King City City Council
March 11, 2025

AGENDA

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CITY OF KING CITY COUNCIL
AND
Sitting as SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF

THE RDA FOR THE CITY OF KING
TUESDAY MARCH 11, 2025
6:00 P.M.

CITY HALL
212 S. VANDERHURST AVENUE
KING CITY, CALIFORNIA 93930
The City Council meeting will be conducted in hybrid in-person/virtual format.

To join the meeting virtually, please use the link below to join the Zoom meeting:
https://bit.ly/3e0zvaR
Meeting ID: 881 5287 9536
Or by telephone: 1-669-900-9128
Passcode: 052933
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City meeting, Please contact the City Clerk's Office (831-386-5925) at least 48 hours prior to the Meeting to ensure that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting.
* Please submit all correspondence for City Council PRIOR to the meeting with a copy to the City Clerk.

CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:

Council Members Oscar Avalos, Robert Cullen, Carlos Victoria, Mayor Pro Tem Carlos DeLeon, and Mayor Mike LeBarre

FLAG SALUTE

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

PUBLIC COMMENT
Any member of the public may address the Council for a period not to exceed three minutes’ total on any item of interest within the jurisdiction of this Council that is not on the agenda. The Council will listen to all communications; however, in compliance with the Brown Act, the Council cannot act on items not on the agenda. Comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not to any individual Council Member.

Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member, staff member or member of the audience is not permitted.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS & COMMITTEE REPORTS
Individual Council Members may comment on Council business, his or her Council activities, City operations, projects or other items of community interest. Council Members may also request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting on any matter or take action to direct staff to prepare a staff report for a future agenda.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Comments presented by the City Manager, City Attorney or other staff on City business

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.
activities, City operations, projects or other items of community interest. Council Members may also request staff to report back at a subsequent meeting on any matter or take action to direct staff to prepare a staff report for a future agenda.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Comments presented by the City Manager, City Attorney or other staff on City business and/or announcements.

CONSENT AGENDA
The following items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Members of the audience may speak on any item(s) listed on the Consent Agenda. Any Council Member, the City Manager, or the City Attorney may request that an item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to allow for full discussion. The Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion. Items withdrawn from the Consent Agenda may be considered by separate motions at the conclusion of the discussion of each item.

Consideration: Meeting Minutes Of February 25, 2025 Council Meeting Recommendation: approve and file.
9(A) CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 25, 2025.PDF City Of King Check Register February 16-28, 2025
Recommendation: receive and file.
9(B) STAFF REPORT CC CITY AP 031125.PDF
Consideration Of Modifications To Parking Restrictions To Comply With AB 413 Recommendation: approve staff's recommendations for motorcycle parking spaces and painted curbs at intersections adjacent to school locations. 9(C) STATE PARKING RESTRICTION AT INTERSECTIONS.PDF
Consideration: City Of King KCCP Payments For The Month Of February 2025 Recommendation: receive and file.
9(D) STAFF REPORT CC CITY AP KCCP 031125.PDF

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Consideration: The Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan, Mitigated Negative Declaration And Mitigation Monitoring And Reporting Program
Recommendation: The Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (Plan or Project) and adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2) direct staff to file a Notice of Determination (NOD); and 3) direct staff to proceed with the process of amending the City’s Sphere of Influence and annexation of the Riverbed area.
10(A) RIVERBED WILDFIRE PREVENTION PLAN MND AND MMRPPDF

8. 9.

A.

Documents:

B.

Documents:

C.

Documents:

D.

Documents:

10. A.

Documents:
(NOD); and 3) direct staff to proceed with the process of amending the City’s Sphere of Influence and annexation of the Riverbed area.
10(A) RIVERBED WILDFIRE PREVENTION PLAN MND AND MMRP.PDF

REGULAR BUSINESS
Consideration: Wastewater Rate Study
Recommendation: 1) accept the Wastewater Rate Study; and 2) direct staff to distribute a Proposition 218 Public Hearing Notice for proposed wastewater rate increases to be held on May 13, 2025.
11(A) WASTEWATER RATE STUDY.PDF

CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
Announcement(s) of any reportable action(s) taken in Closed Session will be made in open session and repeated at the beginning of the next Regular City Council meeting as this portion of the meeting is not recorded.

ADJOURNMENT
The City of King is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Documents:

11. A.

Documents:

12. 13.

City Council Meeting
February 25, 2025

1.__CALL TO ORDER:

Regular Meeting called to order at 6:00pm by Mayor LeBarre.

2.__ROLL CALL:

City Council: Mayor Mike LeBarre, Mayor Pro Tem Carlos DeLeon, Council member Carlos Victoria, Council member Rob Cullen, Council members Oscar Avalos (absent) City Staff: City Manager Steve Adams, City Attorney Roy Santos; City Clerk Erica Sonne

3.__FLAG SALUTE:

The flag salute was led by Mayor LeBarre.

4. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS:

None

5.__SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:

A. Proclamation Declaring March as American Red Cross Month presented by Mayor LeBarre to Patsy Gasca, Community Disaster Program Manager. Ms. Gasca spoke on where the American Red Cross is working currently even helping out down in southern California. The Mayor and Council Members expressed their appreciation for the American Red Cross.

B. Proclamation Declaring March 2, 2025 Day of Peace and Remembrance presented by Mayor LeBarre to Pastor Ken Reese. Pastor Ken hopes we can move forward and be more connected as a faith group to enrich our community. He hopes that this day of peace will be a day to remember and seek peace.

The Mayor and Council Members expressed their appreciation for his organization of this day of peace stating that Pastor Ken is a blessing to our community.

6. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS:

None

7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS:

Council Member Cullen stated that his Solid Waste Authority Board Meeting was last week. There was discussion about the state mandated procurement of compost and mulch program (SB) 1383 and there is no longer a grant for that. They are working out how to deal with the cost and it looks like it will be added to waste hauling in the bill that goes out to customers hopefully broken down so customers know it is for this state-mandated program.

Council Member Victoria stated that the Monterey District Employee of the year Joan Menendez. Liz Serrano, Karen Rios, Laurie Reitz are the classified employees of the year for the district. Every school is having conferences the month of February. He thanked everyone who worked on the Immigration Forum.

He feels it was a great event. He has been communicating to the City Manager and Chief of Police that there is one CHP officer hanging out in town (hiding) giving tickets right and left. He knows that the City 9(A)

Manager and the Chief have been checking into this. Council Member Victoria was told personally that they can do whatever they want as any street can be considered California highway. The perception is in the community is that undocumented people are being targeted. The question that has come up is has council approved working with the CHP and he answers no to the community. He just wanted to bring it to the council’s attention.

Mayor Pro Tem DeLeon had nothing to report this evening.

Mayor LeBarre thanked Council Member Victoria for helping out at the Immigration Forum especially for greeting people and making sure people felt welcome. He mentioned that the next TAMC meeting will be authorizing a contract for a consultant to start the process for regional development impact fees again.

He mentioned at the mayors meeting that there should be a look at ways to lower those costs.

8. CITY STAFF REPORTS AND COMMENTS:

City Manager Adams thanked Council Member Victoria and Mayor LeBarre for their participation in the Immigration Forum and Community Resource Fair.

City Attorney Santos had nothing to report this evening.

9. CONSENT
A. Consideration: Meeting Minutes of February 11, 2025 Council Meeting B. Consideration: City of King Check Register February 1, through February 15, 2025 C. Consideration: Award of Contract for Downtown Electric Vehicle Charging Station Parking Lot Engineering and Design Services
Action: Motion to approve consent agenda items A- C by Victoria seconded by DeLeon.

AYES: Council Members: LeBarre, DeLeon, Cullen, Victoria NOES: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members: Avalos
ABSTAIN: Council Members:

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

None

11. REGULAR BUSINESS
None

12. CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION
None
ADJOURNMENT:

Mayor LeBarre adjourned the meeting at 6:26p.m.

Approved Signatures:

Mayor Mike LeBarre City Clerk, Erica Sonne
City of King City of King
Item No. 9(B)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: MARCH 11, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF CITY OF KING CHECK REGISTER
FEBRUARY 16 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 2025
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council receive and file.

BACKGROUND:

At least once a month, the City Treasurer shall submit to the City Council, a copy of the invoices paid for the previous month.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this item is to provide the Council an opportunity to review and monitor ongoing expenditures. These documents are attached.

COST ANALYSIS:

There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No Environmental Review required for this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for Council consideration:

1. Receive and file the report; or

2. Provide other direction to staff regarding requests for additional information.

3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 1 of 13
Check Report
King City, CA By Check Number
Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Bank Code: POOL-WFB-POOL - WELLS FARGO BANK
Payment Type: EFT
ADAMS ADAMS ASHBY GROUP LLC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 1,232.50 10154 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 6360 Invoice 02/14/2025 Labor Compliance Downtown St. Prj. 0.00 1,232.50 116-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements Labor Compliance Downtown St.… 1,232.50 ALVAREZ ALVAREZ TECHNOLOGY GROUP INC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 7,625.50 10155 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 75023 Invoice 02/14/2025 IT Support - PD Update Software 0.00 206.25 100-1600-61720 Utilities - Gas & Electricity IT Support - PD Update Software 206.25 75077 Invoice 02/14/2025 IT - Setup Multifactor Authentication Publi… 0.00 495.00 100-2100-68131 Computers & Printers IT - Setup Multifactor Authentica… 495.00 75144 Invoice 02/14/2025 IT - Subscriptions, Mgnt. Plans, Email Setti… 0.00 6,635.50 100-2000-61560 Maintenance Agreements IT - Subscriptions, Mgnt. Plans, … 6,635.50 75204 Invoice 02/14/2025 IT - Install Printer 0.00 165.00 100-2000-61560 Maintenance Agreements IT - Install Printer 165.00 75209 Invoice 02/14/2025 IT - Help Desk - Update Printer Driver 0.00 123.75 100-6100-68131 Computers & Printers IT - Help Desk - Update Printer D… 123.75 CAROLLO CAROLLO ENGINEERS INC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 94,743.75 10156 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount FB57355 Invoice 02/14/2025 Professional Services WWTP Upgrade 0.00 94,743.75 310-0000-61520 Engineering Services Professional Services WWTP Up… 94,743.75 FIRST AL FIRST ALARM INC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 399.30 10157 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 865104 Invoice 02/14/2025 Fire Alarm Inspection 0.00 399.30 100-1600-61225 Fire Extinguishers Fire Alarm Inspection 399.30 CYPRESSW MILES CLIFFORD FARMER CYPRESS WATER SERVICE INC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 5,711.00 10158 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 25000 Invoice 02/14/2025 MBAS-Lab Fees OCT/NOV 2024 0.00 5,711.00 310-0000-61500 Professional Services MBAS-Lab Fees OCT/NOV 2024 5,711.00 MAGICC NORMA L DOMINGUEZ 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 13,760.00 10159 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 5022 Invoice 02/14/2025 Janitorial - Park & City Maint. 0.00 8,000.00 100-1400-61500 Professional Services Janitorial - Park & City Maint. 8,000.00 6022 Invoice 02/14/2025 Monarch Inn Temporary Homeless Shelter… 0.00 5,760.00 100-1100-61760 Budget Contingency Monarch Inn Temporary Homele… 5,760.00 RRM DESIGN RRM DESIGN GROUP INC 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 605.00 10160 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 2 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 0597-04-1224 Invoice 02/14/2025 KC Downtown Plaza 0.00 605.00 226-0000-61500 Professional Services KC Downtown Plaza 605.00 SPCA THE SPCA FOR MONTEREY COUNTY 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 980.00 10161 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 12-24 Invoice 02/14/2025 SPCA Dec 2024 0.00 980.00
100-1600-61550 Animal Services SPCA Dec 2024 980.00
TORO TORO PETROLEUM CORP 02/17/2025 EFT 0.00 4,603.71 10162 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount CL82541 Invoice 02/14/2025 Fuel 0.00 3,106.81
100-1600-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 3,106.81
CL83189 Invoice 02/14/2025 Fuel 0.00 1,496.90
100-1800-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 27.96
100-2100-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 115.09
100-2400-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 268.35
310-0000-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 653.86
410-0000-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 330.19
410-0000-61840 Fuel & Oil Fuel 101.45
Total EFT: 0.00 129,660.76
Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 3 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Payment Type: Regular
MONARCH IN MELDI LLC 02/20/2025 Regular 0.00 53,625.00 72408 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 021425 Invoice 02/20/2025 Temporary Homeless Shelter Lease 0.00 53,625.00 121-0000-61500 Professional Services Temporary Homeless Shelter Le… 53,625.00 AFLAC AFLAC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 188.42 72409
Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000483 Invoice 02/28/2025 PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURANCE 0.00 85.58 100-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 72.30 310-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 8.87 410-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 4.41 INV0000484 Invoice 02/28/2025 PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURANCE 0.00 102.84 100-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 93.98 310-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 6.75 410-0000-21171 LTD Insurance Payable PAYROLL DEDUCTION - INSURA… 2.11 ARBA AMERICAN RIVER BENEFIT ADM ARBA 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 47.60 72410 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000495 Invoice 02/28/2025 KCFC AD&D EMPLOYER 0.00 47.60 100-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable KCFC AD&D EMPLOYER 47.00 310-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable KCFC AD&D EMPLOYER 0.60 ANTHEM BLU ANTHEM BLUE CROSS 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 55,462.21 72411 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000486 Invoice 02/28/2025 HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCTION 0.00 4,026.36 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable EE HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCT… 3,595.05 120-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable EE HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCT… 3.35 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable EE HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCT… 12.00 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable EE HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCT… 268.82 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable EE HEALTH INSURANCE DEDUCT… 147.14 INV0000487 Invoice 02/28/2025 HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 51,435.85 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 46,422.84 120-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 69.58 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 135.08 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 3,438.26 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable HEALTH INSURANCE EMPLOYER 1,370.09 CAL PERS R CAL PERS RETIREMENTSYSTEM 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 38,496.89 72412 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000499 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 0.00 6,329.72 100-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 5,189.51 120-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 31.45 224-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 15.53 228-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 116.46 310-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 795.40 410-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYER 181.37 INV0000500 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 0.00 6,233.20 100-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 5,110.40 120-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 30.96 224-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 15.29 228-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 114.68 310-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 783.28 410-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA MISC EMPLOYEE 178.59 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 4 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number INV0000501 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYER 0.00 7,618.01 100-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYER 7,585.30 225-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYER 32.71 INV0000502 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYEE 0.00 7,612.51 100-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYEE 7,579.82 225-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS PEPRA SAFETY EMPLOYEE 32.69 INV0000503 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYER 0.00 1,589.91 100-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYER 1,018.64 310-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYER 247.99 410-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYER 323.28 INV0000504 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 0.00 919.58 100-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 589.65 310-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 143.54 410-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS MISC CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 186.39 INV0000505 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS SAFETY CLASSIC EMPLOYER 0.00 5,678.00 100-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS SAFETY CLASSIC EMPLOYER 5,639.62 225-0000-21130 PERS Payable PERS SAFETY CLASSIC EMPLOYER 38.38 INV0000506 Invoice 02/28/2025 PERS SAFTEY CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 0.00 2,515.96 100-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS SAFTEY CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 2,498.93 225-0000-21131 PERS Payable - EE PERS SAFTEY CLASSIC EMPLOYEE 17.03 CACHLDSUP CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 522.00 72413 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000512 Invoice 02/28/2025 M. DILLON CHILD SUPPORT 0.00 522.00 100-0000-21175 Wage Levys M. DILLON CHILD SUPPORT 522.00 E.D.I.S. EMPLOYER DRIVEN INSURANCE SERVICE 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 846.00 72414 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000485 Invoice 02/28/2025 ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 0.00 846.00 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 744.65 120-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 0.58 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 2.27 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 57.40 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable ASI EMPLOYER SHARE 41.10 K.C.P.O.A. K.C.P.O.A. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 825.00 72415 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000491 Invoice 02/28/2025 KCPOA UNION DUES 0.00 825.00 100-0000-21173 KCPOA Union Dues KCPOA UNION DUES 819.95 225-0000-21173 KCPOA Union Dues KCPOA UNION DUES 5.05
K.C.P.S.A. K.C.P.S.A. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 340.00 72416 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000492 Invoice 02/28/2025 KCPSA UNION DUES 0.00 340.00 100-0000-21174 KCPSA Union Dues KCPSA UNION DUES 337.51 225-0000-21174 KCPSA Union Dues KCPSA UNION DUES 2.49
ICMA RETIR MISSION SQUARE-302397 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 8,142.28 72417 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000479 Invoice 02/28/2025 EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 0.00 720.61 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 610.85 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 60.29 410-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 49.47 INV0000480 Invoice 02/28/2025 EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 0.00 639.27 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 5 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 477.39 120-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 15.91 224-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 7.89 228-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 59.19 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 78.89 INV0000481 Invoice 02/28/2025 EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 0.00 443.82 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 332.87 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… EMPLOYER MATCH - ICMA DC 110.95 INV0000488 Invoice 02/28/2025 DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 0.00 4,023.27 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 3,323.84 120-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 34.02 224-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 12.50 225-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 10.24 228-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 93.75 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 518.93 410-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 29.99 INV0000489 Invoice 02/28/2025 DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 0.00 2,020.04 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 1,852.55 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 48.25 410-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 119.24 INV0000490 Invoice 02/28/2025 DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 0.00 295.27 100-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 265.06 225-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 2.67 310-0000-21141 ICMA Deferred Compensa… DEF COMP EMPLOYEE 27.54 MUTUAL OF OMAHA MUTUAL OF OMAHA 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 3,218.87 72418 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000496 Invoice 02/28/2025 DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 671.58 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 575.13 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 1.34 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 33.59 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 61.52 INV0000497 Invoice 02/28/2025 DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 490.98 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 427.88 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 56.10 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 7.00 INV0000498 Invoice 02/28/2025 DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 1,492.92 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 1,397.69 120-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 2.84 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 6.97 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable DENTAL INSURANCE EMPLOYER 85.42 INV0000508 Invoice 02/28/2025 VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 78.30 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 72.04 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 6.26 INV0000509 Invoice 02/28/2025 VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 68.80 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 60.23 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 6.88 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 1.69 INV0000510 Invoice 02/28/2025 VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 141.84 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 121.48 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.28 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 7.10 410-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 12.98 INV0000511 Invoice 02/28/2025 VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.00 274.45 100-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 253.79 120-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 0.62 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 6 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 225-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 1.51 310-0000-21150 Health Insurance Payable VISION INSURANCE EMPLOYER 18.53 SEIU SEIU LOCAL 521 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 476.25 72419 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000507 Invoice 02/28/2025 SEIU UNION DUES 0.00 476.25 100-0000-21196 City Reimb Payable SEIU UNION DUES 347.29 310-0000-21196 City Reimb Payable SEIU UNION DUES 65.01 410-0000-21196 City Reimb Payable SEIU UNION DUES 63.95 STAND INS STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,695.72 72420 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount INV0000482 Invoice 02/28/2025 EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 0.00 137.58 100-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 123.42 120-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 0.18 224-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 0.09 225-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 0.36 228-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 0.70 310-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 8.09 410-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable EMPLOYER SHARE - AD&D 4.74 INV0000493 Invoice 02/28/2025 STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 0.00 880.53 100-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 789.46 120-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 1.19 224-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 0.60 225-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 2.31 228-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 4.50 310-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 51.83 410-0000-21160 Life Insurance Payable STANDARD LIFE EMPLOYER 30.64 INV0000494 Invoice 02/28/2025 STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 0.00 677.61 100-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 597.71 120-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 0.82 224-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 0.41 225-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 1.59 228-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 3.11 310-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 43.49 410-0000-21170 LTD Insurance Payable STANDARD LTD EMPLOYER 30.48 A & G PUMP A & G PUMPING INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 187.00 72421 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 25-100020 Invoice 02/28/2025 Rental 0.00 187.00
310-0000-61500 Professional Services Rental 187.00
KCTVHARD ALCANTAR HARDWARE INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 318.06 72422 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 576731 Invoice 02/28/2025 Replacement Utility Blade 0.00 3.03 100-2100-61810 Tools & Minor Equipment Replacement Utility Blade 3.03 577221 Invoice 02/28/2025 Keys for Shop 0.00 21.70
100-2100-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Keys for Shop 21.70 577283 Invoice 02/28/2025 Spool Trimmer Head 0.00 32.61 100-2400-61898 Equipment Repair & Main… Spool Trimmer Head 32.61 577336 Invoice 02/28/2025 PPE - Mask 0.00 13.04
100-2400-61898 Equipment Repair & Main… PPE - Mask 13.04 577370 Invoice 02/28/2025 Plant Tie Tape 0.00 12.16
100-2400-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Plant Tie Tape 12.16 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 7 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 577408 Invoice 02/28/2025 Paint Supplies - Rec Center Restroom 0.00 204.12 100-2500-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Paint Supplies - Rec Center Ballr… 204.12 577441 Invoice 02/28/2025 Paint Supplies - Rec Center Ballroom 0.00 4.33 100-2500-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Paint Supplies - Rec Center Ballr… 4.33 577547 Invoice 02/28/2025 Equipment P.M. Supplies 0.00 8.59 100-2400-61898 Equipment Repair & Main… Equipment P.M. Supplies 8.59 577597 Invoice 02/28/2025 Replacement Batteries For Tools 0.00 18.48 100-1700-61810 Tools & Minor Equipment Replacement Batteries For Tools 18.48 ALLTE ALL-TEMP REFRIGERATION HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING, INC. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 2,784.28 72423 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 29555 Invoice 02/28/2025 Pool Heater Repair 0.00 2,784.28 100-2500-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Pool Heater Repair 2,784.28 AMAZON AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,210.02 72424 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 146Q-Q7YV-JV9G Invoice 02/28/2025 Softballs 0.00 64.98
100-2600-61220 Operational Supplies Softballs 64.98
161D-V619-LW79 Invoice 02/28/2025 Manuscript Covers, Paper 0.00 44.10 100-1100-61210 Office Supplies Manuscript Covers, Paper 44.10 1DGW-JGTJ-976W Invoice 02/28/2025 Printer Toner, Basket 0.00 690.55 100-2600-61210 Office Supplies Printer Toner, Basket 690.55 1GTF-7G16-R7FJ Invoice 02/28/2025 Business License Cert Envelope 0.00 183.30 100-1500-61210 Office Supplies Business License Cert Envelope 183.30 1J1D-7Y4M-44NP Invoice 02/28/2025 Batteries, Plates, Dog Blanket, Keurig Pk, P… 0.00 264.61 100-1600-61210 Office Supplies Batteries, Plates, Dog Blanket, K… 264.61 1MXQ-RYNQ-C1… Invoice 02/28/2025 Manuscript Covers 0.00 23.58 100-1100-61210 Office Supplies Manuscript Covers 23.58
1NTN-Y6RF-YHF6 Credit Memo 02/28/2025 CREDIT 0.00 -61.10 100-1500-61210 Office Supplies CREDIT -61.10
AT & T-FIR AT & T MOBILITY 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,162.61 72425 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 287299743011X… Invoice 02/28/2025 PD Phone 0.00 1,162.61 100-1600-61710 Cellular Phones PD Phone 1,162.61
AT&T - C AT&T Calnet 3 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 39.47 72426 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 000023079043 Invoice 02/28/2025 Phones 0.00 39.47
100-1800-61710 Cellular Phones Phones 39.47
AVIATION S AVIATION SPECIALTIES UNLIMITED, INC. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 415.57 72427 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount CofK1124M Invoice 02/28/2025 Change Fuel Filter 0.00 415.57 110-0000-61500 Professional Services Change Fuel Filter 415.57 BENITEZ SECURITY BENITEZ SECURITY SERVICES 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 2,688.00 72428 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 2644 Invoice 02/28/2025 Monarch INN Temporary Homeless Shelter… 0.00 2,688.00 100-1100-61760 Budget Contingency Monarch INN Temporary Homel… 2,688.00 CAL WATER CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 8,484.26 72429 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 8 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount FY 24-25 Invoice 02/28/2025 Water 0.00 8,484.26
100-1600-61730 Utilities - Water Water 46.83
100-1700-61730 Utilities - Water Water 488.55
100-1800-61730 Utilities - Water Water 898.64
100-2400-61730 Utilities - Water Water 1,576.33
100-2400-61730 Utilities - Water Water 1,911.75
100-2400-61730 Utilities - Water Water 482.64
100-2400-61730 Utilities - Water Water 1,292.67
100-2400-61739 Utilities - Water Water 164.34
100-2500-61730 Utilities - Water Water 599.87
100-2600-61730 Utilities - Water Water 497.01
110-0000-61730 Utilities - Water Water 81.87
410-0000-61730 Utilities - Water Water 324.64
610-0000-61730 Utilities - Water Water 119.12
CASEY PRIN CASEY PRINTING INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 628.58 72430 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 225468 Invoice 02/28/2025 Immigration Forum Poster 0.00 195.75 100-1100-61350 Printing & Advertising Immigration Forum Poster 195.75 225469 Invoice 02/28/2025 Temp No Parking Signs 0.00 432.83 410-0000-61229 Supplies-Street Signs Temp No Parking Signs 432.83 CNC ELECTR CLARK N CLEVENGER CNC ELECTRIC AND OUTDOOR POWER 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 47.28 72431 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 7785 Invoice 02/28/2025 String for Blower 0.00 3.80
100-2400-61898 Equipment Repair & Main… String for Blower 3.80 7938 Invoice 02/28/2025 Oil 0.00 43.48
100-2400-61898 Equipment Repair & Main… Stil Oil 43.48
DAVE'S REP DAVE'S REPAIR SERVICE David L Gambetta 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 100.00 72432 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 38138 Invoice 02/28/2025 Monthly Site Inspection 0.00 100.00 110-0000-61500 Professional Services Monthly Site Inspection 100.00 DEPT ACCNT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ACCOUNTING OFFICE 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 49.00 72433 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 794962 Invoice 02/28/2025 Fingerprint: Apps, FBI 0.00 49.00 100-2000-64120 DOJ Fingerprint Checks Fingerprint: Apps, FBI 49.00 EARTHSYS EARTH SYSTEMS PACIFIC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 12,321.80 72434 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 851178 Invoice 02/28/2025 Division St. Rehab 0.00 9,754.30 412-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements Division St. Rehab 9,754.30 852798 Invoice 02/28/2025 KC Plaza Bulbout 0.00 2,567.50 226-0000-61500 Professional Services KC Plaza Bulbout 2,567.50 EMC PLANN EMC PLANNING GROUP, INC. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,802.30 72435 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 23-028-17 Invoice 02/28/2025 Riverbed EPP & Env Review JAN 2025 0.00 1,596.89 228-0000-61500 Professional Services Riverbed EPP & Env Review JAN … 1,596.89 24-149-5 Invoice 02/28/2025 Environmental Review For EV Charging Sta… 0.00 205.41 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 9 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 100-1100-61502 Consultants Environmental Review For EV C… 205.41 FLODUCA F LODUCA CO 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 128,369.90 72436 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 006 Invoice 02/28/2025 Progress Payment 7 Downtown Plaza 0.00 128,369.90 226-0000-61500 Professional Services Progress Payment 7 Downtown … 128,369.90 GISPL GIS PLUMBING 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,287.00 72437 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 5706 Invoice 02/28/2025 Replace Backflow Hwy 101 0.00 1,287.00 100-2400-61500 Professional Services Replace Backflow Hwy 101 1,287.00 GREGG BURK GREGG BURKMAN ELECTRIC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 724.00 72438 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 311 Invoice 02/28/2025 Replace Light Fixtures At Firehouse 0.00 724.00 100-1700-61803 Fire Station Maintenance Replace Light Fixtures At Fireho… 724.00 CONTRERASJ JOSE M CONTRERAS 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,000.00 72439 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 284 Invoice 02/28/2025 Carpet Cleaning 0.00 1,000.00
100-1600-61505 Janitorial Service Carpet Cleaning 1,000.00 KIMLEY-HOR KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 53,249.45 72440 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 30068514 Invoice 02/28/2025 KC San Antonio | Broadway 0.00 37,268.01 410-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements KC San Antonio | Broadway 37,268.01 30990692 Invoice 02/28/2025 KC San Antonio | Broadway 0.00 15,981.44 410-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements KC San Antonio | Broadway 15,981.44 AMERICANRIVER LOS RIOS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 94.00 72441 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 24-814 Invoice 02/28/2025 FTO Admin Course 0.00 94.00
100-1600-61110 Membership Dues FTO Admin Course 94.00
M BASIA MBASIA C/O Alliant Insurance Services 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 7,145.10 72442 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 013125 Invoice 02/28/2025 Liability Claims 0.00 7,145.10 100-2000-64179 Liability Claims Paid Liability Claims 7,145.10 ODP ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, LLC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 84.82 72443 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 410739596001 Invoice 02/28/2025 Office Supplies 0.00 71.78 100-1100-61210 Office Supplies Office Supplies 22.34
100-1800-61210 Office Supplies Office Supplies 49.44
410740032001 Invoice 02/28/2025 Office Supplies 0.00 13.04 100-1800-61210 Office Supplies Office Supplies 13.04
OWEN EQUIP OWEN EQUIPMENT SALES INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 5,691.72 72444 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 00064482 Invoice 02/28/2025 Parts For Sweeper 0.00 1,758.31 410-0000-61899 Equipment Repair & Main… Parts For Sweeper 1,758.31 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 10 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number 00066403 Invoice 02/28/2025 Sweeper Parts 0.00 3,933.41 410-0000-61899 Equipment Repair & Main… Sweeper Parts 3,933.41 PG&E PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 135.58 72445 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 012425 Invoice 02/28/2025 Utilities 0.00 135.58
100-1600-61720 Utilities - Gas & Electricity Utilities 135.58 PAPICH PAPICH CONSTRUCTION CO INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,894,563.05 72446 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 35871 Invoice 02/28/2025 King City 2024 Street Project 0.00 1,894,563.05 310-0000-61800 Repairs & Maintenance King City 2024 Street Project 87,224.00 410-0000-68200 Interest King City 2024 Street Project 296,626.05 411-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements King City 2024 Street Project 974,557.00 412-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements King City 2024 Street Project 536,156.00 PARTS & SE PARTS & SERVICE CTR- NAPA INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 27.54 72447 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 691940 Invoice 02/28/2025 Squeegee for Windshield 0.00 9.29 100-2400-61893 Vehicle Repairs & Mainte… Squeegee for windshield 9.29 692330 Invoice 02/28/2025 Antifreeze 0.00 18.25
100-2400-61893 Vehicle Repairs & Mainte… Antifreeze Higl. Ranger 18.25 CORTEZP PATRICIA VALENTIN-CORTEZ 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 56.00 72448 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 021525 Invoice 02/28/2025 Rec Center Rental Security Deposit 0.00 56.00 100-0000-45325 Recreation Center Rental Rec Center Rental Security Depo… 56.00 PETE'S TOW PDP INVESTMENTS INC PETES TOWING AND P & R TOWING 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 2,055.00 72449 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 35626 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 580.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 580.00 44824 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 385.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 385.00 45093 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 390.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 390.00 45310 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 290.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 290.00 45399 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 290.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 290.00 45402 Invoice 02/28/2025 Evidence Tow 0.00 120.00
100-1600-61507 Special Investigations Evidence Tow 120.00 SENTRY SENTRY ALARM SYSTEMS 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 180.00 72450 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 2274943 Invoice 02/28/2025 Alarm 0.00 180.00
100-2600-61560 Maintenance Agreements Alarm 180.00
T&T PAVE T & T PAVEMENT MARKINGS and Products, Inc. 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 1,494.71 72451 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 11 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 2024523 Invoice 02/28/2025 Red Paint Curbs 0.00 1,494.71 410-0000-65080 Street Maintenance Red Paint Curbs 1,494.71 TGARCIA TERESITA GARCIA ZANCHEZ 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 387.00 72452 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 021425 Invoice 02/28/2025 CAPE Conference 0.00 387.00
100-1600-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… CAPE Conference 387.00 TWO TEAM C TWO TEAM CONSTRUCTION INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 70,356.00 72453 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 22572 Invoice 02/28/2025 PP#3 Visitor Cen. Phase 2 0.00 70,356.00 116-0000-68110 Capital - Improvements PP#3 Visitor Cen. Phase 2 70,356.00 TYLER TECH TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 195.00 72454 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 025-497580 Invoice 02/28/2025 Accounts Receivable Lic. 0.00 195.00 100-2000-61560 Maintenance Agreements Accounts Receivable Lic. 195.00 U.S. BAN US BANK CORP PAYMENT SYSTEM 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 3,524.88 72455 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 020625AW Invoice 02/28/2025 Credit Card Purchases 0.00 211.37 100-2600-61220 Operational Supplies Rec Center Supplies Senior Social 41.67 100-2600-61220 Operational Supplies SOCOS Social Supplies 21.90 100-2600-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… Class at CPRS Conference 60.00 100-2600-64120 DOJ Fingerprint Checks Fingerprinting for Coaches 21.95 100-2600-64120 DOJ Fingerprint Checks Fingerprinting for Coaches 65.85 020625DL Invoice 02/28/2025 Credit Card Purchases 0.00 194.13 100-1300-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… La Plaza Bakery - Community De… 153.19 100-1300-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… Safeway - Community Dev. Direc… 40.94 020625MA Invoice 02/28/2025 Credit Card Purchases 0.00 39.98 100-1300-61530 IT Services Plan/Engineer - Adobe Subscript… 19.99 100-1300-61530 IT Services Plan/Engineer - Adobe Subscript… 19.99 020625MO Invoice 02/28/2025 Accidental Charge 0.00 48.50 100-0000-47235 Miscellaneous Revenue Accidental Charge 48.50 020625OH Invoice 02/28/2025 Credit Card Purchases 0.00 236.99 100-1100-61100 Public Notices State of the City Bilingual 97.00 100-1100-61110 Membership Dues Adobe Subscription 19.99 310-0000-62000 Travel, Meetings & Traini… WWTP Training 30.00 310-0000-62000 Travel, Meetings & Traini… WWTP Training 30.00 310-0000-62000 Travel, Meetings & Traini… WWTP Training 30.00 310-0000-62000 Travel, Meetings & Traini… WWTP Training 30.00 020625SA Invoice 02/28/2025 Credit Card Purchases 0.00 2,793.91 100-1000-61300 Community Promotion FacebookPromotion Bike Path 19.12 100-1000-61300 Community Promotion Facebook Promotion Bike Path 7.75 100-1100-61110 Membership Dues CCAC Membership 250.00
100-1100-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… CCAC Annual Conference 595.00 100-1100-62001 Conference, Travel & Mea… CCAC Annual Conference 355.59 100-1800-64165 Internet Access Back Up Internet 814.54
100-2000-68130 Capital - Computer Adobe Subscription 191.92 100-2000-68130 Capital - Computer Adobe Subscription 19.99 100-2000-68130 Capital - Computer DropBox Subscription 540.00 AYALAV VANESSA FALCON AYALA 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 290.30 72456 Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 12 of 13
Vendor Number Vendor Name Payment Date Payment Type Discount Amount Payment Amount Number Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 022725 Invoice 02/28/2025 Claim Payment - Broken Window 0.00 290.30 100-2000-64179 Liability Claims Paid Claim Payment - Broken Window 290.30 VERIZON WI VERIZON WIRELESS 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 499.43 72457 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 6105855874 Invoice 02/28/2025 Wireless Bill 0.00 499.43 100-1100-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 55.01
100-1300-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 83.14
100-1600-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 304.28
100-1600-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill -119.99
100-1800-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 41.57
100-2100-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 104.38
100-2600-61710 Cellular Phones Wireless Bill 31.04
CONTREVERO VERONICA CONTRERAS 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 95.70 72458 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 021925 Invoice 02/28/2025 Council Member Frame Updates 0.00 95.70 100-1000-61210 Office Supplies Council Member Frame Updates 95.70 WALLACEGR WALLACE GROUP A California Corporation 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 6,263.14 72459 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 63842 Invoice 02/28/2025 PW Regulatory Compliance - NOV 2024 0.00 4,181.89 310-0000-61500 Professional Services PW Regulatory Compliance - NO… 4,181.89 64045 Invoice 02/28/2025 PW Regulatory Compliance - DEC 2024 0.00 2,081.25 310-0000-61500 Professional Services PW Regulatory Compliance - DEC… 2,081.25 SOILSERV WILBUR-ELLIS COMPANY 02/28/2025 Regular 0.00 5,156.40 72460 Account Number Account Name Item Description Distribution Amount Payable # Payable Type Post Date Payable Description Discount Amount Payable Amount 16939008 Invoice 02/28/2025 Fertilizer for Central Park Grass 0.00 343.20 100-2400-61800 Repairs & Maintenance Fertilizer for Central Park Grass 343.20 16945543 Invoice 02/28/2025 Weed Abatement WWTF 0.00 1,489.11 310-0000-61810 Tools & Minor Equipment Weed Abatement WWTF 1,489.11 16945544 Invoice 02/28/2025 Weed Abatement WWTF 0.00 3,324.09 310-0000-61810 Tools & Minor Equipment Weed Abatement WWTF 3,324.09 Total Regular: 0.00 2,379,050.19
Regular Checks
Manual Checks
Voided Checks
Discount
Payment
Payment Type Count
Bank Code POOL-WFB Summary
Bank Drafts
EFT's
53 0
0 0
9 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
62 0.00
Payment
2,379,050.19

0.00 0.00

0.00 129,660.76
2,508,710.95
Payable
Count
110
0 0
0 15
125
Check Report Date Range: 02/16/2025 - 02/28/2025
3/4/2025 12:03:38 PM Page 13 of 13
All Bank Codes Check Summary
Payment Type Discount
Payment
Count Payment
Payable
Count
Regular Checks
Manual Checks
Voided Checks
Bank Drafts
EFT's
53 0
0 0
9 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
62 0.00
2,379,050.19

0.00 0.00

0.00 129,660.76
2,508,710.95
110
0 0
0 15
125
Fund Name Period Amount
Fund Summary
999 Pooled Cash Fund 2/2025 2,508,710.95
2,508,710.95
Item No. 9 (C)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: MARCH 11, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: STEVEN ADAMS, CITY MANAGER
RE: CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATIONS TO PARKING
RESTRICTIONS TO COMPLY WITH AB 413
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council approve staff’s recommendations for motorcycle parking spaces and painted curbs at intersections adjacent to school locations.

BACKGROUND:

AB 413 was recently enacted by the State Legislature in 2024, and enforcement became effective on January 1, 2025. It prohibits stopping, standing, or parking of a vehicle within 20 feet of the vehicle approach side of any unmarked or marked crosswalk or 15 feet of any crosswalk where a curb extension is present.

The legal definition of an unmarked crosswalk is considered the portion of a street that is in between sidewalks at an intersection unless there is a “no crossing” sign.

Therefore, the law essentially applies to every intersection in the City.

The City may establish a different distance by Ordinance if it includes a finding that the different distance is justified by established traffic safety standards. However, it would require the City to mark the different distance at each intersection by paint or a sign.

At the May 14, 2024, the City Council discussed alternatives for implementation and directed staff to proceed with the following:
• Pursue State amendments to reduce or exempt the parking restriction; • Provide public education;
• Enforce on a complaint basis;
• Do not paint or sign any of the intersections; and

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF MODIFICATIONS TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS TO COMPLY WITH AB 413
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 2 OF 3
• Consider contracting for a study and development of a local guideline for any intersections with unique circumstances and constraints, including signage and painting.

DISCUSSION:

Efforts to seek legislative relief were unsuccessful. Public education efforts have been implemented, and no intersections with unique constraints requiring further study have been identified yet. Staff are presenting two additional recommendations for consideration.

First, there are several existing marked angled parking spaces in the downtown area that are located within the restricted parking distance from the crosswalk under the new legislation. Staff recommend these spaces be modified. AB 413 allows spaces within the restricted area to be converted to motorcycle spaces. Staff recommend this be done rather than try to paint over them, which is usually unsightly and does not work well because the striping starts to reappear after a period of time.

The streets were slurry sealed when the striping was painted, so there may not be an opportunity to pave over the striping for a while.

The following spaces are recommended for conversion to motorcycle only. • Westbound Bassett Street, northeast corner of Second Street • Westbound Bassett Street, northeast corner of Third Street • Westbound Bassett Street, northeast corner of Vanderhurst Avenue • Westbound Basset Street, northeast corner of Russ Street • Eastbound Lynn Street, southwest corner of First Street • Eastbound Lynn Street, southwest corner of Second Street • Eastbound Lynn Street, southwest corner of Third Street • Eastbound Lynn Street, southwest corner of Vanderhurst Avenue • Northbound Third Street, southeast corner of Lynn Street The spaces would be signed and painted to divide each space into two motorcycle parking stalls. This would provide a total of 18 motorcycle spaces.

The Police Department has recommended one other exception to the prior direction. As a result, it is proposed to paint 20 feet of red curb on the approach side of the street at intersections directly adjacent to public schools. These are high traffic areas during drop-off and pick-up, and pedestrian safety is an important concern. Since school zone traffic safety is a high priority, staff believe the increased step of painting curbs is warranted and would not create increased liability at other non-painted intersections because they represent a unique situation.

Item No. 9(D)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: MARCH 11, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MIKE HOWARD, FINANCE DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF CITY OF KING KCCP PAYMENTS FOR
THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2025
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended City Council receive and file.

BACKGROUND:

At least once a month, the City Treasurer shall submit to the City Council, a copy of the invoices paid for the previous month.

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this item is to provide the Council an opportunity to review and monitor ongoing expenditures. These documents are attached.

COST ANALYSIS:

There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No Environmental Review required for this item.

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for Council consideration:

1. Receive and file the report; or

2. Provide other direction to staff regarding requests for additional information.

Item No. 10 (A)

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: MARCH 11, 2025
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DOREEN LIBERTO, AICP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIRECTOR
RE: CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE PREVENTION

PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION:

The Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (Plan or Project) and adopting the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; 2) direct staff to file a Notice of Determination (NOD); and 3) direct staff to proceed with the process of amending the City’s Sphere of Influence and annexation of the Riverbed area.

BACKGROUND:

In 2023, CAL FIRE awarded the City a $224,000 Fire Prevention Grant to prepare a Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (hereafter referred to as the Plan or Project) for portions of the San Lorenzo Creek and Salinas River. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was sent to qualified consultants. EMC Planning Group, a land use and environmental planning firm out of Monterey, in collaboration with Deer Creek Resources, a wildfire consulting firm out of Chico, received the contract to prepare the Plan and environmental document.

The attached Plan analyzes wildfire hazards along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek and makes recommendations on reducing potential wildfire-caused losses within the community (Reference Exhibit 1). Areas were prioritized for hazard reduction based upon several factors, including potential wildfire behavior, density of structures, proximity to wildland vegetation, and prevailing fire-season weather and winds. In February 2024 and August 2024, the City conducted two Community Meetings, which were well attended. After the Plan is adopted, the General Plan Safety Element will be amended to reflect the Plan’s direction.

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 2 OF 11
On February 18, 2025, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan. The Planning Commission made a second motion requesting the City Council proceed with amending the City’s Sphere of Influence and annex the Riverbed area. EMC mailed close to 800 Public Hearing Notices regarding the Planning Commission hearing.

DISCUSSION:

King City is at risk from potentially catastrophic wildfire as designated by CAL FIRE’s 2019 Communities at Risk List. The Plan evaluates wildland fire hazards associated with vegetation in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek directly adjacent to the City, and it recommends mitigation actions which could reduce wildfire threats. Figure 1 identifies the Project Area analyzed in the Plan. The Project Area was identified in consultation with CAL FIRE.

For most of the Project Area, the fertility of the soils, availability of shallow groundwater, frequency of major flood disturbances, abundance of noxious weeds, and absentee landownership all work together to create vegetation conditions which are extremely difficult or impractical to manage. Wildfire hazard reduction work should focus on actions needed to reduce vegetation in the first 100 feet out from structures adjacent to the wildland areas. The Plan also makes recommendations on potential education and code enforcement-related improvements, as well as long-term project considerations.

Figure 1: Project Area and Buffer Area

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 3 OF 11
In the past five years, there have been four fires ignited and spread through or near the Project Area. Table 1 provides the Wildland Fire History for the Project Area and immediate vicinity.

Table 1: Project Area Wildland Fire History
Year Name Incident
Number
Cause
2020 Circle Fire BEU-00004978 Playing with fire
2021 Jolon Fire BEU-00004312 Equipment use
2022 King Fire BEU-00002925 Arson causing one death;
case is ongoing
2024 Broadway Fire BEU-00007168 Cooking fire escape from encampment
There is a recent history of people living within the Riverbed area. Multiple individuals and some families had constructed shelters, notably under the 101 overpass and south of the restaurants near the King City/Broadway southbound off ramp, plus some along the river itself. Fire ignitions are a concern in encampments, primarily from escaped cooking and warming fires, accidental ignitions, and arson.

In collaboration with several other agencies, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County (RCDMC) manages the Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program (SMP) to minimize the risk of flooding throughout the river corridor.

Secondary channels have been created throughout the length of the river. They are designed to connect with the main stem of the river at both ends at a higher elevation to convey high flows during and after large storms. The creation of these secondary channels also involves clearing vegetation, often large stands of arundo, which benefits fire mitigation by reducing fuel loading. In the riverbed project area, the SMP creates a channel that alleviates flooding on farmlands and takes the pressure off the levee at the edge of the riverbed. This secondary channel also serves as a fuel break, which would isolate any fires started between the river and the channel. Sediment is removed annually on a portion of the San Lorenzo Creek to improve flow conveyance.

The Plan makes several recommendations aimed at help preventing or minimizing wildfires in the Riverbed area. The recommendations are outlined in Table 2.

