3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-16
in the 2013 Clean Air Plan. The 2016 Ozone plan also moved two stationary source control measures that were previously listed as “further study” measures to proposed control measures. One control measure that was scheduled for adoption in the 2013 Clean Air Plan had been moved to the “further study” list. Finally, the 2016 Ozone Plan continued to pursue programs that will achieve near-term NOx reductions in the marine shipping sector (SBCAPCD 2016).
The most recent update is the 2019 Ozone Plan, which builds upon the 2016 Ozone Plan. This 2019 Plan addresses the state ozone standards only. This is because the District is designated “attainment” for the federal 8-hour ozone standard of 0.070 ppm, which was promulgated by the U.S. EPA in December 2015. The federal attainment designation for Santa Barbara County was finalized in April 2018. Each plan update includes an evaluation of feasible reduction measures for stationary sources and considers numerous factors such as technology advancements, efficiency measures, cost-effectiveness, and the successful implementation of measures at other California air districts. All of the control measures that were found to be feasible in prior plan updates have been implemented, and any additional measures that could be proposed yield relatively smaller emission reductions with higher associated costs. The 2019 Plan still carries forward the contingency measures and some of the “further study” measures from the 2016 Plan. There is a discussion on how the Assembly Bill 617 Rule Development Schedule interacts with the 2019 Plan (SBCAPCD 2019).
The Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) is responsible for the development and analysis of the 2013 Clean Air Plan’s on-road mobile source emission estimates and Transportation Control Measures (TCMs).
SBCAG also provides the SBCAPCD with socio-economic projections that form the basis for many of the stationary and area source growth forecasts for the 2016 Ozone Plan. The 2016 Ozone Plan relies on the land use and population projections provided in SBCAG’s Regional Growth Forecast. The Regional Growth Forecast is generally consistent with the local plans; therefore, the 2016 Ozone Plan is generally consistent with local general plans.
SBCAPCD Rules and Regulations
As stated above, the SBCAPCD is responsible for planning, implementing, and enforcing federal and state ambient standards in the SCCAB. The following rules and regulations apply to all sources in the jurisdiction of SBCAPCD, and would apply to the proposed project:
• Rule 302 (Visible Emissions). Rule 302 prohibits emissions of visible air contaminants from any potential source of air contaminants. The rule prohibits air contaminants, other than water vapor, that are a certain level of darkness or opacity from being discharged for a combined period of more than 3 minutes in any 1 hour. • Rule 303 (Nuisance). This rule could apply to fugitive dust emitted during proposed construction activities or odors during operation. This rule states that a person shall not discharge air contaminants from any source that can cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons, or that can endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety, of any such persons or their business or property. • Rule 311 (Sulfur Content of Fuels). The purpose of this rule is to limit the sulfur content in gaseous fuels, diesel and other liquid fuels, and solid fuels for the purpose of both reducing the formation of SOx and particulates during combustion.
• Rule 345 (Control of Fugitive Dust from Construction and Demolition Activities). Rule 345 establishes limits on the generation of visible fugitive dust emissions at demolition and construction sites. The rule includes measures for minimizing fugitive dust from on-site activities and from trucks moving on and off site.
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-17
City of Carpinteria
The City has adopted measures within the Open Space, Recreation & Conservation element of its General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan to protect air quality (City of Carpinteria 2003). The following policies within that element are protective or air quality:
OSC-11a Carefully review development that will significantly impact air quality.
OSC-11b Promote the reduction of mobile source emissions related to vehicular traffic (e.g. promote alternative transportation, vanshare, buses).
OSC-11c Promote use of solar heating and energy efficient building design to reduce stationary source emissions.
OSC-11d Encourage the improvement of air quality in the Carpinteria Valley by implementing measures in the South Coast Air Quality Attainment Plan. For air quality enhancement, measures will include but not be limited to, measures to reduce dependence on the automobile and encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation such as buses, bicycles and walking.
OSC-11e Encourage agricultural uses in the Plan Area to use the most energy efficient equipment available and to seek grants available to upgrade existing equipment such as boilers and diesel fueled machinery to equipment that has lower emissions and greater energy efficiency.
The following implementation policies also apply to air quality:
55 Incorporate the relevant policies and strategies from the Santa Barbara County Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP).
56 Cooperate in regional air quality plans, programs and enforcement measures.
3.2.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to air quality are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to air quality would occur if the project would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-18
3.2.3.1 County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds The County of Santa Barbara Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual (County of Santa Barbara 2020) states that a significant adverse air quality impact may occur when air pollutant emissions associated with a project, individually or cumulatively:
• Interferes with progress toward the attainment of the ozone standard by releasing emissions which equal or exceed the established long-term quantitative thresholds for NOx and ROC; or • Equals or exceeds the state or federal ambient air quality standards for any criteria pollutant (as determined by modeling).
The evaluation of whether a project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan is based on the consistency with land use and population forecasts. Consistency with an applicable air quality plan means that a project’s direct and indirect emissions are accounted for in the air quality plan’s emissions growth assumptions and the project is consistent with the policies developed in the air quality plan (SBCAPCD 2019). The relevant air quality plan to the proposed project is the 2019 Ozone Plan. The 2019 Ozone Plan relies on the land use and population projections provided by the SBCAG and CARB on-road emissions forecast in order to develop vehicle emission forecasts. In addition, the 2019 Ozone Plan utilizes SBCAG’s Regional Growth Forecast to project population growth and associated air pollutant emissions within Santa Barbara County. Residential projects that exceed the amount of forecasted growth for the specific jurisdiction or sub-region would be considered inconsistent with the 2019 Ozone Plan.
The County’s guidance also indicates that cumulative air quality impacts and consistency with the polices and measures in the Air Quality Supplement of the Comprehensive Plan, other general plans, and the Air Quality Attainment Plan should be determined for all projects (i.e., whether the project exceeds the Air Quality Attainment Plan emission projections or growth assumptions). Pursuant to the County’s Threshold Manual, the following issues should also be discussed, but only if they are applicable to the project:
• Emissions which may affect sensitive receptors (e.g. children, elderly, or acutely ill); • Toxic or hazardous air pollutants in amounts which may increase cancer risk for the affected population; or • Odor or another air quality nuisance problem impacting a considerable number of people Chapter 5 of the Santa Barbara County Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual addresses the subject of air quality. The Long-term/Operational Emission Thresholds provide that a proposed project will not have a significant impact on air quality if operation of the project will:
• Emit (from all project sources, mobile and stationary), less than the daily trigger for offsets of any pollutant (Currently 55 pounds per day for NOx and ROC, and 80 pounds for PM10); • Emit less than 25 pounds per day of NOx or reactive organic compounds from motor vehicle trips only; • Not cause or contribute to a violation of California or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (except ozone); • Not exceed the SBCAPCD’s health risk public notification thresholds adopted by the SBCAPCD board; and • Be consistent with the adopted federal and state Air Quality Plans.
As stated in the SBCAPCD’s Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents (SBCAPCD 2017), no quantitative thresholds have been established for short-term impacts associated with construction
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-19
activities. However, the SBCAPCD uses 25 tons per year for ROC or NOx as a guideline for determining the significance of construction impacts. Additionally, the County’s grading ordinance requires standard dust control conditions for all projects involving grading activities. The Long-term/Operational Emission Thresholds listed above have been established to address mobile emissions (i.e., motor vehicle emissions) and stationary source emissions (i.e., station boilers, engines, paints, solvents, and chemical or industrial processing operations that release pollutants) (SBCAPCD 2017).
The County’s Threshold Manual states that a project will have a significant air quality impact if it causes, by adding to the existing background CO levels, a CO “hot spot” where the California one-hour standard of 20 parts per million carbon monoxide is exceeded, which typically occurs at severely congested intersections. The County’s project screening for CO impacts are the following:
1. If a project contributes less than 800 peak hour trips, then CO modeling is not required.
2. Project contributing more than 800 peak hour trips to an existing congested intersection at level of service (LOS) D or below, or will cause an intersection to reach LOS D or below, may be required to model for CO impacts. However, projects that will incorporate intersection modifications to ease traffic congestion, are not required to perform modeling to determine potential CO impacts.
3.2.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? SBCAPCD and the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) are responsible for developing and implementing the Clean Air Plan (SBCAPCD 2019) for attainment and maintenance of the ambient air quality standards in the basin. SBCAPCD further describes consistency with the Clean Air Plan for projects subject to these guidelines, which means that direct and indirect emissions associated with the project are accounted for in the Clean Air Plan’s emissions growth assumptions, and the project is consistent with policies adopted in the Clean Air Plan.
The 2019 Ozone Plan was adopted by the District Board on December 19, 2019 and is the most recent applicable air quality plan. The 2019 Ozone Plan is the 3 -year update required by the state to show how SBCAPCD plans to meet the state 8-hour O3 standard (SBCAPCD 2019). However, after the 2019 Ozone Plan was adopted the County was designated as attainment for the state O3 standards on July 1, 2020.
The 2019 Ozone Plan relies primarily on the land use and population projections provided by SBCAG and CARB on-road emissions forecasts as a basis for vehicle emissions for all County incorporated and unincorporated areas. The project site within the City of Carpinteria has a Carpinteria General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation of Visitor-Serving Commercial (2003) and has been zoned for Resort Zone District use. The portion of the project within the County of Santa Barbara is designated as Other Open Land and Recreation and is zoned Transportation Corridor and Recreation (County of Santa Barbara 2021). The proposed trail is an apt use for the City’s and County’s vision for the properties within each jurisdiction. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project.
If a project proposes development that is greater than that anticipated in the local plan and SBCAG’s growth projections, the project might be in conflict with the 2019 Ozone Plan and may contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality. Based on the nature of the proposed project, implementation of the project would not result in growth-inducing development. As such, the proposed project would not contribute to the projected City of Carpinteria or Santa Barbara County populations as estimated in the Santa Barbara
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-20
County Association of Governments 2040 Regional Transportation Plan-Sustainable Communities Strategy Regional Growth Forecast. Accordingly, the project is considered to be consistent with the APCD 2019 Ozone Plan and impacts to air quality would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Cumulative air quality impacts are the effect of long-term emissions of the proposed project plus any existing emissions at the same location, as well as the effect of long-term emissions of reasonably foreseeable similar projects, on the projected regional air quality or localized air pollution in the County. As discussed in SBCAPCD’s Scope and Content of Air Quality Sections in Environmental Documents (SBCAPCD 2017), the cumulative contribution of project emissions to regional level should be compared with existing programs and plans, including the most recent Clean Air Plan.
Emissions from construction were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2 (CAPCOA 2017). For the purposes of modeling, it was assumed that construction would commence in March 20223 and would be completed by approximately March 2024, which also accommodates periods where work would not occur due to potential weather-related conditions. The equipment mix anticipated for construction activity was based on the City of Carpinteria Parks and Recreation Department input for typical construction practices. The equipment mix is meant to represent a reasonably conservative estimate of construction activity. For the analysis, it was generally assumed that heavy construction equipment would be operating at the site for approximately eight hours per day, five days per week (22 days per month). To account for dust control measures in the calculations, it was assumed that the active sites would be watered at least two times daily, resulting in an approximately 55% reduction in dust generation to comply with SBCAPCD Rule 345.The analysis contained herein is based on the following subset area schedule assumptions (duration of phases is approximate):
• Site preparation: 2 months
• Grading: 11 months
• Trail Construction: 5 months
• Bridge Construction: 1 month
• Paving: 2 months
• Architectural Coating: 1 month
The majority of the phases listed above would occur concurrently and would not occur sequentially in isolation.
The estimated construction duration was provided by the project applicant. Detailed construction equipment modeling assumptions are provided in Appendix B, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Calculations.
The construction equipment mix used for estimating the construction emissions of the proposed project is based on information provided by the project applicant and is shown in Table 3.2-4. 3 The analysis assumes a construction start date of March 2022, which represents the earliest date construction would initiate.
Assuming the earliest start date for construction represents the worst-case scenario for criteria air pollutant emissions because equipment and vehicle emission factors for later years would be slightly less due to more stringent standards for in-use off-road equipment and heavy-duty trucks, as well as fleet turnover replacing older equipment and vehicles in later years.
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-21
Table 3.2-4. Construction Scenario Assumptions
Construction Phase
One-Way Vehicle Trips Equipment
Average Daily
Worker Trips
Average
Daily Vendor
Truck Trips
Total Haul
Truck Trips Equipment Type Quantity
Usage
Hours
Site Preparation 8 0 0 Graders 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
1 8
Grading 8 0 11,764 Crawler Tractors 1 7
Graders 1 6
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
1 7
Trail Construction 28 12 0 Crawler Tractors 1 7
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
1 6
Bridge Construction 28 12 0 Cranes 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
1 6
Welders 3 8
Paving 6 0 0 Crawler Tractors 1 8
Paving Equipment 1 8
Architectural
Coating
6 0 0 Air Compressors 1 6
Note: See Appendix B for details.
For the analysis, it was assumed that heavy construction equipment would be operating five days per week (22 days per month) during proposed project construction. Construction worker and vendor trips were based on CalEEMod default assumptions and rounded up to the nearest whole number to account for whole round trips.
Proposed project construction would include 107,386 cubic yards of cut, a total of 14,860 cubic yards of fill, and the export of a total of 92,526 cubic yards of earth material during the grading phase. It is anticipated that earth movement would be primarily, if not completely, accomplished using off-road equipment (e.g., scrapers and excavators). Off-road travel was assumed to be 1,000 feet per trip for vendor and haul trucks.
A detailed depiction of the construction schedule—including information regarding phases and equipment used during each phase—is included in Appendix B of this Environmental Impact Report. The information contained in Appendix B was used as CalEEMod model inputs.
Construction Emissions
Construction of the proposed project would result in the temporary addition of pollutants to the local airshed caused by on-site sources (i.e., off-road construction equipment) and off-site sources (i.e., on-road haul trucks, vendor trucks, and worker vehicle trips). Construction emission can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation, and for dust, the prevailing weather conditions.
Therefore, such emission levels can only be estimated, with a corresponding uncertainty in precise ambient air
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-22
quality impacts. Table 3.2-5 presents the estimated annual construction emissions generated during construction of the project. Details of the emission calculations are provided in Appendix B.
Table 3.2-5. Estimated Annual Construction Emissions
Year
ROC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Tons per Year
2022 0.14 2.50 1.03 0.01 0.24 0.10
2023 0.07 0.85 0.53 0.00 0.17 0.05
Maximum Annual Emissions 0.14 2.50 1.03 0.01 0.24 0.10
SBCAPCD Threshold 25 25 25 25 25 25
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Appendix B.
Notes: ROC = reactive organic compound; CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = course particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
As shown in Table 3.2-5, annual construction emissions would not exceed the SBCAPCD significance thresholds for ROC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions during construction. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact.
Operational Emissions
The proposed project would consist of maintenance activities including landscape watering, vegetation control and other trail amenity care and repair, which would involve the temporary use of a light-duty truck that would generate nominal air pollutant emissions. There would be no energy use (electricity or natural gas) associated with the project. No lighting is incorporated into the project design.
Area Sources
CalEEMod was used to estimate operational emissions from area sources, including emissions from consumer product use, architectural coatings, and landscape maintenance equipment. Emissions associated with natural gas usage in space heating and water heating are calculated in the building energy use module of CalEEMod, as described in the following text.
VOC off-gassing emissions result from evaporation of solvents contained in surface coatings, such as in paints and primers used during building maintenance. CalEEMod calculates the VOC evaporative emissions from the application of surface coatings based on the VOC emission factor, the building square footage, the assumed fraction of surface area, and the reapplication rate. The model default reapplication rate of 10% of area per year is assumed.
Consistent with CalEEMod defaults, it is assumed that the surface area for painting equals 2.7 times the floor square footage, with 75% assumed for interior coating and 25% assumed for exterior surface coating (CAPCOA 2017).
Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, rototillers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chainsaws, and hedge trimmers. The emissions associated with landscape equipment use are estimated based on CalEEMod default values for emission factors (grams per square foot of building space per day) and number of summer days (when landscape maintenance would generally be performed) and winter days.
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-23
Mobile Sources
Following the completion of construction activities, the proposed project would generate criteria pollutant emissions from mobile sources (vehicular traffic) as a result of the periodic maintenance of the proposed project. It was assumed that one maintenance trip would occur per week, for 2 one-way trips. CalEEMod default data, including trip characteristics and emissions factors, were used for the model inputs. Projectrelated traffic was assumed to include a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the associated use, as modeled within the CalEEMod. Emission factors representing the vehicle mix and emissions for 2024 were used to estimate emissions associated with vehicular sources.
As discussed, pollutant emissions associated with long-term operations were quantified using CalEEMod.
Project-generated area and mobile source emissions were estimated based on CalEEMod default user assumptions. Table 3.2-6 presents the daily maximum emissions associated with operation (Year 2024) of the proposed project. Details of the emission calculations are provided in Appendix B.
Table 3.2-6. Estimated Maximum Daily Operational Emissions Emission Source
ROC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pound per Day
Area 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Vehicular 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00
Combined Total Emissions 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00
Vehicle Source
Emissions Threshold
25 25
— —
N/A
—
Threshold Exceeded? No No N/A
Area + Vehicle Source
Emissions Threshold
240 240 80
Threshold Exceeded? No No No
Source: Appendix B.
Notes: ROC = reactive organic compound; CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = course particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
As shown in Table 3.2-6, the combined daily emissions would not exceed the SBCAPCD operational thresholds for ROC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5.
Due to the County’s nonattainment status for the PM10 standard and its regional nature, if a project’s emissions exceed the long-term emission thresholds, then the project’s cumulative impacts will be considered significant.
For projects that do not have significant PM10 emissions or localized pollutant impacts, if emissions have been taken into account in the most recent Clean Air Plan growth projections, regional cumulative impacts may be considered less than significant. When a project’s emissions exceed the thresholds and are clearly not accounted for in the most recent Clean Air Plan growth projections, then the project is considered to have significant cumulative impacts that must be mitigated to a less than significant level.
In analyzing cumulative impacts from the proposed project, the assessment must specifically evaluate the project’s contribution to the cumulative increase in pollutants for which the County is designated as nonattainment for the NAAQS or CAAQS. The County is currently in attainment of NAAQS and is in attainment for all CAAQS with the exception of the state standards for PM10. Construction and operation of the proposed
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-24
project would generate emissions of ROCs and NOx (O3 precursors) and PM10; however, the proposed project would not exceed SBCAPCD guidance for annual construction emissions or SBCAPCD thresholds for daily operational emissions. Because implementation of the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts associated with operation of the project, the project’s contribution to the County’s nonattainment status for the state PM10 standard would be less than cumulatively considerable. Because the proposed project would not result in significant PM10 emissions, and project-generated emissions have been taken into account in SBCAPCD’s 2019 Ozone Plan growth projections, cumulative impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state or national 1-hour or 8-hour CO ambient air standards. Localized high levels of CO are associated with traffic congestion and idling or slow-loving vehicles. In accordance with the County Guidelines (as shown in Section 3.2.3.1), a potential hotspot may occur if a project contributes more than 800 peak hour trips to an existing intersection with a Level of Service (LOS) of D or worse (County of Santa Barbara 2020). The peak construction trips would generate up to 61 one-way trips per day (see Appendix B), six of which would be anticipated to occur during the peak hour. During operation, it was assumed that one maintenance vehicle would visit the site per week. With respect to trail users, keep in mind that the trail is intended to promote alternative transportation modes, and to reduce local vehicle trips to the Rincon Preserve and Rincon Beach County Park, by offering a pedestrian and cyclist link between these resources. While some visitors may drive to Rincon Preserve or Rincon Beach County Park specifically to use the new trail segment, such trips are expected to be very limited in comparison to existing visitors to either of these areas. The majority of trail users would be expected to walk from nearby areas or to cycle to and along the trail. Given there are approximately 190 parking spaces at Rincon Beach County Park, and future parking spaces for Rincon Preserve would not be anticipated to exceed 60, parking supply alone would practically limit peak hour trips for Rincon Beach, Rincon Trail, and Rincon Preserve to far below the 800 peak hour trip threshold. Therefore, the County’s screening threshold for CO hotspots would not be exceeded during construction or operation. As such, impacts related to CO hotspots from the project would be less than significant.
Toxic Air Contaminants
“Incremental cancer risk” is the net increased likelihood that a person continuously exposed to concentrations of TAC’s resulting from a project over a 9-, 30-, and 70-year exposure period would contract cancer based on the use of standard Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) risk-assessment methodology (OEHHA 2015). In addition, some TACs have non-carcinogenic effects. TACs that would potentially be emitted during construction activities would be diesel particulate matter (DPM), emitted from heavy-duty construction equipment and heavy-duty trucks. Heavy-duty construction equipment and diesel trucks are subject to CARB ATCMs to reduce DPM emissions. According to the OEHHA, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period for the maximally exposed individual resident; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project (OEHHA 2015). Therefore, for this project, the exposure period to consider would be 24 months, consistent with the duration of construction activity.
Because the project would involve construction activities in several areas across the site, the project would not require the extensive use of heavy-duty construction equipment or diesel trucks in any one location over the duration of the development, which would limit the exposure of any proximate individual sensitive receptor to
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-25
TACs. Furthermore, the closest sensitive receptors to the project site are residences of the Rincon Point community. The closest residence to the proposed trail is located approximately 180 feet (55 meters) from the truck haul route at the eastern end of the trail. Therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant during construction.
The VOC and NOx emissions, as described previously, would nominally contribute to regional O3 concentrations and the associated health effects. In addition to O3, NOx emissions would not contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for NO2. As shown in Table 3.2-2, the existing NO2 concentrations in the area are well below the NAAQS and CAAQS standards. Thus, it is not expected that the proposed project’s operational NOx emissions would result in exceedances of the NO2 standards or contribute to the associated health effects. CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. The associated CO emissions would not contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for particulate matter, obstruct the SCCAB from coming into attainment for these pollutants, or contribute to significant health effects associated with the particulates. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to criteria air pollutant exposure for sensitive receptors. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Although SBCACPD has not adopted quantitative thresholds of significance for odor impacts, SBCAPCD recommends the development of an odor abatement plan for projects that may generate nuisance odors that may affect a substantial number of people.
Construction Odor Impacts
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include diesel equipment and gasoline fumes. Odors from these sources would be localized and generally confined to the project site. The closest residence to the proposed trail is located approximately 180 feet (55 meters) at the eastern end of the trail.
Such odors are temporary and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect a substantial number of people. Furthermore, construction activity would not be centrally located or remain in one location for a substantial amount of time. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not cause an odor nuisance, and impacts associated with odors during construction would be considered less than significant.
Operational Odor Impacts
Certain projects have the potential to cause significant odor impacts because of the nature of their operation and their location. Examples include fast-food restaurants, bakeries, and coffee roasting facilities (SBCAPCD 2017). The proposed project land use is not considered an odor-generating use. Trail maintenance activities involving the occasional use of a light-duty truck would not generate noticeable odor emissions above existing vehicles using Rincon Beach County Park or nearby US Highway 101. Odors associated with equipment and trail equipment and trail maintenance would be temporary and generally confined to the project alignment.
Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not cause an odor nuisance, and impacts associated with odors during maintenance activities would be considered less than significant.
3.2 – Air Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.2-26
3.2.5 Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant prior to mitigation. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
3.2.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The project would result in a less than significant impact prior to mitigation.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-1
3.3 Biological Resources
This section describes the existing biological resources conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and proposes mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. The following discussion is based on review of existing databases; field surveys performed in 2011, 2018, 2019, and 2020; knowledge of the project vicinity from previous biological surveys, consultations with local expert; and information from the Carpinteria Rincon Trail Proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (City of Carpinteria 2015) and the Carpinteria Rincon Trail Final Subsequent MND (City of Carpinteria 2019) certified January 6, 2020.
3.3.1 Existing Conditions
The project is located on lands within the jurisdiction of the City and the County of Santa Barbara (County) (Figure 2-1, Project Location). Carpinteria is a quaint seaside town located about 12 miles east of Santa Barbara near the intersection of Highway 150 and U.S. Highway 101, near the Ventura County line. The proposed trail alignment is located largely along an area of coastal bluff known as the Carpinteria Bluffs. As described in the City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan & Environmental Impact Report (City of Carpinteria 2003), the Carpinteria Bluffs are among the last remaining coastal open space areas within the County and are a prime example of undisturbed California coastline. The Carpinteria Bluffs provide important public access to the coast for residents and visitors. The Carpinteria Bluffs are partially developed and further development or redevelopment of portions of the Carpinteria Bluffs are anticipated over time making the establishment of policies to protect the environment and character of the place of utmost importance.
The project site crosses several parcels of land owned by public agencies. The trail parking lot location on Carpinteria Avenue is owned by the City of Carpinteria. Heading east, the next portion of the proposed trail route is owned by the State of California as part of the U.S. Highway 101 right-of-way and from there the proposed trail route crosses two parcels of landed owned by Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) (APN 001-010-032 and APN 001-220-092).
The proposed trail route then connects to a parcel of land owned by the County as part of Rincon Beach County Park. A series of terraces interspersed with steep slopes along the proposed alignment route are evidence of extensive past grading for a former railroad bed and road cuts. Further evidence of extensive past grading is evident in the soils within the project site, as the vast majority of the site is composed of xerorthents, cut and fill areas, which are soils that are well drained, and are formed in material with a high content of gravel and cobbles derived from mixed rock sources (USDA 2020a). The remaining portion of the biological survey area contains a mapped section of beaches soils composed of sandy or stony alluvium along the coast, located along the bottom of the hill at the edge of the beach within Rincon Beach County Park (USDA 2020a).
The Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way provides an unvegetated corridor approximately 50 feet wide containing a single track that divides the project alignment near its center. The eastern terminus of the proposed trail alignment is within Rincon Beach County Park parking lot, consisting of both undeveloped terraces as well as a largely developed area where a paved parking lot and landscaping dominate. An existing unsanctioned trail extends between Rincon Beach County Park and the UPRR tracks extending west on the bluffs to the north of the UPRR tracks with spur trails providing beach access. The western portion of the alignment is situated west and south of U.S. Highway 101 and partly includes an unvegetated pull-out at the eastern terminus of Carpinteria Avenue as well as an area of disturbed ground adjacent to the pull-out and undeveloped open space south of U.S.
Highway 101.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-2
Despite past disturbances, long stretches of the proposed trail alignment are dominated by native scrub vegetation.
In the eastern portion of the proposed trail alignment between the UPRR crossing and Rincon Beach County Park, the native shrub, quailbush (Atriplex lentiformis), is the dominant shrub throughout much of the area. Additional native vegetation borders the parking lot in Rincon Beach County Park and occupies portions of the proposed trail alignment. In the western portion of the proposed trail alignment between the eastern terminus of Carpinteria Avenue and the UPRR crossing, California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), and quailbush are the dominant plant species.
The project site region is identified by USGS White Ledge Peak 7.5 quadrangle as well as the four coastally influenced adjacent USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles (Ventura, Matilija, Pitas Point, Carpinteria).
3.3.1.1 Literature Review
Prior to the 2011 field visit conducted by Dudek, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) was queried for records of special-status plants and wildlife in the vicinity of the site. In addition, Carpinteria local botanist Larry Ballard was consulted for information on rare plants potentially occurring in the project vicinity, including those on the Rare Plants of Santa Barbara County list, issued by the Central Coast Center for Plant Conservation (CCCPC) (Wilken 2007). Additional field surveys were performed in 2018, 2019, and 2020. Prior to 2018, 2019, and 2020 field surveys, the location of documented special-status plant species near the project site and that have potential to occur on site were identified through a query of the CNDDB (CDFW 2018; CDFW 2020a) and the updated Rare Plants of Santa Barbara County (Wilken 2018). In summary the following were reviewed for this project:
• 2008-2009 Second Wet Season 90-Day Vernal Pool Branchiopod Survey Report, King Ventures Rincon Bluffs Carpinteria, California (Sage Institute Inc. 2009) • Administrative Draft Environmental Impact Report Carpinteria Bluffs, Areas III Development Plan (INTERFACE Planning and Counseling Corporation 1981)
• Carpinteria Bluffs Areas 2 and 3 Biological Resource Analysis & Mapping (Firma 2008) • Carpinteria Bluffs Biological Resources and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat (Condor Environmental Planning Services 1996)
• CDFW CNDDB (CDFW 2018; CDFW 2020a)
• CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2020) • Draft Carpinteria Bluffs Area III Project Biological Resources Due Diligence Report (Dudek 2012a) • Evaluation Report Carpinteria Bluffs Biological Resources and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (LSA Associates Inc. 1997)
• Initial Biological Assessment: Rincon Trail (VJS Biological Consulting 2008) • List of potentially occurring listed species generated from a review of the USFWS’s IPaC Trust Resources Report list of federal and threatened species (USFWS 2020a) • Proposed Final Mitigated Negative Declaration Carpinteria Rincon Trail (City of Carpinteria 2015) • Proposed Final Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration. Carpinteria Rincon Trail (City of Carpinteria 2019) • Rare Plants of Santa Barbara County list (Wilken 2007, 2018) • USGS National Hydrography Dataset (USGS 2020)
• USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper (USFWS 2020b)
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-3
• USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2020c)
• Wetland Delineation of Pool Features at Carpinteria Bluffs Areas III per the California Coastal Act, City of Carpinteria, California (Dudek 2012b)
The biological survey area includes the proposed trail alignment as well as the extent of proposed temporary impacts encompassing vegetated terraces and slopes above and below the proposed trail alignment as well as portions of the developed Rincon Beach County Park (see Figure 3.3-1).
3.3.1.2 Vegetation Communities and Wildlife Habitats
During 2018, Dudek biologists conducted vegetation community mapping within the biological survey area in the field using the List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (Natural Communities List) (CDFW 2010), which is based on the Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition (MCV2) (Sawyer et al. 2009), as shown in Table 3.3-1. The vegetation communities were updated to align with the California Natural Community List (CNCL) (CDFW 2020b), which incorporated changes based on taxonomic revisions related to dominant plants, reassignment of associations to new or different alliances, and revisions to the rarities rankings of some communities. If vegetation observed did not meet the membership rules of the vegetation communities in these sources, modifications were made to accommodate the lack of conformity of the observed communities (e.g., developed/disturbed land uses) using Oberbauer et al. (2008).
Vegetation community mapping conducted in 2018 was confirmed and/or updated during the 2020 site visit.
The following minimum vegetation mapping units applied during vegetation mapping:
• 0.5–1.0 acre for inaccessible areas of the site due to steep terrain. • acres for wetland (i.e., hydrophytic) vegetation in traditional wetland environments (i.e., OBL [obligate – plant species almost always in wetlands], FACW [facultative wetland – plant species usually occurring in wetlands but occasionally found in non-wetlands], but not all FAC [facultative – plant species equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-wetlands] species comprising a vegetation alliance will be mapped unless associated with a hydrologic unit – stream, depression, swale, etc.). • all areas with sensitive vegetation communities were mapped (no minimum mapping unit identified for sensitive vegetation communities)
Table 3.3-1. Survey Dates, Times, Personnel, and Conditions for Biological Surveys Survey Date Time Personnel Survey Conditions Survey Type 8/31/2011 0940-1253 Dave
Compton
61°F–63°F, 70%–100% cloud cover, 1-
8 mph winds
General Biological
Survey
5/5/2018 0655-1040 Heather
Moine
55°F–68°F, 50%–70% cloud cover, 1-2
mph winds
Special-Status Plant
Species Survey
5/15/2018 0630-0755 Heather
Moine
51°F–60°F, 0% cloud cover, 1-3 mph
winds
Vegetation Mapping
7/21/2018 0700-0900 Heather
Moine
63°F–64°F, 100% cloud cover, 1-2
mph winds
Special-Status Plant
Species Survey
9/26/2018 1300-1510 Heather
Moine
67°F–69°F, 50%–75% cloud cover, 2-3
mph winds
Special-Status Plant
Species Survey,
Vegetation Mapping
4/8/2019 1505-1825 Heather
Moine
80°F–85°F, 10%–80% cloud cover, 2-3
mph winds
Special-Status Plant
Species Survey
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-4
Table 3.3-1. Survey Dates, Times, Personnel, and Conditions for Biological Surveys Survey Date Time Personnel Survey Conditions Survey Type 7/23/2019 1300-1605 Heather
Moine
75°F–79°F, 0%–20% cloud cover, 4-5
mph winds
Special-Status Plant
Species Survey
12/24/2020 1320-1505 Mackenzie
Forgey
69°F–68°F, 90% cloud cover, 2-9 mph
winds
General Biological
Survey; Tree
Assessment
Notes: °F = degrees Fahrenheit; mph = miles per hour.
The CNCL (CDFW 2020b) is a hierarchical classification system which classifies natural vegetation communities based on alliances, which contain associations, the most granular level of classification (CDFW 2020c). The CNCL includes a state rarity rank based on the NatureServe Standard Heritage Methodology (NatureServe 2020). The conservation status of a vegetation community is designated by a number from 1 to 5, preceded by a letter reflecting the appropriate geographic scale of the assessment (G = global, N = national, and S = subnational). For the purpose of this report the focus is the S rarity rank. The numbers have the following meaning (NatureServe 2020):
1 = critically imperiled
2 = imperiled
3 = vulnerable to extirpation or extinction
4 = apparently secure
5 = demonstrably widespread, abundant, and secure
For example, S1 would indicate that a vegetation community is critically imperiled within a particular state or province. A rank of S3 would indicate the vegetation community is vulnerable and at moderate risk within a particular state or province, although it may be more secure elsewhere (NatureServe 2020). The CNCL (CDFW 2020b) includes state-level rarity rankings (i.e., the subnational [S] rank) for vegetation communities. The CNCL is considered the authority for ranking the conservation status of vegetation communities in California. As described by CDFW 2020c, ranking is an ongoing process and some associations are considered sensitive, denoted by a “Y” in the “Sensitive” column of the list, while others lack association-specific global and state ranks. This “Y” in the sensitive column indicates rarity, although that alliance may not be rated S3 or below as well (CDFW 2020c). CDFW expects to provide association level ranks for all S3 or rarer entities in the future, including those associations that are considered sensitive despite lacking an S3 or rarer alliance ranking.
The overall condition and quality of habitat provided by each vegetation community including supporting wildlife species was assessed. Discussions include degrees of disturbance, biological productivity of supporting plant and/or wildlife populations, and the relative viability of the habitat resource are included for each vegetation community and land cover type.
County environmentally sensitive habitat (ESH) and City environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) were evaluated based on definitions in the County Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003). Although most undeveloped areas of the coastal zone, as well as many isolated pockets of open space within urban areas, provide a “habitat” for many species of animals and plants, the intent of the Coastal Act is preservation of significant habitat resources.
Coastal Act environmentally sensitive habitat areas are defined as “any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments” (Coastal Act, Section 30107.5). The
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-5
County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) identifies ESH based on such factors as intrinsic, scientific, and educational value and includes the following biological resource categories:
• Dunes
• Wetlands
• Native Grasslands
• Vernal Pools
• Butterfly Trees
• Marine Mammal Rookeries and Hauling Grounds
• White-tailed Kite Habitat
• Rocky Points and Intertidal Areas
• Subtidal Reefs
• Kelp Beds
• Seabird Nesting and Roosting Areas
• Native Plant Communities – examples: coastal sage scrub, chaparral, coastal bluff, closed cone pine forest, California native oak woodland (also individual oak trees), endangered and rare plant species as designated by CNPS, and other plants of special interest such as endemics • Streams
The City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) ESHA includes a diversity and number of habitats and species not commonly found in urban areas and that warrant unique measures to ensure adequate protection. As such, the Carpinteria Bluffs have specifically been identified as an ESHA. The following list includes ESHA that have been identified as existing in Carpinteria:
• Wetlands
• Butterfly Habitat
• Marine Mammal Rookeries and Hauling Grounds
• Rocky Points and Intertidal Areas
• Subtidal Reef
• Kelp Beds
• Creeks and Riparian Habitat
• Significant Native Plant Communities such as coastal sage scrub, riparian scrub, coastal bluff scrub, and native oak woodlands
• Sensitive, rare, threatened or endangered species habitat A total of 12 vegetation communities and land cover types were recorded within the biological survey area, including five native scrub communities and seven non-native communities and land cover types (Figure 3.3-1 and Table 3.3- 2). All five of the native vegetation communities found are protected under the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), identified as coastal sage scrub, coastal bluff scrub, and/or habitat for sensitive species, and are thus considered County ESH and City ESHA. Two of these five communities, California brittle bush scrub – ashy buckwheat scrub alliance and lemonade berry scrub alliance, are also sensitive by virtue of their state rank. These communities are described in
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-6
CNCL and MCV2. Eucalyptus, ice plant mats, and myoporum are non-native and do not have a state rank (state not applicable [SNA]). The other four communities and land cover types are not listed in CNCL or MCV2.
While two individual Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) trees were identified in separate locations within the project site, one within the temporary impact area along the western portion of the site and the other within the proposed alignment footprint in the eastern portion of the site (Figure 3.3-1), they were not mapped as separate vegetation communities because one tree is not considered a stand or woodland. The first Monterey cypress tree is located near the western terminus of the proposed trail alignment, between the alignment and the pull-out off Carpinteria Avenue, and has a diameter of approximately 10 inches measured 4 feet above the ground.
The second Monterey cypress is located within the proposed trail alignment within an unsanctioned trail within Rincon Beach County Park and has a diameter of approximately 12 inches measured 4 feet from the ground. One additional Monterey cypress tree was identified in the northern portion of the project above the railroad right-ofway, which is located along the edge of the temporary impact area adjacent to disturbed habitat and was measured with an approximate 8-inch diameter measured from 4 feet above the ground. Two Monterey cypress trees are located within the developed portion of the Rincon Beach County Park, one of which is a very young sapling with a diameter under an inch and the other is a mature tree with a combined diameter measured 4 feet from the ground of 49 inches due to multiple stems. There are also trees associated with the Rincon Point housing development that abut Rincon Beach County Park and are located south and east of the temporary project impact area and include Monterey cypress trees.
Monterey cypress trees are not naturally occurring within the Carpinteria area and instead are documented as native in populations located in Monterey and Carmel, California (CNPS 2021); therefore, Monterey cypress trees are not considered sensitive vegetation communities or individual trees. However, Monterey cypress trees could be considered County ESH and/or City ESHA if used by sensitive wildlife species as further discussed in Section 3.3.1.4.
Two pine saplings that appeared to be newly planted with mulch placed around the trunks and stakes installed for tree stabilization, are located along the edge of the temporary impact area in the portion of the project above the railroad right-of-way, each under 4 inches diameter measured 4 feet from the ground. One of these newly installed pine saplings is a Norfolk Island pine (Araucaria heterophylla), and the other could not be identified to species due to the lack of cones present at the time of the survey but appears to be a native pine tree (Pinus sp.).
There are also trees associated with the Rincon Point housing development that abut Rincon Beach County Park and are located south and east of the biological survey area, and include a few non-riparian California sycamore (Platanus racemosa) trees and other ornamental tree species located approximately 50-feet from Rincon Creek.
The County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) does not include mapped ESH within the project site. The City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) includes mapped ESHA within the limits of the City north to but not including Carpinteria Avenue.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-7
Table 3.3-2. Summary of Existing Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types Habitat Group General Habitat
Vegetation Community
(Alliance, Association)
Alliance-Association (State
Sensitive)/County
ESH/City ESHA Acreage
Native Scrub
Communities
Coastal Bluff
Scrub
California Brittle Bush – Ashy
Buckwheat Scrub Alliance,
Encelia california Association
S3-Yes (Yes)/Yes/Yes 0.96
Quailbush Scrub Alliance, Atriplex
lentiformis Association
S4-No (No)/Yes/Yes 6.18
Coastal Bluff Scrub Subtotal 7.13
Coastal Scrub California Sagebrush – (Purple
Sage) Scrub Alliance, Artemisia
californica Association
S5-S4 (No)/Yes/Yes 2.08
Coyote Brush Scrub Alliance,
Baccharis pilularis Association
S5-No (No)/Yes/Yes 1.18
Lemonade Berry Scrub Alliance,
Rhus integrifolia Association
S3-S3 (Yes)/Yes/Yes 0.31
Coastal Scrub Subtotal 3.57
Non-native
Communities
and Land
Cover Types
Non-native
Communities
Eucalyptus – Tree of Heaven –
Black Locust Groves Alliance,
Eucalyptus (globulus,
camaldulensis) Association
SNA-SNA (No)/No/No 0.21
Ice Plant Mats Alliance,
Carpobrotus (edulis) Association
SNA-SNA (No)/No/No 0.14
Pepper Tree or Myoporum Groves
Alliance, Myoporum laetum/
Arundo donax Association
SNR-SNA (No)/No/No 0.07
Parks and Ornamental Plantings NA (No)/No/No 0.10
Ruderal NA (No)/No/No 0.17
Land Cover
Types
Developed NA (No)/No/No 1.08
Disturbed Habitat NA (No)/No/No 1.45
Non-native Communities and Land Cover Types Subtotal 3.22 Combined Total 13.92
Notes:
SNA – state not applicable. State status rank not applicable because the species or ecosystem is not a suitable target for conservation activities (NatureServe 2020).
SNR – state no rank (NatureServe 2020).
NA – not applicable. Not included in California Natural Communities List (CDFW 2020b).
Native Scrub Communities
California Brittle Bush – Ashy Buckwheat Scrub Alliance, Encelia california Association (S3-Sensitive [Sensitive], County ESH, City ESHA). This community includes California brittle bush and/or ashy buckwheat (Eriogonum cinereum) as the dominant or co-dominant shrub in the canopy. California brittle bush – ashy buckwheat scrub has an intermittent to continuous shrub canopy less than two meters (seven feet) in height with a variable herbaceous ground layer. The California brittle bush – ashy buckwheat scrub alliance occurs on sunny, steep south-facing slopes often rocky or eroded, with soils derived from sandstone, volcanic or shale substrates (Sawyer et al. 2009). Species associated with California brittle bush scrub on site include quailbush (Atriplex lentiformis), California sagebrush, coyote brush, western prickly pear (Opuntia littoralis) and black mustard.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-8
California brittle brush scrub occurs in limited patches within the project site, wildlife using this community is partly dictated by adjacent communities, which are generally other scrub communities. Brush rabbits (Sylvilagus bachmani) may occur within these areas, and some species of small mammals may occur here as well. The Coast Range western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis bocourti) likely occur within this community and within adjacent communities. Songbirds with the potential to nest within this community include the mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), and song sparrow (Melospiza melodia).
California brittle brush scrub has a S3-Sensitive designation thus considered a sensitive vegetation community per CDFW (2020b). California brittle bush scrub is a state sensitive vegetation community, considered coastal bluff scrub per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019), and supports sensitive plant species. Additionally, California brittle bush scrub is mapped as ESHA, considered coastal bluff scrub in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and supports sensitive plant species. Therefore, California brittle bush scrub is considered County ESH and City ESHA.
The Encelia californica association within the California brittle bush – ashy buckwheat scrub alliance was mapped in the project site. This association occurs in the proposed trail alignment in and near the County’s Rincon Beach County Park (see Figure 3.3-1). Approximately 0.96 acres of this community, or 6.9% of the total biological survey area was identified.
Quailbush Scrub Alliance, Atriplex lentiformis Association (S4-Not Sensitive [Not Sensitive], County ESH, City ESHA).
This vegetation community includes quailbush as a dominant species. Quailbush scrub has an open to intermittent scrub canopy less than five meters (16 feet) in height with a variable herbaceous layer (Sawyer et al. 2009). In the proposed trail alignment, species associated with this community include California brittle bush, lemonade berry and Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata).
Quailbush scrub provides shelter for brush rabbits and probably for other medium-sized mammal species such as the raccoon (Procyon lotor) and striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis). California voles (Microtus californicus) may occur in this vegetation community. Common reptile species that occur here include the Coast Range western fence lizard and San Diego gophersnake (Pituophis catenifer annectens). Nesting songbirds occurring here include the mourning dove, bushtit, northern mockingbird, and song sparrow. Songbirds that may perch on shrubs within this community include the black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans).
Quailbush scrub has a S4-Not Sensitive designation thus is not considered a sensitive vegetation community per CDFW (2020b). Quailbush scrub is considered coastal bluff scrub per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and mapped as ESHA and considered coastal bluff scrub in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and therefore considered County ESH and City ESHA. Additionally, this vegetation community supports sensitive plant species and has the potential to support the state species of special concern (SSC) California legless lizard and further warrants County ESH and City ESHA designations.
The Atriplex lentiformis association within the quailbush scrub alliance was mapped in the project site. It occurs extensively in the proposed trail alignment east of the UPRR and in patches west of the UPRR (see Figure 3.3-1).
Approximately 6.18 acres of this community, or 44.3% of the total biological survey area was identified.
California Sagebrush – (Purple Sage) Scrub Alliance, Artemisia californica Association (S5-S4 [Not Sensitive], County ESH, City ESHA). This community includes California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) and/or purple sage (Salvia leucophylla) as the dominant or co-dominant shrub in the canopy. California sagebrush scrub has an
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-9
intermittent to continuous shrub canopy less than two meters (seven feet) in height with a variable herbaceous ground layer (Sawyer et al. 2009). Species associated with this community include California brittle bush (Encelia californica), coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii) and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis). Black mustard (Brassica nigra) and other non-native species are found in this community on site.
Wildlife occupying California sagebrush scrub includes many species common to other scrub communities within the project site. Brush rabbits seek cover in these areas, and small mammals such as California voles likely occur here. Coast Range western fence lizards and San Diego gophersnakes are reptiles that occur in scrub habitats.
Songbirds nesting here include the mourning dove, northern mockingbird, California towhee (Melozone crissalis), and song sparrow. White-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys) occur here in winter.
California sagebrush scrub has a S5-S4 designation thus is not considered a sensitive vegetation community per CDFW (2020b). California sagebrush scrub is considered coastal sage scrub per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and mapped as ESHA and considered coastal sage scrub in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and therefore considered County ESH and City ESHA. Additionally, this vegetation community supports sensitive plant species and further warrants County ESH and City ESHA designations.
The Artemisia californica association within the California sagebrush – (purple sage) scrub alliance was mapped in the project site. This association occurs in the western portion of the project site, near Carpinteria Avenue and U.S.
Highway 101, in a heavily engineered portion of the proposed trail alignment graded during highway construction (see Figure 3.3-1). A smaller patch occurs adjacent to the parking lot for Rincon Beach County Park. Approximately
2.08 acres of this community, or 14.9% of the total biological survey area was identified.
Coyote Brush Scrub Alliance, Baccharis pilularis Association (S5-Not Sensitive [Not Sensitive], County ESH, City ESHA). Coyote brush scrub communities include greater than 50% relative cover of coyote brush and coyote brush as the dominant or co-dominant shrub in the canopy. Coyote brush scrub has a variable shrub canopy less than three meters (10 feet) in height with a variable herbaceous ground layer (Sawyer et al. 2009). Species associated with this community in the proposed trail alignment include scattered California sagebrush, California brittle bush, myoporum (Myoporum laetum) and black mustard.
Wildlife occurring in coyote brush scrub is very similar to that occurring in quailbush scrub and includes brush rabbits, raccoon, striped skunk, California voles, Coast Range western fence lizard, San Diego gophersnake, mourning dove, bushtit, northern mockingbird, song sparrow and black phoebe.
Coyote brush scrub has a S5-Not Sensitive designation thus is not considered a sensitive vegetation community per CDFW (2020b). Coyote brush scrub is not considered coastal sage scrub or associated with other ESH habitats by definition per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019); however, coyote brush scrub does support sensitive plant species and as such is designated County ESH. Additionally, coyote brush scrub is mapped as ESHA in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and also supports sensitive plant species and therefore considered City ESHA.
The Baccharis pilularis association within the coyote brush scrub alliance was mapped in the project site. It occurs in the proposed trail alignment mostly near the western terminus, but also in small patches in the vicinity of Rincon Beach County Park. The coyote brush scrub between UPRR and U.S. Highway 101 occurs in old road cuts (see Figure 3.3-1). Approximately 1.18 acres of this community, or 8.5% of the total biological survey area was identified.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-10
Lemonade Berry Scrub Alliance, Rhus integrifolia Association (S3-S3 [Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). This vegetation community includes lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) as either a dominant or codominant species. Lemonade berry scrub has a two-tiered, open to continuous shrub canopy less than five meters (16 feet) in height with an open herbaceous ground layer and sparse cover of emergent trees (Sawyer et al. 2009).
Species associated with this community on site include coyote brush and myoporum.
Wildlife occurring in lemonade berry scrub is similar to that occurring in Coyote brush scrub and includes brush rabbits, raccoon, striped skunk, California voles, Coast Range western fence lizard, San Diego gophersnake, mourning dove, bushtit, northern mockingbird, song sparrow and black phoebe.
Lemonade berry scrub has a S3-S3 designation thus is considered a sensitive vegetation community per CDFW (2020b). Additionally, lemonade berry scrub is not considered coastal sage scrub or associated with other ESH habitats by definition per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019); however, it does support sensitive plant species and is a state sensitive vegetation community thus is considered County ESH. Additionally, lemonade berry scrub is not considered coastal sage scrub or associated with other ESHA habitats by definition per the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003); however, it does support sensitive plant species and is a state sensitive vegetation community and thus is considered City ESHA.
The Rhus integrifolia association within the lemonade berry scrub alliance was mapped in the project site. This association occurs in two small patches west of the Rincon Beach County Park (see Figure 3.3-1). Approximately
0.31 acres of this community, or 2.2% of the total biological survey area was identified.
