Agenda, first session — Calimesa City Council, August 21, 2023 (part 2 of 9)

Chorizanthe xanti
var. leucotheca
white-bracted
spineflower
None/None/1B.2 None Coastal scrub (alluvial fans),
Mojavean desert scrub, Pinyon
and juniper woodland; sandy or
gravelly/annual herb/Apr–
June/980–3,935
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

Cuscuta obtusiflora
var. glandulosa
Peruvian dodder None/None/2B.2 None Marshes and swamps
(freshwater)/annual vine
(parasitic)/July–Oct/45–920
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-6 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Deinandra
mohavensis
Mojave tarplant None/SE/1B.3 Covered Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Riparian scrub; mesic/annual
herb/(May)June–
Oct(Jan)/2,095–5,250
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located within the
species’ known elevation range,
and mesic conditions are present
within Calimesa Creek. However,
this species is known to occur
within the San Jacinto Mountains.

The nearest known occurrence is
approximately 11 miles
southeast of the study area
(CDFW 2019).

Dodecahema
leptoceras
slender-horned
spineflower
FE/SE/1B.1 Narrow Endemic
Plant Species
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub (alluvial
fan); sandy/annual herb/Apr–
June/655–2,495
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located within this
species’ known elevation range,
and there are suitable sandy soils
present; however, there is no
suitable vegetation present to
support this species. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 1 mile north of the
study area and is possibly
extirpated (CDFW 2019).

Drymocallis
cuneifolia var.
cuneifolia
wedgeleaf
woodbeauty
None/None/1B.1 None Riparian scrub, Upper montane
coniferous forest; Sometimes
carbonate/perennial herb/June–
Aug/5,905–7,925
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-7 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Eremogone ursina Big Bear Valley
sandwort
FT/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps, Pebble
(Pavement) plain, Pinyon and
juniper woodland; mesic,
rocky/perennial herb/May–
Aug/5,905–9,515
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. This species
is endemic to the San Bernardino
Mountains, and the nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 17 miles northeast
of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Eriastrum
densifolium ssp.
sanctorum
Santa Ana River
woollystar
FE/SE/1B.1 Covered Chaparral, Coastal scrub (alluvial
fan); sandy or gravelly/perennial
herb/Apr–Sep/295–2,000
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located slightly outside of
the species’ known elevation
range, and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is from 1923
and is approximately 1 mile
northeast of the study area
(CDFW 2019).

Eriogonum kennedyi
var. alpigenum
southern alpine
buckwheat
None/None/1B.3 None Alpine boulder and rock field,
Subalpine coniferous forest;
granitic, gravelly/perennial
herb/July–Sep/8,530–11,485
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Eriogonum kennedyi
var.
austromontanum
southern mountain
buckwheat
FT/None/1B.2 None Lower montane coniferous forest
(gravelly), Pebble (Pavement)
plain/perennial herb/June–
Sep/5,805–9,480
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 19 miles northeast
of the study area (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-8 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Eriogonum
microthecum var.
lacus-ursi
Bear Lake buckwheat None/None/1B.1 None Great Basin scrub, Lower montane coniferous forest; clay
outcrops/perennial shrub/July–
Aug/6,560–6,890
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Erythranthe exigua San Bernardino
Mountains
monkeyflower
None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps, Pebble
(Pavement) plain, Upper
montane coniferous forest;
mesic, clay/annual herb/May–
July/5,905–7,595
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Erythranthe
purpurea
little purple
monkeyflower
None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps, Pebble
(Pavement) plain, Upper
montane coniferous
forest/annual herb/May–
June/6,230–7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Gilia leptantha ssp.
leptantha
San Bernardino gilia None/None/1B.3 None Lower montane coniferous forest (sandy or gravelly)/annual
herb/June–Aug/4,920–8,400
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Heuchera parishii Parish's alumroot None/None/1B.3 None Alpine boulder and rock field, Lower montane coniferous
forest, Subalpine coniferous
forest, Upper montane
coniferous forest; rocky,
sometimes carbonate/perennial
rhizomatous herb/June–
Aug/4,920–12,465
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Horkelia cuneata
var. puberula
mesa horkelia None/None/1B.1 None Chaparral (maritime), Cismontane woodland, Coastal
scrub; sandy or
gravelly/perennial herb/Feb–
July(Sep)/225–2,655
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-9 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Horkelia wilderae Barton Flats horkelia None/None/1B.1 None Chaparral (edges), Lower montane coniferous forest,
Upper montane coniferous
forest/perennial herb/May–
Sep/5,495–9,595
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Hulsea vestita ssp.
pygmaea
pygmy hulsea None/None/1B.3 None Alpine boulder and rock field, Subalpine coniferous forest;
granitic, gravelly/perennial
herb/June–Oct/9,300–12,795
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Imperata brevifolia California satintail None/None/2B.1 None Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Mojavean desert scrub,
Meadows and seeps (often
alkali), Riparian scrub;
mesic/perennial rhizomatous
herb/Sep–May/0–3,985
Low potential to occur. The study
area is located within the
species’ known elevation range
and mesic conditions are present
within Calimesa Creek; however,
the site lacks alkali conditions to
support this species. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 5 miles northwest
of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Ivesia argyrocoma
var. argyrocoma
silver-haired ivesia None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps (alkaline), Pebble (Pavement) plain, Upper
montane coniferous
forest/perennial
herb/(May)June–Aug/4,795–
9,710
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Juglans californica Southern California
black walnut
None/None/4.2 Covered Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Riparian woodland;
alluvial/perennial deciduous
tree/Mar–Aug/160–2,955
Observed. This species was
observed along the banks of
Calimesa Creek east of Park
Avenue and west of 5th Street.

Lasthenia glabrata
ssp. coulteri
Coulter’s goldfields None/None/1B.1 Criteria Area
Survey Plant
Species
Marshes and swamps (coastal
salt), Playas, Vernal pools/annual
herb/Feb–June/0–4,005
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-10 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Lewisia brachycalyx short-sepaled lewisia None/None/2B.2 None Lower montane coniferous forest, Meadows and seeps;
mesic/perennial herb/(Feb)Apr–
June(July)/4,490–7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Lilium parryi lemon lily None/None/1B.2 Covered Lower montane coniferous forest, Meadows and seeps,
Riparian forest, Upper montane
coniferous forest;
mesic/perennial bulbiferous
herb/July–Aug/4,000–9,005
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range.

Malacothamnus
parishii
Parish’s bush-mallow None/None/1A None Chaparral, Coastal scrub/perennial deciduous
shrub/June–July/1,000–1,495
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Mentzelia tricuspis spiny-hair blazing star None/None/2B.1 None Mojavean desert scrub; sandy, gravelly, slopes, and
washes/annual herb/Mar–
May/490–4,200
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

Monardella
macrantha ssp.
hallii
Hall’s monardella None/None/1B.3 Covered Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Valley and
foothill grassland/perennial
rhizomatous herb/June–
Oct/2,395–7,200
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located within the
species’ known elevation range;
however, no suitable is present.

Nama stenocarpa mud nama None/None/2B.2 Criteria Area
Survey Plant
Species
Marshes and swamps (lake
margins, riverbanks)/annual /
perennial herb/Jan–July/15–
1,640
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-11 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Navarretia
peninsularis
Baja navarretia None/None/1B.2 None Chaparral (openings), Lower montane coniferous forest,
Meadows and seeps, Pinyon and
juniper woodland; mesic/annual
herb/(May)June–Aug/4,920–
7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Oxytropis oreophila
var. oreophila
rock-loving oxytrope None/None/2B.3 None Alpine boulder and rock field, Subalpine coniferous forest;
gravelly or rocky/perennial
herb/June–Sep/11,150–12,465
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Packera bernardina San Bernardino
ragwort
None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps (mesic,
sometimes alkaline), Pebble
(Pavement) plain, Upper
montane coniferous
forest/perennial herb/May–
July/5,905–7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Parnassia cirrata
var. cirrata
San Bernardino grassof-ParnassusNone/None/1B.3 None Lower montane coniferous forest, Meadows and seeps,
Upper montane coniferous
forest; mesic, streamsides,
sometimes calcareous/perennial
herb/Aug–Sep/4,100–8,005
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Perideridia parishii
ssp. parishii
Parish’s yampah None/None/2B.2 None Lower montane coniferous forest, Meadows and seeps,
Upper montane coniferous
forest/perennial herb/June–
Aug/4,805–9,845
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Petalonyx linearis narrow-leaf
sandpaper-plant
None/None/2B.3 None Mojavean desert scrub, Sonoran
desert scrub; Sandy or rocky
canyons/perennial shrub/(Jan–
Feb)Mar–May(June–Dec)/-80–
3,660
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-12 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Phlox dolichantha Big Bear Valley phlox None/None/1B.2 None Pebble (Pavement) plain, Upper montane coniferous forest
(openings)/perennial herb/May–
July/6,000–9,745
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Physaria kingii ssp.
bernardina
San Bernardino
Mountains
bladderpod
FE/None/1B.1 None Lower montane coniferous
forest, Pinyon and juniper
woodland, Subalpine coniferous
forest; usually
carbonate/perennial herb/May–
June/6,065–8,860
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 20 miles northeast
of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Poa atropurpurea San Bernardino blue
grass
FE/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps
(mesic)/perennial rhizomatous
herb/(Apr)May–
July(Aug)/4,460–8,055
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 15.5 miles
northeast of the study area
(CDFW 2019).

Pyrrocoma uniflora
var. gossypina
Bear Valley
pyrrocoma
None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps, Pebble
(Pavement) plain/perennial
herb/July–Sep/5,245–7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Ribes divaricatum
var. parishii
Parish’s gooseberry None/None/1A None Riparian woodland/perennial deciduous shrub/Feb–Apr/210–
985
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-13 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Sidalcea hickmanii
ssp. parishii
Parish’s
checkerbloom
None/SR/1B.2 None Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Lower montane
coniferous forest/perennial
herb/(May)June–Aug/3,280–
8,200
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Sidalcea malviflora
ssp. dolosa
Bear Valley
checkerbloom
None/None/1B.2 None Lower montane coniferous forest
(meadows and seeps), Meadows
and seeps, Riparian woodland,
Upper montane coniferous forest
(meadows and seeps)/perennial
herb/May–Aug/4,900–8,810
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Sidalcea
neomexicana
salt spring
checkerbloom
None/None/2B.2 None Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Lower
montane coniferous forest,
Mojavean desert scrub, Playas;
alkaline, mesic/perennial
herb/Mar–June/45–5,020
Not expected to occur. No
suitable vegetation present.

Sidalcea pedata bird-foot
checkerbloom
FE/SE/1B.1 None Meadows and seeps (mesic),
Pebble (Pavement)
plain/perennial herb/May–
Aug/5,245–8,200
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 13 miles north of
the study area (CDFW 2019).

Streptanthus
campestris
southern jewelflower None/None/1B.3 None Chaparral, Lower montane coniferous forest, Pinyon and
juniper woodland;
rocky/perennial herb/(Apr)May–
July/2,950–7,545
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-14 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Symphyotrichum
defoliatum
San Bernardino aster None/None/1B.2 None Cismontane woodland, Coastal scrub, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Meadows and
seeps, Marshes and swamps,
Valley and foothill grassland
(vernally mesic); near ditches,
streams, springs/perennial
rhizomatous herb/July–
Nov(Dec)/5–6,695
Low potential to occur. The study
area is located within the
species’ known elevation range,
and mesic conditions are present
within Calimesa Creek. However,
the study area is located within a
highly urbanized setting
containing a high cover of
ornamental plantings and
anthropogenic disturbances
within Calimesa Creek (i.e., trash,
debris, litter, homeless
encampments). The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 3.2 miles west of
the study area within San
Timoteo Canyon (CDFW 2019).

Taraxacum
californicum
California dandelion FE/None/1B.1 None Meadows and seeps (mesic)/perennial herb/May–
Aug/5,310–9,185
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 14.6 miles
northeast of the study area
(CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-15 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name
Status
(Federal/State/

CRPR) MSHCP
Primary Habitat Associations/
Life Form/ Blooming Period/
Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur
Thelypodium
stenopetalum
slender-petaled
thelypodium
FE/SE/1B.1 None Meadows and seeps (mesic,
alkaline)/perennial herb/May–
Sep/5,245–8,200
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present. The nearest
known occurrence is
approximately 18.5 miles
northeast of the study area
(CDFW 2019).

Thelypteris puberula
var. sonorensis
Sonoran maiden fern None/None/2B.2 None Meadows and seeps (seeps and streams)/perennial rhizomatous
herb/Jan–Sep/160–2,000
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Trichocoronis
wrightii var. wrightii
Wright’s trichocoronis None/None/2B.1 Narrow Endemic
Plant Species
Meadows and seeps, Marshes
and swamps, Riparian forest,
Vernal pools; alkaline/annual
herb/May–Sep/15–1,425
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range.

Viola pinetorum ssp.
grisea
grey-leaved violet None/None/1B.2 None Meadows and seeps, Subalpine coniferous forest, Upper
montane coniferous
forest/perennial herb/Apr–
July/4,920–11,155
Not expected to occur. The study
area is located outside of the
species’ known elevation range,
and there is no suitable
vegetation present.

Federal
FE: Federally listed as endangered
FT: Federally listed as threatened
State
SE: State listed as endangered
SR: State listed as rare
CRPR: California Rare Plant Rank
1A: Plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 4: Plants of Limited Distribution – A Watch List

ATTACHMENT E

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
E-16 October 2019
Threat Rank

0.1 – Seriously threatened in California (more than 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat)

0.2 – Moderately threatened in California (20%–80% occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat)

0.3 – Not very threatened in California (less than 20% of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known) MSHCP: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Attachment F
Special-Status Wildlife Species Detected or Potentially Occurring in the Study Area

ATTACHMENT F

SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
F-1 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Amphibians
Rana draytonii California redlegged frogFT/SSC Covered Lowland streams, wetlands, riparian woodlands, livestock
ponds; dense, shrubby or
emergent vegetation associated
with deep, still or slow-moving
water; uses adjacent uplands.

Not expected to occur. The study area contains an ephemeral drainage (Calimesa Creek); however, this feature does not contain perennial waters to support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 14 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Rana muscosa mountain yellowlegged frogFE/SE, WL Covered Lakes, ponds, meadow streams, isolated pools, and open
riverbanks; rocky canyons in
narrow canyons and in
chaparral.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
suitable aquatic habitat in rocky canyons to support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 8.6 miles northeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Spea hammondii western spadefoot None/SSC Covered Primarily grassland and vernal pools, but also in ephemeral
wetlands that persist at least 3
weeks in chaparral, coastal
scrub, valley–foothill woodlands,
pastures, and other agriculture.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
grasslands and coastal scrub and lacks vernal pools to support this species. The majority of the study area has been
developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The nearest occurrence is approximately 4 miles west of the site (CDFW 2019).

Reptiles
Actinemys
marmorata
northwestern pond
turtle
None/SSC Covered Slow-moving permanent or
intermittent streams, ponds,
small lakes, and reservoirs with
emergent basking sites;
adjacent uplands used for
nesting and during winter.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
permanent or intermittent aquatic habitat for this species.

Calimesa Creek bisects the study area; however, it is an ephemeral drainage that lacks slow-moving permanent or
intermittent flows.

Anniella stebbinsi southern
California legless
lizard
None/SSC None Coastal dunes, stabilized dunes,
beaches, dry washes, valley–
foothill, chaparral, and scrubs;
pine, oak, and riparian
woodlands; associated with
sparse vegetation and moist
sandy or loose, loamy soils.

Low potential to occur. Sparse vegetation and loamy soils are present. A known occurrence overlaps the study area; however, it is described as occurring north of the study area near Yucaipa Boulevard and 5th Street. There are numerous other occurrences within 5 miles of the study area (CDFW 2019); however, the majority of the study area has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been
substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-2 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Arizona elegans
occidentalis
California glossy
snake
None/SSC None Commonly occurs in desert
regions throughout Southern
California. Prefers open sandy
areas with scattered brush. Also
found in rocky areas.

Not expected to occur. Open areas with scattered brush and rocky areas are present; however, this species commonly occur in desert regions. The nearest occurrence is approximately 7.6 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
San Diegan tiger
whiptail
None/SSC Covered Hot and dry areas with sparse
foliage, including chaparral,
woodland, and riparian areas.

Low potential to occur. Suitable woodland habitat with sparse understory is present; however, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The nearest occurrence is
approximately 4.2 miles west of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Charina umbratica southern rubber
boa
None/ST Covered Montane oak–conifer and mixedconifer forests, montane chaparral, wet meadows; usually
in vicinity of streams or wet
meadows.

Not expected to occur. The study area is outside of the elevation range of the species; the species is known from the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Mountains. The nearest
known occurrence is approximately 2.7 miles east of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Crotalus ruber red diamondback
rattlesnake
None/SSC Covered Coastal scrub, chaparral, oak
and pine woodlands, rocky
grasslands, cultivated areas,
and desert flats.

Not expected to occur. The study area is located in a highly urbanized area, and lacks suitable rocky substrate, and open habitat to support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 4.7 miles west of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Phrynosoma
blainvillii
Blainville’s horned
lizard
None/SSC Covered Open areas of sandy soil in
valleys, foothills, and semi-arid
mountains including coastal
scrub, chaparral, valley–foothill
hardwood, conifer, riparian,
pine–cypress, juniper, and
annual grassland habitats.

Low potential to occur. The study area supports a minimal amount of potentially suitable habitat (i.e., open sandy areas within Calimesa Creek); however, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The nearest known
occurrence is approximately 4.8 miles southeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Salvadora
hexalepis virgultea
coast patch-nosed
snake
None/SSC None Brushy or shrubby vegetation;
requires small mammal burrows
for refuge and overwintering
sites.

Not expected to occur. The study area supports a minimal amount of brushy or shrubby vegetation to support this species; however, no small mammal burrows were observed during the September 2019 site visit. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 4.8 miles northeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-3 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Thamnophis
hammondii
two-striped
gartersnake
None/SSC None Streams, creeks, pools, streams
with rocky beds, ponds, lakes,
vernal pools.

Not expected to occur. While Calimesa Creek does flow
through the study area, this feature does not support a rocky bed or perennial waters to support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 6.8 miles north and west of the study area within the San Bernardino National Forest (CDFW 2019).

Birds
Agelaius tricolor
(nesting colony)
tricolored
blackbird
BCC/SSC, ST Covered Nests near freshwater, emergent
wetland with cattails or tules, but
also in Himalayan blackberry;
forages in grasslands,
woodland, and agriculture.

Not expected to nest due to lack of suitable wetland and marsh habitat. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 2.3 miles southwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Aquila chrysaetos
(nesting &
wintering)
golden eagle BCC/FP, WL Covered Nests and winters in hilly, open/semi-open areas, including
shrublands, grasslands,
pastures, riparian areas,
mountainous canyon land, open
desert rimrock terrain; nests in
large trees in open areas and on
cliffs in open areas and forages
in open habitats.

Not expected to nest. Low potential to forage. The study area lacks suitable nesting habitat (i.e., large trees in open areas and on cliffs in open areas). The study area has limited suitable open areas for foraging. The nearest occurrence is
approximately 1.5 miles south of the study area from San Timoteo Creek (CDFW 2019).

Athene cunicularia
(burrow sites &
some wintering
sites)
burrowing owl BCC/SSC Covered Nests and forages in grassland, open scrub, and agriculture,
particularly with ground squirrel
burrows.

Low potential to occur. Vacant lots within the eastern portion of the study area contain open habitat providing line-of-sight, and California ground squirrels and potentially suitable burrows were present. However, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and
NETROnline 2019). The nearest known occurrence is
approximately 8.7 miles south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Buteo swainsoni
(nesting)
Swainson’s hawk BCC/ST Covered Nests in open woodland and savanna, riparian, and in
isolated large trees; forages in
nearby grasslands and
agricultural areas such as wheat
and alfalfa fields and pasture.

Not expected to nest. Low potential to forage. The study area is outside the nesting range of the species; however, the species may roost and forage in the study area during migration. The nearest known occurrence is from 1900, considered possibly extirpated, and is approximately 1 mile south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-4 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Coccyzus
americanus
occidentalis
(nesting)
western yellowbilled cuckooFT, BCC/SE Covered Nests in dense, wide riparian woodlands and forest with welldeveloped understories.

Not expected to nest or forage. The study area does not support dense or wide riparian woodlands with well-developed understories to nest and/or winter. The nearest known
occurrence is approximately 11.1 miles west of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Cypseloides niger
(nesting)
black swift BCC/SSC Covered Nests in moist crevices, caves, and cliffs behind or adjacent to
waterfalls in deep canyons;
forages over a wide range of
habitats.

Not expected to nest or forage. The study area does not contain caves or cliffs within canyons and the nearest known occurrence is approximately 10.2 miles northeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Elanus leucurus
(nesting)
white-tailed kite None/FP Covered Nests in woodland, riparian, and individual trees near open lands;
forages opportunistically in
grassland, meadows, scrubs,
agriculture, emergent wetland,
savanna, and disturbed lands.

Low potential to nest and forage. The study area supports a minor amount of woodlands (i.e., eucalyptus/tree of
heaven/black locust groves and Fremont cottonwood forest) for this species to nest; however, the woodland lacks adjacent foraging habitat. There are three known occurrences within 2 miles of the study area within San Timoteo Canyon (CDFW 2019).

Empidonax traillii
extimus (nesting)
southwestern
willow flycatcher
FE/SE Covered Nests in dense riparian habitats
along streams, reservoirs, or
wetlands; uses variety of riparian
and shrubland habitats during
migration.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not contain dense riparian habitats that would support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 5.2 miles south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Haliaeetus
leucocephalus
(nesting &
wintering)
bald eagle FD, BCC/FP, SE Covered Nests in forested areas adjacent to large bodies of water,
including seacoasts, rivers,
swamps, large lakes; winters
near large bodies of water in
lowlands and mountains.

Not expected to nest or winter. The study area does not contain large bodies of water, dense riparian, or other suitable habitats that would support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 17 miles north of the study area within the San Bernardino National Forest (CDFW 2019).

Icteria virens
(nesting)
yellow-breasted
chat
None/SSC Covered Nests and forages in dense,
relatively wide riparian
woodlands and thickets of
willows, vine tangles, and dense
brush.

Not expected to nest or forage. The study area does not contain dense, wide, riparian thickets that would support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 2.6 miles south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-5 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Lanius
ludovicianus
(nesting)
loggerhead shrike BCC/SSC Covered Nests and forages in open habitats with scattered shrubs,
trees, or other perches.

Low potential to occur. The study area supports scattered shrubs and trees to support this species; however, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The nearest known occurrence is
approximately 5.8 miles west of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Polioptila
californica
californica
coastal California
gnatcatcher
FT/SSC Covered Nests and forages in various
sage scrub communities, often
dominated by California
sagebrush and buckwheat;
generally avoids nesting in areas
with a slope of greater than
40%; majority of nesting at less
than 1,000 feet above mean sea
level.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not contain
suitable coastal scrub to support this species, and the study area is located outside of the species’ known elevation range.

The nearest known occurrence is approximately 7.5 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Progne subis
(nesting)
purple martin None/SSC Covered Nests and forages in woodland habitats including riparian,
coniferous, and valley foothill
and montane woodlands; in the
Sacramento region often nests
in weep holes under elevated
freeways.

5.3 miles south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Setophaga
petechia (nesting)
yellow warbler BCC/SSC Covered Nests and forages in riparian and oak woodlands, montane
chaparral, open ponderosa pine,
and mixed-conifer habitats.

Low potential to occur. The study area supports a minor amount of woodlands (i.e., eucalyptus/tree of heaven/black locust groves and Fremont cottonwood forest that contain scattered oaks; however, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The
nearest known occurrence is approximately 2.5 miles south of the study area within San Timoteo Creek (CDFW 2019).

Vireo bellii pusillus
(nesting)
least Bell’s vireo FE/SE Covered Nests and forages in low, dense riparian thickets along water or
along dry parts of intermittent
streams; forages in riparian and
adjacent shrubland late in
nesting season.

Not expected to nest or forage. The study area does not contain dense, wide, riparian thickets that would support this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 2.5 miles south of the study area within San Timoteo Creek (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-6 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Fishes
Catostomus
santaanae
Santa Ana sucker FT/None Covered Small, shallow, cool, clear streams less than 7 meters (23
feet) in width and a few
centimeters to more than a
meter (1.5 inches to more than 3
feet) in depth; substrates are
generally coarse gravel, rubble,
and boulder.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
perennial aquatic habitat for this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 14 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Oncorhynchus
mykiss irideus
pop. 10
southern
steelhead -
southern
California DPS
FE/None None Clean, clear, cool, welloxygenated streams; needs relatively deep pools in migration
and gravelly substrate to spawn.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
perennial aquatic habitat for this species. The nearest known occurrence is possibly extirpated and approximately 7.4 miles north of the study area within the Santa Ana River (CDFW 2019).

Rhinichthys
osculus ssp. 3
Santa Ana
speckled dace
None/SSC None Headwaters of the Santa Ana
and San Gabriel Rivers; may be
extirpated from the Los Angeles
River system.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not support
perennial aquatic habitat for this species. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 5.2 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Mammals
Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None/SSC None Grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, forests; most
common in open, dry habitats
with rocky outcrops for roosting,
but also roosts in man-made
structures and trees.

Low potential to roost and forage. The study area supports man-made structures and trees for roosting and a minor
amount of open habitat (i.e., vacant ruderal lots) are present for foraging; however, the nearest known occurrence is
approximately 6.7 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Chaetodipus
californicus
femoralis
Dulzura pocket
mouse
None/SSC None Open habitat, coastal scrub,
chaparral, oak woodland,
chamise chaparral, mixedconifer habitats; disturbance
specialist; 0 to 3,000 feet above
mean sea level.

Low potential to occur. The study area is within the elevation range for this species, and marginal habitat is present.

However, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019).

The nearest occurrence is approximately 10.2 miles southeast of the site (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-7 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Chaetodipus fallax
fallax
northwestern San
Diego pocket
mouse
None/SSC Covered Coastal scrub, mixed chaparral,
sagebrush, desert wash, desert
scrub, desert succulent shrub,
pinyon–juniper, and annual
grassland.

Low potential to occur. Sparse habitat and stream terraces are present along Calimesa Creek and there are numerous
occurrences within 5 miles of the study area (CDFW 2018).

Dipodomys
merriami parvus
San Bernardino
kangaroo rat
FE/SSC Covered Sparse scrub habitat, alluvial
scrub/coastal scrub habitats on
gravelly and sandy soils near
river and stream terraces.

Not expected to occur. The study area contains stream terraces within Calimesa Creek. However, the study area lacks suitable coastal scrub habitats to support this species, and it is located within a highly urbanized area. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 4.9 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Dipodomys
stephensi
Stephens’
kangaroo rat
FE/ST Covered Annual and perennial grassland
habitats, coastal scrub or
sagebrush with sparse canopy
cover, or in disturbed areas.

Not expected to occur. The study area contains disturbed areas; however, it lacks suitable coastal scrub habitats to support this species and is located within a highly urbanized area. The nearest known occurrence is approximately 4.8 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Eumops perotis
californicus
western mastiff
bat
None/SSC None Chaparral, coastal and desert
scrub, coniferous and deciduous
forest and woodland; roosts in
crevices in rocky canyons and
cliffs where the canyon or cliff is
vertical or nearly vertical, trees,
and tunnels.

Not expected to roost, low potential to forage. The study does not canyons or cliffs for roosting, but does contain a minor amount of woodlands for foraging. However, the nearest known occurrence is approximately 9.6 miles southwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Glaucomys
oregonensis
californicus
San Bernardino
flying squirrel
None/SSC Covered Coniferous and deciduous
forests, including riparian forests
Not expected to occur. The study area is outside of the species range; this species is known from the San Bernardino
Mountains with the nearest occurrence is 9.6 miles northeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Lasiurus xanthinus western yellow bat None/SSC None Valley–foothill riparian, desert riparian, desert wash, and palm
oasis habitats; below 2,000 feet
above mean sea level; roosts in
riparian and palms
Low potential to roost and forage. The study area supports Fremont cottonwood forest and scattered palms for roosting.

The nearest occurrence is approximately 1 mile north of the site (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-8 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Leptonycteris
yerbabuenae
lesser long-nosed
bat
FD/None None Sonoran desert scrub, semidesert grasslands, lower oak woodlands
Low potential to roost and forage. The study area supports a minimal amount of scattered oaks to support this species however, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019).

The nearest occurrence is approximately 1 mile north of the site (CDFW 2019).

Lepus californicus
bennettii
San Diego blacktailed jackrabbitNone/SSC Covered Arid habitats with open ground; grasslands, coastal scrub,
agriculture, disturbed areas, and
rangelands.

Not expected to occur. The study area supports disturbed areas and some open habitats (i.e., Calimesa Creek and vacant lots); however, the study area is located in a highly urbanized area.

The nearest occurrence is approximately 5.2 miles south of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Neotoma lepida
intermedia
San Diego desert
woodrat
None/SSC Covered Coastal scrub, desert scrub,
chaparral, cacti, rocky areas.