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 4 OF 11
Table 2: Plan Recommendations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Return Interval 1 Community
Fuel Break
Create and maintain a buffer along the
populated edge of the Salinas Riverbed and San
Lorenzo Creek.

Very High
Creation
Followed by
Semi-Annual
Maintenance
2 Invasive Plant
Management:

Arundo
Manually remove existing arundo in
coordination with the RCDMC; monitor project
area for new growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
3 Invasive Plant
Management:

Tamarisk
Manually remove existing tamarisk in
coordination with the RCDMC; monitor project
area for new growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
4 Invasive Plant
Management:

Yellow
Starthistle
(YST)
Use prescribed fire to control YST, reduce fuels
and create a matrix of black within the project
area.

High
Seasonal; Three
Consecutive
Years for YST
5 Defensible
Space
Education
Promote fire-safe guidelines in California PRC
4291; distribute mailers to property owners on
the boundary of the project area.

High 3-5 Years
6 Code
Enforcement:

Weed
Abatement
Code Enforcement Officer indicates that there
are no ongoing weed complaints adjacent to
project area; continue to enforce when
complaints are made.

Moderate Ongoing
7 Code
Enforcement:

Motorized
Vehicle Access
Residents report motorized vehicles in project
area; recommend restricting access through
empty lots.

High Ongoing
8 Housing
Pursue funding for temporary and long-term
housing solutions; clean up shelter debris in
project area.

High Ongoing

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 5 OF 11
Some of the recommendations include:

Community Fuel Break
Fuel break from structures. This plan recommends a strategic 100-foot fuel break be created and maintained along the edge of the Salinas riverbed and San Lorenzo Creek as illustrated in Figure 2. Please note that 100 feet is measured horizontally at a zero percent slope and is a recommended width.

Other aspects of a Community Fuel Break include:
• Reduce ladder fuels under larger trees. Small trees and shrubs can spread fire from the surface into the crowns of the larger cottonwood trees and willows on the edge of the riverbed. To curb vertical fuel continuity, concentrate thinning efforts on the understory to prevent fire from climbing into the canopy.
• Remove downed debris and dead trees to minimize fuel for fire. • Grazing animals for fuels reduction. Goats are best suited for maintaining the 100-foot fuel break buffer. The Plan recommends consultation with a grazing company to develop a strategy to maintain the fuel break. This would consist of a single, annual grazing entry in late spring, but return entries may be necessary in wet years.

Figure 2: 100 Foot Fuel Break

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 6 OF 11
Invasive Plant Management
Vegetation management plays a key role in reducing the potential for damaging and destructive wildfires through removing, rearranging, and maintaining the spatial distribution of fuels. For larger-scale noxious weed reduction projects, this RWPP recommends targeting three species to develop fire resiliency most effectively: arundo, tamarisk, and yellow starthistle.

Defensible Space Education
The highest priority for property owners near the project area is to reduce fuels near structures and maintain low-flammability conditions within their parcels. The Plan recommends that the City promote defensible space guidelines and send educational mailers to residents who live on the boundary of the project area.

Code Enforcement
Weed control on private property within the City’s boundaries is handled through the King City Fire Department in coordination with the King City Police Department’s Code Enforcement Services division. Most of the Riverbed area is within the unincorporated area. The City should work with the County to enforce violations of rampant weed growth, which cause fire hazards.

The Plan also makes longer term recommendations, as outlined in Table 3.

Table 3: Long Term Project Considerations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Estimated Timeline 9 Beaver
Reintroduction
Collaborate with RCDMC to engage the
SLO Beaver Brigade and determine
project feasibility.

Moderate 10 Years
10 Open Space
Development
Explore the city's capability and
community desire to purchase the
riverbed land for long-term open space
development.

Moderate 5-10 Years
Beaver Reintroduction
Reintroduction of beavers into riparian areas is a topic of discussion in many parts of the American West. The North American beaver is an ecosystem

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 7 OF 11
engineer with a well-documented impact on restoring wetlands and boosting drought protection. Studies in mountain meadows in Colorado have found that major wildfires have slowed or stopped upon reaching areas flooded by beaver dams. However, this does not necessarily mean that reintroducing beavers into an irrigated floodplain will reduce wildfire hazards. The Salinas Valley is a vastly different ecosystem from a mountain meadow and has been heavily altered by the agriculture industry.

The following link provides one of many articles on The US is bringing back nature's best firefighters: beavers.

Open Space Development
King City staff have identified eventual annexation and acquiring land within the riverbed to establish an open space reserve and/or trail system as a potential future option. While both options may reduce the threat of wildfire due to active management of the land and reestablishing native plants, inviting more human activity into the area may also increase the possibility of ignitions. The City Council authorized staff to proceed with a Sphere of Influence amendment and possible Annexation through LAFCO.

Future Permitting/Approvals
The MND is written to help the City expedite future hazard reduction activities and implementation measures consistent with the RWPP (e.g., no further CEQA review needed). As identified in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (discussed further below), future approvals and/or permits may be required in order to implement the RWPP from the following outside agencies:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Nationwide Permit)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Incidental Take Authorization) • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Streambed Alteration Agreement)
• Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Quality Certification) • Monterey Bay Air Resources District and CAL FIRE or other designated agency (e.g., South Monterey County Fire Protection District) with jurisdiction (Smoke Management Permit)
Planning Commission Discussion Items
The Planning Commission discussed the following topics, providing further clarity.

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 8 OF 11

1. Enforcement within the Riverbed Area. During the Community Meetings, public members expressed concern about offroad vehicles in the Riverbed.

The RWPP recommends citations be issued to individuals riding within the Riverbed area. The Riverbed area is within the unincorporated area with citation authority under the County Sheriff. Since this is private property, the only thing the County Sheriff could issue citations on would be trespassing.

2. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. A public member was concerned that fire insurance is being denied along the Riverbed area and concerned that the RWPP would further designate the area as a high fire risk area.

Public Resources Code 4201-4204 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to map fire hazards within State Responsibility Areas (SRA) based on fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors present, including areas where winds have been identified by the department as a major cause of wildfire spread. These zones, referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), classify a wildland zone as Moderate, High, or Very High fire hazard based on the average hazard across the area included in the zone. King City is located within the Local Responsibility Area (LRA) and not designated within a very high, high or moderate fire hazard severity zone. (Reference Figure 3.) LRA are incorporated cities where local government is responsible for wildfire protection.

Figure 3: CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 9 OF 11
King City is identified on CAL FIRE’s 2019 Communities at Risk List. This list is different than the Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The purpose for the Communities at Risk List is an attempt to direct project funding to reduce the fire risks to listed communities. The RWPP is a proactive plan which identifies ways to reduce fire hazards.

3. Jayne Street Fire. The Planning Commission mentioned that a recent Jayne Street fire was not shown on the Fire History Map. The consultant is researching whether the Jayne Street fire is a wildfire or city/urban fire. The RWPP addresses wildfires and not city/urban fires.

4. RWPP Study Area. The Planning Commission made a similar comment to a community comment regarding the RWPP Study Area. There was a question of why the Study Area did not go further north. Staff worked with CalFire on the Study Area that could be funded for the RWPP. The City can apply for future funding to study the area north of the City.

5. Optional 100 Foot Fuel Break Area. The Planning Commission asked why an area was identified as “Optional 100 Foot Fuel Break” area rather than Mandatory 100 Foot Fuel Break. This area was not originally identified for a fuel break. During a Community Meeting, a public member requested that area be identified as Optional.

6. City’s Sphere of Influence and Annexation of the Riverbed area. The Planning Commission was concerned that the riverbed area is within the unincorporated area with little to no enforcement of code enforcement of wildfire prevention measures (e.g., removal of weeds) and lack of land use jurisdiction. To gain more control over what occurs in the riverbed area for wildfire protection, the Planning Commission recommended the City work with LAFCO to amend the Sphere of Influence (SOI) and annex the area.

On August 22, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022-4895 authorizing the submittal of a pre-application to LAFCO for a Sphere of Influence amendment and Annexation of the Riverbed area. Immediately after the Resolution adoption, staff met with LAFCO staff to discuss the process and begin the application process for the SOI. Soon after, the City received CalFire grant funding to prepare the RWPP. Once the RWPP is adopted, staff can proceed. It is recommended to begin with the SOI and prepare additional analysis of costs prior to a final decision on annexation.

CITY COUNCIL

CONSIDERATION OF CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVERBED WILDFIRE

PREVENTION PLAN, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MARCH 11, 2025
PAGE 10 OF 11
COST ANALYSIS:

The Plan and environmental document costs were paid for through a CAL FIRE Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Grant.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15070 was prepared. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration represents the City’s independent judgment and analysis. Based upon substantial evidence as provided in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and in light of the whole record before the City (lead agency), the proposed Project will not have a significant effect on the environment with the implementation of mitigation measures. The mitigation measures are identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program which has been prepared to meet the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. This program is designed to ensure compliance with Project changes and mitigation measures imposed to avoid or reduce to a less-than-significant level the significant effects identified in the IS/MND. The Initial Study/Mitigation Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program are attached as Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3, respectively. The public review period on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was from July 31, 2024 to August 30, 2024. Public comments were received by the City during the public review period and have been addressed by EMC Planning Group staff. Responses to comments are included in the public hearing materials for consideration by the Planning Commission as Exhibit 4.

Upon adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approval of the Project, it is recommended City Council direct City staff to file a Notice of Determination within five working days.

The MND (and accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) is written to help the City expedite future hazard reduction activities and implementation measures consistent with the Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan so that no further environmental review under CEQA is required for those future activities. This is addressed throughout the MND document.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Approve staff’s recommendations;

2. Recommend modifications to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and/or the Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan;

King City
Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
City of King
February 20, 2025
Prepared by
Deer Creek Resources
EXHIBIT 1
Table of Contents
DISCLAIMER ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................................................... 5 PROJECT GOAL ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................................. 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS....................................................................................................................................................... 8 SALINAS RIVERBED & SAN LORENZO CREEK VEGETATION............................................................................................................. 8 WILDLAND FIRE RELATED ISSUES IN PROJECT AREA........................................................................................................ 12 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT, RESPONSE & MITIGATION AGENCIES.......................................................................................... 12 King City Fire Department........................................................................................................................................ 12 CAL FIRE .................................................................................................................................................................. 12 U.S. Forest Service ................................................................................................................................................... 12 Mutual Aid .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 King City Vegetation Maintenance .......................................................................................................................... 12 Resource Conservation District of Monterey County ................................................................................................ 13 WILDLAND FIRE HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................... 13 ENCAMPMENTS................................................................................................................................................................ 15 SECONDARY CHANNEL ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................................................ 18 COMMUNITY FUEL BREAK................................................................................................................................................... 20 Fuel Break Maintenance.......................................................................................................................................... 26 INVASIVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................................. 28 Arundo .................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Tamarisk ................................................................................................................................................................. 32 Yellow Starthistle..................................................................................................................................................... 34 DEFENSIBLE SPACE EDUCATION............................................................................................................................................ 35 CODE ENFORCEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................ 36 HOUSING........................................................................................................................................................................ 38 LONG-TERM PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS......................................................................................................................... 38 BEAVER REINTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................. 38 OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................................................... 39 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX A: ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS.................................................................................................................. 42 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY................................................................................................................................................... 43 APPENDIX C: COMMUNITY MEETING NOTES................................................................................................................... 51 APPENDIX D: WILDLAND VEGETATION TREATMENT TYPES............................................................................................. 53 APPENDIX E: PRESCRIBED FIRE ........................................................................................................................................ 56 APPENDIX F: DEFENSIBLE SPACE ZONE EDUCATION FOR HOMEOWNERS ....................................................................... 57 APPENDIX G: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................... 61 APPENDIX H: GRANT FUNDING PROGRAMS.................................................................................................................... 62 APPENDIX I: PREPARER & METHODS ............................................................................................................................... 63 Figures & Tables
Figure 1: King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan project area and 1000’ buffer used for modeling.. ......................... 7 Figure 2: Riverbed area on September 7, 2018.................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 3: Riverbed area on June 16, 2020. .......................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Riverbed area on February 26, 2021. ................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 5: Riverbed area on May 13, 2022. ........................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 6: Riverbed area on June 21, 2022 (post-King Fire). .............................................................................................. 11 Figure 7: Riverbed area on November 11, 2023. ............................................................................................................... 11 Figure 8: Fire history in project area. ................................................................................................................................ 14 Figure 9: Abandoned shelter in riverbed. .......................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 10: River and creek sections maintained under the RCDMC's Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program. ......... 17 Figure 11: Recommended 100’ fuel break. ....................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 12: Brush and thin trees within 100-foot buffer should be removed through pruning, chipping, and mowing. ........ 22 Figure 13: Piles of debris along bank should be removed or chipped. ............................................................................... 23 Figure 14: Flashy ladder fuels along bank should be mowed and removed........................................................................ 24 Figure 15: Fire-scarred dead trees within 100-foot fuel break............................................................................................ 25 Figure 16: Annual goat grazing would remove tall weeds and flashy fuels within 100-foot fuel break. ............................. 27 Figure 17: Small arundo stand growing near the Salinas River.......................................................................................... 29 Figure 18: Large arundo stand growing on the slope of the creek in the golf course. ......................................................... 30 Figure 19: Mapped arundo distribution as of January 2024. .............................................................................................. 31 Figure 20: Tamarisk on San Lorenzo Creek at the golf course. ......................................................................................... 32 Figure 21: Mapped tamarisk distribution as of January 2024............................................................................................. 33 Figure 22: Yellow starthistle in mixed vegetation. ............................................................................................................ 34 Figure 23: Access at 228 Rio Vista Dr.............................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 24: Access at 236 Rio Vista Dr.............................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 25: Community members at the February 28, 2024 community meeting. ............................................................... 52 Figure 26: Discussing the benefits of a fuel break at the February 28, 2024 community meeting....................................... 52 Figure 27: CAL FIRE Defensible Zones........................................................................................................................... 57 Table 1: Project Area Wildland Fire History..................................................................................................................... 13 Table 2: Project Recommendations................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 3: Long-Term Project Considerations...................................................................................................................... 38

DISCLAIMER
This document analyzes wildfire hazard along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in King City, California and makes recommendations on reducing potential wildfire-caused losses within the community.

Within this document, areas were prioritized for hazard reduction based upon several factors including potential wildfire behavior, density of structures, proximity to wildland vegetation, and prevailing fireseason weather and winds. The fact that an area may be mapped as lower priority in this document does NOT mean that that area is safe from wildfires. Rather, it means that there were other areas where targeted wildfire hazard reduction projects might benefit a greater number of residents.

Under typical summer wildfire burning conditions, any area with tall dead grass or un-mowed weeds has the potential to support rapid rates of wildfire spread and high intensity burning. Areas adjacent to homes or high-value ecological assets are the highest priorities for annual weed abatement and fire hazard mitigation.

Wildfire behavior is the product of numerous factors, some of which are weather-dependent and difficult or impossible to quantify. The recommendations in this assessment are based upon field surveys, aerial photography, technical analysis, and the professional experience of the authors. Errors may exist in this analysis and could include improper recording of field data due to GPS accuracy or surveyor error, computational errors, data entry mistakes, and any other conceivable cause. This data comprises a simplification of the physical environment intended to allow the authors to make general recommendations about reducing potential fire behavior at the community scale.

While this data is useful in assessing relative risk between the micro-climates and vegetation-types present in the King City riverbed project area, site-specific changes in fuel hazard and wildfire risk (such as annual mowing, grazing, and weed clearance, the growth of flammable ornamental plants and native vegetation, and other changes in the physical environment) will quickly render this data inaccurate.

THIS DATA DESCRIBES VEGETATION AND WILDFIRE HAZARD CONDITIONS

ALONG PORTIONS OF THE SALINAS RIVER AND SAN LORENZO CREEK IN KING CITY DURING FALL 2023 AND WINTER 2024. ANY FUTURE USE OF THIS DATA FOR

OTHER PLANNING, CODE ENFORCEMENT, OR HAZARD MITIGATION WORK IS NOT

RECOMMENDED WITHOUT FIRST CHECKING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND.

Executive Summary
King City is at risk from potentially catastrophic wildfire, as designated by CAL FIRE’s 2019 Communities at Risk List. This project evaluates wildland fire hazards associated with vegetation in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek, directly adjacent to the City, and recommends mitigation actions which could reduce wildfire threats.

For the majority of the project site, the fertility of the soils, availability of shallow groundwater, frequency of major flood disturbances, abundance of noxious weeds, and absentee landownership all work together to create vegetation conditions which are extremely difficult or impractical to manage.

Wildfire hazard reduction work should focus on actions needed to reduce vegetation in the first 100 feet out from structures adjacent to the wildland areas. This report also makes recommendations on potential education and code enforcement-related improvements, as well as long-term project considerations.

Project Goal
This Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (RWPP) serves as a framework for a long-term fire resiliency and prioritizes hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in King City, California.

The plan achieves the two following goals:

1. Provides guidance and strategies to increase the wildfire resilience of the community

2. Protects and enhances the wildlife habitat and ecological value of the project area.

The plan was developed by Deer Creek Resources (DCR) with input from the City, collaborating agencies, and the community. The RWPP uses aerial photography and field surveys to map vegetation, analyze potential wildfire hazards within the project area, and prioritize wildfire hazard mitigation projects.

Project Area Description
The project area covers 179 acres in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek. This land contains no permanent structures, but borders the southern and western city limits which contain residential, commercial, and agricultural parcels. Approximately 70 structures are on the immediate edge of the project area.

King City is a major population center in the Salinas Valley, an important agricultural area. Framed by the Santa Lucia Range in the west and the Gabilán Range in the east, the land immediately surrounding King City is comprised of agricultural fields intersected by the Salinas River—the largest river system on California’s Central Coast. The river flows northwesterly from its headwaters in eastern San Luis Obispo County, 175 miles through the Salinas Valley, and into Monterey Bay north of the city of Marina. The river is an important wildlife corridor, provides irrigation for an immense agricultural industry, and is the main source for aquifer recharge in the valley.

The Salinas River appears as little more than a creek for much of the year, but runs underground for long stretches, supplying the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin, the largest natural aquifer west of the Rockies. The Salinas Valley’s mild climate and rich soil support approximately 200,000 acres of irrigated agriculture. The region produces most of the United States’ lettuce, broccoli, artichokes, strawberries, and cauliflower. Agriculture is a $4.5 billion industry in Monterey County.

After 150 years of agricultural expansion, the Salinas River’s riparian corridor has been significantly narrowed, and levees and channelization have reduced the river’s ability to access its floodplain.

During wet winters, the seemingly benign river can wreak havoc on communities and farmlands, as experienced in 2023 during a series of atmospheric river storms. Other recent farm land flooding occurred in 1995 and 2015, driven by El Niño events.

For much of the project site, the fertility of the soils, availability of shallow groundwater, frequency of major flood disturbances, abundance of noxious weeds, and absentee landownership all work together to create vegetation conditions which are extremely difficult to manage. This project focuses on actions needed to reduce wildland vegetation in the first 100 feet out from structures adjacent to the wildland areas.

To analyze how fire could move into or the urban area using wildfire spread modeling software to present a “worst-case scenario” analysis, the 179-acre riverbed and creek area was expanded to include a 1000-foot buffer surrounding the project area. A project area map is on the following page.

Figure 1: King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan project area and 1000’ buffer used for fuels and fire path modeling..

Existing Conditions
Salinas Riverbed & San Lorenzo Creek Vegetation
As evidenced by the following aerial photographs, the vegetation in the Salinas Riverbed area is incredibly dynamic. Due to regular flooding, prolific seed production from existing vegetation, and extremely fertile soil, plant communities shift across the landscape from year to year. Riparian ecosystems are linear and easily disturbed, creating ample vectors for upstream seed transmission.

While the vegetation matrix may change from year to year, or even season to season, most of the riverbed is covered with continuous weeds. These weeds form a continuous stretch of fuels that grow fast in the spring and early summer, and then dry out. From June through November, the riverbed’s vegetation supports rapid fire spread.

The following aerial photographs show the project area in September 2018, June 2020, February 2021, May and June 2022 and November 23. Note the ever-changing vegetation patterns due to fire, flood, and seed distribution.

Figure 2: Riverbed area on September 7, 2018.

Source: Google
Figure 3: Riverbed area on June 16, 2020.

Source: National Agriculture Imagery Program
Figure 4: Riverbed area on February 26, 2021.

Source: Google
Figure 5: Riverbed area on May 13, 2022.

Source: National Agriculture Imagery Program
Figure 6: Riverbed area on June 21, 2022 (post-King Fire).

Source: Google
Figure 7: Riverbed area on November 11, 2023.

Source: Resource Conservation District of Monterey County Wildland Fire Related Issues in Project Area
Wildland Fire Management, Response & Mitigation Agencies King City Fire Department
The King City Fire Department (KCFD) has served the city for over 90 years. The department’s fulltime employees include a Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, and Administrative Assistant, backed by approximately 30 volunteer firefighters. Volunteers who train several times per month to learn and hone professional emergency response skills. KCFD provides emergency medical services, fire protection, weed abatement, disaster preparedness, and fire prevention. The department manages an annual citywide weed abatement program with inspections throughout the City. Weed abatement violation notices are issued and enforced.

King City Fire Department Apparatus:
• Three Type 1 Engines
• One Aerial
• One Type 5 Engine
• One Utility Unit

CAL FIRE
CAL FIRE is responsible for fire protection of Monterey County’s State Responsibility Areas (SRAs).

The San Benito-Monterey Unit (BEU) of CAL FIRE includes 2.1 million acres of SRA, one of the state’s largest state responsibility jurisdictions. The San Benito-Monterey Unit is operationally divided into seven battalions offering a wide variety of programs which includes: Fire Prevention, Resource Management, Law Enforcement, Air Attack, Helitack, Conservation Camp, Emergency Command Center (communications), and Cooperative Fire Protection (CAL FIRE 2022).

U.S. Forest Service
The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Monterey Ranger District has jurisdiction in the Los Padres National Forest to the west of King City. USFS provides wildland fire suppression across national forest lands within Monterey County and participates in mutual aid.

Mutual Aid
KCFD and surrounding agencies participate in mutual aid and automatic aid agreements. Automatic aid is a contractual agreement between agencies or fire districts, and aid is dispatched to all first alarms. Mutual aid agreements differ from automatic aid in that outside assistance typically is provided when the agreement is activated, and aid is requested by the primary responding agency. Fire agencies in Monterey County participate in a countywide mutual aid agreement.

King City Vegetation Maintenance
King City’s Public Works Department is responsible for vegetation management on city property. The department currently possesses chainsaws, pole saws, and weed whackers necessary for creating and maintaining the recommended fuel break. While the city has two Exmark zero-turn mowers, Exmark recommends against using these on slopes greater than 15 degrees (26.8% grade). Equipment that can handle levee slopes and brush will need to be acquired to maintain a fuel break.

Resource Conservation District of Monterey County
The RCDMC is an invaluable partner in vegetation management for the riverbed area. The agency works with landowners, cities, and other stakeholders throughout the Salinas Valley on a variety of land management activities. From a fire perspective, the RCDMC’s vegetation management actions are critical for the riverbed area. King City should seek further partnership with the RCD to target invasive species through mechanical removal, grazing, and prescribed fire, combined with revegetation of native species.

Wildland Fire History
In the past five years, three fires have ignited and spread through the project area. A fourth fire ignited west of the project area in November 2024.

Table 1: Project Area Wildland Fire History
Year Name Incident Number Cause
2020 Circle Fire BEU-00004978 Playing with fire
2021 Jolon Fire BEU-00004312 Equipment use
2022 King Fire BEU-00002925 Arson causing one death; case is ongoing 2024 Broadway Fire BEU-00007168 Cooking fire escape from encampment Source: CAL FIRE
The King Fire started on May 25, 2022, behind the KFC on Broadway Circle. The fire prompted evacuations and spread to 90 acres before forward progress was stopped on May 27. One person was found dead from the fire, according to the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. Some of the people living in the riverbed were temporarily sheltered at the Salinas Valley Fairgrounds following the fire.

CAL FIRE has indicated that the cause of the fire was arson and that the investigation is ongoing at the time of the RWPP’s publication.

The fatality underscores the necessity of fire mitigation efforts in the riverbed area. It also points to the need for affordable housing in the area.

Figure 8: Fire history in project area.

Encampments
There is a recent history of people living within the riverbed. Multiple individuals and some families had constructed shelters, notably under the 101 overpass and south of the restaurants near the King City/Broadway southbound off ramp, plus some along the river itself. Some of these structures can be seen in the vegetation Existing Conditions images above (Figures 3-5).

Fire ignitions are a concern in encampments, primarily from escaped cooking and warming fires, accidental ignitions, and arson. Statewide, there is a correlation between the increase of wildfire ignitions and the increase in homelessness over the past five years, although no studies have been published to confirm direct cause.

In California, the number of people without a stable place to call home increased to 181,399 in 2023, a jump of 7,599 since 2022 and an increase of 22,500 since the pre-Covid count in 2019. Homelessness experts primarily attribute the rise to a drop in earnings during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who were already struggling to maintain an income and afford housing. In Monterey County, there were approximately 2,047 people experiencing homelessness according to the 2022 Homeless Pointin-Time Count (PIT).

To represent the scale of the problem, The California Homeless Housing Needs Assessment estimates that it will cost $8.1 billion per year over 12 years to solve statewide homelessness, approximately 3% of California’s budget. In 2022, King City was awarded $12.4 million toward the purchase of a hotel through the state’s Project Homekey program. In January 2024, the California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against the developer of the motel conversion, a setback that caused the city to house people in an alternative location until June.

Figure 9: Abandoned shelter in riverbed.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
At the time of DCR’s January 2024 field survey, there was no direct evidence of anyone living within the riverbed area and city staff has confirmed that any people living in encampments had been provided temporary shelter. There were several former encampment sites with scattered debris that should be targeted for cleanup, including the shelter pictured above (Figure 9). Outside the riverbed, there may have been a couple of encampments west of the river and under the 101 overpasses. DCR’s survey team was unable to enter that area to confirm whether they were occupied. City staff has confirmed that trespassing on private property is now being enforced by law enforcement agencies.

Secondary Channel
In collaboration with several other agencies, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County (RCDMC) manages the Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program (SMP) to minimize the risk of flooding throughout the river corridor. Secondary channels have been created throughout the length of the river. They are designed to connect with the main stem of the river at both ends at a higher elevation to convey high flows during and after large storms.

The creation of these secondary channels also involves clearing vegetation, often large stands of arundo, which benefits fire mitigation by reducing fuel loading.

In the riverbed project area, section 1.26 of the SMP creates a channel that alleviates flooding on farmlands and takes the pressure off the levee at the edge of the riverbed. This secondary channel also serves as a fuel break, which would isolate any fires started between the river and the channel.

Sediment is removed annually on Section 1.37 of San Lorenzo Creek to improve flow conveyance.

There is no vegetation removal or other vegetation maintenance performed in this section.

More information on the SMP can be found here: https://RCDMCmonterey.org/salinas-river-streammaintenance-program Figure 10: River (1.26) and creek (1.37) sections maintained under the RCDMC's Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program.

Source: Resource Conservation District of Monterey County Project Recommendations
The projects listed in this section illustrate recommendations that can be implemented to reduce the likelihood of fire spreading in the riverbed project area. The overarching goal of the vegetation management project recommendations is to reduce ladder fuels, create strategic fuel breaks, and raise the overall crown base height (CBH), while preserving the ecological benefits of the conservation easements. Photos accompany each project and illustrate the various fuel hazards found throughout the project area. While some photos are representative of conditions throughout the development, others describe specific areas.

In addition to the vegetation management recommendations, the plan also recommends education on defensible space, code enforcement, and the continued coordination with state agencies to address King City’s housing concerns.

The following table (Table 2) summarizes the project recommendations and more descriptive sections follow. These recommendations are based on the conditions observed throughout the King City riverbed area and San Lorenzo Creek between November 2023 and January 2024.

The primary project recommended by this is the creation of a fuel break on the edge of the Salinas Riverbed to protect homes and businesses and prevent a wildland fire from becoming an urban conflagration. A fuel break will starve an expanding fire of fuels while providing firefighters operational safety and access. While the remaining project recommendations will increase the fire safety and aesthetics of the project area and King City, the fuel break will provide the most protection.

Table 2: Project Recommendations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Return Interval 1 Community
Fuel Break
Create and maintain a buffer along the populated
edge of the Salinas Riverbed and San Lorenzo
Creek.

Very High
Creation
Followed by
Semi-Annual
Maintenance
2 Invasive Plant
Management:

Arundo
Manually remove existing arundo in coordination
with the RCDMC; monitor project area for new
growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
3 Invasive Plant
Management:

Tamarisk
Manually remove existing tamarisk in coordination
with the RCDMC; monitor project area for new
growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
4 Invasive Plant
Management:

Yellow
Starthistle (YST)
Use prescribed fire to control YST, reduce fuels and
create a matrix of black within the project area. High
Seasonal; Three
Consecutive
Years for YST
5 Defensible
Space
Education
Promote fire-safe guidelines in California PRC 4291;
distribute mailers to property owners on the
boundary of the project area.

High 3-5 Years
6 Code
Enforcement:

Weed
Abatement
Code Enforcement Officer indicates that there are
no ongoing weed complaints adjacent to project
area; continue to enforce when complaints are
made.

Moderate Ongoing
7 Code
Enforcement:

Motorized
Vehicle Access
Residents report motorized vehicles in project area;
recommend restricting access through empty lots. High Ongoing 8 Housing
Pursue funding for temporary and long-term
housing solutions; clean up shelter debris in project
area.

High Ongoing
Community Fuel Break
To protect structures and prevent an urban conflagration from spreading through King City, this plan recommends a strategic 100-foot fuel break be created and maintained along the edge of the Salinas riverbed and San Lorenzo Creek, illustrated below in Figure 11. This would begin behind the KFC and Highway 101 and continue along River Drive and Rio Vista Drive, ending at 262 Rio Vista Dr.

The parcels in this area are owned by the City and Fred Miranda. Miranda has granted permission for fuels reduction treatment on his property.

This fuel break would then start again at the north end of the golf course behind 221 Villa Dr., ending at the King City Migrant Center at 440 Jayne St. These parcels are owned by the City and multiple private property owners. The creation of the fuel break would require coordination between multiple parties.

The recommended fuel break would provide an easily accessible buffer in which fuel density is reduced. Fuel breaks provide quick access to firefighters where control activities can be conducted safely due to low fuel volumes. Vegetation would be thinned and trees (cottonwood and willows) would be pruned to remove ladder fuels. Brush, heavy ground fuels, and dead trees would be disposed of to create a park-like appearance. The fuel break does not need to be a bare strip in which all vegetation is removed to mineral soil annually.

Please note that 100 feet is measured horizontally at a zero percent slope and is a recommended width. That amount of space does not exist throughout the entire recommended buffer area such as in areas along San Lorenzo Creek. The width of the fuel break should be adjusted accordingly where necessary.

The following methods would be used to construct this 100-foot fuel break:

Reduce Ladder Fuels Under Larger Trees
Small trees and shrubs can spread fire from the surface into the crowns of the larger cottonwood trees and willows on the edge of the riverbed. To curb vertical fuel continuity, concentrate thinning efforts on the understory to prevent fire from climbing into the canopy. Thinning understory vegetation will also allow leaves to drop to the ground, rather than suspend in lower vegetation where they can be highly flammable and create dangerous ladder fuel. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Hand pruning and chipping understory fuel
Frequency: Three to five years
Access: Easy. Most large trees are on the edge of the riverbed area near roadway access.

Figure 12: Brush and thin trees within 100-foot buffer should be removed through pruning, chipping, and mowing. Mature willows and cottonwoods should be protected.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Remove Downed, High-Water Debris
Many downed limbs and miscellaneous dead material have washed up against the edge of the bank between the KFC and Highway 101 to the intersection of River Drive and the west entrance to Rio Plaza Mobile Home Estates. This debris is both a fuels concern and an impediment to emergency access to the riverbed area. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Removal or chipping
Frequency: After high-water years that move debris
Access: Easy. Most debris washes up against the edge of the riverbed during the winter and can be easily removed.

Figure 13: Piles of debris along bank should be removed or chipped.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Figure 14: Flashy ladder fuels along bank should be mowed and removed.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Remove Dead Trees
Several dead trees, many of which are fire damaged, lie in the 100-foot buffer. These are hazards that should be downed and removed. Healthy cottonwoods and willows should not be removed. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Removal and chipping of smaller material
Frequency: One-time with monitoring
Access: Easy.

Figure 15: Fire-scarred dead trees within 100-foot fuel break.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Coordination With Property Owners
The recommended fuel break extends beyond the city limits in many areas. The city should coordinate with individual property owners and the primary property owner of the project area, Fred Miranda.

Miranda has granted permission to the city and homeowners to mow and remove vegetation on his property to improve fire safety.

Fuel Break Maintenance
Once the 100-foot fuel break has been created, it will require regular maintenance due to the speed at which vegetation grows in the riverbed. High-water years will wash up debris that should be removed each spring. Water that reaches the levee may also replenish the soil’s seed bank, a potential upstream vector for invasive plants. Because thicker brush has been removed during the creation of the buffer, the primary recommended methods for maintenance will be mowing, pruning, and grazing.

Mowing & Pruning
Once large brush and small trees have been manually removed, it should be regularly mowed. Mowing should occur after spring growth, with regular monitoring throughout the year. Wet years will require additional returns.

This plan recommends that the city acquire mowing equipment capable of handling thick brush and steep slopes to maintain the fuel break. While there are newer, remote-controlled mowers available on the market, many are in venture capital mode and have not been proven to be maintainable, so this plan recommends choosing equipment with a proven record that can be serviced by existing city staff.

As crews mow the fuel break, they should be accompanied by workers on foot to prune larger trees and brushes, and to watch mowing equipment for sparks that may cause an ignition. All mowers should be equipped with fire suppression equipment.

Grazing
Of the grazing animals used for fuels reduction, goats are the best suited for maintaining the 100-foot fuel break buffer. Goats have no problem with steep slopes and they are more effective at removing the small woody materials that make up much of the brush and shrubs in the riverbed area. This plan recommends consultation with a grazing company to develop a strategy to maintain the fuel break.

This would consist of a single, annual grazing entry in late spring, but return entries may be necessary in wet years.

Potential companies within service range of King City include:
• Fire Grazers, Inc.
• The Goat Girls
• Living Systems
• Green Goat Landscapers, LLC
Figure 16: Annual goat grazing would remove tall weeds and flashy fuels within 100-foot fuel break.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Invasive Vegetation Management
Vegetation management plays a key role in reducing the potential for damaging and destructive wildfires through removing, rearranging, and maintaining the spatial distribution of fuels. Objectives of vegetation management include:
• Reduce wildfire hazard to mitigate risks to life and property • Reduce the likelihood of ignitions
• Reduce extreme fire behavior to enhance community and firefighter safety • Minimize impacts to natural resources
As noted earlier in the RWPP, the project area contains shifting and dynamic vegetation landscape due to its location in the floodplain of a major river. King City’s efforts in vegetation management should be focused on areas directly adjacent to structures, or on areas where there is synergies with ongoing noxious weed eradication efforts with the RCDMC. For larger-scale noxious weed reduction projects, this RWPP recommends targeting three species to develop fire resiliency most effectively: arundo, tamarisk, and yellow starthistle.

Arundo
Arundo donax (arundo) is a perennial cane that can grow to 30-feet tall, among the fastest growing terrestrial plants. It has invaded central California River valleys in San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties. The non-native plant can form dense stands, displacing native vegetation and degrading wildlife habitat—arundo is not a food source nor does it provide nesting habitat. Arundo damages California's riparian ecosystems by outcompeting native species, such as willows, for water, and its stems and leaves contain a variety of harmful chemicals that deter wildlife from feeding. (Bell) Another problem with arundo is its hard, plate-shaped root masses. Like chunks of pavement, these root masses can stabilize banks, but can lead to massive bank failure when they are undermined during a high-water event. Root masses can be many feet across and weigh hundreds of pounds. Although not common, large arundo root masses have come loose from banks during storms elsewhere in California and have damaged downstream infrastructure like bridges.

Stands of arundo increase the fuel load in a riparian habitat and produce a biomass containing large amounts of energy. Arundo will burn when green and grows increasingly flammable during hotter, drier periods (June to October). Large stands of it can increase the probability, intensity, and spread of wildfire. (Coffman) Post-fire, arundo rhizomes resprout quickly and typically outgrow native plants.

Overtime, this can result in arundo domination along riparian corridors.

Arundo has invaded California’s river valleys throughout the state and in 2011, the California Invasive Plant Council determined that the Salinas River watershed had the second largest infestation in the state. The RCDMC has performed extensive work to eradicate arundo throughout the valley, treating 866 acres, plus an additional 100 acres through the Stream Maintenance Program described below.

The RCDMC has also worked to remove arundo upstream in San Luis Obispo county to prevent reseeding downstream. Ideally, removed arundo would be replaced with native willow or cottonwood.

Figure 17: Small arundo stand growing near the Salinas River.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
At the time of field surveys for this plan, large stands of arundo have been removed from the project area, but individual plants and small stands remain. The RWPP recommends that the RCDMC continue its removal project throughout the Salinas River and that King City develop a treatment plan to target and remove plants within city limits, particularly in the golf course area. Arundo in the golf course area is primarily growing on the banks of the creek (Figure 18), which may make use of heavy mowing equipment difficult to use due to the slope. Hand removal followed by herbicide treatment may be required here.

Figure 18: Large arundo stand growing on the slope of the creek in the golf course.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
The RCDMC uses the following widely implemented method to remove arundo: “Treatment of large arundo stands on the Salinas River typically begins with mowing in the fall, which reduces standing biomass and causes a flush of regrowth from the underground rhizomes in the spring. Arundo resprouts are then sprayed with herbicides the following summer-fall, and in each subsequent year until no sprouts remain. Smaller, scattered stands are treated with herbicide without prior biomass reduction. Herbicides used consist of wildlife-friendly formulations containing glyphosate or a glyphosate/imazapyr mix approved for use near water." (RCDMC) Arundo in the project area was mapped during DCR’s field survey in January 2024, and included on the map below (Figure 19).

Figure 19: Mapped arundo distribution as of January 2024.

Tamarisk
Tamarix ramosissima (tamarisk) is another invasive species that presents increased fire susceptibility in riparian areas. If allowed to grow, this dense shrub can grow up to a 30-foot root depth, roughly twice the depth of cottonwood roots, allowing cottonwood displacement. Like arundo, tamarisk invades riparian systems and responds positively to flooding, which facilitates further seed spread and establishment. The plant forms dense stands and invaded areas may become completely tamarisk dominated with few other plant species present. Tamarisk is flammable even when healthy and green and able to quickly recover and dominate a recently burned area.

DCR field surveys found both individual trees and stands of tamarisk. Tamarisk dominated areas are concentrated in the San Lorenzo Creek corridor along the golf course. Like arundo removal, this RWPP recommends that these stands of tamarisk and individual plants be removed through a combination of digging and targeted herbicide. Tamarisk on the creekbank slope may not be possible to remove with a mower and may require hand digging, followed by herbicide treatment. This species is also being targeted by the RCDMC in the Salinas Riverbed and developing a collaborative removal effort to remove tamarisk in the creek is recommended.

Figure 20: Tamarisk on San Lorenzo Creek at the golf course.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Figure 21: Mapped tamarisk distribution as of January 2024.

Yellow Starthistle
Extensive areas of invasive yellow starthistle (YST) occur within the riverbed area. Areas dominated by YST have higher fuel loadings than areas of only grass, as the thatch from thistle growth persists for over a year. After yellow starthistle is cured in mid-late summer, areas of continuous YST can burn with great intensity, especially on windy days. Fire hazard drops in YST after fall rains, but heavy areas of YST thatch dry out quickly and can burn vigorously into the winter. San Lorenzo Creek contains smaller patches of YST with less continuity.

Any efforts at starthistle control involve a multi-year process, and outside of the first 100 feet from structures, large-scale efforts to control YST should only be undertaken if long-term support for maintaining such an effort seems likely.

Prescribed fire can be an effective tool for reducing the dominance of YST across large acreages. This topic is covered in greater detail in Appendix E.

Figure 22: Yellow starthistle in mixed vegetation.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Defensible Space Education
The highest-priority for property owners near the project area is to reduce fuels near structures and maintain low-flammability conditions within their parcels. Defensible space is beneficial in many ways. It prevents fire from advancing and endangering homes and lives. It improves property value while reducing the risk of loss. It provides a healthier environment for trees and shrubs by minimizing the impacts of competition, insects, and disease. Most importantly, defensible space allows firefighters to defend homes safely and effectively.

Follow-up treatments are crucial to maintaining fire-resilient conditions and it is important to note that this work is never “finished.” Grass and other annual plants can carry fire quickly across areas that are otherwise well-maintained. Some vegetation requires more frequent re-entry intervals to stay healthy compared to others.

Although King City is not located in a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and property owners are not legally bound to comply with Public Resource Code 4291, this plan recommends that the City promote 4291’s defensible space guidelines and send educational mailers to residents who live on the boundary of the project area. Those guidelines are summarized here and more information is provided in Appendix F:

Maintain defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure, but not beyond the property line. The amount of fuel modification necessary shall consider the flammability of the structure as affected by building material, building standards, location, and type of vegetation.

Fuels shall be maintained in a condition so that a wildfire burning under average weather conditions would be unlikely to ignite the structure. Trees and shrubs should be pruned to a crown base height of eight feet and maintained to effectively manage fuels and not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from other nearby vegetation to a structure or from a structure to other nearby vegetation. The intensity of fuels management may vary within the 100-foot perimeter of the structure, the most intense being within the first 30 feet around the structure. Where possible, the first two feet out from a structure should be bare dirt, gravel, concrete, or lawn, and free of wood chips or mulch. Maintain any tree, shrub, or other plant adjacent to or overhanging a building free of dead or dying wood. Maintain the roof of a structure free of leaves, needles, or other vegetative materials. (California Public Resource Code Sec 4291) Code Enforcement
Weed control on private property is handled through the King City Police Department’s Code Enforcement Services division. All code enforcement cases, including weed abatement, are complaint based. Upon receiving a weed abatement complaint and confirming its validity, the city’s code enforcement officer will notify the property owner or residents of the violation. A 30-day notice of violation is mailed if there is no sign of improvement or compliance, followed by a 14-day notice. If no improvements have been made to correct the violation after those final 14 days, an administrative citation is issued.

The current Code Enforcement Office has been in the position since September 2023, and reports no complaints for the Salinas Riverbed, San Lorenzo Creek, or surrounding areas, noting that the bulk of the riverbed falls under the Monterey County Sheriff’s jurisdiction. Historical code enforcement statistics were not available.

Concerned residents should continue to follow code enforcement guidelines to report rampant weed growth in privately owned areas of concern bordering the riverbed and creek.

During the February 28, 2024 community meeting, several attendees expressed their concerns about people riding motorcycles, ATVs, and other motorized vehicles through the riverbed area, which is easily accessible through the empty lot at 228 Rio Vista Drive and moderately accessible through the lot at 236 Rio Vista Drive. In areas of tall, dried vegetation, heat from the exhaust system on an ATV or motorcycle can cause an ignition, as can motorized vehicles without a spark arrestor. Ticketing those who ride in the riverbed area would lower the area’s fire risk. The riverbed area is primarily private property on unincorporated county land and trespassing enforcement would be the responsibility of the Monterey County Sherriff’s Office.

The plan also recommends that the City coordinate with the two property owners to restrict access through these open lots shown in Figures 23 and 24.

Figure 23: Access at 228 Rio Vista Dr.

Source: Google Street View, August 2023
Figure 24: Access at 236 Rio Vista Dr.

Source: Google Street View, August 2023
Housing
Ignitions in the project area can be reduced by housing people living within the project area. While this plan cannot address the state’s, county’s, and city’s homelessness issues, it does recommend that the city further pursue funding to provide temporary and long-term housing solutions and prohibit camping within the project area.

Abandoned encampment sites should be targeted for cleanup. Building materials that have been left in the riverbed provide fuels for any spreading fire and the abundance of plastic and hazardous debris should not be left to burn or otherwise contaminate the riverbed. The example in Figure 9 is the most significant found in January 2024 and would take considerable effort to disassemble and excavate from the ground.

Long-Term Project Considerations
This plan recommends the City further evaluate the reintroduction of beavers into the area and acquiring the riverbed property for development. Neither recommendation can provide immediate fire mitigation like the fuel break, but are worth investigating for long-term benefits to restore the riverbed ecosystem and make it accessible for recreation.

Table 3: Long-Term Project Considerations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Estimated Timeline 9 Beaver
Reintroduction
Collaborate with RCDMC to engage the SLO Beaver
Brigade and determine project feasibility. Moderate 10 Years 10 Open Space
Development
Explore the city's capability and community desire to
purchase the riverbed land for long-term open space
development.

Moderate 5-10 Years
Beaver Reintroduction
Reintroduction of beavers into riparian areas is a topic of discussion in many parts of the American West. The North American beaver is an ecosystem engineer with a well-documented impact on restoring wetlands and boosting drought protection. Studies in mountain meadows in Colorado have found that major wildfires have slowed or stopped upon reaching areas flooded by beaver dams.

However, this does not necessarily mean that reintroducing beavers into an irrigated floodplain will reduce wildfire hazards. The Salinas Valley is a vastly different ecosystem from a mountain meadow and has been heavily altered by the agriculture industry.

Management of vegetation in the floodway of the Salinas River is a necessarily big-picture undertaking. Regular flooding deposits weeds, debris and garbage, soil, and large wood across the project area, and upstream actions like levee construction, reservoir releases, and riparian restoration have downstream impacts. No large-scale land management can succeed within the floodway unless it is designed in a way that considers the watershed-scale perspective.