Non-Native Communities
Eucalyptus – Tree of Heaven – Black Locust Groves Semi-Natural Alliance, Eucalyptus (globulus, camaldulensis) Provisional Association (SNA-SNA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). This alliance contains eucalyptus trees (Eucalyptus sp.), tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima), or black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) as the dominant species in the tree canopy. These groves have an open to continuous tree canopy less than 60 meters (197 feet) in height. Understory shrubs and herbaceous layers are sparse to intermittent, and the herbaceous layer is sparse to intermittent. Throughout California, this semi-natural groves alliance occurs as planted trees, groves, and windbreaks, naturalized on uplands or bottomlands and adjacent to stream courses, lakes, or levees (Sawyer et al. 2009).
The Eucalyptus – tree of heaven – black locust groves semi-natural alliance and specific Eucalyptus (globulus, camaldulensis) association is listed in MCV2 (Sawyer et al. 2009) and CNCL (CDFW 2020b), but is ranked SNA-SNA as it is composed of non-native species; it is not considered sensitive. Additionally, per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) eucalyptus trees are considered ESH if they are butterfly trees or provide habitat to sensitive species. Per the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) eucalyptus trees are considered ESHA if they provide habitat for butterfly habitat or sensitive, rare, threatened or endangered species habitat. Included below is a discussion of potential wildlife use of the eucalyptus trees.
Because of shade and possibly the allelopathic (toxic) properties of eucalyptus leaf litter, little other vegetation is present in this community, and relatively little wildlife is found here. But the relatively open ground under the canopy permits medium-sized mammals such as common raccoons and striped skunks to move easily through this community to access adjacent areas. Some bird species are adapted to this community. Yellow-rumped warblers (Setophaga coronata) feed on insects attracted to eucalyptus blossoms in the winter. Some birds of prey favor eucalyptus trees for nesting. Red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), Cooper’s hawks (Accipiter cooperii), and great horned owls (Bubo virginianus) also have the potential to nest in this community.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-11
Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus) use eucalyptus trees for roosting in the region, but they are not known to use eucalyptus within the project site. The majority of eucalyptus trees within the project site are either singular and isolated, or do not form a large enough grove to provide adequate microclimate conditions and wind protection monarch butterflies require for overwintering sites. Several eucalyptus trees are located within the proposed trail alignment near its western terminus and U.S. Highway 101, and range in diameter from approximately 18 to 28 inches measured 4 feet from the ground. Additionally, a small stand of eucalyptus trees is present at the eastern terminus of the biological survey area, which are rooted next to the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot; however, there is low potential for monarchs to overwinter here as well due to the small relative size of this eucalyptus stand and vulnerability to strong winds and weather. There are also three eucalyptus trees present near the western terminus of the biological survey area, however they each grow individually and do not form a grove capable of supporting overwintering monarchs. There are also trees associated with the Rincon Point housing development that abut Rincon Beach County Park and are located south and east of the eastern portion of the biological survey area and include some eucalyptus trees. Monarch butterflies and monarch butterfly habitat are further discussed in Section 3.3.1.4.
The white-tailed kite is known to occur in the area (City of Carpinteria 2003). The City specifically cites the Carpinteria Bluffs as a location where this species occurs and is protected. However, no white-tailed kites were detected in the biological survey area, and the eucalyptus trees in and around the western portion of biological survey area are relatively small, and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance where kites are unlikely to nest. Marginally suitable woodland nesting habitat is present in the trees adjacent to the project site near Rincon Beach County Park, within the Rincon Point housing development. This species prefers open grassland or marshland habitats which are not present on site, and is found less commonly in agricultural areas or rights-of-way.
This species is known to occur along the south coast, however most foraging and nesting activity in the County is restricted to more rural areas and in particular, the Goleta and Santa Maria Valleys (Lehman 2020).
The Eucalyptus (globulus, camaldulensis) provisional association within the eucalyptus - tree of heaven - black locust semi-natural alliance was mapped in the project site. Within the biological survey area this community is dominated by eucalyptus trees, which are sparse and do not create a windrow and do not provide habitat for sensitive species; and thus are not included as ESH per County of Santa Barbara (2009) or ESHA per City of Carpinteria (2003). Approximately 0.21 acres of this community, or 1.5% of the biological survey area was identified.
Ice Plant Mats Semi-Natural Alliance, Carpobrotus (edulis) Association (SNA-SNA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). Ice plant mats contains hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis), sea fig (Carpobrotus chilensis), or other ice plant taxa as the dominant or co-dominant species in the herbaceous layer. These species invade coastal bluff scrub, dune mat, dune scrub, and coastal prairies and compete with native plants (Sawyer et al. 2009). Ice plant semi-natural alliance areas have an intermittent to continuous canopy within the herbaceous layer less than 0.5 meters (1.6 feet) in height.
Very few wildlife species occur in ice plant mats. California ground squirrels (Spermophilus [Otospermophilus] beecheyi) often inhabit this community. This community provides poor nesting habitat for birds. Common reptiles such as the western fence lizard likely occur here. This community is not generally valuable to special-status wildlife species.
The ice plant mats semi-natural alliance and specific Carpobrotus (edulis) association is listed in MCV2 (Sawyer et al. 2009) and CNCL (CDFW 2020b), but is ranked SNA-SNA as it is composed of non-native species; therefore, it is not considered sensitive. Additionally, ice plant mats vegetation community is not included on the list of ESH per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) or provide habitat for sensitive species. Ice plant mats are not mapped as ESHA, included as other ESHA habitats in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and do not provide habitat for sensitive species, and therefore not considered locally sensitive.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-12
The Carpobrotus (edulis) association within the ice plant mats semi-natural alliance was mapped in the project site.
Approximately 0.14 acres of this community, or 1.0% of the biological survey area was identified.
Pepper Tree or Myoporum Groves Semi-Natural Alliance, Myoporum laetum/Arundo donax Association (SNR-SNA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). Pepper tree or myoporum groves consist of myoporum or pepper trees (Schinus spp.) as the dominant species in the tree canopy. Within the biological survey area, this community is dominated by myoporum. These groves have an open to continuous tree canopy less than 18 meters (59 feet) in height. Understory shrubs are infrequent or common and the herbaceous layer is simple to diverse lacking trees and shrubs. Throughout Central and Southern California, the pepper trees or myoporum groves seminatural alliance occurs in coastal canyons, washes, slopes, riparian areas, and roadsides (Sawyer et al. 2009).
Several myoporum trees are located within the proposed trail alignment west of Rincon Beach County Park, and are largely multistemmed. Myoporum groves provide shelter for medium-sized mammal species such as the brush rabbit, common raccoon, and striped skunk. California voles may occur in this vegetation community. Common reptile species such as the western fence lizard likely occur. Nesting songbirds occurring here likely include the mourning dove, bushtit, and northern mockingbird. Wintering black phoebes are among birds that likely perch on myoporum. Some birds of prey, such the white-tailed kite and other raptors, may also perch in this community where it is adjacent to foraging habitat.
This semi-natural alliance and specific Myoporum laetum/Arundo donax association mapped on site are listed in MCV2 (Sawyer et al. 2009) and CNCL (CDFW 2020b), but is ranked SNA as it is composed of non-native species; thus, it is not considered sensitive. Additionally, myoporum is not included on the list of ESH per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) or provide habitat for sensitive species. Myoporum are not mapped as ESHA, included as other ESHA habitats in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and do not provide habitat for sensitive species, and therefore not considered locally sensitive.
The Myoporum laetum/Arundo donax association within the pepper tree or myoporum groves semi-natural alliance was mapped in the project site. Approximately 0.7 acres of this community, or 0.5% of the biological survey area was identified.
Parks and Ornamental Plantings (NA [Not sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). This community is not described in CNCL or MCV2 because it is not a naturally occurring community in California; thus, it is not considered sensitive. It includes landscaping plants as dominants. Additionally, parks and ornamental plantings is not included on the list of ESH per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) or provide habitat for sensitive species. Parks and ornamental plantings are not mapped as ESHA, included as other ESHA habitats in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and do not provide habitat for sensitive species, and therefore not considered locally sensitive.
The ornamental vegetation community in the proposed trail alignment is characterized by the dominance of landscaped plant species. Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) and California ground squirrel are among common mammals found in this community. Western fence lizards are a common reptile found in parks and ornamental plantings. Common nesting birds such as Eurasian collared-dove (Streptopelia decaocto), California scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), bushtit, and house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus) may be found here.
Parks and ornamental plantings occur within the eastern part of Rincon Beach County Park (see Figure 3.3-1).
Approximately 0.10 acres of this community, or 0.7% of the biological survey area was identified.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-13
Ruderal (NA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). Ruderal is not described in CNCL or MCV2 because it is not a naturally occurring community in California; thus, it is not considered sensitive. Additionally, ruderal habitats are not included on the list of ESH per the County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) or provide habitat for sensitive species. Ruderal habitats are not mapped as ESHA, included as other ESHA habitats in the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003), and do not provide habitat for sensitive species, and therefore not considered locally sensitive.
Ruderal areas are characterized by limited native vegetation resulting in low function ecological processes. Plants in these areas are dominated by non-native species and there is not a dominant plant species or overall structure to the habitat. Ruderal areas provide little habitat or foraging potential for wildlife, due to the lack of significant cover by vegetation; however, there are often patchy areas of non-native plant species. Mammals may include common species, such as the California ground squirrel, but medium-sized mammals such as raccoons may use ruderal habitats as movement corridors. Among common reptiles that may use these areas is the western fence lizard. Seed-eating birds found here include the California towhee and white-crowned sparrow. Ruderal does not provide habitat for special-status wildlife species.
Mapped ruderal includes roadside areas and areas with disturbed non-native vegetation (see Figure 3.3-1).
Approximately 0.17 acres of this community, or 1.3% of the biological survey area was identified.
Land Cover Types
Developed (NA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). Within the biological survey area, developed areas are unvegetated areas such as pavement and development with impervious materials, it is not described in CNCL or MCV2, and does not provide habitat for sensitive species. Developed areas include the parking lot at Rincon Beach County Park and the wide turnout at the eastern terminus of Carpinteria Avenue (see Figure
3.3-1). Approximately 1.08 acres of developed area, or 7.7% of the biological survey area was identified.
Disturbed Habitat (NA [Not Sensitive], County Not Sensitive, City Not Sensitive). This land cover type, which is not described in CNCL or MCV2, includes invasive non-native and other disturbance-tolerant species as dominants, and does not support sensitive species. Species occurring within this community, including some natives, are those that are tolerant to disturbances such as grading or vegetation clearing. On-site, species appearing in disturbed areas include poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), black mustard, Hottentot fig, and horseweed (Erigeron canadensis).
Approximately 1.45 acres of this land cover type, or 10.45% of the biological survey area was identified.
3.3.1.3 Special-Status Plant Species
During 2018 and 2019 Dudek biologists performed floristic surveys for special-status plant species, as shown in Table 3.3-1. All plant species encountered during the field surveys were identified to subspecies or variety, if possible. Species that could not be identified in the field were brought into the laboratory for further investigation.
Scientific and common names for plant species with a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) follow the California Native Plant Society On-Line Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2020). For plant species without a California Rare Plant Rank, scientific names follow the Jepson Interchange for California Floristics; Index to California Plant Names (Jepson Flora Project 2020) and common names follow the California Natural Community List (CDFW 2020b) or the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Plants Database (USDA 2020b).
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-14
For the purpose of CEQA analysis, federal, state, CNPS CRPR 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B plants, and locally rare plants (Wilken 2018) are considered special-status. CRPR 3 and 4 plants are CNPS designated rare, but not considered special-status as plant species but do add to the vegetation community value designated as County ESH and or City ESHA as CNPS CRPR 3 and 4 species.
In considering rarity beyond federal or state designations, the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California was the primary reference (CNPS 2020). Use of the CNPS inventory is helpful because it clearly defines levels of endangerment and rarity for all of the species addressed. The CNPS inventory divides its subject taxa into four ranks: CRPR 1 (which is further divided into 1A and 1B), CRPR 2 (which is further divided into 2A and 2B), CRPR 3, and CRPR 4. Plants with a CRPR of 1A are presumed extirpated or extinct because they have not been seen or collected in the wild in California for many years. Plants with a CRPR of 1B are rare throughout their range, with the majority of them endemic to California. Most of the plants that are ranked 1B have declined significantly over the last century. Plants with a CRPR of 2A are presumed extirpated because they have not been observed or documented in California for many years. Except for being common beyond the boundaries of California, plants with a CRPR of 2B would have been ranked 1B. Plants with a CRPR of 3 have not had sufficient information collected to assign them to one of the other ranks or to reject them. Nearly all of the plants constituting CRPR 3 are taxonomically problematic. Plants with a CRPR of 3 are plants about which more information is needed and 4 are of limited distribution or infrequent throughout a broader area in California, and their status should be monitored regularly.
CRPR 3 plants lack necessary information to assign them to one of the other ranks or to reject them. Should the degree of endangerment or rarity of a CRPR 4 plant change, it would be transferred to a more appropriate rank.
CRPR plants are further defined as follows:
• .1 = seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) • .2 = moderately threatened in California (20%–80% occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat)
• .3 = not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known)
A total of 133 plant species were observed and identified during surveys. Of these, 57 (43%) are considered native and 76 (57%) are considered non-native to California, included as Appendix C1, Plant and Wildlife Species Compendium. The CNDDB (CDFW 2018; CDFW 2020a) and CNPS (CNPS 2020) queries returned 34 special-status plant species that have been documented within the USGS White Ledge Peak 7.5 quadrangle as well as the four coastally influenced adjacent USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles (Ventura, Matilija, Pitas Point, Carpinteria), hereafter referred to as the region. Only the four coastally influenced adjacent USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles were queried for sensitive biological resources instead of all adjacent quadrangle maps, since the habitats north of the foothills vary greatly from the project site and would not be representative of what species are likely to occur in coastal habitats. Dudek analyzed the resulting special-status plant species potential to occur based on known elevation or geographic range, suitable habitat, or the species has been extirpated from the region. Appendix C2, Plant and Wildlife Species Not Expected to Occur within the Biological Survey Area provides a list of the 20 special-status plant species that are not expected to occur based on site surveys, lack of suitable habitat, and the site being out of the species range. The special-status plant species in Appendix C2 are not analyzed in this report as no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts are expected.
Based on Dudek’s habitat suitability analysis including elevation and habitats, 11 of the special-status plant species had the potential to occur within the project site, and 3 special-status plant species were observed during 2018
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-15
and 2019 rare plant surveys. These 14 special-status plant species include aphanisma (Aphanisma blitoides), Miles’ milk-vetch (Astragalus didymocarpus var. milesianus), Ventura marsh milk-vetch (Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus), Coulter’s saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), South Coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), Orcutt’s pincushion (Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana), mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. puberula), California satintail (Imperata brevifolia), Santa Barbara honeysuckle (Lonicera subspicata var. subspicata), cliff malacothrix (Malacothrix saxatilis var. saxatilis), aparejo grass (Muhlenbergia utilis), south coast branching phacelia (Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis), Nuttall’s scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), salt spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana), and woolly seablite (Suaeda taxifolia) (Table 3.3-3).
Table 3.3-3. Special-Status Plant Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Statusa Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Aphanisma
blitoides
aphanisma None/None/
1B.2
Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub; sandy or
gravelly/annual
herb/Feb–June/3–
1,000 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub and coastal bluff
scrub habitat is present, however
the only CNDDB occurrence in the
region was last confirmed in 1963
and located 1.5 miles west of the
Ventura River (CDFW 2020a). This
species was not detected during
2018 or 2019 special-status plant
species surveys.
Astragalus
didymocarpus
var. milesianus
Miles’ milkvetchNone/None/
1B.2
Coastal scrub
(clay)/annual
herb/Mar–June/66–
295 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
although clay soils are absent
(USDA 2020a). There are only two
CNDDB occurrences in the region
the most recent of which was
recorded in the 1970s in the Ojai
area (CDFW 2020a). This species
was not detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Atriplex coulteri Coulter’s
saltbush
None/None/
1B.2
Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland;
alkaline or
clay/perennial
herb/Mar–Oct/10–
1,505 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal bluff scrub and coastal
scrub habitat is present, and the
large quantities of quailbush on
site indicate that suitable alkaline
soils may be present. This
species is known to occur along
Carpinteria coastal bluffs,
however this is from an
occurrence last confirmed in
1927 (CDFW 2020a). This
species was not detected during
2018 or 2019 special-status
plant species surveys.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-16
Table 3.3-3. Special-Status Plant Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Statusa Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Atriplex pacifica South Coast
saltscale
None/None/
1B.2
Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Playas/annual
herb/Mar–Oct/0–460
feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal bluff scrub and coastal
scrub habitat is present and the
large quantities of quailbush on
site indicate that suitable alkaline
soils may be present. However,
there is only one occurrence in
the region which was last
confirmed in 1972 about 1.5
miles west of the Ventura River
(CDFW 2020a). This species was
not detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Centromadia
parryi ssp.
australis
southern
tarplant
None/None/
1B.1
Marshes and swamps
(margins), Valley and
foothill grassland
(vernally mesic),
Vernal pools/annual
herb/May–Nov/0–
1,570 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
habitat is present in the disturbed
habitat and ruderal areas on site,
as this species can occur in
disturbed sites (CDFW 2020a).
However, the only occurrence in
the region was last confirmed in
1997 and is considered possibly
extirpated (CDFW 2020a). This
species was not detected during
2018 or 2019 special-status
plant species surveys.
Chaenactis
glabriuscula
var. orcuttiana
Orcutt’s
pincushion
None/None/
1B.1
Coastal bluff scrub
(sandy), Coastal
dunes/annual
herb/Jan–Aug/0–330
feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal bluff scrub habitat is
present. However, the only
occurrence in the region was last
confirmed in 1961 and is
considered possibly extirpated
(CDFW 2020a). This species was
not detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Horkelia
cuneata var.
puberula
mesa horkelia None/None/
1B.1
Chaparral (maritime),
Cismontane woodland,
Coastal scrub; sandy
or gravelly/perennial
herb/Feb–
July(Sep)/230–2,655
feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
although the most recently
confirmed occurrence in the
region is from 1935 (CDFW
2020a). This species was not
detected during 2018 or 2019
special-status plant species
surveys.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-17
Table 3.3-3. Special-Status Plant Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Statusa Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Imperata
brevifolia
California
satintail
None/None/
2B.1
Chaparral, Coastal
scrub, Mojavean
desert scrub,
Meadows and seeps
(often alkali), Riparian
scrub;
mesic/perennial
rhizomatous
herb/Sep–May/0–
3,985 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
and the large quantities of
quailbush on site indicate that
suitable alkaline soils may be
present. However, there are only
two occurrences in the region,
both of which are located behind
the transverse ranges north the
site, approximal 11 miles
northeast of the project site
(CDFW 2020a). This species was
not detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Lonicera
subspicata var.
subspicata
Santa
Barbara
honeysuckle
None/None/
1B.2
Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal
scrub/perennial
evergreen shrub/May–
Aug(Dec–Feb)/33–
3,280 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present.
However, all the occurrences in
the region are located within the
foothills and not directly along the
coast (CDFW 2020a). This
species was not detected during
2018 or 2019 special-status
plant species surveys.
Malacothrix
saxatilis var.
saxatilis
cliff
malacothrix
None/None/
4.2b
Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal
scrub/perennial
rhizomatous
herb/Mar–Sep/10–
655 feet amsl
Present. Detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Muhlenbergia
utilis
aparejo grass None/None/
2B.2
Meadows and seeps,
marshes and swamps,
chaparral, coastal
scrub, cismontane
woodland; sometimes
alkaline, sometimes
serpentinite/perennial
rhizomatous
herb/Mar–Oct/82–
7,625 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
and the large quantities of
quailbush on site indicate that
suitable alkaline soils may be
present. However, the only
occurrence in the region was last
confirmed in 1964 and was
located west of Matilija Lake
(CDFW 2020a).
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-18
Table 3.3-3. Special-Status Plant Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Statusa Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Phacelia
ramosissima
var.
austrolitoralis
south coast
branching
phacelia
None/None/
3.2b
Chaparral, Coastal
dunes, Coastal scrub,
Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt); sandy,
sometimes
rocky/perennial
herb/Mar–Aug/16–
985 feet amsl
Present. Detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Quercus
dumosa
Nuttall’s
scrub oak
None/None/
1B.1
Closed-cone
coniferous forest,
Chaparral, Coastal
scrub; sandy, clay
loam/perennial
evergreen shrub/Feb–
Apr(May–Aug)/49–
1,310 feet amsl
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
although clay soils are absent
(USDA 2020a). The closest
occurrence in the region was last
confirmed in 1929 and was
described as occurring in
Carpinteria, and the remaining
occurrences in the region2 are
located within the foothills and
not directly along the coast
(CDFW 2020a). This species was
not detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Suaeda taxifolia woolly
seablite
None/None/
4.2b
Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes,
Marshes and swamps
(margins of coastal
salt)/perennial
evergreen shrub/Jan–
Dec/0–165 feet amsl
Present. Detected during 2018 or
2019 special-status plant species
surveys.
Notes: amsl = above mean sea level.
a Status Legend:
FE: Federally listed as endangered
SE: State listed as endangered
CRPR 1A: Plants presumed extinct in California
CRPR 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere CRPR 2A: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but common elsewhere CRPR 2B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere CRPR 3: Plants about which more information is needed – a review list CRPR 4: Plants of limited distribution – a watch list
.1 Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) .2 Fairly endangered in California (20% to 80% of occurrences threatened) .3 Not very endangered in California (less than 20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known). b For the purpose of CEQA analysis, federal, state, and CNPS CRPR 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B plants are considered special-status. CRPR 3 and 4 plants are not considered special-status as plant species but do add to the vegetation community value designated as County environmentally sensitive habitat and or City environmentally sensitive habitat areas as CNPS CRPR 3 and 4 species.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-19
No federal, state, or CNPS CRPR 1 or 2 plant species were observed. Two CNPS CRPR 4.2 plant species, cliff malacothrix (Malacothrix saxatilis var. saxatilis) and woolly seablite (Suaeda taxifolia), and one CNPS CRPR 3.2 plant species, south coast branching phacelia (Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis) were detected within the biological survey area (see Figure 3.3-1). Cliff malacothrix, south coast branching phacelia, and woolly seablite are not included on the Rare Plants of Santa Barbara County list (Wilken 2018); therefore, these are not considered special-status plant species.
Cliff malacothrix (Malacothrix saxatilis var. saxatilis). This CNPS CRPR 4.2 species is a perennial herb that occurs in coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub at 10 to 220 feet in elevation. It occurs along the coast from Orange County north to Santa Barbara County, and inland in Kern and San Bernardino Counties and blooms March through September. A total of 68,385 square feet and 834 individuals were documented (Figure 3.3-1) in the biological survey area.
South coast branching phacelia (Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis). This species is a perennial herb that is native to California and included as CNPS CRPR 3.2. It occurs in chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, marshes and swamps (coastal salt) in sandy sometimes rocky soils and blooms March through August. A total of 14 square feet and 2 individuals were documented (Figure 3.3-1) in the biological survey area.
Woolly seablite (Suaeda taxifolia). This CNPS CRPR 4.2 species is found in coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, and marshes and swamps at 0 to 165 feet elevation. It occurs along the coast from Orange County north to San Luis Obispo County, as well as on the Channel Islands and blooms January through December, year-round. In the project vicinity, this species is distributed in monotypic patches along the bluffs just west of Rincon Beach County Park, adjacent to the trail alignment (Figure 3.3-1). A total of 75,161 square feet and 617 individuals were documented in the biological survey area.
3.3.1.4 Special-Status Wildlife Species
Wildlife species were documented during the 2011 general biological survey and subsequent vegetation mapping, and special-status plant species surveys during 2018 and 2019. Additionally, a Dudek biologist documented wildlife observed during the general biological survey conducted in December 2020.
A total of 32 special-status wildlife species (25 birds, two invertebrates, three mammals, and two reptiles) were either directly observed or detected based on vocal cues or observation of sign, included as Appendix C1. The CNDDB (CDFW 2018, 2020a) and USFWS (USFWS 2020a) queries returned 41 special-status wildlife species that have been documented within the USGS White Ledge Peak 7.5 quadrangle as well as the four coastally influenced adjacent USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles (Ventura, Matilija, Pitas Point, Carpinteria), herein after referred to as the region. Only the four coastally influenced adjacent USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles were queried for sensitive biological resources instead all adjacent quadrangle maps, since the habitats north of the foothills vary greatly from the project site and would not be representative of what species are likely to occur in coastal habitats.
A variety of special-status wildlife have recorded occurrences in the region (i.e., the five 7.5-minute quadrangles queried) and were evaluated for their potential to occur on the project site, including but not limited to the Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus; Special Animal), tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi; federally endangered [FE]), southern steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus; FE), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii); federally threatened [FT]), California legless lizard (Anniella sp.; California Species of Special Concern [SSC]), two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii; SSC), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; state fully protected [FP]); lightfooted clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes; FE, state endangered [SE], FP), snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus;
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-20
FT) and Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi; SE). Appendix C2 provides a list of the 31 special-status wildlife species that are not expected to occur based on site surveys, lack of suitable habitat, and the site being out of the species range. The special-status wildlife species in Appendix C2 are not analyzed in this report as no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts are expected.
Based on Dudek’s knowledge of regional biological resources, distribution of local species, and species-specific habitat preferences, 8 of the special-status wildlife species queried had the potential to occur within the project site. These 8 special-status wildlife species include California legless lizard, Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), coast patch-nosed snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea), white-tailed kite, western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii), San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), and the monarch butterfly and their overwintering population (Table 3.3-4).
Table 3.3-4. Special-Status Wildlife Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Status1
Fed/State/
County/City Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Reptiles
Anniella sp. California
legless lizard
None/SSC/N
one/None
Coastal dunes, stabilized
dunes, beaches, dry
washes, valley–foothill,
chaparral, and scrubs;
pine, oak, and riparian
woodlands; associated
with sparse vegetation
and sandy or loose,
loamy soils
Moderate potential to occur.
Note that the species of legless
lizard occurring in the region is
not known (Papenfuss and
Parham 2013). Suitable scrub
habitat is present, although
loose, loamy soils are less
abundant within the site due to
extensive past grading to form
the slopes adjacent to U.S.
Highway 101. A 1952 CNDDB
occurrence was within the
western portion of the project
site (CDFW 2020a). The next
closest occurrence is located
approximately 2 miles northwest
of the site at Carpinteria State
Beach (CDFW 2020a).
Phrynosoma
blainvillii
Blainville’s
horned lizard
None/SSC/N
one/None
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. Suitable
coastal scrub habitat is present,
although there is only one
CNDDB occurrence in the region,
located approximately 10.5
miles northeast of the site near
the Los Robles Diversion Canal
(CDFW 2020a).
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-21
Table 3.3-4. Special-Status Wildlife Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Status1
Fed/State/
County/City Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Salvadora
hexalepis
virgultea
coast patchnosed snakeNone/SSC/N
one/None
Brushy or shrubby
vegetation; requires
small mammal burrows
for refuge and
overwintering sites
Low potential to occur. Suitable
coastal scrub shrubby habitat is
present, although all three
CNDDB occurrences in the
region are located in the
montane areas behind the site
and not in coastal areas, the
closest of which is located
approximately 10.5. miles north
of the site along E Camino Cielo
(CDFW 2020a).
Birds
Elanus
leucurus
(nesting)
white-tailed
kite
None/FP/ES
H/ESHA
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. Marginally
suitable woodland nesting
habitat is present in the trees
adjacent to the project site near
Rincon Beach County Park,
within the Rincon Point housing
development. This species
prefers open grassland or
marshland habitats which are
not present on site, and is found
less commonly in agricultural
areas or rights-of-way. This
species is known to occur along
the south coast, however most
foraging and nesting activity in
the County is restricted to more
rural areas and in particular, the
Goleta and Santa Maria Valleys
(Lehman 2020).
Mammals
Corynorhinus
townsendii
Townsend’s
big-eared bat
None/SSC/N
one/None
Mesic habitats
characterized by
coniferous and
deciduous forests and
riparian habitat, but also
xeric areas; roosts in
limestone caves and
lava tubes, human-made
structures, and tunnels
Low potential to occur, not
expected to roost. Marginally
suitable coastal scrub foraging
habitat is present, while suitable
roosting habitat is absent on
site. There is only one CNDDB
occurrence in the region, last
confirmed in 1941 at the
Carpinteria Salt Marsh (CDFW
2020a).
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-22
Table 3.3-4. Special-Status Wildlife Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Status1
Fed/State/
County/City Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Eumops perotis
californicus
western
mastiff bat
None/SSC/N
one/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
Low potential to occur, not
expected to roost. Suitable
coastal scrub foraging habitat is
present, while the slopes
present on site are not large and
far enough away from human
disturbance to be suitable
roosting habitat. There is only
one CNDDB occurrence in the
region, which is located
approximately 10 miles east of
the site near Weldon (CDFW
2020a).
Neotoma
lepida
intermedia
San Diego
desert
woodrat
None/SSC/N
one/None
Coastal scrub, desert
scrub, chaparral, cacti,
rocky areas
Moderate potential to occur.
Suitable coastal scrub habitat is
present, and this species is
known to occur along the coast
in the region, the closet
occurrence of which was last
confirmed in 1992 located
approximately 2.75 miles
southeast of the site just east of
Punta Gorda (CDFW 2020a).
Additionally, woodrat middens
have been observed within the
project site during various
surveys.
Puma concolor
(southern and
central coast
California
evolutionary
significant units)
mountain lion None/SC/No
ne/None
Dense undergrowth and
cover in deserts, humid
coast forests, arid
hillsides, and scrub and
oak woodlands.
Low potential to occur. Suitable
habitat north and east of the
project site across U.S. Highway
101 in the vicinity of State Route
150. This species is known to
occur in more rural areas and
may access areas east of the
project site via Rincon Creek;
however, project site access is
constricted by U.S. Highway 101
and adjacent chain link fencing
along the southbound lanes of
the highway, the narrow and
frequently used State Route
150, and the beach.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-23
Table 3.3-4. Special-Status Wildlife Species Observed or with Potential to Occur within the Biological Survey Area
Scientific Name
Common
Name
Regulatory
Status1
Fed/State/
County/City Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur within the BSA Invertebrates
Danaus
plexippus
monarch FC/None/ES
H2/ESHA2
Follows a pattern of
seasonal migration and
the Rocky Mountain
population migrates
southwest to wintering
grounds along the
California coast from
Mendocino to the
Mexico border extending
into Baja, California,
Mexico. Overwintering
populations utilize windprotected tree groves
(typically eucalyptus
[Eucalyptus sp.],
Monterey cypress
[Hesperocyparis
macrocarpa], sycamore
[Platanus racemosa],
and coast live oak
[Quercus agrifolia]) with
nectar sources and
nearby water sources.
Low potential to roost. While
there are a few trees located on
the project site including
Monterey cypress and
eucalyptus trees, most are
isolated individuals, and none
assemble into a woodland large
enough to provide protection
and other elements required by
overwintering monarch
butterflies. There is low potential
for monarch butterflies to
overwinter adjacent to the
project site, including the stand
of eucalyptus and trees
associated with residential
development at Rincon Point
near Rincon Creek; however,
monarch individuals were not
observed during surveys and
winter roost sites have not been
documented in these areas
(Xerces Society 2020). There are
numerous occurrences in the
region, including a stand of
eucalyptus trees north of the
project site along Rincon Creek
and Bates Road north of
Highway 101, last confirmed in
2002 (CDFW 2020a).
1 Federal Designations:
FC Candidate for federal listing as threatened or endangered (FD) Federally delisted; monitored for five years
FE Federally listed Endangered
FT Federally listed as Threatened
FDL Federally delisted
BCC Bird of Conservation Concern
State Designations:
SC Candidate for state listing as endangered
SSC Species of Special Concern
FP California Department of Fish and Game Protected and Fully Protected Species SE State listed as Endangered
ST State listed as Threatened
SDL State delisted
WL Watch List
2 Monarch overwintering sites are protected under County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) as County environmentally sensitive habitat and City environmentally sensitive habitat areas.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-24
Two special-status wildlife species were determined to have a moderate potential to occur within the project site, including Northern California legless lizard (SSC) and San Diego desert woodrat (SSC).
California legless lizard. The California legless lizard is a state SSC and is a fossorial lizard that occupies suitable habitats such as coastal dune, valley and foothill grassland, chaparral, and coastal scrub from Contra Costa County south to the Mexico border. This species requires loose, friable soils for burrowing, and often requires moist substrates and environments (CDFW 2020a). This species has been recorded within the project site from a 1952 occurrence along the coastal bluffs near Rincon Road and Rincon Beach County Park (CDFW 2020a). Suitable habitat for this species occurs on site in the coastal scrub and coastal bluff scrub vegetation communities mapped over a large portion of the site
San Diego desert woodrat. The San Diego desert woodrat is a state SSC known to inhabit scrub habitats, such as coastal sage scrub. Its distribution tends to be on the west side of Coast Ranges from San Diego County north to at least San Luis Obispo County. The San Diego desert woodrat prefers moderate to dense canopies, and are particularly abundant in rock outcrops, rocky cliffs, and slopes (CDFW 2020a). Unlike dusky-footed woodrats, San Diego desert woodrats do not construct large stick nests. This species normally occupies openings in rocks, vegetation (such as openings among patches of cactus), and even debris, and sometimes small stick nests are built within an opening or crevice. Suitable habitat for this species occurs on site in the coastal scrub and coastal bluff scrub vegetation communities mapped over a large portion of the site. Woodrat middens have been observed during surveys on site.
White-tailed kite. The white-tailed kite, a state fully protected species, is known to occur in the area (City of Carpinteria 2003), and in addition to protections by the state, the white-tailed kite receives protection under the Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003). The City specifically cites the Carpinteria Bluffs as a location where this species occurs and is protected. However, no white-tailed kites were detected in the biological survey area, and the scrub vegetation that predominates there is unsuitable for foraging by this species, which hunts in habitats dominated by grasses and forbs. Trees in and around the site are relatively small, and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance where kites are unlikely to nest. Marginally suitable woodland nesting habitat is present in the trees adjacent to the project site near Rincon Beach County Park, within the Rincon Point housing development. This species prefers open grassland or marshland habitats which are not present on site, and is found less commonly in agricultural areas or rights-of-way. This species is known to occur along the south coast, however most foraging and nesting activity in the County is restricted to more rural areas and in particular, the Goleta and Santa Maria Valleys (Lehman 2020).
Monarch butterflies and overwintering sites. Monarch butterflies are currently a federal candidate species, while their overwintering sites are also protected under Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) policies. The monarch butterfly follows a pattern of seasonal migration. The summer grounds of the species are found in New England, the Great Lakes region, the northern Rocky Mountains, and some portions of the Arid West (Pelton et al. 2016). The New England and Great Lakes populations generally migrate southwest to wintering grounds in the Sierra Madre mountain range of Mexico, while the Rocky Mountains population generally migrates southwest to wintering grounds along the California coast.
Monarchs require specific conditions for suitable wintering sites, and wintering sites in California are associated with wind-protected groves of large trees (primarily eucalyptus or pine) with nectar and water sources nearby, dappled sunlight, high humidity, and an absence of freezing temperatures or high wind, generally near the coast
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-25
(Pelton et al. 2016). The majority of trees within the biological survey area are either singular and isolated, or do not form a large enough grove to provide adequate microclimate conditions and wind protection monarch butterflies require for overwintering sites. There is a small portion of eucalyptus trees within the eastern portion of the biological survey area, however there is low potential for monarchs for overwinter here as well due to the small relative size of this eucalyptus stand and vulnerability to strong winds and weather. There are also three eucalyptus trees present at near the western terminus of the biological survey area, however they each grow individually and do not form a grove capable of supporting overwintering monarchs. Additionally, the eucalyptus trees present along the hills behind the biological survey on private property, specifically the eucalyptus trees around the residential development off Bates Ranch Road as well as the eucalyptus trees that extend beyond the terminus of Camino Carreta, appear to be planted windrows and do not form large protected groves that have the microclimate characteristics monarchs require for overwintering.
Monarch butterflies are known to occur near the biological survey area along Bates Road just north of U.S. Highway 101 in a eucalyptus stand associated with Rincon Creek (CNDDB Occurrence No. 268; Xerces Site No. 2803) (CDFW 2020a). Additionally, this site was known to have been surveyed for overwintering monarch populations in 2017 during the Xerces Society New Year’s Count, of which none were detected (Xerces Society 2020).
3.3.1.5 Critical Habitat
There is no USFWS designated critical habitat for any plant species or wildlife species within or adjacent to the project site (USFWS 2020b).
3.3.1.6 Wildlife Movement Corridors
The project site is located adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and does not connect important habitat areas used by large or small wildlife species. In addition, U.S. Highway 101 and adjacent chain link fencing along the southbound lanes of the highway provide impediments to wildlife movement between the bluffs and more inland areas.
Additionally, development and restricted access from more open space areas to the north impede wildlife movement in accessing the project site. Large-sized mammal species such as mountain lion and California black bears (Ursus americanus californiensis) may utilize areas to the east of the biological survey area including Rincon Creek and the channelized portion under U.S. Highway 101 to access beach areas; however, the surrounding areas where Rincon Creek daylights is developed with residential homes and parking lot improvements, resulting in a high urban wildlife interface. Medium-sized mammal species such as the striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) or northern raccoon (Procyon lotor) may move locally along the coast. The UPRR and associated right-of-way provides an unvegetated corridor approximately 50 feet wide containing a single track that divides the project alignment near its center. The UPRR tracks are at a much lower elevation than the adjacent bluffs creating an anthropogenic valley and break in continuous topography along the bluffs. The project includes a span bridge which connects the two bluffs and ultimately will not change the overall topography for wildlife to approach or cross the tracks. Additionally, minor changes to wind and weather patterns in a very local setting are not an impediment to birds moving long distance, particularly since the overall height of the slope should remain at the same elevation.
To evaluate the change in wind uplift patterns above the bluff face from the proposed regrading for the project, Dudek commissioned an Airflow Analysis for the Proposed Regrading of the Rincon Bluffs study (Airflow Study) by an expert in fluid dynamics; the Airflow Study is included as Appendix I of this Environmental Impact Report. Several different approaches were used, based upon published literature including wind tunnel experiments and direct field measurements of the amplification effects of a slope or vertical face on horizontal wind vectors perpendicular to
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-26
the slope face. In the published literature reviewed for this Airflow Study, certain investigators compared the average slope angle of the entire slope or bluff face to determine the wind amplification effect, while others compared the angle of just the upper portion of the slope. The analysis of the effects of the proposed regrading of the bluff face for the project concluded that the proposed regrading could reduce the vertical airflow velocity by 10% to 30% relative to current conditions; for altitudes relevant to paragliding and soaring activities, the reduction is expected to be closer to 30% (Appendix I). Based on available experimental results, the introduction of an upper bench above the trail is expected to provide a small increase in turbulence (of the order of 5%) at an altitude of 30 feet above the front of the bluffs, becoming negligible by an altitude of approximately 75 feet (Appendix I). Migratory avian species travel hundreds to thousands of miles at various elevations during which they can be exposed to a variety of weather systems within days or weeks of each other and have behavioral plasticity in response to microscale through mesoscale conditions including extremely adverse weather (Sahmoun-Baranes 2017). The anticipated changes in velocity and turbulence would occur within a short linear distance relative to the distance traveled for a migrating avian species, and avian species regularly adjust to changing weather conditions.
Additionally, the velocity and turbulence changes would be focused at altitudes near the bluff top and would not extend the whole altitude range for migrating birds.
3.3.1.7 Aquatic Resources
While a delineation of jurisdictional aquatic resources was not performed; no evidence of aquatic features was observed within the biological survey area during field surveys. Additionally, there are no USGS National Hydrography Dataset (USGS 2020) or USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2020b) mapped aquatic resources within the project site. On the adjacent Carpinteria Bluffs III site, to the south and west of the western most portion of the project site, multiple seasonal pools and ephemeral pools have been documented (Sage Institute Inc. 2009; Dudek 2012a, 2012b). As part of the Wetland Determination of Pool Features at Carpinteria Bluffs Area II per the California Coastal Act (Dudek 2012b), jurisdictional determinations for coastal wetlands were made for documented seasonal pools and ephemeral features. No documented coastal wetlands occur within the project site; however, coastal wetlands (Dudek 2012b) are approximately 123 feet from project temporary impacts and 125 feet from project permanent impacts. The closest mapped riverine or stream/river feature is associated with the Rincon Creek outlet located approximately 50 feet from the eastern portion of the biological survey area.
3.3.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.3.2.1 Federal
Clean Water Act, Section 404
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into waters of the United States, and regulating quality standards for surface waters. Under the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry and developing national water quality criteria recommendations for pollutants in surface waters.
The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. USEPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or human-made ditches. Individual homes that are connected to a municipal system, use a septic system, or do not have a surface discharge do not need an
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-27
NPDES permit; however, industrial, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters.
Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has authority to regulate activities that could discharge fill of material into wetlands or other “waters of the United States.” Perennial and intermittent creeks are considered waters of the United States if they are hydrologically connected to other jurisdictional waters (typically a navigable water). USACE also implements the federal policy embodied in Executive Order 11990, which is intended to result in no net loss of wetland value or acres. In achieving the goals of the Clean Water Act, USACE seeks to avoid adverse impacts and offset unavoidable adverse impacts on existing aquatic resources. Any fill of wetlands that are hydrologically connected to jurisdictional waters would require a permit from USACE prior to the start of work. Typically, when a project involves impacts to waters of the United States, the goal of no net loss of wetland acres or values is met through avoidance and minimization to the extent practicable, followed by compensatory mitigation involving creation or enhancement of similar habitats.
Federal Endangered Species Act
Under the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce jointly have the authority to list a species as threatened or endangered (16 USC 1533[c]). Pursuant to the requirements of the ESA, an agency reviewing a project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any federally listed threatened or endangered species may be present in the planning area, and determine whether the project would have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the agency is required to determine whether the project is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any species proposed to be listed under the ESA or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat proposed to be designated for such species (16 USC 1536[3][4]). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service are responsible for implementation of the ESA.
USFWS also publishes a list of candidate species. Species on this list receive special attention from federal agencies during environmental review, although they are not protected otherwise under the ESA. The candidate species are those for which USFWS has sufficient biological information to support a proposal to list them as endangered or threatened.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits the take of any migratory bird or any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird.
Under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, “take” is defined as “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill trap, capture, or collect, or any attempt to carry out these activities” (16 USC 703 et seq.). Additionally, Executive Order 13186, Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds, requires that any project with federal involvement address impacts of federal actions on migratory birds with the purpose of promoting conservation of migratory bird populations (66 FR 3853–3856). Executive Order 13186 requires federal agencies to work with USFWS to develop a memorandum of understanding. USFWS reviews actions that might affect these species. Currently, birds are considered to be nesting under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act only when there are eggs or chicks that are dependent on the nest.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-28
3.3.2.2 State
California Endangered Species Act
The California ESA establishes state policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. Under the California ESA, CDFW is responsible for maintaining a list of threatened species and endangered species (California Fish and Game Code, Section 2070). CDFW also maintains a list of candidate species, which are species that CDFW has formally noticed as under review for addition to the threatened or endangered species list. CDFW also maintains lists of California species of special concern, which serve as watch lists. Pursuant to the requirements of the California ESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the area, and determine whether the proposed project would have a potentially significant impact on such species. CDFW encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species.
California Fish and Game Code
Under the California Fish and Game Code, CDFW provides protection from take for a variety of species, including fully protected species. “Fully protected” is a legal protective designation administered by CDFW and intended to conserve wildlife species that risk extinction within California. Lists have been created for birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles.
Birds of prey are protected in California under California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5. Section 3503.5 states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “taking” by CDFW. Section 3511 prohibits take or possession of a fully protected species. In addition, Section 3513 states “It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory [Bird] Treaty Act.” Any loss of fertile eggs or nesting raptors, or any activities resulting in nest abandonment would constitute a significant impact. Non-raptor native birds receive similar protection under California Fish and Game Code Section 3503. Project impacts to these species would not be considered significant unless the species are known to, or have a high potential to, nest in the area or rely on it for primary foraging.
The Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (California Fish and Game Code, Section 1900 et seq.) gives CDFW authority to designate state endangered, threatened, and rare plants, and provides specific protection measures for identified populations.
CDFW also protects streams, water bodies, and riparian corridors through the Streambed Alteration Agreement process under Sections 1601–1606 of the California Fish and Game Code. The California Fish and Game Code stipulates that it is “unlawful to substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel or bank of any river, stream or lake” without notifying CDFW, incorporating necessary mitigation, and obtaining a Streambed Alteration Agreement. Through policy, CDFW asserts jurisdiction to the top of banks of all streams, including intermittent and ephemeral streams, extending laterally to the upland edge of adjacent riparian vegetation. CDFW uses the Cowardin system for wetland identification and classification, which typically results in a larger jurisdictional area than federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. Under this system, wetlands must
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-29
have one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is nonsoil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.
3.3.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan The City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan includes the following objectives and policies relevant to the proposed project and biological resources:
• OSC-1 Protect, Preserve and Enhance Local Natural Resources and Habitats o Policy OSC-1a. Protect ESHAs from development and maintain them as natural open space or passive recreational areas.
o Policy OSC-1b. Prohibit activities, including development, that could damage or destroy ESHA. o Policy OSC-1c. Establish and support preservation and restoration programs for ESHA, including but not limited to Carpinteria Creek, Carpinteria Bluffs, Carpinteria Salt Marsh, seal rookery, Carpinteria reef, Pismo clam beds and the intertidal zones along the shoreline. o Policy OSC-1d. Property including ESHA should be designated with a zoning category that allows for the protection of, and access to, the resource area, such as Open Space/Recreation or Public Facility zoning. Any development on property including ESHA should be designed and conducted to protect the resources. Within environmentally sensitive habitat only uses dependent upon those resources shall be allowed and the resources shall be protected against any disruption. o Policy OSC-1f. Protect and restore degraded wetlands, butterfly habitat, native plant communities, and sensitive, rare, threatened or endangered species habitat on City-owned land to the maximum extent feasible.
• OSC-3 Preserve and Restore Wetlands Such as the Carpinteria Salt Marsh o Policy OSC-3a. Wetland delineations shall be based on the definitions contained in Section 13577 (b) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations
o Policy OSC-3b. The upland limit of a wetland is defined as ▪ the boundary between land with predominantly hydrophytic cover and land with predominantly mesophytic or xerophytic cover;
▪ the boundary between soil that is predominantly hydric and soil that is predominantly non-hydric; ▪ in the case of wetlands without vegetation or soils, the boundary between land that is flooded or saturated at some time during years of normal precipitation, and land that is not. ▪ If questions exist, the limit shall be determined by a habitat survey made by a qualified biologist in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game. o Policy OSC-3c. Development adjacent to the required buffer around wetlands should not result in adverse impacts including but not limited to sediment runoff, chemical and fertilizer contamination, noise, light pollution and other disturbances.
• OSC-7 Conserve Native Plant Communities.
o Policy OSC-7b. When sites are graded or developed, areas with significant amounts of native vegetation shall be preserved. Structures shall be sited and designed to minimize the impact of grading, paving
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-30
construction of roads, runoff and erosion on native vegetation. Sensitive resources that exhibit any level of disturbance shall be maintained, and if feasible, restored. New development shall include measures to restore any disturbed or degraded habitat on the project site. Cut and fill slopes and all areas disturbed by construction activities shall be landscaped or revegetated at the completion of grading. Plantings shall be of native, drought-tolerant plant species consistent with the existing native vegetation on the site. Invasive plant species that tend to supplant native species shall be prohibited.
Santa Barbara County Article II Coastal Zoning Ordinance Pursuant to PRC Section 30500 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, Santa Barbara County was required to prepare an LCP for portions of the unincorporated areas of Santa Barbara County within the coastal zone. Sections of the Santa Barbara County Article II Zoning Ordinance that may be relevant to the proposed project include Section 35-140, Tree Removal. Section 35-140 regulates the removal of qualifying trees within the coastal zone, and requires Coastal Development Permit (CDP) approval prior to removal of any qualifying tree. A qualifying tree is defined as a tree which is six inches or more in diameter measured four feet above the ground and six feet or more in height and which is 1) located in a County street right-of-way; or 2) located within 50 feet of any major or minor stream except when such trees are removed for agricultural purposes; or 3) oak trees; or 4) used as a habitat by the monarch butterflies. However, a CDP to remove trees in the coastal zone shall only be issued for reasons such as: the trees are dead; the trees prevent the construction of a project for which a CDP has been issued and project redesign is not feasible; the trees are diseased and pose a danger to healthy trees in the immediate vicinity; or the trees are so weakened by age, disease, storm, fire, excavation, removal of adjacent trees, or any injury so as to cause imminent danger to persons or property.
Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan
The Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan was partially certified by the Coastal Commission on March 17, 1981, adopted in 1982, and republished June 2019, as the Local Coastal Program for unincorporated Santa Barbara County. It details the rules and regulations of land use within Santa Barbara County’s coastal areas. The following policies would apply to the proposed project. Policy 9-37 consists of the same guidelines discussed above in the Santa Barbara County Article II Zoning Ordinance Section 35-97.19, Development Standards for Stream Habitats. Policy 9-38 consists of the same guidelines discussed above in the Santa Barbara County Article II Zoning Ordinance Section 35-97.19.
