Agenda packet — Lincoln City Council, July 28, 2026 (part 7 of 10)

3.31. Architectural Coating (2040)

3.31.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1184
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 88 / 118
Off-Roa 0.10767 0.08898 0.74239 1.09462 0.00173 0.00396 — 0.00396 0.00364 — 0.00364 — 133.523 133.523 0.00542 0.00108 — 133.981 d
Architect
ural
Coating
s

3.60341 3.60341 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.10767 0.08898 0.74239 1.09462 0.00173 0.00396 — 0.00396 0.00364 — 0.00364 — 133.523 133.523 0.00542 0.00108 — 133.981 Architect
ural
Coating
s

3.60341 3.60341 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.07712 0.06373 0.53173 0.78402 0.00124 0.00283 — 0.00283 0.00261 — 0.00261 — 95.6348 95.6348 0.00388 0.00078 — 95.9630 Architect
ural
Coating
s

2.58092 2.58092 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01407 0.01163 0.09704 0.14308 0.00023 0.00052 — 0.00052 0.00048 — 0.00048 — 15.8334 15.8334 0.00064 0.00013 — 15.8878 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1185
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 89 / 118
Architect
Coatings

0.47102 0.47102 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.31.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.31504 0.25919 0.16646 4.80516 0.00000 0.00000 1.67298 1.67298 0.00000 0.39214 0.39214 — 1,522.74 1,522.74 0.01095 0.01095 0.68901 1,526.97 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.30409 0.24458 0.18106 3.36357 0.00000 0.00000 1.67298 1.67298 0.00000 0.39214 0.39214 — 1,345.36 1,345.36 0.01825 0.01095 0.01784 1,349.10 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.21780 0.17518 0.12184 2.51581 0.00000 0.00000 1.19225 1.19225 0.00000 0.27937 0.27937 — 990.199 990.199 0.01046 0.00784 0.21280 993.011 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03975 0.03197 0.02224 0.45914 0.00000 0.00000 0.21759 0.21759 0.00000 0.05098 0.05098 — 163.939 163.939 0.00173 0.00130 0.03523 164.404 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1186
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 90 / 118

3.32. Architectural Coating (2041)

3.32.1. Onsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.10767 0.08898 0.74239 1.09462 0.00173 0.00396 — 0.00396 0.00364 — 0.00364 — 133.523 133.523 0.00542 0.00108 — 133.981 Architect
ural
Coating
s

3.60341 3.60341 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00590 0.00488 0.04068 0.05998 0.00009 0.00022 — 0.00022 0.00020 — 0.00020 — 7.31633 7.31633 0.00030 0.00006 — 7.34144 Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.19745 0.19745 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1187
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 91 / 118
Off-Roa 0.00108 0.00089 0.00742 0.01095 0.00002 0.00004 — 0.00004 0.00004 — 0.00004 — 1.21130 1.21130 0.00005 0.00001 — 1.21546 d
Equipm
Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.03603 0.03603 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

3.32.2. Offsite - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.24093 0.23363 0.17741 3.34167 0.00000 0.00000 1.67298 1.67298 0.00000 0.39214 0.39214 — 1,339.28 1,339.28 0.01460 0.01095 0.01478 1,342.92 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01566 0.01240 0.00932 0.19147 0.00000 0.00000 0.09121 0.09121 0.00000 0.02137 0.02137 — 75.4117 75.4117 0.00080 0.00060 0.01350 75.6241 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.00286 0.00226 0.00170 0.03494 0.00000 0.00000 0.01665 0.01665 0.00000 0.00390 0.00390 — 12.4853 12.4853 0.00013 0.00010 0.00223 12.5204 Vendor 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Hauling 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1188
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 92 / 118

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

6.10189 5.55752 4.38936 71.1416 0.19358 0.08074 19.9733 20.0541 0.07586 5.06989 5.14575 — 19,675.8 19,675.8 0.46156 0.64271 9.04865 19,887.9 City
Park

0.58296 0.51745 0.50006 8.59382 0.02413 0.00993 2.50292 2.51285 0.00934 0.63532 0.64466 — 2,452.41 2,452.41 0.05160 0.07569 1.13391 2,477.39 Condo/T
ownhou
se

8.50199 7.74350 6.11586 99.1243 0.26973 0.11250 27.8296 27.9421 0.10570 7.06407 7.16977 — 27,415.0 27,415.0 0.64311 0.89551 12.6078 27,710.5 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

13.6958 12.4740 9.85203 159.679 0.43450 0.18122 44.8306 45.0119 0.17028 11.3795 11.5498 — 44,162.7 44,162.7 1.03599 1.44257 20.3099 44,638.8 Office
Park

0.93399 0.82903 0.80117 13.7686 0.03866 0.01591 4.01006 4.02597 0.01496 1.01788 1.03284 — 3,929.14 3,929.14 0.08268 0.12127 1.81670 3,969.16 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 29.8167 27.1215 21.6585 352.307 0.96059 0.40030 99.1466 99.5469 0.37614 25.1667 25.5428 — 97,635.0 97,635.0 2.27494 3.17775 44.9170 98,683.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

5.63810 5.10017 5.23307 55.0806 0.17552 0.08077 19.9733 20.0541 0.07589 5.06989 5.14578 — 17,848.4 17,848.4 0.48938 0.70300 0.23466 18,070.4 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1189
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 93 / 118
City
Park

0.54230 0.47866 0.59844 6.43394 0.02186 0.00994 2.50292 2.51285 0.00934 0.63532 0.64466 — 2,223.09 2,223.09 0.05270 0.08271 0.02941 2,249.09 Condo/T
ownhou
se

7.85578 7.10627 7.29144 76.7459 0.24455 0.11253 27.8296 27.9421 0.10574 7.06407 7.16981 — 24,868.9 24,868.9 0.68188 0.97951 0.32696 25,178.1 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

12.6549 11.4475 11.7458 123.630 0.39395 0.18128 44.8306 45.0119 0.17034 11.3795 11.5498 — 40,061.2 40,061.2 1.09843 1.57790 0.52670 40,559.4 Office
Park

0.86885 0.76689 0.95879 10.3082 0.03503 0.01592 4.01006 4.02598 0.01496 1.01788 1.03285 — 3,561.73 3,561.73 0.08444 0.13252 0.04711 3,603.38 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 27.5599 24.8995 25.8275 272.198 0.87091 0.40043 99.1466 99.5470 0.37627 25.1667 25.5429 — 88,563.3 88,563.3 2.40683 3.47564 1.16483 89,660.3 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

1.01183 0.91584 0.87006 10.1381 0.03199 0.01441 3.54599 3.56040 0.01354 0.90016 0.91369 — 2,950.92 2,950.92 0.07662 0.10930 0.63244 2,986.04 City
Park

0.05239 0.04623 0.05351 0.64561 0.00214 0.00095 0.23866 0.23962 0.00089 0.06059 0.06148 — 197.452 197.452 0.00451 0.00692 0.04257 199.669 Condo/T
ownhou
se

1.29117 1.16868 1.11026 12.9369 0.04082 0.01839 4.52493 4.54331 0.01728 1.14866 1.16594 — 3,765.58 3,765.58 0.09777 0.13948 0.80704 3,810.40 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

2.20823 1.99874 1.89883 22.1255 0.06982 0.03144 7.73879 7.77023 0.02955 1.96451 1.99405 — 6,440.12 6,440.12 0.16721 0.23854 1.38025 6,516.76 Office
Park

0.11912 0.10513 0.12167 1.46800 0.00487 0.00216 0.54268 0.54484 0.00203 0.13776 0.13980 — 448.970 448.970 0.01026 0.01574 0.09679 454.013 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 Total 4.68273 4.23463 4.05433 47.3141 0.14964 0.06735 16.5911 16.6584 0.06329 4.21167 4.27496 — 13,803.0 13,803.0 0.35635 0.50998 2.95909 13,966.9

4.2. Energy
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1190
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 94 / 118

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 895.755 895.755 0.14491 0.01757 — 904.613 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — — 885.154 885.154 0.14320 0.01736 — 893.906 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,868.36 1,868.36 0.30226 0.03664 — 1,886.84 Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 233.930 233.930 0.03784 0.00459 — 236.243 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,883.20 3,883.20 0.62822 0.07615 — 3,921.60 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 895.755 895.755 0.14491 0.01757 — 904.613 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — — 885.154 885.154 0.14320 0.01736 — 893.906 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1191
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 95 / 118
Apartme
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,868.36 1,868.36 0.30226 0.03664 — 1,886.84 Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 233.930 233.930 0.03784 0.00459 — 236.243 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,883.20 3,883.20 0.62822 0.07615 — 3,921.60 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 148.303 148.303 0.02399 0.00291 — 149.769 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — — 146.547 146.547 0.02371 0.00287 — 147.996 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 309.329 309.329 0.05004 0.00607 — 312.387 Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 38.7298 38.7298 0.00627 0.00076 — 39.1128 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 642.908 642.908 0.10401 0.01261 — 649.265

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1192
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 96 / 118
Single
Family
Housing

0.16159 0.08079 1.38082 0.58758 0.00881 0.11164 — 0.11164 0.11164 — 0.11164 — 1,752.71 1,752.71 0.15511 0.00330 — 1,757.57 City
Park

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se

0.21062 0.10531 1.79984 0.76589 0.01149 0.14552 — 0.14552 0.14552 — 0.14552 — 2,284.59 2,284.59 0.20218 0.00430 — 2,290.92 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.30156 0.15078 2.57697 1.09658 0.01645 0.20835 — 0.20835 0.20835 — 0.20835 — 3,271.02 3,271.02 0.28948 0.00616 — 3,280.09 Office
Park

0.01706 0.00853 0.15508 0.13027 0.00093 0.01179 — 0.01179 0.01179 — 0.01179 — 185.042 185.042 0.01638 0.00035 — 185.555 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.69082 0.34541 5.91272 2.58033 0.03768 0.47730 — 0.47730 0.47730 — 0.47730 — 7,493.35 7,493.35 0.66316 0.01411 — 7,514.14 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.16159 0.08079 1.38082 0.58758 0.00881 0.11164 — 0.11164 0.11164 — 0.11164 — 1,752.71 1,752.71 0.15511 0.00330 — 1,757.57 City
Park

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se

0.21062 0.10531 1.79984 0.76589 0.01149 0.14552 — 0.14552 0.14552 — 0.14552 — 2,284.59 2,284.59 0.20218 0.00430 — 2,290.92 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.30156 0.15078 2.57697 1.09658 0.01645 0.20835 — 0.20835 0.20835 — 0.20835 — 3,271.02 3,271.02 0.28948 0.00616 — 3,280.09 Office
Park

0.01706 0.00853 0.15508 0.13027 0.00093 0.01179 — 0.01179 0.01179 — 0.01179 — 185.042 185.042 0.01638 0.00035 — 185.555 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.69082 0.34541 5.91272 2.58033 0.03768 0.47730 — 0.47730 0.47730 — 0.47730 — 7,493.35 7,493.35 0.66316 0.01411 — 7,514.14 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1193
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 97 / 118
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.02949 0.01474 0.25200 0.10723 0.00161 0.02037 — 0.02037 0.02037 — 0.02037 — 290.181 290.181 0.02568 0.00055 — 290.986 City
Park

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Condo/T
ownhou
se

0.03844 0.01922 0.32847 0.13977 0.00210 0.02656 — 0.02656 0.02656 — 0.02656 — 378.239 378.239 0.03347 0.00071 — 379.289 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.05503 0.02752 0.47030 0.20013 0.00300 0.03802 — 0.03802 0.03802 — 0.03802 — 541.554 541.554 0.04793 0.00102 — 543.056 Office
Park

0.00311 0.00156 0.02830 0.02377 0.00017 0.00215 — 0.00215 0.00215 — 0.00215 — 30.6358 30.6358 0.00271 0.00006 — 30.7208 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total 0.12608 0.06304 1.07907 0.47091 0.00688 0.08711 — 0.08711 0.08711 — 0.08711 — 1,240.61 1,240.61 0.10979 0.00234 — 1,244.05

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 164.338 146.272 5.05747 282.907 0.59614 38.9112 — 38.9112 38.1623 — 38.1623 4,563.21 1,979.25 6,542.46 18.0111 0.16253 — 7,041.17 Consum
er
Product
s

32.0252 32.0252 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1194
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 98 / 118
Architect 3.06043 3.06043 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ural
Coating
s
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

6.57851 6.22577 0.65414 71.2895 0.00309 0.03286 — 0.03286 0.02488 — 0.02488 — 190.911 190.911 0.00798 0.00159 — 191.583 Total 206.002 187.584 5.71161 354.197 0.59923 38.9441 — 38.9441 38.1872 — 38.1872 4,563.21 2,170.16 6,733.38 18.0191 0.16411 — 7,232.76 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 164.338 146.272 5.05747 282.907 0.59614 38.9112 — 38.9112 38.1623 — 38.1623 4,563.21 1,979.25 6,542.46 18.0111 0.16253 — 7,041.17 Consum
er
Product
s

32.0252 32.0252 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

3.06043 3.06043 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 199.423 181.358 5.05747 282.907 0.59614 38.9112 — 38.9112 38.1623 — 38.1623 4,563.21 1,979.25 6,542.46 18.0111 0.16253 — 7,041.17 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 6.73784 5.99717 0.20736 11.5992 0.02444 1.59536 — 1.59536 1.56465 — 1.56465 169.727 73.6176 243.344 0.66992 0.00605 — 261.894 Consum
er
Product
s

5.84460 5.84460 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

0.55853 0.55853 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

0.59207 0.56032 0.05887 6.41605 0.00028 0.00296 — 0.00296 0.00224 — 0.00224 — 15.5872 15.5872 0.00065 0.00013 — 15.6421 Total 13.7330 12.9606 0.26623 18.0152 0.02472 1.59832 — 1.59832 1.56689 — 1.56689 169.727 89.2048 258.932 0.67057 0.00617 — 277.536 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1195
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 99 / 118

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.3502 69.8160 91.1661 2.20051 0.05338 — 162.087 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 78.1808 78.1808 0.01265 0.00153 — 78.9538 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — 14.9892 18.7248 33.7140 1.54000 0.03689 — 83.2058 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 36.3394 166.722 203.061 3.75316 0.09180 — 324.247 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.3502 69.8160 91.1661 2.20051 0.05338 — 162.087 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 78.1808 78.1808 0.01265 0.00153 — 78.9538 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — 14.9892 18.7248 33.7140 1.54000 0.03689 — 83.2058 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 36.3394 166.722 203.061 3.75316 0.09180 — 324.247 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.53476 11.5588 15.0936 0.36432 0.00884 — 26.8354 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1196
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 100 / 118
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 12.9437 12.9437 0.00209 0.00025 — 13.0717 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.48163 3.10011 5.58174 0.25496 0.00611 — 13.7757 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 6.01639 27.6027 33.6191 0.62138 0.01520 — 53.6828

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 58.8529 0.00000 58.8529 5.88213 0.00000 — 205.906 City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.92461 0.00000 2.92461 0.29230 0.00000 — 10.2322 Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — 122.308 0.00000 122.308 12.2242 0.00000 — 427.914 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 294.852 0.00000 294.852 29.4694 0.00000 — 1,031.59 Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.0243 0.00000 10.0243 1.00189 0.00000 — 35.0715 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 — 0.00000 Total — — — — — — — — — — — 488.962 0.00000 488.962 48.8700 0.00000 — 1,710.71 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1197
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 101 / 118
Daily,——————————————————
Winter
(Max)
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 58.8529 0.00000 58.8529 5.88213 0.00000— 205.906 City
Park
——————————— 2.92461 0.00000 2.92461 0.29230 0.00000— 10.2322 Condo/T
ownhou
se
——————————— 122.308 0.00000 122.308 12.2242 0.00000— 427.914 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 294.852 0.00000 294.852 29.4694 0.00000— 1,031.59 Office
Park
——————————— 10.0243 0.00000 10.0243 1.00189 0.00000— 35.0715 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000— 0.00000 Total——————————— 488.962 0.00000 488.962 48.8700 0.00000— 1,710.71 Annual——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 9.74376 0.00000 9.74376 0.97385 0.00000— 34.0901 City
Park
——————————— 0.48420 0.00000 0.48420 0.04839 0.00000— 1.69406 Condo/T
ownhou
se
——————————— 20.2495 0.00000 20.2495 2.02386 0.00000— 70.8461 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 48.8162 0.00000 48.8162 4.87900 0.00000— 170.791 Office
Park
——————————— 1.65963 0.00000 1.65963 0.16587 0.00000— 5.80648 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
——————————— 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000— 0.00000 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1198
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 102 / 118
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 80.9533 0.00000 80.9533 8.09099 0.00000 — 283.228

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.62559 2.62559
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000
Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33066 2.33066
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 5.08789 5.08789
Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04864 0.04864
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.0928 10.0928
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.62559 2.62559
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1199
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 103 / 118
Condo/T — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33066 2.33066 ownhou
se
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 5.08789 5.08789
Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.04864 0.04864
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10.0928 10.0928
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.43470 0.43470
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00000 0.00000
Condo/T
ownhou
se
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.38587 0.38587
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.84236 0.84236
Office
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00805 0.00805
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.67097 1.67097

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1200
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 104 / 118
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1201
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 105 / 118
Equipm TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ent
Type
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetati
on
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1202
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 106 / 118
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1203
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 107 / 118
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/1/2026 2/15/2027 5.00000 120.000 — Grading Grading 2/16/2027 4/24/2028 5.00000 310.000 —
Building Construction Building Construction 2/27/2029 1/14/2041 5.00000 3,100.00 — Paving Paving 4/25/2028 2/26/2029 5.00000 220.000 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 3/13/2029 1/28/2041 5.00000 3,100.00 — Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1204
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 108 / 118

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 367.000 0.40000 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 4.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 148.000 0.41000 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 367.000 0.40000 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 423.000 0.48000 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.000000 7.00000 367.000 0.29000 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00000 8.00000 82.0000 0.20000 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 14.0000 0.74000 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00000 7.00000 84.0000 0.37000
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.000000 8.00000 46.0000 0.45000 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 81.0000 0.42000 Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 89.0000 0.36000 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00000 8.00000 36.0000 0.38000 Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.000000 6.00000 37.0000 0.48000

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation Worker 17.5000 14.3000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1205
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 109 / 118
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.80000 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 20.0000 14.3000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 8.80000 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker 827.920 14.3000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Building Construction Vendor 135.299 8.80000 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving Worker 15.0000 14.3000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.80000 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker 165.584 14.3000 LDA,LDT1,LDT2 Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.80000 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00000 20.0000 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 2,839,901 946,634 30,000.0 10,000.00 17,772.5 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1206
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 110 / 118

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 180.000 0.00000 0.00000
Grading — — 930.000 0.00000 0.00000
Paving 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 8.87163

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Single Family Housing 2.07163 0%
Paving City Park 0.00000 0%
Paving Condo/Townhouse — 0%
Paving Apartments Mid Rise — 0%
Paving Office Park 0.00000 0%
Paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 6.80000 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2027 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2028 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2029 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2030 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2031 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1207
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 111 / 118
2032 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2033 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2034 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2035 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2036 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2037 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2038 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2039 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2040 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2041 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400
2026 0.00000 203.983 0.03300 0.00400

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Single Family
Housing
1,774.72 1,793.52 1,607.40 640,029 27,915.7 28,211.5 25,283.9 10,067,432 City Park 49.2180 123.676 138.189 26,486.2 1,259.13 3,163.98 3,535.26 677,592 Condo/Townhouse 2,247.24 2,498.98 1,927.96 816,721 35,348.3 39,308.1 30,326.2 12,846,743 Apartments Mid
Rise
4,025.60 3,633.40 3,026.60 1,396,803 63,321.3 57,152.2 47,607.4 21,971,236 Office Park 221.400 32.8000 15.2000 60,225.0 5,664.04 839.116 388.859 1,540,725 Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1208
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 112 / 118
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Single Family Housing Wood Fireplaces 28 28
Single Family Housing Gas Fireplaces 94 94
Single Family Housing Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Single Family Housing No Fireplaces 66 66
Single Family Housing Conventional Wood Stoves 17 17
Single Family Housing Catalytic Wood Stoves 17 17
Single Family Housing Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 17 17
Single Family Housing Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Wood Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Gas Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Propane Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Electric Fireplaces 0 0
City Park No Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Gas Fireplaces 92 92
Condo/Townhouse Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Condo/Townhouse No Fireplaces 215 215
Condo/Townhouse Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Condo/Townhouse Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1209
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 113 / 118
Apartments Mid Rise Wood Fireplaces00
Apartments Mid Rise Gas Fireplaces 222 222
Apartments Mid Rise Propane Fireplaces00
Apartments Mid Rise Electric Fireplaces00
Apartments Mid Rise No Fireplaces 518 518
Apartments Mid Rise Conventional Wood Stoves00
Apartments Mid Rise Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Apartments Mid Rise Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Apartments Mid Rise Pellet Wood Stoves00
Office Park Wood Fireplaces00
Office Park Gas Fireplaces00
Office Park Propane Fireplaces00
Office Park Electric Fireplaces00
Office Park No Fireplaces00
Office Park Conventional Wood Stoves00
Office Park Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Office Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Office Park Pellet Wood Stoves00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Wood Fireplaces00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Gas Fireplaces00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Propane Fireplaces00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Electric Fireplaces00
Other Asphalt Surfaces No Fireplaces00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Conventional Wood Stoves00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves00
Other Asphalt Surfaces Pellet Wood Stoves00
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1210
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 114 / 118

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
2,839,901 946,634 30,000.0 10,000.00 17,772.5

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00000
Summer Days day/yr 180.000

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Single Family Housing 1,602,833 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 5,468,925 City Park 0.00000 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 0.00000
Condo/Townhouse 1,583,863 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 7,128,523 Apartments Mid Rise 3,343,180 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 10,206,444 Office Park 418,587 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 577,380
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00000 203.983 0.0330 0.0040 0.00000

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Single Family Housing 11,141,718 55,835,200
City Park 0.00000 86,757,719
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1211
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 115 / 118
Condo/Townhouse 7,822,209 5,586,348

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 109.201 0.00000
City Park 5.42660 0.00000
Condo/Townhouse 226.942 0.00000
Apartments Mid Rise 547.098 0.00000
Office Park 18.6000 0.00000
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00000 0.00000

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Single Family Housing Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.03750 1.000000 0.00000 1.000000
Condo/Townhouse Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1212
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 116 / 118
Condo/Townhouse Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00225 2.50000 2.50000 10.00000
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.11538 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Office Park Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430.00 0.01679 0.60000 0.00000 1.000000
Office Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088.00 0.00180 4.00000 4.00000 18.0000

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1213
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 117 / 118

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use Lot acreage adjusted to represent overall acreage of the project site.

Construction: Construction Phases Demolition not required for the proposed project. Based on typical construction practices, architectural coating assumed to start two weeks after the start of building construction and last for the same number of days.

8.2. Project Characteristics

8.2.1. Project Details
Model Parameter Default Value New Value
City Unincorporated —

8.3. Land Use
Model Parameter Units Default Value New Value
Lot Area acre 61.0390 32.6000
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1214
Lincoln Village 7B Amendment Project - Proposed Project Custom Report, 3/6/2026 118 / 118
Lot Area acre 19.1875 34.0000
Landscape Area sq. ft — 592,416
Lot Area acre 19.4737 41.1000
Landscape Area sq. ft — 716,126
Lot Area acre 0.45914 4.10000
Landscape Area sq. ft — 71,438.0

8.4. Construction

8.4.1. Construction Phases
Phase Type Phase Name Model Parameter Default Value New Value Site Preparation Site Preparation Start Date 6/9/2027 9/1/2026 Site Preparation Site Preparation End Date 11/24/2027 2/15/2027 Grading Grading Start Date 11/25/2027 2/16/2027
Grading Grading End Date 2/1/2029 4/24/2028
Building Construction Building Construction Start Date 2/2/2029 2/27/2029 Building Construction Building Construction End Date 12/21/2040 1/14/2041 Paving Paving Start Date 12/22/2040 4/25/2028
Paving Paving End Date 10/26/2041 2/26/2029
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating Start Date 10/27/2041 3/13/2029 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating End Date 8/31/2042 1/28/2041 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating Work Days per Phase 220.000 3,100.00 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1215

APPENDIX B

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1216
Biological Resources Assessment
for the
Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project
Placer County, California
Prepared For:

Lewis Management Corporation
156 North Mountain Avenue
Upland, CA 91786
Prepared By:
2525 Warren Drive
Rocklin, CA 95677
May 2025
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1217

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Biological Study Area......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Purpose of This Biological Resources Assessment ................................................................................ 1

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Federal Regulations ............................................................................................................................................ 3

2.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act .................................................................................................. 3

2.1.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ................................................................................................................ 4

2.1.3 Federal Clean Water Act .................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 State or Local Regulations ............................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1 California Fish and Game Code .................................................................................................... 5

2.2.2 California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act .......................................................................... 7

2.2.3 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act .............................................................................................. 7

2.2.4 California Environmental Quality Act.......................................................................................... 7

2.2.5 Placer County Conservation Program ..................................................................................... 11

2.2.6 Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program ........................................................ 12

2.2.7 Placer County Tree Preservation Article (Article 12.16) .................................................... 13

3.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 13

3.1 Literature Review .............................................................................................................................................. 13

3.2 Site Reconnaissance ........................................................................................................................................ 14

3.3 Aquatic Resources Delineation ................................................................................................................... 15

3.4 Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Survey ............................................................................................. 15

4.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................................................ 15

4.1 Site Characteristics and Land Use .............................................................................................................. 15

4.2 Soils and Geology ............................................................................................................................................ 16

4.3 Placer County Conservation Program Terrestrial Land-Cover Types and Vegetation Communities ...................................................................................................................................................... 19

4.3.1 Natural Communities ..................................................................................................................... 22

4.3.2 Urban (Nonnatural) Communities ............................................................................................ 22

4.4 Aquatic Resources ........................................................................................................................................... 23

4.4.2 Placer County Conservation Program Stream System...................................................... 23

4.5 Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................................. 27

4.6 Special-Status Species .................................................................................................................................... 27

4.6.1 Plants .................................................................................................................................................... 47 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1218

4.6.2 Invertebrates ..................................................................................................................................... 51

4.6.3 Crotch’s Bumble Bee ...................................................................................................................... 52

4.6.4 Fish ........................................................................................................................................................ 53

4.6.5 Amphibians ........................................................................................................................................ 53

4.6.6 Reptiles ................................................................................................................................................ 54

4.6.7 Birds ...................................................................................................................................................... 55

4.6.8 Mammals ............................................................................................................................................ 60

4.7 Critical Habitat or Essential Fish Habitat ................................................................................................. 61

4.8 Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites ................................................................................. 61

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 62

5.1 General Recommendations and Best Management Practices ....................................................... 62

5.2 Placer County Conservation Program Covered Species Measures and Conditions .............. 62

5.2.1 Species Condition 1. Swainson’s Hawk ................................................................................... 62

5.2.2 Species Condition 3. Western Burrowing Owl ..................................................................... 63

5.2.3 Species Condition 4. Tricolored Blackbird ............................................................................. 63

5.2.4 Species Condition 6. Northwestern Pond Turtle ................................................................. 63

5.2.5 Species Condition 9. Conservancy Fairy Shrimp. ................................................................ 63

5.2.6 Species Condition 10. Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp .................................................................................................................................................. 63

5.3 Special-Status Species Covered under the California Environmental Quality Act ................. 63

5.3.1 Special-Status Plants ...................................................................................................................... 63

5.3.2 Crotch’s Bumble Bee ...................................................................................................................... 65

5.3.3 Western Spadefoot ......................................................................................................................... 65

5.3.4 Northwestern Pond Turtle ........................................................................................................... 66

5.3.5 Other Special-Status Birds and Nesting Birds ...................................................................... 66

5.3.6 Special-Status Raptors and Other Protected Raptors....................................................... 67

5.4 Aquatic Resources ........................................................................................................................................... 67

5.4.1 Community Condition 2.3, Riverine and Riparian Restoration ...................................... 68

5.4.2 Stream System Condition 2, Stream System Mitigation: Restoration ........................ 68

5.4.3 Western Placer CARP Authorization Mitigation Conditions ........................................... 68

5.5 Land Cover and Sensitive Natural Communities ................................................................................. 68

5.5.1 Land Conversion Mitigation, Placer County Conservation Program General Condition 3 ........................................................................................................................................ 68

5.5.2 Riparian Habitat ............................................................................................................................... 68

5.6 Placer County Protected Trees .................................................................................................................... 68

6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 69 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1219

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. BSA Location and Vicinity............................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. BSA Aerial Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Figure 3. Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Types ......................................................................................... 18 Figure 4. PCCP Land Cover ............................................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 5. Revised PCCP Land Cover ........................................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 6. Aquatic Resources Delineation ................................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 7. PCCP Stream System ..................................................................................................................................................... 26

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Placer County Conservation Program-Covered Species ................................................................................... 12 Table 2. Soil Units Mapped within the Biological Study Area ......................................................................................... 19 Table 3. PCCP Land Cover Types within the Biological Study Area ............................................................................... 19 Table 4. Vernal Pool Complex Landcover Relative Wetland Densities ......................................................................... 22 Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation.............................................................................................................................. 28

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Results of Database Queries
Appendix B – Representative Photographs (December 19, 2024) Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (December 19, 2024) Appendix D – Wildlife Species Observed (December 19, 2024) Appendix E – Master Conditions on Covered Activities Checklist Appendix F – Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program Best Management Practices Appendix G – Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program Procedures, Timelines, and Conditions of Approval

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Definition
BCC Bird of Conservation Concern
BIOS Biogeographic Information and Observation System
BRA Biological Resource Assessment
BSA Biological Study Area
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1220
Term Definition
CARP County Aquatic Resources Program
CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
CWA Clean Water Act
DPS Distinct Population Segment
DSH diameter at standard height
ECORP ECORP Consulting, Inc.

ESA Endangered Species Act
ESU Evolutionarily Significant Unit
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
LOP Letter of Permission
LSAA Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MSL Mean Sea Level
N/A Not Applicable
NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPPA Native Plant Protection Act
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
PCA Placer Conservation Authority
PCCP Placer County Conservation Program
Project Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SSC Species of Special Concern
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1221
Term Definition
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VPC Vernal Pool Complex
WBWG Western Bat Working Group
WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program
WQC Water Quality Certification
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1222

1.0 INTRODUCTION
ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP) has conducted a Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) at the request of Lewis Management Corporation, for the proposed Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project (Project) located in Placer County, California. The results of this assessment will support environmental review of the Project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), provide the basis for identifying appropriate measures to lessen or avoid significant impacts to biological resources, and support participation in the Placer County Conservation Program (PCCP).

1.1 Project Location and Description
The Project is located northwest of the intersection at Moore Road and Sorrento Parkway within Placer County, California. The Proposed Project entails the construction of four residential lots with associated utilities and infrastructure and two common area lots for a private road and open space.

1.2 Biological Study Area
The Biological Study Area (BSA) includes all areas where Project-related activities may result in impacts to sensitive biological resources. The 180.00-acre BSA corresponds to a portion of Sections 20 and 21, Township 12 North, Range 06 East (Mount Diablo Base and Meridian) of the Lincoln, California and Roseville, California 7.5-minute quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] 1992 [photorevised 1997 and 2000]; Figure 1). The approximate center of the BSA is located at 38.877171° latitude and -121.326551° longitude within the Upper Coon-Upper Auburn Watershed (Hydrological Unit Code 18020161; USGS 2024).

1.3 Purpose of This Biological Resources Assessment
The purpose of this BRA is to assess the potential for occurrence of special-status plant and animal species or their habitats, and other sensitive or protected resources such as migratory birds, sensitive natural communities, riparian habitat, oak woodlands, and potential Waters of the U.S. or state, including wetlands, within the BSA. This assessment does not include determinate field surveys conducted according to agency-promulgated protocols. The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based upon a review of available literature and the results of site reconnaissance field surveys.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1223
Map Date: 1/8/2025
Sources: ESRI, USGS
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\Scheiber_LnV.aprx - Scheiber LnV 20250108 (kedwards - 1/8/2025) Lincoln, CA and Roseville, CA (1992 p.r.
2000 and 1997, NAD 83)
CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle
US Geological Survey.

Placer County, California
§20-21, T.12N, R.06E, MDBM
Latitude (NAD83): 38.877171°
Longitude (NAD83): -121.326551°
Watershed: Upper Coon-Upper Auburn
(18020161)
I
0 1,000 2,000
Scale in Feet
Figure 1. BSA Location and Vicinity
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project BSA - 180.00 ac.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1224
For the purposes of this assessment, special-status species are defined as plants or animals that:
 are listed, proposed for listing, or candidates for future listing as threatened or endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA);
 are listed or candidates for future listing as threatened or endangered under the California ESA;  meet the definitions of endangered or rare under Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines;  are identified as a Species of Special Concern (SSC) by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW);are birds identified as Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS);
 are included on the CDFW Watch List;
 are plants considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be "rare, threatened, or endangered in California" (California Rare Plant Ranks [CRPRs] 1 and 2), plants listed by CNPS as species about which more information is needed to determine their status (CRPR 3), and plants of limited distribution (CRPR 4);
 are plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA; California Fish and Game Code, Section 1900 et seq.);
 are fully protected in California in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code, Sections 3511 (birds), 4700 (mammals), 5050 (amphibians and reptiles), and 5515 (fishes); or  are PCCP-Covered Species.

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING

2.1 Federal Regulations

2.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act
The federal ESA protects plants and animals that are listed as endangered or threatened by the USFWS or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the taking of listed wildlife, where take is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct” (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 17.3). For plants, the ESA prohibits removing or possessing any listed plant on federal land, maliciously damaging or destroying any listed plant in any area, or removing, cutting, digging up, damaging, or destroying any such species in knowing violation of state law (16 U.S. Code 1538). Under Section 7 of ESA, federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS if their actions, including permit approvals or funding, could adversely affect a listed (or proposed) species (including plants) or its designated Critical Habitat. Through consultation and the issuance of a Biological Opinion, the USFWS may issue an incidental take statement allowing take of a listed species that is incidental to an otherwise authorized activity provided the activity will not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Section 10 of the ESA provides for issuance of incidental take Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1225
permits where no other federal actions are necessary provided a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is developed.

2.1.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements international treaties between the United States and other nations devised to protect migratory birds, any of their parts, eggs, and nests from activities such as hunting, pursuing, capturing, killing, selling, and shipping, unless expressly authorized in the regulations or by permit. The protections of the MBTA extend to disturbances that result in abandonment of a nest with eggs or young. The USFWS may issue permits to qualified applicants as authorized by the MBTA for the following types of activities: falconry, raptor propagation, scientific collecting, special purposes (rehabilitation, education, migratory game bird propagation, and salvage), take of depredating birds, taxidermy, and waterfowl sale and disposal. The regulations governing migratory bird permits can be found in 50 CFR part 13 General Permit Procedures and 50 CFR part 21 Migratory Bird Permits.

2.1.3 Federal Clean Water Act
The purpose of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.” Section 404 of the CWA prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the U.S. without a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The definition of Waters of the U.S. includes rivers, streams, estuaries, the territorial seas, ponds, lakes, and wetlands. Wetlands are defined as those areas:
…that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (33 CFR 328.3 7b).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency also has authority over wetlands and may override a USACE permit.

Substantial impacts to wetlands may require an individual permit. Projects that only minimally affect wetlands may meet the conditions of one of the existing Nationwide Permits. A Water Quality Certification (WQC) or waiver pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA is required for Section 404 permit actions; this certification or waiver is issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).

Western Placer County includes a County Aquatic Resources Program (CARP), which allows for streamlined permitting pursuant to CWA Section401 for impacts to Waters of the U.S. The Western Placer CARP is discussed further in Section 2.2.6.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1226

2.2 State or Local Regulations

2.2.1 California Fish and Game Code

2.2.1.1 California Endangered Species Act
The California ESA (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2050-2116) generally parallels the main provisions of the federal ESA, but unlike its federal counterpart, the California ESA applies the take prohibitions to species proposed for listing (called candidates by the state). Section 2080 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the taking, possession, purchase, sale, and import or export of endangered, threatened, or candidate species, unless otherwise authorized by permit or in the regulations. Take is defined in Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Section 2081 allows CDFW to authorize incidental take permits if species-specific minimization and avoidance measures are incorporated to fully mitigate the impacts of a project.