Beaver reintroduction in a heavy agricultural area would require additional study, but beavers do live in wetlands with poor water quality and improve their own ecosystems. Their dams filter water and the wetlands they create will naturally process excess nitrogen common in agricultural runoff. Long considered a nuisance to farmers, the CDFW offers beaver coexistence methods to protect infrastructure and assets.

In 2023, beaver relocation became legal in California and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife created a team of six people to start a pilot program. Working with the Maidu Summit Consortium, CDFW released a family of seven beavers into Plumas County in December 2023.

If King City is interested in pursuing further information about the roles beavers play in the function of riparian ecosystems, they can reach out to organizations like the SLO Beaver Brigade, the Monterey RCDMC, and partnering with Nature’s Engineers, a Central Coast firm implementing beaver reintroduction projects and constructing ‘beaver dam analogs’(BDAs). Such an undertaking would require additional planning effort involving an array of property owners upstream and downstream from the project area.

Open Space Development
King City staff have identified acquiring land within the riverbed to establish an open space reserve and/or trail system as a potential future option. While both options may reduce the threat of wildfire due to active management of the land and reestablishing native plants, inviting more human activity into the area may also increase the possibility of ignitions.

One previous effort that may benefit King City in determining how to establish a park or open space would be Albuquerque’s Bosque Action Plan used to transform the city’s degraded forestland along the Rio Grande into a nature preserve and recreation area. Where it cuts through Albuquerque, the Rio Grande floods frequently, harbors a variety of wildlife, and is a haven for towering cottonwoods.

Following their example, King City may also be able to develop a similar plan that allows for native wildlife to flourish, provides recreational opportunities, and continues to protect the city from flooding.

References
Bell, Gary. (1997). Ecology and management of Arundo donax, and approaches to riparian habitat restoration in southern California.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Strategic Action Plan. Available at:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/about/cal-fire-strategic-plan-2024 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, San Benito-Monterey Unit Fire Plan 2022.

Available at: https://www.osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/jeuclcrm/2022-san-benito-monterey-unit-fireplan.pdf California Department of Water Resources, Creative Services Branch, Forest Management Task Force, and Public Affairs Office. Available online at https://fmtf.fire.ca.gov/.

Coffman, G., Ambrose, R., Rundel, P., 2010. Wildfire promotes dominance of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) in riparian ecosystems. Biol. Invasions 12, 2723-2734.

Fairfax, Emily and Whittle, Andrew, Smokey the Beaver: beaver-dammed riparian corridors stay green during wildfire throughout the western United States, Ecological Applications, Volume 30, Issue 8, 2020, e02225. Available at
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eap.2225 Fire Recovery Guide, California Native Plant Society, 2019. Available at https://www.cnps.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/08/cnps-fire-recovery-guide-2019.pdf Monterey County Homeless Count and Survey Comprehensive Report, 2022. Available at https://chsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022montereyfinalV2.pdf Mowry, M., Read, A., Johnston, K. and Wafaie, T. 2019. Planning the Wildland-Urban Interface.

Prepared for the American Planning Association. PAS Report 594.

PSE Healthy Energy, Can Prescribed Fires Mitigate Health Harm? A Review of Air Quality and Public Health Implications of Wildfire and Prescribed Fire, 2022. Available at:
https://www.lung.org/getmedia/fd7ff728-56d9-4b33-82eb-abd06f01bc3b/pse_wildfire-and-prescribedfire-brief_final_2022 Monterey County Water Resources Agency and State Coastal Conservancy, Salinas River Long-Term Management Plan, 2019. Available at
https://www.salinasrivermanagementprogram.org/ltmp_doc.html State of California, California Public Resources Code Section 4291, 2022., Available at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=4291.&lawCode=PR C
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Confronting the Wildfire Crisis: A New Strategy for Protecting Communities and Improving Resilience in America’s Forests, 2022. Available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Confronting-Wildfire-Crisis.pdf U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Wildfire Crisis Implementation Plan, 2022. Available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Wildfire-Crisis-Implementation-Plan.pdf U.S. Government Publishing Office. Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. By Congress. Available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1904 Appendix A: Abbreviations & Acronyms
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection BEU San Benito-Monterey Unit of CAL FIRE
DCR Deer Creek Resources
KCFD King City Fire Department
LRA Local Responsibility Area
RWPP Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
SRA State Responsibility Area
USFS United States Forest Service
WUI Wildland Urban Interface
YST Yellow Starthistle
Appendix B: Glossary
Access Roads/Routes: Roads that allow entrance into and out of a property. Routes available for fire trucks and equipment to approach and defend areas or structures, including roadways or driveways.

Assets at Risk: Those things that are important to quality of life that can be threatened with destruction or loss from wildfire. These include homes, businesses, infrastructure, cultural sites, wildlife habitat, natural resources, air quality, recreational facilities and areas, historical structures, and any other important attribute that individual communities rely on for their well-being.

Automatic or Mutual Aid Agreement: An agreement between two or more agencies whereby such agencies are automatically dispatched simultaneously to predetermined types of emergencies in predetermined areas.

Black: An area that has burned.

Broadcast Burning: A controlled burn, where the fire is intentionally ignited and allowed to proceed over a designated area within well-defined boundaries for the reduction of fuel hazard, as a resource management treatment, or both.

Brush: A collective term that refers to stands of vegetation dominated by shrubby, woody plants, or low-growing trees.

Brushing: Clearing or “cleaning up” brushy vegetation in an area.

Buffer: An area of reduced vegetation that creates a barrier separating wildlands from vulnerable residential or business developments; this barrier is like a greenbelt in that it is usually used for another purpose, such as agriculture, recreation, parks, or golf courses.

Burn: (1) An area burned over by wildland fire. (2) A reference to a working fire. (3) To be on fire. (4) To consume fuel during rapid combustion. (5) A fire in progress or under investigation.

Burning Conditions: The state of the combined factors of the environment—such as winds, temperature, fuel moistures, and humidity—that affect fire behavior in a specified fuel type.

Canopy: The top layer of a forest, tree, or low-growing stand of shrubs, which is formed by leaves, needles, and branches creating a continuous cover.

Canopy Density: A term used to describe the amount of vegetative cover in the top layer of a forest; among other things, the canopy density influences the amount of light penetration, understory composition, surface reflectance, and rainfall interception in a forest landscape.

Catastrophic Fire: Wildland or wildland-urban interface fire with a fast-moving front, extending over a large area (300+ acres) or highly destructive to lives, property, or natural resources.

Collaborative: An open, inclusive process that assumes all participants have valuable knowledge and opinions and all their comments are heard and considered; collaboration does not mean consensus or ownership.

Combustible: Any material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated, will ignite and burn.

Combustion: The rapid oxidation of fuel in which heat and usually flame are produced. Combustion can be divided into four phases: pre-ignition, flaming, smoldering, and glowing.

Community: A body of people living in one place or district and considered a whole; a neighborhood, subdivision, small town, village, or township with boundaries defined by the residents or by regulatory jurisdiction.

Cover: Any plants or organic matter that hold soil in place or grow over and create shade that provides wildlife with an area to reproduce and find protection from predators and weather.

Crown Density: A measurement of the thickness or density of the foliage of the treetops (crown) in a stand.

Crown Fire (Crowning): A fire that spreads through the top of the vegetative canopy; characteristic of hot fires and dry conditions. Crown fires become independent from the surface fire and are more complex to control than surface fires.

Defensible Space: An area, either natural or constructed, where material capable of causing a fire to spread has been treated, cleared, reduced, or changed to provide a barrier between an advancing wildland fire and the loss to life, property, or resources. In practice, defensible space is defined as an area with a minimum of 100 feet around a structure that is cleared of flammable brush or vegetation.

Distance from the structure and the degree of fuels treatment vary with vegetation type, slope, density, and other factors.

Embers: Burning (or glowing) particles of vegetation from tree branches, parts of shrubs or chaparral, or other combustible materials that ignite and burn during a wildfire and are carried in wind currents to locations in front of the wildfire (also known as firebrands).

Evacuation: An organized, phased, and supervised withdrawal, dispersal, or removal of citizens from dangerous or potentially dangerous areas, and their reception and care in safe areas.

Evacuation Route: A path or road that has been preplanned for getting out of harm's way in a fire situation. The route should be well understood in advance of crisis by all participants. If there is any unclear direction, the path should be marked.

Exposure: (1) Property that may be endangered by a fire burning in another home or by a wildfire; (2) Direction in which a slope faces, usually with respect to cardinal directions; (3) The general surroundings of a site with special reference to its openness to winds.

Fire: Rapid oxidation, usually with the evolution of heat and light. Requires interaction of heat, fuel, and oxygen.

Fire Behavior: The way a fire reacts to the influences of fuel, weather, and topography. Common terms used to describe behavior include smoldering, creeping, running, spotting, torching, and crowning.

Fire Hazard: A fuel complex, defined by volume, type, condition, arrangement, and location, which determines the degree of ease of ignition and of resistance to control.

Fire Hazard Mitigation: Various methods by which existing fire hazards can be reduced in a certain area, such as fuel breaks, non-combustible roofing, spark arrestors, etc.

Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ): Any geographical area designated pursuant to California Public Resource Code Section 4201 to contain the type and condition of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure density to increase the possibility of conflagration fires. Areas are zoned as Very High, High, or Moderate by evaluating applicable risks and hazard.

Fire History: The known frequency and intensity of fires that have occurred in each area over a period.

Fire Intensity: Amount of heat released by a fire in an area in any given period. Fire intensity is usually related to the flame length of a fire.

Fire/Wildfire Management: Activities required for the protection of burnable wildland assets from fire, or the use of prescribed fire to meet land management objectives.

Fire Planning: Systematic technological and administrative management process of design, organization, facilities, and procedures, including fire use, to protect wildland from fire.

Fire Prevention: Activities such as public education, community outreach, law enforcement, and reduction of fuel hazards, intended to reduce wildland fire and the risks it poses to life and property.

Fire Resilient/Resiliency: The ability of an ecosystem to maintain its native biodiversity, ecological integrity, and natural recovery processes following a wildfire disturbance.

Fire Risk: The combination of vegetation, topography, weather, ignition sources, and fire history that leads to fire or ignition potential and danger in each area.

Fire Safe: For the purposes of this plan, this term is defined as: Action(s) that moderate the severity of a fire hazard to a level of "acceptable risk," as discussed in the Safety Element of the County General Plan. In a broader context, this term describes the state of lessened severity or action(s) that moderate the severity of a fire hazard or risk, while protecting structures and surrounding property from fire, whether fire is inside the structure or is threatening the structure from exterior sources.

Fire Safe Council: Public and private organizations that comprise a council intended to minimize the potential for wildfire damage to communities and homeowners, while also protecting the health of natural resources. Goals are achieved by distributing fire prevention materials, organizing fire safety programs, implementing fuel-reduction projects, and more. Visit www.firesafecouncil.org.

Fire Severity: Degree to which a site has been altered or disrupted by fire; loosely, a product of fire intensity and residence time.

Fire Spread: The movement of fire from one place to another.

Fire Suppression: All the work and activities connected with control and fire-extinguishing operations, beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished.

Fire Weather: Weather conditions that influence fire ignition, behavior, and suppression, such as high temperatures, low precipitation/humidity, and high winds.

Firewise/Firewise Communities/USA Recognition Program: (1) A national, multi-agency effort designed to reach beyond the fire service by involving homeowners, community leaders, planners, developers, and others in the effort to protect people, property, and natural resources from the risk of wildland fire before a fire starts. (2) Firewise offers a series of practical steps that individuals and communities can take to minimize wildfire risks to people, property, and natural resources. It emphasizes community responsibility for planning in the design of a safe community as well as effective emergency response, and individual responsibility for safer home evacuation and design, landscaping, and maintenance.

Fuel(s): Combustible structures and vegetative materials. Includes dead plants, parts of living plants, duff, and other accumulations of flammable vegetation, such as grass, leaves, ground litter, shrubs, and trees that feed a fire. See Surface Fuels.

Fuel Break: A natural or constructed barrier used to stop or check fires that may occur, or to provide a control line from which to work.

Fuel Description: Designation of fuel materials into categories based on size and drying times. Fuel descriptions in use are described below:

Description Material Diameter
Fine Needles, leaves, etc.
1 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 1 hour. <1/4" 10 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 10 hours. 1/4"-1" 100 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 4 days. 1-3" 1000 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 40 days. 3"+ Downed Fuel on the ground.

Heavy Large logs and snags.

Fuel Ladder: A ladder of vegetation from the ground into the canopy (or upper branches) of the trees that allows fire to climb upward.

Fuel Load: The amount of available and potentially combustible material, usually expressed as tons/acre.

Fuel Management: Act or practice of controlling flammability and reducing resistance to control of wildland fuels through mechanical, chemical, biological, or manual means, or by fire in support of land management objectives.

Fuel Treatment: Manipulation or removal of fuels to reduce likelihood of ignition or lessen potential damage and resistance to control (e.g., lopping, chipping, crushing, piling, and burning). Also known as Fuel Treatment.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS): A technology used for digitally viewing, storing, analyzing, and manipulating geographical information. Layers of information can create a better understanding of how data is interrelated. Useful for landscape-level planning.

Hardened Homes: Improving a building's resistance to fire, such as updating a roof with noncombustible roofing material; the goal is to increase the structure’s ability to survive a fire.

Hazard: Any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death of personnel, or damage to or loss of equipment or property.

Healthy Forests Restoration Act: A portion of the 2003 Healthy Forests Initiative intended to reduce hazardous fuels on public and private lands. Establishes Community Wildfire Protection Plans and sets standards for those plans.

Home Ignition Zone: The home and area out to approximately 100 feet, where local conditions affect the potential ignitability of a home during a wildfire.

Ignitability: The susceptibility to catch on fire.

Ignition: The event of combustion initiation that creates fire.

Incident: A human-caused or natural occurrence, such as wildland fire, that requires emergency service action to prevent or reduce the loss of life or damage to property or natural resources. Incident Management Teams also handle other non-fire emergency responses, including tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, and other disasters or large events.

Ingress-Egress: Roads and other avenues to enter and leave a property. Also refers to the act or right to come in or go through, as in entering a property (ingress), and the act or right to depart or go out, as in exiting a property (egress).

Jackpot: Heavy fuel concentrations that can flare up in a fire.

Ladder Fuels: Fuels that provide vertical continuity between strata and allow fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease. They help initiate and assure the continuation of crowning.

Landscape: The visible features of an area of land, including topography, water bodies, vegetation, human elements, such asland uses and structures, and transitory elementssuch aslighting and weather conditions.

Large Fire: 1) CAL FIRE defines a fire burning more than 300 acres as a large fire. 2) A fire burning with a size and intensity such that its behavior is determined by interaction between its own convection column and weather conditions above the surface.

Limbing/Limb Up: Removing selected branches of a standing or fallen tree or shrub.

Manual Treatment/Fuel Reduction: Methods of modifying wildfire fuel complexes without the use of machinery; such treatments may include chainsaws, fire-use applications, chemical treatments, and grazing.

Mastication: The process of “chewing up” or grinding vegetative fuels with machinery to reduce their hazard as a fuel source.

Mitigation: Those activities implemented prior to, during, or after an incident which are designed to reduce or eliminate risks to persons or property that lessen the actual or potential effects or consequences of an incident. Mitigation measures can include efforts to educate governments, businesses, and the public on measures they can take to reduce loss and injury and are often informed by lessons learned from prior incidents.

Mutual Aid Agreement: A reciprocal aid agreement between two or more agencies that defines what resources each will provide to the other in response to certain predetermined types of emergencies.

Mutual aid response is provided upon request.

Pile Burning: A method used to reduce fuel wherein vegetation is cut, stacked, and then burned.

Preparedness: (1) Activities that lead to a safe, efficient, and cost-effective fire management program in support of land and resource management objectives through appropriate planning and coordination. (2) Mental readiness to recognize changes in fire danger and act promptly when action is appropriate. (3) The range of deliberate, critical tasks and activities necessary to build, sustain, and improve the capability to protect against, respond to, and recover from wildfire.

Prescribed Fire (Controlled Burning): A fire that burns within a range of predetermined conditions (such as fuel moisture content, weather conditions, etc.) that will keep it controllable, at desired intensity, and able to achieve its stated objectives. A written, approved burn plan must exist, and environmental requirements (where applicable) must be met, prior to ignition.

Prevention: Activities directed at reducing the incidence of fires, including public education, law enforcement, personal contact, and reduction of fuel hazards.

Pruning: The act of cutting back the unwanted portions of a plant or cutting for the purpose of enhancing growth.

Relative Humidity: A measure of moisture in the air. If the humidity is 100%, the air is completely saturated with moisture. If the humidity is less than 20%, the air is very dry. When the air is dry, it absorbs moisture from the fuels in the forest, making them more flammable.

Response: (1) Movement of an individual firefighting resource from its assigned standby location to another location, or to an incident in reaction to dispatch orders, or to a reported alarm. (2) Activities that address the short-term, direct effect of an incident, including immediate actions to save lives, protect property, and meet basic human needs. Also includes the execution of emergency operations plans as well as mitigation activities designed to limit the loss of life, personal injury, property damage, and other unfavorable outcomes.

Response Time: For the purposes of the CWPP, response time is the time that elapses between the moment a 911 call is placed to the emergency dispatch center and the time that a first responder arrives on scene. Response time includes dispatch time, turnout time (the time it takes firefighters to travel to the fire station, don their gear, and prepare the apparatus), and travel time.

Risk: (1) The chance of a fire starting as determined by the presence and activity of causative agents; (2) A chance of suffering harm or loss; (3) A number related to the potential of firebrands to which a given area will be exposed during a rating day.

Signage: Address markers, road postings, and street signs that designate the location of residences and help orient people within a community or area. Highly visible signage is important for helping emergency responders quickly locate incident sites.

Slope: Upward or downward incline or slant, usually calculated as a percentage. One percent of slope means a rise or fall of one foot of elevation within 100 feet. A 45 percent slope would equal 45 feet of rise in 100 feet.

Snag: A standing dead tree that has usually lost most of its branches. Snags offer essential food and cover for a host of wildlife species.

Spot Fire: A fire ignited outside the perimeter of the main fire by flying sparks or embers.

Structure: Any building or structure used for support or shelter of any use or occupancy.

Suppression: All the work of extinguishing or containing a fire, beginning with its discovery.

Thinning: The act of removing a percentage of vegetation to encourage an open space and healthy growth for the remaining vegetation.

Torch/Torching: A rapid and intense burning of a single or small group of trees/shrubs, causing the upward movement of fire; also known as crown fire initiation or flare-up.

Underburn: A prescribed fire method where burning is conducted in the understory so that the fire consumes surface fuels but not trees or shrubs. Also known as understory burning.

Understory: Generally herbaceous or shrubby vegetation that makes up the plant layer under the tree canopy layer.

Wildfire: An unplanned, unwanted wildland fire including unauthorized human-caused fires, escaped wildland fire use events, escaped prescribed fire projects, and all other wildland fires where the objective is to put the fire out.

Wildlands: Areas in which development is essentially nonexistent, except for roads, railroads, power lines, and similar transportation facilities. Structures, if any, are widely scattered. Can also include large cattle ranches and forests managed for timber production.

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI): The zone where structures and other human developments meet, or intermingle with, undeveloped wildlands.

Appendix C: Community Meeting Notes
A community meeting was held on February 28, 2024. EMC mailed approximately 700 invitations to residents and it was promoted through local media. Approximately 25 residents attended the meeting, along with city representatives, EMC, and Deer Creek Resources.

Comments from community members:
• Track on Riverbed near where Townhomes end & houses start where “small” motorcycles are “raced” around in a large circle.
• Please check on the stats of the “causes” of the fires in the river • Remove deadfall along the road leading to San Lorenzo Park. • Ladder fuel removal on dead trees on the east side of Salinas River next to San Lorenzo Park • The area next to McDonald’s, KFC is the most dangerous for the city business district • Trailer Park at 101 River Drive (Rio Vista Mobile Home Estates) is low-income property. A fire in this facility would be a disaster so clearing across the street is important. • Continue clearing San Lorenzo Creek sediment.
• Use Army Corps of Engineers at Fort Hunter Ligget to bring in crews & equipment to help with clearing like they used to do in the 1940s, 50s & 60s. • Extend the fuel break to 262 Rio Vista Drive.
• Pay Fred Miranda the $ we would spend on permits & committees to do the work himself.

Save $ all the way around!
• Plan should be expanded to include area near San Lorenzo Park (due in part to north wind). • Residents were concerned about flooding.
• Wildlife issues, including vectors for invasive plants. • Trash, junk, and debris in the riverbed.
• Concerns with permit process and environmental review. • How can public funds be used on private lands to clean the area? • The RWPP is a gateway to get money to do continued work on the Riverbed. • There should be fines for people who are not maintaining their property. • There should be more code enforcement.
• Need crime prevention measures.
• Need to remove heavy fuels.

DCR also brought paper maps and encouraged attendees to use pens to draw out their fire concerns.

Mapped, written, and verbal collected comments were taken into consideration for the RWPP development.

Figure 25: Community members at the February 28, 2024 community meeting.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Figure 26: Discussing the benefits of a fuel break at the February 28, 2024 community meeting.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Appendix D: Wildland Vegetation Treatment Types
The following treatment types can be used to manage wildland vegetation to reduce wildfire hazards.

Community Fuel Breaks
Strategic areas of fuels reduction near structures to reduce fire intensity near residential and commercial areas. Fuel breaks not only lower the likelihood of fire starveling through an area, they provide conditions favorable for fire suppression.

Ladder Fuels Reduction
Removal or reduction of fuels that provide vertical continuity allowing fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease
Hand Thinning and Chipping
Hand thinning and chipping is typically performed by a crew using chainsaws and pole saws to thin and clear un-wanted vegetation. Hand thinning is used to cut smaller trees in environmentally sensitive areas where machines may have a significant environmental impact. Hand-thinning is generally limited to younger trees and large branches, as material must be cut into sizes that can be moved by workers without using equipment. Hand thinning may require more frequent treatments to maintain acceptable fuel loads.

Chipping
Chipping will likely be the preferred method of handling woody material removed within the riverbed.

Chipping redistributes forest vegetation that is cut during thinning. Chips can be scattered throughout the project area. Chipped material can also be removed from the project area and disposed of off-site.

Targeted Herbivory/Grazing
Grazing uses goats, sheep, horses, or cows to reduce the small fuels such as grass and small brush. A popular nature-based solution that has been used throughout California, grazing programs have proven to be effective in treating overgrown vegetation elsewhere on the Salinas River. Grazing can also assist with control of invasive species.

Upstream in Paso Robles, a goat grazing program was initiated in 2020, in response to fire ignitions within the riverbed. Paso Robles treats 80-100 acres annually, which equates to approximately 50 days of grazing. Their target area was treated mechanically prior to grazing to reduce heavy fuel loads, standing dead trees, and downed woody materials. This pre-grazing work was primarily performed with chainsaws, pole sales, and tracked chippers. Paso Robles’ annual grazing cost was approximately $50,000-$60,000 per year, plus $15,000 for nesting bird surveys prior to grazing.

It is important to note that grazing animals have little effect on stands of arundo, which should be mechanically removed.

Mechanical Thinning or Mowing (Including Mastication)
Mechanical thinning or mowing uses tractor-mounted cutters or mowing heads to snip, cut, or grind vegetation in place. It can achieve similar effects to chipping. Heavy equipment can cause adverse soil effects such as rutting and the machinery can spread invasive weeds such as yellow starthistle.

Pile Burning
Please note that burning piles is not permitted within King City and burn permits are not issued by the city. The information listed below pertains to potentially burning vegetation piles within the riverbed area, under the supervision of CAL FIRE or a state-certified burn boss.

Pile burning can be a cost-effective method for disposing of cut vegetation. Pile burning is considered to be a type of prescribed fire, and provides an alternative to chipping thinned vegetation, especially in places where chipper access is not available. Piles are created in the spring or summer, covered, and allowed to cure for several months, and then burned after sufficient rain has fallen to thoroughly wet the surrounding area. Piles create less smoke if they are built without too many larger logs in them, and they are also easier to mop up and extinguish if they are made of smaller branches. Also, piles built only of leaves and pine needles tend to smolder and smoke. These materials should be fed (dry) onto a hot-burning fire, or set aside to compost.

Once the piles burn down, they need to be monitored until they are cold. Depending on the size of the pile, this can last for many days or even weeks. Ideally, winter rains and snow do the heavy work of mopping up after the burn. Burning piles in the late spring can be risky, as embers can remain buried in large piles for months, and winds can blow hot embers into the surrounding vegetation after it dries out for the season. DCR/Firestorm can provide contract pile-burning services.

Tips for pile burning:
• When creating piles, they should be covered to keep the material dry. Remove plastic prior to ignition.
• Scrape a clearance of at least 6 feet to bare soil around any burn piles. • If burning when there is a chance the fire might escape into adjacent dry vegetation, tools and water should be available. If burning in moist conditions, water is not always needed. • Burn only clean, dry vegetative waste such as branches. It is best to burn the dry debris immediately after raking, rather than creating uncovered piles that sit for a long time getting wet and holding moisture.
• Never leave the burn pile unattended—extinguish it if you need to leave. • Avoid burning on windy days. The wind can spread embers. • In general, piles should be no larger than four feet in diameter and four feet high. Large pile sizes are possible, especially if qualified personnel burn them. • Break larger piles down, and add branches to the pile as it burns. • Throw partially burned chunks into the pile and turn over the pile several times while burning to improve consumption and completely consume all material. This is called ‘chunking the pile.’
• Mopping up is the most important part of the whole exercise. Burn piles can generate massive heat and remain hot for weeks. Monitor piles regularly even after you think that they are completely out.

Broadcast Burning
Broadcast burning describes prescribed fires ignited in areas with little or no forest canopy present.

Broadcast burning is often used for habitat restoration and fuels reduction purposes, and would be the best method for treating invasive yellow starthistle in the riverbed area as described in the Prescribed Fire section below.

Appendix E: Prescribed Fire
There are potential opportunities to use fire to improve the function, safety, aesthetics, and resiliency of the riverbed project area. Application of prescribed fire (including pile burning) in riparian areas could be a helpful and cost-effective tool for reducing invasive yellow starthistle and increasing fire safety. Prescribed burning reduces the loading of fine fuels, duff, large woody fuels, rotten material, shrubs, and other live surface fuels, and may be useful in reducing long-term accumulations of larger dead and down material. Any application of prescribed fire should be targeted to also help achieve non-fire-related resource management objectives, for example reducing invasive plants.

There are opportunities to use prescribed fire to reduce yellow starthistle in the riverbed area.

Starthistle burning is generally seen as a three-year commitment, and successive burns are necessary to kill seeds in the soil. Burns should take place in mid-summer because grass under YST needs to be fully cured before burning occurs.

While the riverbed is not dominated by YST, there are large patches that can be treated with repeated entries of prescribed fire, which lower the threat of late-summer and fall wildfires, and provide training opportunities to local fire departments and prescribed burning organizations. Burning when flowers first appear (January-May) can eliminate YST in the seedling, rosette, and early bolting stages, although burning during this window can be difficult due to insufficient dry fuel available to carry the intense fire necessary for YST control. The preferred burning window is during the early flower stage, typically between late June and July. This prescription must be continued for at least three consecutive years in infested areas to reduce the seed bank. Burning patches of yellow starthistle creates a matrix of black, burned areas, which can help control wildfire spread.

While prescribed fires temporarily affect air quality, a 2022 report indicates that the air quality and health impacts of prescribed fire smoke are limited. Prescribed fires are implemented under conditions to limit harmful smoke exposure and are conducted when meteorological conditions are favorable, atmospheric conditions support smoke dispersion, and wind patterns allow smoke to move away from populated areas.

Prescribed fire’s utility in the management of invasive vegetation is well-documented. The conceptual burn units identified in the maps for this document were designed to meet multiple objectives. If King City is interested in advancing these types of projects, contracting with a California State Fire Marshal-certified burn boss to develop detailed prescriptions and burn objectives (using the State’s burn plan template) would be the next step.

The California State Fire Marshall is now certifying Professional Prescribed Fire Burn Bosses (CARX). California state legislation (SB-332 and SB-926) provides liability protections and a claims fund to protect burners/landowners in case of escaped burns.

Appendix F: Defensible Space Zone Education for Homeowners The intensity of wildfire fuel management varies within the 100-foot perimeter of the home, with more intense fuels’ reduction occurring closer to your home. Zones 1 and 2 previously made up the 100 feet of defensible space required by law. Assembly Bill 3074, passed into law in 2020, now requires a third zone for defensible space, as of January 1, 2023. Zone 0 is the new ember-resistant zone within 0 to 5 feet. Start at the home and work your way out to 100 feet or to your property line, whichever is closer.

These zones are a “rule of thumb” designed to help property owners and exceptions are made when appropriate or where property lines do not allow.

Figure 27: CAL FIRE Defensible Zones
Image © 2023 CAL FIRE
Zone 0: Ember Resistant Zone
Zone 0 extends 5 feet from buildings, structures, decks, etc.

Science has proven it to be the most important of all the defensible space zones. This zone includes the area under and around all attached decks and requires the most stringent wildfire fuel reduction. The ember-resistant zone is designed to keep fire or embers from igniting materials that can spread the fire to your home. The following provides guidance for this zone, which may change based on the regulation developed by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. • Use hardscape like gravel, pavers, concrete, and other noncombustible mulch materials. No combustible bark or mulch
• Remove all dead and dying weeds, grass, plants, shrubs, trees, branches, and vegetative debris (leaves, needles, cones, bark, etc.); Check your roofs, gutters, decks, porches, stairways, etc. • Remove all branches within 10 feet of any chimney or stovepipe outlet • Limit plants in this area to low growing, nonwoody, properly maintained plants • Limit combustible items (outdoor furniture, planters, etc.) on top of decks • Relocate firewood and lumber to Zone 2
• Replace combustible fencing, gates, and arbors attach to the home with noncombustible alternatives
• Consider relocating garbage and recycling containers outside this zone • Consider relocating boats, RVs, vehicles, and other combustible items outside this zone Zone 1: Lean, Clean and Green Zone
Zone 1 extends 30 feet from buildings, structures, decks, etc. or to your property line, whichever is closer.
• Remove all dead plants, grass, and weeds (vegetation). • Remove dead or dry leaves and pine needles from your yard, roof, and rain gutters. • Remove branches that hang over your roof and keep dead branches 10 feet away from your chimney.
• Trim trees regularly to keep branches a minimum of 10 feet from other trees. • Relocate wood piles to Zone 2.
• Remove or prune flammable plants and shrubs near windows. • Remove vegetation and items that could catch fire from around and under decks, balconies, and stairs.
• Create a separation between trees, shrubs and items that could catch fire, such as patio furniture, wood piles, swing sets, etc.
* During times of drought when green landscaping cannot be achieved due to water restrictions be sure to remove all dead or dying material from Zone 1.

Zone 2: Reduce Fuel Zone
Zone 2 extends from 30 feet to 100 feet out from buildings, structures, decks, etc. or to your property line, whichever is closer.
• Cut or mow annual grass down to a maximum height of 4 inches. • Create horizontal space between shrubs and trees.
• Create vertical space between grass, shrubs, and trees. • Remove fallen leaves, needles, twigs, bark, cones, and small branches. However, they may be permitted to a depth of 3 inches.
• All exposed wood piles must have a minimum of 10 feet of clearance, down to bare mineral soil, in all directions.

Defensible Space Self-Inspection Checklist
• Make street address visible from the street in both directions, contrast with the background, reflective, and a minimum of 4 inches in height in accordance with Monterey County Code Q104.2
• Annual grasses and weeds need to be mowed to 4 inches or less 100 feet from house or to property line
• Remove pine needles, thin brush, and other flammable vegetation 100 feet from house or to property line
• Maintain the roof of any structure free of pine needles, leaves, or any other dead/dying debris
• Cut grasses, thin brush, and other flammable vegetation to 100 feet from house or to property line
• Clear debris – slash and needle piles, construction debris and flammable storage from around structure
• Clear vegetation to mineral soil around firewood storage piles • Remove brush, limbs, grass, needles, and debris ten feet in all directions from around propane tank
• Limb trees up a minimum of 6 feet from the ground
• Remove dead tree limbs adjacent to or overhanging any structure or decks • Remove all portions of trees within ten feet from chimneys and/or stovepipe outlets • Remove all dead and dying trees from the property
• Install a 1/8-inch mesh screen spark arrester on chimneys, stovepipes, and appliances that burn solid fuels
• Maintain defensible space a minimum of 10 feet from the shoulder of the roadway • Remove any hazardous vegetation constituting an extreme fire hazard, as determined by the code official
Defensible Space Landscaping:

University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, is an excellent resource for defensible space landscaping: Reducing the Vulnerability of Building to Wildfire: Vegetation and Landscaping Guidance: https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8695.pdf
California Assembly Bill 38, Inspections and Real Estate Transactions Passed in 2019, California Assembly Bill 38 (AB 38) established a five-year pilot program requiring California’s Office of Emergency Services and CAL FIRE to work together to utilize a broad range of potential funding, including federal funds, to proactively support at-risk communities through a statewide fire retrofit program. The goal is to help communities and owners of homes built prior to updated building codes in 2008 harden their homes and make them more likely to survive future fires.

The bill requires the State Fire Marshal, in consultation with state officials, to identify building retrofits and structure hardening measures, and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to identify defensible space, vegetation management and fuel modification activities eligible for financial assistance under the program.

AB 38 is designed to help educate home buyers in fire prone areas by requiring property sellers in those areas to inform buyers that the property follows established wildfire protection measures, including fire hardening improvements on the property and a disclosure notice to also include the State Fire Marshal’s list of low-cost retrofits.

More information on AB 38 can be found at
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/b2fc79e82aec4ecab4250987db7312cb.

Appendix G: Additional Resources
ALERT California: alertca.live/
AlertMontereyCounty: www.co.monterey.ca.us/government/departments-a-h/emergencycommunications-911/old-site/citizen-awareness/alert-monterey-county CAL FIRE Defensible Space Zones: www.fire.ca.gov/programs/communications/defensible-spaceprc-4291 CAL OES Retrofit Rebate Program: www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/operations/recoverydirectorate/hazard-mitigation/california-wildfire-mitigation-program California Climate Investments: www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov/ California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps: egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ California Public Resources Code 4291:
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=4291.&lawCode=PRC California Wildfire & Forest Resilience Task Force: https://wildfiretaskforce.org/ Fire Safe Council for Monterey: www.firesafemonterey.org/defensible-space.html Firewise USA: firewise.org
Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003: www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/housebill/1904 Housing arrangement and vegetation factors associated with single-family home survival in the 2018 Camp Fire, California: fireecology.springeropen.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s42408-021-00117-0.pdf National Fire Protection Association: www.nfpa.org
Office of the State Fire Marshal: osfm.fire.ca.gov
Ready, Set, Go! Program: www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/ready-set-go Reducing the Vulnerability of Building to Wildfire: Vegetation and Landscaping Guidance:
anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8695.pdf
Wildfire Home Retrofit Guide: ucanr.edu/HomeRetrofitGuide Appendix H: Grant Funding Programs
County Coordinators Grant
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
California Healthy Soils Program
California Wildfire Mitigation Program
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants:
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post-Fire Grant
• Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grants Monterey County Fire Relief Fund Grants
State Fire Assistance Grants
USDA Community Wildfire Defense Grants
Appendix I: Preparer & Methods
Statement of Qualifications
Established in 2011, Deer Creek Resources (DCR) is the resource management division of Firestorm Wildland Fire Suppression, Inc. Firestorm has been in the wildland fire and forestry business since 1996 and is California’s largest wildland firefighting contractor with over 250 federally-qualified wildland firefighters.

In addition to wildland firefighting, Firestorm/DCR is a leader in wildland fire hazard mitigation, prescribed fire, and forestry services. We have completed forestry projects on over 30,000 acres, including thinning, piling, mastication, fuel break construction, ecological restoration, post-fire erosion control, and trail maintenance. We have successfully implemented ecological burning on over 225,000 acres on forests and rangelands throughout the United States.

DCR uses mapping, innovative wildfire analytics, and applied science to help communities and landowners prepare for wildfire, manage watersheds and wildlands, and increase the transparency of land management decision making. We use our expert knowledge of wildfire behavior and land management to develop tangible wildfire hazard mitigation projects that affect real changes on the ground.

Our pre-fire plans improve public safety and benefit the landscape by:
• Identifying places where a wildfire might trap and kill people or destroy property • Establishing priorities for fuel reduction and habitat restoration • Integrating wildfire management with other land management objectives • Reducing the risk of natural resource damage from severe fire and fire suppression activities • Improving fire suppression effectiveness, as well as firefighter safety • Preventing infrastructure losses/property damage during wildfire incidents We use the following tools to assess fire hazard across landscapes:
• Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
• Cartography/mapmaking
• Satellite imagery, aerial photography, and LiDAR
• Fixed-wing aerial imagery, orthophotography and UAV piloting • Ground-based fuel mapping and surveys
• Numeric wildfire behavior models
• Qualitative data via interviews with knowledgeable locals • Application of peer-reviewed science
DCR’s wildfire mitigation experts have helped to develop wildfire pre-plans in the Lassen Foothills, Klamath Mountains, Lake Tahoe Basin, Central Coast, Klamath Mountains, and for Plumas, El Dorado, Amador, Monterey, Nevada, and Yuba Counties. Our staff developed a major hazardous fuels reduction project for University of California’s Lick Observatory on Mount Hamilton, in Santa Clara County, and also developed the Plumas County Hazardous Fuel Assessment & Strategy. We recently completed a community wildfire protection plans (CWPP) for the Olympic Valley and are currently developing CWPPs for the American River Parkway in Sacramento and for the City of Redding.

DCR has provided professional GIS mapping services for major planning efforts including the South Lassen Watersheds Project, the Northern Sacramento Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (NSV-IRWM) and Upper Feather River IRWM projects. Among other things, we have performed vegetation mapping of coastal wetlands for public agencies, developed field mapping applications for petroleum pipeline right-of-way inspectors, built map-based asset catalogs for major winery properties, and used aerial LiDAR data to conduct a timber inventory across 65,000 acres. We can also perform UAV and fixed-wing aerial surveys to create orthomosaic images of landscapes, from five acres to 50,000.

Our pre-fire plans improve public safety and benefit the landscape by integrating wildfire management with other land management objectives to reduce the risk of natural resource damage from severe fire or fire suppression activities and preventing infrastructure and property losses.

We have experience with all aspects of wildland fire management and mitigation throughout California. DCR’s mapping crews have provided GIS support to CAL FIRE and the USDA Forest Service on several of the most destructive urban-interface fires in California’s history.

Firestorm has implemented wildfire hazard mitigation vegetation management projects resulting in tens of thousands of acres being treated. We understand the workflow of wildfire mitigation, from project conception to implementation, and emphasize follow-up and regular maintenance to maintain favorable conditions.

RWPP Data Collection Methods
Deer Creek Resources attended a group site visit with staff from EMC Planning Group and King City on December 6, 2023 and conducted an in-depth field survey on January 24 and 25, 2024. During the December visit, the group visited the project area and discussed preliminary vetting of potential fuels projects. In January, two DCR field surveyors walked the entirety of the riverbed and creek sections of the project area, noting wildfire hazards and considering wildland fire fuels reduction projects that would contribute to the overall wildfire resilience of the city.

Notes, geographic coordinates, and photos from the two-day survey are included in the accompanying shapefile, which can be opened in ArcGIS or other mapping applications.

DCR obtained aerial images and LiDAR of the project area from the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County (RCDMC). These flights took place between November 11-13, 2023. Aerial images were combined to create an orthomosaic (photo base map), which was used to map fuels and model likely fire behavior. DCR’s fire modeling was presented to the city on February 26, 2023.

Aerial images from the flight are used on all accompanying maps.

A community meeting was held on February 28, 2024, to collect input from King City residents.

Comments and notes from the meeting are included in Appendix C.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 1 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
In Compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Project Name King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Lead Agency City of King
Project Proponent City of King (Community Development Department) Project Location Areas of Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek both within City of King and Unincorporated Monterey County as well as in California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) (State Highway 101) and Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way (portions of the following APNs: 245-081-031; 235-052-007; 235-052-008; 02-031-021; 026-031-011; 026-121-006; 026- 461-022; 026-121-004; 235-051-010; 026-131-007; 026-221- 002; 235-031-005; 235-031-006; 026-293-003; 235-021-009; 026-311-005; 235-021-016; 026-311-003)
Project Description The King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (RWPP) serves as a framework for a long-term fire resiliency and prioritizes hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in or near the City of King, California. The plan achieves the two following goals:
1) provides guidance and strategies to increase the wildfire resilience of the community; and, 2) protects and enhances the wildlife habitat and ecological value of the project area.

The plan was developed by Deer Creek Resources (DCR)
with input from City of King staff, collaborating agencies, and the community. The RWPP uses aerial photography and field surveys to map vegetation, analyze potential wildfire hazards within the project area, and prioritize wildfire hazard mitigation projects. The primary implementation measure recommended by the RWPP is the creation of a fuel break on the edge of the Salinas Riverbed to protect homes and businesses and prevent a wildland fire from becoming an urban conflagration. A fuel break will starve an expanding fire of fuels while providing firefighters operational safety and access. While the remaining project recommendations will increase the fire safety and aesthetics of the project area and King City, the fuel break will provide the most
protection.

Public Review Period Begins – July 31, 2024
Ends – August 30, 2024
EXHIBIT 2
Mitigated Negative Declaration 2 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Written Comments To City of King Community Development Department Attn: Doreen Liberto, Community Development Director
212 S. Vanderhurst Avenue
King City, CA 93930
E-mail: [email protected]
Proposed Findings The City of King is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based.

The initial study indicates that the proposed project has the potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. However, the mitigation measures identified in the initial study would reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the lead agency, City of King, that the project, with mitigation measures incorporated, may have a significant effect on the environment. See the
following project-specific mitigation measures:

Mitigation Measures
Biological Resources
BIO-1 The summer blooming period prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a biologist qualified in botany shall conduct a focused survey for Davidson’s bush mallow and umbrella larkspur in accordance with current California Department of Fish and Wildlife and California Native Plant Society rare plant survey protocols (CDFW 2018 and CNPS 2001). Some special-status plant species are only identifiable during their blooming periods and surveys are only considered valid if they occur when blooms are visible. The survey shall occur during the peak blooming period for these species to determine their presence or absence.

Based on the known blooming periods of the special-status plant species potentially present, two surveys would be necessary to adequately survey the project site: the first in May/June and the second in August/September. If possible, known reference populations of the target species in the project vicinity shall first be visited to verify that the species is observable, and the focused survey shall be conducted within two weeks of observing the reference population in full bloom.

The biologist shall prepare a brief report documenting the results of the surveys for submittal to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities.

If the focused surveys conclude that special-status plant species are not present within the project site boundary, or if they are present but impacts can be Mitigated Negative Declaration 3 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 completely avoided, then no further mitigation would be required. Focused plant surveys are generally considered valid for two years. Surveys shall be repeated if disturbance activities are planned after two years.

If at any point special-status plant species are identified within the project site boundary and they would be affected by the proposed project, then appropriate mitigation shall be developed by the biologist and implemented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities. Measures may include, but are not limited to:
a. A qualified biologist shall identify an on-site or off-site mitigation area suitable for restoration of habitat and seed transplantation for any specialstatus plant species. b. Prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, a qualified biologist or native plant specialist shall perform seed collection from all special-status plants located within the impact areas and implement seed installation at the mitigation area at the optimal time. Additionally, topsoil from the special-status species occurrence area(s) shall be salvaged (where practical) for use in the mitigation area.
c. A maintenance and monitoring program shall be developed by a qualified biologist and established for a minimum of five years after mitigation area installation to verify that restoration activities have been successful.

Maintenance activities may include, but not be limited to, watering during the plant establishment period, supplemental seed planting as needed, and removal of non-native plants. Monitoring shall include, at a minimum, quarterly monitoring reports for the first year and annual reports for the remaining four years. The performance standard for successful mitigation shall be a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio (i.e., three plants observed in mitigation area for each plant lost from the project site) achieved in at least one of the five years of monitoring.

The King City Community Development Department will be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure. Compliance with this measure shall be documented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file.

BIO-2 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance or vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for all project personnel. At a minimum, the training shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring in the project vicinity, including, but not limited to, special-status plants (if present), Monterey hitch, California redlegged frog, Northern California legless lizard, southwestern pond turtle, Mitigated Negative Declaration 4 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 burrowing owl, American badger, Monterey dusky-footed woodrat, San Joaquin kit fox, special-status bat species, and nesting birds and raptors. Their habitats, general measures that are being implemented to conserve species as they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which project activities will occur will be explained. Informational handouts with photographs clearly illustrating the species’ appearances shall be used in the training session. As new phases or activities begin, all new project personnel shall undergo this mandatory environmental awareness training. The project contractor shall document evidence of completion of this training by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities.

The qualified biologist will train biological monitors selected from the project crew by the project contractor (typically the project foreman). Before the start of work each day, the monitor will check for animals under any equipment such as vehicles. If a special-status species is observed within an active project area, the qualified biologist will be notified immediately and all work within 50 feet of the individual will be halted and all equipment turned off until the individual has left the area.

