Agenda, regular meeting — Moreno Valley City Council, October 6, 2026 (part 4 of 11)

Major Renovations - Qualifying major renovations include any repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, alteration, addition or other improvement of a building or structure where either:

This CEQA GHG Compliance Checklist is required to accompany the Application Materials submitted to the City for all projects and plans subject to CEQA review that are not deemed statutorily or categorically exempt. The CEQA GHG Checklist is designed to assist the applicant and the City in identifying the minimum CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements specific to a proposed project or plan. However, it may be necessary to supplement the completed CEQA GHG Checklist with supporting information, materials, calculations, or certifications to demonstrate compliance with CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements. If the minimum CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements are not already clearly committed to as part of the CEQA project description, the completed CEQA GHG Checklist shall be included in the respective project or plan description and referenced in the respective conditions of approval.

Dual Plumbing- A "Dual plumbed system" or "dual plumbing" means a system that utilizes separate piping systems for recycled water and potable water within a facility and where the recycled water is used for landscape irrigation and plumbing outlets (e.g., toilets, urinals) within a building.Graywater Ready- Is a system that collects water from graywater sources (clothes washers, showers, lavatory faucets, etc.) separately from blackwater sources (i.e. toilets, kitchen faucets, and dishwashers). Graywater can then be utilized to supply water for landscaping irrigation and toilets.

Major Transit Stop- Major Transit Stop is defined by Assembly Bill (AB) 2553 (2024) as a rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by bus or rail, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service of 20 minutes or less during peak commute periods.

All Project Types- “All Project Types” refers to all new developments or major renovations/remodels for residential, mixed-use, commercial, and institutional land uses ndustrial projects and emissions generated by those sources are regulated by CARB and are not under the City’s direct operational control. Therefore, this checklist does not apply to industrial projects. 1) The cost of the renovation equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the improvement or repair is started, or; 2) The square footage of the renovation exceeds 50 percent of the square footage of the structure before the improvement or repair is started.

APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
This CEQA GHG Compliance Checklist is required to accompany the Application Materials submitted to the City for all projects and plans subject to CEQA review that are not deemedstatutorily or categorically exempt. The CEQA GHG Checklist is designed to assist the applicant and the City in identifying the minimum CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements specific to a proposed project or plan. However, it may be necessary to supplement the completed CEQA GHG Checklist with supporting information, materials, calculations, or certifications to demonstrate compliance with CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements. If the minimum CAP and other applicable climate-focused requirements are not already clearly committed to as part of the CEQA project description, the completed CEQA GHG Checklist shall be included in the respective project or plan description and referenced in the respective conditions of approval.

Definitions
All Project Types- “All Project Types” refers to all new developments or major renovations/remodels for residential, mixed-use, commercial, and institutional land uses.

Industrial projects and emissions generated by those sources are regulated by CARB and are not under the City’s direct operational control. Therefore, this checklist does not apply to industrial projects.

Graywater Ready- Is a system that collects water from graywater sources (clothes washers, showers, lavatory faucets, etc.) separately from blackwater sources (i.e. toilets, kitchen faucets, and dishwashers). Graywater can then be utilized to supply water for landscaping irrigation and toilets.

Major Renovations - Qualifying major renovations include any repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, alteration, addition or other improvement of a building or structure where either:
1) The cost of the renovation equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the improvement or repair is started, or; 2) The square footage of the renovation exceeds 50 percent of the square footage of the structure before the improvement or repair is started.

Page 4 of 12 ends

854
Public Safety Campus
478-110-001, -002, -003, 004, 005, 006, -007, 478-120-001, -002, -005, -006, and 481-322-044, 291-650-017,260-460-009, 488-330-001, 485-042-029, 308-030-018, and 487-370-0187, -008, -017, -018, -025, and -027 City of Moreno Valley
213-394-0379
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Heidi Rous
660 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, CA 90017 [email protected] Redlands Boulevard and Brodiaea Avenue, 25180 Santiago Drive, and existing Civic Center Buildings

60.37 Public Safety Campus (235,000 sf), corporate yard (43,560 sf), and existing civic center uses (145,926 sf ) Angelica Frausto-Lupo
14177 Frederick St. Moreno Valley,CA
(951) 413.3215
[email protected]

GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Project or Plan Name:

Address:

Assessor’s Parcel Number(s):

Date Submitted:

Applicant Name: Contact Phone:

Company Name (if applicable):

Contact Email:

Company Address:

Non
Consultant Name: Contact Phone:Company Name:

Contact Email:

Company Address:

Gross:

Net:

If proposing a Major Renovation:

Square-footage of renovation:Square-footage of existing development:

Cost of renovation: □ Residential (indicate # of single-family dwelling units): □ Residential (indicate # of multi-family dwelling units): □ Commercial (indicate total square footage, gross and net):

Municipal (indicate total square footage, gross and net):
□ Other (describe):

Page 5 of 12 ends

Was a consultant retained to complete this checklist? YesX If Yes, complete the following:Market value of existing development:

Identify all applicable proposed land uses:

Project Information (description summary)
What is the size of the project site or plan area (acres)? GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION Project or Plan Name: Address: Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): Date Submitted: Applicant Name: Contact Phone: Company Name (if applicable): Contact Email: Company Address: Was a consultant retained to complete this checklist? YesX No[] If Yes, complete the following: Consultant Name: Contact Phone:

Company Name:

Contact Email:

Company Address:

Project Information (description summary)
What is the size of the project site or plan area (acres)? Gross:

Net:

If proposing a Major Renovation:

Square-footage of renovation:

Square-footage of existing development:

Cost of renovation:

Market value of existing development:

Identify all applicable proposed land uses:
[1 Residential (indicate # of single-family dwelling units):[I Residential (indicate # of multi-family dwelling units):
[1 Commercial (indicate total square footage, gross and net):
> Municipal (indicate total square footage, gross and net):
[I Other (describe):

Page 5 of 12 ends

855
The City of Moreno Valley (City) proposes to implement the Public Safety Campus Project (Project), which consists of three primary components: (1) development of a Public Safety Campus (PSC); (2) construction of a Corporate Yard Fueling Station; and (3) tenant improvements at existing civic center facilities throughout the City. All three components together comprise the Project. The Project also includes improvements to a drainage culvert and roadway improvements on nearby streets. These improvements would accommodate a range of civic uses identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and are intended to enhance emergency response capabilities, improve operational efficiency, and support the City’s growing public safety and municipal service needs as the City continues to grow. The Project would encompass approximately 60.37 acres.