Not expected to occur. The study area does not contain
suitable habitat to support this species and is located in a highly urbanized area. The nearest occurrence is approximately 3.9 miles north of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
pocketed freetailed batNone/SSC None Pinyon–juniper woodlands, desert scrub, desert succulent
shrub, desert riparian, desert
wash, alkali desert scrub,
Joshua tree, and palm oases;
roosts in high cliffs or rock
outcrops with drop-offs, caverns,
and buildings.

Not expected to roost or forage. The study area does not contain suitable desert habitat or dense palm oasis to support foraging and does not contain rock outcrops or caverns for roosting. The nearest occurrence is approximately 10.4 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Onychomys
torridus ramona
southern
grasshopper
mouse
None/SSC None Grassland and sparse coastal
scrub.

Low potential to occur. The study area does not support coastal scrub, but does contain open areas with some cover of grasses (i.e., Calimesa Creek and vacant lots); However, this small patch of habitat in the study area is isolated within an area that has been developed for over 50 years, and the non-developed areas have been substantially disturbed by mowing and tilling (Google Earth 2019 and NETROnline 2019). The nearest
occurrence is approximately 4.8 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Perognathus
alticolus alticolus
white-eared
pocket mouse
None/SSC None Arid ponderosa pine
communities
Not expected to occur. The study area lacks suitable ponderosa pine communities to support this species. The nearest
occurrence is approximately 17 miles northwest of the study area (CDFW 2019).

ATTACHMENT F (CONTINUED)
12200
F-9 October 2019
Scientific Name Common Name Status (Federal/State) MSHCP Habitat Potential to Occur Perognathus
longimembris
brevinasus
Los Angeles
pocket mouse
None/SSC Covered Lower-elevation grassland,
alluvial sage scrub, and coastal
scrub.

Not expected to occur. The study area lack suitable habitat to support this species and is located in a highly urbanized area.

The nearest occurrence is approximately 5.3 miles east of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Taxidea taxus American badger None/SSC None Dry, open, treeless areas; grasslands, coastal scrub,
agriculture, and pastures,
especially with friable soils.

Not expected to occur. The study area is located in a highly urbanized area and does not contain adequate open habitat to support this species. The nearest occurrence is approximately

7.3 miles northeast of the study area (CDFW 2019).

Status Legend
Federal
BCC: USFWS – Birds of Conservation Concern
FD: Federally delisted; monitored for 5 years
FE: Federally listed as endangered
FT: Federally listed as threatened
State
FP: CDFW Fully Protected Species
SE: State listed as endangered
ST: State listed as threatened
SSC: California Species of Special Concern
MSHCP: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Conservation Plan

ATTACHMENT F

SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES DETECTED OR POTENTIALLY OCCURRING IN THE STUDY AREA 12200
F-10 October 2019

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Calimesa Creek Stage III Project
Aquatics Resources Delineation Report
Prepared for:

TKE Engineering Inc.
2305 Chicago Avenue
Riverside, California 92507
Contact: Steve Ledbetter, PE
Prepared by:

3544 University Avenue
Encinitas, California 92501
Contact: Megan Enright
NOVEMBER 2020
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.
12200
i November 2020
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.

ITEM 1: REQUEST FOR A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ................................................................................. 1 ITEM 2: CONTACT INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................... 1 ITEM 3: SITE ACCESS ........................................................................................................................................... 1 ITEM 4: DIRECTIONS TO THE PROJECT SITE .......................................................................................................... 1 ITEM 5: JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION METHODS................................................................................................ 2 ITEM 6: AQUATIC RESOURCES NARRATIVE............................................................................................................ 2 ITEM 7: DELINEATION MAPS................................................................................................................................. 2 ITEM 8: DATES OF FIELD WORK ........................................................................................................................... 2 ITEM 9: TABLE OF AQUATIC RESOURCES .............................................................................................................. 3 ITEM 10: REVIEW AREA DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................. 3 ITEM 11: HYDROLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 4 ITEM 12: REMOTE SENSING ................................................................................................................................. 4 ITEM 13: SOILS .................................................................................................................................................... 4 ITEM 14: SITE LOCATION MAPS ............................................................................................................................ 4 ITEM 15: AQUATIC FEATURES SPREADSHEET ....................................................................................................... 4 ITEM 16: DELINEATION MAPS .............................................................................................................................. 4 ITEM 17: PHOTOGRAPHS ..................................................................................................................................... 4 ITEM 18: DATA FORMS ......................................................................................................................................... 5 ITEM 19: METHODS ............................................................................................................................................. 5 ITEM 20: DIGITAL DATA ........................................................................................................................................ 5 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................................. 5

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
ii November 2020

APPENDICES
A
B
C
D
E
F
ACOE Regulatory Program Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form (Interim) Navigable Waters Protection Rule
Figures
Wetland Determination Data Forms and Ordinary High Water Mark Forms California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Resources WETS Table
Representative Photographs
TABLES
1 Schedule of the Jurisdictional Delineation Conducted for the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project..............................3 2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Jurisdictional Aquatic Resource Summary ....................................................3 3 Soils within the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Review Area.........................................................................4

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
1 November 2020
This Aquatic Resources Delineation Report is being provided to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) in accordance with the Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (ACOE 2016).

This report and supporting appendices provide the 20 items listed in the Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (ACOE 2016).

Item 1: Request for a Jurisdictional Determination
Appendix A contains the ACOE Regulatory Program Approved Jurisdictional Determination Form (Interim) Navigable Waters Protection Rule (July 2020).

Item 2: Contact Information
Applicant City of Calimesa Agent Dudek
Contact Name Kelly Lucia,
Planning Director
Contact Name Megan Enright
Address 908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, California 92320
Address 605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Phone 909.809.8778 Phone 760.420.7833
Fax NA Fax NA
Email [email protected] Email [email protected] Item 3: Site Access
The project applicant or agent will accompany ACOE staff to the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project (project) if site visits are deemed necessary.

Item 4: Directions to the Project Site
The 28.2-acre review area is located south of County Line Road, east of Interstate 10, and west of 3rd Street in the City of Calimesa in Riverside County (Figure 1; Figures included in Appendix B). The review area is within U.S.

Geological Survey 7.5-minute Yucaipa quadrangle map, Sections 11, 12, 13, and 14 of Township 2 South, Range 2 West (Figure 2 of Appendix B). The review area consists of two discontinuous polygons separated by approximately 1,640 feet. The approximate center of the western polygon of the review area is longitude 117°03ʹ35″W and latitude 33°00ʹ14″N, and the approximate center of the of the eastern polygon of the review area is longitude 117°02ʹ56″W and latitude 33°00ʹ12″N.

To drive to the western polygon of the review area, take Interstate 10, exit on County Line Road, and head east.

Take Calimesa Boulevard and head south. Calimesa Creek is approximately 150 feet south of the intersection of County Line Road and Calimesa Boulevard on Calimesa Boulevard. The downstream portion of the western polygon of the review area starts approximately 380 feet west of Calimesa Boulevard. The remainder of the western polygon is approximately 135 feet west of the intersection of Calimesa Creek and 5th Street. To drive to the eastern polygon of the review area, head east on County Line Road from its intersection with Calimesa Boulevard. The eastern polygon of the review area is approximately 2,000 feet east of the intersection of 5th Street and County Line Road.

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
2 November 2020
Item 5: Jurisdictional Delineation Methods
The ACOE wetlands delineation was performed in accordance with the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (ACOE 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:

Arid West Region (ACOE 2008a), A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual (ACOE 2008b), and guidance provided by ACOE and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the geographic extent of jurisdiction based on the U.S.

Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Clean Water Act (ACOE and EPA 2008).

Item 6: Aquatic Resources Narrative
The review area contains one ephemeral drainage (Calimesa Creek). Calimesa Creek conveys water that connects to Temescal Canyon Wash approximately 7 miles downstream, which ultimately flows to the Santa Ana River. Within the review area, the drainage includes a concrete-lined trapezoidal channel containing Calimesa Creek. The downstream portion of Calimesa Creek, west of 5th Street, includes a sandy bottom earthen-lined channel that is subject to frequent scouring associated with annual storm events. While the unvegetated channel within the review area was composed primarily of bare ground and a sandy substrate, a low percent cover of plant species was observed in the review area and include sacred thorn-apple (Datura wrightii) and bromes (Bromus spp.).There are approximately 0.89 acres of ephemeral drainage within the review area identified in Figure 3 of Appendix B. This 0.89 acres of ephemeral drainage is not ACOE-jurisdictional because it is a (b)(3) non-jurisdictional waters per Title 33, Part 328.3 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Wetland determination data forms were completed at one sampling point (WPD-1) to determine the status of three wetland criteria (vegetation, soils, and hydrology) within representative potential jurisdictional aquatic resources within the review area. Four OHWM datasheets (ODP-1 through ODP-4) were recorded at potential non-wetland waters within the review area to determine the status of OHWM indicators within those features. Wetland determination data forms and OHWM datasheets are included as Appendix C, Wetland Determination Data Forms and Ordinary High Water Mark Forms.

Waters of the State
See Appendix D for a discussion of area under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Item 7: Delineation Maps
All maps of delineated aquatic resources are provided in Appendix B.

Item 8: Dates of Field Work
On September 20, 2019, Dudek Biologist Britney Strittmater conducted a jurisdictional delineation for the review area was (Table 1).

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
3 November 2020
Table 1. Schedule of the Jurisdictional Delineation Conducted for the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Date Hours Personnel Conditions
September 20, 2019 9:45 a.m. to
2:45 p.m.

Britney Strittmater no cloud cover; wind speeds from 1 to 3 mph; temperatures ranging from 65°F to 79°F

Item 9: Table of Aquatic Resources
Table 2 includes a description of each non-jurisdictional ephemeral waters identified within the review area, its Cowardin type, any OHWM indicators present, the location, and the acreage/linear feet.

Table 2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Jurisdictional Aquatic Resource Summary Feature
Name
Linear
Feet Acreage Latitude Longitude OHMW Indicators Cowardin NWW1a 314 0.12 34° 00’ 13" N 117° 03’ 46" W • Changes in vegetation
cover
• Change in
average
sediment
texture
• Change in
vegetation
species
R4SBC/
NWW1b 1,033 0.36 34° 00’ 13" N 117° 03’ 36" W Riverine
NWW1c 716 0.27 34° 00’ 15" N 117° 03’ 26" W
NWW1d 84 0.03 34° 00’ 13" N 117° 03’ 22" W • Changes in vegetation
cover
NWW1e 917 0.12 34° 00’ 9 " N 117° 02’ 57" W
Total 3,035 0.89 — — — —
Notes: OHWM = ordinary high water mark.

Totals may not sum due to rounding.

Item 10: Review Area Description
The review area is characterized as a mix of residential and commercial development, and vacant lots. One ephemeral drainage feature (Calimesa Creek) bisects the review area east to west. Based on aerial imagery (Google Earth 2019), vacant lots have been frequently disced, as recently as December 2018. This is presumed to be for weed abatement and fire prevention. Elevations range from approximately 2,380 to 2,500 feet above mean sea level. A mix of developed and undeveloped lands (i.e., vacant lots) to the north, south, east, and west surrounds the review area.

A WETS table is provided in Appendix E for the Yucaipa Station, 4.1 SE. There was climatological data available for June, July, and September 2019. However, there was no data available for August 2019 (NRCS and NWCC 2019).

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
4 November 2020
Item 11: Hydrology
The review area is located within the Santa Ana Hydrologic Unit, San Timoteo Hydrologic Area, and South Mesa Hydrologic Subarea (HSA 801.67). The review area contains one ephemeral drainage (Calimesa Creek). Calimesa Creek conveys water that connects to Temescal Canyon Wash, which has surface connection ultimately flowing to the Santa Ana River (Figure 4 of Appendix B).

Item 12: Remote Sensing
No remote sensing was used for this aquatics resources delineation.

Item 13: Soils
Soil types within the project area are shown on Figure 5 of Appendix B and in Table 3. There are no hydric soils within the review area (USDA 2019).

Table 3. Soils within the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Review Area Soil Code Soil Name Hydric Rating Acreage
RaB2 Ramona sandy loam, 2%–5 % slopes, eroded Not Hydric 16.3 ReC2 Ramona very fine sandy loam, 0%–8% slopes, eroded Not Hydric 1.2 RmC Ramona Sandy Loam, 2%–9% slopes Not Hydric 7.2
SmF2 San Timoteo loam, 25%–50% slopes, eroded Not Hydric 3.5 Total 28.3
Sources: USDA 2019.

Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

Item 14: Site Location Maps
All maps are provided in Appendix B.

Item 15: Aquatic Features Spreadsheet
A copy of the ORM Bulk Upload Aquatic Resources or Consolidated Excel spreadsheet is not submitted with this report because Table 2 provides the information requested and there is only one feature.

Item 16: Delineation Maps
All maps are provided in Appendix B.

Item 17: Photographs
Photos of the project site are provided in Appendix F, and the photo point locations are on Figure 3 of Appendix B.

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
5 November 2020
Item 18: Data Forms
Wetland determination data forms and OHWM datasheets along with a summary table are provided in Appendix C.

Item 19: Methods
Jurisdictional boundaries were mapped in the field using a Trimble GeoXT GPS with submeter accuracy and aerial imagery from Digital Globe dated 2018. Following the field work, Ms. Strittmater digitized the aquatic resources using ArcGIS and project-specific, 1-foot contour topography.

Additionally, the delineation defined areas under the jurisdiction of California Department of Fish and Wildlife, pursuant to Sections 1600–1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 401 and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. See Appendix D for additional detail regarding California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board jurisdictional areas.

Item 20: Digital Data
Geographic information system (GIS) data of the review area and non-jurisdictional ephemeral drainage are located on a CD in Appendix G.

References Cited
ACOE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Online ed.

Environmental Laboratory, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi:

U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. January 1987. http://www.cpe.rutgers.edu/ Wetlands/1987-Army-Corps-Wetlands-Delineation-Manual.pdf.

ACOE. 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Environmental Laboratory, ERDC/EL TR-08-28. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. September 2008.
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/
stelprdb1046489.pdf.

ACOE. 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States: A Delineation Manual. ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Prepared by R.W.

Lichvar and S.M. McColley. Hanover, New Hampshire: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. August 2008. https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/ tr/fulltext/u2/a486603.pdf.

ACOE. 2016. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports. https://www.spk.usace.army.mil/Portals/12/documents/regulatory/jd/minimumstandards/Minimum_Standards_for_Delineation_with_Template-final.pdf

AQUATICS RESOURCES DELINEATION REPORT FOR THE CALIMESA CREEK STAGE III PROJECT 12200
6 November 2020
ACOE and EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S.

Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. December 2, 2008. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-02/documents/cwa_jurisdiction_following_ rapanos120208.pdf.

Google Earth. 2019. Aerial photograph. 1:200 scale.

NRCS and NWCC (Natural Resources Conservation Services and National Water and Climate Center). 2019.

Navigating to Climate Data and Products from the FOTG County Locator. Data downloaded: Climatological data for June, July, and September 2019. Accessed October 15, 2019. https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/ climate/navigate_wets.htm.

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2019. Web Soil Survey. Accessed October 2019. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm.

Appendix A
ACOE Regulatory Program Approved Jurisdictional
Determination Form (Interim) Navigable Waters
Protection Rule

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REGULATORY PROGRAM

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)

NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE

Page 1 of 3 ends

I. ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
Completion Date of Approved Jurisdictional Determination (AJD): Select.

ORM Number: (e.g. HQS-2020-00001-MSW).

Associated JDs: N/A or ORM numbers and identifiers (e.g. HQS-2020-00001-MSW-MITSITE).

Review Area Location1: State/Territory: CA City: Calimesa County/Parish/Borough: Riverside Center Coordinates of Review Area: Latitude 34.00359665 Longitude 117.0626693 II. FINDINGS
A. Summary: Check all that apply. At least one box from the following list MUST be selected. Complete the corresponding sections/tables and summarize data sources. ☐ The review area is comprised entirely of dry land (i.e., there are no waters or water features, including wetlands, of any kind in the entire review area). Rationale: N/A or describe rationale. ☐ There are “navigable waters of the United States” within Rivers and Harbors Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete table in Section II.B).
☐ There are “waters of the United States” within Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete appropriate tables in Section II.C).
☒ There are waters or water features excluded from Clean Water Act jurisdiction within the review area (complete table in Section II.D).

B. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 Section 10 (§ 10)2
§ 10 Name § 10 Size § 10 Criteria Rationale for § 10 Determination N/A. N/A. N/A N/A. N/A.

C. Clean Water Act Section 404
Territorial Seas and Traditional Navigable Waters ((a)(1) waters):
3 (a)(1) Name (a)(1) Size (a)(1) Criteria Rationale for (a)(1) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A.

Tributaries ((a)(2) waters):
(a)(2) Name (a)(2) Size (a)(2) Criteria Rationale for (a)(2) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A.

Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters ((a)(3) waters):
(a)(3) Name (a)(3) Size (a)(3) Criteria Rationale for (a)(3) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A.

Adjacent wetlands ((a)(4) waters):
(a)(4) Name (a)(4) Size (a)(4) Criteria Rationale for (a)(4) Determination N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A. N/A.
1 Map(s)/figure(s) are attached to the AJD provided to the requestor. 2 If the navigable water is not subject to the ebb and flow of the tide or included on the District’s list of Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigable waters list, do NOT use this document to make the determination. The District must continue to follow the procedure outlined in 33 CFR part 329.14 to make a Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 navigability determination. 3 A stand-alone TNW determination is completed independently of a request for an AJD. A stand-alone TNW determination is conducted for a specific segment of river or stream or other type of waterbody, such as a lake, where upstream or downstream limits or lake borders are established. A standalone TNW determination should be completed following applicable guidance and should NOT be documented on the AJD Form.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REGULATORY PROGRAM

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)

NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE

Page 2 of 3 ends

D. Excluded Waters or Features
Excluded waters ((b)(1) – (b)(12)):4
Exclusion Name Exclusion Size Exclusion5 Rationale for Exclusion Determination NWW1a 0.12 acre(s) (b)(3) Ephemeral
feature, including
an ephemeral
stream, swale,
gully, rill, or pool.

This is an ephemeral portion of Calimesa Creek
NWW1b 0.36 acre(s) (b)(3) Ephemeral
feature, including
an ephemeral
stream, swale,
gully, rill, or pool.

This is an ephemeral portion of Calimesa Creek
NWW1c 0.27 acre(s) (b)(3) Ephemeral
feature, including
an ephemeral
stream, swale,
gully, rill, or pool.

This is an ephemeral portion of Calimesa Creek
NWW1d 0.03 acre(s) (b)(3) Ephemeral
feature, including
an ephemeral
stream, swale,
gully, rill, or pool.

This is an ephemeral portion of Calimesa Creek
NWW1e 0.12 acre(s) (b)(3) Ephemeral
feature, including
an ephemeral
stream, swale,
gully, rill, or pool.

This is an ephemeral portion of Calimesa Creek
III. SUPPORTING INFORMATION
A. Select/enter all resources that were used to aid in this determination and attach data/maps to this document and/or references/citations in the administrative record, as appropriate. ☒ Information submitted by, or on behalf of, the applicant/consultant: Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2020)
This information is sufficient for purposes of this AJD.

Rationale: N/A
☐ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: Title(s) and/or date(s). ☒ Photographs: Other: Appendix F of the Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2020) ☐ Corps site visit(s) conducted on: Date(s).
☐ Previous Jurisdictional Determinations (AJDs or PJDs): ORM Number(s) and date(s). ☐ Antecedent Precipitation Tool: provide detailed discussion in Section III.B. ☐ USDA NRCS Soil Survey: Title(s) and/or date(s).
☒ USFWS NWI maps: Appendix B, Figure 4 of the Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2020) 4 Some excluded waters, such as (b)(2) and (b)(4), may not be specifically identified on the AJD form unless a requestor specifically asks a Corps district to do so. Corps districts may, in case-by-case instances, choose to identify some or all of these waters within the review area. 5 Because of the broad nature of the (b)(1) exclusion and in an effort to collect data on specific types of waters that would be covered by the (b)(1) exclusion, four sub-categories of (b)(1) exclusions were administratively created for the purposes of the AJD Form. These four sub-categories are not new exclusions, but are simply administrative distinctions and remain (b)(1) exclusions as defined by the NWPR.

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

REGULATORY PROGRAM

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM (INTERIM)

NAVIGABLE WATERS PROTECTION RULE

Page 3 of 3 ends

☒ USGS topographic maps: Appendix B, Figure 2 of the Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2020)
Other data sources used to aid in this determination:

Data Source
(select)
Name and/or date and other relevant information
USGS Sources National Hydrography Data Set. GIS data downloaded January 2020 from https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/?basemap=b1&category=nhd&title=NHD%20View USDA Sources USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2019. Web Soil Survey. Accessed October 2019. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm NOAA Sources N/A.

USACE Sources N/A.

State/Local/Tribal
Sources
N/A.

Other Sources Dudek. 2020. Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Aquatics Resources Delineation Report. November 2020.

Google Earth. 2019. Aerial photograph. 1:200 scale.

B. Typical year assessment(s): N/A
C. Additional comments to support AJD: N/A

Appendix B
Figures

Vicinity Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/16/2019 USGS National Map 2019, Yucaipa Quadrangle
Township 2S Range 2W Sections 11-14
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/16/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 1 Vicinty.mxd 0 0.75 1.5
n Miles
Review Area
FIGURE 1
1 inch = 1.5 miles
USGS Topo Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/16/2019 USGS 7.5-Minute Series Yucaipa Quadrangle
Township 2S Range 2W Sections 11-14
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/16/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 2 USGS Topo.mxd 0 1,000 2,000
n Feet
Review Area
FIGURE 2
1 inch = 2,000 feet
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !( !(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!
PP13
PP14
PP15
PP16
PP17
PP18
PP19
PP20
PP21
PP22 PP PP23 24
PP25
PP26
PP27
PP28
PP29
PP30
PP31 PP32

COUNTY LINE RD
5T
H
S
T
PA
R
K
AVE

CALIMESA
BLVD
AVEN
UE B

AVENUE K

ERWIN ST
NWW1d ODP 2
ODP 3
ODP 4 6'
6'
8'
6'
7' 10'
12'
10'
13'
13'
19'
23'
24'
26 26' '
27' 32'
NWW1a NWW 47' 1b NWW1c
34° 0' 15.388" N, 117° 3' 34.107" W
WDP 1
Aquatic Resource Delineation Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/30/2020 DigitalGlobe 2018
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/30/2020 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 3a Delineation.mxd 0 125 250 n Feet
Review Area
Ephemeral Drainage (NNW)
Transects
!( Wetland Data Form Point (WDP)
!( OHWM Data Sheet Point (ODP)
!( Photo Points (PP)
FIGURE 3a
1 inch = 250 feet
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!( !( !(
!
!
PP1
PP2
PP3
PP4
PP5
PP6
PP7
PP8
PP9 PP10
PP11
PP12

COUNTY LINE RD

EL SERENE LN
CLIN
G
WAY
4T
H
S
T

ROGERS CT
3R
D
S
T

FLORDASON DR

TURNER LN
ODP 1 5'
NWW1e
34° 0' 9.495" N, 117° 2' 59.631" W
Aquatic Resource Delineation Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/30/2020 DigitalGlobe 2018
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/30/2020 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 3b Delineation.mxd 0 125 250 n Feet
Review Area
Ephemeral Drainage (NNW)
Transects
!( OHWM Data Sheet Point (ODP)
!( Photo Points (PP)
FIGURE 3b
1 inch = 250 feet
Santa Ana River
HU, San Timoteo
HA, Yucaipa HSA
Santa Ana River
HU, San Timoteo
HA, Oak Glen HSA
Santa Ana River
HU, San Timoteo
HA, South Mesa HSA
Santa Ana River HU,
San Timoteo HA,
Chicken Hill HSA
Santa Ana River
HU, San Timoteo
HA, Beaumont HSA
Santa Ana River HU,
San Timoteo HA,
Cherry Valley HSA
National Wetlands Inventory and Hydrologic Unit Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/17/2019 USGS National Map 2019; USFWS Nation Wetlands Inventory USGS National Hydrography Dataset; CA Dept of Water Resources NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/17/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 4 NWI.mxd 0 0.225 0.45 n Miles
Review Area
Watershed (HUC 10)
Hydrologic Units
NWI Wetlands
Freshwater Pond
Riverine
FIGURE 4
1 inch = 0.38 miles
Project Site
!(^
Upper Santa
Ana River
San
Timoteo
Wash
RaB2
SmF2
ReC2
RmC
RmD
RmE2
RaB2 RmC
NRCS Soils Map
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/17/2019 USGS National Map 2019

USGS NRCS
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/17/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure 5 Soils.mxd 0 250 500 n Feet
Review Area
Soils
RaB2 - Ramona sandy loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes, eroded ReC2 - Ramona very fine sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes, eroded RmC - Ramona sandy loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes
RmD - Ramona sandy loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes
RmE2 - Ramona sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded SmF2 - San Timoteo loam, 25 to 50 percent slopes, eroded FIGURE 5
1 inch = 500 feet

1.07 acres

0.03 acres

0.12 acres 1.95 acres

0.37 acres

COUNTY LINE RD
5TH ST

PARK AVE

CALIMESA BLVD

AVENUE B

AVENUE K

ERWIN ST
CDFW-Jurisdictional Resources
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/18/2019 DigitalGlobe 2018
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/18/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure E-1a CDFW-Jurisditional Resources.mxd 0 125 250
n Feet
Review Area
CDFW Jurisdictional Streams
Non-Riparian Streambed
Riparian
FIGURE E-1a
1 inch = 250 feet

0.35 acres

COUNTY LINE RD

EL SERENE LN

CLING WAY
4TH ST

ROGERS CT
3RD ST

FLORDASON DR

TURNER LN
CDFW-Jurisdictional Resources
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 10/18/2019 DigitalGlobe 2018
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 10/18/2019 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure E-1b CDFW-Jurisditional Resources.mxd 0 125 250 n Feet
Review Area
CDFW Jurisdictional Streams
Non-Riparian Streambed
FIGURE E-1b
1 inch = 250 feet
C
O
U
N
T
Y
L
I
N
E
R
D
5TH ST

PARK AVE

CALIMESA BLVD

AVENUE B
AV
E
N
U
E
K
AV
E
N
U
E
K

ERWINST
RWQCB-JurisdictionalResources
CalimesaCreekProject-Calimesa,California-11/4/2020
DigitalGlobe2018
NAD83CaliforniaZoneVIUSFoot
Date: 11/4/2020 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure E-2a RWQCB-Jurisditional Resources.mxd 0125250
n
Feet
ReviewArea
RWQCB-JurisdictionalWatersoftheState
StreamChannel
Non-RiparianStreambed
Riparian
FIGUREE-2a
1inch=250feet

COUNTY LINE RD

EL SERENE LN
CLIN
G
WAY
4T
H
S
T

ROGERS CT
3R
D
S
T

FLORDASON DR

TURNER LN
RWQCB-Jurisdictional Resources
Calimesa Creek Project - Calimesa, California - 11/4/2020 DigitalGlobe 2018
NAD83 California Zone VI US Foot
Date: 11/4/2020 - Last saved by: slucarelli - Path: Z:\Projects\j1220001\MAPDOC\CalimesaCreek\JD Report\Figure E-2b RWQCB-Jurisditional Resources.mxd 0 125 250 n Feet
Review Area
RWQCB-Jurisdictional Waters of the State
Stream Channel
Non-Riparian Streambed
FIGURE E-2b
1 inch = 250 feet
Appendix C
Wetland Determination Data Forms and
Ordinary High Water Mark Forms

US Army Corps of Engineers
Arid West - Version 11-1-2006
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:

Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:

Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:

Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):

Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:

Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:

Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes No Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.

Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:

VEGETATION
Dominance Test worksheet:

Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:

Total % Cover of: Multiply by:

OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:

Prevalence Index is 3.01
Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present.

Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Use scientific names.) % Cover Species? Status

1. 2.

3. 4.

Sapling/Shrub Stratum

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. Total Cover:

Herb Stratum

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

Total Cover:

Woody Vine Stratum

1. 2.

Total Cover:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes No
Remarks:

Dominance Test is >50%
Total Cover: % %
%
%
%
%%
Calimesa Creek III Calimesa/Riverside 09/20/19
WPD-1
B. Strittmater
terrace convex 0
CA
C - Mediterranean California WGS 1984
Ramona Sandy Loam, 2% to 5% slopes Riverine
1 1
100.0
50 6
3 Data station taken within streambed terrace
Yes
No
No
5 No
1 3
50 Hirschfeldia incana
Datura wrightii
Xanthium strumarium
Arundo donax
59 FACW
FAC
UPL
UPL
30 59 139
30 0
9 100
0 2.36
Arid West - Version 11-1-2006
SOIL Sampling Point:

Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks 1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, RC=Root Channel, M=Matrix.

Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils4 :

Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) 4
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) wetland hydrology must be present.

