DOCSLIB.ORG

Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide Gate Structure Replacement Project Valley Water Project No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide Gate Structure Replacement Project Valley Water Project No DRAFT Mitigated Negative Declaration SEPTEMBER 2020 Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide Gate Structure Replacement Project Valley Water Project No. 10394001 Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide Gate Structure Replacement Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration September 2020 Table of Contents : Introduction .............................................................................................. 1-1 Organization of this Document ................................................................................................ 1-1 Purpose of the Mitigated Negative Declaration ....................................................................... 1-1 Decision to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration............................................................ 1-1 Public Review Process ........................................................................................................... 1-2 Interagency Collaboration and Regulatory Review ................................................................. 1-2 Project Description .................................................................................. 2-1 Project Background ................................................................................................................. 2-1 Project Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2-5 Project Description .................................................................................................................. 2-5 Project Design Development Process ................................................................................... 2-27 : Environmental Setting ............................................................................. 3-1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................... 3-1 Surrounding Land Uses .......................................................................................................... 3-1 Physical Environment ............................................................................................................. 3-1 Environmental Evaluation ....................................................................... 4-1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................... 4-3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources........................................................................................ 4-8 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................. 4-10 Biological Resources ............................................................................................................ 4-17 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................... 4-68 Energy ................................................................................................................................... 4-74 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................. 4-76 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................. 4-82 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................ 4-86 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................ 4-92 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................... 4-101 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................. 4-104 Noise ................................................................................................................................... 4-106 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................... 4-113 Public Services ................................................................................................................... 4-114 Recreation ........................................................................................................................... 4-117 Transportation ..................................................................................................................... 4-124 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 4-129 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................. 4-132 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................ 4-136 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................... 4-138 Report Preparation .................................................................................... 5-1 References ................................................................................................. 6-1 i Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide Gate Structure Replacement Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration September 2020 Figures Figure 2-1. Project Location ...................................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-2. Palo Alto Flood Basin and Vicinity .......................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3. Project Overview ................................................................................................... 2-11 Figure 2-4. Plan and Profile of New Tide Gate Structure ........................................................ 2-12 Figure 2-5. Trail Closure ......................................................................................................... 2-13 Figure 2-6. Staging and Access .............................................................................................. 2-14 Figure 2-7. Project Schedule and Phasing .............................................................................. 2-17 Figure 2-8. Overview of Options Evaluated ............................................................................ 2-31 Figure 3-1. Photo of Existing Tide Gate and Levee .................................................................. 3-2 Figure 4-1. Habitats in the Western Portion of the Study Area ............................................... 4-26 Figure 4-2. Habitats in the Eastern Portion of Study Area ...................................................... 