Page 6 of 12 ends

Project description. This description shall be consistent with the project description that will be used for the CEQA document. The description may be attached to the GHG Checklist if there are space constraints. Project description. This description shall be consistent with the project description that will be used for the CEQA document. The description may be attached to the GHG Checklist if there are space constraints.

Page
6 of 12
856

COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST TABLE
Section 1: LAND USE CONSISTENCY
Regulation Requirements Project/Plan Required Explanation4 Compliance
Yes□
Moreno Valley 2024 1 a. Does the Project/Plan include a No8 General Plan Update General Plan Amendment?
N/AD
1 b. Does the Project/Plan include a Zoning
Map Amendment/Rezoning, and/or Zoning
Text Amendment?
If "No" for questions 1a. and 1b., proceed
to Section 2: CAP Measures Consistency. Yes□
Moreno Valley Zoning If "Yes" to either question 1 a or 1.b, the No8
Code applicant shall prepare a Project/Planspecific analysis of GHG emissions, NIA□ including quantification of existing and projected GHG emissions compared to
Moreno Valley CEQA GHG Emissions
Thresholds and incorporation of the CAP
measures in this CEQA GHG Checklist to
the extent feasible.
4 Every question included in this CEQA GHG Checklist is required to be answered with explanation of either: 1) how it will be achieved, 2) why it will not be achieved, or 3) why it is not applicable. References to the plan set page number or other project description detail should be provided to demonstrate compliance.

Page 7 of 12 ends

The Project would be permitted under
existing land use designation and a
General Plan Amendment would not
be required.

The Project would be permitted
under the existing land use
designation and a zone change
would not be required.
857
The Project would be designed in
accordance with the 2025
CALGreen Code.

The Project would be designed in
accordance with applicable 2025
CALGreen Code Standards.

Therefore, the Project will provide
electric ready applicances in
accordance with the California
Electric Code.

The Project would be designed in
accordance with applicable 2025
CALGreen Code Standards.

Therefore, the Project would
include electric ready appliances in
accordance with the California
Electric Code.

Measure No. Requirements Required Explanation
Building Energy
Building Decarbonization and Energy Efficiency
YesX
Non
N/AD
YesX
Non
N/AH
YesX
Non
N/AH
7 As of the date of this current CEQA GHG Checklist, the 2022 CALGreen Code is in effect. Beginning January 1, 2026, the 2025 CALGreen Code will apply. For more information

Page 8 of 12 ends

Project/Plan
Compliance5

2. All Project Types - Energy-Efficient Design. Will the Project/Plan comply with the latest version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6),6 CALGreen Code,7 and any applicable Moreno Valley Building Energy Appliance Reach Codes or Energy Score Ordinances?
visit: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen.
8 A “Yes” to this checklist item means that all heating, cooking, and water heating appliances are electrified.

Measures BE-2
and BE-3

4.AII Project Types - Building Decarbonization. Will the Project/Plan include decarbonized new construction and
applicable major renovations, including for heating, cooking, and water heating?8

3.AII Project Types - Energy-Efficient Air Conditioning. As an option, will the Project/Plan include central air conditioning unit installations and replacements that are two-way, providing both heating and cooling with a single unit?
Measures BE-4,
and BE-5
Measures BE-2,
BE-3, BE-4, and
BE-5
5 “No” responses to checklist items, except for those that include “as an option” in the language, indicate that a quantitative GHG emissions analysis shall be required for the Plan/Project. Checklist items that include “as an option” in the language are voluntary in nature. 6 As of the date of this current CEQA GHG Checklist, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are in effect. Beginning January 1,2026, the 2025 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will apply. For more information visit: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards.

Section 2: CAP MEASURES CONSISTENCY
Project/Plan
Compliance? Measure No. Requirements Required Explanation Building Decarbonization andEnergyEfficiency

2. All Project Types —Energy-Efficient Design. Will the YesX Measures BE-2, | Project/Plan comply with the latest version of the Building BE-3, BE-4, and | Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6),6 CALGreen NoO BE-5 Code,” and any applicable Moreno Valley Building Energy N/A] Appliance Reach Codes or Energy Score Ordinances?

3.All Project Types —Energy-Efficient Air Conditioning. As Yes Measures BE-4, | an option, will the Project/Plan include central air conditioning NoLl and BE-5 unit installations and replacements that are two-way, providing both heating and cooling with a single unit? N/AC]

4.All Proj ildi izati Yes . roject Types —Building Decarbonization. Will the MeasuresBE-2 | Project/Plan includedecarbonizednewconstructionand Noll and BE-3 applicable major renovations, including for heating, cooking, and water heating? N/AC]
9 “Ng” responses to checklist items, except for those that include “as an option” in the language, indicate that a quantitative GHG emissions analysis shall be required for the Plan/Project. Checklist items that include “as an option” in the language are voluntary in nature. 6 As of the date of this current CEQA GHG Checklist, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are in effect. Beginning January 1, 2026, the 2025 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will apply. For more information visit: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards. 7 As of the date of this current CEQA GHG Checklist, the 2022 CALGreen Code is in effect. Beginning January 1, 2026, the 2025 CALGreen Code will apply. For more information visit: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen.
8 A “Yes” to this checklist item means that all heating, cooking, and water heating appliances are electrified.

Page 8 of 12 ends

858
Renewable Energy

5. All Project Types - Solar and Battery Storage Yes8 Requirements. As applicable, will the Project/Plan include Measure BE-6 installation of a solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage No□ system in accordance with the requirements of the current version of Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part NIA□ 6)?9
Yes□

6. Nonresidential Projects - As an option, will the
Measure BE-6 Project/Plan install solar PV on at least 50 percent of usable No□ roof space and install battery storage? N/AD
Transportation
Multi-Modal Transportation

7. All Project Types - Bicycle Parking. Will the Project/Plan Yes□ Measure T-1 comply with the latest version of the Moreno Valley Municipal No□ Code Section 9.11.06010 or CALGreen Code,11 whichever has the greater requirement, for provision of bicycle parking? NIA□

8. All Project Types - Parking Requirements. If located Yes□ Measure T-2 within O.5-mile of a Major Transit Stop, would the Plan/Project No8 implement reduced parking consistent with AB 2097 (2022)12 and AB 2553 (2024 )?13 NIA□
9 As of the date of this current CEQA GHG Checklist, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are in effect. Beginning January 1, 2026, the 2025 Building Energy Efficiency Standards will apply. Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards. 10 Available at: https://ecode360.com/43230888#43230943 11 Available at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/calgreen
12 Available at: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2097 13 Available at: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB2553

Page 9 of 12 ends

The Project would incorporate solar
PV throughout Project covered
parking areas in accordance with
Title 24, Part 6.

The Project is not located within a

0.5-mile of a Major Transit Stop.