Restrictive Layer (if present):

Type:

Depth (inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Remarks:

HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Primary Indicators (any one indicator is sufficient) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):

Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):

Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe) Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:

Remarks:

US Army Corps of Engineers
Soil Textures: Clay, Silty Clay, Sandy Clay, Loam, Sandy Clay Loam, Sandy Loam, Clay Loam, Silty Clay Loam, Silt Loam, Silt, Loamy Sand, Sand. 3 3 WPD-1
0-10" 2.5Y 3/3 100 Sandy Loam
Pit collapses at ~4" due to sandy soils
ODP-1
ODP-1
ODP-1
ODP-1
ODP-2
ODP-2
ODP-2
ODP-2
ODP-3
ODP-3
ODP-3
ODP-3
ODP-4
ODP-4
ODP-4
ODP-4
Appendix D
California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Resources

APPENDIX D

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

JURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES
12200
D-1 October 2019
Methods
Dudek Biologist Britney Strittmater conducted a delineation of jurisdictional waters of the United States and state within the review area on September 20, 2019. Table 1 summarizes the site conditions and timing of the survey.

An aquatics resources delineation report was prepared for the review area and waters of the United States, including wetlands, that are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) are addressed in the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2019). Maps are included in Appendix B of the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Aquatics Resources Delineation Report (Dudek 2019), including the project location (Figure 1), U.S. Geological Survey topographic map (Figure 2), National Wetland Inventory, Hydrological Unit, and National Hydrography Data (Figure 4), and soils map (Figure 5).

Table 1. Schedule of the Jurisdictional Delineation Conducted for the Calimesa Creek Stage III Project Date Hours Personnel Conditions
September 20,
2019
9:45 a.m. to 2:45
p.m.

Britney Strittmater no cloud cover; wind speeds from 1 to 3 mph; and temperatures ranging from 65°F to 79°F
Jurisdictional boundaries were mapped in the field using a Trimble GeoXT GPS with submeter accuracy and aerial imagery from Digital Globe dated 2018. Following the field work, Britney Strittmater digitized the resources using ArcGIS and project-specific 1-foot contour topography.

The jurisdiction-specific methods used to delineate California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) jurisdiction are described below.

CDFW Jurisdiction Methods
The delineation defined areas under the jurisdiction of the CDFW pursuant to Sections 1600–1603 of the California Fish and Game Code. A predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, where associated with a stream channel, was used to determine CDFW-regulated riparian areas. Streambeds under the jurisdiction of CDFW were delineated using the Cowardin method of waters classification, which defines waters boundaries by a single parameter (i.e., hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, or hydrology).

RWQCB Jurisdiction Methods
Areas regulated by the RWQCB are generally coincident with the ACOE, but can also include the adjacent riparian zone. Therefore, for this project, the RWQCB jurisdiction and CDFW jurisdiction are coincident.

APPENDIX D

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

JURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES
12200
D-2 October 2019
Results
There are 3.1 acres of RWQCB- and CDFW-jurisdictional resources in the review area along Calimesa Creek (Table 2). Of that 3.1 acres, 2.7 acres are non-riparian streambed and 0.4 acres are riparian. Within the non-riparian areas, there is unvegetated channel and non-hydrophytic vegetation. Within the riparian areas, there is Fremont cottonwood. Figures E-1a and Figure E-1b show the CDFW-jurisdictional areas. Figures E-2a and Figure E-2b show the RWQCB-jurisdictional areas. Each vegetation community is described below.

Table 2. California Department of Fish and Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board Jurisdictional Resources
Resources Type Vegetation Community Grand Total
Non-Riparian Streambed Eucalyptus/Tree of Heaven/Black Locust Groves

1.6 Unvegetated Channel 1.1
Non-Riparian Streambed Total 2.7
Riparian Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii)
Alliance

0.4 Riparian Total 0.4
Grand Total 3.1
Notes: CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife; RWQCB = Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Eucalyptus/Tree of Heaven/Black Locust Groves Semi-Natural Stands The eucalyptus/tree of heaven/black locust grove semi-natural stand is dominated by eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), or black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) in the tree canopy, forming an open-to-continuous tree layer less than 60 meters tall with a sparse to intermittent shrub and herbaceous layer (Sawyer et al 2009).

Within the review area, this semi-natural stand occurs along the banks of Calimesa Creek within the western portion of the review area and is co-dominated by tree of heaven and black locust with a few scattered eucalyptus trees present. Scattered giant reed (Arundo donax), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) were present, but were not dominant. This area contained a moderate amount of trash, debris, and litter resulting from homeless encampments and adjacent residential and commercial developments.

Fremont Cottonwood Forest Alliance
Fremont cottonwood forest alliance is dominated or co-dominated by Fremont cottonwood with a continuous to open tree canopy less than 25 meters tall. The shrub layer is intermittent to open and the herbaceous layer is variable (Sawyer et al. 2009). This community is found rivers, streams, lower canyons, alluvial fans, and valleys with a subsurface water supply that varies throughout the year (Sawyer et al. 2009).

Fremont cottonwood forest occurs along the downstream banks of Calimesa Creek within the western portion of the study area. This vegetation community contains greater than 5% absolute cover of Fremont cottonwood warranting a community; however, this community does include a high cover of tree of heaven. Scattered emergent

APPENDIX D

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

JURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES
12200
D-3 October 2019
coast live oaks and eucalyptus are present at lower covers. The understory is sparse and includes non-native grasses, including brome species (Bromus spp.).

Unvegetated Channel
Within the review area, unvegetated channel includes a concrete-lined trapezoidal channel containing Calimesa Creek. The downstream portion of Calimesa Creek, west of 5th Street, includes a sandy bottom earthen-lined channel that is subject to frequent scouring associated with annual storm events. While the unvegetated channel within the review area was composed primarily of bare ground and a sandy substrate, a low percent cover of plant species were observed in the review area within this land cover type include sacred thorn-apple (Datura wrightii), and bromes (Bromus spp.).

APPENDIX D

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

JURISDICTIONAL RESOURCES
12200
D-4 October 2019

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix E
WETS Table

ĂƚĞ DĂǆdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ DŝŶdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ ǀŐdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ 'ĂƐĞϰϬ 'ĂƐĞϱϬ WƌĞĐŝƉŝƚĂƚŝŽŶ ^ŶŽǁĨĂůů ^ŶŽǁĞƉƚŚ ϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϬϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϭϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϭ D D D D D Ϭ͘Ϭϱ D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϮ D D D D D Ϭ͘ϬϮ D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϮϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϲͲϯϬ D D D D D D DDǀĞƌĂŐĞͮ^Ƶŵ D D D D D Ϭ͘Ϭϳ D D zƵĐĂŝƉĂ^ƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ϰ͘ϭ^

;ŶŽƚĞ͗ƵŐƵƐƚϮϬϭϵĚĂƚĂǁĂƐŶŽƚĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƐƚĂƚŝŽŶͿ ĂƚĞ DĂǆdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ DŝŶdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ ǀŐdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ 'ĂƐĞϰϬ 'ĂƐĞϱϬ WƌĞĐŝƉŝƚĂƚŝŽŶ ^ŶŽǁĨĂůů ^ŶŽǁĞƉƚŚ ϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϬϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϭϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϯ D D D D D d D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϰ D D D D D Ϭ͘Ϯϯ D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϮϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϯϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϳͲϯϭ D D D D D D DDǀĞƌĂŐĞͮ^Ƶŵ D D D D D Ϭ͘Ϯϯ D D ĂƚĞ DĂǆdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ DŝŶdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ ǀŐdĞŵƉĞƌĂƚƵƌĞ 'ĂƐĞϰϬ 'ĂƐĞϱϬ WƌĞĐŝƉŝƚĂƚŝŽŶ ^ŶŽǁĨĂůů ^ŶŽǁĞƉƚŚ ϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϬϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϲ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϳ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϭϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϬ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϭ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϮ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϯ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϰ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϱ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϲ D D D D D Ϭ͘Ϭϭ D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϳ D D D D D Ϭ͘ϭϯ D DϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϴ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϮϵ D D D D D D DDϮϬϭϵͲϬϵͲϯϬ D D D D D D DDǀĞƌĂŐĞͮ^Ƶŵ D D D D D Ϭ͘ϭϰ D D

Appendix F
Representative Photographs

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-1 November 2020
PP-1: Downstream, west-facing view of trapezoidal
channel near OWHM data point (ODP)-1
PP-2: Upstream, east-facing view of trapezoidal
channel
PP-3: Upstream, east-facing view of trapezoidal
channel
PP-4: Downstream, west-facing view of trapezoidal
channel

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-2 November 2020
PP-5: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters of
the United States
PP-5: Downstream, west-facing view of non-wetlands
waters of the United States
PP-6: South-facing view of non-wetlands waters of the
United States
PP-7: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters of
the United States

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-3 November 2020
PP-8: Downstream, west-facing view of non-wetlands
waters of the United States
PP-9: Downstream, west-facing view of non-wetlands
waters of the United States
PP-10: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters of
the United States
PP-11: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters
of the United States

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-4 November 2020
PP-11: Downstream, west-facing view of non-wetlands
waters of the United States near ODP-2
PP-12: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters
of the United States near WDP-1
PP-13: South-facing of non-wetland waters of the
United States near ODP-3
PP-14: Upstream, east-facing of non-wetland waters
of the United States

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-5 November 2020
PP-15: North-facing view of non-wetlands waters of
the United States near ODP-4
PP-16: Downstream, west-facing view of non-wetlands
waters of the United States
PP-17: Downstream, west-facing view of nonwetlands waters of the United States

APPENDIX F

REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOS
12200
F-6 November 2020

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Calimesa Creek Stage III Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration – February 9, 2023 Appendix C – Cultural Resource Assessment

UPDATED CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF THE
CALIMESA CHANNEL, STAGE 3 PROJECT, CITY OF CALIMESA,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
by
Robert S. White
Laura S. White M.A. †
Richard Guttenberg, M.A.

Archaeological Associates
P.O. Box 180
Sun City, CA 92586
Tel (951) 244-1783
Fax (951) 244-0084
for
Phil Martin & Associates
1809 E. Dyer Road
Suite 301
Santa Ana, CA 92705

UPDATED
November, 2019
USGS 7.5' Topographic Quadrangle: Yucaipa
Study Area Acreage: 8+acres
Sections 13 and 14, Township 2 South, Range 2 West, SBBM KEYWORDS: Survey, Calimesa Creek, City of Calimesa, P33-023900, Riverside County CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished herein and in the attached exhibits present data and information required for this report, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ...........................………..

Robert S. White
Principal Investigator
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Management Summary . . . . . . . . iv
I. INTRODUCTION ......... 1
II. SETTING .......... 3
III. RESEARCH ORIENTATION . . . . . . . 17
IV. METHODS . . . . . . . . . 18
V. NATIVE AMERICAN SCOPING . . . . . . 21
VI. FIELD SURVEY . . . . . . . . . 22
VII. REPORT OF FINDINGS . . . . . . . 22
VIII. DETERMINATIONS OF ELIGIBILITY . . . . . 23
IX. DISCUSSION AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS . . . 27
REFERENCES CITED . . . . . . . 28
APPENDIX A: Personnel Qualifications
APPENDIX B: Records Search Results
APPENDIX C: NAHC Sacred Lands File Check
APPENDIX D: Native American Correspondence
APPENDIX E: DPR 523 forms for Primary # 33-020295

LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Regional location of the project area as . . . . 2 indicated on a portion of the USGS San Bernardino
1:100,000 scale Topographic Map (1982).

Figure 2. Study area plotted on a portion of the .....4 Yucaipa 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadrangle
(1996).

Page
ii
Figure 3. Project alignment as shown on aerial . . . . . 6 (scale unknown)
Figure 4. Location of historic storm drain plotted on . . . . 24 a portion of the Beaumont 7.5' USGS Topographic
Quadrangle (1996).

Figure 5. Location of historic storm drain (P33-023900) . . . . 25 as shown on aerial photograph. (scale unknown)

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Historic Buildings/Structures within a One-mile . . . . 19 Radius of the Study Area.

LIST OF PLATES
Page
Plate I. Top: Westerly, downstream view from terminus . . . . 32 of concrete, trapezoidal daylight channel at the beginning of of the project (east end). Bottom: Looking eastward upstream from Park Avenue.

Plate II. Top: Westerly view looking downstream from . . . . 33 Park Avenue. Bottom: Looking eastward upstream toward
Park Avenue from fire station.

Plate III. Top: Westerly view looking downstream from . . . . 34 behind 577 County Line Road. Bottom: Easterly view
upstream from behind law offices at 601 County Line Road.

Plate IV. Top: Northeasterly view of storm drain on located . . . 35 on west side of Calimesa Boulevard. Bottom: easterly view of storm drain adit constructed in 1930.

Plate V. Top: Close-up of construction date cast into head . . . . 36 frame over storm drain adit. Bottom: Easterly view looking upstream through canopy from the western project terminus. iii
Plate VI. Top: Looking east along alignment of proposed low . . . 37 flow diversion. Bottom: Looking northeast across proposed retention basin from the southwest parcel corner.
iv

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
At the request of Phil Martin & Associates, Archaeological Associates(AA) has undertaken an updated cultural resources assessment of the Calimesa Channel Stage 3 Project (formally known as the Calimesa Creek Improvement Project undertaken in 2013/2014) in the City of Calimesa, Riverside County. The purpose of the study was to identify all potentially significant cultural resources situated within the limits of the revised undertaking. The project entails:1) the stabilization of approximately 2,100-feet of earthen creek channel by means of a remedial grading program, 2) construct a new subterranean storm within County Line Road between Interstate 10 and 5th Street intended to divert seasonal high flows from entering this section of the creek, 3) abandonment of a small section of the creek situated immediately west of 5th Street and install a low flow diversion pipeline, and 4) the construction of a 4.5 acre retention basin located just southwest of the intersection of County Line Road and 3rd Street.

The results of the records searches conducted at the Eastern Information Center at UC Riverside and the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum indicated that no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites have been recorded within the limits of the creek alignment. Furthermore, no prehistoric resources of any kind were discovered as a result of a comprehensive field study.

The efforts of the field survey resulted in the discovery of one historic structure. It comprises a concrete storm drain that was constructed in 1930. It lies in the creek bottom on the west side of Calimesa Boulevard just south of County Line Road. A subsequent historical and architectural evaluation of the engineering structure has shown that it does not appear eligible for the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources. As a matter of course, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523A (Primary Record) and 523B (Building, Structure, and Object Record) forms were completed for the drain structure (Primary # 33-023900) and submitted to the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at UC Riverside (Appendix E).

No additional work in conjunction with cultural resources, including monitoring of any future grading activities, is warranted or recommended.
1 I. INTRODUCTION
The following report was written for Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. by Archaeological Associates. It describes the results of an updated Cultural Resources Assessment of the Calimesa Channel Stage 3 Project (formally known as the Calimesa Creek Improvement Project). The undertaking is located between 3rd Avenue and Interstate 10, both north and south of County Line Road in the City of Calimesa, Riverside County (fig.1).

Presently, it is desired to: 1) stem the ongoing erosion of approximately 2,100 feet of earthen creek channel between Interstate 10 and 5th Street through a remedial grading program, 2) construct a new subterranean storm within County Line Road between Interstate 10 and 5th Street intended to divert seasonal high flows from entering this section of the creek, 3) abandonment of a small section of the creek situated immediately west of 5th Street and install a low flow diversion pipeline, and 4) the construction of a 4.5 acre retention basin located just southwest of the intersection of County Line Road and 3rd Street. The original plan (2014) to create a hiking trial along the section of Calimesa Creek etween Interstate 10 and 5th Street has been dropped from the project.

The archaeological records searches for the project was conducted by Robert S. White (County Approved Archaeologist #164). The intensive survey of the subject section of creek was conducted by Robert S. White, Laura S. White, M.A, and Susan R. Klein. The field assessment of the proposed retention basin and the low flow diversion was performed by Robert S. White and Richard Guttenberg, M.A. The historic period storm drain adit that lies beneath Calimesa Boulevard just south of County Line Road was evaluated for significance by Robert S. White. Qualification statements are provided in Appendix A.

The purpose of this undertaking was to identify all potentially significant cultural resources situated within the study area. This information is needed since adoption of the improvement plan may result in adverse effects upon locations of archaeological or historical importance. Our assessment consisted of: (1) records searches conducted to determine whether any previously recorded historic or prehistoric material is present within the project footprint, (2) archival research, (3) a field reconnaissance intended to identify any previously unrecorded cultural resources, (4) Native American Scoping, and (5) determinations of historical and architectural significance for the aforementioned storm drain.

The study was conducted in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 which includes criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) 2 Figure 1. Regional location of the project area as indicated on a portion of the USGS San Bernardino 1:100,000 scale Topographic Map (1982).
3 and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended in 2015, which includes criteria for eligibility to the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). This report was prepared according to the Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format contained within the State=s Preservation Planning Bulletin Number 4(a) (California Department of Parks and Recreation 1989).

II. SETTING
A. Study Area Location
Regionally, the study area is situated on the western edge of the San Gorgonio Pass approximately 3-miles south of the Crafton Hills. The San Gorgonio Pass is a substantial inland corridor that connects the Coachella Valley to points west. The Pass cities of Beaumont and Banning lie a short distance to the southeast as does the City of Yucaipa to the north. Specifically, the subject section of Calimesa Creek is located in the City of Calimesa from a point just west of 5th Street (terminus of concrete, trapezoidal daylight channel) westward under Park Avenue and Calimesa Boulevard to the point just west of Calimesa Boulevard where the creek enters a large storm drain beneath County Line Road. The 4 ½ acre proposed retention basin is located a short distance to the east just southwest of the intersection of County Line Road and 3rd Street.

The majority of the 2,100-foot section of creek channel/storm drain alignment is bordered by civic, commercial and residential development on the north and south. Some vacant land abuts the alignment east of Park Avenue and sporadically along the southern boundary west of Park Avenue. The western terminus of the earthen creek is the aforementioned storm drain at County Line Road. The eastern creek/storm drain abuts the terminus of a concrete daylight channel. The retention basin abuts residential development on the west, Calimesa Creek (concrete daylight channel) on the south, vacant parcels on the north and residential/retail on the east.

Legally, the project lies in the N ½ of the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ and the NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 14 (creek and storm drain) and the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 13 (retention basin), Township 2 South, Range 2 West, San Bernardino Base Meridian as shown on a portion of the USGS Yucaipa 7.5' Topographic Quadrangle (fig. 2). 4 Figure 2. Study area plotted on a portion of the Yucaipa 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadrangle (1996). 5 B. Natural Setting
The San Gorgonio Pass comprises the readily identifiable geographical territory that separates the Coachella Valley from the San Jacinto and Moreno Valleys. Located at the geologic junction of the Transverse Ranges (San Bernardino Mountains) on the north and the Peninsular Ranges (San Jacinto Mountains) on the south, it is one of the most distinctive areas of Riverside County. For the most part, the pass comprises an east-west oriented lowland covered by both recent and older alluvial fan deposits mainly derived from the San Bernardino Mountains. Two, prominent high peaks, Mount San Gorgonio at 11,485-feet and Mount San Jacinto at 10,831-feet tower above the area. Water originating from the San Bernardino Mountains is drained to points west of the pass via the south fork of the Santa Ana River. To points east of the pass, water is conveyed by the San Gorgonio River into the Whitewater River.

The project area is situated in a region of the county where the climate comprises warm summers and cool winters. August is the hottest month of the year (in the 90s) while December is the coldest (in the high 30s). Typical precipitation includes an annual average of just over 19-inches Topographically, the terrain is this area of the City of Calimesa is devoid of any significant relief although gently descending as one moves toward the west. The creek has cut a channel that varies in depth from approximately 10-feet below grade at the beginning (east end) to 30-feet near the western terminus. The top width of the channel width is variable (40 to 60 feet) depending on location (fig. 3). Elevations along the creek/storm drain alignment range from a maximum of 2,415- feet above mean sea level at the east end to a minimum of approximately 2,382-feet at the west end.

Elevations within the retention basin parcel average 2,480 feet above mean sea level.

Within the portion of the earthen channel, on-site vegetation comprises a dense riparian canopy of trees concentrated west of Park Avenue. East of Park Avenue, trees are sparse and the stream-side habitat is represented by exotic weeds and forbes, non-native opportunistic grasses, and limited sage scrub. Some of the more readily identifiable trees and plants identified included walnut, live oak, elder, ash, eucalyptus, cedar, cottonwood and apricot trees, mulefat, reeds, tumbleweed, oleander, fan palm, cabazilla, wild cucumber, giant bamboo, blackberry and buckwheat. The portion of the study area located east of Park Avenue appears to have been partially denuded of vegetation sometime in the past. Fauna encountered were limited to Red-tailed hawks and ravens.
6 Figure 3. Study area as shown on aerial (scale unknown). 7 Within the proposed retention basin, vegetation is sparse due to discing for weed abatement (fire control). Some of the more readily identifiable trees and plants included walnut (three small juvenile trees in the southwest quarter), buckwheat, short pod mustard, tumbleweed and other exotic weeds and forbes. Soils throughout the project area comprise sandy loam. No bedrock exposures or sources of natural surface water were encountered anywhere within the channel alignment, adjacent to the County Line Road or within the proposed retention basin.

Disturbance within the earthen creek channel is fairly widespread but did not significantly hamper the field investigation. Disturbed areas comprise: 1) construction of Park Avenue and Calimesa Boulevard over the channel and storm drain crossings beneath, 2) construction rubble (e.g. concrete, asphalt) dumped into the channel to stem erosion, 3) a portion of the western channel bottom appears to have been slurried also in an attempt to retard erosion, and 4) vagrant encampments and associated trash (especially within that portion of the creek channel just west of 5th Street). Disturbance within the retention basin footprint comprises the aforementioned discing for weed abatement and numerous geo-technical bore holes. .

C. Prehistoric Occupation of the San Gorgonio Pass
While prehistoric man may have been present in California from the earliest days of the Holocene epoch (circa 10,000 years ago), there is no indication that he frequented the area of the San Gorgonio Pass prior to Late Prehistoric times (beginning circa 1000 A.D.). The Serrano or "Mountaineers" occupied the San Bernardino Mountains and San Timoteo Canyon to the west of the San Gorgonio Pass during this period while the Pass Cahuilla are said to have inhabited at least the eastern half of the Pass. Strong, who was probably as reliable an authority on the subject, regarded the territorial affiliation of the Pass as an insoluble problem:

That the Pass division of the Cahuilla occupied the San Gorgonio Pass has been generally accepted, but in a recent work Kroeber changed his opinion giving the region in question to the Serrano...This was done in accord with the findings of Benedict [1924] who worked on the Morongo Reservation near Banning in 1922...This general region, due to the breaking down of the culture, the assembling of all dialectic groups on one reservation, and the lack of any tribal unity, is the most complex in southern California. (Strong 1929:10).
8 It has been suggested that the Highland Springs settlement was the Serrano village of "Akvat or Akavat" (Anonymous 1972:3-2). This suggestion appears to find its roots in a map published by Kroeber (1925:Plate 57) which shows the village of "Aka-va-t" at the eastern end of San Timoteo Canyon northwest of Banning. Tom Hughes (1938) seems also to have regarded Highland Springs as a Serrano site as does Johnston who sums up the situation admirably:

Indians: Riv-90 [Highland Springs Resort]. There is a set of bedrock mortars here bearing a plaque erected by Guy C. Bogart, late Beaumont sponsor, promoter, and historian. Two lineages are given for this spot by three different anthropologists. Bean [1960] lists the Aekit Wanakik [Cahuilla]. Benedict [1924] and Kroeber [1925] both give Pavukuyam Serrano. The two latter name the place Akvat and Akavat respectively. This probably represents another case of Serrano and Cahuilla Indians living side by side; other like situations are Banning Water Canyon and Mission Creek. (Johnston 1957).

Like all of the prehistoric southern Californians, the Serrano were hunters and gatherers:

The primary vegetable staples varied with hamlet locality: acorns and pinon nuts for groups living in the foothills [such as Highland Springs]; honey mesquite, cacti fruits, for those living in or near the desert. These principal foods were supplemented by various other roots, bulbs, shoots, and seeds, particularly chia (Salvia columbariae)... (Bean and Smith 1978:571).

Game animals included deer, rabbits, mountain sheep, and various birds and small rodents. These were hunted with bow and arrow, rabbit stick, traps, nets, etc. Because of the critical importance of water availability, most villages were located near springs or watercourses--a fact explaining the probable presence of a Serrano camp at Highland Springs.

Serrano villages were small, probably rarely exceeding fifty individuals. Structures were shared by members of individual families and usually comprised circular domed willow frames covered with tule thatching (ibid.). Houses each had a central fire-pit but were probably used principally for sleeping and storage. Day-to-day activities were carried out outside or under ramadas. Besides the houses, a typical Serrano village would have included a ceremonial house, sweathouses, and granaries for acorn storage.
9 The Serrano never existed as a "tribe" in the political sense, inter-village bonds depending upon ceremonial and social connections:

All bonds between the [Serrano] groups were of a purely ceremonial nature, and there appears to have been no sort of tribal or political union between them...It is therefore erroneous to speak of such a mythical thing as a Serrano "tribe", for none such existed within historic times, and there is no reason to believe that it ever did. (Strong 1929:14).

It is not known when the Serrano first encountered the Spanish though Pedro Fages visited Serrano territory as early as 1772. This visit would have had negligible effect upon Serrano culture. Bean and Smith postulate that the establishment of an asistencia at Redlands around 1819 may have comprised the first influential contact (Bean and Smith 1978:573; asistencias were small satellite outposts set up by the central missions to serve outlying areas).

The Serrano living at Akvat may have had their first contact with the whites when a Father Gorgonio visited the area prior to 1812 or later when Pauline Weaver and Daniel Sexton first began lumbering operations. Further discussion of these subjects follows below.

D. Historical Overview

1. Early History of San Gorgonio Pass
The earliest Spanish explorers may not have even known of the existence of the San Gorgonio Pass, Anza's interior route between northern Mexico and Alta California having passed to the south. However, the Yuma massacre of 1781 rendered Anza's route dangerous and by the early 1820's the new Mexican government was investigating the possibility of using the San Gorgonio Pass as an alternative (Bancroft 1886:ii, 508). According to Quimby (1975:6) the San Gabriel Mission had set up a station at Banning Water Canyon as early as 1821 and cattle were being raised there in 1823 when the Romero Expedition came through the Pass to explore it as an alternative to Anza's inland route to Alta California.

It is possible that one Spaniard, a Father Gorgonio, was living in the Pass prior to 1812. The papers of a Ms. Ada G. Elder, who gathered stories about the early history of the Pass, stated that:
10 ... Doctor Wellwood Murray, an early settler of the Pass and Palm Springs, told Miss Elder that a priest from San Juan Capistrano traveled up the Santa Ana River, through San Timoteo Canyon, and up Singleton Canyon into the Pass where he administered to the Indians. This priest was named Father Gorgonio and the Pass seems to have taken its name from him. He was killed in 1812 so the early date of his influence can be seen. Her paper also reports adobe walls standing on what is now Highland Springs, with no specific facts known as to their origin. (Johnston 1987:95).

On the other hand, Gudde (1965:271) states that in 1824 San Gorgonio was a cattle ranch for the Mission San Gabriel, and that it was named for "Gorgonius, a third-century martyr, whose feast day is September 9." In any event, the adobe walls were said to have been present when the Smith family settled Highland Springs in 1854. The adobe may have belonged to Father Gorgonio as stated by Miss Elder--in this case it would have represented an outpost of the Mission San Gabriel, or it may have been connected with Weaver's development of the Rancho San Gorgonio (Johnston 1957:1).

2. Pauline Weaver and the Rancho San Gorgonio
The first Anglos definitely known to have settled in the Pass were Daniel Sexton and Pauline Weaver who arrived about 1842. Sexton came to the Pass from San Bernardino to start a lumbering business concentrated on what later became Weaver's Rancho San Gorgonio. He hired Indian labor for 25 cents a day and sold his product to Isaac Williams, well-known owner of the Rancho Santa Ana del Chino. Sexton is remembered most for a Fourth of July celebration which he sponsored in 1842:

Upon being asked by the Indians whether Americans engaged in any annual public celebrations, Sexton had decided to acquaint them with Independence Day...Reportedly highlighting the occasion with a diverse array of events including an opening prayer, a flag-raising ceremony, Indians songs and dances, and two barrels of whiskey, the day's celebration eventually degenerated into a drunken orgy bearing little resemblance to the educational type of program the Indians had requested. (McAdams 1955:53).
11 The climax of this fiesta was the flying of the first American Flag to fly in California. Rumor has it he [Sexton] made the flag from his wife's petticoats. (Quimby 1975:6).

Weaver was no less colorful a figure than Sexton. Apparently born Powell Weaver in White County, Tennessee, he was the son of an English Settler while his mother was said to have been Cherokee. The Mexicans called him "Paulino" and the Indians called him "Pauline", the latter becoming his best known name. He was a trapper, farmer, lumberman, prospector, and explorer who is said to have been the first white man to settle in Arizona. He eventually moved to California and settled in the San Gorgonio Pass region west of Noble Creek. More specifically, the 1857 General Land Office Plat Map for Township 2 South, Range 1 West shows Weaver's house in Section 27 adjacent to a creek known today as Little San Gorgonio Creek. It seems probable that he and Sexton may have worked together for a while as both were acquainted with Isaac Williams (who had also been a trapper).