2.2.1.2 Fully Protected Species
The State of California first began to designate species as fully protected prior to the creation of the federal and California ESAs. Lists of fully protected species were initially developed to provide protection to those animals that were rare or faced possible extinction and included fish, amphibians and reptiles, birds, and mammals. Most fully protected species have since been listed as threatened or endangered under the state and/or federal ESAs. Previously, the regulations that implement the Fully Protected Species Statute (California Fish and Game Code Sections 4700 for mammals, 3511 for birds, 5050 for reptiles and amphibians, and 5515 for fish) provided that fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time. However, on July 10, 2023, Senate Bill 147 was signed into law, authorizing CDFW to issue take permits under the California ESA for fully protected species for qualifying projects through 2033. Qualifying projects include:
 a maintenance, repair, or improvement project to the State Water Project, including existing infrastructure, undertaken by the Department of Water Resources;  a maintenance, repair, or improvement project to critical regional or local water agency infrastructure;
 a transportation project, including any associated habitat connectivity and wildlife crossing project, undertaken by a state, regional, or local agency, that does not increase highway or street capacity for automobile or truck travel;
 a wind project and any appurtenant infrastructure improvement, and any associated electric transmission project carrying electric power from a facility that is located in the State to a point of junction with any California based balancing authority; or Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1227
 a solar photovoltaic project and any appurtenant infrastructure improvement, and any associated electric transmission project carrying electric power from a facility that is located in the State to a point of junction with any California-based balancing authority.

CDFW may also issue licenses or permits for take of these species for necessary scientific research or live capture and relocation, and may allow incidental take for lawful activities carried out under an approved Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) within which such species are covered.

2.2.1.3 Native Plant Protection Act
The NPPA of 1977 was created with the intent to “preserve, protect and enhance rare and endangered plants in this State.” The NPPA is administered by CDFW and provided in California Fish and Game Code Sections 1900-1913. The Fish and Wildlife Commission has the authority to designate native plants as endangered or rare and to protect endangered and rare plants from take. The California ESA of 1984 (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2050-2116) provided further protection for rare and endangered plant species, but the NPPA remains part of the California Fish and Game Code.

2.2.1.4 Special Protections for Birds
Sections 3503, 3513, and 3800 of the California Fish and Game Code specifically protect birds.

Section 3503 prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird.

Subsection 3503.5 prohibits the take, possession, or destruction of any birds in the orders Strigiformes (owls) or Falconiformes (hawks and eagles), as well as their nests and eggs. Section 3513 prohibits the take or possession of any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA. Section 3800 states that, with limited exceptions, it is unlawful to take any nongame bird, defined as all birds occurring naturally in California that are not resident game birds, migratory game birds, or fully protected birds. These provisions, along with the federal MBTA, serve to protect all nongame birds and their nests and eggs, except as otherwise provided in the code.

2.2.1.5 Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code requires that a Notification of Lake or Streambed Alteration be submitted to CDFW for “any activity that may substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake.” The notification must incorporate proposed measures to protect affected fish and wildlife resources. CDFW may suggest additional protective measures during their review. A Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA) is the final proposal mutually agreed upon by CDFW and the applicant. Projects that require an LSAA often also require a permit from the USACE under Section 404 of the CWA. The conditions of the Section 404 permit and the LSAA frequently overlap in these instances.

The PCCP/Western Placer CARP does not provide a streamlined process for obtaining an LSAA; therefore, if the Project would impact aquatic features under the jurisdiction of CDFW pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 1600-1616, an LSAA would need to be obtained through the standard LSAA Notification procedure.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1228

2.2.2 California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act
The California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act was passed in 2001 to address loss of oak woodland habitats throughout the State. As a result of the Act, the Oak Woodland Conservation Program was established to provide funding for conservation and protection of California oak woodlands. Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 went into effect as of January 1, 2005 and requires lead agencies to analyze potential effects to oak woodlands during the CEQA process. The lead agency must implement one of several mitigation alternatives, including conservation of oak woodlands through conservation easements, planting or restoration of oak woodlands, contribution of funds to the Oak Woodlands Conservation Fund, or other appropriate mitigation measures if it is determined that a project may have a significant effect on oak woodlands,.

2.2.3 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The RWQCB implements water quality regulations under the federal CWA and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. These regulations require compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), including compliance with the California Storm Water NPDES General Construction Permit for discharges of storm water runoff associated with construction activities. General Construction Permits for projects that disturb 1 or more acres of land require development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act, the RWQCB also regulates actions that would involve “discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the water of the state” (Water Code 13260(a)). Waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (Water Code 13050 (e)). The RWQCB regulates all such activities, as well as dredging, filling, or discharging materials into Waters of the State, that are not regulated by the USACE due to a lack of connectivity with a navigable water body. The RWQCB may require issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements for these activities.

The Western Placer CARP allows for streamlined permitting pursuant to the CWA and complies with the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act for impacts to Waters of the U.S. The Western Placer CARP is discussed further in Section 2.2.6.

2.2.4 California Environmental Quality Act
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15380, a species not protected on a federal or state list may be considered rare or endangered if the species meets certain specified criteria. These criteria follow the definitions in the federal and California ESAs, and Sections 1900-1913 of the California Fish and Game Code, which deal with rare or endangered plants or animals. Section 15380 was included in the CEQA Guidelines primarily to deal with situations where a project under review may have a significant effect on a species that has not yet been listed by either the USFWS or CDFW.

2.2.4.1 CEQA Significance Criteria
Sections 15063-15065 of the CEQA Guidelines address how an impact is identified as significant.

Generally, impacts to listed (i.e., rare, threatened, or endangered) species are considered significant.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1229
Assessment of impact significance to populations of non-listed species (e.g., SSC) usually considers the proportion of the species’ range that will be affected by a project, impacts to habitat, and the regional and population level effects.

Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines encourages local agencies to develop and publish the thresholds that the agency uses in determining the significance of environmental effects caused by projects under its review. However, agencies may also rely upon the guidance provided by the expanded Initial Study checklist contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to Appendix G, impacts to biological resources would normally be considered significant if a project would:
 have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS;
 have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by CDFW or USFWS;  have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected Waters of the U.S. including wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, and coastal) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;  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;
 conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or
 conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan.

An evaluation of whether an impact on biological resources would be substantial must consider both the resource itself and how that resource fits into a regional or local context. Substantial impacts would be those that would diminish, or result in the loss of, an important biological resource, or those that would obviously conflict with local, state, or federal resource conservation plans, goals, or regulations. Impacts are sometimes locally important but not significant according to CEQA because although the impacts would result in an adverse alteration of existing conditions, they would not substantially diminish or result in the permanent loss of an important resource on a population-wide or region-wide basis.

2.2.4.2 Species of Special Concern
SSC are defined by the CDFW as a species, subspecies, or distinct population of an animal native to California that are not legally protected under the ESA, the California ESA or the California Fish and Game Code, but currently satisfy one or more of the following criteria:
 The species has been completely extirpated from the State or, as in the case of birds, it has been extirpated from its primary seasonal or breeding role.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1230
 The species is listed as federally (but not State) threatened or endangered, and meets the state definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed.  The species has or is experiencing serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for state threatened or endangered status.
 The species has naturally small populations that exhibit high susceptibility to risk from any factor that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for state threatened or endangered status.

SSC are typically associated with threatened habitats. Projects that result in substantial impacts to SSC may be considered significant under CEQA.

2.2.4.3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern The 1988 amendment to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act mandates the USFWS “identify species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become candidates for listing under ESA.” To meet this requirement, the USFWS published a list of BCC (USFWS 2021) for the U.S. The list identifies the migratory and nonmigratory bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that represent USFWS’ highest conservation priorities. Depending on the policy of the lead agency, projects that result in substantial impacts to BCC may be considered significant under CEQA.

2.2.4.4 Watch List Species
The CDFW maintains a list consisting of taxa that were previously designated as "Species of Special Concern" but no longer merit that status, or which do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status.

Depending on the policy of the lead agency, projects that result in substantial impacts to species on the CDFW Watch List may be considered significant under CEQA.

2.2.4.5 California Rare Plant Ranks
The CNPS maintains the Rare Plant Inventory (CNPS 2024a), which provides a list of plant species native to California that are threatened with extinction, have limited distributions, or low populations. Plant species meeting one of these criteria are assigned to one of six CRPRs. The rank system was developed in collaboration with government, academic, non-governmental organizations, and private sector botanists, and is jointly managed by CDFW and the CNPS. The CRPRs are currently recognized in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The following are definitions of the CNPS CRPRs:
 Rare Plant Rank 1A – presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere  Rare Plant Rank 1B – rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere  Rare Plant Rank 2A – presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1231
 Rare Plant Rank 2B – rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere  Rare Plant Rank 3 – a review list of plants about which more information is needed  Rare Plant Rank 4 – a watch list of plants of limited distribution Additionally, the CNPS has defined Threat Ranks that are added to the CRPR as an extension. Threat Ranks designate the level of threat on a scale of 0.1 through 0.3, with 0.1 being the most threatened and 0.3 being the least threatened. Threat Ranks are generally present for all plants ranked 1B, 2B, or 4, and for the majority of plants ranked 3. Plant species ranked 1A and 2A (presumed extirpated in California), and some species ranked 3, which lack threat information, do not typically have a Threat Rank extension. The following are definitions of the CNPS Threat Ranks:
 Threat Rank 0.1 – Seriously threatened in California (greater than 80 percent of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat)
 Threat Rank 0.2 – Moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat)
 Threat Rank 0.3 – Not very threatened in California (less than 20 percent of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known) Factors, such as habitat vulnerability and specificity, distribution, and condition of occurrences, are considered in setting the Threat Rank; and differences in Threat Ranks do not constitute additional or different protection (CNPS 2024a). Depending on the policy of the lead agency, substantial impacts to plants ranked 1A, 1B, 2A, or 2B are typically considered significant under CEQA Guidelines Section 15380.

Significance under CEQA is typically evaluated on a case-by-case basis for plants ranked 3 or 4.

2.2.4.6 Sensitive Natural Communities
Sensitive natural communities are vegetation communities that are imperiled or vulnerable to environmental effects of projects. CDFW maintains the California Natural Community List (CDFW 2023a), which provides a list of vegetation alliances, associations, and special stands as defined in A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (MCV; CNPS 2024b), along with their respective state and global rarity ranks, if applicable. Natural communities with a state rarity rank of S1, S2, or S3 are considered sensitive natural communities. Depending on the policy of the lead agency, impacts to sensitive natural communities may be considered significant under CEQA.

2.2.4.7 Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites
Impacts to wildlife movement corridors or nursery sites may be considered significant under CEQA. As part of the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project, CDFW and California Department of Transportation maintain data on Essential Habitat Connectivity areas. This data is available in the CNDDB.

The goal of this Project is to map large intact habitat or natural landscapes and potential linkages that could provide corridors for wildlife. In urban settings, riparian vegetated stream corridors can also serve as wildlife movement corridors. Nursery sites include but are not limited to concentrations of nest or den Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1232
sites such as heron rookeries, bat maternity roosts, and mule deer critical fawning areas. These data are available through CDFW’s Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) database or as occurrence records in the CNDDB and are supplemented with the results of the field reconnaissance.

2.2.5 Placer County Conservation Program
The PCCP is a regional effort that provides development and infrastructure projects with streamlined federal and state permitting processes while creating a preserve system to protect habitat, open space, and agricultural lands (Placer County 2020a). In addition to streamlining the ESA permitting processes, a parallel process has been developed to address permitting pursuant to the CWA Section 401 permitting process: the Western Placer CARP. This process is further described in Section 2.2.6. The PCCP was prepared by local agencies (who will become the Permittees) including Placer County, the City of Lincoln, South Placer Regional Transportation Authority, Placer County Water Agency, and the Placer Conservation Authority (PCA), an entity created to implement the PCCP on behalf of the other Permittees. The PCCP will allow the aforementioned local agencies to receive incidental take permits for certain fish and wildlife species (i.e., Covered Species; Table 1) from USFWS and CDFW for activities and projects overseen by the PCA.

The PCCP includes three separate, but complementary, components that support two sets of state and federal permits:
 Western Placer County HCP/NCCP. The PCCP is a joint HCP and NCCP that will protect fish and wildlife and their habitats and fulfill the requirements of the federal ESA and the California Natural Community and Conservation Planning Act.
 Western Placer CARP. The CARP will protect streams, wetlands, and other water resources and fulfill the requirements of the federal CWA and analogous state laws and regulations.  In-Lieu Fee Program is a program under which compensatory mitigation requirements under Section 404 of the CWA can be fulfilled by payment of a fee. The In-Lieu Fee Program will provide wetland mitigation credits that can be used to fulfill Section 404 compensatory mitigation requirements. The In-Lieu Fee Program will provide compensatory mitigation for impacts on aquatic resources for all projects and activities that are covered under the HCP/NCCP and the Western Placer CARP.

Table 1 provides a list of the PCCP-Covered Species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1233
Table 1. Placer County Conservation Program-Covered Species Common Name Scientific Name
Status*
ESA California
ESA Other
Birds
Swainson’s hawk Buteo swainsoni – T –
California black rail Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus – T – Western burrowing owl Athene cunicularia – CC SSC
Tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor – T –
Reptiles
Giant garter snake Thamnophis gigas T T –
Northwestern pond turtle Actinemys marmorata PT – SSC
Amphibians
Foothill yellow-legged frog Rana boylii – T –
California red-legged frog Rana draytonii T – –
Fish
Steelhead (California Central Valley
Distinct Population Segment) Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus T – – Chinook salmon (Central Valley
fall/late fall-run Evolutionarily
Significant Unit)
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha – – SC,
SSC
Invertebrates
Valley elderberry longhorn beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus T – – Conservancy fairy shrimp Branchinecta conservatio E – – Vernal pool fairy shrimp Branchinecta lynchi T – –
Vernal pool tadpole shrimp Lepidurus packardi E – –
Notes: ESA = Endangered Species Act
*Status Abbreviations:

CC = Candidate for listing as Endangered or Threatened; E = Endangered; PT = Formally Proposed for listing as Threatened; SC = Federal Species of Concern; SSC = California Department of Fish and Wildlife Species of Special Concern; T = Threatened

2.2.6 Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program
The Western Placer CARP is an independent program from the PCCP that uses the PCCP fees and conservation strategy to satisfy the mitigation requirements of impacting affected aquatic features, Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1234
including Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State in Placer County (Placer County 2020b). The purpose of the Western Placer CARP is to provide a mechanism that streamlines the environmental permitting process as it pertains to impacts to aquatic features that fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE and RWQCB. For projects with impacts that exceed 3.0 acres of Waters of the U.S. in total, or exceed 1.0 acre of impacts to vernal pools, or result in the loss of more than a total of 500 linear feet of streambed, a Letter of Permission (LOP) will need to be obtained through the USACE. For projects that do not exceed these thresholds, a permit can be obtained through the Western Placer CARP coverage under the PCCP Programmatic General Permit.

The Western Placer CARP does not provide a streamlined process for obtaining an LSAA with CDFW, which is required if a project would be impacting aquatic features under the jurisdiction of CDFW pursuant to Fish and Game Code Sections 1600-1616. Therefore, an LSAA, if required due to Project impacts, should be obtained through the standard LSAA notification process. In addition to the aquatic features under the jurisdiction of the USACE and RWQCB, the PCCP/Western Placer CARP also regulates activities being conducted within the Stream System, defined as primary streams and creeks as well as tributaries that contribute to the hydrology of primary streams and creeks located within the PCCP Plan Area.

2.2.7 Placer County Tree Preservation Article (Article 12.16) Projects approved through the PCCP do not have to conform to the Placer County Tree Preservation Article. As such, projects mitigate through payment of land conversion and special habitat conversion fees.

The Placer County Tree Preservation Article (Article 12.16; Tree Preservation Article) requires tree permits for all development activities (except those that qualify under an exemption) within the protected zone of any protected tree on public or private land. The Tree Preservation Article does not allow for any person, firm, corporation, or county agency to harm, destroy, kill, or remove any protected tree unless authorized by a tree permit or as permitted pursuant to approval of a discretionary project.

The Tree Preservation Article is applicable to all native trees, landmark trees, riparian zone trees, and certain commercial firewood operations, except as exempted, with a single main stem or trunk at least 6 inches diameter at standard height (DSH), or a multiple trunk with an aggregate of at least 10 inches DSH. Foothill pine (Pinus sabiniana) is exempt from this article. In addition, certain plants commonly found as “brush,” such as manzanita, are not considered to be trees in this article regardless of size.

3.0 METHODS

3.1 Literature Review
ECORP biologists performed a review of existing available information for the BSA. Literature sources included current and historical aerial imagery, any previous biological studies conducted for the area, topographic mapping, soil survey mapping available from the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, USFWS Critical Habitat Mapper, NMFS Essential Fish Habitat Mapper, and other relevant literature as cited throughout this Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1235
document. ECORP reviewed the following resources to identify special-status plant and wildlife species that have been documented in or near the BSA:
 CDFW’s CNDDB data for the “Lincoln, California” and 7.5-minute quadrangle and the surrounding 12 quadrangles (CDFW 2024a);
 CNPS Rare Plant Inventory data for the "Lincoln, California" 7.5-minute quadrangle and the surrounding 12 quadrangles (CNPS 2024a);
 USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation Resource Report List for the BSA (USFWS 2024a);
 NMFS Resources data for the “Lincoln, California” 7.5-minute quadrangle (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2022);
 PCCP Modeled Habitat for Covered Species information (Table 3-9 in the HCP/NCCP; Placer County 2020b).

The results of the database queries are provided in Appendix A. Each special-status species identified in the literature review is evaluated for its potential to occur in the BSA in Section 4 based on available information concerning species habitat requirements and distribution, occurrence data, and the findings of the site reconnaissance.

3.2 Site Reconnaissance
ECORP biologist Daniel Wong conducted the site reconnaissance visit on December 19, 2024. The biologist visually assessed the BSA while walking through all accessible portions of the site, using binoculars to scan inaccessible areas. The biologist collected the following biological resource information:
 Characteristics and approximate boundaries of vegetation communities and other land cover types;
 Plant and animal species or their sign directly observed; and  Incidental observations of special habitat features such as burrows, active raptor nests, potential bat roost sites.

The biologist qualitatively assessed and mapped vegetation communities based on dominant plant composition. Vegetation community classification was based on the PCCP vegetation communities, paying special attention to identifying those portions of the BSA with the potential to support specialstatus species or sensitive habitats. Data were recorded on a Global Positioning System unit, field notebooks, and/or maps. Photographs were taken during the survey to provide visual representation of the conditions within the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1236

3.3 Aquatic Resources Delineation
ECORP biologists Stephanie Castle and Keith Kwan performed an Aquatic Resources Delineation on December 6, 2024 in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (USACE 2008a). Non-wetland waters were identified in the field according to A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (USACE 2008b), where applicable.

3.4 Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Survey
ECORP biologist Daniel Wong conducted a survey for valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) within the BSA plus a 165-foot buffer on December 19, 2024. The survey was conducted in compliance with PCCP Species Condition 8, Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (PCCP Section

6.3.5.13). The survey was intended to identify all elderberry shrubs (Sambucus spp.) with at least one stem measuring 1.0 inch or greater in diameter at ground level within the BSA, its location mapped, and thoroughly searched for evidence of valley elderberry longhorn beetle presence (i.e., exit holes).

Elderberry shrub data recorded in the field included approximate, health, and the type of habitat (riparian versus nonriparian).

No elderberry shrubs were observed during the survey.

4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Site Characteristics and Land Use
The BSA is located on relatively flat and gentle rolling terrain in a rural residential area. The BSA is situated at an elevational range of approximately 120 to 140 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) in the Sacramento Valley Subregion of the Greater Central Valley floristic region of California (Jepson eFlora [eds.] 2024). The average annual precipitation is approximately 36.12 inches, falling as rain at the Auburn, CA station, approximately 5.0 miles from the BSA. (NOAA 2024a). The average winter low temperature is is 38.3 degrees Fahrenheit and the average summer high temperature is 90.1 degrees Fahrenheit.

The BSA is primarily an agricultural field of cultivated perennial ryegrass (Festuca perennis). Auburn Creek flows along the northern boundary of the site, and a residential structure is located in the northeast corner of the BSA. The BSA is in the Foothill Potential Future Growth Area of the PCCP and Plan Area A.

Vegetation communities and plant species composition are described in further detail in Section 4.3.

Land uses surrounding the BSA include rural and suburban residential development. Figure 2 provides an overview of the Project setting, including existing land uses within and adjacent to the BSA.

Representative photographs of the BSA are provided in Appendix B.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1237

4.2 Soils and Geology
ECORP staff obtained soil survey mapping for the BSA from the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2024a; Figure 3). Table 2 provides an overview of the soil series mapped within the BSA and key features of the soil series, such as hydric rating or presence of serpentine or gabbroic soil material.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1238
0 400
I
Scale in Feet
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Aerial_Maps\Scheiber Aerial.aprx - Scheiber Aerial 20250103 (kedwards - 1/6/2025) Figure 2. BSA Aerial View Map Date: 1/6/2025
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022), ECORP
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Map Contents
BSA - 180.00 ac.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1239
162
193
193
141
194
162
162
142
162
141
175
193
193
I
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Soils_and_Geology\Scheiber_Soils.aprx - Scheiber Soils 20250108 (kedwards - 1/8/2025) 0 400
Scale in Feet
Map Date: 1/8/2025
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022), NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database for
Placer County, CA
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Figure 3. Natural Resources Conservation
Service Soil Types
Map Features
BSA - 180.00 ac.

NRCS Soils Type
Series Number - Series Name
141 - Cometa-Fiddyment complex, 1 to 5
percent slopes
142 - Cometa-Ramona sandy loams, 1 to 5
percent slopes
162 - Kilaga loam
193 - Xerofluvents, occasionally flooded
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1240
Table 2. Soil Units Mapped within the Biological Study Area Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Parent Material Hydric Rating
141 Cometa-Fiddyment complex,
1 to 5 percent slopes Alluvium derived from granite parent material No 142 Cometa-Ramona sandy loams,
1 to 5 percent slopes Alluvium derived from granite parent material No 162 Kilaga loam Alluvium parent material No
193 Xerofluvents, occasionally flooded Fluvent soils No Source: Natural Resources Conservation Service 2024a, 2024b No soil units derived from serpentinite or gabbroic parent materials are known to occur within the BSA or its immediate vicinity (Horton 2017; Jennings et al. 1977).

4.3 Placer County Conservation Program Terrestrial Land-Cover Types and Vegetation Communities
PCCP Land Cover data (i.e., PCCP-Covered Species Modeled Habitat data) within the BSA were reviewed and are presented in Figure 4. Following the site reconnaissance, the land cover types onsite were reevaluated, and a revised PCCP Land Cover map is provided in Figure 5 and summarized in Table 3. PCCP land covers found within the BSA include Vernal Pool Complex (VPC) High, VPC Intermediate, VPC Low, and Rural Residential. Three of these land cover types are categorized as a natural communities.

Table 3. PCCP Land Cover Types within the Biological Study Area PCCP Land Cover Type Acreage
Natural Communities
Vernal Pool Complex High 7.52
Vernal Pool Complex Intermediate 126.75
Vernal Pool Complex Low 26.58
Urban (Nonnatural Communities)
Road 3.64
Rural Residential 15.52
Total of all PCCP Land Cover Types1 180.00
Notes: PCCP = Placer County Conservation Program
1The acreage value for each land cover type has been rounded to the nearest 1/100 decimal. Summation of these values may not equal the total area reported.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1241
0 400
I
Scale in Feet
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Biological_Resources\Scheiber Biological Resources.aprx - Scheiber PCCP Land Cover 20250102 (kedwards - 1/2/2025) Figure 4. PCCP Land Cover Map Date: 1/2/2025
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022), ECORP
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Map Contents
BSA - 180.00 ac.

PCCP Land Cover
Pasture - 0.04 ac.

Road - 3.02 ac.

Rural Residential - 18.57 ac.

VPC High - 7.48 ac.

VPC Intermediate - 123.73 ac.

VPC Low - 26.81 ac.

Valley Foothill Riparian Woodland - 0.35 ac.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1242
0 400
I
Scale in Feet
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Biological_Resources\Scheiber Biological Resources.aprx - Scheiber PCCP Revised Land Cover 20250102 (kedwards - 1/8/2025) Figure 5. Revised PCCP Land Cover Map Date: 1/8/2025
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022), ECORP
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Map Contents
BSA - 180.00 ac.

ECORP Revised PCCP Land Cover
Road - 3.64 ac.

Rural Residential - 15.52 ac.

VPC High - 7.52 ac.

VPC Intermediate - 126.75 ac.

VPC Low - 26.58 ac.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1243
Revisions to PCCP Land Cover include removal of Calley Foothill Riparian Woodland mapped in the northeastern portion of the BSA and addition of road land cover in the southeastern portion of the BSA based on conditions observed during the site assessment. Land cover types present within the BSA are described in the following sections based on land cover definitions from the PCCP (Placer County 2020a) and observations made during the site reconnaissance. A full list of plants observed onsite can be found in Appendix C.

4.3.1 Natural Communities

4.3.1.1 Vernal Pool Complex
A Vernal Pool Complex, as described by the PCCP, is an annual grassland which contains the presence of wetlands and swales within depressional areas of the terrain. Vernal pools require the presence of a shallow restrictive soil layer which prevents subsurface water infiltration, and an extended inundation which can support large branchiopod habitat. Differentiating itself from the Annual Grassland land cover type, is the inclusion of wetland or vernal pool endemic species such as downingia (Downingia sp.), goldfields (Lasthenia sp.), wooly marbles (Psilocarphus sp.), or white navarretia (Navarretia sp.).

This land cover type has been divided into three subcategories, based on the complexity and density of vernal pools within the landscape: VPC High, VPC Intermediate, and VPC Low. The criteria for each landcover subcategory is summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Vernal Pool Complex Landcover Relative Wetland Densities PCCP Land Cover
Type Vernal Pool Seasonal Wetlands Swales Total Vernal Pool Constituents VPC High 4.5% 4.0% 2.0% 5.0–10.5%
VPC Intermediate 1–4.5% 1.0–4.0% 1.0–2.0% 3.0–5.0%
VPC Low 0–1.0% 0.0–1.0% 0.0–1.0% 0.1–3.0%
Notes: PCCP = Placer County Conservation Program; VPC = Vernal Pool Complex

4.3.2 Urban (Nonnatural) Communities

4.3.2.1 Rural Residential
Rural Residential areas are defined in the PCCP as areas developed with 0.1 to one dwelling unit per acre and less than 70 percent tree canopy cover. Areas mapped as rural residential typically include small pockets of remnant oak woodland land-cover types, often with shrubs and lower branches cleared to reduce fuel loads and small paddocks grazed by a variety of livestock. Large residential lots may have most of the native vegetation removed and replaced with mowed annual grassland, lawns, and widely scattered trees (Placer County 2020a).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1244
The Rural Residential land cover type is found along the northern boundary of the BSA and includes a residence and revegetated spoils piles likely from local construction sites. The Rural Residential land cover type is composed of vegetation characteristic of the surrounding woodland found onsite.

4.4 Aquatic Resources
ECORP conducted an Aquatic Resources Delineation for the BSA (ECORP 2024). A total of 3.689 acre of aquatic resources were mapped within the BSA. The aquatic features identified onsite include seasonal wetlands, seasonal wetland swales, and vernal pools (Figure 6). These features are further described in the following sections.

4.4.1.1 Seasonal Wetland
Seasonal wetlands are ephemerally wet due to accumulation of surface runoff and rainwater within lowlying areas. Inundation periods tend to be relatively short and they are commonly dominated by nonnative annual and sometimes perennial hydrophytic species. Several seasonal wetlands were mapped within the BSA. The seasonal wetlands within the BSA were dominated by perennial ryegrass, and prostrate knotweed (Polygonum aviculare).

4.4.1.2 Seasonal Wetland Swale
Seasonal wetland swales are generally linear wetland features that convey precipitation runoff and support a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology indicators, but do not exhibit an ordinary high water mark. These are typically inundated for short periods during and immediately after rain events, but usually maintain soil saturation for longer periods during the wet season. Seasonal wetland swales were mapped throughout the BSA. The seasonal wetland swales within the BSA were primarily dominated by perennial ryegrass and hyssop loosestrife (Lythrum hyssopifolia).

4.4.1.3 Vernal Pool
Vernal pools are topographic basins within a grassland community that are typically underlain with an impermeable or semi-permeable soil layer near the surface, such as a hardpan or duripan. Direct rainfall and surface runoff inundate the pools during the wet season. The pools typically remain inundated and/or saturated through spring and are dry by late spring through the following wet season. Vernal pools are scattered throughout the site. The dominant plant species observed within vernal pools include Hyssop loostrife and Great Valley button-celery (Eryngium castrense). Other species observed within vernal pools include slender popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys stipitatus).

4.4.2 Placer County Conservation Program Stream System
Baseline PCCP Stream System data was reviewed and field verified. During the field reconnaissance and aquatic resources delineation, approximately 19.90 acres of the PCCP Stream System were mapped within the BSA. Auburn Ravine, directly north of the BSA, is part of the PCCP Stream System which includes a 100-year floodplain buffer (Placer County 2020b; Figure 7). However, the Auburn Ravine does not flow through the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1245
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1246
A!
A!
Auburn Ravine
65 Moore Rd
65 Moore Rd
Mazzolo Dr
Tara Bella Dr
Torino Way
Marina Grande Way
SW-01
SW-02
SW-03
SW-04
VP-05
SW-06
VP-07
VP-08
SW-09
SW-10
SW-11
SW-12
VP-13
VP-14
SW-15
VP-17 VP-16
SW-18
VP-19
VP-20
SW-21
VP-22
VP-23
VP-24
VP-25
VP-26
SWS-01
SWS-02
SW-27
SWS-03
SWS-04
SWS-05
SWS-06
SWS-07
SWS-08
SWS-09
SWS-10

38.88225297,
-121.32293584

38.87353336,
-121.33065981
Map Contents
BSA - 180.00 ac.
!A Reference Coordinates
Aquatic Resources - 3.689 ac.

Seasonal Wetland - 0.519 ac.

Seasonal Wetland Swale - 1.300 ac.

Vernal Pool - 1.870 ac.
1 Subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers verification. This exhibit depicts information and data produced in accord with the wetland delineation methods described in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region Version 2.0 as well as the Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Division Regulatory Program as amended on February 10, 2016, and conforms to Sacramento District specifications. However, feature boundaries have not been legally surveyed and may be subject to minor adjustments if more accurate locations are required.
* The acreage value for each feature has been rounded to the nearest 1/1000 decimal. Summation of these values may not equal the total potential Waters of the U.S. acreage reported.

Photo Source: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2023)
Boundary Source: MSCE
Delineator(s): Stephanie Castle and Keith Kwan
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet 0 400
I
Scale in Feet
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Jurisdictional_Delineation\Scheiber ARD.aprx - Scheiber ARD Draft 20241220 (kedwards - 12/20/2024) Figure 6. Aquatic Resources Delineation Map Date: 12/20/2024 2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project 1 inch = 400 ft.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1247
0 400
I
Scale in Feet
Location: N:\2021\2021-245 Scheiber Property Lincoln\MAPS\Biological_Resources\Scheiber Biological Resources.aprx - Scheiber PCCP Stream System 20250103 (kedwards - 1/3/2025) Figure 7. PCCP Stream System Map Date: 1/3/2025
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022), ECORP
2021-245.01 Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Map Contents
BSA - 180.00 ac.

PCCP Stream System Impacted - 19.90 ac.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1248

4.5 Wildlife
The BSA provides habitat for a variety of wildlife species. Wildlife species observed onsite during the site reconnaissance included great horned owl (Bubo virginianus), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and great blue heron (Ardea herodias). A list of wildlife species observed in the BSA is provided in Appendix D.

4.6 Special-Status Species
Table 5 presents the list of special-status plant and animal species identified through the literature review.

For each species, the table provides the listing status, a brief description of habitat requirements and/or species ecology, a determination of the potential to occur within the BSA, and the rationale for that determination. The potential for each species to occur onsite was assessed using the following criteria:
 Present – Species was observed during the site visit or is known to occur within the BSA based on recent documented occurrences within the CNDDB or other literature.  Potential to Occur – Suitable habitat (including soils and elevation requirements) occurs in the BSA and the species is known or expected to occur in the Project vicinity based on available data sources or professional knowledge/experience.
 Low Potential to Occur – Marginal or limited amounts of habitat occur or the species is not known to occur in the vicinity of the Project based on CNDDB records and other available information.  Presumed Absent – No suitable habitat (including soils and elevation requirements) or the species is not known to occur within the vicinity of the Project based on CNDDB records and other documentation.

Following Table 5 is a brief description and discussion of each special-status species that was determined to have potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1249
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Plants
Mexican mosquito fern
(Azolla microphylla) – – 4.2
Marshes and swamps, ponds
or slow–moving bodies of
water.

Elevation: 100–330 feet
Bloom Period: August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Big-scale balsamroot
(Balsamorhiza
macrolepis)
– – 1B.2
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and valley and
foothill grassland, sometimes
on serpentine soils.

Elevation: 150–5,100 feet
Bloom Period: March–June
Low Potential to
Occur. The annual
grassland within the
Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
marginally suitable
habitat for this
species; there are
only two extant
occurrences in the
vicinity, both of
which are historic
with no recent
observations.

Valley brodiaea
(Brodiaea rosea ssp.
vallicola)
– – 4.2
Occurs in old alluvial terraces
and silt, sandy, or gravelly soils
in vernal pools and swales
within valley and foothill
grassland.

Elevation: 35–1,100 feet
Bloom Period: April–May
Low Potential to
Occur. The wetlands
within the Vernal
Pool Complexes of
the BSA may provide
marginally suitable
habitat for this
species.

Sierra foothills
brodiaea
(Brodiaea sierrae)
– – 4.3
Usually found on serpentine or
gabbroic soils within chaparral
or cismontane woodland.

Elevation: 165–3,215 feet
Bloom Period: May–August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1250
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Spicate calycadenia
(Calycadenia spicata) – – 1B.3
Adobe, clay, disturbed areas,
dry, gravelly, openings,
roadsides, and rocky sites
within cismontane woodland
and valley and foothill
grassland.

Elevation: 130–4,595 feet
Bloom Period: May–September
Low Potential to
Occur. The annual
grassland within the
Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
marginally suitable
habitat for this
species.

Hispid salty bird’sbeak
(Chloropyron molle ssp.
hispidum)
– – 1B.1
Alkaline soils in meadows and
seeps, playas, and valley and
foothill grasslands.

Elevation: 5–510 feet
Bloom Period: June–September
Presumed Absent.

There is no alkaline
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Brandegee’s clarkia
(Clarkia biloba ssp.
brandegeeae)
– – 4.2
Chaparral, cismontane
woodlands, and lower
montane coniferous forest
often along roadcuts.

Elevation: 245–3,000 feet
Bloom Period: May–July
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Dwarf downingia
(Downingia pusilla) – – 2B.2
Mesic areas in valley and
foothill grassland, and vernal
pools. Species has also been
found in disturbed areas such
as tire ruts and scraped
depressions (CDFW 2024a).

Elevation: 5–1,460 feet
Bloom Period: March–May
Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Stinkbells
(Fritillaria agrestis) – – 4.2
Clay and sometimes serpentine
soils in chaparral, cismontane
woodland, pinyon and juniper
woodland, and valley and
foothill grassland.

Elevation: 35–5,100 feet
Bloom Period: March–June
Potential to Occur.

The annual
grassland within the
Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1251
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Boggs Lake hedgehyssop
(Gratiola heterosepala)
– CE 1B.2
Clay substrates of marshes and
swamps (lake margins) and
vernal pools.

Elevation: 35–7,790 feet
Bloom Period: April–August
Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Woolly rose-mallow
(Hibiscus lasiocarpos
var. occidentalis)
– – 1B.2
Marshes and freshwater
swamps (river banks and low
peat islands in sloughs), and
riprap on sides of levees.

Elevation: 0–395 feet
Bloom Period: June–September
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Ahart’s dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus
var. ahartii)
– – 1B.2
Mesic areas in valley and
foothill grassland. Species has
an affinity for slight
disturbance such as farmed
fields (USFWS 2005).