4-27 Figure 4-3. CNDDB Plant Occurrences within 2 Miles of Project Area ................................... 4-30 Figure 4-4. CNDDB Fish and Wildlife Occurrences within 2 Miles of Project Area ................. 4-35 Figure 4-5. Post-Project Habitat Types at the New Tide Gate Structure................................. 4-49 Figure 4-6. Level A and B Impact Thresholds for Marine Mammals ....................................... 4-62 Figure 4-7. Comparison of Aerial Imagery during Low and High Tides................................... 4-96 Figure 4-8. Recreational Opportunities in Project Vicinity ..................................................... 4-119 Figure 4-9. Trail Detours Outside Active Construction Period .............................................. 4-121 Figure 4-10. Trail Detours During Active Construction Period .............................................. 4-122 Tables Table 1-1. Summary of Applicable Regulatory Requirements ................................................... 1-3 Table 2-1. Import Materials ........................................................................................................ 2-9 Table 2-2. Disposal Materials .................................................................................................. 2-10 Table 2-3. List of Equipment and Estimated Operation ........................................................... 2-15 Table 2-4. Best Management Practices .................................................................................. 2-19 Table 4-1. County and City Policies Related to Aesthetics ....................................................... 4-4 Table 4-2. Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants/Precursors ........................... 4-11 Table 4-3. Construction Emissions without BMPs Incorporated by Calendar Year ................. 4-14 Table 4-4. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Policies Related to Biological Resources ............. 4-21 Table 4-5. Palo Alto Baylands Master Plan Policies Relevant to Biological Resources .......... 4-22 Table 4-6. Special-Status Plants with Potential to Occur in the Study Area ............................ 4-31 Table 5-7. Special-Status Animal Species with Potential to Occur in the Study Area ............. 4-36 Table 4-8. Land Cover Type Conversions within the Project Area .......................................... 4-47 Table 4-9. Interim Injury Criteria for Fish ................................................................................. 4-57 Table 4-10. NMFS In-water Level A Acoustic Thresholds (PTS Onset) .................................. 4-59 Table 4-11. NMFS Current In-Air Level A and Level B Acoustic Thresholds .......................... 4-59 Table 4-12. Hydroacoustic Assessment for Construction
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 3. Project Description March 5, 2003 Page 3-1
    Marina Shores Village Project Draft EIR City of Redwood City 3. Project Description March 5, 2003 Page 3-1 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This chapter describes the proposed action or "project" addressed by this EIR. The description is based on information provided to the City by the project applicant, Glenborough-Pauls LLC. As stipulated by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the project description has been detailed to the extent needed for adequate review and evaluation of environmental impacts. In addition to describing key elements of the proposed project, this chapter is supplemented by project description details in individual environmental chapters 4 through 15. The description that follows includes (a) the project setting (location, boundaries, and local setting of the project site); (b) the project background (site history); (c) a statement of the basic project objectives sought by the applicant; (d) the project's physical and operational characteristics (i.e., land use components, densities, building types, architectural design, landscaping/open space, circulation and parking plans, marina and shoreline modifications, infrastructure provisions, project management, and other pertinent features); (e) the anticipated project construction schedule; and (f) the various anticipated permits and jurisdictional approvals required to allow construction of the project. 3.1 PROJECT SETTING 3.1.1 Regional Location As illustrated on Figure 3.1 (Regional Map), the proposed project site is located at the northern edge of the developed portion of Redwood City, on the San Francisco Bay side of U.S. Highway 101 (Bayshore Freeway). U.S. 101 provides regional access to the approximately 46.45-acre project site; East Bayshore Road and Bair Island Road provide local access.
    [Show full text]
  • Foster City, a Planned Community in the San Francisco Bay Area
    FOS T ER CI T Y - A NEW CI T Y ON T HE BAY A TRIBU T E T O PROFESSOR MI C HAEL MCDOUGALL KAL V IN PLATT As a tribute to Michael McDougall, long-time friend and colleague, Kalvin Platt revisits the Kalvin Platt, FAIA, is project for Foster City, a planned community in the San Francisco Bay Area. Mike was a Chairman of the SWA Group, an International principal planner and designer of this successful story of a new community which, as early Planning and Landscape as 1958, pioneered several planning and urban design maxims that we value today in good Architectural consulting place-making and sustainability. Foster City is a lesson for all of us. firm with 7 offices and award winning projects around the world. Mr. Platt has In the early 1960s; when I came to California as a planner and joined Wilsey, Ham, and Blair, an extensive experience Engineering and Planning Company in Millbrae; I met Michael McDougall. He was working on Foster in Planning New Towns and Communities, City, a new town along the San Francisco Bay. The sinuous “Venice-like” lagoon system that formed Sustainable Land the backbone of the plan amazed me with its inherent beauty and appropriateness to the natural Planning, Urban sloughs that ran along the Bay. What also amazed me was that this was a Master Planned New Design and Park and Town, the first significant effort of this post-WWII large scale planning concept in California and it had Conservation Planning. begun to be built as planned.