The property now occupied by the Highland Springs Resort was on the eastern margin of what Weaver came to refer to as his "rancho." In 1845 he and Isaac Williams petitioned California's last Mexican Governor, Pio Pico, to grant them the Pass. However, correspondence between Pio Pico and Isaac Williams reveals that Pico was reluctant to make the grant. The problem focused on a portion of land known as "Potrero" or San Jacinto y San Gorgonio, that lay adjacent to the larger San Gorgonio tract. Williams and Weaver incorporated the Potrero acreage into their San Gorgonio petition claiming that it had been abandoned by the original grantee, Santiago Johnson.

Consequently, Pico instructed Williams to secure a letter from Johnson, stating that he [Johnson] had no further interest in the grant. Johnson replied that "his ailments do not permit him to appear...that the land...was his, that having sold it to Rubidu [Louis Robidoux], he does not know anything about its condition." Confronted with this complication, Pico imparted to Williams that until the matter with Johnson was resolved, he could not insure concession of any land. Pico ended his communication to Williams with "I shall take care to secure in your favor and that of Mr.

Paublino [sic] the land of San Gorgonio, thereby fulfilling the duty of friendship" (Gunther 1984:459). Wrongly, Williams and Weaver took this to mean that they could take possession of the land. This misconception would have serious repercussions in the decades to come as the "Rancho" was parted out. Clearly, had Williams and Weaver amended their request to Pio Pico by dropping 12 the Potrero claim from the petition, they would have been successful in obtaining legal title to the San Gorgonio Pass.

In a paper presented to the Sacramento Book Collectors Club in 1949, Raymond D. Weaver (grand nephew of Pauline Weaver) had this to say about the grant:

In 1845 we find him [Pauline] on the Rancho San Gorgonio, about 30 miles southeast of San Bernardino. He no doubt has been here for some time as in July of this year he and Julian (Isaac) Williams made application to the last Mexican Governor Pio Pico for this Rancho, dated July 2, 1845. It is signed Julian Williams and Paulino Weaver. This application and map was damaged in the 1906 San Francisco fire, but it has been translated almost in it's [sic] entirety. No record has ever been located of this Grant ever having been confirmed by the United States. (Weaver 1949:4).

In any event, Weaver continued to occupy his portion of the "Rancho San Gorgonio" even after California became a part of the United States. However, this occupation was intermittent. In July of 1846, the American Commander Robert F. Stockton had become confident that Mexico's California forces were completely under control. Consequently, he prepared an official document to this effect and entrusted it to Kit Carson for delivery to Washington. Among those assigned to accompany Carson was Pauline Weaver. The party came across General Kearney's detachment which had been sent by President Polk to seize Mexico's northwestern provinces. Carson subsequently joined Kearney's forces and Weaver was directed on to Santa Fe where he joined the group which later came to be known as the "Mormon Battalion." By 1850, Pauline Weaver had returned to the Rancho San Gorgonio where he was to play yet another significant role in southern California history. In early 1851, a Cahuilla chief named Antonio Garra plotted a pan-Indian uprising intended to drive the whites out. Weaver recognized the impending danger and set about doing something to thwart it. He contacted chief Juan Antonio (who is said to have been at Sexton's Independence Day celebration [Quimby 1975:6]) and persuaded him to assemble a party of friendly Indians to travel to Warner's Pass and capture Garra.

He succeeded though at considerable expense to himself since he had to outfit Antonio with mules and supplies. Antonio was successful and brought Garra and eleven of his band to Rancho San Gorgonio where they were held for the state militia. The state legislature did not get around to 13 compensating Weaver for his expenses during this affair for four years. This may be one reason that he decided to sell off pieces of his rancho, a portion of which includes our study area.

In 1853, the Congress of the United States authorized the United States Army to conduct a land survey to find the most favorable route for a railroad between the Mississippi River and the Pacific Ocean. While on their way from San Bernardino to the Colorado Desert, the party of engineers led by Lt. R.S. Williamson, passed through the San Gorgonio Pass. On November 13, 1853, Weaver's rancho was visited by the survey party and the following notes were taken by Mr.

W.P. Blake, geologist for the expedition:
...The ascent continued very gradual; at length a short hill brought us to the edge of a broad and gently sloping plain, upon which an adobe house is built. This, although partly in ruins, was occupied by Mr.

Weaver, well known as an experienced mountaineer. He is the claimant of a large rancho at this place. The presence of fruit trees and other evidences of cultivation showed that the rancho had been in use for many years, and it is said that the occupants have several times been driven away by the Indians. The situation of this rancho, and the house, is such as one would least expect, being at the summit of the pass. (Blake 1856:90).

Upon returning to Arizona, Weaver resided in Yuma and in the La Paz area supporting his family by trapping beaver and gold mining. He had also resumed his scouting activities and served as an intermediary between the Army and Indian tribes. Despite his good relationship with the natives, in the mid 1860's Weaver was shot by a war party and seriously wounded. He later died in 1867 and was buried at Camp Verde (aka Fort Lincoln) with full military honors. His remains were transferred to the Army National Cemetery in San Francisco. Finally, in 1929 through the efforts of Sharlot Hall (poet and historian), the Boy Scouts, and citizens of Prescott, Arizona, Weaver=s remains were returned to Arizona to his final resting place in Prescott (Quimby 1975:6f.).

3. Dr. Isaac Smith and the Smith Ranch
In 1853, Dr. Isaac William Smith and his family came to California from Iowa via Utah.

Smith was born in Dexter, Maine in 1806 and later studied medicine in Augusta, Maine. Upon completing his studies, Smith became a physician and practiced medicine in Maine until his wife 14 developed tuberculosis. In search of a dryer climate, they headed west with their two children, Eliza and Hiram. However en route, Mrs. Smith died in Pittsburgh (Hughes 1938:8).

Upon reaching Iowa, Isaac served as surgeon in the U.S. Army at Fort Madison where he remarried and had a daughter, Jane. However, the second Mrs. Smith also died. It was his third wife, Emily Lavina Wright Merriman with a daughter of her own (Emeline) that eventually completed the trek to California with Smith and his children (ibid.). They departed Council Bluffs, Iowa and arrived at the Mormon settlement in San Bernardino in 1853. It was while searching for stray stock in the San Gorgonio Pass that Smith encountered an ill-stricken Pauline Weaver. The outcome of this acquaintance is summarized below:

Ex-army surgeon Isaac Smith to whom Pauline Weaver sold an undivided third of so-called San Gorgonio Rancho became the first permanent Caucasian settler in San Gorgonio Pass. When he arrived he found Weaver undergoing a painful illness and immediately extended his professional medical services. As Weaver began to recover, he encouraged Smith to remain in the Pass to establish a cattle ranch. Ultimately, Smith decided to accept Weaver's advice and completed the purchase previously described.

Together with his wife, three sons, three daughters, and one stepdaughter, Smith established the family's residence at Weaver's homesite north of present Beaumont. Upon regaining his health, Weaver reportedly resumed his wandering life as a trapper in Arizona, occasionally returning to the Pass to visit the Smiths and to dispose of his remaining real property rights. (McAdams 1955:65f.).

Officially, it was on the 10th of October, 1853, that Weaver quit claimed to Smith one undivided third part of the Rancho San Gorgonio for the sum of $1000. The property was described as follows:
... Commencing at the South East Corner of the San Bernardino Line, thence due North three Leags [sic] thence along the main mountain South Easterly to a certain Branch running to the Valley of San Gargona [San Gorgonio], thence South to the hills that divide San Jasinto [sic] from San Gargona, thence Westerly to the beginning, and known as the San Gorgona Ranch (Deed Book A, page 3, San Bernardino County Archives).

However, the deed from Weaver was mortally flawed. As previously discussed, Weaver and Williams had failed to obtain confirmation to the land from Mexican Governor Pio Pico. 15 Subsequently, the U.S. Government did not recognize the claim. Williams and Weaver forfeited title to the land and it legally reverted to public domain (McAdams 1955:55). Whether or not Weaver knew for certain that his claim to the "rancho" was unsupported at the time of the sale to Smith is unclear. Smith's actions in later years indicated that he suspected something had gone awry although he seemed to hold out hope that the situation would be successfully resolved.

After having lived at Weaver's residence for about a year, Smith moved his family approximately two miles to the southeast to Section 25 where they established a permanent residence in 1854. He built his home (commonly known as the Smith Ranch) on the site now occupied by the Highland Springs Resort. However, there is much confusion as to the specific quadrant of Section 25 that Smith settled on. According to McAdams (1955:67), in 1857 Smith filed a possessory claim for the N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 and the S 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 25, Township 2 South, Range 1 West totaling 160 acres. By 1868, Smith's "homestead" had grown to 320 acres in size (Deed Book H, pp. 321-322, San Bernardino County Archives). However, in 1874 when Smith was officially granted a homestead patent (#1575) it was for 160 acres comprising the SW 1/4 of Section 25 (Bureau of Land Management).

Like his predecessors, Smith was able and independent. With readily available water for irrigation, he planted fruit trees and a vineyard and began what was to become a successful stock ranch (McAdams 1955:67). Following his initial land purchase, Smith subsequently acquired several horses (mostly mares and colts) and branding iron from Pauline Weaver in 1854 for a sum of $380 (Deed Book A, Page 10 San Bernardino County Archives).

While at the new ranch, the Smiths had four more children (Emily, Ollie, Mary, and Caroline) who were among the first Caucasian infants born in the Pass. The first wedding in the area occurred in 1856 when Jane Smith (daughter by his second wife) married Lt. John Sherburne of the Army Engineers (Hughes 1938:9f.). It was in March of 1868 that Smith eventually sold 1/2 of his undivided 1/3 of the Rancho San Gorgonio to Sherburne (son-in-law) for $1000 (see Table 1).

However, this conveyance excluded Smith's "homestead." Apparently aware of Smith's faulty deed papers, Sherburne attempted to complete the papers for the San Gorgonio grant. Insofar as we have been able to ascertain, Sherburne was unsuccessful.
16 4. Stagecoach Activities in the San Gorgonio Pass
In September of 1857, John Butterfield was awarded the U.S. Mail contract and began studying possible stage routes to Los Angeles. The citizens of San Bernardino were very anxious to have the stage from Yuma pass through San Gorgonio Pass en route to their city. They elected Isaac Smith to the state legislature on a platform favoring the route, and not surprisingly, Smith Ranch was regarded as an excellent potential way-station. In an attempt to get Butterfield to run his stages to San Bernardino, the County Supervisors had Smith, Stephen M. St. John, and Alfred Bybee lay out a county road between San Bernardino and the southeast corner of the county. Unofficially, this route was known as "the Smith Survey." However, despite the efforts of Smith and the citizenry of San Bernardino, Butterfield decided to use the southern route through Warner's Pass (Johnston 1987:105ff.)
Fortunately, the setback was a temporary one. On September 6, 1862, David Alexander's (Colorado Stage and Express Line) first Concord stagecoach traveled from Los Angeles to La Paz, Arizona via the Bradshaw Trail (Johnston 1957; 1987:133). In the San Gorgonio Pass, the stage stop known as "Smith's Station" was established on the Smith Ranch (Highland Springs Resort).

The stop provided fresh horses, food, and presumably a place to sleep for stagecoach passengers.

Mr. Jim Banks served as proprietor of Smith's Station between 1862-1876 (Johnston 1987:205).

According to Holmes (1912:180), it took from 18-20 hours to reach the Smith Ranch from the initial starting point in Los Angeles.

Smith's Station had hardly opened for business when the Superintendent of the Colorado Stage and Express Line, Warren Hall and his leading driver, Henry Wilkinson were murdered. Upon arriving at Smith's Station on the 29th of October, Wilkinson was greeted by Superintendent Hall.

Shortly thereafter, the two men discovered that the stage's express box containing $1,200. was missing. They immediately accused a company hostler by the name of Gordon of robbing the stage:

Wilkinson and his shotgun guard took the suspect up an oak-filled canyon just north of the ranch. They planned to extort a confession by hanging the suspect by the neck, not quite to the point of fatality.

After actually raising Gordon off the ground once or twice Wilkinson sent the guard back after Hall, as the suspect would not confess. (Johnston 1987:134).
17 Gordon subsequently drew a knife with which he attacked both Wilkinson and Hall before escaping. Shortly following the melee, Smith and others found the two men dead from their wounds. Smith is reported to have used the front door of his house to transport both bodies back to the ranch; the blood stains on which were visible for years thereafter. After surrendering to San Bernardino's sheriff, Gordon was later acquitted of the crime on the grounds of self-defense.

Although absolved of the murders of Wilkinson and Hall, Gordon's luck finally ran out some years later. He was reported to have been hanged in Montana for the killing of sheepmen.

Other stage stops in the Pass were located on the Gilman Ranch in neighboring Banning and at Whitewater. At the Gilman Ranch (formerly the Noble Ranch), the old adobe home of Jose Pope served as the stage station. It was owned by James M. Gilman who later married Martha Smith (daughter of Isaac Smith). The Whitewater Station, was established in 1860 by Frank Smith (son of Isaac Smith). Smith erected a shack then later an adobe that served as the stage station. Water for the station was conveyed through a ditch dug by Smith to the Whitewater River. It was here on his son's Whitewater ranch in 1878 that Isaac Smith himself met his demise as a result of a gunshot wound inflicted during an Indian altercation (Holmes 1912:179f.; Johnston 1987:119).

III. RESEARCH ORIENTATION
Previous Research
Much of the historic data pertaining to the San Gorgonio Pass and the project vicinity was drawn from literature housed at the Beaumont, Banning and Riverside Public Libraries. Tom Hughes' History of Banning and San Gorgonio Pass was published in 1938 and seems to be the first published history of the Pass. Other noted works include Holme's History of Riverside County (1912), Gabbert's History of Riverside City and County (1935), Gunther's Riverside County, California, Place Names: Their Origins and Their Stories (1984), and Quimby's History of the Potrero Ranch and its Neighbors (1975). Francis J. Johnston's The Bradshaw Trail (1987) is an excellent reference on the history of the Bradshaw and Arizona stage line which passed through the area. However, perhaps the most complete and useful document on the Pass' history is the Master's thesis of H.E. McAdams entitled Early History of the San Gorgonio Pass: Gateway to California (1955).
18 B. Research Goals
The goals of our research were to identify known locations of potential significance resources situated within the study area. Our hypotheses were as follows:
(1) Prehistoric sites may be found almost anywhere but are generally located in areas that offered access to water and plant resources. In this area, due to particularly arid conditions, sources of permanent or semi-permanent water would have offered the best chance for settlement or seasonal encampments. Thus, within the pass itself, the topographic transition zones from the lowlands to the mountains/foothills would be considered higher probability than the valley floor. This would hold true not only for the presence of dependable sources of water, but also the diverse communities of flora and the animals they would attract. Ideally, oak groves or seasonal water courses lined with oak trees would have been most attractive for gathering and processing sites. Granitic boulders and outcrops were also commonly utilized as milling stations for vegetal foodstuffs and to a lesser extent rock shelters and rock art sites.
(2) Historic sites in the region would most likely be associated with early ranching, fruit growing and general farming activities. Lacking standing structures, remains of these homesteads and farmsteads typically comprises concrete, river cobble or adobe structure foundations, irrigation systems and trash scatters. However, not all debris scatters (e.g. tin can, glass, crockery) can be connected to a particular home or farmstead. In many instances, isolated scatters of dumped historic debris represent nothing more that illicitly discarded rubbish.

IV. METHODS
A. Records Searches
In-person records searches of the project alignment and location of the proposed retention basin were conducted by Robert S. White at the Eastern Information Center (EIC), University of California at Riverside and at the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum in Redlands. The searches entailed a review of all previously recorded prehistoric and historic archaeological sites situated on or within a one-mile radius of the project area.

Additionally, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), and the Office of Historic Preservation=s Directory of Properties (DOP) were reviewed for the purpose of identifying any historic properties. 19 1. Previously Recorded Prehistoric and Historic Resources Within the Study Area The results of the search indicated that no prehistoric or historic archaeological resources (sites, structures, isolates) have been previously recorded within the boundaries of the undertaking.

2. Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites/Isolates Within a One-Mile Radius Five prehistoric archaeological sites have been documented within a one-mile radius of the study area. All lie to the northwest. They comprise an isolated burial, ground stone scatter, large lithic and groundstone scatters and a sparse lithic scatter. The closest prehistoric site to the project is CA-SBR-428. This location is described as a large lithic and groundstone scatter that has been destroyed (Smith 1934). It lies approximately 3/5-mile to the northwest.

There is one recorded historic archaeological site and one historic isolate within a one-mile radius. The site, #33-15300, is characterized as a portion of a wooden pole line with date tags of “40” and “50”. It lies approximately ½-mile to the south. The historic isolate, #33-15299, consists of two fragments of an older bottle dating between 1880-1914. It lies approximately ½-mile to the southwest.

3. Previously Recorded Historic Structures Within a One-Mile Radius of the Study Area Outside the study area, nine historic structures have been recorded within a one-mile radius (Table 1). The closest historic building to the study area (CRM TECH 3530-1H, temporary field designation) lies just to the east of the proposed retention basin across 5th Street (Tang and Hogan 2019).

4. Previous Surveys
The results of the search indicated that the study area has not been previously surveyed for cultural resources. Outside the property, approximately 5% of the surrounding one-mile radius has been investigated. These studies comprise small acreage surveys (40 acres or less), large acreage surveys (more than 40 acres), and linear projects (roads and utilities). Eight survey reports are on file with the Eastern Information Center and the Archaeological Information Center for the one-mile search radius. The closest survey to the study area comprises a 5-acre assessment of the County Line Service Station, LP project. The assessment resulted in the identification of a single-family residence (1946-1962) that is not considered historically significant (Tang and Hogan 2008). 20 Table 1. Historic Buildings/Structures within a One-mile Radius of the Study Area.

Site Number Site Description
33-13993 Earthen reservoir, well and cistern constructed in early 1950s. 33-13395 Remnant of a 1940’s concrete house slab, well and well shed 33-16792 Small residential complex located at 1118 7th Street, Calimesa. Constructed circa 1929. 33-16793 Vernacular farmhouse with Craftsman elements and associated barn located at 726 W. Avenue L, Calimesa. Constructed in mid 1910s.
33-17258 Ranch style residence located at 946 7th Place, Calimesa. Constructed 1946-1962. 36-10822 Drainage feature comprising 12’ diameter riveted pipe and headwall located near the intersection of Colorado Street and Nebraska Lane, Yucaipa. Estimated construction date of late 1930s to mid1940s. 36-12607 Water reservoir w/earthen dam and spillway located adjacent to Yucaipa Creek at the I-10 Calimesa Rest Area. Constructed in 1935.
36-12608 Pump house w/engine driven mechanical pump located 45-meters south of Yucaipa Creek near Interstate 10. No date of construction given.

CRM TECH
3530-1H
(temporary field
number)
Single story, single family, ranch style house constructed in 1958. Located at 295 S. California Street, Calimesa. Determined not to be historically significant.

5. Heritage Properties
No listed National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), or California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI) properties have been recorded within the study area nor within a one-mile radius.

6. Historic Map Research
In addition to the records searches, several historic GLO and Geological Survey (USGS) maps of the Calimesa region were inspected. These maps are on file with one or more of the following entities: Bureau of Land Management, Map Room of the Science Library at UC Riverside, the USGS TopoView Historic Topographic Map Database, and the California Historic Topographic Map Collection housed in Special Collections at the Merriam Library at California State University, Chico. These included:

GLO 1871 Plat Map Township No. 2 South Range No. 2 West, SBBM; surveyed in 1853. 21 Southern California Sheet No.1, 1:250,000, 1901 reprinted 1948, surveyed 1893-1900.

Redlands 15’ 1901, surveyed 1898-1899.

Yucaipa 7.5’ 1954.

Yucaipa 7.5’ 1967, photorevised 1973.

A review of these maps was performed for the purpose of identifying locations of potential historical resources. The results of the map research indicated that man-made features (e.g.: roads and structures) did not exist in the area until sometime after 1901. Numerous structures as well as the subject section of Calimesa Creek appear on either side of County Line Road on the Yucaipa 7.5’ 1954 sheet.

7. Land Patents
Archival research also included a review of land patents on file with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Sacramento. The creek and alignment lies in the N ½ of Section 14 and in the SE ¼ of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 2 West, San Bernardino Base Meridian. The proposed retention basin lies in the NW ¼ of Section 13, also in Township 2 South, Range 2 West, SBBM. Office records indicate that a serial land patent for 6,410.05 acres including the N ½ of Section 13, the N ½ of Section 14, and the entirety of Section 11 (encompassing the study area) was issued to the State of California on September 24, 1872 by authority of the September 4, 1841:

Grant-Certain Land to State (5 Stat. 453). The land patent is recorded as Accession No./BLM Serial Nr: CACAAA 080618.

V. NATIVE AMERICAN SCOPING
A. Sacred Lands File Check
On September 27, 2013, a Sacred Lands File Check for the project area was requested by Ms. Laura S. White, M.A. The search was conducted on October 1, 2013 by Mr. Dave Singleton, Program Analyst for the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento. The results of the search indicated that no sacred Native American sites have been recorded within the boundaries of the study area. A list of both individual and Native American groups was also provided for further scoping (Appendix C).
22 B. Native American Correspondence
In order to learn more about the potential archaeological sensitivity of the project area, letters of inquiry were sent to all Native American individuals and groups included on the NAHC contact list (Appendix C). To date, one response has been received. The reader is referred to Appendix D for written correspondence.

VI. FIELD SURVEY
A field reconnaissance of the original study area (creek channel) was conducted by Robert S. White (Principal Investigator, County approved), Laura S. White, M.A. (surveyor; RPA and County approved) and Susan R. Klein in August 2013 and February 2014. The pedestrian survey began at the east end of the project and proceeded in a westerly direction. Surface visibility varied between 0 and 100% depending on the density of the low-lying vegetation and riparian canopy.

Where feasible, the survey was conducted by walking parallel transects spaced at 1-2 meters along each side of the creek. Meandering transects were used when parallel transects were impractical. Additionally, meandering transects were employed in the bottom of the creek where access was possible. In particular, the creek bank escarpments were examined for any signs of buried archaeological deposits. By employing these techniques, a thorough survey of the alignment was accomplished.

The field survey of the low flow diversion and the retention basin took place on September 10 with follow-up work on October 4, 2019. Visibility in both areas was very good varying 85 to 100% depending the density of the low-lying vegetation. Parallel transects spaced at 1-2 meters were utilized across the low flow diversion alignment and 5-10 meters within the proposed retention basin.

VII. REPORT OF FINDINGS
A. Prehistoric Resources
The results of all field investigation were entirely negative. No prehistoric resources of any kind were encountered within the boundaries of the study area. 23 B. Historic Resources
A concrete storm drain adit (structure) was encountered in the bottom of Calimesa Creek underneath Calimesa Boulevard just south of County Line Road (figs. 4 & 5). It is not a pre-cast structure. Rather, it is constructed of formed and poured concrete reinforced with steel (rebar). The western adit has a maximum width of 85-inches. Interior height was indeterminate as it was flooded with water and mud. However, it is esitmated to be 72-inches high. Tunnel behind adit is 60-inches square. Header over entrance bears the cast date of “1930”. Date panel is 20-inches wide and 9- inches high. Surmounting the header are courses of cement-filled sandbags, approximately 2 ½-feet high. This structure was constructed for the sole purpose of conveying seasonal flows in Calimesa Creek beneath Calimesa Boulevard. It was constructed in 1930 using modern materials and techniques.

VIII. DETERMINATIONS OF ELIGIBILITY
The storm drain structure was evaluated for significance under criteria based on two separate but overlapping legislative sources: (1) the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), which includes criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); and (2) the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended in 1992, which includes criteria for eligibility to the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).

Essentially, all resources which have been determined eligible for the National Register are also eligible for the California Register, but the latter also provides for the inclusion of additional resources that have been identified by historic resource surveys or that have been designated as a result of a local landmark ordinance. Thus, many cultural resources are significant under California law but need not be addressed under Federal law. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the criteria applied to assess impacts on historic resources differ between federal and state statutes.
24 Figure 4. Location of historic storm drain plotted on a portion of the Beaumont 7.5' USGS Topographic Quadrangle (1996).
25 Figure 5. Location of historic storm drain (P33-023900) as shown on aerial photograph. (scale unknown)
26 archaeology, engineering, and culture …present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, material, workmanship, feeling, and association ..." and ...
(A) That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history or
(B) That are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or (C) That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (D) That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history." B. CEQA Compliance
According to Section 15064.5 of CEQA, a resource may be listed as an historical resource in the California Register of Historical Resources if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
(1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. (2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; (3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or (4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation.

C. NRHP and CRHR Evaluation
Criterion A
Fairly extensive research has indicated that the storm drain structure located on the west side of Calimesa Boulevard just south of County Line Road is not associated with any historic event important in the regional history of California or the United States. Consequently, it does not appear eligible for listing in either the NRHP or the CRHR under Criterion A. 27 Criterion B
Research has also failed to identify any person associated with the structure as important or prominent to National or California history. Therefore, it does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion B.

Criterion C
Criterion C posits eligibility on the basis of style or artistic merit. The engineering structure is not the work of a master architect or builder. Furthermore, it does not possess high artistic value and is not a distinctive example of any particular engineering style. For this reason, this simple storm drain does not appear to embody the kind of architectural distinction that would qualify it for inclusion into the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion C.

Criterion D
Under Criterion D, the storm drain is not likely to yield information about the history or prehistory of the area as this criterion primarily pertains to archaeological sites. Therefore, it does not appear eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR under Criterion D.

IX. MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
A. Prehistoric Resources
The results of the records searches and field studies were negative for the presence of prehistoric resources within the project area. Therefore, no further work in conjunction with prehistoric resources, including monitoring of any future grading activities, is warranted or recommended.

B. Historic Resources
The storm drain structure on the west side of Calimesa Boulevard south of County Line Road comprises an historic resource that does not appear significant within the meaning of NEPA or CEQA. Therefore, no further work in conjunction with historical resources is recommended for the drain structure. As a matter of course, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523A (Primary Record) and 523B (Building, Structure, and Object Record) forms were completed for the 28 storm drain and submitted to the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at UC Riverside (Appendix E).

The EIC has assigned Primary # 33-023900 to the resource. 29 REFERENCES CITED

ANONYMOUS
1972 Historical Background of Highland Springs. Excerpted from an EIR by the Impact Group. Manuscript on file with Archaeological Associates. Sun City.

BANCROFT, HUBERT H.
1886 The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft: History of California (7 vols.). The History Company. San Francisco.

BEAN, LOWELL
1960 The Wanakik Cahuilla. IN: The Masterkey. Southwest Museum, Vol. 34, No. 3.

Highland Park.

BEAN, LOWELL J. and CHARLES R. SMITH
1978 Serrano. IN: Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8:California (R.F. Heizer ed.). Smithsonian Institution. Washington D.C.

BENEDICT, RUTH F.
1924 A Brief Sketch of Serrano Culture. American Anthropologist 26(3):366-392.

BLAKE, WILLIAM PHIPPS
1856 Geological Report. IN: Reports of Explorations in California for Railroad Routes near the 35th and 32nd Parallels of North Latitude (by Lt. R.S. Williamson). Reports of Explorations and Surveys to Ascertain the Most Practicable and Economic Route for a Railroad from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean, vol. 5. Beverly Tucker, Printer. Washington D.C.

GABBERT, JOHN RAYMOND
1935 History of Riverside City and County. Record Publishing Company. Riverside.

GUDDE, ERWIN G.
1965 California Place Names. University of California Press. Berkeley.

GUNTHER, JANE DAVIES
1984 Riverside County, California, Place Names: Their Origins and Their Stories.

Rubidoux Printing Co. Riverside.

HOLMES, ELMER WALLACE
1912 History of Riverside County. Historic Record Company. Los Angeles.

HUGHES, TOM
1938 History of Banning and the San Gorgonio Pass. Banning Record Print. Banning.

JOHNSTON, FRANCIS J.
1987 The Bradshaw Trail. Historical Commission Press. Riverside. 30 KROEBER, ALFRED L.
1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78.

Smithsonian Institution. Washington, D.C.

McADAMS, HENRY E.
1955 Early History of the San Gorgonio Pass: Gateway to California. M.A. Thesis in History. University of Southern California. Los Angeles.

QUIMBY, GARFIELD M.
1975 History of the Potrero Ranch and its Neighbors. California History Books.

Fresno.

SMITH, GERALD
1957 Archaeological Site Form CA-SBR-429 on file with the Archaeological Information Center at the San Bernardino County Museum.

STRONG, WILLIAM D.
1929 Aboriginal Society in Southern California. University of California Publication in American Archaeology and Ethnology Vol. 26. Berkeley.