The Project would provide 862 parking
spaces; therefore, the Project would
provide 43 bicycle parking spaces.

X
859
CALGreen Tier 2 requirements for nonresidential projects require 50 percent of parking spaces to be EV capable.

Therefore, the Project would provide
431 EV charging spaces.

The Project would utilize electric or lowemission off-road equipment during Project Construction.

The Project will comply with applicable
federal, State, and local recycling
waste diversion requirements during
Project construction and operations.

Vehicle and Off-road Equipment Decarbonization
YesX
Measure T-4 NoD
N/AD
YesR
Measure T-5 NoD
N/AD
Solid Waste
YesR
Measure SW-1 NoD
N/AD

Page 10 of 12 ends

14 Available at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/calgreen
15 Available at: https://ecode360.com/43225954

9. All Project Types - Electric Vehicle Chargers. Will the Project/Plan comply with the CALGreen14 Tier 2 requirements for electric vehicle (EV) charging parking spaces?

10. All Project Types - Off-Road Equipment
Decarbonization. Will the Project/Plan include the use of zeroemission (e.g., electric, renewable diesel) off-road construction and landscaping equipment (e.g., mowers, chippers, tractors)?

11. All Project Types - Landfill Diversion. Will the
Project/Plan meet current legislation (e.g., California SB 1383 [2016], AB 1276 [2021]) and Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapters 6.02 and 6.0315 requirements for inclusion of solid waste sorting and disposal receptacles to support the CAP and Statewide goals to sort, recycle, and collect recyclables and reduce landfilled garbage?
Vehicle andOff-roadEquipment Decarbonization
Yes

9. All Project Types —Electric Vehicle Chargers. Will the Measure T-4 Project/Plan comply with the CALGreen'4 Tier 2 requirements No[l for electric vehicle (EV) charging parking spaces? N/A]

10. All Project Types —Off-Road Equipment Yeskd
MeasureT-5 Decarbonization. WilltheProject/Planinclude the useof zero- Noll emission (e.g., electric, renewable diesel) off-road construction and landscaping equipment (e.g., mowers, chippers, tractors)? N/AO

11. All Project Types —Landfill Diversion. Will the
Project/Plan meet current legislation (e.g., California SB 1383 Yesk [2016], AB 1276 [2021]) and Moreno Valley Municipal Code Measure SW-1 | Chapters 6.02 and 6.033 requirements for inclusion of solid No[l waste sorting and disposal receptacles to support the CAP and N/AC Statewide goals to sort, recycle, and collect recyclables and reduce landfilled garbage?
14Available at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/calgreen
15Availableat:https://ecode360.com/43225954
Page10 of 12
860
The Project will submit a Waste
Management Plan to achieve a 65 percent
diversion for construction waste in
accordance with CALGreen Requirements.

The Project will meet or exceed applicable
CALGreen water efficiency standards
through the installation of water-efficient
fixtures, fittings, and landscaping measures
In accordance with the Moreno Valley
Municipal Code Chapter 9.17,
landscaped ares will utilize native or lowwater use plant materials, smart irrigation systems, and drought-tolerant design.

In accordance with State Legislation
and Moreno Valley Municipal Code
Requirements, the Project would
provide waste disposal and signage
to support waste diversion.

YesR
Measure SW-1 NoD
N/AL
YesX
Measure SW-1 NoD
N/AL
Water Use
YesR
Measure WW-1 NoD
N/AD
YesX
Measure WW-1 NoD
N/AL
YesD
Measure WW-1 NoD
N/AR
16 Available at: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/ 17 Available at: https://ecode360.com/43225954

Page 11 of 12 ends

18 Available at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/calgreen
19 Available at: https://ecode360.com/43233174

15. All Project Types - Water Efficient Landscaping. Will the Project/Plan comply with the requirements of Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapter 9.1719 by including water efficient landscaping and landscaping irrigation systems?

13. All Project Types - Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling. Will the Project/Plan achieve a 65 percent diversion from landfill rate for construction waste in accordance with CALGreen requirements?

12. All Project Types - Organics Recycling Requirement.

Will the Project/Plan meet SB 1383 (2016)16 legislation and Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapters 6.02 and 6.0317
requirements by requiring that residences and businesses provide organic waste disposal containers and post educational signage to encourage Project/Plan occupants to sort, compost, and collect organic waste to support the goal of achieving a 75 percent reduction of landfilled organic waste compared to 2014 levels?

14. All Project Types - Water Conservation. Will the
Project/Plan meet the water-efficiency standards established by the latest version of the CALGreen18 code by including water efficient fixtures and appliances?

16. All Project Types - Dual Plumbing. As an option, will the Project/Plan include development that is built with dual plumbing or graywater ready plumbing that can utilize recycled water or graywater for landscape watering and toilets?

12. All Project Types —Organics Recycling Requirement.

Will the Project/Plan meet SB 1383 (2016)16 legislation and Moreno Valley Municipal Code Chapters 6.02 and 6.0317 Yes requirements by requiring that residences and businesses Measure SW-1 | provide organic waste disposal containers and post educational No[] signage to encourage Project/Plan occupants to sort, compost, N/A and collect organic waste to support the goal of achieving a 75 percent reduction of landfilled organic waste compared to 2014 levels?

13. All Proi . coc . YesX
. roject Types —Construction and Demolition Debris
Recycling. Will the Project/Plan achieve a 65 percent diversion Measure SW-1 from landfill rate for construction waste in accordance with Nol CALGreen requirements? N/AO

14. All Project Types —Water Conservation. Will the Yes Measure WW-1 Project/Plan meet the water-efficiency standards established Nol] by the latest version of the CALGreen8 code by including ° water efficient fixtures and appliances? N/ACT . I . . YesX 15. All Project Types —Water Efficient Landscaping. Will : the Project/Plan comply with the requirements of Moreno Noll Measure WW-1 Valley Municipal Code Chapter 9.1719 by including water efficient landscaping and landscaping irrigation systems? N/AO . . . . Yes 16. All Project Types —Dual Plumbing. As an option, will the Measure WW-1 Project/Plan include development that is built with dual Nod plumbing or graywater ready plumbing that can utilize recycled water or graywater for landscape watering and toilets? N/AK 16 Available at: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/ 17 Available at: https://ecode360.com/43225954
18Availableat: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/calgreen
19 Available at: https:/ecode360.com/43233174
Page11of 12
861
Pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter

9.17, the Project would utilize drought
tolerant landscaping.