BIO-3 The following measures shall be implemented to protect Monterey hitch and aquatic habitats:
a. Implementation measures 1-4 that require ground disturbance activities within the active channels of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek shall be conducted from September to April each year, during periods of low flow (Salinas River) or no flow (San Lorenzo Creek), outside of the spawning period for Monterey hitch.
b. For the duration of the project, herbicides may be applied to vegetation within a 10-foot buffer zone along the edge of the active channel for nonnative invasive vegetation treatment only. Only herbicides approved for use in aquatic environments shall be used.
c. For the duration of the project will use work measures including Best Management Practices (BMPs), time-of-year-restrictions, water pollution prevention, erosion control, and tree root protection to further minimize erosion and impacts to riparian and aquatic habitat. BMPs intended to reduce erosion of exposed soil into the bed and banks of the creek may include, but are not limited to, soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, silt fencing, and fiber rolls. Standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures will be required for work performed in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of the creek. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting), loosely woven netting, or similar material in any form shall not be used at the project site as wildlife Mitigated Negative Declaration 5 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 can become entangled and trapped in them. Materials utilizing fixed weaves (strands cannot move), polypropylene, polymer, or other synthetic materials shall not be used.

BIO-4 Ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal activities (implementation measures 1-4) are proposed within and immediately adjacent to California redlegged frog habitat. Project implementation may directly impact aquatic habitat and upland habitat. Prior to the start of disturbance activities, one or both of the following options will be implemented:

Option 1. Protocol-Level Surveys for California Red-Legged Frog Protocol surveys will be conducted per the Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2005) to determine if California red-legged frog is present at the project site. If surveys result in a negative finding, documentation will be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for confirmation. If the negative finding is considered valid no further action is required.

If California red-legged frog is found, Incidental Take Authorization will be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, as detailed in Option 2, below.

Option 2. Assume Presence of California Red-Legged Frog and Obtain Incidental Take Authorization
If the presence of California red-legged frog is determined during protocol-level surveys or it is assumed that they are present on the project site, the King City Community Development Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a permit term for the duration of the project. The King City Community Development Department will ensure that all avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measures required in the permit to minimize the potential for “take” of California red-legged frog are implemented.

BIO-5 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance in areas with sandy soils (which includes a majority of the project area), the King City Community Development Department shall retain a qualified biologist to determine measures to avoid or minimize impacts to legless lizards, depending on the proposed activity. Measures may include, but not be limited to:
a. Preconstruction Surveys. Within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance in potential habitat, preconstruction surveys shall be conducted. Methods include a “three-pass, high grading” methodology that requires raking of the soil to locate and remove as many California legless lizards as possible.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 6 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 If legless lizards are found during the first pass, an overnight period of no soil disturbance must occur before the second pass. The same requirement will be implemented after the second pass if legless lizards are located. If no California legless lizards are found during the second pass, a third pass is not required.
b. Identification of Relocation Site(s). Prior to surveying and construction, one or more relocation sites shall be identified by a qualified biologist. All relocation sites shall be approved by the King City Community Development Department and shall consist of suitable habitat. Relocation sites shall be as close to the capture site as possible but far enough away to ensure the animal(s) is/are not harmed by construction of the project.

Relocation shall occur on the same day as capture. California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Native Species Field Survey Forms shall be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for all special-status species observed. c. Barrier fencing. If California legless lizards are observed, a barrier shall be installed to prevent movement of legless lizards back into the work are.

All captured California legless lizards would be moved to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b).
d. Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be onsite to monitor ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities and salvage and relocate any legless lizards encountered. The monitoring shall walk alongside equipment/crews in each new area of disturbance, and shall have authority to halt activities temporarily if necessary to capture and relocate legless lizards. Any legless lizards captured shall be relocated as soon as possible to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b).

BIO-6 The King City Community Development Department shall implement the following measures for the protection of western pond turtle:
a. Within 24 hours prior to vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities associated with implementation measures 1-4, the King City Community Development Department shall retain a biologist qualified to survey for southwestern pond turtle, including their eggs and nests, to conduct a preconstruction survey along aquatic features and an adjacent 300-feet buffer of riparian areas in and adjacent to the project site. b. If southwestern pond turtle or their nests are observed during preconstruction surveys, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to monitor activities in suitable habitat. Southwestern pond turtles found within the project area shall be allowed to leave of their own volition or they shall be captured by a qualified biologist and relocated out of harm’s way to the Mitigated Negative Declaration 7 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 nearest suitable habitat immediately upstream or downstream from the project area. Pond turtle relocation shall only be conducted after notifying the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
c. If southwestern pond turtle nests are identified in the work area during preconstruction surveys, a 300-foot no disturbance buffer shall be established between the nest and any areas of potential disturbance.

Buffers shall be clearly marked with temporary fencing. Disturbance activities will not be allowed to commence in the exclusion area until hatchlings have emerged from the nest, or the nest is deemed inactive by a qualified biologist.
d. All construction-related trenches, holes, or pits shall be covered at the end of each workday to prevent entrapment of pond turtles.

The qualified biologist shall prepare a report documenting the results of the preconstruction survey(s) for submittal to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance.

BIO-7 To avoid loss of or harm to burrowing owl as a result of implementation measures 1-4, the following measures shall be implemented:
a. To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, a biologist qualified in ornithology shall conduct surveys for burrowing owl prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal. The qualified biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to the methods for take avoidance described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012). If no burrowing owls are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department and no further measures are required.
b. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal nodisturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (CDFG 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either:

Mitigated Negative Declaration 8 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival.

Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers
(meters)
Low Med High
Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m
c. If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance.

Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. d. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. Once the absence of burrowing owl has been confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department.

BIO-8 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, and not more than 14 days prior to the commencement of ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct surveys to identify any potential American badger burrows/dens. If the survey results are negative (i.e., no badger dens observed), a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities and no further mitigation is required.

If the results are positive (badger dens are observed), the qualified biologist shall determine if the dens are active by installing a game camera for three days and three nights to determine if the den is in use.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 9 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 a. If the biologist determines that a den may be active, coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be undertaken to develop a suitable strategy to avoid impacts to American badger. The strategy may include the following: the biologist shall install a one-way door in the den opening and continue use of the game camera. Once the camera captures the individual exiting the one-way door, the den can be excavated with hand tools to prevent badgers from reusing them. If the biologist determines that the den is a maternity den, project activities shall be delayed during the maternity season (February to August), or until the badgers leave the den on their own accord or the biologist determines that the den is no longer in use. b. If the game camera does not capture an individual entering/exiting the den, the den can be excavated with hand tools to prevent badgers from reusing them.
c. After dens have been excavated and the absence of American badger confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal.

BIO-9 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests within thirty (30) days prior to the start of disturbance activities. If the survey results are negative (i.e., no woodrat nests observed), a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities and no further mitigation is required.

If the results are positive (woodrat nests are observed), all Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance.

If Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests are found that cannot be avoided, each active nest shall be disturbed by the qualified biologist to the degree that Monterey dusky-footed woodrat leaves the nest and seeks refuge elsewhere. After the nests have been disturbed, the nest sticks shall be removed from the impact areas and placed outside of areas planned for impacts. Nests shall be dismantled during the non-breeding season (between October 1 and December 31), if possible. If a litter of young is found or suspected, nest material shall be replaced and the nest left alone for 2-3 weeks, after this time the nest will be rechecked to verify that young are capable of independent survival before proceeding with nest dismantling.

After nests have been dismantled and the absence of Monterey dusky-footed woodrat confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 10 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 BIO-10 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011) shall be implemented prior to the initiation of any ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities associated with implementation measures 1-4 on the project site to avoid unintended take of individual San Joaquin kit foxes.

Pre-activity surveys for San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no less than 30 days prior to the beginning of project activities, including ground disturbance or vegetation removal, that may impact San Joaquin kit fox.

The surveys shall include all work areas and a minimum 200-foot buffer of the project site. The pre-project implementation surveys shall identify kit fox habitat features on the project site, evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, assess the potential impacts of the proposed activity. The status of all dens shall be determined and mapped.

If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200 feet of the project boundary, the project contractor shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish an appropriate avoidance buffer. The avoidance buffer shall be maintained until such time as the burrow is no longer active and/or an incidental take permit is determined to be required and is obtained.

In addition, the following measures shall be observed:
a. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas. Night-time project activities shall be prohibited. Off-road traffic outside of the designated project area shall be prohibited. b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during project implementation, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals.

If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 11 of the Construction and Operational Requirements in the Standardized Recommendations must be followed.
c. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming trapped or injured. If used, all pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater stored at the construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until the U.S. Fish and Mitigated Negative Declaration 11 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Wildlife Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped. d. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from the project site.
e. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site during project implementation activities.
f. To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets shall be permitted on site during project implementation.
g. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the project site during project implementation shall be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project related restrictions deemed necessary by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of proven lower risk to kit fox.
h. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape. i. Any contractor, employee, or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

BIO-11 If possible, project activities should be conducted between September 16 and January 14 to avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15). If implementation measures 1-4 are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys as follows:
a. Two surveys for active bird nests will occur within 14 days prior to start of ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to project commencement.

Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are Mitigated Negative Declaration 12 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys will be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas.

If no nesting birds are found, a letter report will be prepared by the biologist and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, and no further measures are required.
b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active project activities shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to project activities, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during project activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest).

If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or project foreman shall have the authority to cease all project work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, and no further measures are required.

BIO-12 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed and trees within 50 feet of the project area approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or disturbance activities. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed.

Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit.

Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 13 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. If bats or roosting sites are found, bats shall not be disturbed without specific notice to and consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

The nursery season is typically considered May 1 through October 1. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be consulted prior to any eviction or other action. If avoidance or postponement is not feasible, a Bat Eviction Plan will be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for written approval prior to project implementation. A request to evict bats from a roost includes details for excluding bats from the roost site and monitoring to ensure that all bats have exited the roost prior to the start of activity and are unable to re-enter the roost until activity is completed. Any bat eviction shall be timed to avoid lactation and youngrearing. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance shall occur until after the nursery season. Once the absence of roosting bats has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department.

BIO-13 In advance of the start of implementation measures 1-4, a Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan shall be prepared. The plan shall include clear goals and objectives, success criteria, specifics on restoration/creation/enhancement (e.g., plant palette, soils, irrigation design standards and requirements), specific monitoring periods and reporting guidelines, and a maintenance plan. Species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant List (CalIPC 2024) shall be removed if present and not included in the planting palette.

Appropriate performance standards may include, but are not limited to, an 80 percent survival rate of restoration tree and shrub plantings; absence of invasive plant species in restored areas; and self‐sustaining conditions (i.e., plant viability without supplemental water) at the end of five years. If the restoration activities are not meeting success criteria, remedial measures shall be implemented and would typically include, but are not limited to, replanting, reseeding, grading adjustments, supplemental irrigation, access control, increased weed control, and extended maintenance and monitoring periods.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 14 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 The Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the King City Community Development Department for review and approval as well as any other appropriate regulatory agencies during the permit application process, if needed.

BIO-14 In advance of the start of implementation measures 1-4, in areas where impacts to jurisdictional aquatic features cannot be avoided, the King City Community Development Department will retain a qualified biologist to determine the extent of potential wetlands and waterways regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). If the USACE claims jurisdiction, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. The City and the qualified biologist shall coordinate with the RWQCB to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. The City and the qualified biologist shall also coordinate with the CDFW to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

BIO-15 Prior to the start of implementation measure 1-4 and any tree removal or trimming activities, the King City Community Development Department will hire an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)-certified arborist to conduct a tree survey and prepare an evaluation report with associated data and location map for all potentially affected trees on and immediately adjacent to the project site. The King City Community Development Department will follow the arborist’s recommendations, such as planting replacement trees in appropriate on-site or off-site areas, preferably associated with the Salinas River or San Lorenzo Creek corridors, along with any required maintenance and monitoring.

Cultural Resources
CR-1 Prior to construction, all personnel directly involved in project-related activities shall be provided archaeological and cultural sensitivity training. The training shall be conducted by a Native American Monitor or a qualified archaeologist that meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for archaeology. The training shall take place at a day and time to be determined in conjunction with the project construction foreman, and prior to any scheduled project-related activities. The training will include the following: a discussion of applicable laws and penalties; samples or visual aids of artifacts that could be encountered in the project vicinity, including what those artifacts and resources may look like partially buried, or wholly buried and freshly exposed; and instructions to halt work in the vicinity of any potential cultural resource discovery, and notify the archaeological monitor as necessary. If a handout is provided by the archaeologist, the foreman will keep a copy of it in his or her vehicle as a reference. Having reference material in the vehicle does not replace contacting an archaeologist should resources be uncovered.

Mitigated Negative Declaration 15 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 CR-2 In the event that archaeological resources are inadvertently discovered, work shall temporarily halt or divert work within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated. All potentially significant or unique archaeological deposits shall be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources. If archaeological deposits are encountered, they will be evaluated and mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For prehistoric archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand-excavated recovery and non-destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources shall also be sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation.

Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance by a qualified archaeologist. Significant and/or unique cultural resources consist, of but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

If such resources or artifacts are determined to be of native tribal origin, any mitigation or recovery program shall include direction from tribal leadership that has previously consulted with King City for proper handling and treatment.

The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive report complete with methods, results, and recommendations, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered resources. The report shall be submitted to the Northwest Information Center and the State Historic Preservation Office, as required.

CR-3 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) contain the mandated procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains. According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are encountered at the site, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease and necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area shall be taken. The Monterey County Coroner shall be notified immediately.

The Coroner shall then determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, who would, in turn, notify the person the Native American Heritage Commission identifies as the Most Likely Descendant of any human remains. Further actions shall be Mitigated Negative Declaration 16 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 determined, in part, by the desires of the Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant has 48 hours to make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains following notification from the Native American Heritage Commission of the discovery. If the Most Likely Descendant does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the Most Likely Descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission.

This document was produced on recycled paper.

INITIAL STUDY

KING CITY

RIVERBED WILDFIRE PREVENTION PLAN

CITY OF KING

PREPARED FOR
City of King, Community Development Department
Doreen Liberto, AICP, MDR, Community Development Director 212 S. Vanderhurst Avenue
King City, CA 93930
Tel 831.385.3281
[email protected]

PREPARED BY
EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Tel 831.649.1799
Fax 831.649.8399
Stuart Poulter, AICP, MCRP, Senior Planner
[email protected]
www.emcplanning.com
July 26, 2024

EMC Planning Group Inc.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................... 1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED............................................. 17 C. DETERMINATION.............................................................................................................. 18 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................. 19

1. Aesthetics.............................................................................................................................. 21

2. Agriculture and Forest Resources...................................................................................... 23

3. Air Quality............................................................................................................................. 25

4. Biological Resources ............................................................................................................ 28

5. Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................... 57

6. Energy.................................................................................................................................... 60

7. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................ 61

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................... 64

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials..................................................................................... 66

10. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................ 69

11. Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................... 72

12. Mineral Resources................................................................................................................ 73

13. Noise...................................................................................................................................... 74

14. Population and Housing ..................................................................................................... 76

15. Public Services...................................................................................................................... 77

16. Recreation ............................................................................................................................. 79

17. Transportation ...................................................................................................................... 80

18. Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................... 81

19. Utilities and Service Systems.............................................................................................. 82

20. Wildfire .................................................................................................................................. 84

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................. 86 E. SOURCES............................................................................................................................. 88 EMC Planning Group Inc.

Appendices
Appendix A Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (May 8, 2024) Appendix B Special-Status Species in the Project Vicinity Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location Map .................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2 Aerial Map ....................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3 Site Photographs ............................................................................................................. 13 Figure 4 Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Fuel Break Map................................................. 15 Figure 5 Habitat Map..................................................................................................................... 31 Figure 6 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity .................. 35 Tables
Table 1 Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Implementation Measures (Projects) ............... 4 Section A Background 1 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 A. BACKGROUND
Project Title King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Lead Agency Contact Person
and Phone Number
Doreen Liberto, AICP, MDR
Community Development Director
City of King
831-385-3281
Date Prepared July 2024
Study Prepared by EMC Planning Group Inc.
601 Abrego Street
Monterey, CA 93940
Project Location Areas of Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek both within City of King and Unincorporated
Monterey County as well as in California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
(U.S. Highway 101) and Union Pacific
Railroad rights-of-way (portions of the
following APNs: 245-081-031; 235-052-007;
235-052-008; 02-031-021; 026-031-011; 026-
121-006; 026-461-022; 026-121-004; 235-051-
010; 026-131-007; 026-221-002; 235-031-005;
235-031-006; 026-293-003; 235-021-009; 026-
311-005; 235-021-016; 026-311-003)
Project Sponsor Name and Address City of King
Community Development Department
212 S. Vanderhurst Avenue
King City, CA 93930
General Plan Designation OS – Open Space, PD – Planned
Development (King City General Plan);
Farmlands 40 - 160 Ac Min (Monterey
County General Plan)
Zoning P-F – Primary Flood Plain District, S-F –
Secondary Flood Plain District; R-1 – Single
Family Residential, H-S – Highway Service
District (King City Zoning);
F/40 – Farmlands/40 units per acre
(Monterey County Zoning)
Section A Background 2 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Setting
King City is a major population center in the Salinas Valley and is an important agricultural area.

Framed by the Santa Lucia Range in the west and the Gabilán Range in the east, the land immediately surrounding King City is comprised of agricultural fields intersected by the Salinas River—the largest river system on California’s central coast. The river flows northwesterly from its headwaters in eastern San Luis Obispo County, 175 miles through the Salinas Valley, and into Monterey Bay just north of the city of Marina. The river is an important wildlife corridor, provides irrigation for an immense agricultural industry, and is the main source for aquifer recharge in the valley.

The project area covers 179 acres in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek, bordering the King City city limits on the south and east. The site contains no permanent structures, but approximately 70 permanent structures are on the immediate edge of the project area. Additionally, homeless encampments and debris exist intermittently throughout the project area particularly in the Salinas riverbed area fronting River Drive. The larger portion of the project site that covers the Salinas River floodplain is located within unincorporated Monterey County while the remaining portion of the project site, which runs along the San Lorenzo Creek on the eastern border of King City, is within city limits. The project site is surrounded by the following uses: commercial and residential uses to the north, the Salinas River and agricultural uses to the south, agricultural uses to the east, and the Salinas River and its floodplain to the west.

U.S. Highway 101 wraps around the site to the north and crosses the project site at its intersection with San Lorenzo Creek.

The project site’s general plan designations are as follows:
 OS – Open Space, PD – Planned Development (King City); and  Farmlands 40 - 160 Ac Min (Monterey County).

The project site’s zoning designations are as follows:
 P-F – Primary Flood Plain District (King City);
 S-F – Secondary Flood Plain District (King City);
 R-1 – Single Family Residential (King City);
 H-S – Highway Service District (King City); and
 F/40 – Farmlands/40 units per acre (Monterey County).

Figure 1, Regional Location Map, presents the location of the project area within the regional context of south Monterey County. Figure 2, Aerial Map, presents an aerial photo of the project area within the context of King City and the immediate surrounding area. This image also includes a 1,000-foot fuels modeling buffer around the project site, which is used for fuels and fire path modeling in the wildfire prevention plan discussed below. Figure 3, Site Photographs, provides a visual of portions of the project site from a pedestrian’s viewpoint.

Section A Background 3 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Description of Project
The draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (May 8, 2024) (hereinafter referred to as the “RWPP” or “plan” or “proposed project”) serves as a framework for a long-term fire resiliency and prioritizes hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in or near the City of King, California. The plan would achieve the two following goals:

1. Provides guidance and strategies to increase the wildfire resilience of the community; and

2. Protects and enhances the wildlife habitat and ecological value of the project area.

The plan was developed by Deer Creek Resources with input from City staff, collaborating agencies, and the community. The RWPP uses aerial photography and field surveys to map vegetation, analyze potential wildfire hazards within the project area, and prioritize wildfire hazard mitigation projects. For a complete copy of the Public Review Draft RWPP, please refer to Appendix A.

Table 1, Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Implementation Measures (Projects), summarizes the implementation measure recommendations found the RWPP, which are based on the conditions observed throughout the King City riverbed area and San Lorenzo Creek between November 2023 and January 2024 by Deer Creek Resources.

The primary implementation measure included in the RWPP is the creation of a fuel break on the edge of the Salinas Riverbed to protect homes and businesses and prevent a wildland fire from becoming a large fire affecting King City. A fuel break will starve an expanding fire of fuels while providing firefighters operational safety and access. While the remaining implementation measures will increase the fire safety and aesthetics of the project area and King City, the fuel break will provide the most protection. Additional details of the community fuel break vegetation management measure are discussed below.

Community Fuel Break
To protect structures and prevent large fire from spreading through King City, this plan includes a strategic 100-foot fuel break be created and maintained along the edge of the Salinas riverbed and San Lorenzo Creek, illustrated below in Figure 4, Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Fuel Break Map. The fuel break would begin behind the KFC restaurant and U.S. Highway 101 and continue along River Drive and Rio Vista Drive, ending at 254 Rio Vista Drive. The parcels in this area are owned by the City and Fred Miranda, a private landowner. Deer Creek Resources staff have confirmed with Mr. Miranda that he will grant the City access for fuels reduction treatment on his property (Nate Daly, email message, April 15, 2024).

Extending the fuel break to 262 Rio Vista Dive was requested by a community member at a February 28, 2024 community meeting. Although current vegetation conditions did not warrant that extension, the RWPP does include this area within the project area. This fuel break would then start again at the north end of the golf course behind 221 Villa Drive, ending at the King City Migrant Center at 440 Jayne Street. These parcels are owned by the City and multiple private property owners. The creation of the fuel break would require coordination between multiple parties.

Section A Background 4 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Table 1 Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Implementation Measures (Projects) Implementation
Measure
Number
Implementation
Measure
(Project)
Implementation Measure
Description
Priority
Level
Recommended
Return Interval
1 Community Fuel Break Create and maintain a buffer along the populated edge of the Salinas Riverbed
and San Lorenzo Creek.

Very High Creation Followed by
Semi-Annual
Maintenance
2 Invasive Plant
Management: Arundo
Manually remove existing Arundo in
coordination with the Resource
Conservation District of Monterey
County; monitor project area for new
growth.

High Annual Monitoring After
Removal (if found)
3 Invasive Plant
Management: Tamarisk
Manually remove existing tamarisk in
coordination with the Resource
Conservation District of Monterey
County; monitor project area for new
growth.

High Annual Monitoring After
Removal (if found)
4 Invasive Plant
Management: Yellow
Starthistle
Use prescribed fire to control yellow
starthistle, reduce fuels and create a
matrix of black, burned areas within the
project area.

High Seasonal; Three
Consecutive Years for
yellow starthistle
5 Defensible Space
Education
Promote fire-safe guidelines in
California PRC 4291; distribute mailers
to property owners on the boundary of
the project area.

High 3-5 Years
6 Code Enforcement:

Weed Abatement
Code Enforcement Officer indicates that
there are no ongoing weed complaints
adjacent to project area; continue to
enforce when complaints are made.

Moderate Ongoing
7 Code Enforcement:

Motorized Vehicle
Access
Residents report motorized vehicles in
project area; restrict access through
empty lots.

High Ongoing
8 Housing Pursue funding for temporary and longterm housing solutions; clean up shelter debris in project area.

High Ongoing
SOURCE: Deer Creek Resources 2024
The recommended fuel break would provide an easily accessible buffer in which fuel density is reduced. Fuel breaks provide quick access to firefighters where control activities can be conducted safely due to low fuel volumes. Vegetation would be thinned and trees (cottonwood and willows) would be pruned to remove ladder fuels. Brush, heavy ground fuels, and dead trees would be disposed of to create a park-like appearance. The fuel break does not need to be a bare strip in which all vegetation is removed to mineral soil (i.e., soils derived from minerals or rocks containing little organic matter) annually.

The recommended width of the fuel break is 100 feet, but that space does not exist throughout the entire recommended buffer area (e.g., in areas along San Lorenzo Creek); therefore, the width would be adjusted accordingly where necessary.

Section A Background 5 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Fuel Break Construction Methods
Reduce Ladder Fuels Under Larger Trees
Small trees and shrubs can spread fire from the surface into the crowns of the larger cottonwood trees and willows on the edge of the riverbed. To curb vertical fuel continuity, the plan includes a measure that the City concentrate thinning efforts on the understory to prevent fire from climbing into the gray pine canopy. Thinning understory vegetation will also allow leaves to drop to the ground, rather than suspend in lower vegetation where they can be highly flammable and create dangerous ladder fuel. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Remove Downed, High-Water Debris
Many downed limbs and miscellaneous dead material have washed up against the edge of the bank between the KFC and U.S. Highway 101 to the intersection of River Drive and the west entrance to Rio Plaza Mobile Home Estates. This debris is both a fuels concern and an impediment to emergency access to the riverbed area. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Remove Dead Trees
Several dead trees, many of which are fire damaged, lie in the 100-foot buffer. The plan indicates that these are hazards that should be downed and removed. However, healthy cottonwoods and willows should not be removed. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Long-Term Project Considerations
Beaver Reintroduction
This plan recommends the City further evaluate the reintroduction of American beavers (Castor canadensis) into the area and acquiring the riverbed property for open space development. The plan notes that neither recommendation can provide immediate fire mitigation like the fuel break, but are worth investigating for long-term benefits to restore the riverbed ecosystem and make it accessible for recreation.

The plan further notes that if the City is interested in pursuing further information about the roles beavers play in the function of riparian ecosystems, they can reach out to organizations like the San Luis Obispo County (SLO) Beaver Brigade, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County, and partnering with Nature’s Engineers, a Central Coast firm implementing beaver reintroduction projects and constructing ‘beaver dam analogs’(BDAs). Such an undertaking would require additional planning effort involving an array of property owners upstream and downstream from the project area. Such long-term projects would also require additional study and environmental review though, based on available scientific literature, the introduction of beaver habitat has resulted in environmental benefits and improved wildfire resiliency (Fairfax and Whittle 2020; Wigglesworth 2024).

Section A Background 6 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Tribal Cultural Burning
In addition, the City is also in discussions with the Xolon Salinan Tribe to determine whether tribal cultural burning practices might be integrated into the final RWPP. Such discussions with the tribal representatives of the Xolon Salinan Tribe are ongoing and will be considered as an implementation measure and tribal cultural benefit. The City, in collaboration with the Xolon Tribe and its consultants, will determine whether the project area and the types of vegetation found in the project area are appropriate and feasible for implementation of tribal cultural burning practices, whether as a standalone measure or incorporated into an already identified implementation measure.

A report prepared in July 2023 by the Science Advisory Panel for the California Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force indicates that the Central Coast landscape is also heavily shaped by indigenous land stewardship. For example, centuries of cultural burning cultivated some oak woodlands and coastal prairies that we see today. That historical stewardship was disrupted by European settlement, but there are now increasing efforts to restore native ecosystems by incorporating Traditional Ecological Knowledge into land management (California Wildfire & Forest Resilience Task Force 2023). Traditional Ecological Knowledge is further defined by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as “the evolving knowledge acquired by indigenous and local peoples over hundreds or thousands of years through direct contact with the environment…[and is] an accumulating body of knowledge, practice, and belief, evolving by adaptive processes and handed down through generations by cultural transmission, about the relationship of living beings (human and non-human) with one another and with the environment” (USFWS 2011).

According to the Honorable Ron W. Goode, Tribal Chairman of the North Fork Mono Tribe, “cultural burns are a form of land management passed down by Indigenous tribes over thousands of years. It is called cultural burning not only because of its spiritual and cultural importance to Indigenous communities, but because the burns are designed to cultivate the biodiverse, sustainable growth that make landscapes more resilient.” Goode also notes that are important differences in philosophy and execution between prescribed burns (which the RWPP already incorporates as part of Implementation Measure #4) and cultural burning. “Agencies tend to focus on acreage and fuel reduction, relying upon natural features or previous fires to control potential spread. Forestry technicians may prioritize large-scale pile burning, for example, then leave when it is done. Indigenous cultural burns focus on what needs to be burned to revitalize the land with the intent of returning to make use of it again” (Schelenz 2022).

Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Nationwide Permit)
 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Incidental Take Authorization)  California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Streambed Alteration Agreement)  Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Quality Certification)  Monterey Bay Air Resources District and CAL FIRE or other designated agency (i.e., South Monterey County Fire Protection District) with jurisdiction (Smoke Management Permit)
Section A Background 7 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

Two California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area have been offered consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. Both tribes did not respond to the consultation offer. See Section 18, Tribal Cultural Resources, for additional information. City staff is however, in discussions with the Xolon Salinan Tribe to determine whether tribal cultural burning practices might be integrated into the final RWPP. See the discussion in the project description above.

Section A Background 8 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

King City
Greenfield
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
Jolon Rd.

Spreckles
Rd.

Source: ESRI 2024
Figure 1
Regional Location Map
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study 0 2 miles
Project
Location
£¤101

1
k
Salinas
King City
Soledad
£¤101
Big Sur
Morro Bay
Morro Bay
Cambria
Seaside

1
Regional Location
Project Site
Salinas
River Flood
plain
Section A Background 10 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

U.S. Highway 101
Salinas River
Salinas River
Residential
Uses
Residential
Uses
Commercial
Uses
Commercial
Uses
San Lorenzo
Creek
Agricultural
Uses
0 1,500 feet
Source: ESRI 2024, EMC Planning Group 2024
Figure 2
Aerial Map
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study Project Site
City Limit
1,000-Foot Modeling Buffer
Section A Background 12 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

U.S.Highway 101
Salinas River
4 3
2 1
On S First Street facing southwest at San Lorenzo Creek. 4 On U.S. Highway 101 facing north along San Lorenzo Creek that runs under the highway. 3 Existing residences adjacent to the northern edge ofthe Salinas River floodplain. 2 On U.S. Highway 101 facing southeast across the Salinas River floodplain. 1 Photographs: EMC Planning Group 2024
Source: Google Earth 2024
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study Site Photographs
Figure 3
Project Site
Section A Background 14 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

U.S. Highway 101
Salinas River
Salinas River
Residential
Uses
Residential
Uses
Commercial
Uses
Commercial
Uses
San Lorenzo
Creek
Agricultural
Uses
0 1,500 feet
Source: ESRI 2024, EMC Planning Group 2024
Figure 4
Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Fuel Break Map
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study Project Site
City Limit
1000 Ft Modeling Buffer
100 ft Fuel Break
Optional 100 ft Fuel Break
Section A Background 16 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Section B Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 17 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services ☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
☐ Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
☐ Recreation
☐ Air Quality ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Transportation ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Energy ☐ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Section C Determination 18 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 C. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☐ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
_______ __________________
Doreen Liberto, AICP, MDR Date
Community Development Director
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 19 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 20 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 21 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

1. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 (Modernization of Transportation Analysis for Transit-Oriented Infill Projects), would the project:

Comments:
a. The King City General Plan Consolidated Plan Document (“General Plan”) does not specifically identify scenic vistas, but mentions that most of southern Monterey County could be considered scenic due to its rural character and agricultural setting. The General Plan also states that the gently rolling hillsides, river, and row crops provide a pleasant visual background for the community. The distant mountain ranges (e.g., Santa Lucia Range) could also be considered a scenic visual backdrop for King City. Scenic vistas are not specifically identified within the 2010 Monterey County General Plan; however, Goal OS-1 states, “retain the character and natural beauty of Monterey County be preserving, conserving, and maintaining unique physical features, natural resources, and agricultural operations.” The 2007 Monterey County General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Volume 1 SCH#2007121001 mentions that Monterey County’s visual character and aesthetic resources are linked to its geography and natural topography, vegetation, and cultural history of the region. Monterey County’s scenic vistas of particular concern closest to King City are San Lucas (located approximately seven miles southeast of King City) and Pine Canyon (located approximately 1.4 miles southwest of King City). The Monterey County Parcel Report Web App identifies the Santa Lucia Mountain Range to the southwest as a highly sensitive visual resource and the Diablo Mountain Range to the northeast as a sensitive visual resource (Monterey County 2024).

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 22 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The proposed project involves activities such as fuel hazard reduction and vegetation management activities, which may result in a beneficial impact on scenic vistas (e.g., removing dead trees and invasive plant species could provide views of the distant mountain ranges that were otherwise obstructed). Implementation of the proposed project and the recommended activities of the RWPP would not result in an adverse effect on scenic vistas.
b. There are no state designated scenic highways within or near King City; the nearest eligible highway is State Route 198 approximately eight miles southeast (California Department of Transportation 2024). Therefore, the project would not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c. The proposed project involves activities that reduce fire hazards in the project area.

Implementation of fuel hazard reduction and vegetation management activities would result in visual changes such as the removal of dead trees, limbs, and shrubs, as well as the trimming of tree understory and removal of invasive species. These types of activities, as well as the plan implementation measures listed in Table 1 of this initial study, would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings or conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.
d. The proposed project is a wildfire prevention plan whose purpose is to reduce fire hazards in the area; therefore, it does not involve the development of structures or anything that would create a new source of substantial light or glare. The project would not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 23 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects and in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

Comments:
a. The larger portion of the project site (consisting of the Salinas River floodplain) is designated by the California Department of Conservation as “Grazing Land” while the remainder of the project site, which wraps around the eastern border of the city limits (consisting of the San Lorenzo Creek corridor), is designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land” (California Department of Conservation 2024). Additionally, the project site is not currently used for agricultural purposes. Therefore, the proposed project would not Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 24 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use. b. The project site does not contain any Williamson Act land and, therefore, the project will not conflict with a Williamson Act contract (Department of Conservation 2023).

The larger portion of the project site (consisting of the Salinas River floodplain) is zoned by Monterey County as Farmlands/40 units per acre (F/40) while the remaining portions of the project site are zoned by King City as Primary Flood Plain District (P-F), Secondary Flood Plain District (S-F), Sigle Family Residential (R-1), and Highway Service District (H-S).

Although the larger portion of the project site is zoned for agricultural use, it is not currently used for agricultural purposes (EMC Planning Group, site visit, 2024) and has not been used for agricultural purposes since at least 1994 (Google Earth 2024).

Additionally, implementation of the plan would not prohibit the land zoned for agricultural use to be put into agricultural use at some future date. Therefore, implementation of the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use. c-d. The project site is comprised of the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek and does not involve any existing agricultural uses. Additionally, there are no forest lands or timberland zoned lands within King City. Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production.
e. There are no forest lands within King City and, therefore, the project would not involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Agricultural uses exist along the eastern border outside of the project site. These agricultural uses are within the project’s 1,000-foot fuels modeling buffer (refer to the buffer shown on Figure 2, Aerial Map). The project does not involve the development of any structures or infrastructure that could result in the conversion of the adjacent farmland to nonagricultural use. Implementation of the project would result in, among other activities, periodic maintenance of fuel breaks and manual removal of invasive plant species. The project would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 25 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

Comments:

King City is within the North Central Coast Air Basin (air basin), which is under the jurisdiction of the Monterey Bay Air Resources District (air district or MBARD). This section is based primarily on guidance in the air district’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (2008) (CEQA guidelines), and the air district’s 2012 – 2015 Air Quality Management Plan (2017) (air quality management plan).
a. A consistency determination is a process by which the lead agency demonstrates that the population associated with a proposed project is accommodated by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments’ regional growth forecasts. The regional growth forecasts for population and dwelling units are embedded in the emission inventory projections used in the air quality plan. Projects within the regional growth forecasts have been accommodated in the air quality plan and, therefore, are consistent with the air quality plan. The proposed project is not population generating and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the air quality management plan (MBUAPCD Air Quality Guidelines, p. 5-10).
b. The air district’s threshold of significance for criteria air emissions are typically used as the basis for evaluating the relative impacts of land development projects. Land development projects commonly generate short-term emissions from construction activities, and long-term emissions from project operations. The air district threshold of significance for short-term construction emissions for land use projects is related to particulate dust emissions known as PM10. Air district CEQA guidelines Table 5-2, Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
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
nonattainment 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 26 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Construction Activity with Potentially Significant Impacts, identifies the level of construction activity that could result in significant temporary fugitive dust impacts if not mitigated. Construction activities associated with grading and excavation that disturb more than 2.2 acres per day and construction activities with minimal earthmoving that disturb more than 8.1 acres per day are assumed to generate more than 82 pounds of particulate matter per day, which would exceed the threshold of significance.

This information is provided to offer context, as the proposed project is not a land use development project. The information reflects the air district’s interest in managing particulate dust from activities within the air basin. Therefore, the qualitative analysis here focuses on particulate dust. As described below, the project would not be a source of long-term, daily, weekly, or monthly continuous air emissions. Nevertheless, the proposed project involves activities that would be sources of short-term air emissions, analogous to short-term construction activities for land use projects, but significantly less intensive.

Creating a fuel break is the primary implementation strategy and the strategy that involves the most notable level of combustible fuel removal. It involves a one-time effort to reduce ladder fuels under larger trees, remove downed limbs and dead material, and remove a limited number of dead trees. Semi-annual maintenance of the established fire break would require a significantly reduced level of effort relative to the initial clearing activity. Limited use of handheld gas-powered equipment such as weed whackers and pole pruners, and wood chippers would be required for the initial clearing. Manual clearing of brush and other materials would also occur. A mower(s) would likely be used to support semi-annual fuel break maintenance.

Implementing the fuel break strategy does not require grading or excavations, activities which involve using heavy equipment that produces particulate emissions, nor does the project involve activities that would disturb bare mineral soil surfaces and generate dust or create exposed soil surfaces from which fugitive dust can be generated from wind erosion. These are the main sources of PM10 during short-term “construction” activities with which the air district is concerned. Relative to these sources, particulate dust emissions from using hand-operated equipment and chippers would be minimal. Some level of dust would likely be generated from using mowers for semi-annual fuel break maintenance, but given the short duration of activity and the fact that the activity would not expose or disturb mineral soils, the volume of particulate generation would be limited. The RWPP does not specify the duration of the initial fuel break vegetation management activity, nor for semi-annual maintenance activities, nor does it specify the duration of use for vegetation removal equipment. Consequently, potential daily PM10 emissions volumes during this activity have not been forecast for informational purposes.

Using limited prescribed fire to control yellow starthistle is the other RWPP implementation measure that could be a source of particulate matter emissions from organic fuel combustion. The RWPP only identifies the use of prescribed burning under very specific and controlled circumstances to thin out this specific invasive plant species that does occurs in large patches (though is not dominate) throughout the Salinas Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 27 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 riverbed area and more infrequently in the San Lorenzo Creek area. The RWPP notes that such a strategy would require a multi-year process and is not deemed a very high priority implementation measure. It is also noted that the City is currently in ongoing discussions with the Xolon Salinan Tribe to consider incorporating tribal cultural burning practices as a part of the RWPP. Such tribal cultural burning practices, if adopted as part of the final RWPP, would also be limited in nature and require careful monitoring and oversight by City, tribal, and fire service personnel. MBARD Rule 404, Particulate Matter, addresses particulate emission limits. It limits the amount of particulate matter that can be discharged by any source within the air basin. The rule exempts several types of activities, including fires set for the purpose of preventing a fire hazard. This indicates that particulate air emissions from the yellow starthistle control strategy or the incorporation of tribal cultural burning practices into the plan is not at issue for its overall particulate air emissions.

The management activities involving invasive plant management are not expected to be sources of PM10 as removal activities would be conducted manually, without use of equipment that produces particulate emissions or results in ground clearing or significant disturbance.

Given the considerations above, the proposed project contribution to regional air quality impacts would be less than significant.
c. Portions of the project site are located adjacent to sensitive residential receptors. Diesel particulate emissions are the typical emissions of concern for potentially impacting public health during typical short-term “construction” activities. These emissions are toxic and can pose health risks to sensitive receptors that are exposed to high concentrations of this emission type. Associated sources of toxic diesel air contaminants commonly include heavy, diesel fueled construction equipment such as bulldozers, graders, excavators, idling or moving trucks, etc.

As described in checklist question “b” above, short-term RWPP implementation activities do not require using heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment that has potential to generate substantial toxic air emissions. Handheld landscape maintenance equipment such as weedwhackers and pole pruners, and other equipment types such as mowers and chippers are typically not diesel-powered. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact from exposing sensitive receptors to high concentrations of toxic air contaminants.
d. Representative sources of odors commonly assumed to have significant nuisance potential for a substantial number of people include landfills, wastewater treatment plants, animal feed lots, large-scale composting operations, etc. The proposed project does not have such potential. If goats are used as a vegetation management option, localized, temporary odors could be produced. This odor source would not rise to the level of being significant as it would be temporary, infrequent, and would not affect a substantial number of people. Potential odor impacts of the project would be less than significant.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 28 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:

The following analysis evaluates the potential for protected biological resources to be impacted by the implementation of the proposed project. The analysis is based on a review of the proposed project description including the implementation plan, results of biological records research relevant to the project area, and reconnaissance‐level biological field surveys of the project site. The reconnaissance-level surveys were conducted by EMC Planning Group senior biologist Patrick Furtado, M.S., on December 6, 2023, and February 14, 2024.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
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, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or US 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, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US
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, filing, 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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 29 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Information in this section is also derived from the following documents:
 San Lorenzo Creek Restoration Plan for the Downtown Addition Project (WRA 2013);  Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program Revised Final EIR (MCWRA 2014); and  Salinas River Long-Term Management Plan (MCWRA 2019).

Prior to conducting the field surveys, Mr. Furtado reviewed the plan, aerial photographs, natural resource database accounts, and other relevant scientific literature. This review included searching the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Database (USFWS 2024a), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (“CNDDB”, CDFW 2024a, CDFW 2024b), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2024a) to identify special-status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. A review of the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) database was also conducted to identify potentially jurisdictional aquatic features (wetlands, drainages, and/or riparian areas) on or adjacent to the project site (USFWS 2024b).

The reconnaissance‐level biological field surveys documented existing plant communities and wildlife habitats and evaluated the potential for special‐status species to occur in the project area.

Biological resources were documented in field notes, including species observed, dominant plant communities, significant wildlife habitat characteristics, and riparian and wetland habitat.

Qualitative estimations of plant cover, structure, and spatial changes in species composition were used to determine plant communities and wildlife habitats. Habitat quality and disturbance levels were described. Plant species were identified in the field or collected for subsequent identification. Searches for reptiles and amphibians were performed by overturning and then replacing rocks and debris. Birds were identified by visual and/or auditory recognition and mammals were identified by diagnostic signs (including scat and tracks).

Existing Conditions
The approximately 179-acre project site consists of undeveloped land within the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek on the southern and eastern edges of the city, and in unincorporated Monterey County. The land uses of the adjacent developed areas are residential, commercial, and agricultural.

The Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek support mature, but highly disturbed, riparian woodland habitat along their banks. The Salinas River also supports disturbed alluvial scrub habitat within its floodplain.

The western half of the project site is mapped on the Thompson Canyon U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map, while the eastern half is located on the San Lucas USGS quadrangle.

Soils
The riverine soils at the project site are classified by the Natural Resources Conservation Service as Corducci and Typic Xerofluents consisting of fine to coarse sand. These are well-drained soils derived from mixed alluvium parent materials.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 30 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Aquatic Features
The Salinas River flows northwesterly along the southern and western boundaries of the project site. San Lorenzo Creek is within the project site and flows in a southerly direction along the eastern edge of the project site before turning westward and joining the Salinas River. The Salinas River had a substantial flow of water at the time of the surveys but the San Lorenzo Creek was dry.

Plant and Wildlife Habitat
Communities along the Salinas River include riparian woodland and alluvial scrub. San Lorenzo Creek supports a mix of riparian woodland and alluvial scrub. Habitats are shown on Figure 5, Habitat Map.

Salinas River Riparian Woodland
Habitat found along the Salinas River, adjacent to developed areas in King City (south of Broadway Street, River Drive and Rio Vista Drive), includes both riparian woodland and floodplain alluvial scrub. A stretch of Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii) riparian woodland is found immediately below the gas stations and fast-food restaurants along the southern edge of the city. A park strip east of the adjacent McDonald’s restaurant consists of manicured lawn.

The riparian woodland habitat here has been severely degraded from wildfire, invasive plants, garbage dumping, homeless encampments, and vandalism to trees. Found within the burned cottonwoods, the native understory vegetation consists of mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), wild rose (Rosa californica), umbrella sedge (Cyperus eragrostis), curly dock (Rumex crispus), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), and arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis).

Non-native plant species observed under and adjacent to the riparian woodland include tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima), also known as saltcedar, milk thistle (Silybum marianum), mallow (Malva parviflora), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), bird’s-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), caper spurge (Euphorbia lathyris), starthistle (Centaurea sp.), mustard (Brassica nigra and Hirschfeldia incana), cockleburs (Xanthium spp.), horseweed (Erigeron canadensis), perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), and tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca).

San Lorenzo Creek Riparian Woodland
The riparian woodland along San Lorenzo Creek is highly impacted by grading and sediment removal, and the invasion of aggressive non-native plant species including tamarisk, giant reed (Arundo donax), perennial pepperweed, and tree tobacco. Large amounts of garbage piles are found within both the riparian woodland and the adjacent floodplain.

Native vegetation observed along San Lorenzo Creek also includes mulefat, coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), arroyo willow, red willow (Salix laevigata), cottonwood (Populus fremontii and P. trichocarpa), and mistletoe (Phoradendron californicum), an important food source for many local bird species.
0 1,000 feet
Source: ESRI 2024
Figure 5
Habitat Map
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study Project SiteRiparian
Riparian/Alluvial Mix
Alluvial
Disturbed (Agriculture/Developed)
Active Stream/River Channel
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 32 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 33 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The floodplain next to San Lorenzo Creek, recently used as a golf course, has also been highly impacted through the deforestation of native riparian tree species such a cottonwood and willow.

Raptors, in particular, rely on mature riparian trees for nesting and one red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) was observed during one of the surveys using a remnant cottonwood on the project site. However, despite the degraded habitat conditions, a diverse array of bird species was observed using the riparian and floodplain habitat along San Lorenzo Creek and the Salinas River including acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufescens), hairy woodpecker (Dryobates villosus), California scrubjay (Aphelocoma californica), wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), and black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans).

Salinas River Floodplain Alluvial Scrub
The floodplain alluvial scrub on the project site is found between the riparian woodland and the Salinas River on sandy river sediments. Alluvial scrub consists mainly of flood-adapted droughtdeciduous and evergreen woody shrubs. The native scrub vegetation observed along the Salinas River includes big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis), mulefat, wild rose, coyotebrush, sandbar willow (Salix exigua), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), and creeping wild rye (Elymus triticoides).

Deer and other animal tracks were abundant in this habitat.

Despite significant native vegetation on the river floodplain, in many areas non-native invasive species dominate. These include tamarisk, Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), cockleburs, giant reed, starthistle, and widespread, biennial white sweetclover (Melilotus albus).

Large flocks of white-crowned sparrow were observed moving through this habitat, along with mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), and California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivium). Wildlife tracks were ubiquitous with black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus columbianus), feral pig/boar (Sus scrofa), racoon (Procyon lotor), small rodents, and large birds such as herons and egrets. A great egret (Ardea alba) was observed hunting at the river’s edge. a. Special-Status Species. Special-status species are those listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Rare, or as candidates for listing by the USFWS and/or CDFW; as Species of Special Concern or Fully Protected species by the CDFW; or as Rare Plant Rank 1B or 2B species by CNPS. Appendix B, Special-Status Species in the Project Vicinity, presents tables with database search results, and lists special-status species documented within the project vicinity, their listing status and suitable habitat description, and their potential to occur on the project site. Figure 6, Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity, presents a map of California Natural Diversity Database results.

Special-Status Plant Species. No special-status plants were observed during the reconnaissance site assessment; however, surveys were conducted outside the peak blooming period for umbrella larkspur and did not comprehensively survey the entire plan area for Davidson’s bushmallow. Based on the presence of suitable or marginally suitable habitats, the project site has the potential to support the following two specialstatus plants species:

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 34 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Davidson’s bush-mallow. Davidson’s bush-mallow (Malacothamnus davidsonii) is primarily found in sandy washes of coastal scrub and riparian woodlands habitats. This CNBS 1B.2 plant is found in a tributary to the Salinas River 2.1 miles southwest of the project site (Occurrence No. 37, CNDDB 2024b). The blooming period for this species is generally from June to January. Riparian woodland and scrub habitats within the project boundary are considered potential habitat for this species.

Umbrella larkspur. Umbrella larkspur (Delphinium umbraculorum) is a CNPS 1B.3 plant species found along stream banks and open woodlands in moist, well-drained soils.

Umbrella larkspur was recorded 0.8 miles southwest of the project area along a tributary to the Salinas River (Occurrence No. 67, CNDDB 2024b). The blooming period for this species is generally from April to June. Riparian woodland and scrub habitats along the banks of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek are considered potential habitat for this species.

If present, loss or harm to special-status plant species is considered a significant adverse impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce the potential impact to special-status plants to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-1 The summer blooming period prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a biologist qualified in botany shall conduct a focused survey for Davidson’s bush mallow and umbrella larkspur in accordance with current California Department of Fish and Wildlife and California Native Plant Society rare plant survey protocols (CDFW 2018 and CNPS 2001). Some special-status plant species are only identifiable during their blooming periods and surveys are only considered valid if they occur when blooms are visible. The survey shall occur during the peak blooming period for these species to determine their presence or absence. Based on the known blooming periods of the special-status plant species potentially present, two surveys would be necessary to adequately survey the project site: the first in May/June and the second in August/September. If possible, known reference populations of the target species in the project vicinity shall first be visited to verify that the species is observable, and the focused survey shall be conducted within two weeks of observing the reference population in full bloom.

The biologist shall prepare a brief report documenting the results of the surveys for submittal to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities. If the focused surveys conclude that special-status plant species are not present within the project site boundary, or if they are present but impacts can be completely avoided, then no further mitigation would be required. Focused plant surveys are generally considered valid for two years. Surveys shall be repeated if disturbance activities are planned after two years.

Monterey
hitch
American
badger
bank
swallow
bank
swallow
San Joaquin
kit fox
umbrella
larkspur
San Joaquin
kit fox
San Joaquin
kit fox
southwestern
pond turtle
Davidson's
bushmallow
recurved
larkspur
San Joaquin
kit fox
burrowing
owl
Northern California
legless
lizard
0 1.4 Miles
Source: ESRI 2024, CDFW CNDDB 2024
Figure 6
Special-Status Species Within the Project Vicinity
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study Project Site3.1-Mile Buffer
Special-Status PlantsSpecial-Status Wildlife
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 36 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 37 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 If at any point special-status plant species are identified within the project site boundary and they would be affected by the proposed project, then appropriate mitigation shall be developed by the biologist and implemented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities. Measures may include, but are not limited to:
a. A qualified biologist shall identify an on-site or off-site mitigation area suitable for restoration of habitat and seed transplantation for any special-status plant species. b. Prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, a qualified biologist or native plant specialist shall perform seed collection from all special-status plants located within the impact areas and implement seed installation at the mitigation area at the optimal time. Additionally, topsoil from the special-status species occurrence area(s) shall be salvaged (where practical) for use in the mitigation area. c. A maintenance and monitoring program shall be developed by a qualified biologist and established for a minimum of five years after mitigation area installation to verify that restoration activities have been successful. Maintenance activities may include, but not be limited to, watering during the plant establishment period, supplemental seed planting as needed, and removal of non-native plants. Monitoring shall include, at a minimum, quarterly monitoring reports for the first year and annual reports for the remaining four years. The performance standard for successful mitigation shall be a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio (i.e., three plants observed in mitigation area for each plant lost from the project site) achieved in at least one of the five years of monitoring.

The King City Community Development Department will be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure. Compliance with this measure shall be documented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file.

Special-Status Wildlife Species. Special-status wildlife species with the potential to utilize the alluvial scrub and riparian woodland habitats found within the project boundary include Monterey hitch (Lavinia exilicauda harengus), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra nigra), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), American badger (Taxidea taxus), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), protected bats, and nesting birds and raptors. These species are discussed in more detail below.

Implementation of the following general wildlife protection measure, in association with the species-specific mitigation measures identified below, will reduce potential, significant impacts to protected biological resources to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-2 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance or vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for all project personnel. At a minimum, the training shall include a description of special-status species potentially Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 38 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 occurring in the project vicinity, including, but not limited to, special-status plants (if present), Monterey hitch, California red-legged frog, Northern California legless lizard, southwestern pond turtle, burrowing owl, American badger, Monterey dusky-footed woodrat, San Joaquin kit fox, special-status bat species, and nesting birds and raptors. Their habitats, general measures that are being implemented to conserve species as they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which project activities will occur will be explained.

Informational handouts with photographs clearly illustrating the species’ appearances shall be used in the training session. As new phases or activities begin, all new project personnel shall undergo this mandatory environmental awareness training. The project contractor shall document evidence of completion of this training by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities.

The qualified biologist will train biological monitors selected from the project crew by the project contractor (typically the project foreman). Before the start of work each day, the monitor will check for animals under any equipment such as vehicles. If a special-status species is observed within an active project area, the qualified biologist will be notified immediately and all work within 50 feet of the individual will be halted and all equipment turned off until the individual has left the area.

Monterey Hitch. Monterey hitch is listed as CDFW Species of Special Concern and is a small native fish known from the Pajaro River and Salinas River systems. Monterey hitch can occupy a wide variety of habitats, although they are most abundant in lowland areas with large pools or in small reservoirs. Preferred substrates include a mixture of sand and gravel with the presence of cover, such as fallen trees, overhanging bushes, etc. Spawning season is typically from May to August. When inundated, potential habitat includes project areas within the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek. Impacts to Monterey hitch could occur as a result of mechanical vegetation removal, application of herbicides, and sediment management, and are considered potentially significant.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to Monterey hitch to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-3 The following measures shall be implemented to protect Monterey hitch and aquatic habitats:
a. Implementation measures 1-4 that require ground disturbance activities within the active channels of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek shall be conducted from September to April each year, during periods of low flow (Salinas River) or no flow (San Lorenzo Creek), outside of the spawning period for Monterey hitch.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 39 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 b. For the duration of the project, herbicides may be applied to vegetation within a 10- foot buffer zone along the edge of the active channel for non-native invasive vegetation treatment only. Only herbicides approved for use in aquatic environments shall be used. c. For the duration of the project will use work measures including Best Management Practices (BMPs), time-of-year-restrictions, water pollution prevention, erosion control, and tree root protection to further minimize erosion and impacts to riparian and aquatic habitat. BMPs intended to reduce erosion of exposed soil into the bed and banks of the creek may include, but are not limited to, soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, silt fencing, and fiber rolls. Standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures will be required for work performed in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of the creek. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting), loosely woven netting, or similar material in any form shall not be used at the project site as wildlife can become entangled and trapped in them. Materials utilizing fixed weaves (strands cannot move), polypropylene, polymer, or other synthetic materials shall not be used.

California Red‐Legged Frog. A federally-listed Threatened species and California Species of Special Concern, California red‐legged frog occurs in lowlands and foothills primarily in perennial or ephemeral ponds, pools, and streams where water remains long enough (14‐28 weeks) for breeding and metamorphosis of tadpoles. Specific breeding sites include streams, creeks, ponds, marshes, sag ponds, deep pools, backwater areas, dune ponds, lagoons, and estuaries. California red-legged frog may disperse from their aquatic breeding habitats to upland habitats during the dry season. They prefer upland habitats that provide moisture to prevent desiccation and protection from predators, including downed logs, woody vegetation, boulders, moist leaf litter, or other refugia during the dry season. In areas where upland habitats do not contain structure, they take refuge in burrows. However, if there is sufficient water at their breeding location, they may remain in aquatic habitats year‐round instead of moving to adjacent uplands.

During wet seasons, frogs can move long distances between habitats, traversing upland areas or ephemeral drainages. Dispersal distances are typically less than 0.3 mile, with a few individuals moving 1.2‐2.2 miles. Seeps and springs in open grasslands can function as foraging habitat or refugia for wandering frogs.

CNDDB records indicate that the closest known occurrence of California red-legged frog to the project site was recorded in 2008, within a deep pool along Vaqueros Creek, 11 miles northwest of the site (Occurrence No. 1002, CNDDB 2024a). Potential upland and breeding habitat may be present within the pools and riparian vegetation within Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek within the project boundary and within multiple freshwater ponds within 0.5 miles from the project site. Based on the suitable habitat at the project site, along with proximity to potential breeding and migratory habitat, there is potential for California red-legged frogs to exist within the project site. Impacts to California red-legged frog at any life stage are considered significant.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 40 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to California redlegged frog to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-4 Ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal activities (implementation measures 1-4) are proposed within and immediately adjacent to California red-legged frog habitat. Project implementation may directly impact aquatic habitat and upland habitat. Prior to the start of disturbance activities, one or both of the following options will be implemented:

Option 1. Protocol-Level Surveys for California Red-Legged Frog Protocol surveys will be conducted per the Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2005) to determine if California red-legged frog is present at the project site. If surveys result in a negative finding, documentation will be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for confirmation. If the negative finding is considered valid no further action is required.

If California red-legged frog is found, Incidental Take Authorization will be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, as detailed in Option 2, below.

Option 2. Assume Presence of California Red-Legged Frog and Obtain Incidental Take Authorization
If the presence of California red-legged frog is determined during protocol-level surveys or it is assumed that they are present on the project site, the King City Community Development Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a permit term for the duration of the project. The King City Community Development Department will ensure that all avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measures required in the permit to minimize the potential for “take” of California red-legged frog are implemented.

Northern California Legless Lizard. Northern California legless lizard is a California Species of Special Concern. This is a small, slender lizard with no legs that lives mostly underground, burrowing in loose, sandy soil. It forages in loose soil, sand, and leaf litter during the day. It does not bask in direct sunlight, but is sometimes found on the surface at dusk and at night. Treeless, open areas with sandy soils and sparse vegetation are present throughout habitats at the project site and provide suitable habitat for legless lizard. The nearest observation was recorded in 2018, approximately 0.55 miles south of the project site along a drainage within Pine Canyon (Occurrence No. 362, CNDDB 2024b).

If northern California legless lizard is present on or adjacent to the project site, vegetation removal activities could result in the loss or disturbance of individual animals. This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 41 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to Northern California legless lizard to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-5 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance in areas with sandy soils (which includes a majority of the project area), the King City Community Development Department shall retain a qualified biologist to determine measures to avoid or minimize impacts to legless lizards, depending on the proposed activity. Measures may include, but not be limited to:
a. Preconstruction Surveys. Within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance in potential habitat, preconstruction surveys shall be conducted. Methods include a “three-pass, high grading” methodology that requires raking of the soil to locate and remove as many California legless lizards as possible.

If legless lizards are found during the first pass, an overnight period of no soil disturbance must occur before the second pass. The same requirement will be implemented after the second pass if legless lizards are located. If no California legless lizards are found during the second pass, a third pass is not required. b. Identification of Relocation Site(s). Prior to surveying and construction, one or more relocation sites shall be identified by a qualified biologist. All relocation sites shall be approved by the King City Community Development Department and shall consist of suitable habitat. Relocation sites shall be as close to the capture site as possible but far enough away to ensure the animal(s) is/are not harmed by construction of the project.

Relocation shall occur on the same day as capture. California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Native Species Field Survey Forms shall be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for all special-status species observed.
c. Barrier fencing. If California legless lizards are observed, a barrier shall be installed to prevent movement of legless lizards back into the work are. All captured California legless lizards would be moved to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b). d. Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be onsite to monitor ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities and salvage and relocate any legless lizards encountered.

The monitoring shall walk alongside equipment/crews in each new area of disturbance, and shall have authority to halt activities temporarily if necessary to capture and relocate legless lizards. Any legless lizards captured shall be relocated as soon as possible to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b).

Southwestern Pond Turtle. Southwestern pond turtle is a California Species of Special Concern and is proposed for federal listing as threatened. It is uncommon to common in suitable aquatic habitat throughout California including freshwater marshes, stock ponds, lakes, rivers, and streams. This species is considered omnivorous. Aquatic plant material, including pond lilies, beetles and a variety of aquatic invertebrates as well as fishes, frogs, Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 42 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 and even carrion have been reported among their food. Pond turtles require basking sites such as partially submerged logs, rocks, mats of floating vegetation, or open mud banks.

Turtles slip from basking sites to underwater retreats at the approach of humans or potential predators.

An occurrence of southwestern pond turtle was documented in 1988 along the Salinas River at the project site (Occurrence No. 254, CNDDB 2024b). Suitable aquatic and upland habitats are present within the project site. Impacts to southwestern pond turtle are potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to southwestern pond turtle to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-6 The King City Community Development Department shall implement the following measures for the protection of western pond turtle:
a. Within 24 hours prior to vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities associated with implementation measures 1-4, the King City Community Development Department shall retain a biologist qualified to survey for southwestern pond turtle, including their eggs and nests, to conduct a preconstruction survey along aquatic features and an adjacent 300-feet buffer of riparian areas in and adjacent to the project site.
b. If southwestern pond turtle or their nests are observed during preconstruction surveys, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to monitor activities in suitable habitat.

Southwestern pond turtles found within the project area shall be allowed to leave of their own volition or they shall be captured by a qualified biologist and relocated out of harm’s way to the nearest suitable habitat immediately upstream or downstream from the project area. Pond turtle relocation shall only be conducted after notifying the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c. If southwestern pond turtle nests are identified in the work area during preconstruction surveys, a 300-foot no disturbance buffer shall be established between the nest and any areas of potential disturbance. Buffers shall be clearly marked with temporary fencing.

Disturbance activities will not be allowed to commence in the exclusion area until hatchlings have emerged from the nest, or the nest is deemed inactive by a qualified biologist.
d. All construction-related trenches, holes, or pits shall be covered at the end of each workday to prevent entrapment of pond turtles.

The qualified biologist shall prepare a report documenting the results of the preconstruction survey(s) for submittal to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 43 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl is a California Species of Special Concern. Burrowing owls live and breed in burrows in the ground, especially in abandoned California ground squirrel burrows. Optimal habitat conditions include large open, dry and nearly level grasslands or prairies with short to moderate vegetation height and cover, areas of bare ground, and populations of burrowing mammals. This species was observed in 2002 approximately 1.8 miles north of the project area at the Mesa Del Rey Airport (Occurrence No. 436, CDFW 2024). Alluvial scrub and riparian understory habitats provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for burrowing owl. In agricultural environments (found adjacent to the project area), burrowing owls nest along roadsides and water conveyance structures (open canals, ditches, drains) surrounded by crops. If burrowing owl is present on or adjacent to the project site, ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities could result in the loss or disturbance of individual animals.

This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to burrowing owl to a less-thansignificant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-7 To avoid loss of or harm to burrowing owl as a result of implementation measures 1-4, the following measures shall be implemented:
a. To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, a biologist qualified in ornithology shall conduct surveys for burrowing owl prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal. The qualified biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to the methods for take avoidance described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012). If no burrowing owls are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department and no further measures are required. b. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (CBOC 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (CDFG 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 44 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers
(meters)
Low Med High
Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m
Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m
c. If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1).

Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return.
d. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. Once the absence of burrowing owl has been confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department.

American Badger. American badger is a CDFW Species of Special Concern. It is an uncommon, permanent resident found throughout most of the state, except in the northern North Coast area. This large member of the weasel family uses most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats with friable soils suitable for burrows. Prey species include fossorial rodents such as rats, mice, chipmunks, ground squirrels, and pocket gophers. Badger diet shifts seasonally depending on the availability of prey and may also include reptiles, insects, earthworms, eggs, birds, and carrion. Mixed oak woodland, coastal scrub, and grassland habitats provide cover, drier soils for burrowing, and prey resources for this species (CDFW 2024c).

The CNDDB includes one occurrence record for American badger within the project area (Occurrence No. 300, CNDDB 2024b). Suitable habitat is present within the friable soils and floodplain habitats of the project area. As such, American badger has the potential to occur on the project site. Therefore, project impacts on American badger are potentially significant.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 45 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to American badger to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-8 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, and not more than 14 days prior to the commencement of ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct surveys to identify any potential American badger burrows/dens. If the survey results are negative (i.e., no badger dens observed), a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities and no further mitigation is required.

If the results are positive (badger dens are observed), the qualified biologist shall determine if the dens are active by installing a game camera for three days and three nights to determine if the den is in use.
a. If the biologist determines that a den may be active, coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be undertaken to develop a suitable strategy to avoid impacts to American badger. The strategy may include the following: the biologist shall install a one-way door in the den opening and continue use of the game camera.

Once the camera captures the individual exiting the one-way door, the den can be excavated with hand tools to prevent badgers from reusing them. If the biologist determines that the den is a maternity den, project activities shall be delayed during the maternity season (February to August), or until the badgers leave the den on their own accord or the biologist determines that the den is no longer in use. b. If the game camera does not capture an individual entering/exiting the den, the den can be excavated with hand tools to prevent badgers from reusing them. c. After dens have been excavated and the absence of American badger confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal.

Monterey Dusky-Footed Woodrat. The Monterey dusky-footed woodrat is a California Species of Special Concern found in Monterey and San Luis Obispo counties. They are common to abundant in forest habitats of moderate canopy and moderate to dense understory. Monterey dusky-footed woodrat feeds mainly on woody plants, especially live oak, maple, coffeeberry, alder, and elderberry when available. They prefer moderate canopy cover in a variety of habitats. Houses are built of sticks and leaves at the base of, or in a tree, around a shrub, or at the base of a hill. Houses may measure eight feet in height and eight feet in diameter with nests located inside the stick house. They are mostly nocturnal but may reduce their activity on moonlit or rainy nights (CDFW 2008).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 46 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This species is often found in cool, shady habitat with dense cover and the stick houses can be used by many generations over several years. The abandoned homes of dusky-footed woodrat provide habitat for a number of other species such as deer mice, salamanders, frogs, lizards, and snakes. Predators of dusky-footed woodrat include owls, hawks, bobcats, and coyotes. The project site includes riparian trees and shrubs considered suitable habitat for this species.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to Monterey dusky-footed woodrat to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-9 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests within thirty (30) days prior to the start of disturbance activities. If the survey results are negative (i.e., no woodrat nests observed), a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities and no further mitigation is required.

If the results are positive (woodrat nests are observed), all Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance.

If Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests are found that cannot be avoided, each active nest shall be disturbed by the qualified biologist to the degree that Monterey dusky-footed woodrat leaves the nest and seeks refuge elsewhere. After the nests have been disturbed, the nest sticks shall be removed from the impact areas and placed outside of areas planned for impacts. Nests shall be dismantled during the non-breeding season (between October 1 and December 31), if possible. If a litter of young is found or suspected, nest material shall be replaced and the nest left alone for 2-3 weeks, after this time the nest will be rechecked to verify that young are capable of independent survival before proceeding with nest dismantling.

After nests have been dismantled and the absence of Monterey dusky-footed woodrat confirmed, a letter report shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal.

San Joaquin Kit Fox. The San Joaquin kit fox is a federally-listed endangered species and a state-listed threatened species. The present range of the San Joaquin kit fox extends from the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, north to Tulare County, and along the interior Coast Range valleys and foothills to central Contra Costa County. San Joaquin kit foxes typically inhabit annual grasslands or grassy open spaces with scattered shrubby vegetation but can also be found in some agricultural habitats and urban areas. This species needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and they also need areas that provide a suitable prey base, including rabbits, mice, ground nesting birds, and California ground squirrels, as well as insects, reptiles, and carrion.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 47 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 There are four documented occurrences of San Joaquin kit fox within between 1.5 and 2.8 miles from the project site (Occurrence Nos. 940, 1003, 1005, and 1008, CNDDB 2024b).

Suitable habitat and suitable prey are found on and adjacent to the project site. As such, San Joaquin kit fox has the potential to occur on the project site.

Impacts to San Joaquin kit fox are considered potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (above), which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the project site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce this potential, significant impact to San Joaquin kit fox to a less-thansignificant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-10 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011) shall be implemented prior to the initiation of any ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities associated with implementation measures 1-4 on the project site to avoid unintended take of individual San Joaquin kit foxes.

Pre-activity surveys for San Joaquin kit fox shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no less than 30 days prior to the beginning of project activities, including ground disturbance or vegetation removal, that may impact San Joaquin kit fox. The surveys shall include all work areas and a minimum 200-foot buffer of the project site. The pre-project implementation surveys shall identify kit fox habitat features on the project site, evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, assess the potential impacts of the proposed activity. The status of all dens shall be determined and mapped.

If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200 feet of the project boundary, the project contractor shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to establish an appropriate avoidance buffer. The avoidance buffer shall be maintained until such time as the burrow is no longer active and/or an incidental take permit is determined to be required and is obtained.

In addition, the following measures shall be observed:
a. Project-related vehicles shall observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas. Nighttime project activities shall be prohibited. Off-road traffic outside of the designated project area shall be prohibited.
b. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during project implementation, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks.

Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 11 of the Construction and Operational Requirements in the Standardized Recommendations must be followed.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 48 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 c. Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming trapped or injured. If used, all pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of four inches or greater stored at the construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.
d. All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from the project site. e. No firearms shall be allowed on the project site during project implementation activities.
f. To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets shall be permitted on site during project implementation. g. Use of rodenticides and herbicides on the project site during project implementation shall be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project related restrictions deemed necessary by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If rodent control must be conducted, zinc phosphide shall be used because of proven lower risk to kit fox. h. In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures shall be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape.
i. Any contractor, employee, or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Nesting Birds and Raptors. Migratory and resident raptors and passerines and their nests are protected under the California Fish and Game Code, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In addition, golden and bald eagles receive protection under the Golden and Bald Eagle Protection Act. While the life histories of bird species vary, overlapping nesting seasons (approximately February to August, with peak activity April to July) and foraging similarities allow for their concurrent discussion.

CDFW Species of Special Concern and Fully Protected species of birds have the potential to occur within the project area. Suitable, but marginal, nesting areas for bank swallow (Riparia riparia) exist in the incised banks of the riparian woodlands around the project boundary. Bank swallows were documented along the Salinas River, including the project area, in 1981 (Occurrence No. 93, CDFW 2024b).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 49 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The home range of a population of federally and state-listed Endangered California condor (Gymnogyps californianus) occurs approximately 19 miles north and 20 miles west of the project area (with about 70 birds found between Big Sur and Pinnacles National Park in the coastal and interior Coast Ranges). No suitable California condor nesting habitat is present within the project area. While foraging habitat exists within the project parcel, given the distance from their home range, there is minimal potential that individual California condors migrate to the project site to forage.

Additionally, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act protects all nesting birds, regardless of status.

Common migratory and resident songbirds that may nest within the survey area include, but are not limited to, killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), California quail (Callipepla californica), California towhee (Melozone crissalis), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), ruby crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula), etc. Also, species of raptors such as red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), and sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus) have the potential to nest within riparian trees, and to use the floodplain for foraging habitat.

The project site and surrounding area contain a variety of trees, shrubs, and open grassland areas suitable for nesting. Disturbance activities, including vegetation and tree removal, can impact nesting birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, should nesting birds be present during the activities.

If protected bird species are nesting on or adjacent to the project site during the bird nesting season, then disturbance activities could result in the loss of fertile eggs, nestlings, or otherwise lead to the abandonment of nests.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the construction site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce the potential impact to nesting birds to a lessthan-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-11 If possible, project activities should be conducted between September 16 and January 14 to avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15). If implementation measures 1-4 are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys as follows:
a. Two surveys for active bird nests will occur within 14 days prior to start of ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, with the final survey conducted within 48 hours prior to project commencement. Appropriate minimum survey radii surrounding each work area are typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys will be conducted at the appropriate times of day Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 50 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 to observe nesting activities. Locations off the site to which access is not available may be surveyed from within the site or from public areas. If no nesting birds are found, a letter report will be prepared by the biologist and submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, and no further measures are required. b. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, an appropriate buffer between each nest and active project activities shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to project activities, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily during project activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or project foreman shall have the authority to cease all project work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Once the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, and no further measures are required.

Special-Status Bats. Of the 25 native bat species in California, 17 receive some level of state or federal protection. Trees and/or buildings or structures on or adjacent to the project site could provide roosting habitat for state-listed species of special concern Townsend’s big-eared bat. Townsend’s big-eared bat prefers caves, mines, tunnels, buildings, or other human-made structures for roosting. Although there are no observations of special-status bat species recorded within three miles of the site, potential habitat is present.

Ground disturbance and vegetation/tree removal activities at the project site could result in the disturbance of roost and natal sites occupied by special-status bats on or adjacent to the project site, if present. Loss or harm to special-status bats is considered a significant adverse impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires a training session on special-status species potentially present on the construction site for all personnel, and the following mitigation measure, will reduce the potential impact to protected bat species to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-12 Prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a qualified biologist shall conduct a habitat assessment for bats and potential roosting sites in trees to be removed and trees within 50 feet of the project area approximately 14 days prior to tree removal or disturbance activities. These surveys shall include a visual inspection of potential roosting features (bats need not be present) and a search for presence of guano within the project site, construction access routes, and 50 feet around these areas. Cavities, crevices, exfoliating bark, and bark Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 51 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 fissures that could provide suitable potential nest or roost habitat for bats shall be surveyed.

Assumptions can be made on what species is present due to observed visual characteristics along with habitat use, or the bats can be identified to the species level with the use of a bat echolocation detector such as an “Anabat” unit. Potential roosting features found during the survey shall be flagged or marked.

If no roosting sites or bats are found, a letter report confirming absence shall be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department and no further mitigation is required. If bats or roosting sites are found, bats shall not be disturbed without specific notice to and consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

The nursery season is typically considered May 1 through October 1. If bats are found roosting outside of the nursery season, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be consulted prior to any eviction or other action. If avoidance or postponement is not feasible, a Bat Eviction Plan will be submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for written approval prior to project implementation. A request to evict bats from a roost includes details for excluding bats from the roost site and monitoring to ensure that all bats have exited the roost prior to the start of activity and are unable to re-enter the roost until activity is completed. Any bat eviction shall be timed to avoid lactation and youngrearing. If bats are found roosting during the nursery season, they shall be monitored to determine if the roost site is a maternal roost. This could occur by either visual inspection of the roost bat pups, if possible, or by monitoring the roost after the adults leave for the night to listen for bat pups. Because bat pups cannot leave the roost until they are mature enough, eviction of a maternal roost cannot occur during the nursery season. Therefore, if a maternal roost is present, a 50-foot buffer zone (or different size if determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife) shall be established around the roosting site within which no construction activities including tree removal or structure disturbance shall occur until after the nursery season. Once the absence of roosting bats has been confirmed, a letter report will be prepared and submitted to the King City Community Development Department.
b. Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Communities. Special-status natural communities are those that are considered rare in the region, support special-status plant or wildlife species, or receive regulatory protection (i.e., wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code). In addition, the CDFW has designated a number of natural communities as rare; these communities are given the highest inventory priority and are tracked in the CNDDB (CDFW 2024d). In the project vicinity, CDFW sensitive natural communities include black cottonwood woodlands.

The black cottonwood woodland on the project site along the southern boundary of the city and along the San Lorenzo Creek is considered a sensitive natural community (black cottonwood woodlands - S3) (CNPS 2024b). The state rank S3 is assigned to natural communities in the state that are vulnerable due to restricted range, relatively few populations, recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation from the state. The proposed project will involve the removal of Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 52 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 approximately nine acres of dead and damaged riparian trees and vegetation within the proposed fuel break. Impacts to sensitive natural communities are considered potentially significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to sensitive natural communities to a less-than-significant level.

The project’s King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan recommends the City further evaluate the potential reintroduction of American beavers (Castor canadensis) within or adjacent to the project area to provide wildfire resiliency. Research has shown how large, wet, floodplain complexes maintained by American beavers create natural wildfire fuel breaks that remain green even in high severity fires (Fairfax and Whittle 2020). The reintroduction of American beaver to the project site would not have any adverse impact to the riparian habitat but rather help to restore and improve this sensitive natural community.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-13 In advance of the start of implementation measures 1-4, a Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan shall be prepared. The plan shall include clear goals and objectives, success criteria, specifics on restoration/creation/enhancement (e.g., plant palette, soils, irrigation design standards and requirements), specific monitoring periods and reporting guidelines, and a maintenance plan. Species from the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant List (Cal-IPC 2024) shall be removed if present and not included in the planting palette. Appropriate performance standards may include, but are not limited to, an 80 percent survival rate of restoration tree and shrub plantings; absence of invasive plant species in restored areas; and self‐sustaining conditions (i.e., plant viability without supplemental water) at the end of five years. If the restoration activities are not meeting success criteria, remedial measures shall be implemented and would typically include, but are not limited to, replanting, reseeding, grading adjustments, supplemental irrigation, access control, increased weed control, and extended maintenance and monitoring periods.

The Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan shall be submitted to the King City Community Development Department for review and approval as well as any other appropriate regulatory agencies during the permit application process, if needed. c. Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. Wetlands and riparian habitats are considered jurisdictional by several regulatory agencies including the USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB.

Potentially jurisdictional wetlands and waters located within the project site include the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek. These features are discussed below are shown on Figure 5, National Wetland Inventory and Habitat Map.

The project site encompasses sections of the San Lorenzo Creek and the Salinas River.

The San Lorenzo Creek and Salinas River floodplain is described as Freshwater forested/shrub wetlands PSSA (Palustrine (P), nontidal wetlands dominated by woody vegetation less than 6 m tall (SS), that is temporarily flooded (A)) by the USFWS. The riverine habitat running through the both the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek is classified as a R4SBC system (an intermittent stream that is seasonally flooded) (USFWS 2024b).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 53 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The extent of project impacts to each potentially jurisdictional wetland feature (including Waters of the U.S. and State) has not yet been determined, but it is assumed that impacts such as invasive species removal will ultimately be beneficial for potentially jurisdictional wetland features. However, modifications to riparian vegetation and disturbance to areas within the top of bank and ordinary high water mark will likely necessitate permits from USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB. Impacts to jurisdictional aquatic features as a result of this project are considered significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-13, which requires implementation of a Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan, and the following mitigation measure would reduce potential, significant impacts to jurisdictional aquatic habitats to less-than-significant.

Mitigation Measures
BIO-14 In advance of the start of implementation measures 1-4, in areas where impacts to jurisdictional aquatic features cannot be avoided, the King City Community Development Department will retain a qualified biologist to determine the extent of potential wetlands and waterways regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). If the USACE claims jurisdiction, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. The City and the qualified biologist shall coordinate with the RWQCB to obtain a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification. The City and the qualified biologist shall also coordinate with the CDFW to obtain a Streambed Alteration Agreement.
d. Wildlife Movement. Ensuring wildlife movement through a landscape, to enable the acquisition of resources for feeding, cover, and reproduction, has been recognized as critical for the survival of animal populations. Habitat “connectivity” is the ability of an individual or population to move between habitat patches that provide these resources (Hilty et al. 2019).

A species can undertake several types of movement events, which generally take place at different spatial and temporal scales at various life history stages. Daily movement can occur in the procurement of food and water, shelter, or other resource requirements.

Seasonal movement, or “migration,” generally occurs at a much larger spatial scale. Long distance juvenile dispersal or other colonization events might take place once in an individual’s life, occurring only after a lapse of several generations. These various types of movement, along with species-specific differences, lead to numerous ways in which to measure a landscape’s connectivity in terms of habitat needs.

The California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project provides a statewide wildlife habitat connectivity map using the Biogeographic Information and Observation System (CDFW 2024e). This system was queried to determine the presence or absence of wildlife corridors on the project site. The Salinas River at the intersection of the San Lorenzo Creek is considered essential habitat which connects wildlife from the Diablo Range to the Coast Range Mountains.

The proposed project includes measures that will be implemented to reduce the likelihood of fire spreading in the riverbed project area, including creating and Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 54 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 maintaining a buffer along the populated edge of the Salinas Riverbed and San Lorenzo Creek, and removal of invasive Arundo, tamarisk, and yellow starthistle. Activities associated with these measures will cause a temporary impact to wildlife corridors, however implementation of long-term goals of the project in combination with the Riparian Revegetation and Monitoring Plan (BIO-13) are anticipated to enhance biological communities present. Impacts to wildlife corridors are therefore considered beneficial and less than significant.
e. Local Biological Resource Policies/Ordinances.

Portions of the project are located within the King City city limits and portions within unincorporated Monterey County. The following ordinances apply to the proposed project in both jurisdictions (see Figure 2, Aerial Map to view the city limit line within the project boundary).

Monterey County General Plan. The 2010 Monterey County General Plan Conservation and Open Space (OS) element contains the following goal and policies associated with biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project:

Goal OS-5. Conserve listed species, critical habitat, habitat and species protected in area plans; avoid, minimize and mitigate significant impacts to biological resources.

Policy OS-5.4. Development shall avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to listed species and critical habitat to the extent feasible.

Policy OS-5.16. A biological study shall be required for any development project requiring a discretionary permit and having the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species.

Policy OS-5.25. Occupied nests of statutorily protected migratory birds and raptors shall not be disturbed during the breeding season (generally February 1 to September 15).

Monterey County Code of Ordinances
Title 16, Section 16.60.040 –The Monterey County Code of Ordinances restricts the removal of mature trees countywide. No person may conduct any tree cutting or removal without first obtaining a Tree Removal permit from the Monterey County Director of Planning.

The Monterey County Director of Planning may approve the removal of no more than three protected trees per lot in a one-year period. The following information shall be submitted to the Director of Planning prior to consideration of such removal:

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 55 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

1. Applicants or authorized representatives name, address and telephone number;

2. The description of the site(s) involved, including the street address, if any, and the assessor’s parcel number;

3. A site plan sufficient to identify and locate the trees to be removed, other trees, buildings, proposed buildings, and other
improvements;

4. The purpose for the tree removal;

5. A description of the species, diameter two feet above ground level, estimated height, and general health of the trees to be removed;

6. A description of the method to be used in removing the tree(s);

7. A statement showing how trees not proposed for removal are to be protected during removal or construction;

8. Proposed visual impact mitigation measures the applicant intends to take (if appropriate). Size, location and species of replacement trees, if any, shall be indicated on the site plan; and

9. Such further information as may be required by the Director of Planning, including but not limited to the opinion of a registered professional forester, tree surgeon, or other qualified expert to enable the determination of matter required under these regulations.

King City General Plan. The King City General Plan Conservation and Open Space (OS) element contains the following goal and policies associated with biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project:

Policy 2.1.1: The City shall assure that environmentally-sensitive lands which are unique, limited, and fragile natural areas, are protected and preserved wherever possible.

Program 2.1.1.1: The city shall work with Monterey County, the State Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Forest Service, and other agencies to identify environmentally-sensitive habitat areas; and shall promote the conservation of these habitat areas in conjunction with private landowners, other public agencies, and non-profit organizations.

Policy 2.2.1: The City shall strive to preserve and restore wherever possible the riparian habitat of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek, within its Planning Area.

Program 2.2.1.1: The City shall require biological investigations of any proposed development that could significantly impact the riparian habitat of the Salinas River or of San Lorenzo Creek. Such investigations shall assess the significance of natural habitat within the project site, and the degree of any adverse impacts of the proposed project upon the habitat. The City shall require that significant adverse impacts be fully mitigated wherever possible.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 56 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 King City Municipal Code
Section 13.10.100, Removal of Trees—New developments. When the removal of a tree or trees is proposed in connection with the improvement or development of property by subdivision, building permit, or other entitlement, the applicant shall file with the public works director, and include in the application for such permit or entitlement, a plot plan showing the location and type of tree or trees to be removed and a brief statement of the reason for removal, as well as any other information that may be pertinent. On receipt of such plot plan and statement, the public works director will make an inspection of the site to determine the health, value, ease of relocation, and susceptibility to damage of the tree or trees proposed to be removed and thereafter will file with the city official or city body having jurisdiction of such application (e.g., the planning commission or city council) a report of his findings and recommendations concerning the proposal. If the official or city body having jurisdiction approves the application, a permit for tree removal shall be issued at the same time as other permits or entitlements for the project.

Protected Trees. The proposed project includes removal of riparian trees along the fuel breaks. Direct impacts as a result of the proposed project would occur through tree removal and indirect impacts could potentially jeopardize tree health through damage to roots and paving under tree driplines, resulting in the potential need to remove the trees.

Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this potential, significant impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-15 Prior to the start of implementation measure 1-4 and any tree removal or trimming activities, the King City Community Development Department will hire an International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)-certified arborist to conduct a tree survey and prepare an evaluation report with associated data and location map for all potentially affected trees on and immediately adjacent to the project site. The King City Community Development Department will follow the arborist’s recommendations, such as planting replacement trees in appropriate on-site or off-site areas, preferably associated with the Salinas River or San Lorenzo Creek corridors, along with any required maintenance and monitoring. f. Conservation Plans. There are no critical habitat boundaries, habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the proposed project site (CDFW 2024b).

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 57 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

The Northwest Information Center (NWIC) was contacted to determine if there were any known cultural resources within the project vicinity. The NWIC returned with reply letter 23-0535 indicating that two resources were found:
 P-27-002322, which is a portion of El Camino Real, U.S. Highway 101.  P-27-002613, which is a historic building described as a multi-family property and hotel/motel.

Comments:
a/b. Historic Structures. The results of the archival search states that two historic structural resource is located in the project vicinity (P-27-002613 and P-27-0023222). However, these resources will not be impacted from implementation of the proposed project because the historic building and portion of U.S. Highway 101 is located off-site. The historic structure is approximately 150 meters (492 feet) from the San Lorenzo Creek on the southeast side of King City and the portion of U.S. Highway 101, while crossing over the San Lorenzo Creek area via an overpass bridge, would not be affected by project activities.

Archaeological Resources. An archaeological pedestrian survey of the project area was completed on December 6, 2023 by EMC Planning Group Registered Professional Archaeologist, Vanessa Potter, MA. Ms. Potter conducted a survey of three areas to determine if there were surface traces of historic or prehistoric materials in the project area. The first survey area began off of River Drive and accessed a portion of the Salinas River floodplain. The second survey area began near 1st Street and accessed a portion of the San Lorenzo Creek. The third survey explored the flooded portion of the golf course located near South Golf Drive and Villa Drive. Agricultural fields are located to the north of the golf course and the Creek to the east. This survey represents a sample of the project area.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to section 15064.5?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 58 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The archaeological pedestrian survey results were negative. There was no surface evidence of cultural resources such as ground stone, shell, or lithics. There was no surface evidence of historic or unique archaeological resources. The portion of the Salinas River floodplain that was surveyed showed evidence of human use. There were churned up soils, trash, a flipped car, and dried squash vines. The floodplain was dry at the time of the survey. The banks of the San Lorenzo Creek were observed for any accumulated cultural materials post flooding. Many discarded tires were noted at this section of the creek. The creek was dry at the time of the survey.

However, unknown buried prehistoric, historic or unique archaeological resources could be present at any portions of the Salinas River and the San Lorenzo Creek. While unlikely, the recommended implementation strategies have the potential to uncover or disturb unknown cultural resources, causing a substantial change in the significance of the resource. This would be considered a significant impact. The following mitigation measures would reduce this potential significant impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
CR-1 Prior to construction, all personnel directly involved in project-related activities shall be provided archaeological and cultural sensitivity training. The training shall be conducted by a Native American Monitor or a qualified archaeologist that meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for archaeology. The training shall take place at a day and time to be determined in conjunction with the project construction foreman, and prior to any scheduled project-related activities. The training will include the following: a discussion of applicable laws and penalties; samples or visual aids of artifacts that could be encountered in the project vicinity, including what those artifacts and resources may look like partially buried, or wholly buried and freshly exposed; and instructions to halt work in the vicinity of any potential cultural resource discovery, and notify the archaeological monitor as necessary.

If a handout is provided by the archaeologist, the foreman will keep a copy of it in his or her vehicle as a reference. Having reference material in the vehicle does not replace contacting an archaeologist should resources be uncovered.

CR-2 In the event that archaeological resources are inadvertently discovered, work shall temporarily halt or divert work within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until it can be evaluated. All potentially significant or unique archaeological deposits shall be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources. If archaeological deposits are encountered, they will be evaluated and mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For prehistoric archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand-excavated recovery and non-destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources shall also be sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 59 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance by a qualified archaeologist. Significant and/or unique cultural resources consist, of but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant, a qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

If such resources or artifacts are determined to be of native tribal origin, any mitigation or recovery program shall include direction from tribal leadership that has previously consulted with King City for proper handling and treatment.

The archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive report complete with methods, results, and recommendations, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered resources. The report shall be submitted to the Northwest Information Center and the State Historic Preservation Office, as required. c. Although there was no surface evidence of human skeletal remains during the archaeological pedestrian survey, there remains the possibility that the project’s implementation measures could damage or destroy previously undiscovered Native American human remains. Disturbance of Native American human remains is considered a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure
CR-3 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) contain the mandated procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains. According to the provisions in CEQA, if human remains are encountered at the site, all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease and necessary steps to ensure the integrity of the immediate area shall be taken. The Monterey County Coroner shall be notified immediately. The Coroner shall then determine whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines the remains are Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours, who would, in turn, notify the person the Native American Heritage Commission identifies as the Most Likely Descendant of any human remains. Further actions shall be determined, in part, by the desires of the Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant has 48 hours to make recommendations regarding the disposition of the remains following notification from the Native American Heritage Commission of the discovery. If the Most Likely Descendant does not make recommendations within 48 hours, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the Most Likely Descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 60 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

6. ENERGY
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Energy impacts generally pertain to excessive use of fossil-fuel generated energy typically in the form of electricity and natural gas, and/or excessive demand for transportation fuel. The proposed project would create an inconsequential increase in energy demand, primarily in the form of fuel use in equipment used for short-term vegetation management activities. The project would have a less than significant impact from wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary energy consumption. b. The project would be an inconsequential source of energy demand to which no State or local regulations for renewable energy, energy efficiency or energy conservation apply.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact from conflict with or obstructing a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 61 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Fault Rupture. The nearest known earthquake fault to the project site is the San Andreas Fault Zone, which is located approximately 14.5 miles northeast of the site (California Department of Conservation 2024). Based on the location of the nearest earthquake fault Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
(1) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(2) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(3) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(4) 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, creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 62 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 and the nature of the proposed project, the project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault.

Seismic Ground Shaking. The San Andreas Fault is located approximately 14.5 miles northeast of the project site, which is a distance that, if an earthquake were to occur, could result in seismic ground shaking on the site. However, based on the nature of the proposed project, the project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic ground shaking.

Liquefaction. The project site is located within a high and moderate liquefaction susceptibility area (Monterey County 2024b). However, the proposed project does not involve the construction of buildings, roads, or any type of infrastructure that could be damaged and result in potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury, or death. The proposed project involves activities that support fire protection and suppression, which would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving liquefaction.

Landslides. The project site is located within a low landslide susceptibility area (Monterey County 2024b). Additionally, the proposed project does not involve the construction of buildings, roads, or any type of infrastructure that could be damaged and result in potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury, or death.

The proposed project involves activities that support fire protection and suppression, which would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. b. The project site involves low to moderate erosion hazards (Monterey County 2024b).

However, according to the RWPP, the recommended fuel break does not need to be a bare strip in which all vegetation is removed to mineral soil (i.e., soils derived from minerals or rocks containing little organic matter) annually. Therefore, the activities involved with the proposed project would not require grading and instead would involve hand labor consisting of minor pruning, weed-pulling, herbicide application, and trimming. Because there is no grading or excavation involved, it is unlikely that the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. c. The site has low susceptibility to landslide hazards and due to the nature of the proposed project, the project would not be located on soil that would become unstable and result in on- or off-site landslides. Additionally, the nature of the project as a wildfire prevention plan would not result in lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse of the site soils.

The project site is located within a high and moderate liquefaction susceptibility area (Monterey County 2024b). However, the activities associated with the proposed project would not result in the soil becoming unstable and potentially resulting in liquefaction.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 63 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 d/e. The project does not include construction and would not increase risks of property damage from construction on expansive soils, or the use of septic systems. Therefore, no impacts related to construction and the use of septic systems would occur. f. There are no identified paleontological resources or unique geological features within or immediately surrounding King City or the greater Salinas Valley (Monterey County 2008, Figure 4.10.1). Paleontological resources or geologic features are largely located in mountainous areas of Monterey County and not in low-lying coastal or interior valley areas. The proposed project would involve minimal ground disturbance activities beyond vegetation management activities associated with the RWPP. Therefore, no impacts associated with unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature would occur.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 64 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Analogous to the discussion of air quality impacts in Section 3.0, Air Quality, checklist question “b,” the RWPP strategies with potential to generate air emissions, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, are primarily limited to establishing and maintaining a community fuel break through mechanical means, removing invasive species, and managing the invasive yellow starthistle through prescribed burns. The fuel break strategy implementation activities, including using handheld gas-powered tools such as weed whackers and pole pruners, as well as mowers and wood chippers, are considered analogous to construction activities given that they are short-term in nature and would not be continuous sources of air emissions on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis.

The air district has not adopted guidance for assessing the impacts of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from land use projects or from non-land use projects that would provide direction for evaluating the impacts of the proposed project. However, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the adjacent air district to the north, has adopted guidance that addresses construction and operational GHG emissions from land use project as part of its CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. This guidance is informative for its reference to the fuel break strategy. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District does not consider GHG emissions from construction activities to be a substantial source of GHGs relative to those from long term operations of land use projects. Consequently, a threshold of significance is not established for them.

Like criteria air emissions, the primary sources of GHG emissions from short-term construction activities are typically from heavy duty construction equipment and heavy duty on-road transportation sources like heavy-duty trucks. Fuel break activities would include using handheld gas-powered equipment, and wood chippers for one-time fuel break creation, and mowers for semi-annual maintenance. The equipment would be an inconsequential source of GHG emissions relative to typically more intensive construction activities for land use development projects, which the Bay Area Air Quality Management District has determined do not generate a substantial volume of GHG emissions.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 65 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 By its very nature, the yellow starthistle prescribed burn implementation activity is not analogous to a short-term construction activity, other than for its short-term, limited nature. This activity would include three individual prescribed burn events over three consecutive years within the area. The GHG dynamics of prescribed burns can be quite variable and dynamic. Generally, independent of other air emissions, fire consumes biomass and releases carbon dioxide compounds from organic matter. Longer-term emissions are generated when burned vegetation decomposes, while some carbon is returned to the soil. However, GHG emissions in the form of carbon dioxide released during prescribed burns would otherwise be a natural part of the carbon cycle and not typically considered separate or additive, as they are not included in GHG emissions inventories. Here, the “carbon cycle” generally refers to the natural process whereby plants naturally die, with their carbon content released through decomposition. In this context, the prescribed burn activity would not be a source of substantial GHG emissions.

Given the information above, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact from generating GHG emissions.
b. There are no GHG reduction plans, policies or regulations that are applicable to the type of project proposed or the associated project implementation activities. The proposed project would have no impact from conflict with an applicable GHG reduction plan.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 66 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:

Comments:
a/b. As a wildfire prevention plan, the proposed project does not involve activities that would result in the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. See the discussion regarding herbicides in below. Therefore, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

As a wildfire prevention plan, the proposed project includes activities that would reduce wildfire hazard risk. Some of these recommendations include the use of herbicides (e.g., invasive vegetation management for Arundo and Tamarisk) and some may result in temporary hazardous emissions due to fuel management and treatment (i.e., prescribed Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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,
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 a public-use airport,
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. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 67 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 burns or broadcast burns). However, the use of herbicides for the invasive vegetation management is not only a widely-used treatment method, but has already been an ongoing treatment method at the project site by the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County. Therefore, the proposed project would not be introducing this as a new treatment method in the area. Additionally, the hazardous emissions due to some of the fuel management and treatment methods would be temporary and occur one to two times each year, at most, which would not result in a significant hazard to the public (refer to Section 3.0, Air Quality, for a more detailed discussion on this topic).

The proposed project, therefore, would not 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. The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

The nearest schools to the project site are King City High School (approximately 0.5 miles north) and King City Arts Charter San Lorenzo School (approximately 0.3 miles northwest) (Google Earth 2024). Additionally, as discussed in a/b above, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances.
d. The following lists were reviewed:
 Hazardous Materials Waste and Substances Sites from the Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor Database (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2024);
 Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker Database (State Water Resources Board 2024);
 Solid Waste Disposal Sites Identified by Water Board with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit (California Environmental Protection Agency 2024a);
 “Active” Cease and Desist Order and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from Water Board (California Environmental Protection Agency 2024b); and  List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (California Environmental Protection Agency 2024c).

The project site is not located on any of these lists, with exception to the State Water Resources Board’s GeoTracker Database. There is one leaking underground storage tank, whose case closed back in 1992, that is located within the project site. There are another three leaking underground storage tanks whose cases are completed and closed within the 1,000-foot fuels modeling buffer shown around the project site in Figure 2, Aerial Map.

Because this case is not within the project site boundary where the implementation of fire safety activities would occur, the project would not result in the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 68 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 e. The proposed project is located within two miles of the Mesa Del Rey Airport, which is located at the north end of King City. However, the project does not involve any residential or commercial uses and, therefore, implementation of the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area in relation to its proximity to the Mesa Del Rey Airport. f. The eastern part of the project site crosses U.S. Highway 101. Although U.S. Highway 101 is not officially identified as an emergency evacuation route in the Monterey County Emergency Operations Plan (November 2020) or in the Monterey County Emergency Operations Plan, Annex - Evacuation and Transportation (April 2022), it is one of two primary routes connecting King City to both northern and southern Monterey County. At this location, U.S. Highway 101 is elevated from the San Lorenzo Creek below. Therefore, the project’s fire hazard reduction activities would occur beneath U.S. Highway 101 at this location and would not interfere or impair its use as an emergency evacuation route. g. The proposed project is a wildfire prevention plan whose sole purpose is to support a long-term fire resiliency and prioritize hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in or near King City. The primary implementation measure in the RWPP is the creation of a fuel break on the edge of the Salinas Riverbed to protect homes and businesses and prevent a wildland fire from becoming an extensive, destructive fire. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 69 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Construction Water Quality Impacts. Due to the nature of the proposed project, typical construction activities are not anticipated. The project’s “construction” involves hand labor consisting of minor pruning, weed-pulling, herbicide application, and trimming as well as the use of some mechanical equipment. These activities could result in the degradation of surface water quality in the Salinas River and/or the San Lorenzo Creek by way of spills from gas-powered mechanical equipment, trimmed vegetation that is not hauled away, and burned vegetation.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
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:
(1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite; ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ (2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding onor off-site; ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(3) Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(4) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 70 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 The State Water Resources Control Board has implemented a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program to control and enforce storm water pollutant discharge reduction per the Clean Water Act. The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board issues and enforces the NPDES permits for discharges to water bodies in Monterey County. According to City Municipal Code Section 17.56.100, the City Engineer shall review the project to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

City Municipal Code Section 13.09.160 states that all construction sites shall install, implement, and maintain best management practices, which shall be implemented and maintained year-round and include measures associated with run-on and runoff control and good site management. Additionally, this code section states that all construction sites shall be inspected by the City to verify that best management practices are installed, maintained, and effective.

Required compliance with the NPDES requirements and City Municipal Code would ensure that applicable water quality standards are met and that water quality impacts from construction activities will be less than significant.

Operational Water Quality Impacts. The project is a wildfire prevention plan with fire resiliency activities occurring periodically, at varying times, throughout the year. These activities include, but are not limited to, fuel reduction, which would result in the removal of vegetation in the area to reduce fuel for wildfires. This could aid in the increase of runoff and pollution of waters from trimmed vegetation that was not hauled away or previously burned debris that makes its way into the Salinas River and/or San Lorenzo Creek.

The City is a small municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) and, therefore, projects within the City shall meet the standards established by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. According to City Municipal Code Section 17.56.100, the City Engineer shall review the project to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, which include low impact development measures such as limiting any type of disturbance of creeks and natural drainage features.

Adherence to the requirements of the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board would ensure that impacts associated with post-construction water quality would be less than significant.
b. The proposed project as a wildfire protection plan does not involve any uses that would require the demand of groundwater. Therefore, the project would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. c. Erosion. Refer to the discussion in Section 7.0, Geology and Soils, checklist question “b.”
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 71 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Flooding. The proposed project as a wildfire protection plan involves activities such as fuel management to support fire resiliency in the area. The project site does not contain any impervious features nor does the project introduce new impervious features, which could increase the rate or amount of stormwater runoff and could result in the potential for flooding on- or off-site. Therefore, the project would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site Runoff. As stated above, the project would not create new impervious features on the project site, which could result in higher peak discharges that may potentially exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Therefore, implementation of the project and its fire resiliency activities would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide additional sources of polluted runoff.

Flood Flows. The project does not involve any structures that could impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, no impact would occur.
d. According to the Flood Emergency Management Agency, the project site is not located within flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones and, therefore, would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.
e. The project would not result in any demand on groundwater resources and, therefore, would not conflict with or obstruct a sustainable groundwater management plan.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 72 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:

Comments:
a. Implementation of the project would occur within the river and stream beds and therefore, would not physically divide an established community. b. The various environmental topics in this initial study address applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. This initial study shows that for those environmental topics (e.g., air quality, biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, etc.), there are either no impacts, less than significant impacts, or significant impacts that can be mitigated to a less-thansignificant level. Therefore, the project would not create any 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.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Cause any 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 73 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Comments:
a/b. According to the U.S. Geological Survey’s Mineral Resources Online Spatial Data Interactive Map, there are no mineral resources within or adjacent to the project area (U.S. Geological Survey 2024). Further, the King City General Plan Conservation, Open Space, and Safety Elements indicates that there are no known mineral resources within the City’s planning area (p. 8). Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state nor would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 74 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

13. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Comments:
a. Due to the nature of the proposed project, there would be no permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project.

During the initial and maintenance treatments, noise-generating equipment may be used (e.g., chainsaw, backpack or hand blower, push mower, etc.). As discussed throughout this initial study, the larger portion of the project site is located south of the city limits and within unincorporated Monterey County while the eastern portion of the project site is within King City. Therefore, noise control regulations from both King City and Monterey County apply to the project.

City Municipal Code Section 7.25.050 states that it is unlawful for any person to use or operate any sound amplifying equipment outdoors from 10:00 PM to 9:00 AM. However, an exemption is made (Section 7.25.070.F) for noise associated with construction, repair, remodeling, demolition, paving or grading of any real property, provided that the activities take place only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM.

Monterey County Municipal Code Section 10.60.030 states that at any time of day, it is prohibited to operate any machine or device which produces a noise level that exceeds eighty-five (85) dBA measured fifty (50) feet therefrom. Monterey County Municipal Code Section 10.60.040 prohibits any loud and unreasonable sound any day of the week from 9:00 PM to 7:00 AM.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. 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 in applicable
standards of other agencies?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b. Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or
ground borne 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 75 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 All activities recommended as part of the RWPP will be required to occur during the time period mentioned in the above regulations by both the City and Monterey County.

Additionally, the recommended activities would be dispersed throughout the project site and, therefore, noise increases at any one sensitive receptor would be limited. The use of equipment that may cause increases in ambient noise levels would be temporary and sporadic. It is for these reasons, in addition to the project’s required compliance with the City and Monterey County Municipal Codes, that the project would not generate a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of local standards.
b. Implementation of the activities provided in the plan would not result in the long-term operation of any source of ground vibration, such as pile driving, drilling, boring, or rock blasting. Thus, implementation of the project would not result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to levels of excessive vibration or groundborne noise levels. c. The proposed project is located within two miles of the Mesa Del Rey Airport, which is located at the north end of King City. The Master Plan – Mesa Del Rey Airport does not include an airport noise contour map; however, the project does not involve any residential or commercial uses and, therefore, implementation of the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 76 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Comments:
a. The proposed project does not involve residential uses and, therefore, would not increase the population. The proposed project would not induce unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly.
b. There are no permanent structures on the project site. However, homeless encampments and debris exist intermittently throughout the project area particularly in the Salinas riverbed area fronting River Drive. The City, in conjunction, with local community groups, have been working over the last several years to move homeless individuals out of the riverbed area particularly given recent fires that have been ignited due to homeless encampments. Therefore, the project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 77 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Comments:
a-e. Fire protection services for King City are provided by the City’s Fire Department, with mutual aid agreements with other fire agencies in Monterey County, as needed. Table 1, Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Implementation Measures (Projects), provided in Section A, Background, of this initial study provides the implementation measures to reduce the likelihood of fire spreading in the project area. Because the City and surrounding area are within local fire responsibility areas, the City’s Fire Department will be responsible for implementing some of the recommendations including, but not limited to, community fuel breaks. However, maintenance of the community fuel breaks will only occur semi-annually, which would not result in the need for new or physically altered City fire facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance objectives.

Weed abatement and motorized vehicle access are two code enforcement implementation measures also listed within Table 1. These projects would be performed by the City’s Code Enforcement Officer, which is a position within the City’s Police Department.

These two project recommendations would be maintained on an ongoing basis. Based on the nature of these recommended projects, the City’s Police Department would not result in the need for new or physically altered police facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance objectives. The larger portion of the project site is south of the city limits and within Monterey County. However, the police protection needs of the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office would not be necessary due to the nature of the proposed project and proximity to the city limits.

The proposed project does not involve residential uses and, therefore, would have no adverse environmental impact on schools or parks.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 78 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Therefore, implementation of the proposed project as a wildfire prevention plan would not result in physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain performance objectives.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 79 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

16. RECREATION
Comments:
a. The project does not involve the increase in population, and therefore, would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities.
b. The project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 80 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

17. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Comments:
a-d. The project involves the implementation of long-term fire resiliency methods and prioritizing hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek, in or near King City. The project does not consist of any development or infrastructure that would involve transportation-related uses. Vehicles would be present on the site only during the annual or semi-annual maintenance activities, which would be temporary and not result in any transportation-related impacts. Therefore, the project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; the project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b); the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses; and the project would have no impacts associate with emergency access.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 81 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a. On October 16, 2023, the City sent an offer of consultation letter to the tribal representatives of the Xolon Salinan Tribe and the Salinan Tribe of San Luis Obispo, Monterey, San Benito. These two tribes had previously requested consultation with the City pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52. No responses to the AB 52 consultation offer letters were received. City staff is however, in discussions with the Xolon Salinan Tribe to determine whether tribal cultural burning practices might be integrated into the final RWPP. See the discussion in the project description above. a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value
to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
(1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the resource
to a California Native American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 82 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Comments:
a-c. The project involves the implementation of long-term fire resiliency methods and prioritizing hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek, in or near King City. The project does not involve any development that would require utilities and service systems. Therefore, the project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

Because the project would not require the need for water or wastewater treatment, it would have no impact on water supplies or on wastewater treatment providers and their ability to serve wastewater needs.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm
water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, single-dry and
multiple- dry years?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 83 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 d/e. Implementation of the proposed project may require the removal of brush and leaf litter to off-site areas such as landfills. However, some of the cut material may be chipped and spread throughout the project site. All material not disposed of on-site would be taken to the Johnson Canyon Sanitary Landfill located at 31400 Johnson Canyon Road east of Gonzales for treatment and reuse as compost. The project would result in more material for disposal off-site, if any, during the creation of the community fuel break and first removal of invasive species. Maintenance of both the fuel breaks and the invasive species growth in the future would not result in as much material, which is why the return interval for these two recommended activities is semi-annual and annual, respectively (refer back to Table 1 in Section A). It is for this reason that the project would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals, and the project would be required to comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 84 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

20. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Comments:

The project site is not located within or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2024).

However, due to the nature and purpose of the proposed project, as well as concerns from the public, the checklist questions in this section will be discussed.

The project area covers 179 acres in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek, bordering the King City city limits on the south and east. The site contains no permanent structures, but approximately 70 structures are on the immediate edge of the project area on the northside of the Salinas River floodplain. The site contains highly disturbed, riparian woodland habitat along the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek banks. The Salinas River floodplain also contains disturbed alluvial scrub habitat. Trees exist along the north edges of the site that border the city limits as well as both sides of the San Lorenzo Creek. There are power lines or other utilities on the project site and the site itself is relatively flat with a gentle slope from north to south at the northern border of the site (i.e., near residences at southern city limit). According to the Monterey County Parcel Report Web App, slopes greater than 25 percent are generally located along the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek banks (Monterey County 2024).

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 85 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 a. Refer back to Section 9.0, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, checklist question “f.” Implementation of the recommended fire resilience activities do not involve any components that could substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
b. The site is generally flat with the only areas containing slopes greater than 25 percent being those adjacent to the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek banks (Monterey County 2024). The project also does not involve project occupants. The purpose of the proposed project is to reduce wildfire hazards in the area and involves no components that could exacerbate wildfire risks. Therefore, the project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors and, therefore, would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire.
c. The proposed project involves the installation and maintenance of fuel breaks. Any environmental impacts associated with the installation and maintenance of fuel breaks are discussed throughout this initial study and would be reduced to less than significant level through the mitigations and/or uniformly applied regulations identified herein. d. The project site is relatively flat and does not involve steep slopes; the project site is located within a low landslide susceptibility area (Monterey County 2024). Additionally, the project does not involve activities that would change existing drainage on the site.

The objective of the proposed project is to protect the adjacent residences and structures from fire hazards. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 86 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Comments:
a. As discussed in Section 4.0, Biological Resources, the proposed project has the potential to have a substantial adverse effect through plant and wildlife habitat modifications.

Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-15 would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level.

As discussed in Section 5.0, Cultural Resources, the project site is not known to contain any significant historic resources, unique archaeological resources, or Native American human remains. However, it is possible that these resources could be accidentally uncovered during implementing wildfire prevention-related measures associated with the project. In the event this should occur, Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2 and CR-3 would reduce potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. b. The proposed project has the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts in the areas of biological resources (potential disturbance to existing plant and wildlife habitats). However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-15, impacts of the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated
Less-ThanSignificant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or
restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c. Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Section D Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 87 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 c. As discussed in Section 3.0, Air Quality, the proposed project has the potential to result in adverse environmental effects that could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings as a result vegetation management activities to create the proposed fuel break and the potential of utilizing limited prescribed fire to control yellow starthistle, which could be a source of particulate matter emissions from organic fuel combustion. As noted in Section 3.0, MBARD Rule 404, Particulate Matter, addresses particulate emission limits.

It limits the amount of particulate matter that can be discharged by any source within the air basin. The rule exempts several types of activities, including fires set for the purpose of preventing a fire hazard. This indicates that particulate air emissions from the yellow starthistle control strategy is not at issue for its particulate air emissions and therefore, would not cause substantial adverse health effects.

In addition, while portions of the project site are located adjacent to sensitive residential receptors, short-term RWPP implementation activities do not require using heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment that has potential to generate substantial toxic air emissions.

Handheld landscape maintenance equipment such as weedwhackers and pole pruners, and other equipment types such as mowers and chippers are typically not diesel-powered.

Therefore, the project would have a less-than-significant impact from exposing sensitive receptors to high concentrations of toxic air contaminants.

Section E Sources 88 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 E. SOURCES
Environmental Setting
Google Earth. 2024.

Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

King City. November 1998. King City General Plan Consolidated Plan Document. King City, CA.

Monterey County. September 2008. 2007 Monterey County General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Volume 1 SCH#2007121001. Salinas, CA.
———. October 2010. 2010 Monterey County General Plan. Salinas, CA.

Project Description
California Wildfire & Forest Resilience Task Force (Science Advisory Panel). July 2023. Central Coast Regional Profile. https://wildfiretaskforce.org/wpcontent/uploads/2023/07/CentralCoast_RegionalProfile_July2023.pdf Daly, Nate, Planning Manager, Deer Creek Resources. Email message to Doreen Liberto-Blanck, King City Community Development Director, with cc to EMC Planning Group consultant, 15 April 2024.

Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Fairfax, Emily, and Andrew Whittle. December 2020. “Smokey the Beaver: beaver-dammed riparian corridors stay green during wildfire throughout the western United States.” Ecological Applications 30(8), e02225. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2225 Schelenz, Robyn. April 6, 2022. “How the Indigenous practice of ‘good fire’ can help our forests thrive.” University of California News.
https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/how-indigenous-practice-good-fire-canhelp-our-forests-thrive U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). February 1, 2011. Traditional Ecological Knowledge for Application by Service Scientists. https://www.fws.gov/media/traditional-ecologicalknowledge-fact-sheet Wigglesworth, Alex. March 26, 2024. “Yes, beavers can help stop wildfires. And more places in California are embracing them.” Los Angeles Times.
https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2024-03-26/beavers-can-help-mitigatemegafires-california Section E Sources 89 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Aesthetics
California Department of Transportation. “California State Scenic Highway System Map.” Accessed on June 13, 2024.
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46 cc8e8057116f1aacaa
EMC Planning Group. Site visits on December 6, 2023 and February 14, 2024.

Google Earth. 2024.

King City. November 1998. King City General Plan Consolidated Plan Document. King City, CA.

Monterey County. September 2008. 2007 Monterey County General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Volume 1 SCH#2007121001. Salinas, CA.
———. October 2010. 2010 Monterey County General Plan. Salinas, CA. ———. “Parcel Report Web App.” Accessed on June 11, 2024. https://maps.co.monterey.ca.us/wab/parcelreportwebapp/
Agriculture
California Department of Conservation. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Accessed on June 13, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ ———. April 5, 2023. “California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder.” Accessed on July 12, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/ EMC Planning Group. Site visits on December 6, 2023 and February 14, 2024.

Google Earth. 2024.

Air Quality
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Monterey Bay Air Resources District. 2017. 2012-2015 Air Quality Management Plan.

March 15, 2017.
https://www.mbard.org/files/6632732f5/2012-2015-AQMP_FINAL.pdf Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. 2008. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines.

February 2008. https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/home/showdocument?id=22559.

Section E Sources 90 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Biological Resources
Calflora Database. 2024. Calflora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation online database. Berkeley, California. Accessed June 2024. https://www.calflora.org/
California Burrowing Owl Consortium (CBOC). 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities.

Sacramento, California.
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline ———. 2024a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) online database. Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024.
https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/cnddb
———. 2024b. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) online database.

Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024.
http://bios.dfg.ca.gov
———. 2024c. Badger. Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Mammals/Badger
———. 2024d. California Natural Community List. Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities ———. 2024e. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project. Sacramento, California.

Accessed June 2024.
https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Connectivity/CEHC California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 2024. Cal-IPC Invasive Plant Inventory online database. Accessed June 2024.
https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/
California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2001. CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines. Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024.
https://www.cnps.org/plant-science/field-protocols-guidelines ———. 2024a. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California online database.

Sacramento, California. Accessed June 2024.
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org
Section E Sources 91 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 ———. 2024b. Manual of California Vegetation online database. Sacramento, California.

Accessed June 2024.
https://www.cnps.org/vegetation/manual-of-california-vegetation Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2024. EPA Watershed Mapper. https://mywaterway.epa.gov/
Hilty J, Keeley A, Lidicker W, Merenlender A. 2019. Corridor Ecology. Second Edition. Island Press. Washington D.C.

King City. 1998. King City General Plan.

Monterey County. 2010. 2010 Monterey County General Plan.

Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA). 2014. Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program Revised Final EIR.
———. 2019. Salinas River Long-Term Management Plan.

Riparian Habitat Joint Venture (RHJV). 2004. Version 2.0. The riparian bird conservation plan: a strategy for reversing the decline of riparian associated birds in California. Partners in Flight.
http://www.prbo.org/calpif/pdfs/riparian.v-2.pdf.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2005. Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog.
———. 2011. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance.
———. 2024a. Endangered Species Program online database. Species list for Monterey County.

Washington, D.C. Accessed June 2024.
http://www.fws.gov/endangered/
———. 2024b. National Wetlands Inventory online database. Washington, D.C.

Accessed June 2024.
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/
———. 2024c. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species online mapper.

Accessed June 2024.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html
Section E Sources 92 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2024. The National Map online database. Accessed June 2024. https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/
WRA. 2013. San Lorenzo Creek Restoration Plan for the Downtown Addition Project.

Cultural Resources
Archaeological Consulting. 2011. Archeological Records Search and Preliminary Impact Assessment for the Highway 101 Widening Project in Salinas, Monterey County, California. ———. 2003. Negative Archaeological Survey Report for the First Street Improvements Project, South from Division Street Over State Highway 101 Onto Mesa Verde Road, in King City, Monterey County, California, 05-MON-101, Post Mile R.

Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

EMC Planning Group. 2024. King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Cultural Resources Assessment Letter Report. March 4, 2024
Energy
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Geology and Soils
California Department of Conservation. “Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation.” Accessed on June 11, 2024. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

King City. Municipal Code. Last updated on March 12, 2024. https://ecode360.com/KI4948 Monterey County. Monterey County Municipal Code. Last modified on February 7, 2024a. https://library.municode.com/ca/monterey_county/codes/code_of_ordinances ———. “Parcel Report Web App.” Accessed on June 11, 2024b. https://maps.co.monterey.ca.us/wab/parcelreportwebapp/
———. September 2008. 2007 Monterey County General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Volume 1 SCH#2007121001. Salinas, CA.

Section E Sources 93 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-actceqa/updated-ceqa-guidelines U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 13:

Miscellaneous Sources, Chapter 13.1, Wildfires and Prescribed Burning. https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-factors-and-quantification/ap-42-fifth-editionvolume-i-chapter-13-miscellaneous-0 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
California Environmental Protection Agency. “List of solid waste disposal sites identified by Water Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit (PDF).” Accessed on June 10, 2024a. chromeextension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://calepa.ca.gov/wpcontent/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf ———. “List of “active” CDO and CAO from Water Board (MS Excel, 1,453 KB).” Accessed on June 10, 2024b. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ California Environmental Protection Agency. “List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC.” Accessed on June 10, 2024c.
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/?emrc=63f01af3d8806 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. “Envirostor.” Accessed on June 10, 2024. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov
Google Earth. 2024.

State Water Resources Control Board. “GeoTracker.” Accessed on June 10, 2024. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cq id=9235730826
Hydrology and Water Quality
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

King City. Municipal Code. Last updated on March 12, 2024. https://ecode360.com/KI4948 Monterey County. Monterey County Municipal Code. Last modified on February 7, 2024a. https://library.municode.com/ca/monterey_county/codes/code_of_ordinances Section E Sources 94 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Land Use and Planning
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Mineral Resources
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

U.S. Geological Survey. “Mineral Resources Online Spatial Data Interactive Map.” Accessed on May 31, 2024. https://mrdata.usgs.gov/general/map-us.html Noise
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Google Earth. 2024
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission. October 1976. Master Plan – Mesa Del Rey Airport. Salinas, CA.

Population and Housing
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Public Services
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Recreation
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Transportation
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Section E Sources 95 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 Tribal Cultural Resources
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Utilities and Service Systems
CalRecycle. “SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details – John Smith Road Landfill (35-AA-0001).” Accessed on June 13, 2024.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2151?siteID=2583 Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Wildfire
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. “Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Areas.” Accessed June 18, 2024. https://calfire-forestry.maps.arcgis.com /apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=988d431a42b242b29d89597ab693d008 Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Monterey County. “Parcel Report Web App.” Accessed on June 11, 2024. https://maps.co.monterey.ca.us/wab/parcelreportwebapp/
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Deer Creek Resources. May 8, 2024. Public Review Draft King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

Chico, CA.

Section E Sources 96 EMC Planning Group
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study July 2024 This side intentionally left blank.

Public Review Draft
King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
(dated May 8, 2024) A

APPENDIX

Public Review Draft
King City
Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
City of King
May 8, 2024
Prepared by
Deer Creek Resources
Public Review Draft

Table of Contents
DISCLAIMER..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................................... 5 PROJECT GOAL................................................................................................................................................................. 5 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................... 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS..................................................................................................................................................... 8 SALINAS RIVERBED & SAN LORENZO CREEK VEGETATION................................................................................................................. 8 WILDLAND FIRE RELATED ISSUES IN PROJECT AREA....................................................................................................... 12 WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT, RESPONSE & MITIGATION AGENCIES............................................................................................. 12 King City Fire Department............................................................................................................................................ 12 CAL FIRE........................................................................................................................................................................ 12 U.S. Forest Service ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 Mutual Aid.................................................................................................................................................................... 12 King City Vegetation Maintenance............................................................................................................................... 12 Resource Conservation District of Monterey County.................................................................................................... 13 WILDLAND FIRE HISTORY ........................................................................................................................................................ 13 ENCAMPMENTS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15 SECONDARY CHANNEL ............................................................................................................................................................ 17 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................................................... 18 COMMUNITY FUEL BREAK ....................................................................................................................................................... 20 Fuel Break Maintenance .............................................................................................................................................. 26 INVASIVE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT....................................................................................................................................... 28 Arundo.......................................................................................................................................................................... 28 Tamarisk....................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Yellow Starthistle.......................................................................................................................................................... 34 DEFENSIBLE SPACE EDUCATION ................................................................................................................................................ 35 CODE ENFORCEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................. 36 HOUSING ............................................................................................................................................................................. 38 LONG-TERM PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 38 BEAVER REINTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................... 38 OPEN SPACE DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 39 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................................... 40 APPENDIX A: ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................ 42 APPENDIX B: GLOSSARY................................................................................................................................................. 43 APPENDIX C: COMMUNITY MEETING NOTES ................................................................................................................. 51 APPENDIX D: WILDLAND VEGETATION TREATMENT TYPES............................................................................................ 53 APPENDIX E: PRESCRIBED FIRE....................................................................................................................................... 56 APPENDIX F: DEFENSIBLE SPACE ZONE EDUCATION FOR HOMEOWNERS ...................................................................... 57 APPENDIX G: ADDITIONAL RESOURCES.......................................................................................................................... 61 2 Public Review Draft
APPENDIX H: GRANT FUNDING PROGRAMS .................................................................................................................. 62 APPENDIX I: PREPARER & METHODS ............................................................................................................................. 63 Figures & Tables
Figure 1: King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan project area and 1000’ buffer used for fuels and fire path modeling.. ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2: Riverbed area on September 7, 2018........................................................................................................................ 9 Figure 3: Riverbed area on June 16, 2020. .............................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 4: Riverbed area on February 26, 2021. ..................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5: Riverbed area on May 13, 2022. ............................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 6: Riverbed area on June 21, 2022 (post-King Fire). ................................................................................................. 11 Figure 7: Riverbed area on November 11, 2023.................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 8: Fire history in project area. .................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 9: Abandoned shelter in riverbed. .............................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 10: River (1.26) and creek (1.37) sections maintained under the RCDMC's Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program. ................................................................................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 11: Recommended 100’ fuel break............................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 12: Brush and thin trees within 100-foot buffer should be removed through pruning, chipping, and mowing. Mature willows and cottonwoods should be protected. ..................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 13: Piles of debris along bank should be removed or chipped. .................................................................................. 23 Figure 14: Flashy ladder fuels along bank should be mowed and removed. ......................................................................... 24 Figure 15: Fire-scarred dead trees within 100-foot fuel break............................................................................................... 25 Figure 16: Annual goat grazing would remove tall weeds and flashy fuels within 100-foot fuel break................................ 27 Figure 17: Small arundo stand growing near the Salinas River............................................................................................. 29 Figure 18: Large arundo stand growing on the slope of the creek in the golf course. ........................................................... 30 Figure 19: Mapped arundo distribution as of January 2024. ................................................................................................. 31 Figure 20: Tamarisk on San Lorenzo Creek at the golf course.............................................................................................. 32 Figure 21: Mapped tamarisk distribution as of January 2024................................................................................................ 33 Figure 22: Yellow starthistle in mixed vegetation................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 23: Access at 228 Rio Vista Dr. ................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 24: Access at 236 Rio Vista Dr. ................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 25: Community members at the February 28, 2024 community meeting. ................................................................. 52 Figure 26: Discussing the benefits of a fuel break at the February 28, 2024 community meeting........................................ 52 Figure 27: CAL FIRE Defensible Zones............................................................................................................................... 57 Table 1: Project Area Wildland Fire History......................................................................................................................... 13 Table 2: Project Recommendations....................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 3: Long-Term Project Considerations.......................................................................................................................... 38 3 Public Review Draft

DISCLAIMER
This document analyzes wildfire hazard along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in King City, California and makes recommendations on reducing potential wildfire-caused losses within the community.

Within this document, areas were prioritized for hazard reduction based upon several factors including potential wildfire behavior, density of structures, proximity to wildland vegetation, and prevailing fireseason weather and winds. The fact that an area may be mapped as lower priority in this document does NOT mean that that area is safe from wildfires. Rather, it means that there were other areas where targeted wildfire hazard reduction projects might benefit a greater number of residents.

Under typical summer wildfire burning conditions, any area with tall dead grass or un-mowed weeds has the potential to support rapid rates of wildfire spread and high intensity burning. Areas adjacent to homes or high-value ecological assets are the highest priorities for annual weed abatement and fire hazard mitigation.

Wildfire behavior is the product of numerous factors, some of which are weather-dependent and difficult or impossible to quantify. The recommendations in this assessment are based upon field surveys, aerial photography, technical analysis, and the professional experience of the authors. Errors may exist in this analysis and could include improper recording of field data due to GPS accuracy or surveyor error, computational errors, data entry mistakes, and any other conceivable cause. This data comprises a simplification of the physical environment intended to allow the authors to make general recommendations about reducing potential fire behavior at the community scale.

While this data is useful in assessing relative risk between the micro-climates and vegetation-types present in the King City riverbed project area, site-specific changes in fuel hazard and wildfire risk (such as annual mowing, grazing, and weed clearance, the growth of flammable ornamental plants and native vegetation, and other changes in the physical environment) will quickly render this data inaccurate.

THIS DATA DESCRIBES VEGETATION AND WILDFIRE HAZARD CONDITIONS

ALONG PORTIONS OF THE SALINAS RIVER AND SAN LORENZO CREEK IN KING CITY DURING FALL 2023 AND WINTER 2024. ANY FUTURE USE OF THIS DATA FOR

OTHER PLANNING, CODE ENFORCEMENT, OR HAZARD MITIGATION WORK IS NOT

RECOMMENDED WITHOUT FIRST CHECKING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS ON THE GROUND.
4 Executive Summary
King City is at risk from potentially catastrophic wildfire, as designated by CAL FIRE’s 2019 Communities at Risk List. This project evaluates wildland fire hazards associated with vegetation in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek, directly adjacent to the City, and recommends mitigation actions which could reduce wildfire threats.

For the majority of the project site, the fertility of the soils, availability of shallow groundwater, frequency of major flood disturbances, abundance of noxious weeds, and absentee landownership all work together to create vegetation conditions which are extremely difficult or impractical to manage.

Wildfire hazard reduction work should focus on actions needed to reduce vegetation in the first 100 feet out from structures adjacent to the wildland areas. This report also makes recommendations on potential education and code enforcement-related improvements, as well as long-term project considerations.

Project Goal
This Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan (RWPP) serves as a framework for a long-term fire resiliency and prioritizes hazard reduction projects along portions of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek in King City, California.

The plan achieves the two following goals:

1. Provides guidance and strategies to increase the wildfire resilience of the community

2. Protects and enhances the wildlife habitat and ecological value of the project area.

The plan was developed by Deer Creek Resources (DCR) with input from the City, collaborating agencies, and the community. The RWPP uses aerial photography and field surveys to map vegetation, analyze potential wildfire hazards within the project area, and prioritize wildfire hazard mitigation projects.

Project Area Description
The project area covers 179 acres in the Salinas River floodplain and San Lorenzo Creek. This land contains no permanent structures, but borders the southern and western city limits which contain residential, commercial, and agricultural parcels. Approximately 70 structures are on the immediate edge of the project area.

King City is a major population center in the Salinas Valley, an important agricultural area. Framed by the Santa Lucia Range in the west and the Gabilán Range in the east, the land immediately surrounding King City is comprised of agricultural fields intersected by the Salinas River—the largest river system on California’s Central Coast. The river flows northwesterly from its headwaters in eastern San Luis Obispo County, 175 miles through the Salinas Valley, and into Monterey Bay north of the city of Marina. The river is an important wildlife corridor, provides irrigation for an immense agricultural industry, and is the main source for aquifer recharge in the valley. 5 The Salinas River appears as little more than a creek for much of the year, but runs underground for long stretches, supplying the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin, the largest natural aquifer west of the Rockies. The Salinas Valley’s mild climate and rich soil support approximately 200,000 acres of irrigated agriculture. The region produces most of the United States’ lettuce, broccoli, artichokes, strawberries, and cauliflower. Agriculture is a $4.5 billion industry in Monterey County.

After 150 years of agricultural expansion, the Salinas River’s riparian corridor has been significantly narrowed, and levees and channelization have reduced the river’s ability to access its floodplain.

During wet winters, the seemingly benign river can wreak havoc on communities and farmlands, as experienced in 2023 during a series of atmospheric river storms. Other recent farm land flooding occurred in 1995 and 2015, driven by El Niño events.

For much of the project site, the fertility of the soils, availability of shallow groundwater, frequency of major flood disturbances, abundance of noxious weeds, and absentee landownership all work together to create vegetation conditions which are extremely difficult to manage. This project focuses on actions needed to reduce wildland vegetation in the first 100 feet out from structures adjacent to the wildland areas.

To analyze how fire could move into or the urban area using wildfire spread modeling software to present a “worst-case scenario” analysis, the 179-acre riverbed and creek area was expanded to include a 1000-foot buffer surrounding the project area. A project area map is on the following page. 6 Figure 1: King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan project area and 1000’ buffer used for fuels and fire path modeling.. 7 Existing Conditions
Salinas Riverbed & San Lorenzo Creek Vegetation
As evidenced by the following aerial photographs, the vegetation in the Salinas Riverbed area is incredibly dynamic. Due to regular flooding, prolific seed production from existing vegetation, and extremely fertile soil, plant communities shift across the landscape from year to year. Riparian ecosystems are linear and easily disturbed, creating ample vectors for upstream seed transmission.

While the vegetation matrix may change from year to year, or even season to season, most of the riverbed is covered with continuous weeds. These weeds form a continuous stretch of fuels that grow fast in the spring and early summer, and then dry out. From June through November, the riverbed’s vegetation supports rapid fire spread.

The following aerial photographs show the project area in September 2018, June 2020, February 2021, May and June 2022 and November 23. Note the ever-changing vegetation patterns due to fire, flood, and seed distribution.
8 Figure 2: Riverbed area on September 7, 2018.

Source: Google
Figure 3: Riverbed area on June 16, 2020.

Source: National Agriculture Imagery Program
9 Figure 4: Riverbed area on February 26, 2021.

Source: Google
Figure 5: Riverbed area on May 13, 2022.

Source: National Agriculture Imagery Program
10 Figure 6: Riverbed area on June 21, 2022 (post-King Fire).

Source: Google
Figure 7: Riverbed area on November 11, 2023.

Source: Resource Conservation District of Monterey County 11 Wildland Fire Related Issues in Project Area
Wildland Fire Management, Response & Mitigation Agencies King City Fire Department
The King City Fire Department (KCFD) has served the city for over 90 years. The department’s fulltime employees include a Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, and Administrative Assistant, backed by approximately 30 volunteer firefighters. Volunteers who train several times per month to learn and hone professional emergency response skills. KCFD provides emergency medical services, fire protection, weed abatement, disaster preparedness, and fire prevention. The department manages an annual citywide weed abatement program with inspections throughout the City. Weed abatement violation notices are issued and enforced.

King City Fire Department Apparatus:
• Three Type 1 Engines
• One Aerial
• One Type 5 Engine
• One Utility Unit

CAL FIRE
CAL FIRE is responsible for fire protection of Monterey County’s State Responsibility Areas (SRAs).

The San Benito-Monterey Unit (BEU) of CAL FIRE includes 2.1 million acres of SRA, one of the state’s largest state responsibility jurisdictions. The San Benito-Monterey Unit is operationally divided into seven battalions offering a wide variety of programs which includes: Fire Prevention, Resource Management, Law Enforcement, Air Attack, Helitack, Conservation Camp, Emergency Command Center (communications), and Cooperative Fire Protection (CAL FIRE 2022).

U.S. Forest Service
The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Monterey Ranger District has jurisdiction in the Los Padres National Forest to the west of King City. USFS provides wildland fire suppression across national forest lands within Monterey County and participates in mutual aid.

Mutual Aid
KCFD and surrounding agencies participate in mutual aid and automatic aid agreements. Automatic aid is a contractual agreement between agencies or fire districts, and aid is dispatched to all first alarms. Mutual aid agreements differ from automatic aid in that outside assistance typically is provided when the agreement is activated, and aid is requested by the primary responding agency. Fire agencies in Monterey County participate in a countywide mutual aid agreement.

King City Vegetation Maintenance
King City’s Public Works Department is responsible for vegetation management on city property. The department currently possesses chainsaws, pole saws, and weed whackers necessary for creating and maintaining the recommended fuel break. While the city has two Exmark zero-turn mowers, Exmark recommends against using these on slopes greater than 15 degrees (26.8% grade). Equipment that can handle levee slopes and brush will need to be acquired to maintain a fuel break. 12 Resource Conservation District of Monterey County
The RCDMC is an invaluable partner in vegetation management for the riverbed area. The agency works with landowners, cities, and other stakeholders throughout the Salinas Valley on a variety of land management activities. From a fire perspective, the RCDMC’s vegetation management actions are critical for the riverbed area. King City should seek further partnership with the RCD to target invasive species through mechanical removal, grazing, and prescribed fire, combined with revegetation of native species.

Wildland Fire History
In the past five years, three fires have ignited and spread through the project area:

Table 1: Project Area Wildland Fire History
Year Name Incident Number Cause
2020 Circle Fire BEU-00004978 Playing with fire
2021 Jolon Fire BEU-00004312 Equipment use
2022 King Fire BEU-00002925 Arson causing one death; case is ongoing Source: CAL FIRE
The King Fire started on May 25, 2022, behind the KFC on Broadway Circle. The fire prompted evacuations and spread to 90 acres before forward progress was stopped on May 27. One person was found dead from the fire, according to the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. Some of the people living in the riverbed were temporarily sheltered at the Salinas Valley Fairgrounds following the fire.

CAL FIRE has indicated that the cause of the fire was arson and that the investigation is ongoing at the time of the RWPP’s publication.

The fatality underscores the necessity of fire mitigation efforts in the riverbed area. It also points to the need for affordable housing in the area.
13 Figure 8: Fire history in project area.
14 Encampments
There is a recent history of people living within the riverbed. Multiple individuals and some families had constructed shelters, notably under the 101 overpass and south of the restaurants near the King City/Broadway southbound off ramp, plus some along the river itself. Some of these structures can be seen in the vegetation Existing Conditions images above (Figures 3-5).

Fire ignitions are a concern in encampments, primarily from escaped cooking and warming fires, accidental ignitions, and arson. Statewide, there is a correlation between the increase of wildfire ignitions and the increase in homelessness over the past five years, although no studies have been published to confirm direct cause.

In California, the number of people without a stable place to call home increased to 181,399 in 2023, a jump of 7,599 since 2022 and an increase of 22,500 since the pre-Covid count in 2019. Homelessness experts primarily attribute the rise to a drop in earnings during the COVID-19 pandemic among people who were already struggling to maintain an income and afford housing. In Monterey County, there were approximately 2,047 people experiencing homelessness according to the 2022 Homeless Pointin-Time Count (PIT).

To represent the scale of the problem, The California Homeless Housing Needs Assessment estimates that it will cost $8.1 billion per year over 12 years to solve statewide homelessness, approximately 3% of California’s budget. In 2022, King City was awarded $12.4 million toward the purchase of a hotel through the state’s Project Homekey program. In January 2024, the California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against the developer of the motel conversion, a setback that caused the city to house people in an alternative location until June.
15 Figure 9: Abandoned shelter in riverbed.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
At the time of DCR’s January 2024 field survey, there was no direct evidence of anyone living within the riverbed area and city staff has confirmed that any people living in encampments had been provided temporary shelter. There were several former encampment sites with scattered debris that should be targeted for cleanup, including the shelter pictured above (Figure 9). Outside the riverbed, there may have been a couple of encampments west of the river and under the 101 overpasses. DCR’s survey team was unable to enter that area to confirm whether they were occupied. City staff has confirmed that trespassing on private property is now being enforced by law enforcement agencies. 16 Secondary Channel
In collaboration with several other agencies, the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County (RCDMC) manages the Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program (SMP) to minimize the risk of flooding throughout the river corridor. Secondary channels have been created throughout the length of the river. They are designed to connect with the main stem of the river at both ends at a higher elevation to convey high flows during and after large storms.

The creation of these secondary channels also involves clearing vegetation, often large stands of arundo, which benefits fire mitigation by reducing fuel loading.

In the riverbed project area, section 1.26 of the SMP creates a channel that alleviates flooding on farmlands and takes the pressure off the levee at the edge of the riverbed. This secondary channel also serves as a fuel break, which would isolate any fires started between the river and the channel.

Sediment is removed annually on Section 1.37 of San Lorenzo Creek to improve flow conveyance.

There is no vegetation removal or other vegetation maintenance performed in this section.

More information on the SMP can be found here: https://RCDMCmonterey.org/salinas-river-streammaintenance-program Figure 10: River (1.26) and creek (1.37) sections maintained under the RCDMC's Salinas River Stream Maintenance Program.