Elevation: 100–750 feet
Bloom Period: March–May
Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Red Bluff dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus
var. leiospermus)
– – 1B.1
Vernally mesic areas in
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, meadows and
seeps, valley and foothill
grassland, and vernal pools.

Elevation: 115–4,100 feet
Bloom Period: March–June
Presumed Absent.

The BSA is outside
the known
geographic range
for this species
(CDFW 2024a).

Legenere
(Legenere limosa) – – 1B.1
Various seasonally inundated
areas including wetlands,
wetland swales, marshes,
vernal pools, artificial ponds,
and floodplains of intermittent
drainages (USFWS 2005).

Elevation: 5–2,885 feet
Bloom Period: April–June
Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1252
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Bristly leptosiphon
(Leptosiphon aureus) – – 4.2
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal prairie, and
valley and foothill grassland.

Elevation: 180–4,920 feet
Bloom Period: April–July
Potential to Occur.

The annual
grassland within the
Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Humboldt lily
(Lilium humboldtii ssp.
humboldtii)
– – 4.2
Occurs in openings within
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and lower montane
coniferous forest.

Elevation: 295–4,200 feet
Bloom Period: May–July
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Sacramento Orcutt
grass
(Orcuttia viscida)
FE CE 1B.1
Vernal pools.

Elevation: 100–330 feet
Bloom Period: April–July
Potential to occur.

The Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Pincushion navarretia
(Navarretia myersii ssp.
myersii)
– – 1B.1
Often acidic soils in vernal
pools.

Elevation: 65–1,085 feet
Bloom Period: April–May
Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the Vernal Pool
Complexes of the
BSA may provide
suitable habitat for
this species.

Sanford’s arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii) – – 1B.2
Shallow marshes and
freshwater swamps.

Elevation: 0–2,135 feet
Bloom Period: May–October
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Oval-leaved viburnum
(Viburnum ellipticum) – – 2B.3
Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and lower montane
coniferous forest communities.

Elevation: 705–4,595 feet
Bloom Period: May–June
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1253
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Brazilian watermeal
(Wolffia brasiliensis) – – 2B.3
Assorted shallow freshwater
marshes and swamps.

Elevation: 65–330 feet
Bloom Period: April–December
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Invertebrates
Conservancy fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta
conservatio)
FE – – Vernal pools/wetlands.

Survey Period: November-April
Low Potential to
Occur. The vernal
pools within the BSA
represent marginally
suitable habitat for
this species.

Vernal pool fairy
shrimp
(Branchinecta lynchi)
FT – – Vernal pools/wetlands.

Survey Period: November–April
Potential to Occur.

The vernal pools and
seasonal wetlands
within the BSA
represent suitable
habitat for this
species.

Crotch’s bumble bee
(Bombus crotchii) – CC –
Primarily nests underground,
found in variety of habitats
including open grasslands,
shrublands, chaparral, desert
margins, and semi-urban
settings, from the California
coast east to the Sierra
Cascade and from Redding
south to Mexico.

Survey Period: FebruaryOctober (Preferably AprilAugust) Potential to occur.

The annual
grasslands within
the BSA represent
suitable habitat for
this species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1254
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Monarch butterfly
(Danaus plexippus)
FC – –
Adult monarchs west of the
Rocky Mountains typically
overwinter in sheltered
wooded groves of Monterey
pine, Monterey cypress, and
gum eucalyptus along coastal
California, then disperse in
spring throughout California,
Nevada, Arizona, and parts of
Oregon and Washington.

Adults require milkweed and
additional nectar sources
during the breeding season.

Larval caterpillars feed
exclusively on milkweed.

Survey Period: Any season
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
wintering or
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Valley elderberry
longhorn beetle
(Desmocerus
californicus dimorphus)
FT – –
Elderberry (Sambucus sp.)
shrubs.

Survey Period: Any season
Presumed Absent.

There are no
elderberry shrubs
within the BSA.

Vernal pool tadpole
shrimp
(Lepidurus packardi)
FE – – Vernal pools/wetlands.

Survey Period: November-April
Potential to Occur.

The vernal pools and
seasonal wetlands
within the BSA
represent suitable
habitat for this
species.

Fish
Green sturgeon
(Acipenser medirostris)
FT – SSC
Anadromous; undammed coldwater rivers having relatively deep pools with large
substrates.

Survey Period: N/A
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Steelhead (CA Central
Valley DPS)
(Oncorhynchus mykiss
irideus)
FT – SSC
Fast-flowing, well-oxygenated
rivers and streams below dams
in the Sacramento and San
Joaquin River systems.

Survey Period: N/A
Presumed Absent.

The DPS is present
and occurs
seasonally in Auburn
Ravine, and is
designated critical
habitat. However,
Auburn Ravine is
outside of the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1255
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Chinook salmon
(Central Valley fall/late
fall-run ESU)
(Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha)
– – SSC
Undammed rivers, streams,
creeks in the Sacramento and
San Joaquin River systems.

Survey Period: N/A
Presumed Absent.

The ESU is present
and occurs
seasonally in Auburn
Ravine, however
Auburn Ravine is
outside of the BSA.

Pacific lamprey
(Entosphenus
tridentatus)
– – SSC
Undammed rivers, streams,
creeks in the Sacramento and
San Joaquin River systems.

Survey Period: N/A
Presumed Absent.

The species is
present and occurs
seasonally in Auburn
Ravine, however
Auburn Ravine is
outside of the BSA.

Amphibians
Western spadefoot
(Northern DPS)
(Spea hammondii)
FPT – SSC
California endemic species of
vernal pools, swales, and
seasonal wetlands in grassland,
scrub and woodland habitats
throughout the Central Valley
and South Coast Ranges.

Prefers open areas with sandy
or gravelly soils.

Survey Period: Winter-Spring.

Potential to Occur.

The wetlands within
the BSA represent
suitable habitat for
this species.

Foothill yellow-legged
frog
Northeast/Northern
Sierra Clade
(Rana boylii)
– CT SSC
Partly shaded shallow streams
and riffles in variety of
habitats. Needs cobble-sized
substrate for egg-laying and at
least 15 weeks of permanent
water to attain metamorphosis.

Can be active all year in
warmer locations; become
inactive or hibernate in colder
climates. Yuba River to Middle
Fork American River and Sutter
Buttes.

Survey Period: May–October.

Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1256
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
California red-legged
frog
(Rana draytonii)
FT – SSC
Lowlands and foothills of the
northern and southern Coast
Ranges and Sierra Nevada.

Found in deep standing or
flowing water with dense
shrubby or emergent riparian
vegetation; requires 11-20
weeks of permanent water for
larval development. Adults
require aestivation habitat to
endure summer dry down.

Survey Period: January – Sept.

Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Reptiles
Northwestern pond
turtle
(Actinemys marmorata)
FPT – SSC
Requires basking sites and
upland habitats up to 0.5
kilometer from water for egg
laying. Uses ponds, streams,
detention basins, and irrigation
ditches.

Survey Period: AprilSeptember
Potential to Occur.

The annual
grassland within the
BSA represents
suitable upland
nesting habitat for
this species.

Giant garter snake
(Thamnophis gigas)
FT CT –
Freshwater ditches, sloughs,
and marshes in the Central
Valley. Almost extirpated from
the southern parts of its range.

Survey Period: April-October
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Birds
Western grebe
(Aechmophorus
occidentalis)
– – BCC
Winters on salt or brackish
bays, estuaries, sheltered sea
coasts, freshwater lakes, and
rivers. Nests on freshwater
lakes and marshes with open
water bordered by emergent
vegetation.

Nesting: June-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
wintering or
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1257
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Clark’s grebe
(Aechmophorus clarkii) – – BCC
Winters on salt or brackish
bays, estuaries, sheltered sea
coasts, freshwater lakes, and
rivers. Breeds on freshwater to
brackish marshes, lakes,
reservoirs and ponds, with a
preference for large stretches
of open water fringed with
emergent vegetation.

Nesting: June-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
wintering or
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus)
FT CE –
Breeding habitat is generally
open woodland with clearings
and low, dense, scrubby
vegetation associated with
watercourses, and includes
desert riparian woodlands with
willow, Fremont’s cottonwood,
alder, walnut, box-elder, and
dense mesquite. Nests are
generally found in deciduous
hardwoods with thick bushes,
vines, or hedgerows providing
dense foliage within 10 meters
(33 feet) of ground; prefer
riparian patches of at least 81
hectares (200 acres) (Hughes
2020). Winters in South
America.

Nesting: June 15-August 15
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

California black rail
(Laterallus jamaicensis
coturniculus)
– CT CFP
Salt marsh, shallow freshwater
marsh, wet meadows, and
flooded grassy vegetation. In
California, primarily found in
coastal and Bay-Delta
communities, but also in
Sierran foothills (Butte, Yuba,
Nevada, Placer, El Dorado
counties).

Nesting: March-September
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
habitat for this
species within the
BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1258
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Marbled godwit
(Limosa fedoa) – – BCC
Nests in Montana, North and
South Dakota, Minnesota, into
Canada. Winter range along
Pacific Coast from British
Columbia south to Central
America, with small numbers
wintering in interior California.

Wintering habitat includes
coastal mudflats, meadows,
estuaries, sandy beaches,
sandflats, and salt ponds.

Migrant/Wintering in CA:

August-April
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
wintering habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Short-billed Dowitcher
(Limnodromus griseus) – – BCC
Nests in Canada, southern
Alaska; winters in coastal
California south to South
America; wintering habitat
includes coastal mudflats and
brackish lagoons.

Migrant/Wintering: lateAugust-May
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
wintering habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Willet
(Tringa semipalmata) – – BCC
Breeds locally in interior of
western North America. In
California, breeding range
includes the Klamath Basin and
Modoc Plateau and portions of
Mono and possibly Inyo
counties. Breeding habitat
includes prairies, Breeds in
wetlands and grasslands on
semiarid plains; in uplands
near brackish or saline
wetlands; prefers temporary,
seasonal, and alkali wetlands
over semipermanent and
permanent wetlands.

Nesting: April-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1259
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
California gull (nesting
colony)
(Larus californicus)
– –
BCC,
CDFW
WL
Nesting occurs in the Great
Basin, Great Plains, Mono Lake,
and south San Francisco Bay.

Breeding colonies located on
islands on natural lakes, rivers,
or reservoirs. Winters along
Pacific Coast from southern
British Columbia south to Baja
California and Mexico. In
California, winters along coast
and inland (Central Valley,
Salton Sea).

Nesting: April-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Black tern
(Chlidonias niger) – – BCC,
SSC
Breeding range includes
northeastern California, Central
Valley, Great Plains of U.S. and
Canada; winters in Central and
South America; nesting habitat
includes shallow freshwater
marsh with emergent
vegetation, prairie sloughs,
lake margins, river islands, and
cultivated rice fields.

Nesting: May-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Double-crested
cormorant
(Nannopterum
auritum)
– – CDFW
WL
Nests near ponds, lakes,
artificial impoundments, slowmoving rivers, lagoons,
estuaries, and open coastlines
and typically forages in shallow
water. Non-nesters are found
in many coastal and inland
waters.

Nesting: April-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Osprey
(Pandion haliaetus) – – CDFW
WL
Nesting habitat requires close
proximity to accessible fish,
open nest site free of
mammalian predators, and
extended ice-free season. Nest
in large trees, snags, cliffs,
transmission/ communication
towers, artificial nest platforms,
channel markers/buoys.

Nesting: April-September
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1260
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Cooper’s hawk
(Astur cooperii) – – CDFW
WL
Nests in trees in riparian
woodlands, deciduous/mixed
and evergreen forests, and
urban landscapes (Rosenfield
et al. 2024).

Nesting: March-July
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

White-tailed kite
(Elanus leucurus) – – CFP
Nesting occurs within trees in
low elevation grassland,
agricultural, wetland, oak
woodland, riparian, savannah,
and urban habitats.

Nesting: March-August
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Golden eagle
(Aquila chrysaetos) – –
CFP,
CDFW
WL
Nesting habitat includes
mountainous canyon land,
rimrock terrain of open desert
and grasslands, riparian, oak
woodland/savannah, and
chaparral. Nesting occurs on
cliff ledges, river banks, trees,
and human-made structures
(e.g., windmills, platforms, and
transmission towers). Breeding
occurs throughout California,
except the immediate coast,
Central Valley floor, Salton Sea
region, and the Colorado River
region, where they can be
found during Winter.

Nesting: February-August
Wintering in Central Valley:

October-February
Potential to Occur.

There is suitable
wintering habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Northern harrier
(Circus hudsonius) – – BCC,
SSC
Nests on the ground in open
wetlands, marshy meadows,
wet/lightly grazed pastures,
(rarely) freshwater/brackish
marshes, tundra, grasslands,
prairies, croplands, desert, and
shrub-steppe.

Nesting: April-September
Potential to Occur.

The annual
grassland in the BSA
that is not farmed
annually represents
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1261
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Bald eagle
(Haliaeetus
leucocephalus)
Delisted CE CFP
Typically nests in forested
areas near large bodies of
water in the northern half of
California; nest in trees and
rarely on cliffs; wintering
habitat includes forest and
woodland communities near
water bodies (e.g., rivers,
lakes), wetlands, flooded
agricultural fields, open
grasslands.

Nesting: February-September
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Swainson’s hawk
(Buteo swainsoni) – CT PCCP
Nesting occurs in trees in
agricultural, riparian, oak
woodland, scrub, and urban
landscapes. Forages over
grassland, agricultural lands,
particularly during
disking/harvesting, irrigated
pastures.

Nesting: March-August
Potential to Occur.

The larger trees
within the BSA
represent suitable
breeding habitat,
and the annual
grassland is suitable
foraging habitat for
this species .

Western screech-owl
(Megascops kennicottii) – – BCC
Nests in tree cavities excavated
by woodpeckers, natural
cavities in trees, and nest
boxes. Breeding habitat
includes vegetation
communities with deciduous
trees, such as riparian, desert,
oak and pine-oak woodlands,
and urban/suburban parks.

Nesting: March-July
Potential to Occur.

The larger trees that
support cavities
within the BSA
represent suitable
habitat for this
species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1262
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Western burrowing
owl
(Athene cunicularia)
– CC
BCC,
SSC,
PCCP
Nests in burrows or burrow
surrogates in open, treeless,
areas within grassland, steppe,
and desert biomes. Often with
other burrowing mammals
(e.g., prairie dogs, California
ground squirrels). May also use
human-landscapes such as
agricultural fields, golf courses,
cemeteries, roadside, airports,
vacant urban lots, and
fairgrounds.

Nesting: February-August
Potential to Occur.

The annual
grassland within the
BSA that is not
annually farmed
represents
potentially suitable
habitat for this
species.

Nuttall's woodpecker
(Dryobates nuttallii) – – BCC
Resident from northern
California south to Baja
California. Nests in tree cavities
in oak woodlands and riparian
woodlands.

Nesting: April-July
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Merlin
(Falco columbarius) – – CDFW
WL
Breeds in Oregon, Washington
north into Canada. Winters in
southern Canada to South
America, including California.

Breeds near forest openings,
fragmented woodlots, and
riparian areas. Wintering
habitat includes wide variety,
open forests, grasslands, tidal
flats, plains, and urban
settings.

Wintering in the Central Valley:

September-April; does not
breed in California.

Low Potential to
Occur. This species
does not nest in the
region but is a
common migrant,
but there is suitable
foraging habitat for
this species.

Yellow-billed magpie
(Pica nuttallii) – – BCC
Endemic to California; found in
the Central Valley and coast
range south of San Francisco
Bay and north of Los Angeles
County; nesting habitat
includes oak savannah within
large expanses of open
ground; also found in urban
parklike settings.

Nesting: April-June
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1263
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Oak titmouse
(Baeolophus inornatus) – – BCC
Nests in tree cavities within dry
oak or oak-pine woodland and
riparian; where oaks are
absent, they nest in juniper
woodland, open forests (gray,
Jeffrey, Coulter, pinyon pines
and Joshua tree).

Nesting: March-July
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Bank swallow
(Riparia riparia) – CT –
Nests colonially along coasts,
rivers, streams, lakes,
reservoirs, and wetlands in
vertical banks, cliffs, and bluffs
in alluvial, friable soils. May
also nest in sand, gravel
quarries and road cuts. In
California, breeding range
includes northern and central
California.

Nesting: May-July
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Purple martin
(Progne subis) – – SSC
In California, breeds along
coast range, Cascade-northern
Sierra Nevada region and
isolated population in
Sacramento. Nesting habitat
includes montane forests,
Pacific lowlands with dead
snags; the isolated Sacramento
population nests in weep holes
under elevated
highways/bridges. Winters in
South America.

Nesting: May-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Wrentit
(Chamaea fasciata) – – BCC
Coastal sage scrub, northern
coastal scrub, chaparral, dense
understory of riparian
woodlands, riparian scrub,
coyote brush and blackberry
thickets, and dense thickets in
suburban parks and gardens.

Nesting: March-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1264
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Grasshopper sparrow
(Ammodramus
savannarum)
– – BCC,
SSC
In California, breeding range
includes most coastal counties
south to Baja California;
western Sacramento Valley and
western edge of Sierra Nevada
region. Nests in moderately
open grasslands and prairies
with patchy bare ground.

Avoids grasslands with
extensive shrub cover; more
likely to occupy large tracts of
habitat than small fragments;
removal of grass cover by
grazing often detrimental.

Nesting: May-August
Low Potential to
Occur. The annual
grassland within the
BSA that is not
annually farmed
represents
marginally suitable
breeding habitat for
this species.

Belding's savannah
sparrow
(Passerculus
sandwichensis beldingi)
– CE BCC
Resident coastally from Point
Conception south into Baja
California; coastal salt marsh.

Year-round resident; nests
March-August
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Song sparrow
"Modesto"
(Melospiza melodia
heermanni)
– – SSC
Resident in central and
southwest California, including
Central Valley; nests in marsh,
scrub habitat.

Nesting: April-June
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Santa Barbara song
sparrow
(Melospiza melodia
graminea)
– – BCC
Breeding habitat includes
dense shrubs and thickets of
giant coreopsis (Coreopsis
gigantea), grasslands with
scattered shrubs, ArtemisiaOpuntia grass associations, and dense grasslands. Resident
on California Channel Islands
(San Clemente, San Miguel,
Santa Cruz, Santa Rosa,
Anacapa) and Isla Los
Coronados, Baja California.;
nests February-July
Presumed Absent.

Outside known and
historic range of this
species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1265
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Yellow-breasted Chat
(Icteria virens) – – SSC
Early successional riparian
habitats with a well-developed
shrub layer and an open
canopy. Narrow borders of
streams, creeks, sloughs, and
rivers. Taller trees like
cottonwood (Populus sp.) and
alder (Alnus sp.) are necessary
for song perches.

Nesting: March-September
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Tricolored blackbird
(Agelaius tricolor) – CT BCC,
SSC
Breeds locally west of CascadeSierra Nevada and
southeastern deserts from
Humboldt and Shasta counties
south to San Bernardino,
Riverside and San Diego
counties. Central California,
Sierra Nevada foothills and
Central Valley, Siskiyou, Modoc
and Lassen counties. Nests
colonially in freshwater marsh,
blackberry bramble, milk
thistle, triticale fields, weedy
(mustard, mallow) fields, giant
cane, safflower, stinging
nettles, tamarisk, riparian
scrublands and forests,
fiddleneck and fava bean
fields. (Beedy et al. 2020)
Nesting: March-August
Potential to Occur.

There is no potential
breeding habitat
within the BSA but
the annual grassland
onsite represents
suitable foraging
habitat.

Bullock’s oriole
(Icterus bullockii) – – BCC
Breeding habitat includes
riparian and oak woodlands.

Nesting: March-July
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
suitable breeding
habitat for this
species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1266
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Saltmarsh common
yellowthroat
(Geothlypis trichas
sinuosa)
– – BCC,
SSC
Breeds in salt marshes of San
Francisco Bay; winters San
Francisco south along coast to
San Diego County.

Nesting: March-July
Presumed Absent.

There is no suitable
breeding habitat for
this species within
the BSA.

Yellow warbler
(Setophaga petechia) – – SSC
Breeding range includes most
of California, except Central
Valley (isolated breeding
locales on Valley floor,
Stanislaus, Colusa, and Butte
counties), Sierra Nevada range
above tree line, and
southeastern deserts. Nesting
habitat includes riparian
vegetation near streams and
meadows. Winters in Mexico
south to South America.

Nesting: May-August
Potential to Occur.

This species does
not nest in the
region but is a
common migrant.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1267
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
Mammals
Pallid bat
(Antrozous pallidus) – – SSC
Crevices in rocky outcrops and
cliffs, caves, mines, trees (e.g.,
basal hollows of redwoods,
cavities of oaks, exfoliating
pine and oak bark, deciduous
trees in riparian areas, and fruit
trees in orchards). Also roosts
in various human structures
such as bridges, barns,
porches, bat boxes, and human
occupied as well as vacant
buildings (WBWG 2024).

Survey Period: AprilSeptember
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
potentially suitable
roosting habitat for
this species.

Townsend's big-eared
bat
(Corynorhinus
townsendii)
– – SSC
Occurs throughout the west
and is distributed from the
southern portion of British
Columbia south along the
Pacific coast to central Mexico
and east into the Great Plains,
with isolated populations
occurring in the central and
eastern United States. It has
been reported in a wide variety
of habitat types ranging from
sea level to 3,300 meters.

Habitat associations include:
coniferous forests, mixed
meso-phytic forests, deserts,
native prairies, riparian
communities, active
agricultural areas, and coastal
habitat types. Roosting can
occur within caves, mines,
buildings, rock crevices, trees.

Survey Period: AprilSeptember
Potential to Occur.

The trees within the
BSA represent
potentially suitable
roosting habitat for
this species.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1268
Table 5. Special-Status Species Evaluation
Common Name
(Scientific Name)
Status
Habitat Description/
Species Ecology
Potential to
Occur within the

ESA BSA
California
ESA/
NPPA
Other
American badger
(Taxidea taxus) – – SSC
Drier open stages of most
shrub, forest, and herbaceous
habitats with friable soils.

Survey Period: Any season
Presumed Absent.

The BSA does not
meet contain large,
open ranges for this
species.

Notes: BSA = Biological Study Area; CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife; CRPR = California Rare Plant Rank; Delisted = Formally Delisted; DPS = Distinct Population Segment; ESA = Endangered Species Act; ESU = Evolutionarily Significant Unit; N/A = Not Applicable; NPPA = Native Plant Protection Act; PCCP = Placer County Conservation Program; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; WBWG = Western Bat Working Group
Status Codes:

FC Candidate for ESA listing as Threatened or Endangered FE ESA listed, Endangered
FPT Formally Proposed for ESA listing as Threatened
FT ESA listed, Threatened
CC Candidate for California ESA listing as Endangered or Threatened CE California ESA- or NPPA listed, Endangered
CFP California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species (§ 3511-birds, § 4700-mammals, § 5050-reptiles/amphibians)
CT California ESA- or NPPA-listed, Threatened
CDFW WL CDFW Watch List
BCC USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern (USFWS 2021)
PCCP PCCP-Covered Species
SSC CDFW Species of Special Concern
1B CRPR/Rare or Endangered in California and elsewhere
2B CRPR/Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere 4 CRPR/Plants of Limited Distribution – A Watch List

0.1 Threat Rank/Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat)

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

0.3 Threat Rank/Not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known) Sources: Beedy et al. 2020; CDFW 2024a; Hughes 2020; Rosenfield et al. 2024; USFWS 2005, 2021; WBWG 2024

4.6.1 Plants
Based on the literature review, 21 special-status plant species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). However, upon further analysis and after the site visit, 10 of those species are presumed to be absent from the BSA due to the lack of suitable habitat or because the BSA is outside the known geographical or elevational range for the species. No further discussion of those Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1269
species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining species that have potential to occur within the BSA is presented below.

4.6.1.1 Big-Scale Balsamroot
Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous perennial that occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodlands, valley and foothill grassland, and sometimes on serpentinite soils. Bigscale balsamroot blooms from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 150 to 5,100 feet above MSL. Big-scale balsamroot is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Amador, Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Lake, Mariposa, Napa, Placer, Santa Clara, Shasta, Solano, Sonoma, Tehama, and Tuolumne counties (CNPS 2024a).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrence of big-scale balsamroot within 5 miles of the BSA. The only occurrence in the vicinity of the BSA is historic and has not been observed for over 38 years (CDFW 2024a). However, the annual grassland within Vernal Pool Complex provides marginally suitable habitat for this species. Big-scale balsamroot has low potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.2 Valley Brodiaea
Valley brodiaea (Brodiaea rosea ssp. vallicola) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is a bulbiferous perennial herb that occurs in old alluvial terraces and silty, sandy, or gravelly soils in vernal pools, swales, and valley and foothill grassland.

Valley brodiaea blooms from April through May (sometimes June) and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 35 to 1,100 feet above MSL. Valley brodiaea is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Calaveras, Nevada, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Sutter, and Yuba counties (CNPS 2024a).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of valley brodiaea within 5 miles of the BSA. However, the Vernal Pool Complex provides marginally suitable habitat for this species. Valley brodiaea has low potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.3 Spicate Calycadenia
Spicate calycadenia (Calycadenia spicata) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.3 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in dry, adobe, clay, gravelly, rocky, or disturbed areas, openings, and roadsides within cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grassland. Spicate calycadenia blooms from May through September and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 130 to 4,595 feet above MSL. Spicate calycadenia is endemic to California; the current range includes Amador, Butte, Calaveras, El Dorado, Fresno, Kern, Nevada, Placer. Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tulare, Tuolumne, and Yuba Counties (CNPS 2024a).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of spicate calycadenia within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). However, the Vernal Pool Complex provides marginally suitable habitat for this species. Spicate calycadenia has low potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1270

4.6.1.4 Dwarf Downingia
Dwarf downingia (Downingia pusilla) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 2B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools and mesic areas of valley and foothill grasslands. Dwarf downingia has also been found in manmade features such as tire ruts, scraped depressions, stock ponds, and roadside ditches. This species blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 5 to 1,460 feet above MSL. The current range of this species in California includes Fresno, Merced, Napa, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Yuba counties (CNPS 2024a).

There are eight documented CNDDB occurrences of dwarf downingia within 5 miles of the BSA. The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Dwarf downingia has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.5 Stinkbells
Stinkbells (Fritillaria agrestis) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is a perennial bulbiferous herb that occurs in clay, sometimes serpentinite areas in chaparral, cismontane woodland, pinyon and juniper woodland, and valley and foothill grassland. Stinkbells bloom from March through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 35 to 5,100 feet above MSL. This species is endemic to California; its current range includes Alameda, Colusa, Contra Costa, Fresno, Kern, Kings, Mendocino, Merced, Monterey, Mariposa, Placer, Sacramento, Santa Barbara, San Benito, Santa Clara, San Luis Obispo, San Mateo, Solano, Stanislaus, Tulare, Tuolumne, Ventura, Yolo, and Yuba counties, and is considered to be extirpated from San Mateo County (CNPS 2024a).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of stinkbells within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The annual grassland within Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Stinkbells has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.6 Boggs Lake Hedge-Hyssop
Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop (Gratiola heterosepala) is not listed pursuant to the federal ESA, is listed as endangered pursuant to the California ESA, and is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in clay in marshes and swamps (lake margins), and vernal pools. Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop blooms from April through August and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 35 to 7,790 feet above MSL. The current range of this species in California includes Fresno, Lake, Lassen, Madera, Mendocino, Merced, Modoc, Placer, Sacramento, Shasta, Siskiyou, San Joaquin, Solano, Sonoma, and Tehama counties (CNPS 2024a).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrences of Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Boggs Lake hedgehyssop has potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1271

4.6.1.7 Ahart’s Dwarf Rush
Ahart’s dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. ahartii) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.2 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in mesic areas in valley and foothill grasslands. This species also appears to have an affinity for slight disturbance since it has been found on farmed fields and gopher turnings (USFWS 2005). Ahart’s dwarf rush blooms from March through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 100 to 750 feet above MSL (USFWS 2005). Ahart’s dwarf rush is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Butte, Calaveras, Placer, Sacramento, Tehama, and Yuba counties (CNPS 2024a).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of Ahart’s dwarf rush within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Ahart’s dwarf rush has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.8 Legenere
Legenere (Legenere limosa) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in a variety of seasonally inundated environments including wetlands, wetland swales, marshes, vernal pools, artificial ponds, and floodplains of intermittent drainages (USFWS 2005). Legenere blooms from April through June and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 5 feet to 2,885 feet above MSL. Legenere is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Lake, Monterey, Napa, Placer, Sacramento, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, Shasta, San Mateo, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Tehama, and Yuba counties. It is believed to be extirpated from Stanislaus County (CNPS 2024a).

There are three documented CNDDB occurrences of legenere within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Legenere has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.9 Bristly Leptosiphon
Bristly leptosiphon (Leptosiphon aureus) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CRPR 4.2 species. This species is an annual herb that occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, and valley and foothill grassland. Bristly leptosiphon blooms from April through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 180 to 4,920 feet above MSL. Bristly leptosiphon is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Alameda, Butte, Colusa, Humboldt, Kern, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Napa, Placer, San Benito, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Solano, Sonoma, and Yuba counties (CNPS 2024a).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of bristly leptosiphon within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). However, the annual grassland within the Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Bristly leptosiphon has potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1272

4.6.1.10 Sacramento Orcutt Grass
Sacramento Orcutt grass (Orcuttia viscida) is listed as endangered pursuant to both the federal and California ESAs, and is designated as a CRPR 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools. The median area of occupied pools discovered prior to 1988 was 0.69 acre and ranged from 0.25 to 2.03 acres (USFWS 2005). Sacramento Orcutt grass blooms from April through July and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 100 to 330 feet above MSL. Sacramento Orcutt grass is endemic to California and to the southeastern Sacramento Valley (Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998, as cited in USFWS 2005), with all known occurrences restricted to Sacramento County. Known occurrences of this species within the general region are limited to a small area east of Mather Field, Phoenix Field Ecological Reserve, Phoenix Park (introduced population), and an area near Rancho Seco Lake (USFWS 2005; CNPS 2025).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of bristly Sacramento Orcutt grass within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). However, the Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species.

Sacramento Orcutt grass has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.1.11 Pincushion Navarretia
Pincushion navarretia (Navarretia myersii ssp. myersii) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs, but is designated as a CNPS 1B.1 species. This species is an herbaceous annual that occurs in vernal pools that are often acidic. Pincushion navarretia blooms from April through May and is known to occur at elevations ranging from 65 to 1,085 feet above MSL. Pincushion navarretia is endemic to California; the current range of this species includes Amador, Calaveras, Madera, Merced, Placer, and Sacramento counties (CNPS 2024a).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrence of pincushion navarretia within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Pincushion navarretia has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.2 Invertebrates
Based on the literature review, six special-status invertebrate species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). However, upon further analysis and after the site visit, two species are presumed to be absent from the BSA due to lack of suitable habitat or because the BSA is outside of the geographic range for the species. No further discussion of these species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining species that has the potential to occur within the BSA is presented below.

4.6.2.1 Conservancy Fairy Shrimp
The conservancy fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio) is listed as endangered pursuant to the federal ESA, and is a PCCP-Covered Species. This fairy shrimp is endemic to California and is found in grasslands in the northern two thirds of the Central Valley (Eriksen and Belk 1999). The historic distribution of conservancy fairy shrimp is not known but it likely occurred throughout a large portion of the Central Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1273
Valley and Southern Coastal regions of California (USFWS 2005). Until recently, this species has only been known from a few disjunct populations in California, including four clustered populations in the Vina Plains area in Tehama and Butte counties, Jepson Prairie Preserve in Solano County, The Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge in Glenn County, the Tule Ranch Unit of CDFW’s Yolo basin Wildlife Area in Yolo County, the Grasslands Ecological Area in Merced County, one location in Stanislaus County, three locations in the Southern Sierra Foothills Vernal Pool Region, and two locations near the Santa Barbara Vernal Pool Region (USFWS 2003, 2006). In April 2007, the USFWS reported that a single conservancy fairy shrimp was documented in one vernal pool within the Mariner Conservation Bank in Placer County near the city of Lincoln.

Like vernal pool fairy shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp, the life cycle of conservancy fairy shrimp is reliant on the ephemeral conditions of its vernal habitat. It inhabits a variety of different landforms and soil types and is often found in large, turbid pools with low conductivity, total dissolved solids, and alkalinity (USFWS 2005). The largest threat to conservancy fairy shrimp is loss of habitat through urbanization. Other threats include water supply/flood control projects and agricultural conversion (USFWS 1994).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrence of conservancy shrimp within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). However, the Vernal Pool Complex provides marginally suitable habitat for this species.

Conservancy has low potential to occur onsite.

4.6.2.2 Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp
The vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) is listed as threatened pursuant to the federal ESA, and is a PCCP-Covered Species. Vernal pool fairy shrimp may occur in seasonal ponds, vernal pools, and swales during the wet season, which generally occurs from December through May. This species can be found in a variety of pool sizes, ranging from less than 0.001 acre to more than 24.5 acres (Eriksen and Belk 1999). The shrimp hatch from cysts when colder water (10°C [50°F] or less) fills the pool and mature in as few as 18 days, under optimal conditions (Eriksen and Belk 1999). At maturity, mating takes place and cysts are dropped. Vernal pool fairy shrimp occur in disjunct patches dispersed across California’s Central Valley from Shasta County to Tulare County, the central and southern Coast Ranges from northern Solano County to Ventura County, and three areas in Riverside County (USFWS 2003).

There are 29 documented CNDDB occurrences of vernal pool fairy shrimp within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Vernal pool fairy shrimp has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.3 Crotch’s Bumble Bee
The Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) is a candidate for listing as endangered under the California ESA. The historic range of the Crotch’s bumble bee extends from coastal areas east to the edges of the desert in central California south to Baja California del Norte, Mexico, excluding mountainous areas (Thorp et al. 1983; Williams et al. 2014). The species was historically common throughout the southern two-thirds of its range but is now largely absent from much of that area and is nearly extirpated from the center of its historic range, the Central Valley (Hatfield et al. 2014).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1274
The Crotch’s bumble bee inhabits open grassland and scrub habitats (Williams et al. 2014). The species visits a wide variety of flowering plants, although its very short tongue makes it best suited to forage at open flowers with short corollas (Xerces Society 2018). Plant families most commonly associated with Crotch’s bumble bee include Fabaceae, Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Lamiaceae, and Boraginaceae (Xerces Society 2018). The species primarily nests underground (Williams et al. 2014). Little is known about overwintering sites for the species, but bumble bees generally overwinter in soft, disturbed soils or under leaf litter or other debris (Goulson 2010; Williams et al. 2014). The flight period for Crotch’s bumble bee queens in California is from late February to late October, peaking in early April with a second pulse in July (Thorp et al. 1983). The flight period for workers and males is California is from late March through September with peak abundance in early July (Thorp et al. 1983).

There are no documented occurrences of Crotch’s bumblebee within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a), however the annual grassland provides suitable habitat for this species. Crotch’s bumble bee has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.3.1 Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp
The vernal pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) is listed as endangered pursuant to the federal ESA, and is a PCCP-Covered Species. This species inhabits vernal pools containing clear to highly turbid water, ranging in size from 0.001 to 89.0 acres (USFWS 1994). Vernal pool tadpole shrimp are distinguished from other vernal pool branchiopods discussed in this report by a large, shield-like carapace that covers the anterior half of their body (USFWS 2003). Cysts hatch during the wet season and the shrimp reach maturity in a few weeks. This species matures slowly and is long-lived, relative to other species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp will continue to grow as long as the pools in which they occur remain inundated, and in some instances can survive for 6 months or longer (USFWS 2003). The geographic range of vernal pool tadpole shrimp extends from Shasta County to northern Tulare County in California’s Central Valley, and in the central coast range from Solano County to Alameda County (USFWS 2003).

There are two documented CNDDB occurrences of vernal pool tadpole shrimp within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Vernal pool tadpole shrimp has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.4 Fish
Based on the literature review, four special-status fish species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). Auburn Ravine occurs along the northern boundary of the BSA and is designated critical habitat for steelhead salmon (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus). However, the channel of Auburn Ravine is approximately 500-ft outside the BSA. Therefore, special-status fish species are presumed absent from the BSA. No further discussion of special-status fish is provided in this assessment.