Mayra Garcia
Mayra Garcia
September 29, 2026
Urban Forest
YesR
Measure CS-2 Non
N/AL
YesX
Final Consistency Determination NoC
Signature(s)
Checklist Prepared by:
(Name)
Checklist Prepared by:
(Signature)
Checklist Prepared on:
(Date)
20 Signatures for the checklist preparer and/or Project/Plan applicant/proponent should be added below to indicate that this checklist has been filled out accurately and the Project/Plan has committed to including the Checklist Items above marked with “Yes” in the Project/Plan design.

Does the Project/Plan incorporate all applicable and nonoptional checklist items? If no, Project/Plan requires quantitative GHG emissions assessment.

17. All Project Types - Tree Planting. Will the Project/Plan include new climate-adaptive/drought tolerant trees and landscaping20 (as applicable) in order to increase the Citywide urban forest?
Refer to the California Native Plant Society’s Planting Guide for Riverside County for examples: https://www.bewaterwise.com/assets/mwd_plantguide-screen_riverside_4.16.pdf.

Page 12 of 12 ends

17. All Project Types —Tree Planting. Will the Project/Plan MeasureCS-2 | includenewclimate-adaptive/drought tolerant trees and Noll landscaping?? (as applicable) in order to increase the Citywide urban forest?
Yesk
N/AO
Section 3: Summary and Signature
Final Consistency Determination
Does the Project/Plan incorporate all applicable and non- Yes optional checklist items? If no, Project/Plan requires Noll quantitative GHG emissions assessment. °
Signature(s)
Checklist Items above marked with “Yes” in the Project/Plan design.

Signatures for the checklist preparer and/or Project/Plan applicant/proponent should be added below to indicate that this checklist has been filled out accurately and the Project/Plan has committed to including the Checklist Prepared by:

Checklist Prepared by:
(Name)
Checklist Prepared on:
(Signature)
(Date)
20 Refer to the California Native Plant Society's Planting Guide for Riverside County for examples: https://www.bewaterwise.com/assets/mwd_plantguide-screen_riverside_4.16.pdf.

Page12 of 12
862
Appendix B
Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation
Report
Appendix B
Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation
Report
Kimley»Horn
863
Determination of
Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation
Report
Belago Park
TTM 38157 and 38158
Permittee Name
City of Moreno Valley
14177 Frederick Street
Moreno Valley, California 92553
Consultant Name
ELMT Consulting, Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 92711
June 2024
Revised April 2025
Determination of
Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation
Report
Belago Park
TTM 38157 and 38158
Permittee Name
City of Moreno Valley
14177Frederick Street
Moreno Valley, California 92553
Consultant Name
ELMT Consulting, Inc.
2201N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 92711
June2024
Revised April 2025
864
DBESP Report
i
Contents
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................................................................. 1 2 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 2

2.1 Project Area ............................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Project Description.................................................................................................................... 2

2.3 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................... 3 3 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE MITIGATION (SECTION 6.1.2)................................................................. 7

3.1 Methods...................................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Results/Impacts.......................................................................................................................... 9

3.3 Mitigation and Equivalency.................................................................................................... 10

3.3.1 Direct Effects ........................................................................................................................ 10

3.3.2 Indirect Effects...................................................................................................................... 10 4 ADDITIONAL SURVEY NEEDS (SECTION 6.3.2)....................................................................... 13

4.1 Burrowing Owl ........................................................................................................................ 13

4.1.1 Methods................................................................................................................................. 13

4.1.2 Results/Impacts..................................................................................................................... 15

4.1.3 Mitigation and Equivalency .................................................................................................. 15 5 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................... 18

APPENDIX
Appendix A Project Exhibits
Appendix B Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix C Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters DBESP Report
Contents
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....cooiriirieteneetetere esteereresesestentsteseseseententsreesonesensessenessesneesersnenenesans 2 INTRODUCTION......coieitrrerentreetreereneetetenerte seseeesesestestesesatesesesesesesasentsateserseseensentrtenerasesessesseneenes

2.1 PIOJECE ATRA... rte rere renters test ete sarees ee sarees ene nas ese sac est nene rane neeenenanenesnten

2.2 Project DeSCriPLION ............cooeriiiicereieceeeerr errors ereseceeserenanessesenteseeresarenenanesereneas

2.3 EXiSting Conditions ...........cccorieireeniiircreenterretrerereereeeree secneesere rresseesersessessesereneranesereneas 3 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE MITIGATION (SECTION 6.1.2)......ccceioierirrerenennercreneenreserrenereresesseesene

3.1 MELROAS......ooeeeeee reteset eerste eeeetetera eeesameeren

3.2 ReSUIS/TIMPACES ........coniimrirnirrereeriect eterno reereeereeseeseesareesnesensesresseeresseeseranenerenenaneneneneen

3.3 Mitigation and EQUIVAIENCY .........c..cooririiriiireeeenrceeeerrerere errereeestes reraneanrereesaseraseenee10

3.3.1 DIHIECEEIECLS coerce crete creer err ereee ert ese recent re reser ease ne sae enee sent nene saree nenennn ene 10

3.3.2 INAITECt EfECLS ...coeiniiiiiereeereeecteeectereree nner eens rereraneannessessenteneesareenenenanene10 4 ADDITIONAL SURVEY NEEDS (SECTION 6.3.2).....c.ccccererirrererrerenernenreeeneensenernenerseesesseeseneenes13

4.1 Burrowing OWL... teense etree sects rere ser r erase erro e sree aera sane nenenenane 13

4.1.1 MEROAScence errr teresa treeraneanenna see een rarsennaeenreaes13

4.1.2 ReSUMS/TMPACES ......oeeeieeirieiiiieiteet etcetera erect ee tsetse eee see sees me eabe sere neneneneaene 15

4.1.3 Mitigation and EQUIVAIENCY .......cooceeriiiiiiriiiiiieiretee teeters testeseetesters estes 15 5 REFERENCES. ...... reenter eset ener tere se cesses stents senses esse se stents ae sa ease se erent rate nesseesenesasent 18

APPENDIX
Appendix A Project Exhibits
Appendix B Habitat Assessment and WesternRiverside County MSHCP Consistency Analysis Appendix C Delineation of State andFederal Jurisdictional Waters 865
DBESP Report
1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report contains the results of the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for impacts to riparian/riverine resources. The proposed project would develop two Tentative Tract Maps (No. 38157 and 38158) with 310 single family units within four Planning Areas, would develop a public park and improve adjacent roadways in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site at Redlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering off-site to the south.

According to historic aerials, this drainage (storm drain) was installed to accommodate storm flows associated with the agricultural activities that once occurred within and surrounding the site. This drainage receives flows via a box culvert under Redlands Boulevard. This drainage exits the middle of the southern boundary of the project site where it flows into four box culverts under Cactus Avenue. Drainage 1 eventually connects into the Perris Valley Storm Drain, which flows to Canyon Lake and ultimately Lake Elsinore. From Lake Elsinore, water flows out to Temescal Creek, which is ultimately tributary to the Santa Ana River (Relatively Permanent Water) and the Pacific Ocean (Traditional Navigable Water).