• Policy 9-36: When sites are graded or developed, areas with significant amounts of native vegetation shall be preserved. All development shall be sited, designed, and constructed to minimize impacts of grading, paving, construction of roads or structures, runoff, and erosion on native vegetation. In particular, grading and paving shall not adversely affect root zone aeration and stability of native trees. • Policy 9-37: The minimum buffer strip for major streams in rural areas, as defined by the land use plan, shall be presumptively 100 feet, and for streams in urban areas, 50 feet. These minimum buffers may be adjusted upward or downward on a case-by-case basis. The buffer shall be established based on an investigation of the following factors and after consultation with the Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board in order to protect the biological productivity and water quality of streams:
1) Soil type and stability of stream corridors;
2) How surface water filters into the ground;
3) Slope of the land on either side of the stream; and
4) Location of the 100-year flood plain boundary.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-31
Riparian vegetation shall be protected and shall be included in the buffer. Where riparian vegetation has previously been removed, except for channelization, the buffer shall allow for the reestablishment of riparian vegetation to its prior extent to the greatest degree possible. Riparian vegetation shall be protected and shall be included in the buffer. Where riparian vegetation has previously been removed, except for channelization, the buffer shall allow for the reestablishment of riparian vegetation to its prior extent to the greatest degree possible.
• Policy 9-38: No structures shall be located within the stream corridor except: public trails, dams for necessary water supply projects, flood control projects where no other method for protecting existing structures in the flood plain is feasible and where such protection is necessary for public safety or to protect existing development; and other development where the primary function is for the improvement of fish and wildlife habitat. Culverts, fences, pipelines, and bridges (when support structures are located outside the critical habitat) may be permitted when no alternative route/location is feasible. All development shall incorporate the best mitigation measures feasible.
3.3.3 Thresholds of Significance
The County provides types of impacts to biological resources that may be considered significant if the project substantially alters biological resources in the following ways (County of Santa Barbara 2008):
1. Substantially reduce or eliminate species diversity or abundance
2. Substantially reduce or eliminate quantity or quality of nesting areas
3. Substantially limit reproductive capacity through losses of individuals or habitat
4. Substantially fragment, eliminate, or otherwise disrupt foraging areas and/or access to food sources
5. Substantially limit or fragment range and movement (geographic distribution or animals and/or seed dispersal routes)
6. Substantially interfere with natural processes, such as fire or flooding, upon which the habitat depends.
Furthermore, the size, type, and timing of impacts should be considered in assessing the significance of project impacts on biological resources (County of Santa Barbara 2008).
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to biological resources are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to biological resources would occur if the project would:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-32
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. g) Result in cumulatively considerable impacts to biological resources.
3.3.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? For the purpose of CEQA analysis, federal, state, CNPS CRPR 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B plants, and locally rare plants (Wilken 2018) are considered special-status plant species. CRPR 3 and 4 plants, which are CNPS “rare”, but not considered special-status yet these plant species do add to the vegetation community value designated as County ESH and or City ESHA as CNPS CRPR 3 and 4 species. No federal, state, or CNPS CRPR 1 or 2 species, or locally rare (Wilken 2018) species were observed. Two CNPS CRPR 4.2 plant species, cliff malacothrix and woolly seablite, and one CNPS CRPR 3.2 plant species, south coast branching phacelia, were detected within the biological survey area. Cliff malacothrix, south coast branching phacelia, and woolly seablite are not included on the Rare Plants of Santa Barbara County list (Wilken 2018) and therefore, are not considered special-status plant species. No special-status plant species were observed; thus, impacts to special-status plant species would be less than significant.
Habitat was documented for two special-status wildlife species, either within or adjacent to the trail alignment:
California legless lizard and San Diego desert woodrat. Habitat for the California legless lizard was found in the proposed trail alignment immediately south of the UPRR crossing. California legless lizard individuals could suffer injury or mortality because of grading and other construction activities associated with the project.
Therefore, impacts to California legless lizard would be potentially significant absent mitigation. Habitat for the woodrat is located throughout the scrub dominated portions of the site. Woodrat individuals could suffer injury or mortality because of grading and other construction activities. Therefore, impacts to woodrat would be potentially significant absent mitigation. Impacts to these species’ habitats would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1 through MM-BIO-4.
White-tailed kite is known to occur along the south coast, however most foraging and nesting activity in the County is restricted to more rural areas and in particular, the Goleta and Santa Maria Valleys (Lehman 2020). The City specifically cites the Carpinteria Bluffs as a location where white-tailed kites occur and their habitat is protected.
However, no white-tailed kites were detected in the biological survey area, and the scrub vegetation that predominates there is unsuitable for foraging by this species, which hunts in habitats dominated by grasses and forbs. This species prefers open grassland or marshland habitats which are not present on site, and is found less commonly in agricultural areas or rights-of-way. Trees in and around the project site are relatively small, and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance where white-tailed kites are unlikely to nest. Marginally suitable woodland nesting habitat is present in the trees adjacent to the project site near Rincon Beach County Park and within the Rincon Point housing development; however, proposed project impacts are greater than 500 feet from these habitats. The trees within the vicinity of Rincon Beach County Park are not planned to be directly impacted. Therefore, impacts to white-tailed kites would be less than significant.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-33
Monarchs require specific conditions for suitable wintering sites, and wintering sites in California are associated with wind-protected groves of large trees (primarily eucalyptus or pine) with nectar and water sources nearby, dappled sunlight, high humidity, and an absence of freezing temperatures or high wind, generally near the coast (Pelton et al. 2016). The majority of trees within the project site are either singular and isolated, or do not form a large enough grove to provide adequate microclimate conditions and wind protection monarch butterflies require for overwintering sites. There are three eucalyptus trees present near the western terminus of the project site, however they each grow individually and do not form a grove capable of supporting overwintering monarchs. There is a small portion of eucalyptus trees within the eastern portion of the biological survey area, however there is low potential for monarchs for overwinter here as well due to the small relative size of this eucalyptus stand and vulnerability to strong winds and weather. The easternmost proposed project impacts are over 1,000 feet from these eucalyptus trees. Additionally, the eucalyptus trees present along the hills behind the project site on private property, specifically the eucalyptus trees around the residential development off Bates Ranch Road as well as the eucalyptus trees that extend beyond the terminus of Camino Carreta, appear to be planted windrows and do not form large protected groves that have the microclimate characteristics monarchs require for overwintering.
Monarch butterflies are known to occur near the project site along Bates Road just north of U.S. Highway 101 in a eucalyptus stand associated with Rincon Creek (CNDDB Occurrence No. 268; Xerces Site No. 2803) (CDFW 2020a). Additionally, this site was known to have been surveyed for overwintering monarch populations in 2017 during the Xerces Society New Year’s Count, of which none were detected (Xerces Society 2020). While this population is not within 100 feet of the project site, it could be affected by project implementation due to changed weather patterns. However, no impacts to this monarch overwintering site is anticipated since the overall height of the slope within Rincon Beach County Park south of Highway 101 will not be reduced, as work includes proposed terraces to stabilize the hill but will not decrease its overall height, and therefore no changes to the wind conditions at the overwintering site are expected. Additionally, this overwintering site is largely protected by the hill below the single residential development at 637 Bates Road, and any possible changes to weather and wind patterns due to project implementation would not affect the protective contour this hill independently provides.
Therefore, monarch butterflies are not anticipated to be affected since there is low potential for the project site to support overwintering populations, and because known overwintering populations in the vicinity would not be adversely affected due to project implementation. Therefore, impacts to monarch butterfly individuals and monarch butterfly overwintering sites would be less than significant.
Several trees, including eucalyptus, Monterey cypress, pine, are located within the proposed trail alignment near its western terminus and U.S. Highway 101. These trees are relatively small and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance including U.S. Highway 101 vehicular traffic and pedestrian use of Carpinteria Avenue and adjacent areas. These isolated and singular trees lack dense foliage and are located in areas vulnerable to strong winds and weather. Several myoporum trees are located within the proposed trail alignment and are largely multistemmed. The myoporum located directly adjacent to the unsanctioned trail experiences high levels of human disturbance. Due to the locations of these trees in areas with high levels of human disturbance, relatively small size of these trees, isolated nature of the trees, and vulnerability to strong winds and weather, raptors are unlikely to nest in these trees. Therefore, removal of these trees would not substantially reduce or eliminate quantity or quality of raptor nesting areas and impacts would be less than significant.
Additionally, a stand of trees is present at the eastern terminus of the biological survey area, which are rooted next to the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. The eastern most proposed project impacts are over 1,000 feet from this stand of trees. The trees within the vicinity of Rincon Beach County Park are not planned to be directly impacted. Therefore, project impacts to raptor nesting trees would not substantially reduce or eliminate quantity or quality of nesting areas and impacts to nesting trees would be less than significant.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-34
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.2, five native scrub communities ([California brittle bush – ashy buckwheat scrub alliance, Encelia californica association], [quailbush scrub alliance, Atriplex lentiformis association], [coastal sage scrub: California sagebrush – (purple sage) scrub alliance, Artemisia californica association], [coyote brush scrub alliance, Baccharis pilularis association], and [lemonade berry scrub alliance, Rhus integrifolia association]) are found in the proposed trail alignment and adjacent areas. These five native scrub communities are designated sensitive by CDFW, County ESH by definition (coastal bluff scrub or coastal sage scrub habitat) or supporting sensitive species, and/or City ESHA by definition (coastal bluff scrub or coastal sage scrub habitat), mapped as ESHA by the City, or supporting sensitive species, as described in Table 3.3-5.
Communities impacted by the proposed project are shown in Table 3.3-5, below, and include California brittle bush – ashy buckwheat scrub alliance, Encelia californica association (0.38 acres temporary impacts, 0.04 acres permanent impacts) and quailbush scrub alliance, Atriplex lentiformis association (1.31 acres temporary impacts,
0.41 acres permanent impacts) as well as coastal sage scrub: California sagebrush – (purple sage) scrub alliance, Artemisia californica association (1.15 acres temporary impacts, 0.14 acres permanent impacts), coyote brush scrub alliance, Baccharis pilularis association (0.57 acres temporary impacts, 0.14 acres permanent impacts), and lemonade berry scrub alliance, Rhus integrifolia association (0.14 acres temporary impacts, 0.03 acres permanent impacts).
Table 3.3-5. Temporary and Permanent Impacts to Sensitive Native Vegetation Communities Vegetation Community Alliance, Association
AllianceAssociation
(State
Sensitive)/
County ESH/
City ESHA
Temporary
Impacts
(acres)
Permanent
Impacts
(acres)
Total Impacts
(acres)
Coastal Bluff Scrub
California Brittle Bush – Ashy Buckwheat Scrub
Alliance, Encelia californica Association
S3-Yes
(Yes)/Yes/Yes 0.38 0.04 0.42
Quailbush Scrub Alliance, Atriplex lentiformis
Association
S4-No
(No)/Yes/Yes 1.31 0.41 1.73
Coastal Bluff Scrub Subtotal 1.69 0.46 2.15
Coastal Scrub
California Sagebrush – (Purple Sage) Scrub
Alliance, Artemisia californica Association
S5-S4
(No)/Yes/Yes 1.15 0.14 1.29
Coyote Brush Scrub Alliance, Baccharis
pilularis Association
S5-No
(No)/Yes/Yes 0.57 0.14 0.71
Lemonade Berry Scrub Alliance, Rhus
integrifolia Association
S3-S3
(Yes)/Yes/Yes 0.14 0.03 0.17
Coastal Scrub Subtotal 1.86 0.30 2.17
Combined Total 3.55 0.76 4.32
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-35
As shown in Table 3.3-5, approximately 3.55 acres of CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA habitats would be temporarily impacted due to construction. An additional 0.76 acres of CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA habitats would be permanently impacted due to construction. These native plant communities are considered CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA and protected under County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) policies.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in a substantial adverse effect on a sensitive natural community, and impacts would be potentially significant.
County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) policies require County ESH and City ESHA avoidance. With implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-5, impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.8, above, no jurisdictional aquatic resources were detected at the biological survey area during the field survey. Therefore, no direct impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would occur. On the adjacent Carpinteria Bluffs III site, to the south and west of the western most portion of the project site, multiple seasonal pools and ephemeral pools have been documented (Sage Institute Inc. 2009; Dudek 2012a, 2012b).
As part of the Wetland Determination of Pool Features at Carpinteria Bluffs Area II per the California Coastal Act (Dudek 2012b), jurisdictional determinations for coastal wetlands were made for documented seasonal pools and ephemeral features. These coastal wetlands (Dudek 2012b) are approximately 123 feet from project temporary impacts and 125 feet from project permanent impacts. The closest mapped riverine or stream/river feature is associated with the Rincon Creek outlet located approximately 50 feet from the eastern portion of the biological survey area and over 1,000 feet from the eastern terminus of proposed impacts. The existing developed areas near this portion of Rincon Creek included the Rincon Beach County Park asphalt parking lot and associated developments of a standard curb, vegetation, paved Rincon Point Lane, and additional vegetation.
The City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) includes implementation policies associated with wetlands which state, “Maintain a minimum 100-foot setback/buffer strip in a natural condition along the upland limits of all wetlands. No structures other than those required to support light recreational, scientific and educational uses shall be permitted within the setback, where such structures are consistent with all other wetland development policies and where all feasible measures have been taken to prevent adverse impacts. The minimum setback may be adjusted upward to account for site-specific conditions affecting avoidance of adverse impacts.”
Project impacts, both temporary and permanent, are greater than 100 feet from known coastal wetlands near the western terminus of the project and greater than 1,000 feet from Rincon Creek near the eastern terminus of the project. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on coastal wetlands including creeks and no impact would occur.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-36
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.7, the proposed trail alignment is located adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and does not connect important habitat areas used by large or small terrestrial wildlife species. In addition, U.S. Highway 101 and the chain link fence adjacent to the southbound lanes of the highway provide impediments to movement of larger and medium-sized wildlife. Additionally, development and restricted access from more open space areas to the north impede wildlife movement in accessing the project site. Large-sized mammal species such as mountain lion and California black bears (Ursus americanus californiensis) may utilize areas to the east of the biological survey area including Rincon Creek and the channelized portion under U.S. Highway 101 to access beach areas; however, the surrounding areas where Rincon Creek daylights is developed with residential homes and parking lot improvements, resulting in a high urban wildlife interface. Medium-sized mammal species such as the striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) or northern raccoon (Procyon lotor) may occasionally use the opening provided by the trail to move locally along the coast. The trail may provide some hazard to common, smaller terrestrial species such as the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), common side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana) and California pocket mouse (Chaetodipus californicus), but the trail and associated fencing will not present a physical barrier to their movement.
Concerning avian species, minor changes to wind and weather patterns in a very local setting are not an impediment to birds moving long distance, particularly since the overall height of the slope should remain at the same elevation. As identified in the Airflow Study (Appendix I), the analysis of the effects of the proposed regrading of the bluff face for the project concluded that the proposed regrading could reduce the vertical airflow velocity by 10% to 30% relative to current conditions; for altitudes relevant to paragliding and soaring activities, the reduction is expected to be closer to 30%. Based on available experimental results, the introduction of an upper bench above the trail is expected to provide a small increase in turbulence (of the order of 5%) at an altitude of 30 feet above the front of the bluffs, becoming negligible by an altitude of approximately 75 feet. Migrating avian species may experience reduced airflow velocity by approximately 30% and an increase in turbulence (of the order of 5%) at an altitude of 30 feet above the front of the bluffs. Migratory avian species travel hundreds to thousands of miles at various elevations during which they can be exposed to a variety of weather systems within days or weeks of each other and have behavioral plasticity in response to microscale through mesoscale conditions including extremely adverse weather (Sahmoun-Baranes 2017). The anticipated changes in velocity and turbulence would occur within a short linear distance relative to the distance traveled for a migrating avian species, and avian species regularly adjust to changing weather conditions. Additionally, the velocity and turbulence changes would be focused at altitudes near the bluff top and would not extend the whole altitude range for migrating birds.
Therefore, changes in topography associated with regrading would not substantially impact migratory avian species and impacts would be less than significant.
In addition, as discussed under Threshold a, above, 22 species of native birds were detected on site, including several with the potential to nest there. Nests, eggs and nestlings of all native bird species are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code. Vegetation clearing and grading, if occurring during the nesting season (typically mid-February to August), have the potential to destroy nests, eggs and nestlings, which could violate these regulations. Therefore, the project impacts to nesting birds from project disturbances would be potentially significant. With implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-6, project impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-37
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.4, three Monterey cypress trees (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa), a species native to California but not to the project region, exist on or near the proposed alignment, or within the temporary impact area. This includes a single tree near the western terminus of the project site near the pull-out off Carpinteria Ave., a single tree at the edge of the temporary disturbance area near disturbed habitat in the western half of the project, and a single tree adjacent to the myoporum grove along an unsanctioned trail within Rincon Beach County Park. Additionally, two newly planted pine saplings (Pinus sp.) exist near the edge of the temporary disturbance area in the western portion of the project, both of which were under 3 inches diameter measured 4 feet from the ground and were installed with supportive stakes and mulch. Several eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.) are adjacent to the western portions of the proposed trail, located within the City, as well as exist near the eastern terminus of the biological survey area overhanging the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. All of the trees described above are not native or naturally occurring in the region, therefore they should not be considered native trees under Policy 9.36 of the Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan (County of Santa Barbara 2019).
Furthermore, the only trees on site that meet the definition for qualifying trees under the Santa Barbara County Article II Coastal Zoning Ordinance, are the few eucalyptus trees located at the eastern terminus of the biological survey area, the canopies of which spread across the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. These few trees are large enough and are located within 50 feet of Rincon Creek satisfying the definition for a qualifying tree. Note that Rincon Creek is outside the biological survey area and greater than 1,000 feet from proposed project impacts.
The trees associated with Rincon Creek and trees south of the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot are not proposed to be impacted or altered in any way, and thus the project would not conflict with the Coastal Zoning Ordinance. None of the other trees on site meet the definition of a qualifying trees under the Santa Barbara County Article II Coastal Zoning Ordinance as they are not located in a County street right-of-way, located within 50 feet of any major or minor stream, oak trees or used as a habitat by the monarch butterflies. In addition, none of the trees identified on site are not a part of any windbreak on the Carpinteria Bluffs, which are protected under the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003). Therefore, the project does not conflict with any local tree preservation policy and impacts to trees would be less than significant.
White-tailed kite is known to occur along the south coast, however, most foraging and nesting activity in the County is restricted to more rural areas and in particular, the Goleta and Santa Maria Valleys (Lehman 2020). The City specifically cites the Carpinteria Bluffs as a location where white-tailed kites occur and their habitat is protected.
However, no white-tailed kites were detected in the biological survey area, and the scrub vegetation that predominates there is unsuitable for foraging by this species, which hunts in habitats dominated by grasses and forbs. This species prefers open grassland or marshland habitats which are not present on site, and is found less commonly in agricultural areas or rights-of-way. Trees in and around the project site are relatively small, and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance where white-tailed kites are unlikely to nest. Marginally suitable woodland nesting habitat is present in the trees adjacent to the project site near Rincon Beach County Park and within the Rincon Point housing development; however, proposed project impacts are greater than 500 feet from these habitats. The trees within the vicinity of Rincon Beach County Park are not planned to be directly impacted. Therefore, impacts to white-tailed kites would be less than significant.
Monarchs require specific conditions for suitable wintering sites, and wintering sites in California are associated with wind-protected groves of large trees (primarily eucalyptus or pine) with nectar and water sources nearby, dappled sunlight, high humidity, and an absence of freezing temperatures or high wind, generally near the coast (Pelton et al. 2016). The majority of trees within the project site are either singular and isolated, or do not form a
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-38
large enough grove to provide adequate microclimate conditions and wind protection monarch butterflies require for overwintering sites. There are three eucalyptus trees present near the western terminus of the project site, however they each grow individually and do not form a grove capable of supporting overwintering monarchs. There is a small portion of eucalyptus trees within the eastern portion of the biological survey area, however, there is low potential for monarchs to overwinter here as well due to the small relative size of this eucalyptus stand and vulnerability to strong winds and weather. The easternmost proposed project impacts are over 1,000 feet from these eucalyptus trees. Additionally, the eucalyptus trees present along the hills behind the project sit on private property, specifically the eucalyptus trees around the residential development off Bates Ranch Road as well as the eucalyptus trees that extend beyond the terminus of Camino Carreta, appear to be planted windrows and do not form large protected groves that have the microclimate characteristics monarchs require for overwintering.
Monarch butterflies are known to occur near the project site along Bates Road just north of U.S. Highway 101 in a eucalyptus stand associated with Rincon Creek (CNDDB Occurrence No. 268; Xerces Site No. 2803) (CDFW 2020a). Additionally, this site was known to have been surveyed for overwintering monarch populations in 2017 during the Xerces Society New Year’s Count, of which none were detected (Xerces Society 2020). While this population is not within 100 feet of the project site, it could be affected by project implementation due to changed weather patterns. However, no impacts to this monarch overwintering site is anticipated since the overall height of the slope within Rincon Beach County Park south of U.S. Highway 101 will not be reduced, as work includes proposed terraces to stabilize the hill but will not decrease its overall height, and therefore no changes to the wind conditions at the overwintering site are expected. Additionally, this overwintering site is largely protected by the hill below the single residential development at 637 Bates Road, and any possible changes to weather and wind patterns due to project implementation would not affect the protective contour this hill independently provides.
Therefore, monarch butterflies are not anticipated to be affected since there is low potential for the project site to support overwintering populations, and because known overwintering populations in the vicinity would not be adversely affected due to project implementation. Therefore, impacts to monarch butterfly individuals and monarch butterfly overwintering sites would be less than significant.
Several trees, including eucalyptus, Monterey cypress, and pine, are located within the proposed trail alignment near its western terminus and U.S. Highway 101. These trees are relatively small and located in areas with high levels of human disturbance including U.S. Highway 101 vehicular traffic and pedestrian use of Carpinteria Avenue and adjacent areas. These isolated and singular trees lack dense foliage and are located in areas vulnerable to strong winds and weather. Several myoporum trees are located within the proposed trail alignment and are largely multistemmed. The myoporum located directly adjacent to the unsanctioned trail experiences high levels of human disturbance. Due to the locations of these trees in areas with high levels of human disturbance, relatively small size of these trees, isolated nature of the trees, and vulnerability to strong winds and weather, raptors are unlikely to nest in these trees. Therefore, removal of these trees would not substantially reduce or eliminate quantity or quality of raptor nesting areas and impacts would be less than significant.
Additionally, a stand of trees is present at the eastern terminus of the biological survey area, which are rooted next to the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. The easternmost proposed project impacts are over 1,000 feet from this stand of trees. The trees within the vicinity of Rincon Beach County Park are not planned to be directly impacted. Therefore, project impacts to raptor nesting trees would not substantially reduce or eliminate quantity or quality of nesting areas and impacts to nesting trees would be less than significant.
County environmentally sensitive habitat (ESH) and City environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) were evaluated based on definitions in the County Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003). As shown in Table 3.3-5,
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-39
approximately 3.55 acres of CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA habitats would be temporarily impacted due to construction. An additional 0.76 acres of CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA habitats would be permanently impacted due to construction. These native plant communities are considered CDFW sensitive, County ESH, and/or City ESHA and protected under County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) policies. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a substantial adverse effect on a sensitive natural community, and impacts would be potentially significant. County CLUP (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and the City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) policies require County ESH and City ESHA avoidance. With implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-5, impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation.
As discussed in Section 3.1.1.8, above, no jurisdictional aquatic resources were detected in the biological survey area during the field survey. Therefore, no direct impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources would occur. On the adjacent Carpinteria Bluffs III site, to the south and west of the western most portion of the project site, multiple seasonal pools and ephemeral pools have been documented (Sage Institute Inc. 2009; Dudek 2012a, 2012b).
As part of the Wetland Determination of Pool Features at Carpinteria Bluffs Area II per the California Coastal Act (Dudek 2012b), jurisdictional determinations for coastal wetlands were made for documented seasonal pools and ephemeral features. These coastal wetlands (Dudek 2012b) are approximately 123 feet from project temporary impacts and 125 feet from project permanent impacts. The closest mapped riverine or stream/river feature is associated with the Rincon Creek outlet located approximately 50 feet from the eastern portion of the biological survey area and over 1,000 feet from the eastern terminus of proposed impacts. The existing developed areas near this portion of Rincon Creek included the Rincon Beach County Park asphalt parking lot and associated developments of a standard curb, vegetation, paved Rincon Point Lane, and additional vegetation.
The City of Carpinteria General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) includes implementation policies associated with wetlands which state, Maintain a minimum 100-foot setback/buffer strip in a natural condition along the upland limits of all wetlands. No structures other than those required to support light recreational, scientific and educational uses shall be permitted within the setback, where such structures are consistent with all other wetland development policies and where all feasible measures have been taken to prevent adverse impacts. The minimum setback may be adjusted upward to account for site-specific conditions affecting avoidance of adverse impacts.
Project impacts, both temporary and permanent, are greater than 100 feet from known coastal wetlands near the western terminus of the project and greater than 1,000 feet from Rincon Creek near the eastern terminus of the project. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on coastal wetlands including creeks and no impact would occur.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No habitat conservation plans apply to the project area (CDFW 2019). No impact would occur. g) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable impacts to biological resources? The surrounding land uses of the project site include transportation, open space, residential development, and recreational facilities. While the project site is primarily composed of undeveloped lands, they have been previously subject to extensive grading to form the terraces and slopes that abut U.S. Highway 101 to the north
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-40
and UPRR which bisects the site. The coastal bluffs west of the project site are moderately trafficked areas used for recreation, walking, and biking. In 2017, The Land Trust for Santa Barbara County partnered with the Citizens for the Carpinteria Bluffs, the City of Carpinteria, the County of Santa Barbara, and over a thousand community members to purchase, initiate restoration, and ensure long-term maintenance of the Carpinteria Bluffs III property (also referred to as Rincon Bluffs Preserve), the 21-acre property directly to the west of the project site. A conservation easement of the Carpinteria Bluffs III property/Rincon Bluffs Preserve has been recorded which provides permanent preservation and provides long-term conservation of the open space, scenery, habitat for native plants and animals, and coastal access and recreational opportunities. And within the eastern portion of the project site, the currently developed Rincon Beach County Park provides infrastructure for recreation and is highly utilized. Areas to the south are associated with undeveloped beach areas and the Pacific Ocean. As discussed in Section 3.1.1.7, the proposed trail alignment is located adjacent to the Pacific Ocean and does not connect important habitat areas used by large or small terrestrial wildlife species, and minor changes to wind and weather patterns in a very local setting are not an impediment to birds moving long distance, particularly since the overall height of the slope would remain at the same elevation. Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce potential impacts to special-status wildlife species and sensitive vegetation communities to less-thansignificant levels. Therefore, cumulative impacts resulting from the proposed project, in combination with the reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area, would be less-than-significant.
3.3.5 Mitigation
MM-BIO-1 Workers Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP). The City shall fund an approved biologist to prepare and implement a worker education and awareness program (WEAP) specific to the project.
The program shall be presented to all individuals involved in the construction of the project. The program shall include information focused on sensitive vegetation communities, sensitive wildlife and plant species, and common wildlife species and their habitats and shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Description of sensitive vegetation communities.
• Workers shall be provided with photographs of sensitive biological resources including sensitive wildlife and plant species.
• Workers shall be informed verbally and in writing of the various project tasks that require biological surveys and monitoring for resource protection. • Workers shall be provided with a photograph or description of the markers for active bird nests, trees, or other mitigation areas, so that they shall know these are not to be disturbed without a biological monitor present.
• Workers shall be informed not to litter. All trash and litter shall be picked up and removed from the construction sites at the end of each day.
• Workers shall be informed to obey a speed limit of 15 miles per hour while traveling on the project site to avoid collisions with wildlife.
• Workers shall avoid driving over or otherwise disturbing areas outside the designated construction areas.
Plan Requirements and Timing: The applicant shall submit the WEAP to the City of Carpinteria (City) and County of Santa Barbara (County) for review and approval prior to implementation. All workers, contractors, and visitors shall attend the WEAP prior to entering the project site and performing any
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-41
work. The applicant shall provide copies of the training attendance sheets to City of Carpinteria and County staff as a record of compliance with this measure on a monthly basis. The WEAP shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Carpinteria and County prior to Zoning Clearance approval.
Implementation of the WEAP training shall occur prior to the start of construction and as new crew members are added to the project.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County permit compliance staff will ensure compliance with the WEAP throughout construction by review of attendance sheets and hardhats, inspection of the site, and interviewing workers, as appropriate.
MM-BIO-2 Fencing. To prevent inadvertent impacts on adjacent sensitive vegetation communities including County ESH and City ESHA, native vegetation, special-status species, and common wildlife species and their habitats, construction limits will be fenced with highly visible fencing and staked. Wildlifesafe highly visible construction fencing shall be installed to identify the limits of grading/disturbance, which would reduce potential human trampling outside of the construction limits and minimize the potential spread of non-native weeds or invasive plant species. Wildlife-safe construction fencing and flagging shall remain in place during construction and replaced as needed.
Plan Requirements and Timing: The detailed fencing plan, showing the location of required fencing shall be reviewed and approved by City of Carpinteria and County staff prior to Zoning Clearance approval. This condition shall be printed on all project plans. The detailed fencing plan, showing the location of fencing shall be submitted to City of Carpinteria and County staff for review and approval prior to Zoning Clearance approval. The fence shall be installed prior to the start of ground disturbing activities.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County staff will inspect the project plans and site, to ensure compliance with this measure as appropriate.
MM-BIO-3 Pre-construction California Legless Lizard Survey and Relocation. Prior to initiation of construction, capture and relocation efforts for California legless lizards shall be conducted. Trapping shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and shall include the following steps:
1. Prior to initiation of capture and relocation, a suitable receptor site shall be located. This site shall include areas with loose, moist soils occurring in scrub habitat with high coverage of deerweed (Lotus scoparius) or California goldenbush, in arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) thickets or in other suitable scrub or woodland habitat.
2. Capture and relocation shall take place no more than five days prior to the initiation of construction.
3. These surveys shall be performed by lightly raking loose soil, sand and leaf litter with a wooden rake for a sufficient period to determine that no legless lizards are present, or all legless lizards have been captured.
4. Any lizards found shall be placed in a receptacle with sand and a wet towel and relocated to the previously designated receptor site.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-42
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to initiation of construction, capture and relocation efforts for California legless lizards shall be conducted where appropriate. Trapping shall be conducted by a qualified biologist.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County staff shall ensure the pre-construction survey and relocation efforts, if required, are completed prior to commencement of any earth-moving activities.
MM-BIO-4 Pre-construction Woodrat Survey and Relocation. Prior to initiation of construction, capture and relocation efforts for woodrat shall be conducted. Trapping shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and shall include the following steps:
1. Prior to initiation of capture and relocation, a suitable receptor site shall be located. This site shall be within similar habitat and an adequate distance away from any locations that might be subject to increased human disturbance, such as adjacent to a walking path.
2. These pre-construction surveys shall be performed searching all coastal sage scrub or coastal bluff scrub within the disturbance area for middens or other sign of the species.
3. Any middens and woodrats found shall be live-trapped and relocated to the pre-determined receptor site. The midden shall be dismantled and the materials placed at the relocation site.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to initiation of construction, capture and relocation efforts for woodrat shall be conducted where appropriate. Trapping shall be conducted by a qualified biologist.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County staff shall ensure the pre-construction survey and relocation efforts, if required, are completed prior to commencement of any earth-moving activities.
MM-BIO-5 Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan. Prior to approval of a coastal development permit, the City shall contract with a qualified biologist to develop a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Plan (Plan) to mitigate for impacts to County ESH/City ESHA vegetation communities. The Plan shall outline efforts to restore or enhance coastal sage scrub and coastal bluff scrub communities, and, therefore, preserve or provide wildlife habitat, in areas temporarily impacted by construction of the trail and within similar habitats adjacent to the impacted biological resources. The Plan may focus on the following:
• In-kind, on-site restoration of areas where coastal sage scrub or coastal bluff scrub has been removed;
• Enhancement of temporarily impacted areas on site currently occupied by ornamental, disturbed or developed areas;
• Restoration of areas occupied by non-native habitats or native habitats with large components of non-native vegetation, within similar habitats adjacent to the impacted biological resources.
Under the Plan, a total of 3.55 acres of County ESH/City ESHA native vegetation communities temporarily impacted by vegetation clearance shall be restored on site in kind at 1:1. A total of
0.76 acres of County ESH/City ESHA native vegetation communities permanently impacted shall be mitigated on site in kind at 3:1. As mitigation potential within the project area may be insufficient for mitigating 0.76 acres permanent impacts to County ESH/City ESHA native vegetation communities at 3:1, any additional mitigation required shall be carried out on areas within adjacent
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-43
land controlled by the County or City, such as the Rincon Bluffs Preserve . Off-site mitigation for permanent impacts shall be implemented in-kind at 3:1.
A qualified biologist/botanist shall develop the Plan, which shall provide specific measures to restore or enhance habitat to replace the loss of coastal sage scrub and coastal bluff scrub communities. This Plan shall be focused on adaptive management principles, and shall identify detailed enhancement areas and strategies based on the parameters outlined below, with longterm timing and monitoring requirements. The Plan shall:
1. Provide an up-to-date inventory of on-site native vegetation resources.
2. Define attainable and measurable goals and objectives to achieve through implementation of the Plan. Goals and objections shall focus on replacement of coastal sage scrub, coastal bluff scrub and rare plants removed during construction.
3. Provide site selection and justification.
4. Detail a restoration work plan including methodologies, restoration schedule, plant materials (seed and container plant) sourcing – locally genetic stock, and implementation strategies.
5. Provide a detailed maintenance plan to include removal of invasive non-native species.
6. Define performance standards.
7. Provide a monitoring plan to include methods and analysis of results. Also, include goal success or failure criteria, and an adaptive management plan and suggestions for failed restoration efforts.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria shall contract with a qualified biologist to develop a Plan. The Plan shall outline efforts to restore or enhance coastal sage scrub and coastal bluff scrub communities in areas temporarily and permanently impacted by construction of the project.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County staff shall ensure development of the Plan and adherence to Plan measures are completed prior to commencement of any earth-moving activities.
City and County staff shall periodically conduct site inspections to ensure compliance on site.
Restored areas shall be monitored for five years following planting. Annual reports and the final report shall be submitted to the City and County.
MM-BIO-6 Pre-construction Nesting Bird Surveys. Within 30 days prior to any vegetation clearing or ground disturbance associated with construction or grading that would occur during the nesting/breeding season of native bird species potentially nesting on the site (typically mid-February through August in the project region, or as determined by a qualified biologist), the City shall have weekly surveys conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests of special-status bird species, or of any bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the California Fish and Game Code, are present in the disturbance zone or within 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) of the area to be disturbed.
The surveys shall occur on a weekly basis, with the last survey being conducted no more than seven days prior to initiation of disturbance work. If ground disturbance is delayed, then additional predisturbance surveys shall be conducted such that no more than seven days will have elapsed between the survey and ground disturbance activities. The City or contractor shall provide the biologist with plans detailing the extent of proposed ground disturbance prior to the survey effort.
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-44
If active nests are found, including any nests for Cooper’s hawk, clearing and construction within 300 feet of the nest (500 feet for raptors) shall be postponed or halted, at the discretion of the biologist, until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, as determined by the biologist, and there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest shall be established in the field with highly visible construction fencing, and construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. The results of the surveys, including graphics showing the locations of any nests detected, and any avoidance measures recommended, shall be submitted to the City and County within 14 days of completion of the pre-construction surveys to document compliance with applicable state and federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Pre-construction nesting bird surveys shall be completed within 30 days prior to any vegetation clearing or ground disturbance associated with construction or grading during the bird nesting season (typically mid-February to August). The surveys shall occur on a weekly basis, with the last survey being conducted no more than seven days prior to initiation of disturbance work.
Monitoring: The City of Carpinteria and County staff shall ensure the pre-construction nesting bird surveys and any avoidance requirements are completed prior to commencement of any earthmoving activities.
3.3.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-3 would reduce impacts to California legless lizard to less than significant. Implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-4 would reduce impacts to San Diego desert woodrat to less than significant. After implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-5, impacts to sensitive vegetation communities, including County ESH and City ESHA, would be less than significant. After implementation of MM-BIO-1, MM-BIO-2, and MM-BIO-6, impacts to nesting birds during the bird nesting season would be less than significant.
Rincon Beach Park
Parking Area and Coastal Access Point
C A R P I N T E R I A A V
CBB-ABS, ENCA
CBB-ABS, ENCA
CBB-ABS, ENCA
CBB-ABS,
ENCA
CS-PS, ARC
CS-PS, ARC
CYS, BP
DEV
DEV
DEV
DH
DH
DH
DH
EUC-TH-BL,
EUC
EUC-TH-BL, EUC
EUC-TH-BL,
EUC
EUC-TH-BL, EUC
IPM, CE IPM, CE
IPM, CE
LBS, RI
LBS, RI
PTMG, ML/AD
ORN
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
QS, ATL
RUD
150
101
1 27
2 20
5 62
40 4
7 35
9 1 41
32 23
75 10
81 116
198
139
262
FIGURE 3.3-1
Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail EIR
AERIAL SOURCE: CIRGIS 2017
ENGINEERING SOURCE: Bengal 2019
Proposed Project Impacts
California Native Plant Society California Rare
Plant Rank 3 and 4 Plant Species (individuals
count)
! (Malacothrix saxatilis "
saxatilis)
#$
(Phacelia
ramosissima " austrolitoralis)
%
#$
(Suaeda taxifolia)
! (Malacothrix saxatilis "
saxatilis)
&
#
'
#( )%
*
+##
,
*+-. /
#
#
0
$
+ Encelia
california ##
*+ /
$#
(
,
$
+ Artemisia
california ##
1+/
#
$
+
Baccharis pilularis ##
-2 *3*'+-2 /-
#
3
'
#4
#
+
Eucalyptus (globulus, camaldulensis)
##
56+ -/5
6#
+
Carpobrotus (edulis) ##
'+5/'
$
+
Rhus integrifolia ##
64+6'7)/
6
4
#
+ Myoporum laetum /
Arundo donax ##
8+'/8
$#
$
+
Atriplex lentiformis ##
)3/) #$
3$
9./
#
9
#
2)/
)-&/)
3.3 – Biological Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.3-46
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-1
3.4 Cultural Resources
This section describes the existing cultural resources conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project.
3.4.1 Existing Conditions
A Phase 1 cultural resources investigation for the originally proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail was prepared by Dudek in March 2008. The cultural resources investigation included an archaeological site records and literature search at the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), University of Santa Barbara, California and an intensive surface survey covering the entire project area. For the current revised trail design, Dudek performed a new Phase 1 Cultural Resources Survey in 2018 of the entire alignment to document existing conditions and in order to assess impacts of the updated trail alignment on cultural resources. The updated Phase 1 cultural resources investigation included an archaeological site records and literature search at the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), University of Santa Barbara, California and an intensive surface survey of the revised trail alignment and area within earthwork limits and temporary impact areas delineated for the transportation and storage of construction equipment. As is customary for Phase 1 cultural resource surveys, the document is not circulated with the associated CEQA document. The updated Dudek Phase 1 survey is onfile with the City of Carpinteria, Community Development Department and with the County of Santa Barbara Planning & Development Department.
Although limited weathered shell was observed in disturbed contexts, no cultural resources were observed in situ, or within intact soils, during the intensive field survey under generally good to excellent ground surface visibility. However, the project site is not only located partially within an archaeological site (CA-SBA-1168), it is also surrounded, in every direction, by archaeological sites with the closest loci of CA-SBA-1/CA-VEN-62 located immediately adjacent to the southeastern extent of the proposed project site. Based on the presence of a portion of the proposed project site overlapping a small portion of the archaeological site CA-SBA-1168, the close proximity of multiple archaeological sites to the proposed project site, as well as the general archaeological sensitivity of the area surrounding the proposed project site, there is substantial evidence for potential unknown significant prehistoric and historic archaeological resources to exist within the project site. Technical Reports and supporting documentation are available in Confidential Appendix D.
These confidential appendices are archived at the City and are only accessible to eligible individuals as defined under applicable regulations governing cultural resources confidentiality.
3.4.1.1 Prehistoric Setting
California has one of the best studied archaeological records in the world, and the Santa Barbara Channel is among the most studied regions of California. The basic regional culture historical patterns (i.e., what life was like at different points in time) have been articulated for many decades, and in spite of the ever increasing intensity of archaeological work in the region, our understanding (or at least our definition) of these general patterns has changed only slightly in part because our understanding of how to distinguish them has been compromised by conflicting data and interpretations; notable exceptions include our understanding of the earliest inhabitants, which keeps getting earlier and better defined (Erlandson et al. 2011; Erlandson, Rick, et al. 2007), and our perspectives on the late prehistoric evolution of socio-political complexity, which have matured and expanded rapidly since the late 1980s (e.g., Erlandson and Jones 2002; Arnold 2001, 2004).
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-2
The cultural history of the Santa Barbara Channel has seen many iterations, and much of our understanding of change through time is based on foundational research by Rogers (1929) and Warren (1968), both of whom conducted substantial primary research on the mainland coast. Higher resolution periodization was later established by King (1990) who used a combination of stylistic change in shell beads and absolute ages from radiocarbon dates. This bead-based chronology dovetails well with a more recent chronology based on lower-resolution changes in human behavior and material culture (Arnold 1992), and this has been further refined with a larger set of absolute age estimates pegged to a background of regional environmental change matched with more accurate radiocarbon calibration (Kennett 2005). 1 Note that the
temporal span of each period in the sequence is approximate, and naming conventions for them vary across different authors; the cultural patterns (e.g., subsistence and settlement) and temporal markers (shell bead styles, for example) used to define them, also vary across temporal boundaries by region.
Paleoindian/Paleocoastal Period (The Earliest Inhabitants): 13,000 – 11,000 BP Though the earliest appearance of people in the New World is a contentious issue with new data generating new ideas every few years about who they were and how they got here, the evidence from the California Bight is relatively straightforward: cultural deposits and human remains from a series of sites on Santa Rosa and San Miguel islands date from 13,000-11,500 years ago and suggest that people at the time were well-adapted to life on the sea but also had connections to people who lived much further east, deep in the American continent (Erlandson et al. 2011). While this isn’t the earliest evidence of human activity in the New World (which, at most is somewhere between 16,000 and 15,000 years old), this early evidence from the West Coast gives credit to the idea that (at least some of) its earliest inhabitants were a marine-adapted people able to move skillfully and quickly between islands and near-shore environments across the southern landmass of the (now submerged) continent of Beringia, down the entire Pacific Coast of North America, and eventually to the southern tip of South America in only a few thousand years (Erlandson, Graham, et al. 2007; Fladmark 1979; Dixon 2001). Though these “Paleocoastal” sites from the islands are the earliest we know of, we may never find evidence for the earliest coastal inhabitants as the shorelines they lived on are now submerged under more than 50 m of water (Masters and Aiello 2007). Indeed, sites of this antiquity are unknown on the mainland, though the occasional isolated – and undated – fluted projectile point (for example from Gaviota State Park CA-SBA-1951) may be suggestive (Erlandson, Cooley, and Carrico 1987).
Early Holocene/Milling Stone Horizon: 11,000 – 5500 BP
Many scholars of North American archaeology separate the Paleoindian/Paleocoastal period from the succeeding Archaic period on the rough (and now debatable) observation that the earlier people were more focused on large game while the later people exploited a broader range of resources and required a different set of tools to do so.
On a continent-wide scale, the Archaic therefore sits in the middle of a trajectory of increasing technological and social intensity, somewhere between big-game hunting and full-fledged farming; in California, this crude trajectory has little value as farming was never part of the pre-Columbian picture, yet use of the term “Archaic” persists (cf.
Meighan 1959). Colloquially, it applies to everything from the Early Holocene to the end of the Middle-Late Period transition (ca. 11,000 – 1000 years ago), distinguished only by the late prehistoric intensification of economy, technology, population, and political complexity (though see Glassow 1992 for a slightly different interpretation). 1 Note that all dates provided herein are rounded and drawn from the literature. We attempt to maintain consistency by using calendar, calibrated, years before present (cal BP) which are essentially the same as saying “years ago.” However, most authors prior to the mid-1990s (e.g., Glassow 1996) typically report in uncalibrated radiocarbon years before present, uncorrected for marine reservoir offsets, therefore their cultural chronologies can differ from current age estimates for the same site (or cultural period) by 200 – 1500 years, depending on the age and material dated. This is a general problem for the interpretation of California culture history as even current authors use a mixture of differently reported dates. We’ve tried to account for this, as much as possible, herein, but it further suggests the need to maintain a large, fully vetted, and corrected radiocarbon database, preferably shared across multiple research teams and authors.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-3
Here, the division between Paleoindian and Early Archaic is somewhat arbitrary, but follows current convention; likewise, we combine the earliest known settlements on the mainland coast in this period with those of the more well-documented Milling Stone Horizon because they exist in many of the same places, show evidence for the intensive use of shellfish, use many of the same tools (albeit in different proportions), and overlap in time.
One of the reasons these sites are so visible, stratified, and well-preserved is they contain the remains of shellfish, leading many to suggest that this early Holocene occupation of the region was heavily oriented towards the intensive and persistent exploitation of marine resources. The material remains (and perhaps adaptations) of these earliest Holocene2 inhabitants of the mainland occasionally differ however, from their predecessors on the islands, but also from their successors on the mainland. However, some of these early sites also differ from the later coastal (and Coast Range interior) occupants as they do not contain millingstones, which become increasingly common after about 8500 years ago. However, it is important not to overstate the differences, as there are clearly sites dating to the early Holocene where groundstone dominates the formal lithic assemblage, both on the coast (Fitzgerald 2000) and deep into the interior (McGuire 1993). Contemporaneous variability in site types and artifact assemblages may point to variability in mobile foraging strategies, or reveal that very different groups exploited an otherwise sparsely inhabited coastal region at slightly different times. These alternatives demand interrogation, as do the relationships between the evidence for human activity on the coast and that of the California interior and the more distant Desert West (Koerper, Langenwalter, and Schroth 1991).
While the emergence of an adaptation tuned to marine resources seems beyond question (particularly if the first people to come to coastal California brought this ability with them from somewhere else), the emergence of a processing technology centered on the use of groundstone slabs and handstones (i.e., the hallmarks of the Milling Stone Horizon) has been the focus of investigation for decades (see Warren 1968; Basgall and True 1985). Like shell middens, grinding tools, especially in high frequencies, are highly visible in the archaeological record and at face value can bias (indeed have biased) interpretation of their relative economic importance (see Nelson and Lippmeier 1993). Recent efforts to understand the highly visible “Milling Stone” sites focus on patterns of groundstone manufacture and use. Following Basgall and True (1985), Hale (2001) analyzed groundstone (millingstones and handstones) and battered stone (scraper planes, cobble tools, etc.) tools from well-known Milling Stone sites across Southern California, including CA-SBA-142 (Glen Annie Canyon) on the Santa Barbara mainland, and found that Milling Stone sites were places that people visited repeatedly, over hundreds to thousands of years to conduct similar economic activities, perhaps for only short periods of time. The large numbers of reused or expedient groundstone tools at these sites speak to food processing. Indeed, regular use of milling tools for processing seeds and other plant foods, such as roots and tubers, does not preclude using them to process rodents, reptiles, and other animals (which might be more easily cooked or dried with less costly tools).
Costs associated with acquiring and transporting raw materials suitable for milling, and investments in shaping them to accomplish specific tasks may be modest (depending on local geology), but significant enough to suggest they were essential for survival; investing in them would make them available for use in less essential tasks, like pulverizing nonessential foods or pigments, that might otherwise be processed in other ways. Therefore, while millingstones may have been used for many things, their prominence indexes their importance to a specific adaptive strategy, and archaeological research should be geared towards understanding that relationship.
Hale (2001) interprets Milling Stone sites as places of seasonal occupation for intensive processing, but not as sedentary villages as Wallace (1955) and others envision. Large, well-used assemblages in single locations (as is typical of the classic Milling Stone identity) result from recurrent seasonal visits to specific locations for food processing over multiple years. The milling equipment in these kinds of sites are typically made from locally abundant stone (encountered either in its raw form or as previously discarded tools). Therefore, analysis of tool shaping and maintenance as well as use-wear reveal much about the nature and intensity of occupation and activity. 2 Note that the Holocene is set at the end of the Younger Dryas, ca. 11,500 years ago (+/-).
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-4
Hale (2001) also laments the rarity of other kinds of sites linked both temporally and socioeconomically to those of the Milling Stone period, as they would help to illustrate the full picture of the Archaic in California, and help us to move beyond simple definitions of it as a period marked by economic drudgery imposed by marginalizing climatic regimes (e.g., the Altithermal - see Antevs 1948). Herein lies an important research avenue: assembling well-dated archaeological site data across broad regions to better understand socioeconomic nuance during the Archaic and abandon the site-specific interpretation of the Milling Stone period that is itself an artifact of early archaeological research.
Generally speaking, adaptations attributed to the Archaic (including the Milling Stone phenomenon) involved small groups of people who moved regularly throughout the year to exploit a broad range of resources using a very flexible tool kit that could be made relatively easily or expediently and applied to a wide range of scenarios (Hale 2001; Fitzgerald and Jones 1999; Lantis 1938; Basgall and True 1985). Here, and elsewhere throughout the California Bight and central coast, the full suite of material attributes aligned with the classic Milling Stone horizon is found in a relatively small number of archaeological sites; together with evidence for somewhat different activities at other kinds of sites, presumably within the spatial catchment of annual, or even generational human activity, the Milling Stone pattern reveals a “highly successful strategy of mobility, flexibility, and emphasis on low-risk, moderate-return resources, such as small game, shellfish, and certain plants… (that) seems downright practical” for the environmental and cultural context of the age (Stevens 2013: 54).