TANG, BAI "TOM" and MICHAEL HOGAN
2008 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: County Line Service Station, APNs 411-040-003, -004, and -005, City of Calimesa, Riverside County, California.

CRM TECH. Report (RI-7288) on file with the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.

TANG, BAI "TOM" and MICHAEL HOGAN
2019 Historic-Period Building Evaluation Report: 295 W. County Line Road and 907 S California Street, Assessor’s Parcel Nos. 410-040-001 and 410-111-001, City of Calimesa, Riverside County California. Unpublished manuscript on file with CRM TECH, Colton.

WARNER, JIM
1983a Historic Resources Inventory for 33-6127 on file with the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.
1983b Historic Resources Inventory for 33-6128 on file with the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.
1983c Historic Resources Inventory for 33-6210 on file with the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.

WAY, K. ROSS and LYNNE M. MURONE-DUNN
2003 Primary record for 33-13427 (CA-RIV-7462) on file with the Eastern Information Center, University of California, Riverside.
31 WEAVER, RAYMOND D.
1949 No Title. Notes on Pauline Weaver read before the Sacramento Book Collector Club, May 13, 1949. Unpublished manuscript on file with the Beaumont District Library.

Beaumont.

WHITE, ROBERT S. and LAURA S. WHITE
2014 Cultural Resources Assessment of the Calimesa Creek Improvement Project, City of Calimesa, Riversode County, California. Unpublished manuscript on file with Archaeological Associates, Sun City.
32 Plate I. Top: Westerly, downstream view from terminus of concrete, trapezoidal daylight channel at the beginning of the of the project (east end). Bottom: Looking eastward upstream from Park Avenue.
33 Plate II. Top: Westerly view looking downstream from Park Avenue.

Bottom: Looking eastward upstream toward Park Avenue from fire station. 34 Plate III. Top: Westerly view looking downstream from behind 577 County Line Road.

Bottom: Easterly view upstream from behind law offices at 601 County Line Road. 35 Plate IV. Top: Northeasterly view of storm drain on located on west side of Calimesa Boulevard.

Bottom: easterly view of storm drain adit constructed in 1930. 36 Plate V. Top: Close-up of construction date cast into head frame over storm drain adit.

Bottom: Easterly view looking upstream through canopy from the western project terminus. 37 Plate VI. Top: Looking east along alignment of proposed low flow diversion.

Bottom: Looking northeast across proposed retention basin from the southwest parcel corner.

APPENDIX A: Personnel Qualifications
ROBERT S. WHITE, PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
* 1987 B.A. in Liberal Studies with emphasis in Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach.
* 1977 A.A. Degree in Liberal Arts, Los Angeles Harbor College. * Riverside County Certified Archaeologist #164
* Orange County Certified Archaeologist
* Holds a "blanket" Cultural Resource Use Permit on the supervisory level with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the Ridgecrest, Barstow, Palm Springs, El Centro, and Needles desert resources areas. * 30 years of full-time experience conducting cultural resource management projects in southern California.
________________________________________________________________________ LAURA S. WHITE, FIELD DIRECTOR
* 1989 M.A. in Anthropology with emphasis in Archaeology, San Diego State University, San Diego.
* 1981 B.A. in Anthropology, University of San Diego, San Diego. * Member of the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA) * Riverside County Certified Archaeologist #165
* Orange County Certified Archaeologist
* San Diego County Certified Archaeologist
* Holds a "blanket" Cultural Resource Use Permit on the supervisory level with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the Ridgecrest, Barstow, Palm Springs, El Centro, and Needles desert resources areas. * 28 years of full-time experience conducting cultural resource management projects in southern California.

Curriculum Vitae
Richard Bryan Guttenberg
Archaeological Associates [email protected]
P.O. Box 180
Sun City, CA 92586

EDUCATION
Master of Arts
M.A. Anthropology – emphasis in Archaeology, 2014, California State University Los Angeles.

Geographic Information Systems Certificate, 2014, California State University Los Angeles.

Post-Baccalaureate Education
Identification and Evaluation of Mid-20th-Century Buildings, May 2010, National Preservation Institute.

Bachelor of Art in Anthropology
Emphasis in Archaeology, 1997, California State University, Long Beach.

RESEARCH INTERESTS
California archaeology and ethnohistory, hunter/gatherer maritime adaptations, Channel Islands archaeology, emergence of complex societies, prehistoric migrations, lithic technology, GIS and spatial analysis, remote sensing, architectural history.

HONORS AND AWARDS
Scholarship and Award Recipient, 2010. Administered by California State University, Los Angeles
Special Recognition in Graduate Studies, 2010, Administered by California State University, Los Angeles.

Cotsen Fellowship, Summer 2010, Administered by California State University, Los Angeles.

Member, Phi Kappa Phi Honor Society.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
2 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
1997-Present Vice President-Cultural and Natural Resources, JMA-John Minch and Associates, Inc., 26623 Sierra Vista Mission Viejo, CA 92692 Serves as Vice President and senior project manager with over thirteen years of experience working in environmental regulatory compliance.Project experience includes cultural / paleontological resource management and biological services in as many as 14 counties throughout California. Current duties include the planning, management and implementation of environmental consulting services and regulatory documentation for a variety of private and municipal projects with multiple Stakeholders. Seven years of management experience in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Section 106 consultations, Native American consultations, and scoping,Historic American Building Survey and Historic American Engineering Record (HABS/HAER), Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPP) and inspection of Best Management Practices (BMP), and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Works directly with several Principal Investigators and serves as lead contact for clients. Experience coordinating with local, state and federal agencies including: the City of Los Angeles, Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, State Water Resources Control Board – Los Angeles, South Coast Air Quality Management District, California Energy Commission, California Coastal Commission, California Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Other responsibilities include thehiring, training,and schedulingof field staff, management of field and laboratory materials and equipment, curation, preparation, and analysis of archaeological and paleontological collections, performing assessments of archaeological and paleontological resources, archaeological record searches, design and implementation of archaeological and paleontological monitoring programs, archaeological site recordation and reporting, report writing and editing, GIS mapping and analysis, and business marketing.

RESEARCH AND FIELD EXPERIENCE
Project Manager: Phase I Archaeological Survey, CH2MHill for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) –Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), Canoga Park, CA. 2014 - present.

Designed, managed, and implemented a cultural resources Phase I survey of the NASA administered areas at the SSFL. Assisted in coordinating Native American Stakeholder consultations, co-authored project documentation, constructed GIS maps and figures, and assisted with archaeological site recordation. Currently manages and coordinates a large crew of archaeological monitors for soil sampling and remediation activities at SSFL.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
3 Project Manager: Phase I Archaeological Survey, Boeing Company, SSFL, Canoga Park, CA. 2013 – present.

Designed, managed, and implemented a cultural resources Phase I survey of the Boeing administered areas at the SSFL. Assisted in coordinating Native American Stakeholder consultations, co-authored project documentation, constructed GIS maps and figures, and assisted with archaeological site recordation. Currently manages and coordinates a large crew of archaeological monitors for soil sampling and remediation activities at SSFL.

Project Manager: Archaeological / Paleontological Services and Environmental Compliance, Republic Services, Inc., Sunshine Canyon Landfill, Sylmar, CA. Summer 2005 – present.

Project manager duties include assessment, coordination and implementation of biological, archaeological, and paleontological investigations for City Landfill extension, responsible for daily groundwater quality sampling and weekly reporting of collected samples, coordination of migratory nesting bird surveys, management of workface air quality study, scheduling, and client and agency coordination, and annual reporting.

Project Manager: Archaeological Monitoring Program, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, HydroGeoLogic, Inc., Building 204, 5800 Woolsey Canyon Rd., Canoga Park, CA, 91304. Spring 2010 – present.

Designed, managed, and implemented a cultural resources monitoring and protection plan for a radiological sampling investigation conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Energy. Assisted in coordinating Section 106 and Native American Stakeholder consultations, co-authored project documentation and constructed GIS maps and figures. Managed and coordinated a large crew of archaeological monitors, and assisted with archaeological site recordation.

Project Manager: Archaeological – Paleontological Services, El Segundo Repowering Project, NRG Energy, Inc., 301 Vista Del Mar, El Segundo, CA 90245.

Winter 2005 – present.

Managed and assisted with the design and implementation of both a Cultural and Paleontological Resources Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (CRMMP/PRMMP) for the redevelopment of the El Segundo Power Plant.

Assisted with regulatory documentation in compliance with the California Energy Commission. Managed and directed archaeological and paleontological resource monitoring of heavy construction activities.

Project Manager: Archaeological – Paleontological Investigation,Chatsworth Reservoir Wetland Restoration Project, Republic Services, Inc. 2005 – Present.

Assisted with design of archaeological and paleontological investigation, records search of cultural resources, participation in field reconnaissance survey, co- author of survey report, client and agency coordination.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
4 Project Manager/Field Director: Archaeological and Paleontological Investigations, Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, various projects, Spring, 2008 –present.

Ongoing management of various projects concerning cultural and paleontological resources, record searches, assessments, monitoring, client and agency coordination.

Research Assistant: California State University Los Angeles, San Nicolas Island Field School, Summer 2010.

Conducted archaeological fieldwork and laboratory analysis including excavation, screening, mapping, and collection of GPS data with Trimble GeoXH.

Principal investigator is Dr. René Vellanoweth.

Research Assistant: California State University Los Angeles, San Nicolas Island Field School, Summer 2009.

Conducted archaeological fieldwork and laboratory analysis including excavation, screening, and record keeping. Principal investigator is Dr. René Vellanoweth.

Field Director / Archaeological and Paleontological Monitor: Saddlewood Residential Housing Project, Standard Pacific Homes, Inc., Walnut, CA, Winter 2005 – Summer 2007.

Archaeological and Paleontological resource monitoring, fossil preparation, curation, mapping, and report editing.

Biological Monitor: Browning Ferris Industries, Inc. / Allied Waste, Inc, Sunshine Canyon Landfill, Spring 2004 – Summer 2006.

Biological monitoring of City Landfill expansion project, monitoring and inspection of heavy construction activities associated with a CDF&G 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement, ACOE 404 Agreement, groundwater sampling and reporting, assistance with coordination of ornithological mist-netting, and wildlife trapping and re-location.

Field Director / Archaeological Paleontological Monitor: Whispering Hills Residential Housing Project and San Juan Hills High School, Concorde Development, Inc., San Juan Capistrano CA, Summer 2003 – Winter 2005.

Field reconnaissance survey, archaeological salvage excavation, archaeological / paleontological monitoring, paleontological salvage, fossil preparation, curation, mapping, report editing.

Field Director / Paleontological Monitor: Various projects,Temecula,CA, Spring 2002 – Spring 2004.

Paleontological resource monitoring and salvage on various small projects in Temecula, Wildomar, and French Valley, Riverside County, CA. Assisted with editing and production of final monitoring reports.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
5 Field Director: Archaeological/Paleontological Investigation, Vista Del Verde Residential Development and Black Gold Golf Course, Villages III and IV, Toll Brothers, Inc., Yorba Linda, Orange County, CA, Winter 2003 – Fall 2003 Assessment, coordination, and implementation of archaeological / paleontological investigation designed for large residential golf course development, archaeological / paleontological monitoring, laboratory analysis, curation, mapping, and report editing.

Field Director: Mission San Juan Capistrano’s Trabuco Aqueduct,City of San Juan Capistrano, Orange County. Winter 2002.

Archaeological monitoring of grading activities that uncovered Mission-era feature and let to the identification of the aqueduct.Project Manager/Field Director duties include direct assistance to the Principal Investigator in study to discover, excavate, and record the physical remains of the historic feature, an early 19th century aqueduct that served The Mission San Juan Capistrano.

Field Director: Paleontological Investigation, California Fiber Optic Cable Project, Williams Communications, Inc., Counties of Contra Costa, Mendocino, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, Solano, Sonoma, Washoe, and Yolo. Winter 1999 – Fall 2000.

Direction, coordination, and implementation of paleontological investigation designed for multi-county installation of fiber optic cable in Northern California.

Paleontological monitoring, training and staffing.Provided logistical support for field crew along several hundred miles of linearalignment/right-of-way.

Field Director: Archaeological/Paleontological Investigation, Vista Del Verde Residential Development and Black Gold Golf Course, Villages I and II, Toll Brothers, Inc., Yorba Linda, Orange County. Spring – Fall, 1999.

Participated in pre-construction field reconnaissance survey, assessment, coordination, and implementation of archaeological / paleontological investigation designed for large residential golf course development, archaeological / paleontological monitoring, laboratory analysis, curation, mapping, and report editing.

Field Director / Paleontological Monitor: Variousprojects, Orange and Los Angeles County, CA, Spring 1998 – Spring 1999.

Archaeological and Paleontological resource monitoring and salvage on various small projects in Simi Valley, Sylmar, Newhall, Anaheim Hills, and Diamond Bar, CA. Assisted with editing final monitoring reports.

Field Archaeologist / Paleontologist: Archaeological/Paleontological Investigation, Ocean Trails, LLC / Trump National Golf Club, Golf Course and Residential Development, Palos Verdes, Los Angeles County. Winter 1998 – Summer 2002.

Participated in all aspects of the investigation including: survey, monitoring, excavation, wet screening, artifact identification, laboratory analysis, and artifact preparation and curation.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
6 Field Archaeologist: Archaeological Investigation, San Buenaventura Mission – Holy Cross Parish School, Los Angeles Catholic Archdiocese, City of Ventura, Ventura County.Summer 1997.

Participated in all aspects of the investigation including: survey, monitoring, excavation of pre-historic components as well as Spanish Colonial architecture, wet-screening, artifact identification, record keeping, laboratory analysis, and artifact preparation and curation.

PRESENTATIONS
1996 Symposium on remote sensing techniques in archaeology. Research paper presented at the 30th annual meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, Bakersfield, California, April 3–6.
2011 Symposium on GIS as a Tool for Intrasite Spatial Analysis at CA-SNI-25, San Nicolas Island, CA. Research paper presented at the 76th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Sacramento, California, April 1st.

PAPERS and PUBLICATIONS
2013 Richard B. Guttenberg, René L. Vellanoweth, William E. Kendig, Rebekka G.

Knierim, and Steven J. Schwartz, Geographic Information Systems as a Tool for Analyzing Intrasite Spatial Variability on San Nicolas Island. In California’s Channel Islands: The Archaeology of HumanEnvironment Interactions, edited by C.S. Jazwa and J.E. Perry, pp. 97‐112. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 2009 Richard B. Guttenberg and Ray Corbett,Cultural Resource Monitoring and Mitigation Plan for Excavations at the Arco/British Petroleum Carson Refinery, City of Carson, California.Unpublished report on file, British Petroleum Refinery, City of Carson, California.
2010 Ray Corbett and Richard B. Guttenberg, Substation 25 Replacement Project, Cultural Resources Final Monitoring Report (LAN-2682), City of Carson, California.Unpublished Report on file, British Petroleum Refinery, City of Carson, California.
2010 Richard B. Guttenberg and Ray Corbett, Cultural Resources Assessment, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Area IV Radiological Study, Ventura County, CA.

Unpublished report on file, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, San Francisco, California.
2010 Richard B. Guttenberg and Ray Corbett, Project Description and Cultural Resources Assessment, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Northern Undeveloped Lands Radiological Study, Ventura County, CA. Unpublished Report on file, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Richard B. Guttenberg Curriculum Vitae
7 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Society for American Archaeology
Society for California Archaeology
Pacific Coast Archaeological Society
Los Angeles Conservancy
APPENDIX B: Records Search Results

APPENDIX E
Caltrans DPR 523B (11/94) Page 1 of 3
*Required Information.

State of California — The Resources Agency Primary # P33-023900 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code: 6Z
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer Date
*Resource Name or #: Calimesa Creek -1 Caltrans Map Reference No.: N/A P1. Other Identifier: C-1
*P2. Location: *a. County Riverside County/Route/Postmile: N/A b. Address Calimesa Boulevard at County Line Road
City Calimesa Zip 92320
*c. UTM: USGS Quad: Yucaipa 7.5’ d. UTM: Zone 11, 494337 mE/ 3762365 mN *e. Other Locational Data (APN #) Bottom of Calimesa Creek immediately west of Calimesa Boulevard at County Line Road.

NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of the NW ¼ of Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 2 West, SBBM. *P3a. Description: (Briefly describe resource below)
This is an active, concrete storm drain located in the bottom of Calimesa Creek underneath Calimesa Boulevard just south of County Line Road. It is not a pre-cast struture. Rather, it is constructed of formed and poured concrete reinforced with steel (rebar). The western adit has a maximum width of 85-inches. Interior height was indeterminate as it was flooded with water and mud. However, it is esitmated to be 72-inches. Tunnel behind adit is 60-inches square.

Header over entrace bears the cast date of “1930” Date panel is 20-inches wide and 9-inches high. Surmounting the header are courses of cement-filled sandbags, approximately 2 ½-feet high. *P3b. Resource Attibutes: HP11. –Engineering Structure
**P4. Resources Present: Building X Structure Object Site District Elements of District Other
P5b. Description of Photo:

Looking east at west adit.
*P6. Date Constructed/Age:
1930 (factual)
X Historic Prehistoric Both
*P7. Owner and Address:

City of Calimesa
908 Park Avenue
Calimesa, CA 92320
*P8. Recorded by:

Robert S. White
Archaeological Associates
P.O. Box 180
Sun City, CA 92586
*P9. Date Recorded:
02/28/2014
*P10. Type of Survey: X Intensive
Reconnaissance Other
Describe:
*P11. Report Citation: Cultural Resources Assessment of the Calimesa Creek Improvement Project, City of Calimesa, Riverside County, California byWhite & White 2014.
*Attachments: NONE X Map Sheet Continuation Sheet X Building, Structure and Object Record Linear Resource Record Archaeological Record District Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List):

See Office of Historic Preservation Recording Historical Resources for instructions.

Caltrans DPR 523B (11/94) Page 2 of 3
*Required Information
State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency: Primary # P33-023900 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#:

BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
See Office of Historic Preservation Recording Historical Resources for instructions.

Map Reference No.: N/A
*Resource Identifier: Calimesa Creek-1 *NRHP Status Code: 6Z B1. Historic Name: None
B2. Common Name: None County/Route/Postmile: N/A
B3. Original Use: Storm Drain B4. Present Use: Storm Drain *B5. Architectural Style: NA
*B6. Construction History: Constructed in 1930 (dated). Builder unkown. Predates City of Calimesa incorporation (1990), Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (1938) as well as the Work(s) Progress Administartion (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps. (CCC) formed in 1935 and 1933 respectively. *B7. Moved? X No Yes Unknown Date: 1930 (factual) Original Location: Yes *B8. Related Features (describe below):

Concrete tunnel (5-feet by 5-feet square) underneath Calimesa Boulevard to the east.

B9a. Architect: Unknown B9b. Builder: Unknown
*B10. Significance: Theme: Flood Control Area: City of Calimesa, Riverside County Period of Significance: 1930 Property Type: Engineering Structure Applicable Criteria: N/A This structure was constructed for the sole purpose of conveying seasonal flows in Calimesa Creek beneath Calimesa Boulevard. It was constructed in 1930 using modern materials and techniques. It does not appear to meet any of the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Place (NRHP) or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). It is not associated with any historic event (Criterion A) and there is no evidence indicating that that any of the people associates with the residence were prominent in national, state or local history (Criterion B). Consequently, we are left to consider the elements of Criterion (C) the “architectural” criterion which posits eligibility on the basis of style or artistic merit. The storm drain is not the work of a master architect or builder. Furthermore, it does not possess high artistic value and is not a distinctive example of any particular style.

Under Criterion D, the storm drain is not likely to yield information about the history or prehistory of the area as this criterion primarily pertains to archaeological sites (see continuation sheet for further information).

B11. Additional Resource Attributes: HP11-Engineering Structure B12. References:

B13. Remarks:

Storm drain is operational and in good condition. There are no plans to demolish or modify the drain at this time.

B14. Evaluator: Robert S. White, Archaeological
Associates, P.O. Box 180, Sun City, CA 92586
Date of Evaluation: February 28, 2014
Caltrans DPR 523J (1/95) Page 3 of __3__
*Required information
State of California ⎯ The Resources Agency Primary # P33-023900 DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
See Office of Historic Preservation Recording Historical Resources for instructions.

Resource Identifier: Climesa Creek Storm Drain Caltrans Map Reference No.: N/A County/Route/Postmile: N/A
Map Name: Yucaipa 7.5’ *Scale: 1” = 2000 ft. *Date of Map: 1996 Calimesa Creek Stage III Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration – February 9, 2023 Appendix D – Geotechnical Report

PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION

CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN

STAGE III

CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. 63223.1
DECEMBER 20, 2019
Prepared For:

TKE Engineering, Inc.
2305 Chicago Avenue
Calimesa, California 92507
Attention: Mr. Steve Ledbetter
December 20, 2019
TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
2305 Chicago Avenue
Riverside, California 92507
Attention: Mr. Steve Ledbetter
Subject: PreliminarySoils Investigation, Calimesa Channel Basin, Stage III, Calimesa, California.

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., is pleased to present this report summarizing our preliminary soils investigation for the subject project. This report was based upon a scope of services generally outlined in our Work Authorization Agreement dated November 4, 2019 and other written and verbal communications.

In summary, it is our opinion that the proposed project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided the recommendations presented in the attached report are incorporated into design and construction.

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

Table of Contents
Page No.

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FIELD INVESTIGATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Fill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Alluvium. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 General Site Grading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Initial Site Preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Preparation of Fill Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Engineered Compacted Fill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Slope Construction.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Slope Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Short Term Excavations.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Sulfate Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Construction Monitoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Table of Contents
Page No.

LIMITATIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 TIME LIMITATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 CLOSURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

APPENDICES
Appendix A
Index Map.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 Site Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2 Cross Section A-A’. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3 Appendix B
Field Investigation Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B Boring Log Legend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-i Soil Classification Chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-ii Boring Logs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 through B-3 Appendix C
Laboratory Testing Program.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C Appendix D
Slope Stability.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1 and D-2 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019

INTRODUCTION
During November and December of 2019, a Preliminary Soils Investigation was performed by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., for the proposed Calimesa Channel Basin, Stage III, in the City of Calimesa, California. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings and to provide geotechnical design recommendations for the proposed improvement. The scope of our services included:
• Review of available geotechnical literature, reports, maps, and agency information pertinent to the study area;
• A subsurface field investigation to determine the physical soil conditions pertinent to the proposed project;
• Laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation; • Development of geotechnical recommendations for site grading design; and • Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, and providing conclusions and recommendations for site development.

To orient our investigation at the site, a copy of the Site Plan, prepared by TKE Engineering, Inc., undated, was furnished for our use. The proposed locations of the improvements are indicated on this plan. The approximate locations of the site is shown on the attached Index Map, Enclosure A-1, within Appendix A.

The findings of our investigation, as well as our conclusions and recommendations, are presented in the following sections of this report.

PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS
It is our understanding that the site is proposed for a flood control basin. Approximately 25 feet of cut and 7 feet of fill is proposed to create the basin. A slope inclination of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical is proposed. Access to the basin will be provided by a road along the northern part of the basin. A storm drain inlet and outlet are proposed along the south side of the basin, connecting the basin to the adjacent Calimesa Channel. 1 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019
It is also understood that the infiltration characteristics of the proposed basin have been evaluated by others.

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The subject site is vacant and contains a light growth of grass and weeds.

FIELD INVESTIGATION
Our field exploration program was conducted on November 14, 2019, and consisted of drilling three exploratory borings with a truck-mounted Mobile B-61 drill rig equipped with 8-inch diameter hollow stem augers to approximate depths of 31.5 to 41 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of our exploratory borings are presented on the attached Site Plan, Enclosure A-2, within Appendix A.

The subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory borings were logged by a geologist from this firm. Relatively undisturbed and bulk samples were obtained at selected intervals and returned to our geotechnical laboratory in sealed containers for further testing and evaluation. A detailed description of the field exploration program and the boring logs are presented in Appendix B.

LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
Selected soil samples obtained during the field investigation were subjected to laboratory testing to evaluate their physical and engineering properties. Laboratory testing included in-place density and moisture content, laboratory compaction characteristics, direct shear, and soluble sulfate content. A detailed description of the laboratory testing program and the test results are presented in Appendix C.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
As indicated by our subsurface exploration, the project area is underlain by fill/topsoil materials followed by native alluvial materials. These units are described in further detail in the following section:

Fill/Topsoil: The existing surface contains fill/topsoil materials on the order of 2-feet in thickness. These materials were comprised of silty sand soils that were dry and in a loose in-place state. The fill/topsoil materials are most likely a result of past and current weed abatement practices at the site (discing).
2 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019
Older Alluvium: Older alluvial materials were encountered underlying the fill materials described above to a maximum depth of approximately 41 feet in our boring B-1. The alluvial materials were variable, consisting of silty sand, clayey sand, sandy silt, well graded sand, and poorly graded sand. The older alluvial soils were typically light red brown in color and dry to damp. Based on our in-place density tests and equivalent Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts, the older alluvial materials are in a medium dense to dense state upon first encounter, becoming dense to very dense with depth.

Groundwater was not encountered within our borings as explored to a maximum depth of approximately 41 feet.

The subsurface conditions encountered in our exploratory borings are indicative of the locations explored. It is not to be construed that these conditions are present the same throughout the site. A more detailed description of the subsurface soil conditions as encountered within our exploratory borings is presented on the Boring Logs, within Appendix B.

CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of our field investigation and testing program, it is the opinion of LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., that the proposed improvements are feasible from a soil engineering standpoint, provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into design and implemented during grading and construction.

Based upon the field investigation and test data, it is our opinion that the existing fill/topsoil materials will not, in their present condition, provide uniform and/or adequate support for the proposed improvements. However, the existing older alluvial soils at a depth of approximately 2 feet below the existing surface are considered suitable to provide uniform and/or adequate support for the proposed improvements.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are provided for your assistance in establishing proper design, grading, and construction criteria:
3 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019
General Site Grading
It is imperative that no clearing and/or grading operations be performed without the presence of a qualified geotechnical engineer. An on-site, pre-job meeting with the client, the contractor, and soil engineer should occur prior to all grading related operations.

Operations undertaken at the site without the geotechnical engineer present may result in exclusion of affected areas from the final compaction report for the project.

Grading of the subject site should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations as well as applicable portions of the California Building Code, and/or applicable local ordinances.

All uncontrolled fills encountered during site preparation should be completely removed, cleaned of significant deleterious materials, and may be reused as compacted fill. It is also our recommendation that any existing uncontrolled and/or undocumented fills under any proposed flatwork and paved areas be removed and replaced with engineered compacted fill. If this is not done, premature structural distress (settlement) of the flatwork and pavement may occur.

Cavities created by removal of subsurface obstructions should be thoroughly cleaned of loose soil, organic matter, and other deleterious materials, shaped to provide access for construction equipment, and backfilled as recommended in the following Engineered Compacted Fill section of this report.

Initial Site Preparation
All fill/topsoil materials should be removed from areas to receive engineered compacted fill. The data developed during this investigation indicates that removals on the order of 2 feet deep will be required to encounter competent older alluvium. Competent older alluvium is defined as damp, relatively dense soil with a minimum relative compaction of 85 percent (ASTM D 1557). The given removal depths are preliminary. The actual depths of removal should be determined during the grading operation by observation and in-place density testing.

Preparation of Fill Areas
Prior to placing fill and after conducting the removals discussed above, the surfaces of all areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of at least 6-inches. 4 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019
The scarified soil should be brought to near optimum moisture content and compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent (ASTM D 1557).

Engineered Compacted Fill
The on-site soils should provide adequate quality fill material, provided they are free from organic matter and other deleterious materials. Unless approved by the geotechnical engineer, rock or similar irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches should not be buried or placed in fills.

Import fill should be inorganic, non-expansive granular soils free from rocks or lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension. Sources for import fill should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to their use.

Fill should be spread in maximum 8-inch loose lifts, each lift brought to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent in accordance with ASTM D 1557.

Slope Construction
A slope stability analysis was performed for the proposed approximately 30-foot high, 2H:1V slope for the basin. Shear strength data obtained during this investigation was applied for the materials encountered. Using the software program SLIDE 2018, the proposed condition revealed a static factor of safety of greater than 1.5. Using a Kh factor of 0.2, the proposed condition revealed a seismic factor of safety of greater than 1.0. The results of our analysis are provided in the Appendix D.

Slope Protection
Since the site soil materials are susceptible to erosion by running water, measures should be provided to prevent surface water from flowing over slope faces Dry side (exterior) slopes at the project should be planted with a deep rooted ground cover as soon as possible after completion. The use of succulent ground covers such as iceplant or sedum is not recommended. If watering is necessary to sustain plant growth on slopes, then the watering operation should be monitored to assure proper operation of the irrigation system and to prevent over watering. Wet side (interior) slopes may not be practical for such plantings. Routine maintenance of any such erosion should be expected. 5 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019
Short-Term Excavations
Following the California Occupational and Safety Health Act (CALOSHA) requirements, excavations deeper than 5 feet should be sloped or shored. All excavations and shoring should conform to CAL-OSHA requirements.