4.6.5 Amphibians
Based on the literature review, three special-status amphibian species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). However, upon further analysis and after the site Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1275
visit, two species were presumed to be absent from the BSA due to lack of suitable habitat or because the BSA is outside of the geographic range for the species. No further discussion of these species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining species which have the potential to occur within the BSA is presented below.

4.6.5.1 Western Spadefoot
The northern distinct population segment of western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) is proposed to be listed as threatened pursuant to the federal ESA, is not listed pursuant to the California ESA; however, it is designated as a CDFW SSC. Necessary habitat components of the western spadefoot include loose, friable soils in which to burrow in upland habitats and breeding ponds. Breeding sites include temporary rain pools, such as vernal pools and seasonal wetlands, or pools within portions of intermittent drainages (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Spadefoots spend most of their adult life within underground burrows or other suitable refugia, such as rodent burrows. In California, western spadefoot toads are known to occur from the Redding area, Shasta County southward to northwestern Baja California, at elevations below 4,475 feet (Jennings and Hayes 1994).

There are seven documented CNDDB occurrences of western spadefoot within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The Vernal Pool Complex provides suitable habitat for this species. Western spadefoot has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.6 Reptiles
Based on the literature review, two special-status reptile species were identified as having the potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). However, upon further analysis and after the site visit, one species was presumed to be absent from the BSA due to the lack of suitable habitat. A brief description of the remaining species that have the potential to occur within the BSA is presented below.

4.6.6.1 Northwestern Pond Turtle
The northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata) is proposed for listing as Threatened pursuant to the federal ESA, is considered an SSC by CDFW, and is a PCCP-Covered Species. The range of the northwestern pond turtle in California extends from the Coast Ranges on the Oregon border southward to Marin County, throughout the lower elevations and foothills of the southern Cascades and Sierra Nevada Mountains, and within the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys (Thomson et al. 2016). They can occur in a variety of waters including ponds, lakes, streams, reservoirs, rivers, settling ponds of wastewater treatment plants, and other permanent and ephemeral wetlands (Bury et al. 2012). However, in streams and other lotic features they generally require slack- or slow-water aquatic microhabitats (Jennings and Hayes 1994).

Northwestern pond turtles also require basking areas such as logs, rocks, banks, and brush piles for thermoregulation (Bury et al. 2012). Nesting sites for pond turtles are typically located in annual grasslands adjacent to a watercourse with little slope and hard, dry soil (Ashton et al. 1997). Nesting habitat soils typically display high clay or silt fraction, with few nests located in sandy soils. Nests are usually within 400 meters of a watercourse, with the majority being within 50 meters of the water’s edge (Holland 1994).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1276
PCCP modeled northwestern pond turtle aquatic habitat is defined by fresh emergent wetlands, seasonal wetland, riverine/riparian, and ponds, and modeled upland nesting habitat (nesting, burrowing habitat) is defined as any land cover type within 150 feet of aquatic habitat, except for urban/suburban, rural residential, agricultural types, barren, and disturbed land cover types (Placer County 2020a).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrence of northwestern pond turtle within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The mapped PCCP Stream System along the northern boundary provides suitable upland dispersal and nesting habitat for this species. Northwestern pond turtles have potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7 Birds
Based on the literature review, 36 special-status bird species were identified as having potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). Upon further analysis and after the site visit, 20 of those species are considered to be absent from the BSA due to the lack of suitable habitat or because the BSA is outside of the geographic range for the species. No further discussion of those species is provided in this assessment. A brief description of the remaining eight species that have potential to occur within the BSA is presented below.

4.6.7.1 Cooper's Hawk
The Cooper’s hawk (Astur cooperii) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs. However, it is a CDFW Watch List species. Typical nesting and foraging habitats include riparian woodland, dense oak woodland, and other woodlands near water. Cooper’s hawks nest throughout California from Siskiyou County to San Diego County and includes the Central Valley (Rosenfield et al. 2024). Breeding occurs from March through July, with a peak from May through July.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of Cooper’s hawk within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

The trees along Auburn Ravine represent suitable nesting habitat for this species. Cooper’s hawk has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.2 White-Tailed Kite
White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, the species is fully protected pursuant to Section 3511 of the California Fish and Game Code. This species is a common resident in the Central Valley and the entire length of the California coast, as well as all areas up to the Sierra Nevada foothills and southeastern deserts (Dunk 2020). In northern California, whitetailed kite nesting occurs from March through early August, with nesting activity peaking from March through June. Nesting occurs in trees within riparian, oak woodland, savannah, and agricultural communities that are near foraging areas such as low elevation grasslands, agricultural, meadows, farmlands, savannahs, and emergent wetlands (Dunk 2020).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of white-tailed kite within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The trees along Auburn Ravine represent suitable nesting habitat for this species. White-tailed kite has potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1277

4.6.7.3 Golden Eagle
The golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs.

However, it is fully protected according to Section 3511 of the Fish and Game Code of California and the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and is a CDFW Watch List species. Golden eagles generally nest on cliff ledges and/or large lone trees in rolling to mountainous terrain. Golden eagles nest throughout California except the flat portions of the Central Valley, the immediate coast, and portions of southeastern California (Katzner et al. 2020). Occurrences within the Central Valley are usually dispersing post-breeding birds, nonbreeding subadults, or migrants. Foraging habitat includes open grassland and savannah. Nesting occurs from February through August.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of golden eagle within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

The VPC landcover represents suitable foraging habitat for this species. Golden Eagle has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.4 Northern Harrier
The northern harrier (Circus hudsonius) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, it is considered to be a USFWS BCC and a CDFW SSC. This species is known to nest in the Central Valley, along the Pacific Coast, and in northeastern California. The northern harrier is a groundnesting species, and typically nests in emergent wetland/marsh, open grasslands, or savannah communities usually in areas with dense vegetation (Smith et al. 2020). Foraging occurs within a variety of open environments such as marshes, agricultural fields, and grasslands. Nesting occurs from April through September.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of northern harrier within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The VPC landcover represents suitable breeding habitat for this species. Northern harrier has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.5 Swainson's Hawk
The Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni) is listed as a threatened species and are protected pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act, and is a PCCP-Covered Species This species nests in North America (Canada, western U.S., and Mexico) and typically winters from South America north to Mexico. However, a small population has been observed wintering in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Bechard et al. 2020). In California, the nesting season for Swainson’s hawk ranges from mid-March to late August.

Swainson’s hawks nest in tall trees in a variety of wooded communities including riparian, oak woodland, roadside landscape corridors, urban areas, and agricultural areas, among others. Foraging habitat includes open grassland, savannah, low-cover row crop fields, and livestock pastures. In the Central Valley, Swainson’s hawks typically feed on a combination of California vole (Microtus californicus), California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), ring-necked pheasant (Phasianus colchicus), many passerine birds, and grasshoppers (Melanopulus species). Swainson’s hawks are opportunistic foragers and will readily forage in association with agricultural mowing, harvesting, discing, and irrigating (Estep 1989). The Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1278
removal of vegetative cover by such farming activities results in more readily available prey items for this species.

There are four documented CNDDB occurrences of Swainson’s hawk within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The riparian area along Auburn Ravine represents suitable nesting habitat for this species and the annual grassland found throughout the BSA represents potential foraging habitat.

4.6.7.6 Western Screech-Owl
The western screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii) is a USFWS BCC but is not listed pursuant to the state or federal ESAs. The western screech-owl can be found throughout the western U.S. In California, they are absent from higher mountain regions, the Mohave Desert, Salton Sea Basin, and urbanized areas in coastal Ventura and San Diego counties (Small 1994). They are found in a wide variety of habitats with deciduous trees such as riparian, desert, and oak and pine-oak woodlands (Cannings et al. 2020). Western screech-owls nest in cavities, most commonly excavated by woodpeckers, but will also use natural cavities and nest boxes (Cannings et al. 2020). Breeding occurs from March through July.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of western screech-owl within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The larger trees that support cavities along Auburn Ravine represents suitable nesting habitat for this species. Western screech-owl has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.7 Westen Burrowing Owl
The western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is not listed pursuant to the federal ESA but is currently a candidate for listing under the California ESA; in addition, it is designated as a BCC by the USFWS, an SSC by the CDFW, and a PCCP-Covered Species. Western burrowing owls inhabit dry open rolling hills, grasslands, desert floors, and open bare ground with gullies and arroyos. They can also inhabit developed areas such as golf courses, cemeteries, roadsides within cities, airports, vacant lots in residential areas, school campuses, and fairgrounds (Poulin et al. 2020). This species typically uses burrows created by fossorial mammals, most notably the California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) but may also use manmade structures such as concrete culverts or pipes; concrete, asphalt, or wood debris piles; or openings beneath concrete or asphalt pavement (California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG] 2012).

The breeding season typically occurs between February 1 and August 31 (CDFG 2012).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of western burrowing owl within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The VPC within the BSA represents suitable nesting habitat for this species. Western burrowing owl has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.8 Nuttall's Woodpecker
The Nuttall’s woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii) is not listed and protected under either state or federal ESAs but is considered a USFWS BCC. They are resident from Siskiyou County south to Baja California.

Nuttall’s woodpeckers nest in tree cavities primarily within oak woodlands, but also can be found in riparian woodlands (Lowther et al. 2020). Breeding occurs from April through July.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1279
There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of Nuttall’s woodpecker within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The riparian area along Auburn Ravine represent suitable nesting habitat for this species. Nuttall’s woodpecker has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.9 Merlin
The Merlin (Falco columbarius) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs but is a CDFW Watch List species. This falcon breeds in Canada and Alaska and occurs in California as a migrant and during the nonbreeding season (September through April). Foraging habitat in winter includes open forests, grasslands, and tidal flats (Warkentin et al. 2020).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of merlin within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a), and is common migrant but does not nest in the region. The annual grassland within the BSA represents suitable foraging habitat for this species. Merlin has low potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.10 Yellow-Billed Magpie
The yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs but is considered a USFWS BCC. This endemic species is a yearlong resident of the Central Valley and Coast Ranges from San Francisco Bay to Santa Barbara County. Yellow-billed magpies build large, bulky nests in trees in a variety of open woodland habitats, typically near grassland, pastures or cropland. Nest building begins in late January to mid-February, which may take up to 6 to 8 weeks to complete, with eggs laid from April through May, and fledging from May through June (Koenig and Reynolds 2020). The young leave the nest about 30 days after hatching (Koenig and Reynolds 2020). Yellow-billed magpies are highly susceptible to West Nile Virus, which may have been the cause of death to thousands of magpies during 2004-2006 (Koenig and Reynolds 2020).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of yellow-billed magpie within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The riparian area along Auburn Ravine represent suitable nesting habitat for this species. Yellowbilled magpie has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.11 Oak Titmouse
Oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus) is not listed and protected under either state or federal ESAs but are considered a USFWS BCC. Oak titmouse breeding range includes southwestern Oregon south through California’s Coast, Transverse, and Peninsular ranges, western foothills of the Sierra Nevada, into Baja California; they are absent from the humid northwestern coastal region and the San Joaquin Valley (Cicero et al. 2020). They are found in dry oak or oak-pine woodlands but may also use scrub oaks or other brush near woodlands (Cicero et al. 2020). Nesting occurs during March through July.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of oak titmouse within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

The riparian area along Auburn Ravine represents suitable nesting habitat for this species. Oak titmouse has potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1280

4.6.7.12 Grasshopper Sparrow
The grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs, but it is designated as an SSC by the CDFW. The grasshopper sparrow is an uncommon and local summer resident and breeder along the western edge of the Sierra Nevada and most coastal counties south to Baja California (Small 1994; Vickery 2020). This species generally inhabits moderately open grasslands and prairies with patchy bare ground and scattered shrubs (Vickery 2020). Grasshopper sparrows are more likely to occupy large tracts of habitat than small fragments (Samson 1980; Herkert 1994; Vickery et al. 1994 as cited in Vickery 2020). Breeding generally occurs from early May through August.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of grasshopper sparrow within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The relatively small patch of VPC that is not annually farmed within the BSA represents marginally suitable nesting habitat for this species. Grasshopper sparrow has low potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.13 Tricolored Blackbird
The tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) is a PCCP-Covered Species, and was granted emergency listing for protection under the California ESA in December 2014 but the listing status was not renewed in June 2015. After an extensive status review, the California Fish and Game Commission listed tricolored blackbirds as a threatened species in 2018. In addition, it is currently considered a USFWS BCC and a CDFW SSC. This colonial nesting species is distributed widely throughout the Central Valley, Coast Range, and into Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Baja California (Beedy et al. 2020). Tricolored blackbirds nest in colonies that can range from several pairs to several thousand pairs, depending on prey availability, the presence of predators, or level of human disturbance. Tricolored blackbirds nesting habitat includes emergent marsh, riparian woodland/scrub, blackberry thickets, densely vegetated agricultural and idle fields (e.g., wheat, triticale, safflower, fava bean fields, thistle, mustard, cane, and fiddleneck), usually with some nearby standing water or ground saturation (Beedy et al. 2020). They feed mainly on grasshoppers during the breeding season, but may also forage upon a variety of other insects, grains, and seeds in open grasslands, wetlands, feedlots, dairies, and agricultural fields (Beedy et al. 2020). The nesting season is generally from March through August.

There are 13 documented CNDDB occurrences of tricolored blackbird within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). There is no potential nesting habitat onsite, but the VPC within the BSA represents suitable foraging habitat for this species. Tricolored blackbird has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.14 Bullock’s Oriole
The Bullock’s oriole (Icterus bullockii) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs but is currently a BCC according to the USFWS. In California, Bullock’s orioles are found throughout the state except the higher elevations of mountain ranges and the eastern deserts (Small 1994). They are found in riparian and oak woodlands where nests are built in deciduous trees, but may also use orchards, conifers, and eucalyptus trees (Flood et al. 2020). Nesting occurs from March through July.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1281
There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of Bullock’s oriole within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

The riparian area along Auburn Ravine represents suitable nesting habitat for this species. Bullock’s oriole has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.7.15 Yellow Warbler
Yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia) is a CDFW SSC. Yellow warbler nest from Baja California northward to Alaska and winter from Southern California to South America (American Ornithologists’ Union 1983).

Breeding occurs throughout much of California up to 8,000 feet elevation, except the Central Valley and southeastern deserts (Heath 2008). Breeding habitat includes riparian vegetation in close proximity to water along streams and wet meadows (Heath 2008). During migration, yellow warbler may occur in a wide variety of woodland habitats throughout California. The nesting season is May through August.

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of yellow warbler within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a).

Yellow warbler do not nest in the vicinity of the BSA, but are common migrants through the area. The trees adjacent to Auburn Ravine within the BSA represents suitable foraging habitat for this species.

Yellow warbler has potential to occur onsite.

4.6.8 Mammals
Based on the literature review and site reconnaissance, two special-status mammal species were identified as having potential to occur in the vicinity of the BSA (Table 5). Further discussion for these species is provided below.

4.6.8.1 Pallid Bat
The pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) is not listed pursuant to either the federal or California ESAs; however, this species is considered an SSC by CDFW. The pallid bat is a large, light-colored bat with long, prominent ears and pink, brown, or grey wing and tail membranes. This species ranges throughout North America from the interior of British Columbia, south to Mexico, and east to Texas. The pallid bat inhabits low elevation (below 6,000 feet above MSL) rocky arid deserts and canyonlands, shrub-steppe grasslands, karst formations, and high elevation (above 7,000 feet above MSL) coniferous forest. This species roosts alone or in groups in the crevices of rocky outcrops and cliffs, caves, mines, trees, and in various human structures such as bridges and barns. The pallid bat is a feeding generalist that gleans a variety of arthropod prey from surfaces as well as capturing insects on the wing. Foraging occurs over grasslands, oak savannahs, ponderosa pine forests, talus slopes, gravel roads, lava flows, fruit orchards, and vineyards.

Although this species utilizes echolocation to locate prey, they often use only passive acoustic cues. This species is not thought to migrate long distances between summer and winter sites (Western Bat Working Group [WBWG] 2024).

There is one documented CNDDB occurrences of pallid within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The trees and snags identified within the BSA represents suitable roosting habitat for this species. Pallid bat has potential to occur onsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1282

4.6.8.2 Townsend’s Big-Eared Bat
The Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) is not listed pursuant to either the California or federal ESAs; however, this species is considered an SSC by CDFW. The Townsend’s big-eared bat is a fairly large bat with prominent bilateral noes lumps and large rabbit-like ears. This species occurs throughout the west and ranges from the southern portion of British Columbia south along the Pacific coast to central Mexico and east into the Great Plains. The Townsend’s big-eared bat has been reported from a wide variety of habitat types and elevations from sea level to 10,827 feet above MSL. Habitats used include coniferous forests, mixed mesophytic forests, deserts, native prairies, riparian communities, active agricultural areas, and coastal habitat types. Its distribution is strongly associated with the availability of caves and cave-like roosting habitat including abandoned mines, buildings, bridges, rock crevices, and hollow trees. This species is readily detectable when roosting due to their habit of roosting pendant-like on open surfaces. The Townsend’s big-eared bat is a moth specialist with more than 90 percent of its diet composed of them. Foraging habitat is generally edge habitats along streams adjacent to and within a variety of wooded habitats. This species often travels long distances when foraging and large home ranges have been documented in California (WBWG 2024).

There are no documented CNDDB occurrences of Townsend’s big-eared bat within 5 miles of the BSA (CDFW 2024a). The trees and snags identified within the BSA represents suitable roosting habitat for this species. Townsend’s big eared bat has potential to occur onsite.

4.7 Critical Habitat or Essential Fish Habitat
There is no designated critical habitat present within the BSA. The PCCP Stream System mapped within the BSA corresponds to Auburn Ravine, a designated anadromous fish Critical Habitat for steelhead (California Central Valley Distinct Population Segment; NOAA 2024b). However, the channel of Auburn Ravine exists approximately 500 ft. beyond the BSA. Therefore, there is no anadromous fish critical habitat or Essential Fish Habitat present within the BSA.

4.8 Wildlife Movement Corridors and Nursery Sites
The Essential Connectivity Areas map identifies larger, relatively natural habitat blocks that support native biodiversity and areas essential for connectivity between them. The BSA does not fall within an Essential Habitat Connectivity area or a known nursery site (CDFW 2024b) For the purposes of this analysis, nursery sites include but are not limited to concentrations of nest or den sites such as heron rookeries or bat maternity roosts. This data is available through CDFW’s BIOS database or as occurrence records in the CNDDB and is supplemented with the results of the site reconnaissance.

No nursery sites have been documented within the BSA (CDFW 2024a) and none were observed or expected to occur.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1283

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
This section summarizes recommended measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts to biological resources from the Proposed Project. Applicable conditions for Project PCCP Covered Activities are identified in the “Master Conditions on Covered Activities Checklist” (Appendix E) and the Western Placer CARP Best Management Practices (Appendix F), other recommended measures could be implemented and adhered to prior to Project implementation in order to mitigate impacts to PCCP-Covered Species and species regulated under CEQA. Potential Project impacts have not been finalized at this time, so these recommended measures are subject to change.

5.1 General Recommendations and Best Management Practices The Project applicant shall implement erosion control measures and Best Management Practices to reduce the potential for sediment or pollutants. Measures may include the following:
 Comply with the general conditions outlined in PCCP Section 6.3.1, conditions of approval in Western Placer CARP Section 7, and best management practices in CARP Appendix C (Appendix F).
 To the extent feasible, implement erosion control measures and Best Management Practices to reduce the potential for sediment or pollutants within the BSA. Measures may include flagging of work areas, erosion control native seed mixtures, removal of trash, refueling in upland areas only and use of appropriate secondary containment, and a mandatory Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) for all contractors, work crews, and any onsite personnel.

5.2 Placer County Conservation Program Covered Species Measures and Conditions
The PCCP includes conditions that must be implemented for Covered Activities. These conditions are grouped into the following categories: (1) general, (2) natural community, (3) stream system, (4) rural, (5) public project, (6) species, and (7) reserve management conditions. The PCCP also includes conditions that are required for activities that may affect Covered Species or where potential for take can be avoided or reduced.

The Project shall comply with the following PCCP Conditions as the mechanism for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating for the Proposed Project impacts to PCCP-Covered Species.

5.2.1 Species Condition 1. Swainson’s Hawk
The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 1 for Swainson’s Hawk (PCCP Section

6.3.5.6). Swainson’s hawk surveys will be conducted according to PCCP Section 6.3.5.6.1 and if an occupied nest is identified, minimization measures according to PCCP Section 6.3.5.6.2 must be adopted, and PCCP Section 6.3.5.6.3 if construction monitoring is required.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1284

5.2.2 Species Condition 3. Western Burrowing Owl
The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 3 for Western Burrowing Owl (PCCP Section 6.3.5.8). Western burrowing owl surveys will be conducted according to PCCP Section 6.3.5.8.1. If a western burrowing owl or evidence of presence at or near a burrow entrance is found to occur within 250 feet of the Project, applicable measures in PCCP Section 6.3.5.8.2 shall be implemented, and PCCP Section

6.3.5.8.3 if construction monitoring is required.

5.2.3 Species Condition 4. Tricolored Blackbird
The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 4 for Tricolored Blackbird (PCCP Section

6.3.5.9). Tricolored blackbird surveys will be conducted according to PCCP Section 6.3.5.9.1 and applicable measures in PCCP Section 6.3.5.9.2 will be implemented if a tricolored blackbird nesting colony is found and PCCP Section 6.3.5.9.3 implemented if construction monitoring is required.

5.2.4 Species Condition 6. Northwestern Pond Turtle
The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 6 for Northwestern Pond Turtle (PCCP Section 6.3.5.11), and shall refer to Chapter 5 Conservation Strategy of the PCCP to assess impacts and apply appropriate minimization measures.

5.2.5 Species Condition 9. Conservancy Fairy Shrimp.

The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 4 for Conservancy Fairy Shrimp (PCCP Section 6.3.5.14). Conservancy fairy shrimp surveys will be conducted according to PCCP Section 6.3.5.14.1 and applicable measures in PCCP Section 6.3.5.14.2 will be implemented if this species occurs, and PCCP Section 6.3.5.14.3 implemented if construction monitoring is required.

5.2.6 Species Condition 10. Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp The Project applicant shall comply with PCCP Species Condition 4 for Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp (PCCP Section 6.3.5.15). Surveys will be conducted according to PCCP Section

6.3.5.15.1, and PCCP Section 6.3.5.15.2 if vernal pool fairy shrimp or vernal pool tadpole shrimp occurs.

5.3 Special-Status Species Covered under the California Environmental Quality Act
The following recommended measures are provided as the mechanism for potentially avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating for Proposed Project impacts to special-status species not covered under the PCCP but are regulated under CEQA.

5.3.1 Special-Status Plants
The PCCP does not cover plants; however, the BSA supports potential habitat for other special-status plants, as identified in Table 5. No special-status plants are known to occur onsite; however, protocol-level surveys have not been conducted. If a special-status plant occurs in or near the Project Area, Project Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1285
impacts could include damage or loss of individual plants, loss of occupied habitat, and indirect impacts such as disturbance from human encroachment and changes in habitat quality due to introduction or spread of non-native invasive plants, alteration of hydrology, erosion, and transport of soil, debris or pollutants into occupied habitat from adjacent Project areas.

The following measures are recommended to minimize potential impacts to special-status plants:
 If suitable habitat for special-status plants cannot be avoided, the applicant shall perform specialstatus plant surveys according to CDFW, CNPS, and USFWS protocols (CDFW 2018; CNPS 2001; USFWS 2000). Surveys shall be conducted throughout all suitable habitat within the Project development area (including all areas with Proposed Project-related ground-disturbing or vegetation-disturbing activities) and a 50-foot buffer to address potential direct and indirect impacts of the Project. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and timed according to the identifiable period for special-status plant species with potential to occur (typically the blooming period). To the extent feasible, known reference populations will be visited prior to surveys to confirm target species are evident and identifiable at the time of the survey. If no special-status plants are found, no further measures pertaining to special-status plants are necessary.
 If a special-status plant is identified within or adjacent to the Project development area, the following shall apply:
• An impact assessment shall be made by a qualified biologist to determine whether Projectrelated activities would result in significant impacts to the special-status plants. If impacts are determined to be less than significant, no further measures are needed. • If potential impacts are determined to be significant, the following shall apply:
− To avoid the introduction and spread of non-native invasive plant species, clothing, vehicles, and equipment (including shoes, equipment undercarriage and tires/tracks) should be cleaned prior to entering the Project Area and, if invasive plant species are known to occur within the Project Area, prior to entering an area of the Project Area that is free of invasive plants. Materials used for the Project, such as fill dirt or erosion control materials, should be from weed-free locations or certified weed free. − The Project shall be modified to the extent feasible to minimize impacts to special-status plants. No-disturbance buffers shall be established around special-status-plants plant populations to be avoided in or adjacent to the Project Area. A 25-foot buffer should be maintained between Project activities and the status-plants plant populations, unless otherwise determined by a qualified biologist. Buffer distances may vary depending upon factors such as species ecology, species rarity, and site-specific conditions. Buffer areas shall be clearly demarcated in the field, and no vegetation or ground-disturbing activities shall occur within the boundaries of the delineated area. − If special-status plants are to be avoided by the Project, a WEAP shall be developed prior to construction to inform workers of avoided special-status plants. A qualified biologist Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1286
will present the WEAP to all personnel working in the Project Area prior to the start of Project activities. The WEAP may be recorded and used through the duration of construction to train new workers who were absent for the initial WEAP. The WEAP will include, but will not be limited to, species identification, habitat requirements, and the species’ protected status. The training shall provide clear instruction that if any workers encounter the special-status plant(s) to be avoided within the Project impact area, work shall halt within 50-feet of the plants and the biological monitor shall be informed. The Project proponent shall retain logs of personnel who have taken the training for the duration of construction.
− If complete avoidance is not feasible, the agency with jurisdiction (CDFW, USFWS and/or the CEQA Lead Agency) shall be consulted to determine if additional minimization or mitigation measures are required. Additional measures, if needed, shall be developed in consultation with the respective agency. These measures may include restoration or permanent preservation of habitat for the special-status plant species or translocation (via seed collection and/or transplantation) from planned impact areas to unaffected suitable habitat. If a plant that is a state or federally listed threatened or endangered plant or a plant that is a candidate for state listing is found onsite, the applicant shall consult with CDFW and/or USFWS, as applicable, to determine appropriate avoidance and minimization measures, and an incidental take permit and compensatory mitigation may be required.

5.3.2 Crotch’s Bumble Bee
The BSA provides suitable habitat for Crotch’s bumble bee. A habitat assessment and focused survey for Crotch’s bumble bee may be required by CDFW prior to the commencement of construction activities.

Surveys should be conducted based on CDFW’s Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species (CDFW 2023b). If Crotch’s bumble bee nests are found within the Proposed Project impacts, additional mitigation and avoidance measures shall be developed in consultation with CDFW.

5.3.3 Western Spadefoot
The BSA contains suitable habitat for western spadefoot. Implementation of the following minimization measures will ensure that there are no significant impacts to this species:
 Pre-construction surveys for western spadefoot will be conducted within the limits of construction to detect adults, larvae, and/or egg masses, within 14 days prior to the start of construction.  If no western spadefoots are found, no further measures pertaining to this species are necessary.  If adults, larvae, or egg masses are found, they will be relocated to suitable habitat within an onor off-site preserve(s), in consultation with CDFW.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1287

5.3.4 Northwestern Pond Turtle
The BSA contains suitable habitat and PCCP Modeled Habitat for northwestern pond turtle. In addition to the measures outlined in Section 5.2.4, implementation of the following measures would avoid or minimize potential effects to northwestern pond turtles:
 A qualified biologist will perform a pre-construction clearance survey within 24 hours of the initiation of Project activities.
 If northwestern pond turtles are found within the Project footprint, they will be allowed to move out of the Project Area on their own volition.
 Areas impacted within the BSA that represent suitable habitat for northwestern pond turtle shall be restored to pre-Project conditions after Project completion. If no northwestern pond turtles are found during clearance survey, no further measures are necessary.

5.3.5 Other Special-Status Birds and Nesting Birds
The BSA contains suitable nesting and/or wintering and foraging habitat for special-status birds and other birds protected under the California Fish and Game Code and MBTA. If Project-related activities occur during the nesting season, the removal of active nests or disruption of nesting activities could lead to “take” of a protected bird, or an active nest with eggs or young, which would be considered a significant impact under CEQA. Impacts to wintering and foraging habitat is typically not considered significant under CEQA.

To avoid or minimize impacts to protected birds and active nests, the following mitigation measures are recommended:
 A pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted within 14 days prior to the commencement of Project-related activities to identify active nests that could be impacted by construction.
 The pre-construction nesting bird survey shall include accessible areas within 100 feet of the Project boundaries, including any temporary disturbance areas. For raptors, the pre-construction nesting bird survey shall include accessible areas within 500 feet of the Project boundary.  If active nests are found, a no-disturbance buffer shall be established around the nest. A qualified biologist, in consultation with the CDFW, shall establish a buffer distance. The buffer shall be maintained until the nestlings have fledged (e.g., are capable of flight and become independent of the nest), to be determined by a qualified biologist. The avoidance buffer can be removed and no further measures are necessary once the young have fledged or the nest is no longer occupied, as determined by a qualified biologist.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1288

5.3.6 Special-Status Raptors and Other Protected Raptors For construction and other ground-disturbing activities with potential to affect other special-status raptor nests (e.g., activities proposed to occur in or within 500 feet of suitable habitat), the following measures shall be implemented to prevent potential impacts to active raptor nests.  For Project activities, including tree and other vegetation removal, that begin between February 1 and September 15, qualified biologists shall conduct pre-construction surveys for special status raptors and to identify active nests on and within 500 feet of the Project Area. The surveys shall be conducted before the beginning of any construction activities between February 1 and September

15.  Impacts to nesting raptors shall be avoided by establishing appropriate buffers around active nest sites identified during pre-construction raptor surveys. Project activity shall not commence within the buffer areas until a qualified biologist has determined, in coordination with CDFW, that the young have fledged, the nest is no longer active, or reducing the buffer would not likely result in nest abandonment. CDFW guidelines recommend implementation of a 500-foot-wide buffer for these raptor species, but the size of the buffer may be adjusted if a qualified biologist and the Project proponent, in consultation with CDFW, determine that such an adjustment would not be likely to adversely affect the nest. Monitoring of the nest by a qualified biologist during and after construction activities shall be required if the activity has potential to adversely affect the nest.  Trees shall not be removed during the breeding season for nesting raptors unless a survey by a qualified biologist verifies that there is not an active nest in the tree.

5.4 Aquatic Resources
The BSA supports aquatic resources that have been delineated but not verified by the USACE. The following mitigation measures are recommended to minimize potential impacts to Waters of the U.S.:
 The Project applicant shall attend a pre-application meeting with the USACE which will include Placer County and other relevant agencies. Unless otherwise directed by the agencies in the preapplication meeting, the Project applicant shall prepare and submit an application package to Placer County, the USACE, and the RWQCB including the following items: the aquatic resources delineation with a request to obtain USACE verification (or preliminary or an approved jurisdictional determination), an application for a Clean Water Act Section 401 WQC, a request to obtain authorization under the PCCP for a USACE LOP, and a PCCP/Western Placer CARP authorization application. The Project applicant shall secure the WQC, LOP, and PCCP/Western Placer CARP authorizations and apply all applicable conditions of the authorizations.

The Project shall comply with the following PCCP Stream System Conditions:

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1289

5.4.1 Community Condition 2.3, Riverine and Riparian Restoration PCCP Community Condition 2.3 states that “Covered Activities that affect riverine or riparian constituent habitat must contribute to restoration as mitigation to compensate for loss of riverine or riparian constituent habitat.”
If the Project proposes to impact riverine and associated riparian habitat, the Special Habitat Fee Schedule 4d Riverine/Riparian will apply to the Project.

5.4.2 Stream System Condition 2, Stream System Mitigation: Restoration PCCP Stream System Condition 2 states that “where Covered Activities result in the permanent or temporary impacts on the Stream System, regardless of the community or constituent habitat type affected, effects shall be mitigated by appropriate restoration or enhancement.” If the Project proposes to impact the PCCP Stream System, the Special Habitat Fee Schedule 4f Stream System Encroachment will apply to the Project; however, areas subject to stream system encroachment excludes any area already subject to a constituent habitat fee (such as riverine/riparian fee).

5.4.3 Western Placer CARP Authorization Mitigation Conditions Mitigation conditions from Section 7.5 of the Western Placer CARP (Appendix G) apply to all Covered Activities that have the potential to impact Aquatic Resources of Placer County.

5.5 Land Cover and Sensitive Natural Communities
Mitigation requirements for this Project are expected due to conversion of natural land cover and proposed impacts to aquatic resources and PCCP special habitat. Fees associated with mitigation are outlined in Chapter 9 of the PCCP.

5.5.1 Land Conversion Mitigation, Placer County Conservation Program General Condition 3
PCCP General Condition 3 states that “Covered Activities that would result in permanent conversion of natural land cover must pay fees or otherwise contribute to establishing the Reserve System and are subject to the maximum extent of take proposed under the Plan.” Based on the PCCP Land Conversion Fee Schedule, the Project meets the criteria of Land Conversion Fee.

5.5.2 Riparian Habitat
The BSA supports riparian habitat. If the Project proposes to impact riparian habitat, applicable PCCP conditions, land conversion fees, and special habitat fees shall be applied.

5.6 Placer County Protected Trees
Tree impacts will be mitigated through payment of land conversion and special habitat conversion fees under the PCCP.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1290

6.0 REFERENCES
American Ornithologists’ Union. 1983. Check-list of North American birds. 6th ed. American Ornithol.

Union, Washington, D.C.

Ashton, D. T., A. J. Lind, K. E. Schlick. 1997. Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata). Natural History.

United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Redwood Sciences Laboratory. Arcata, CA.

Bechard, M. J., C. S. Houston, J. H. Saransola, and A. S. England. 2020. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.swahaw.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Beedy, E. C., W. J. Hamilton, III, R. J. Meese, D. A. Airola, and P. Pyle. 2020. Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.tribla.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Bury, R. B., D. T. Ashton, H. H. Welsh Jr., D. A. Reese, and D. J. Germano. 2012. Synopsis of Biology. Pages 9 – 19 In Western Pond Turtle: Biology, Sampling Techniques, Inventory and Monitoring, Conservation, and Management Bury, R. B., H. H. Welsh Jr., D. J. Germano, and D. A. Ashton, editors. Northwest Fauna No. 7.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. March 7.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2024a. RareFind 5. Online Version, commercial version dated: April 1, 2023. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The Resources Agency, Sacramento. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data. December 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Essential Connectivity Areas - California Essential Habitat Connectivity (CEHC) [ds620]. DS0620_20140109. Publication date:
2010-03-01. https://wildlife.ca.gov/data/BIOS. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2023a. Natural Communities. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities.

Accessed December 17, 2024.
_____. 2023b. Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species.

June 6.
_____. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. Sacramento.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024a. Rare Plant Inventory. Online Edition, Version 9-01 0.0.

Sacramento. http://www.rareplants.cnps.org/. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (MCV). Sacramento. https://vegetation.cnps.org/. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1291
_____. 2001. CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines. https://cnps.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/03/cnps_survey_guidelines.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Cannings, R. J., T. Angell, P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Western Screech-Owl (Megascops kennicottii), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.wesowl1.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Cicero, C., P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Oak Titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.oaktit.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Dunk, J. R. 2020. White-tailed Kite (Elanus leucurus), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole and F. B.

Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.whtkit.01.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP). 2024. Aquatic Resources Delineation for The Residences at Granite Bay Golf Club Phase 2 Project. Prepared for The Douglas Group, Inc. In Preparation.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-

1. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. p. 143. January.

Eriksen, C. H. and D. Belk. 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools, and Playas. Mad River Press, Inc. Eureka, California.

Estep, J. A. 1989. Biology, movements, and habitat relationships of the Swainson's hawk in the Central Valley of California, 1986-1987. California Department of Fish and Game, Nongame Bird and Mammal Section Report.

Flood, N. J., C. L. Schlueter, M. W. Reudink, P. Pyle, M. A. Patten, J. D. Rising, and P. L. Williams. 2020.

Bullock's Oriole (Icterus bullockii), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor).

Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.bulori.01.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Goulson, D. 2010. Bumblebees: Behaviour, Ecology, and Conservation. Oxford University Press, New York. 317pp.