The Early Period: 5500 – 2500 BP
The identity of the California “Early Period” in Santa Barbara (in both definition and timing) differs from that of other parts of California. The problem is really about the naming conventions assigned to trends (i.e., the “Periods”) in the production and use of shell beads which vary around the state (Bennyhoff and Hughes 1987; Groza 2002; Groza et al. 2011) rather than local conditions or broader patterns of behavior.3 Instead, here it helps to imagine the shift in quasi-adaptive terms, initially characterized by both Rogers (1929) and Greenwood (1972) as a “Hunting” people or period, marked quite notably by an increase in the abundance of projectile points and a decline in the relative abundance of millingstones. On the central coast, Jones and colleagues (Jones 1992; Jones and Codding 2019; Jones et al. 2007) put the division somewhere between 5500 and 5100 BP, though others (Glassow et al. 2007; Lebow and Moratto 2005) see this transition happening around the Northern California Bight at 7500-7000 BP; yet the use of millingstones continues here, and elsewhere in California, into the late Holocene (Erlandson 1997a, 1997b; Sutton, Schneider, and Yohe II 1993).
Beyond the bead-based periodization, temporal distinctions are hazy, as identification of the Early Period as a clear-cut behavioral or cultural shift at a specific point in time is less obvious. In the literature from the mainland of the California Bight, some authors identify change in patterns of settlement, specifically a shift away from a practice of relocating the entire residential settlement multiple times throughout the year (i.e., a “residentially mobile” pattern), to a pattern the entails moving the residential base only a few times a year (i.e., a “logistically mobile” pattern). For example, Glassow (1990, 1996) saw this shift happening at approximately 8500 years ago for the broader region (prior to the dates he uses for the end of the Milling Stone Horizon) while research from the far northern end of the California Bight puts this shift much later, at approximately 3000 years ago (Lebow et al. 2006). Unfortunately, the differences in interpretation make it difficult to identify or define temporal periods for the region on the basis of cultural behavior alone.
Use of milling equipment persists through this period, though the form and variety of the manos and metates change (Gamble and King 1997), while mortars and pestles were “added to the milling repertoire” around 6000 years ago (Glassow et al. 2007:197). At CA-SBA-53 on the Goleta Slough, millingstones and mortars in roughly the 3 By contrast, archaeologists in other parts of the state have abandoned this confusion in favor of chronologies based on a broader range of material culture anchored to absolute dates (Rosenthal 2011; Rosenthal et al. 2007) Either way, these names and boundaries are all somewhat arbitrary, imprecise, and/or artificial.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-5
same proportions (and in greater numbers than in most any other excavated sites in the region) come from deposits dating to 5650-5050 BP (Harrison and Harrison 1966; Rick and Glassow 1999). Whether any of these things point to a change in diet is still an open question. Importantly, mortars are costly to make and signal an investment in processing technology much greater than the use of millingstones (Hale 2001, 2010). Such an investment was likely made to increase processing efficiency of pulpy nut meat such as acorns (Hale 2009). Glassow (1997) suggests that they could have been used to process bulrush and other estuarine resources, though millingstones would have offered similar efficiency in processing such things. It is certain, however, that the addition of mortars marks a socioeconomic shift that placed emphasis on intensive resource extraction and/or processing beyond that which could be accomplished using a basined millingstone. Perhaps this is the economic shift that identifies the onset of the Early Period. The extent to which this change in economy reflects change in the density and distribution of subsistence resources as a function of regional environmental change at the end of the Mid-Holocene warm period, or “Altithermal” (Glassow 1997; Rick and Glassow 1999; Glassow, Wilcoxon, and Erlandson 1988), along with a decline in marine productivity associated with warming sea-surface temperatures (Kennett et al. 2007) is an important but unresolved issue.
A broad range of evidence regarding subsistence diversification, increasing sedentism, status differentiation, ritual activity, rock art, and population growth have all been marshalled to suggest that the second half of this interval (after 4000 years ago, or what Lebow and Moratto call the “Late Early Period”) contains some of the earliest evidence for the evolution of cultural complexity in the region (Glassow et al. 2007; Erlandson and Rick 2002), though dramatic, fundamental change did not happen until the end of the Middle Period and into the Late Period.
The Middle Period: 2500 – 800 BP
Glassow (1996: 22) suggests that the defining feature of this period is the elevated importance of fish and marine mammals in the subsistence budget. Appearance of the single-piece shell fishhook around 2900 BP, along with increasing importance of notched stone sinkers corroborates this and may have been essential to the intensification of the marine-based economy on the mainland as well as on the islands (Rick et al. 2002; Erlandson 1997b). Indeed, intertidal resources (namely shellfish) remained important to everyone living within walking distance of the coast. And though it seems clear that people in some places acquired more of their protein from large terrestrial and marine mammals during the Middle Period than did people in earlier periods (Lebow et al. 2007) shellfish was still the dominant source of protein throughout the region (Glassow 1992).
During this time, the old groundstone food processing slabs of the early and middle Holocene are mostly absent throughout the region, while mortars become more common, and with increasing effort invested in their production (Glassow 1996; Hale 2009). Whether or not this shift from millingstones to mortars points to the rising importance of the acorn to the subsistence economy, as it is thought to do elsewhere in California (Hale 2010; Basgall 1987), is a question that demands further attention. Answering it depends, in part, on establishing a solid understanding of the distribution of different kinds of oak trees in different parts of the region. For example, oak trees are rare, or entirely absent from the landscape within about 10 km of the coastline throughout the northern end of the California Bight (see Glassow 1996: 6). Where oak trees were scarce, mortars were either used for processing other things, or acorns were transported from considerable distance – a pattern well documented from other parts of California (Morgan 2007).
Land use patterns observed to the west, in the Vandenberg region (Lebow et al. 2006), suggest that these changes in resource use were accompanied by a shift in settlement patterns: though the shift to a logistical pattern of residence began around 3000 years ago, it was fully in place throughout the Middle Period. If the patterns observed from the compilation of radiocarbon dates, both from Vandenberg (Lebow et al. 2010; Lebow et al. 2011) and the
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-6
surrounding region (Glassow 1996) can be used to evaluate change in human population, then the Middle Period is the first episode of measurable and sustained demographic increase in the history of the region, increasing noticeably approximately 2800-1800 years ago, and then dramatically after that. Thereafter, life across the Channel on the Islands starts to change markedly: the number of settlements starts to increase and people start to live in those settlements for longer periods of time while commanding more rigid territories and controlling the natural resources within them; at the same time, the incidence of inter-personal violence increases while human health and stature start to decline (Kennett 2005; Lambert and Walker 1991; Lambert 1997, 2002; Walker 1989).
Together, these things mark the beginning of a trend that continues into the Late Period where it intensifies dramatically. The extent to which these patterns obtained on the mainland and the adjacent interior, or how people in any given area were affected by the dramatic change on the Islands, are open questions.
The Late Period: 800 B.P. – European colonization (ca. A.D. 1780) For most of this periodization, the exact starting and ending dates are mostly inconsequential, but the Late Period is different, in part because the bead-based chronology is more precise, the archaeological record is better preserved, change in that record is more pronounced, and because change in the cultural record seems to match dramatic change in well-dated, high-resolution paleo-environmental archives from the Santa Barbara Basin that are also reflected in written records from other parts of the world (Kennett and Kennett 2000; Kennett 2005; Raab and Larson 1997; Jones and Kennett 1999; Arnold, Colten, and Pletka 1997). Setting it at 800 B.P. follows King’s (1990) bead-based chronology, and includes the period of dramatic environmental change (ca. 800-650 BP) along with its purported role in rapid Late Period cultural change. However, one could easily define this cultural period by everything that happens after that environmental change, as Arnold (1992) does, or alternatively by putting it at 1300 BP – the beginning of Lebow and Moratto’s (2005) Late Middle Period – by which time many of the material hallmarks of Late Period cultural complexity (the sewn-plank canoe, the bow and arrow, exotic raw materials, intensive fishing, standardized Olivella shell beads, status differentiation, skeletal evidence for interpersonal violence, stable primary villages) were all in place, and the pace of cultural change began to increase (Kennett 2005).
Hale (2010) argues that the rate-limiting factors on cultural evolution are socioeconomic, rather than technoenvironmental. Therefore, the archaeological signatures of culture change (namely, the types and uses of artifacts, including food remains) that appear to be more rapid during the Late Period are more important when viewed in the light of major socioeconomic shifts, rather than seeing them simply as a rapid accumulation of variability. More to the point, a time-limited strategy would actively resist change while an energy-limited strategy would actively pursue it, and would accumulate material representation in the archaeological record accordingly simply through technological improvements to make tools more efficient or specialized, and in specialized subsistence (Bettinger 1999). The causal relationship between the archaeologically visible increase in material diversity over shorter periods of time, and socioeconomic strategy (i.e., time- or energy-limited) on the one hand, or demographic increase on the other (see below), merits further investigation throughout the region (particularly at sites with rich artifact assemblages).
Since the mid-1980s an enormous body of literature has accumulated on the origins of cultural, social, and political complexity in the Santa Barbara Channel. Much of this has been dedicated to the Late Period and most of that has been done on the Islands. The archaeology of this is spectacular, and dovetails dramatically with the written accounts of European explorers, Mission colonists, and 20th century ethnographers. In addition to basic archaeological reconnaissance, there has been focused attention on understanding subsistence (e.g., Bernard 2004; Martin and Popper 2001), the context of shell bead money production (Arnold and Munns 1994), the production of tools (i.e., microlithic drills) used to manufacture that money (Arnold 1987, 2001), the differential access to exotic goods (Arnold and Graesch 2001), the presence of trade centers (Arnold 2001; Gamble 2008), the production and control of sea-worthy watercraft (Gamble 2002; Arnold 1995), and established patterns of exchange (Arnold 1995; Fauvelle 2011).
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-7
By 650 BP the full suite of attributes that early European chroniclers noticed of the Chumash were in place on the Islands: sedentary villages of permanent semi-subterranean architecture, high dietary diversity that also included prestige items like pelagic fish, a monetized market economy, specialized craft production, inter-village and islandmainland exchange networks, political control of natural resources, numerous forms of personal adornment, and an unequal distribution of wealth. Presumably, these things also index the social order documented of the Chumash, including elite offices, formal religious systems, hereditary power and prestige (i.e., the “Dynasty of Nobility”), a ranked social order, institutional inequality, and chiefly control (e.g., Blackburn 1976; Gamble 2008; Harrington 1942; Hollimon 2004; Johnson 1988).
3.4.1.2 Historic Context
The earliest European exploration of California was by sea approximately one generation following the Spanish conquest of the indigenous groups in what is now Mexico. In 1542, ships under the command of former conquistador Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo explored the coast perhaps as far north as Mendocino. The expedition spent time ashore on the mainland and islands of the Santa Barbara Channel, long enough to record various attributes of Chumash social and political life, and noted that the region along the mainland coast from approximately Point Mugu to Point Conception was heavily populated. That said, the Cabrillo expedition only report going ashore here to visit settlements at Pueblo de las Canoas (interpreted variously as either Ventura, Mugu, or Malibu Lagoon), Pueblo de las Sardinas (perhaps at Mission Creek near downtown Santa Barbara), and Xexo (likely Cojo Anchorage at Point Concepcion). Inhabitants from these settlements, as well as those at Dos Pueblos, Goleta Lagoon, and perhaps Carpinteria likely paddled out to encounter, and board, the European sailing vessels (Gamble 2008; McDaniel McDevitt 2013; Johnson 1982; Rindge 1985; Heizer 1972; Wagner 1928). The Cabrillo expedition also anchored and landed at various points on the islands, including on their return trip south, where Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo died under conflicting accounts, perhaps on San Miguel Island (Heizer 1972).
Spanish ships engaged in the Manila Galleon trade regularly sailed south along the California coast beginning in 1565. This resulted in a least two known instances of contact with indigenous groups in California. One instance occurred when Pedro de Unamuno entered Morro Bay in 1587 and traveled inland perhaps as far as what is now the city of San Luis Obispo and made claim to the land in the name of the King of Spain. Later, Sebastian Cermeño visited San Luis Obispo Bay in 1595 in a small boat following the loss of his ship further north at Point Reyes (Greenwood 1978). These voyages did little to strengthen the Spanish presence in the remote province of Alta California. In 1602, Sebastián Vizcaíno sailed north through the Santa Barbara channel long enough to grant one of the islands (and therefore the region) the name “Santa Barbara.” While in the region the expedition encountered several Chumash who had come out by canoe to greet and inspect them (Wagner 1929). Vizcaíno’s cosmographer, Jerónimo Martín Palacios, may have paid a return visit to the mainland long enough to comment on the size of the settlements and the quality of its natural resources, though this remains uncertain (Brown 1967).
Spanish Mission Period (1786–1834)
Following the earliest boat-based exploratory visits to the Santa Barbara Channel, and the subsequent, irregular, and largely undocumented contacts through the Manila Galleon trade, the Spanish Period in the California Bight began with the 1769 overland expedition led by Captain Gaspar de Portolá in an effort to establish a system of missions and fortifications in Alta California. The goal of the Portolá expedition was to establish a mission in Monterey, the second mission in Alta California following the mission in San Diego, and to reconnoiter the region for colonization.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-8
Diaries from the Portolá expedition provide the most detailed accounts of the mainland around Santa Barbara, where they made elaborate descriptions of Chumash generosity, ceremony, performance, cuisine, village size, population, and even politics (Bolton 1967; Priestley 1937; D.E. Smith and Teggart 1909; Teggart 1909). Notably, the village names recorded by the Portolá expedition did not match those recorded by Cabrillo 227 years earlier, perhaps revealing something about the long term stability and tenure of village locations in the area, possibly associated (at least during the protohistoric era) with shifting socioeconomic interests and political allegiances (C.D.
King 1978; Johnson 1982).
When the Portolá expedition traveled overland, heading north from Ventura in 1769, they were famously taken by what they witnessed in the vicinity of modern day Carpinteria: a large, prosperous bluff-top village next to a freshwater outlet (Carpinteria Creek) oriented substantially towards the sea. To the Spanish, the presence of several tomol sewn-plank canoes in various states of manufacture or repair seemed like a shipyard, and they dubbed the location La Carpinteria (Brown 2001). This was the village of Mishopshno, and over the years the Spanish estimated between 500 and 97 inhabitants, notably declining from A.D.1770 to 1796 (Gamble 2008; Brown 1967, 2001).
An important feature of this location, as noted by Friar Crespí of the Portolá expedition, were the natural “springs” of asphaltum, which provided essential raw materials for (among other things) the waterproofing of ocean-going canoes (Brown 2001). As the expedition moved north from here, they would have had to circumvent a large lagoon or estuary occupying an area much larger than that represented by the Carpinteria Salt Marsh today. Beyond that, near the mouth of Toro Canyon they encountered the village of Q’oloq’ (Coloc), which was considerably smaller than Mishopshno, before continuing up the coast. This area was later visited by Felipe de Goycoechea in 1796 while conducting a formal census of the California coast.
With the establishment of Mission San Luis Obispo (1772), Mission San Buenaventura (1782), the Presidio of Santa Barbara (1782), and later Mission Santa Barbara (1786), Mission La Purísima (1787), and Mission Santa Ynez (1804), life changed profoundly for the indigenous inhabitants of the region. The root cause of change was Spanish religious and political hegemony brought by the Franciscan missionaries and enforcement of their assumed authority by the Spanish military. Religious conversion, adoption of farming and ranching practices, forced labor, capital and corporal punishment, virulent exotic disease, and intermarriage with other groups also contributed to the rapid dissipation or modification of many aspects of traditional tribal culture. The effect of the early Spanish Period on the Native population was dramatic. By 1805, the vast majority of pre-existing Chumash villages had been abandoned as their inhabitants either relocated to the Mission districts to assimilate with communities there, or moved further inland to the periphery of traditional Chumash territory and beyond (McLendon and Johnson 1999; Byrd and DeArmond 2018; Byrd, DeArmond, and Engbring 2018).
The extent to which the armed Chumash resistance of 1824, and the subsequent response by both Spanish and Chumash (Sandos 1985) affected the lifeways, residences, and genealogical histories of people originally tied to the villages of Mishopshno and Q’oloq’ – both of which are recorded in the baptismal records of Mission Santa Barbara (Johnson 1988) – is an ongoing and important avenue of research, perhaps answerable only through a combination of documentary records, oral history, and thoughtful, ongoing consultation and collaboration (Ranch 2012).
3.4.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.4.2.1 Federal
Although there is no federal nexus for this project, the trail proposal was evaluated in consideration of National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) designation criteria and integrity requirements.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-9
National Register of Historic Places
The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the United States’ official list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects worthy of preservation. Overseen by the National Park Service, under the U.S. Department of the Interior, the NRHP was authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. Its listings encompass all National Historic Landmarks and historic areas administered by the National Park Service.
NRHP guidelines for the evaluation of historic significance were developed to be flexible and to recognize the accomplishments of all who have made significant contributions to the nation’s history and heritage. Its criteria are designed to guide federal agencies, state and local governments, and others in evaluating potential entries in the NRHP. For a property to be listed in or determined eligible for listing, it must be demonstrated to possess integrity and to meet at least one of the following criteria:
The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, 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.
Integrity is defined in NRHP guidance, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, as “the ability of a property to convey its significance. To be listed in the NRHP, a property must not only be shown to be significant under the NRHP criteria, but it also must have integrity” (NPS 1990). In assessing historic integrity, the NRHP recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, in various combinations, define integrity. In order to retain historic integrity “a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects” (NPS 1990). The seven aspects of integrity are: location, design, setting, workmanship, materials, feeling, and association. NRHP guidance further asserts that properties be completed at least 50 years ago to be considered for eligibility. Properties completed fewer than 50 years before evaluation must be proven to be “exceptionally important” (criteria consideration G) to be considered for listing.
3.4.2.2 State
California Register of Historical Resources
In California, the term “historical resource” includes “any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which is historically or archaeologically significant, or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California” (PRC Section 5020.1(j)). In 1992, the California legislature established the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) “to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change” (PRC Section 5024.1(a)). The criteria for listing resources on the CRHR, enumerated as follows, were developed to
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-10
be in accordance with previously established criteria developed for listing in the NRHP, previously enumerated above. According to Public Resources Code (PRC), Section 5024.1(c)(1–4), a resource is considered historically significant if it (i) retains “substantial integrity” and (ii) meets at least one of the following criteria:
(1) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
(2) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. (3) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. (4) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
To understand the historic importance of a resource, sufficient time must have passed to obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resource. A resource less than 50 years old may be considered for listing in the CRHR if it can be demonstrated that sufficient time has passed to understand its historical importance (see 14 CCR 4852(d)(2)).
The CRHR protects cultural resources by requiring evaluations of the significance of prehistoric and historic resources. The criteria for the CRHR are nearly identical to those for the NRHP, and properties listed or formally designated as eligible for listing in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR, as are the state landmarks and points of interest. The CRHR also includes properties designated under local ordinances or identified through local historical resource surveys.
California Environmental Quality Act
The following California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) statutes (PRC Section 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) are of relevance to the analysis of archaeological, historic, and tribal cultural resources:
PRC Section 21083.2(g) defines “unique archaeological resource” as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria (PRC Section 21083.2(g)):
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
(2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
• PRC Section 21084.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) defines “historical resources.” In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b) defines the phrase “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource”; it also defines the circumstances when a project would materially impair the significance of a historical resource.
• PRC Section 21074(a) defines “tribal cultural resources.” • PRC Section 5097.98 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) set forth standards and steps to be employed following the accidental discovery of human remains in any location other than a dedicated ceremony.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-11
• PRC Sections 21083.2(b) and 21083.2(c) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 provide information regarding the mitigation framework for archaeological and historic resources, including examples of preservation-in-place mitigation measures. Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to significant archaeological sites because it maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context and may help avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the archaeological site(s).
Under CEQA, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it may cause “a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” (PRC Section 21084.1; 14 CCR 15064.5(b)). If a site is listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, included in a local register of historic resources, or identified as significant in a historical resources survey (meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(c)), it is an “historical resource” and is presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of CEQA (PRC Section 21084.1; 14 CCR 15064.5(a)). The lead agency is not precluded from determining that a resource is a historical resource even if it does not fall within this presumption (PRC Section 21084.1; 14 CCR 15064.5(a)).
A “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” reflecting a significant effect under CEQA means “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would be materially impaired” (14 CCR 15064.5(b)(1); PRC Section 5020.1(q)). In turn, the significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project does any of the following (14 CCR 15064.5(b)(2)):
(A) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register; or
(B) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) of the PRC or its identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the PRC, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or (C) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.
Pursuant to these sections, the CEQA inquiry begins with evaluating whether a project site contains any historical resources, then evaluates whether that project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource such that the resource’s historical significance would be materially impaired.
If it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that they cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Sections 21083.2(a)–(c)). Impacts on non-unique archaeological resources are generally not considered significant environmental impacts (PRC Section 21083.2(a); 14 CCR 15064.5(c)(4)). However, if a non-unique archaeological resource qualifies as a tribal cultural resource (PRC Sections 21074(c) and 21083.2(h)), further consideration of significant impacts is required.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 assigns special importance to human remains and specifies procedures to be used when Native American remains are discovered. These procedures are detailed in PRC Section 5097.98.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-12
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5
California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods, regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that if human remains are discovered in any place other than a dedicated cemetery, no further disturbance or excavation of the site or nearby area reasonably suspected to contain human remains can occur until the county coroner has examined the remains (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b)). PRC Section 5097.98 also outlines the process to be followed in the event that remains are discovered. If the coroner determines or has reason to believe the remains are those of a Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c)). The NAHC will notify the “most likely descendant” (MLD). With the permission of the landowner, the most likely descendant may inspect the site of discovery. The inspection must be completed within 48 hours of notification of the MLD by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and items associated with Native Americans.
3.4.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan The City’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan includes the following objectives and policies relevant to the proposed project and cultural resources:
• OSC-16 Preserve Carpinteria’s Cultural Resources
Implementation Policies
74. Explore all available measures, including purchase, tax relief, purchase of development rights, etc. to avoid development on important archaeological sites. Where these measures are not feasible and development will adversely affect identified archaeological or paleontological resources, require adequate mitigation.
75. Prohibit activities, other than development, which could damage or destroy archaeological sites, including off-road vehicle use and unauthorized collecting of artifacts.
76. Review all proposals for development in or adjacent to cultural resource areas for their potential to impact the resource. Give special consideration to development of facilities that enhance the cooperation, enjoyment or maintenance of these areas.
77. Prior to the city granting a development permit, all archaeological sites (or areas near known archeological sites that have been determined though Phase 1 investigation to potentially include cultural or paleontological resources) must undergo a subsurface test to determine the integrity and significance of the site. Through the project environmental review process, the disposition and/or preservation of any archaeological sites deemed to have significance as a result of the subsurface testing shall be determined. Preservation of cultural/paleontological resource sites through avoidance shall be preferred, however, other methods of disposition may be approved through the environmental review process as identified in the city’s Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA.
78. A qualified archaeologist and Native American observer (acceptable to the city) shall be retained to monitor grading activities on identified archeological sites and in the vicinity of identified archaeological
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-13
resources. If cultural artifacts or similar material of potential cultural or paleontological importance, are uncovered during grading or other excavation the following shall occur:
a. The monitor or archaeologist shall halt the grading or excavation and notify the City. b. A qualified archaeologist shall prepare a report assessing the significance of the find and recommending any actions to be taken by the applicant(s) prior to the city granting permission for grading to resume.
c. The removal of cultural artifacts or other materials shall only occur after preparation of the report and in conformance with the recommendations of the report as approved by the City.
Santa Barbara County Article II Coastal Zoning Ordinance Pursuant to PRC Section 30500 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, Santa Barbara County was required to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP) for portions of the unincorporated areas of Santa Barbara County within the coastal zone. Sections of the Santa Barbara County Article II Zoning Ordinance that may be relevant to the proposed project include standards for archaeological resources (Section 35-65).
Section 35-65. Archaeology
1. When developments are proposed for lots where archaeological or other cultural sites are located, project design shall be required which avoids impacts to such cultural sites if possible.
2. When sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding construction on archaeological or other types of cultural sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall be designed in accord with guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission.
3. Native Americans shall be consulted when development proposals are submitted which impact significant archaeological or cultural sites.
Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan
The Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan was partially certified by the Coastal Commission on March 17, 1981 and is the Local Coastal Program for unincorporated Santa Barbara County. It details the rules and regulations of land use within Santa Barbara County’s coastal areas. The following policies would apply to the proposed project. • Policy 10-1: All available measures, including purchase, tax relief, purchase of development rights, etc., shall be explored to avoid development on significant historic, prehistoric, archaeological, and other classes of cultural sites.
• Policy 10-2: When developments are proposed for parcels where archaeological or other cultural sites are located, Project design shall be required which avoids impacts to such cultural sites if possible. • Policy 10-3: When sufficient planning flexibility does not permit avoiding construction on archaeological or other types of cultural sites, adequate mitigation shall be required. Mitigation shall be designed in accord with guidelines of the State Office of Historic Preservation and the State of California Native American Heritage Commission.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-14
3.4.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to cultural resources are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to cultural resources would occur if the project would:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5. c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. d) Result in a cumulatively considerable impact to cultural resources.
3.4.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
One previously recorded cultural resource site partially intersects the proposed project area (CA-SBA-1168); CASBA-1168 is a prehistoric archaeological site and therefore, no historical built environment resources exist within or near the proposed project site. CA-SBA-1168 has not been evaluated for NRHP or CRHR eligibility; however, based on the site record description, it likely meets the criteria for eligibility on either or both the CRHR and NRHP.
Extensive topographic modification of the existing terrain in the proposed project area overlapping CA-SBA-1168 occurred with construction of U.S. Highway 101 in the late 1960s, after the earliest archeological investigations in this area were completed. Information to conclusively define the boundary of CA-SBA-1168 compared to limits of earthwork completed for the U.S. Highway 101 construction does not evidently exist (the boundary description in the original archaeological investigation was poorly described, and was not verified with perimeter excavations at many points). It is therefore possible that some portion of CA-SBA-1168 exists at depth beneath fill materials used to construct some of the slope faces along the south side of U.S. Highway 101. Deep excavations for the Rincon Trail UPRR bridge foundation on both the northern and southern sides of the UPRR alignment could potentially encounter intact deposits associated with CA-SBA-1168. Additionally, based on information gathered during AB-52 consultation, the fill materials placed on portions of CA-SBA-1168 originated from the immediate area and could retain displaced cultural material from CA-SBA-1168 and other surrounding sites. Therefore, the proposed project could have potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources. Mitigation measures CR1 through CR-4 are required in order to address this impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) CR-1 through MM-CR-4 would reduce impacts to historical resources to less than significant with mitigation. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
The current updated Phase 1 Cultural Resources Survey identified several pieces of weathered shellfish within the proposed project area, in disturbed contexts near the metal gate at the western end of Rincon Beach County Park and along the northern edge of the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. Particularly since the shellfish pieces were identified on the ground surface in areas that have been impacted by previous grading and documented placement of fill soils, their location is considered to be the result of modern activities and soil movement (i.e., grading associated with construction of U.S. Highway 101, the UPRR alignment, an asphalt path and the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot) and not an intact or disturbed cultural deposit. The recovered
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-15
shellfish, mainly unidentifiable Veneridae (Venus clams), lacked the density and diversity documented at CA-SBA1. No other cultural material associated with prehistoric occupation including stone tools, animal bone, or groundstone implements were identified. Even if the shellfish were in situ (i.e., in its original depositional location) and associated with prehistoric activity, the shell is not of sufficient density or diversity to provide important information to explain and understand the prehistoric occupation of coastal areas of Santa Barbara County, particularly when compared to the substantial CA-SBA-1 deposits. Additionally, it is important to understand that CA-SBA-1168 is documented as existing under 10-15 feet of imported fill and is only exposed along the south cut of Highway 101. Therefore, the pieces of shellfish observed in disturbed contexts within the proposed project area are not considered a potentially significant archaeological resource under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.a.3, City of Carpinteria Environmental Review Guidelines and Santa Barbara County Cultural Resources Guidelines.
Extensive topographic modification of the existing terrain in the project area occurred with construction of U.S.
Highway 101 in the late 1960’s, after the earliest archeological investigations in this area were completed.
Information to conclusively define the boundary of CA-SBA-1168 compared to limits of earthwork completed for the U.S. Highway 101 construction does not evidently exist (the boundary description in the original archaeological investigation was poorly described, and was not verified with perimeter excavations at many points). It is therefore possible that some portion of CA-SBA-1168 exists at depth beneath fill materials used to construct some of the slope faces along the south side of U.S. Highway 101. Deep excavations for the Rincon Trail UPRR bridge foundation on the both the northern and southern sides of the UPRR alignment could potentially encounter intact deposits associated with CA-SBA-1168. Additionally, based on information gathered during AB-52 consultation, the fill materials placed on portions of CA-SBA-1168 originated from the immediate area and could retain displaced cultural material from CA-SBA-1168 and other surrounding sites. Therefore, the proposed project could have potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources. Mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-4 are required in order to address this impact. Implementation of MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4 would reduce impacts to historical resources to less than significant with mitigation. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? No burial areas have been previously identified or were observed during the pedestrian survey within the proposed project area. The Phase 1 Survey included a search of the Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Land Files. The search results were negative but did include a strong suggestion from the (NAHC) that specific Native American individuals be contacted to see if they might have any additional information regarding the cultural or archaeological significance of the proposed project site. Tribal consultation was conducted in support of the project and is documented in detail in Section 3.13, Tribal Cultural Resources. No human burials were documented as a result of tribal consultation. No human remains have been identified within the proposed project or within the associated archaeological site CA-SBA-1168 as a result of previous or current archaeological investigations. No impacts relating to disturbance of human remains is expected to occur as a result of this project. d) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable impact to cultural resources? Potentially significant project-specific impacts to cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of MM-CR-1, MM-CR-2, MM-CR-3, and MM-CR-4, avoiding the potential for the proposed project to contribute to significant cumulative impacts to cultural resources. The project would, therefore, result in a less than cumulatively considerable impact to cultural resources.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-16
3.4.5 Mitigation
The potential exists for significant cultural resources impacts. The project would require the implementation of MMCUL-1 through MM-CUL-4 to reduce such impacts to less than significant levels.
MM-CR-1 Cultural Resource Treatment and Inadvertent Discovery Plan.
Potential impacts to cultural resources shall be minimized through development of protocols for practical adherence of mitigation measures CR-2 and CR-3 prior to and after ground disturbing construction activities associated with the proposed project. These protocols shall be outlined in a Cultural Resource Treatment Plan (CRTP). The CRTP shall be developed by a City-qualified archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, prior to the implementation of ground disturbing activities and include wording of each mitigation measure CR-2-4, specific and detailed explanation for implementation of each mitigation measure and contact protocol. The CRTP shall be provided to all agency personnel, consulting tribes, contractors and archaeological personnel. The existence and necessity for adherence to the CRTP shall be noted on plans, handbooks, or the like associated with tasks that may incur ground disturbance either intentionally or inadvertently.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall contract with a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist to develop the required CRTP in accordance with the above criteria. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara staff shall review and authorize the CRTP prior to the commencement of ground disturbance activities to ensure that the CRTP adheres to the criteria established in CR-1.
MM-CR-2 Workers Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) Training.
All personnel participating in tasks that may incur ground disturbance either intentionally or inadvertently shall be briefed regarding unanticipated discoveries prior to the start of said activities.
A basic presentation shall be prepared by a City-qualified archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards to inform all personnel working on the project about the archaeological sensitivity of proposed project areas. The purpose of the WEAP training is to provide specific details on the kinds of archaeological materials that may be identified during project activities and explain the importance of and legal basis for the protection of cultural resources. Each personnel shall also be instructed in the proper procedures to follow in the event that cultural resources or human remains are encountered. These procedures include work curtailment or redirection, and the immediate contact of the site supervisor, qualified archaeologist and if human remains are encountered, the County coroner.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall contract with a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist to develop and conduct the required WEAP Training in accordance with the above criteria. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara staff shall ensure the required WEAP training has been conducted by attending the WEAP Training and documenting attendance of required personnel by means of a sign in sheet completed by all attendees of the WEAP Training.
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-17
MM-CR-3 Initial ground disturbing activities shall be monitored by a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist in accordance with the following specifications:
Temporary Impact Areas (equipment staging and materials storage outside trail alignment) - a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist shall monitor transport and placement activities until such time that it is reasonable to ascertain that no additional prehistoric archaeological/cultural resources are located within areas of temporary disturbance of the proposed project site.
Permanent Impact Areas not including bridge piling installation (all areas of the trail alignment excepting the bridge approaches area on both sides of the UPRR alignment) – a County-qualified/ City-approved archaeologist shall monitor project implementation during the initial grading and excavation activities until such time as sufficient subsurface soil has been uncovered/excavated to ascertain that no additional prehistoric archaeological/cultural resources are located on the proposed project improvement area.
Bridge piling installation – a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist shall monitor the installation of bridge pilings within intact soils and/or any soils deeper than 10 feet below current ground surface to ascertain that no additional prehistoric archaeological/cultural resources are located on the proposed project improvement area.
The monitor shall immediately inform equipment operators in the event archaeological resources are encountered, and shall be empowered to immediately halt construction activity in the area of the discovery until assessment can be completed, and materials recovered as appropriate (refer to CR-2 for additional detail). Monitoring reports shall be provided to the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara on a monthly basis during construction, with a final monitoring report produced at the conclusion of construction activities and provided to both the City and County.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall contract with a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist to monitor initial ground disturbance activities in accordance with the above criteria. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara staff shall ensure the contracted archaeologist provide monitoring of initial ground disturbance activities in accordance with the above criteria through receipt of field documentation describing each day of monitoring, construction activity occurring during the monitoring, and observed soil profile conditions related to the potential for presence of archaeological resources.
MM-CR-4 In the event cultural resources are encountered, construction shall be redirected to another area of the project while data/resource assessment and recovery is accomplished.
Grading/construction shall be immediately suspended in the immediate area (no less than 50 feet from the area of the discovery) where cultural resources are encountered and temporarily redirected to another portion of the project area to allow the archaeologist to assess the nature, extent and significance of any discoveries and develop appropriate management recommendations for archaeological resource treatment consistent with Santa Barbara County Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended May 25, 2010). It is anticipated that recovery of artifacts would occur where project elements (such as pilings) would conflict with in situ artifact locations, and such artifacts would be properly archived
3.4 – Cultural Resources
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.4-18
in accordance with the project CEQA, City of Carpinteria and Santa Barbara County guidelines and the CRTP protocol.
Identified remedial action for the discovery shall be completed prior to allowing construction to recommence in the area, no less than 50 feet from the area of the discovery. The project sponsors shall be responsible for funding the assessment of archaeological resources encountered during construction, and for the proper archiving or preservation of such resources. A Phase 3 Archaeological Resources Assessment and Data Recovery Report shall be prepared to document any archaeological resources encountered during construction.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall contract with a County-qualified/City-approved archaeologist to provide archaeological assessment and recovery of any archaeological resources encountered during project construction, in accordance with the above criteria.
Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara staff shall ensure the contracted archaeologist assess the nature, extent and significance of any archaeological discoveries occurring during project construction and develop appropriate management recommendations for archaeological resource treatment in accordance with the project CEQA, City of Carpinteria and Santa Barbara County guidelines and the CRTP protocol..
The contracted archaeologist shall assess the nature, extent and significance of any archaeological discoveries occurring during project construction and develop appropriate management recommendations for archaeological resource treatment.
3.4.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
After implementation of MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4, impacts would be reduced to less than significant.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-1
3.5 Geology and Soils
This section describes the existing geologic and soils conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project. The following analysis is based in part upon the following document:
• Geotechnical Report for the Proposed Rincon Beach Multi-Use Trail, prepared by Bengal Engineering in January 2019, the body of which is included as Appendix E of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The complete Geotechnical Report (including all plates and attachments) is on file with the City of Carpinteria.
Other sources consulted are listed in Section 3.5.7, References.
3.5.1 Existing Conditions
The proposed trail alignment lies generally within an elevated marine terrace, which has been subject to extensive grading associated with current and former transportation facilities. Exhibit 3.5-1 is an oblique aerial illustrating the topographic conditions along the northern/western portion of the trail alignment, starting at the existing eastern terminus of Carpinteria Avenue.
Exhibit 3.5-1 Topography of the Northern Trail Portion
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-2
US Highway 101 was constructed via massive excavation of earth material, which is immediately evident in the two planar slopes off-set by a bench along the left-hand side of the freeway, The angle of the slope and a mid-elevation bench were created during the cuts for the freeway, to stabilize these manufactured slopes. On the opposite side of the freeway, similar cut slopes were also created, but the cut slopes have become less evident with the growth of vegetative cover. The flat, roughly triangular area at the Carpinteria Avenue terminus was leveled through the local placement of some of the excavated freeway earth materials. With reference to the trail alignment in Exhibit 3.5-1 (the red line), the trail would be located entirely on artificial landforms on the north side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) alignment. For reference, the ground surface at the “Wave Overhead” (the highway bridge which provides the grade separation between mainline US Highway 101 and the Union Pacific Railroad) was originally approximately 100-feet higher in elevation than today (Bengal 2020), The cut slope along the south of US Highway 101 (right side of US Highway 101 in the aerial) would be re-graded again to form a mid-elevation bench to carry the trail.
Exhibit 3.5-2 shows the topography in the area of the proposed UPRR crossing bridge, which is entirely the result of grading to depress the UPRR tracks below the elevation of the new US Highway 101.
Exhibit 3.5-2 Topography at the Proposed UPRR Bridge Crossing The planar cut slopes separated by a bench are evident again along the left-side of the railroad tracks, a single less steep cut slope exists along the right-hand side of the tracks. At the location of the Wave Overhead, the railroad line was excavated about 140-feet below the natural grade (Bengal 2020). The red rectangle is the approximate location of the proposed bridge, which would have foundations within the slopes previously created via the rail line excavation. This portion of the trail, the bridge segment, would therefore also only involve artificial landforms, not natural slopes.
Exhibit 3.5-3 illustrates the topography within the portion of the trail along the southern side of the UPRR alignment.
The railroad tracks at the bottom left-hand corner lead toward the Wave Overhead, but they originally followed the bench visible along the right side of the ridge. The slope above the bench was cut for the railroad, and along the top of the slope the coastal highway was previously located. Remnants of retaining walls constructed to protect the old highway alignment can be seen sliding from the top of the cut slope manufactured for the former railway bench.
Thus, again, this segment of the trail would entirely traverse artificial landforms (i.e., cut slope and bench), here originally created via the UPRR construction. These artificial slope faces would be regraded to a more geotechnically stable configuration (i.e., less steep in profile) and a new bench created upon which to set the trail. In summary,
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-3
the entire length of the proposed trail alignment would be located on landforms resulting from former grading for construction of US Highway 101 and current or former UPRR alignments.
Exhibit 3.5-3 Topography of the Southern Trail Portion
Regional Geology
The City of Carpinteria is located in the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province of Southern California. According to the California Geological Survey (CGS), the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province is composed of a series of steep east-west trending mountain ranges, which is in contrast to the northwest trend of coastal California and surrounding mountain ranges (CGS 2002). Geologic deposits within the City and adjacent unincorporated County lands are generally represented by alluvium. The mountains and foothills north of the project site are characterized by alluvium, quaternary nonmarine terrace deposits, Pleistocene nonmarine, Pleistocene volcanic, and Eocene marine deposits (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986; USGS 2009).
Faults and Seismicity
Faults in the Carpinteria area include the Carpinteria Fault, the Rincon Creek Fault, the Arroyo Parida Fault and the Shepard Mesa Fault. According to the State of California Conservation Department, California Geologic Survey (CGS), none of these faults are considered "active" (CGS 1996). The CGS has calculated the probabilities for earthquakes throughout the state of California; the research indicates a 10% probability within the next 50 years for an earthquake between magnitudes 6.5 and 7.0 to occur along a fault within five miles of the Carpinteria Planning Area. The geotechnical report for Rincon Trail (Bengal Engineers 2019) identifies a potential peak ground acceleration of 0.8 g for the project site (“g” represents acceleration rate of gravity). There are no Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones for the Carpinteria Planning Area (CGS 2018b). No recent movement (within the last 11,000 years) or recent fault rupture has been identified along the known faults in the Carpinteria Planning Area.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-4
Geologic Formations
The trail alignment north of the UPRR corridor is underlain by Miocene age and older surficial sediments (Qoa or alluvium), bedrock of the Santa Barbara Formation (Qsb) consisting of silty sand and sand-like material, and bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) consisting mainly of sandy silt and siltstone/shale (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986; Bengal Engineers 2019). The trail alignment within and south of the UPRR corridor is underlain directly by bedrock of the Monterey Formation (Tm) siltstone/shale and Sisquoc Formation (Tsq) siltstone/mudstone both consisting mainly of sandy silt/silt-like materials (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986; Bengal Engineers 2019). The Monterey Formation has been identified in some locations to contain an abundance of fossil specimens including birds, fish, sea lions, sea cows, porpoises, whales, and sharks (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986).
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when loosely consolidated soils lose their load bearing capabilities during ground shaking and flow in a fluid-like manner. The specific soil condition conducive to liquefaction is loose sands and silty sands below the water table and typically within the top 50 feet of the ground surface. The Bengal geotechnical investigation did not identify the presence of soil horizons that would have the potential for liquefaction (Bengal Engineers 2019). Consequently, soils with liquefaction potential are not anticipated to occur within the trail alignment.
Landslide/Rockfall
Landslides generally occur on steep slopes that have been undercut by erosion or on slopes where the bedding planes of the bedrock are inclined down the slope. The updated project alignment avoids slopes with identified historic landslide activity. However, the Bengal geotechnical investigation found that due to the relatively low shear strength of the Monterey and Sisquoc Formations (Tm and Tsq) and the slope face orientation, the existing oceanfacing slope south of the proposed trail bridge is considered to be susceptible to surficial/local instability under static conditions. These steep slopes in the southern trail alignment are the result of former landform modification carried out for the railroad alignment and former state highway, and do not represent natural conditions resulting from natural weathering of the involved earth materials and geologic formations.
Soil Settlement/Consolidation
Settlement is the downward movement of soil or of structures it supports, resulting from a reduction in the voids in the underlying strata. The Bengal geotechnical investigation did not identify the presence of soil horizons that would have the potential for settlement or consolidation (Bengal Engineers 2019). Consequently, soils with settlement potential are not anticipated to occur within the trail alignment.
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils are those characterized as having a high shrink-swell potential, associated with a high percentage of clay content. The Bengal geotechnical investigation did not identify the presence of soil horizons that would have the potential for expansiveness (Bengal Engineers 2019). Consequently, soils with expansion potential are not anticipated to occur within the trail alignment.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-5
3.5.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.5.2.1 Federal
U.S. Geological Survey Landslide Hazard Program
In fulfillment of the requirements of Public Law 106-113, the USGS created the Landslide Hazard Program in the mid-1970s. According to USGS, the primary objective of the National Landslide Hazards Program is to reduce longterm losses from landslide hazards by improving our understanding of the causes of ground failure and suggesting mitigation strategies (USGS 2018). The federal government takes the lead role in funding and conducting this research, whereas the reduction of losses due to geologic hazards is primarily a state and local responsibility.
3.5.2.2 State
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (1972)
The Alquist-Priolo Act was passed in 1972 to ensure public safety by prohibiting the siting of most structures for human occupancy across traces of active faults that constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep (CGS 2018a). In accordance with this act, the State Geologist established regulatory zones, called “earthquake fault zones,” around surface traces of active faults and has published maps showing these zones.
Construction within these zones cannot be permitted until a geologic investigation has been conducted to prove that a building planned for human occupancy would not be constructed across an active fault. The project is not located on a site designated to be an active earthquake fault zone (CGS 2018c).
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act of 1990 (PRC Chapter 7.8, Section 2690 et seq.) directs the CGS to protect the public from earthquake-induced liquefaction and landslide hazards (note that these hazards are distinct from fault surface rupture hazard regulated by the Alquist-Priolo Act). This act requires the State Geologist to delineate various seismic hazard zones and requires cities, counties, and other local permitting agencies to regulate certain development projects within these zones (i.e., zones of required investigation). Before a development permit may be granted for a site within a Seismic Hazard Zone, a geotechnical investigation of the site must be conducted and appropriate mitigation measures incorporated into the project design. Evaluation and mitigation of potential risks from seismic hazards within zones of required investigation must be conducted in accordance with CGS Special Publication 117A, adopted March 13, 1997, by the State Mining and Geology Board, as updated in 2008.
California Building Code (CBC) (2019)
The CBC has been codified in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) as Title 24, Part 2. Title 24 is administered by the California Building Standards Commission, which, by law, is responsible for coordinating all building standards. Under state law, all building standards must be centralized in Title 24 or those standards are not enforceable. The purpose of the CBC is to establish minimum standards to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, and general stability, by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all building and structures within its jurisdiction. The 2019 edition of the CBC is based on the 2018 International Building Code published by the International Code Conference.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-6
Chapters 16 and 16A of the 2019 CBC include structural design requirements governing seismically resistant construction, including (but not limited to) factors and coefficients used to establish seismic site class and seismic occupancy category for the soil/rock at the building location and the proposed building design. Chapters 18 and 18A include (but are not limited to) the requirements for foundation and soil investigations (Sections 1803 and 1803A); excavation, grading, and fill (Sections 1804 and 1804A); damp-proofing and water-proofing (Sections 1805 and 1805A); allowable load-bearing values of soils (Sections 1806 and 1806A); the design of foundation walls, retaining walls, embedded posts and poles (Sections 1807 and 1807A), and foundations (Sections 1808 and 1808A); and design of shallow foundations (Sections 1809 and 1809A) and deep foundations (Sections 1810 and 1810A). Chapter 33 of the 2019 CBC includes (but is not limited to) requirements for safeguards at work sites to ensure stable excavations and cut or fill slopes (Section 3304).
Construction activities are subject to occupational safety standards for excavation and trenching, as specified in the California Safety and Health Administration regulations (Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations) and in Chapter 33 of the CBC. These regulations specify the measures to be used for excavation and trench work where workers could be exposed to unstable soil conditions. The proposed project would be required to employ these safety measures during excavation and trenching.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration Regulations In California, the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has responsibility for implementing state standards that have been determined to be “as effective as” federal rules relevant to worker safety, including slope protection during construction excavations.
3.5.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan – Safety Element The City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan outlines goals, policies, and programs designed to protect the community from geologic and seismic hazards. The General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan Safety Element includes the following objectives and policies applicable to the project:
Objective S-1 Minimize the potential risks and reduce the loss of life, property and the economic and social dislocations resulting from fault surface rupture in the planning area, from ground shaking due to an earthquake along a fault in the planning area or in the region, from seismically -induced liquefaction in the planning area, and from seismically-induced tsunamis.
Policy S-1c Development in areas identified as having high seismically-induced liquefaction potential shall follow structural engineering foundation design parameters outlined in the Uniform Building Code or obtained through an independent structural engineering study.
Objective S-2: Minimize the potential risks and reduce the loss of life, property and economic and social dislocations resulting from seismically-induced and naturally-occurring landslides, from mud and debris flows, from rock falls, and from seacliff retreat.
Policy S-2a. Areas identified on Figure S-2 as High Landslide Potential shall either be designated in an open space zoning category or the potential for landslide will be mitigated through avoiding disturbance of the slope area of the site subject to landslide potential.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-7
Policy S-2b. Building improvements and other development including any irrigated landscape areas shall be setback sufficiently to protect the development and all associated improvements from bluff failure and bluff retreat over a 100-year term.
Objective S-3 Minimize the potential risks and reduce the loss of property and the economic and social dislocations resulting from expansive soils, soil settlement, subsidence, and hydrocompaction.
Policy S-3b All new development will comply with the Uniform Building Code, local City building ordinances, and geotechnical recommendations related to construction in areas identified as having a high potential for expansive soils or soil settlement.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Seismic Safety and Safety Element Geologic, soil, and seismic factors affect the suitability of land for various uses and, hence, should be considered, along with other factors, in land use planning to eliminate or minimize their adverse effects. Geologic and Seismic Goal 1 applies to the proposed project (County of Santa Barbara 2011):
• Protect the community to the extent feasible from risks associated with the effects of seismically induced incidents by requiring:
o Protection Policy 1: The County minimizes the potential effects of geologic, soil, and seismic hazards through the development review process.
o Protection Policy 2: The County shall refer to the CBC, the Land Use Development Code (LUDC), County Ordinances, the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP), and the Comprehensive Plan when considering the siting and construction of structures in seismically hazardous areas. o Protection Policy 3: The County shall ensure compliance with state seismic and building standards in the evaluation, design, and siting of critical facilities. o Protection Policy 4: The Office of Emergency Services (OES) shall continue coordinating emergency planning for the Santa Barbara Operational Area pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act of 1970. o Protection Policy 5: The County shall require a preliminary soil report prepared by a qualified civil engineer be submitted at the time a tentative map is submitted.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Environmental Resources Management Element This element states that urbanization should be prohibited on slopes 30% and greater and should be prohibited, except in a relatively few special instances on slopes between 20% and 30% (County of Santa Barbara 2009).
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Coastal Land Use Plan The purpose of the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) is to protect coastal resources while accommodating land use development within the coastal zone. Policies outlined in the CLUP that are applicable to the project are listed below (County of Santa Barbara 2019):
Policy 3-8 Applications for grading and building permits, and applications for subdivision shall be reviewed for adjacency to, threats from, and impacts on geologic hazards arising from seismic events, tsunami runup, landslides, beach erosion, or other geologic hazards such as expansive soils and subsidence
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-8
areas. In areas of known geologic hazards, a geologic report shall be required.
Mitigation measures shall be required where necessary.
Policy 3-13 Plans for development shall minimize cut and fill operations. Plans requiring excessive cutting and filling may be denied if it is determined that the development could be carried out with less alteration of the natural terrain.