Short-term excavations greater that 5 feet deep shall conform to Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Construction Safety Orders, Section 1504 and 1539 through 1547.

Based on our exploratory borings, it appears that Type C soil is the predominant type of soil on the project and all short-term excavations should be based on this type of soil.

Deviation from the standard short-term slopes are permitted using Option 4, Design by a Registered Professional Engineer (Section 1541.1).

Short-term slope construction and maintenance is the responsibility of the contractor, and should be a consideration of his methods of operation and the actual soil conditions encountered.

Sulfate Protection
The results of the sulfate tests conducted on selected subgrade soils expected to be encountered at foundation levels are presented in Appendix C.

Based on the results of our soluble sulfate tests, sulfate exposures of on site soils is considered negligible by the CBC. Therefore, no specific recommendations are given for concrete elements to be in contact with on site soils.

Construction Monitoring
Post investigative services are an important and necessary continuation of this investigation. Project plans and specifications should be reviewed prior to construction to confirm that the intent of the recommendations presented herein have been incorporated into the design. Verification testing including soluble sulfates and expansion index should be performed during the site grading.

During construction, sufficient and timely geotechnical observation and testing should be provided to correlate the findings of this investigation with the actual subsurface conditions exposed during construction. Items requiring observation and testing include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
6 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.1
December 20, 2019

1. Site preparation-stripping and removals.

2. Excavations, including approval of the bottom of excavation prior to backfilling.

3. Scarifying and recompacting prior to fill placement.

4. Placement of engineered compacted fill and backfill, including approval of fill materials and the performance of sufficient density tests to evaluate the degree of compaction being achieved.

LIMITATIONS
This report contains geotechnical conclusions and recommendations developed solely for use by TKE Engineering, Inc. and their design consultants, for the purposes described earlier. It may not contain sufficient information for other uses or the purposes of other parties. The contents should not be extrapolated to other areas or used for other facilities without consulting LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

The recommendations are based on interpretations of the subsurface conditions concluded from information gained from subsurface explorations, and a surficial site reconnaissance.

The interpretations may differ from actual subsurface conditions, which can vary horizontally and vertically across the site. Due to possible subsurface variations, all aspects of field construction addressed in this report should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical consultant.

If parties other than LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., provide construction monitoring services, they must be notified that they will be required to assume responsibility for the geotechnical phase of the project being completed by concurring with the recommendations provided in this report or by providing alternative recommendations.

The report was prepared using generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices under the direction of a state licensed geotechnical engineer. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Any persons using this report for bidding or construction purposes should perform such independent investigations as deemed necessary to satisfy themselves as to the surface and subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures to be used in the performance of work on this project.
7 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

APPENDIX A
Index Map, Site Plan and Cross Section
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

INDEX MAP
ENCLOSURE:

DATE:

SCALE:

A-1
PROJECT:

CLIENT:

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

PROJECT NO:
1" = 2,000'
DECEMBER 2019

TKE ENGINEERING
CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA 63223.1 SITE

SITE PLAN
PROJECT NO: 63223.1
ENCLOSURE:

DATE:

SCALE:

DECEMBER 2019
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.
§

Legend
A-2
(Locations Approximate)
Map Symbols B-3 - Exploratory Boring Location B-2 B-1 B-3 A A'
2455 2460 2465 2470 2475 2480 2485
A A' 2445 0 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 2450 B-2 SM SM SM SM SM SM SP SP SP SM SM SM SM SC SC SC SW/SM SW/SM SW/SM

CROSS SECTION A-A'
PROJECT NO: 63223.1
ENCLOSURE:

DATE:

SCALE:

DECEMBER 2019
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.
1" = 10' (H=V)
A-3 2455 2460 2465 2470 2475 2480 2485 2445 2450 Proposed Topography Existing Topography

APPENDIX B
Field Investigation Program and Boring Logs
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

APPENDIX B

FIELD INVESTIGATION
Subsurface Exploration
The site was investigated on December 18, 2019 and consisted of advancing three exploratory borings to depths of approximately 31.5 and 41 feet below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on Enclosure A-2, within Appendix A.

The exploration was conducted using a truck-mounted Mobile B-61 drill rig equipped with a 8-inch diameter hollow stem augers. The soils were continuously logged by our geologist who inspected the site, created detailed logs of the borings, obtained undisturbed, as well as disturbed, soil samples for evaluation and testing, and classified the soils by visual examination in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.

Relatively undisturbed samples of the subsoils were obtained at a maximum interval of 5 feet. The samples were recovered by using a California split barrel sampler of 2.50-inch inside diameter and 3.25-inch outside diameter or a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) driven by a 140-pound automatic trip hammer dropped from a height of 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler into the ground the final 12 inches were recorded and further converted to equivalent SPT N-values. Factors such as efficiency of the automatic trip hammer used during this investigation (80%), borehole diameter (8"), and rod length at the test depth were considered for further computing of equivalent SPT N-values corrected for field procedures ( N60) which are included in the boring logs, Enclosures B-1 through B-3.

The soil samples obtained using the California split barrel sampler were retained in brass sample rings of 2.42 inches in diameter and 1.00 inch in height, and placed in sealed plastic containers. Disturbed soil samples were obtained at selected levels within the borings and placed in sealed containers for transport to our geotechnical laboratory.

All samples obtained were taken to our geotechnical laboratory for storage and testing.

Detailed logs of the borings are presented on the enclosed Boring Logs, Enclosures B-1 through B-3. A Boring Log Legend and Sampling Key are presented on Enclosures B-I and B-ii, respectively.

B
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

CONSISTENCY OF SOIL
SANDS

SPT BLOWS CONSISTENCY
0-4 Very Loose
4-10 Loose
10-30 Medium Dense
30-50 Dense
Over 50 Very Dense

COHESIVE SOILS

SPT BLOWS CONSISTENCY
0-2 Very Soft
2-4 Soft
4-8 Medium
8-15 Stiff
15-30 Very Stiff
30-60 Hard
Over 60 Very Hard

SAMPLE KEY
Symbol Description

INDICATES CALIFORNIA

SPLIT SPOON SOIL
SAMPLE

INDICATES BULK
SAMPLE

INDICATES SAND CONE

OR NUCLEAR DENSITY
TEST

INDICATES STANDARD

PENETRATION TEST
(SPT) SOIL SAMPLE

TYPES OF LABORATORY TESTS
1 Atterberg Limits
2 Consolidation
3 Direct Shear (undisturbed or remolded)
4 Expansion Index
5 Hydrometer
6 Organic Content
7 Proctor (4", 6", or Cal216)
8 R-value
9 Sand Equivalent
10 Sieve Analysis
11 Soluble Sulfate Content
12 Swell
13 Wash 200 Sieve

BORING LOG LEGEND
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO.: 63223.1 CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC. ENCLOSURE: B-i
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. DATE: DECEMBER 2019

PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS

BOULDERS COBBLES

GRAVEL SAND

SILT OR CLAY

COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
12" 3" 3/4" No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 200
(U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE)

SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
PROJECT CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 63223.1 CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC. ENCLOSURE: B-ii
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. DATE: DECEMBER 2019
73 15.3

7.0 5.8
92 74
96 108.0
35 31
32 18
37 @ 35 feet, SANDY SILT, approximately 10% coarse grained sand, 15% medium grained sand, 15% fine grained sand,
60% silty fines with trace clay, red brown, damp.
96 for 11"
@ 0 feet, FILL/TOPSOIL: SILTY SAND, approximately 15%
coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 30% fine
grained sand, 25% silty fines, brown, dry, loose.
@ 30 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 10% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 25% fine grained sand,
40% silty fines, red brown, damp.
@ 25 feet, WELL GRADED SAND with GRAVEL,
approximately 15% gravel to 2", 25% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand, 5% silty fines, light red brown, dry, rings disturbed.
@ 20 feet, POORLY GRADED SAND, approximately 5%
gravel to 1", 5% coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 55% fine grained sand, 5% silty fines, light red brown, dry.
@ 15 feet, SILTY SAND, trace gravel to 1", approximately 5% coarse grained sand, 35% medium grained sand, 40% fine
grained sand, 20% silty fines, light red brown, damp.
@ 12 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 10% coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 35% fine grained sand,
25% silty fines, light red brown, damp.
@ 7 feet, becomes moist, decrease in amount of porosity.

12.1 @ 2 feet, OLDER ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, approximately 5% coarse grained sand, 15% medium grained sand, 35%
fine grained sand, 45% silty fines, light red brown, damp, some pinhole porosity.

7.6 6.4

13.8 9.4
B-1

3.2 @ 5 feet, contains trace clay, remains porous.
126.0
ML
SM
SW
SP
SM
23 121.6
107.3
122.5
113.3
117.1
112.7
111.3
109.6 SW
SM

3.1 @ 40 feet, WELL GRADED SAND with GRAVEL and SILT,
approximately 15% gravel to 1", 20% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand, 10% silty fiens, speckled red brown, damp.

TKE Engineering, Inc. 2480
November 14, 2019
CLIENT:

PROJECT NUMBER: MOISTURE CONTENT
8"
63223.1 SPT (%) BLOW COUNTS

8.2 LABORATORY TESTS
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45

DESCRIPTION
GEOTECHNICAL GROUP INC.

LOG OF BORING B-1

TEST DATA
3, 7, 11
END OF BORING @ 41'
Fill to 2'
No groundwater
No bedrock
3 DEPTH IN FEET
ENCLOSURE:

Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III
EQUIPMENT:

DATE DRILLED:

Mobile B-61
ELEVATION:

HOLE DIA.:

PROJECT: LITHOLOGY U.S.C.S. SAMPLE TYPE (PCF) DRY DENSITY 64 @ 35 feet, SILTY SAND, trace gravel to 1", approximately 20% coarse grained sand, 20% medium grained sand, 25% fine
grained sand, 35% silty fines with trace clay, red brown, damp.

14.6 6.5

6.8 77 for 11"

5.6 68
34 13.5
26 17
15 23
67 64
@ 5 feet, trace gravel to 2", non-porous, no roothairs. @30 feet, CLAYEY SAND, approximately 20% coarse grained sand, 20% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand,
30% clayey fine of low plasticity, red brown, damp, trace thin calcite stringers, trace pinhole porosity.
@ 25 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 5% coarse grained
sand, 35% medium grained sand, 45% fine grained sand,
15% silty fines, light red brown, damp to moist.
@ 20 feet, WELL GRADED SAND with SILT, approximately
30% coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 30%
fine grained sand, 10% silty fines, speckled red brown, damp. @ 15 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 10% coarse grained sand, 35% medium grained sand, 35% fine grained sand,
20% silty fines, light red brown, dry to damp to moist. @ 12 feet, POORLY GRADED SAND, approximately 10%
coarse grained sand, 35% medium grained sand, 50% fine
grained sand, 5% silty fines, light red brown, damp.

10.6 @ 7 feet, SILTY SAND, trace gravel to 1/2", approximately 15% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 30%
fine grained sand, 30% silty fines with trace clay, red brown, moist, some pinhole and slightly larger porosity.
@ 2 feet, OLDER ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, approximately
15% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 30%
fine grained sand, 30% silty fines with trace of clay, red brown, damp, some pinhole porosity, some roothairs.
@ 0 feet, FILL/TOPSOIL: SILTY SAND, approximately 5%
coarse grained sand, 15% medium grained sand, 40% fine
grained sand, 40% silty fines, light brown, dry, loose.

7.4 B-2

11.6 125.9
@ 10 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 15% coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand,
25% silty fines, light red brown, damp.
111.3 SM
SW
SM
SM
SP
SM
127.1
114.4
111.9
113.3
106.1
116.9
120.1
111.4

10.2 SC
SM

8.7 END OF BORING @ 35.92'
Fill to 2'
No groundwater
No bedrock
TKE Engineering, Inc. 2483
November 14, 2019
CLIENT:

PROJECT NUMBER:
8"
63223.1 MOISTURE CONTENT SPT (%) BLOW COUNTS
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 LABORATORY TESTS
GEOTECHNICAL GROUP INC. Mobile B-61
LOG OF BORING B-2

TEST DATA

DESCRIPTION
3 ELEVATION:

ENCLOSURE:

Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III
EQUIPMENT:

DATE DRILLED:

HOLE DIA.: DEPTH IN FEET
PROJECT: LITHOLOGY U.S.C.S. SAMPLE TYPE (PCF) DRY DENSITY

9.1 19
15 27
49 56
76 54

6.9 9.3

15.1 16.7

14.5 5.0
@ 12 feet, becomes slightly finer grained, remains porous.

END OF BORING @ 31.5'
Fill to 2'
No groundwater
No bedrock
@ 30 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 20% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 35% fine grained sand,
20% silty fines, red brown, damp, trace pinhole porosity. @ 25 feet, WELL GRADED SAND, trace gravel to 3/4",
approximately 25% coarse grained sand, 35% medium
grained sand, 35% fine grained sand, 5% silty fines, light red brown, dry, rings disturbed.

4.3 @ 15 feet, WELL GRADED SAND with GRAVEL,
approximately 15% gravel to 1.5", 25% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand, 5% silty fines, speckled red brown, dry.

3.5 @ 10 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 10% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 35% fine grained sand,
30% silty fines, lght red brown, moist, porous.
@ 7 feet, CLAYEY SAND, approximately 15% coarse grained sand, 20% medium grained sand, 20% fine grained sand,
45% clayey fines of low plasticity, damp, some porosity.

B-3
@ 2 feet, OLDER ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, appproximately
15% coarse grained sand, 20% medium grained sand, 20%
fine grained sand, 45% silty fines with trace clay, red brown, damp, some roothairs, trace pinhole and slightly larger porosity.
116.2
@ 20 feet, SILTY SAND, approximately 25% coarse grained sand, 30% medium grained sand, 30% fine grained sand,
15% silty fines, light red brown, dry.
123.1
35 SW
SM
SW
SM
SM
121.2
116.0
113.7
107.7
114.3
115.0
SC
@ 5 feet, SILTY SAND, approximtely 5% coarse grained sand, 25% medium grained sand, 35% fine grained sand, 35% silty fines, red brown, damp, trace roothairs, trace pinhole
porosity.

SM
43 GEOTECHNICAL GROUP INC.

CLIENT: TKE Engineering, Inc.

November 14, 2019
2476
@ 0 feet, FILL/TOPSOIL: SILTY SAND, approximately 5%
coarse grained sand, 20% medium grained sand, 40% fine
grained sand, 35% silty fines, light brown, dry, loose. 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35 MOISTURE CONTENT SPT (%) BLOW COUNTS LABORATORY TESTS DESCRIPTION 63223.1
TEST DATADRY DENSITY LOG OF BORING B-3 (PCF)
3 3
Mobile B-61
DATE DRILLED:

PROJECT NUMBER:
8" ENCLOSURE:

Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III
HOLE DIA.:

EQUIPMENT: SAMPLE TYPE
ELEVATION: DEPTH IN FEET
PROJECT: LITHOLOGY U.S.C.S.

APPENDIX C
Laboratory Testing Program and Test Results
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

APPENDIX C

LABORATORY TESTING
General
Selected soil samples obtained from the borings were tested in our laboratory to evaluate the physical properties of the soils affecting foundation design and construction procedures. The laboratory testing program performed in conjunction with our investigation included in-place moisture content and dry density, laboratory compaction, direct shear, and soluble sulfate tests. Descriptions of the laboratory tests are presented in the following paragraphs:

Moisture-Density Tests
The moisture content and dry density information provides an indirect measure of soil consistency for each stratum, and can also provide a correlation between soils on this site.

The dry unit weight and field moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed samples, in accordance with ASTM D 2937 and ASTM D 2216, respectively, and the results are shown on the boring logs, Enclosures B-1 through B-3, for convenient correlation with the soil profile.

Laboratory Compaction
Selected soil samples were tested in the laboratory to determine compaction characteristics using the ASTM D 1557-02 compaction test method. The results are presented in the following table:

LABORATORY COMPACTION
Boring
Number
Sample Depth
(feet)
Soil Description
U.S.C.S.

Maximum
Dry Density
(pcf)
Optimum
Moisture
Content
(percent)
B-1 1-4 (SM) Silty Sand 131.5 7.5
C
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Direct Shear Tests
Shear tests are performed, in accordance with ASTM D 3080, with a direct shear machine at a constant rate-of-strain (usually 0.04 inches/minute). The machine is designed to test a sample partially extruded from a sample ring in single shear. Samples are tested at varying normal loads in order to evaluate the shear strength parameters, angle of internal friction and cohesion. Samples are tested in an undisturbed (u) or remolded (r) state (90% relative compaction per ASTM 1557) and soaked, to represent the worst-case conditions expected in the field.

The results of the shear tests are presented in the following table:

DIRECT SHEAR TESTS
Boring
Number
Sample Depth
(feet)
Soil Description
U.S.C.S.

Angle of
Internal
Friction
(degrees)
Apparent
Cohesion
(psf)
B-1 1-4 (r) (SM) Silty Sand 23 372
B-1 5 (u) (SM) Silty Sand 35 156
B-2 12 (u) (SP) Poorly Graded Sand 33 300
B-3 10 (u) (SM) Silty Sand 23 120
B-3 15 (u) (SW) Well Graded Sand 40 96
Soluble Sulfate Content Tests
The soluble sulfate content of selected subgrade soils were evaluated. The concentration of soluble sulfates in the soils was determined by measuring the optical density of a barium sulfate precipitate. The precipitate results from a reaction of barium chloride with water extractions from the soil samples. The measured optical density is correlated with readings on precipitates of known sulfate concentrations. The test results are presented on the following table:

C
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

SOLUBLE SULFATE CONTENT TESTS
Boring
Number
Sample Depth
(feet) Soil Description
Sulfate
Content
(% by weight)
B-1 1-4 (SM) Silty Sand <0.005
C
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

APPENDIX D
Slope Stability
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

2.517
Material Name Color Unit Weight
(lbs/Ō3) Strength Type Cohesion(psf)
Phi
(deg)
Water
Surface Ru
SM (5) 113.4 Mohr-Coulomb 156 35 None 0
SP (12) 114.5 Mohr-Coulomb 300 33 None 0
SW (15) 110.2 Mohr-Coulomb 96 40 None 0
SM (4) 126.3 Mohr-Coulomb 372 23 None 0
SM (10) 121.7 Mohr-Coulomb 120 29 None 0 2520 2500 2480 2460 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Analysis Description Group 1
Company
LOR Geotechnical Scale1:160 Drawn By
File Name Slide1.slmd Date 12/18/19
Project
Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III
SLIDEINTERPRET 8.029
Enclosure D-1

1.568
Material Name Color Unit Weight
(lbs/Ō3) Strength Type Cohesion(psf)
Phi
(deg)
Water
Surface Ru
SM (5) 113.4 Mohr-Coulomb 156 35 None 0
SP (12) 114.5 Mohr-Coulomb 300 33 None 0
SW (15) 110.2 Mohr-Coulomb 96 40 None 0
SM (4) 126.3 Mohr-Coulomb 372 23 None 0
SM (10) 121.7 Mohr-Coulomb 120 29 None 0 2520 0.2 2500 2480 2460 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Analysis Description Group 1
Company
LOR Geotechnical Scale1:160 Drawn By
File Name Slide1.slmd Date 12/18/19
Project
Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III
SLIDEINTERPRET 8.029
Enclosure D-2
January 29, 2020
TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
2305 Chicago Avenue
Riverside, California 92507
Attention: Mr. Steve Ledbetter
Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical and Geologic Information, Calimesa Channel Basin, Stage III, Calimesa, California.

As requested, we have prepared this letter containing supplemental geotechnical and geologic information as related to our previous investigation conducted for the proposed Calimesa Channel Basin, Stage III, located in the City of Calimesa, California (LOR, 2019).

Regional Geologic Setting
The subject site is located along the junction of two major geomorphic provinces of southern California, or at the end of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province where it meets the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges include a series of small northwestern trending mountains, separated by wide flat valleys, that extend from the Los Angeles region southeastward into Baja, California. The northern margin of this province butts up against a series of mountain ranges that lie in a transverse direction to the normal northwestern trend, or extend east and west. These mountains include the Santa Monica Mountains, the San Gabriel Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains that lie just north and east of the city of Calimesa. In the Calimesa locality, these two major provinces are termed the Peninsular Ranges Block to the south and the San Bernardino Mountains Block to the north and are separated by a series of complex faults known collectively as the San Andreas Fault Zone. In this tectonically complex area, the Peninsular Ranges Block is generally sliding to the northwest, and partially thrusted underneath the San Bernardino Mountains Block. Therefore, the resulting faults end up with a complex mix of strike slip and thrust faults.

The San Andreas fault, which lies approximately 7.5 kilometers (4.7 miles) to the northeast, acts as the boundary between the Peninsular and Transverse Ranges provinces. The next largest active fault in the region, in terms of total movement and anticipated magnitudes, is the San Jacinto fault which lies approximately 9.4 kilometers (5.8 miles) to the southwest. This fault has similar motions to the San Andreas or right lateral strike slip.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
While the trend of the San Andreas fault is predominately a relatively straight line across much of California, in the area just north of Indio, the San Andreas fault has an approximately 15-mile wide step-over zone, stepping to the west and cutting across the San Gorgonio Pass then up to the eastern end of the city of Yucaipa. Beyond this to the northwest, the trend of the fault once again resumes a northwesterly course. This twisting motion has resulted in a complex tectonic setting in the region between the San Andreas and the San Jacinto faults, that is not as yet completely understood. However, in general, the result of this geometry is that along the San Gorgonio pass and up into the Yucaipa region the motion changes from right lateral strike slip to thrusting. Within the CalimesaYucaipa region, this complex motion has resulted in several types of motions, extension with tectonic activity, including essentially all types of fault motions, from right lateral strike slip, or horizontal, to thrusting and normal, or tensional faulting along a numerous series of smaller fault splays.

One of the largest of these smaller splays is the Banning fault, lying along the base of the San Bernardino Mountains and situated approximately 2,100 feet to the southwest of the site. This fault appears to be the dominate thrust in the western end of the pass, joining the San Gorgonio Pass Fault Zone to the east with the motion changing to strike slip.

Therefore, the topography of the land in this region has been drastically altered by differing tectonic forces, which have resulted in the uplifting of the region east of the site. The bedrock materials underlying the region of the small hills to the east of Calimesa are composed of a complex mix of metamorphic rocks of gneiss, schist, phyllite, and metaigneous rocks of meta-diorite to meta-granotoid rocks. These rocks are very similar in composition to the basement rocks of the far southeastern end of the San Bernardino Mountains Block.

As noted above, the closest known potentially active fault in relation to the subject site is the Banning fault, located approximately 0.8 kilometers (0.5 miles) to the southwest, while the much larger, active, San Andreas fault is located approximately 7.5 kilometers (4.7 miles) to the northeast. A complete listing of the distances to known active faults in relation to the site is given in the Faulting section of this letter.

The regional geology as mapped by the U.S.G.S. (Mattti and Morton, 2010 and Matti et al, 2003) and partial legend is shown on Enclosure 1,attached. 2 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
Site Geologic Conditions
As noted above and our previous investigation, the site is underlain by a thin layer of fill/topsoil materials followed by older alluvial soils (LOR, 2019, Matti et al, 2003).

Fill/Topsoil:

During our previous investigation, the existing surface of the site contains fill/topsoil materials on the order of 2-feet in thickness (LOR, 2019). These materials were comprised of silty sand soils that were dry and in a loose in-place state. The fill/topsoil materials are most likely a result of past and current weed abatement practices at the site (discing).

Older Alluvium:

Older alluvial materials were encountered underlying the fill materials described above to a maximum depth of approximately 41 feet (LOR, 2019). The older alluvial materials were variable, consisting of silty sand, clayey sand, sandy silt, well graded sand, and poorly graded sand. The older alluvial soils were typically light red brown in color and dry to damp.

Based on our in-place density tests and equivalent Standard Penetration Test (SPT) blow counts, the older alluvial materials are in a medium dense to dense state upon first encounter, becoming dense to very dense with depth.

Groundwater Hydrology
Groundwater was not encountered within our exploratory borings advanced to a maximum depth of approximately 41 feet beneath the existing ground surface.

Records for nearby wells which were readily available from the State of California Department of Water Resources online database was reviewed as a part of this investigation.

According to the State of California Department for Water resources online database, the nearest well is State Well Number 02S02W12M001S located approximately 0.9 kilometers (0.5 miles) north-northwest of the site. Data for this well was present from December of 1926 to June of 2018. Groundwater depths over 200 feet were reported during that time.

A measuring point elevation of 2,477 feet above mean sea level was provided.

Another nearby well according to the State of California Department for Water resources online database, the nearest well is State Well Number 02S02W14J002S located 3 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
approximately 1.1 kilometers (0.7 miles) southwest of the site. Data for this well was present from June of 1998 to October of 2010. Groundwater depths slightly over 150 feet were reported during that time. A measuring point elevation of 2,418 feet above mean sea level was provided.

The proposed bottom elevation of the basin is 2,457 feet above mean sea level. Based on the groundwater data above, groundwater lies at a depth of just under 200 feet at the site.

Mass Movement
The site lies on a relatively flat surface. Mass movement failures such as landslides, rockfalls, or debris flows within the site vicinity are not known to exist and no evidence of mass movement was observed on the site.

Faulting
There are no known active faults at the site. In addition, according to the Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California (Hart and Bryant, 1997) the subject site does not lie within a current State of California Earthquake Fault Zone.

As previously noted, the subject site lies near the middle of a large wedge shaped area in between the San Jacinto fault, located approximately 9.4 kilometers (5.8 miles) to the southwest and the San Andreas, which lies approximately 7.5 kilometers (4.7 miles) to the northeast. Both of these faults are considered to be major active faults which move in a lateral fashion with the northwest portions offset to the southeast during earthquakes. This type of motion is called right lateral strike slip. The San Andreas fault is considered to be the major tectonic feature of California, separating the Pacific plate and the North American plate. While estimates vary, the San Andreas fault is generally thought to have an average slip range on the order of 24 mm/yr and capable of generating large magnitude events on the order of 7.5 or greater.

The San Jacinto fault zone is a sub-parallel branch of the San Andreas fault zone, extending from the northwestern San Bernardino area, southward into the El Centro region.

It is believed that the San Jacinto fault zone has an average slip rate of about 12 mm/year and is capable of producing an earthquake magnitude on the order of 6.5 or greater.

Lying in between these two faults are numerous smaller faults with varying types of motion.

Perhaps the largest of these, based on length and estimated amounts of past displacement, in the region around the site is the Banning fault. 4 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
Based on mapping conducted by the USGS, the Banning fault bifurcates off of the San Andreas fault just north of Indio, then extends through the Banning-Beaumont pass area and into the Calimesa area. While some reports claim that the Beaumont fault has been inactive since earliest Pleistocene time (1.8 million years ago), the State of California has placed the Calimesa portion of the Banning fault within an Earthquake Fault Zone on their maps of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California. According to mapping by others, at its closest approach the Banning fault lies approximately 2,100 feet southwest of the subject site (Matti and Morton, 2010 and Matti, et al, 2003).

Another known active fault is the Chicken Hill fault located approximately 3.7 kilometers (2.3 miles) to the northwest.

The Chicken Hill fault is considered part of numerous faults collectively called the Crafton Hills Complex. The Crafton Hills Complex is comprised of numerous intra faults created by the interaction of the San Andreas fault to the northeast and the San Jacinto fault to the southwest which are poorly understood. The possible earthquake magnitude and recurrence interval of this fault system is not known.

Current standards of practice included a discussion of all potential earthquake sources within a 100 kilometer (62 mile) radius. However, while there are other large earthquake faults within a 100 kilometer (62 mile) radius of the site, none of these are considered as relevant to the site as the faults described above, due to their greater distance and smaller anticipated magnitudes.

Historical Seismicity
In order to obtain a general perspective of the historical seismicity of the site and surrounding region, a search was conducted for seismic events at and around the area within various radii. This search was conducted utilizing the online historical seismic search catalog of the U.S.G.S. (2020). This program conducts a search of a user selected cataloged seismic events database, within a specified radius and selected magnitudes, and then plots the events onto an overlay map of known faults. For this investigation the database of seismic events utilized by the program was obtained from the Southern California Seismic Network (SCSN) available from the Southern California Earthquake Center. At the time of our search the data base contained data from January 1, 1932 through January 26, 2020.
5 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
In our first search, the general seismicity of the region was analyzed by selecting an epicenter map listing all events of magnitude 4.0 and greater, recorded since 1932, within a 100 kilometer (62 mile)radius of the site, in accordance with guidelines of the California Division of Mines and Geology. This map illustrates the regional seismic history of moderate to large events. As depicted on Enclosure 2, within Appendix A, the site lies within a relatively active region associated with the San Andreas fault trending northwest and the northwest trending faulting of the Mojave Desert geomorphic province. The 7.3 magnitude Landers earthquake and associated aftershocks including the 6.4 magnitude Big Bear earthquake are illustrated on this map, located to the northeast of the site. In addition, the 7.1 magnitude Hector Mine earthquake is also illustrated.