Approximately 1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of riverine habitat was mapped within the proposed project site.

The riverine habitat is synonymous with the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional streambed. The proposed project design will result in permanent impacts to 1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of riverine habitat within Drainage 1.

The applicant proposes to mitigate permanent impacts to onsite riverine habitat (previously installed flood control drainage) through the following:
• Permanent impacts to 1.4 acres of riverine habitat (areas that do not support riparian habitat) will be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio consisting of 1.4 re-establishment CDFW mitigation credits, and 0.57:1 ratio consisting of 0.8 acre of rehabilitation credits, totaling 2.2 acres of mitigation credit, for a total mitigation ration of 1.57:1.

The above actions would result in a net increase in the function and ecological value of riverine habitat within the region by preserving/enhancing high quality habitat along the San Jacinto River within the Riverpark Mitigation Bank.

DBESP Report
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report contains the results of the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) for impacts to riparian/riverine resources. The proposedproject would develop two Tentative Tract Maps (No. 38157 and 38158) with 310 single family units within four Planning Areas, would develop apublic park and improve adjacentroadways in the City ofMorenoValley,RiversideCounty,California
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site at Redlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering off-site to the south.

According to historic aerials, this drainage (storm drain) was installed to accommodate storm flows associatedwith the agricultural activities that once occurred within and surrounding the site. This drainage receives flows via a box culvert under RedlandsBoulevard. This drainage exits the middle of the southern boundary of the project site where it flows into four box culverts under Cactus Avenue. Drainage 1 eventually connects into the Perris Valley Storm Drain, which flows to Canyon Lake and ultimately Lake Elsinore.FromLakeElsinore, water flows out to TemescalCreek, whichisultimately tributary to the Santa AnaRiver (Relatively PermanentWater) andthePacific Ocean(TraditionalNavigable Water).

Approximately 1.4 acres(1,296 linear feet) ofriverine habitat wasmapped within theproposedproject site.

The riverine habitat is synonymous with the jurisdiction of the California Department ofFish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional streambed.Theproposedproject designwillresult inpermanentimpacts to 1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) ofriverine habitat withinDrainage 1.

The applicant proposes to mitigate permanent impacts to onsite riverine habitat (previously installed flood control drainage) through the following:
e Permanent impacts to 1.4 acres ofriverine habitat (areas that do not support riparian habitat) will be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio consisting of 1.4 re-establishment CDFW mitigation credits, and 0.57:1 ratio consisting of0.8 acreofrehabilitationcredits, totaling 2.2 acresofmitigationcredit, for a total mitigationration of 1.57:1.

2.1 Project Area
The project site is generally located south of State Route 60, west of State Route 79, north of State Route 74, and east of Interstate 215 City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California. The site is depicted on the Sunnymead quadrangle of the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West. Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cactus Avenue and Redlands Boulevard Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 478-100-012 and -035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; 478-120-001, -002, -005, and -006; and 478-120-025 and 478-120-027. Refer to Exhibits 1-3 in Appendix A.

2.2 Project Description
The Project proposes to subdivide the 34.32-acre site into two Tentative Tract Maps and develop it with 310 single-family residential units within four Planning Areas. The Project proposes associated improvements such as landscaping, parking, open space, private roadways, installation of concrete walls in the flood control channel, and utility and stormwater improvements. The Project proposes associated offsite improvements including adjacent roadway improvements as well as a city park on an 8.22 acre parcel northeast of the project site. Approvals required for the Project include a General Plan Amendment, zone change, two Tentative Tract Maps, condition use permits for Planned Unit Development permits (PUD)s and a Development Agreement. Refer to Appendix B, Site Plan. Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3 are distributed throughout the two Tentative Tract Maps. Map 38157 includes Planning Area 1, which is located within the southwest portion of the Project Map 38158 includes of Planning Area 2A, 2B and 3. The existing storm channel will be concrete lined.

DBESP Report
2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Project Area
The project site is generally located south of StateRoute 60, west of StateRoute 79, north of StateRoute 74, and east ofInterstate 215 City ofMoreno Valley, Riverside County, California. The site is depicted on the Sunnymeadquadrangle of the United StatesGeological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West. Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner ofthe intersection of CactusAvenue andRedlandsBoulevardAssessor’sParcelNumbers 478-100-012 and -035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; 478-120-001, -002, -005, and -006; and 478-120-025 and 478-120-027. Refer to Exhibits 1-3 in Appendix A.

2.2 Project Description
The Project proposes to subdivide the 34.32-acre site into two Tentative Tract Maps and develop it with 310 single-family residential units within four Planning Areas. The Project proposes associated improvements such as landscaping, parking, open space,private roadways, installation of concrete walls in the flood control channel, and utility and stormwater improvements. The Project proposes associatedoffsite improvements including adjacentroadway improvements as well as a city park on an 8.22 acreparcel northeast of the project site. Approvals required for the Project include a General Plan Amendment, zone change, two Tentative Tract Maps, condition use permits for Planned Unit Development permits (PUD)s and a Development Agreement. Refer to Appendix B, Site Plan. Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3 are distributedthroughout the two Tentative TractMaps.Map 38157 includesPlanning Area 1, whichis located withinthe southwestportionoftheProjectMap 38158 includes ofPlanningArea 2A, 2B and3. The existing storm channel will be concretelined.

The following offsite areaswill be apart of the Project as describedbelow:
1) a3.84-acre CityPark will be developedonparcel(APN 478-120-027) whichis approximately 8.22 acres; the remaining 4.38 acres of parcel 478-120-027 would be graded for potential future expansion of the proposedpark and/or public facility usesby the City 2) offsite roadway improvements on all Project frontages and on Wilmot Street, and 3) concrete lining on the flood control channel
StreetImprovements
e Cactus Avenue
The Project would improve the northerly half of the right of way (ROW) (44°) of Cactus Avenue resulting in a fully built ROW (88°) on the Project site frontage of TTMs 38157 and 38158 with the completion of street improvements of AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk. The existing street paving will be refurbished by an Asphalt Grind and Capping operation as a part of the improvements.
867
DBESP Report
3 • Brodiaea Avenue
The Project would improve Brodiaea Ave to its full ROW width of 79’, along the Project site frontage 38158 and the frontage of the proposed new park to Redlands Boulevard with the completion of street improvements of AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk. • Redlands Boulevard
Redlands Boulevard would be improved to its full ROW across the frontages of TTM 38158 and the new proposed park. Completion of street improvements include the addition of a raised median, AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk improvements.
• Wilmot Street
Wilmot Street (From Brodiaea Avenue Southerly to Cactus Avenue) The Project would improve the easterly half of the ROW (19’) of Wilmot Street on the Project site frontage of TTM 38158 and would buildout the full ROW (66’) on the portion of the road that is currently undeveloped (between TTM 38157 and 38158) with the completion of street improvements of AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk.