Source: Resource Conservation District of Monterey County 17 Project Recommendations
The projects listed in this section illustrate recommendations that can be implemented to reduce the likelihood of fire spreading in the riverbed project area. The overarching goal of the vegetation management project recommendations is to reduce ladder fuels, create strategic fuel breaks, and raise the overall crown base height (CBH), while preserving the ecological benefits of the conservation easements. Photos accompany each project and illustrate the various fuel hazards found throughout the project area. While some photos are representative of conditions throughout the development, others describe specific areas.

In addition to the vegetation management recommendations, the plan also recommends education on defensible space, code enforcement, and the continued coordination with state agencies to address King City’s housing concerns.

The following table (Table 2) summarizes the project recommendations and more descriptive sections follow. These recommendations are based on the conditions observed throughout the King City riverbed area and San Lorenzo Creek between November 2023 and January 2024.

The primary project recommended by this is the creation of a fuel break on the edge of the Salinas Riverbed to protect homes and businesses and prevent a wildland fire from becoming an urban conflagration. A fuel break will starve an expanding fire of fuels while providing firefighters operational safety and access. While the remaining project recommendations will increase the fire safety and aesthetics of the project area and King City, the fuel break will provide the most protection. 18 Table 2: Project Recommendations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Return Interval 1 Community
Fuel Break
Create and maintain a buffer along the populated
edge of the Salinas Riverbed and San Lorenzo
Creek.

Very High
Creation
Followed by
Semi-Annual
Maintenance
2 Invasive Plant
Management:

Arundo
Manually remove existing arundo in coordination
with the RCDMC; monitor project area for new
growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
3 Invasive Plant
Management:

Tamarisk
Manually remove existing tamarisk in coordination
with the RCDMC; monitor project area for new
growth.

High
Annual
Monitoring After
Removal
4 Invasive Plant
Management:

Yellow
Starthistle (YST)
Use prescribed fire to control YST, reduce fuels and
create a matrix of black within the project area. High
Seasonal; Three
Consecutive
Years for YST
5 Defensible
Space
Education
Promote fire-safe guidelines in California PRC 4291;
distribute mailers to property owners on the
boundary of the project area.

High 3-5 Years
6 Code
Enforcement:

Weed
Abatement
Code Enforcement Officer indicates that there are
no ongoing weed complaints adjacent to project
area; continue to enforce when complaints are
made.

Moderate Ongoing
7 Code
Enforcement:

Motorized
Vehicle Access
Residents report motorized vehicles in project area;
recommend restricting access through empty lots. High Ongoing 8 Housing
Pursue funding for temporary and long-term
housing solutions; clean up shelter debris in project
area.

High Ongoing
19 Community Fuel Break
To protect structures and prevent an urban conflagration from spreading through King City, this plan recommends a strategic 100-foot fuel break be created and maintained along the edge of the Salinas riverbed and San Lorenzo Creek, illustrated below in Figure 11. This would begin behind the KFC and Highway 101 and continue along River Drive and Rio Vista Drive, ending at 254 Rio Vista Dr. The parcels in this area are owned by the City and Fred Miranda. Miranda has granted permission for fuels reduction treatment on his property.

Extending the fuel break to 262 Rio Vista Dr. was requested by a community member at the February 28, 2024 meeting. Although current vegetation conditions did not warrant that extension, the city should consider the option.

This fuel break would then start again at the north end of the golf course behind 221 Villa Dr., ending at the King City Migrant Center at 440 Jayne St. These parcels are owned by the City and multiple private property owners. The creation of the fuel break would require coordination between multiple parties.

The recommended fuel break would provide an easily accessible buffer in which fuel density is reduced. Fuel breaks provide quick access to firefighters where control activities can be conducted safely due to low fuel volumes. Vegetation would be thinned and trees (cottonwood and willows) would be pruned to remove ladder fuels. Brush, heavy ground fuels, and dead trees would be disposed of to create a park-like appearance. The fuel break does not need to be a bare strip in which all vegetation is removed to mineral soil annually.

Please note that 100 feet is the recommended width, but that space does not exist throughout the entire recommended buffer area such as in areas along San Lorenzo Creek, and thus the width would be adjusted accordingly where necessary.
20 Figure 11: Recommended 100’ fuel break.
21 The following methods would be used to construct this 100-foot fuel break:

Reduce Ladder Fuels Under Larger Trees
Small trees and shrubs can spread fire from the surface into the crowns of the larger cottonwood trees and willows on the edge of the riverbed. To curb vertical fuel continuity, concentrate thinning efforts on the understory to prevent fire from climbing into the gray pine canopy. Thinning understory vegetation will also allow leaves to drop to the ground, rather than suspend in lower vegetation where they can be highly flammable and create dangerous ladder fuel. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Hand pruning and chipping understory fuel
Frequency: Three to five years
Access: Easy. Most large trees are on the edge of the riverbed area near roadway access.

Figure 12: Brush and thin trees within 100-foot buffer should be removed through pruning, chipping, and mowing. Mature willows and cottonwoods should be protected.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
22 Remove Downed, High-Water Debris
Many downed limbs and miscellaneous dead material have washed up against the edge of the bank between the KFC and Highway 101 to the intersection of River Drive and the west entrance to Rio Plaza Mobile Home Estates. This debris is both a fuels concern and an impediment to emergency access to the riverbed area. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Removal or chipping
Frequency: After high-water years that move debris
Access: Easy. Most debris washes up against the edge of the riverbed during the winter and can be easily removed.

Figure 13: Piles of debris along bank should be removed or chipped.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
23 Figure 14: Flashy ladder fuels along bank should be mowed and removed.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
24 Remove Dead Trees
Several dead trees, many of which are fire damaged, lie in the 100-foot buffer. These are hazards that should be downed and removed. Healthy cottonwoods and willows should not be removed. Removed vegetation could either be hauled off or chipped into mulch and spread.

Priority: High
Method: Removal and chipping of smaller material
Frequency: One-time with monitoring
Access: Easy.

Figure 15: Fire-scarred dead trees within 100-foot fuel break.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
25 Coordination With Property Owners
The recommended fuel break extends beyond the city limits in many areas. The city should coordinate with individual property owners and the primary property owner of the project area, Fred Miranda.

Miranda has granted permission to the city and homeowners to mow and remove vegetation on his property to improve fire safety.

Fuel Break Maintenance
Once the 100-foot fuel break has been created, it will require regular maintenance due to the speed at which vegetation grows in the riverbed. High-water years will wash up debris that should be removed each spring. Water that reaches the levee may also replenish the soil’s seed bank, a potential upstream vector for invasive plants. Because thicker brush has been removed during the creation of the buffer, the primary recommended methods for maintenance will be mowing, pruning, and grazing.

Mowing & Pruning
Once large brush and small trees have been manually removed, it should be regularly mowed. Mowing should occur after spring growth, with regular monitoring throughout the year. Wet years will require additional returns.

This plan recommends that the city acquire mowing equipment capable of handling thick brush and steep slopes to maintain the fuel break. While there are newer, remote-controlled mowers available on the market, many are in venture capital mode and have not been proven to be maintainable, so this plan recommends choosing equipment with a proven record that can be serviced by existing city staff.

As crews mow the fuel break, they should be accompanied by workers on foot to prune larger trees and brushes, and to watch mowing equipment for sparks that may cause an ignition. All mowers should be equipped with fire suppression equipment.
26 Grazing
Of the grazing animals used for fuels reduction, goats are the best suited for maintaining the 100-foot fuel break buffer. Goats have no problem with steep slopes and they are more effective at removing the small woody materials that make up much of the brush and shrubs in the riverbed area. This plan recommends consultation with a grazing company to develop a strategy to maintain the fuel break.

This would consist of a single, annual grazing entry in late spring, but return entries may be necessary in wet years.

Potential companies within service range of King City include:
• Fire Grazers, Inc.
• The Goat Girls
• Living Systems
• Green Goat Landscapers, LLC
Figure 16: Annual goat grazing would remove tall weeds and flashy fuels within 100-foot fuel break.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
27 Invasive Vegetation Management
Vegetation management plays a key role in reducing the potential for damaging and destructive wildfires through removing, rearranging, and maintaining the spatial distribution of fuels. Objectives of vegetation management include:
• Reduce wildfire hazard to mitigate risks to life and property • Reduce the likelihood of ignitions
• Reduce extreme fire behavior to enhance community and firefighter safety • Minimize impacts to natural resources
As noted earlier in the RWPP, the project area contains shifting and dynamic vegetation landscape due to its location in the floodplain of a major river. King City’s efforts in vegetation management should be focused on areas directly adjacent to structures, or on areas where there is synergies with ongoing noxious weed eradication efforts with the RCDMC. For larger-scale noxious weed reduction projects, this RWPP recommends targeting three species to develop fire resiliency most effectively: arundo, tamarisk, and yellow starthistle.

Arundo
Arundo donax (arundo) is a perennial cane that can grow to 30-feet tall, among the fastest growing terrestrial plants. It has invaded central California River valleys in San Luis Obispo and Monterey counties. The non-native plant can form dense stands, displacing native vegetation and degrading wildlife habitat—arundo is not a food source nor does it provide nesting habitat. Arundo damages California's riparian ecosystems by outcompeting native species, such as willows, for water, and its stems and leaves contain a variety of harmful chemicals that deter wildlife from feeding. (Bell) Another problem with arundo is its hard, plate-shaped root masses. Like chunks of pavement, these root masses can stabilize banks, but can lead to massive bank failure when they are undermined during a high-water event. Root masses can be many feet across and weigh hundreds of pounds. Although not common, large arundo root masses have come loose from banks during storms elsewhere in California and have damaged downstream infrastructure like bridges.

Stands of arundo increase the fuel load in a riparian habitat and produce a biomass containing large amounts of energy. Arundo will burn when green and grows increasingly flammable during hotter, drier periods (June to October). Large stands of it can increase the probability, intensity, and spread of wildfire. (Coffman) Post-fire, arundo rhizomes resprout quickly and typically outgrow native plants.

Overtime, this can result in arundo domination along riparian corridors.

Arundo has invaded California’s river valleys throughout the state and in 2011, the California Invasive Plant Council determined that the Salinas River watershed had the second largest infestation in the state. The RCDMC has performed extensive work to eradicate arundo throughout the valley, treating 866 acres, plus an additional 100 acres through the Stream Maintenance Program described below.

The RCDMC has also worked to remove arundo upstream in San Luis Obispo county to prevent reseeding downstream. Ideally, removed arundo would be replaced with native willow or cottonwood. 28 Figure 17: Small arundo stand growing near the Salinas River.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
At the time of field surveys for this plan, large stands of arundo have been removed from the project area, but individual plants and small stands remain. The RWPP recommends that the RCDMC continue its removal project throughout the Salinas River and that King City develop a treatment plan to target and remove plants within city limits, particularly in the golf course area. Arundo in the golf course area is primarily growing on the banks of the creek (Figure 18), which may make use of heavy mowing equipment difficult to use due to the slope. Hand removal followed by herbicide treatment may be required here.
29 Figure 18: Large arundo stand growing on the slope of the creek in the golf course.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
The RCDMC uses the following widely implemented method to remove arundo: “Treatment of large arundo stands on the Salinas River typically begins with mowing in the fall, which reduces standing biomass and causes a flush of regrowth from the underground rhizomes in the spring. Arundo resprouts are then sprayed with herbicides the following summer-fall, and in each subsequent year until no sprouts remain. Smaller, scattered stands are treated with herbicide without prior biomass reduction. Herbicides used consist of wildlife-friendly formulations containing glyphosate or a glyphosate/imazapyr mix approved for use near water." (RCDMC) Arundo in the project area was mapped during DCR’s field survey in January 2024, and included on the map below (Figure 19).
30 Figure 19: Mapped arundo distribution as of January 2024. 31 Tamarisk
Tamarix ramosissima (tamarisk) is another invasive species that presents increased fire susceptibility in riparian areas. If allowed to grow, this dense shrub can grow up to a 30-foot root depth, roughly twice the depth of cottonwood roots, allowing cottonwood displacement. Like arundo, tamarisk invades riparian systems and responds positively to flooding, which facilitates further seed spread and establishment. The plant forms dense stands and invaded areas may become completely tamarisk dominated with few other plant species present. Tamarisk is flammable even when healthy and green and able to quickly recover and dominate a recently burned area.

DCR field surveys found both individual trees and stands of tamarisk. Tamarisk dominated areas are concentrated in the San Lorenzo Creek corridor along the golf course. Like arundo removal, this RWPP recommends that these stands of tamarisk and individual plants be removed through a combination of digging and targeted herbicide. Tamarisk on the creekbank slope may not be possible to remove with a mower and may require hand digging, followed by herbicide treatment. This species is also being targeted by the RCDMC in the Salinas Riverbed and developing a collaborative removal effort to remove tamarisk in the creek is recommended.

Figure 20: Tamarisk on San Lorenzo Creek at the golf course.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
32 Figure 21: Mapped tamarisk distribution as of January 2024. 33 Yellow Starthistle
Extensive areas of invasive yellow starthistle (YST) occur within the riverbed area. Areas dominated by YST have higher fuel loadings than areas of only grass, as the thatch from thistle growth persists for over a year. After yellow starthistle is cured in mid-late summer, areas of continuous YST can burn with great intensity, especially on windy days. Fire hazard drops in YST after fall rains, but heavy areas of YST thatch dry out quickly and can burn vigorously into the winter. San Lorenzo Creek contains smaller patches of YST with less continuity.

Any efforts at starthistle control involve a multi-year process, and outside of the first 100 feet from structures, large-scale efforts to control YST should only be undertaken if long-term support for maintaining such an effort seems likely.

Prescribed fire can be an effective tool for reducing the dominance of YST across large acreages. This topic is covered in greater detail in Appendix E.

Figure 22: Yellow starthistle in mixed vegetation.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
34 Defensible Space Education
The highest-priority for property owners near the project area is to reduce fuels near structures and maintain low-flammability conditions within their parcels. Defensible space is beneficial in many ways. It prevents fire from advancing and endangering homes and lives. It improves property value while reducing the risk of loss. It provides a healthier environment for trees and shrubs by minimizing the impacts of competition, insects, and disease. Most importantly, defensible space allows firefighters to defend homes safely and effectively.

Follow-up treatments are crucial to maintaining fire-resilient conditions and it is important to note that this work is never “finished.” Grass and other annual plants can carry fire quickly across areas that are otherwise well-maintained. Some vegetation requires more frequent re-entry intervals to stay healthy compared to others.

Although King City is not located in a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and property owners are not legally bound to comply with Public Resource Code 4291, this plan recommends that the City promote 4291’s defensible space guidelines and send educational mailers to residents who live on the boundary of the project area. Those guidelines are summarized here and more information is provided in Appendix F:

Maintain defensible space of 100 feet from each side and from the front and rear of the structure, but not beyond the property line. The amount of fuel modification necessary shall consider the flammability of the structure as affected by building material, building standards, location, and type of vegetation.

Fuels shall be maintained in a condition so that a wildfire burning under average weather conditions would be unlikely to ignite the structure. Trees and shrubs should be pruned to a crown base height of eight feet and maintained to effectively manage fuels and not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from other nearby vegetation to a structure or from a structure to other nearby vegetation. The intensity of fuels management may vary within the 100-foot perimeter of the structure, the most intense being within the first 30 feet around the structure. Where possible, the first two feet out from a structure should be bare dirt, gravel, concrete, or lawn, and free of wood chips or mulch. Maintain any tree, shrub, or other plant adjacent to or overhanging a building free of dead or dying wood. Maintain the roof of a structure free of leaves, needles, or other vegetative materials. (California Public Resource Code Sec 4291) 35 Code Enforcement
Weed control on private property is handled through the King City Police Department’s Code Enforcement Services division. All code enforcement cases, including weed abatement, are complaint based. Upon receiving a weed abatement complaint and confirming its validity, the city’s code enforcement officer will notify the property owner or residents of the violation. A 30-day notice of violation is mailed if there is no sign of improvement or compliance, followed by a 14-day notice. If no improvements have been made to correct the violation after those final 14 days, an administrative citation is issued.

The current Code Enforcement Office has been in the position since September 2023, and reports no complaints for the Salinas Riverbed, San Lorenzo Creek, or surrounding areas, noting that the bulk of the riverbed falls under the Monterey County Sheriff’s jurisdiction. Historical code enforcement statistics were not available.

Concerned residents should continue to follow code enforcement guidelines to report rampant weed growth in privately owned areas of concern bordering the riverbed and creek.

During the February 28, 2024 community meeting, several attendees expressed their concerns about people riding motorcycles, ATVs, and other motorized vehicles through the riverbed area, which is easily accessible through the empty lot at 228 Rio Vista Drive and moderately accessible through the lot at 236 Rio Vista Drive. In areas of tall, dried vegetation, heat from the exhaust system on an ATV or motorcycle can cause an ignition, as can motorized vehicles without a spark arrestor. Ticketing those who ride in the riverbed area would lower the area’s fire risk.

The plan also recommends that the City coordinate with the two property owners to restrict access through these open lots shown in Figures 23 and 24.
36 Figure 23: Access at 228 Rio Vista Dr.

Source: Google Street View, August 2023
Figure 24: Access at 236 Rio Vista Dr.

Source: Google Street View, August 2023
37 Housing
Ignitions in the project area can be reduced by housing people living within the project area. While this plan cannot address the state’s, county’s, and city’s homelessness issues, it does recommend that the city further pursue funding to provide temporary and long-term housing solutions and prohibit camping within the project area.

Abandoned encampment sites should be targeted for cleanup. Building materials that have been left in the riverbed provide fuels for any spreading fire and the abundance of plastic and hazardous debris should not be left to burn or otherwise contaminate the riverbed. The example in Figure 9 is the most significant found in January 2024 and would take considerable effort to disassemble and excavate from the ground.

Long-Term Project Considerations
This plan recommends the City further evaluate the reintroduction of beavers into the area and acquiring the riverbed property for development. Neither recommendation can provide immediate fire mitigation like the fuel break, but are worth investigating for long-term benefits to restore the riverbed ecosystem and make it accessible for recreation.

Table 3: Long-Term Project Considerations
Project
Number Project Type Project Description Priority Estimated Timeline 9 Beaver
Reintroduction
Collaborate with RCDMC to engage the SLO Beaver
Brigade and determine project feasibility. Moderate 10 Years 10 Open Space
Development
Explore the city's capability and community desire to
purchase the riverbed land for long-term open space
development.

Moderate 5-10 Years
Beaver Reintroduction
Reintroduction of beavers into riparian areas is a topic of discussion in many parts of the American West. The North American beaver is an ecosystem engineer with a well-documented impact on restoring wetlands and boosting drought protection. Studies in mountain meadows in Colorado have found that major wildfires have slowed or stopped upon reaching areas flooded by beaver dams.

However, this does not necessarily mean that reintroducing beavers into an irrigated floodplain will reduce wildfire hazards. The Salinas Valley is a vastly different ecosystem from a mountain meadow and has been heavily altered by the agriculture industry.

Management of vegetation in the floodway of the Salinas River is a necessarily big-picture undertaking. Regular flooding deposits weeds, debris and garbage, soil, and large wood across the 38 project area, and upstream actions like levee construction, reservoir releases, and riparian restoration have downstream impacts. No large-scale land management can succeed within the floodway unless it is designed in a way that considers the watershed-scale perspective.

Beaver reintroduction in a heavy agricultural area would require additional study, but beavers do live in wetlands with poor water quality and improve their own ecosystems. Their dams filter water and the wetlands they create will naturally process excess nitrogen common in agricultural runoff. Long considered a nuisance to farmers, the CDFW offers beaver coexistence methods to protect infrastructure and assets.

In 2023, beaver relocation became legal in California and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife created a team of six people to start a pilot program. Working with the Maidu Summit Consortium, CDFW released a family of seven beavers into Plumas County in December 2023.

If King City is interested in pursuing further information about the roles beavers play in the function of riparian ecosystems, they can reach out to organizations like the SLO Beaver Brigade, the Monterey RCDMC, and partnering with Nature’s Engineers, a Central Coast firm implementing beaver reintroduction projects and constructing ‘beaver dam analogs’(BDAs). Such an undertaking would require additional planning effort involving an array of property owners upstream and downstream from the project area.

Open Space Development
King City staff have identified acquiring land within the riverbed to establish an open space reserve and/or trail system as a potential future option. While both options may reduce the threat of wildfire due to active management of the land and reestablishing native plants, inviting more human activity into the area may also increase the possibility of ignitions.

One previous effort that may benefit King City in determining how to establish a park or open space would be Albuquerque’s Bosque Action Plan used to transform the city’s degraded forestland along the Rio Grande into a nature preserve and recreation area. Where it cuts through Albuquerque, the Rio Grande floods frequently, harbors a variety of wildlife, and is a haven for towering cottonwoods.

Following their example, King City may also be able to develop a similar plan that allows for native wildlife to flourish, provides recreational opportunities, and continues to protect the city from flooding.
39 References
Bell, Gary. (1997). Ecology and management of Arundo donax, and approaches to riparian habitat restoration in southern California.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Strategic Action Plan. Available at:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/about/cal-fire-strategic-plan-2024 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, San Benito-Monterey Unit Fire Plan 2022.

Available at: https://www.osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/jeuclcrm/2022-san-benito-monterey-unit-fireplan.pdf California Department of Water Resources, Creative Services Branch, Forest Management Task Force, and Public Affairs Office. Available online at https://fmtf.fire.ca.gov/.

Coffman, G., Ambrose, R., Rundel, P., 2010. Wildfire promotes dominance of invasive giant reed (Arundo donax) in riparian ecosystems. Biol. Invasions 12, 2723-2734.

Fairfax, Emily and Whittle, Andrew, Smokey the Beaver: beaver-dammed riparian corridors stay green during wildfire throughout the western United States, Ecological Applications, Volume 30, Issue 8, 2020, e02225. Available at
https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eap.2225 Fire Recovery Guide, California Native Plant Society, 2019. Available at https://www.cnps.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/08/cnps-fire-recovery-guide-2019.pdf Monterey County Homeless Count and Survey Comprehensive Report, 2022. Available at https://chsp.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2022montereyfinalV2.pdf Mowry, M., Read, A., Johnston, K. and Wafaie, T. 2019. Planning the Wildland-Urban Interface.

Prepared for the American Planning Association. PAS Report 594.

PSE Healthy Energy, Can Prescribed Fires Mitigate Health Harm? A Review of Air Quality and Public Health Implications of Wildfire and Prescribed Fire, 2022. Available at:
https://www.lung.org/getmedia/fd7ff728-56d9-4b33-82eb-abd06f01bc3b/pse_wildfire-and-prescribedfire-brief_final_2022 Monterey County Water Resources Agency and State Coastal Conservancy, Salinas River Long-Term Management Plan, 2019. Available at
https://www.salinasrivermanagementprogram.org/ltmp_doc.html State of California, California Public Resources Code Section 4291, 2022., Available at https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=4291.&lawCode=PR C
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Confronting the Wildfire Crisis: A New Strategy for Protecting Communities and Improving Resilience in America’s Forests, 2022. Available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Confronting-Wildfire-Crisis.pdf 40 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. Wildfire Crisis Implementation Plan, 2022. Available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Wildfire-Crisis-Implementation-Plan.pdf U.S. Government Publishing Office. Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. By Congress. Available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1904 41 Appendix A: Abbreviations & Acronyms
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection BEU San Benito-Monterey Unit of CAL FIRE
DCR Deer Creek Resources
KCFD King City Fire Department
LRA Local Responsibility Area
RWPP Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
SRA State Responsibility Area
USFS United States Forest Service
WUI Wildland Urban Interface
YST Yellow Starthistle
42 Appendix B: Glossary
Access Roads/Routes: Roads that allow entrance into and out of a property. Routes available for fire trucks and equipment to approach and defend areas or structures, including roadways or driveways.

Assets at Risk: Those things that are important to quality of life that can be threatened with destruction or loss from wildfire. These include homes, businesses, infrastructure, cultural sites, wildlife habitat, natural resources, air quality, recreational facilities and areas, historical structures, and any other important attribute that individual communities rely on for their well-being.

Automatic or Mutual Aid Agreement: An agreement between two or more agencies whereby such agencies are automatically dispatched simultaneously to predetermined types of emergencies in predetermined areas.

Black: An area that has burned.

Broadcast Burning: A controlled burn, where the fire is intentionally ignited and allowed to proceed over a designated area within well-defined boundaries for the reduction of fuel hazard, as a resource management treatment, or both.

Brush: A collective term that refers to stands of vegetation dominated by shrubby, woody plants, or low-growing trees.

Brushing: Clearing or “cleaning up” brushy vegetation in an area.

Buffer: An area of reduced vegetation that creates a barrier separating wildlands from vulnerable residential or business developments; this barrier is like a greenbelt in that it is usually used for another purpose, such as agriculture, recreation, parks, or golf courses.

Burn: (1) An area burned over by wildland fire. (2) A reference to a working fire. (3) To be on fire. (4) To consume fuel during rapid combustion. (5) A fire in progress or under investigation.

Burning Conditions: The state of the combined factors of the environment—such as winds, temperature, fuel moistures, and humidity—that affect fire behavior in a specified fuel type.

Canopy: The top layer of a forest, tree, or low-growing stand of shrubs, which is formed by leaves, needles, and branches creating a continuous cover.

Canopy Density: A term used to describe the amount of vegetative cover in the top layer of a forest; among other things, the canopy density influences the amount of light penetration, understory composition, surface reflectance, and rainfall interception in a forest landscape. 43 Catastrophic Fire: Wildland or wildland-urban interface fire with a fast-moving front, extending over a large area (300+ acres) or highly destructive to lives, property, or natural resources.

Collaborative: An open, inclusive process that assumes all participants have valuable knowledge and opinions and all their comments are heard and considered; collaboration does not mean consensus or ownership.

Combustible: Any material that, in the form in which it is used and under the conditions anticipated, will ignite and burn.

Combustion: The rapid oxidation of fuel in which heat and usually flame are produced. Combustion can be divided into four phases: pre-ignition, flaming, smoldering, and glowing.

Community: A body of people living in one place or district and considered a whole; a neighborhood, subdivision, small town, village, or township with boundaries defined by the residents or by regulatory jurisdiction.

Cover: Any plants or organic matter that hold soil in place or grow over and create shade that provides wildlife with an area to reproduce and find protection from predators and weather.

Crown Density: A measurement of the thickness or density of the foliage of the treetops (crown) in a stand.

Crown Fire (Crowning): A fire that spreads through the top of the vegetative canopy; characteristic of hot fires and dry conditions. Crown fires become independent from the surface fire and are more complex to control than surface fires.

Defensible Space: An area, either natural or constructed, where material capable of causing a fire to spread has been treated, cleared, reduced, or changed to provide a barrier between an advancing wildland fire and the loss to life, property, or resources. In practice, defensible space is defined as an area with a minimum of 100 feet around a structure that is cleared of flammable brush or vegetation.

Distance from the structure and the degree of fuels treatment vary with vegetation type, slope, density, and other factors.

Embers: Burning (or glowing) particles of vegetation from tree branches, parts of shrubs or chaparral, or other combustible materials that ignite and burn during a wildfire and are carried in wind currents to locations in front of the wildfire (also known as firebrands).

Evacuation: An organized, phased, and supervised withdrawal, dispersal, or removal of citizens from dangerous or potentially dangerous areas, and their reception and care in safe areas. 44 Evacuation Route: A path or road that has been preplanned for getting out of harm's way in a fire situation. The route should be well understood in advance of crisis by all participants. If there is any unclear direction, the path should be marked.

Exposure: (1) Property that may be endangered by a fire burning in another home or by a wildfire; (2) Direction in which a slope faces, usually with respect to cardinal directions; (3) The general surroundings of a site with special reference to its openness to winds.

Fire: Rapid oxidation, usually with the evolution of heat and light. Requires interaction of heat, fuel, and oxygen.

Fire Behavior: The way a fire reacts to the influences of fuel, weather, and topography. Common terms used to describe behavior include smoldering, creeping, running, spotting, torching, and crowning.

Fire Hazard: A fuel complex, defined by volume, type, condition, arrangement, and location, which determines the degree of ease of ignition and of resistance to control.

Fire Hazard Mitigation: Various methods by which existing fire hazards can be reduced in a certain area, such as fuel breaks, non-combustible roofing, spark arrestors, etc.

Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ): Any geographical area designated pursuant to California Public Resource Code Section 4201 to contain the type and condition of vegetation, topography, weather, and structure density to increase the possibility of conflagration fires. Areas are zoned as Very High, High, or Moderate by evaluating applicable risks and hazard.

Fire History: The known frequency and intensity of fires that have occurred in each area over a period.

Fire Intensity: Amount of heat released by a fire in an area in any given period. Fire intensity is usually related to the flame length of a fire.

Fire/Wildfire Management: Activities required for the protection of burnable wildland assets from fire, or the use of prescribed fire to meet land management objectives.

Fire Planning: Systematic technological and administrative management process of design, organization, facilities, and procedures, including fire use, to protect wildland from fire.

Fire Prevention: Activities such as public education, community outreach, law enforcement, and reduction of fuel hazards, intended to reduce wildland fire and the risks it poses to life and property.

Fire Resilient/Resiliency: The ability of an ecosystem to maintain its native biodiversity, ecological integrity, and natural recovery processes following a wildfire disturbance. 45 Fire Risk: The combination of vegetation, topography, weather, ignition sources, and fire history that leads to fire or ignition potential and danger in each area.

Fire Safe: For the purposes of this plan, this term is defined as: Action(s) that moderate the severity of a fire hazard to a level of "acceptable risk," as discussed in the Safety Element of the County General Plan. In a broader context, this term describes the state of lessened severity or action(s) that moderate the severity of a fire hazard or risk, while protecting structures and surrounding property from fire, whether fire is inside the structure or is threatening the structure from exterior sources.

Fire Safe Council: Public and private organizations that comprise a council intended to minimize the potential for wildfire damage to communities and homeowners, while also protecting the health of natural resources. Goals are achieved by distributing fire prevention materials, organizing fire safety programs, implementing fuel-reduction projects, and more. Visit www.firesafecouncil.org.

Fire Severity: Degree to which a site has been altered or disrupted by fire; loosely, a product of fire intensity and residence time.

Fire Spread: The movement of fire from one place to another.

Fire Suppression: All the work and activities connected with control and fire-extinguishing operations, beginning with discovery and continuing until the fire is completely extinguished.

Fire Weather: Weather conditions that influence fire ignition, behavior, and suppression, such as high temperatures, low precipitation/humidity, and high winds.

Firewise/Firewise Communities/USA Recognition Program: (1) A national, multi-agency effort designed to reach beyond the fire service by involving homeowners, community leaders, planners, developers, and others in the effort to protect people, property, and natural resources from the risk of wildland fire before a fire starts. (2) Firewise offers a series of practical steps that individuals and communities can take to minimize wildfire risks to people, property, and natural resources. It emphasizes community responsibility for planning in the design of a safe community as well as effective emergency response, and individual responsibility for safer home evacuation and design, landscaping, and maintenance.

Fuel(s): Combustible structures and vegetative materials. Includes dead plants, parts of living plants, duff, and other accumulations of flammable vegetation, such as grass, leaves, ground litter, shrubs, and trees that feed a fire. See Surface Fuels.

Fuel Break: A natural or constructed barrier used to stop or check fires that may occur, or to provide a control line from which to work.
46 Fuel Description: Designation of fuel materials into categories based on size and drying times. Fuel descriptions in use are described below:

Description Material Diameter
Fine Needles, leaves, etc.
1 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 1 hour. <1/4" 10 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 10 hours. 1/4"-1" 100 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 4 days. 1-3" 1000 Hour Woody material, generally drying out within 40 days. 3"+ Downed Fuel on the ground.

Heavy Large logs and snags.

Fuel Ladder: A ladder of vegetation from the ground into the canopy (or upper branches) of the trees that allows fire to climb upward.

Fuel Load: The amount of available and potentially combustible material, usually expressed as tons/acre.

Fuel Management: Act or practice of controlling flammability and reducing resistance to control of wildland fuels through mechanical, chemical, biological, or manual means, or by fire in support of land management objectives.

Fuel Treatment: Manipulation or removal of fuels to reduce likelihood of ignition or lessen potential damage and resistance to control (e.g., lopping, chipping, crushing, piling, and burning). Also known as Fuel Treatment.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS): A technology used for digitally viewing, storing, analyzing, and manipulating geographical information. Layers of information can create a better understanding of how data is interrelated. Useful for landscape-level planning.

Hardened Homes: Improving a building's resistance to fire, such as updating a roof with noncombustible roofing material; the goal is to increase the structure’s ability to survive a fire.

Hazard: Any real or potential condition that can cause injury, illness, or death of personnel, or damage to or loss of equipment or property.

Healthy Forests Restoration Act: A portion of the 2003 Healthy Forests Initiative intended to reduce hazardous fuels on public and private lands. Establishes Community Wildfire Protection Plans and sets standards for those plans.

Home Ignition Zone: The home and area out to approximately 100 feet, where local conditions affect the potential ignitability of a home during a wildfire. 47 Ignitability: The susceptibility to catch on fire.

Ignition: The event of combustion initiation that creates fire.

Incident: A human-caused or natural occurrence, such as wildland fire, that requires emergency service action to prevent or reduce the loss of life or damage to property or natural resources. Incident Management Teams also handle other non-fire emergency responses, including tornadoes, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, and other disasters or large events.

Ingress-Egress: Roads and other avenues to enter and leave a property. Also refers to the act or right to come in or go through, as in entering a property (ingress), and the act or right to depart or go out, as in exiting a property (egress).

Jackpot: Heavy fuel concentrations that can flare up in a fire.

Ladder Fuels: Fuels that provide vertical continuity between strata and allow fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease. They help initiate and assure the continuation of crowning.

Landscape: The visible features of an area of land, including topography, water bodies, vegetation, human elements, such asland uses and structures, and transitory elementssuch aslighting and weather conditions.

Large Fire: 1) CAL FIRE defines a fire burning more than 300 acres as a large fire. 2) A fire burning with a size and intensity such that its behavior is determined by interaction between its own convection column and weather conditions above the surface.

Limbing/Limb Up: Removing selected branches of a standing or fallen tree or shrub.

Manual Treatment/Fuel Reduction: Methods of modifying wildfire fuel complexes without the use of machinery;such treatments may include chainsaws, fire-use applications, chemical treatments, and grazing.

Mastication: The process of “chewing up” or grinding vegetative fuels with machinery to reduce their hazard as a fuel source.

Mitigation: Those activities implemented prior to, during, or after an incident which are designed to reduce or eliminate risks to persons or property that lessen the actual or potential effects or consequences of an incident. Mitigation measures can include efforts to educate governments, businesses, and the public on measures they can take to reduce loss and injury and are often informed by lessons learned from prior incidents.
48 Mutual Aid Agreement: A reciprocal aid agreement between two or more agencies that defines what resources each will provide to the other in response to certain predetermined types of emergencies.

Mutual aid response is provided upon request.

Pile Burning: A method used to reduce fuel wherein vegetation is cut, stacked, and then burned.

Preparedness: (1) Activities that lead to a safe, efficient, and cost-effective fire management program in support of land and resource management objectives through appropriate planning and coordination. (2) Mental readiness to recognize changes in fire danger and act promptly when action is appropriate. (3) The range of deliberate, critical tasks and activities necessary to build, sustain, and improve the capability to protect against, respond to, and recover from wildfire.

Prescribed Fire (Controlled Burning): A fire that burns within a range of predetermined conditions (such as fuel moisture content, weather conditions, etc.) that will keep it controllable, at desired intensity, and able to achieve its stated objectives. A written, approved burn plan must exist, and environmental requirements (where applicable) must be met, prior to ignition.

Prevention: Activities directed at reducing the incidence of fires, including public education, law enforcement, personal contact, and reduction of fuel hazards.

Pruning: The act of cutting back the unwanted portions of a plant or cutting for the purpose of enhancing growth.

Relative Humidity: A measure of moisture in the air. If the humidity is 100%, the air is completely saturated with moisture. If the humidity is less than 20%, the air is very dry. When the air is dry, it absorbs moisture from the fuels in the forest, making them more flammable.

Response: (1) Movement of an individual firefighting resource from its assigned standby location to another location, or to an incident in reaction to dispatch orders, or to a reported alarm. (2) Activities that address the short-term, direct effect of an incident, including immediate actions to save lives, protect property, and meet basic human needs. Also includes the execution of emergency operations plans as well as mitigation activities designed to limit the loss of life, personal injury, property damage, and other unfavorable outcomes.

Response Time: For the purposes of the CWPP, response time is the time that elapses between the moment a 911 call is placed to the emergency dispatch center and the time that a first responder arrives on scene. Response time includes dispatch time, turnout time (the time it takes firefighters to travel to the fire station, don their gear, and prepare the apparatus), and travel time.

Risk: (1) The chance of a fire starting as determined by the presence and activity of causative agents; (2) A chance of suffering harm or loss; (3) A number related to the potential of firebrands to which a given area will be exposed during a rating day.
49 Signage: Address markers, road postings, and street signs that designate the location of residences and help orient people within a community or area. Highly visible signage is important for helping emergency responders quickly locate incident sites.

Slope: Upward or downward incline or slant, usually calculated as a percentage. One percent of slope means a rise or fall of one foot of elevation within 100 feet. A 45 percent slope would equal 45 feet of rise in 100 feet.

Snag: A standing dead tree that has usually lost most of its branches. Snags offer essential food and cover for a host of wildlife species.

Spot Fire: A fire ignited outside the perimeter of the main fire by flying sparks or embers.

Structure: Any building or structure used for support or shelter of any use or occupancy.

Suppression: All the work of extinguishing or containing a fire, beginning with its discovery.

Thinning: The act of removing a percentage of vegetation to encourage an open space and healthy growth for the remaining vegetation.

Torch/Torching: A rapid and intense burning of a single or small group of trees/shrubs, causing the upward movement of fire; also known as crown fire initiation or flare-up.

Underburn: A prescribed fire method where burning is conducted in the understory so that the fire consumes surface fuels but not trees or shrubs. Also known as understory burning.

Understory: Generally herbaceous or shrubby vegetation that makes up the plant layer under the tree canopy layer.

Wildfire: An unplanned, unwanted wildland fire including unauthorized human-caused fires, escaped wildland fire use events, escaped prescribed fire projects, and all other wildland fires where the objective is to put the fire out.

Wildlands: Areas in which development is essentially nonexistent, except for roads, railroads, power lines, and similar transportation facilities. Structures, if any, are widely scattered. Can also include large cattle ranches and forests managed for timber production.

Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI): The zone where structures and other human developments meet, or intermingle with, undeveloped wildlands.
50 Appendix C: Community Meeting Notes
A community meeting was held on February 28, 2024. EMC mailed approximately 700 invitations to residents and it was promoted through local media. Approximately 25 residents attended the meeting, along with city representatives, EMC, and Deer Creek Resources.

Comments from community members:
• Track on Riverbed near where Townhomes end & houses start where “small” motorcycles are “raced” around in a large circle.
• Please check on the stats of the “causes” of the fires in the river • Remove deadfall along the road leading to San Lorenzo Park. • Ladder fuel removal on dead trees on the east side of Salinas River next to San Lorenzo Park • The area next to McDonald’s, KFC is the most dangerous for the city business district • Trailer Park at 101 River Drive (Rio Vista Mobile Home Estates) is low-income property. A fire in this facility would be a disaster so clearing across the street is important. • Continue clearing San Lorenzo Creek sediment.
• Use Army Corps of Engineers at Fort Hunter Ligget to bring in crews & equipment to help with clearing like they used to do in the 1940s, 50s & 60s. • Extend the fuel break to 262 Rio Vista Drive.
• Pay Fred Miranda the $ we would spend on permits & committees to do the work himself.

Save $ all the way around!
• Plan should be expanded to include area near San Lorenzo Park (due in part to north wind). • Residents were concerned about flooding.
• Wildlife issues, including vectors for invasive plants. • Trash, junk, and debris in the riverbed.
• Concerns with permit process and environmental review. • How can public funds be used on private lands to clean the area? • The RWPP is a gateway to get money to do continued work on the Riverbed. • There should be fines for people who are not maintaining their property. • There should be more code enforcement.
• Need crime prevention measures.
• Need to remove heavy fuels.

DCR also brought paper maps and encouraged attendees to use pens to draw out their fire concerns.

Mapped, written, and verbal collected comments were taken into consideration for the RWPP development.
51 Figure 25: Community members at the February 28, 2024 community meeting.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
Figure 26: Discussing the benefits of a fuel break at the February 28, 2024 community meeting.

Image © 2024 Deer Creek Resources
52 Appendix D: Wildland Vegetation Treatment Types
The following treatment types can be used to manage wildland vegetation to reduce wildfire hazards.

Community Fuel Breaks
Strategic areas of fuels reduction near structures to reduce fire intensity near residential and commercial areas. Fuel breaks not only lower the likelihood of fire starveling through an area, they provide conditions favorable for fire suppression.

Ladder Fuels Reduction
Removal or reduction of fuels that provide vertical continuity allowing fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease
Hand Thinning and Chipping
Hand thinning and chipping is typically performed by a crew using chainsaws and pole saws to thin and clear un-wanted vegetation. Hand thinning is used to cut smaller trees in environmentally sensitive areas where machines may have a significant environmental impact. Hand-thinning is generally limited to younger trees and large branches, as material must be cut into sizes that can be moved by workers without using equipment. Hand thinning may require more frequent treatments to maintain acceptable fuel loads.

Chipping
Chipping will likely be the preferred method of handling woody material removed within the riverbed.

Chipping redistributes forest vegetation that is cut during thinning. Chips can be scattered throughout the project area. Chipped material can also be removed from the project area and disposed of off-site.

Targeted Herbivory/Grazing
Grazing uses goats, sheep, horses, or cows to reduce the small fuels such as grass and small brush. A popular nature-based solution that has been used throughout California, grazing programs have proven to be effective in treating overgrown vegetation elsewhere on the Salinas River. Grazing can also assist with control of invasive species.

Upstream in Paso Robles, a goat grazing program was initiated in 2020, in response to fire ignitions within the riverbed. Paso Robles treats 80-100 acres annually, which equates to approximately 50 days of grazing. Their target area was treated mechanically prior to grazing to reduce heavy fuel loads, standing dead trees, and downed woody materials. This pre-grazing work was primarily performed with chainsaws, pole sales, and tracked chippers. Paso Robles’ annual grazing cost was approximately $50,000-$60,000 per year, plus $15,000 for nesting bird surveys prior to grazing.

It is important to note that grazing animals have little effect on stands of arundo, which should be mechanically removed.
53 Mechanical Thinning or Mowing (Including Mastication) Mechanical thinning or mowing uses tractor-mounted cutters or mowing heads to snip, cut, or grind vegetation in place. It can achieve similar effects to chipping. Heavy equipment can cause adverse soil effects such as rutting and the machinery can spread invasive weeds such as yellow starthistle.

Pile Burning
Please note that burning piles is not permitted within King City and burn permits are not issued by the city. The information listed below pertains to potentially burning vegetation piles within the riverbed area, under the supervision of CAL FIRE or a state-certified burn boss.

Pile burning can be a cost-effective method for disposing of cut vegetation. Pile burning is considered to be a type of prescribed fire, and provides an alternative to chipping thinned vegetation, especially in places where chipper access is not available. Piles are created in the spring or summer, covered, and allowed to cure for several months, and then burned after sufficient rain has fallen to thoroughly wet the surrounding area. Piles create less smoke if they are built without too many larger logs in them, and they are also easier to mop up and extinguish if they are made of smaller branches. Also, piles built only of leaves and pine needles tend to smolder and smoke. These materials should be fed (dry) onto a hot-burning fire, or set aside to compost.

Once the piles burn down, they need to be monitored until they are cold. Depending on the size of the pile, this can last for many days or even weeks. Ideally, winter rains and snow do the heavy work of mopping up after the burn. Burning piles in the late spring can be risky, as embers can remain buried in large piles for months, and winds can blow hot embers into the surrounding vegetation after it dries out for the season. DCR/Firestorm can provide contract pile-burning services.

Tips for pile burning:
• When creating piles, they should be covered to keep the material dry. Remove plastic prior to ignition.
• Scrape a clearance of at least 6 feet to bare soil around any burn piles. • If burning when there is a chance the fire might escape into adjacent dry vegetation, tools and water should be available. If burning in moist conditions, water is not always needed. • Burn only clean, dry vegetative waste such as branches. It is best to burn the dry debris immediately after raking, rather than creating uncovered piles that sit for a long time getting wet and holding moisture.
• Never leave the burn pile unattended—extinguish it if you need to leave. • Avoid burning on windy days. The wind can spread embers. • In general, piles should be no larger than four feet in diameter and four feet high. Large pile sizes are possible, especially if qualified personnel burn them. • Break larger piles down, and add branches to the pile as it burns. • Throw partially burned chunks into the pile and turn over the pile several times while burning to improve consumption and completely consume all material. This is called ‘chunking the pile.’
54 • Mopping up is the most important part of the whole exercise. Burn piles can generate massive heat and remain hot for weeks. Monitor piles regularly even after you think that they are completely out.

Broadcast Burning
Broadcast burning describes prescribed fires ignited in areas with little or no forest canopy present.

Broadcast burning is often used for habitat restoration and fuels reduction purposes, and would be the best method for treating invasive yellow starthistle in the riverbed area as described in the Prescribed Fire section below.
55 Appendix E: Prescribed Fire
There are potential opportunities to use fire to improve the function, safety, aesthetics, and resiliency of the riverbed project area. Application of prescribed fire (including pile burning) in riparian areas could be a helpful and cost-effective tool for reducing invasive yellow starthistle and increasing fire safety. Prescribed burning reduces the loading of fine fuels, duff, large woody fuels, rotten material, shrubs, and other live surface fuels, and may be useful in reducing long-term accumulations of larger dead and down material. Any application of prescribed fire should be targeted to also help achieve non-fire-related resource management objectives, for example reducing invasive plants.