In the second search, the micro seismicity of the area lying within a 10 kilometer (62 mile) radius of the site was examined by selecting an epicenter map listing events on the order of 1.0 and greater since 1978. The results of this search is a map that presents the seismic history around the area of the site with much greater detail, not permitted on the larger map. The reason for limiting the events to the last 40 ± years on the detail map is to enhance the accuracy of the map. Events recorded prior the mid 1970's are generally considered to be less accurate due to advancements in technology. As depicted on this map, Enclosure 3, the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones appear to be the source of numerous events.

In summary, the historical seismicity of the site entails numerous small to medium magnitude earthquake events occurring around the subject site, predominately associated with the presence of the San Andreas and San Jacinto fault zones. Any future developments at the subject site should anticipate that moderate to large seismic events could occur very near the site.

Secondary Seismic Hazards
Other secondary seismic hazards generally associated with severe ground shaking during an earthquake include liquefaction, seiches and tsunamis, earthquake induced flooding, landsliding and rockfalls, and seismic-induced settlement.

Liquefaction: The potential for liquefaction generally occurs during strong ground shaking within loose granular sediments where the depth to groundwater is usually less than 50 feet. As the site is underlain by relatively medium dense to dense older alluvial materials and the depth to groundwater is thought to be in excess of 50 feet, the possibility of liquefaction at the site is considered nil.
6 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63223.11
January 29, 2020
Seiches/Tsunamis: The potential for the site to be affected by a seiche or tsunami (earthquake generated wave) is considered nil due to absence of any large bodies of water near the site.

Flooding (Water Storage Facility Failure): There are no large water storage facilities located on or near the site which could possibly rupture during an earthquake and affect the site by flooding.

Seismically-Induced Landsliding: Due to the low relief of the site and surrounding region, the potential for landslides to occur at the site is considered nil.

Rockfalls: No large, exposed, loose or unrooted boulders are present above the site that could affect the integrity of the site.

Seismically-Induced Settlement: Settlement generally occurs within areas of loose, granular soils with relatively low density. Since the site is underlain by relatively medium dense to dense older alluvial materials, the potential for settlement is considered low. In addition, the earthwork operations recommended to be conducted during the development of the site will mitigate any near surface loose soil conditions (LOR, 2019).

Soil Expansiveness
As noted by our previous report, the majority of the site surficial soils consist of silty sands, minor units of well graded sand and poorly graded sand, and trace units of clayey sand and sandy silt. The granular units of silty sand, well graded sand, and poorly graded sand are considered to have a very low expansion potential. The finer grained units of clayey sand and sandy silt are anticipated to have very low to low expansion potential. 7 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

REFERENCES
C a l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f W a t e r R e s o u r c e s , 2 0 2 0 , http://w w w .w ater.ca.gov/w aterdatalibrary/.

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., 2019, Preliminary Soils Investigation, Calimesa Channel Basin, Stage III, Calimesa, California, Project No. 63223.1, dated December 20, 2019.

Matti, J.C. and Morton, D.M.,2010, Geologic and Geophysical Maps of the El Casco 7.5' Quadrangle, Riverside County, California, with Accompanying Geologic-map Database, USGS Open-File Report 2010-1274.

Matti, J.C., D.M. Morton, B.F. Cox, S.E. Carson,, and T.J. Yetter, 2003, Geologic Map of the Yucaipa 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 03-301.

USGS, 2020, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/. 9 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

ENCLOSURE:

DATE:

SCALE:
1 PROJECT:

CLIENT:

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

PROJECT NO:
1" = 2,000'
REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP (Matti & Morton, 2003)
Description of Geologic Units
JANUARY 2020
SITE

TKE ENGINEERING
CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA 63223.11 CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NO: DATE: SCALE: 63223.112 JANUARY 2020 §NP LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. HISTORICAL SEISMICITY MAP - 100km Radius CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA TKE ENGINEERING ENCLOSURE: U.S. Geologic Survey (2017a) real-time earthquake epicenter map. Plotted are 572 epicenters of instrument-recored events from 1932 to present (01/26/20) of local magnitude greater than M4.0 within a radius of ~62 miles (100 kilometers) of the site. Location accuracy varies. The site is indicated by the green square. The selected magnitude corresponds to a threshold intensity value where very light damage potential begins. These evens are also generally widely felt by persons. Red lines mark the surface traces of known Quaternary-age faults.

CLIENT: PROJECT: PROJECT NO: DATE: SCALE: 63223.113 JANUARY 2020 §NP LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. HISTORICAL SEISMICITY MAP - 10km Radius CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, CALIFORNIA TKE ENGINEERING ENCLOSURE: U.S. Geologic Survey (2017a) real-time earthquake epicenter map. Plotted are 4,847 epicenters of instrument-recored events from 1978 to present (01/26/20) of local magnitude greater than M1.0 within a radius of ~6.2 miles (10 kilometers) of the site. Location accuracy varies. The site is indicated by the green square. Red lines mark the surface traces of known Quaternary-age faults.

Calimesa Creek Stage III Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration – February 9, 2023 Appendix E – Phase I, Environmental Site Assessment

PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

PROPOSED CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III

4.6± ACRES OF VACANT LAND
PORTIONS OF APNs 410-030-049 THROUGH -052

CALIMESA

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. 63592.2
DECEMBER 5, 2019
Prepared For:

TKE Engineering, Inc.
2305 Chicago Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
Attention: Mr. Steve Ledbetter, PE
December 5, 2019
TKE Engineering, LLC Project No. 63592.2
2305 Chicago Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
Attention: Mr. Steve Ledbetter, PE
Subject: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Proposed Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III

4.6± Acres of Vacant Land
Portions APNs 410-030-049 through -052
Calimesa, Riverside County, California
Attached herewith is the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted by this firm for the subject site located in Calimesa, California.

This Phase I ESA was planned and executed based upon a scope of services generally outlined in our Work Authorization Agreement dated October 23, 2019, and other written and verbal communication.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide this environmental assessment for the subject site. If you have any questions or comments regarding this assessment, please do not hesitate to contact this firm at your convenience.

LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

Table of Contents
Page No.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 NON-SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Environmental Cleanup Liens and Activity and Use Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 PHYSICAL SETTING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Topography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Regional Geologic Setting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Hydrogeology.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 HISTORY OF SITE USAGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Historical Topographic Maps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Aerial Photograph Review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 County Assessor’s Parcel and Ownership Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 County Building Records. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 City Directory Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 SITE RECONNAISSANCE.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Adjoining Properties.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region. . . . . . . 21 ENVIRONMENTAL DATABASE REVIEW.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 HIST UST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 RCRA-NonGen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 San Bernardino County Permit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 CA Notify 65.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Orphan Summary.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Table of Contents
Page No.

Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 VAPOR ENCROACHMENT EVALUATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Vapor Encroachment Screen.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 DATA GAPS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 LIMITATIONS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 TIME LIMITATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 CLOSURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Table of Contents

FIGURES
Figure 1 - Index Map
Figure 2 - Storm Drain and Basin Plan
Figure 3 - Assessor’s Parcel Map
Figure 4 - Recent Color Aerial Photograph

APPENDICES
Appendix A - Completed ASTM E1527-13 User Questionnaire Appendix B - EDR Sanborn Map Report
Appendix C - EDR Historical Topographic Map Report
Appendix D - EDR Historical Aerial Photographs
Appendix E - EDR Historical City Directory Information
Appendix F - Color Site Photographs
Appendix G - CRDEH Records Response Letters Dated November 5, 2019 Appendix H - EDR Environmental Database Report
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This firm conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the proposed Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III, 4.6± acres of vacant land located near the southwest corner of the intersection at West County Line Road and 3rd Street in Calimesa, California.

This Phase I ESA was conducted in conformance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E1527-13 and All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) set forth in 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) part 312.

The subject site has been agricultural grove, vacant land, and/or residential use dating back to at least 1899. The subject site is currently vacant land.

No drums, buckets, or other containers, which might pose an adverse environmental impact to the subject site, were observed. No soil staining, chemical odor, or other signs of obvious soil contamination were noted, except for very minor oil-stained soil which is a de minimis condition.

There are several sites listed in environmental regulatory and proprietary databases within 1 mile of the subject site. However, based on our research and Vapor Encroachment Screen (VES), no environmentally impaired properties, listed within these databases, have current or former releases of hazardous substances and/or petroleum products that have migrated to the subject site. Based on the results of our VES, a vapor encroachment condition (VEC) at the subject site can be ruled out.

This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions (RECs), historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs), or controlled recognized environmental conditions (CRECs) indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject site. However, two potential environmental concerns were noted during our review of historical aerial photographs:
• The presence of agricultural grove in the central and southern portions of the subject site (approximate lower two-thirds) in 1938, gone by 1949. • In the 1950s, within the east portion of the subject site, particularly in the approximate east one-third of the subject site, was natural vegetative growth, numerous smaller objects and possibly small piles of materials or disturbed soils, and some dirt drives or roads.
1 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
• The nature of the activities associated with this portion of the subject site is undetermined. Currently, there is no onsite evidence of these historical activities.

The above potential environmental concerns are not anticipated to have had a significant environmental impact to the subject site. The only way to confirm this conclusion is to perform soil sampling and analysis. However, with regards to the onsite historical activities in the 1950s, it may be impractical and/or infeasible to develop an effective soil sampling plan to address potential impacts, due to the lack of undetermined nature of past activities. 2 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

INTRODUCTION
During October to December 2019, a Phase I ESA was conducted by this firm for the proposed Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III, 4.6± acres of vacant land, portions of Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 410-030-049 through -052, located near the southwest corner of the intersection at West County Line Road and 3rd Street in Calimesa, Riverside County, California. The subject site is currently vacant land, planned to be developed into an approximate 20-foot deep storm water basin that will include an inlet, outlet, and spillway.

The Phase I ESA was conducted in conformance with the Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I ESA Process, ASTM E1527-13, and AAI set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. The purpose was to identify RECs, HRECs, and/or CRECs that may be associated with the subject site. A REC is defined as the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substance or petroleum products in, on, or at a property:
(1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. A HREC is defined as a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property, and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meets the unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls (i.e., property use restrictions, activity and use limitations, institutional controls, or engineering controls, which would fall under a controlled recognized environmental condition or CREC). This does not include de minimis conditions, that generally, do not present a threat to human health or the environment, and generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of the appropriate government agency. Conditions determined to be de minimis are not RECs or CRECs.

The approximate location of the site within its regional setting is presented on an Index Map (Figure 1). The proposed storm water basin is presented on a Storm Drain and Basin Plan (Figure 2).

The findings of our Phase I ESA, as well as our conclusions and recommendations, are presented in the following sections of this report.
3 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

NON-SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS
The following environmental issues are outside the scope of ASTM E1527-13 and 40 CFR Part 312:
• Lead in Drinking Water
• Lead-Based Paint
• Wetlands
• Methane
• Radon
• Cultural Land Historical Resources
• Industrial Hygiene
• Health and Safety
• Ecological Resources
• Endangered Species
• Indoor Air Quality
• Mold and Mildew
• Asbestos-Containing Materials
• Mineral Resources
• Regulatory Compliance
• Natural Hazards
• High Voltage Power Lines

METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Per ASTM E1527-13 and AAI, User provided information, as available, was evaluated with respect to site history, usage, and environmental concerns.

A general review of the physical setting of the subject site, including geology and groundwater hydrology, was performed. This review, in part, provides information regarding the potential for groundwater to be contaminated and the potential pathways for contaminant transport.

Historical maps, aerial photographs, and other records and information were researched and examined, as available, to investigate the present and past use of the subject site and surrounding area.
4 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
As available, person(s) knowledgeable about the subject site were interviewed to obtain any known information regarding site usage and potential environmental concerns.

Concurrent with our public and governmental agency interviews and literature research, a site reconnaissance of the property was conducted. The site reconnaissance was conducted in order to determine current uses of the site and the potential for soil and/or possible groundwater contamination based on aboveground visual observation.

During this Phase I ESA, public regulatory agencies, potentially including environmental, building, etc. were contacted directly or online research was conducted for information regarding permits, underground storage tanks (USTs), hazardous materials incidents, and general information about the subject site and surrounding area to ascertain the past uses with respect to environmental concerns.

Federal, state, local, tribal, and proprietary lists and databases were reviewed to ascertain the presence of known environmentally impaired sites on the subject site or within the immediate area, and to determine their impact, if any, to the site.

As part of the Phase I ESA, a Vapor Encroachment Screen was conducted to determine if a vapor encroachment condition exists, based on the information obtained during the Phase I ESA.

More details regarding the above methodology and procedures are described in other sections of this report.

USER PROVIDED INFORMATION
ASTM E1527-13 defines a User as the party seeking to use Practice E1527 to complete an environmental site assessment of the property. A User may include, without limitation, a potential purchaser of property, a potential tenant of property, an owner of property, a lender, or a property manager.

Under ASTM E1527-13 and AAI, specific tasks are assigned to the User that will help identify the possibility of RECs in connection with the property. These tasks do not require the technical expertise of an environmental professional and are generally not performed 5 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
by environmental professionals performing a Phase I ESA. The User may provide the information gathered from these tasks, including the following:
• Any environmental cleanup liens against the property that are filed or recorded under federal, tribal, state or local law;
• Any activity and land use limitations (AULs), such as engineering controls, land use restrictions, or institutional controls that are in place at the site and/or have been filed or recorded in a registry under federal, tribal, state, or local law; • Specialized knowledge or experience (that is material to RECs in connection with the property) of the User related to the property or nearby properties (for example, is the User involved in the same line of business as the current or former occupants of the property or an adjoining property so that the User would have specialized knowledge of the chemicals and processes used by this type of business); • Relationship of the purchase price to the fair market value of the property if it were not contaminated (reason for significantly lower purchase price, such as contamination is known or believed to be present at the property); • Commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information about the property that would help the environmental professional to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases (such as the past uses of the property, specific chemicals that are present or once were present at the property, spills or other chemical releases that have taken place at the property, and any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the property);
• Any obvious indicators that point to the presence or likely presence of contamination at the property, based on the knowledge and experience of the User related to the property; and
• Other information, including the reason why the Phase I ESA is required and/or is being performed, the type of property and type of property transaction (sale, purchase, exchange, etc.), the complete and correct address for the property, the scope of services desired for the Phase I ESA, identification of all parties who will rely on the Phase I ESA report, identification of the site contact and how the contact can be reached, any special terms and conditions which must be agreed upon by the environmental professional, and any other knowledge or experience with the property that may be pertinent to the environmental professional (for example, copies of any available prior environmental site assessment reports, documents, correspondence, etc., concerning the property and its environmental condition). 6 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
A User Questionnaire was completed by a representative of the current owner of the subject site. The completed questionnaire indicates there are no environmental liens or AULs recorded or filed for the subject site, there are no indicators of any contaminants, and the purpose for conducting this assessment is the prospective purchase of the subject site (vacant land) by the City of Calimesa. The Billy W. Simmons Family Trust, the current owner of the subject site, and City of Calimesa, are identified as the parties who will rely on this report. A copy of the completed User Questionnaire is provided in Appendix A.

Another User, the client, provided us with a map showing thirty (30) infiltration or percolation test locations across the subject site. The infiltration test locations are indicated to be 20 feet deep and the percolation test locations are indicated to be 40 feet deep.

Details regarding these test locations, as observed in the field, are discussed in the SITE RECONNAISSANCE section of this Phase I ESA report.

Environmental Cleanup Liens and Activity and Use Limitations Under AAI and ASTM E1527-13, a search for environmental cleanup liens and AULs must be conducted, typically by the User. The subject site, whose researched historical use has been agricultural (including grove and dry farm land), vacant land, and/or single-family residential, did not appear in the state and/or federal liens, deed, or activity/use limitation databases in The Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Radius Map™ Report with Geocheck® (Appendix H), and no records on file with the County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health (CRDEH) were found for the subject site, which indicate there are no environmental cleanup liens or AULs associated with the subject site.

PHYSICAL SETTING
Topography
The subject site is situated at elevations ranging from approximately 2,472 to 2,485 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The topography is relatively planar with an overall fall in a westerly direction. The area in/near the northwest corner of the subject site appears to be situated a couple of feet higher than the surrounding ground surface.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
it meets the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province. The Peninsular Ranges include a series of small, northwest-trending mountains, separated by wide flat valleys, that extend from the Los Angeles region southeastward into Baja, California. The northern margin of this province butts up against a series of mountain ranges that lie in a transverse direction to the normal northwestern trend, or extend east and west. These mountains include the Santa Monica Mountains, the San Gabriel Mountains, and the San Bernardino Mountains that lie just north and east of the City of Calimesa. In the Calimesa locality, these two major provinces are termed the Peninsular Ranges Block to the south and the San Bernardino Mountains Block to the north, and are separated by a series of complex faults known collectively as the San Andreas Fault Zone. In this tectonically complex area, the Peninsular Ranges Block is generally sliding to the northwest, and partially thrusted underneath the San Bernardino Mountains Block. Therefore, the resulting faults end up with a complex mix of strike slip and thrust faults.

The San Andreas fault, which lies approximately 5.3 miles to the northeast, acts as the boundary between the Peninsular and Transverse Ranges provinces. The next largest active fault in the region, in terms of total movement and anticipated magnitudes, is the San Jacinto fault which lies approximately 5.8 miles to the southwest. This fault has similar motions to the San Andreas or right lateral strike slip.

While the trend of the San Andreas fault is predominately a relatively straight line across much of California, in the area just north of Indio, the San Andreas fault has an approximately 15-mile wide step-over zone, stepping to the west and cutting across the San Gorgonio Pass, then up to the eastern end of the City of Yucaipa. Beyond this to the northwest, the trend of the fault once again resumes a northwesterly course. This twisting motion has results in a complex tectonic setting in the region between the San Andreas and the San Jacinto faults, which is not as yet completely understood. However, in general, the result of this geometry is that along the San Gorgonio Pass and up into the Yucaipa region, the motion changes from right lateral strike slip to thrusting. Within the Calimesa-Yucaipa region, this complex motion has resulted in several types of motions, extension with tectonic activity, including essentially all types of fault motions, from right lateral strike slip, or horizontal, to thrusting and normal, or tensional faulting along a numerous series of smaller fault splays. One of the largest of these smaller splays is the Banning fault, lying along the base of the San Bernardino Mountains and situated approximately 1,600 feet to the southwest of the site. This fault appears to be the dominate thrust in the western end of the pass, joining the San Gorgonio Pass Fault Zone to the east with the motion changing to strike slip.
8 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Therefore, the topography of the land in this region has been drastically altered by differing tectonic forces, which have resulted in the uplifting of the region east of the subject site.

The bedrock materials underlying the region of the small hills to the east of Calimesa are composed of a complex mix of metamorphic rocks of gneiss, schist, phyllite, and meta-igneous rocks of meta-diorite to meta-granotoid rocks. These rocks are very similar in composition to the basement rocks of the far southeastern end of the San Bernardino Mountains Block.

The subject site has been mapped by the United States Geological Survey as being underlain by old (late to middle Pleistocene) axial-valley deposits, described as moderately to well consolidated silt, sand, and gravel (Matti et al., 2003).

Hydrogeology
The subject site is located near the south side of the central portion of the Yucaipa Subbasin which is situated within the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin.

The Yucaipa Subbasin underlies the southeast part of San Bernardino Valley. It is bounded on the north by the San Andreas fault, on the west by the Redlands fault and the Crafton Hills, on the south by the Banning fault, and on the east by the Yucaipa Hills. This part of the San Bernardino Valley is drained by Oak Glen, Wilson, and Yucaipa Creeks south and west into San Timoteo Wash, a tributary to the Santa Ana River.

Groundwater within the Yucaipa Subbasin is found chiefly in alluvium, with lesser quantities in the San Timoteo Formation and fractured bedrock beneath the alluvium.

Alluvial deposits in the subbasin are divided into older and younger units. The Holocene age younger alluvium consists of unconsolidated boulders, gravel, sand, silt, and clay.

This unit forms a thin veneer and is mostly above the water table. The middle to late Pleistocene age older alluvium consists of boulders, gravel, sand, silt, and clay, and holds the primary source of groundwater in the subbasin. Clays present in this section are due to weathering and soil formation during accumulation of the deposits.

Several structures disrupt groundwater flow in the subbasin. The Chicken Hill fault, Yucaipa barrier, Casa Blanca barrier, and Gateway barrier all restrict groundwater movement, trend northeasterly, and were formed in response to differential movements along the San Andreas and Banning faults. These structures displace water levels as much as 160 feet across them. The Oak Glen fault and the South Mesa barrier trend northwesterly, and are the result of sympathetic movement related to the San Andreas and Banning faults. These structures displace water levels as much as 120 feet across them. 9 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
The Redlands and Crafton faults have displacements of groundwater levels, which indicate that they are partial barriers to groundwater flow. In the western part of the subbasin, northeast-dipping beds of the San Timoteo Formation form barriers that cause groundwater to rise to the surface.

Water level records in most parts of the subbasin show relatively small seasonal fluctuations and a steady decline from 1918 through 1933, without significant recovery during the following wet years. Increased pumping and reduced recharge caused by below-normal precipitation resulted in an increased rate of water level decline of 10 to 20 feet per year beginning in 1945. This rate of decline continued into the early 1960s then was reduced to 5 to 10 feet per year in 1969.

The water table in the Yucaipa Subbasin slopes steeply from the San Andreas fault through a narrow gap to Yucaipa, then flattens southwest of Yucaipa. At Live Oak Creek and other ravines in the north, the water table reaches the surface. Fluctuations in water levels were usually around 5 to 10 feet annually. In 2004, the subbasin was in an overdraft state; however, water levels were at or near historic highs. Groundwater within the subbasin is typically reached between 200 to 280 feet below the surface.

Groundwater flow is generally from areas of recharge in the north and east along the edges the San Bernardino Mountains and the Crafton and Yucaipa Hills, towards the Bunker Hill Subbasin on the southwest and west (California Department of Water Resources, 2004).

Local water level measurements were researched at the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) online Water Data Library (California DWR, 2019). The closest well found in this search, State Well No. 02S02W12M001S, is located approximately 0.5 mile north-northwest of the subject site. This well has groundwater level measurements from December 1926 to June 1998 ranging from approximately 206 to 336 feet below the ground surface (bgs). The reference elevation for this well at 2,477.26 feet amsl is within the range of ground surface elevations of the subject site, suggesting the groundwater beneath the subject site may be at similar levels. A second well, State Well No. 02S02W14J002S, is located approximately 0.7 mile southwest of the subject site. This well has groundwater level measurements from June 1998 to October 2010 ranging from approximately 155 to 159 feet bgs. The reference elevation for this well at 2,420.80 feet amsl is approximately 50 feet lower than the range of ground surface elevations for the subject site, which if added to the reported groundwater levels, would suggest a range of groundwater levels around 200 feet bgs at the subject site. 10 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Based on the researched groundwater levels, groundwater beneath the subject site is estimated to be around 200 feet bgs or deeper.

The local groundwater flow direction is estimated in a westerly direction, coincident with the fall in local ground surface topography and flow of the adjacent Calimesa Channel and local Yucaipa Creek.

HISTORY OF SITE USAGE
To obtain a history of previous site usage, a search was conducted for available historical Sanborn Fire Insurance and topographic maps, aerial photographs, County Assessor’s parcel information, county building records, and city directory information.

Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps
No coverage of Sanborn Fire Insurance maps was available for the subject site.

The Certified Sanborn® Map Report from EDR is provided in Appendix B.

Historical Topographic Maps
Historical topographic maps of the quadrangle that includes the subject site and/or adjoining quadrangle, at a scale of approximately 1"=2,200', provided by EDR from 1899, 1901, 1942, 1943, 1953/1954, 1954, 1967, 1973, 1979/1980, 1988, 1996, and 2012, were reviewed. The historical EDR topographic maps are provided in Appendix C.

The early map images, 1899 and 1901, are essentially the same, from large scale maps (likely 1:62,500 or larger). Coverage of these maps ends approximately 550 feet south of the subject site. These map images show the subject site as vacant land, immediately surrounded by vacant land. The Riverside-San Bernardino County Line is shown over 100 feet north of the subject site. Yucaipa Creek is shown approximately 0.7 mile to the north.

The 1942 and 1943 maps, likely from maps at a scale of 1:24,000 or 1:62,500, show map coverage offsite to the south, over 800 feet from the subject site. These maps are essentially the same. The areas shown include agricultural groves, residential-sized structures, a couple of apparent small ponds, retention basins, or reservoirs, drainage features, paved and dirt roads, and vacant land.
11 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
The map images from 1953/1954 and 1954, likely from maps at a scale of 1:24,000 or 1:62,500, show the subject site as vacant land. The present day roads near the subject site, West County Line Road and 3rd Street have been built, along which are numerous residence-sized buildings, some of which are on properties adjacent to the northwest, north, northeast, east, and southeast of the subject site. The Calimesa Channel is shown along the south side of the subject site. Agricultural groves are shown in the area with none at the subject site. The 1953/1954 map shows agricultural grove to the west of the north portion of the subject site.

The map images from 1967, 1973, and 1979/1980 are largely the same, likely from maps at a scale of 1:24,000, and show the subject site and surrounding properties largely the same as on the 1953/1954 and 1954 map images. Additional residence-sized buildings are shown to the south beyond the Calimesa Channel. No agricultural groves are shown at or adjoining the subject site.

The map images from 1988 and 1996 are essentially the same, likely from maps at a scale of 1:24,000. The coverage shown on the 1988 map image ends approximately 880 feet south of the subject site. The subject site and surrounding properties are largely the same, with the exception being the property adjacent to the west where several residence-sized buildings have been added and three rectangular buildings are shown, likely with associated commercial use.

The map image from 2012 is likely from a map at a scale of 1:24,000. This map image does not show structural features, but includes infrastructure, topography, and surface water features. Based on the additional roads shown near the subject site, additional development has taken place.

Aerial Photograph Review
Digital aerial photographs provided by EDR, from 1938, 1949, 1953, 1959, 1961, 1967, 1975, 1985, 1989, 1990, 1995, 2005, 2009, 2012, and 2016, were reviewed to investigate the past use of the subject site and the surrounding properties. Google Earth Pro computer program (2019) recent (1995 to 2018) and online (Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, 2019) historical digital aerial images were used to enhance our review and/or provide supplementary review. A limited number of stereographic pairs of aerial photographs on file at the County of San Bernardino Flood Control District (CSBFCD), from 1953, 1955, 1959, and 1965, were reviewed to evaluate the east portion of the subject site which appeared in the EDR digital aerial photographs from 1953 and 1959 (and possibly 12 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
1961) to include areas of apparent disturbed soils or piled soils or other materials.

Copies of the historical aerial photographs provided by EDR with the approximate boundaries of the subject site are provided in Appendix D.

A brief summary of the site and surround conditions during the various times, as reflected in the EDR aerial photographs, is given below.

1. Date: June 14, 1938, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' In this early aerial photo image, the northern approximate one-third of the subject site is largely vacant land, with a smaller square structure, roughly 15 feet wide and long, located along the east subject site boundary, just south of the northeast subject site corner.

The central and southern portions of the subject site (approximate lower two-thirds) is largely comprised of what appear to be younger agricultural grove trees, which extend offsite to the east. Adjacent to the east and northeast, near the northeast corner of the subject site, are a residence (situated near the southwest corner of the intersection at West County Line Road and 3rd Street) and associated apparent outbuildings, including the one along the east subject site boundary. The Calimesa Channel is a natural drainage feature bordering to the south of the subject site. To the south beyond this drainage feature is vacant land and a relatively mature agricultural grove among which are a residence and associated structures. Adjacent to the west are three types and/or ages of agricultural grove trees, with the youngest in the south end, which appear recently planted. Adjacent to the north of the subject site is vacant land. West County Line Road is a small, unimproved, 2-lane, asphalt-paved road approximately 150 feet north of the subject site, as is 3rd Street approximately 160 feet to the east.

2. Date: May 23, 1949, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The agricultural grove has been removed from the subject site. Most of the subject site includes what appears to be natural vegetation that is being maintained by mowing or discing, or is possibly fallow dry farm land. In and near the southwest subject site corner is vacant, unkept land, and along the south side of the subject site in the central and east portions, vegetation has been cleared for the most part with a dirt road leading into the east side near the southeast site corner. Three single-family residences have been added near/along West County Line Road, north of the subject site. Just northwest of the subject site, along the south side of West County Line Road, the present day single-family residence and associated detached garage have been added. Just northeast of the 13 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
southeast corner of the subject site, a single-family residence has been added. South of Calimesa Channel, the agricultural grove is gone, with additional structures present, possibly including residences, and two smaller agricultural groves in rectangular areas.

West County Line Road has been widened, but still appears to be an unimproved, 2-lane road.

3. Date: February 16, 1953, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site is largely dryland farmed, with an apparent rectangular structure in the southeast corner along the south side of a dirt road, both of which appear to be associated with an offsite residence and detached garage on the adjacent property to the east.