City Park Improvements & Surrounding Area on APN # 478120027 • Park improvements will consist of approximately 4 acres:
o Parking lot for 100 cars
o 10,000 SF Splash Pad
o Open Space (with lawn, walkways, fitness stations, and site furnishings) o Picnic Shelter
o Restrooms
o Rough grading
o City will maintain the park once constructed
• Rough grading of approximately 4.38 acres
• Full Street Improvements to Brodiaea Avenue and Wilmot Street Flood Control Improvements
The project would improve Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes, with a base width of 12’, a depth of 10’ and 20’ access roads along each side of the channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing of Redlands Boulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existing pipe culvert crossing. See attached typical section.

TTM 38157 will extend RCFCD SD Line G-11 from it’s westerly boundary to Wilmot Street within Cactus Avenue. The nominal size will be 36” to 48” RCP.

2.3 Existing Conditions
The project site occurs in an area that historically supported agricultural land uses that have been gradually replaced by urban land uses. Land use in the vicinity of the site primarily supports residential development with commercial and industrial developments intermixed. The project site is located within a predominantly DBESP Report
e Brodiaea Avenue
The Project would improve Brodiaeca Ave to its full ROW width of 79°, along the Project site frontage 38158 and the frontage of the proposed new park to Redlands Boulevard with the completion of street improvements of AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk. e Redlands Boulevard
Redlands Boulevard would be improved to its full ROW across the frontages of TTM 38158 and the newproposedpark. Completion of streetimprovements include the additionof araisedmedian, AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk improvements.
e Wilmot Street
Wilmot Street(FromBrodiaea Avenue Southerly to CactusAvenue) The Project would improve the easterlyhalf of the ROW (19%) of Wilmot Street on theProject site frontage of TTM 38158 and would buildout the full ROW (66”) on the portion of the road that is currently undeveloped (between TTM 38157 and 38158) with the completion of street improvements of AC Paving, curb & gutter and sidewalk.

City Park Improvements & Surrounding Area on APN # 478120027 e Park improvements will consist of approximately 4 acres:

Parking lot for 100 cars
10,000 SF SplashPad
Open Space(with lawn, walkways, fitness stations, and site furnishings) Picnic Shelter
Restrooms
0 O 0 0 O O°
Rough grading
o City will maintain the park once constructed
e Rough grading of approximately 4.38 acres
e Full StreetImprovements to BrodiaeaAvenueandWilmot Street Flood Control Improvements
Theproject wouldimprove Riverside County Flood ControlDistrict (RCFCD) LineF with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes,with abase width of 12°, a depth of 10’ and 20’ accessroads along each side of the channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing of Redlands Boulevard and extenddownstreamto CactusAvenue to jointhe existingpipe culvert crossing. Seeattachedtypical section.

TTM 38157 will extendRCFCD SDLine G-11 fromit’s westerly boundary to Wilmot StreetwithinCactus Avenue. The nominal size willbe 36” to 48” RCP.
23 Existing Conditions
The project site occurs in an areathat historically supportedagricultural landuses that have been gradually replacedby urban landuses.Landusein the vicinity of the siteprimarily supportsresidential development withcommercial andindustrial developmentsintermixed. Theproject siteis locatedwithinapredominantly 868
DBESP Report
4 residential area that is either undeveloped vacant land, open space, residential land, or residential agricultural land. The surrounding areas are described below:
• North: Area north of the Project site is developed with a single-residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R2 Residential (R2) and zoned as Residential Agriculture 2 (RA2). The northeast area adjacent to the Project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. The land use is designated as Open Space/Park (OS) and is zoned as Open Space (OS). Additionally, the northwest area directly adjacent to the Project site is developed with single-family residential, designated as R5 Residential (R5) and zoned as Residential 5 (R5).
• South: The area to the south of the Project site is bound by Cactus Avenue and is developed with a single-family residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R10 Residential and zoned as SP-193 Moreno Valley Ranch.
• East: The area to the east of the Project site is bound by Redlands Boulevard followed by vacant and undeveloped land designated as Commercial (C) and zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (NC).
• West: The area site to the west of the Project site is undeveloped and developed with a singlefamily residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R5 Residential (R5) and is zoned as Residential 5 (R5).

The project site primarily supports undeveloped land with some developed areas along site boundaries, within on-site portions of Wilmot Street, and within and along portions of the flood control channel that occur near site boundaries. Developed land supported by the off-site improvement areas includes the existing roadways including Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street and a concrete slab laid on the northern portion of the adjacent proposed city park improvement area.

The entirety of the site has been subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding development. Historic aerials show these activities have been ongoing since at least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at some point between 1985 and 1996.

The disturbances outlined above have eliminated the natural plant communities that historically occurred on the project site and surrounding area. As a result, no native plant communities occur on-site, nor will any native plant communities be impacted from implementation of the proposed project.

Vegetation
No native plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site. The project site supports one (1) plant community: non-native grassland. In addition, the site supports two (2) land cover types that would be classified as disturbed and developed. Refer to Exhibit 4, Vegetation. The vegetation community and land cover types are described in further detail below. • Non-Native Grassland: The majority of the project site supports non-native grassland that occurs in varying densities throughout the site, except the northeast corner and portions of the site DBESP Report
residential area that is either undeveloped vacant land, open space, residential land, or residential agricultural land. The surrounding areas are describedbelow:
e North: Areanorth oftheProject site is developedwith a single-residentialneighborhood. The land use is designated as R2 Residential (R2) and zoned as Residential Agriculture 2 (RA2). The northeast area adjacent to the Project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. The land use is designatedasOpen Space/Park(OS) andis zoned asOpen Space(OS). Additionally, the northwest area directly adjacent to the Project site is developed with single-family residential, designatedas R5 Residential (R5) and zoned asResidential 5 (R5).
e South: The areato the south of the Project site is boundby Cactus Avenue and is developed with a single-family residentialneighborhood. The landuse is designatedasR10 Residential and zoned as SP-193 Moreno Valley Ranch.
e East: The area to the east of the Project site is bound by Redlands Boulevard followed by vacant and undeveloped land designated as Commercial (C) and zoned as Neighborhood Commercial NO).
eo West: The area site to the west of the Project site is undeveloped and developed with a singlefamily residentialneighborhood. The landuseis designatedasRS Residential (RS) andis zoned as Residential 5 (R5).

