABLE 3.0-1: Monthly Mean Precipitation (inches)

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

2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 Source: Livermore Municipal Airport Station (NOAA and NCDC, 2025)

4.0 WATER BUDGET – PROPOSED MITIGATION AREA
The water budget defines and quantifies the important input and output parameters, such as precipitation, evapotranspiration, and infiltration into or out of a given body of water. These parameters are analyzed individually to develop expected numerical value flux estimates, and the sum of the parts provides an estimate of available water at a given time step. For this project, the summation analysis approximates the volumes of available surface water expected to flow through, or be retained in, the proposed wetland each month. 508 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

As illustrated in Diagram 1 below, the model that is analyzed in this report is expressed mathematically as:

Δ𝑆
Δ𝑡
= 𝑅𝑖𝑛 + 𝐷𝑃 − 𝐸𝑇 − 𝑅𝑜𝑢𝑡 − 𝐺𝑜𝑢𝑡
Where,
ΔS/Δt: Change in storage over time
Rin: Surface Inflow (including upstream run-on in acre-ft/month) DP: Direct Precipitation (in acre-ft/month)
ET: Evapotranspiration (in acre-ft/month)
Rout: Surface Outflow (in acre-ft/month)
Gout: Subsurface Infiltration (in ac-ft/month
An estimate of the amount of water available to the proposed plant palette is considered separately in this document.

4.1 INFLOW PARAMETERS
For the water budget, we quantified several sources of both inflow and outflow to each wetland complex. It is assumed that all portions of the tributary watershed will flow into each wetland complex through a series of diversion structures. Inflow components included direct precipitation falling on areas within the proposed wetlands. We calculated these inflows using published precipitation data, approximate project watershed areas, and hydrologic calculations to estimate runoff from developed sites, as described below.
• For purposes of this analysis, we estimate that 10 percent of the total volume of rainfall occurring within the upstream watershed will be transformed into rainfall runoff and enter the creek channel as surface flow in the study area for an average month. The 10 percent overall estimate of total rainfall volume entering the wetlands as rainfall runoff corresponds with United States Geological Survey estimates for the area, according to a study by Rantz (1971) and with rainfall-runoff transformation estimates used by the California Stormwater Quality Association. The 10 percent estimate considers seasonal variations in rainfall intensity and the nature of clay soil in the watershed, which often retains considerable water in the early rainfall season. The estimate is, thus, somewhat conservative in the spring after watershed saturation occurs and water requirements of plantings are higher. The upstream watershed area to the restoration project is estimated by ENGEO as 145.7 acres, as shown in Figure 1.

The 145.7 acres is generally open space grassland but also consists of 4.1 acres of impervious surfaces from Manning Road north of Wetlands A and C, and a structure and access road to the north of Wetland A. Runoff from the impervious regions will essentially flow directly into the proposed wetland. The remaining part of the watershed is open grassland and vegetation.
• 100 percent of direct precipitation based on average monthly rainfall is also included in the analysis over the total project area as a hydrologic input.

Tables 4.1-1 to 4.1-8 in Appendix A (attached) summarize the results of the monthly inflows for the various wetlands.
509 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

4.2 OUTFLOW PARAMETERS
The outflow components of our water balance consisted of evapotranspiration and groundwater infiltration, and we calculated these using both published data and approximations. Several of these assumptions are listed as follows.
• Groundwater infiltration is difficult to estimate in ephemeral channels in semiarid and arid regions, such as the proposed project, because periods of stream flow are unpredictable, typically of short duration, and because seepage losses are unsteady in initially dry channels.

Based on research conducted by Niswonger et al. (2008), we estimate losses to infiltration as being 5 percent of the total volume of stream flow entering the channel per reach, as an average, for purposes of this study.
• Evapotranspiration is estimated based on referenced evapotranspiration measured since 2004 for Pleasanton, California, based on the plant palette associated with the project. The reduction of the evapotranspiration rates by a crop factor of 0.7 was used to account for the employment of native vegetation in the planting scheme. Therefore, the total evapotranspiration for the native plant palettes used in the study and inherent in the creek corridor is estimated as 70 percent of the evapotranspiration rate expected for reference agricultural crops in conformance with recommendations from the California Irrigation Management Information System. The evapotranspiration for the project site is shown in Table 4.2.1 below.
• The analysis assumes all wetland areas contain wetland vegetation that will evapotranspire any available water. Therefore, evaporation losses are considered negligible.