Policy 3-14 All developments shall be designed to fit the site topography, soils, geology, hydrology, and any other existing conditions and be oriented so that grading and other site preparation is kept to an absolute minimum. Natural features, landforms, and native vegetation, such as trees, shall be preserved to the maximum extent feasible. Areas of the site which are not suited to development because of known soil, geologic, flood, erosion or other hazards shall remain in open space.
Policy 3-15 For necessary grading operations on hillsides, the smallest practical area of land shall be exposed at any one time during development, and the length of exposure shall be kept to the shortest practicable amount of time. The clearing of land should be avoided during the winter rainy season and all measures for removing sediments and stabilizing slopes should be in place before the beginning of the rainy season.
Policy 3-16 Sediment basins (including debris basins, desilting basins, or silt traps) shall be installed on the project site in conjunction with the initial grading operations and maintained throughout the development process to remove sediment from runoff waters. All sediment shall be retained on site unless removed to an appropriate dumping location.
Policy 3-17 Temporary vegetation, seeding, mulching, or other suitable stabilization method shall be used to protect soils subject to erosion that have been disturbed during grading or development. All cut and fill slopes shall be stabilized as rapidly as possible with planting of native grasses and shrubs, appropriate non-native plants, or with accepted landscaping practices.
Santa Barbara County Grading Code
Ordinance No. 4766, 11-9-2010 of County Code of Ordinances (SBCCO) addresses compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II stormwater regulations and sets forth local stormwater requirements for the disturbance of less than 1 acre, to avoid pollution of water courses and drainage ways with sediments or other pollutants generated on or caused by surface runoff on or across a construction site.
Santa Barbara County Building Code
SBCCO Ord. No. 4822, 1-17-2012 addresses geological, topographical, and climatic conditions in the County including extreme weather conditions, firefighting resources, flammable vegetation, High Hazard Areas, extreme wind conditions, and seismic shaking and the minimum standards to safeguard and protect life, buildings, and structures within the County.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-9
3.5.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to geology and soils are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to geology and soils would occur if the project would:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking.
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv. Landslides.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. g) Result in considerable cumulative impacts to geology and soils.
3.5.3.1 Local Significance Thresholds
City of Carpinteria
The City of Carpinteria’s Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as Amended (1997), states the following conditions or impacts shall be considered significant:
• The graded or cleared portion of the site includes more than 10,000 square feet of area having a slope greater than 15 percent.
• There is a significant risk that more than 2,500 square feet will be unprotected or inadequately protected from erosion during any portion of the rainy season.
• Grading or clearing will occur within 50 feet of any watercourse or 100-year floodplain. • Grading will involve cut and fill volumes of 3,000 cubic yards or more, or cut or fill heights of 15 feet or greater. • The project will significantly increase water runoff, velocities, peak discharges, or water surface elevations on or off-site. Coordinate with the Department of Public Works for clarification. • The project will produce erosion impacts which constitute a structural hazard or significant visual impact, or will result in sediment or excessive drainage flows which cannot be contained or controlled on-site. • The project will result in impacts which violate or are in conflict with any of the Federal, State, or local policies, ordinances or regulations listed above.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-10
• Any cut or fill slope over 15 feet in height is potentially significant for grading, visual, erosion, siltation and community character impacts.
• Any grading which includes the addition, removal or moving of earth is potentially significant. • Any grading proposed within environmentally sensitive areas is potentially significant.
County of Santa Barbara
The County thresholds are similar and include the following criteria:
• The project site or any part of the project is located on land having substantial geologic constraints, as determined by P&D or PWD. Areas constrained by geology include parcels located near active or potentially active faults and property underlain by rock types associated with compressible/collapsible soils or susceptible to landslides or severe erosion. “Special Problems” areas designated by the Board of Supervisors have been established based on geologic constraints, flood hazards and other physical limitations to development.
• The project results in potentially hazardous geologic conditions such as the construction of cut slopes exceeding a grade of 1.5 horizontal to 1 vertical.
• The project proposes construction of a cut slope over 15 feet in height as measured from the lowest finished grade.
• The project is located on slopes exceeding 20% grade.
3.5.4 Impact Analysis
The following analysis is based upon the CEQA Appendix G checklist, as described above. a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42? ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
The California Department of Conservation provides an index map that identifies all Official Maps of Earthquake Fault Zones delineated by the California Geological Survey through December 2010 under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. According to the most recent data, the proposed project is not located within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone; however, the project site is to the north of the Pitas Point quadrangle (CGS 2018c). The northwestern corner of the Pitas Point quadrangle encompasses a very small portion of Santa Barbara County, consisting of the Rincon Point neighborhood south of Rincon Point Lane. The fault line within the Pitas Point Quadrangle that is closest to the proposed project runs northwest-southeast, north of La Conchita Beach in Ventura County, approximately two miles southeast from Rincon Beach County Park (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986).
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-11
According to the City of Carpinteria’s General Plan Fault Map, the Rincon Creek fault is located to the north of the proposed project and the Carpinteria Fault is located to the south (City of Carpinteria 2003). In the immediate vicinity of the proposed trail and parking lot, the project is located on the up-thrown side on an inferred fault located to the north of US Highway 101 near the connection to Highway 150 (City of Carpinteria 2003). According to the Santa Barbara County’s South Coast Seismic Tectonic Map, the entire south coast portion of the county, including the project site, is rated as having a high seismic potential with a moderate possible variation from the assigned rating (County of Santa Barbara 2011). The Santa Barbara County South Coast Seismic Tectonic Map indicates that the Red Mountain fault is the closest known potentially active fault and traverses the proposed trail near the intersection of the UPRR and the trail alignment. The Red Mountain fault is approximately 39 km (24 miles) long and trends in a generally east-west direction, running parallel to the coastline, near the project area. A maximum credible earthquake of moment magnitude 6.8 has been assigned to this reverse displacement fault (CGS 1996).
The proposed project consists of a shared-use path with pedestrian bridge and other trail improvements. The project would not introduce new buildings that would be subject to structural damage in the unlikely event of strong seismic ground shaking. Moreover, there are no existing buildings within the project area that would pose a risk of loss, injury, or death as a result of potential structural damage caused by earth movement.
However, the pedestrian bridge structure could be damaged by seismic activity if not designed to withstand the potential peak ground acceleration of 0.8 g, as identified in the Bengal geotechnical report (Appendix E).
Previously manipulated and engineered slopes along the trail alignment are proposed to be re-graded to achieve a finished slope face that is more gradual (less steep) than the existing slope faces. Slopes adjacent to US Highway 101 would be reshaped with those above the trail having a slope ratio of 1.25:1, fill slopes (which would be present only adjacent to the bridge over the UPRR) are proposed to have slope ratios between 2:1 and 4:1. For the portion of the path on the ocean side of the UPRR alignment, the regraded slopes for the trail “bench” would employ cut slopes with a ratio of 1:1 above the trail, while a ratio of 1.25:1 would be employed for the “reinforced” fill slopes below the trail. These slope angles are each shallower than existing conditions, and mid-elevation benches in the slopes would further decrease the potential for mass soil movement (shallow landslides). It is important to note that all of the earthwork proposed for the project involves manipulation of manufactured slopes (previously modified landforms) and not natural topography. In addition, the project proposes to vegetate all new slope areas to minimize the potential for shallow erosion to occur.
The Carpinteria Valley is subject to geologic hazards related primarily to earthquakes and secondary hazards, such as landslides and liquefaction; the project includes manufactured slopes and a bridge structure that could be damaged by seismic ground shaking. As such, potential impacts relating to adverse effects caused by strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic related ground failure would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure (MM) GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Soils within the project site have been classified as Xerorthents, cut and fill areas (USDA 2020). The NRCS Web Soil Survey provides an erosion hazard rating that indicates the hazard of soil loss from off-road and off-trail areas after disturbance activities that expose the soil surface. Xerorthents in the project area have a moderate erosion hazard rating, which indicates that some erosion is likely and that erosion control measures may be needed (USDA 2020). The project does propose to vegetate all new slope area to minimize the potential for soil erosion to occur.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-12
To prepare the site for trail construction, the trail alignment along with adjacent slopes would be graded to meet the proposed finished grade surface and to achieve stable slope profiles above and below the trail. It is anticipated that total cut would be approximately 107,386 cubic yards and total fill would be approximately 14,860 cubic yards during the grading phase. Cut material on site would be utilized for the necessary fill material, as feasible.
The re-grading of previously manufactured slopes is intended to reduce the angle of the slope face, decreasing historic erosion rates and increasing the long-term stability of the slope faces. The lower angle slopes would not be noticeably different from the existing manufactured slopes but should eliminate or greatly reduce the amount of soil materials moving down the slope areas to be deposited on the trail or areas below the trail. Erosion potential would be lessened with the proposed engineered slope design. However, soil erosion could be increased unless proper slope construction techniques are employed. Accordingly, soil erosion impacts would be potentially significant. MM-GEO-3 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Due to relatively low strength of the underlying Monterey Formation (Tm) siltstone/shale bedrock, the single span bridge structure could experience differential settlement and related damage or collapse, a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is required. The Bengal geotechnical report also concluded that from a slope stability perspective, the slopes along the coastal bluff, both above and below the existing unsanctioned County trail are problematic with respect to local/surficial slope instability. The proposed grading plans were reviewed by Bengal and existing slopes and proposed cut slopes were analyzed for gross stability. Shear strength test results were obtained and slope stability analyses were performed to evaluate the global or overall static as well as seismic loading conditions. Based on the Bengal slope stability analysis, the subject slopes containing the proposed trail alignment are considered to have adequate stability against static loading or under normal, short- and long-term service conditions. However, with seismic activity, shallow slope instability could occur. As such, shallow slope instability associated with seismic activity is considered potentially significant. MM-GEO-3 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? The Bengal geotechnical report did not identify soils with expansive characteristics, and therefore the potential is very low for expansive soils to be present within the trail alignment. Potential impacts relating to expansive soil would be less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The proposed project does not include restrooms of other waste generating facilities that would require the use of septic tanks, sewers or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impact would occur f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The soil in the area of the proposed trail was characterized as Xerorthents, cut and fill areas consisting of mechanically manipulated soils where the original profile is no longer discernible (USDA 2020). Monterey
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-13
Formation marine siliceous shale of the early to late Miocene age, sand and cobbles of the Santa Barbara formation, and older dissected surficial sediments composed of former alluvial deposits of silt, sand and gravel that in places are weakly consolidated, form the geologic base of the project site (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 1986). The potential for paleontological resources to be encountered during project grading is low due to the extensive historical cut and fill within the project area and due to the existing quality of soils, which have been mechanically manipulated as a result of previous construction projects.
The Phase 1 survey found that no prehistoric artifacts are mixed with modern debris and that the area has already been subject to extensive ground disturbances associated with construction. The Phase 1 conclusion is confirmed by the previous SAIC investigation (SAIC 1996) that was conducted along the northern edge of the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot for a cellular communications facility. The investigation concluded that prehistoric artifacts were mixed with modern debris and the area had been subject to extensive ground disturbances associated with the construction, and subsequent abandonment, of US Highway 101. Therefore, the prehistoric cultural remains were not considered an important resource and no additional measures were required. Impacts would be less than significant
g) Would the project result in considerable cumulative impacts to geology and soils? Cumulative development throughout the Carpinteria Valley would incrementally contribute to geologic resource impacts. However, the project's contribution to cumulative geologic resource impacts would not be considerable based on the information above because the project impacts would each be reduced to less than significant with incorporation of required mitigation measures.
3.5.5 Mitigation
The potential exists for significant geology-related impacts to occur involving structural damage from seismic events, differential settlement of the pedestrian bridge structure, shallow slope instability associated with seismic activity, and increased soil erosion on slopes graded for the project. The project would require the implementation of MM-GEO-1 to MM-GEO-3 to reduce such impacts.
MM-GEO-1 Seismicity. The pedestrian bridge shall adhere to the recommendation identified in Appendix E to this Environmental Impact Report to withstand a peak ground acceleration (PGA) at the site of 0.8g generated by an earthquake of moment magnitude Mw=7.4.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall verify the engineering plans include this bridge design specification. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara public works staff or construction inspector retained for the project shall inspect bridge construction to verify conformance with this specification.
MM-GEO-2 Differential Settlement of Pedestrian Bridge Foundations. Bridge foundation construction shall adhere to the recommendation identified in Appendix E to this Environmental Impact Report, which specifies a deep foundation employing cast-in-drilled hole (CIDH) piles. Based on the anticipated loadings, Caltrans Standard Plan 24” CIDH Concrete Piles with 200 kips design capacity are recommended in the geotechnical report. Should hard cemented bedrock be encountered during the installation of the CIDH piles, coring may be necessary.
3.5 – Geology and Soils
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.5-14
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall verify the engineering plans include this bridge foundation specification. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara public works staff or construction inspector retained for the project shall inspect foundation construction to verify conformance with this specification.
MM-GEO-3 Soil Erosion/Slope Stability. Slope construction shall adhere to the recommendations in the geotechnical report, summarized below.
1. All new fills placed along the trail alignment shall be placed as engineered geotextile-reinforced soils with subsurface/back drains.
2. Manufactured slope profiles shall be no steeper than as specified in the Bengal 2019 geotechnical report (Appendix E), or any updated version thereof which has been prepared to address final trail design.
3. Install adequate surface drainage facilities to collect and dispose of surface runoff properly, consistent with the drainage system designs included in 30% Project Plans for Rincon MultiUse Trail (Appendix E), or as updated to address final trail design.
4. Hydro-seed the exposed newly cut and fill surfaces. Periodic watering and re-application of hydroseed shall occur as necessary until vegetation on slope surfaces has been successfully established.
These measures, in conjunction with the slope flattening and load reduction resulting from the proposed slope cutbacks, should substantially reduce the hazards associated with both slope erosion and local/surficial slope instability under both static and seismic loading conditions.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara shall verify the engineering plans include the above specifications. Monitoring:
City of Carpinteria/County of Santa Barbara public works staff or construction inspector retained for the project shall inspect slope and drainage system construction to verify conformance with these specifications.
3.5.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Potential impacts related to geology and soils would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures GEO-1, GEO-2, and GEO-3.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-1
3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section describes the existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project.
3.6.1 Existing Conditions
3.6.1.1 Climate Change Overview
Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate—such as temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns—lasting for an extended period of time (decades or longer). The Earth’s temperature depends on the balance between energy entering and leaving the planet’s system. Many factors, both natural and human, can cause changes in Earth’s energy balance, including variations in the Sun’s energy reaching Earth, changes in the reflectivity of Earth’s atmosphere and surface, and changes in the greenhouse effect, which affects the amount of heat retained by Earth’s atmosphere (EPA 2017).
The greenhouse effect is the trapping and build-up of heat in the atmosphere (troposphere) near the Earth’s surface. The greenhouse effect traps heat in the troposphere through a threefold process as follows: short-wave radiation emitted by the Sun is absorbed by the Earth; the Earth emits a portion of this energy in the form of longwave radiation; and GHGs in the upper atmosphere absorb this long-wave radiation and emit it into space and toward the Earth. The greenhouse effect is a natural process that contributes to regulating the Earth’s temperature and creates a pleasant, livable environment on Earth. Human activities that emit additional GHGs to the atmosphere increase the amount of infrared radiation that gets absorbed before escaping into space, thus enhancing the greenhouse effect and causing the Earth’s surface temperature to rise.
The scientific record of the Earth’s climate shows that the climate system varies naturally over a wide range of time scales and that, in general, climate changes prior to the Industrial Revolution in the 1700s can be explained by natural causes, such as changes in solar energy, volcanic eruptions, and natural changes in GHG concentrations.
Recent climate changes, in particular the warming observed over the past century, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming since the mid-20th century and is the most significant driver of observed climate change (EPA 2017; IPCC 2013). Human influence on the climate system is evident from the increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere, positive radiative forcing, observed warming, and improved understanding of the climate system (IPCC 2013). The atmospheric concentrations of GHGs have increased to levels unprecedented in the last 800,000 years, primarily from fossil fuel emissions and secondarily from emissions associated with land use changes (IPCC 2013).
Continued emissions of GHGs will cause further warming and changes in all components of the climate system as discussed further in Section 3.6.1.5, Potential Effects of Climate Change.
3.6.1.2 Greenhouse Gases
A GHG is any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere; in other words, GHGs trap heat in the atmosphere. GHGs include, but are not limited to, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), ozone (O3), water vapor, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-2
sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).1 Some GHGs—such as CO2, CH4, and N2O—occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Manufactured GHGs, which have a much greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases (e.g., HFCs, HCFCs, PFCs, and SF6), which are associated with certain industrial products and processes. A summary of the most common GHGs and their sources is included in the following text.2 Also included is a discussion of other climate-forcing substances.
Carbon Dioxide. CO2 is a naturally occurring gas and a by-product of human activities, and is the principal anthropogenic GHG that affects the Earth’s radiative balance. Natural sources of CO2 include respiration of bacteria, plants, animals, and fungus; evaporation from oceans; volcanic out-gassing; and decomposition of dead organic matter. Human activities that generate CO2 are from the combustion of fuels (e.g., coal, oil, natural gas, and wood) and changes in land use.
Methane. CH4 is produced through both natural and human activities. CH4 is a flammable gas and is the main component of natural gas. CH4 is produced through anaerobic (without oxygen) decomposition of waste in landfills, flooded rice fields, animal digestion, decomposition of animal wastes, production and distribution of natural gas and petroleum, coal production, and incomplete fossil fuel combustion.
Nitrous Oxide. N2O is produced through natural and human activities, mainly through agricultural activities and natural biological processes, although fuel burning and other processes also create N2O. Sources of N2O include soil cultivation practices (microbial processes in soil and water), especially the use of commercial and organic fertilizers; manure management; industrial processes, such as in nitric acid production, nylon production, and fossil-fuel-fired power plants; vehicle emissions; and using N2O as a propellant (such as in rockets, race cars, and aerosol sprays).
Fluorinated Gases. Fluorinated gases (also referred to as F-gases) are synthetic powerful GHGs emitted from many industrial processes. Fluorinated gases are commonly used as substitutes for stratospheric O3-depleting substances (e.g., chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs], HCFCs, and halons). The most prevalent fluorinated gases include the following:
• Hydrofluorocarbons: HFCs are compounds containing only hydrogen, fluorine, and carbon atoms. HFCs are synthetic chemicals used as alternatives to O3-depleting substances in serving many industrial, commercial, and personal needs. HFCs are emitted as byproducts of industrial processes and are used in manufacturing. • Perfluorocarbons: PFCs are a group of human-made chemicals composed of carbon and fluorine only.
These chemicals were introduced as alternatives, along with HFCs, to O3-depleting substances. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing. Since PFCs have stable molecular structures and do not break down through the chemical processes in the lower atmosphere, these chemicals have long lifetimes, ranging between 10,000 and 50,000 years. • Sulfur Hexafluoride: SF6 is a colorless gas that is soluble in alcohol and ether and slightly soluble in water.
SF6 is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, semiconductor manufacturing, the magnesium industry, and as a tracer gas for leak detection. • Nitrogen Trifluoride: Nitrogen trifluoride is used in the manufacture of a variety of electronics, including semiconductors and flat panel displays.
1 California Health and Safety Code 38505 identifies seven GHGs that CARB is responsible for monitoring and regulating to reduce emissions: CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, HFCs, PFCs, and nitrogen trifluoride. 2 The descriptions of GHGs are summarized from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Second Assessment Report (1995), IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (2007), CARB’s Glossary of Terms Used in GHG Inventories (CARB 2015), and the EPA’s Glossary of Climate Change Terms (EPA 2016).
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-3
Chlorofluorocarbons. CFCs are synthetic chemicals that have been used as cleaning solvents, refrigerants, and aerosol propellants. CFCs are chemically unreactive in the lower atmosphere (troposphere), and the production of CFCs was prohibited in 1987 due to the chemical destruction of stratospheric O3.
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons. HCFCs are a large group of compounds with a structure very close to that of CFCs— containing hydrogen, fluorine, chlorine, and carbon atoms—but including one or more hydrogen atoms. Like HFCs, HCFCs are used in refrigerants and propellants. HCFCs were also used in place of CFCs for some applications; however, their use in general is being phased out.
Black Carbon. Black carbon is a component of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), which has been identified as a leading environmental risk factor for premature death. It is produced from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels and biomass burning, particularly from older diesel engines and forest fires. Black carbon warms the atmosphere by absorbing solar radiation, influences cloud formation, and darkens the surface of snow and ice, which accelerates heat absorption and melting. Black carbon is short lived and varies spatially, which makes it difficult to quantify its global warming potential (GWP). DPM emissions are a major source of black carbon and are toxic air contaminants that have been regulated and controlled in California for several decades to protect public health. In relation to declining DPM from CARB’s regulations pertaining to diesel engines, diesel fuels, and burning activities, CARB estimates that annual black carbon emissions in California have reduced by 70% between 1990 and 2010, with 95% control expected by 2020 (CARB 2014).
Water Vapor. The primary source of water vapor is evaporation from the ocean, with additional vapor generated by sublimation (change from solid to gas) from ice and snow, evaporation from other water bodies, and transpiration from plant leaves. Water vapor is the most important, abundant, and variable GHG in the atmosphere and maintains a climate necessary for life.
Ozone. Tropospheric O3, which is created by photochemical reactions involving gases from both natural sources and human activities, acts as a GHG. Stratospheric O3, which is created by the interaction between solar ultraviolet radiation and molecular oxygen, plays a decisive role in the stratospheric radiative balance. Depletion of stratospheric O3, due to chemical reactions that may be enhanced by climate change, results in an increased ground-level flux of ultraviolet-B radiation.
Aerosols. Aerosols are suspensions of particulate matter in a gas emitted into the air through burning biomass (plant material) and fossil fuels. Aerosols can warm the atmosphere by absorbing and emitting heat and can cool the atmosphere by reflecting light.
3.6.1.3 Global Warming Potential
Gases in the atmosphere can contribute to climate change both directly and indirectly. Direct effects occur when the gas itself absorbs radiation. Indirect radiative forcing occurs when chemical transformations of the substance produce other GHGs, when a gas influences the atmospheric lifetimes of other gases, and/or when a gas affects atmospheric processes that alter the radiative balance of the Earth (e.g., affect cloud formation or albedo) (EPA 2016). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) developed the global warming potential (GWP) concept to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The GWP of a GHG is defined as the ratio of the time-integrated radiative forcing from the instantaneous release of one kilogram of a trace substance relative to that of one kilogram of a reference gas (IPCC 2014). The reference gas used is CO2; therefore, GWP-weighted emissions are measured in metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e).
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-4
The current version of CalEEMod (Version 2016.3.2) assumes that the GWP for CH4 is 25 (so emissions of one MT of CH4 are equivalent to emissions of 25 MT of CO2), and the GWP for N2O is 298, based on the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC 2007). The GWP values identified in CalEEMod were applied to the proposed project.
3.6.1.4 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Global Inventory
Anthropogenic GHG emissions worldwide in 2017 (the most recent year for which data is available) totaled approximately 50,860 MMT CO2e, excluding land use change and forestry (Olivier and Peters 2018). Six countries— China, the United States, the Russian Federation, India, Japan, and Brazil—and the European community accounted for approximately 65% of the total global emissions, or approximately 33,290 MMT CO2e (Olivier and Peters 2018).
Table 3.6-1 presents the top GHG-emissions-producing countries and the European Union.
Table 3.6-1. Six Top GHG Producer Countries and the European Union Emitting Countries 2014 GHG Emissions (MMT CO2e)a,b
China 13,530
United States 6,640
European Union 4,560
India 3,650
Russian Federation 2,220
Japan 1,490
Brazil 1,200
Total 33,290
Source: Olivier and Peters 2018.
Notes: GHG = greenhouse gas; MMT CO2e = million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. a Column may not add due to rounding.
b GHG emissions do not include land use change and forestry-related GHG emissions.
National and State Inventories
Per the 2020 EPA Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2018, total U.S. GHG emissions were approximately 6,677 MMT CO2e in 2018 (EPA 2020). The primary GHG emitted by human activities in the United States was CO2, which represented approximately 81.3% of total GHG emissions (5,428 MMT CO2e). The largest source of CO2, and of overall GHG emissions, was fossil-fuel combustion, which accounted for approximately 92.8% of CO2 emissions in 2018 (5,032 MMT CO2e). Relative to the 1990 emissions level, gross U.S. GHG emissions in 2018 were 3.7% higher; however, the gross emissions were down from a high of 15.2% above the 1990 level that occurred in 2007. GHG emissions decreased from 2017 to 2018 by 2.9% (188 MMT CO2e) and, overall, net emissions in 2018 were 10.2% below 2005 levels (EPA 2020).
According to California’s 2000 through 2018 GHG emissions inventory (2019 edition), California emitted 425 MMT CO2e in 2018, including emissions resulting from out-of-state electrical generation (CARB 2020). The sources of GHG emissions in California include transportation, industry, electric power production from both in-state and out-of-state sources, residential and commercial activities, agriculture, high GWP substances, and recycling and waste. The California GHG emission source categories and their relative contributions in 2018 are presented in Table 3.6-2.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-5
Table 3.6-2. GHG Emissions Sources in California
Source Category Annual GHG Emissions (MMT CO2e) Percent of Total a
Transportation 169.5 39.8%
Electric Power 63.1 14.8%
Industrial 89.2 21.0%
Commercial and Residential 41.4 9.7%
Agriculture 32.6 7.7%
High GWP 20.5 4.8%
Recycling and Waste 9.1 2.1%
Total 425.4 100%
Source: CARB 2020.
Notes: GHG = greenhouse gas; MMT CO2e = million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. a Column may not add due to rounding.
Between 2000 and 2018, per-capita GHG emissions in California dropped from a peak of 14.0 MT per person in 2001 to 10.7 MT per person in 2018, representing a 24% decrease. In addition, total GHG emissions in 2018 were approximately 1 MMT CO2e more than 2017 emissions (CARB 2020).
The City of Carpinteria (City) provided an update to their GHG emission inventory in their Energy and Climate Action Plan 2017 Progress Report (County of Santa Barbara 2018). GHG emissions for the County of Santa Barbara (County) in 2016 are presented in Table 3.6-3.
Table 3.6-3. GHG Emissions Sources in the County of Santa Barbara Source Category Annual GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) Percent of Totala Transportation 588,246 45.0%
Building Energy 374,164 28.6%
Off-Road 138,950 10.6%
Agriculture 119,360 9.1%
Solid Waste 82,750 6.3%
Water and Wastewater 3,364 0.3%
Totals 1,306,833 100.0%
Source: County of Santa Barbara 2017.
Notes: GHG = greenhouse gas; MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.
Emissions reflect the 2016 County of Santa Barbara GHG inventory. a Percentage of total has been rounded, and total may not sum due to rounding.
3.6.1.5 Potential Effects of Climate Change
Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources through uncertain impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. The 2014 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Synthesis Report indicated that warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. Signs that global climate change has occurred include warming of the atmosphere and ocean, diminished amounts of snow and ice, and rising sea levels (IPCC 2014).
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-6
In California, climate change impacts have the potential to affect sea-level rise, agriculture, snowpack and water supply, forestry, wildfire risk, public health, and electricity demand and supply (CCCC 2006). The primary effect of global climate change has been a 0.2°C rise in average global tropospheric temperature per decade, determined from meteorological measurements worldwide between 1990 and 2005. Scientific modeling predicts that continued emissions of GHGs at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21st century than were observed during the 20th century. A warming of about 0.2°C [0.36°F]) per decade is projected, and there are identifiable signs that global warming could be taking place.
Although climate change is driven by global atmospheric conditions, climate change impacts are felt locally. A scientific consensus confirms that climate change is already affecting California. The average temperatures in California have increased, leading to more extreme hot days and fewer cold nights; shifts in the water cycle have been observed, with less winter precipitation falling as snow, and both snowmelt and rainwater running off earlier in the year; sea levels have risen; and wildland fires are becoming more frequent and intense due to dry seasons that start earlier and end later (CAT 2010).
An increase in annual average temperature is a reasonably foreseeable effect of climate change. Observed changes over the last several decades across the Western United States reveal clear signals of climate change. Statewide average temperatures increased by about 1.7°F from 1895 to 2011, and warming has been the greatest in the Sierra Nevada (CCCC 2012). By 2050, California is projected to warm by approximately 2.7°F above 2000 averages, a threefold increase in the rate of warming over the last century. By 2100, average temperatures could increase by 4.1°F to 8.6°F, depending on emissions levels. Springtime warming—a critical influence on snowmelt— will be particularly pronounced. Summer temperatures will rise more than winter temperatures, and the increases will be greater in inland California, compared to the coast. Heat waves will be more frequent, hotter, and longer.
There will be fewer extremely cold nights (CCCC 2012). It is predicted that the Sierra snowpack, which accounts for approximately half of the surface water storage in California and much of the state’s water supply, will decline by 30% to as much as 90% over the next 100 years (CAT 2006).
Model projections for precipitation over California continue to show the Mediterranean pattern of wet winters and dry summers with seasonal, year-to-year, and decade-to-decade variability. For the first time, however, several of the improved climate models shift toward drier conditions by the mid-to-late 21st century in central and, most notably, Southern California. By late-century, all projections show drying, and half of them suggest 30-year average precipitation will decline by more than 10% below the historical average (CCCC 2012).
A summary of current and future climate change impacts to resource areas in California, as discussed in Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk (CNRA 2014), is provided below.
Agriculture. The impacts of climate change on the agricultural sector are far more severe than the typical variability in weather and precipitation patterns that occur year to year. The agriculture sector and farmers face some specific challenges that include more drastic and unpredictable precipitation and weather patterns; extreme weather events that range from severe flooding and extreme drought to destructive storm events; significant shifts in water availably and water quality; changes in pollinator lifecycles; temperature fluctuations, including extreme heat stress and decreased chill hours; increased risks from invasive species and weeds, agricultural pests, and plant diseases; and disruptions to the transportation and energy infrastructure supporting agricultural production. These challenges and associated short-term and long-term impacts can have both positive and negative effects on agricultural production.
Nonetheless, it is predicted that current crop and livestock production will suffer long-term negative effects resulting in a substantial decrease in the agricultural sector if climate change is not managed or mitigated.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-7
Biodiversity and Habitat. The state’s extensive biodiversity stems from its varied climate and assorted landscapes, which have resulted in numerous habitats where species have evolved and adapted over time. Specific climate change challenges to biodiversity and habitat include species migration in response to climatic changes, range shift and novel combinations of species; pathogens, parasites, and disease; invasive species; extinction risks; changes in the timing of seasonal life-cycle events; food web disruptions; and threshold effects (i.e., a change in the ecosystem that results in a “tipping point” beyond which irreversible damage or loss has occurs). Habitat restoration, conservation, and resource management across California and through collaborative efforts among public, private, and nonprofit agencies has assisted in the effort to fight climate change impacts on biodiversity and habitat. One of the key measures in these efforts is ensuring species’ ability to relocate as temperature and water availability fluctuate as a result of climate change.
Energy. The energy sector provides California residents with a supply of reliable and affordable energy through a complex integrated system. Specific climate change challenges for the energy sector include temperature, fluctuating precipitation patterns, increasing extreme weather events, and sea-level rise. Increasing temperatures and reduced snowpack negatively impact the availability of a steady flow of snowmelt to hydroelectric reservoirs. Higher temperatures also reduce the capacity of thermal power plants, since power plant cooling is less efficient at higher ambient temperatures. Increased temperatures will also increase electricity demand associated with air conditioning.
Natural gas infrastructure in coastal California is threatened by sea-level rise and extreme storm events.
Forestry. Forests occupy approximately 33% of California’s 100 million acres and provide key benefits, such as wildlife habitat, absorption of CO2, renewable energy, and building materials. The most significant climate changerelated risks to forests are accelerated risk of wildfire and more frequent and severe droughts. Droughts have resulted in more large-scale mortalities and, combined with increasing temperatures, have led to an overall increase in wildfire risks. Increased wildfire intensity subsequently increases public safety risks, property damage, fire suppression and emergency response costs, watershed and water quality impacts, and vegetation conversions.
These factors contribute to decreased forest growth, geographic shifts in tree distribution, loss of fish and wildlife habitat, and decreased carbon absorption. Climate change may result in increased establishment of non-native species, particularly in rangelands where invasive species are already a problem. Invasive species may be able to exploit temperature or precipitation changes or quickly occupy areas denuded by fire, insect mortality, or other climate change effects on vegetation.
Ocean and Coastal Ecosystems and Resources. Sea-level rise, changing ocean conditions, and other climate change stressors are likely to exacerbate long-standing challenges related to ocean and coastal ecosystems in addition to threatening people and infrastructure located along the California coastline and in coastal communities.
Sea-level rise, in addition to more frequent and severe coastal storms and erosion, is threatening vital infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, power plants, ports and airports, gasoline pipes, and emergency facilities, as well as negatively impacting the coastal recreational assets, such as beaches and tidal wetlands. Water quality and ocean acidification threaten the abundance of seafood and other plant and wildlife habitats throughout California and globally.
Public Health. Climate change can impact public health through various environmental changes and is the largest threat to human health in the 21st century. Changes in precipitation patterns affect public health primarily through potential for altered water supplies and extreme events, such as heat, floods, droughts, and wildfires.
Increased frequency, intensity, and duration of extreme heat and heat waves is likely to increase the risk of mortality due to heat-related illness, as well as exacerbate existing chronic health conditions. Other extreme weather events are likely to negatively impact air quality and increase or intensify respiratory illness, such as asthma and allergies. Additional health impacts that may be caused by climate change include cardiovascular
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-8
disease, vector-borne diseases, mental health impacts, and malnutrition injuries. Increased frequency of these ailments is likely to subsequently increase the direct risk of injury and/or mortality.
Transportation. Residents of California rely on airports, seaports, public transportation, and an extensive roadway network to gain access to destinations, goods, and services. While the transportation industry is a source of GHG emissions, it is also vulnerable to climate change risks. Particularly, sea-level rise and erosion threaten many coastal California roadways, airports, seaports, transit systems, bridge supports, and energy and fueling infrastructure. Increasing temperatures and extended periods of extreme heat threaten the integrity of the roadways and rail lines. High temperatures cause the road surfaces to expand, which leads to increased pressure and pavement buckling. High temperatures can also cause rail breakages, which could lead to train derailment.
Other forms of extreme weather events, such as extreme storm events, can negatively impact infrastructure, which can impair movement of peoples and goods, or potentially block evacuation routes and emergency access roads.
Increased wildfires, flooding, erosion risks, landslides, mudslides, and rockslides can all profoundly impact the transportation system and pose a serious risk to public safety.
Water. Water resources in California support residences, plants, wildlife, farmland, landscapes, and ecosystems and bring trillions of dollars in economic activity. Climate change could seriously impact the timing, form, amount of precipitation, runoff patterns, and frequency and severity of precipitation events. Higher temperatures reduce the amount of snowpack and lead to earlier snowmelt, which can impact water supply availability, natural ecosystems, and winter recreation. Water supply availability during the intense dry summer months is heavily dependent on the snowpack accumulated during the winter. Increased risk of flooding has a variety of public health concerns, including water quality, public safety, property damage, displacement, and post-disaster mental health problems. Prolonged and intensified droughts can also negatively affect groundwater reserves and result in increased overdraft and subsidence. Droughts can negatively impact agriculture and farmland throughout the state.
The higher risk of wildfires can lead to increased erosion, which can negatively impact watersheds and result in poor water quality. Water temperatures are also prone to increase, which can negatively impact wildlife that rely on a specific range of temperatures for suitable habitat.
In May 2017, the CNRA released the draft Safeguarding California Plan: 2017 Update, which was a survey of programmatic responses for climate change and contained recommendations for further actions (CNRA 2017).
3.6.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.6.2.1 Federal
Massachusetts v. EPA
In Massachusetts v. EPA (April 2007), the U.S. Supreme Court directed the EPA administrator to determine whether GHG emissions from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. In December 2009, the administrator signed a final rule with the following two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA):
• The administrator found that elevated concentrations of GHGs—CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. This is the “endangerment finding.”
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-9
• The administrator further found the combined emissions of GHGs—CO2, CH4, N2O, and HFCs—from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG air pollution that endangers public health and welfare. This is the “cause or contribute finding.” These two findings were necessary to establish the foundation for regulation of GHGs from new motor vehicles as air pollutants under the CAA.
Energy Independence and Security Act
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (December 2007), among other key measures, would do the following, which would aid in the reduction of national GHG emissions (EPA 2007):
• Increase the supply of alternative fuel sources by setting a mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard requiring fuel producers to use at least 36 billion gallons of biofuel in 2022. • Set a target of 35 miles per gallon for the combined fleet of cars and light trucks by model year 2020 and direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to establish a fuel economy program for medium- and heavy-duty trucks and create a separate fuel economy standard for work trucks. • Prescribe or revise standards affecting regional efficiency for heating and cooling products and procedures for new or amended standards, energy conservation, energy efficiency labeling for consumer electronic products, residential boiler efficiency, electric motor efficiency, and home appliances.
Federal Vehicle Standards
In response to the Massachusetts v. EPA ruling, the Bush Administration issued Executive Order (EO) 13432 in 2007 directing the EPA, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Energy to establish regulations that reduce GHG emissions from motor vehicles, non-road vehicles, and non-road engines by 2008. In 2009, the NHTSA issued a final rule regulating fuel efficiency and GHG emissions from cars and light-duty trucks for model year 2011.
In 2010, the EPA and NHTSA issued a final rule regulating cars and light-duty trucks for model years 2012 through 2016 (75 FR 25324–25728).
In 2010, President Obama issued a memorandum directing the Department of Transportation, Department of Energy, EPA, and NHTSA to establish additional standards regarding fuel efficiency and GHG reduction, clean fuels, and advanced vehicle infrastructure. In response to this directive, the EPA and NHTSA proposed stringent, coordinated federal GHG and fuel economy standards for model years 2017 through 2025 light-duty vehicles. The proposed standards projected to achieve 163 grams/mile of CO2 in model year 2025, on an average industry fleet-wide basis, which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon if this level were achieved solely through fuel efficiency. The final rule was adopted in 2012 for model years 2017 through 2021 (77 FR 62624–63200), and NHTSA intends to set standards for model years 2022 through 2025 in a future rulemaking.
In addition to the regulations applicable to cars and light-duty trucks described above, in 2011, the EPA and NHTSA announced fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks for model years 2014 through 2018. The standards for CO2 emissions and fuel consumption are tailored to three main vehicle categories:
combination tractors, heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles. According to the EPA, this regulatory program will reduce GHG emissions and fuel consumption for the affected vehicles by 6% to 23% over the 2010 baselines (76 FR 57106–57513).
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-10
In August 2016, the EPA and NHTSA announced the adoption of the phase two program related to the fuel economy and GHG standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The phase two program will apply to vehicles with model year 2018 through 2027 for certain trailers and model years 2021 through 2027 for semi-trucks, large pickup trucks, vans, and all types of sizes of buses and work trucks. The final standards are expected to lower CO2 emissions by approximately 1.1 billion MT and reduce oil consumption by up to 2 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the program (EPA and NHTSA 2016).
On September 27, 2019, EPA and NHTSA published the “Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One:
One National Program.” (84 Fed. Reg. 51,310), which became effective November 26, 2019. The Part One Rule revokes California’s authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and set zero-emission vehicle mandates in California. The Part One Rule impacts some of the underlying assumptions in the CARB EMFAC 2014 and EMFAC 2017 models for criteria air pollutant emissions from gasoline light-duty vehicles, which CARB released off-model adjustment factors for on November 20, 2019, primarily for use in federal Clean Air Act conformity demonstration analyses. Part Two of these regulations has not been adopted yet. Because CARB does not know the full impacts of these rules until Part Two is released, no off-model adjustments factors are available for GHG emissions at this time.
In addition, the EMFAC off-model adjustments have not yet been incorporated into CalEEMod. This issue is evolving as California and 22 other states, as well as the District of Columbia and two cities, filed suit against the EPA over the vehicle waiver revocation on November 15, 2019 and a petition for reconsideration of the rule was filed on November 26, 2019 by California and 22 other states, the District of Columbia, and four cities. Accordingly, the timing and consequences of these types of federal decisions and subsequent challenges are speculative at this time.
3.6.2.2 State
The statewide GHG emissions regulatory framework is summarized below by category: state climate change targets, building energy, renewable energy and energy procurement, mobile sources, solid waste, water, and other state regulations and goals. The following text describes executive orders, legislation, regulations, and other plans and policies that would directly or indirectly reduce GHG emissions and/or address climate change issues.
State Climate Change Targets
Executive Order S-3-05
EO S-3-05 (June 2005) established the following statewide goals: GHG emissions should be reduced to 2000 levels by 2010, GHG emissions should be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020, and GHG emissions should be reduced to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
Assembly Bill 32 and CARB’s Climate Change Scoping Plan In furtherance of the goals established in EO S-3-05, the Legislature enacted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
Under AB 32, CARB is responsible for and is recognized as having the expertise to carry out and develop the programs and requirements necessary to achieve the GHG emissions reduction mandate of AB 32. Under AB 32, CARB must adopt regulations requiring the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions from specified sources. This program is used to monitor and enforce compliance with established standards. CARB also is required to adopt rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions. AB 32 relatedly authorized CARB to adopt market-based compliance mechanisms to meet the specified
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-11
requirements. Finally, CARB is ultimately responsible for monitoring compliance and enforcing any rule, regulation, order, emission limitation, emission reduction measure, or market-based compliance mechanism adopted.
In 2007, CARB approved a limit on the statewide GHG emissions level for year 2020 consistent with the determined 1990 baseline (427 million metric tons [MMT] CO2e). CARB’s adoption of this limit is in accordance with Health and Safety Code, Section 38550.
Further, in 2008, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change (Scoping Plan) in accordance with Health and Safety Code, Section 38561. The Scoping Plan establishes an overall framework for the measures that would be adopted to reduce California’s GHG emissions for various emission sources/sectors to 1990 levels by 2020 (CARB 2008). The Scoping Plan evaluates opportunities for sector-specific reductions, integrates all CARB and Climate Action Team early actions and additional GHG reduction features by both entities, identifies additional measures to be pursued as regulations, and outlines the role of a cap-and-trade program. The key elements of the Scoping Plan include the following (CARB 2008):
1. Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs as well as building and appliance standards.
2. Achieving a statewide renewable energy mix of 33%.
3. Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other Western Climate Initiative partner programs to create a regional market system and caps sources contributing 85% of California’s GHG emissions.
4. Establishing targets for transportation-related GHG emissions for regions throughout California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets.
5. Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing state laws and policies, including California’s clean car standards, goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard.
6. Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on high GWP gases, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State of California’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation.
In the Scoping Plan, CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level in 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of approximately 29% from the otherwise projected 2020 emissions level (i.e., those emissions that would occur in 2020, absent GHG-reducing laws and regulations [referred to as “business-as-usual”]). For purposes of calculating this percent reduction, CARB assumed that all new electricity generation would be supplied by natural gas plants, no further regulatory action would impact vehicle fuel efficiency, and building energy efficiency codes would be held at 2005 standards.
In the 2011 Final Supplement to the Scoping Plan’s Functional Equivalent Document (Final Supplement), CARB revised its estimates of the projected 2020 emissions level in light of the economic recession and the availability of updated information about GHG-reduction regulations. Based on the new economic data, CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level by 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of 22% (down from 29%) from the business-as-usual conditions. When the 2020 emissions level projection was updated to account for newly implemented regulatory measures, including Pavley I (model years 2009 through 2016) and the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) (12% to 20%), CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level in 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of 16% (down from 29%) from the business-as-usual conditions.
In 2014, CARB adopted the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework (First Update). The stated purpose of the First Update is to “highlight California’s success to date in reducing its GHG emissions and lay the foundation for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050” (CARB 2014). The First Update found that California is on
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-12
track to meet the 2020 emissions reduction mandate established by AB 32, and noted that California could reduce emissions further by 2030 to levels squarely in line with those needed to stay on track to reduce emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050 if the state realizes the expected benefits of existing policy goals.
In conjunction with the First Update, CARB identified “six key focus areas comprising major components of the state’s economy to evaluate and describe the larger transformative actions that will be needed to meet the state’s more expansive emission reduction needs by 2050.” Those six areas are energy, transportation (e.g., vehicles/equipment, sustainable communities, housing, fuels, infrastructure), agriculture, water, waste management, and natural and working lands. The First Update identifies key recommended actions for each sector that will facilitate achievement of EO S-3-05’s 2050 reduction goal (CARB 2014).
Based on CARB’s research efforts presented in the First Update, it has a “strong sense of the mix of technologies needed to reduce emissions through 2050.” Those technologies include energy demand reduction through efficiency and activity changes; large-scale electrification of on-road vehicles, buildings, and industrial machinery; decarbonizing electricity and fuel supplies; and the rapid market penetration of efficient and clean energy technologies (CARB 2014).
As part of the First Update, CARB recalculated the state’s 1990 emissions level using more recent GWPs identified by the IPCC. Using the recalculated 1990 emissions level (431 MMT CO2e) and the revised 2020 emissions level projection identified in the 2011 Final Supplement, CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level by 2020 would require a reduction in GHG emissions of approximately 15% (instead of 29% or 16%) from the business-as-usual conditions (CARB 2014).
On January 20, 2017, CARB released the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (Second Update) for public review and comment (CARB 2017). This update proposed CARB’s strategy for achieving the state’s 2030 GHG target as established in SB 32 (discussed below), including continuing the Cap-and-Trade Program through 2030. The Second Update incorporated approaches to cutting short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) under the Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy (a planning document adopted by CARB in March 2017; SLCP Reduction Strategy), and acknowledged the need for reducing emissions in agriculture and highlighted the work underway to ensure that California’s natural and working lands increasingly sequester carbon. During development of the Second Update, CARB held a number of public workshops in the Natural and Working Lands, Agriculture, Energy, and Transportation sectors to inform development of the 2030 Scoping Plan Update (CARB 2017). When discussing project-level GHG emissions-reduction actions and thresholds, the Second Update stated, “Achieving net zero increases in GHG emissions, resulting in no contribution to GHG impacts, may not be feasible or appropriate for every project, however, and the inability of a project to mitigate its GHG emissions to net zero does not imply the project results in a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant environmental impact of climate change under CEQA” (CARB 2017). The Second Update was approved by CARB’s Governing Board on December 14, 2017.
EO B-30-15
EO B-30-15 (April 2015) identified an interim GHG reduction target in support of targets previously identified under EO S-3-05 and AB 32. EO B-30-15 set an interim target goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 to keep California on its trajectory toward meeting or exceeding the long-term goal of reducing statewide GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, as set forth in EO S-3-05. To facilitate achievement of this goal, EO B-30-15 called for an update to CARB’s Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of MMT CO2e. The EO also called for state agencies to continue to develop and implement GHG emission reduction programs in support of the reduction targets. EO B-30-15 does not require local agencies to take any action to meet the new interim GHG reduction target.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-13
SB 32 and AB 197
SB 32 and AB 197 (enacted in 2016) are companion bills that set a new statewide GHG reduction targets; made changes to CARB’s membership and increased legislative oversight of CARB’s climate change-based activities; and expanded dissemination of GHG and other air-quality-related emissions data to enhance transparency and accountability. More specifically, SB 32 codified the 2030 emissions reduction goal of EO B-30-15 by requiring CARB to ensure that statewide GHG emissions are reduced to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. AB 197 established the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, consisting of at least three members of the Senate and three members of the Assembly, in order to provide ongoing oversight over implementation of the state’s climate policies. AB 197 also added two members of the Legislature to CARB as nonvoting members; required CARB to make available and update (at least annually through its website) emissions data for GHGs, criteria air pollutants, and TACs from reporting facilities; and required CARB to identify specific information for GHG emissions-reduction measures when updating the Scoping Plan.
SB 605 and SB 1383
SB 605 (2014) required CARB to complete a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of SLCPs in the state; SB 1383 (2016) required CARB to approve and implement the SLCP Reduction Strategy. SB 1383 also established specific targets for the reduction of SLCPs (40% below 2013 levels by 2030 for CH4 and HFCs, and 50% below 2013 levels by 2030 for anthropogenic black carbon), and provided direction for reductions from dairy and livestock operations and landfills. Accordingly, and as mentioned above, CARB adopted its SLCP Reduction Strategy in March 2017, which established a framework for the statewide reduction of emissions of black carbon, CH4, and fluorinated gases.
EO B-55-18
EO B-55-18 (September 2018) established a new statewide goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter.” This executive order directed CARB to “work with relevant state agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal.”
Building Energy
Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations was established in 1978, and serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards. While not initially promulgated to reduce GHG emissions, Part 6 of Title 24 specifically establishes Building Energy Efficiency Standards that are designed to ensure new and existing buildings in California achieve energy efficiency and preserve outdoor and indoor environmental quality. These energy efficiency standards are reviewed every few years by the Building Standards Commission and the California Energy Commission (CEC) (and revised if necessary) (California Public Resources Code, Section 25402[b][1]). The regulations receive input from members of industry, as well as the public, with the goal of “reducing of wasteful, uneconomic, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy” (California Public Resources Code, Section 25402). These regulations are carefully scrutinized and analyzed for technological and economic feasibility (California Public Resources Code, Section 25402[d]), and cost effectiveness (California Public Resources Code, Sections 25402[b][2] and [b][3]). These standards are updated to consider and incorporate new energy efficient technologies and construction methods. As a result, these standards save energy, increase electricity supply
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-14
reliability, increase indoor comfort, avoid the need to construct new power plants, and help preserve the environment. The 2019 standards continue to improve upon the 2016 standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings. The 2019 standards went into effect on January 1, 2020.
Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations In addition to the CEC’s efforts, in 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR 11) is commonly referred to as CALGreen, and establishes minimum mandatory standards as well as voluntary standards pertaining to the planning and design of sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and interior air quality. The CALGreen standards took effect in January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all groundup, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential, and state-owned buildings, schools, and hospitals. The CALGreen 2019 standards went into effect on January 1, 2020, and continue to improve upon the 2016 CALGreen standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings (CALGreen 2016).
The 2019 Title 24 standards are the currently applicable building energy efficiency standards, and became effective on January 1, 2020. The 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will further reduce energy used and associated GHG emissions compared to current standards. In general, single-family residences built to the 2019 standards are anticipated to use approximately 7% less energy due to energy efficiency measures than those built to the 2016 standards; once rooftop solar electricity generation is factored in, single-family residences built under the 2019 standards will use approximately 53% less energy than those under the 2016 standards (CEC 2018).
Nonresidential buildings built to the 2019 standards are anticipated to use an estimated 30% less energy than those built to the 2016 standards (CEC 2018).
Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations
Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations requires manufacturers of appliances to meet state and federal standards for energy and water efficiency. Performance of appliances must be certified through the CEC to demonstrate compliance with standards. New appliances regulated under Title 20 include refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers; room air conditioners and room air-conditioning heat pumps; central air conditioners; spot air conditioners; vented gas space heaters; gas pool heaters; plumbing fittings and plumbing fixtures; fluorescent lamp ballasts; lamps; emergency lighting; traffic signal modules; dishwashers; clothes washers and dryers; cooking products; electric motors; low voltage dry-type distribution transformers; power supplies; televisions and consumer audio and video equipment; and battery charger systems. Title 20 presents protocols for testing for each type of appliance covered under the regulations, and appliances must meet the standards for energy performance, energy design, water performance and water design. Title 20 contains three types of standards for appliances: federal and state standards for federally regulated appliances, state standards for federally regulated appliances, and state standards for non-federally regulated appliances.
AB 1109
Enacted in 2007, AB 1109 required the CEC to adopt minimum energy efficiency standards for general purpose lighting to reduce electricity consumption 50% for indoor residential lighting and 25% for indoor commercial lighting.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-15
Renewable Energy and Energy Procurement
SB 1078
SB 1078 (2002) established the RPS program, which requires an annual increase in renewable generation by the utilities equivalent to at least 1% of sales, with an aggregate goal of 20% by 2017. This goal was subsequently accelerated, requiring utilities to obtain 20% of their power from renewable sources by 2010.
SB 1368
SB 1368 (2006) required the CEC to develop and adopt regulations for GHG emission performance standards for the long-term procurement of electricity by local publicly owned utilities. This effort helps protect energy customers from financial risks associated with investments in carbon-intensive generation by allowing new capital investments in power plants whose GHG emissions are as low as or lower than new combined-cycle natural gas plants by requiring imported electricity to meet GHG performance standards in California and by requiring that the standards be developed and adopted in a public process.
SB X1 2
SB X1 2 (2011) expanded the RPS by establishing that 20% of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2013, and 33% by December 31, 2020, and in subsequent years be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources. Under the bill, a renewable electrical generation facility is one that uses biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megawatts or less, digester gas, municipal solid waste conversion, landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current, and that meets other specified requirements with respect to its location. In addition to the retail sellers previously covered by the RPS, SB X1 2 added local, publicly owned electric utilities to the RPS.
SB 350
SB 350 (2015) further expanded the RPS by establishing that 50% of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2030, be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources. In addition, SB 350 included the goal to double the energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas final end uses (such as heating, cooling, lighting, or class of energy uses on which an energy efficiency program is focused) of retail customers through energy conservation and efficiency. The bill also required the California Public Utilities Commission, in consultation with the CEC, to establish efficiency targets for electrical and gas corporations consistent with this goal.
SB 100
SB 100 (2018) increased the standards set forth in SB 350 establishing that 44% of the total electricity sold to retail customers in California per year by December 31, 2024, 52% by December 31, 2027, and 60% by December 31, 2030 be secured from qualifying renewable energy sources. Under SB 100, it is the policy of the state that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 100% of the retail sales of electricity to California. This bill requires that the achievement of 100% zero-carbon electricity resources does not increase the carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid and that the achievement not occur through resource shuffling.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-16
Mobile Sources
EO S-1-07
Issued on January 18, 2007, EO S-1-07 set a declining Low Carbon Fuel Standard for GHG emissions measured in CO2e grams per unit of fuel energy sold in California. The target of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard is to reduce the carbon intensity of California passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10% by 2020. The carbon intensity measures the amount of GHG emissions in the lifecycle of a fuel, including extraction/feedstock production, processing, transportation, and final consumption, per unit of energy delivered. CARB adopted the implementing regulation in April 2009. The regulation is expected to increase the production of biofuels, including those from alternative sources, such as algae, wood, and agricultural waste.
SB 375
SB 375 (2008) addresses GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector through regional transportation and sustainability plans. SB 375 required CARB to adopt regional GHG reduction targets for the automobile and lighttruck sector for 2020 and 2035. Regional metropolitan planning organizations were then responsible for preparing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within their Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The goal of the SCS is to establish a forecasted development pattern for the region that, after considering transportation measures and policies, would achieve, if feasible, the GHG reduction targets. If a SCS is unable to achieve the GHG reduction target, a metropolitan planning organization must prepare an Alternative Planning Strategy demonstrating how the GHG reduction target would be achieved through alternative development patterns, infrastructure, or additional transportation measures or policies.
Pursuant to Government Code, Section 65080(b)(2)(K), a SCS does not (i) regulate the use of land; (ii) supersede the land use authority of cities and counties; or (iii) require that a city’s or county’s land use policies and regulations, including those in a general plan, be consistent with it. Nonetheless, SB 375 makes regional and local planning agencies responsible for developing those strategies as part of the federally required metropolitan transportation planning process and the state-mandated housing element process.
In 2010, CARB adopted the SB 375 targets for the regional metropolitan planning organizations. The targets for SBCAG are a 7% reduction in emissions per capita by 2020 and a 13% reduction by 2035.
SBCAG completed and adopted its 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (2050 RTP/SCS) in August 2013 (SBCAG 2013). In November 2013, CARB, by resolution, accepted SBCAG’s GHG emissions quantification analysis and determination that, if implemented, the 2040 RTP/SCS would achieve CARB’s 2020 and 2035 GHG emissionsreduction targets for the region. In August 2017, SBCAG adopted the Fast Forward 2040, SBCAG RTP/SCS. Like the 2040 RTP/SCS, the Fast Forward 2040 meets CARB’s 2020 and 2035 reduction targets for the region (SBCAG 2017).
Advanced Clean Cars Program
In January 2012, CARB approved the Advanced Clean Cars program, a new emissions-control program for model years 2015 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog- and soot-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package. The package includes elements to reduce smog-forming pollution, reduce GHG emissions, promote clean cars, and provide the fuels for clean cars (CARB 2011). To improve air quality, CARB has implemented new emission standards to reduce smog-forming emissions beginning with 2015 model year vehicles. It is estimated that in 2025, cars will emit 75% less smog-forming pollution than the average
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-17
new car sold before 2012. To reduce GHG emissions, CARB, in conjunction with the EPA and the NHTSA, has adopted new GHG standards for model year 2017 to 2025 vehicles; the new standards are estimated to reduce GHG emissions by 34% in 2025. The zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) program will act as the focused technology of the Advanced Clean Cars program by requiring manufacturers to produce increasing numbers of ZEVs and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (EVs) in the 2018 to 2025 model years.
EO B-16-12
EO B-16-12 (2012) directs state entities under the Governor’s direction and control to support and facilitate development and distribution of ZEVs. This executive order (EO) also sets a long-term target of reaching 1.5 million ZEVs on California’s roadways by 2025. On a statewide basis, EO B-16-12 also establishes a GHG emissions-reduction target from the transportation sector equaling 80% less than 1990 levels by 2050. In furtherance of this EO, the Governor convened an Interagency Working Group on ZEVs that has published multiple reports regarding the progress made on the penetration of ZEVs in the statewide vehicle fleet.
AB 1236
AB 1236 (2015) requires local land use jurisdictions to approve applications for the installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, as defined, through the issuance of specified permits unless there is substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The bill provides for appeal of that decision to the planning commission, as specified. AB 1236 requires local land use jurisdictions with a population of 200,000 or more residents to adopt an ordinance, by September 30, 2016, which creates an expedited and streamlined permitting process for EV charging stations, as specified. The City added Section 86.0151, Electric Vehicle Parking Regulations, to its municipal code in August 2015 in response to the AB 1236 requirements.
SB 350
In 2015, SB 350—the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act—was enacted into law. As one of its elements, SB 350 established a statewide policy for widespread electrification of the transportation sector, recognizing that such electrification is required for achievement of the state’s 2030 and 2050 reduction targets (see Public Utilities Code, Section 740.12).
EO B-48-18
EO B-48-18 (2018) launched an eight-year initiative to accelerate the sale of EVs through a mix of rebate programs and infrastructure improvements. The order also set a new EV target of 5 million EVs in California by 2030. EO B48-18 included funding for multiple state agencies, including the CEC, to increase EV charging infrastructure and for CARB to provide rebates for the purchase of new EVs and purchase incentives for low-income customers.
Solid Waste
AB 939 and AB 341
In 1989, AB 939, known as the Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code, Sections 40000 et seq.), was passed because of the increase in waste stream and the decrease in landfill capacity. The statute established the California Integrated Waste Management Board, which oversees a disposal reporting system. AB 939 mandated a reduction of waste being disposed where jurisdictions were required to meet diversion goals of all solid waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-18
AB 341 (2011) amended the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 to include a provision declaring that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75% of solid waste generated be source-reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020, and annually thereafter. In addition, AB 341 required the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to develop strategies to achieve the state’s policy goal. The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery has conducted multiple workshops and published documents that identify priority strategies that it believes would assist the state in reaching the 75% goal by 2020 (CalRecycle 2015).
Water
EO B-29-15
In response to the ongoing drought in California, EO B-29-15 (April 2015) set a goal of achieving a statewide reduction in potable urban water usage of 25% relative to water use in 2013. The term of the EO extended through February 28, 2016, although many of the directives have since become permanent water-efficiency standards and requirements. The EO includes specific directives that set strict limits on water usage in the state. In response to EO B-29-15, the California Department of Water Resources has modified and adopted a revised version of the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance that, among other changes, significantly increases the requirements for landscape water use efficiency and broadens its applicability to include new development projects with smaller landscape areas.
Other State Regulations and Goals
SB 97
SB 97 (August 2007) directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop guidelines under CEQA for the mitigation of GHG emissions. In 2008, OPR issued a technical advisory as interim guidance regarding the analysis of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. The advisory indicated that the lead agency should identify and estimate a project’s GHG emissions, including those associated with vehicular traffic, energy consumption, water usage, and construction activities (OPR 2008). The advisory further recommended that the lead agency determine significance of the impacts and impose all mitigation measures necessary to reduce GHG emissions to a level that is less than significant. The California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted the CEQA Guidelines amendments in December 2009, which became effective in March 2010.
Under the amended CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency has the discretion to determine whether to use a quantitative or qualitative analysis or apply performance standards to determine the significance of GHG emissions resulting from a particular project (14 CCR 15064.4[a]). The CEQA Guidelines require a lead agency to consider the extent to which a project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[b]). The CEQA Guidelines also allow a lead agency to consider feasible means of mitigating the significant effects of GHG emissions, including reductions in emissions through the implementation of project features or off-site measures. The adopted amendments do not establish a GHG emission threshold, instead allowing a lead agency to develop, adopt, and apply its own thresholds of significance or those developed by other agencies or experts. The CNRA also acknowledges that a lead agency may consider compliance with regulations or requirements implementing AB 32 in determining the significance of a project’s GHG emissions (CNRA 2009).
With respect to GHG emissions, the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.4(a), state that lead agencies should “make a good faith effort, to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions. The CEQA Guidelines note that an agency may identify emissions by either selecting a “model or
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-19
methodology” to quantify the emissions or by relying on “qualitative analysis or other performance based standards” (14 CCR 15064.4[a]). Section 15064.4(b) states that the lead agency should consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment: (1) the extent a project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; (2) whether project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; and (3) the extent to which a project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[b]).
EO S-13-08
EO S-13-08 (November 2008) is intended to hasten California’s response to the impacts of global climate change, particularly sea-level rise. Therefore, the EO directs state agencies to take specified actions to assess and plan for such impacts. The final 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy report was issued in December 2009 (CNRA 2009), and an update, Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk, followed in July 2014 (CNRA 2014). To assess the state’s vulnerability, the report summarizes key climate change impacts to the state for the following areas: agriculture, biodiversity and habitat, emergency management, energy, forestry, ocean and coastal ecosystems and resources, public health, transportation, and water. Issuance of the Safeguarding California:
Implementation Action Plans followed in March 2016 (CNRA 2016). In January 2018, the CNRA released the Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update, which communicates current and needed actions that state government should take to build climate change resiliency (CNRA 2018).
3.6.2.3 Local
SBCAPCD and SBCAG
The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD) is the regional agency responsible for the regulation and enforcement of federal, state, and local air pollution control regulations in the County. The SBCAPCD operates monitoring stations in the County, develops rules and regulations for stationary sources and equipment, prepares emissions inventory and air quality management planning documents, and conducts source testing and inspections. The SBCAPCD’s focus is on criteria air pollutants to achieve California Ambient Air Quality Standards and National Ambient Air Quality Standards. It does not generally regulate sources of GHG emissions, except in its role as a reviewing agency for projects subject to CEQA.
SBCAG prepared a 2040 Regional Transportation Plan-Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP-SCS), adopted in August 2017, which shows how the region will achieve the required GHG per capita emission targets as well the cobenefits of reducing criteria pollutants. The 2040 RTP-SCS is based on a preferred land use and transportation scenario, which lays out one possible pattern of future growth and transportation investment for the region. The 2040 RTP-SCS preferred scenario emphasizes a transit-oriented development and infill approach to land use and housing, supported by complementary transportation and transit investments. The 2040 RTP-SCS meets the requirements of SB 375 and successfully achieves the region’s GHG emission targets in 2020 and 2035, while accommodating forecast growth and regional housing needs. The 2040 RTP-SCS would meet the SBCAG region’s GHG emission targets from passenger vehicles for 2020 and 2035, achieving reductions in per capita emissions of CO2 from passenger vehicles of 13.3% in 2020 and 17.7% in 2035, better than the SBCAG target of zero net growth in per capita emissions (SBCAG 2017).
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-20
County of Santa Barbara
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(a) states,
Lead agencies may analyze and mitigate the significant effects of GHG emissions at a programmatic level, such as in…a separate plan to reduce GHG emissions. Later project-specific environmental documents may tier from…that existing programmatic review…a lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the requirements in a previously adopted plan.
The County of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors adopted the Energy and Climate Action Plan (ECAP) in May 2015 and certified the accompanying EIR (County of Santa Barbara 2015). The ECAP meets the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b) for a “plan to reduce GHG emissions.” The ECAP commits the County to reduce community-wide GHG emissions by 15% below 2007 levels by 2020 consistent with the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32) and the related Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2008). The ECAP is a qualified GHG emissions reduction plan for projects built prior to 2020.
The County of Santa Barbara developed a Climate Action Strategy, which is a two-phase project comprised of (1) a Climate Action Study, and (2) an Energy and Climate Action Plan (ECAP). The Climate Action Strategy covers the unincorporated areas of Santa Barbara County where the County of Santa Barbara retains land use permit authority, which includes a portion of the proposed project. The County of Santa Barbara Long-Range Planning Division completed Phase 1 of the Climate Action Strategy, the Climate Action Study, in September 2011. The Climate Action Study provides a summary of policies, programs, and projects that the County of Santa Barbara can implement to reduce GHG emissions in the unincorporated County (County of Santa Barbara 2011). Phase 2, the ECAP, which seeks to reduce the County’s GHG emissions through implementation of selected emission reduction measures with the goal of achieving the selected GHG reduction target, was adopted in May 2015 (County of Santa Barbara 2015). The E-CAP is currently being updated to incorporate the longer term GHG goals of the County, which are to reduce its emissions by 50% below 2007 levels by 2030 (County of Santa Barbara 2020).
City of Carpinteria
The City has adopted measures within its Open Space, Recreation & Conservation element of its General Plan to reduce GHG emissions (City of Carpinteria 2003). Measures identified within Section 3.2.2.3 for protecting air quality would also help to reduce GHG emissions. The following policies within that element in addition are included to reduce GHG emissions:
CDS6-f To ensure the efficient utilization of energy resources, design measures shall be incorporated into project design that allow for development projects to exceed the minimum energy requirements of the city’s Uniform Codes.
1. Building orientation shall be designed to maximize natural lighting, passive solar heating, and cooling;
2. Landscaping shall be designed to maximize the use of native drought tolerant species and deciduous trees to shade buildings in summer and allow for passive solar heating in winter;
3. Energy efficient street lighting shall be used, with consideration of safety, visual impacts, and impacts to wildlife and sensitive habitat;
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-21
4. Design of parking facilities shall take into consideration the layout of entrances and exits so as to avoid concentrations of cars or excessive idling.
5. Alternatively fueled vehicles are to be used in construction and as fleet vehicles, if feasible and available.
C-7a Ensure that major businesses prepare and implement Transportation Systems Management Plans to achieve a reduction in the number of trips generated by their employees and operations by encouraging private sector program elements similar to the following:
• Preferential employee carpool/vanpool parking
• Work-at-home (telecommuting)
• Designation of Company Transportation Coordinator
• The construction of Transit Passenger Shelters (if located along an existing or designed transit route)
• Bus subsidies
• Transit operating subsidies
• Transit pass subsidies
• Buspool or shuttle bus programs
• Vanpool program
• Parking fees
• Showers, lockers and preferred bicycle parking
• Non-peak period shift schedules
• Flexible work hours offered to employees who rideshare • Provision of luncheon/lounge seating area with vending machines and food preparation facilities
• Other programs and incentives which can feasibly and significantly reduce potential peak period trips.
C-7b Develop safe and direct pedestrian accessibility between residential areas, schools, parks, and shopping areas in both new and existing urban areas.
C-7c Provide safe mobility for the physically handicapped through the design of street improvements and public facilities.
C-7d Practice signal timing that is designed for the safe movement of the aged and the handicapped at locations where such needs exist.
C-7e Provide continuous sidewalks, where appropriate, for safe pedestrian circulation and consider creative alternatives for such issues.
C-7f Earmark a larger portion of development impact fees for alternative transportation programs.
C-7g Create a citywide campaign of prolonged duration promoting alternative transportation.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-22
C-8a Integrate the development of bicycle routes and pedestrian pathways in additional areas of the city, and encourage the utilization of such routes for commuting as well as recreational purposes.
C-8b Provide adequate right-of-way and improvements for bicycle lanes, when called for in future street dedications.
C-8c Provide or require safe and adequate bicycle parking at transportation centers, public parks, recreation areas and other nonresidential locations.
C-8d Encourage integration of the city’s bicycle routes with state and countywide programs.
C-8e Encourage educational programs on bicycle safety, and complement such programs through bicycle law enforcement.
C-8f Encourage pedestrian movement by providing pedestrian facilities that are direct and convenient, particularly in the beach and downtown areas.
C-8g Consider rerouting the Pacific Coast Bikeway to another location parallel to the coastline, such as adjacent to the railroad right of way throughout the city. [5-year] C-8h Encourage a bike trail link from Carpinteria to Summerland along the railroad right of way and a coastal link to Ventura paralleling U.S. 101.
C-8i Inspect, provide, and maintain contiguous bike lanes for a one-half mile radius around each school site.
C-8j Encourage the School Board to instruct the School District to include bicycle safety as part of the curriculum.
C-8k Contact the Carpinteria Chapter of the AHA and ask them to include the benefits of bicycling as part of their workplace training program. [2-year] C-8l As a requirement of new development, significant attention must be paid to bicycle-friendly infrastructure and the maintenance of nearby old infrastructure.
C-8m Add more bike lanes to arterial street cross-sections.
C-8n Develop funding sources for new bicycle infrastructure including diversion of funds from sources currently applied to single occupant vehicle infrastructure.
C-8o Correct bike lanes at intersections, allowing for straight through bike lanes adjacent to auto lanes, when a right-turn lane exists.
C-8p Correct pressure sensitive signals to respond to weight of bicyclists.
C-8q Encourage the placement of bicycle lockers at shopping centers and major traffic areas.
C-8r Encourage large employers to place bicycle lockers in convenient locations on their premises.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-23
C-9a Continue cooperation with the Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District (SBMTD), Caltrans and other transportation agencies, in order to assure that all City residents have adequate access to public transit as an alternative to the automobile.
C-9b Develop the circulation system in a manner that will maximize route efficiency for transit lines within the city.
C-9c Coordinate with SBMTD, Caltrans and other transportation agencies in the development of route systems and transfer points.
C-9d Promote efficient and attractive public transit which maintains acceptable personal safety, and minimizes the disruption of neighbors attributable to transportation facilities and operations.
C-9e Encourage privately owned transit systems to interface with the public transit systems.
C-9f Encourage SBMTD and others to develop a variety of public transit modes and schedules coordinated with those of adjacent cities, while meeting residential and seasonal transit needs. Further, support development of a Ventura/Santa Barbara express bus commuter line with stops in Carpinteria.
C-9g Continue cooperation with SBMTD to ensure frequent, predictable, safe and reliable neighborhood shuttle bus service.
C-9h Encourage MTD to promote use of Parking Lot 3 as a park and ride lot, and encourage Caltrans to establish and promote its parcel southwest of the Bailard/Highway 101 interchange for a park and ride lot.
C-9i Work with MTD to promote increased bus use and explore providing expanded inner city/neighborhood shuttle service within the city. [2-year] C-9j Encourage the growth of low impact and non-polluting industry, and promote improved congestion management techniques. This may take the form of local business ordinances and might be applied through the permitting process.
C-9k Provide incentives to businesses that offer flexible shift/start times, compressed work week opportunities, and telecommuting options.
C-9l Design and place improved signage for parking lots, sites of interest, business districts and recreational areas.
C-9m Work with SBCAG’s Traffic Solutions program to promote and educate citizens and employers about alternative transportation including bicycling, carpooling, vanpooling, buses, telecommuting, staggered start/stop times, compressed work weeks, and other alternatives as they are developed.
C-9n Require new development plans to include significant attention to alternative modes of transportation.
C-9o Require well-designed walkways as a condition to new development approval.
C-9p Establish a regulatory framework for siting antennas and telecommunication equipment that protects visual resources. [2-year]
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-24
C-9q Participate in countywide planning for telecommunications.
C-9r Encourage local businesses to participate in electronic commerce.
3.6.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to greenhouse gas emissions are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to greenhouse gas emissions would occur if the project would:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The Appendix G thresholds for GHGs do not prescribe specific methodologies for performing an assessment, do not establish specific thresholds of significance, and do not mandate specific mitigation measures. Rather, the CEQA Guidelines emphasize the lead agency’s discretion to determine the appropriate methodologies and thresholds of significance consistent with the manner in which other impact areas are handled in CEQA (CNRA 2009). Additional guidance regarding assessment of GHGs is discussed below.
County of Santa Barbara
The County adopted the developing interim greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions thresholds to apply to new development projects while the County updates its Energy and Climate Action Plan (ECAP). The updated ECAP, now referred to as the 2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP), will identify reductions needed in both existing and new developments in the county to meet its 2030 GHG emissions reduction target. In July 2020, the County adopted a new target to reduce its emissions by 50% below 2007 levels by 2030 with direction from the Board of Supervisors (County of Santa Barbara 2020). The interim thresholds will help the County process discretionary projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and continue to achieve GHG emissions reductions from new development while it prepares the 2030 CAP.
The County Planning and Development Department developed the interim GHG emissions thresholds to assist project applicants to comply with the requirements of CEQA regarding potentially adverse impacts to climate change. The determination on whether or not a project may have a significant effect on the environment shall be based in part on the thresholds of significance. The proposed interim thresholds for GHG emissions are quantitative measures of environmental change. Thresholds of significance supplement provisions in the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines) for the determination of significant environmental effects, including Sections 15064, 15065, 15382, and Appendix G incorporated herein. The primary purpose of the interim GHG emissions thresholds is to provide a means to identify proposed local plans and development projects that may have a significant adverse effect related to GHGs. Subsequent sections of this memorandum present the justifications for the recommended interim GHG emissions thresholds. These changes were incorporated into the County’s Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual as amended on October 27, 2020 (County of Santa Barbara 2020).
The CEQA Guidelines address GHG emissions as a cumulative impact due to the global nature of climate change (14 CCR 15064.4[b]). As the California Supreme Court explained, “because of the global scale of climate change,
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-25
any one project’s contribution is unlikely to be significant by itself” (Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments [2017] 3 Cal.5th 497, 512.). A project’s significant GHG impacts must be disclosed and mitigated to the extent feasible whenever the lead agency determines that the project contributes to a significant, cumulative climate change impact (14 CCR 15064.4[b] and 15183.5). Therefore, the impacts analysis of GHG emissions is global in nature and should be considered in a broader context. A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable even if it appears relatively small compared to statewide, national or global emissions (14 CCR 15064.4[b]). The interim GHG emissions thresholds are set at a level of impact that identifies either (1) a cumulatively considerable contribution to an existing adverse condition, or (2) a cumulatively significant impact in combination with other projects causing related impacts.
The interim thresholds that apply to land use development projects, which include both project level residential and non-residential development and plans (e.g., specific plans and community plans). These thresholds would not apply to GHG-emitting power plants, oil and gas facilities, or other industrial stationary sources as the County has an adopted bright line threshold of 1,000 MT CO2e per year for industrial stationary sources. The interim thresholds will only apply to non-exempt discretionary projects under CEQA. Under Step 1, applicants first compare non-exempt project applications against a screening threshold. Applicants can either qualitatively compare the project size to project screening criteria, or, if the screening criteria are not applicable, quantitatively calculate project-specific emissions (see Table 3 of the GHG memorandum). Examples of projects that may not be able to use project screening criteria include (1) project types not included in Table 3 of the GHG memorandum, or (2) projects that include emissions sources not accounted for in the modeled assumptions for the proposed land use type shown in Table 3 of the GHG memorandum. The screening threshold shall be no greater than 300 MT CO2e per year, based on the estimated effectiveness of mitigation measures for new development. This threshold would result in approximately 15% of all applicable future projects and 87% of all applicable future land use emissions being subject to the efficiency threshold under Step 2. Under Step 2, any project with 2030 estimated emissions exceeding the screening threshold will be subject to an efficiency GHG emissions threshold based on the project’s estimated service population. For projects exceeding the screening threshold, an efficiency threshold of 3.8 MT CO2e/year per service population (SP) in 2030 will apply. Projects subject to the efficiency threshold amortize any construction emissions over the lifetime of the project (e.g., 30 years). The efficiency threshold would apply to the sum of the amortized construction emissions and the estimated annual operational emissions. Furthermore, until the 2030 CAP is adopted, the County considers projects or plans that have emissions below interim thresholds to be consistent with County GHG emission reduction plans. The interim thresholds are part of the County’s GHG emissions reduction strategy and were informed by the County’s 2030 target. The interim thresholds provide a pathway for projects and plans to show compliance with County goals (County of Santa Barbara 2020).
City of Carpinteria
The City does not have an adopted GHG threshold or qualified GHG reduction plan for the project to tier off. Therefore, the County of Santa Barbara’s Interim GHG Threshold of 300 MT CO2e per year will be applied to the project.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-26
3.6.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Construction Emissions
Construction of the project would result in GHG emissions that are primarily associated with use of off-road construction equipment, on-road vendor trucks, and worker vehicles. The County’s Interim GHG Thresholds (County of Santa Barbara 2020) recommends the use of a 300 MT CO2e bright-line threshold for both construction and operation of development projects.
CalEEMod was used to calculate the annual GHG emissions based on the construction scenario described in Section 3.2.4 and Appendix B. Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to commence in March 2022, lasting a total of approximately 24 months. On-site sources of GHG emissions include off-road equipment and offsite sources include on-road vehicles (haul trucks, vendor trucks, and worker vehicles). Table 3.6-4 below presents construction emissions for the project from on-site and off-site emissions sources.
Table 3.6-4. Estimated Annual Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Year
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Metric Tons
2022 522.46 0.08 0.00 524.56
2023 182.66 0.04 0.00 183.56
Total 708.12
Amortized Emissions over 30 years 23.60
Source: Appendix B.
Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent As shown in Table 3.6-4, the estimated total GHG emissions during construction would be approximately 708 MT CO2e. When construction emissions are amortized over 30 years, the construction emissions would be approximately 24 MT CO2e per year. As with project-generated construction air quality pollutant emissions, GHG emissions generated during construction of the project would be short term in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and would not represent a long-term source of GHG emissions. As discussed in Section 3.6.3, Thresholds of Significance, the amortized construction emissions will be added to operational emissions and compared to the significance threshold.
Loss of Sequestered Carbon
The calculation methodology and default values provided in CalEEMod (CAPCOA 2017) were used to calculate potential CO2 emissions associated with the one-time change in carbon sequestration capacity of a vegetation land use type. The calculation of the one-time loss of sequestered carbon is the product of the converted acreage value and the carbon content value for each land use type (vegetation community). The mass of sequestered carbon per unit area (expressed in units of MT of CO2 per acre) is dependent on the specific land use type. Assuming that the
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-27
sequestered carbon is released as CO2 after removal of the vegetation, annual CO2 is calculated by multiplying total biomass (MT of dry matter per acre) from IPCC data by the carbon fraction in plant material, and then converting MT of carbon to MT of CO2 based on the molecular weights of carbon and CO2.
It is conservatively assumed that all sequestered carbon from the removed vegetation would be returned to the atmosphere; that is, the wood from the vegetation communities would not be re-used in a solid form or another form that would retain carbon. GHG emissions generated during construction activities, including clearing, vegetation removal, and grading, are estimated in the construction emissions analysis.
CalEEMod calculates GHG emissions resulting from land conversion and uses six3 general IPCC land use classifications for assigning default carbon content values (in units of MT CO2 per acre). CalEEMod default carbon content values were assumed to estimate the loss of sequestered carbon (release of CO2) from the removal of the scrub (14.3 MT CO2 per acre), forest (111 MT CO2 per acre), and grassland (4.31 MT CO2 per acre) vegetation categories, which are based on data and formulas provided in the IPCC reports. The project would permanently disturb 0.75 acres of scrub and temporarily disturb 9.95 acres of scrub as shown in Table 3.3-5 in Section 3.3, Biological Resources. As such, the project is estimated to result in 153.01 MT CO2 through carbon loss.
When amortized over 30 years, this would result in annual carbon loss of 5.10 MT CO2 per year. When added to the amortized construction emissions, the project would result in 28.70 MT CO2e per year.
Operational Emissions
CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 was used to estimate potential project-generated operational GHG emissions from area sources (landscape maintenance), mobile sources, solid waste, and water supply and wastewater treatment. Emissions from each category are discussed in the following text with respect to the project. See Section 3.2.4 for a discussion of operational emission calculation methodology and assumptions, specifically for area and mobile sources. Operational year 2024 was assumed as it is the first full year of operation following completion of construction.
Solid Waste
The project would generate solid waste and would, therefore, result in CO2e emissions associated with landfill off-gassing. Solid waste generation was derived from the CalEEMod default rates for each land use type.
Emission estimates associated with solid waste were estimated using CalEEMod. Trash and recycling cans would be provided in the existing dirt parking lot at the western trail terminus. Waste collection services would be provided by E. J. Harrison and Sons or other local service provider and would occur weekly. Existing trash and recycling cans located in Rincon Beach County Park at the eastern trail terminus would be available to serve the trail.
Water Supply and Wastewater
Water supplied to the project requires the use of electricity. Accordingly, the supply, conveyance, treatment, and distribution of water would indirectly result in GHG emissions through use of electricity. Annual water use for the project and GHG emissions associated with the electricity used for water supply were calculated based upon default water use estimates for each land-use type, as estimated by CalEEMod and Southern California 3 Forest land (scrub), forest land (trees), cropland, grassland, wetlands, and other.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-28
Edison factors. The water use would be associated with watering of landscaping around the trail. This is conservative as watering is only needed for the first couple of years to establish the plantings.
Emissions Estimates
CalEEMod was used to estimate potential project-generated operational GHG emissions from area sources (landscaping), mobile sources, solid waste, and water supply and wastewater treatment. Emissions from each category are discussed in the following text. Operational year 2024 was assumed as the first full year of operation upon construction completion. The projects estimated operational emissions are shown in Table 3.6-5.
Table 3.6-5. Estimated Annual Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emission Source
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Metric Tons per Year
Area 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17
Waste 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.06
Water 1.86 0.00 0.00 1.87
Subtotal 2.10
Amortized Construction Emissions over 30 Years 23.60
Amortized Loss of Sequestered Carbon over 30 Years 5.10 Total 30.80
Notes: CH4 = methane; CO2 = carbon dioxide; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent; N2O = nitrous oxide See Appendix B for complete results.
As shown in Table 3.6-5, project GHG emissions generated from operational activities are estimated to be approximately 2 MT CO2e per year in 2024. Total operational emissions combined with amortized construction emissions and vegetation removal would be 31 MT CO2e per year, assuming a 30-year project life. As such, the total estimated emissions would be less than the County’s bright-line significance threshold of 300 MT CO2e per year. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Consistency with GHG Reduction Plans
The Board adopted the ECAP in 2015 as the County’s GHG emission reduction plan. The County has been implementing the ECAP since 2016 but is not projected to meet the plan’s 2020 GHG emission reduction goals, according to the 2016 GHG Emissions Inventory Update and Forecast and the 2017 ECAP Progress Report. The final ECAP progress report will be released in 2021, using data through 2020. Until the 2030 CAP is adopted, the County considered projects or plans that have emissions below interim thresholds to be consistent with County GHG emission reduction plans. The interim thresholds are part of the County’s GHG emissions reduction strategy and were informed by the County’s 2030 target. The interim thresholds provide a pathway for projects and plans to show compliance with County goals and State GHG Reduction Plans, Policies, and Regulations.
The Board’s 2030 GHG emission reduction goal (50% reduction from 2007 levels by the year 2030) is consistent with the state’s direction under Senate Bill 32 as codified in the California Health and Safety Code, Division 25.5, Part 4, Section 38566 (40% reduction below 1990 levels by 2030). CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan (CARB 2017) describes the state’s strategy for achieving California’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target. The 2017 Scoping Plan does not prescribe or require specific actions by local government agencies; rather, the Scoping Plan provides guidance to local agencies and CARB supports programs that assist local agencies. Local
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-29
government efforts to reduce emissions within their jurisdiction are critical to achieving the state’s long term GHG goals, and can also provide important co-benefits, such as improved air quality, local economic benefits, more sustainable communities, and an improved quality of life. CARB recommends statewide targets of no more than 6 MT CO2e per capita by 2030, and no more than 2 MT CO2e per capita by 2050. The statewide per capita targets account for all emissions sectors in the state, statewide population forecasts, and the statewide reductions necessary to achieve the 2030 statewide target under SB 32 and the longer-term state emissions reduction goal of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. This limit represents California’s and these other governments’ recognition of their “fair share” to reduce GHG emissions to the scientifically based levels to limit global warming below 2°C.
CARB recommends that local governments evaluate and adopt robust and quantitative locally-appropriate goals that align with the statewide per capita targets and the state’s sustainable development objectives and develop plans to achieve the local goals. The County’s interim GHG emission efficiency threshold is considerably lower than the state’s 2030 per capita target. Therefore, analysts can apply the County’s interim threshold with confidence that it aids the state in achieving its target, as well.
As shown, the emissions would be less than the County’s bright-line threshold of 300 MT CO2e per year.
Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact.
3.6.5 Mitigation
No mitigation measures would be required. However, Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-3 requires temporarily impacted vegetated areas shall be restored on site at a 1:1 ratio. Any remaining on-site mitigation potential (in disturbed land/disturbed areas or developed areas) shall be restored at a ratio of 2:1 for coastal sage scrub and coastal bluff scrub permanently removed on site. This mitigation would require additional plantings to offset the impacted species identified in Table 3.3-5.
3.6.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Sequestered Carbon
CalEEMod calculates GHG emissions resulting from land conversion and uses six4 general IPCC land use classifications for assigning default carbon content values (in units of MT CO2 per acre). CalEEMod default carbon content values were assumed to estimate the loss of sequestered carbon (release of CO2) from the removal of the scrub (14.3 MT CO2 per acre), forest (111 MT CO2 per acre), and grassland (4.31 MT CO2 per acre) vegetation categories, which are based on data and formulas provided in the IPCC reports. In accordance with MM-BIO-3, the project must restore temporarily vegetated areas at a 1:1 ratio and permanently removed scrub will be restored at a 2:1 ratio. This would result in a total of 11.45 acres of scrub to be replaced in accordance with MM-BIO-3. This would result in the sequestration of 163.74 MT CO2, or 5.46 MT CO2 per year when amortized over 30 years. The project’s operational emissions plus amortized construction emissions, vegetation removal, and carbon sequestration would result in emissions of 25.34 MT CO2e per year. This would still be less than the County’s significance threshold. Impacts would remain less than significant. 4 Forest land (scrub), forest land (trees), cropland, grassland, wetlands, and other.
3.6 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.6-30
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-1
3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This section describes the hazards and hazardous materials conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project.
3.7.1 Existing Conditions
Hazardous materials occur in every community, in relation to residential, commercial, industry, medical practices, research, transportation, construction, and other uses. As a result of natural events, system failures, and accidents (spills), hazardous materials have the potential to pose a risk to the environment and human health. A multitude of local, state, and federals laws exist to regulate the storage, use, handling, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials. To ensure public safety and heighten awareness of hazardous materials exposure risk, businesses and other entities that handle, store, transport, or use hazardous materials are required to file reports with appropriate authorities and maintain emergency response plans in the event of a hazardous materials release.
Dudek performed a regulatory agency records search for the project site and vicinity using the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database (SWRCB 2021) and the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database (DTSC 2021). These lists are a compilation of information from various sources listing potential and confirmed hazardous waste and hazardous substances sites in California.
There are no sites of potential concern listed on the DTSC EnviroStor database within 1 mile of the project site.
There are also no potential sites with environmental concern listed on the SWRCB GeoTracker database within 0.25 miles of the project site; the only listed site within a quarter mile is a closed case on the opposite side of the freeway, approximately 850 feet north of the eastern terminus of the trail. Appendix F includes the EnviroStor and GeoTracker database maps of hazardous sites in the vicinity of the Study Area. The closest DTSC-listed sites include:
• Rincon del Mar Ranch – Bates Road (approximately 850 feet northeast of the eastern trail terminus). The case involved the spill of petroleum products, for which no remediation was required; case closed. • Infrared Industries – 6307 Carpinteria Avenue (approximately 0.5 miles west of the western trail terminus) The case involved the release of TCE (solvent) to soil and shallow groundwater from an underground tank; the tank was removed along with contaminated soil, TCE concentrations in groundwater were below action levels; case closed.
• Vacant Lot – 6185 Carpinteria Avenue (approximately 0.75 miles west of the western trail terminus). There are no specifics provided for this case, but since it is a vacant lot it may have involved illegal dumping. No remediation was required for the incident, and the case was closed. • Conoco Phillips Kittie Ballard Well Site (approximately 1 mile west of the western trail terminus). This case involved reported oil seeps from a previously abandoned oil well. The well was re-abandoned to current DOGGR standards in 2011, case closed.
As such, the project site has no known history of illicit dumping, oil well drilling, or release of hazardous materials, and has been highly engineered and extensively disturbed related to construction of US Highway 101 and the UPRR.
Because the northern trail area (northward of the UPRR) is adjacent to US Highway 101, aerially deposited lead could occur in shallow soils, from the historic presence of lead as a gasoline additive affecting vehicle operations within the US Highway 101 alignment. No other hazardous waste or contaminants are anticipated to be present within the proposed Rincon Trail alignment.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-2
3.7.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.7.2.1 Federal
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 Federal hazardous waste laws are generally promulgated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These laws provide for the “cradle to grave” regulation of hazardous wastes. Any business, institution, or other entity that generates hazardous waste is required to identify and track its hazardous waste from the point of generation until it is recycled, reused, or disposed. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is responsible for implementing the RCRA program as well as California’s own hazardous waste laws, which are collectively known as the Hazardous Waste Control Law.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as Superfund, on December 11, 1980. CERCLA established prohibitions and requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites; provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) amended the CERCLA on October 17, 1986.
SARA stressed the importance of permanent remedies and innovative treatment technologies in cleaning up hazardous waste sites; required Superfund actions to consider the standards and requirements found in other state and federal environmental laws and regulations; provided new enforcement authorities and settlement tools; increased state involvement in every phase of the Superfund program; increased the focus on human health problems posed by hazardous waste sites; encouraged greater citizen participation in making decisions on how sites should be cleaned up; and increased the size of the trust fund to $8.5 billion.
Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Act
The Emergency Planning Community Right-to-Know Act, also known as SARA Title III, was enacted in October 1986. This law requires any infrastructure at the state and local levels to plan for chemical emergencies. Reported information is then made publicly available so that interested parties may become informed about potentially dangerous chemicals in their community. Sections 301 through 312 of the Act are administered by EPA’s Office of Emergency Management.
EPA’s Office of Information Analysis and Access implements the SARA Title III Section 313 program. In California, SARA Title III is implemented through the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP). As the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for the majority of the County, the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department, Environmental Health Services implements the CalARP program.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The U.S. Department of Transportation regulates hazardous materials transportation under Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. State agencies with primary responsibility for enforcing federal and state regulations and responding to hazardous materials transportation emergencies are the California Highway Patrol and Caltrans. These agencies also govern permitting for hazardous materials transportation. The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act reflects laws passed by Congress as of January 2, 2006.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-3
EPA Regional Screening Levels
The federal EPA provides regional screening levels for chemical contaminants to provide comparison values for residential and commercial/industrial exposures to soil, air, and tap water (drinking water). Residential Screening Levels (RSLs) are available on the EPA’s website and provide a screening level calculation tool to assist risk assessors, remediation project managers, and others involved with risk assessment and decision making. RSLs are also used when a site is initially investigated to determine if potentially significant levels of contamination are present to warrant further investigation. In California, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) incorporated the EPA RSLs into the HERO human health risk assessment. HERO created Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note 3, which incorporates HERO recommendations and DTSCmodified screening levels (DTSC-SLs) based on review of the EPA RSLs. The DTSC-SL should be used in conjunction with the EPA RSLs to evaluate chemical concentrations in environmental media at California sites and facilities.
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as Amended, and Related Authorities The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 93-288), as amended (42 USC 5121– 5206), and implementing regulations (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 44, Sections 206.31–206.48) provide the statutory framework for a presidential declaration of an emergency or a declaration of a major disaster. Such declarations open the way for a wide range of federal resources to be made available to assist in dealing with an emergency or major disaster. The Stafford Act structure for the declaration process reflects the fact that federal resources under this act supplement state and local resources for disaster relief and recovery. Except in the case of an emergency involving a subject area that is exclusively or preeminently in the federal purview, the governor of an affected state, or acting governor if the governor is not available, must request such a declaration by the president.
Federal Response Plan
The Federal Response Plan of 1999 is a signed agreement among 27 federal departments and agencies, including the American Red Cross, that: (1) provides the mechanism for coordinating delivery of federal assistance and resources to augment efforts of state and local governments overwhelmed by a major disaster or emergency; (2) supports implementation of the Stafford Act, as well as individual agency statutory authorities; and (3) supplements other federal emergency operations plans developed to address specific hazards. The Federal Response Plan is implemented in anticipation of a significant event likely to result in a need for federal assistance or in response to an actual event requiring federal assistance under a Presidential declaration of a major disaster or emergency.
3.7.2.2 State
Government Code Section 65962.5(a), Cortese List
The Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites Cortese List is a planning document used by the state, local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the CalEPA to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. DTSC is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide additional hazardous material release information for the Cortese List.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-4
California Unified Program for Management of Hazardous Waste and Materials California Health and Safety Code (HSC), Division 20, Chapter 6.11, Sections 25404- 25404.9 Sections– Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program Under the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Enforcement and Emergency Response Program (EERP) administer the technical implementation of California’s Unified Program, which consolidates the administration, permit, inspection, and enforcement activities of several environmental and emergency management programs at the local level (CalEPA 2021). Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs) implement the hazardous waste and materials standards. This program was established under the amendments to the California HSC made by SB 1082 in 1994. The CUPA for the project area is the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department, Environmental Health Services.
Hazardous Waste Control Law
The DTSC regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste under RCRA and the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (22 CCR 6.5). Both laws impose “cradle to grave” regulatory systems for handling hazardous waste in a manner that protects human health and the environment. CalEPA has delegated some of its authority under the Hazardous Waste Control Law to county health departments and other CUPAs.
Aboveground and Underground Petroleum Storage Tanks
Title 22 California HSC, Division 20, Chapter 6.67, Sections 25270 to 25270.13 – Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act This law applies if a facility is subject to Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) regulations under Title 40 U.S.C. Part 112, or if the facility has 10,000 gallons or more of petroleum in any or combination of Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) and connecting pipes. If a facility exceeds these criteria, it must prepare a SPCC plan.
Low-Threat Underground Storage Tank (UST) Case Closure Policy This policy applies to petroleum Underground Storage Tank (UST) sites subject to Chapter 6.7 of the Health and Safety Code. This policy establishes both general and media-specific criteria. If both the general and applicable media-specific criteria are satisfied, then the leaking UST case is generally considered to present a low threat to human health, safety and the environment. This policy recognizes, however, that even if all of the specified criteria in the policy are met, there may be unique attributes of the case or site-specific conditions that increase the risk associated with the residual petroleum constituents. In these cases, the regulatory agency overseeing corrective action at the site must identify the conditions that make case closure under the policy inappropriate.
Regional Water Boards and local agencies have been directed to review all cases in the petroleum UST Cleanup Program using the framework provided in this policy. These case reviews shall, at a minimum, include the following for each UST case:
1. Determination of whether or not each UST case meets the criteria in this policy or is otherwise appropriate for closure based on a site-specific analysis.
2. If the case does not satisfy the criteria in this policy or does not present a low-risk based upon a site-specific analysis, impediments to closure shall be identified.
3. Each case review shall be made publicly available on the State Water Resources Control Board's GeoTracker web site in a format acceptable to the Executive Director.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-5
Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations, Solid Waste Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations contains a waste classification system that applies to solid wastes that cannot be discharged directly or indirectly to waters of the state and which therefore must be discharged to waste management sites for treatment, storage, or disposal (27 CCR 2).
Human Health Risk Assessment Note 3 –DTSC-Modified Screening Levels (DTSC-SLs) Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 3 presents recommended screening levels (derived from the EPA RSLs using DTSC-modified exposure and toxicity factors) for constituents in soil, tap water, and ambient air. The DTSC-SL should be used in conjunction with the EPA RSLs to evaluate chemical concentrations in environmental media at California sites and facilities.
Environmental Cleanup Levels
Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs) provide conservative screening levels for over 100 chemicals found at sites with contaminated soil and groundwater. They are intended to help expedite the identification and evaluation of potential environmental concerns at contaminated sites. The ESLs were developed by staff at the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board; however, they are used throughout the state. While ESLs are not intended to establish policy or regulation, they can be used as a conservative screening level for sites with contamination.
Other agencies in California currently use the ESLs (as opposed to RSLs). In general, the ESLs could be used at any site in the State of California, provided all stakeholders agree (SFBRWQCB 2020). In recent experience, regulatory agencies in various regions use ESLs as regulatory cleanup levels. The ESLs are not generally used at sites where the contamination is solely related to a leaking underground storage tank (LUST); those sites are instead subject to the Low-Threat Underground Storage Tank Closure Policy.
Senate Bill 1889, Accidental Release Prevention Law/CalARP Program Senate Bill 1889 required California to implement a new federally mandated program governing the accidental airborne release of chemicals promulgated under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act. Effective January 1, 1997, CalARP replaced the previous California Risk Management and Prevention Program and incorporated the mandatory federal requirements. CalARP addresses facilities that contain specified hazardous materials, known as “regulated substances” that, if involved in an accidental release, could result in adverse off-site consequences.
CalARP defines regulated substances as chemicals that pose a threat to public health and safety or the environment because they are highly toxic, flammable, or explosive.
Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
California has developed an Emergency Response Plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local government, and private agencies. The plan is administered by Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) and includes response to hazardous materials incidents. The CalOES coordinates the response of other agencies, including CalEPA, California Highway Patrol, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
California Fire Code
The California Fire Code (CFC) is Chapter 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. It is created by the California Building Standards Commission and it is based on the International Fire Code (IFC) created by the
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-6
International Code Council. It is the primary means for authorizing and enforcing procedures and mechanisms to ensure the safe handling and storage of any substance that may pose a threat to public health and safety. The CFC regulates the use, handling, and storage requirements for hazardous materials at fixed facilities. The CFC and the California Building Code use a hazard classification system to determine what protective measures are required to protect fire and life safety. These measures may include construction standards, separations from property lines, and specialized equipment. To ensure that these safety measures are met, the CFC employs a permit system based on hazard classification. The CFC is updated every 3 years.
California Emergency Services Act
This Act was adopted to establish the state’s roles and responsibilities during human-made or natural emergencies that result in conditions of disaster and/or extreme peril to life, property, or the resources of the state. This Act is intended to protect health and safety by preserving the lives and property of the people of the state.
California Natural Disaster Assistance Act
The California Natural Disaster Assistance Act provides financial aid to local agencies to assist in the permanent restoration of public real property, other than facilities used solely for recreational purposes, when such real property has been damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster. The act is activated after the following occurs: (1) a local declaration of emergency; or (2) the CalEMA gives concurrence with the local declaration, or the Governor issues a Proclamation of a State Emergency. Once the Natural Disaster Assistance Act is activated, local government is eligible for certain types of assistance, depending upon the specific declaration or proclamation issued.
Title 14, Division 1.5 of the California Code of Regulations California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5 establishes the regulations for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and is applicable in all State Responsibility Areas (SRAs)—areas where CAL FIRE is responsible for wildfire protection. Any development in SRAs must comply with these regulations. Among other things, Title 14 establishes minimum standards for emergency access, fuel modification, setbacks to property line, signage, and water supply.
California Public Resources Code Sections 4201–4204
These sections of the California Public Resources Code require the California Department of Forestry to classify all SRAs into Fire Hazard Severity Zones. The purpose of this code is to provide classification of lands within SRAs in accordance with the severity of fire hazard present for the purpose of identifying measures to retard the rate of spreading and to reduce the potential intensity of uncontrolled fires that threaten to destroy resources, life, or property.
3.7.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan The Safety Element of the General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan (City of Carpinteria 2003) addresses physical hazards related to earthquakes, fire, flooding, hazardous material uses and transportation, soil and slope stability hazards.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-7
Objective S-6 Minimize the potential risks and reduce the loss of life, property and the economic and social dislocations resulting from hazardous materials accidents at large industrial facilities, at facilities handling acutely hazardous materials, and along transportation corridors.
S-6a The City should maintain lists of facilities in the planning area that involve the use, storage, and/or transportation of hazardous materials.
S-6b City policies concerning the use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials, and regarding underground or above-ground storage tanks shall reflect the County of Santa Barbara and the State Regional Water Quality Control Board policies and requirements and shall ensure that the use, storage, transportation and disposal of hazardous materials does not result in hazardous discharge or runoff.
S-6c The City should consider the presence of large industrial facilities, facilities that handle acutely hazardous materials or pesticides, and railroad and utilities rightof-ways in land use planning.
S-6d The City shall support protective measures against the spillage of hazardous materials, including crude oil, gas and petroleum products, and shall support effective containment and cleanup facilities and procedures for accidental spills that occur.
S-6e Where feasible, new hazardous industrial development shall be located away from existing developed areas.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan – Hazardous Waste Element The Hazardous Waste Element of the Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan (County of Santa Barbara 2009) provides goals and policies for hazardous waste generated within the County. Goals and policies that could be considered applicable to the proposed project include materials storage and contaminated sites, as presented below.
Goal 9-1 To protect the public health and safety and the environment from risks posed by improper storage of hazardous materials and hazardous waste.
Policies 9-1 The County and cities shall encourage the proper storage of hazardous materials and hazardous waste through continued inspection efforts and public education regarding proper storage methods and regulations.
Goal 10-1 To protect public health and safety and the environment from risks due to the presence of abandoned or contaminated sites.
Policies 10-1 The County and cities should work with other involved agencies to establish a coordinated interagency effort for identification, regulation, mitigation, and notification of contaminated sites.
10-2 The County and cities in conjunction with the State Department of Health Services shall encourage on-site treatment and remediation to reduce the transport of hazardous waste from contaminated sites.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-8
3.7.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to hazards and hazardous materials are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to hazards and hazardous materials would occur if the project would:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
g) Result in cumulatively considerable impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. h) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
3.7.4 Impact Analysis
The following analysis of potential project impacts is provided, based upon each of the above identified significance thresholds.
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous material?
The use/operation of the proposed shared-use path and trail amenities would not involve the use of, nor generate, hazardous materials. Therefore, no impacts with regard to the transport, use, accidental release or disposal of hazardous materials would occur. No impact would occur. b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Construction of the proposed project would require heavy construction equipment, which involves the use of hydrocarbon fuels and lubricants that are considered hazardous materials, Concrete is considered a hazardous material until it cures, and is included in the project construction. Paint or other surface coatings are also considered hazardous materials, until they are fully dried; the bridge and certain fencing elements may involve paint application on site. During construction, hydrocarbon fuels and lubricants, paints and concrete may inadvertently enter the stormwater drainage system. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) covering
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-9
water quality protection during the construction phase of the project would be required to be prepared and implemented by the applicant pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State Construction Activities Storm Water General Permit.. Accordingly, project hazardous materials impacts upon water quality from accidental releases during construction could be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure (MM) WAT-2 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No existing or proposed public schools are located within a quarter mile of the project site. Additionally, no hazardous materials would be kept on site once the proposed project is operational. Therefore, there would be no impact to adjacent schools from the use or handling of any hazardous materials on the project site. No impact would occur.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites (refer to Section 3.7.1, Existing Conditions).
Therefore, the project does not have the potential to expose people to a significant risk as a result of a known hazardous materials site. However, the northern portion of the trail alignment is immediately adjacent to the US Highway 101 alignment, and therefore aerially deposited lead (ADL) could occur in shallow soils, from the historic presence of lead as a gasoline additive affecting vehicle operations within the US Highway 101 alignment. Because of proposed grading for the trail, surface soils that could potentially contain ADL are likely to be removed, and transported off the site. However, some soils containing ADL could be used as fill for the project, or could be used off site as fill in areas where the public could have exposure to the soils. Consequently, impacts from ADL containing soil could be potentially significant. MM-HAZ-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
The project site is not located within the airport land use plan for any public use airport and is also not within two miles of a public airport. The closest public airport to the project site is the Santa Barbara municipal airport, located approximately 30 miles to the northwest. No impact would occur. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Access to the proposed trail would be provided via the existing unimproved parking lot at the western end of the trail that connects to Carpinteria Avenue and also at Rincon Beach County Park from Bates Road, both of which are public streets that could be accessed by emergency vehicles and personnel. The Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District will review the proposed project to ensure no interference with emergency response or evacuation would occur during construction, as potentially related to truck traffic on area roadways. The proposed project is designed to correct unsafe conditions such
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-10
as those that exist in the current alignment of the Pacific Coast Bikeway along US Highway 101 and the common practice of trespassing along the railroad corridor to access Rincon Beach County Park from the City of Carpinteria, thereby, reducing potential emergency events. Consequently, no impact would occur. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
According to the City of Carpinteria’s General Plan/Coastal Plan Fire Hazards Zones Map, the project alignment is located within a moderate fire hazard area (City of Carpinteria 2003). According to the Santa Barbara County’s Fire Protection Districts, High Fire Hazard Areas and Flood Hazard Areas Map, the proposed project is not located within a fire hazard area (County of Santa Barbara 2017. The proposed project would not involve the construction of buildings or introduce substantial numbers of people into the area. The proposed project is designed to prevent unwarranted fire hazards to the land and public safety through vegetation control and use of native plant species along the alignment and within the proposed parking area. No impact would occur. h) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable impacts to hazards and hazardous materials? Cumulative development throughout the Carpinteria Valley would incrementally contribute to hazardous materials/safety impacts. However, based on the analysis above, and with adherence to applicable Objectives and Policies found in the City and County's General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plans, the project with required mitigation incorporated is not expected to result in any site-specific public health risk or hazard. The project's contribution to cumulative hazards impacts would not be considerable.
3.7.5 Mitigation
The project would require the implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) HAZ-1 to reduce impacts from the potential exposure of the public to soils containing aerially deposited lead. The project would also require the implementation of MM-WAT-2 (refer to Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality) to reduce impacts upon surface water quality from accidental release of hazardous materials during construction.
Required Mitigation Measures
MM-HAZ-1 Aerially Deposited Lead (ADL). Surface soils within the trail alignment segment north of the UPRR corridor shall be tested for potential ADL presence to determine if such soils may be used as fill, or must be disposed in a properly licensed landfill. Using the risk based screening levels developed by California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), excavated soils with a lead concentration less than or equal to 80 mg/kg total lead (analyzed by USEPA Method 6010 or 6020) would be acceptable for reuse without restrictions, including as fill material within the Rincon Trail project. Excavated soils that are considered a California hazardous waste (total lead concentration greater than or equal to 1,000 mg/kg or a soluble lead concentration greater than or equal to 5 milligrams per liter [mg/L] as determined by the California Waste Extraction Test [CAWet]) or are a RCRA hazardous waste and must be disposed of in a Class I hazardous waste landfill. Excavated soils with lead concentrations below 1,000 mg/kg but above 80 mg/kg total lead may be eligible for reuse with specific restrictions to reduce or eliminate exposure, with prior written approval from DTSC, or may be disposed of at an appropriately permitted landfill.
Plan Requirements: ADL testing requirements and soil re-use restrictions according to identified ADL concentration shall be shown on grading and building plans. Since excess soil material would be generated through proposed grading activities, soils containing greater than 80 mg/kg total lead shall
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-11
not be used as fill material for the project but shall be exported off site. Soil containing total lead greater than 1,000 mg/kg shall be disposed in a Class I hazardous waste landfill. Timing: Condition shall be adhered to throughout all grading and construction activities. Monitoring: City of Carpinteria and County staff shall ensure measures are on plans. City and County Grading Inspectors shall spot check and ensure compliance on site.
3.7.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
With incorporation of MM-HAZ-1 to address the potential for ADL to be present in shallow soils, and incorporation of MM-WAT-2 (refer to Section 3.8) to reduce impacts upon surface water quality from accidental release of hazardous materials during construction, residual impacts related to hazardous materials would be less than significant.
3.7 – Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.7-12
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-1
3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
This section describes the hydrology and water quality conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project. This section is based partially upon a drainage analysis prepared by Bengal Engineers, Drainage System Feasibility Discussion: The Rincon Multi-Use Trail, City of Carpinteria, which is included as Appendix G of this Environmental Impact Report.
3.8.1 Existing Conditions
Surface Drainage / Storm Water Run-off
The proposed trail route is located along areas that have been subject to fill placement, abandoned roadways, or old terraced road and rail cuts; the trail would be exclusively located within area that has been subject to artificial landform modification over the years. Please refer to Section 3.5 (Geology & Soils) for a detailed description of landform modification that has occurred within the trail alignment. A small unsanctioned trail exists in some areas of the proposed trail, including the portion of the proposed trail from the railroad crossing to the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot. At both ends of the trail are pre-existing parking areas; Rincon Beach County Park has a paved lot and at Carpinteria Avenue there is an existing dirt lot which would continue to provide informal parking for the proposed project.
The proposed Carpinteria Avenue trail head and parking lot is currently unimproved with an area crowned in the approximate center of the lot for drainage purposes. It is anticipated that the majority of the storm water runoff from the lot enters Highway 150, and then drains onto the southbound freeway on ramp and ultimately collects into the freeway drainage system; drainage from this freeway sub-area is currently conveyed by a storm drain which outlets at the beach. The remaining runoff likely enters Carpinteria Avenue and drains to the southern edge curb line, then west until it enters at a drop inlet located within the curb.
The Rincon Beach County Park parking lot has three visible drainage points. An infiltration area is located along the south side of the parking lot and serves the westernmost portion of the parking area, although most of the runoff from this area enters a drop inlet located at the western terminus of the parking area, which continues draining to the beach below. The eastern portion of the parking area drains from the County property onto Bates Road, where it enters a drop inlet located just north of the park entrance on the west side of the road, and likely into Rincon Creek through the existing storm drain system.
The majority of the length of proposed trail is outside of the City of Carpinteria’s and Santa Barbara County’s respective 2013 Statewide Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) General Permit (2013 General Permit) boundaries, and thus the majority of the project is exempt from the Post Construction Requirements (PCRs) of the 2013 General Permit. Because the project is not regulated by the 2013 General Permit and PCRs therein, the project may not fully avoid potential water quality impacts unless it achieves compliance with active construction and post‐construction requirements of the Statewide Construction General Permit (CGP).
Flooding
The proposed alignment is not located within a 100-year flood hazard zone (FEMA 2019), nor is it within a Tsunami Inundation Zone (CDOC 2009).
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-2
Sea Level Rise (SLR)
Sea level rise is anticipated to occur because of an increase in the average oceanic temperatures globally, leading to the melting of polar ice caps. Some of the negative effects of sea level rise include flooding of low elevation areas that are currently above mean sea level, and increased erosion rates within areas along the ocean. The release of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a key factor in the potential warming of the atmosphere and ocean temperature increases, and therefore projections of sea level rise rely heavily upon the predicted GHG emissions in the coming decades, on a world-wide basis. This methodology has led to the identification of a range for the possible elevation increases of sea levels at future reference time periods. For the local region, the issue of sea level rise has been addressed in several studies including 2017 Santa Barbara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Carpinteria’s Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment (SLRVA) (Carpinteria 2019).
The above studies of local sea rise potential identify a low, medium, high and extreme (worst-case highest) increase in sea level for the planning year horizons of 2030, 2060, and 2100, which are based upon the range for global GHG emissions in the same target years. Table 3.8-1 summarizes the sea level elevation increases using the “high GHG emissions” scenario for each target year.
Table 3.8-1. Sea Level Rise Projections for Carpinteria Coastline Projected Horizon Year/Time
Sea Level Rise
(inches/feet)
Probability of Occurring in
Projected Year 1
2030 10.2 inches/ ~1 foot <0.5%
2060 27.2 inches/ ~2 feet ~2%
2100 60.2 inches/ ~5 feet ~2%
Source: City of Carpinteria 2019.
1 The range of probabilities relate to scenarios in future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as sea level rise uncertainties largely associated with the rate of global ice sheet melt.
The range in predicted sea level rise for Year 2100 is a low of 2 feet up to an extreme (worst-case) of 10 feet (Carpinteria 2019). Using the “high GHG emissions” scenario, the Carpinteria SLRVA mapped the extent of sea level rise hazard for each of the target assessment years. The portion of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail on the north side of the UPRR alignment is located outside of the sea level rise hazard zone through Year 2100. The portion of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail on the south side of the UPRR alignment is located right at the boundary of the Year 2030 / Year 2060 hazard zones (Carpinteria 2019). The County of Santa Barbara sea level rise mapping is not as detailed but indicates that the Rincon Beach County Park facilities could be inundated by approximately Year 2060 (Santa Barbara County 2017). The 2100 hazard zone boundary extends up from the ocean to the western edge of US Highway 101 at the Wave Overhead crossing of the UPRR alignment and expands further east to include the entire US Highway 101 corridor at approximately the western end of the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot (Carpinteria 2019). The location of the southern portion of the trail within the sea level rise hazard zone indicates there would be the potential for accelerated erosion and increased sea cliff retreat to affect the southern trail segments. US Highway 101 and the coastal bike route southward from Rincon Point Road/Bates Road could become permanently inundated by 2100 absent engineering solutions, according to this mapping (Carpinteria 2019).
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-3
3.8.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.8.2.1 Federal
Clean Water Act
The federal CWA is the primary surface water protection legislation throughout the country. By employing a variety of regulatory and nonregulatory tools, including establishing water quality standards, issuing permits, monitoring discharges, and managing polluted runoff, the CWA aims to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of surface waters to support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.” The CWA regulates both the pollutant content of point-source discharges, as well as addressing polluted runoff (nonpoint-sources).
Section 401
CWA Section 401 requires that state water quality standards be met and that construction, dredging, and disposal activities not cause concentrations of chemicals in the water column that exceed state standards. CWA Section 401 requires a water quality certification from the SWRCB (as delegated to RWQCBs).
Section 402
CWA Section 402 states that discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States is unlawful unless the discharge is authorized and in compliance with an NPDES permit. The USEPA has granted the state primacy in administering and enforcing the provisions of the CWA and the NPDES Program. The NPDES permit program is the primary federal program that regulates point-source and non-point-source discharges to the waters of the United States (see also NPDES Program below).
National Flood Insurance Program
FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program includes a flood hazard mapping program, in which FEMA identifies flood hazards and assesses flood risks. Under this program, FEMA produces Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) which delineates flood risk areas and risk levels. Areas identified as at risk for flooding on the FIRMs are referred to as Special Flood Hazard Areas, which are those areas at risk of the 100-year flood (1% annual chance of flooding). It also delineates areas that are in moderate flood hazard areas, or those areas between a 0.2% annual chance of flooding (500-year flood) and 1.0% chance of flooding (a Special Flood Hazard Area). Special Flood Hazard Areas are further divided into zones, which provide information on the degree of flooding within the risk area, including average depth of flooding.
3.8.2.2 State
Porter-Cologne Act
The Porter-Cologne Act) (California Water Code section 13000 et seq.) is the primary law governing water quality regulation in California. It establishes a comprehensive program to protect water quality and the beneficial uses of
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-4
water. The Porter-Cologne Act applies to surface waters, wetlands, groundwater, and to both point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Act, the policy of the state is as follows:
• That the quality of all the waters of the State shall be protected, • That all activities and factors affecting the quality of water shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality within reason, and
• That the State must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of water in the State from degradation.
The Porter-Cologne Act established nine RWQCBs (based on hydrogeologic barriers) and the SWRCB, who are charged with implementing its provisions, have primary responsibility for protecting water quality in California. The SWRCB provides program guidance and oversight, allocates funds, and reviews RWQCB decisions. In addition, the SWRCB allocates rights to the use of surface water. The RWQCBs have primary responsibility for individual permitting, inspection, and enforcement actions in each of nine hydrologic regions.
State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards The SWRCB and RWQCBs are responsible for preserving, enhancing, and restoring “the quality of California’s water resources and ensuring their proper allocation and efficient use for the benefit of present and future generations.” The SWRCB develops statewide regulations governing water use and point-source and nonpoint-source pollutant discharge, while the RWQCBs work in smaller regions throughout the state to implement SWRCB policies and regulations. RWQCBs also establish additional region- and area-specific regulations and policies to achieve water quality goals under the CWA and the Porter-Cologne Act.
California Ocean Plan
The SWRCB adopted the California Ocean Plan in 1972 and amended it recently in 2015 and again in 2019 (SWRCB 2019). The Ocean Plan provides control for the discharge of waste to ocean waters and ensures the protection of beneficial uses of ocean waters. The Ocean Plan sets forth water quality objectives (WQOs) for protection of marine aquatic life and sets forth objectives for bacterial, physical, chemical, and biological characteristics for ocean waters. Compliance is determined from samples collected within the waste field where initial dilution is completed.
In cases where there is conflict between limitations set forth in the Ocean Plan and those set forth in other federal or state legislation, the more stringent limitations apply. The 2019 update of the Ocean Plan includes an amendment to address issues associated with desalination facilities (Desalination Amendment).
Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin
The City of Carpinteria and County of Santa Barbara are within the jurisdiction of the Central Coast RWQCB. This region’s Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coast Basin (Basin Plan) (RWQCB 2017) details the existing and potential beneficial surface and groundwater uses in the region, as well as water quality objectives and implementation measures throughout the basin. The Basin Plan includes water quality objectives and implementation measures for water quality parameters, including the following:
Ocean Waters
• Dissolved Oxygen
• pH
• Radioactivity
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-5
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities In California, the SWRCB administers regulations promulgated by the USEPA (55 CFR 47990) requiring the permitting of stormwater-generated discharges under the NPDES. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil are required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) (Order 2009-0009 DWQ amended by 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES Permit CAS000002). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility. The Construction General Permit requires the submittal of a Notice of Intent) and the development and implementation of an SWPPP. The SWPPP should contain a site map that shows the construction site perimeter, existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, stormwater collection and discharge points, general topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project. The SWPPP must list Best Management Practices (BMPs) the discharger will use to protect stormwater runoff and the placement of those BMPs. Additionally, the SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for non-visible pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the site discharges directly to a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment.
3.8.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan The City of Carpinteria’s General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan Safety Element includes the following objectives and policies relevant to flood hazards and the proposed project (City of Carpinteria 2003):
Objective S-4 Minimize the potential risks and reduce the loss of life, property and the economic and social dislocations resulting from flooding.
Policy S-4a All new development proposed in the 100-year floodplain must adhere to the County of Santa Barbara Floodplain Management Ordinance, Chapter 15-A of the County Code.
Policy S-4b The development of critical facilities within the 100-year floodplain should be discouraged.
Policy S-4c Setbacks from flood control channels, as determined by the Santa Barbara County Flood Control District, will be required to allow access to maintain and enable proper operation of the channels.
Policy S4-e The City shall establish setback guidelines for land use planning purposes along natural creek, river, or stream floodplains, and identify and pursue opportunities to eliminate existing concrete channels and/or banking from creeks, rivers, or streams
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-6
The General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan Open Space, Recreation and Conservation Element includes the following objectives and policies relevant to hydrology and water quality:
Objective OSC-6 Preserve the natural environmental qualities of creekways and protect riparian habitat.
Policy OSC-6d Carry out and maintain all permitted construction and grading within stream corridors in such a manner so as to minimize impacts on biological resources and water quality such as increased runoff, creek bank erosion, sedimentation, biochemical degradation, or thermal pollution.
Policy OSC-6e Natural drainage patterns and runoff rates and volumes shall be preserved to the greatest degree feasible by minimizing changes to natural topography, and minimizing the areas of impervious surfaces created by new development.
Policy OSC-6f All development shall be evaluated for potential adverse impacts to water quality and shall consider Site Design, Source Control and Treatment Control BMPs in order to minimize polluted runoff and water quality impacts resulting from the development. In order to maximize the reduction of water quality impacts, BMPs should be incorporated into the project design in the following progression: (1) Site Design BMPs, (2) Source Control BMPs, and (3) Treatment Control BMPs.
Objective OSC-10 Conserve all water resources, and protect the quality of water Policy OSC-10a Minimize the erosion and contamination of beaches. Minimize the sedimentation, channelization and contamination of surface water bodies.
Policy OSC-10c Degradation of the water quality of groundwater basins, nearby streams or wetlands, or any other waterbody shall not result from development. Pollutants such as sediments, litter, metals, nutrients, chemicals, fuels or other petroleum hydrocarbons, lubricants, raw sewage, organic matter and other harmful waste shall not be discharged into or alongside any waterbody during or after construction.
Santa Barbara County Coastal Land Use Plan
The County’s Coastal Land Use Plan applies to the coastal areas of the County, including the project site. The following policy of the Coastal Land Use Plan is relevant to the Proposed Project related to hydrology and water quality (County of Santa Barbara 2019):
Policy 3-12 Permitted development shall not cause or contribute to flood hazards or lead to expenditure of public funds for flood control works, i.e., dams, stream channelizations, etc.
3.8.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to hydrology and water quality are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to hydrology and water quality would occur if the project would:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-7
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site. ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site.
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. iv. impede or redirect flood flows.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
f) Result in cumulatively considerable hydrological or water quality impacts.
3.8.3.1 Local Significance Thresholds
The City of Carpinteria’s Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as Amended (1997), states that the following conditions or impacts shall be considered significant:
Hydrology
Flooding
a) Significant impacts result if the project would impose flood hazards on other properties. b) The Municipal Code prohibits development within areas of special flood hazard except under certain circumstances. The policy requires approval by the Floodplain Administrator before construction, development or alteration begins within any area of special flood hazard.
If the project would result in increased runoff:
a) Impacts on hydrologic conditions may be significant because the area available for aquifer recharge is reduced. This may impact well water supplies.
b) There may be significant impacts on stream hydrology if uncontrolled runoff results in erosion and subsequent sedimentation of downstream water bodies.
Threshold:
• moderate to large-scale projects where grading would occur during rainy season; or • projects proximate to bodies of water or drainageways.
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-8
If project would result in modifications to existing drainage patterns:
a) There may be significant impacts on biological communities if drainage patterns are changed.
Threshold:
• Projects where drainage patterns are influenced such that existing vegetation would decline because long-or short-term soil-plant-water relationships would no longer meet habitat requirements. • Projects which would result in substantial changes to streamflow velocities.
Water Quality
Pollution/Contamination
a) Impacts on water quality may result in significant human health and safety impacts.
Threshold:
• Projects which would generate any amount of highly noxious substance. • Projects which would generate large amounts of substances which in small amounts are insignificant but are cumulatively hazardous.
• Projects that would result in the deterioration of the quality of a drinking water source. b) Impacts on water quality may have significant impacts on biological communities.
Threshold:
• Projects which would generate, or result in the accumulation of substances which affect health, or cause genetic defects of wildlife either by direct physical contact with contaminated water, or by water quality changes which cause decline in riparian or lacustrine vegetation which provide wildlife habitat.
c) Project would be significant if it would result in erosion and subsequent sedimentation of water bodies:
Threshold:
• moderate to large-scale grading project (>2,000 cubic yards per graded acre) • projects that results in loss of vegetation on slopes (e.g., brush management measures).
3.8.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Because the majority of the length of proposed trail is outside of the City of Carpinteria’s and Santa Barbara County’s respective 2013 Statewide Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) General Permit (2013 General Permit) boundaries, the majority of the project is exempt from the Post Construction Requirements (PCRs) of the 2013 General Permit. Nonetheless, the proposed project has been designed to reduce or minimize the potential for adverse impacts on stormwater quality. The proposed trail would result in approximately 2,800 linear feet (or 1.0 acre) of impermeable surfaces (concrete) but would also include native restoration plantings or hydro-seed application at graded areas along the alignment. Native plantings or the
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-9
application of hydro-seed would stabilize slope areas to minimize soil erosion and avoid sediment-related water quality impacts. The re-contouring of existing manufactured slopes to employ a shallower slope angle, revegetation of project slopes, and bench-work to intercept sheet flow across extensive slope faces are the principal project design components intended to ensure the avoidance of water quality impacts. In addition, trail use would be limited to pedestrians and cyclists, motor vehicles would be prohibited except for emergency response or infrequent maintenance activities. Consequently, petroleum distillate contaminants associated with many transportation facilities would not be associated with the proposed mixed-use trail. The use of the trail by pets may lead to pet waste contamination of water runoff. Dog feces, if left behind, can contribute to high bacteria counts in runoff water. However, pet waste receptacles with bags will be provided at the trailheads within the parking areas to encourage clean-up by pet owners and trail users. Because of the potential for sediment and other impurities to affect stormwater quality, the project's long-term impacts to water quality would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measure (MM) WAT-4, MM-WAT-5, and MM-WAT-6 are intended to address these long-term water quality impacts and are required to be incorporated.
The proposed project must also meet the construction-related standards set out in the County’s and City's Storm Water Management Plans. During construction, soil, dust, paints and concrete may inadvertently enter the stormwater drainage system. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) covering water quality protection during the construction phase of the project would be required to be prepared and implemented by the applicant pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State Construction Activities Storm Water General Permit. The General Permit, which is implemented by the State Water Resources Control Board, is required for projects disturbing one acre or more of soil. The SWPPP is required to include BMPs to be implemented during construction to control the discharge of materials from the site, and may include temporary retention basins, straw bales, sand bagging, mulching, erosion control blankets or soil stabilizers. Standard erosion control measures, as identified below, would ensure that the project does not have the potential to result in substantial soil erosion affecting water resources. Accordingly, the project would result in water quality impacts that are significant without mitigation. MM-WAT-1, MM-WAT-2 and MM-WAT-3 are intended to reduce these short-term water quality impacts to less than significant levels and are required to be incorporated. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? The project would not significantly deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Given the relatively small size of the alignment (approximately 1.0 acre of trail surface) and the use of native vegetation restoration where feasible, the project would not significantly interfere with natural groundwater recharge. With respect to groundwater depletion, no new water supply would be required to serve the proposed trail use; native vegetation employed for biological restoration and project landscaping would not require irrigation following an initial grow-in period. Cut and fill areas are typically well drained with a very rapid surface runoff (USDA 2019) which will be addressed through project design features and standard stormwater and erosion control measures to ensure no adverse effects on existing groundwater supplies will occur from project implementation. The project’s impact on groundwater supplies would be less than significant c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off-site?
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-10
ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off-site?
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
The project would moderately alter the existing drainage patterns of the site, via regrading of project slopes and short-term removal of vegetation, as well as through introduction of the impervious trail surface (approximately 1 acre of new impervious surface). Increased stormwater runoff and erosion potential during construction and until new vegetation is established are addressed under MM-WAT-1, MM-WAT-2, and MMWAT-3. Long-term stormwater runoff from the trail surface would be collected by a concrete v-ditch adjacent to the trail, and released through a series of short length storm drains with discharge along the adjacent beach. The provision of project-specific storm drains would accommodate the storm runoff volumes anticipated from the project’s impervious surfaces, and also avoid directing stormwater to existing public storm drain systems in the project vicinity that could lack surplus capacity to accommodate the project.
Release of project storm drainage along the beach would not result in substantial erosion, as the introduction of impervious surface would be minimal compared to the overall project drainage area and the trail drainage will be divided into 6 separate outlets to minimize the discharge volume from any of the outlets. Illustration
3.8-1 illustrates these 6 outlets, three exist (blue color) and three would be new (magenta).
Illustration 3.8-1 Major Storm
Drainage Components of the
Project
SOURCE: Bengal Engineering
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-11
Illustrations 3.8-2 and 3.8-3 provide plan sheet excerpts of the proposed drainage system outlets, with connection to other drainage conveyance elements.
SOURCE: Bengal Engineering
Illustration 3.8-2 Design Details for Storm Drain Outlets #1 - #3 SOURCE: Bengal Engineering
Illustration 3.8-3 Design Details for Storm Drain Outlets #4 - #6
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-12
The proposed storm drain system includes concrete v-ditch for collection and conveyance of runoff water, drop inlets connecting to vertical drainpipes, and outlets at the beach elevation. The concrete v-ditch components would be durable, and not prone to weathering or failure over time. The vertical drains are proposed to be composed of a 12-inch diameter corrugated metal pipe. The pipe would be buried to cross beneath the trail section and would descend partly down the bluff face. However, in order to allow visual access for inspection of the pipe integrity, the lower portion of the storm drainpipe would be mounted on the surface of the slope/bluff face. The corrugated metal material was selected for weight consideration and as a superior material to PVC for withstanding damage from fire or sun exposure. However, the metal is prone to rust or corrosion, with the potential for collapse orfailure over time. Leaks from the vertical drains would contribute to erosion of the bluff face, failure of a vertical storm drain could lead to significant erosion of the bluff face. The storm drains would be installed by the project, MM-WAT-5 requires periodic inspection and maintenance of the storm drains in perpetuity to prevent failure of such facilities. Accordingly, the project's impacts on existing drainage patterns and storm drain systems would be potentially significant.
Incorporation of MM-WAT-5 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation.
The proposed project does not include housing units or habitable structures other than minor trail amenities and ancillary support features, such as the proposed pedestrian bridge over the UPRR corridor. Furthermore, according to the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the area (Panel 06083C1438H), the project is not located within a 100- year or a 500-year flood boundary (FEMA 2019). According to the Santa Barbara County’s Fire Protection Districts, High Fire Hazard Areas and Flood Hazard Areas Map, the proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard overlay (County of Santa Barbara 2017). The project alignment would not be located in the vicinity of a levee or dam.
The bluff face portion of the project south of the UPRR corridor is identified in both the City of Carpinteria’s Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment and the County of Santa Barbara’s Vulnerability Assessment as being an area expected to be susceptible to erosional impacts as a result of sea level rise, which could reach up to a worst-case maximum of 10 feet by year 2100 (City of Carpinteria 2019).
In fact, the erosion hazard limits associated with sea level rise in year 2100 extend to US Highway 101, in the areas just east of the UPRR undercrossing of US Highway 101 (City of Carpinteria 2019). Using the “high GHG emissions” scenario, the alignment of the trail south of the UPRR crossing generally follows the boundary between the Year 2030 hazard area and the Year 2060 hazard area. The drainage system outlets infrastructure would be located within the Year 2030 hazard area, on the ocean side of the trail. Based upon the “high GHG emissions:” the probability that sea level rise would reach 1 foot by the year 2030 is 0.5%; the probability it will reach 2 feet by 2060 is 2%. With sea level one to two feet higher, the bottom of the storm drain outlets could be submerged at times, and the face of the bluff adjacent to the drains could experience accelerated erosion. Some additional maintenance may be required to replace corroded elements at the bottom of the drain outlets or to re-anchor the lower end of the drain outlets to the bluff face. However, wholesale replacement of the bluff-face vertical down drain portions of the storm drain system because of sea level rise damage is not anticipated to be required even by the Year 2060, and based on the “high GHG emissions” estimate. Similarly, the trail itself would not be directly threatened by the 2-foot sea level rise predicted by 2060, which has only a 2% calculated probability of occurrence.
By the Year 2100, there is a 2% probability of a 5-foot rise in sea level elevation along the coast adjacent to Carpinteria Bluffs and Rincon Point using the “high GHG emissions” scenario (City of Carpinteria 2019). With this magnitude of sea level rise, the erosion hazard zone would extend from the ocean up
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-13
to the US Highway 101 corridor, east (or south) of the UPRR crossing, which would envelop the entire southern portion of the trail alignment and the Rincon Beach County Park facilities. Accelerated erosion would primarily result from wave action superimposed on the higher elevation sea level surface, jeopardizing the base area of the existing coastal bluff/sea cliff. Bluff retreat/erosion rates for the Monterey formation in southern Santa Barbara County average approximately ½ foot per year (Santa Barbara County 2017); however, the anticipated acceleration of bluff retreat rates from sea level rise have not been quantified.
The proposed trail is set back from the base of the bluffs by a distance ranging between 60 and 100 feet horizontally. Even if the bluff retreat rates were to double from the influence of sea level rise (i.e., 1 foot per year), the closest portion of the trail to the base of the existing sea cliff would represent a horizontal distance equivalent to 60 years of erosion. While storm drain outlets on the bluff face may need to be periodically repaired or replaced in this 60-year period, the trail itself likely would not be threatened within this timeframe. For transportation infrastructure, a useful life of 50-75 years is typically employed (50 years for pavement, 75 years for bridges, Caltrans 2018). Thus, even with accelerated erosion of the bluff face caused by coastal flooding (i.e., greater wave uprush or more frequent inundation of the bluff base), the alignment of the trail south of the UPRR corridor is not anticipated to be impacted by sea level rise or exacerbated coastal flooding over the useful life of the project. In addition, recommendations prescribed in the geotechnical report (Bengal 2019) for the slope created above and below the trail bench would increase the stability of these slopes and reduce the existing erosion rates for the bluff faces along the southern trail alignment, which could partially offset the predicted acceleration of erosion rates associated with sea level rise. No flood hazard impacts would occur.
The City of Carpinteria’s Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment indicates that the Rincon Beach County Park could be at risk for inundation by 2060 (Carpinteria 2019). To protect similar recreation facilities, the City of Santa Barbara and City of Carpinteria have a long-standing practice of building a winter sand dune or berm along their respective beaches. Creation of a winter sand berm might be one feasible approach used by the County in the future to protect the Rincon Beach County Park facilities. Extending the creation of such an annual winter berm eastward along the base of the bluffs also could be one method contemplated for slowing overall bluff retreat rates that have been accelerated by sea level rise. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow can result from strong seismic activity, and such inundation is especially of concern where it could affect development involving pollutant sources potentially released to the environment. According to the City of Carpinteria’s General Plan/Coastal Plan Fault Map, the Rincon Creek fault is located to the north of the proposed project and the Carpinteria Fault is located to the south (City of Carpinteria 2003). Although the Pacific Ocean is located to the south of the proposed project site, the proposed trail is located at elevations ranging from 40 feet above sea level to 185 feet above sea level. Where the trail is aligned along the bluffs, the elevation ranges from approximately 65 to 75 feet above sea level. According to the California Department of Conservation Tsunami Inundation Map For Emergency Planning - Carpinteria Quadrangle, the project site is not located within an area of potential tsunami inundation (CDOC 2009). The proposed project is not located near an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water; therefore, there would not be subject to inundation by seiche. Areas susceptible to debris and mud flows correspond to the areas with a high potential for earthquake-induced landslides. The City of Carpinteria’s General Plan Slope Stability Hazards Map indicates that the project
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-14
is not located within a high landslide potential area or a high rock fall potential area (City of Carpinteria 2003). Finally, the project does not involve any hazardous materials or other pollutants that could be released in the event of inundation of the project site. Impacts relating to inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow would be less than significant.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Because the majority of the length of proposed trail is outside of the City of Carpinteria’s and Santa Barbara County’s respective 2013 Statewide Phase II Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) General Permit (2013 General Permit) boundaries, the majority of the project is exempt from the Post Construction Requirements (PCRs) of the 2013 General Permit. The project proposes drought-tolerant native landscaping with no permanent irrigation source, and therefore groundwater extraction to support the project would be temporary during plant establishment and would not conflict with any adopted sustainable groundwater management plan. Temporary irrigation during the plant establishment period (first year) would be provided via small-scale water trucks. No impacts would occur to a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
f) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable hydrological or water quality impacts? Cumulative development throughout the Carpinteria Valley would incrementally contribute to hydrology and water quality impacts. However, based on the analysis above, and with adherence to applicable Objectives and Policies found in the City and County's General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plans, the project's contribution to cumulative water resource impacts would not be considerable and would be further reduced through the implementation of the project specific measures below.
3.8.5 Mitigation
The project would require the implementation of MM-WAT-1 through MM-WAT-5 to reduce potential project impacts to surface water quality.
MM-WAT-1 Obtain Coverage Under Construction General Permit. The project shall obtain coverage under a Construction General Permit via the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ).
Plan Requirements: The requirement to obtain coverage from the SWRCB under a Construction General Permit shall be indicated on grading plans. Timing: Evidence of coverage under a Construction General Permit shall be provided to the City of Carpinteria Public Works Department and County of Santa Barbara Public Works Division prior to the initiation of grading. Monitoring:
City and County Public Works staff shall confirm evidence of the Construction General Permit issuance prior to issuance of grading permits.
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-15
MM-WAT-2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. The construction contractor shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented and monitored prior to and during construction. The following BMPs shall be incorporated into the SWPPP to minimize potential construction-related water quality impacts:
1. Disturbed areas shall be stabilized or re-vegetated prior to the start of the rainy season. The work area shall be flagged to identify its limits. Vegetation shall not be removed or intentionally damaged beyond these limits.
2. Construction materials shall be placed in designated areas where they could not enter water bodies or storm drains due to spillage or erosion.
3. Waste and debris generated during construction shall be stored in designated waste collection areas and containers away from watercourses and shall be disposed of regularly.
4. During construction, washing of concrete trucks, paint, equipment, or similar activities shall occur only in areas where polluted water and materials can be contained for subsequent removal from the site. Wash water shall not be discharged to the storm drains, street, drainage ditches, creeks, or wetlands. The concrete washout area shall be isolated from water bodies, and wash water and waste shall be removed from the project site. The location of the washout area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs.
5. All fueling of heavy equipment shall occur in a designated area removed from water bodies and other drainages, such that any spillage would not enter surface waters. The designated refueling area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills. The location of the fueling area shall be clearly noted at the construction site with signs.
6. Vehicles and equipment shall be maintained properly to prevent leakage of hydrocarbons and coolant and shall be examined for leaks on a daily basis. All maintenance shall occur in a designated off-site area. The designated area shall include a drain pan or drop cloth and absorbent materials to clean up spills.
7. Any accidental spill of hydrocarbons or coolant that may occur on the construction site shall be cleaned up immediately. Absorbent materials shall be maintained on the construction site for this purpose.
8. Special considerations for work during the rainy season: stockpiled soils should be covered at the end of the work day, and concrete pouring shall be avoided within 15 days of a forecasted rain event to allow full curing, due to its toxic nature until it has fully cured.
Plan Requirements: A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared and implemented prior to construction and shall include the above elements. The SWPPP shall be submitted to City and County Public Works for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits for the project. Timing: The stormwater features and BMPs shall be installed and operational prior to initiation of grading. Monitoring: City and County Public Works staff shall site inspect for installation and maintenance in accordance with the approved plan and periodically thereafter to ensure proper maintenance over the duration of construction activities.
MM-WAT-3 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. Best available erosion and sediment control measures shall be implemented and maintained during grading and construction. Best available erosion and sediment control measures may include, but are not limited to use of sediment basins, gravel bags, silt fences, geo-bags or gravel and geotextile fabric berms, erosion control blankets, coir rolls, jute
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-16
net and straw bales. Construction access points shall be stabilized using gravel beds, rumble plates or other measures to prevent sediment from being tracked onto adjacent roadways. Any sediment or other materials tracked off site shall be removed the same day as they are tracked using dry cleaning methods.
Plan Requirements and Timing: An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted to and approved by City and County Public Works prior to issuance of grading permits. The plan shall be designed and implemented to address erosion and sediment control during all phases of development of the site. Monitoring: City and County Public Works shall perform site inspections throughout construction.
MM-WAT-4 Planting of Vegetation. As soon as practicable following the completion of trail construction, the contractor shall install native plantings for biological restoration and hydro-seed slope areas with an appropriate native plant seed mix, in order to provide long-term stabilization of soils disturbed during construction. Periodic watering and re-application of hydro-seed shall occur as necessary until vegetation on slope surfaces has been successfully established.
Plan Requirements and Timing: Landscaping plans including biological restoration areas and hydro-seeding of manufactured slope areas submitted to Community Development Department/Planning & Development (CDD/P&D) for review prior to approval of a coastal development permit. Monitoring: CDD/P&D shall site inspect vegetation plantings and hydro-seed application before issuing final clearance and acceptance of the trail project.
MM-WAT-5 Periodic Inspection and Maintenance of Storm Drain Components. Staff from City and County Parks/Public Works departments shall perform an annual inspection of stormwater components annually, prior to the on-set of the rainy season (November 1) to ensure all components are in good repair and are not blocked by debris or sediment. Any materials found to be obstructing flow in the drainage system shall be removed prior to November 1 each year. The exposed vertical portion of each of the corrugated metal pipe drains shall be examined annually for signs of corrosion, damage or openings in the drain pipe wall. Corrosion visible on the exterior pipe wall shall be treated and sealed promptly, any holes through the pipe wall shall be patched, or the damaged/affected segment shall be replaced or modified.
Plan Requirements and Timing: The applicant shall include these inspection and maintenance requirements in the final drainage system design plans. The plans shall be submitted to Community Development Department/Planning & Development (CDD/P&D) and City and County Public Works for review prior to approval of a grading permit. Monitoring: A memo with the annual inspection notes and corrective maintenance performed shall be prepared and submitted to the City and County Public Works Departments.
MM-WAT-6 To minimize pollutants impacting the ocean, storm drain filters/inserts shall be installed in the project area storm drain inlets. The filters/inserts shall be maintained in working order.
Plan Requirements: Prior to approval of Grading or Building Permits, the applicant shall submit plans identifying the type and location of filters/inserts to Community Development Department/Planning & Development (CDD/P&D) and City and County Public Works for review and approval. The location of such filters/inserts shall be noted on grading and building plans
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-17
Filters/inserts shall be installed prior final clearance and shall be cleaned using approved methods at least twice a year, once immediately prior to November 1 (before the start of the rainy season) and once in January. Monitoring: CDD/P&D and City and County Public Works shall site inspect periodically throughout the construction phase to ensure proper installation. Records of maintenance shall be maintained by City/County and shall be submitted to CDD/P&D and City and County Public Works on an annual basis prior to the start of the rainy season and for five years thereafter. After the fifth year, the records shall be maintained by the City/County. CDD/P&D and Public Works shall review the maintenance records and site inspect as needed following completion of construction to ensure periodic cleanout
3.8.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
After implementation of MM-WAT-1 through MM-WAT-6, residual impacts to hydrology and water quality resulting from potential uncontained stormwater runoff or soil erosion and sedimentation during construction and operation of the project would be less than significant.
3.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.8-18
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-1
3.9 Land Use and Planning
This section describes the existing land uses within the Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project or proposed project) site and vicinity, identifies the land use and zoning designations applicable to the project site, provides associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project.
3.9.1 Existing Conditions
The proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail would extend from the eastern end of Carpinteria Avenue to Rincon Beach County Park along abandoned roadways or old terraced road and rail cuts. The current alignment for the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) is oriented east/west within the project site, and roughly bisects the proposed trail near the center of its alignment. A small unsanctioned trail exists in some areas of the proposed trail, including the portion of the proposed trail from the UPRR crossing to the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot.
The Land Use Elements in the City General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan and County Comprehensive Plan establish the types and intensities of land uses within these communities and guide growth and development within Carpinteria and unincorporated County lands within the Carpinteria Valley. The Land Use Element is the heart of the Land Use Plan of the two certified Local Coastal Programs (California Coastal Act of 1976 Section 30108.5); however, other elements of the General Plan are also included as components of the Land Use Plan for the purposes of the respective Local Coastal Programs.
The vision for the City includes qualities the community would like to retain and aspects that could benefit from change. The City and surrounding area enjoy a variety of attractive natural resources including safe, clean beaches, coastal bluffs, a salt marsh, several creeks, a narrow valley and a coastal mountain range. These same features contribute to the environmental qualities of the surrounding County lands.
U.S. Highway 101 is located to the north of the proposed trail alignment, with the Pacific Ocean to the south below the Carpinteria bluffs; the UPRR rail corridor bisects the central portion of the trail alignment. Undeveloped bluff open space is located adjacent to the western terminus of the trail and existing informal dirt parking lot, while Rincon Beach County Park and the Rincon Point residential community are located adjacent to the eastern terminus of the trail.
The portion of the project site within the City has a General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation of Visitor-Serving Commercial (City of Carpinteria 2003) and has been zoned for Resort Zone District use (City of Carpinteria 2021). The portion of the project within the County of Santa Barbara is designated as Other Recreation/Open Space (County of Santa Barbara 2019) and is zoned Transportation Corridor and Recreation (County of Santa Barbara 2020). The proposed public multi-use trail would conform to the allowed uses under the existing land use designations of the City and County, and would also be consistent with the zoning designations of both jurisdictions.
3.9.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.9.2.1 Federal
There are no federal plans, policies, or ordinances applicable to the land use considerations of the proposed project.
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-2
3.9.2.2 State
California Coastal Act of 1976
The California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal Act) establishes goals and provisions for a designated Coastal Zone along the entire California coastline. Within the City of Carpinteria, the Coastal Zone is coterminous with the City Boundary. In August 2003, the California Coastal Commission certified the latest update of the City’s Coastal Land Use Program, further discussed below. In the Carpinteria Valley outside of the City, the Coastal Zone generally extends inland to State Route 192/150. The California Coastal Commission certified the latest update of the County’s Coastal Land Use Program in 1981 (County of Santa Barbara 2019).
Senate Bill 375
The adoption of California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, Senate Bill (SB) 375 on September 30, 2008, aligns with the goals of regional transportation planning efforts, regional greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets, and land use and housing allocations. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations such as the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) within their regional transportation plan to demonstrate achievement of GHG reduction targets. In compliance with SB 375, SBCAG has adopted an SCS that covers all of the City of Carpinteria, as well as other cities and unincorporated portions of Santa Barbara County (SBCAG 2013).
3.9.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan California State Government Code Section 65300 requires that every city adopt a General Plan, sometimes referred to as a City’s blueprint for growth and development. The City’s General Plan, originally adopted in 1986 and updated in 2003, contains the seven mandatory elements: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise and Safety. The City’s General Plan combined several of these required elements with an optional element, resulting in the Open Space, Recreation & Conservation Element. The Carpinteria General Plan also included several additional desired optional elements: The Community Design Element and Public Facilities and Services Element (City of Carpinteria 2003). The Land Use Element is described in further detail below, including applicable objectives and policies. The remaining elements of the Carpinteria General Plan are described within the EIR sections to which they pertain. This document also serves as the City’s Local Coastal Land Use Plan, which ensures that the local government’s land use plans, zoning ordinances, zoning maps, and implementation actions meet the requirements, provisions and polices of the California Coastal Act.
City of Carpinteria General Plan – Land Use Element
The Land Use Element designates various land uses in the city and specifies the development and land uses which are allowed within each land use district (City of Carpinteria 2003). The Land Use Element is intended to establish and maintain an organized and balanced set of land uses within the City to offer economic, housing, and recreation opportunities while avoiding conflict between land uses. Objectives and polices from the Land Use element which are applicable to the proposed project are presented below.
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-3
Objective LU-1 Establish the basis for orderly, well planned urban development while protecting coastal resources and providing for greater access and recreational opportunities for the public.
LU-1d Ensure that the type, location and intensity of land uses planned adjacent to any parcel designated open space/recreation or agriculture (as shown on Figure LU-1) are compatible with these public resources and will not be detrimental to the resource.
Objective LU-3 Preserve the small beach town character of the built environment of Carpinteria, encouraging compatible revitalization and avoiding sprawl development at the city’s edge.
LU-3b The Community Design Element shall guide the character of development, and represent a comprehensive statement of the community’s visual objectives.
LU-3h Develop land uses that encourage the thoughtful layout of transportation networks, minimize the impacts of vehicles in the community, and encourage alternative means of transportation.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan
As indicated above, California State Government Code Section 65300 requires all cities and counties adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan that outlines physical development of the county or city. The County of Santa Barbara refers to theirs as a Comprehensive Plan, to avoid confusion with the City of Santa Barbara General Plan.
The comprehensive plan must cover a local jurisdiction's entire planning area so that it can adequately address the broad range of issues associated with the city or county's development. Ultimately, the comprehensive plan expresses the community's development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future public and private land uses. The Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan contains the following Elements:
Agriculture, Circulation, Coastal Land use Plan, Conservation, Energy, Environmental Resources Management, Hazardous Waste, Housing, Land Use, Noise, Open Space, Scenic Highways, Seismic Safety & Safety. The Coastal Land Use Plan is described in further detail below, including applicable objectives and policies. The remaining elements of the County Comprehensive Plan are described within the EIR sections to which they pertain.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan – Coastal Land Use Plan The Coastal Land Use Plan lays out the general patterns of development throughout areas officially designated within the coastal zone of the unincorporated County. The following policies could be applicable to planning and implementation of the project (County of Santa Barbara 2019).