The project site primarily supports undeveloped land with some developed areas along site boundaries, within on-site portions of Wilmot Street, and within and along portions of the flood control channel that occur near site boundaries. Developed land supported by the off-site improvement areas includes the existing roadways including Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street and a concrete slab laid on the northernportion of the adjacentproposed city park improvement area.

The entirety of the site has been subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associatedwith historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding development.Historic aerials show theseactivitieshavebeenongoing sinceat least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at somepoint between 1985 and 1996.

The non-native grassland plant community supported by the project site is almost entirely comprised of non-native grasses such as barley (Hordeum vulgare) and bromes (Bromus spp.) with other weedy species interspersed throughout. Common plant species observed in the non-native grassland include black mustard (Brassica nigra), lambs quarters (Chenopodium album), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), lupine (Lupinus bicolor), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), spiny sowthistle (Sonchus asper), stinknet (Oncosiphon pilulifer), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), and tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus). In addition, two gum trees (Eucaluptus sp.) are present near the southeast corner of the site along Redlands Boulevard and a small stand of palo verde (Parkinsonia sp.) are present near the northeast corner of the site along Brodiaea Avenue.
• Disturbed: Disturbed areas supported by the project site occur along site boundaries, adjacent to on-site development, and within and surrounding earthen portions of the on-site flood control channel. These areas vary in vegetative density from unvegetated to densely vegetated and, with the exception of the flood control channel, generally support the same weedy/early successional species observed in the non-native grassland, without dominance by non-native grass species.

Disturbed areas supported within the flood control channel are generally barren with the exception of pockets of non-native species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta). • Developed: Developed land occurs along site boundaries, within on-site portions of Wilmot Street, and within and along portions of the flood control channel that occur near site boundaries.

Developed land supported by the off-site improvement areas includes the existing roadways including Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street and a concrete slab laid on the northern portion of the adjacent proposed city park improvement area.

Jurisdictional Resources
Drainage 1
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends southwest from the northeast corner of the project site near Redlands Boulevard for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering slightly southwards offsite to the west and ultimately southwest. Drainage 1 is mostly earthen flood control channel that receives flows via a box culvert beneath Redlands Drive and exits the project site at the middle of the southern boundary, where flows are conveys beneath Cactus Avenue via four box culverts, to a golf course. The downstream limits of Drainage 1 are overlain with riprap and concrete. This drainage only conveys flows during and immediately following storm events. According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed between 1985 and 1996, replacing an ephemeral drainage that extended from the east/northeast. The historic drainage remains in place upstream of Redlands Drive.

DBESP Report
perimeter that support disturbed land. This plant community is dominated by non-native grasses such as oats (Avena spp.) and bromes (Bromus spp.) and supports primarily weedy/early successional species.

The non-native grassland plant community supported by the project site is almost entirely comprised ofnon-native grasses suchasbarley (Hordeum vulgare) andbromes (Bromus spp.) with other weedy species interspersed throughout. Common plant species observed in the non-native grasslandinclude black mustard (Brassica nigra), lambs quarters (Chenopodium album), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), lupine (Lupinus bicolor), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), spiny sowthistle (Sonchus asper), stinknet (Oncosiphonpilulifer), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), and tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus). In addition, two gum trees (Fucaluptus sp.) arepresentnear the southeast corner of the site along Redlands Boulevard and a small stand of palo verde (Parkinsonia sp.) are present near the northeast corner of the site alongBrodiaecaAvenue.
e Disturbed: Disturbed areas supportedby the project site occur along site boundaries, adjacent to on-site development, and within and surrounding earthen portions of the on-site flood control channel. These areas vary in vegetative density from unvegetated to densely vegetated and, with the exception of the flood control channel, generally support the same weedy/early successional species observed in the non-native grassland, without dominance by non-native grass species.

Disturbed areas supportedwithin the flood control channel are generally barren with the exception of pockets of non-native species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and Mexican fanpalm (Washingtonia robusta). e Developed: Developedland occurs along siteboundaries, within on-siteportions ofWilmot Street, and within and along portions of the flood control channel that occur near site boundaries.

Developed land supported by the off-site improvement areas includes the existing roadways including Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street and a concrete slab laid on the northernportion of the adjacentproposed city park improvement area.

JurisdictionalResources
Drainage 1
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends southwest from the northeast corner of the project site near Redlands Boulevard for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering slightly southwards offsite to the west andultimately southwest.Drainage 1 is mostly earthen flood control channel that receives flows via a box culvert beneath Redlands Drive and exits the project site at the middle of the southern boundary, where flows are conveys beneath Cactus Avenue via four box culverts, to a golf course. The downstream limits of Drainage 1 are overlain with riprap and concrete. This drainage only conveys flows during and immediately following storm events. According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed between 1985 and1996,replacinganephemeraldrainagethat extendedfromthe east/northeast.Thehistoric drainage remains in place upstream ofRedlands Drive.
870
DBESP Report
6 Minimal surface water was present within the lower points of Drainage 1 due to a storm that had passed through the area the day prior to the field investigation. Evidence of an OHWM was observed via scour, changes in substrate, shelving, and lack of vegetation. The OHWM ranged from approximately 1-8 feet in width throughout the length of the drainage within site boundaries.

In-channel vegetation within site boundaries consisted primarily of non-native plant species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus, UPL), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca, FACU), and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta, FACW). In addition, several black willow (Salix gooddingii, FACW) were observed growing through the riprap in the downstream limits near Cactus Avenue.

DBESP Report
Minimal surface water was present within the lower points of Drainage 1 due to a storm that had passed through the area the day prior to the field investigation. Evidence of an OHWM was observed via scour, changes in substrate, shelving, and lack of vegetation. The OHWM ranged from approximately 1-8 feet in width throughout the length of the drainage within site boundaries.

In-channel vegetationwithinsiteboundaries consistedprimarily ofnon-nativeplant species suchasRussian thistle (Salsola tragus, UPL), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca, FACU), andMexican fanpalm(Washingtonia robusta,FACW).In addition, severalblack willow (Salixgooddingii, FACW) were observedgrowing through the riprap in the downstream limits near CactusAvenue. 871
DBESP Report
7 3 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE MITIGATION (SECTION 6.1.2)

3.1 Methods
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, identifies Riparian/Riverine resources as lands which contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent vegetation, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to or which depend upon soil moisture from nearby fresh water sources, or areas with freshwater flow during all or a portion of the year. Riverine habitat includes all wetlands and deep-water habitats contained in natural or artificial channels periodically or continuously containing flowing water or which forms a connecting link between the two bodies of standing water. Riverine habitat is bounded on the landward side by upland, by the channel bank (including natural and man-made levees), or by wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, mosses, or lichens. In braided streams, the system is bounded by the banks forming the outer limits of the depression within which the braiding occurs. Springs discharging into a channel are considered part of the riverine habitat. The term riparian is used to define the type of wildlife habitat found along the banks of a river, stream, lake or other body of water. Riparian habitats are ecologically diverse and can be found in many types of environments including grasslands, wetlands and forests.