Near this rectangular structure and extending through most of the approximate east one-third of the subject site is natural vegetative growth, numerous smaller objects and possibly small piles of materials or disturbed soils, and some dirt drives or roads. The 1955 CSBFCD aerial photographs show this area extended westward, filling in most of the east portion of the subject site. This area with natural vegetation extends offsite to the east, ending on the west side of 3rd Street. A couple of single-family residences appear to have been built east of the subject site. Approximately 80 feet west of the subject site, a single-family residence and two longer, rectangular buildings are now present. To the east, 3 rd Street has been widened, but still appears to be an unimproved, 2-lane road.

4. Date: October 16, 1959, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The area of the subject site previously shown with smaller objects, natural vegetation, dirt drives/roads, and small piles of materials or disturbed soils is now limited to an area approximately 150 feet wide by 150 feet long. The rectangular structure in the southeast corner of the subject site appears absent with a concrete slab foundation apparently remaining. The rest of the subject site appears to be either dry farm land or mowed, natural, dry vegetation. A single-family residence has been added to the east of the subject site. Around half a dozen single-family residences have been added to the south beyond the Calimesa Channel. Among the mature grove offsite to the west, additional longer, rectangular structures have been added, along with a few residences and associated structures. The younger grove in/towards the south end of the subject site is gone.

5. Date: July 8, 1961, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown.

The area approximately 150 feet wide and long previously shown in the northeast corner 14 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
of the subject site appears to be cleared of the objects and piles, but it is difficult to discern due to the exposure of the digital aerial photograph. The review of the CSBFCD 1965 aerial photographs suggest this area has been leveled with no piles or disturbed soils remaining, with natural vegetation growing and remnant lighter colored objects that may be larger rocks or pieces of concrete.

6. Date: May 9, 1967, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site appears essentially the same as shown in the CSBFCD 1965 aerial photograph, and is vacant land with essentially natural vegetation. The concrete slab foundation in the southeast corner of the subject site appears absent. The EDR 1967 digital aerial photograph continues to show what appear to be remnant smaller objects near the northeast corner of the subject site. The surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown, except adjacent to the west of the south portion of the subject site appear to be at least five adjacent long, rectangular structures, suggesting a commercial usage such as landscape nursery or poultry ranch. Also, at least two single-family residences have been added south of the Calimesa Channel.

7. Date: August 1, 1975, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' This digital infrared photo image is of somewhat poor quality. However, the subject site and surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown. The square structure near the northeast corner along the east subject site boundary is absent. The present day 7 Eleven building is evident at least approximately 80 feet east of the northeast subject site corner, replacing the residence previously situated at its location. At the north end of the offsite 7 Eleven property, over 150 feet away, there may be a canopy structure associated with a fueling (gasoline) station. The Calimesa Channel has been artificially channelized and concrete lined bordering to the south, extending east-northeast and westerly beyond the subject site.

8. Date: September 2, 1985, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' This digital infrared photo image is of somewhat poor quality. However, the subject site and surrounding properties appear essentially the same as previously shown, with a couple of residential outbuildings or structures added adjacent to the east near the southeast corner of the subject site. The remnant light colored objects near the northeast corner of the subject site, possibly including large rocks and pieces of concrete, are no longer evident. 15 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

9. Date: August 14, 1989, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear essentially the same as previously shown. A single-family residence was added to the south beyond the Calimesa Channel.

Over 180 feet to the north, on the north side of West County Line Road, the present day retail center (“Town Center”) and self car wash (“Auto Spa”) have been constructed.

10. Date: August 29, 1990, Source: EDR (USDA), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown.

The two single-family residences north of the east portion of the subject site have been removed. Two single-family residences have been added on the property adjacent to the east of the central portion of the subject site.

11. Date: October 2, 1995, Source: EDR (USGS/DOQQ), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown.

Onsite, along the north boundary, just east of the northwest corner, is a lighter colored object, possibly a vehicle of some kind. A dirt road appears to have been worn from the location of this possible vehicle up to West County Line Road. The long, rectangular structures adjacent to the west of the south portion of the subject site appear to have significant tree or other vegetation growth present, suggesting partial removal of these structures. Offsite to the southwest across the Calimesa Channel, a new tract of single-family residences have been built.

12. Date: 2005, Source: EDR (USDA/NAIP), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear essentially the same as previously shown. The vehicle previously shown onsite and apparent associated dirt road up to County Line Road are absent. The offsite rectangular structures adjacent to the west of the south portion of the subject site are likely mostly destructed.

13. Date: 2009, Source: EDR (USDA/NAIP), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear essentially the same as previously shown.
16 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

14. Date: 2012, Source: EDR (USDA/NAIP), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear largely the same as previously shown.

The single-family residence north of and near the northwest corner of the subject site appears to be gone.

15. Date: 2016, Source: EDR (USDA/NAIP), Approximate Scale: 1"=500' The subject site and surrounding properties appear essentially the same as previously shown. The light coloring which indicated the long, rectangular structures offsite to the west of the south portion of the subject site appears completely absent.

The Google Earth Pro aerial images from 2016 to 2018 show the subject site and the surrounding area essentially the same as in the EDR 2016 digital aerial photograph.

County Assessor’s Parcel and Ownership Information
The subject site is comprised of approximately 4.6 acres which includes portions of APNs 410-030-049 through -052. These parcels comprise a total of 5.98 acres. These parcels have no associated addresses and are indicated to be vacant land (Parcel Quest Lite, 2019). The current owner of the subject site is the Billy W. Simmons Family Trust.

A copy of the Assessor’s Parcel Map is presented on Figure 3 with the approximate boundaries of the subject site.

County Building Records
A records request was submitted online to the County of Riverside Building and Safety Department for any historical building records that may be associated with APNs 410-030-049 through -052, portions of which comprise the subject site. A response was received by telephone on November 5, 2019. An address at 345 County Line Road was stated to be associated with all four of these APNs. The only building records available included a permit and re-inspections related to a solar hot water system.

City Directory Information
Historical EDR city directory information (image report) was requested for the nearby streets to the subject site, West County Line Road and 3rd Street. 17 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
The available listings are from 1971 to 2014. The EDR-City Directory Image Report is provided in Appendix E.

Listings for 3rd Street are mostly residential, but include some commercial listings, including telecommunications, tire service, floor covering, contracting, notary, pool plastering, golf course, and welding services.

Listings for West County Line Road include a mix of residential and commercial listings.

The commercial listings include printing, real estate/realtors, insurance, shoe repair, medical offices, food establishments, auto repair garage, convenience store (7 Eleven), construction, water district, auto machine shop, auto smog testing, law office, electric contractor, and plant nursery.

SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Site reconnaissance was conducted on October 24, 2019. To orient our site reconnaissance, a copy of a recent color aerial photograph (Google Earth aerial image) was obtained for our use. This recent color aerial photograph with approximate site boundaries is presented on Figure 4.

The subject site is approximately 4.6 acres of trapezoid-shaped, vacant land. Along the east and west boundaries are wood and metal fencing of various heights up to approximately 6 feet, associated with the offsite, adjacent properties. Along the south subject site boundary is an approximate 6-foot high metal chain-link fence, associated with the offsite, adjacent Calimesa Channel. Vegetation across the subject site is mostly dry to green weeds, light to dense. A couple of small volunteer trees are present, along with bamboo in the southwest corner of the site. A landscaped tree is present immediately west of the fencing along the east subject site boundary, likely associated with an offsite singlefamily residential property. Cactus was observed along the east boundary growing into the subject site.

Thirty soil test (infiltration and percolation) locations were seen onsite. These locations included open, approximate 8-inch boreholes with approximate 3-inch perforated pipes in them, wooden stakes indicating the boreholes were 20 or 40 feet bgs, and small piles of soil which were presumably excavated during drilling of the boreholes. Some of the perforated pipes had a type of filter fabric covering them. The map provided by the client, a User, as previously discussed under the USER PROVIDED INFORMATION, shows all thirty soil test locations.
18 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
No evidence of utilities were observed onsite, except for a sewer manhole cover indicated to belong to Yucaipa Valley Water District (YVWD). This sewer manhole cover is situated within a concrete pad approximately 5 feet wide and long. A crash post is located near the southeast corner of this concrete pad which is situated in/near the southwest corner of the subject site. The alignment for the underground sewer line associated with the YVWD sewer manhole cover is not apparent.

Relatively small amounts of illegally dumped trash and debris are present, including plastic, concrete, glass, wood, tires (a few), clothes, ceramic tiles, cardboard, and metal.

In/near the northwest corner of the subject site is debris, including rock, concrete, and wood, that appears to be related to the demolition of the offsite, nearby former single-family residence to the north. This area of the site appears to be situated a couple of feet higher than the surrounding ground surface, and may include disturbed soils associated with the demolition of the former nearby residence.

No containers with hazardous materials or wastes and no signs of obviously contaminated soils were observed, except for a very small amount of apparent oil-stained soil at the southwesternmost soil test percolation location (I-11).

Adjoining Properties
The subject site is bordered to the north by vacant land similar to the subject site. Past this vacant land is West County Line Road, a partially improved, asphalt-paved, 3-lane (two travel lanes and one turn lane) road, beyond which are commercial properties that include a self car wash, a dentist, an optometrist, property management, restaurants, realtors, a liquor store, insurance companies, and a medical group. Adjacent to the east and west of the subject site are single-family residential properties. The adjacent residential property to the west includes old structures that suggest a commercial use such as landscape nursery or agricultural-related use; however, these uses appear to have ended years ago.

An apparent sealed/closed, blue, steel 55-gallon drum is located approximately 10 feet west of the subject site. This drum is slightly rusted, but appears intact with no signs of leakage. Beyond the northeast corner of the subject site to the east is vacant land, beyond which is a 7 Eleven convenience store, approximately 90 feet from the subject site.

Border to the south of the subject site is the Calimesa Channel, a concrete-lined, trapezoidal ditch, flood control channel. Beyond this channel are single-family residential properties.
19 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Color photographs of the subject site and adjoining properties are provided in Appendix F.

REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW
For records relating to environmental compliance and hazardous materials/waste within the County of Riverside, the CRDEH generally is the lead agency. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (CRWQCB-SAR) or CRDEH may be the lead agency for soil and/or groundwater investigations and remediation. These agencies were contacted, directly or online, for records they may have for the subject site and/or nearby properties.

County of Riverside Department of Environmental Health
Requests to review records for the subject site, and possibly adjoining properties, utilizing address ranges along West County Line Road and 3rd Street, were emailed to the CRDEH on October 23, 2019. In letters dated November 5, 2018, the CRDEH indicated that records were found. These electronic records were provided by email on November 13, 2019. The records provided are for 7 Eleven at 301 West County Line Road, located approximately 90 feet east of the subject site, and McDaniel’s Garage at 367 West County Line Road, located approximately 140 feet west of the subject site. Copies of the CRDEH records response letters are provided in Appendix G.

The records for 7 Eleven at 301 West County Line Road include hazardous materials disclosure related to carbon dioxide and propane. Notices to Comply or Notices of Violation were documented, including Hazardous Materials Business Plan not available onsite, failure to establish and implement a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, no employee hazardous materials handler training documented, failure to obtain hazardous materials permit, and failure to have safety data sheets available.

A CRDEH letter, dated November 3, 1998, indicates the CRDEH had no records regarding the former USTs located at the 7 Eleven site. It was believed, though not confirmed, that the USTs were removed prior to the start of the CRDEH Hazardous Materials Management Division in late 1985. It was also believed that subsurface contamination as a result of a release of motor vehicle fuel was nonexistent or not significant in extent. It was acknowledged there was a possibility that records had been lost.

The records for McDaniel’s Garage range from May 1989 to February 1995, and primarily involve hazardous waste generation of waste oil related to automotive maintenance, 20 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
including permits and inspections. Around 6 gallons or less of waste oil were generated per month. Noted violations include lack of hazardous waste container labeling and keeping hazardous waste manifests or receipts for at least 3 years. In 1993, complaints were made about waste oil disposal to the ground, to which the CRDEH responded. The operation was noted to be a non-generator of hazardous waste in February 1995.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Santa Ana Region The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains the online GeoTracker database, which includes CRWQCB-SAR records for: 1) cleanup sites, including leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, cleanup program sites, military cleanup sites, and California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) cleanup sites; 2) permitted facilities, including waste discharge requirements sites, permitted USTs, DTSC hazardous waste sites, land disposal sites, irrigated lands regulatory program sites, and oil/gas sites; and 3) other sites, including project sites, non-case information sites, sampling points - public, and field points. This database was searched for records that may pertain to the subject site, and none were found. The closest identified site to the subject site is Frontier California, Inc. at 1010 Calimesa Boulevard, located approximately

0.65 mile west-southwest of the subject site. This site is a permitted UST site with no reported release (California State Water Resources Control Board, 2019). Based on the distance away, this UST site and other listed sites should have no adverse environmental impact to the subject site.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATABASE REVIEW
EDR was contacted to provide an environmental database search for the subject site.

The database search provides information regarding landfills, USTs, hazardous waste generators, etc., at the subject site and surrounding properties in accordance with ASTM Standards and AAI. Four sites, not including the subject site, were found in EDR’s search of available government records within the respective search radii. A copy of the EDR database report, which provides a complete list of the federal, state, tribal, and proprietary records searched, is provided in Appendix H.

HIST UST
The California SWRCB maintains the Historical UST (HIST UST) list which contains active and inactive underground storage tank locations. This database lists one site, 7-Eleven Store 13980 (2131), located at 301 (West) County Line Road, approximately 85 feet east 21 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
of the subject site. This facility is listed with two USTs, two 10,000-gallon gasoline (unleaded and regular) tanks. Based on the distance away and lack of reported release, the listed HIST UST site is not anticipated to have an adverse environmental impact to the subject site.

RCRA-NonGen
RCRAInfo is USEPA’s comprehensive information system that includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by RCRA. Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste.

One site, Calimesa Dental at 34636 County Line Road, Suite 19, over 200 feet north of the subject site, is listed in this database. The listed RCRA-NonGen has no reported violations.

Based on the distance away and lack of reported violations, the listed RCRA-NonGen site should not have an adverse environmental impact to the subject site.

San Bernardino County Permit
This database, maintained by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division, includes underground storage tanks, medical waste handlers/generators, hazardous materials handlers, hazardous waste generators, and waste oil generators/handlers. One site, Casa Trejo at 34636 County Line Road, over 200 feet north of the subject site, is listed in this database. This site is listed for bulk carbon dioxide at a retail food facility, with a permit that last expired on May 31, 2010. The listed county permit site should have no adverse environmental impact to the subject site based on the nature of the permitting.

CA Notify 65
This database, no longer updated, includes listings of all Proposition 65 incidents reported to counties by the SWRCB and the RWQCB. One site, ARCO #83180 at 1216 Calimesa Boulevard, located over 0.7 mile southwest of the subject site, is listed in the CA Notify 65 database. No pertinent information is listed. Based on the distance from the subject site and regulatory oversight, this Notify 65 site should have no adverse environmental impact to the subject site.
22 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Orphan Summary
The Orphan Summary within the EDR database report, which is a list of all sites whose location is not readily identified (mapped), and may be near the subject site, was reviewed.

There are no sites listed in the Orphan Summary on or adjoining the subject site.

Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources
The California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) maintains a list of all producing and abandoned oil and gas wells within the State of California. The online DOGGR Well Finder was reviewed, which indicates no abandoned or producing gas and/or oil wells have been located within one mile of the subject site (DOGGR, 2019).

VAPOR ENCROACHMENT EVALUATION
As part of this Phase I ESA, a VES was conducted to determine if a VEC exists, based on the information obtained during the Phase I ESA. A VEC is the presence or likely presence of chemicals of concern (COC) vapors in the subsurface of the target property caused by the release of vapors from contaminated soil or groundwater either on or near the target property (i.e., subject site).

Vapor Encroachment Screen
A VES, comprised of Tier 1 and 2 (non-invasive) screening, was conducted by this firm for the subject site. The VES was conducted in general accordance with the Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions, ASTM E2600-15. Although not required to satisfy the requirements of the Phase I ESA under ASTM E1527-13, ASTM E2600-15 was chosen as a methodology to evaluate potential contaminant vapor concerns at or adjoining the subject site.

The subject site use has historically been agricultural grove, vacant land, and residential use. The subject site is located in a mixed residential and light commercial area. Based on past geotechnical investigation by this firm in the local area, the subject site and surrounding area are anticipated to be largely underlain by interbedded silty sands and sandy clays with occasional layers or lenses of clayey sands, sandy silts, and well-graded sands. Based on the local geology and hydrogeology, groundwater beneath the subject site, anticipated to be greater than 200 feet bgs, is not considered a potential source of contaminant vapor into the subject site.
23 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Based on the results of Tier 1 screening, utilizing The EDR Radius Map™ Report with GeoCheck® and research of the history of the subject site and adjoining properties, the historical 10,000-gallon gasoline USTs at the 7-Eleven approximately 85 feet east of the subject site are the only site within 0.33 mile with current and/or former potential sources of soil vapor intrusion or encroachment. Based on the results of the VES, Tier 1 screening, a VEC at the subject site cannot be ruled out. However, based on Tier 2 screening, the location of the historical USTs, which have no reported release(s), are over 100 feet from the subject site, and therefore, a VEC can be ruled out.

DATA GAPS
Under AAI and ASTM E1527-13, data gaps that remain after the conduct of all required activities must be identified. The source of information consulted to address the data gaps should be identified, and the significance of the data gaps with respect to our ability to identify conditions indicative of releases or threatened release of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the property should be addressed.

No interview was conducted with the current owner of the subject site. However, based on the historical usage of the subject site which has been predominantly vacant land, there are no significant data gaps remaining after our conduct of AAI and ASTM E1527-13.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No drums, buckets, or other containers, which might pose an adverse environmental impact to the subject site, were observed. No soil staining, chemical odor, or other signs of obvious soil contamination were noted, except for very minor oil-stained soil which is a de minimis condition.

We have performed this Phase I ESA in conformance with ASTM E1527-13 and AAI set forth in 40 CFR Part 312 for 4.6± acres of vacant land located near the southwest corner of the intersection at West County Line Road and 3rd Street in Calimesa, California. 24 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
This Phase I ESA has revealed no evidence of RECs, HRECs, or CRECs indicative of releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the subject site.

However, two potential environmental concerns were noted during our review of historical aerial photographs:
• The presence of agricultural grove in the central and southern portions of the subject site (approximate lower two-thirds) in 1938, gone by 1949. • In the 1950s, within the east portion of the subject site, particularly in the approximate east one-third of the subject site, was natural vegetative growth, numerous smaller objects and possibly small piles of materials or disturbed soils, and some dirt drives or roads. The nature of the activities associated with this portion of the subject site is undetermined. Currently, there is no onsite evidence of these historical activities.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS
We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquires in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

Mr. John Leuer is the President of LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., founded in 1988. As a cofounder and President of the company, Mr. Leuer has managed LOR through hundreds of Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, as well as numerous Phase II Environmental Site Assessments and remediation projects, primarily remedial excavation. Mr. Leuer has over 36 years experience in the geotechnical and environmental fields. Mr. Leuer has substantial experience coordinating projects for many city, county and state agencies, as well as in the public sector, gaining a reputation for being responsive to clients needs while providing strong technical expertise. LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. is one of three firms that previously provided report review for underground storage tank closure for the County of San Bernardino, Fire Department Hazardous Materials Division. 25 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
Mr. Leuer holds a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Cal State University at Northridge. He is a registered Geotechnical and Civil Engineer in the State of California. Mr. Leuer is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Mr. Mathew L. Hunt has over 20 years experience in the environmental field. Mr. Hunt works under LOR Geotechnical Group’s environmental operations and has conducted over 350 Phase I Environmental Site Assessments for the private and public sectors.

The properties have ranged from agricultural to residential to commercial/industrial.

In addition to his experience with environmental assessments for property transfers, he has worked on projects that require mitigation prior to development. Mr. Hunt is well versed in hazardous waste sampling and characterization methodologies in soil and groundwater regimes for groundwater monitoring, site assessment, and site remediation. Projects have ranged from leaking USTs at gasoline stations to commercial and government (including Superfund/CERCLA sites) projects involving metals, perchlorate, and solvents.

Mr. Hunt has a B.S. in soil science from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and a M.S. in soil and water science from the University of California, Riverside.

LIMITATIONS
This report was prepared solely for the use and benefit of LOR’s client, TKE Engieering, Inc., and their designates, including the Billy W. Simmons Family Trust and City of Calimesa. They may release this information to third parties, who may use and rely upon this information at their discretion. However, any use of or reliance upon this information by a party other than TKE Engineering, Inc. and their designates, shall be solely at the risk of such third party and without legal recourse against LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.; its subsidiaries and affiliates; or their respective employees, officers, or directors; regardless of whether the action in which recovery of damages is sought is based upon contract, statute, or otherwise.

The content and conclusions provided by LOR in this assessment are based on information collected during our investigation, which may include, but is not limited to, visual site inspections, interviews with the site owner, regulatory agencies and other pertinent individuals, a review of available public documents, and our professional judgement based on said information at the time of preparation of this document.

Any subsurface samples results and observations presented herein are considered to be representative of the area of investigation; however, soil conditions may vary between sample locations and may not necessarily apply to the general site as a whole. If future 26 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
subsurface or other conditions are revealed which may vary from these findings, the newlyrevealed conditions must be evaluated and may invalidate the conclusions of this report.

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted practices using standards of care and diligence normally practiced by recognized consulting firms performing services of a similar nature. LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (LOR) is not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by other individuals or entities which is used in this report. This report presents our professional judgement based upon data and findings identified in this report, and the interpretation of such data based upon our experience and background, and no warranty, either expressed or implied, is made.

The conclusions presented are based upon the current regulatory climate and may require revision if future regulatory changes occur.

TIME LIMITATIONS
The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards-of-Practice and/or Governmental Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control.

Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a significant amount of time without a review by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. Based on ASTM E1527-13 and AAI, certain components of this report are no longer valid after 180 days of their being performed, including interviews, visual inspection of the subject property and adjoining properties, and review of federal, tribal, state, and local government records. Once this 180-day period has expired, this report should be updated or revised to meet the requirements for continued viability under the ASTM and AAI standards.
27 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019

REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials, 2013, E1527-13: Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, November 1, 2013.

American Society for Testing and Materials, 2015, E2600-15: Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions, October 1, 2015.

California Department of Water Resources, 2004, California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118, Hydrologic Region South Coast, Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin, February 27, 2004 (last update).

California Department of Water Resources, 2019, Online Water Data Library, http://wdl.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/, accessed November 1, 2019.

California Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, 2019, Online Well Finder, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#openModal/-117.03552/34.00230/13, accessed October 24, 2019.

California State Water Resources Control Board, 2019, Online GeoTracker Database, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/, accessed October and November 2019.

Google, Inc., 2019, Google Earth Pro Computer Software Program, Version 7.3.2.5776 (64-bit), March 5, 2019.

Matti, J.C., Morton, D.M., Cox, B.F., Carson, S.E., Yetter, T.J., Cossette, P.M., Jones, Bradley, Wright, M.C., Kennedy, S.A., Dawson, M.L., and Hauser, R.M., 2003, Geologic Map and Digital Database of the Yucaipa 7.5' Quadrangle, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 03-301, Scale 1:24,000.

National Environmental Title Research, LLC, 2019, Online HistoricAerials:
www.historicaerials.com, accessed October and November 2019.

Parcel Quest Lite, 2019, Online Riverside County Property Information Search https://assr.parcelquest.com/Home, accessed October 22, 2019. 29 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

TKE Engineering, Inc. Project No. 63592.2
December 5, 2019
United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2005, 40 CFR Part 312: Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries; Final Rule, November 1, 2005 (Amended 2013).

United States Geological Survey, 2017, Online Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the Un it e d S t a t e s (d o wn lo a d a b le KMZ f ile s f o r Google Earth), https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/kml.php.
30 LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

FIGURES
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Basemap Source: Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Online Lightbox™ N
SITE

INDEX MAP
FIGURE: 1
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

DATE: NOVEMBER 2019
CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC.

PROJECT NO.: 63592.2
SCALE: 1" ~ 1,350'
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

STORM DRAIN AND BASIN PLAN
FIGURE: 2
DATE: NOVEMBER 2019
CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC.

PROJECT NO.: 63592.2
APPROX. SCALE: 1" = 150'
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA Basemap Source: TKE Engineering, Inc.

Approximate Site Boundary
Approximate Site Boundary
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL MAP
FIGURE: 3
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

DATE: NOVEMBER 2019
CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC.

PROJECT NO.: 63592.2
SCALE: 1" ~ 200'
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA Basemap Source: ParcelQuest Lite (https://assr.parcelquest.com/Home) LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc.

RECENT COLOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
FIGURE: 4
DATE: NOVEMBER 2019
CLIENT: TKE ENGINEERING, INC.

PROJECT NO.: 63592.2
APPROX. SCALE: 1" = 285'
PROJECT: CALIMESA CHANNEL BASIN STAGE III, CALIMESA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA Approximate Site Boundary
Aerial Image Source: Google Earth Pro Computer Program (Aerial Image Date: December 2, 2018)

APPENDIX A
Completed ASTM E1527-13 User Questionnaire
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

APPENDIX B
EDR Sanborn Map Report
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III West County Line Road/3rd Street Calimesa, CA 92320 October 24, 2019 5842101.3 Certified Sanborn® Map Report
Certified Sanborn Results:

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
- page
The Sanborn Library includes more than 1.2 million
fire insurance maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris &
Browne, Hopkins, Barlow and others which track
historical property usage in approximately 12,000
American cities and towns. Collections searched:

Library of Congress
University Publications of America
EDR Private Collection
The Sanborn Library LLC Since 1866™
Limited Permission To Make Copies
Sanborn® Library search results
EDR Inquiry # Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:

Certification #
PO #
Project
10/24/19 West County Line Road/3rd Street Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. 6121 Quail Valley Court Calimesa, CA 92320 5842101.3 Riverside, CA 92507 Mathew L. Hunt The Sanborn Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. were identified for the years listed below. The Sanborn Library is the largest, most complete collection of fire insurance maps. The collection includes maps from Sanborn, Bromley, Perris & Browne, Hopkins, Barlow, and others. Only Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is authorized to grant rights for commercial reproduction of maps by the Sanborn Library LLC, the copyright holder for the collection.

Results can be authenticated by visiting www.edrnet.com/sanborn.

The Sanborn Library is continually enhanced with newly identified map archives. This report accesses all maps in the collection as of the day this report was generated. 686F-4855-A696 63592.2 UNMAPPED PROPERTY Calimesa Channel Basin Stage 3 This report certifies that the complete holdings of the Sanborn Library, LLC collection have been searched based on client supplied target property information, and fire insurance maps covering the target property were not found.

Certification #: 686F-4855-A696
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (the client) is permitted to make up to FIVE photocopies of this Sanborn Map transmittal and each fire insurance map accompanying this report solely for the limited use of its customer. No one other than the client is authorized to make copies. Upon request made directly to an EDR Account Executive, the client may be permitted to make a limited number of additional photocopies. This permission is conditioned upon compliance by the client, its customer and their agents with EDR's copyright policy; a copy of which is available upon request.

This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE,

WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any property.

Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

APPENDIX C
EDR Historical Topographic Map Report
LOR GEOTECHNICAL GROUP, INC.

EDR Historical Topo Map Report
Inquiry Number:
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com
with QuadMatch™
Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III West County Line Road/3rd Street Calimesa, CA 92320 October 24, 2019 5842101.4 EDR Historical Topo Map Report
EDR Inquiry #
Search Results:

P.O.#
Project:

Maps Provided:

Latitude:

Longitude:

UTM Zone:

UTM X Meters:

UTM Y Meters:

Elevation:

Contact:

Site Name: Client Name:
2012
1996
1988
1979, 1980
1973
1967
1954
1953, 1954
1943
1942
1901
1899
10/24/19 Calimesa Channel Basin Stage III LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. West County Line Road/3rd Street 6121 Quail Valley Court Calimesa, CA 92320 Riverside, CA 92507 5842101.4 Mathew L. Hunt EDR Topographic Map Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. were identified for the years listed below. EDR’s Historical Topo Map Report is designed to assist professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topo Map Report includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the late 1800s.
63592.2 34.003241 34° 0' 12" North Calimesa Channel Basin Stage 3 -117.048871 -117° 2' 56" West Zone 11 North 495487.04 3762516.41 2478.19' above sea level This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY

Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice.

Copyright 2019 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 5842101 4 2 page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
2012 Source Sheets
2012
El Casco

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
1996 Source Sheets
1996
El Casco

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1996
1996
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1994
1988 Source Sheets
1988
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1985
1979, 1980 Source Sheets
1979
El Casco

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1976
1980
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1978
5842101 4 3
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1973 Source Sheets
1973
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1973
1967 Source Sheets
1967
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1966
1967
El Casco

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1966
1954 Source Sheets
1954
Redlands
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1952
1953, 1954 Source Sheets
1953
El Casco

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1951
1954
Yucaipa

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1952
5842101 4 4
page
Topo Sheet Key
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets. -
1943 Source Sheets
1943
PERRIS
15-minute, 62500
1942 Source Sheets
1942
Perris
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1939
1901 Source Sheets
1901
Redlands
15-minute, 62500
1899 Source Sheets
1899
Redlands
15-minute, 62500
5842101 4 5
Historical Topo Map
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT: