NEW SANTA ROSA CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE · Santa Rosa Central Library, 211 E Street, Santa Rosa, and at Santa Rosa City Hall, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa. The public review and comment

NEW SANTA ROSA CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments State Clearinghouse No. 2011052071

Prepared for July 20, 2011Administrative Office of the Courts

NEW SANTA ROSA CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments State Clearinghouse No. 2011052071

Prepared for July 20, 2011 Administrative Office of the Courts

225 Bush Street Suite 1700 San Francisco, CA 94104 415.896.5900 www.esassoc.com

Los Angeles

Oakland

Olympia

Petaluma

Portland

Sacramento

San Diego

Seattle

Tampa

Woodland Hills 208091.01

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.

AOC-Santa Rosa Courthouse i ESA / 208091.01 Final Initial Study-Response to Comments July 20, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS New Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse Final Initial Study – Response to Comments

Page 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Purpose of this Document .................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Overview ................................................................................................. 1-2 1.3 Organization of the Final Initial Study ................................................................. 1-2

2. Comments and Responses ....................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 List of Commenters ............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Individual Responses .......................................................................................... 2-2

Letter A – Responses to Comments from the State Clearinghouse ................... 2-3 Letter B – Responses to Comments from the California Regional Water

Quality Control Board ................................................................................... 2-7 Letter C – Responses to Comments from the Santa Rosa Fire Department .... 2-17 Letter D – Responses to Comments from Daniel Chester, Sonoma County

Superior Court ............................................................................................ 2-20 Letter E – Responses to Comments from Marsha Vas Dupre, Santa Rosa

City Councilmember ................................................................................... 2-22 3. Initial Study Text Revisions ...................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Text Revisions .................................................................................................... 3-1

Appendices A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ......................................................... A-1 B. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of Public

Comment Period .................................................................................................. B-1

AOC-Santa Rosa Courthouse 1-1 ESA / 208091.01 Final Initial Study-Response to Comments July 20, 2011

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this Document The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its implementing regulations (the “CEQA Guidelines”) require a lead agency to consider any comments received during the public review process before it may approve a project for which a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration has been prepared. This document contains the public comments and responses to those comments by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) on the New Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2011052071).

On May 25, 2011, the AOC (the CEQA lead agency) released the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration on the proposed project for public review and comment. The Draft Initial Study describes the proposed project and its environmental setting; analyzes potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts related to construction and operation; identifies impacts that could be significant; and recommends mitigation measures, which, if adopted, could avoid or minimize such impacts. The Draft Initial Study was available for public review at the Santa Rosa Central Library, 211 E Street, Santa Rosa, and at Santa Rosa City Hall, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa.

The public review and comment period on the Draft Initial Study began May 25, 2011 and ended June 24, 2011. The AOC held a public hearing on June 16, 2011, to accept comments on the Draft Initial Study from agencies, organizations, and individuals. The public hearing was held at 5:30 p.m. in the Sonoma County Administration Center, Hall of Justice – Department 15, 600 Administration Drive, Santa Rosa, California. The AOC provided notification of the public review period and the public hearing to: 1) public agencies; 2) adjacent property owners and occupants; and 3) organizations that had demonstrated particular interest in the proposed project. No oral comments were received at the public hearing. Some written comments were received after the end of the comment period and were accepted. Responses to all comments are provided in Chapter 2, Comments and Responses.

This Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration will be used by the AOC in its consideration of approval of the proposed project. The State of California Public Works Board must also approve acquisition of the project site for the project.

1. Introduction


1.2 Project Overview The Judicial Council of California is the rule-making arm of the California court system. The Judicial Council’s staff agency, the AOC, is responsible for implementing the Judicial Council’s policies. In that role, the AOC is responsible for implementation of the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002. Following the Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002, the AOC conducted a survey to assess the physical condition of the state’s courthouses. The survey showed that 90 percent of courthouses need improvements to protect the safety and security of the public, litigants, jurors and families who are served by California’s courts. In October 2008, the Judicial Council identified 41 “Immediate and Critical Need” courthouse projects, in an effort to prioritize future courthouse construction and renovation.

The new Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse (“proposed project”) is one of the 41 “Immediate and Critical Need” projects identified by the Judicial Council in 2008. For this proposed project, the AOC will construct a new, approximately 173,500 gross building square foot courthouse with 15 courtrooms for the Superior Court of California. The project site is currently owned by the Sonoma County, but is within the city of Santa Rosa’s jurisdiction. The project site is located at 600 Administration Drive in the existing Sonoma County Administration Center campus, north of downtown Santa Rosa.

The proposed project places the new courthouse in the area where the Old Jail facility was previously located just east of the Hall of Justice and includes the surface parking adjacent to the former Old Jail facility. In addition, existing parking lots located directly across Ventura Avenue east of the courthouse site and north of the Hall of Justice on Russell Avenue, along with a new parking area that will be created from the removal of the Fleet Building located across Ventura Avenue east of the site, will all become dedicated courthouse parking.

The new courthouse will become the criminal courthouse facility for the Superior Court and will consolidate court facilities that are currently located in separate facilities. The new courthouse will also provide support space for court administration, including the court clerk, court security operations, jury assembly and deliberation rooms, holding areas for in-custody detainees, and building facility support space. The design will be consistent with other facilities recently constructed by the AOC, and will include location-specific considerations. Design criteria for the proposed project are taken from the California Trial Court Facilities Standards approved by the Judicial Council in 2006.

1.3 Organization of the Final Initial Study The following elements of this document, in combination with the Draft Initial Study, constitute the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project:

Chapter 1, Introduction.

1. Introduction


Chapter 2, Comments and Responses. This chapter contains copies of the written comments received on the Draft Initial Study and individual responses to the comments. Each comment is marked with an identifying code shown in the margin. Responses to the comments from each letter are presented immediately after that comment letter.

Chapter 3, Initial Study Text Revisions. This chapter contains text changes to the Draft Initial Study that reflect additions, corrections, and clarifications resulting from the analysis conducted by the AOC in preparing responses to comments on the Draft Initial Study. These changes are incorporated as part of the Final Initial Study.


CHAPTER 2 Comments and Responses

This chapter lists the public agencies, private organizations, and individuals who provided comments on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), provides copies of written comments received, and responds to those comments. As required by CEQA, these responses to comments address significant environmental issues raised by commenters during the review period (Pub. Res. Code § 21091(d); CEQA Guidelines § 15074(b)). The AOC has also elected to address concerns and suggestions regarding the adequacy and accuracy of the Draft Initial Study that were raised by commenters after the review period closed (Pub. Res. Code § 21091(d)).

Where the text of the Draft Initial Study has been revised in response to a comment or concern, the revised text is included as part of the response with revisions shown using the following conventions: text changes are shown in indented paragraphs, text added to the Draft Initial Study is shown in underline, and text deleted from the Draft Initial Study is shown in strikethrough. These text changes also appear in Chapter 3, Initial Study Text Revisions.

2.1 List of Commenters The Administrative Office of the Courts held a public hearing to accept comments on the Draft Initial Study on June 16, 2011; however, no comments regarding the adequacy or accuracy of the environmental analysis were received during the hearing. The AOC received five comment letters on the Draft Initial Study, one each from the parties identified below in Table 2-1.

TABLE 2-1 COMMENTERS ON THE NEW SANTA ROSA CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE

DRAFT INITIAL STUDY

Comment Letter Commenter Date

A State Clearinghouse, Scott Morgan, Director (June 24, 2011) June 24, 2011

B California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region, Jo Bentz, Engineering Geologist (June 21, 2011) June 21, 2011

C Santa Rosa Fire Department, Scott Moon, Acting Fire Marshal (June 30, 2011) June 30, 2011

D Daniel Chester, Child Custody Recommending Counselor, Sonoma County Superior Court (May 26, 2011) May 26, 2011

E Marsha Vas Dupre, Santa Rosa City Councilmember (June 7, 2011) June 7, 2011

2. Comments and Responses


2.2 Individual Responses This section includes the letters received, with individual comments delineated as indicated above, followed by responses to each comment.



Letter A – Responses to Comments from the State Clearinghouse

A-1 Commenter acknowledges receipt of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration at the State Clearinghouse for the proposed project. Commenter states the proposed project has complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Commenter also states that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration has been submitted to state agencies for review and comments from one responding agency is enclosed [See Comment Letter B]. No response required.

Comment Letter B

2-7

Comment Letter B

2-8

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdText BoxB-1

skdText BoxB-2

skdText BoxB-3

skdText BoxB-4

skdText BoxB-5

Comment Letter B

2-9

skdLine

skdText BoxB-5cont.

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdLine

skdText BoxB-6

skdText BoxB-7

skdText BoxB-8

skdText BoxB-9

skdText BoxB-10

Comment Letter B

2-10

skdLine

skdText BoxB-10 cont.

skdLine

skdText BoxB-11

Comment Letter B

2-11

skdLine

skdText BoxB-11 cont.

Comment Letter B

2-12

Comment Letter B

2-13



Letter B – Responses to Comments from the Regional Water Quality Control Board

B-1 Commenter requests that the Project Description indicate whether any soil disturbance or construction activities would occur at the existing parking area on Russell Avenue. Construction activities proposed for this area include installation of a security fence and possibly new lighting fixtures and repaving of the site, if deemed necessary. No deep trenching or grading would occur. Therefore, the following text is added after the last sentence of the first paragraph on page 2-8 of the Draft Initial Study:

Construction activities proposed for the existing parking area on Russell Avenue would include installation of a security fence, possibly additional lighting fixtures, and repaving of the parking lot surface. No deep trenching or grading would occur.

B-2 Commenter notes that Paulin Creek is misidentified as Pine Creek in the Draft Initial Study. The following text changes are added to the Draft Initial Study to correct this error:

The first sentence under Impact c) on page 3-14 is revised as follows:

The closest drainage to this site is Pine Paulin Creek, which is approximately 500 feet south of the proposed project site.

The fifth sentence under Impact b) on page 3-34 is revised as follows:

Concentrated water erosion, if not managed or controlled, could eventually result in significant soil loss and/or discharging of sediment into utilities, roads, Pine Paulin Creek, and/or to other parts of the proposed project site.

B-3 Commenter reiterates the requirement for the project applicant to obtain a General Construction NPDES permit which involves preparing a SWPPP for the construction phase of the project. Comment is noted and the regulatory requirements will be completed as required.

B-4 Commenter states that the information regarding hazardous release sites either on one of the project sites or in the immediate vicinity of the project sites is incorrect. The comment states that there are four sites in the area of the project sites.

Because the AOC is required to comply with standard conditions and requirements for state and/or federal regulations or laws that are independent of CEQA compliance (as noted on page 2-14 of the IS/MND), the AOC (or its contractor) would be required to prepare a SWPPP and SGMP under the NPDES permit. The revisions to the text, as shown below, clarify this requirement. Revisions to the second paragraph on page 3-41 are as follows:

A review of available environmental databases maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control



(DTSC) for sites that have been impacted by leaking underground fuel tanks (LUFT), non-fuel related cases known as Spills, Leaks, Investigative Cleanup (SLIC), and other cleanup sites was conducted for the project site and surrounding area. The proposed project site, specifically, the Fleet Building (2688 Ventura Avenue), is listed as a LUFT site not listed among either of these databases (DTSC, 2010). The Phase I investigation for the site concluded that no recognized environmental conditions existed on-site, however this investigation did not include the Fleet Building as part of the study area (Bureau Veritas, 2010). In addition, three other sites (2604 Ventura Avenue, 2777 Ventura Avenue, and 540/552 Russell Avenue) are all located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. These sites involve releases of petroleum hydrocarbons and while one of them (2777 Ventura Avenue) has been closed and the Russell Avenue project site involves no earthwork activities, there is a potential for encountering contaminated soil or groundwater during construction at the other two project sites. The construction activities will require preparation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) by the AOC as part of the General Construction NPDES permit. Included as part of the SWPPP, a soil and groundwater management plan (SGMP) will be prepared by the AOC and approved by the City of Santa Rosa Fire Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board. All construction activities will adhere to the safety measures contained within the SGMP, including specifications on handling requirements of suspected contaminated soil and groundwater, which will reduce any potential impacts that might occur as a result of encountering potential contamination to less than significant levels.

B-5 Commenter states that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) would require preparation of an approved soil and groundwater management plan prior to approval of a grading permit. See Response B-4, above.

B-6 Commenter makes a request to review building plans in order to coordinate with any groundwater remediation in the area. Comment is noted.

B-7 Commenter provides a means of reviewing RWQCB files. Comment is noted.

B-8 Commenter discusses the potential for encountering groundwater during excavation activities and requests any dewatering be done in accordance with a SGMP. See Response to B-4. In addition, the second sentence of the last paragraph on page 3-46 is revised as follows:

Dewatering activities would be temporary in nature and would be subject to the protocols found in the SGMP (see also discussion in Hazards above) as well as the permitting requirements of the RWQCB, either as specified in the NPDES General Construction Permit or another NPDES permit issued by the RWQCB.

B-9 Commenter identifies permit requirements for dewatering including contact information at the RWQCB for assistance. Comment is noted.



B-10 Commenter discusses the RWQCB Low Impact Development (LID) requirements for new development and provides a list of resources. Comment is noted.

B-11 Commenter continues the discussion of LID requirements including incorporation of landscape based best management practices that will treat runoff and meet sizing requirements as stated in the comment. Comment is noted.

Fire Department

2373 Circadian Way ● Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Phone: (707) 543-3500 ● Fax: (707) 543-3520

www.srcity.org

June 30, 2011 Judicial Council of California Attn: Ms. Laura Sainz Administrative Office of the Courts 2860 Gateway Oaks, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95833 RE: Comments on Proposed New Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Administration Drive and Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, SCH No. 2011052071 Dear Ms. Sainz: Santa Rosa Fire Department staff did not receive a copy of the New Criminal Courthouse Initial Study and had to go on line to locate a copy of the document for review creating a delay in our response. Fire Department staff comments on the Initial Study pertain to the Proposed Courthouse Project; Section 2.2 Proposed Project, Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section 3.14 Public Services. Upon review of the Initial Study document the impacts to the Fire Department are significant and should not be listed as a “Less than Significant Impact.” The closest fire station located on Lewis Road is currently browned out 50% of the year. The Fire Department currently does not meet the goals of the General Plan. Additionally, the proposed structure is a high rise, measuring over 100 feet in height. Resources are substantial for a high rise incident, and this type of response requires compliance with the National Fire Protection Association Standard 1710 – Career Fire Department Organization and Deployment. The project will also need to comply with the California Fire Code. High rise incident responses require approximately 30 personnel which deplete the Departmental resources creating a significant impact to the Department and service delivery. Therefore, mitigations to the Initial Study for this project will be necessary.

Comment Letter C

2-17

skdLine

skdText BoxC-1

Fire Department 2373 Circadian Way ● Santa Rosa, CA 95407

Phone: (707) 543-3500 ● Fax: (707) 543-3520 www.srcity.org

Mitigation will require the following actions:

1. The structure will need to be designed to conform to the City of Santa Rosa Fire Department Standard for High Rise buildings.

2. The emergency vehicle access on Paulin Drive will required to provide a minimum of 26 foot in width along the full side of the building in compliance with the California Fire Code Appendix D. The road shall be a minimum of 15 feet and no further than 30 feet from the access along the north side of the building.

3. An Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System shall be installed throughout the building in compliance with California Fire Code Chapter 5 requirements and Santa Rosa Fire Department Standards.

4. Public access areas will need to provide Automatic External Defibrillators (AED’s). 5. Demolition of the Fleet Services Building will require a Site Closure permit from the Santa

Rosa Fire Department (we are the Local Certified Unified Program Agency CUPA) and a final inspection prior to approval to move forward with the demolition.

6. Should the plan proceed to construct the tunnel from the New Criminal Courthouse to the MADF the installation shall be reviewed and permitted in compliance with California Fire Code and NFPA Standards.

Please advise our Department of how these mitigations will be met and what the next steps will be in the process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Initial Study, should you have any questions regarding this matter please contact our office. Sincerely, Scott Moon Acting Fire Marshal Santa Rosa Fire Department cc: Mark McCormick, Acting Fire Chief – Santa Rosa Fire Department Mark Aston, Fire Chief – Sonoma County Department of Emergency Services Robert MacIntyre, Fire Marshal – Sonoma County Department of Emergency Services File

Comment Letter C

2-18

skdLine

skdText BoxC-1 cont.



Letter C – Responses to Comments from the Santa Rosa Fire Department

C-1 Commenter states that the Draft Initial Study incorrectly identifies impacts to fire protection services as less than significant. Commenter states that the proposed project would be required to comply with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1710, the California Fire Code, and incorporate additional mitigation measures to reduce the impact to less than significant levels. As discussed in the Project Description of the Initial Study, the proposed courthouse design will conform to the California Trial Court Facilities Standards (Judicial Council of California, 2006; amended in 2010). Section 20.10 in the Appendix of the California Trial Court Facilities Standards lists Fire Protection Codes and Standards that are applicable to projects utilizing the Judicial Council’s design standards. These codes and standards include the California Building Code, California Fire Code, and applicable NFPA Standards. Project compliance with the applicable codes and standards would therefore reduce potential fire protection services impacts to less than significant levels.

The AOC acknowledges that demolition of the Fleet Services Building would require a Site Closure Permit from the Fire Department, and that possible future construction of a tunnel from the courthouse to the MADF would require compliance with the California Fire Code and applicable NFPA standards. The future construction of a tunnel is not part of the project description and would not be conducted by AOC, but would be under the oversight and implementation of the County. It is expected that the County will be required to comply with the California Fire Code and all applicable NFPA standards.

From: Daniel Chester Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 12:27 PM To: Sainz, Laura Subject: New Santa Rosa Criminal Courthouse I am a family mediator (now known as a Child Custody Recommending Counselor) with the Sonoma County Superior Court. I have had a chance to review the initial study on the proposed new courthouse, and I have a few comments. The plan looks very good and we need this building. I believe my concern reflects something very important to those of us who work with the public here at the existing courthouse. It has to do with parking. The proposal provides secure parking for judges and key managers only. They should have it, no doubt about it. But, so should other staff who work directly with the public in this setting. We mediators work in a very charged environment, frequently with victims and perpetrators of domestic violence. Often our sessions place these individuals in close proximity to one another, sometimes in very small confines. Because of this, tensions are typically very high, even in cases that do not have a history of domestic violence. Our clients can be, and frequently are, very combative and reactive. It does not help that we meet with them in a criminal courthouse (as opposed to a family courthouse), as this lends a whole other layer of tension to the process. It is sufficiently dangerous that we require so-called “panic” buttons in our meeting rooms so we can summon law enforcement should violence or other difficulties erupt. Following what can be a difficult mediation, we are called upon to author recommendations and take positions which can be very provocative. We or our recommendations often become a target to be attacked as part of the litigation process. When violence erupts in a courthouse setting, it frequently involves family law litigants with raging custody and visitation disputes. This leads to a great deal of anxiety on our part, and concern for safety in our workplace. (In fact, those of us who live in Sonoma County have been known to take special precautions even at home.) Provision should be made to ensure that we are safe and secure when we enter and exit the courthouse environment. Recommending mediators are as likely a target as judges for unwelcome or unsafe interactions with the public. (Not all counties have recommending mediators. Sonoma County does.) The opportunities for litigants to monitor our habits and practices should be minimized, and secured parking would go a long way toward accomplishing that goal. The long walk we make to our vehicles at the end of a grueling day in this charged environment is not an easy one. Please consider accommodating this in the plans for the new courthouse by expanding the secured parking. Daniel Chester Child Custody Recommending Counselor (Mediator) Sonoma County Superior Court

Comment Letter D

2-20

skdLine

skdText BoxD-1



Letter D – Responses to Comments from Daniel Chester D-1 Commenter notes that the proposed project provides secure parking for judges and key

managers only. The AOC appreciates the concerns of the commenter regarding secure parking; however, parking is not considered an environmental topic under CEQA and is therefore not analyzed in the Draft Initial Study. The AOC may consider this during interim and final design reviews of the project.

From: Vas Dupre, Marsha [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 9:47 PM To: Sainz, Laura Cc: Fowler, Caroline Subject: CA Superior Courthouse in Son. Co. - Mit. Neg. Dec. Letter of 5/24/11 Dear Laura, Thank you for the Letter of 5/24/11 re the CA Superior Courthouse in Son. Co. - Mit. Neg. Dec. Sincerely, Marsha Marsha Vas Dupre Councilmember City Manager's Office, 100 Santa Rosa Ave., Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Tel. (707) 543-3012 | [email protected]

Comment Letter E

2-22

mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]�mailto:[email protected]�skdLine

skdText BoxE-1



Letter E – Responses to Comments from Marsha Vas Dupre E-1 Commenter acknowledges receipt of letter regarding the proposed project. No response

required.


CHAPTER 3 Initial Study Text Revisions

3.1 Introduction The following changes have been made to the previously published text of the Draft Initial Study. These changes include: minor corrections made by the section authors to improve writing clarity, grammar, and consistency; clarifications, additions, or deletions resulting from specific responses to comments; and AOC staff-initiated text changes to update information in the Draft Initial Study. These text revisions are organized by the page number in the Draft Initial Study. An explanation of the change, including identification of where it would be made, is presented in italics. The specific additions and deletions use the following conventions:

Deleted text is shown in strike out text. Additional text is shown in underline text.

3.2 Text Revisions The following text is added after the last sentence of the first paragraph on page 2-8 of the Draft Initial Study:

Construction activities proposed for the existing parking area on Russell Avenue would include installation of a security fence, possibly additional lighting fixtures, and repaving of the parking lot surface. No deep trenching or grading would occur.

The first sentence under Impact c) on page 3-14 of the Draft Initial Study is revised as follows:

The closest drainage to this site is Pine Paulin Creek, which is approximately 500 feet south of the proposed project site.

The fifth sentence under Impact b) on page 3-34 of the Draft Initial Study is revised as follows:

Concentrated water erosion, if not managed or controlled, could eventually result in significant soil loss and/or discharging of sediment into utilities, roads, Pine Paulin Creek, and/or to other parts of the proposed project site.

The second paragraph on page 3-41 of the Draft Initial Study is revised as follows:

A review of available environmental databases maintained by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for sites that

3. Initial Study Text Revisions


have been impacted by leaking underground fuel tanks (LUFT), non-fuel related cases known as Spills, Leaks, Investigative Cleanup (SLIC), and other cleanup sites was conducted for the project site and surrounding area. The proposed project site, specifically, the Fleet Building (2688 Ventura Avenue), is listed as a LUFT site not listed among either of these databases (DTSC, 2010). The Phase I investigation for the site concluded that no recognized environmental conditions existed on-site, however this investigation did not include the Fleet Building as part of the study area (Bureau Veritas, 2010). In addition, three other sites (2604 Ventura Avenue, 2777 Ventura Avenue, and 540/552 Russell Avenue) are all located in the immediate vicinity of the project site. These sites involve releases of petroleum hydrocarbons and while one of them (2777 Ventura Avenue) has been closed and the Russell Avenue project site involves no earthwork activities, there is a potential for encountering contaminated soil or groundwater during construction at the other two project sites. The construction activities will require preparation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) by the AOC as part of the General Construction NPDES permit. Included as part of the SWPPP, a soil and groundwater management plan (SGMP) will be prepared by AOC and approved by the City of Santa Rosa Fire Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board. All construction activities will adhere to the safety measures contained within the SGMP, including specifications on handling requirements of suspected contaminated soil and groundwater, which will reduce any potential impacts that might occur as a result of encountering potential contamination to less than significant levels.

The second sentence of the last paragraph on page 3-46 of the Draft Initial Study is revised as follows:

Dewatering activities would be temporary in nature and would be subject to the protocols found in the SGMP (see also discussion in Hazards above) as well as the permitting requirements of the RWQCB, either as specified in the NPDES General Construction Permit or another NPDES permit issued by the RWQCB.

AOC-Santa Rosa Courthouse A-1 ESA / 208091.01 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program July 20, 2011

APPENDIX A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g P

rogr

am

AOC

-San

ta R

osa

Cou

rthou

se

A-2

ES

A /

2080

91.0

1 M

itiga

tion

Mon

itorin

g an

d R

epor

ting

Pro

gram

Ju

ly 2

0, 2

011

MIT

IGA

TIO

N M

ON

ITO

RIN

G A

ND

REP

OR

TIN

G P

RO

GR

AM

N

EW S

ANTA

RO

SA C

RIM

INAL

CO

UR

THO

USE

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r Im

plem

entin

g M

itiga

tion

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r M

onito

ring

Tim

ing

1. Ae

sthe

tics

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

2. Ag

ricul

tura

l Res

ourc

es

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

3. Ai

r Qua

lity

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

AIR

-1: O

ver t

he e

ntire

dur

atio

n of

con

stru

ctio

n, c

onst

ruct

ion

cont

ract

ors

shal

l be

requ

ired

to

impl

emen

t the

follo

win

g ba

sic

cons

truct

ion

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res

reco

mm

ende

d by

the

BA

AQ

MD

CE

QA

Gui

delin

es.

A

ll ex

pose

d su

rface

s (e

.g.,

park

ing

area

s, s

tagi

ng a

reas

, soi

l pile

s, g

rade

d ar

eas,

and

unp

aved

acc

ess

road

s) s

hall

be w

ater

ed tw

o tim

es p

er d

ay.

A

ll ha

ul tr

ucks

tran

spor

ting

soil,

san

d, o

r oth

er lo

ose

mat

eria

l off-

site

sha

ll be

cov

ered

.

A

ll vi

sibl

e m

ud o

r dirt

trac

k-ou

t ont

o ad

jace

nt p

ublic

road

s sh

all b

e re

mov

ed u

sing

wet

pow

er v

acuu

m s

treet

sw

eepe

rs a

t lea

st o

nce

per d

ay. T

he u

se o

f dry

pow

er s

wee

ping

is p

rohi

bite

d.

A

ll ve

hicl

e sp

eeds

on

unpa

ved

road

s sh

all b

e lim

ited

to 1

5 m

ph.

A

ll ro

adw

ays,

driv

eway

s, a

nd s

idew

alks

to b

e pa

ved

shal

l be

com

plet

ed a

s so

on a

s po

ssib

le. B

uild

ing

pads

sha

ll be

la

id a

s so

on a

s po

ssib

le a

fter g

radi

ng u

nles

s se

edin

g or

soi

l bin

ders

are

use

d.

Id

ling

times

sha

ll be

min

imiz

ed e

ither

by

shut

ting

equi

pmen

t off

whe

n no

t in

use

or re

duci

ng th

e m

axim

um id

ling

time

to 5

min

utes

(as

requ

ired

by th

e C

alifo

rnia

airb

orne

toxi

cs c

ontro

l mea

sure

Titl

e 13

, Sec

tion

2485

of C

alifo

rnia

Cod

e of

Reg

ulat

ions

[CC

R]).

Cle

ar s

igna

ge s

hall

be p

rovi

ded

for c

onst

ruct

ion

wor

kers

at a

ll ac

cess

poi

nts.

A

ll co

nstru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent s

hall

be m

aint

aine

d an

d pr

oper

ly tu

ned

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith m

anuf

actu

rer’s

spe

cific

atio

ns.

All

equi

pmen

t sha

ll be

che

cked

by

a ce

rtifie

d m

echa

nic

and

dete

rmin

ed to

be

runn

ing

in p

rope

r con

ditio

n pr

ior t

o op

erat

ion.

P

ost a

pub

licly

vis

ible

sig

n w

ith th

e te

leph

one

num

ber a

nd p

erso

n to

con

tact

at t

he L

ead

Age

ncy

rega

rdin

g du

st

com

plai

nts.

Thi

s pe

rson

sha

ll re

spon

d an

d ta

ke c

orre

ctiv

e ac

tion

with

in 4

8 ho

urs.

The

Air

Dis

trict

’s p

hone

num

ber

shal

l als

o be

vis

ible

to e

nsur

e co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith a

pplic

able

regu

latio

ns.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

4. Bi

olog

ical R

esou

rces

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re B

IO-1

: Bre

edin

g B

ird S

urve

ys. T

he p

roje

ct s

pons

or s

hall

avoi

d di

stur

banc

e of

bre

edin

g bi

rds

durin

g pr

ojec

t con

stru

ctio

n by

impl

emen

ting

the

follo

win

g m

easu

res:

1. P

roje

ct c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

sha

ll oc

cur o

utsi

de o

f the

gen

eral

ly a

ccep

ted

nest

ing

seas

on (F

ebru

ary

1 to

A

ugus

t 31)

. If c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

beg

in b

efor

e th

e bi

rd n

estin

g se

ason

and

con

tinue

uni

nter

rupt

ed in

to th

e se

ason

, the

n no

sur

veys

sha

ll be

requ

ired.

AO

C/Q

ualif

ied

Bio

logi

st

AO

C/Q

ualif

ied

Bio

logi

st

Prio

r to

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g P

rogr

am

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

OR

ING

AN

D R

EPO

RTI

NG

PR

OG

RAM

(con

tinue

d)

NEW

SAN

TA R

OSA

CR

IMIN

AL C

OU

RTH

OU

SE

AO

C-S

anta

Ros

a C

ourth

ouse

A

-3

ES

A /

2080

91.0

1 M

itiga

tion

Mon

itorin

g an

d R

epor

ting

Pro

gram

Ju

ly 2

0, 2

011

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r Im

plem

entin

g M

itiga

tion

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r M

onito

ring

Tim

ing

4. Bi

olog

ical R

esou

rces

(con

t.)

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

BIO

-1 (c

ont.)

2. I

f it i

s no

t fea

sibl

e to

avo

id c

onst

ruct

ion

activ

ities

as

stip

ulat

ed u

nder

(1),

then

the

follo

win

g m

easu

res

shal

l be

take

n:

a. N

o m

ore

than

two

wee

ks b

efor

e in

itiat

ion

of c

onst

ruct

ion,

a n

estin

g bi

rd s

urve

y sh

all b

e co

nduc

ted

with

in 2

50 fe

et

of th

e pr

ojec

t site

by

a qu

alifi

ed b

iolo

gist

. If a

ctiv

e ne

sts

are

obse

rved

, buf

fer z

ones

of s

ize

acce

ptab

le to

C

alifo

rnia

Dep

artm

ent o

f Fis

h an

d G

ame

shal

l be

esta

blis

hed

arou

nd th

e ne

sts.

Con

stru

ctio

n ac

tiviti

es s

hall

not

occu

r with

in b

uffe

r zon

es u

ntil

youn

g ha

ve fl

edge

d or

the

nest

is o

ther

wis

e ab

ando

ned.

b. I

f con

stru

ctio

n is

hal

ted

for m

ore

than

two

wee

ks d

urin

g th

e ne

stin

g se

ason

, the

n ad

ditio

nal s

urve

ys s

hall

be

cond

ucte

d as

des

crib

ed a

bove

.

c. N

ests

that

are

est

ablis

hed

durin

g co

nstru

ctio

n sh

all b

e pr

otec

ted

from

dire

ct im

pact

(i.e

. tre

es s

hall

be fl

agge

d an

d av

oide

d). H

owev

er, o

nce

cons

truct

ion

has

begu

n, p

rote

ctio

n fro

m in

dire

ct im

pact

s in

clud

ing

cons

truct

ion

with

in th

e bu

ffer z

one

wou

ld n

ot b

e re

quire

d.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re B

IO-2

: Tre

e Pr

otec

tion.

The

follo

win

g m

easu

res

are

take

n fro

m th

e S

anta

Ros

a C

ity C

ode,

S

ectio

n 17

-24.

050,

Per

mit

Cat

egor

y II

– Tr

ee A

ltera

tion,

Rem

oval

or R

eloc

atio

n on

Pro

perty

Pro

pose

d fo

r D

evel

opm

ent,

and

shal

l min

imiz

e di

rect

and

indi

rect

impa

cts

on p

rote

cted

tree

s (tr

ees

that

are

to b

e re

tain

ed o

n-si

te):

1. B

efor

e th

e st

art o

f any

cle

arin

g, e

xcav

atio

n, c

onst

ruct

ion

or o

ther

wor

k on

the

site

, eve

ry p

rote

cted

tree

sha

ll be

se

cure

ly fe

nced

off

at th

e “p

rote

cted

per

imet

er,”

whi

ch s

hall

be e

ither

the

root

zon

e or

oth

er li

mit

as m

ay b

e es

tabl

ishe

d by

the

City

. Suc

h fe

nces

sha

ll re

mai

n co

ntin

uous

ly in

pla

ce fo

r the

dur

atio

n of

all

wor

k un

derta

ken

in

conn

ectio

n w

ith th

e de

velo

pmen

t. Th

e ar

ea fe

nced

off

shal

l not

be

used

as

a st

orag

e ar

ea o

r alte

red

or d

istu

rbed

, ex

cept

as

desc

ribed

in (2

) and

(4) b

elow

.

2. I

f the

pro

pose

d de

velo

pmen

t (pr

ojec

t), in

clud

ing

any

site

wor

k fo

r the

dev

elop

men

t (pr

ojec

t), w

ill e

ncro

ach

upon

the

prot

ecte

d pe

rimet

er o

f a p

rote

cted

tree

, spe

cial

mea

sure

s sh

all b

e ut

ilize

d, a

s ap

prov

ed b

y th

e C

ity o

f San

ta R

osa

Dire

ctor

of C

omm

unity

Dev

elop

men

t (D

irect

or) o

r the

Pla

nnin

g C

omm

issi

on, t

o al

low

the

root

s to

obt

ain

oxyg

en,

wat

er, a

nd n

utrie

nts

as n

eede

d. A

ny e

xcav

atio

n, c

uttin

g, fi

lling

, or c

ompa

ctio

n of

the

exis

ting

grou

nd s

urfa

ce w

ithin

th

e pr

otec

ted

perim

eter

, if a

utho

rized

at a

ll by

the

Dire

ctor

, sha

ll be

min

imiz

ed a

nd s

ubje

ct to

suc

h co

nditi

ons

as

may

be

impo

sed

by th

e D

irect

or. N

o si

gnifi

cant

cha

nge

in e

xist

ing

grou

nd le

vel s

hall

be m

ade

with

in th

e dr

ip li

ne o

f a

prot

ecte

d tre

e. N

o bu

rnin

g or

use

of e

quip

men

t with

an

open

flam

e sh

all o

ccur

nea

r or w

ithin

the

prot

ecte

d pe

rimet

er. A

ll br

ush,

ear

th a

nd o

ther

deb

ris s

hall

be re

mov

ed in

a m

anne

r whi

ch p

reve

nts

inju

ry to

the

prot

ecte

d tre

e.

3. N

o oi

l, ga

s, c

hem

ical

s or

oth

er s

ubst

ance

s th

at m

ay b

e ha

rmfu

l to

trees

sha

ll be

sto

red

or d

umpe

d w

ithin

the

prot

ecte

d pe

rimet

er o

f any

pro

tect

ed tr

ee, o

r at a

ny o

ther

loca

tion

on th

e si

te fr

om w

hich

suc

h su

bsta

nces

mig

ht

ente

r the

per

imet

er o

f a p

rote

cted

tree

. No

cons

truct

ion

mat

eria

ls s

hall

be s

tore

d w

ithin

the

prot

ecte

d pe

rimet

er o

f a

prot

ecte

d tre

e.

4. U

nder

grou

nd tr

ench

ing

for u

tiliti

es s

hall

avoi

d m

ajor

sup

port

and

abso

rbin

g tre

e ro

ots

of p

rote

cted

tree

s. If

av

oida

nce

is im

prac

tical

, tun

nels

sha

ll be

mad

e be

low

the

root

s. T

renc

hes

shal

l be

cons

olid

ated

to s

ervi

ce a

s m

any

units

as

poss

ible

. Tre

nchi

ng w

ithin

the

drip

line

of p

rote

cted

tree

s sh

all b

e av

oide

d to

the

grea

test

ext

ent p

ossi

ble

and

shal

l onl

y be

don

e un

der t

he a

t-site

dire

ctio

ns o

f a c

ertif

ied

arbo

rist.

AO

C/C

ity o

f San

ta

Ros

a/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

ity o

f San

ta

Ros

a/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Prio

r to

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g P

rogr

am

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

OR

ING

AN

D R

EPO

RTI

NG

PR

OG

RAM

(con

tinue

d)

AO

C-S

anta

Ros

a C

ourth

ouse

A

-4

ES

A /

2080

91.0

1 M

itiga

tion

Mon

itorin

g an

d R

epor

ting

Pro

gram

Ju

ly 2

0, 2

011

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r Im

plem

entin

g M

itiga

tion

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r M

onito

ring

Tim

ing

4. Bi

olog

ical R

esou

rces

(con

t.)

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

BIO

-2 (c

ont.)

5. N

o co

ncre

te o

r asp

halt

pavi

ng s

hall

be p

lace

d ov

er th

e ro

ot z

ones

of p

rote

cted

tree

s. N

o ar

tific

ial i

rrig

atio

n sh

all

occu

r with

in th

e ro

ot z

one

of o

aks.

6. N

o co

mpa

ctio

n of

the

soil

with

in th

e ro

ot z

one

of p

rote

cted

tree

s sh

all o

ccur

.

7. I

f the

tree

s pr

opos

ed to

be

rem

oved

can

be

econ

omic

ally

relo

cate

d, th

e A

OC

sha

ll m

ove

the

trees

to a

sui

tabl

e lo

catio

n on

the

site

sho

wn

on th

e ap

prov

ed p

lans

.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re B

IO-3

: Tre

e R

epla

cem

ent.

Tree

rem

oval

per

mits

sha

ll be

obt

aine

d fro

m th

e C

ity o

f San

ta R

osa

for a

ll st

reet

tree

s an

d he

ritag

e tre

es re

mov

ed fo

r the

pro

pose

d pr

ojec

t. In

add

ition

, the

follo

win

g tre

e re

plac

emen

t m

easu

res

(take

n fro

m th

e S

anta

Ros

a C

ity C

ode,

Sec

tion

17-2

4.05

0, P

erm

it C

ateg

ory

II –

Tree

Alte

ratio

n, R

emov

al o

r R

eloc

atio

n on

Pro

perty

Pro

pose

d fo

r Dev

elop

men

t) sh

all b

e im

plem

ente

d:

1. F

or e

ach

six

inch

es (o

r fra

ctio

n th

ereo

f) of

the

diam

eter

of a

tree

whi

ch w

as a

ppro

ved

for r

emov

al, t

wo

trees

of t

he

sam

e ge

nus

and

spec

ies

as th

e re

mov

ed tr

ee (o

r ano

ther

spe

cies

, if a

ppro

ved

by th

e D

irect

or),

each

of a

min

imum

15

-gal

lon

cont

aine

r siz

e, s

hall

be p

lant

ed o

n th

e pr

opos

ed p

roje

ct s

ite, p

rovi

ded

how

ever

, tha

t an

incr

ease

d nu

mbe

r of

sm

alle

r siz

e tre

es o

f the

sam

e ge

nus

and

spec

ies

may

be

plan

ted

if ap

prov

ed b

y th

e D

irect

or, o

r a fe

wer

num

ber

of s

uch

trees

of a

larg

er s

ize

if ap

prov

ed b

y th

e D

irect

or.

2. F

or e

ach

six

inch

es (o

r fra

ctio

n th

ereo

f) of

the

diam

eter

of a

tree

whi

ch w

as n

ot a

ppro

ved

for r

emov

al, f

our t

rees

of

the

sam

e ge

nus

and

spec

ies

as th

e re

mov

ed tr

ee (o

r ano

ther

spe

cies

, if a

ppro

ved

by th

e D

irect

or),

each

of a

m

inim

um 1

5-ga

llon

cont

aine

r siz

e, s

hall

be p

lant

ed o

n th

e pr

opos

ed p

roje

ct s

ite, p

rovi

ded

how

ever

, tha

t an

incr

ease

d nu

mbe

r of s

mal

ler s

ize

trees

of t

he s

ame

genu

s an

d sp

ecie

s m

ay b

e pl

ante

d if

appr

oved

by

the

Dire

ctor

, or

a fe

wer

num

ber o

f suc

h tre

es o

f a la

rger

siz

e if

appr

oved

by

the

Dire

ctor

.

3. I

f the

dev

elop

men

t site

is in

adeq

uate

in s

ize

to a

ccom

mod

ate

the

repl

acem

ent t

rees

, the

tree

s sh

all b

e pl

ante

d on

pu

blic

pro

perty

with

the

appr

oval

of t

he D

irect

or o

f the

City

’s R

ecre

atio

n an

d P

arks

Dep

artm

ent.

Upo

n th

e re

ques

t of

the

AO

C a

nd th

e ap

prov

al o

f the

Dire

ctor

, the

City

may

acc

ept a

n in

-lieu

pay

men

t of $

100.

00 p

er 1

5-ga

llon

repl

acem

ent t

ree

on c

ondi

tion

that

all

such

pay

men

ts s

hall

be u

sed

for t

ree-

rela

ted

educ

atio

nal p

roje

cts

and/

or

plan

ting

prog

ram

s of

the

City

.

AO

C/C

ity o

f San

ta

Ros

a/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

ity o

f San

ta

Ros

a/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Prio

r to

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

5. Cu

ltura

l Res

ourc

es

M

itiga

tion

Mea

sure

CU

L-1:

If c

ultu

ral r

esou

rces

are

enc

ount

ered

, all

activ

ity in

the

vici

nity

of t

he fi

nd s

hall

ceas

e un

til

it ca

n be

eva

luat

ed b

y a

qual

ified

arc

haeo

logi

st a

nd a

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an re

pres

enta

tive.

Pre

hist

oric

arc

haeo

logi

cal

mat

eria

ls m

ight

incl

ude

obsi

dian

and

che

rt fla

ked-

ston

e to

ols

(e.g

., pr

ojec

tile

poin

ts, k

nive

s, s

crap

ers)

or t

oolm

akin

g de

bris

; cul

tura

lly d

arke

ned

soil

(“m

idde

n”) c

onta

inin

g he

at-a

ffect

ed ro

cks,

arti

fact

s, o

r she

llfis

h re

mai

ns; a

nd s

tone

m

illin

g eq

uipm

ent (

e.g.

, mor

tars

, pes

tles,

han

dsto

nes,

or m

illin

g sl

abs)

; and

bat

tere

d st

one

tool

s, s

uch

as

ham

mer

ston

es a

nd p

itted

sto

nes.

His

toric

-per

iod

mat

eria

ls m

ight

incl

ude

ston

e, c

oncr

ete,

or a

dobe

foot

ings

and

wal

ls;

fille

d w

ells

or p

rivie

s; a

nd d

epos

its o

f met

al, g

lass

, and

/or c

eram

ic re

fuse

. If t

he a

rcha

eolo

gist

and

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an

repr

esen

tativ

e de

term

ine

that

the

reso

urce

s m

ay b

e si

gnifi

cant

, the

y w

ill n

otify

the

AO

C. A

n ap

prop

riate

trea

tmen

t pla

n fo

r the

reso

urce

s sh

ould

be

deve

lope

d. T

he a

rcha

eolo

gist

sha

ll co

nsul

t with

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an re

pres

enta

tives

in

dete

rmin

ing

appr

opria

te tr

eatm

ent f

or p

rehi

stor

ic o

r Nat

ive

Am

eric

an c

ultu

ral r

esou

rces

.

AO

C/Q

ualif

ied

Arc

haeo

logi

st/F

IGR

A

OC

/Qua

lifie

d A

rcha

eolo

gist

/FIG

R

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion

or g

roun

d-di

stur

bing

ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g P

rogr

am

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

OR

ING

AN

D R

EPO

RTI

NG

PR

OG

RAM

(con

tinue

d)

NEW

SAN

TA R

OSA

CR

IMIN

AL C

OU

RTH

OU

SE

AO

C-S

anta

Ros

a C

ourth

ouse

A

-5

ES

A /

2080

91.0

1 M

itiga

tion

Mon

itorin

g an

d R

epor

ting

Pro

gram

Ju

ly 2

0, 2

011

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r Im

plem

entin

g M

itiga

tion

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r M

onito

ring

Tim

ing

5. Cu

ltura

l Res

ourc

es (c

ont.)