Policy 7-1 The County shall take all necessary steps to protect and defend the public’s constitutionally guaranteed rights of access to and along the shoreline. At a minimum, County actions shall include:
a. Initiating legal action to acquire easements to beaches and access corridors for which prescriptive rights exist consistent with the availability of staff and funds.
b. Accepting offers of dedication which will increase opportunities for public access and recreation consistent with the County’s ability to assume liability and maintenance costs.
c. Actively seeking other public or private agencies to accept offers of dedications, having them assume liability and maintenance
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-4
responsibilities, and allowing such agencies to initiate legal action to pursue beach access.
Policy 7-2 For all development between the first public road and the ocean granting of an easement to allow vertical access to the mean high tide line shall be mandatory unless:
a. Another more suitable public access corridor is available or proposed by the land use plan within a reasonable distance of the site measured along the shoreline, or
b. Access at the site would result in unmitigable adverse impacts on areas designated as “Habitat Areas” by the land use plan, or
c. Findings are made, consistent with Section 30212 of the Act, that access is inconsistent with public safety, military security needs, or that agriculture would be adversely affected, or
d. The parcel is too narrow to allow for an adequate vertical access corridor without adversely affecting the privacy of the property owner. In no case, however, shall development interfere with the public’s right of access to the sea where acquired through use unless an equivalent access to the same beach area is guaranteed.
Policy 7-5 For areas controlled by Federal, State, County, or District agencies, in a zone extending approximately 250 feet inland from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to coastal dependent and related recreational activities and support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set back from the beach and bluffs and nearshore areas reserved for day use activities.
Recreational activities that are not coastal dependent may be located within this 250-foot zone if the less desirable coastal dependent support facilities (parking, restrooms, etc.) are located inland. In no case shall facilities, except for required structures (i.e., lifeguard towers, volleyball nets, etc.), be located directly on the dry sandy beach.
Policy 7-6 Recreational uses on oceanfront lands, both public and private, that do not require extensive alteration of the natural environment (i.e., tent campgrounds) shall have priority over uses requiring substantial alteration (i.e., recreational vehicle campgrounds).
Policy 7-8 Increased opportunities for beach access shall be provided in the Carpinteria planning area.
Policy 7-26 All proposed trails for the coastal zone shall be incorporated into the County’s Master Plans89 for hiking, biking, and equestrian trails.
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-5
3.9.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the Project impacts to land use and planning are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to land use and planning would occur if the project would:
a) Physically divide an established community.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. c) Result in cumulatively considerable impacts to land use and planning.
3.9.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? The proposed project consists of a shared use path that would provide safe access from the existing eastern terminus of pedestrian and cyclist paths associated with Carpinteria Avenue to Rincon Beach County Park and the Ventura County line. The project site has been extensively graded over time to accommodate the alignment of former and current transportation facilities, including the previous alignment for the State Highway 2 (abandoned), the former location for the Southern Pacific Railroad (abandoned), and the UPRR tracks (active).
Topographic benches remnant from these former and current transportation alignments are in some portions of the project site used for unsanctioned trails. The proposed project would not traverse an established community; instead, the project would provide safe, non-vehicular access and connections between neighborhoods in the City of Carpinteria and the Rincon Beach County Park, as well as connecting to other segments of the coastal trail system, benefiting residents, visitors, and land uses near the project site. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The project site within the City of Carpinteria has a Carpinteria General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation of Visitor-Serving Commercial (2003) and has been zoned for Resort Zone District use. The portion of the project within the County of Santa Barbara is designated as Other Open Land and Recreation and is zoned Transportation Corridor and Recreation (County of Santa Barbara 2010). The proposed trail is an apt use for the City’s and County’s vision for the properties within each jurisdiction. While the proposed trail in some areas would traverse areas designated as environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA), mitigation measures require the restoration of areas outside the trail to fully offset the removal of native plants to accommodate trail construction (refer to Section 3.3, Biological Resources). With the incorporation of mitigation measures identified in this document to reduce environmental impacts to less than significant levels, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project. In addition, no habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans apply to the project site. Overall, the proposed project would achieve the goal of enhanced coastal access. In addition, with respect to consideration of parking related to coastal access, construction is not anticipated to reduce parking availability. No parking spaces would be removed by the proposed project. However, absent mitigation, impacts due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be potentially significant. Mitigation Measures (MM) AES-1; MM-BIO-1 through MM-
3.9 – Land Use and Planning
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.9-6
BIO-6; MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4; MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3; MM-HAZ-1; MM-WAT-1 through MM-WAT-6; MM-NOI-1 through MM-NOI-2; MM-TCR-1 would reduce impacts to conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulations to less than significant with mitigation.
c) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable impacts to land use and planning? The proposed project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designations that have been assigned to the project site parcels. It would also implement a number of policies aimed at increasing public access to the beach as well as providing transportation alternatives for non-vehicle travel. While portions of the proposed trail would traverse designated ESHA, MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-4 would be required to fully offset the project’s reduction in habitat area (refer to Section 3.3). In addition, impacts due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be potentially significant. Therefore, Mitigation Measures (MM) AES-1; MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-6; MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4; MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3; MM-HAZ-1; MM-WAT-1 through MM-WAT-6; MM-NOI-1 through MM-NOI-2; MM-TCR-1 would reduce impacts to conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulations to less than significant with mitigation. Therefore, with implementation of all mitigation included in the EIR, the proposed project would not have a considerable contribution to any cumulative land use or planning impact.
3.9.5 Mitigation Measures
The project would require the implementation of MM-AES-1; MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-6; MM-CR-1 through MMCR-4; MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3; MM-HAZ-1; MM-WAT-1 through MM-WAT-6; MM-NOI-1 through MM-NOI-2; MM-TCR-1 to reduce impacts conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect to a less than significant level.
3.9.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
As discussed above, portions of the trail would traverse areas designated ESHA, which could result in a conflict with resource protection policies related to ESHA, unless appropriate mitigation is incorporated. MM-BIO-1 through MMBIO-4 (see Section 3.3) prescribes required mitigation measures to satisfy requirements found in City and County policies governing ESHA. In addition, impacts due to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be potentially significant. Therefore, MM AES-1; MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-6; MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4; MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3; MM-HAZ-1; MMWAT-1 through MM-WAT-6; MM-NOI-1 through MM-NOI-2; MM-TCR-1 would reduce impacts to conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulations. The residual impact to land use and planning would be less than significant.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-1
3.10 Noise and Vibration
This section defines terminology used in the discussion of noise and vibration, describes the noise and vibration conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and identifies mitigation measures related to implementation of the project.
3.10.1 Existing Conditions
The assessment of sound and vibration involves terminology that may be unfamiliar to the general public. In order to assist the reader, the following discussion is presented on the fundamentals of sound and vibration. A description of existing noise levels is also provided.
3.10.1.1 Fundamentals of Sound
Vibrations, traveling as waves through air from a source, exert a force perceived by the human ear as sound. Sound pressure level (referred to as sound level) is measured on a logarithmic scale in decibels (dB) that represent the fluctuation of air pressure above and below atmospheric pressure. Frequency, or pitch, is a physical characteristic of sound and is expressed in units of cycles per second or hertz (Hz). The normal frequency range of hearing for most people extends from about 20 to 20,000 Hz. The human ear is more sensitive to middle and high frequencies, especially when the noise levels are quieter. As noise levels get louder, the human ear starts to hear the frequency spectrum more evenly. To accommodate for this phenomenon, a weighting system to evaluate how loud a noise level is to a human was developed. The frequency weighting called “A” weighting is typically used for quieter noise levels which de-emphasizes the low frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of a human ear. This A-weighted sound level is called the “noise level” and is referenced in units of dBA.
Since sound is measured on a logarithmic scale, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dBA increase in the noise level. Changes in a community noise level of less than 3 dBA are not typically noticed by the human ear. Changes from 3 to 5 dBA may be noticed by some individuals who are extremely sensitive to changes in noise. A 5 dBA increase is readily noticeable (Caltrans 2013). The human ear perceives a 10 dBA increase in sound level as a doubling of the sound level (i.e., 65 dBA sounds twice as loud as 55 dBA to a human ear).
An individual’s noise exposure occurs over a period of time; however, noise level is a measure of noise at a given instant in time. Community noise sources vary continuously, being the product of many noise sources at various distances, all of which constitute a relatively stable background or ambient noise environment. The background, or ambient, noise level gradually changes throughout a typical day, corresponding to distant noise sources, such as traffic volume, as well as changes in atmospheric conditions.
Noise levels are generally higher during the daytime and early evening hours when traffic (including airplanes), commercial, and industrial activity is the greatest. However, noise sources experienced during nighttime hours when background levels are generally lower can be potentially more conspicuous and irritating to the receiver. In order to evaluate noise in a way that considers periodic fluctuations experienced throughout the day and night, a concept termed “community noise equivalent level” (CNEL) was developed, wherein noise measurements are weighted, added, and averaged over a 24-hour period to reflect magnitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence. A complete definition of CNEL and other terminology used to describe noise is provided in Table 3.9-1.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-2
Table 3.9-1. Definitions of Acoustical Terminology
Term Definition
Decibel (dB) A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of two like quantities
Sound Pressure Level (SPL) 10 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the square of the sound to the square of the reference sound pressure of 20 µPascals. Sound pressure level is the quantity that is measured by a sound level meter, expressed in dB.
Frequency (Hz) The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz.
A-Weighted Sound Level
(dBA)
SPL in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de- emphasizes low and high frequency components of frequency components of sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective response to sound. All sound levels in this report are A-weighted.
Noise Unwanted sound.
Equivalent Sound Level (Leq) The average A-weighted sound level during the measurement period. For this CEQA evaluation, Leq refers to a one-hour period unless otherwise stated.
Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound level during the measurement period.
L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted sound levels that are exceeded l%, l0%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.
Day/Night Noise Level (Ldn) The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured during the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Community Noise Equivalent
Level (CNEL)
The average A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels during the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Impulsive Noise Noise loud enough to disrupt normal activities and usually lasting less than one second.
Exterior Noise Distance Attenuation
Noise sources are classified in two forms: (1) point sources, such as stationary equipment or a group of construction vehicles and equipment working within a spatially limited area at a given time, and (2) line sources, such as a roadway with a large number of pass-by sources (motor vehicles). Sound generated by a point source typically diminishes (attenuates) at a rate of 6.0 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source to the receptor at acoustically “hard” sites and at a rate of 7.5 dBA for each doubling of distance from source to receptor at acoustically “soft” sites. Sound generated by a line source (i.e., a roadway) typically attenuates at a rate of 3 dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling distance, for hard and soft sites, respectively. Sound levels can also be attenuated by man-made or natural barriers. For the purpose of sound attenuation discussion, a “hard” or reflective site does not provide any excess ground-effect attenuation and is characteristic of asphalt or concrete ground surfaces, as well as very hard-packed soils. An acoustically “soft” or absorptive site is characteristic of unpaved loose soil or vegetated ground.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-3
3.10.1.2 Fundamentals of Vibration
Vibration is an oscillatory motion that can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. The response of humans to vibration is very complex. However, it is generally accepted that human response is best approximated by the vibration velocity level associated with the vibration occurrence.
Heavy equipment operation, including stationary equipment that produces substantial oscillation or construction equipment that causes percussive action against the ground surface, may be perceived by building occupants as perceptible vibration. It is also common for ground-borne vibration to cause windows, pictures on walls, or items on shelves to rattle. Although the perceived vibration from such equipment operation can be intrusive to building occupants, the vibration is seldom of sufficient magnitude to cause even minor cosmetic damage to buildings.
When evaluating human response, ground-borne vibration is usually expressed in terms of root mean square (RMS) vibration velocity. RMS is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the vibration signal. As for sound, it is common to express vibration amplitudes in terms of decibels defined as:
𝐿𝑣 = 20 log (
𝑣𝑟𝑚𝑠
𝑣𝑟𝑒𝑓 )
Where vrms is the RMS vibration velocity amplitude in inches/second and vref is the decibel reference of 1x10-6 inches/second.
To avoid confusion with sound decibels, the abbreviation VdB is used for vibration decibels. The vibration threshold of perception for most people is around 65 VdB (which is equivalent to 0.0018 in/sec RMS). Vibration levels in the 70 to 75 VdB range are often noticeable, but generally deemed acceptable, and levels in excess of 80 VdB are often considered unacceptable (FTA 2018).
Vibration impacts to buildings are generally discussed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) that describes particle movement over time (in terms of physical displacement of mass, expressed as inches/second or in/sec).
Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition-related activities. Next to pile driving and soil compacting, grading activity has the greatest potential for vibration impacts if large bulldozers, large trucks, or other heavy equipment are used. A conservative maximum vibration level standard is 0.2 in/sec PPV for the prevention of structural damage to typical residential buildings (Caltrans 2020).
3.10.1.3 Existing Noise Conditions
Project Site Noise Levels
Existing noise levels in the City of Carpinteria and surrounding County of Santa Barbara area are affected by several different sources of noise, including automobile and rail traffic, agricultural and industrial activity, and periodic sources such as construction. The major noise sources in Carpinteria are transportation related noise sources, including US Highway 101, freight and passenger railroad service and major arterial roads.
The City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan Noise Contour Maps and County of Santa Barbara Noise Element Noise Contour Maps indicate that the proposed project is located within the boundaries for the 65 - 70 dBA noise contour for existing and future conditions (City of Carpinteria 2003; County of Santa Barbara 2009).
US Highway 101 and the UPRR are the predominant noise sources in the project area. See Appendix H of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the contour maps described.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-4
3.10.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.10.2.1 Federal
The following federal regulations pertaining to noise would apply to the proposed project.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Standards
CFR Title 23, Part 772 sets procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise. Title 23 is implemented by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Highway Administration (FHWA). The purpose of this regulation is to provide procedures for noise studies and noise abatement measures to help protect the public health and welfare, to supply noise abatement criteria, and to establish requirements for information to be given to local officials for use in the planning and design of highways. All highway projects which are developed in conformance with this regulation shall be deemed to be in conformance with the DOT-FHWA Noise Standards. Title 23 establishes a 67 dBA Leq(h) standard applicable to federal highway projects for evaluating impacts to land uses including residences, recreational uses, hotels, hospitals, and libraries [23 CFR Chapter 1, Part 772, Section 772.19].
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Standards Although the FTA standards are intended for federally funded mass transit projects, the impact assessment procedures and criteria included in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (FTA 2018) are routinely used for projects proposed by local jurisdictions. The FTA and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) have published guidelines for assessing the impacts of ground-borne vibration associated with rail projects, which have been applied by other jurisdictions to other types of projects. The FTA measure of the threshold of architectural damage for conventional wood-frame construction (i.e., most residences) is 0.2 inch/second peak particle velocity (PPV).
3.10.2.2 State
The following state regulations pertaining to noise would apply to the proposed project.
California Noise Control Act of 1973
Sections 46000 through 46080 of the California Health and Safety Code, known as the California Noise Control Act of 1973, declares that excessive noise is a serious hazard to the public health and welfare and that exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage. It also identifies a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in the urban, suburban, and rural areas. The California Noise Control Act declares that the State of California has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise. It is the policy of the state to provide an environment for all Californians free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.
California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR Title 24)
In 1974, the California Commission on Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation standards for hotels, motels, dormitories, and multifamily residential buildings (CCR Title 24, Part 2). Title 24 establishes standards for interior room noise (attributable to outside noise sources). The regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a multifamily residential building or structure is proposed to be located in an
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-5
area with CNEL (or Ldn) of 60 dBA or greater. Such acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to limit intruding noise to an interior CNEL (or Ldn) of at least 45 dBA (California’s Title 24 Noise Standards, Chap. 2-35). The City of Sacramento applies the interior noise criterion of CNEL 45 dBA for single-family residences, in addition to multifamily residential structures.
3.10.2.3 Local
The following local/regional regulations pertaining to noise would apply to the proposed project.
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan 2003 The Noise Element of the City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan provides objectives, policies, and programs regarding Noise, including the following:
Objective N-5: The City will minimize the effects of nuisance noise effects on sensitive land uses.
N-5a. The City will address nuisance on a case-by-case basis and develop appropriate mitigation measures such as scheduling of events or activities during hours when effects would be minimal.
N-5b. The City will require that construction activities adjacent to sensitive noise receptors be limited as necessary to prevent adverse noise impacts.
N-5c. The City will require that construction activities employ techniques that minimize the noise impacts on adjacent uses.
The City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan provides guidelines for determining whether or not ambient noise levels are compatible with certain land uses in the City. The guidelines indicate the compatibility of noise-sensitive land uses in areas subject to noise levels of 55 to 80 dB CNEL or Ldn. Residential uses are normally unacceptable in areas exceeding 70 dB CNEL; and conditionally acceptable between 60 - 70 dB CNEL for multifamily units. Schools, libraries, hospitals, and nursing homes are treated as noise-sensitive land uses, with normally acceptable levels up 60 dB CNEL, and conditionally acceptable levels up to 70 dB CNEL.
Commercial/professional office buildings and recreational uses such as golf courses and water recreation have normally acceptable levels up 75 dB CNEL (City of Carpinteria 2003).
City of Carpinteria Municipal Code
The City of Carpinteria Municipal Code Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places, including Chapter 12.04 – Street Construction and Excavation, Section 12.04.410 – Noise, dust, and debris requirements, describes the noise standards that are applicable public works construction activity within the City. In addition, Section 15.16.170 – Hours during which construction may occur, and Section 15.16.180 Exemption — after-hours or emergency permits, apply to any construction for which a permit is required by the City. The following excerpts from the municipal code are applicable to the project (City of Carpinteria 2020):
12.04.410 – Noise, dust, and debris requirements
Each permittee shall conduct and carry out work permitted under this chapter in such manner as to avoid unnecessary inconvenience and annoyance to the general public and occupants of
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-6
neighboring property. The permittee shall take appropriate measures to reduce to the fullest extent practicable in the performance of the work, noise, dust and unsightly debris. During the hours of ten p.m. to seven a.m. the permittee shall not use, except with the express written permission of the engineer, or in case of an emergency as otherwise provided in this chapter, any tool, appliance or equipment producing noise of sufficient volume to disturb the sleep or repose of occupants of the neighboring property.
15.16.170 - Hours during which construction may occur.
Any person conducting construction work for which a permit is required pursuant to Titles 14 and 15 shall comply with the following:
A. Construction activities shall be allowed Mondays through Fridays from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.; B. Construction activities shall be allowed on Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.; C. Construction activities shall be allowed on Sundays from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
15.16.180 - Exemption; after-hours or emergency permits.
A. The community development director or designee may issue an after-hours construction permit authorizing work, if the director determines that the public interest will be served by such a permit or in the case of an emergency. An after-hours construction permit may be revoked or suspended by the director, or his designee, if it is determined that the activity detrimentally affects the public health, safety, and welfare.
B. The planning commission, or community development director, may impose more restrictive hours of construction as a condition of approval in its action on permits issued pursuant to Titles 14 and 15 hereof.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Noise Element
The Noise Element of the Comprehensive Plan establishes maximum long-term exterior noise exposure levels for noise sensitive uses, and also identifies the land uses considered to be noise sensitive. The following Noise Element Policies are considered applicable to the Project. 1) In the planning of land use, 65 dB Day-Night Average Sound Level should be regarded as the maximum exterior noise exposure compatible with noise-sensitive uses unless noise mitigation features are included in project designs.
2) Noise-sensitive land uses should be considered to include:
a) Residential, including single and multifamily dwellings, mobile home parks, dormitories, and similar uses. b) Transient lodging, including hotels, motels, and similar uses. c) Hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent hospitals, and other facilities for long-term medical care. d) Public or private educational facilities, libraries, churches, and places of public assembly. 6) Residential uses proposed in areas where the Day-Night Average Sound Level is 65 dB or more should be designed so that noise levels in exterior living spaces will be less than 65 dB LDN. An analysis of
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-7
proposed projects should be required, indicating the feasibility of noise barriers, site design, building orientation, etc., to meet the prescribed exterior noise standard.
3.10.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to noise are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to noise would occur if the project would:
a) Result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
b) Result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
d) Result in cumulatively considerable noise impacts.
3.10.3.1 Local Significance Thresholds
The Santa Barbara County Environmental Thresholds and Guidelines Manual provides noise thresholds for assisting in the determination of significant noise impacts. The following excerpts from the guidelines manual are applicable to the project:
a) A proposed development that would generate noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A) CNEL and could affect sensitive receptors would generally be presumed to have a significant impact. b) A project will generally have a significant effect on the environment if it will increase substantially the ambient noise levels for noise-sensitive receptors adjoining areas. Per item a., this may generally be presumed when ambient noise levels affecting sensitive receptors are increased to 65 dB(A) CNEL or more. However, a significant effect may also occur when ambient noise levels affecting sensitive receptors increase substantially but remain less than 65 dB(A) CNEL, as determined on a case-by-case level. c) Noise from grading and construction activity proposed within 1,600 feet of sensitive receptors, including schools, residential development, commercial lodging facilities, hospitals or care facilities, would generally result in a potentially significant impact. According to EPA guidelines, average construction noise is 95 dB(A) at a 50' distance from the source. A 6 dB drop occurs with a doubling of the distance from the source.
Therefore, locations within 1,600 feet of the construction site would be affected by noise levels over 65 dB(A). To mitigate this impact, construction within 1,600 feet of sensitive receptors shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 8 AM to 5 PM only. Noise attenuation barriers and muffling of grading equipment may also be required. Construction equipment generating noise levels above 95 dB(A) may require additional mitigation.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-8
3.10.4 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
On-Site Construction Noise (Temporary)
Construction of the proposed project would generate noise that could expose nearby receptors (i.e., residences and commercial uses) to elevated noise levels that may disrupt communication and routine activities. The magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, equipment, duration of the construction phase, distance between the noise source and receiver, and intervening structures. Noise from construction equipment generally exhibits point source acoustical characteristics. A point source sound is attenuated (or reduced) at a rate of 6 decibels per doubling of distance from the source for “hard site” conditions and at 7.5 decibels per doubling of distance for “soft site” conditions. These rules apply to the propagation of sound waves with no obstacles between source and receivers, such as topography (ridges or berms) or structures. The range of maximum noise levels for various types of construction equipment is provided in Table 3.9-2. Typical operating cycles may involve two minutes of full power, followed by three or four minutes at lower levels.
Table 3.9-2. Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels Equipment Typical Maximum Sound Level - 50 feet from Source(Lmax dB) Air Compressor 81
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 81
Grader 85
Loader 85
Paver 89
Roller 74
Saw 76
Scraper 89
Truck 88
Source: FTA 2018
The nearest point of construction activities to the closest noise-sensitive receivers would be approximately 775 feet south of the project site, at the Rincon Point residential neighborhood.. Although construction of the trail elements would largely occur at greater distances from this closest residence, this distance was used as the worst-case scenario to conservatively model construction noise impacts at the nearest residential receptors at Rincon Point.
Noise-sensitive receivers proximate to the project, but north of US Highway 101 (i.e., commercial and residential), will not experience significant noise impacts from construction activities as these residences
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-9
and commercial businesses are located within the 70 dBA noise contour, as indicated in the City of Carpinteria General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Noise Contour Maps and County of Santa Barbara Noise Element Contour Map. Potential project-generated construction noise would not be audible over US Highway 101 traffic noise. Nonetheless, construction-related noise levels were modeled at these closest residential and commercial receivers to the north of the project; construction activity noise levels are summarized in Table 3.9-3, with the modeling input and results contained in Appendix H of this EIR.
The Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008) was used to estimate construction noise levels at these noise-sensitive land uses. Although the model was developed by the FHWA, RCNM is often used for non-roadway projects, because the same types of construction equipment used for roadway projects are also used to construct other project types. Input variables for RCNM consist of the receiver/land use types, the equipment type and number of each (e.g., two graders, a loader, a tractor), the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (e.g., percentage of each hour the equipment typically works per day), and the distance between the construction activity and noise-sensitive receivers. No topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the modeling of construction noise (i.e., the receivers are modelled with no obstacles to the travel of sound between the construction activity and receiver location, a worst-case assumption). The noise levels from the proposed construction activities are summarized in Table 3.9-3. The complete set of RCNM input and output data for construction noise is provided in Appendix H of this EIR.
As shown, at the nearest residences at Rincon Point, noise levels would range from approximately 54 dBA Leq to 60 dBA Leq when construction is taking place at or near the project site boundary (i.e., easternmost part of proposed trail). At the nearest residences to the north of the project, noise levels would range from approximately 56 dBA Leq to 62 dBA Leq when construction is taking place at or near the northern project site boundary; these levels would range from approximately 56 dBA Leq to 62 dBA Leq at the commercial properties to the north of the project. These heavy construction equipment noise levels are based on surveys, conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1971. Mostly because of more stringent recent air quality emissions standards, newer, cleaner, and quieter equipment is used on most construction projects in California. Thus, construction phase noise levels indicated in Table 3.9-3 represent “worst-case” conditions. As the table shows, the highest noise levels are expected to occur during the site prep, grading, and paving phases of construction.
Table 3.9-3. Outdoor Construction Noise Levels by Phase at Nearest Receptors Construction Phase
Residences South
(dB Leq)
Residences North
(dB Leq)
Commercial North
(dB Leq)
Site Prep 60 62 61
Grading 60 62 61
Trail Construction 57 59 58
Bridge Construction 54 56 56
Paving 57 60 59
Source: Appendix H.
The County of Santa Barbara exempts construction activity noise from standard exterior noise exposure limits, if conducted during specific limited daytime hours. The guideline requires noise generating construction activities (including site prep, grading, and construction), be restricted to the weekday hours between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. (County of Santa Barbara 2008); construction is prohibited on weekends and State Holidays..
This ensures that sensitive receptors are not disturbed by early morning or late night activities, or by activities
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-10
on the weekends or during State holidays. The noise from construction activities incident upon Rincon Point residences is subject to these thresholds as the residences are located in Santa Barbara County.
As discussed, ambient and future noise levels affecting noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to the project are characterized by a 70 dBA roadway noise contour. Based on the noise level values at the nearest sensitive receptor, which represent “worst-case” scenario noise exposure over the construction cycle, daytime construction noise levels would average approximately 12 dBA lower than ambient noise levels. However, construction noise levels in the evening or overnight period could be plainly audible above background levels and could also result in sleep disturbance for residential occupants. Therefore, temporary construction noise impacts are potentially significant. Mitigation Measure (MM) NOI-1 and MM-NOI-2 are required in order to reduce construction noise impacts. Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation.
Off-Site Construction Traffic Noise (Temporary)
Construction of the proposed project would generate haul truck trips and construction employee vehicle trips to and from the project site. Fill would be accomplished with on-site cut material. Haul trucks with an approximately 16 cubic yard capacity would export excess cut to the closest disposal site. Heavy truck traffic is anticipated to be approximately 20 heavy truck trips (10 truckloads, each with a round-trip to/from the site) a day during the grading and excavation phase of the project. This averages to 2.5 trips per hour over an 8-hour workday, with 3 trips per hour a reasonable worst-case scenario. Within the northern half of the project, north of the UPRR alignment, haul trucks would access the site via the SR150 interchange from US Highway 101 northbound or southbound. The closest residence to the SR150 northbound off-ramp from US Highway 101 is located at approximately 180 feet (off Camino Carreta). For the southern half of the project, haul trucks would navigate through the Rincon Beach County Park parking lot and use the Bates Road interchange with US Highway 101. Haul trucks traveling through Rincon Beach County Park would pass within 125 feet of the closest Rincon Point residences.
From data presented in Table 3.9.2, a heavy dump truck generates a maximum sound level of 88 dBA at 50 feet. This maximum would be reduced to 80 dBA at 125 feet and 77 dBA at 180 feet. Assuming a truck is at the minimum identified distance from the Rincon Point neighborhood home for approximately 1 minute while driving by, and three trucks pass during the busiest hour, the average noise at this home from haul truck operations would be 67 dBA Leq. Assuming a truck is at the minimum identified distance from the Camino Carreta home for approximately 1 minute while driving by, and three trucks pass during the busiest hour, the average noise at this home from haul truck operations would be 64 dBA Leq. These noise levels are very similar, and slightly below, the daytime noise levels at these residences associated with traffic along US Highway 101.
Thus, daytime operations of heavy haul trucks to export material from the site would not be anticipated to result in substantial temporary noise increases at the closest sensitive receptors to the local portions of the haul route. However, haul trucks operating in the evening or overnight period could be plainly audible above background levels and could also result in sleep disturbance for residential occupants. Therefore, temporary off-site construction traffic noise impacts related to haul truck operations are potentially significant. MM-NOI1 is required in order to reduce construction traffic noise impacts from haul truck operations that could potentially occur in the evening or overnight periods. Impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation.
Permanent Noise Increases – Landform Modification and Trail Operations Members of the public have expressed concerns in responses to the Notice of Preparation (NOP) that noise levels associated with US Highway 101 and UPRR operations could increase in the Rincon Point neighborhood
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-11
as a result of the proposed project grading. The effectiveness of a noise barrier, including a solid ridge, depends upon the height of the top of the barrier, relative to the elevation of the noise source (on one side of the barrier) and the noise receiver (on the other side of the barrier). The proposed grading for the trail project would alter the angle of the slope face along the trail alignment, but it would not decrease the elevation of the top of the ridge along the trail. The proposal would also have no effect upon the elevation of the US Highway 101 travel lanes, the elevation of the UPRR tracks, or the elevation of the homes within the Rincon Point residential neighborhood. Consequently, the proposed project grading would have no impact on the transportation-related ambient noise levels in the Rincon Point residential neighborhood or along Rincon Beach County Park.
Operation of the project would involve pedestrian and cyclist use of the trail and related amenities; neither hiking nor cycling generate substantial noise, and the closest noise-sensitive receivers (residents within Rincon Point) already experience similar noise sources from use of Rincon Beach County Park. Consequently, trail users are expected to generate an incremental increase in the noise levels adjacent to proximate residences, resulting in permanent noise level increases that are less than significant. b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction (Short-Term) Vibration
For construction vibration, this analysis used the FTA threshold for structural damage (vibration-peak-particle velocities greater than 0.2 inches per second for residences, which equates to the Caltrans standard for sensitive structures) and FTA’s threshold for human annoyance within residences (80 vibration velocity level in decibels (VdB) at residences where people normally sleep).
During grading, construction, and paving activities for the proposed project ground-borne vibration would be produced by heavy-duty construction equipment. The most important equipment relative to generation of vibration, and the vibration levels produced by such equipment, are illustrated in Table 3.9-4.
Table 3.9-4. Vibration Velocities for Typical Construction Equipment Equipment
PPV at 25 Feet
(Inches Per Second)
Approximate Ground Vibration
Level 25 feet (VdB)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86
Drill Rig / Auger 0.089 58
Jackhammer 0.035 87
Small Bulldozer 0.003 79
Source: FTA 2018; Caltrans 2020.
As shown in Table 3.9-4, use of heavy equipment (e.g., a large bulldozer) generates vibration levels of 0.089 inches per second PPV at a distance of 25 feet. The nearest residences to construction activity for the eastern trail portion would be at Rincon Point, approximately 775 feet south. Additionally, haul trucks traveling through Rincon Beach County Park would pass within 125 feet of the closest Rincon Point residences. The nearest residences to the trail construction activity could experience vibration levels of 0.0004 inches per second PPV during bulldozer operations. The closest residence to the haul route for loaded trucks traveling through Rincon Beach County Park could experience vibration levels of 0.007 inches per second PPV during loaded truck passby. Vibration levels at these receptors would not begin to approach the FTA or Caltrans building damage threshold of 0.2 inches per second PPV (the FTA uses this value for standard construction residences, Caltrans uses it for fragile or sensitive structures).
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-12
At 125 feet (the closest residences to the truck haul route), vibration levels from a loaded truck would be reduced to approximately 66 VdB; as such the vibration levels would also be well below the level considered barely perceptible to persons (80 VdB), and therefore should generally not be discernible to area residents. While some persons particularly sensitive to vibration may perceive some vibration episodes during certain construction activities, vibration levels would not be anticipated to reach annoyance levels for residents along the project alignment. Ground-borne vibration would not be associated with the proposed project following construction activities. Therefore, impacts related to ground-borne vibration would be less than significant. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The proposed project would not expose people residing or visiting in the project area to excessive noise levels from aircraft. The nearest public airport is Santa Barbara Airport, located approximately 30 miles northwest of the project site. There are no private airports in the vicinity of the project site. As such, no impacts from airport/aircraft noise would occur.
d) Would the project result in cumulatively considerable noise impacts? Cumulative development throughout the Carpinteria Valley would incrementally contribute to noise impacts.
However, noise analysis for the project indicates that future noise conditions will not exceed the City's or County’s established parameters with the identified mitigation. In addition, the measures identified to reduce short term construction noise impacts would reduce the project's contribution to cumulative noise impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, the project would not have considerable contributions toward any cumulative noise impacts.
3.10.5 Mitigation
To reduce potential noise impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
MM-NOI-1 Construction Hours. Construction activity for site preparation and for future development shall be limited to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on state holidays (e.g., Thanksgiving, Labor Day) or weekends. Construction equipment maintenance shall be limited to the same hours. Non-noise generating construction activities are not subject to these restrictions.
Plan Requirements: Two signs stating these restrictions shall be posted on site at each end of the proposed trail. Timing: Signs shall be in place prior to the beginning of and throughout all grading and construction activities. Monitoring: City and County Grading Inspectors shall spot check and respond to complaints.
MM-NOI-2 Construction Equipment. All construction equipment with engines must have original manufacturer’s approved muffling devices. All stationary equipment shall be physically buffered from nearby sensitive receptors.
Plan Requirements: Plans shall indicate the requirement of OEM muffled equipment. Timing: This condition applies when any engine driven equipment is in use at the project site during construction.
Monitoring: City and County Grading Inspectors shall spot check and respond to complaints.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-13
3.10.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
After implementation of MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI-2, impacts to nearby noise- sensitive receptors during construction activity would be less than significant.
3.10 – Noise and Vibration
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.10-14
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-1
3.11 Recreation
This section describes the recreational conditions of the proposed Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project (project) site and vicinity, identifies associated regulatory requirements, and evaluates potential impacts related to implementation of the project.
3.11.1 Existing Conditions
The City of Carpinteria Parks and Recreation Department’s recent history of park and trail development dates back to 1985. In 2009, the City completed a Project Study Report (PSR) on a Rincon Trail project (City of Carpinteria 2009a). In January 2010, the Carpinteria City Council approved the 2010 Parks Department Work Plan, which includes plans to complete the Rincon segment of the Carpinteria Coastal Vista Trail. As of December 2017, five miles of the Carpinteria Coastal Vista Trail have been constructed (California Coastal Conservancy 2017). The proposed trail would link the City’s trail and an existing Rincon Beach County Park.. The Rincon Beach County Park’s parking lot can be very crowded on summer weekends when beach use is high, or during the winter when surfing conditions are favorable. The proposed trail would provide a safe route for alternative transportation between the City and the Rincon Beach County Park; a current unsanctioned trail between these two points is interrupted by the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) rail corridor that bisects the central portion of the trail alignment, and which poses a significant safety hazard for pedestrians that trespass across the UPRR tracks. Establishment of the proposed trail would remove the attractive nuisance of illicit crossing of the tracks by pedestrians.
There are several types of recreation-oriented open space in the project vicinity, including areas that are located in and maintained by the City, private entities, and state or county agencies. • Public parks: state, county and local
• Natural areas publicly owned or privately owned with public access easements • Undeveloped vacant lots, privately owned
• Privately owned recreational facilities
• School playgrounds and ball fields
• Trails: equestrian, bicycle, jogging and walking, and • Coastal access and beaches.
Carpinteria is a city of approximately 13,000 people, with close to two million visitors a year due to the popularity of the area’s beaches, parks, and campground. Carpinteria has approximately 97.96 acres of City parks within the City boundary. Carpinteria State Beach is also within the City boundary. Carpinteria offers a variety of opportunities for coastal recreation. Downtown shops and restaurants draw visitors, as well as opportunities for surfing, fishing, bird watching, wildlife viewing, and walking on nearby beaches. A number of special events take place in Carpinteria each year, including the California Avocado Festival and the Rincon Classic Surf Competition. The State Beach facilities are primarily used by out-of-town campers and local residents share the beachfront picnicking, restrooms, and beach day use area (City of Carpinteria 2003). Additional nearby recreational facilities outside of the City and within the County of Santa Barbara (County) include Rincon Beach County Park, located to the south of the project site and within the County of Santa Barbara, and Rincon Point State Beach, located 0.4 miles southeast of the project site.
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-2
The City of Carpinteria has a total of 6.75 bikeway miles, including 6.25 miles of formal street bikeway facilities and
0.5 miles of off-street bikeway facilities. Cycling and walking to recreational sites promotes direct interface with the physical environment and benefits the community ecologically. Class I bikeways are trails or paths that have entirely separate rights of way from automobile roadways for the use of bicycles and pedestrians. The paths minimize crossflow with vehicle traffic and can be located in parks, recreational areas, or road rights-of-way if such width permits (City of Carpinteria 2003). The proposed shared use path would be designed as a Class I bikeway for use by cyclists and pedestrians.
In 2009, the City completed a Coastal Access Feasibility Study to analyze the feasibility of new sanctioned access points to connect Carpinteria’s beaches and coastal resources with the rest of the community, determine potential railroad crossing alternatives, refine and prioritize alternatives based on public input, and create an implementation plan (City of Carpinteria 2009b). The study was needed because of the “barrier effect” of the rail corridor on the City, the increased public use of the coast, the level of current and predicted passenger and freight train traffic with increased potential risk of conflict at uncontrolled crossings, the limited number of sanctioned crossings, and the hazardous practice of trespassing over railroad tracks to reach coastal destinations. The study has resulted in a number of specific recommendations and preliminary designs for crossings, including the proposed crossing in the Coastal Vista Trail Rincon segment.
In 2010, the City completed an Open Space Management Plan for the City-owned Carpinteria Bluffs Nature Preserve and Tar Pits Park properties (California Coastal Conservancy 2010). The Open Space Management Plan includes a public access element and lays out the City’s vision for completion of the larger Carpinteria Coastal Vista Trail. In the meantime, the City has pursued completion of other segments of the Carpinteria Coastal Vista Trail, all of which have undergone extensive public hearings to receive Coastal Development Permits. Notable recent accomplishments with respect to regional bike circulation include the completion of the Class I bike path from Rincon Beach County Park to Mobil Pier in Ventura County and the extension of a new all-weather bike path from the Casitas Pass Road/Via Real intersection to Carpinteria Avenue along Carpinteria Creek (as part of the Linden Avenue and Casitas Pass Road Interchanges and Via Real Extension project). Both of these bike paths would connect to the proposed Rincon Trail project. In conjunction with the US 101 South Coast High Occupancy Vehicle project, the Santa Claus Lane bike path connecting Santa Claus Lane to the west end of Carpinteria Avenue will be constructed. A trail easement also has been acquired by the City along the S&S Seeds property (6155 Carpinteria Avenue) and anticipates acquiring an easement across the adjacent vacant commercial property (6175 Carpinteria Avenue) as part of a currently proposed development project, and the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County has acquired the former Carpinteria Bluffs III 21.65-acre parcel at the eastern Carpinteria Avenue terminus, which has been transferred to the City of Carpinteria as permanent public open space to be known as Rincon Bluffs Preserve.
The proposed Carpinteria Rincon trail segment of the Carpinteria Coastal Vista Trail will ultimately connect with the Carpinteria Bluffs Nature Preserve (Preserve) portion of the trail constructed in 2004. This segment was constructed as a condition of the Coastal Development Permit for the Preserve allowing development of a parking area, baseball fields, and restroom building (California Coastal Conservancy 2010). The Carpinteria Bluffs Nature Preserve trail segment was planned and built to connect to the subject Carpinteria Rincon Trail segment, which provides a dedicated bridge across UPRR and a contiguous trail to Rincon Beach County Park.
The portion of the project site within the City has a General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation of Visitor-Serving Commercial (City of Carpinteria 2003) and has been zoned for Resort Zone District use (City of Carpinteria 2016). A public multi-use trail would be an allowed use under the visitor serving land use designation.
The portion of the project within the County of Santa Barbara is designated as Other Recreation/Open Space and is zoned Transportation Corridor and Recreation (County of Santa Barbara 2009). The County transportation
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-3
corridor zoning reflects the presence of current and former transportation facilities within the project site, while open space and recreation land use designations reflect the desire to accommodate coastal oriented recreation on the project site and vicinity.
A number of comments were submitted by members of the paragliding and hang-gliding community (or more simply the soaring community) indicating that wind uplift conditions associated with the ocean bluffs along the project trail alignment provide opportunities above the proposed trail properties for paragliding and hang gliding. Comment letters assert that such soaring activities have been carried out in the air space over the trail alignment property for several decades, and that the air space is one of a limited number of opportunities for soaring within the coastal environment in Santa Barbara County. While paragliders and hang-gliders have capitalized on bluff-related uplift during favorable wind conditions to launch from private properties along the bluff faces above the proposed bicycle and pedestrian path alignment, the proposed trail corridor has been dedicated to transportation uses since its construction in the late 1800s (railroad then state highway). Therefore, while the soaring community has taken advantage of favorable wind and uplift phenomena associated with the existing topography within the trail corridor, neither launching nor landing areas within the trail corridor have been contemplated or formalized in recreation plans adopted by the City of Carpinteria or County of Santa Barbara. It should be noted that the steep slopes in the southern trail alignment are the result of former landform modification carried out for the railroad alignment and former state highway, and do not represent natural conditions resulting from natural weathering of the involved earth materials and geologic formation. Please refer to Section 3.5 (Geology & Soils) for a detailed description of landform modification that has occurred within the trail alignment. One reason for not proposing formal launching or landing areas for soaring activities is the presence of U.S. Highway 101 and the UPRR alignment in close proximity to the wind uplift zone associated with the bluff face. Paragliders and hang-gliders launching from an elevation not much greater than these transportation facilities have little time to react if wind conditions are not as expected or change, representing possible safety hazards for paragliders and hang-gliders that find themselves forced to land within the freeway or railroad corridors. With respect to the presence of these major transportation corridors, the area is not ideal for ensuring the safety of low altitude paragliders and hang-gliders taking advantage of the bluffrelated wind uplift conditions.
It should be noted that Rincon County Beach Park prohibits the take-off or landing of any type of gliders. In addition, UPRR prohibits pedestrian access across their alignment (precluding direct access to the bluff area that generates the best uplift). Thus, the typical launch area for paragliding and hang gliding to gain access to the air space over the trail alignment is currently from private property adjacent to the trail alignment, not from a sanctioned use public property.
The private property owner also retains the option of prohibiting paragliders and hang gliders from using the property as a launch area at any time.
Fundamentals of Paragliding or Hang-Gliding
Because members of the soaring community have indicated the air space above the trail alignment has been used extensively for paragliding and hang-gliding, the following fundamental discussion is provided to assist the general public in understanding this issue.
Many people not involved in soaring tend to make the assumption that a lot of wind is needed in order for successful paragliding or hang-gliding to occur. Wind is not essential for this type of soaring but can extend the length of time aloft for an individual flight (BHPA 2021). The presence of wind also can facilitate launch, much the same as for kite flying. With less or no wind present, a paraglider or hang-glider will have to run in order to establish enough relative air speed over the “wing” of the glider to produce lift (BHPA 2021). Launch areas for paragliders and hanggliders often incorporate a long unobstructed slope that both allows the pilot to build up the needed air speed above
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-4
the wing, but also increases the elevation of the craft above the ground elevation as the pilot advances. At the top of ridges, cliffs, or bluffs, when the wind direction is against these features, launch can often be accomplished from a stationary position, if the wind speed is already sufficient over the wing to create lift (BHPA 2021).
After takeoff, a glider maintains its airspeed by flying on a descending path through the air, using gravity to propel it. The glide ratio is a measure of a glider's performance. It expresses the relationship between the distance that a glider can travel horizontally (in still air) and the height loss involved. For instance, a glider that has a glide ratio of 10:1 will travel 100 feet horizontally for every ten feet of elevation (height above the ground) lost in still air (BHPA 2021). Wind that has a vertical component in the upward direction, which can be caused when wind strikes a landform, such as a ridge or cliff, can carry a glider to a greater elevation; following the ridge back and forth where a vertical wind component exists a glider can remain in the air longer than under still air conditions.
According to a number of comments received on the notice of preparation by members of the soaring community, the presence of the existing steep ocean bluffs within the trail alignment result in the creation of a favorable vertical wind component above the bluff face. This vertical wind component, or updraft, facilitates the launching of gliders and supports extended flight times by gliders.
3.11.2 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Ordinances
3.11.2.1 Federal
Federal Aviation Regulation Part 103
Hang gliding, paragliding, and mini-wing flights in the United States are governed by the Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 103, Federal Aviation Regulation, Ultralight Vehicles. FAR Part 103 was adopted July 30, 1982, and formally establishes what is recreational flight. FAR Part 103 does not apply to flights by Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) licensed pilots in FAA registered aircraft, which are governed by FAR Part 61 and FAR Part 91 and may be governed in addition by other civil laws and regulations. Persons participating in hang gliding, paragliding, and mini-wing operations under FAR Part 103 are required by law to fly in accordance with FAR Part 103, and in accordance with any other applicable civil laws. FAR Part 103 outlines inspection requirements, certification and registration, and operating rules for recreational flight. The following sub-sections of Part 103 are pertinent to soaring activities above the project site. § 103.9 Hazardous operations.
(a) No person may operate any ultralight vehicle in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons or property.
(b) No person may allow an object to be dropped from an ultralight vehicle if such action creates a hazard to other persons or property.
§ 103.15 Operations over congested areas.
No person may operate an ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons.
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-5
3.11.2.2 State
State Water Resources Control Board California Ocean Plan The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has the responsibility for regulating and enforcing standard related to surface waters throughout California, including ocean waters within the 3-mile state limit. SWRCB adopted the most recent California Ocean Plan, the state’s water quality control plan for California ocean waters, in October 2012. The purpose of the California Ocean Plan is to protect the quality of the ocean water for use and enjoyment by the people of the state by requiring control of the discharge of waste to ocean waters. The California Ocean Plan identifies both water contact and non-contact recreation as a beneficial use for all ocean waters of the state. As a result, it established water quality objectives for bacteria for contact recreation areas, including coastal waters adjacent to public beaches such as Carpinteria State Beach and Rincon Beach County Park. Bacterial standards for water contact apply to a zone that extends 1,000 feet from the shoreline or the 30-foot depth contour.
3.11.2.3 Local
City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan The Open Space, Recreation, and Conservation Element of the City of Carpinteria General Plan/Local Coastal Land Use Plan provides objectives and policies related to parks and recreation needs of the community, including the following (City of Carpinteria 2003):
Objective OSC-14 Provide for adequate park and recreation facilities to meet the needs of the community and visitors.
OSC-14a Increase coastal and recreational access for all segments of the population, including the disabled and elderly, while protecting natural resources, particularly environmentally sensitive habitat areas.
OSC-14b Provide for passive recreation uses of natural open space areas, such as along creeks and the Bluffs 1 areas, where such uses would not damage the resources being protected.
OSC-14c Increase opportunities for ocean recreation programs including: kayaking, sailing, snorkeling, and scuba diving through the city Parks and Recreation Department, and by encouraging private development of these activities.
OSC-14d In a zone extending approximately 250 feet inland from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to coastal dependent and related recreational activities and support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set back from the beach and bluffs and near-shore areas reserved for day use activities. Recreational activities that are not coastal dependent may be located within this 250-foot zone if the less desirable coastal dependent support facilities (parking, restrooms, etc.) are located inland. In no case shall facilities, except for required structures (i.e. lifeguard towers, volleyball nets, etc.) be located directly on the sandy beach.
OSC-14e Recreational uses on ocean front land, both public and private, that do not require extensive alteration of the natural environment shall have priority over uses requiring substantial alteration.
OSC-14f No unrelated development shall be permitted in publicly owned recreational areas except pipelines to serve coastal dependent industrial uses when no alternative route is feasible.
3.11 – Recreation
Carpinteria Rincon Trail Project Environmental Impact Report 11032 March 2021 3.11-6
OSC-14g In implementing all proposals made in the General Plan/Land Use Plan for expanding opportunities for coastal access and recreation, utilize purchase in fee (simple) only after all other less costly alternatives have been studied and rejected as infeasible. Other alternatives may include: purchase of easements, recreation preserve contracts, and mandatory dedication in connection with development.
OSC-14h Support habitat preservation by establishing habitat preserves and open space for passive and active recreation by developing programs including, but not limited to: transfer of development rights; conservation easements; land acquisition grants; partnership agreements between private developers, the City, school districts, State Park, and the National Forest; overlay performance zoning; development impact fees for recreational resources and services; and use fees and fines.
Santa Barbara County Comprehensive Plan Coastal Land Use Plan The County of Santa Barbara’s Coastal Land Use Plan, which addresses land use in the coastal zone (including the project site and surrounding properties), emphasizes access to the County’s beaches, among other planning and land use policies. Section 3.7, Coastal Access and Recreation, of the Coastal Land Use Plan includes policies aimed at protecting the public’s right to access the beach and enjoy recreational opportunities at and along the shoreline.
Policies specifically applicable to the project area are listed below (County of Santa Barbara 2019):
Policy 7-5: For areas controlled by Federal, State, County, or District agencies, in a zone extending approximately 250 feet inland from the mean high tide line, priority shall be given to coastal dependent and related recreational activities and support facilities. However, camping facilities should be set back from the beach and bluffs and nearshore areas reserved for day use activities. Recreational activities that are not coastal dependent may be located within this 250-foot zone if the less desirable coastal dependent support facilities (parking, restrooms, etc.) are located inland. In no case shall facilities, except for required structures (i.e., lifeguard towers, volleyball nets, etc.), be located directly on the dry sandy beach.