    [Show full text]
  • BAYLANDS & CREEKS South San Francisco
    Oak_Mus_Baylands_SideA_6_7_05.pdf 6/14/2005 11:52:36 AM M12 M10 M27 M10A 121°00'00" M28 R1 For adjoining area see Creek & Watershed Map of Fremont & Vicinity 37°30' 37°30' 1 1- Dumbarton Pt. M11 - R1 M26 N Fremont e A in rr reek L ( o te C L y alien a o C L g a Agua Fria Creek in u d gu e n e A Green Point M a o N l w - a R2 ry 1 C L r e a M8 e g k u ) M7 n SF2 a R3 e F L Lin in D e M6 e in E L Creek A22 Toroges Slou M1 gh C ine Ravenswood L Slough M5 Open Space e ra Preserve lb A Cooley Landing L i A23 Coyote Creek Lagoon n M3 e M2 C M4 e B Palo Alto Lin d Baylands Nature Mu Preserve S East Palo Alto loug A21 h Calaveras Point A19 e B Station A20 Lin C see For adjoining area oy Island ote Sand Point e A Lucy Evans Lin Baylands Nature Creek Interpretive Center Newby Island A9 San Knapp F Map of Milpitas & North San Jose Creek & Watershed ra Hooks Island n Tract c A i l s Palo Alto v A17 q i ui s to Creek Baylands Nature A6 o A14 A15 Preserve h g G u u a o Milpitas l Long Point d a S A10 A18 l u d p Creek l A3N e e i f Creek & Watershed Map of Palo Alto & Vicinity Creek & Watershed Calera y A16 Berryessa a M M n A1 A13 a i h A11 l San Jose / Santa Clara s g la a u o Don Edwards San Francisco Bay rd Water Pollution Control Plant B l h S g Creek d u National Wildlife Refuge o ew lo lo Vi F S Environmental Education Center .
    [Show full text]
  • Section 3.4 Biological Resources 3.4- Biological Resources
    SECTION 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4- BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section discusses the existing sensitive biological resources of the San Francisco Bay Estuary (the Estuary) that could be affected by project-related construction and locally increased levels of boating use, identifies potential impacts to those resources, and recommends mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate those impacts. The Initial Study for this project identified potentially significant impacts on shorebirds and rafting waterbirds, marine mammals (harbor seals), and wetlands habitats and species. The potential for spread of invasive species also was identified as a possible impact. 3.4.1 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES SETTING HABITATS WITHIN AND AROUND SAN FRANCISCO ESTUARY The vegetation and wildlife of bayland environments varies among geographic subregions in the bay (Figure 3.4-1), and also with the predominant land uses: urban (commercial, residential, industrial/port), urban/wildland interface, rural, and agricultural. For the purposes of discussion of biological resources, the Estuary is divided into Suisun Bay, San Pablo Bay, Central San Francisco Bay, and South San Francisco Bay (See Figure 3.4-2). The general landscape structure of the Estuary’s vegetation and habitats within the geographic scope of the WT is described below. URBAN SHORELINES Urban shorelines in the San Francisco Estuary are generally formed by artificial fill and structures armored with revetments, seawalls, rip-rap, pilings, and other structures. Waterways and embayments adjacent to urban shores are often dredged. With some important exceptions, tidal wetland vegetation and habitats adjacent to urban shores are often formed on steep slopes, and are relatively recently formed (historic infilled sediment) in narrow strips.
    [Show full text]
  • About WETA Present Future a Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service
    About WETA Maintenance Facility will consolidate Central and South Bay fleet operations, include a fueling facility with emergency fuel The San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation storage capacity, and provide an alternative EOC location, Authority (WETA) is a regional public transit agency tasked with thereby significantly expanding WETA’s emergency response operating and expanding ferry service on the San Francisco and recovery capabilities. Bay, and is responsible for coordinating the water transit response to regional emergencies. Future Present WETA is planning for a system that seamlessly connects cities in the greater Bay Area with San Francisco, using Today, WETA operates daily passenger ferry service to the fast, environmentally responsible vessels, with wait times cities of Alameda, Oakland, San Francisco, Vallejo, and South of 15 minutes or less during peak commute hours. WETA’s San Francisco, carr4$)"(*- /#)тѵр million passengers 2035 vision would expand service throughout the Bay Area, annually under the San Francisco Bay Ferry brand. Over the operating 12 services at 16 terminals with a fleet of 44 vessels. last five years, SF Bay Ferry ridership has grown чф percent. In the near term, WETA will launch a Richmond/San Francisco route (201ш) and new service to Treasure Island. Other By the Numbers terminal sites such as Seaplane Lagoon in Alameda, Berkeley, Mission Bay, Redwood City, the South Bay, and the Carquinez *- /#)ǔǹǒ --$ ./-).+*-/0+ Strait are on the not-too-distant horizon. ($''$*)-$ -. /*ǗǕǑ$& .-*.. 0. 4 --4 /# 4 #4ǹ 1 -44 -ǹ A Plan for Expanded Bay Area Ferry Service --4-$ -.#$+ 1 )! --$ . Vallejo #.$)- . /*!' / /2 )ǓǑǒǘ CARQUINEZ STRAIT Ǚǖʞ.$) ǓǑǒǓǹ )ǓǑǓǑǹ Hercules WETA Expansion Targets Richmond Funded Traveling by ferry has become increasingly more popular in • Richmond Berkeley the Bay Area, as the economy continues to improve and the • Treasure Island Partially Funded Pier 41 Treasure Island population grows.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 8: the Current Permitting Process for Projects Proposed on San Francisquito Creek
    SECTION 8: THE CURRENT PERMITTING PROCESS FOR PROJECTS PROPOSED ON SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK 8.1 THE PROJECT PERMITTING PROCESS FOR THE PRIVATE LANDOWNER Creeks are important ecological resources regarded as sensitive habitats. Several federal, state and local agencies oversee regulations that protect creeks in the San Francisco Bay Area. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and San Mateo County Flood Control District are among the agencies requiring permits and other approvals for any project that may affect creek habitat, including bank stabilization. Figure 8A The project planning process A landowner must follow several steps to obtain permits or approvals for a project in or near San Francisquito Creek (‘project’ being defined as Contact Local buildings, bank stabilization projects, grading, major landscaping, pool, Agency/Consult with deck, or wall construction and concrete paving). Currently, he or she Permitting Agencies must contact all appropriate agencies, whether or not the agency ulti- mately will be involved in the proposed project. Local city planning and/ or public works departments can be of assistance in beginning this process and should be contacted as a first step, as illustrated in Figure Review Master Plan’s 8.1. Any landowner planning modifications within fifty feet of the top of Recommendations for Site bank should also consult the recommendations in this Master Plan report to determine potential upstream and downstream impacts. 8.2 CURRENT PERMITTING AGENCIES AND Secure Engineer’s REQUIREMENTS Services City Grading Permits A permit is required for any excavation or fill that will encroach on or alter a natural drainage channel or water course, up to and including the Develop Design top of bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Goga Wrfr.Pdf
    The National Park Service Water Resources Division is responsible for providing water resources management policy and guidelines, planning, technical assistance, training, and operational support to units of the National Park System. Program areas include water rights, water resources planning, regulatory guidance and review, hydrology, water quality, watershed management, watershed studies, and aquatic ecology. Technical Reports The National Park Service disseminates the results of biological, physical, and social research through the Natural Resources Technical Report Series. Natural resources inventories and monitoring activities, scientific literature reviews, bibliographies, and proceedings of technical workshops and conferences are also disseminated through this series. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service. Copies of this report are available from the following: National Park Service (970) 225-3500 Water Resources Division 1201 Oak Ridge Drive, Suite 250 Fort Collins, CO 80525 National Park Service (303) 969-2130 Technical Information Center Denver Service Center P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 Cover photos: Top: Golden Gate Bridge, Don Weeks Middle: Rodeo Lagoon, Joel Wagner Bottom: Crissy Field, Joel Wagner ii CONTENTS Contents, iii List of Figures, iv Executive Summary, 1 Introduction, 7 Water Resources Planning, 9 Location and Demography, 11 Description of Natural Resources, 12 Climate, 12 Physiography, 12 Geology, 13 Soils, 13
    [Show full text]
  • Birding Northern California by Jean Richmond
    BIRDING NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Site Guides to 72 of the Best Birding Spots by Jean Richmond Written for Mt. Diablo Audubon Society 1985 Dedicated to my husband, Rich Cover drawing by Harry Adamson Sketches by Marv Reif Graphics by dk graphics © 1985, 2008 Mt. Diablo Audubon Society All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced in whole or in part by any means without prior permission of MDAS. P.O. Box 53 Walnut Creek, California 94596 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . How To Use This Guide .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Birding Etiquette .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Terminology. Park Information .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 One Last Word. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5 Map Symbols Used. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Acknowledgements .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 Map With Numerical Index To Guides .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 8 The Guides. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 Where The Birds Are. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 158 Recommended References .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 165 Index Of Birding Locations. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 166 5 6 Birding Northern California This book is a guide to many birding areas in northern California, primarily within 100 miles of the San Francisco Bay Area and easily birded on a one-day outing. Also included are several favorite spots which local birders
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 AIR MONITORING NETWORK PLAN July 1, 2017
    METEOROLOGY, MEASUREMENT AND RULES DIVISION 2016 AIR MONITORING NETWORK PLAN July 1, 2017 Charles Knoderer Duc Nguyen Dan Alrick and Katherine Hoag Meteorology, Measurements and Rules Division 375 Beale St., Suite 600, San Francisco, CA 94105 This page intentionally left blank. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1. ...... INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 11 2. ...... OVERVIEW OF NETWORK OPERATION .................................................................................... 11 2.1 ... Network Design ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 ... Minimum Monitoring Requirements ............................................................................. 17 Monitoring Agreements with Yolo/Solano AQMD and Northern Sonoma APCD ........................................................................................... 19 Monitoring Agreements with Monterey Bay Unified APCD .................... 19 2.2.1 Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Ozone .......................................... 19 Ozone Monitoring Season Waivers and Waiver Request ......................... 22 Napa Ozone Spatial Scale, Waiver Request ................................................... 22 2.2.2 Minimum Monitoring Requirements for PM2.5 ............................................. 23 State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements ........................................... 23
    [Show full text]
  • Desilva Island
    SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY 187 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY 188 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY This subregion includes shoreline areas from the Oakland Bay Bridge south to San Jose. Most of the tidal marshland in the South San Francisco Bay was diked and drained for pasture in the early 1900s and eventually converted to salt evaporation ponds. Planning efforts are underway to restore much of the marshland in this area to tidal action, although some ponds will be managed as non-tidal wildlife areas. Black- Active Great crowned Little or year Site Blue Great Snowy Night- Cattle Blue last # Colony Site Heron Egret Egret Heron Egret Heron County active Page 801 Alameda NWR Alameda Active 190 802 Artesian Slough Santa Clara 2002 191 803 Bair Island North San Mateo 1994 193 804 Bair Island South San Mateo Active 195 805 Baumberg 13 Alameda 2002 197 806 Baumberg 6B Alameda Active 198 807 Baumberg 8A Alameda 1996 218 808 Burlingame San Mateo 2000 218 809 Charleston Slough Santa Clara 1993 218 810 Coyote Creek Santa Clara 2003 199 811 Coyote Creek Lagoon Santa Clara 2002 200 812 Greco Island San Mateo 1998 219 813 Guadalupe Slough Santa Clara 2003 219 814 Hayward Shoreline Alameda Active 202 815 Lake Elizabeth Santa Clara Active 204 816 Lake Merritt Alameda Active 206 817 Moffett A2E Santa Clara 1995 219 818 Moffett A2W Santa Clara 1999 219 819 Moffett A3N/B2 Santa Clara 1996 220 820 Ovation Court Santa Clara Active 220 821 Oyster Cove Pier San Mateo Active 208 Palo Alto Baylands 822 Santa Clara Active 209 Duck Pond 823 Portola Valley San Mateo Active 211 824 Quarry Lakes Santa Clara 1995 212 825 Redwood Shores San Mateo 2004 213 826 Ruus Park Alameda Active 215 827 Shorebird Way Santa Clara Active 216 828 Steinberger Slough San Mateo Active 217 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY 189 190 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BAY Alameda NWR Great Blue Herons nest on a pier at the proposed Alameda National Wildlife Refuge, on the old Alameda Naval Air Station.
    [Show full text]
  • 50K Course Guide
    50K COURSE GUIDE IMPORTANT UPDATES (11/02/2017) • NEW COURSE MODIFICATION - Old Inn to Muir Beach • New 2017 Start & Finish Locations • On-Course Nutrition Information • UPDATED Crew and spectator information RACE DAY CHECKLIST PRE-RACE PREPARATION • Review the shuttle and parking information on the website and make a plan for your transportation to the start area. Allow extra time if you are required or planning to take a shuttle. • Locate crew- and spectator-accessible Aid Stations on the course map and inform your family/friends where they can see you on-course. Review the crew and spectator information section of this guide for crew rules and transportation options. • If your distance allows, make a plan with your pacer to meet you at a designated pacer aid station. Review the pacer information section of this guide for pacer rules and transportation options. • Locate the designated drop bag aid stations and prepare a gear bag for the specific drop bag location(s). Review the drop bag information section of this guide for more information regarding on-course drop bag processes and policies. • Pick up your bib and timing device at a designated packet pickup location. • Attend the Pre-Race Panel Discussion for last-minute questions and advice from TNF Athletes and the Race Director. • Check the weather forecast and plan clothing and extra supplies accordingly for both you and your friends/family attending the race and Finish Festival. It is typically colder at the Start/Finish area than it is in the city. • Make sure to have a hydration and fuel plan in place to ensure you are properly nourished throughout your race.
    [Show full text]
  • Portolá Trail and Development of Foster City Our Vision Table of Contents to Discover the Past and Imagine the Future
    Winter 2014-2015 LaThe Journal of the SanPeninsula Mateo County Historical Association, Volume xliii, No. 1 Portolá Trail and Development of Foster City Our Vision Table of Contents To discover the past and imagine the future. Is it Time for a Portolá Trail Designation in San Mateo County? ....................... 3 by Paul O. Reimer, P.E. Our Mission Development of Foster City: A Photo Essay .................................................... 15 To enrich, excite and by T. Jack Foster, Jr. educate through understanding, preserving The San Mateo County Historical Association Board of Directors and interpreting the history Paul Barulich, Chairman; Barbara Pierce, Vice Chairwoman; Shawn DeLuna, Secretary; of San Mateo County. Dee Tolles, Treasurer; Thomas Ames; Alpio Barbara; Keith Bautista; Sandra McLellan Behling; John Blake; Elaine Breeze; David Canepa; Tracy De Leuw; Dee Eva; Ted Everett; Accredited Pat Hawkins; Mark Jamison; Peggy Bort Jones; Doug Keyston; John LaTorra; Joan by the American Alliance Levy; Emmet W. MacCorkle; Karen S. McCown; Nick Marikian; Olivia Garcia Martinez; Gene Mullin; Bob Oyster; Patrick Ryan; Paul Shepherd; John Shroyer; Bill Stronck; of Museums. Joseph Welch III; Shawn White and Mitchell P. Postel, President. President’s Advisory Board Albert A. Acena; Arthur H. Bredenbeck; John Clinton; Robert M. Desky; T. Jack Foster, The San Mateo County Jr.; Umang Gupta; Greg Munks; Phill Raiser; Cynthia L. Schreurs and John Schrup. Historical Association Leadership Council operates the San Mateo John C. Adams, Wells Fargo; Jenny Johnson, Franklin Templeton Investments; Barry County History Museum Jolette, San Mateo Credit Union and Paul Shepherd, Cargill. and Archives at the old San Mateo County Courthouse La Peninsula located in Redwood City, Carmen J.
    [Show full text]