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re C

UL-

1 (c

ont.)

In c

onsi

derin

g an

y su

gges

ted

miti

gatio

n pr

opos

ed b

y th

e ar

chae

olog

ist a

nd N

ativ

e A

mer

ican

repr

esen

tativ

e, th

e A

OC

w

ill d

eter

min

e w

heth

er a

void

ance

is n

eces

sary

and

feas

ible

in li

ght o

f fac

tors

suc

h as

the

natu

re o

f the

find

, pro

ject

de

sign

, cos

ts, a

nd o

ther

con

side

ratio

ns. I

f avo

idan

ce is

infe

asib

le, o

ther

app

ropr

iate

mea

sure

s (e

.g.,

data

reco

very

) will

be

inst

itute

d. W

ork

may

pro

ceed

in o

ther

par

ts o

f the

pro

ject

are

a w

hile

miti

gatio

n fo

r cul

tura

l res

ourc

es is

bei

ng c

arrie

d ou

t.

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re C

UL-

2: P

rior t

o st

art o

f con

stru

ctio

n at

the

site

, the

AO

C s

hall

prov

ide

a qu

alifi

ed p

aleo

ntol

ogis

t to

cond

uct p

aleo

ntol

ogic

al re

sour

ces

sens

itivi

ty tr

aini

ng to

ens

ure

field

sup

ervi

sors

and

con

stru

ctio

n cr

ews

unde

rsta

nd th

e po

tent

ial f

or fo

ssil

rem

ains

bei

ng u

ncov

ered

and

/or d

istu

rbed

by

proj

ect-r

elat

ed e

arth

mov

ing;

whe

re s

uch

rem

ains

are

m

ost l

ikel

y to

be

enco

unte

red

durin

g ea

rth m

ovin

g; a

nd p

roce

dure

s to

be

empl

oyed

if fo

ssil

rem

ains

are

dis

cove

red

durin

g ex

cava

tions

(whi

ch in

clud

e ha

lting

con

stru

ctio

n w

ithin

50

feet

of t

he fi

nd u

ntil

its s

igni

fican

ce c

an b

e de

term

ined

). Th

e qu

alifi

ed p

aleo

ntol

ogis

t wou

ld a

lso

serv

e as

a p

oint

of c

onta

ct s

houl

d an

y fo

ssils

be

unea

rthed

by

cons

truct

ion

crew

s, a

nd w

ould

pre

serv

e an

d sa

lvag

e an

y un

ique

or s

igni

fican

t fos

sils

that

are

une

arth

ed.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or/Q

ualif

ied

Pal

eont

olog

ist

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or/Q

ualif

ied

Pal

eont

olog

ist

Prio

r to

cons

truct

ion

or g

roun

d-di

stur

bing

ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re C

UL-

3: If

hum

an re

mai

ns a

re e

ncou

nter

ed u

nexp

ecte

dly

durin

g co

nstru

ctio

n ex

cava

tion

and

grad

ing

activ

ities

, Sta

te H

ealth

and

Saf

ety

Cod

e S

ectio

n 70

50.5

requ

ires

that

no

furth

er d

istu

rban

ce s

hall

occu

r un

til th

e S

onom

a C

ount

y C

oron

er h

as m

ade

the

nece

ssar

y fin

ding

s as

to o

rigin

and

dis

posi

tion

purs

uant

to P

RC

S

ectio

n 50

97.9

8. If

the

rem

ains

are

det

erm

ined

to b

e of

Nat

ive

Am

eric

an d

esce

nt, t

he c

oron

er h

as 2

4 ho

urs

to n

otify

th

e N

AH

C. T

he N

AH

C w

ill th

en id

entif

y th

e pe

rson

(s) t

houg

ht to

be

the

Mos

t Lik

ely

Des

cend

ent,

who

will

hel

p de

term

ine

wha

t cou

rse

of a

ctio

n sh

ould

be

take

n in

dea

ling

with

the

rem

ains

.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or/N

AH

C/

Cou

nty

Cor

oner

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion

or g

roun

d-di

stur

bing

ac

tiviti

es

6. Ge

olog

y, So

ils, a

nd S

eism

icity

No

miti

gatio

n re

quire

d.

7. Gr

eenh

ouse

Gas

Em

issio

ns

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

8. Ha

zard

s and

Haz

ardo

us M

ater

ials

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

9. Hy

drol

ogy a

nd W

ater

Qua

lity

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

10. L

and

Use a

nd L

and

Use P

lanni

ng

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

Miti

gatio

n M

onito

ring

and

Rep

ortin

g P

rogr

am

MIT

IGAT

ION

MO

NIT

OR

ING

AN

D R

EPO

RTI

NG

PR

OG

RAM

(con

tinue

d)

AO

C-S

anta

Ros

a C

ourth

ouse

A

-6

ES

A /

2080

91.0

1 M

itiga

tion

Mon

itorin

g an

d R

epor

ting

Pro

gram

Ju

ly 2

0, 2

011

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

res

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r Im

plem

entin

g M

itiga

tion

Part

y R

espo

nsib

le fo

r M

onito

ring

Tim

ing

11. M

iner

al Re

sour

ces

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

12. N

oise

and

Vibr

atio

n

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re N

OI-1

: Lim

it co

nstru

ctio

n to

day

time

hour

s be

twee

n 7

a.m

. and

7 p

.m. o

n w

eekd

ays

and

betw

een

9 a.

m. a

nd 6

p.m

. on

wee

kend

s.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re N

OI-2

: Loc

ate

the

equi

pmen

t sta

ging

are

a as

far a

s po

ssib

le fr

om H

olid

ay A

partm

ents

whe

n fe

asib

le.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

Miti

gatio

n M

easu

re N

OI-3

: Con

stru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent n

oise

sha

ll be

min

imiz

ed d

urin

g pr

ojec

t con

stru

ctio

n by

muf

fling

an

d sh

ield

ing

inta

kes

and

exha

ust o

n co

nstru

ctio

n eq

uipm

ent (

per t

he m

anuf

actu

rer’s

spe

cific

atio

ns) a

nd b

y sh

roud

ing

or s

hiel

ding

impa

ct to

ols.

No

equi

pmen

t sha

ll ha

ve a

n un

-muf

fled

exha

ust.

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

AO

C/C

onst

ruct

ion

Con

tract

or

Dur

ing

cons

truct

ion,

de

mol

ition

, or

grou

nd-d

istu

rbin

g ac

tiviti

es

13. P

opul

atio

n an

d Ho

usin

g

No

miti

gatio

n re

quire

d.

14. P

ublic

Ser

vices

No

miti

gatio

n re

quire

d.

15. R

ecre

atio

n

No

miti

gatio

n re

quire

d.

16. T

rans

porta

tion

and

Traf

fic

N

o m

itiga

tion

requ

ired.

17. U

tiliti

es an

d Se

rvice

Sys

tem

s

No

miti

gatio

n re

quire

d.