Hatfield, R., S. Colla, S. Jepsen, L. Richardson, R. Thorp, and S. F. Jordan. 2014. IUCN assessments for North American Bombus spp. Technical report for the North American IUCN Bumble Bee Specialist Group. Assessments completed 2014, document updated in February 2015. 56 pp.

Heath, S. K. 2008. Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petachia). Pages 332 - 339 in California Bird Species of Special Concern: A Ranked Assessment of Species, Subspecies, and Distinct Populations of Birds of Immediate Conservation Concern in California, W. D. Shuford and T. Gardali, Eds. Studies of Western Birds No. 1. 450 pp.

Herkert, J. R. 1994. The effects of habitat fragmentation on midwestern grassland bird communities. J.

Ecol. Appl. 4:461-471.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1292
Holland, D. C. 1994. The Western Pond Turtle: Habitat and History. Final Report to the United States Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Environment, Fish, and Wildlife. Portland, OR.

Horton, J. D. 2017. 0818, The State Geologic Map Compilation Geodatabase of the Conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey data release DOI: 10.5066/F7WH2N65, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO. https://doi.org/10.5066/F7WH2N65. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Hughes, J. M. 2020. Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G.

Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.yebcuc.01.Jennings, M. R. and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Final report to California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Branch. Rancho Cordova, CA.

Jennings, C. W., R. G. Strand, and T. H. Rogers. 1977. Geologic map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, scale 1:750,000. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_16320.htm.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2024. Jepson eFlora. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Katzner, T. E., M. N. Kochert, K. Steenhof, C. L. McIntyre, E. H. Craig, and T. A. Miller. 2020. Golden Eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), Version 2.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald and B. K. Keeney, Editors).

Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.goleag.02.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Koenig, W. D. and M. D. Reynolds. 2020. Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica nuttalli), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.yebmag.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Lowther, P. E., P. Pyle, and M. A. Patten. 2020. Nuttall's Woodpecker (Dryobates nuttallii), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.nutwoo.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2024a. National Climatic Data Center 1991- 2020 Climate Normals for Auburn, CA, U.S. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdoweb/datatools/normals. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____ 2024b. NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region Protected Resources App. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/map/national-esa-critical-habitat-mapper.

Accessed December 17, 2024.
_____. 2022. Intersection of USGS 7.5" Topographic Quadrangles with NOAA Fisheries ESA Listed Species, Critical Habitat, Essential Fish Habitat, and MMPA Species Data with California. KMZ file link available: https://svctenvims.dot.ca.gov/bio_link/.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1293
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2024a. Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservation-basics/naturalresource-concerns/soil/hydric-soils. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Placer County. 2020a. Placer County Conservation Program: Western Placer County Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan. February. https://www.placer.ca.gov/3362/PlacerCounty-Conservation-Program. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2020b. Placer County Conservation Program: Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Plan.

February. https://www.placer.ca.gov/3362/Placer-County-Conservation-Program.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Poulin, R. G., L. D. Todd, E. A. Haug, B. A. Millsap, and M. S. Martell. 2020. Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.burowl.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Samson, F. B. 1980. Island biogeography and the conservation of prairie birds. Proc. North Am. Prairie Conf. 7:293-305.

Small, A. 1994. California Birds: Their Status and Distribution. Ibis Publishing Company. Vista, California. 342 pp.

Smith, K. G., S. R. Wittenberg, R. B. Macwhirter, and K. L. Bildstein. 2020. Northern Harrier (Circus hudsonius), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (P. G. Rodewald, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.norhar2.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Thomson R. C., Wright A., Shaffer H. B. 2016. California amphibian and reptile species of special concern.

Oakland: University of California Press.

Thorp, R. W., D. S. Horning, and L. L Dunning. 1983. Bumble bees and cuckoo bumble bees of California (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Bulletin of the California Insect Survey 23:1-79 pp.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region.
_____. 2008b. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Hanover, NH: Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory and U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024a. USFWS Resource Report List. Information for Planning and Consultation. https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/program/nationalwetlands-inventory/wetlands-mapper. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1294
_____. 2021. Birds of Conservation Concern 2021. USFWS, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/birds-of-conservationconcern-2021.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2024. _____. 2006. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for Four Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants in California and Southern Oregon; Final Rule. Federal Register. February 10 (Volume 71, Number 28). _____. 2005. Recovery Plan for Vernal Pool Ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1. Portland, Oregon. December 15, 2005. _____. 2003. Final Designation of Critical Habitat for Four Vernal Pool Crustaceans and Eleven Vernal Pool Plants in California and Southern Oregon; Final Rule. Federal Register 8(151):46684-46867 _____. 2000. Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed and Candidate Plants. January.
_____. 1994. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Conservancy Fairy Shrimp, Longhorn Fairy Shrimp, and the Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp; and Threatened Status for the Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp. Portland, Oregon. 59 Federal Register 48136.

September 19.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2024. Watershed Boundary Dataset. Data refreshed September 2024. https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer.

Accessed December 17, 2024.
_____. 1992 (photorevised 1997 and 2000). Lincoln, California and Roseville, California 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle. United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Denver.

Vickery, P. D. 2020. Grasshopper Sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), Version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.graspa.01. Accessed December 17, 2024.

Warkentin, I. G., N. S. Sodhi, R. H. M. Espie, A. F. Poole, L. W. Oliphant, and P. C. James. 2020. Merlin (Falco columbarius), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (S. M. Billerman, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.merlin.01. Accessed February 12, 2025.

Western Bat Working Group (WBWG). 2024. Species Accounts. https://wbwg.org/species-accounts/.

Accessed December 17, 2024.

Williams, P. H., R. W. Thorp, L. L. Richardson, and S. R. Colla. 2014. Bumble bees of North America: An Identification Guide. Princeton University Press. 208 pp.

Xerces Society. 2018. A Petition to the State of California Fish and Game Commission. October. https://xerces.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/CESA-petition-Bombus-Oct2018.pdf.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1295

APPENDIX A
Results of Database Queries
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1297
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL
Acipenser medirostris pop. 1
green sturgeon - southern DPS
AFCAA01031 Threatened None G2T1 S1 SSC
Actinemys marmorata
northwestern pond turtle
ARAAD02031 Proposed
Threatened
None G2 SNR SSC
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S2 SSC
Alkali Meadow
Alkali Meadow
CTT45310CA None None G3 S2.1
Alkali Seep
Alkali Seep
CTT45320CA None None G3 S2.1
Ammodramus savannarum
grasshopper sparrow
ABPBXA0020 None None G5 S3 SSC
Andrena subapasta
An andrenid bee
IIHYM35210 None None G1G2 S1S2
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
AMACC10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Ardea alba
great egret
ABNGA04040 None None G5 S4
Ardea herodias
great blue heron
ABNGA04010 None None G5 S4
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
ABNSB10010 None Candidate
Endangered
G4 S2 SSC
Balsamorhiza macrolepis
big-scale balsamroot
PDAST11061 None None G2 S2 1B.2
Bombus crotchii
Crotch's bumble bee
IIHYM24480 None Candidate
Endangered
G2 S2
Bombus pensylvanicus
American bumble bee
IIHYM24260 None None G3G4 S2
Branchinecta conservatio
Conservancy fairy shrimp
ICBRA03010 Endangered None G2 S2
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S3
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S4
Quad IS (Camp Far West (3912113) OR Wolf (3912112) OR Rocklin (3812172) OR Roseville (3812173) OR Lincoln (3812183) OR Gold Hill (3812182) OR Pleasant Grove (3812174) OR Sheridan (3812184) OR Wheatland (3912114) OR Rio Linda (3812164) OR Folsom (3812162) OR Citrus Heights (3812163))
Query Criteria:

Report Printed on Friday, May 30, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated May, 2 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 3 Information Expires 11/2/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1298
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Calycadenia spicata
spicate calycadenia
PDAST1P090 None None G3? S3 1B.3
Chloropyron molle ssp. hispidum
hispid salty bird's-beak
PDSCR0J0D1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.1
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
ABNKC11011 None None G5 S3 SSC
Clarkia biloba ssp. brandegeeae
Brandegee's clarkia
PDONA05053 None None G4G5T4 S4 4.2
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
ABNRB02022 Threatened Endangered G5T2T3 S1
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
AMACC08010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
valley elderberry longhorn beetle
IICOL48011 Threatened None G3T3 S3
Downingia pusilla
dwarf downingia
PDCAM060C0 None None GU S2 2B.2
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP
Falco columbarius
merlin
ABNKD06030 None None G5 S3S4 WL
Fritillaria agrestis
stinkbells
PMLIL0V010 None None G3 S3 4.2
Gonidea angulata
western ridged mussel
IMBIV19010 None None G3 S2
Gratiola heterosepala
Boggs Lake hedge-hyssop
PDSCR0R060 None Endangered G2 S2 1B.2
Hydrochara rickseckeri
Ricksecker's water scavenger beetle
IICOL5V010 None None G2? S2?
Icteria virens
yellow-breasted chat
ABPBX24010 None None G5 S4 SSC
Juncus leiospermus var. ahartii
Ahart's dwarf rush
PMJUN011L1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2
Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus
Red Bluff dwarf rush
PMJUN011L2 None None G2T2 S2 1B.1
Lasionycteris noctivagans
silver-haired bat
AMACC02010 None None G3G4 S3S4
Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus
California black rail
ABNME03041 None Threatened G3T1 S2 FP
Legenere limosa
legenere
PDCAM0C010 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Lepidurus packardi
vernal pool tadpole shrimp
ICBRA10010 Endangered None G3 S3
Report Printed on Friday, May 30, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated May, 2 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 3 Information Expires 11/2/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1299
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Linderiella occidentalis
California linderiella
ICBRA06010 None None G2G3 S2S3
Melospiza melodia pop. 1
song sparrow ("Modesto" population)
ABPBXA3013 None None G5T3?Q S3? SSC
Nannopterum auritum
double-crested cormorant
ABNFD01020 None None G5 S4 WL
Navarretia myersii ssp. myersii
pincushion navarretia
PDPLM0C0X1 None None G2T2 S2 1B.1
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
Northern Claypan Vernal Pool
CTT44120CA None None G1 S1.1
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
Northern Hardpan Vernal Pool
CTT44110CA None None G3 S3.1
Northern Volcanic Mud Flow Vernal Pool
Northern Volcanic Mud Flow Vernal Pool
CTT44132CA None None G1 S1.1
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 11
steelhead - Central Valley DPS
AFCHA0209K Threatened None G5T2Q S2 SSC
Orcuttia viscida
Sacramento Orcutt grass
PMPOA4G070 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Pandion haliaetus
osprey
ABNKC01010 None None G5 S4 WL
Progne subis
purple martin
ABPAU01010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Riparia riparia
bank swallow
ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S3
Sagittaria sanfordii
Sanford's arrowhead
PMALI040Q0 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Setophaga petechia
yellow warbler
ABPBX03010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
AAABF02020 Proposed
Threatened
None G2G3 S3S4 SSC
Taxidea taxus
American badger
AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Thamnophis gigas
giant gartersnake
ARADB36150 Threatened Threatened G2 S2
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
CTT42110CA None None G3 S3.1
Wolffia brasiliensis
Brazilian watermeal
PMLEM03020 None None G5 S2 2B.3
Record Count: 58
Report Printed on Friday, May 30, 2025
Commercial Version -- Dated May, 2 2025 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 3 Information Expires 11/2/2025
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1300
Search Results
21 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: , Quad is one of [3812183:3812173:3912114:3912113:3912112:3812182:3812184:3812174:3812172:3812162:3812163:3812164] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON

NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM

BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK
CA
RARE
PLANT
RANK
CA

ENDEMIC
DATE

ADDED PHOTO
Azolla
microphylla
Mexican
mosquito
fern
Azollaceae annual/perennial
herb
Aug None None G5 S4 4.2 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Balsamorhiza
macrolepis
big-scale
balsamroot
Asteraceae perennial herb Mar-Jun None None G2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1974- 01-01
©1998
Dean Wm.

Taylor
Brodiaea
rosea ssp.
vallicola
valley
brodiaea
Themidaceae perennial
bulbiferous herb
AprMay(Jun)None None G4G5T3 S3 4.2 Yes 2019-
01-07
© 2011
Steven
Perry
Brodiaea
sierrae
Sierra
foothills
brodiaea
Themidaceae perennial
bulbiferous herb
May-Aug None None G3 S3 4.3 Yes 2012-
11-20
© 2006
George W.

Hartwell
Calycadenia
spicata
spicate
calycadenia
Asteraceae annual herb May-Sep None None G3? S3 1B.3 2023- 04-05
© 2023
Christopher
Bronny
Chloropyron
molle ssp.
hispidum
hispid salty
bird's-beak
Orobanchaceae annual herb
(hemiparasitic)
Jun-Sep None None G2T1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
4/1/25, 3:45 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3812183:3812173:3912114:3912113:3912112:3812182:3812184:3812174:3812172:3812… 1/4 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1301
Clarkia
biloba ssp.
brandegeeae
Brandegee's
clarkia
Onagraceae annual herb (Mar)MayJulNone None G4G5T4 S4 4.2 Yes 2001- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Downingia
pusilla
dwarf
downingia
Campanulaceae annual herb Mar-May None None GU S2 2B.2 1980- 01-01
© 2013
Aaron
Arthur
Fritillaria
agrestis
stinkbells Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous herb
Mar-Jun None None G3 S3 4.2 Yes 1980-
01-01
© 2016
Aaron
Schusteff
Gratiola
heterosepala
Boggs Lake
hedgehyssop
Plantaginaceae annual herb Apr-Aug None CE G2 S2 1B.2 1974- 01-01
©2004
Carol W.

Witham
Hesperevax
caulescens
hogwallow
starfish
Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G3 S3 4.2 Yes 2001- 01-01
© 2017
John
Doyen
Juncus
leiospermus
var. ahartii
Ahart's
dwarf rush
Juncaceae annual herb Mar-May None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 Yes 1984- 01-01
© 2004
Carol W.

Witham
Juncus
leiospermus
var.
leiospermus
Red Bluff
dwarf rush
Juncaceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G2T2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01
©2016
Dylan
Neubauer
4/1/25, 3:45 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3812183:3812173:3912114:3912113:3912112:3812182:3812184:3812174:3812172:3812… 2/4 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1302
Legenere
limosa
legenere Campanulaceae annual herb Apr-Jun None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01
©2000
John Game
Leptosiphon
aureus
bristly
leptosiphon
Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jul None None G4? S4? 4.2 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2007
Len Blumin
Lilium
humboldtii
ssp.
humboldtii
Humboldt
lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous herb
MayJul(Aug)None None G4T3 S3 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
© 2008
Sierra
Pacific
Industries
Navarretia
heterandra
Tehama
navarretia
Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jun None None G4 S4 4.3 1974- 01-01
©2021
Scot Loring
Navarretia
myersii ssp.
myersii
pincushion
navarretia
Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-May None None G2T2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2020
Leigh
Johnson
Orcuttia
viscida
Sacramento
Orcutt grass
Poaceae annual herb AprJul(Sep)FE CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01
© Rick York
and CNPS
Sagittaria
sanfordii
Sanford's
arrowhead
Alismataceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb (emergent)
MayOct(Nov)None None G3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1984-
01-01
©2013
Debra L.

Cook
Wolffia
brasiliensis
Brazilian
watermeal
Araceae perennial herb
(aquatic)
Apr-Dec None None G5 S2 2B.3 2001-
01-01
© 2021
Scot Loring
Showing 1 to 21 of 21 entries
Go to top
4/1/25, 3:45 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3812183:3812173:3912114:3912113:3912112:3812182:3812184:3812174:3812172:3812… 3/4 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1303
}
Suggested Citation:

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2025. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5.1). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 1 April 2025].
4/1/25, 3:45 PM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3812183:3812173:3912114:3912113:3912112:3812182:3812184:3812174:3812172:3812… 4/4 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1304
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area.

However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
Placer County, California
Local office
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Office
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
Federal Building
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 1/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1305
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 2/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1306
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ). 1 2
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 3/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1307

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:

Reptiles
Amphibians
Insects
Crustaceans

NAME STATUS
Northwestern Pond Turtle Actinemys marmorata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1111
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5425
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
There is proposed critical habitat for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Proposed Threatened
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7850
Threatened

NAME STATUS
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 4/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1308
Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

This location overlaps the critical habitat for the following species:

Bald & Golden Eagles
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8246
Endangered
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp Lepidurus packardi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2246
Endangered

NAME TYPE
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498#crithab
Final
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act .

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or golden eagles, or their habitats , should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below.

Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

Additional information can be found using the following links:
1 2
3 12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 5/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1309
There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-takemigratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservationmeasures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-andgolden-eagles-may-occur-project-action NAME
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 6/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1310
probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Effort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse. 12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 7/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1311

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply). To see a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.

It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Please contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office if you have questions.

Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .
1 2
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 8/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1312
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below.

Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-takemigratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-andgolden-eagles-may-occur-project-action 3 NAME
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 9/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1313
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Black Tern Chlidonias niger surinamenisis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3093
Breeds May 15 to Aug 20
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481
Breeds elsewhere
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 10/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1314
Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8350
Breeds Apr 1 to Sep 15
Nuttall's Woodpecker Dryobates nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia graminea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5513
Breeds Mar 1 to Sep 5
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds elsewhere
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743
Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Western Screech-owl Megascops kennicottii cardonensis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Breeds Mar 1 to Jun 30
Willet Tringa semipalmata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 11/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1315
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Yellow-billed Magpie Pica nuttalli
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9726
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 12/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1316
probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Belding's
Savannah
Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Black Tern
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bullock's Oriole

BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Common
Yellowthroat

BCC - BCR
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 13/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1317
Marbled
Godwit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Northern
Harrier

BCC - BCR
Nuttall's
Woodpecker

BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Santa Barbara
Song Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tricolored
Blackbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western
Screech-owl

BCC - BCR
Willet
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Yellow-billed
Magpie
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the 12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 14/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1318
locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure.

To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 15/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1319

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint.

On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page. 12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 16/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1320
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuge lands at this location.

Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.

This location overlaps the following wetlands:

FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
PEM1A

FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
PFOA

RIVERINE
R2UBH
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 17/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1321
NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies.

Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.

A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website
12/17/24, 4:11 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/4JM7RHX4OBCGLCXAQSOHTU7JEY/resources 18/18 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1322
Critical Habitat Report
Area of Interest (AOI) Information
Area : 203.39 km²
Dec 17 2024 16:21:22 Pacific Standard Time
12/17/24, 4:21 PM about:blank
about:blank 1/2
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1323
Summary
Name Count Area(km²) Length(m)
All Critical Habitat Polyline 5 N/A 31,380.83
All Critical Habitat Polygon 0 0 N/A
All Critical Habitat Polyline
# Listed Entity Common Name Scientific Name Length(m)
1 Steelhead [California Central
Valley DPS] Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss 31,380.83

12/17/24, 4:21 PM about:blank
about:blank 2/2
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1324
EFH Mapper Report
EFH Data Notice
Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) is defined by textual descriptions contained in the fishery management plans developed by the regional fishery management councils. In most cases mapping data can not fully represent the complexity of the habitats that make up EFH. This report should be used for general interest queries only and should not be interpreted as a definitive evaluation of EFH at this location. A location-specific evaluation of EFH for any official purposes must be performed by a regional expert. Please refer to the following links for the appropriate regional resources.

West Coast Regional Office
Query Results
Degrees, Minutes, Seconds: Latitude = 38º 52' 43" N, Longitude = 122º 40' 24" W Decimal Degrees: Latitude = 38.879, Longitude = -121.327 The query location intersects with spatial data representing EFH and/or HAPCs for the following species/management units.

EFH
No additional Essential Fish Habitats (EFH) were identified at the report location.

Pacific Salmon EFH
Link HUC Name Species/Management
Unit
Lifestage(s) Found at
Location
Management
Council FMP
Upper CoonUpper Auburn Chinook Salmon All Pacific Pacific Coast Salmon Plan
Atlantic Salmon
No Atlantic Salmon were identified at the report location.

HAPCs
No Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) were identified at the report location.

EFH Areas Protected from Fishing
No EFH Areas Protected from Fishing (EFHA) were identified at the report location.

Spatial data does not currently exist for all the managed species in this area. The following is a list of species or management units for which there is no spatial data. **For links to all EFH text descriptions see the complete data inventory: open data inventory --> Pacific Coastal Pelagic Species,
Jack Mackerel,
Pacific (Chub) Mackerel,
Pacific Sardine,
Northern Anchovy - Central Subpopulation,
Northern Anchovy - Northern Subpopulation,
Pacific Highly Migratory Species,
Bigeye Thresher Shark - North Pacific,
12/17/24, 4:19 PM EFH Report
https://www.habitat.noaa.gov/apps/efhmapper/efhreport/ 1/2 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1325
Spatial data does not currently exist for all the managed species in this area. The following is a list of species or management units for which there is no spatial data. **For links to all EFH text descriptions see the complete data inventory: open data inventory --> Bluefin Tuna - Pacific,
Dolphinfish (Dorado or Mahimahi) - Pacific,
Pelagic Thresher Shark - North Pacific,
Swordfish - North Pacific
12/17/24, 4:19 PM EFH Report
https://www.habitat.noaa.gov/apps/efhmapper/efhreport/ 2/2 Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1326

APPENDIX B
Representative Photographs (December 19, 2024)
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1327
Appendix B – Representative Photographs (December 19, 2024) 2021-245.02/Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Photo 1. Representative Photo of a Seasonal Wetland
within VPC High Land Cover (facing northeast).

Photo 2. Representative Photo of a Vernal Pool within
VPC High Land Cover (facing east).

Photo 3. Representative Photo of the Annual Grassland
within the VPC Intermediate Land Cover.
(facing northwest).

Photo 4. Representative Photo of the Annual Grassland
within the VPC Low Land Cover (facing east).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1328
Appendix B – Representative Photographs (December 19, 2024) 2021-245.02/Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project Photo 5. Representative Photo of Seasonal Wetland
Swale within the VPC Low Land Cover (facing north).

Photo 6. Representative Photo of a Vernal Pool and
Seasonal Wetland Swale within VPC Intermediate
Land Cover (facing south).

Photo 7. Representative Photo of the Disturbed Annual
Grassland within the VPC Intermediate Land Cover
(facing north).

Photo 8. Representative Photo of the Disturbed Annual
Grassland and Vernal Pool within the VPC Intermediate
Land Cover (facing north).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1329

APPENDIX C
Plant Species Observed (December 19, 2024)
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1330
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (December 19, 2024) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project
C-1 DRAFT
2021-245.02

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

APIACEAE CARROT FAMILY
Daucus carota* Queen Anne's lace
Eryngium castrense Great Valley button-celery

ASTERACEAE SUNFLOWER FAMILY
Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort
Centaurea solstitialis* Yellow star-thistle
Centromadia fitchii Fitch's spikeweed
Cichorium intybus* Chicory

BORAGINACEAE BORAGE FAMILY
Plagiobothrys stipitatus Slender popcorn-flower

CARYOPHYLLACEAE PINK FAMILY
Stellaria media* Common chickweed

CYPERACEAE SEDGE FAMILY
Eleocharis macrostachya Creeping spikerush

EUPHORBIACEAE SPURGE FAMILY
Croton setiger Turkey mullein

FABACEAE LEGUME FAMILY
Trifolium hirtum* Rose clover
Vicia sp.* Vetch

FAGACEAE OAK FAMILY
Quercus lobata Valley oak
Quercus wislizeni Interior live oak

GERANIACEAE GERANIUM FAMILY
Geranium molle* Dovefoot geranium

PLANTAGINACEAE PLANTAIN FAMILY
Plantago lanceolata* English plantain

POACEAE GRASS FAMILY
Bromus diandrus* Ripgut brome
Bromus hordeaceus* Soft brome
Cynodon dactylon* Bermuda grass
Elymus caput-medusae* Medusahead grass
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1331
Appendix C – Plant Species Observed (December 19, 2024) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project
C-2 DRAFT
2021-245.02

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME
Festuca perennis* Italian ryegrass
Sorghum halepense* Johnson grass

POLYGONACEAE BUCKWHEAT FAMILY
Rumex crispus* Curly dock
Rumex pulcher* Fiddle dock

ROSACEAE ROSE FAMILY
Rubus armeniacus* Himalayan blackberry

SALICACEAE WILLOW FAMILY
Salix exigua Sandbar willow
Notes: * = non-native species
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1332

APPENDIX D
Wildlife Species Observed (December 19, 2024)
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1333
Appendix D – Wildlife Species Observed (December 19, 2024) ECORP Consulting, Inc.

Scheiber Property-Lincoln Village 7 Project
D-1 DRAFT
2021-245.02
Scientific Name Common Name
Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed Hawk
Bubo virginianus Great Horned Owl
Melanerpes formicivorus Acorn Woodpecker
Sayornis nigricans Black Phoebe
Aphelocoma californica California Scrub-Jay
Sturnus vulgaris European Starling*
Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned Sparrow
Sturnella neglecta Western Meadowlark
Euphagus cyanocephalus Brewer's Blackbird
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1334

APPENDIX E
Master Conditions on Covered Activities Checklist
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1335
1 Placer County Conservation Program
Master Conditions on Covered Activities Checklist
(Certain conditions apply to all projects and have already been marked with a ‘Yes’) Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
General Conditions (refer to User’s Guide Chapter 7.2 and PCCP Chapter 6.3) General Condition 1, Watershed Hydrology and Water
Quality (PCCP 6.3.1.1)
General Condition 1 applies to project applicants if the project disturbs 1 or more acres of soil or whose project disturbs less than 1 acre, but the project is part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs 1 or more acres, then the applicant must obtain coverage under the State Water Board General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009- 0009-DWQ).

General Condition 2, Conservation Lands: Development
Interface Design Requirements (PCCP 6.3.1.2)
General Condition 2 applies when new infrastructure projects, and urban and rural development occur in or adjacent to Plan reserves, mitigation and conservation banks, and any other property protected by an in-perpetuity conservation
mechanism for natural lands management. The applicant will incorporate design requirements to minimize the indirect effects of development on these types of conservation lands in the permit area.

General Condition 3, Land Conversion (PCCP 6.3.1.3)
General Condition 3 applies to project applicants whose projects result in permanent natural land cover conversion and therefore must pay land conversion fees or contribute to the Reserve System This condition also includes criteria for permanent effect avoidance in the PFG and for low density rural development.

Yes
General Condition 4, Temporary Effects (PCCP 6.3.1.4)
General Condition 4 applies when the project results in temporary effects on natural land cover and the applicant wishes to apply temporary effect fees (lower than the fees applied under General Condition 3). The applicant must
describe how an area qualifies for the temporary effect fee.

General Condition 5, Conduct Worker Training (PCCP

6.3.1.5)
General Condition 5 applies to projects for which any
avoidance and minimization measures must be conducted
during construction.

Conditions to Avoid and Minimize Effects on Specific Natural Communities (PCCP Section 6.3.2) Community Condition 1, Wetland Avoidance and Minimization (Vernal Pool and Aquatic/Wetland Complex) (PCCP Section 6.3.2.1)
Community Condition 1.1 Avoidance of Vernal Pool
Complex Constituent Habitat
Community Condition 1.1 requires projects to first evaluate whether avoidance of effects on vernal pool complex
constituent habitat (also termed vernal pool wetlands) is advisable and feasible, as described below, and then mitigate for unavoidable effects to vernal pool wetlands, generally through payment of fees. Vernal pool wetlands include vernal pools, seasonal wetland in vernal pool complex, and seasonal swales (referred to in the HCP/NCCP as vernal pool constituent habitats). Applicant must identify AMMs specific to the project.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1336
2 Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
Community Condition 1.2 Avoidance of Aquatic/Wetland
Complex Habitat
Community Condition 1.2 requires projects to first evaluate whether avoidance of effects on aquatic/wetland complex constituent habitat (also termed non-vernal pool wetlands) is advisable and feasible, as described below, and then mitigate for unavoidable effects to non-vernal pool wetlands, generally through payment of fees. Non-vernal pool wetlands include fresh emergent marsh, lacustrine, and non-vernal pool
seasonal wetlands. This category includes flowing springs and long-duration seeps (associated with groundwater seepage) not located inside the Stream System. Applicant must identify AMMs specific to the project.

Community Condition 1.3 Aquatic/Wetland Complex
Impact Minimization Measures
Community Condition 1.3, requires projects with temporary effects on non-vernal pool wetlands or their buffers to implement Community Condition 1.3. If the project results in impacts on non-vernal pool wetlands or their buffers and the applicant cannot comply with Community Condition 1.3, then the impacts will be treated as permanent and addressed under Community Conditions 1.1 or 1.2. Applicant must identify Wetland Impact Minimization Criteria to qualify for temporary effects.

Community Condition 1.4 Salvage of Vernal Pool
Constituent Habitat
Community Condition 1.4 applies to projects that impact vernal pool constituent habitat. The applicant will coordinate with the PCA to grant adequate and timely access for potential salvage of wetland soil and biota as deemed appropriate.

Community Condition 2, Riverine and Riparian Avoidance and Minimization (PCCP Section 6.3.2.2) Community Condition 2.1 Riverine and Riparian Avoidance and Minimization
Community Condition 2.1, focusing specifically on riverine and riparian constituent habitat components and the 50-foot buffer off the edge of riparian vegetation associated with the Riverine/Riparian Complex community, is supplemental to Stream System Condition 1, Stream System Avoidance and
Minimization.

Community Condition 2.2 Minimize Riverine and Riparian
Effects
Community Condition 2.2 requires projects that cannot avoid riverine/riparian effects to minimize these effects. Projects with unavoidable impacts to riverine/riparian habitat will be required to adhere to minimization measures described in PCCP Table 6-1. In-stream and Stream System BMPs. Applicant must identify BMPs/AMMs specific to the project.

Community Condition 2.3 Riverine and Riparian
Restoration
Community Condition 2.3 requires projects to contribute to restoration as mitigation to compensate for loss of riverine or riparian constituent habitat either by onsite replacement and restoration and/or payment of additional fees to the PCA so that the restoration actions are undertaken by PCA offsite.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1337
3 Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
Community Condition 3, Valley Oak Woodland Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation (PCCP Section 6.3.2.3) Community Condition 3.1 Valley Oak Woodland Avoidance
and Minimization
Projects avoiding impacts to > 1 acre of valley oak woodland may consider that valley oak stand avoided and therefore the area may not be subject to land conversion fees. Community Condition 3.1 establishes the circumstances under which valley oak woodlands can be considered avoided under the PCCP.

Community Condition 3.2 Valley Oak Woodland and
Individual Valley Oak Trees Restoration
Projects must compensate for loss of Valley Oak Woodland natural community, and individual valley oak trees by paying the Plan land conversion fee.

Conditions to Avoid, Minimize, and Mitigate Effects on the Stream System (PCCP Chapter Section 6.3.3) Stream System Condition 1, Stream System Avoidance and
Minimization
Stream System Condition 1 requires design and
implementation of projects in such a way as to avoid and minimize adverse effects to the Stream System. Applicants can avoid or minimize Stream System impacts to reduce fees.

Stream System Condition 2, Stream System Mitigation:

Restoration
Stream System Condition 2 applies to all projects with
unavoidable effects on the Stream System. Where the project results in permanent or temporary impacts on the Stream System, effects shall be mitigated by appropriate restoration or enhancement.

Conditions to Minimize Effects on Covered Species (PCCP Section 6.3.5) Species Condition 1, Swainson’s Hawk (PCCP Section 6.3.5.6) SWHA 1 Surveys: Conduct planning-level surveys within
modeled habitat in the Valley of the project site and within 1,325 feet of project site well in advance of project
implementation. If the project cannot be designed to avoid active SWHA nest trees and the construction must occur during the nesting season (approximately February 1 to September 15), a preconstruction survey must be conducted no more than 15 days prior to ground disturbance.

SWHA 2 Applicable Measure: During the nesting season,
ground-disturbing activities within 1,320 feet of occupied nests or nests under construction will be prohibited. See PCCP Section

6.3.5.6.2 for further details on minimizing disturbance and buffer waivers.

SWHA 3 Applicable Measure: Active (within the last 5 years) SWHA nest trees on a project site will not be removed during the nesting season.

SWHA 4 Construction Monitoring: If an active nest is present within the project site or 1,320 feet of the project site, construction monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist and will focus on ensuring that activities do no occur within the buffer zone and that effects on SWHA are minimized.

Species Condition 2, California Black Rail (PCCP Section 6.3.5.7) CA Black Rail 1 Surveys: If a project/Covered Activity is within 500 feet of the perimeter of a fresh emergent wetland greater than 0.2 acre in size, a minimum of 4 surveys initiated between March 15 and May 31 and completed by June/early July must be Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1338
4 Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
conducted the year in which ground disturbance activities commence.

CA Black Rail 2 Applicable Measure: If the wetlands are occupied by CA black rail and the PCA does not grant take coverage, a buffer around the avoided wetland will be demarcated 500 feet from the outside perimeter of the occupied wetland and an exclusion fence installed.

CA Black Rail 3 Applicable Measure: If the PCA grants take coverage, clearing the habitat (or dewatering) will occur between September 15 and February 1 (outside the breeding season). If the project will not convert all of the wetland habitat, a buffer around the avoided wetland will be demarcated with exclusion fencing as a no-work area.

CA Black Rail 4 Construction Monitoring: If a wetland is occupied by CA black rail, construction monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that no Covered Activities occur within the buffer zone established around the occupied wetland, or if take allowance is granted outside of the breeding season, to ensure that adverse effects are minimized.

Species Condition 3, Western Burrowing Owl (PCCP Section 6.3.5.8) BUOW 1 Surveys: Conduct preconstruction surveys within
modeled habitat in the Valley, or as determined by a qualified biologist, of the project site and within a 250-foot accessible radius of project site. Two surveys must be conducted within 15 days prior to ground disturbance to establish the presence or absence of burrowing owls.

BUOW 2 Applicable Measure: If BUOW or evidence of presence is found during the breeding season (approximately February 1 – August 31), the applicant will avoid all nests that could be disturbed and establish a 250-foot non-disturbance buffer zone around nests. The buffer zone will be flagged or otherwise clearly marked.

BUOW 3 Applicable Measure: If BUOW or evidence of presence is found during the non-breeding season (approximately
September 1 – January 31), the applicant will establish a 160- foot non-disturbance buffer zone around active burrows. The buffer zone will be flagged or otherwise clearly marked.

BUOW 4 Applicable Measure: During the non-breeding season only, if a project cannot avoid occupied burrows after all alternative avoidance and minimization measures are
exhausted, as confirmed by the Wildlife Agencies, a qualified biologist may passively exclude birds from those burrows. A burrowing owl exclusion plan must be developed by a qualified biologist consistent with the most recent guidelines from the Wildlife Agencies and submitted to and approved by the PCA and Wildlife Agencies.

BUOW 5 Construction Monitoring: If a BUOW nest or active burrow is present within the project site, construction monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist and will focus on ensuring that activities do no occur within the buffer zone and that effects on BUOW are minimized.

Species Condition 4, Tricolored Blackbird (PCCP Section 6.3.5.9) Tricolored Blackbird 1 Surveys: Preconstruction planning-level surveys for nest colony sites must be conducted by a qualified biologist if the PCA-provided map indicates an active colony site occurs on the project site or within 1,300 feet of a colony site as well as those project sites located below 300 feet in elevation within modeled habitat. Surveys should be conducted at least twice with at least month between surveys during the nesting

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1339
5 Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
season 1 year prior to initial ground disturbance if feasible, and the year of ground disturbing for the Covered Activity (required).

If Covered Activities will occur in the project work area during the nesting season, three surveys shall be conducted within 15 days prior to the Covered Activity, with one of the surveys occurring within 5 days prior to the start of the Covered Activity.

Tricolored Blackbird 2 Surveys: If an active colony site is within 3 miles of the project site, a qualified biologist will conduct two surveys of foraging habitat within the project site and within a 1,300-foot radius around the project site to determine whether foraging habitat is being actively used by foraging tricolored blackbirds. The surveys will be conducted approximately one week apart, with the second survey occurring no more than 5 calendar days prior to ground-disturbing activities.

Tricolored Blackbird 3 Applicable Measures: If a tricolored blackbird nesting colony is found, avoidance and minimization measures shall be applied as outlined in PCCP Section 6.3.5.9.2.

These AMMs include prohibiting work during the nesting season (March 15 – July 31, or until chicks have fledged or the colony abandoned on its own) and establishing buffers.