There are opportunities to use prescribed fire to reduce yellow starthistle in the riverbed area.

Starthistle burning is generally seen as a three-year commitment, and successive burns are necessary to kill seeds in the soil. Burns should take place in mid-summer because grass under YST needs to be fully cured before burning occurs.

While the riverbed is not dominated by YST, there are large patches that can be treated with repeated entries of prescribed fire, which lower the threat of late-summer and fall wildfires, and provide training opportunities to local fire departments and prescribed burning organizations. Burning when flowers first appear (January-May) can eliminate YST in the seedling, rosette, and early bolting stages, although burning during this window can be difficult due to insufficient dry fuel available to carry the intense fire necessary for YST control. The preferred burning window is during the early flower stage, typically between late June and July. This prescription must be continued for at least three consecutive years in infested areas to reduce the seed bank. Burning patches of yellow starthistle creates a matrix of black, burned areas, which can help control wildfire spread.

While prescribed fires temporarily affect air quality, a 2022 report indicates that the air quality and health impacts of prescribed fire smoke are limited. Prescribed fires are implemented under conditions to limit harmful smoke exposure and are conducted when meteorological conditions are favorable, atmospheric conditions support smoke dispersion, and wind patterns allow smoke to move away from populated areas.

Prescribed fire’s utility in the management of invasive vegetation is well-documented. The conceptual burn units identified in the maps for this document were designed to meet multiple objectives. If King City is interested in advancing these types of projects, contracting with a California State Fire Marshal-certified burn boss to develop detailed prescriptions and burn objectives (using the State’s burn plan template) would be the next step.

The California State Fire Marshall is now certifying Professional Prescribed Fire Burn Bosses (CARX). California state legislation (SB-332 and SB-926) provides liability protections and a claims fund to protect burners/landowners in case of escaped burns. 56 Appendix F: Defensible Space Zone Education for Homeowners The intensity of wildfire fuel management varies within the 100-foot perimeter of the home, with more intense fuels’ reduction occurring closer to your home. Zones 1 and 2 previously made up the 100 feet of defensible space required by law. Assembly Bill 3074, passed into law in 2020, now requires a third zone for defensible space, as of January 1, 2023. Zone 0 is the new ember-resistant zone within 0 to 5 feet. Start at the home and work your way out to 100 feet or to your property line, whichever is closer.

These zones are a “rule of thumb” designed to help property owners and exceptions are made when appropriate or where property lines do not allow.

Figure 27: CAL FIRE Defensible Zones
Image © 2023 CAL FIRE
57 Zone 0: Ember Resistant Zone
Zone 0 extends 5 feet from buildings, structures, decks, etc.

Science has proven it to be the most important of all the defensible space zones. This zone includes the area under and around all attached decks and requires the most stringent wildfire fuel reduction. The ember-resistant zone is designed to keep fire or embers from igniting materials that can spread the fire to your home. The following provides guidance for this zone, which may change based on the regulation developed by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. • Use hardscape like gravel, pavers, concrete, and other noncombustible mulch materials. No combustible bark or mulch
• Remove all dead and dying weeds, grass, plants, shrubs, trees, branches, and vegetative debris (leaves, needles, cones, bark, etc.); Check your roofs, gutters, decks, porches, stairways, etc. • Remove all branches within 10 feet of any chimney or stovepipe outlet • Limit plants in this area to low growing, nonwoody, properly maintained plants • Limit combustible items (outdoor furniture, planters, etc.) on top of decks • Relocate firewood and lumber to Zone 2
• Replace combustible fencing, gates, and arbors attach to the home with noncombustible alternatives
• Consider relocating garbage and recycling containers outside this zone • Consider relocating boats, RVs, vehicles, and other combustible items outside this zone Zone 1: Lean, Clean and Green Zone
Zone 1 extends 30 feet from buildings, structures, decks, etc. or to your property line, whichever is closer.
• Remove all dead plants, grass, and weeds (vegetation). • Remove dead or dry leaves and pine needles from your yard, roof, and rain gutters. • Remove branches that hang over your roof and keep dead branches 10 feet away from your chimney.
• Trim trees regularly to keep branches a minimum of 10 feet from other trees. • Relocate wood piles to Zone 2.
• Remove or prune flammable plants and shrubs near windows. • Remove vegetation and items that could catch fire from around and under decks, balconies, and stairs.
• Create a separation between trees, shrubs and items that could catch fire, such as patio furniture, wood piles, swing sets, etc.
* During times of drought when green landscaping cannot be achieved due to water restrictions be sure to remove all dead or dying material from Zone 1.
58 Zone 2: Reduce Fuel Zone
Zone 2 extends from 30 feet to 100 feet out from buildings, structures, decks, etc. or to your property line, whichever is closer.
• Cut or mow annual grass down to a maximum height of 4 inches. • Create horizontal space between shrubs and trees.
• Create vertical space between grass, shrubs, and trees. • Remove fallen leaves, needles, twigs, bark, cones, and small branches. However, they may be permitted to a depth of 3 inches.
• All exposed wood piles must have a minimum of 10 feet of clearance, down to bare mineral soil, in all directions.

Defensible Space Self-Inspection Checklist
• Make street address visible from the street in both directions, contrast with the background, reflective, and a minimum of 4 inches in height in accordance with Monterey County Code Q104.2
• Annual grasses and weeds need to be mowed to 4 inches or less 100 feet from house or to property line
• Remove pine needles, thin brush, and other flammable vegetation 100 feet from house or to property line
• Maintain the roof of any structure free of pine needles, leaves, or any other dead/dying debris
• Cut grasses, thin brush, and other flammable vegetation to 100 feet from house or to property line
• Clear debris – slash and needle piles, construction debris and flammable storage from around structure
• Clear vegetation to mineral soil around firewood storage piles • Remove brush, limbs, grass, needles, and debris ten feet in all directions from around propane tank
• Limb trees up a minimum of 6 feet from the ground
• Remove dead tree limbs adjacent to or overhanging any structure or decks • Remove all portions of trees within ten feet from chimneys and/or stovepipe outlets • Remove all dead and dying trees from the property
• Install a 1/8-inch mesh screen spark arrester on chimneys, stovepipes, and appliances that burn solid fuels
• Maintain defensible space a minimum of 10 feet from the shoulder of the roadway • Remove any hazardous vegetation constituting an extreme fire hazard, as determined by the code official
Defensible Space Landscaping:

University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources, is an excellent resource for defensible space landscaping: Reducing the Vulnerability of Building to Wildfire: Vegetation and Landscaping Guidance: https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8695.pdf
59 California Assembly Bill 38, Inspections and Real Estate Transactions Passed in 2019, California Assembly Bill 38 (AB 38) established a five-year pilot program requiring California’s Office of Emergency Services and CAL FIRE to work together to utilize a broad range of potential funding, including federal funds, to proactively support at-risk communities through a statewide fire retrofit program. The goal is to help communities and owners of homes built prior to updated building codes in 2008 harden their homes and make them more likely to survive future fires.

The bill requires the State Fire Marshal, in consultation with state officials, to identify building retrofits and structure hardening measures, and the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection to identify defensible space, vegetation management and fuel modification activities eligible for financial assistance under the program.

AB 38 is designed to help educate home buyers in fire prone areas by requiring property sellers in those areas to inform buyers that the property follows established wildfire protection measures, including fire hardening improvements on the property and a disclosure notice to also include the State Fire Marshal’s list of low-cost retrofits.

More information on AB 38 can be found at
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/b2fc79e82aec4ecab4250987db7312cb. 60 Appendix G: Additional Resources
ALERT California: alertca.live/
AlertMontereyCounty: www.co.monterey.ca.us/government/departments-a-h/emergencycommunications-911/old-site/citizen-awareness/alert-monterey-county CAL FIRE Defensible Space Zones: www.fire.ca.gov/programs/communications/defensible-spaceprc-4291 CAL OES Retrofit Rebate Program: www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/operations/recoverydirectorate/hazard-mitigation/california-wildfire-mitigation-program California Climate Investments: www.caclimateinvestments.ca.gov/ California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps: egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ California Public Resources Code 4291:
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=4291.&lawCode=PRC California Wildfire & Forest Resilience Task Force: https://wildfiretaskforce.org/ Fire Safe Council for Monterey: www.firesafemonterey.org/defensible-space.html Firewise USA: firewise.org
Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) of 2003: www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/housebill/1904 Housing arrangement and vegetation factors associated with single-family home survival in the 2018 Camp Fire, California: fireecology.springeropen.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s42408-021-00117-0.pdf National Fire Protection Association: www.nfpa.org
Office of the State Fire Marshal: osfm.fire.ca.gov
Ready, Set, Go! Program: www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/ready-set-go Reducing the Vulnerability of Building to Wildfire: Vegetation and Landscaping Guidance:
anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8695.pdf
Wildfire Home Retrofit Guide: ucanr.edu/HomeRetrofitGuide 61 Appendix H: Grant Funding Programs
County Coordinators Grant
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
California Healthy Soils Program
California Wildfire Mitigation Program
Environmental Quality Incentives Program
FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants:
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
• Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post-Fire Grant
• Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grants Monterey County Fire Relief Fund Grants
State Fire Assistance Grants
USDA Community Wildfire Defense Grants
62 Appendix I: Preparer & Methods
Statement of Qualifications
Established in 2011, Deer Creek Resources (DCR) is the resource management division of Firestorm Wildland Fire Suppression, Inc. Firestorm has been in the wildland fire and forestry business since 1996 and is California’s largest wildland firefighting contractor with over 250 federally-qualified wildland firefighters.

In addition to wildland firefighting, Firestorm/DCR is a leader in wildland fire hazard mitigation, prescribed fire, and forestry services. We have completed forestry projects on over 30,000 acres, including thinning, piling, mastication, fuel break construction, ecological restoration, post-fire erosion control, and trail maintenance. We have successfully implemented ecological burning on over 225,000 acres on forests and rangelands throughout the United States.

DCR uses mapping, innovative wildfire analytics, and applied science to help communities and landowners prepare for wildfire, manage watersheds and wildlands, and increase the transparency of land management decision making. We use our expert knowledge of wildfire behavior and land management to develop tangible wildfire hazard mitigation projects that affect real changes on the ground.

Our pre-fire plans improve public safety and benefit the landscape by:
• Identifying places where a wildfire might trap and kill people or destroy property • Establishing priorities for fuel reduction and habitat restoration • Integrating wildfire management with other land management objectives • Reducing the risk of natural resource damage from severe fire and fire suppression activities • Improving fire suppression effectiveness, as well as firefighter safety • Preventing infrastructure losses/property damage during wildfire incidents We use the following tools to assess fire hazard across landscapes:
• Geographic Information Systems (GIS)
• Cartography/mapmaking
• Satellite imagery, aerial photography, and LiDAR
• Fixed-wing aerial imagery, orthophotography and UAV piloting • Ground-based fuel mapping and surveys
• Numeric wildfire behavior models
• Qualitative data via interviews with knowledgeable locals • Application of peer-reviewed science
DCR’s wildfire mitigation experts have helped to develop wildfire pre-plans in the Lassen Foothills, Klamath Mountains, Lake Tahoe Basin, Central Coast, Klamath Mountains, and for Plumas, El 63 Dorado, Amador, Monterey, Nevada, and Yuba Counties. Our staff developed a major hazardous fuels reduction project for University of California’s Lick Observatory on Mount Hamilton, in Santa Clara County, and also developed the Plumas County Hazardous Fuel Assessment & Strategy. We recently completed a community wildfire protection plans (CWPP) for the Olympic Valley and are currently developing CWPPs for the American River Parkway in Sacramento and for the City of Redding.

DCR has provided professional GIS mapping services for major planning efforts including the South Lassen Watersheds Project, the Northern Sacramento Valley Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (NSV-IRWM) and Upper Feather River IRWM projects. Among other things, we have performed vegetation mapping of coastal wetlands for public agencies, developed field mapping applications for petroleum pipeline right-of-way inspectors, built map-based asset catalogs for major winery properties, and used aerial LiDAR data to conduct a timber inventory across 65,000 acres. We can also perform UAV and fixed-wing aerial surveys to create orthomosaic images of landscapes, from five acres to 50,000.

Our pre-fire plans improve public safety and benefit the landscape by integrating wildfire management with other land management objectives to reduce the risk of natural resource damage from severe fire or fire suppression activities and preventing infrastructure and property losses.

We have experience with all aspects of wildland fire management and mitigation throughout California. DCR’s mapping crews have provided GIS support to CAL FIRE and the USDA Forest Service on several of the most destructive urban-interface fires in California’s history.

Firestorm has implemented wildfire hazard mitigation vegetation management projects resulting in tens of thousands of acres being treated. We understand the workflow of wildfire mitigation, from project conception to implementation, and emphasize follow-up and regular maintenance to maintain favorable conditions.

RWPP Data Collection Methods
Deer Creek Resources attended a group site visit with staff from EMC Planning Group and King City on December 6, 2023 and conducted an in-depth field survey on January 24 and 25, 2024. During the December visit, the group visited the project area and discussed preliminary vetting of potential fuels projects. In January, two DCR field surveyors walked the entirety of the riverbed and creek sections of the project area, noting wildfire hazards and considering wildland fire fuels reduction projects that would contribute to the overall wildfire resilience of the city.

Notes, geographic coordinates, and photos from the two-day survey are included in the accompanying shapefile, which can be opened in ArcGIS or other mapping applications.

DCR obtained aerial images and LiDAR of the project area from the Resource Conservation District of Monterey County (RCDMC). These flights took place between November 11-13, 2023. Aerial images were combined to create an orthomosaic (photo base map), which was used to map fuels and 64 model likely fire behavior. DCR’s fire modeling was presented to the city on February 26, 2023.

Aerial images from the flight are used on all accompanying maps.

A community meeting was held on February 28, 2024, to collect input from King City residents.

Comments and notes from the meeting are included in Appendix C. 65 Special-Status Species in the Project Vicinity B

APPENDIX

King City Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study
EMC Planning Group 1
Appendix A Special-Status Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity Species Status
(Federal/State)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site American badger
(Taxidea taxus)
--/SSC Most abundant in drier, open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats. Need sufficient food and open, uncultivated ground with friable soils to dig burrows. Prey on burrowing rodents.

Possible. Suitable open uncultivated ground
with friable soil within the project area.

Arroyo toad
(Bufo californicus)
FE/SSC Semi-arid regions near washes or intermittent streams, including valleyfoothill and desert riparian, desert wash, etc. Rivers with sandy banks, willows, cottonwoods, and sycamores, loose, gravelly areas of streams in drier parts of range.

Unlikely. Although marginal habitat exists
within the project area, the closest known
observation is 16 miles west outside of the
Salinas River Watershed.

Bank swallow
(Riparia riparia)
--/ST Highly colonial species that nests in alluvial soils along rivers, streams, lakes, and ocean coasts. Nesting colonies only occur in vertical banks or bluffs of friable soils at least one meter tall, suitable for burrowing with some predator deterrence values. Breeding colony present in Salinas River.

Low probability. Marginal habitat present.

Last observation of nesting colony in 1987.

Blunt-nosed leopard lizard
(Gambelia silus)
FE/SE Resident of sparsely vegetated alkali and desert scrub habitats, in areas of low topographic relief. Seeks cover in mammal burrows, under shrubs or structures such as fence posts.

Unlikely. Outside of known geographic range.

Buena Vista Lake Ornate Shrew
(Sorex ornatus relictus)
FE/-- Resident of moist habitat surrounding wetlands of the Kern, Buena Vista, Goos, and Tulare lakes on the San Joaquin Valley floor.

Unlikely. Outside of known geographic range.

Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
--/SSC Open, dry, annual or perennial grasslands, desert, or scrubland, with available small mammal burrows.

Low probability. Marginal open burrowing
habitat with prey available within the project
area.

California Clapper Rail
(Rallus longirostris obsoletus)
FE/-- Resides exclusively in tidal and brackish marshes with intact marsh vegetation providing, invertebrate food, tidal channels, and suitable nesting and cover during extreme tides.

Unlikely. Suitable tidal and brackish marsh
not present.

California condor
(Gymnogyps californianus)
FE/SE Requires vast expanses of open savannah, grasslands, and foothill chaparral in mountain ranges of moderate altitude. Deep canyons containing clefts in the rocky walls provide nesting sites. Forages up to 100 miles from roost/nest.

Unlikely. No suitable nesting habitat within
project area. Possible flyovers.

California least tern
(Sternula antillarum browni)
FE/SE Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay south to northern Baja California. Colonial breeder on bare or sparsely vegetated, flat substrates (sand beaches, alkali flats, landfills, or paved areas).

Unlikely. Not along coast.

California red-legged frog
(Rana draytonii)
FT/SSC Rivers, creeks, and stock ponds with pools and overhanging vegetation.

Requires dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation, and prefers short riffles and pools with slow-moving, well-oxygenated water. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or moist leaf litter.

Low probability, Suitable breeding habitat
present in adjacent ponds. Marginal upland
habitat present. Closest known occurrence
10 miles away.

California tiger salamander
(Ambystoma californiense)
FT/ST Grasslands and oak woodlands near seasonal pools and stock ponds in central and coastal California. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or Unlikely. Closest known occurrence 10 miles
away.

Appendix A
2 EMC Planning Group
Species Status
(Federal/State)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site moist leaf litter. Requires seasonal water sources that persist into late March for breeding habitat.

Coast horned lizard
(Phrynosoma blainvillii)
--/SSC Arid grassland and scrubland habitats; prefers lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Requires open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burrowing, and abundant supply of ants and other insects for feeding.

Unlikely. Suitable grassland and scrubland
not present.

Cooper's hawk
(Accipter cooperii)
--/WL Oak or riparian woodlands. Possible. Marginal woodlands present within the project area.

Foothill yellow-legged frog
(Rana boylii)
--/SSC Partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Requires at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying and 15 weeks of available water to attain metamorphosis.

Unlikely. Suitable shaded streams with
cobble substrate not present.

Giant kangaroo rat
(Dipodomys ingens)
FE/SE Annual grasslands on the western side of the San Joaquin Valley, marginal habitat in alkali scrub. Needs level terrain and sandy loam soils for burrowing.

Unlikely. Annual grassland and alkali scrub
habitat not present.

Golden eagle
(Aquila chrysaetos)
--/SFP Rolling foothill mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of range. Also uses large trees in open areas.

Unlikely. Suitable nesting habitat not present.

Possible flyover.

Least Bell's vireo
(Vireo bellii pusillus)
FE/SE Summer resident of southern and central California in riparian habitats below 2,000 feet in elevation. Often nests in large shrubs, along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways.

Low probability. Not known from project
vicinity, however suitable riparian habitat with
shrub vegetation present throughout the
project site.

Marbled murrelet
(Brachyramphus marmoratus)
FT/SE Feeds near shore, and nests up to six miles inland from coast from Half Moon Bay to Santa Cruz in old-growth redwood forests, often in Douglas fir trees.

Unlikely. Suitable old-growth redwood forests
not present.

Monarch butterfly
(Danaus plexippus)
FC/-- Winter roost sites. Wind protected tree groves (Eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress) with nectar and water sources nearby.

Unlikely. Suitable winter roosting trees not
present. Possible site utilization during
migration.

Monterey dusky-footed woodrat
(Neotoma fuscipes luciana)
--/SSC Forest habitats of moderate canopy and moderate to dense understory. Also in chaparral habitats. Nests constructed of grass, leaves, sticks, feathers, etc. Population may be limited by availability of nest materials.

Possible. Marginal habitat present within
project area.

Monterey hitch
(Lavinia exilicauda harengus)
--/SSC Inhabits slow warm water, including lakes and quiet stretches of rivers.

Sometimes found in cool and clear low-gradient streams, hiding among aquatic vegetation in sandy runs or pools.

Possible. Suitable riverine habitat present.

Known occurrence throughout the site.

Northern California legless lizard
(Anniella pulchra)
--/SSC Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation, moist soils. Anniella pulchra is traditionally split into two subspecies: A. pulchra pulchra (silvery legless lizard) and A. pulchra nigra (black legless lizard), but these subspecies are typically no longer recognized.

Possible. Suitable sandy soils under sparce
vegetation present throughout the project
area.

King City Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study
EMC Planning Group 3
Species Status
(Federal/State)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Pallid bat
(Antrozous pallidus)
--/SSC Deserts, grasslands, scrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts must protect bats from high temperatures.

Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas for roosting not
present.

Pinnacles optioservus riffle beetle
(Optioservus canus)
--/-- Aquatic, found on rocks and in gravel of riffles in cool, swift, clear streams. Unlikely. No gravel or rocks in stream or river bottom.

Salinas pocket mouse
(Perognathus inornatus psammophilus)
--/SSC Annual grassland and desert shrub communities in the Salinas Valley.

Prefers fine-textured, sandy, friable soils. Burrows for cover and nesting.

Unlikely. Suitable grassland and desert shrub
communities not present.

San Francisco garter snake
(Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia)
FE/SE, SFP Typically found in the vicinity of freshwater marshes, ponds and slowmoving streams in San Mateo County and extreme northern Santa Cruz County. Prefers dense cover and water depths of at least one foot. Upland areas near water are also very important.

Unlikely. Outside of known geographic range.

San Joaquin coachwhip
(Masticophis flagellum ruddocki)
--/SSC Open, dry habitats with little or no tree cover. Found in valley grassland and saltbush scrub in the San Joaquin Valley. Requires mammal burrows for refuge and oviposition sites.

Unlikely. Suitable grassland and saltbush
scrub habitat non present.

San Joaquin kit fox
(Vulpes macrotis mutica)
FE/ST Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation.

Needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base.

Probable. San Joaquin kit fox uses the
Salinas River corridor as habitat.

Santa Cruz long-toed salamander
(Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum)
FE/SE, SFP Wet meadows near sea level in a few restricted locales in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Aquatic larvae prefer shallow (<12 inches) water; use clumps of vegetation or debris for cover. Adults use mammal burrows.

Unlikely. Outside of geographic range.

Smith’s blue butterfly
(Euphilotes enoptes smithi)
FE/-- Coastal dunes and coastal sage scrub plant communities. Host plants include Eriogonum latifolium and E. parvifolium for larval and adult stages.

Unlikely. Suitable host plant not present.

Southern coastal roach
(Hesperoleucus venustus subditus)
--/SSC Found in the drainages of Tomales Bay and northern San Francisco Bay in the north, and drainages of Monterey Bay in the south.

Unlikely. Outside of known geographical
range.

Steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus)
FT/-- Coastal stream with clean spawning gravel. Requires cool water and pools.

Needs migratory access between natal stream and ocean.

Unlikely. Not found within the Salinas River.

Tidewater goby
(Eucyclogobius newberryi)
FE/SSC Brackish water habitats, found in shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches, still but not stagnant water with high oxygen levels.

Unlikely. Not found within upper reach of
Salinas River.

Townsend's big-eared bat
(Corynorhinus townsendii)
--/SCT Inhabits a wide variety of habitats. Most common in mesic sites. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings. Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to human disturbance.

Possible. Marginal suitable habitat present.

Tricolored blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor)
--/SE Areas adjacent to open water with protected nesting substrate, which typically consists of dense, emergent freshwater marsh vegetation.

Unlikely. Utilized ponds and wetlands more
frequently than river habitats.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi)
FT/-- Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley, Central Coast Mtns., and South Coast Mtns. in astatic rain-filled pools. Inhabits small, clear-water sandstone depression pools and grass swale, earth slump, or basalt-flow depression pools.

Unlikely. No suitable vernal pool habitat
present.

Appendix A
4 EMC Planning Group
Species Status
(Federal/State)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Western bumble bee
(Bombus occidentalis)
--/CE Meadows and grasslands with flowering plants; can also be found in natural areas within urban environments.

Unlikely. Suitable meadows or grasslands
with flowering plants not present.

Western pond turtle
(Emys marmorata)
FC/SSC Ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches with aquatic vegetation. Needs basking sites (such as rocks or partially submerged logs) and suitable upland habitat for egg-laying (sandy banks or grassy open fields).

Possible. Suitable habitat present within the
project area.

Western snowy plover
(Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus)
FT/SSC Sandy beaches, salt pond levees, shores of large alkali lakes; sandy, gravelly, or friable soils for nesting.

Unlikely. No suitable beaches or lakes
present.

Western spadefoot
(Spea hammondii)
--/SSC Occurs primarily in grassland habitats, but can be found in valley-foothill hardwood woodlands, breeds in winter and spring (January - May) in quiet streams and temporary pools.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat not present within
the project area.

Western yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus)
FC/SE Riparian forest nester, along the broad, lower flood-bottoms of larger river systems. Nests in riparian jungles of willow, often mixed with cottonwoods, with lower story of blackberry, nettles, or wild grape.

Unlikely. Suitable riparian forest not present
within the project area.

SOURCE: CDFW 2023
NOTE: Status Codes:

Federal (USFWS)
FE: Listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FT: Listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FSC: Species of Special Concern.

FD: Delisted under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

State (CDFW)
SE: Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.

ST: Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act.

SR: Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act.

SC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.

SSC: Species of Special Concern.

SFP: Fully Protected species under the California Fish and Game Code.

SD: Delisted under the California Endangered Species Act.

King City Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study
EMC Planning Group 1
Appendix A Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity Species Status
(Federal/State/
CNPS)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Butterworth's buckwheat
(Eriogonum butterworthianum)
--/Rare/1B.3 Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland. Dry sandstone outcrops and crevices; elevation 335-715m.

Unlikely, Suitable valley and foothill grassland
not present.

Carmel Valley bush-mallow
(Malacothamnus palmeri var.
involucratus)
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub; elevation 30-1100m.

Blooming Period: May - October
Unlikely. Suitable chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and coastal scrub not present.

Beach layia
(Layia carnosa)
FE/SE/1B.1 Coastal dunes, hugely reduced in range along California's north coast dunes, on sparsely vegetated semi-stabilized dunes, usually behind foredunes; elevation 0-75m. Blooming Period: March - July Unlikely, Suitable coastal dunes not present.

Coastal dunes milkvetch
(Astragalus tener var. titi)
FE/SE/1B.1 Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes. Known only froma few extant occurrences, mostly historical in Southern California. Moist sandy depressions of bluffs or dunes along and near the Pacific Ocean, one site on a clay terrace; elevation 1-50m. Blooming Period: March - May Unlikely. Suitable coastal bluff scrub and
dunes not present.

Cone Peak Bedstraw
(Galium californicum ssp. luciense)
--/--/1B.3 Broadleafed upland forest, lower montane coniferous forest, cismontane woodland, chaparral. In forest duff or gravelly talus of pine and oak forest, in partial shade. 400-1465 m.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat and substrates not
present.

Contra Costa goldfields
(Lasthenia conjugens)
FE/--/1B.1 Wet areas in cismontane woodland, playas (alkaline), valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools; elevation 0-470m. Blooming Period: March - June
Unlikely. Suitable verna pool habitat not
present.

Davidson's bush-mallow
(Malacothamnus davidsonii)
--/--/1B.2 Coastal scrub, riparian woodland, chaparral, sandy washes; elevation 180-855m. Blooming Period: June - January
Moderate potential to occur. Suitable riparian
woodland and scrub habitat present.

Dwarf calycadenia
(Calycadenia villosa)
--/--/1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, meadows and seeps. Open, dry meadows, hillsides, gravelly outwashes; elevation 215-1275m. Blooming Period: May - October
Unlikely. Suitable open dry meadow habitat
not present.

Hardham's evening primrose
(Camissonia hardhamiae)
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, decomposed carbonate; elevation 330-500m. Blooming Period: April - May
Unlikely. Suitable habitat and substrates not
present.

Hickman's checkerbloom
(Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. hickmanii)
--/--/1B.3 Chaparral; elevation 335-1200m. Blooming Period: May - July Unlikely. Suitable chaparral habitat not present.

Hickman's cinquefoil
(Potentilla hickmanii)
FE/SE/1B.1 Coastal bluff scrub, closed-cone coniferous forest, meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps, small streams in open or forested areas along the coast; elevation 5-125m. Blooming Period: April - August Unlikely. Suitable coastal bluff scrub and
dunes not present.

Hooked popcorn flower
(Plagiobothrys uncinatus)
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral (sandy), cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland; elevation 300-730m. Blooming Period: April - May
Unlikely. Suitable sandy chaparral, cismontane
woodland, valley and foothill grassland not
present
Appendix A
2 EMC Planning Group
Species Status
(Federal/State/
CNPS)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Indian Valley bush-mallow
(Malacothamnus aboriginum)
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral and cismontane woodland; rocky, often burned areas. Prefers granitic outcrops and sandy bare soil; elevation 150-1700m. Blooming Period: April - October
Unlikely. Suitable habitat not present.

Indian Valley spineflower
(Aristocapsa insignis)
--/--/1B.3 Cismontane woodland. Sandy substrates. 180-1070 m. Unlikely. Suitable woodland habitat not present.

Jolon clarkia
(Clarkia jolonensis)
--/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland, chaparral, coastal scrub; elevation 20-660m.

Blooming Period: April - June
Unlikely, Suitable cismontane woodland,
chaparral, coastal scrub not present.

Lemmon's jewel-flower
(Caulanthus coulteri var. lemmonii)
--/--/1B.2 Pinyon-juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland; elevation 80- 1220m. Blooming Period: March - May
Unlikely. Suitable woodland or grassland
habitat not present.

Marsh sandwort
(Arenaria paludicola)
FE/SE/1B.1 Sandy openings in freshwater or brackish marshes and swamps; elevation 3-170m. Blooming Period: May - August
Unlikely. Suitable marsh habitat not present.

Menzies's wallflower
(Erysimum menziesii ssp. menziesii)
FE/SE/1B.1 Coastal dunes. Known only from Mendocino and Monterey Counties, localized on dunes and coastal strand; elevation 0-35m. Blooming Period: March - June
Unlikely. Suitable dune and coastal strand
habitat not present.

Monterey clover
(Trifolium trichocalyx)
FE/SE/1B.1 Closed-cone coniferous forest, endemic to Monterey County. Poorly drained, low nutrient soil underlain with hardpan soils, also openings and burned areas; elevation 120-205. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable closed cone habitat not
present.

Monterey gilia
(Gilia tenuiflora ssp. arenaria)
FE/ST/1B.2 Maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, sandy openings; elevation 0-45m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable chaparral, dunes, scrub
habitat not present.

Monterey spineflower
(Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens)
FT/--/1B.2 Sandy openings in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 3- 450m. Blooming Period: April - June
Unlikely. Suitable chaparral and dune habitat
not present.

Pale-yellow layia
(Layia heterotricha)
--/--/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, pinyon and juniper woodland, valley and foothill grassland / alkaline or clay; elevation 300-1600m. Blooming Period:

March - June
Unlikely. Suitable woodland habitat not
present.

Purple amole
(Chlorogalum purpureum var.
purpureum)
FT/--/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Often in grassy areas with blue oaks in foothill woodland; elevation 300-330m. Blooming Period: May - June
Unlikely. Suitable woodland or grassland
habitat not present.

Salt marsh bird's-beak
(Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus)
FE/SE/1B Coastal dunes, marshes and swamps (coastal salt); elevation 0-30m.

Blooming Period: May - October
Unlikely. Suitable dune or marsh habitat not
present.

San Antonio collinsia
(Collinsia antonina)
--/--/1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, shale substrates; elevation 365m.

Blooming Period: March - May
Unlikely. Suitable woodland habitat not
present.

San Benito pentachaeta
(Pentachaeta exilis ssp. aeolica)
--/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Grassy areas; elevation 635-855m. Blooming Period: April - May
Unlikely. Suitable woodland or grassland
habitat not present.

King City Wildfire Prevention Plan Initial Study
EMC Planning Group 3
Species Status
(Federal/State/
CNPS)
Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site San Francisco collinsia
(Collinsia multicolor)
--/--/1B.2 Serpentine sites in closed cone coniferous forest and coastal scrub.

Prefers decomposed shale (mudstone) mixed with humus; elevation 30- 250m. Blooming Period: March - May
Unlikely. Suitable closed cone habitat not
present.

Santa Cruz tarplant
(Holocarpha macradenia)
FT/SE/1B.1 Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; often on clay or sandy soils; elevation 10-220m. Blooming Period: June - October Unlikely. Suitable prairie, scrub, or grassland
habitat not present.

Santa Lucia purple amole
(Hooveria purpurea var. purpurea)
FT/--/1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland. Often in open grasslands, sometimes within scattered oak woodlands and open areas in shrublands. Gravelly clay soils. 240-390 m.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat not present.

Shining navarretia
(Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians)
--/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools; elevation 200-1000m. Blooming Period: May - July
Unlikely. Suitable woodland, grassland or
vernal pool habitat not present.

Tidestrom's lupine
(Lupinus tidestromii)
FE/SE/1B.1 Partially stabilized dunes, immediately near the ocean; elevation 0-3m.

Blooming Period: April - June
Unlikely. Suitable dune habitat not present.

Umbrella larkspur
(Delphinium umbraculorum)
--/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland, mesic sites; elevation 400-1600m. Blooming Period: April - June
Low probability. Moderate habitat present.

Known population within project vicinity.

Yadon’s rein orchid
(Piperia yadonii)
FE/--/1B.1 Sandy sites in coastal bluff scrub, closed cone coniferous forest, maritime chaparral; elevation 10-510m. Blooming Period: May - August Unlikely. Suitable costal bluff habitat not
present.

Yellow flowered eriatrum
(Eriastrum luteum)
--/--/1B.2 Broadleafed upland forest, cismontane woodland, chaparral. On bare sandy decomposed granite slopes. 240-580 m.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat not present.

SOURCE: CDFW CNDDB 2023, CNPS 2023
NOTE: Status Codes:

Federal (USFWS)
FE: Listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FT: Listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

FSC: Species of Special Concern.

FD: Delisted under the Federal Endangered Species Act.

State (CDFW)
SE: Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.

ST: Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act.

SR: Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act.

SC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act.

SSC: Species of Special Concern.

Appendix A
4 EMC Planning Group
SFP: Fully Protected species under the California Fish and Game Code.

SD: Delisted under the California Endangered Species Act.

CNPS Rare Plant Ranks and Threat Code Extensions
1B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. .1: Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat). .2: Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened). .3: Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known).

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Introduction
CEQA Guidelines section 15097 requires public agencies to adopt reporting or monitoring programs when they approve projects subject to an environmental impact report or a negative declaration that includes mitigation measures to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. The reporting or monitoring program is to be designed to ensure compliance with conditions of project approval during project implementation in order to avoid significant adverse environmental effects.

The law was passed in response to historic non-implementation of mitigation measures presented in environmental documents and subsequently adopted as conditions of project approval. In addition, monitoring ensures that mitigation measures are implemented and thereby provides a mechanism to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation measures.

A definitive set of project conditions would include enough detailed information and enforcement procedures to ensure the measure's compliance. This monitoring program is designed to provide a mechanism to ensure that mitigation measures are implemented.

Monitoring and Reporting Program
The basis for this monitoring program is the mitigation measures included in the project environmental impact report. These mitigation measures are designed to eliminate or reduce significant adverse environmental effects to less than significant levels. The City of King has agreed to implement the mitigation measures as required, before, during, and after implementation of projects pursuant to the King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan.

The attached table will assist with monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation measures in the mitigated negative declaration.

EXHIBIT 3
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
Biological Resources
BIO-1 The summer blooming period prior to the start of implementation measures 1-4, a biologist qualified in botany shall conduct a focused survey for Davidson’s bush mallow and umbrella larkspur in accordance with current California Department of Fish and Wildlife and California Native Plant Society rare plant survey protocols (CDFW 2018 and CNPS 2001). Some special-status plant species are only identifiable during their blooming periods and surveys are only considered valid if they occur when blooms are visible. The survey shall occur during the peak blooming period for these species to determine their presence or absence. Based on the known blooming periods of the special-status plant species potentially present, two surveys would be necessary to adequately survey the project site: the first in May/June and the second in August/September. If possible, known reference populations of the target species in the project vicinity shall first be visited to verify that the species is observable, and the focused survey shall be conducted within two weeks of observing the reference population in full bloom.

The biologist shall prepare a brief report documenting the results of the surveys for submittal to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities. If the focused surveys conclude that specialstatus plant species are not present within the project site boundary, or if they are present but impacts can be completely avoided, then no further mitigation would be required. Focused plant surveys are generally considered valid for two years. Surveys shall be repeated if disturbance activities are planned after two years.

If at any point special-status plant species are identified within the project site boundary and they would be affected by the proposed project, then appropriate mitigation shall be developed by the biologist and City of King
Community
Development
Department;
City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
The summer blooming period
prior to the start of
implementation measures 1-4
A letter report by a qualified
biologist shall be completed
and submitted to the King City
Community Development
Department, where it will be
kept on file.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
implemented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities.

Measures may include, but are not limited to:
a. A qualified biologist shall identify an on-site or off-site mitigation area suitable for restoration of habitat and seed transplantation for any special-status plant species.
b. Prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, a qualified biologist or native plant specialist shall perform seed collection from all special-status plants located within the impact areas and implement seed installation at the mitigation area at the optimal time. Additionally, topsoil from the special-status species occurrence area(s) shall be salvaged (where practical) for use in the mitigation area.
c. A maintenance and monitoring program shall be developed by a qualified biologist and established for a minimum of five years after mitigation area installation to verify that restoration activities have been successful. Maintenance activities may include, but not be limited to, watering during the plant establishment period, supplemental seed planting as needed, and removal of non-native plants. Monitoring shall include, at a minimum, quarterly monitoring reports for the first year and annual reports for the remaining four years. The performance standard for successful mitigation shall be a minimum 3:1 replacement ratio (i.e., three plants observed in mitigation area for each plant lost from the project site) achieved in at least one of the five years of monitoring.

The King City Community Development Department will be responsible for implementation of this mitigation measure. Compliance with this measure shall be documented prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file.

BIO-2 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance or vegetation removal, a qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for all project personnel. At a minimum, the training shall include a description of special-status species potentially occurring in the City of King City
Community
Development
Department;
Prior to ground disturbance or
vegetation removal activities
associated with
implementation measures 1-4.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
project vicinity, including, but not limited to, special-status plants (if present), Monterey hitch, California red-legged frog, Northern California legless lizard, southwestern pond turtle, burrowing owl, American badger, Monterey dusky-footed woodrat, San Joaquin kit fox, special-status bat species, and nesting birds and raptors. Their habitats, general measures that are being implemented to conserve species as they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which project activities will occur will be explained. Informational handouts with photographs clearly illustrating the species’ appearances shall be used in the training session. As new phases or activities begin, all new project personnel shall undergo this mandatory environmental awareness training. The project contractor shall document evidence of completion of this training by a letter report prepared by the biologist and submitted to the King City Community Development Department, where it will be kept on file, prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities.

The qualified biologist will train biological monitors selected from the project crew by the project contractor (typically the project foreman).

Before the start of work each day, the monitor will check for animals under any equipment such as vehicles. If a special-status species is observed within an active project area, the qualified biologist will be notified immediately and all work within 50 feet of the individual will be halted and all equipment turned off until the individual has left the area.

City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
A letter report by a qualified
biologist shall be completed
and submitted to the King City
Community Development
Department, where it will be
kept on file.

Periodically throughout project
implementation.

BIO-3 The following measures shall be implemented to protect Monterey hitch and aquatic habitats:
a. Implementation measures 1-4 that require ground disturbance activities within the active channels of the Salinas River and San Lorenzo Creek shall be conducted from September to April each year, during periods of low flow (Salinas River) or no flow (San Lorenzo Creek), outside of the spawning period for Monterey hitch.
b. For the duration of the project, herbicides may be applied to vegetation within a 10-foot buffer zone along the edge of the active channel for non-native invasive vegetation treatment only.

Only herbicides approved for use in aquatic environments shall be used.

City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
During implementation of
measures 1-4 that require
ground disturbance activities
within or within 10-feet of the
active channels of the Salinas
River and San Lorenzo Creek
Throughout construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
c. For the duration of the project will use work measures including Best Management Practices (BMPs), time-of-year-restrictions, water pollution prevention, erosion control, and tree root protection to further minimize erosion and impacts to riparian and aquatic habitat. BMPs intended to reduce erosion of exposed soil into the bed and banks of the creek may include, but are not limited to, soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, silt fencing, and fiber rolls. Standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures will be required for work performed in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of the creek. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting), loosely woven netting, or similar material in any form shall not be used at the project site as wildlife can become entangled and trapped in them. Materials utilizing fixed weaves (strands cannot move), polypropylene, polymer, or other synthetic materials shall not be used.

BIO-4 Ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal activities (implementation measures 1-4) are proposed within and immediately adjacent to California red-legged frog habitat. Project implementation may directly impact aquatic habitat and upland habitat. Prior to the start of disturbance activities, one or both of the following options will be implemented:

Option 1. Protocol-Level Surveys for California Red-Legged Frog Protocol surveys will be conducted per the Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-legged Frog (U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service 2005) to determine if California red-legged frog is present at the project site. If surveys result in a negative finding, documentation will be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for confirmation. If the negative finding is considered valid no further action is required.

If California red-legged frog is found, Incidental Take Authorization will be obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities, as detailed in Option 2, below.

City of King
Community
Development
Department;
City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
Prior to ground disturbance or
vegetation removal activities
associated with
implementation measures 1-4.

Any avoidance, minimization,
and compensatory mitigation
measures required in the
permit(s) shall implemented
throughout construction.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
Option 2. Assume Presence of California Red-Legged Frog and Obtain Incidental Take Authorization
If the presence of California red-legged frog is determined during protocollevel surveys or it is assumed that they are present on the project site, the King City Community Development Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with a permit term for the duration of the project. The King City Community Development Department will ensure that all avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation measures required in the permit to minimize the potential for “take” of California red-legged frog are implemented.

BIO-5 Prior to implementation measures 1-4 that include ground disturbance in areas with sandy soils (which includes a majority of the project area), the King City Community Development Department shall retain a qualified biologist to determine measures to avoid or minimize impacts to legless lizards, depending on the proposed activity. Measures may include, but not be limited to:
a. Preconstruction Surveys. Within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance in potential habitat, preconstruction surveys shall be conducted. Methods include a “three-pass, high grading” methodology that requires raking of the soil to locate and remove as many California legless lizards as possible.

If legless lizards are found during the first pass, an overnight period of no soil disturbance must occur before the second pass. The same requirement will be implemented after the second pass if legless lizards are located. If no California legless lizards are found during the second pass, a third pass is not required.
b. Identification of Relocation Site(s). Prior to surveying and construction, one or more relocation sites shall be identified by a qualified biologist. All relocation sites shall be approved by the King City Community Development Department and shall
consist of suitable habitat. Relocation sites shall be as close to the capture site as possible but far enough away to ensure the animal(s) is/are not harmed by construction of the project.

Relocation shall occur on the same day as capture. California City of King
Community
Development
Department;
City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
Prior to implementation
measures 1-4 that include
ground disturbance in areas
with sandy soils.

A letter report by a qualified
biologist shall be completed
and submitted to the King City
Community Development
Department, where it will be
kept on file.

Periodically throughout project
implementation.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Native Species Field Survey Forms shall be
submitted to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for all special-status species observed.
c. Barrier fencing. If California legless lizards are observed, a barrier shall be installed to prevent movement of legless lizards back into the work are. All captured California legless lizards would be moved to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b). d. Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall be onsite to monitor ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities and salvage and relocate any legless lizards encountered. The monitoring shall walk alongside equipment/crews in each new area of disturbance, and shall have authority to halt activities temporarily if necessary to capture and relocate legless lizards.

Any legless lizards captured shall be relocated as soon as possible to the nearby relocation site(s) identified in (b).

BIO-6 The King City Community Development Department shall implement the following measures for the protection of western pond turtle:
a. Within 24 hours prior to vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities associated with implementation measures 1-4, the King City Community Development Department shall retain a biologist qualified to survey for southwestern pond turtle, including their eggs and nests, to conduct a preconstruction survey along aquatic features and an adjacent 300-feet buffer of riparian areas in and adjacent to the project site.
b. If southwestern pond turtle or their nests are observed during preconstruction surveys, a qualified biologist shall be on-site to monitor activities in suitable habitat. Southwestern pond turtles found within the project area shall be allowed to leave of their own volition or they shall be captured by a qualified biologist and relocated out of harm’s way to the nearest suitable habitat immediately upstream or downstream from the project area.

Pond turtle relocation shall only be conducted after notifying the City of King
Community
Development
Department;
City of King Public
Works Department;
A qualified biologist
Within 24 hours prior to
vegetation removal or grounddisturbing activities
associated with
implementation measures 1-4.

A letter report by a qualified
biologist shall be completed
and submitted to the King City
Community Development
Department, where it will be
kept on file.

Periodically throughout project
implementation.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 EMC Planning Group King City Riverbed Wildfire Prevention Plan December 2024 Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Responsibility
Monitoring/Reporting
Action & Schedule
Mitigation Compliance Record
Name/Title; Date; Comments
California Department of Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
c. If southwestern pond turtle nests are identified in the work area during preconstruction surveys, a 300-foot no disturbance buffer shall be established between the nest and any areas of potential disturbance. Buffers shall be clearly marked with temporary fencing. Disturbance activities will not be allowed to commence in the exclusion area until hatchlings have emerged from the nest, or the nest is deemed inactive by a qualified biologist. d. All construction-related trenches, holes, or pits shall be covered at the end of each workday to prevent entrapment of pond turtles.
e. The qualified biologist shall prepare a report documenting the results of the preconstruction survey(s) for submittal to the King City Community Development Department prior to ground
disturbance.