TABLE 4.2-1: Monthly Evapotranspiration in Project Area

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Monthly
Evapotranspiration
(in.)

1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 Adjusted
Evapotranspiration
(in.)

1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 Tables 4.2-2 to 4.2-9 in Appendix A show the monthly water outflows for the proposed wetlands.

4.3 PLANT AVAILABLE WATER
In months with calculated inflow, the wetland vegetation is assumed to evapotranspire available surface water up to the limit of maximum estimated evapotranspiration. In months with no inflow, wetland vegetation is assumed to rely on residual water found in the vadose zone or in perched groundwater sources. For wetland grasses; however, they will likely not be sustained. The Plant Available Water (PAW) is shown below, along with the study results summary in Tables 4.3-1 to 4.3-8 below.
510 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

TABLE 4.3-1: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed A

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 1.26 1.30 1.02 0.55 0.23 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.44 0.75 1.59 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.44 0.55 0.62 0.66 0.58 0.44 0.33 0.20 0.18 Outflow (ac-ft) 1.08 1.05 0.67 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.55 1.41 PAW (ac-ft) 0.13 0.20 0.31 0.42 0.23 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.31 0.17 0.12 TABLE 4.3-2: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed B1

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 1.52 1.56 1.23 0.66 0.28 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.54 0.90 1.91 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.17 0.23 0.31 0.37 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.47 0.36 0.28 0.18 0.18 Outflow (ac-ft) 1.34 1.33 0.92 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.72 1.73 PAW (ac-ft) 0.11 0.16 0.26 0.34 0.28 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.25 0.14 0.10 TABLE 4.3-3: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed B2

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.10 0.21 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.03 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.13 0.12 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.18 PAW (ac-ft) 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.03 TABLE 4.3-4: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C1

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.07 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.06 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 TABLE 4.3-5: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C2

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.15 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.14 PAW (ac-ft) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 511 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

TABLE 4.3-6: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C3

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.20 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.18 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 TABLE 4.3-7: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C4

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.20 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.18 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 TABLE 4.3-8: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C5

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.17 Total Potential Loss
(ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.16 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00

4.4 WATER BUDGET CONCLUSIONS
As shown by Table 4.3-1 to Table 4.3-8 above, we expect the wetland areas to be dry for approximately 4 months out of the year between June and September, when potential losses greatly exceed inflows and PAW values are minimal. However, saturated to near-saturated conditions should exist in the proposed wetland areas from October through May.

5.0 CONCLUSION
Land uses upstream of the project are outside of the Contra Costa County urban limit line and are, therefore, expected to remain relatively the same in the future. We expect that any minor modifications to the upstream watershed that could affect run-on flows do not adversely affect the ability of the wetland performance, given the assumptions used in the water balance calculations.

We note that the State Water Resources Control Board regulates the diversion and impoundment of rainfall runoff and, therefore, large diversions of upstream flows are unlikely. 512 of 556
Olberding Environmental, Inc. 11134.000.005
Quarry Lakes Parkway Mitigation Area October 3, 2025
WATER AVAILABILITY ANALYSIS Revised April 3, 2026

Based on the above analyses, the project appears to be feasible from a hydrologic perspective, given the performance criteria we have been provided. If you have any questions or comments regarding this letter, please call, and we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,
ENGEO Incorporated
Natasha Marsden Jonathan Buck, PE, GE
jb/ch/rhb/ss
Attachments: Selected References
Figures
Appendix A – Water Balance Calculations
513 of 556
11134.000.005
October 3, 2025
Revised April 3, 2026

SELECTED REFERENCES

1. Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. 2016. Mean Annual Precipitation. Attachment 6. Revised August 5, 2025.

2. California Irrigation Management Information System. 2025. Pleasanton Gage, Pleasanton, California. 2025.

3. Contra Costa County Public Works Department. 1977. Mean Seasonal Isohyets Compiled from Precipitation Records 1879-1973. Drawing Number B-166. Revised January 1, 2010.

4. Crane, R. 1995. Geology of the Mount Diablo Region, in Geology of the Mount Diablo Region Guidebook, Northern California Geological Society.

5. Graymer, R. W. et al. 1996. Preliminary Geologic Map Emphasizing Bedrock Formations in Alameda County, California. Derived from the Digital Database Open-File 96-252, U.S.Geological Survey.

6. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2025. Daily precipitation for Livermore Station GHCND:USC00044997. https://www.weather.gov/wrh/climate

7. National Conservation Resource Service; www.websoilsurvey.com, Dublin California. 2025.

8. Niswonger et al. 2008. Method for Estimating Spatially Variable Seepage Loss and Hydraulic Conductivity in Intermittent and Ephemeral Streams. Water Resources Research Vol 44. 2008.

9. Rantz, S.E. 1974. Mean annual runoff in the San Francisco Bay Region, California, -70.

Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-613, Department of the Interior, States Geological Survey, prepared in cooperation with the California Department of Water Resources, San Francisco Bay Region Environment and Resources Planning Study. 514 of 556
11134.000.005
October 3, 2025
Revised April 3, 2026

FIGURES
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Wetland Area A
Figure 3 – Wetland Area B1
Figure 4 – Wetland Area B2
Figure 5 – Wetland Area C
515 of 556

MANNING ROAD

HIGHLAND ROAD

EAGLE RIDGE PRESERVE BOUNDARY NELSON PROPERTY

WATERSHED A
WATERSHED B1
WATERSHED C1
WATERSHED C2
WATERSHED B2

EAGLE RIDGE

PRESERVE BOUNDARY

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
/ ALAMEDA COUNTY LINE
WATERSHED C3
WATERSHED C4 WATERSHED C5
Expect Excellence

VICINITY MAP

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MITIGATION AREA

LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA
11134.000.005
AS SHOWN 1
N
0 FEET 900

WATERSHED AREA

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

EXISTING DRAINAGE

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
LEGEND
516 of 556

WATERSHED A

49.12 ac.

WETLAND AREA A

1.48 ac.
9-INCH CULVERT
18-INCH CULVERT
Expect Excellence

WETLAND AREA A

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MITIGATION AREA

LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA
11134.000.005
AS SHOWN 2
N
0 FEET 400

WATERSHED AREA

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

RIPARIAN CREATION

EXISTING DRAINAGE

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
LEGEND
517 of 556
WATERSHED B1

64.80 ac.

WETLAND AREA B1

1.21 ac.

Expect Excellence
WETLAND AREA B1

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MITIGATION AREA

LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA
11134.000.005
AS SHOWN 3
N
0 FEET 400

WATERSHED AREA

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

RIPARIAN CREATION

EXISTING DRAINAGE

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
LEGEND
518 of 556
WATERSHED B2

5.24 ac.

WETLAND AREA B2

0.33 ac.

Expect Excellence
WETLAND AREA B2

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MITIGATION AREA

LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA
11134.000.005
AS SHOWN 4
N
0 FEET 300

WATERSHED AREA

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

RIPARIAN CREATION

EXISTING DRAINAGE

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
LEGEND
519 of 556
WATERSHED C2

5.50 ac.

WATERSHED C1

1.84 ac.

WETLAND AREA C1

0.11 ac.
18-INCH CULVERT
WATERSHED C3

7.11 ac.

WETLAND AREA C3

0.10 ac.

WETLAND AREA C4

0.08 ac.

WETLAND AREA C5

0.06 ac.

WETLAND AREA C2

0.04 ac.

WATERSHED C4

7.15 ac. WATERSHED C5

6.24 ac.

Expect Excellence

WETLAND AREA C

QUARRY LAKES PARKWAY MITIGATION AREA

LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA
11134.000.005
AS SHOWN 5
N
0 FEET 400

WATERSHED AREA

SEASONAL WETLAND CREATION

RIPARIAN ENHANCEMENT

RIPARIAN CREATION

EXISTING DRAINAGE

EPHEMERAL DRAINAGE
LEGEND
N
520 of 556
11134.000.005
October 3, 2025
Revised April 3, 2026

APPENDIX A
Water Balance Calculations
521 of 556
Table 4.1-1: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland A Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 49.12 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.97 1.00 0.79 0.42 0.18 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.34 0.57 1.22 5.56 Wetland Area (ac) 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.29 0.30 0.24 0.13 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.10 0.17 0.37 1.68 Table 4.2-2: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed A
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.4 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 1.48 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.13 0.20 0.31 0.42 0.54 0.62 0.66 0.58 0.43 0.31 0.17 0.12 4.50 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.28 Table 4.3-1: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed A
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 1.26 1.30 1.02 0.55 0.23 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.44 0.75 1.59 7.24 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.44 0.55 0.62 0.66 0.58 0.44 0.33 0.20 0.18 4.77 Outflow (ac-ft) 1.08 1.05 0.67 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.55 1.41 4.98 PAW (ac-ft) 0.13 0.20 0.31 0.42 0.23 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.31 0.17 0.12 1.99 522 of 556
Table 4.1-2: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland B1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 64.80 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 1.28 1.31 1.04 0.55 0.24 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.45 0.76 1.61 7.34 Wetland Area (ac) 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.24 0.25 0.19 0.10 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.08 0.14 0.30 1.37 Table 4.2-3: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed B1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 1.21 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.11 0.16 0.26 0.34 0.45 0.51 0.54 0.47 0.36 0.25 0.14 0.10 3.68 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.37 Table 4.3-2: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed B1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 1.52 1.56 1.23 0.66 0.28 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.54 0.90 1.91 8.71 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.17 0.23 0.31 0.37 0.46 0.51 0.54 0.47 0.36 0.28 0.18 0.18 4.04 Outflow (ac-ft) 1.34 1.33 0.92 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.72 1.73 6.60 PAW (ac-ft) 0.11 0.16 0.26 0.34 0.28 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.25 0.14 0.10 1.76 523 of 556
Table 4.1-3: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland B2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 5.24 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.10 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.13 0.59 Wetland Area (ac) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.08 0.37 Table 4.2-4: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed B2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.03 1.00 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 Table 4.3-3: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed B2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.10 0.21 0.97 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.15 0.13 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.03 1.03 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.13 0.12 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.18 0.56 PAW (ac-ft) 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.39 524 of 556
Table 4.1-4: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland C1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.21 Wetland Area (ac) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.12 Table 4.2-5: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed C1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.33 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 Table 4.3-4: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C1
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.07 0.33 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.34 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.06 0.19 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.13 525 of 556
Table 4.1-5: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland C2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.14 0.62 Wetland Area (ac) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 Table 4.2-6: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed C2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.12 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 Table 4.3-5: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C2
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.15 0.67 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.15 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.14 0.57 PAW (ac-ft) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.07 526 of 556
Table 4.1-6: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland C3 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 7.11 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.18 0.81 Wetland Area (ac) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.11 Table 4.2-7: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed C3
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.30 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04 Table 4.3-6: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C3
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.20 0.92 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.34 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.18 0.73 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.15 527 of 556
Table 4.1-7: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland C4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 7.15 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.14 0.15 0.11 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.18 0.81 Wetland Area (ac) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.09 Table 4.2-8: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed C4
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.24 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04 Table 4.3-7: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C4
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.16 0.16 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.20 0.90 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.28 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.14 0.14 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.08 0.18 0.73 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.13 528 of 556
Table 4.1-8: Montly Water Inflows for Proposed Wetland C5 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Average Monthly Precipitation (in.) 2.37 2.43 1.92 1.02 0.44 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.09 0.84 1.40 2.98 13.59 Upstream Watershed (ac) 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 6.24 (10%) Upstream Inflows (ac-ft) 0.12 0.13 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.16 0.71 Wetland Area (ac) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 (100%) Project Direct Rainfall (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.07 Table 4.2-9: Monthly Water Outflow for Watershed C5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Monthly Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.54 2.28 3.63 4.82 6.31 7.19 7.64 6.68 5.03 3.58 1.97 1.40 52.07 Adusted Evapotranspiration (inches) 1.08 1.60 2.54 3.37 4.42 5.03 5.35 4.68 3.52 2.51 1.38 0.98 36.45 Project Watershed (ac) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 Evapotranspiration (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.18 Infiltration (5% of Inflow) 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.04 Table 4.3-8: Monthly Water Balance for Watershed C5
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Total Inflows (ac-ft) 0.13 0.14 0.11 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.17 0.77 Total Potential Loss (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.22 Outflow (ac-ft) 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.16 0.64 PAW (ac-ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.10 529 of 556
530 of 556
Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City
Manager to execute an Agreement with
Rocky Ridge, LLC for the Purchase and Sale
of Mitigation Values for Quarry Lakes
Parkway: Phases 1-4, City Project No. 18-04-
CEQA Review of First Addendum to the East
West Connector Final Environmental Impact
Report April 2026
Marilou R. Ayupan, Public Works Director
City Manager Report- Item 5.2
April 28, 2026 - City Council Meeting
531 of 556

2 Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
Location of the High Value
Mitigation Site in
Livermore Foothills (north
of I-580) within Alameda
Creek Watershed
Manning Ranch (Eagle Ridge Preserve) and
Cayetano Creek borders the counties of
Alameda and Contra Costa
532 of 556

3 Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
(Manning Ranch and Cayetano Creek)
Seasonal Wetlands
(3.4 acres)
Habitat Preservation
(18 acres)
Creek Restoration
(1,880 feet)
Riparian
(1.0 acre)
533 of 556

4 Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
Total Cost of Mitigation Values
534 of 556

5 Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
MTC RM3, Dumbarton Corridor $25.0 Million Grant
*Includes Environmental Mitigation funds for $11,050,000 for Rocky Ridge PSA 535 of 556

6 Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
• The First Addendum will
address the proposed biological
offsite mitigation identified in the
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring
Plan (HMMP) dated April 2026
• Rocky Ridge, LLC owner and
developer of high value
mitigation area
536 of 556

7 Staff Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to
execute an Agreement with Rocky Ridge, LLC for the
Purchase and Sale of Mitigation Values in the amount of $ 11,050,000, for the Quarry Lakes Parkway: Phases 1-4, City Project No. 18-04 – CEQA Review of the First
Addendum to the East West Connector Final
Environmental Impact Report April 2026
Questions?
Rocky Ridge, LLC PSA of Mitigation Values for
Quarry Lakes Parkway, Phases 1- 4
537 of 556
City Council Staff Report Page 1 of 5 April 28, 2026
Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 5.3
DATE: April 28, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joan Malloy, City Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Increasing the Cannabis Business Tax Rate Applicable to Retailers Pursuant to Union City Municipal Code Chapter 3.24

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends that the City Council consider an adjustment to the cannabis business tax rate applicable to cannabis retailers operating in Union City. Pursuant to Union City Municipal Code Chapter 3.24, which voters approved, the City Council has the authority to establish the tax rate for retailers by resolution, up to a maximum of six percent (6%).

The current tax rate is four percent (4%).

Staff is seeking City Council direction on whether to increase the rate and, if so, to what level within the allowable range. Staff also requests City Council direction regarding the preferred effective date of the new rate to ensure adequate time for operator notification, administrative implementation, and system updates.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This report is in alignment with the following City Council Priority:

Goal A: Financial Stability and Sustainability
Strategy 5: Implement the City’s cannabis program to attain the anticipated revenue with a commitment to adapting where necessary in light of evolving Statewide trends.

Strategy 11: Assess the effectiveness of the City’s cannabis program to determine whether it is meeting intended objectives, public safety impacts, revenue targets, and other factors.

BACKGROUND
In November 2018, Union City voters approved Measure DD, establishing a cannabis business tax through Ordinance No. 854-18, codified in Chapter 3.24 of the Union City Municipal Code. The cannabis business tax imposed varying excise tax rates on the following cannabis business activities: cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, testing, and 538 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.3
City Council Staff Report Page 2 of 5 April 28, 2026
retail. For retailers, the City Council established an initial tax rate of four percent (4%) of gross receipts. Under this framework, the City Council holds the authority to set the cannabis business tax rate by resolution, including any adjustments up to the allowable not-to-exceed amount of six percent (6%). The City has issued permits only to retailers – there are no operating cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, or testing cannabis businesses in the City.

At its meeting on October 28, 2025, the City Council received a report with recommendations from the Revenue Ad Hoc Subcommittee and its review of the City’s various revenue streams – one of which included the cannabis business tax. Mayor Gary Singh requested, and the City Council then provided direction, for City staff to provide a more detailed report on the cannabis business tax, including statewide trends and local industry impacts, should an adjustment be considered.

Union City currently has two licensed cannabis retailers in operation. Together, these two retailers make up Union City’s commercial cannabis retail presence and are subject to the four percent (4%) cannabis business tax on gross receipts currently in place. As reflected in the following chart, cannabis business tax revenues collected throughout the City have declined gradually.

Chart 1. City of Union City – Annual 4% Cannabis Tax Revenues Collected

DISCUSSION
State Regulatory Tax Landscape
Across California, the cannabis retail sector continues to experience a combination of competitive pressures, regulatory adjustments, and persistent market imbalances between the licensed and illicit markets. Following the 2022 adoption of AB 195, the State FY 2021-2022 FY 2022-2023 FY 2023-2024 FY 2024-2025 FY 2025-2026 (Two Quarters Only)
City of Union City
4% Cannabis Tax of Gross Receipts
539 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.3
City Council Staff Report Page 3 of 5 April 28, 2026
eliminated the cultivation tax and shifted responsibility for remitting excise taxes directly to retailers.1 Although the excise tax briefly increased in mid-2025 under scheduled statutory adjustments, subsequent legislative action (AB 564) restored the rate to fifteen percent (15%), where it is expected to remain through 2028.2 For retailers, this stabilization of the state excise tax reduces volatility but does not eliminate the margin pressures associated with statewide price compression. There are still ongoing discussions about how to effectively regulate and tax cannabis while ensuring that the legal market remains competitive and sustainable.

Industry data through 2024 and 2025 show that although licensed production has grown gradually, consumer prices for cannabis products continue to decline due to competition, oversupply, and the influence of the illicit market.3 Retailers are experiencing sustained downward pressure on wholesale and retail pricing, even as consumer preferences have shifted toward lower-priced product segments. Despite this, certain categories (particularly beverages and pre-rolls) have shown year-over-year growth, softening the impact of market contraction in other areas. Consumer demand remains stable overall, but price sensitivity has increased, intensifying the importance of competitive pricing among nearby jurisdictions.4
Regional/Local Tax Comparators
Regionally, Union City’s current cannabis business tax rate of four percent (4%) for retailers places it at the lower end of the range of Bay Area jurisdictions. Although tax rates vary across cities, some, such as Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, and San Leandro, impose higher or tiered cannabis business tax rates, generally falling in the range of five to ten percent (5%-10%), depending on local policy.

Table 1. Alameda County and Cities Permitting Cannabis Retail and Tax Rates (as of April 2026) Counties and
Cities
Retail
(Storefront) No. Allowed Current Tax Rate Maximum Tax Rate Alameda County
(Unincorporated) Allowed 5 None None
Alameda Allowed 4 None None
Albany Prohibited - - -
Berkeley Allowed No Limit 5% 10%
Dublin Prohibited - - -
Emeryville Allowed No Limit 3% 6%
1 California Legislature. (2022). Assembly Bill No. 195 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) (Chapter 56). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB195. 2 Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. (2025, September 22). Governor Newsom signs legislation cutting taxes on cannabis, promoting the long-term success of the legal industry. State of California. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/09/22/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-cutting-taxes-on-cannabispromoting-the-long-term-success-of-the-legal-industry/ 3 California Department of Cannabis Control. (2025, March). California cannabis market outlook: Executive summary. State of California. https://cdn.cannabis.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2025/03/CaliforniaCannabis-Market-Outlook-Executive-Summary-FNL.pdf 4 California Department of Cannabis Control. (2025, March). California cannabis market outlook. State of California. https://sbp.senate.ca.gov/system/files/2025-03/4-california-cannabis-market-outlook-fullreport.pdf 540 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.3
City Council Staff Report Page 4 of 5 April 28, 2026
Counties and
Cities
Retail
(Storefront) No. Allowed Current Tax Rate Maximum Tax Rate Fremont Prohibited - - -
Hayward Allowed 3 7% 15%
Livermore Prohibited - - -
Newark Prohibited - - -
Oakland Allowed No Limit
Tiered; Depends
on Gross Receipts
and Equity Rebates
5%-10%
Piedmont Prohibited - - -
Pleasanton Prohibited - - -
San Leandro Allowed 4 5% 10%
Union City Allowed 3 4% 6%
Union City’s tax structure, therefore, remains competitive even if modestly increased.

While cannabis tax revenues have steadily declined, an adjustment to a rate up to six percent (6%) would proportionally increase these revenues if the sales volume of the City’s retail operations were to increase. The ultimate impact will depend on broader retail trends and the operators’ ability to absorb or pass through tax-related costs.

Potential Implications
The City Council should consider statewide market factors that continue to shape the viability of the licensed retail sector. Illicit market activity continues to outpace the legal market in overall volume, contributing to persistent underpricing relative to licensed retailers. As statewide enforcement and regulatory adjustments continue to evolve, many cities have opted to calibrate their local tax structures in response to these dynamics.

Union City’s authority under Chapter 3.24 allows the City Council to adjust the retail tax rate within the allowable range when appropriate to respond to fiscal needs, market conditions, or equity considerations.

Outreach/Notification to Retail Operators
Staff has initiated outreach to the City’s existing cannabis retail operators to notify them of the potential adjustment to the cannabis business tax rate. This courtesy notice was to inform existing cannabis retail operators of their opportunity to provide written or in-person public comment, and also for the City to receive any feedback regarding anticipated operational impacts associated with a future rate change. The operators’ input may help inform the City Council’s direction on whether to adjust the tax rate at this time and, if so, to what level within the allowable range.

While one option is to adopt a single tax rate effective on a specified date, the City Council may also consider an alternative approach. Another option is to implement a phased increase to gradually move from the current rate to the desired final rate over a defined period, which may help reduce immediate financial impacts on the cannabis retail operators. A phased structure could, for example, begin with an increase to five percent (5%), followed by a scheduled adjustment to six percent (6%) at a later date, should the City Council choose to reach the maximum allowable rate. 541 of 556
Agenda Item No. 5.3
City Council Staff Report Page 5 of 5 April 28, 2026
Overall, the proposed adjustment to the cannabis business retail tax rate is presented as a policy option under the City Council’s authority. While an increase up to six percent (6%) remains consistent with regional practice and would provide additional fiscal support for essential City services, City Council may also consider market conditions, operator feedback, and statewide trends when determining the appropriate tax rate for Union City’s regulated cannabis retail sector.

FISCAL IMPACT
If the City Council adopts an increase to the cannabis business retail tax rate, staff will estimate annual and mid-year uplift based on reported retailer gross receipts and adjust the revenue forecasts accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council consider adopting a resolution increasing the cannabis business tax rate applicable to cannabis retail businesses operating in Union City from the current four percent (4%) to a specified tax rate no more than six percent (6%), as authorized under Union City Municipal Code Chapter 3.24.

Prepared by: Jennifer Phan, Deputy City Manager
Submitted by: Jennifer Phan, Deputy City Manager
Attachments

1. Draft Resolution
542 of 556

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UNION CITY

INCREASING THE CANNABIS BUSINESS TAX RATE APPLICABLE TO

RETAILERS PURSUANT TO UNION CITY MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER

3.24 WHEREAS, on December 11, 2018, following voter approval, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 854-18, adding Chapter 3.24 (Cannabis Business Tax) to the Union City Municipal Code (UCMC), which authorizes the City Council to set cannabis business tax rates by resolution; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24, cannabis retailers are taxed on gross receipts from the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products, and the current tax rate for retailers is four percent (4%); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to UCMC Section 3.24.050, the City Council may, by resolution, adjust the cannabis business tax rate for retailers up to an amount not to exceed six percent (6%); and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adjust the cannabis business tax rate applicable to retail cannabis businesses to support essential City services and ensure the regulated market contributes proportionately to community impacts; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at any time, may consider market conditions, cannabis retail operator feedback, and statewide trends when determining the appropriate tax rate for Union City’s regulated cannabis retail sector.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that effective [INSERT DATE], the cannabis business tax rate applicable to cannabis retail businesses operating within the City of Union City is hereby set at [INSERT] percent of gross receipts from the retail sale of cannabis and cannabis products, as defined in UCMC Chapter 3.24; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City’s Tax Administrator is directed to take all actions necessary to implement this Resolution, including updating forms, notices, and procedures consistent with UCMC Chapter 3.24.
543 of 556
Resolution No. 2026-XXX
Adjustment to Cannabis Business Tax

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on April 28, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

GARY SINGH
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
544 of 556
Item 5.3: Increasing Cannabis Business
Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24
April 28, 2026 City Council Meeting
545 of 556

2 Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 Background
• 2018 – Measure DD and Ordinance No. 854-18 established City Council’s authority to set cannabis business tax for the following activities:
• October 28, 2025 – City Council received recommendations from the Revenue Ad Hoc Subcommittee and its review of
the City’s various revenue streams – one of which
included the cannabis business tax.

Cultivation Distribution Manufacturin
g
Testing
Dispensary/
Retail
546 of 556

3 Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 Background (cont.)
• For retailers, the current tax rate is 4% and City Council may adopt or amend the tax rate by resolution up to 6%. • To-date, two retail businesses have opened and are
currently in operation.

Policy Direction:

Provide report for City Council consideration of adjustment to cannabis business tax for retail cannabis businesses only (no other impact on other cannabis categories)
547 of 556
4 Revenue Trends
Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 FY 2021-2022 FY 2022-2023 FY 2023-2024 FY 2024-2025 FY 2025-2026 (Two Quarters Only)
City of Union City
4% Cannabis Tax of Gross Receipts
548 of 556

5 Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 Revenue Trends
• Cannabis tax collections at the 4% rate have shown a
gradual decline over several fiscal years.
• City Council must evaluate if the current tax rate supports City services or needs adjustment to stabilize revenue. • Maintaining competitive tax rates must be balanced with fiscal sustainability and local market conditions.
• If increased, revenue forecasts will be updated postCouncil action, based on retailers’ gross receipts under new rates.
549 of 556

6 AB 195 (2022) shifted tax
from cultivation to
retailers (up to 19%).

Regulatory
Changes
AB 564 (2025) restored
rate for retailers to 15%
through June 30, 2028;
to be reevaluated and
adjusted every two
years.