Tricolored Blackbird 4 Applicable Measures: If construction activity or other Covered Activities disturb foraging tricolored blackbirds, as determined by a qualified biologist, avoidance and minimization measures shall be applied as outlined in PCCP Section 6.3.5.9.2. These AMMs include prohibiting work during the nesting season (March 15 – July 31, or until chicks have fledged or the colony abandoned on its own) and establishing buffers.

Tricolored Blackbird 5 Construction Monitoring: If a tricolored blackbird nesting colony is present within the project site, construction monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist and will focus on ensuring that activities do no occur within the buffer zone and that effects on tricolored blackbird nesting are minimized.

Tricolored Blackbird 6 Construction Monitoring: If actively used foraging habitat is present within the project site, construction monitoring will be conducted by a qualified biologist and will focus on ensuring that activities do no occur within the buffer zone and that effects on tricolored blackbird foraging are minimized.

Species Condition 5, Giant Garter Snake (PCCP Section 6.3.5.10) If certain communities are present on or adjacent to a project site and within the geographic range of GGS habitat in the Plan Area (see PCCP Appendix D, Species Accounts), a qualified biologist will conduct a survey to assess whether the
communities provide suitable habitat for GGS.

GGS 1 Applicable Measures: To avoid effects on GGS aquatic habitat, the project applicant will conduct no in-water/inchannel activity and will maintain a permanent 200-foot nondisturbance buffer from the outer edge of suitable habitat. If the project cannot avoid effects of construction activities, the project applicant will implement AMMs outlined in PCCP Section

6.3.5.10.2. Species Condition 6, California Red-legged Frog, Foothill Yellow-legged Frog, and Western Pond Turtle (PCCP
Section 6.3.5.11)
No specific measures--refer to Section 6.3.5.11 for list of conditions on covered activities that apply to these species

Species Condition 7, Central Valley Steelhead and Central Valley Fall-/Late Fall-Run Chinook Salmon (Salmonids)
(PCCP Section 6.3.5.12)

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1340
6 CARP Condition
Applies
to Project How Condition is/will be Met
CARP Condition 1a: All work within the Plan Area that
impacts Aquatic Resources of Placer County shall be
completed according to the plans and documents included in the PCCP/CARP application, Standard USACE 404 permit if applicable, Water Quality Certification, or, if applicable, WDR. All changes to those plans shall be reported to the Local Jurisdiction. Minor changes may require an
amendment to the CARP Authorization, Water Quality
Certification, or, if applicable, WDR. Substantial changes may render the CARP authorization, USACE permit, Water
Quality Certification, if applicable, WDR, void, and a new application may be required.

Measure
Applies
to
Project How Condition is/will be Met
Identify which Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings apply for the project.

Salmonid 1: Fish Passage Design
Salmonid 2: Fish Passage During Construction
Salmonid 3: Pre-construction Relocation
Salmonid 4: Spawning Gravel Cleaning
Salmonid 5: Use of Riprap When Necessary
Invertebrate Species Conditions
Species Condition 8, Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle
(PCCP Section 6.3.5.13)
Planning surveys for VELB are required for Covered Activities within modeled habitat. The project applicant will apply avoidance and minimization measures as specified in the USFWS’s Conservation Guidelines for the Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (USFWS 1999) or current Wildlife Agency approved avoidance and minimization procedure. When take is authorized, the project applicant must coordinate with the PCA to provide transplants and seedlings/cuttings for planting in suitable habitat on the Reserve System.

Species Condition 9, Conservancy Fairy Shrimp (PCCP
Section 6.3.5.14)
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp 1: Surveys for Conservancy fairy shrimp are required if vernal pools and seasonal wetlands occur on the project site and if the project site falls within the survey boundary depicted in PCCP Figure 5-7. This area is limited, Conservancy Fairy Shrimp 2 – 5 apply if species occurrences are identified during the survey. Please see PCCP Sections 6.3.5.14.2 – 6.3.5.14.3

Species Condition 10, Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Vernal Pool Tadpole Shrimp (PCCP Section 6.3.5.15)
Surveys are required in vernal pools that will be lost to Covered Activities to determine the occupancy rate of vernal pool fairy shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp in these wetlands. The Occupancy Rate Standards will be determined after at least 37 wetted acres of vernal pools have been surveyed, known as the Initial Survey Phase.

Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Tadpole Shrimp 1: Wet season surveys will be conducted for vernal pool fairy shrimp and vernal pool tadpole shrimp in vernal pools, as determined by wetland delineation during the Initial Survey Phase. The PCA can advise applicants if the Initial Survey Phase applies to their project.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1341
7 CARP Condition
Applies
to Project How Condition is/will be Met
CARP Condition 1b: All deviations from plans and
documents provided with the Application and approved by the Local Jurisdiction must be reported to the Local
Jurisdiction immediately.

Yes
CARP Condition 2: Any construction within the Stream
System shall be implemented in a way to avoid and
minimize impacts to vegetation outside the construction area. All preserved wetlands, other Aquatic Resources of Placer County, and the Stream Zone shall be protected with bright construction fencing. Temporary fencing shall be removed immediately upon completion of the project.

CARP Condition 3: Erosion control measures shall be
specified as part of the CARP application, and the
application is not complete without them. All erosion
control specified in the permit application shall be in place and functional before the beginning of the rainy season and shall remain in place until the end of the season. Site supervisors shall be aware of weather forecasts year-round and shall be prepared to establish erosion control on short notice for unusual rain events. Erosion control features shall be inspected and maintained after each rainfall period.

Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, removal of accumulated silt and the replacement of damaged barriers and other features.

Yes
CARP Condition 4: All required setbacks shall be
implemented according to the HCP/NCCP Condition 4
(HCP/NCCP Section 6.1.2).

Yes
CARP Condition 5: All work in aquatic resources within the Stream System shall be restricted to periods of low flow and dry weather between April 15 and October 15, unless
otherwise permitted by Local Jurisdictions and approved by the appropriate State and federal regulatory agency. Work within aquatic resources in the Stream System outside of the specified periods may be permitted under some
circumstances. The Applicant must provide the Local
Jurisdiction with the following information: a) the extent of work already completed; b) specific details about the work yet to be completed; and c) an estimate of the time needed to complete the work in the Stream System.

CARP Condition 6: Weather forecasts should be monitored, and erosion control established before all storm events. Yes CARP Condition 7: Following work in a stream channel, the low flow channel shall be returned to its natural state to the extent possible. The shape and gradient of the streambed shall be restored to the same gradient that existed before the work to the extent possible.

CARP Condition 8: Except for site preparation for the
installation and removal of dewatering structures, no
excavation is allowed in flowing streams unless dredging WDRs are issued by the RWQCB. Detailed plans for
dewatering must be part of the Application.

CARP Condition 9: Temporary crossings as described in the Application shall be installed no earlier than April 15 and shall be removed no later than October 15, unless otherwise permitted by Local Agencies and approved by the
appropriate State and federal regulatory agency. This work window could be modified at the discretion of the Local Jurisdiction and the CDFW.

CARP Condition 10: No vehicles shall be allowed within the Stream System. If the project requires in channel work, necessary earth-moving and construction equipment shall Yes
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1342
8 CARP Condition
Applies
to Project How Condition is/will be Met
be allowed within the Stream System after the section of stream where work is performed is dewatered. The
equipment and vehicles used in the Stream System shall be described in the Application.

CARP Condition 11: Staging areas for equipment,
materials, fuels, lubricants, and solvents shall be located outside the stream system, channel, and banks and away
from all preserved aquatic resources. All stationary
equipment operated within the Stream System must be
positioned over drip-pans. Equipment entering the Stream System must be inspected daily for leaks that could
introduce deleterious materials into aquatic resources. All discharges, unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the Local Jurisdiction. The Local Jurisdiction shall then immediately notify the appropriate state and federal agencies.

Yes
CARP Condition 12: Cement, concrete, washings, asphalt, paint, coating materials, oil, other petroleum products, and other materials that could be hazardous to aquatic life shall be prevented from reaching streams, lakes, or other water bodies. These materials shall be placed a minimum of 50 feet away from aquatic environments. All discharges,
unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the Local Jurisdiction. The Local Jurisdiction shall then immediately notify the appropriate state and federal
agencies
Yes
CARP Condition 13: During construction, no litter or
construction debris shall be dumped into water bodies or other aquatic resources; nor shall it be placed in a location where it might be moved by wind or water into aquatic
resources. All construction debris shall be removed from the site upon completion of the project.

Yes
CARP Condition 14: Only herbicides registered with the
California Department of Pesticide Regulation shall be used in streams, ponds, and lakes, and shall be applied in
accordance with label instructions. A list of all pesticides that may be used in the project area shall be submitted to the Local Jurisdiction before use.

Yes
CARP Condition 15: Before beginning construction, the
project Applicant must have a valid CARP authorization or waiver notice. In order to obtain a permit, the Applicant must pay all mitigation fees or purchase appropriate credits from an agency-approved mitigation bank.

CARP Condition 16: A copy of the CARP conditions and
Water Quality Certification and WDRs shall be given to
individuals responsible for activities on the site. Site personnel, (employees, contractors, and subcontractors) shall be adequately informed and trained to implement all permit, Water Quality Certification, and WDR conditions and shall have a copy of all permits available onsite at all times for review by site personnel and agencies.

CARP Condition 17: Work shall not disturb active bird
nests until young birds have fledged. To avoid impacts to nesting birds, any disturbance shall occur between
September 1 and February 1 prior to the nesting season.

Tree removal, earthmoving or other disturbance at other times is at the Local Jurisdiction’s discretion and will require surveys by a qualified biologist to determine the absence of nesting birds prior to the activity.

Yes
CARP Condition 18: All trees marked for removal within the Stream System must be shown on maps included with the
Application. Native trees over five inches diameter at breast Yes
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1343
9 CARP Condition
Applies
to Project How Condition is/will be Met
height (DBH) shall not be removed without the consent of the Local Jurisdiction.

CARP Condition 19: The Local Jurisdiction shall be notified immediately if threatened or endangered species that are not Covered Species are discovered during construction
activities. The Local Jurisdiction shall suspend work and notify the USFWS, NMFS, and the CDFW for guidance.

Yes
CARP Condition 20: Wildlife entering the construction site shall be allowed to leave the area unharmed or shall be flushed or herded humanely in a safe direction away from the site.

Yes
CARP Condition 21: All pipe sections shall be capped or inspected for wildlife before being placed in a trench. Pipes within a trench shall be capped at the end of each day to prevent entry by wildlife, except for those pipes that are being used to divert stream flow.

Yes
CARP Condition 22: At the end of each workday, all open trenches will be provided with a ramp of dirt or wood to allow trapped animals to escape. Yes
CARP Condition 23: If human remains or cultural artifacts are discovered during construction, the Applicant shall stop work and notify the Local Jurisdiction immediately. Work will not continue in the area until a qualified coroner and archaeologist have evaluated the remains, conducted a
survey, prepared an assessment, and required consultations are completed.

Yes
Lake and Streambed Alternation Agreement Conditions:

Additional conditions may be required by CDFW if the
Covered Activity is subject to a LSAA.

Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Western
Placer County Aquatic Resource Program (CARP)
Updated November 17, 2022
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1344

APPENDIX F
Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program Best Management Practices Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1345
Appendix C-1
Best Management Practices (BMPs)
for the Western Placer County Aquatic Resource Program
(CARP)
I.Introduction
The purpose of this document is to define the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be required for all projects permitted through the County Aquatic Resource Program (CARP).

II.Definitions
Applicant. A private landowner, department or division of a Local Agency, or other party who submits an Application to the County for a CARP Authorization. The CARP document refers to the applicant or “project proponent” in the same sense.

Aquatic resources. Aquatic resources are “Aquatic Resources of Placer County”.

Aquatic Resources of Placer County. Aquatic Resources of Placer County include Waters of the U.S.; Waters of the State; Stream Systems, and constituent habitats for Aquatic/Wetland Complex, Vernal Pool Complex and Riverine/Riparian Complex within the Stream System and includes all definitions described in Section 3.3 of the CARP.

Bed-and-bank morphology. The shape of a stream channel that exhibits a clear channel and bank created by evidence of flowing water. Water may flow through upland swales during high rainfall events, but not with enough duration or force to create bed and bank morphology.

Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs are avoidance and minimization measures designed to reduce or avoid an adverse effect on a particular resource. BMPs described in this chapter were based on Permittees’ current practices.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The agency that enforces Section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code, which authorizes and includes avoidance, minimization and mitigation measures for project activities that would substantially divert or obstruct water, change or use material from or deposit debris waste or other material where it could pass into the bed, bank, or channel of a river, stream, or lake.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1346
CARP. The Western Placer County Aquatic Resource Program. A component of the Placer County Conservation Program (PCCP) The CARP provides a structure for protecting aquatic resources in western Placer County while streamlining the environmental permitting process for impacts to aquatic resources.

CARP Application. The application that an Applicant must provide to the Local Jurisdiction to obtain an Aquatic Resource Permit, as explained in the CARP, Chapter 5, Section 5.2..

CARP Authorization. An authorization to impact Aquatic Resources of Placer County issued by the Local Jurisdictions to an Applicant for an HCP/NCCP Covered Activity that will affect aquatic resources, as described in the CARP, Chapter 7. CARP authorization.

CARP Manual. The manual that sets forth the procedures for implementing the CARP. The CARP Manual contains examples of the forms and supporting documents for the CARP.

Construction zone. The limit of project construction plus equipment staging areas and access roads.

Covered Activity. A Covered Activity as described in Chapter 2 of the HCP/NCCP and Section 1.3 of the CARP. Covered activities may be Development Projects, programs or operations and maintenance activities. To be covered under state and federal permits issued for the PCCP, Covered Activities must meet avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation requirements set forth in the HCP/NCCP and CARP for certain species of fish and wildlife and their habitat, including measures to protect Aquatic Resources of Placer County.

Dewater. To remove water temporarily from a work area so that a structure can be built.

Dewatering structures. Pumps, pipes, dams, coffer dams, and other structures designed to remove water from the work area.

Discharge of fill material. The discharge of material to Aquatic Resources of the County that has the effect of eliminating aquatic resources from a project site.

Enhancement. The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of an aquatic resource to heighten, intensify, or improve a specific aquatic resource function(s).

Enhancement results in the gain of selected aquatic resource function(s), but may also lead to a decline in other aquatic resource function(s). Enhancement does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area. Community and species-specific enhancement concepts can be found in the HCP/NCCP.

Erodible materials. Material that is easily eroded by hydrologic forces such as soil or small gravels.

Erosion control measures. Methods implemented during and after construction to ensure water quality in the aquatic resources. These are sometimes referred to as Best Management Practices (BMPs).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1347
Exception. An allowance for reductions in mandated setback distances necessary to allow reasonable use and development of a property based on the variety of constraints and factors that may affect the property.

Functions. Functions mean the physical, chemical, and biological processes that occur in ecosystems.

Groundwater. Water beneath the surface of the earth within the zone below the water table in which the soil is completely saturated with water but does not include water that flows in known and definite channels.

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). A habitat conservation plan (HCP) is a document that meets federal ESA requirements and enables local agencies to allow projects and activities to occur in endangered species’ habitats. In exchange, those projects and activities must incorporate HCP-prescribed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for adverse effects on natural communities and endangered species.

Intermittent stream. Intermittent streams have bed-and-bank morphology but are distinct from perennial streams in that they are seasonal and cease to flow for some portion of the year. They have a broad range of flow duration: some cease flowing shortly after the end of the rainy season, whereas others flow until fall but cease flowing briefly before the onset of the next rainy season. Groundwater is a significant source of water for intermittent streams, and intermittent streams may also be influenced by leaky canals, irrigation, and urban runoff. Intermittent streams may support a Riparian Zone similar to that found in association with perennial streams. Riparian vegetation can be patchy or continuous.

Land Conversion Authorization. Means any permit or approval that authorizes a ground disturbing activity, including, but not limited to, specific plan, tentative map, parcel map, conditional use permit, minor use permit, administrative review permit, design/site agreement, variance, grading permit, grading plan, improvement plan, and building permit. Also includes approvals for County-sponsored capital improvement projects and operations and maintenance activities.

Lake. Natural water bodies and reservoirs. Western Placer County does not have natural lakes. Large ponds with more than 20 percent open water that are not periodically dredged are treated as lakes.

Local Jurisdictions. The Permittees that are also local governments with land use authority.

There are two Local Jurisdictions described in the PCCP, the City of Lincoln (City), and the County of Placer (County). The Local Jurisdictions are the only Permittees with the authority to grant Land Conversion Authorizations on Development Projects that are considered Covered Activities under the HCP/NCCP and CARP.

Low flow channel. The narrowest channel within a broader stream channel that carries water during periods of low flow, particularly in intermittent and perennial streams during the summer months.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1348
Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). A natural community conservation plan (NCCP) is the State of California counterpart to the federal HCP. It provides a means of complying with California’s Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCP Act) and securing take authorization at the State level. The primary objective of the NCCP program is to conserve natural communities at the ecosystem scale while accommodating compatible land uses.

Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). The ordinary high-water mark generally corresponds to the upper limit on the streambank of a two-year storm event for riverine systems and corresponds to the spillway elevation of lacustrine features. The ordinary high-water mark in a riverine or lacustrine system is the limit of Aquatic Resources of Placer County in those systems.

Other waters. A term used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to designate waters of the United States that are not wetlands or special aquatic sites as defined by USACE and USEPA regulations. Rivers, streams, lakes, and large ponds are not wetlands and are generally called other waters on aquatic resource delineation maps.

Palustrine system. Palustrine systems are non-tidal wetlands characterized by the presence of hydrophytic trees, shrubs, and emergent vegetation (vegetation that is rooted below water but grows above the surface). Palustrine wetlands range from permanently saturated (e.g., perennial marsh) to land that is wet only seasonally (e.g., seasonal wetlands and vernal pools).

Permit conditions. Permit conditions are appended to an Aquatic Resource Permit at the time the Permit is issued. Permittees must comply with all permit conditions. Section 7.5 of the CARP Manual provides a set of standard conditions that are applied to all permits. In some circumstances, the Local Agencies may impose additional conditions.

Permittee. An Applicant who has received a CARP Authorization from the County or the City.

PCWA acts as both applicant and permittee for its own activities.

Placer Conservation Authority (PCA). Means the joint exercise of powers agency formed by and among the County and the City of Lincoln pursuant to the Joint Powers Act, Gov. Code § 6500 et seq.. Oversees implementation of PCCP on behalf of the Local Jurisdictions.

Placer County Conservation Program (PCCP). The Placer County Conservation Program (PCCP) applies to western Placer County and specific areas where conservation activities will take place in neighboring Sutter County. The goal of the PCCP is to provide an effective framework to protect, enhance, and restore the natural resources in specific areas of western Placer County while streamlining environmental permitting for Covered Activities. Within this framework, the PCCP will achieve conservation goals, comply with state and federal environmental regulations, accommodate anticipated urban and rural growth, and permit the construction and maintenance of infrastructure needed to serve the county’s population. The PCCP includes three separate, but complementary, components that support two sets of state and federal permits:

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1349

1. Western Placer County Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan

2. Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program

3. Western Placer County In-Lieu Fee Program.

Project. For the purposes of the CARP, a project is a specific activity or activities that are to be covered by permits for impacts to Aquatic Resources of Placer County. Project also refers to the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

Project area. The area in which the proposed project would occur. Usually corresponds with parcel boundary lines.

Project footprint. The area that would be directly impacted or affected by the proposed project. Usually corresponds to the limits of the construction in the plans and specifications for the project.

Qualified Biologist. A qualified biologist must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in biology, environmental studies, fisheries, geomorphology, or related field, and have at least two years of related work experience.

Resource Agencies. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFS), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and, in Placer County, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB).

Rehabilitation. The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural/historic functions to a degraded aquatic resource.

Rehabilitation results in a gain in aquatic resource function, but does not result in a gain in aquatic resource area.

Restoration. The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural/historic functions to a former or degraded aquatic resource. For the purpose of tracking net gains in aquatic resource area, restoration is divided into two categories: reestablishment and rehabilitation. Species specific restoration concepts can be found in the HCP/NCCP.

Riparian Zone. The constituent habitat comprising the band of hydrophytic trees and shrubs that are adjacent to perennial and intermittent streams. Riparian habitat relies on streams with sufficient flow duration or near surface groundwater to support woody hydrophytes. In western Placer County, valley oak (Quercus lobata), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), and are typical riparian tree species. Willows (Salix spp.) and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) are typical shrub species. The Riparian Zone is measured from the outermost canopy edge of the riparian species or from the top-of-bank, whichever is greater. Riparian habitat within the Stream System is considered an Aquatic Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1350
Resource of Placer County. Riparian vegetation outside the Stream System is subject to the requirements of the HCP/NCCP but is not considered an Aquatic Resource of Placer County.

Riverine system. Riverine systems are water conveyance systems that include rivers, streams, and their tributaries. These features are linear, non-wetland aquatic resources that carry high velocity flows and have a sparsely vegetated stream bed. High flows create bed-andbank morphology, and the USACE jurisdictional line is the OHWM. Names used to describe riverine features include, but are not limited to, rivers, streams, creeks, drainages, ditches, and canals, all of which occur in Placer County. These riverine features may be perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral. Riverine systems’ bed-and-bank morphology may be limited to narrow scour lines in ephemeral streams. A measurable OHWM distinguishes riverine systems from otherwise similar palustrine systems, such as wetland swales. Riverine systems in western Placer County often have a palustrine fringe component (wetlands along the banks) and may support woody riparian vegetation. Like lacustrine systems, riverine systems are considered “other waters”.

Seep/Spring. Seeps and springs are points of groundwater discharge that usually occur on slopes. Seeps generally lack the flowing water of springs. Nearly all the groundwater discharge areas in Western Placer County are low-volume and considered seeps. Seeps and springs typically support herbaceous hydrophytic vegetation including black sand spikerush (Eleocharis pachycarpa), pennyroyal (Mentha pulegium), and dense-flowered spike primrose (Epilobium densiflorum).

Sensitive landcover types. Fragile habitats or ecosystems that are susceptible to impacts from encroachment.

Special aquatic sites. Special aquatic sites are defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency at 40 CFR Part 230 Subpart E. These include sanctuaries and refuges, wetlands, mud flats, vegetated shallows, coral reefs, and riffle and pool complexes. Only wetlands and riffle and pool complexes occur in western Placer County.

Spring. Similar to seeps, except usually exhibiting flowing water for part of the year.

Stream channel. The area of a stream where normal to high flows occur. It is usually marked by bed-and-bank morphology.

Stream System. The stream channel (wet or dry) and the surrounding area including any area subject to flooding in a 100-year event as determined by the FEMA or project specific information; whichever is more accurate or the outermost limit of a variable-width boundary measured outward from the edge of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Further details are provided in CARP Section 3.6, and Stream System boundaries are schematically illustrated in Figure 3-2. The Stream System boundary is truncated at the point where the watershed falls below 40 acres in extent..

Stream Zone. Defined by the Department of Fish and Wildlife as the stream channel through which water and sediment flow, have flowed, or are capable of flowing. It is delineated by the top of the bank or the outer edge of the riparian canopy, whichever is more landward. Where Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1351
riparian habitat is lacking, the Stream Zone is the top of the bank. The Stream Zone is embedded within the Stream System.

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). A plan that describes the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used to comply with Section 402 of the federal Clean Water Act. It applies primarily to construction activities.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The USACE regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, pursuant to Section 404 of the federal CWA.

Value. The value to society that accrues from the function of wetlands and other aquatic resources. For example, wetlands that store water during storm events have value in flood control.

Vernal pool. Vernal pools are seasonally inundated wetlands that form in relatively shallow soil depressions underlain by a water-restricting layer such as clay, cemented alluvium, or volcanic basalt at or near the surface. These depressions fill with rainwater, near surface groundwater and/or runoff from adjacent areas during the winter and may remain inundated until spring or early summer, sometimes filling and emptying multiple times during the wet season. Vernal pools are typically characterized by endemic plants species.

In Placer County, vernal pools are typically between 3-16 inches in depth measured vertically from the lowest point in the pool to the spillway. Vernal pools are differentiated from other seasonal wetlands by the distinct flora that are present. Examples of vernal pool flora include Plagiobothrys stipitatus, Lasthenia fremontii, Eryngium vaseyi, Navarretia leucocephala, and Psilocarphus brevissimus.

Waters of the State (WOS). Waters of the state include “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” (Water Code section 13050(e)). In Placer County, examples include, but are not limited to, rivers, streams, lakes, marshes, mudflats, unvegetated seasonally ponded areas, drainage swales, sloughs, wet meadows, natural ponds, vernal pools, seasonal wetlands, and riparian woodlands. Waters of the State also include isolated features that are not regulated by the USACE. Examples of isolated waters include man-made, off-stream ponds. WOS are included in Aquatic Resources of Placer County.

Waters of the United States (WOUS). Waters of the United States means all waters and wetlands over which the USACE and the USEPA are granted jurisdiction in the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section§ 1251, et seq. as defined in 33 CFR Part 328.

Watershed. A land area that drains to a common waterway, such as a stream, river, lake, estuary, wetland, or ultimately the ocean.

Wetland delineation. A map of a property showing the location and extent of ponds, lakes, rivers, creeks, streams, marshes, seeps, springs, vernal pools, or other wetlands that occur there. Wetland delineations must be conducted according to certain standards established by the Corps and must be reviewed by the Local Jurisdiction for completeness.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1352
Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Most wetlands are considered waters of the United States, but isolated wetlands are not regulated by the USACE. The County and City regulate wetlands and isolated waters when a Development Project is a Covered Activity. Wetlands in western Placer County include seasonal wetlands, vernal pools, seeps and springs, marshes, fringe wetlands, and wetland swales.

III.General Measures (good housekeeping practices)
A. Scheduling
All construction within the Stream System, in or near Aquatic Resources of Placer County (within 50 feet) should be scheduled around the weather to better manage erosion and sediment control. The following measures shall be taken to reduce the amount of soil exposed to erosion by weather:
• Land disturbance activities should be avoided or minimized between October 15 and May 1.
• Weather shall be checked prior to the start of work.
• Work in streams containing listed salmonid species shall be limited to the May 15 through October 15 work-window.
• Maintain sufficient erosion and sediment control materials onsite at all times, including during the dry season, to be able to effectively protect the site in advance of any storms.

B. Pre-Project Measures
It is important to clearly define the boundaries of the project with fencing and flagging.

Implementation of the following measures will minimize disturbance of sensitive areas and habitats. These measures should be in place prior to the start of ground breaking activities. • Prior to construction, the project proponent shall be required to prepare an erosion and sediment control plan or Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for projects that disturb one (1) acre or more of soil. New construction within the project footprint can alter watershed hydrology and introduce new pollution sources that may affect water quality in local streams. The erosion and sediment control plan or SWPPP shall describe site design planning approaches that will protect water quality by preventing and reducing the adverse impacts of stormwater pollutants and increases in peak runoff rate and volume. Such approaches include hydrologic source control measures that focus on the protection of natural resources and the reduction of impervious surfaces. • All areas of vegetation to be preserved shall be clearly marked with flagging or fencing.

Sensitive habitats to be avoided such as wetlands, elderberry shrubs, or heritage oak Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1353
trees shall be fenced off to prevent construction equipment from damaging those habitats.
• Silt fencing or other sediment trapping methods shall be installed between areas where soil will be exposed and Aquatic Resources of Placer County to minimize the transport of sediment off the site.
• Temporary barriers shall be constructed to keep wildlife out of construction sites. • All staging areas shall be clearly marked with flagging or fencing and located a minimum of 100 feet away from Aquatic Resources of Placer County when possible. • During construction, traffic speeds on all unpaved surfaces shall be limited to 15 miles per hour or less.
• The prime contractor shall suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (including instantaneous gusts) are excessive and dust is impacting adjacent properties. • In order to minimize wind driven dust during construction, the prime contractor shall apply methods such as surface stabilization, establishment of a vegetative cover, paving, (or use another method to control dust as approved by the individual jurisdiction). • The contractor shall suspend all grading operations when fugitive dust exceeds Placer County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Rule 228 (Fugitive Dust) limitations. The prime contractor shall be responsible for having an individual who is California Air Resources Board (CARB)-certified to perform Visible Emissions Evaluations (VEE). This individual shall evaluate compliance with Rule 228 on a weekly basis. It is to be noted that fugitive dust is not to exceed 40% opacity and not go beyond the property boundary at any time. Lime or other drying agents utilized to dry out wet grading areas shall not exceed Placer County APCD Rule 228 Fugitive Dust limitations. Operators of vehicles and equipment found to exceed opacity limits will be notified by APCD and the equipment must be repaired within 72 hours.

C. Project Implementation
Once a project is underway, it is important to maintain the following conditions. • All sites are required to utilize a combination of Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as fiber rolls, straw waddles, mulch, tarps, sand bags, etc. that effectively protect the site and prevent anything but clean rainwater from running off site. • Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be sited on previously disturbed areas or on non-sensitive non-native grassland land cover types, when these sites are available, to minimize risk of direct discharge into riparian areas or other sensitive land cover types. When such sites are not available, staging shall occur on the road used to access the site. Standard BMPs, such as those developed in the West Placer Storm Water Quality Design Manual pertaining to staging must be utilized.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1354
• As required for all projects, all species survey protocols shall be followed within the construction zone. The survey area shall be expanded beyond the project footprint whenever possible to help identify covered species and their habitats so that impacts on covered species that occur adjacent to the construction zone can be minimized. • No erodible materials such as loose soil shall be deposited into watercourses. Brush, loose soils, or other debris material shall not be stockpiled within stream channels or within 100 feet of stream banks or any Aquatic Resources of Placer County that is being avoided.
• All sediment trapping methods, such as silt fence or straw wattles, shall be inspected and maintained on a daily basis.
• On-site monitoring shall be conducted by a qualified biologist throughout the construction period to ensure that disturbance limits, BMPs, and Plan restrictions are being implemented properly.
• Prior to approval of Grading or Improvement Plans, on project sites greater than one acre, the applicant shall submit a Construction Emission / Dust Control Plan to the Placer County APCD.
• Construction vehicles leaving the site shall be cleaned to prevent dust, silt, mud, and dirt from being released or tracked off-site.
• All exposed soil shall be covered with bio degradable erosion control measures such as straw wattles and erosion control blankets. Such measures must be installed if rain is forecasted.
• Portions of the project that occur in streams (e.g., bridge or culvert construction) shall comply with the BMPs listed under the In-Stream Projects section bellow.

D. Post-project Practices
Following completion of project construction:
• All construction material, trash, and debris including fencing and flagging shall be removed from the project site and properly disposed of off-site. • The applicant shall revegetate all disturbed areas.
• All temporarily disturbed areas, such as staging areas, shall be returned to pre-project conditions or improved with native plants within two years of project completion. • Geotextiles, blankets, and mats shall be installed on any exposed slopes of 3:1 or greater as these slopes are highly susceptible to erosion. These slopes shall also be hydroseeded with a native seed mix to minimize soil erosion.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1355
• Cut and fill slopes shall be revegetated with native plants if possible, or with non-invasive plants suitable for the altered soil conditions.
• Invasive plants within the project area and any construction staging areas shall be removed to prevent the spread of these species into nearby or adjacent reserves. • Vegetation and debris shall be managed in and near culverts and under and near bridges to ensure that entryways remain open and visible to wildlife and that the passage through the culvert or under the bridge remains clear. • All structures constructed for wildlife movement (tunnels, culverts, underpasses, fences) shall be monitored by the PCA, and repairs made promptly to ensure that the structure is in proper condition. For facilities owned by entities not participating in the PCCP, the PCA will coordinate with these entities to ensure regular monitoring through access and data collection agreements reached with these entities.

IV.In-Stream Projects
In-stream projects—such as flood protection projects, construction of new bridges, repair or rehabilitation of existing bridges, water supply capital projects, and other development may affect wildlife, aquatic species, and habitats by discharging sediment, disturbing earth and riparian vegetation, and altering hydrologic and hydraulic characteristics of water bodies.

Impacts to streams should be avoided wherever possible. See section 4.7.1 of the CARP for Stream System Avoidance guidelines. For projects where Stream System impacts are unavoidable, projects must be designed to minimize adverse impacts on stream morphology, aquatic and riparian habitat, and flow, and must adhere to the BMPs listed under IV.C. Stream System Impact Minimization.

A. Stream Protection
Projects occurring in the proximity of a flowing body of water such as a stream or creek require additional protection from erosion and sedimentation to protect the water quality of these features. Permits may be required from the Corps, CVRWQCB, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the National Marine Fisheries Service depending on the extent of impacts and the resources that are present in and adjacent to the waterway. The CVRWQCB may require water sampling before, during, and after project activities to ensure that the project is not negatively impacting water quality.

Temporary Stream Crossings
Temporary stream crossings such as culverts, fords, and bridges can help prevent and/or reduce stream bed erosion and sediment from entering the waterway. Spanning the waterway is the preferred temporary crossing as this allows construction equipment to cross without coming in contact with the bed or bank of the waterway. Culverts may be used for perennial or intermittent streams if spanning the waterway is cost prohibitive. Fords may be used only on intermittent or ephemeral drainages during the dry season when water has ceased to flow. The following measures must be employed for temporary stream crossings:

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1356
• For bridges or culverts, the structure design must be prepared under the direction and approval of a registered civil or structural engineer
• To prevent water backing up or washouts during rain events, any temporary structure shall not constrict the waterway flow.
• Crossings shall be constructed in the dry season (May 1 to October 15) or in the case of salmonid streams, May 15 to October 15.
• Adjacent construction roadways and work areas shall be stabilized. • Removal of adjacent vegetation shall be minimized to the extent possible. • Vehicles shall not be operated, stored, fueled or maintained in the wet or dry portions of the waterway without authorization of the County.
• Drip pans must be placed under vehicles/equipment on temporary stream crossing structures that remain idle from more than an hour. Being in such proximity to a water course, this measure and others implemented with it shall be installed correctly and maintained to prevent any polluting discharge.
• Any incident of discharge requires notifying the CVRWQCB of the noncompliance. • Inspect temporary stream crossings weekly and after significant rain events for water flow blockage, sediment buildup, trapped debris, structural damage, riprap displacement or stream bed erosion. Verify sediment buildup is removed regularly. • Temporary crossings must be removed once they are no longer needed and the waterway must be restored to its original condition.

Bank Stabilization
It is essential to stabilize the banks of streams and channels when working around these features to minimize turbidity and sediment input into the waterway. The potential for discharging sediment and other pollutants into waterways can be greatly reduced by stabilizing work areas in and around these features. The following measures must be adhered to when implementing bank stabilization projects:
• Existing vegetation shall be left intact to the extent possible. Vegetation helps stabilize banks and prevent erosion.
• If vegetation must be removed, disturbed areas shall be temporarily stabilized with hydraulic mulch, hydroseed, soil binders, straw mulch, or a combination thereof. • If possible, construct a water diversion away from the work area and implement a barrier around the work area.
• BMP’s and equipment shall be inspected daily. Repairs shall be completed in a timely manner. Leaky equipment shall be removed from the stream area immediately until it is repaired.

B. Stormwater Flow Diversion
Covered activities that require work within or adjacent to streams such as bridges, levee maintenance and repair, flood protection projects, stream maintenance, outfalls, flood-protection capital projects, and any emergency actions that occur near streams. Examples include:
• Recreational trails (see Section 6.3.6.1.2 of the HCP/NCCP, New Trail Design and Use Standards for Future Reserves).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1357
• New installation or replacement of utilities that result in no new significant permanent disturbance to the riparian corridor during construction and operation and generate only incidental human activity with temporary loss of habitat. • Construction and maintenance of access roads providing access to streams or levees for managing facilities and infrastructure.
• Stream crossings essential for access to a parcel or facility (i.e., crossing the stream is the only available means to access the parcel).

C. Stream System Impact Minimization
Where Stream System avoidance is not feasible, all projects that are PCCP/CARP covered activities shall minimize impacts on the Stream System by implementing the following BMPs.

All in-stream projects must be designed to minimize adverse impacts on stream morphology, aquatic and riparian habitat, and flow conditions.

D. Types of Projects Subject to In-stream BMPs
Covered activities that occur in-stream are subject to design requirements or construction practices guidelines because they are expected to result in impacts on creeks or streams.

Examples include:
• Installation or rehabilitation of flood protection projects and levee reconstruction. • Operations and maintenance of flood protection facilities (e.g., dams, armored creeks, detention ponds, streams). Activities may include construction of new facilities, vegetation management, minor sediment removal, or bank stabilization. • Non-routine stream maintenance activities including extensive removal of vegetation in flood control channels.
• Bridge construction and replacement including vehicular, train, and pedestrian bridges throughout the PCCP coverage area.
• Development of trails in or through the in-stream area (streambed, banks, and adjacent riparian land-cover).
• Culvert installation or replacement.
• Restoration projects throughout the PCCP coverage area, including removal or modification of fish barriers and creek realignment.
• Facility maintenance such as trail, bridge, road, and culvert repair and/or replacement in in-stream areas (including riparian areas).
• Natural resource protection such as small bank stabilization projects, restoration to reduce erosion, fish passage enhancements, removal of barriers to fish passage, and removal of debris deposited during flooding.
• Operations and maintenance of water supply facilities (e.g., flashboard dams, inflatable dams, stream gages, and diversions).

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1358
• Removal of debris blockages except in emergency situations. • Mitigation and/or monitoring in creeks or adjacent riparian corridors. • Vegetation management for exotic species removal and native vegetation plantings.

E. Design Requirements
Some impacts on stream and riparian land-cover types are expected under the CARP. All covered activities shall implement the following measures to avoid or minimize impacts of covered activities on streams and valley foothill riparian land-cover. • Site characteristics shall be evaluated in advance of project design to determine if nontraditional designs, such as bioengineered bank treatments that incorporate live vegetation, can be successfully utilized while meeting the requirements of the project. • Maintenance of natural stream characteristics, such as riffle-pool sequences, riparian canopy, sinuosity, floodplain connectivity, and a natural channel bed, shall be incorporated into the project design to the extent possible and practicable. • If a culvert is used, up- and downstream ends of the culvert must be appropriately designed so that the stream cannot flow beneath the culvert or create a plunge pool at the downstream end.
• If structural changes to the channel bed are necessary as part of project design, provisions for fish passage shall be incorporated into the project design. • All proposed creek crossings must be sited to avoid or minimize riparian removal. • Trails shall be sited and designed with the smallest footprint necessary to cross through the in-stream area. Trail crossings shall be aligned perpendicular to the channel and be designed to avoid any potential for future erosion. Trails that follow stream courses shall be sited outside the riparian corridor to the maximum extent feasible. • All projects shall be conducted in conformance with the County drainage policies. • If the project requires removal of riparian vegetation, the amount of riparian vegetation removed shall be minimized while still meeting the project goals. The amount of riparian vegetation to be removed shall be included in the application package submitted to the County. The County shall determine if the requested riparian vegetation removal is necessary in order to implement the proposed project.
• Riparian restoration to offset project impacts shall be implemented on-site, if possible, to replace the functions of the riparian woodland degraded or lost to the covered activity.

Riparian restoration implemented on-site shall be credited to CARP/PCCP mitigation requirements if the restoration helps to meet the biological goals and objectives of the CARP/PCCP.
• Projects that discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the United States must adhere to the requirements of the CARP.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1359
• Projects must adhere to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings as described in the following section (National Marine Fisheries Service 2001).
• When implementing levee reconstruction covered activities, no baseline shaded riverine aquatic cover shall be removed if the shaded riverine aquatic cover was developed for or contributes to past mitigation projects or efforts.
• If levee reconstruction requires the removal of vegetation that provides habitat value to the adjacent stream (e.g., shading, bank stabilization, food sources, etc.), then the project shall include replacement of the vegetation/habitat that was removed during reconstruction unless it is determined to be inappropriate to do so by the relevant resource agencies (e.g., USACE, NMFS).
• All trees marked for removal from stream zones (riparian) must be shown on maps included with the application package. Non-riparian native trees greater than five inches in diameter at breast height shall not be removed without the consent of the County. • Applicants for transportation improvements that include stream crossings must comply with Section V. Design and Construction Requirements for Covered Transportation Projects.

F. Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings
All covered activities within the Stream System shall adhere to the NMFS Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings unless otherwise noted. Key guidelines described in Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings (NMFS 2001) are described below. • For stream crossings, the following structure types (listed in descending order of preference) shall be considered.

1. Free-span bridges that fully span the stream and allow for long-term dynamic channel stability.

2. Streambed simulation approaches including bottomless arch, embedded culvert design, or ford that maintains the natural streambed. The structure should be sufficiently large and embedded deep enough into the channel to allow the natural movement of bedload and formation of a stable bed inside the culvert or structure.

3. Non-embedded culvert (often referred to as a hydraulic design), for use in lowgradient areas, that allows fish passage.

4. Baffled culvert (creases in the culvert create a series of short high-velocity runs and low-velocity backwater areas that allow the fish to swim in short bursts and then rest), for use in high-gradient areas, that allows fish passage. • If the project’s site is in an active salmonid spawning area, only free-span bridges or streambed simulations (i.e., culverts with a bed that simulates the natural streambed) are acceptable.
• All stream crossings, regardless of the design (i.e., bridge or culvert) or material used, shall be designed to accommodate the 100-year peak flood flow with appropriate clearance to prevent structural damage to the crossing. In practice, it is preferable that the crossing itself and its structural supports completely span the 100-year floodway. At Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1360
a minimum, culverts must accommodate the 100-year flood without causing any adjacent flooding around the crossing that could result in mass erosion of the bank or the structural support of the crossing. This requirement will reduce the risk of channel degradation, stream diversion, and failure that may lead to adverse effects on salmonids over the lifespan of the crossing.
• For in-stream culvert installation or replacement projects that may affect stream hydraulics, the project must be designed so that the elevations of surface waters in the stream-reach exhibit gradual flow transitions, both upstream and downstream. Abrupt changes in water surface and velocities must be avoided, with no hydraulic jumps, turbulence, or drawdown at the entrance. A continuous low-flow channel must be maintained throughout the entire stream reach. Hydraulic controls may be necessary to provide resting pools, concentrate low flows, prevent erosion of stream bed or banks, and allow passage of bedload material.
• If a free-span bridge is not feasible due to engineering or cost constraints, bridge piers and footings shall be designed to have minimum impact on the stream. This applies in all stream zones, not just active salmonid spawning areas. A hydraulic analysis must be prepared that shows piers or footings will not cause significant scour or channel erosion.

Whenever possible, the span of bridges shall also allow for upland habitat beneath the bridge to provide undercrossing areas for wildlife species that will not enter the creek.

Native plantings, natural debris, or large rocks (not riprap) shall be installed under bridges to provide wildlife cover and encourage the use of crossings. • All in-stream structures shall be aligned with the stream, with no abrupt changes in flow direction upstream or downstream of the crossing. This requirement can often be accommodated by changes in road alignment or slight elongation of the culvert. Where elongation would be excessive, such a solution must be weighed against a better crossing alignment and/or modified transition sections upstream and downstream of the crossing. Project components that may result in disruption of stream hydraulics and alterations to the natural stream bed shall be anticipated and mitigated in the project design.
• Natural supplemental lighting shall be provided in new and replacement culverts that are more than 150 feet long. Where supplemental lighting is required, the spacing between light sources shall not exceed 75 feet.
• If structural changes to the channel bed are necessary as part of project design, provisions for fish passage shall be incorporated into the project design. If the project proponent has the opportunity to incorporate new fish passage into the project design in an area where fish passage is currently lacking, the project proponent shall work with the PCA to determine if new fish passage would support covered species recovery.

G. Construction BMPs
As described above, all in-stream projects shall adopt specific BMPs to minimize impacts on covered species, natural communities, and wildlife movement, as appropriate. • All work in the Stream System, including wetlands and streams, shall be done according to the plans and documents included in the CARP application. All changes to those plans shall be reported to the County and the PCA prior to construction. Minor changes Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1361
may require an amendment to the CARP-related conditions on the land conversion authorization. Substantial changes may render the land conversion authorization void and the permittee may need to submit a new application. • All CARP-related land conversion authorization conditions shall be depicted on the construction plans. A copy of the conditions shall be given to individuals responsible for activities on the site. Site supervisors shall be familiar with all conditions and shall have a copy on-site at all times.
• The construction corridor in the Stream System shall be created in a way to avoid and minimize impacts to vegetation outside the corridor. All preserved wetlands, other waters, and stream zones shall be protected with bright construction fencing.

Temporary fencing shall be removed upon completion of the project. • Erosion control measures shall be specified as part of the Environmental Questionnaire/CARP application, and the application is not complete without them. All erosion control specified in the permit application shall be in place and functional 48 hours prior to any rain event. Projects shall maintain sufficient erosion and sediment control materials onsite at all times, including during the dry season, to be able to effectively protect the site in advance of any storms. Erosion control features shall be inspected after each rain event. Site supervisors shall be constantly aware of weather forecasts, even during the summer dry season, and shall be prepared to establish erosion control on short notice for unusual rain events. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, removal of accumulated silt and the replacement of damaged barriers and other features.
• All work between the top-of-bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater for perennial and intermittent streams, shall be restricted to periods of low flow and dry weather between May 1 and October 15 unless otherwise permitted by the Resource Agencies. Work may also be conducted two weeks immediately prior to or after work period defined above depending on current weather patterns and timing of salmonid runs, provided that the project proponent receives written permission from the Resource Agencies.
• All work in ephemeral or short-term intermittent streams that generally do not support fish shall be restricted to periods when the stream is not flowing, or by terms specified in the land conversion authorization, providing that erosion control measures are in place before wet weather. Weather forecasts should be monitored, and erosion control established before all storm events.
• Work between the top-of-bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater outside of the specified periods may be permitted under some circumstances.

The project proponent must provide the County with the following information: a) the extent of work already completed; b) specific details about the work yet to be completed; and c) an estimate of the time needed to complete the work. The CDFW may be asked to confirm the modified dates.
• Work between the top-of-bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater shall not disturb active bird nests until young birds have fledged. To avoid impacts to nesting birds in stream zones, trees and shrubs shall be removed between August 15 and February 15. Tree removal at other times is at the County’s discretion Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1362
and shall require surveys by a qualified biologist to determine the absence of nesting birds.
• Except for site preparation for the construction of dewatering structures, no excavation is allowed in live streams. Detailed plans for dewatering must be part of the permit application.
• Temporary crossings as described in the land conversion authorization permit shall be installed no earlier than May 1 or May 15 if the stream is a salmonid stream and shall be removed no later than October 15. This work window could be modified at the discretion of the County and the CDFW.
• No vehicles other than necessary earth-moving and construction equipment shall be allowed within the between the top-of-bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater. The equipment and vehicles used in this area shall be described in the CARP application.
• Staging areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricants, and solvents shall be located outside the stream channel and banks and away from all preserved aquatic resources.

All stationary equipment that must be within the area that lies between the top-of-bank or the outer edge of riparian vegetation, whichever is greater, must be positioned over drippans. Equipment entering this area must be inspected daily for leaks that could introduce deleterious materials into the stream waters. All discharges, unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the County. The County shall review the incident and determine whether the matter warrants notifying the appropriate state and federal agencies.
• Cement, concrete, washings, asphalt, paint, coating materials, oil, other petroleum products, and other materials that could be hazardous to aquatic life shall be prevented from reaching streams, lakes, or other water bodies. These materials shall be placed away from aquatic environments and removed immediately if they are accidentally placed near an aquatic feature. All discharges into waters, unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the County. The County, in consultation with the PCA shall then determine if the matter warrants notification of the appropriate state and federal agencies.
• During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be dumped into water bodies or other aquatic resources. Nor shall it be placed in a location where it might be moved by wind or water into aquatic resources. All construction debris shall be removed from the site on a regular basis and upon completion of the project. • Only herbicides registered with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation shall be used in streams, ponds, and lakes, and shall be applied in accordance with label instructions. A list of all pesticides that may be used in the project area shall be submitted to the County before use.
• The County and PCA shall be notified immediately if threatened or endangered species not expected on the site are discovered during construction activities. If the grading activity is deemed to put at risk the safety of the species, the County shall suspend work and notify USFWS, NMFS and the CDFW for guidance.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1363
• Wildlife entering the construction site shall be allowed to leave the area unharmed, or shall be flushed or herded humanely in a safe direction away from the site. • All pipe sections shall be capped or inspected for wildlife before being placed in a trench.

Pipes within a trench shall be capped at the end of each day to prevent entry by wildlife. • At the end of each workday all open trenches shall be provided with a ramp of dirt or wood to allow trapped animals to escape.

H. Post-construction In-stream Practices
Following construction, the project area shall be returned to pre-project conditions except in areas where permanent impacts (e.g., installation of a bridge) are part of the project design.

Plants in re-vegetated areas shall be successfully established within two years of project completion. The following measures shall be applied to in-stream projects and will decrease the potential for subsequent erosion and/or spread of nonnative species at the project site. • Following work in a stream channel, the low flow channel shall be returned to its natural state as nearly as possible. The shape and gradient of the streambed shall be as close as possible to the shape and gradient that existed before the work began. • Any graded slopes or disturbed soils shall be revegetated with plants native to local watersheds.
• Permanent water quality treatment facilities/Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be designed according to the guidance of the California Stormwater Quality Association Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbooks for Construction, for New Development / Redevelopment, and for Industrial and Commercial (or other similar source as approved by the Engineering and Surveying Division. Storm drainage from on- and off-site impervious surfaces (including roads) shall be collected and routed through specially designed catch basins, vegetated swales, vaults, infiltration basins, water quality basins, filters, etc. for entrapment of sediment, debris and oils/greases or other identified pollutants • If an area with suitable spawning habitat, including spawning gravels, is disturbed during project construction, habitat shall be restored to pre-project conditions to the extent possible given any changes to the stream bed that result from project implementation. • All temporarily disturbed areas, such as staging areas, shall be returned to pre-project conditions. Plants in re-vegetated areas shall be successfully established within two years of project completion.
• Vegetation and debris must be managed in and near culverts and under and near bridges to ensure that entryways remain open and visible to wildlife and that passage through the culvert or bridge remains clear.

I. In-stream Operation and Maintenance Activities
Placer County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is responsible for in-stream operations and maintenance of flood control facilities in the PCCP coverage area. Private property owners may also conduct stream operation and maintenance activities for specific purposes related to flood control and stormwater facilities.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1364
The BMPs identified below are required for in-stream operations and maintenance activities.

These BMPs are designed to minimize impacts to riparian and riverine land-cover and covered species during implementation of covered stream operations and maintenance activities. • Operations and maintenance activities shall comply with HCP/NCCP preconstruction survey requirements.
• Prior to undertaking stream maintenance activities, conditions shall be assessed to identify tasks that are necessary to maintain the channel for the purpose for which it was designed and/or intended (e.g., flood control, groundwater recharge). Only in-stream work that is necessary to maintain the channel shall be conducted. • When stream reaches require extensive vegetation thinning or removal (e.g., when the channel has been fully blocked by willows or other vegetation), removal shall be phased to the extent possible so that a portion of the riparian land-cover remains. In addition, vegetation removal shall be targeted and focused on removing the least amount of riparian vegetation as possible while still meeting the desired flood control needs. For example, vegetation removal shall be focused on shrubby undergrowth at the toe-ofslope that is most likely to increase roughness and create a flooding hazard. Vegetation on the upper banks, particularly mature tree canopy, should be maintained to the extent possible to provide habitat for birds and small mammals and shading for the active channel.
• When reaches require sediment removal, approaches shall be considered that may reduce the impacts of the activity.
• In natural streams not managed for flood control purposes, woody material (including live leaning trees, dead trees, tree trunks, large limbs, and stumps) shall be retained unless it is a safety issue, or threatening a structure, impedes reasonable access, or is causing bank failure and sediment loading to the stream. • If debris blockages threaten bank stability and/or may increase downstream sedimentation, debris shall be removed. When clearing natural debris blockages (e.g., branches, fallen trees, soil from landslides) from the channel, removal shall concentrate on the minimum amount of debris removal necessary to maintain flow conveyance (i.e., prevent significant backwatering or pooling). Non-natural debris (e.g., trash, shopping carts, etc.) shall be fully removed from the channel.
• If bank failure occurs due to debris blockages, bank repairs shall only use compacted soil, and shall be re-seeded with native grasses and stabilized with natural erosion control fabric. If compacted soil is not sufficient to stabilize the slope, bioengineering techniques must be used. No hardscape (e.g., concrete or any sort of bare riprap) or rock gabions may be utilized in natural streams. Rock riprap may only be used to stabilize channels experiencing extreme erosion, and boulders must be backfilled with soil and planted with willows or other native riparian species suitable for the project site.

If available, local native species shall be utilized as appropriate. • Invasive plant species removed during maintenance activities shall be handled and disposed of in such a manner as to prevent further spread of the invasive species.

Equipment used in construction should be cleaned to remove invasive species' propagules prior to use.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1365
• Any disturbed soils shall be re-vegetated with native plants; non-native, non-invasive species; or non-reproductive (i.e., sterile hybrids) plants suitable for the altered soil conditions.
• When possible, activities in the active channel shall be avoided.

V. Design and Construction Requirements for Covered Transportation Projects
This condition identifies design and construction requirements to minimize the impacts of public transportation projects on wildlife movement, covered species, and their habitat. This condition applies to all covered transportation projects within the PCCP coverage area. All covered transportation projects that affect the Stream System (i.e. cross streams or creeks, including bridges) are subject to the BMPs listed in Section IV above.

A. Exempt Transportation Projects
The following projects are not subject to the design requirements or construction practices specified in this condition because they are not expected to result in new ground disturbance and are not expected to create new barriers to wildlife movement or augment existing barriers.

Although they are not required to implement this condition, they shall still be subject to measures that are identified in the environmental impact analysis process. • Installing traffic signals, signs, pavement markings, flashing beacons, or other safety warnings.
• Painting new lane striping.
• Installing “rumble” strips, channelizers, or other safety markers. • Installing guardrails or similar structures that are permeable to wildlife. • Installing ramp metering.
• Regrading existing shoulders (refer to Operations and Maintenance Activities Section below).
• Implementing other road safety improvements on less than 1,000 feet of roadway. Note that road safety improvements that cross creeks are subject to the BMPs in the Instream Projects section above.

B. Types of Projects Subject to Condition
The following projects are subject to the design requirements or construction practices because they are expected to result in new ground disturbance, or they may create new barriers to wildlife movement, or augment existing barriers. Each project category is subject to a specific combination of requirements listed in Table C-1. The requirements are described below.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1366

APPENDIX G
Western Placer County Aquatic Resources Program
Procedures, Timelines, and Conditions of Approval
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1367
Chapter 7.

CARP PROCEDURES, TIMELINES, AND CONDITIONS OF

APPROVAL

7.1. Introduction
CARP procedures are designed to occur concurrently with the HCP/NCCP permitting process (HCP/NCCP Chapter 6, Section 6.2 Program Participation: Receiving Take Authorization under the Plan) and, as needed, the CEQA process. This Chapter explains the permitting processes, procedures, and timelines that can be anticipated when submitting a CARP Authorization Form. A detailed description of the documents required for submittal of a CARP application is provided in Chapter 5 of this document. A detailed description of the avoidance, minimization, and mitigation requirements of the CARP authorization is provided in Chapter 6. Applicants are encouraged to review the requirements described in CARP Chapters 5 and 6, as well as the procedures outlined in this Chapter prior to submitting an application for a CARP Authorization.

7.2. Initial Screening and Consultation
For discretionary projects subject to CEQA, the Applicant initiates the first step in determining whether compliance with the CARP is required by submitting an application with an environmental supplement to the Local Jurisdiction (Appendices D-1 through D-3). For ministerial projects not subject to CEQA, the project proponent will file the appropriate land development application (e.g., building permit). These applications will be reviewed by a Local Jurisdiction’s staff to: 1) determine the completeness of the application, 2) determine the project’s complexity, and 3) assess the likelihood that Aquatic Resources of Placer County are present on the proposed project site. The Local Jurisdiction will review the best available information and resources (e.g., LiDAR, highresolution aerial photography, or other available imagery of the site) and may need to conduct a site visit to determine if Aquatic Resources of Placer County are present. If aquatic resources are present or are likely to be present, a CARP Authorization will be required, and a full site assessment and aquatic resource delineation will be required, and the application will be required to file a CARP Application (Appendix E). Many Applicants will already know that they have Aquatic Resources present and will submit the CARP Application with their development project applications.

For larger, more complex projects (i.e., projects that will be permitted through a LOP or standard permit), prior to submitting a CARP application, Applicants must participate in an Initial Consultation (pre-application meeting) with Local Jurisdiction staff to review the proposed project and determine whether a CARP Authorization is needed. The Initial Consultation will also help to determine the level of CEQA review necessary and will identify any studies that may be needed in addition to the required aquatic resource delineation and Biological Resources Assessment (CARP Chapter 5). The process of the Initial Screening and Consultation is illustrated in Figure 7-1.

During Initial Consultation, Applicants will be expected to adequately describe the site and provide aerial photographs, drawings, site plans, or tentative maps with enough information to determine if aquatic resources are present on the project site, and if the proposed project will impact those Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1368
resources that are identified as Aquatic Resources of Placer County. A list of application requirements is provided in CARP Chapter 5. Some sites may not have Aquatic Resources of Placer County present, and/or some activities may not affect Aquatic Resources of Placer County, and thus, compliance with the CARP may not be required. If the Applicant or Local Jurisdiction representative identifies aquatic resources onsite, the resources must be shown on a project map, site plan, or tentative map. In all cases, Aquatic Resources of Placer County are to be depicted even if an Applicant is proposing avoidance of all direct and indirect effects.

If compliance with the CARP is not required due to the absence of Aquatic Resources of Placer County or the absence of any effect on Aquatic Resources of Placer County, the Applicant may proceed through the HCP/NCCP application process.

If Aquatic Resources of Placer County are present and impacts to these resources are anticipated, compliance with the CARP will be required, and the Applicant will be provided with both the HCP/NCCP and CARP Application packages (Appendix E). The Applicant will be required to complete and submit both applications along with the Local Jurisdiction’s standard planning project application forms (Appendix D).

7.3. CARP Authorization Process
The CARP Authorization process closely follows the Local Jurisdiction’s environmental review (i.e., CEQA) and discretionary entitlement review process. As part of the entitlement review process, Local Jurisdictions require that all Applicants fill out a project application and a supplemental environmental form. After review of these two forms, the Local Jurisdiction will determine if a CARP Authorization and CARP Application are required for the Covered Activity. For non-discretionary projects that are Covered Activities, the Local Jurisdiction and PB will evaluate the project’s ministerial application (e.g., building permit) to determine if there is any potential impact to Aquatic Resources (See Section 5.2)
If the project’s impacts to aquatic resources exceed the threshold(s) authorized by the USACE PGP and the Applicant is required to obtain a LOP or Standard Permit to comply with section 404 of the CWA , the Applicant must notify the Local Jurisdiction that one or more applications is being processed by the USACE by completing the relevant portion of the CARP Authorization Form (Appendix E) and, once issued, must provide a copy of the approved LOP or Standard Permit to the Local Jurisdiction. For these projects, a CARP Authorization will not be required, provided the project complies with the terms and conditions of the LOP or Standard Permit and the requirements of the HCP/NCCP, including but not limited to the payment of applicable PCCP Development Fees.

The process described below applies to Covered Activities authorized by the Local Jurisdiction that meet the threshold for the PGP.

As illustrated in Figure 7-2, once the Applicant submits the CARP application, the Local Jurisdiction will have 15 calendar days to review it for completeness and request additional information. Once the application is deemed complete, the PB will have 15 calendar days to conduct a site assessment to evaluate the extent of aquatic resources that are present and to determine if habitat for Covered Species or cultural resources will be affected by the proposed project (CARP Chapter 5). The PB will either map the aquatic resources within the proposed project site for small projects (projects with less than 0.01 acres of aquatic resources) if one is not provided by the Applicant, or review the delineation provided by the Applicant. The purpose of the review is to ensure that the delineation Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1369
meets the USACE’s minimum standards for delineations in order to expedite the verification process at the USACE. The PB’s review is not intended to provide a two-step verification process. The review of the delineation will occur during the 15-calendar day review period. The Applicant may be asked to provide additional information and conduct further studies after the PB has conducted the site assessment.

Once the aquatic resource delineation is reviewed by the PB, the Local Jurisdiction will submit it to the USACE for verification, as necessary under the USACE Section 404 permitting strategy for Covered Activities. This step is not necessary if the Applicant has already received a valid aquatic resources verification or preliminary or approved jurisdictional determination from the USACE.

This step is also not necessary if the Applicant notifies the Local Jurisdiction that it is filing a separate LOP or Standard Permit application with the USACE. In addition to a delineation, the Applicant will also submit any other documents required to complete the application, and once these have been received and the delineation has been verified, the CARP Application will be deemed complete, and the process will continue. The proposed project will be evaluated by Local Jurisdiction staff and the PB to ensure that Aquatic Resources of Placer County within or adjacent to the Stream System, or an existing preserve, are being avoided to the greatest extent practicable. The Applicant may be required to modify their project to avoid aquatic resources.

If a Water Quality Certification is required for the project, a fee as required by Section 2200(a)(3) of the California Code of Regulations must accompany the CARP Application, and the application will be placed on public notice through the Central Valley RWQCB website for 21-days or as otherwise required by the State. If the Applicant indicates that project activities will not impact waters of the U.S. (WOUS) and will only impact WOS, the Local Jurisdiction will forward the CARP Application to the RWQCB for review and issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). The CARP Application fulfills the requirement under California Water Code Section 13260 to submit a Report of Waste Discharge for WDRs.

If the activities will require Notification under FGC Section1602, the Applicant will submit a complete Notification package and applicable fee to CDFW for review and determination of whether a LSAA will be issued. The HCP/NCCP and the CARP can, under most circumstances, serve as the framework for determining the avoidance and minimization measures and compensatory mitigation requirements to offset impacts from activities subject to FGC 1600 et seq.

The CEQA process will run concurrently with the permitting process described above and integrate the CARP’s BMPs and mitigation measures into the final environmental document. This timeline may vary depending on the outcome of the analysis of impacts (such as traffic, air quality, noise, biology, etc.) and the level of environmental review required for the project (Negative Declaration [Neg. Dec.], Mitigated Negative Declaration [MND], or Environmental Impact Report [EIR]).

After all approvals have been obtained and the Applicant has paid all the applicable fees, the CARP Authorization will be granted through a CARP Authorization Form.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1370

7.4. Process for CARP Authorizations of Local
Jurisdiction Projects
To gain CARP Authorization for Local Jurisdiction projects, a site assessment will be conducted, and all aquatic resources will be mapped. A Site Assessment Form will be completed to determine the extent and type of biological, aquatic, and cultural resources present. The Site Assessment Form will establish applicable CARP requirements for the project. If the proposed project meets all the requirements of the CARP as noted on the Site Assessment Form, then the project will have authorization under the CARP.

CARP Authorizations are not required for a Local Jurisdiction project if a LOP or Standard Permit is issued for the project by the USACE.

All Site Assessment Forms will be submitted to the PCA, which will maintain a record of all CARP information provided by the Local Agencies for all projects covered by the CARP.

7.5. CARP Authorization Conditions of Approval
The following conditions apply to all Covered Activities that have the potential to impact Aquatic Resources of Placer County:

Administrative
All work within the Plan Area that impacts Aquatic Resources of Placer County shall be completed according to the plans and documents included in the CARP application, Water Quality Certification, and, if applicable, WDRs. All changes to those plans shall be reported to the Local Jurisdiction. Minor changes may require an amendment to the CARP Authorization, Water Quality Certification, and, if applicable, WDRs. Substantial changes may render the authorization, Water Quality Certification, and, if applicable, WDRs, void, and a new application may be required.

A copy of the CARP conditions and Water Quality Certification and WDRs shall be given to individuals responsible for activities on the site. Site personnel, (employees, contractors, and subcontractors) shall be adequately informed and trained to implement all permit, Water Quality Certification, and WDR conditions and shall have a copy of all permits available onsite at all times for review by site personnel and agencies.

Any construction within the Stream System shall be implemented in a way to avoid and minimize impacts to vegetation outside the construction area. All preserved wetlands, other Aquatic Resources of Placer County, and the Stream Zone shall be protected with bright construction fencing. Temporary fencing shall be removed immediately upon completion of the project.

Before beginning construction, the project Applicant must have a valid CARP authorization or waiver notice. In order to obtain a permit, the Applicant must pay all mitigation fees or purchase appropriate credits from an agency-approved mitigation bank.

All deviations from plans and documents provided with the Application and approved by the Local Jurisdiction must be reported to the Local Jurisdiction immediately.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1371
Erosion Control
Erosion control measures shall be specified as part of the CARP application, and the application is not complete without them. All erosion control specified in the permit application shall be in place and functional before the beginning of the rainy season and shall remain in place until the end of the season. Site supervisors shall be aware of weather forecasts year-round and shall be prepared to establish erosion control on short notice for unusual rain events. Erosion control features shall be inspected and maintained after each rainfall period. Maintenance includes, but is not limited to, removal of accumulated silt and the replacement of damaged barriers and other features.

All required setbacks shall be implemented according to the HCP/NCCP Condition 4 (HCP/NCCP Section 6.1.2).

Work Period
All work in aquatic resources within the Stream System shall be restricted to periods of low flow and dry weather between April 15 and October 15, unless otherwise permitted by Local Jurisdictions and approved by the appropriate State and federal regulatory agency. Work within aquatic resources in the Stream System outside of the specified periods may be permitted under some circumstances. The Applicant must provide the Local Jurisdiction with the following information: a) the extent of work already completed; b) specific details about the work yet to be completed; and c) an estimate of the time needed to complete the work in the Stream System.

Restoration
Following work in a stream channel, the low flow channel shall be returned to its natural state to the extent possible. The shape and gradient of the streambed shall be restored to the same gradient that existed before the work to the extent possible.

Work shall not disturb active bird nests until young birds have fledged. To avoid impacts to nesting birds, any disturbance shall occur between September 1 and February 1 prior to the nesting season. Tree removal, earthmoving or other disturbance at other times is at the Local Jurisdiction’s discretion and will require surveys by a qualified biologist to determine the absence of nesting birds prior to the activity.

All trees marked for removal within the Stream System must be shown on maps included with the Application. Native trees over five inches diameter at breast height (DBH) shall not be removed without the consent of the Local Jurisdiction.

Dewatering/Diversion
Except for site preparation for the installation and removal of dewatering structures, no excavation is allowed in flowing streams unless dredging WDRs are issued by the RWQCB.

Detailed plans for dewatering must be part of the Application.

Temporary crossings as described in the Application shall be installed no earlier than April 15 and shall be removed no later than October 15, unless otherwise permitted by Local Agencies and approved by the appropriate State and federal regulatory agency. This work window could be modified at the discretion of the Local Jurisdiction and the CDFW.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1372
Equipment/Staging Areas
No vehicles other than necessary earth-moving and construction equipment shall be allowed within the Stream System after the section of stream where work is performed is dewatered.

The equipment and vehicles used in the Stream System shall be described in the Application.

Staging areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricants, and solvents shall be located outside the stream channel and banks and away from all preserved aquatic resources. All stationary equipment operated within the Stream System must be positioned over drip-pans. Equipment entering the Stream System must be inspected daily for leaks that could introduce deleterious materials into aquatic resources. All discharges, unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the Local Jurisdiction. The Local Jurisdiction shall then immediately notify the appropriate state and federal agencies.

Cement, concrete, washings, asphalt, paint, coating materials, oil, other petroleum products, and other materials that could be hazardous to aquatic life shall be prevented from reaching streams, lakes, or other water bodies. These materials shall be placed a minimum of 50 feet away from aquatic environments. All discharges, unintentional or otherwise, shall be reported immediately to the Local Jurisdiction. The Local Jurisdiction shall then immediately notify the appropriate state and federal agencies.

During construction, no litter or construction debris shall be dumped into water bodies or other aquatic resources; nor shall it be placed in a location where it might be moved by wind or water into aquatic resources. All construction debris shall be removed from the site upon completion of the project.

Only herbicides registered with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation shall be used in streams, ponds, and lakes, and shall be applied in accordance with label instructions. A list of all pesticides that may be used in the project area shall be submitted to the Local Jurisdiction before use.

Wildlife
The Local Jurisdiction shall be notified immediately if threatened or endangered species that are not Covered Species are discovered during construction activities. The Local Jurisdiction shall suspend work and notify the USFWS, NMFS, and the CDFW for guidance.

Wildlife entering the construction site shall be allowed to leave the area unharmed or shall be flushed or herded humanely in a safe direction away from the site.

All pipe sections shall be capped or inspected for wildlife before being placed in a trench. Pipes within a trench shall be capped at the end of each day to prevent entry by wildlife, except for those pipes that are being used to divert stream flow.

At the end of each workday, all open trenches will be provided with a ramp of dirt or wood to allow trapped animals to escape.

Cultural Resources
If human remains or cultural artifacts are discovered during construction, the Applicant shall stop work in the area and notify the Local Jurisdiction immediately. Work will not continue in the area until a qualified coroner and archaeologist have evaluated the remains, conducted a survey, prepared an assessment, and required consultations are completed.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1373
Additional Conditions
Additional conditions may be required by CDFW if the Covered Activity is subject to a LSAA.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1374

APPENDIX C

CONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1375
Technical Memorandum
Date: February 13 , 2026
To: Nick Pappani, Raney Planning and Management
From: John Gard and Ashley Weiss, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Lincoln Village 7 Specific Plan Amendment - Consistency Review Overview
An amendment to the Village 7 Specific Plan (henceforth referred to as “Village 7 B Amendment”) has been proposed by the project applicant. This memorandum presents a detailed qualitative analysis t o understand whether the proposed land use changes associated with the amendment would cause new or more severe transportation impacts (relative to those identified in the Village 7 Specific Plan Project EIR, PBS&J, 2009 ). In light of the fact that conditions have changed dramatically since that EIR was prepared, this consistency review also focuses on whether proposed land use changes would cause new or more severe impacts under current (2025) conditions.

The Village 7 Specific Plan was originally approved in 20 10 by the City of Lincoln and last updated in 2024 . The Village 7 Specific Plan is located in the southwest area of the City of Lincoln, along both sides of Ferrari Ranch Road. The Village 7 B Amendment includes modified land uses for the most northern portion of the Village 7 Specific Plan area north of Moore Road. This area is known as the Scheiber and Aitken Ranch II properties and also referred to as the “Village 7B area”. The Village 7B area is currently vacant and will connect to the remaining portions of the Village 7 Specific Plan area via Liberty Par kway and Moore Road.

The Village 7 B Amendment is sub ject to requirements enacted by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This memorandum consists of the following sections that enable evaluation of the project’s transportation impacts under CEQA :
• Project Description
• Trip Generation Comparison
• Changed Conditions
• Standards of Significance
• Impacts Assessment
Project Description
The original Village 7 Specific Plan included the following land uses 1:
1 Source: Village 7 Specific Plan Project DEIR , June 2009 .

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1376
• 7 units of Country Estates
• 1,113 units of Low Density Residential
• 1,393 units of Medium Density Residential
• 772 units of High Density Residential
• Elementary School (assumed in Village 7 DEIR to have 900 - student capacity) • 4.9 acre Mixed Use Commercial (Assumed in DEIR as 15,000 sq. ft. Community Center) • 58 acres of Parks and Recreation
The original Village 7 Specific Plan was last updated in 2024 to reflect minor adjustments to the proposed land uses (hereinto referred to as the “ c urrent Village 7 Specific Plan”). The c urrent Village 7 Specific Plan includes the following land uses: 2
• 1,181 units of Low Density Residential
• 1,529 units of Medium Density Residential
• 575 units of High Density Residential
• Elementary School (assumed in Village 7 DEIR to have 900 - student capacity) • 4.9 acre Mixed Use Commercial (Assumed in DEIR as 15,000 sq. ft. Community Center) • 58 acres of Parks and Recreation
The Village 7 B Amendment would reduce the amount of Parks and Recreation space by 2.7 acres, while also modifying the density of several parcels zoned for residential uses. It would result in the following net changes in land uses compared to the current Village 7 Specific Plan :
• Reduce amount of Low Density Residential by 181 units. • Increase amount of Medium - High Density Residential by 740 units. • Increase amount of Medium Density Residential by 69 units. • Increase amount of Country Estates Residential by 7 units. • Add a 20,000 square feet Community Center.