AOC-Santa Rosa Courthouse B-1 ESA / 208091.01 Final Initial Study-Response to Comments July 20, 2011

APPENDIX B Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of Public Comment Period

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

B-2

OFFICE OF COUR T CONS TRUCTION AND M ANAG EMENT

455 Golden Gate Avenue . San Francisco, California 94102-3688 Telephone 415-865-4900 . Fax 415-865-8885 . TDD 415-865-4272

T A N I C A N T I L - S A K A U Y E

Chief Justice of California Chair of the Judicial Council

W I L L I A M C . V I C K R E Y

Administrative Director of the Courts

R O N A L D G . O V E R H O L T

Chief Deputy Director

L E E W I L L O U G H B Y

Director, Office of Court Construction and Management

Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declarationand Notice of Public Comment Period:

May 25 through June 24, 2011

BACKGROUNDThe Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), the staff agency of the Judicial Council of California, is considering adopting a mitigated negative declaration in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a new California Superior Courthouse in the County of Sonoma. The project site is in the City of Santa Rosa at the Sonoma County Administration Center campus, north of downtown Santa Rosa. The site is generally bounded by US Highway 101 on the west, Paulin Drive on the north and east, and Administration Drive on the south. Ventura Avenue divides the project site between the courthouse and new courthouse parking. The proposed project includes an approximately 174,000 square foot building with a basement and 15 courtrooms. The environmental issues to be addressed in the mitigated negative declaration include: Aesthetics; Biological Resources; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Land Use and Land Use Planning; Transportation and Traffic; Cultural Resources; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Public Services; Utilities and Service Systems; Air Quality; Geology, Soils and Seismicity; Hydrology and Water Quality; and Noise and Vibration.

WHY THIS NOTICE?The purpose of this notice is twofold:

1. To provide you with the opportunity to learn more about the proposed project; and2. To allow you to provide comments to the AOC on the proposed project.

The mitigated negative declaration can be viewed on-line at the website address below or at:

Santa Rosa Central Library City of Santa Rosa (City Hall)211 E Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 100 Santa Rosa Ave, Santa Rosa, CA 95404(707) 545-0831 (707) 543-3010

HOW DO YOU PARTICIPATE?The AOC encourages your participation. You may submit comments to:

Laura Sainz, Administrative Office of the Courts2860 Gateway Oaks, Suite 400,Sacramento, CA 95833 Email: [email protected]

In addition, a public meeting for this project will be held on:Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 5:30 to 6:30 p.m.

County Administration Center, Hall of Justice - Department 15, 600 Administration Drive, Santa Rosa, CA 95403

The deadline for written comments is June 24, 2011.

For more information on the project and/or to receive a copy of the mitigated negative declaration, please visit http://www.courts.ca.gov/2802.htm#tab3550. If you have questions or wish to discuss the project, please contact Laura Sainz at the Administrative Office of the Courts at 916-263-7992 or via email at [email protected].

B-3

mailto:[email protected]�http://www.courts.ca.gov/2802.htm#3550�mailto:[email protected]�

Age

ncie

s Mai

ling

List

New

San

ta R

osa

Cri

min

al C

ourt

hous

e C

EQA

Neg

ativ

e D

ecla

ratio

n: G

over

nmen

t

Page

1 o

f 11_

Age

ncie

s_C

EQA

Mai

ling

List

-AO

C

#Name

Title

Address

City

State

Zip

1A

ssem

blym

embe

r Nor

een

Evan

sSt

ate

Cap

itol

P.O

. Box

942

849

Sacr

amen

toC

A94

249-

0007

2A

ssem

blym

embe

r Nor

een

Evan

sD

istri

ct O

ffic

e50

D S

treet

, Sui

te 3

01Sa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

404

5Se

nato

r Pat

ricia

Wig

gins

Stat

e C

apito

lSt

ate

Cap

itol,

Roo

m 4

081

Sacr

amen

toC

A95

814

6Se

nato

r Pat

ricia

Wig

gins

Dist

rict O

ffic

e50

D S

t., #

120A

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

49

Hon

arab

le G

ary

Nad

ler

Supe

rior C

ourt

of C

alifo

rnia

, C

ount

y of

San

ta R

osa

600

Adm

inist

ratio

n D

rive

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

310

Hon

orab

le R

ené

Aug

uste

Cho

utea

uSu

perio

r Cou

rt of

Cal

iforn

ia,

Cou

nty

of S

anta

Ros

a60

0 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e Sa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

11M

r. Jo

sé O

ctav

io G

uillé

nSu

perio

r Cou

rt of

Cal

iforn

ia,

Cou

nty

of S

anta

Ros

a60

0 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e Sa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

12Su

perv

isor P

aul K

elle

ySu

perv

isor D

istri

ct 4

- Bo

ard

of S

uper

viso

rs57

5 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e, R

oom

100

ASa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

13Su

perv

isor

Mik

e K

erns

Supe

rvis

or D

istri

ct 2

- B

oard

of S

uper

viso

rs57

5 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e, R

oom

100

ASa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

14Su

perv

isor E

fren

Car

rillo

Supe

rviso

r Dis

trict

5 -

Boar

d of

Sup

ervi

sors

575

Adm

inist

ratio

n D

rive,

Roo

m 1

00 A

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

315

Supe

rvis

or V

aler

ie B

row

nSu

perv

isor

Dis

trict

1 -

Boa

rd o

f Sup

ervi

sors

575

Adm

inist

ratio

n D

rive,

Roo

m 1

00 A

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

316

Supe

rviso

r Shi

rlee

Zane

Supe

rviso

r Dis

trict

3 -

Boar

d of

Sup

ervi

sors

575

Adm

inist

ratio

n D

rive,

Roo

m 1

00 A

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

3

17V

eron

ica

Ferg

uson

- C

ount

y A

dmin

istra

tive

Off

icer

Sono

ma

Cou

nty

575

Adm

inist

ratio

n D

rive,

Sui

te 1

04A

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

3

18St

epha

n R

. Pas

sala

cqua

- D

istri

ct A

ttorn

eySo

nom

a C

ount

y60

0 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e, R

oom

212

-JSa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

19St

even

Woo

dsid

e - C

ount

y C

ouns

elSo

nom

a C

ount

y57

5 A

dmin

istra

tion

Driv

e, R

oom

105

ASa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

20R

ober

t M. O

chs -

Chi

ef P

roba

tion

Off

icer

Sono

ma

Cou

nty

PO B

ox 1

1719

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

6-17

1921

John

R. A

brah

ams -

Pub

lic D

efen

der

Sono

ma

Cou

nty

600

Adm

inis

tratio

n D

rive,

Roo

m 1

11-J

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

322

Bill

Cog

bill

- She

riff/C

oron

erSo

nom

a C

ount

y27

96 V

entu

ra A

venu

eSa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

403

38M

ayor

Sus

an G

orin

Off

ice

of th

e M

ayor

100

Sant

a R

osa

Ave

nue,

Roo

m 1

0 Sa

nta

Ros

aC

A95

405

24C

ounc

ilmem

ber J

ane

Ben

der

City

of S

anta

Ros

a10

0 Sa

nta

Ros

a A

venu

e, R

oom

10

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

525

Cou

ncilm

embe

r Ver

onic

a Ja

cobi

City

of S

anta

Ros

a10

0 Sa

nta

Ros

a A

venu

e, R

oom

10

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

526

Cou

ncilm

embe

r Ern

esto

Oliv

ares

City

of S

anta

Ros

a10

0 Sa

nta

Ros

a A

venu

e, R

oom

10

Sant

a R

osa

CA

9540

527

Cou

ncilm

embe

r Joh

n Sa

wye

rC

ity o

f San

ta R

osa

100

Sant

a R

osa

Ave

nue,

Roo

m 1

0 Sa

nta

Documents

NEW SANTA ROSA CRIMINAL COURTHOUSE · Santa Rosa Central Library, 211 E Street, Santa Rosa, and at Santa Rosa City Hall, 100 Santa Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa. The public review and comment