Excise Tax
Adjustments
Competition,
oversupply, and illicit
market presence
continue to pressure
pricing despite
regulatory
predictability.

Market &
Pricing
Pressures
Local tax changes
must be evaluated in
context of broader
industry dynamics
affecting retailer
viability.

Local Impact
Considerations
Statewide Regulatory
Environment
Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 550 of 556

7 Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 Regional/Local Tax Landscape
• Union City’s 4% cannabis tax rate is among the lowest in the Bay Area, highlighting its competitive position.

Counties and
Cities
Retail
(Storefront)
No.

Allowed Current Tax Rate
Maximum
Tax Rate
Alameda County
(Unincorporated) Allowed 5 None None
Alameda Allowed 4 None None
Berkeley Allowed No Limit 5% 10%
Emeryville Allowed No Limit 3% 6%
Hayward Allowed 3 7% 15%
Oakland Allowed No Limit
Tiered; Depends on
Gross Receipts and
Equity Rebates
5%-10%
San Leandro Allowed 4 5% 10%
Union City Allowed 3 4% 6%
551 of 556

8 Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 Outreach to Retailers
• Staff informed Union City’s cannabis retailers about
potential tax rate changes and offered opportunity for
feedback/public comment.
• Two cannabis retailers submitted written public comment, attached to agenda packet for review.
552 of 556
9 Established
Rate
Single-Step or
Phased
Effective Date
A rate increase, if
any, from the
current 4%,
up to the allowable
range of 6%, can be
set to respond to
fiscal needs, market
conditions, and
industry stability.

A one-time tax rate
increase is simple to
administer and aids in
clear financial
forecasting.

Gradual tax increases
soften financial
impacts and allow
businesses time to
adapt.

A clear effective
date ensures
predictability and
allows both the City
and businesses to
implement changes.

Policy Considerations
Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 553 of 556

10 Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council consider
adopting a resolution increasing the cannabis business
tax rate applicable to cannabis retail businesses
operating in Union City from the current four percent
(4%) to a specified tax rate no more than six percent (6%), as authorized under Union City Municipal Code Chapter

3.24. Item 5.3:

Increasing Cannabis Business Tax Pursuant to UCMC Chapter 3.24 554 of 556

April 23rd, 2026
Re: Proposed Increase to Cannabis Retailer Business Tax (4% → 6%) Dear Mayor, City Council Members & City Manager,
On behalf of Lemonnade Union City and Flor Union City, the two licensed cannabis retailers operating within the City, we appreciate the opportunity to provide input regarding the proposed increase in the local cannabis business tax from 4% to 6%.

We understand and respect the City’s responsibility to balance revenue generation with longterm economic sustainability. From our perspective as operators, the current 4% rate is fair and supports a competitive legal market. It is also worth noting that even at 4%, there are jurisdictions with lower effective tax rates, making regional competitiveness an important consideration.

At the same time, it is important to recognize the current realities of the cannabis market. Retail margins are under sustained pressure due to price compression, increased competition, and broader macroeconomic factors impacting consumer spending. In this environment, even modest increases in taxation can have disproportionate downstream effects.

This proposed 2% increase would be borne directly by consumers at the point of sale. As total purchase costs rise, customers have consistently shown sensitivity to pricing and often shift their behavior by:
• Purchasing in neighboring jurisdictions with lower taxes • Utilizing delivery services based outside Union City that do not contribute local tax revenue • Returning to the illicit market, where no taxes are paid Additionally, if consumer resistance increases, retailers may be forced to absorb a portion of the tax impact through pricing adjustments. Given already compressed margins, this would further challenge the sustainability of licensed operators who are committed to compliance, local employment, and long-term investment in Union City.

Our shared goal is a stable, regulated market that maximizes both legal participation and consistent tax revenue. In our view, maintaining the current 4% rate supports that objective by keeping Union City competitive, encouraging consumers to remain within the legal market, and preserving operator viability.

We respectfully encourage the City to consider the timing and broader market conditions before implementing any increase. A stable and competitive tax structure today is likely to generate stronger, more durable revenue over time than a higher rate that risks reducing overall sales volume.
555 of 556
556 of 556