The net effect of the above is an increase of 635 units compared to the original Village 7 Specific Plan . All of these proposed changes occur on the Scheiber and Aitken Ranch II properties north of Moore Road.

In addition, the proposed project includes minor land use modifications to a 49.5 - acre portion of the Village 7 Specific Plan area south of Moore Road. These proposed minor modifications would modify VMDR from 9.6 acres to 9.4 acres, VLDR from 11.1 acres t o 11.6 acres, VHDR from 3.0 acres to 2.8 acres, and VPR from 8.6 acres to 6.6 acres . These proposed land use modifications would result in a reduction in the total number of units within this area; and, therefore, would not affect this environmental analysis. As a result, the proposed land use modification south of Moore Road are not dis cussed further in this analysis.

Trip Generation Comparison
Table 1 displays the gross trip generation of the approved Village 7 Specific Plan from Table 4.3 - 5 of the Village 7 Specific Plan Project DEIR (2009). The 2009 DEIR used trip generation rates from the 2 Source: Village 7 General Development Plan (Amendment 1), May 14, 2024.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1377
Institute of Transportation Engineers 2003 Trip Generation Manual (7 th Edition) , which were the most up- to- date at the time.

Table 1. Original Village 7 Specific Plan Trip Generation (7 th Edition Trip Generation)
Trip Rates Trips
Land Use Quantity1 Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour Daily AM Peak Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Single - Family
Residential 2,513 du 9.57 0.75 1.01 24,049 1,885 2,538
Multi- family
Residential 772 du 6.72 0.51 0.62 5,188 394 479
Elementary
School
900
students 1.29 0.42 0.15 1,161 378 135
Community
Center 15 ksf 22.88 1.62 1.64 343 24 25
Gross Trips 30,741 2,681 3,177
Internal Trips 2- 3,240 - 478 - 341
External Trips 27,501 2,203 2,836
Notes:

1. du = dwelling units; ksf = thousand square feet.

2. 50 percent of recreation center trips, 60 percent of school trips assumed to remain internal to the site for daily, AM, and PM peak hours. Additionally, in the daily and PM peak hours, an additional 5 percent total residential - toresidential trips were assumed to remain internal to the site.

Source: Table 4.3 - 5 of the Village 7 Specific Plan Project DEIR (2009).

The Village 7 Specific Plan was updated in 2016 and again in 2024 to include some modifications to the approved land use . No transportation study was conducted for the 2024 update ( referred to here as “c urrent Village 7 Specific Plan”) as the changes to the transportation network and land uses were considered to be minor. Table 2 below includes the trip generation for the current Village 7 Specific Plan using the rates from the original Village 7 DEIR . The current Village 7 Specific Plan is expected to produce an additional 562 daily trips, 47 AM peak hour trips, and 77 PM peak hour trips compared to the original Village 7 Specific Plan.

Table 2. Current Village 7 Specific Plan Trip Generation (7th Edition Trip Generation) Trip Rates Trips
Land Use Quantity1 Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour Daily AM Peak Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Single - Family
Residential 2,710 du 9.57 0.75 1.01 25,935 2,033 2,737
Multi- family
Residential 575 du 6.72 0.51 0.62 3,864 293 357
Elementary
School
900
students 1.29 0.42 0.15 1,161 378 135
Community
Center 15 ksf 22.88 1.62 1.64 343 24 25
Gross Trips 31,303 2,728 3,254
Internal Trips 2- 3,240 - 478 - 341
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1378
Trip Rates Trips
Land Use Quantity1 Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour Daily AM Peak Hour
PM Peak
Hour
External Trips 28,063 2,250 2,913
Notes:

1. du = dwelling units; ksf = thousand square feet.

Source: Amended Village 7 Specific Plan Project (2024) ; Fehr & Peers, 202 6.

Table 3 displays the trip generation estimate for the Village 7 B Amendment based on its proposed land use s and the same version of ITE ’s Trip Generation Manual . Use of trip rates from the 2003 version of the Trip Generation Manual enables direct comparisons of trips generated between the various specific plan land use concepts. The following key conclusions are drawn from Table 3 :
• The Village 7B Amendment would generate an additional 3,783 daily trips, 299 AM peak hour trips, and 334 PM peak hour trips more than the current Village 7 Specific Plan. • When compared to the more critical PM peak hour, the Village 7B Amendment generates 411 more external vehicle trips than the original Village 7 Specific Plan.

Table 3. Proposed Village 7 Specific Plan Trip Generation (7th Edition Trip Generation) Trip Rates Trips
Land Use Quantity1 Daily AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour Daily AM Peak Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Single - Family
Residential 2
2,605 du 9.57 0.75 1.01 24,930 1,954 2,631
Multi- family
Residential 3
1,315 du 6.72 0.51 0.62 8,837 671 815
Elementary
School
900
students 1.29 0.42 0.15 1,161 378 135
Community
Center 35 ksf 22.88 1.62 1.64 801 57 57
Gross Trips 35,729 3,060 3,638
Internal Trips 4- 3,883 - 511 - 391
External Trips 31,846 2,549 3,247
Notes:

1. du = dwelling units; ksf = thousand square feet.

2. The following project land use categories were included in the Single Family Residential dwelling unit count: Rural Residential, Country Estates, Low Density Residential, and Medium Density Residential.

3. The following project land use categories were included in the Multi - Family Residential dwelling unit count: Medium - High Density Residential and High Density Residential.

4. 50 percent of recreation center trips, 60 percent of school trips assumed to remain internal to the site for daily, AM, and PM peak hours. Additionally, in the daily and PM peak hours, an additional 5 percent total residential - toresidential trips were ass umed to remain internal to the site.

Source: Table 4.3 - 5 of the Village 7 Specific Plan Project DEIR (2009 ), Fehr & Peers , 202 6.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1379
Changed Conditions
Since the Village 7 DEIR was certified in 2010, there have been numerous changes to the transportation network in the project area along with various regulatory changes . Additionally, analytical methods used in transportation analyses have also evolved . These changed conditions are documented below.

Changes to the Environmental Setting
As noted in Chapter 4.3 of the DEIR, t he environmental setting for transportation represents approximate 2005 - 2006 conditions, despite the DEIR’s 2009 release date. The issuance of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the DEIR establishes the date of the environmental setting.

The environmental setting covered a large geographic area including most of the City of Lincoln, parts of unincorporated Placer County, Roseville, and Caltrans facilities. The following describes major changes to the roadway network within the Lincoln area between 2005 - 2006 (see DEIR Figure

4.3 - 2) and current (2025) conditions:
• The SR 65 Bypass was constructed from existing SR 65 (at Lincoln Boulevard ) to north of Sheridan where it reconnects with the original highway . The facility is a four - lane freeway from Lincoln Boulevard to north of Ferrari Ranch Road , transitioning to a two - to four - lane expressway with at - grade intersections as it continues north .
• A new interchange was constructed on the SR 65 Bypass at Ferrari Ranch Road . • Moore Road was changed to a cul - de - sac on either side of the SR 65 Bypass. • Construction of Sorrento Parkway between Moore Road and Ferrari Ranch Road has occurred.

Notwithstanding the above, the arterial street system in Lincoln has generally not changed much in the past two decades (though new development north of SR 193 is adding streets) . Many intersections studied in the DEIR still have the same lane configurations and traffic controls.

The roadway network has changed more dramatically to the south of Lincoln, as evidenced by the following:
• New interchanges are constructed on SR 65 at Whitney Ranch Parkway and Sunset Boulevard.

The Sunset Boulevard interchange replaced its at - grade intersection. • The first phase of the four - phase I - 80/SR 65 interchange improvements are completed. This eliminated the northbound SR 65 bottleneck immediately north of I - 80.

Bicycle and pedestrian facilities have been added in Lincoln as new development has occurred. In 2024, the City updated its Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) plan. NEV’s are allowed on any roadway within Lincoln that has a speed limit of 35 MPH or less and on approved NEV lanes.

At the time the DEIR was prepared, the City of Lincoln operated Lincoln Transit, which provided fixed - route transit service to the city . This service was discontinued about a decade ago, with service now provided by Placer County Transit.

Although not directly related to the transportation system per se, substantial land development has occurred throughout south Placer County over the past two decades. To illustrate, Table 4.3 - 13 of the Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1380
DEIR indicates that SR 65 north of Sunset Boulevard carried 47,500 Average Daily Trips (ADT) in 2005. That segment carried 77,000 ADT in 2022, corresponding to an annual 3% growth rate.

Changes to the Regulatory Setting
There have also been numerous changes to the regulatory setting in the past two decades. By far, the most notable and far - reaching change is the following:
• Senate Bill (SB) 743 mandates that CEQA documents no longer use delay - based metrics such as intersection level of service ( LOS ) for purposes of identifying a proposed project’s significant impacts to the transportation network. Instead, a new metric known as vehicle miles traveled ( VMT ) is typically used.

Caltrans has modified how they approach management of state highway facilities. The following two documents illustrate this:
• 2020 VMT - Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG ) - provides guidance on how Caltrans will review land use projects, with focus on VMT analysis and supporting state land use goals, state planning priorities, and GHG emission reduction goals , as well as identifying land use projects’ possible transportation impacts to the State Highway System and potential non - capacity increasing mitigation measures. The TISG indicates that Caltrans intends to “transition away from requesting LOS or other vehicl e ope rations analyses of land use projects,” instead placing the focus on VMT and safety. • 2024 Local Development Review (LDR) Safety Review Practitioners Guidance – advises practitioners how to evaluate project - related safety impacts on the state highway system.

The analytical approach described in the guidance focuses on vulnerable road users (i.e., bicyclists and pedestrians) and underserved communities. It prescribes specific methods and thresholds for analyzing and mitigating for the safety effects associated with vehicle queues spilling from freeway off - ramps back to the freeway. It also re iterates Caltrans ’ support for shifting away from using delay - based metrics for analysis in CEQA.

The above guidance documents are in direct contrast to the LOS - focused guidance contained in the Guide for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (Caltrans, 2002). That document is cited in the References section of the DEIR transportation chapter.

Changes in Analytical Methods
There have also been numerous changes in how the roadway network is analyzed since the DEIR was published . The following lists several of the more important changes:
• Intersection analysis in the DEIR was performed using the 2000 Edition of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) . This was the 4 th edition, which has since been updated three times with the most recent document being the 7 th edition released in 2022. • Intersection analysis within Lincoln and Roseville relied on the “Circular 212” methodology.

This methodology is no longer utilized by either jurisdiction.

The City of Roseville, City of Lincoln, and Placer County have all prepared and released updated traffic impact study guidelines since the DEIR was released.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1381
Additionally, it is noted that new methods for estimating the internalization of project trips from mixed - use land development were still in development at the time the DEIR was prepared. In the year 2010’s , researchers from EPA, several academic institutions, and Fehr & Peers released the Mixed - Use Trip Generation Model (MXD), which is now utilized in countless traffic studies and EIRs to estimate internal trips and external trips made by walking, biking, a nd taking transit. This tool was not available whe n the DEIR was being prepared.

Standards of Significance
As the purpose of this memo is to determine if the proposed Village 7 B Amendment would cause new or more severe transportation impacts (relative to those identified in the Village 7 DEIR 2009) , this memorandum utilizes the same significance thresholds as were utilized in the DEIR. Those thresholds are listed on the following page.

Roadway System

1. Change the level of service from acceptable (LOS C or better) to unacceptable (LOS D or worse) at study intersections within and controlled by the City of Lincoln.

2. Increase the average delay by five or more seconds at an intersection in Lincoln that currently (or is projected to) operate unacceptably.

3. Change the level of service on study roadways or intersections within the City of Roseville or Placer County from acceptable to unacceptable (as defined by those jurisdictions).

4. Increase the v/c ratio by 0.01 or more at an intersection or roadway in Placer County that currently (or is projected to) operate unacceptably.

5. Worsen operations from LOS E or better to LOS F on a freeway, or from LOS D or better to LOS E or F on a state highway.

6. Increase by five percent or greater the freeway density or highway percent time spent following at a facility that currently (or is projected to) operate unacceptably.

7. Interfere with or preclude planned transportation improvements such as roadway widenings/extensions or trail facilities.

8. Add traffic to a facility not constructed to current design standards, thereby resulting in substantially worsened conditions relating to traffic flow, safety, or driver convenience.

9. Create vehicular travel demand above that which is planned, thereby resulting in cumulative level of service impacts.

10. Create a temporary, but prolonged impact due to lane closures, need for temporary signals, emergency vehicle access, traffic hazards to bikes/pedestrians, damage to roadbed, or truck traffic on roadways not designated as truck routes.

Transit System

1. Create a demand for public transit services above the capacity which is provided, or planned.

2. Interfere with existing or planned transit services or facilities.

Bicycle and Pedestrian System

1. Disrupt or interfere with existing or planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

2. Create inconsistencies with adopted pedestrian or bicycle system plans, guidelines, policies, or standards.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1382
Project Access and Internal Circulation

1. Provide inadequate access and internal circulation for vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists.

Impacts Assessment
The California Fourth Appellate District Court of Appeals published findings of a case known as Olen Properties Corp. v. City of Newport Beach (2023) . Th e findings of th is case provide important insights into how to approach this impacts assessment . At issue in that case was whether a new EIR was required for a change to a 2006 program EIR . The court affirmed the use of an addendum to the 2006 Program EIR to analyze the effects of the project change. Key passages from the court ruling pertaining to this study are:

1. “In 2018, California adopted CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,2 which changed the measure of traffic impact from level of service (LOS) to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The 2006 EIR used the LOS measure, as it predated the change to VMT by more than a decade . The traffic study for the Project was conducted in 2020, but also used the LOS measure because the purpose of the study was to compare the effects of the Project to the 2006 EIR .”

2. “And it is settled law in California that subsequent changes to the (CEQA) guidelines are not “new information” triggering section 21166, subdivision (c), so long as the underlying environmental issue was understood at the time of the initial EIR. ( Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1318 - 1320.) Indeed, the rule could hardly be any different —if each change to guidelines constituted “new information,” section 21166 would require a new EIR nearly every time any change is m ade to a project, no matter how inconsequential.

3. “Accordingly, we conclude the City of Newport Beach was not required to undertake a VMT study of the traffic impact of the Project. ”
Hence, t he remainder of this section focuses on how the Village 7 B Amendment would change the significance and severity of the 2009 DEIR transportation impacts. Table 4 summarizes these results for each of the 15 impact statement s. Note that the evaluation is necessarily p rimarily qualitative given the nature of this work, lack of availability of prior tools used in the analysis, and other considerations. Where additional impacts were qualitatively identified, roadway segment daily volumes or freeway segment peak hour densities were scaled using the proportional increase in daily or peak hour traffic volumes, respectively. This methodology was applied to evaluate whether the incremental trips associated with the proposed Village 7B Amendment would generate a new significant impact or materially alter any previously identified impact.

Impact 4.3 - 1, which pertains to intersection operations in the City of Lincoln, has been expanded to include an impact analysis under both the original EIR setting (i.e., 2006) and current ( fall 2025) conditions. By including both time periods, reviewers can understand the degree to which changes to the environmental setting cause differences in project impacts at city intersections.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1383
Table 4. Existing Impacts Summary Table
2009 DEIR Finding 2026 Assessment
Impact Impact
Significant?
Recommended
Mitigation
Level of Significance
After Mitigation Expected Level of Significance

4.3 - 1 The Proposed Project would not
worsen (to a significant level)
unacceptable operations at City of Lincoln
intersections (excluding those in
downtown on SR 65 which are described
separately) under existing plus project
conditions.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant (2009 DEIR existing setting as baseline condition). The existing plus project intersection operations results from the Village 7 Specific Plan showed all study intersections in Lincoln would operate at LOS A or B. It is unlikely that the additional PM peak hour trips associated with the proposed land use added to the City’s then 2006 roadway network would result in an LOS D or worse.

Less than Significant (Fall 2025 as existing setting). An updated level of service evaluation based on fall 2025 conditions was completed at ten critical City of Lincoln intersections . The analysis, found in Attachment A, shows that the net increase in vehicle trips between the proposed Village 7B project and the approved Village 7B Amendment would not worsen an intersection in Lincoln to an unacceptable level and would not exacerbate already unacceptable conditions to a significant degree.

4.3 - 2 The Proposed Project could
temporarily worsen unacceptable
operations on State Route 65 in downtown
Lincoln under existing plus project
conditions if occupancy of the Proposed
Project occurs prior to the completion of
the SR 65 Bypass.

Yes None
Short - term
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than Significant
Construction of the SR 65 Bypass is complete .

4.3 - 3 The Proposed Project would not
cause operations at any intersections in
Roseville to worsen to an unacceptable
level under existing plus project
conditions.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
Added project trips would be dispersed throughout the South Placer County roadway network. Added project traffic to an individual City of Roseville intersection would be modest . Additionally, facilities most likely to be adversely affected (along Fiddyment Road) have now been upgraded with roadway widenings and new signals .

4.3 - 4 The Proposed Project would not
result in unacceptable levels of service at
any intersections in Placer County under
existing plus project conditions.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
The project would add a net increase of about 60 PM peak hour trips to Fiddyment Road south of Moore Road (in Placer County).

This added volume is not sufficient to degrade to an unacceptable level the Fiddyment Road/Athens Avenue study intersection.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1384
2009 DEIR Finding 2026 Assessment
Impact Impact
Significant?
Recommended
Mitigation
Level of Significance
After Mitigation Expected Level of Significance

4.3 - 5 The Proposed Project would worsen
to an unacceptable level or further worsen
already unacceptable operations at three
locations on SR 65 south of Lincoln under
existing plus project conditions.

Yes
Pay applicable
SPRTA Fee
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
The Village 7 B Amendment would add trips to SR 65 south of the Twelve Bridges Drive interchange . The f ollowing summarizes the Amendment’s effects on SR 65 south of Lincoln:

1. The 2009 DEIR determined that project trips would result in impacts to three SR 65 facilities. The SR 65/Sun set Boulevard intersection and SR 65 NB On - Ramp from I - 80 Westbound segment were both identified as impacts because they
degraded from an acceptable to unacceptable LOS. This finding would remain with the proposed Village 7B Amendment . The 2009 DEIR determined that already unacceptable operations at the SR 65 NB Diagonal Off - Ramp to Galleria Boulevard would be exacerbated to a significant degree under the Village 7 Specific Plan . The proposed Amendment would not result in a substantial increase in that impact because the change in density (used to analyze freeway segments ) would be less than 5% threshold (i.e., the significance threshold used in the 2009 DEIR for freeway segments) .

2. There are three study freeway segments that would operate acceptably at LOS E with the project in the 2009 DEIR (see Table 4.3 - 7). These segments are SR 65 NB On - Ramp from Galleria Boulevard, SR 65 NB Off - Ramp to Pleasant Grove Blvd , and SR 65 SB Off - Ramp to Galleria Blvd. The Amendment is anticipated to worsen conditions to an unacceptable LOS F at SB 65 NB Off - Ramp to Pleasant Grove Boulevard segment because the volumes on the freeway would result in a V/C ratio >1 and LOS F . The Amendment would not degrade the two other segments to LOS F.

Thus, the DEIR overall conclusions with respect to this impact would remain significant and unavoidable with one additional impacted segment . The mitigation would remain the same.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1385
2009 DEIR Finding 2026 Assessment
Impact Impact
Significant?
Recommended
Mitigation
Level of Significance
After Mitigation Expected Level of Significance

4.3 - 6 The Proposed Project would add
significant levels of traffic to Moore Road
between the project site and Fiddyment
Road, and to Fiddyment Road from Moore
Road to the south City limits, which are
not constructed to current design
standards.

Yes
Pay fair cost to
upgrade Moore
Road between
Fiddyment Road and
the western
Proposed Project
boundary, and
Fiddyment Road
from Moore Road to
the south City limits
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
No change from 2009 DEIR conclusion. For this particular impact, the significan ce of the impact is determined by whether the project adds trips to a roadway not constructed to current design standards .

The amount of traffic being added plays no role in the determination of the severity of the impact . Therefore, the proposed Village 7 B Amendment , which is anticipated to add 380 additional daily trips to Moore Road east of Fiddyment Road and 320 additional daily trips on Fiddyment Road south of Moore Road, would have the same conclusion regardin g the significance of the impact, the same mitigation measure (pay fair share) , and the same residual significance after mitigation.

4.3 - 7 The Proposed Project would add
significant levels of traffic to portions of
Nelson Lane, which is not constructed to
current design standards.

Yes None
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
No change from 2009 DEIR conclusion. For this particular impact, the significance of the impact is determined by whether the project adds trips to a roadway not constructed to current design standards.

The amount of traffic being added plays no role in the determination of the severity of the impact . Therefore, the proposed Village 7B Amendment , which is anticipated to add 450 additional daily trips to Nelson Lane north of Moore Road, would have the same conclusion regarding the significance of the impact, the same mitigation measure (pay fair share) , and the same residual significance after mitigation.

4.3 - 8 The Proposed Project would provide
adequate facilities to accommodate its
planned transit demand.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
No change from 2009 DEIR conclusion (based on how transit impacts were judged at the time).

4.3 - 9 The Proposed Project would provide
adequate on - site facilities to support
walking and bicycling.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
No change from 2009 DEIR conclusion.

4.3 - 10 The Proposed Project would not
conflict with planned transportation
improvements.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
No change from 2009 DEIR conclusion.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1386
2009 DEIR Finding 2026 Assessment
Impact Impact
Significant?
Recommended
Mitigation
Level of Significance
After Mitigation Expected Level of Significance

4.3 - 11 The Proposed Project would cause
temporary impacts along Moore Road
during construction - related activities.

Yes None feasible
Short - term
Significant and
Unavoidable
Less than Significant
Ferrari Ranch Road has been extended to Moore Road creating a secondary access point for construction. This was explicitly mentioned as a conditional impact consideration in the impact statement.

4.3 - 12 The Proposed Project would not
cause any cumulative impacts on the City
of Lincoln roadway system.

No None Less than Significant
Less than Significant
The DEIR concluded that all Lincoln study intersections would operate acceptably under cumulative conditions because the General Plan considered the Village 7 project . The City’s 2050 General Plan indicates that the study intersections on old SR 65 (now known as Lincoln Boulevard) are not subject to the LOS C operating standard. Table 4.3 - 9 indicates that no City of Lincoln study intersections are on the cusp of degrad ing from acceptable to unacceptable. Therefore, the added trips from the Amendment is not anticipated to cause a nother study intersection to operate unacceptably .

4.3 - 13 The Proposed Project would
worsen to an unacceptable level or further
worsen cumulatively unacceptable
operations (to a significant degree) on
roadway segments within Placer County.

Yes
Pay fair share cost
to improve the five
Placer County
roadway segments
significantly
impacted by the
Proposed Project
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
Table 4.3 - 10 shows that the DEIR project cause d significant impacts at five of the seven study segments in Placer County. The two non - impacted segments were:

1. Athens Avenue west of Industrial Avenue. The proposed Amendment would cause this segment to carry an additional (rounded) 60 vehicles per day, but the LOS would remain at an acceptable LOS C.

2. Industrial Avenue south of Twelve Bridges Drive . The project would cause this segment to carry an additional (rounded) 140 vehicles per day, but the LOS would remain at an acceptable LOS D (given this segment is within ½ mile of a freeway ).

The severity of impacts at the five impacted Placer County roadway segments would not increase as the net effect of proposed Village 7B Amendment trips would be less than a 0.01 V/C ratio increase (i.e., the significance threshold used in the 2009 DEIR for Placer County roadways). Thus, the added trips would not exacerbate to a substantial degree cumulatively unacceptable conditions.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1387
2009 DEIR Finding 2026 Assessment
Impact Impact
Significant?
Recommended
Mitigation
Level of Significance
After Mitigation Expected Level of Significance

4.3 - 14 The Proposed Project would
worsen cumulatively unacceptable
operations (to a significant degree) on
State Route 193 and State Route 65
through Placer County, Rocklin, and
Roseville.

Yes
Pay SPRTA Fees to
help widen SR 65 to
six lanes, and pay
fair share cost to
make improvements
to the SR 193/Sierra
College Boulevard
intersection
Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
The 2009 DEIR concluded that then proposed project would impact 1 intersection and 18 different freeway/highway segments under cumulative conditions (per Table 4.13 - 12 of 2009 DEIR ). The Amendment would not substantially increase the impact at the 18 impacted segments. However, t he Amendment would cause an impact on two additional segments: SR 65 Diagonal On - Ramp from Sunset Boulevard and SR 65 SB Loop On - Ramp from Pleasant Grove Boulevard . The addition of Village 7 B Amendment trips would result in a 5% increase in density for these two segments already operating at LOS F (i.e., the significance threshold used in the 2009 DEIR for freeways) . However, the type of mitigation and residual significance after mitig ation would not change.

4.3 - 15 The Proposed Project would cause
a significant cumulative impact at one
intersection located in the City of
Roseville.

Yes None feasible.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Significant and Unavoidable
This impact was deemed significant and unavoidable because the affected intersection (SR 65 NB Ramps/Pleasant Grove Boulevard) is outside the City of Lincoln and therefore the city does not have the ability to ensure improvements to it are made. Of the 179 signalized intersections in the City of Roseville studied under Cumulative No Project and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions in the 2009 DEIR , the Blue Oaks Blvd/West Side Dr (now Westbrook Blvd) intersection experienced a 0.12 v/c ratio increase (from 0. 18 to

0.30), four intersections experienced a 0.02 or 0.03 v/c ratio increase, and 30 intersections experienced a 0.01 v/c ratio increase.

All other intersections had either no change or a beneficial v/c ratio change. Following evaluates the 35 total inter sections that had v/c ratio increases:
- Blue Oaks Blvd/West Side Drive – Village 7B Amendment would not worsen operations to an unacceptable level given its LOS A operations.
- Of the 34 intersections experiencing a 0.03 , 0.02 , or 0.01 v/c ratio increase in the 2009 DEIR, none were on the verge of worsening from acceptable (LOS C or better) to unacceptable (LOS D or worse).

Source: 2009 Village 7 Specific Plan Draft EIR (2009); Fehr & Peers, 202 6.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1388
Potential for New Significant Impact Statements
As part of this analysis, the potential for significant new transportation impacts not previously identified in the 2009 DEIR were reviewed. Through this comprehensive screening, two topics were identified that warranted additional evaluation. The 2009 DEIR analyzed each of the topics below and concluded project impacts to them would be less than significant.

Impact #1 : The significance criterion pertaining to two - lane state highways utilizes an acceptable operating standard of LOS D. Hence, a project - related degradation from LOS D or better to LOS E or worse would be considered a significant impact. The following evaluat es the susceptibility of study roadway segments along SR 65 and SR 193 being impacted by the proposed Village 7 B Amendment:
• Table 4.3 - 6 (Existing Plus Project Intersection Operations): The 2009 DEIR project only caused an impact at one such intersection (SR 65/Sunset Boulevard) and it was discussed in Impact

4.3.5. Based on the amount of added traffic the proposed Amendment would generate, the directionality of those trips and the results in Table 4.3 - 6, the Village 7B Amendment would not cause any new impacts at other state highway intersections. • Table 4.3 - 7 (Existing Plus Project Highway Operations ): All f our highway segments operated at an unacceptable LOS E without and with the 2009 DEIR project. The significance threshold for exacerbating an unacceptable condition on a state highway is a 5% or greater increase in the percent time spent following (PTSF). Table 4.3 - 7 indicates that the 2009 DEIR project increased the PTSF for each segment by 1 to 3% . Hence, impacts were not deemed significant. Given that the proposed Amendment represents about a 15% increase in external peak hour trips, the PTSF would not i ncrease to 5%. Hence, impacts would also be less than significant for the proposed Village 7B Amendment.

Note that the 2009 DEIR did not analyze SR 65 and SR 193 two - lane highway segments under cumulative conditions.

Impact # 2: The Fiddyment Road/Athens Avenue intersection (located in unincorporated Placer County) was shown in Table 4.3 - 9 (Cumulative Intersection Operations) as worsening from LOS C to D during the PM peak hour due to the 2009 DEIR project. However, it was not identified as a cumulative impact. A footnote in the table indicates that “ This intersection is shown as LOS D in Table 5- 28 in the 2050 Lincoln General Plan DEIR under cumulative mitigated conditions. ” While the purpose of this comment is not enti rely clear, it may suggest the General Plan EIR had acknowledged that projects included in the City’s General Plan (including Village 7) were expected to cause this intersection to worsen to an unacceptable LOS D condition. The Village 7B Amendment would add 14 southbound through trips during the PM peak hour to this intersection. Review of the detailed LOS calculation indicates that movement was “critical” from the Circular 212 methodology employed at the time. Mathematically, adding 14 tri ps to this criti cal movement increases the overall v/c ratio by

0.003. Hence, added trips from the Village 7B Amendment would increase the v/c ratio at this intersection from 0.850 to 0.853. The significance criteria for exacerbating an unacceptable condition at Placer County was a 0.01 increase in the v/c ratio. The Village 7 B Amendment v/c ratio increase was far less than that. Therefore, the Village 7B Amendment would not further degrade unacceptable operations at this intersection to a significant degree.

Attachments
Attachment A: Year 2025 Existing Conditions and Existing Plus Project Level of Service Results Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1389
Attachment A: Year 2025 Existing Conditions and Existing Plus Project Level of Service Results
An updated level of service evaluation was completed using traffic count data from 2025 to determine if the proposed Village 7B amendment would result in any new significant impacts specific to Impact Statement 4.3-1 in the Village 7 Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report . This particular impact statement, which pertains to intersection operations at City of Lincoln intersections, is especially critical to fully analyze given how different current study area conditions are versus what was present when the EIR analysis was conducted in 2006.

This analysis was completed for the following three scenarios:
• Existing Conditions (using 2025 traffic count data)
• Existing Plus Current Village 7B Conditions
• Existing Plus Proposed Village 7B Conditions
This analysis evaluates the effects of the land use changes in the subarea of the Village 7 Specific Plan north of Moore Road, also known as Village 7B, on the roadway network. This evaluates whether the proposed Village 7B amendment would result in any significant impacts to nearby intersections in the City of Lincoln. Ten intersections were selected for analysis based on their expected usage by project trips and susceptibility of being impacted. The list was agreed upon by City of Lincoln staff.

This evaluation was completed using Synchro 12.0 software and relied on the methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual , 7
th Edition . Trip generation for the two Plus Project scenarios was based on ITE’s Trip Generation Manual , 12th Edition as presented in the “Lincoln Village 7B Specific Plan Amendment – Project Travel Characteristics Memorandum” dated November 25, 2025. Trip distribution generally followed the Cumulative Year Project Trip Distribution figure from the Project Travel Characteristics Memorandum, but modifications were made to reflect the existing roadway network and lack of development in areas to the south (i.e., Placer Ranch/Sunset Industrial) and west (i.e., Village 5) which could attract project trips.

Overall, all intersections operate at LOS C or better during the PM peak hour (noting that the City’s LOS policy only pertains to this time period) and no significant impacts were identified per the City of Lincoln’s significance criteria.

Accordingly, the Draft EIR conclusions with regard to Impact 4.3-1 are the same regardless of whether project effects are judged relative to then 2006 conditions or current 2025 conditions.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1390
Table 1: Village 7B Existing and Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Results Intersection Intersection
Control Peak Hour
Existing Conditions Existing Plus Current
Village 7B Conditions1
Existing Plus Proposed
Village 7B Conditions2
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Fiddyment Rd /
Moore Rd AWSC AMPM

7.7 8.5
A
A

8.0 8.9
A
A

8.2 9.2
A
A
2 Nelson Ln / Moore
Road TWSC AMPM

5.3 (9.1)

5.5 (9.6)
A (A)
A (A)

4.5 (9.9)

5.5 (11.0)
A (A)
A (B)

4.3 (10.5)

5.7 (12.2)
A (B)
A (B)
3 Caledon Cir (W) /
Ferrari Ranch Rd Signal AMPM

28.0 19.4
C
B

30.9 20.7
C
C

33.1 21.7
C
C
4 SR 65 SB Ramps /
Ferrari Ranch Rd Signal AMPM

5.9 5.6
A
A

6.0 5.6
A
A

7.1 5.7
A
A
5 SR 65 NB Ramps /
Ferrari Ranch Rd Signal AMPM

10.5 11.7
B
B

10.9 13.3
B
B

11.3 14.6
B
B
6 Ferrari Ranch Rd /
Groveland Ln Signal AMPM

23.0 26.4
C
C

23.3 27.6
C
C

23.4 28.4
C
C
7 Joiner Pkwy /
Ferrari Ranch Rd Signal AMPM

24.6 24.6
C
C

24.9 24.9
C
C

25.0 25.0
C
C
8 Joiner Pkwy /
Moore Rd AWSC AMPM

33.6 15.5
D
C

34.8 15.8
D
C

35.5 16.0
E
C
9 Lincoln Blvd /
Ferrari Ranch Rd Signal AMPM

25.0 24.9
C
C

25.0 25.0
C
C

25.0 25.0
C
C
10 Joiner Pkwy /
Nicolaus Rd Signal AMPM

22.0 21.1
C
C

22.5 21.6
C
C

22.9 22.0
C
C
Bold indicates unacceptable operations.

1. “Current Village 7B” includes the land use from the current Village 7 Specific Plan dated May 14, 2024 for the area north of Moore Road.

2. “Proposed Village 7B” includes the proposed land use for the area north of Moore Road.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2026.

Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1391

APPENDIX D

WASTEWATER CAPACITY MEMORANDUM
Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1392
— SINCE 1953 —
1025 CREEKSIDE RIDGE DRIVE, SUITE 150, ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95678 PHONE (916) 773-1189 FAX (916) 773-2595 OFFICES: ROSEVILLE PLEASANTON
www.msce.com

MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 14, 2026
TO: Lewis Group of Companies
FROM: Tye Sheehan, P.E.

SUBJECT: Village 7 Wastewater Capacity Based on LU Updates Introduction
This Memorandum summarizes wastewater collection and treatment capacity considerations associated with the proposed modification to the Village 7 Specific Plan, which would modify the total residential units from 3,285 to 3,788 units. The purpose of this memorandum is to demonstrate that the proposed increase does not result in new or more severe wastewater impacts beyond those previously analyzed under the previous sewer master plans.

Wastewater Collection System Capacity
Wastewater planning for Village 7 is addressed in the City of Lincoln Wastewater Collection System Master Plan, adopted in 2018. Review of the Master Plan indicates that capital improvement projects (CIPs) recommended to address collection system capacity deficiencies are located upstream of the Village 7 connection point.

Village 7 discharges to large diameter regional trunk sewer infrastructure, including the Moore Road 66 inch trunk sewer, which was evaluated under future buildout conditions as part of the City’s adopted hydraulic modeling.

Appendix D of the Wastewater Collection System Master Plan presents Level of Service (LOS) modeling results for full General Plan buildout conditions (Scenario 6). Under Scenario 6, the Moore Road 66 inch trunk sewer is shown to retain greater than 15 million gallons per day (MGD) of residual conveyance capacity and to operate within the City’s adopted LOS criteria.

Because Village 7 is situated downstream of the identified CIP improvement locations, the downstream conveyance system was planned to accommodate Village 7 flows. The Scenario 6 modeling demonstrates that the regional trunk sewer facilities serving Village 7, including the Moore Road 66 inch interceptor, were not identified as capacity constrained under ultimate buildout peak wet weather flow conditions and maintain ample excess conveyance capacity to accommodate incremental increases in flow.

Wastewater Treatment Facilitis (LiSWA)
Wastewater generated within the City of Lincoln is treated at the City’s Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility (WWTRF), which is owned and operated by the Lincoln Sewer Maintenance District No. 1 Wastewater Authority (LiSWA), a joint powers authority between the City of Lincoln and Placer County.

Public regulatory notices identify the WWTRF as providing tertiary level wastewater treatment for up to approximately 5.9 million gallons per day (MGD) under current permitting conditions. In addition to existing treatment capacity, LiSWA is responsible for planning, financing, and implementing facility improvements and longterm expansion to serve regional growth.

Treatment Capacity and Expansion Planning
The City of Lincoln Wastewater Collection System Master Plan evaluates wastewater system performance under conservative peak wet weather flow (PWWF) conditions for purposes of collection system hydraulic planning and Attachment 7 Exhibit A
1393

MEMORANDUM
Wastewater Capacity
Liberty at Lincoln – Village 7 SP

Page 2 of 3 ends

Lincoln City CouncilJuly 28, 2026

Lincoln City Council
July 28, 2026