Mount Sutro Open Space Reserve May 26, 2010 1
Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions 2. Agenda Overview 3. Recap/Background 4. Community Planning Process 5. Demonstration Project Planning 6. Environmental Review (CEQA) 7. Next Steps 2
2001 Management Plan • Objectives: – Ensure public safety/property protection – Improve health of forest – Protect/expand native plants – Enhance wildlife habitat – Maintain scenic quality – Improve public access – Implement Management Plan • Framework, not blueprint, for managing Reserve 3
2001 Management Plan • Phase 1 of long-term management program • Five types of actions: – Hazardous tree removal – Eucalyptus thinning – Conversion planting – Native plant restoration/enhancement – Trail system improvements • Phase 1 actions in 32 various acres of Reserve • Annually phased work • Adaptive management strategy 4
Three levels of priorities 5
Actions Taken Since 2001 Priority 1 actions complete (7 of 9 ) : • Crestmont-Christopher, and Lower Medical Center Way Hazardous Tree removal • Installation of Rotary Meadow, a native plant demonstration area on the summit (combination of 3 Management Plan actions) • Aldea Screen Planting • Cleared and improved trails through the efforts of Mount Sutro Stewards 6
Actions Taken Since 2001 (cont.) Priority 2 actions complete (1 of 4): • Edgewood, Surge Hazardous Tree removal Priority 3 actions complete (3 of 7): • Upper Medical Center Way, East Aldea and Chancellor’s Residence Hazardous Tree removal 7
Additional Actions Taken Since 2001 • Slope stabilization and native planting on hillside slide (due to water pipe break) site above Medical Center Way • Tree and brush removal for construction of Regeneration Medicine Building • Mount Sutro Stewards’ historical trail restoration • Non-UCSF project: SF Public Utilities Commission pump house and pipeline project 8
How Conditions Have Changed • Forest health has continued to decline • Fuel load has continued to increase • Fewer hazardous trees in a few limited areas • Native plant garden at summit • Trail improvements but still incomplete 9
2001 Adaptive Management Strategy • Demonstration projects prior to full-scale implementation • Eucalyptus Thinning in 2-acre Area L (primary demonstration project) • Eucalyptus Thinning in 0.5-acre Area P (secondary demonstration project) 10
2001 Adaptive Management Strategy • Conversion Planting in 7.6 total acres in Areas B, C, D, F, J, K, N and O (summit, south ridge and east bowl/corridor) with variety of native plants 11
Sutro Forest Goals and Objectives • SAFE • HEALTHY • AESTHETIC • USABLE 12
SAFE • Reduce potential for devastating wildfire • Provide emergency response access • Remove hazardous trees near trails, roads and structures • Improve trailside visibility 13
HEALTHY • Reduce competition among trees (growing space, soil water and fertility) • Remove diseased and unhealthy trees • Increase growing space • Remove vines from tree trunks 14
AESTHETIC • Maintain a forested setting • Maintain attractive, healthy trees • Improve visibility within forest • Provide views beyond forest • Privacy for neighbors 15
USABLE • Maintain adequate path and trailside clearance • Place logs for seating along trails and to close unauthorized trails • Modify steep trail segments with switchbacks • Enrich habitat and outdoor experience 16
17
Examples of Other Eucalyptus Thinning Projects 18
Highway 1 “13 Curves” Point Reyes National Seashore Before After Issues: • Fire safe access/egress/use for highway travelers • Enhance native bird habitat • Contain loss of native plants • Reduce damage to riparian systems 19
Highway 1 “13 Curves” continued Prescriptions: • Remove ground and ladder fuels • Remove saplings under 10” in diameter • Treat stumps with Garlon • Remove subordinate trunks of multi-trunk trees • Clear trunks of loose bark, debris 10’ off ground Results: • Very low return of understory to date • No tree failures due to thinning • No transfer of herbicide to adjacent trees 20
Camino Del Canyon Near Muir Woods National Monument Issues: • Fire safe access/egress for residents • Reinforce/enhance defensible space Before • Preserve historic tree alignment • Contain loss of native plants • Prevent regrowth without herbicides After 21
Camino Del Canyon continued Prescriptions: • Remove ground and ladder fuels • Remove saplings under 10” in diameter • Raise crowns to 10’+ above ground • Clear trunks of loose bark, debris up to 10’ • Cover stumps with black plastic, wood chips Results: • More open, accessible and safe forest • Removed 60% of eucalyptus stems • Stump kill was fully effective on covered stumps • Understory of poison oak, blackberry returned 22
Dominican College Issues: • Fire safe emergency access/evacuation routes • Fire hazard reduction for surrounding community • Reduction of ignition risks • Reduction of fire intensity/rate of spread Prescriptions: • Remove ground and ladder fuels • Thin trees for equipment maintenance • Remove saplings under 8” in diameter • Clear trunks of loose bark, debris to 10’ • Clear debris around remaining trees • No herbicides used 23 Before
Dominican College continued Results: • Nearby fire subsequent to treatment was easily suppressed at site • Flat area maintained with small tractor • Hillside not maintained and remains hazardous • No tree failures with thinning After 24
Vista Tiburon Issues: • Reduce fire threat to surrounding homes • Remove or safety prune hazard trees • Reinforce and enhance defensible space • Preserve screening for higher residents • Preserve privacy for residents • Enhance habitat with native trees/shrubs Before • Retain forested setting 25
Vista Tiburon Prescriptions: • Remove ground and ladder fuels • Remove subordinate eucalyptus reproduction • Raise crowns to 10’ above grade • Clear trunks of loose bark and debris to 10’ • Prevent stump regrowth with herbicides • Cut sprout growth and kill stumps regularly Results: • Removed 44% of eucalyptus stems • Stump kill was 100% - treatment unknown • 40% of replacement vegetation survived After 26
Demonstration Project Planning 2001 Management Plan Proposal 27
Environmental Review CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act University of California is “Lead Agency” • Responsible for carrying out project • Responsible for preparing CEQA document 28
Environmental Review Purposes of CEQA • Inform governmental decision-makers and the public about potential significant environmental effects of proposed activities • Identify ways to avoid or reduce significant impacts • Prevent significant impacts by requiring feasible mitigation measures or alternatives CEQA documents are informational, not an approval 29
Environmental Review Preparers • UCSF staff • UC Office of the President staff • Consultants • Attorneys 30
Environmental Review Levels of CEQA Review • Exempt from CEQA • Not exempt from CEQA Initial Study (“IS”) Negative Declaration (“ Neg Dec”) Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) Proposed project not exempt from CEQA 31
Environmental Review Examples of UCSF as Lead Agency • UCSF Long Range Development Plan EIR • UCSF Medical Center at Mission Bay EIR • Helipad Operations SEIR • Osher Building EIR and Addendum • Regeneration Medicine Building Negative Declaration 32
Environmental Review Mount Sutro Project Description • Phased implementation over 61 acres - 2-acre Demonstration area - South Ridge and Edgewood areas - Remainder of forest • Analyze range of potential management activities to cover possible choices under “adaptive management” 33
Environmental Review CEQA Topics • • Aesthetics Land Use • • Agriculture Minerals • • Air Quality Noise (incl. Greenhouse Gas) • Population/Housing • Biology • Public Services • Cultural • Recreation • Geology • Traffic • Hazards/Hazmat • Utilities • Hydrology 34
Environmental Review Community Concerns • • Ecosystem disturbance Visual impacts • • Insects, fungi, reptiles Herbicide use • • Carbon sequestration Erosion • • Historic elements Wind • • Increased fire hazard Vermin • • Noise from power plant Rock outcroppings • Light spill 35
Environmental Review Activities to-date exempt from CEQA • Maintenance of existing facilities, including landscaping - Pruning - Shrub/weed removal - Trail maintenance and improvements • Minor alterations to land - Hazardous tree removal • New gardening or landscaping - Native plant garden at summit • Accessory structures - Trail markers 36
Environmental Review Future activities exempt from CEQA • Ongoing maintenance • Trail maintenance and improvements • Hazardous tree removal • Maintenance and plantings at native plant garden at summit 37
Recommend
More recommend