Based on the results of a Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters Report (ELMT, 2023) prepared under a separate cover, one (1) unnamed drainage feature was observed on the project site. This feature will be considered riverine habitat under Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, as it does not support riparian habitats. The extent of the riverine habitat on the project site is synonymous with the jurisdiction of CDFW.

The habitat associated with this drainage feature does not provide suitable habitat for any of the riparian obligate species listed under the MSHCP that may occur within the regional vicinity, including the Stateand federally-listed as endangered least Bell’s Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus [LBVI]), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), or yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). As a result, no focused surveys were conducted or recommended, and no impacts to this species will occur from project implementation.

Vernal Pools
One of the factors for determining the suitability of the habitat for fairy shrimp would be demonstrable evidence of seasonal ponding in an area of topographic depression that is not subject to flowing waters.

These astatic pools are typically characterized as vernal pools. More specifically, vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas without a continual source of water. They have wetland indicators of all 3 parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetland indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Obligate hydrophytes and facultative wetlands plant species are normally dominant during the wetter portion of the growing season. The determination that an area exhibits vernal pool characteristics and the definition of the watershed supporting vernal pool hydrology is made on a case-by-case basis. Such determinations should be considered the length of time the areas exhibit upland and wetland characteristics and the manner in which the area fits into the overall ecological system as a wetland. The seasonal hydrology of vernal pools provides for a unique environment, which supports plants and invertebrates DBESP Report
3 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE MITIGATION (SECTION 6.1.2)

3.1 Methods
Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, identifies Riparian/Riverine resources as lands which contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs,persistent emergent vegetation, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to or which dependupon soilmoisture fromnearby fresh water sources,or areaswith freshwater flow during all or aportion of the year. Riverine habitat includes all wetlands and deep-waterhabitats contained in natural or artificial channels periodically or continuously containing flowing water or which forms a connectinglink between the twobodies of standing water. Riverine habitat isbounded on the landward side by upland, by the channel bank (including natural and man-made levees), or by wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, mosses, or lichens. In braided streams, the system is bounded by the banks forming the outer limits of the depressionwithin which the braiding occurs. Springs discharging into a channel are consideredpart of the riverine habitat. The termriparian is used to define the type of wildlife habitat found along the banks of a river, stream, lake or other body of water. Riparian habitats are ecologically diverse and can be found in many types of environments including grasslands, wetlands and forests.

Based on the results of a Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters Report (ELMT, 2023) prepared under a separate cover, one (1) unnamed drainage feature was observed on the project site. This feature will be consideredriverine habitat under Section 6.1.2 ofthe MSHCP, asit doesnot supportriparian habitats. The extent oftheriverine habitat on theproject siteis synonymous with the jurisdiction ofCDFW.

The habitat associated with this drainage feature does not provide suitable habitat for any of the riparian obligate species listed under the MSHCP that may occur within the regional vicinity, including the Stateand federally-listed as endangeredleast Bell’s Vireo (Vireo belliipusillus [LBVI]), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), or yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus). As a result, no focused surveys were conducted or recommended, and no impacts to this species will occur from project implementation.

VernalPools
One of the factors for determining the suitability of the habitat for fairy shrimp would be demonstrable evidence of seasonalponding in an area of topographic depression that is not subject to flowing waters.

These astatic pools are typically characterized as vernalpools. More specifically, vernalpools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depressionareas without a continual source of water. They have wetland indicators of all 3 parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing seasonbut normally lack wetland indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Obligate hydrophytes and facultative wetlands plant species are normally dominant during the wetter portion of the growing season. The determination that an area exhibits vernal pool characteristics and the definition ofthe watershedsupporting vernalpoolhydrology is made on a case-by-casebasis. Such determinations shouldbe consideredthe length of time the areas exhibit upland and wetland characteristics and the manner in which the area fits into the overall ecological system as a wetland. The seasonal hydrology of vernal pools provides for a unique environment, which supports plants and invertebrates 872
DBESP Report
8 specifically adapted to a regime of winter inundation, followed by an extended period when the pool soils are dry.

Vernal pools are seasonally inundated, ponded areas that only form in regions where specialized soil and climatic conditions exist. During fall and winter rains typical of Mediterranean climates, water collects in shallow depressions where downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of a hard pan or clay pan layer (duripan) below the soil surface. Later in the spring when rains decrease and the weather warms, the water evaporates and the pools generally disappear by May. The shallow depressions remain relatively dry until late fall and early winter with the advent of greater precipitation and cooler temperatures.

Vernal pools provide unusual "flood and drought" habitat conditions to which certain plant and wildlife species have specifically adapted as well as invertebrate species such as fairy shrimp.

The MSHCP lists two general classes of soils known to be associated with special-status plant species; clay soils and Traver-Domino Willow association soils. The specific clay soils known to be associated with special-status species within the MSHCP plan area include Bosanko, Auld, Altamont, and Porterville series soils, whereas Traver-Domino Willows association includes saline-alkali soils largely located along floodplain areas of the San Jacinto River and Salt Creek. Without the appropriate soils to create the impermeable restrictive layer, none of the special-status species associated with vernal pools can occur on the project site. Exeter sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and Madera fine sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes) are mapped as historically underlying the project site. In addition, agricultural land uses spanning much of the past century have thoroughly mixed and compacted on-site soils, such that conditions suitable for the formation of vernal pools are no longer present.

A review of recent and historic aerial photographs (1985-2023) of the project site did not provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernal pool conditions within the project site. Ponding was observed within the flood control channel; however, this was due to a storm that had passed through the vicinity of the site in the days leading up to the field investigation. The proposed project is designed to avoid impacts to the flood control channel, and no impacts are expected to occur from project implementation. No surface water was present outside of the flood control channel, further supporting the fact that the drainage patterns currently occurring on the project site do not follow hydrologic regimes needed for vernal pools. From this review of historic aerial photographs and observations during the field investigations, it can be concluded that there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat occurring within the proposed project site.

Therefore, the project is consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

Based on the historical aerial review, existing human disturbances, and current hydrologic regimes of the project site, it can be concluded that the project site lacks astatic conditions, and, therefore, would not provide suitable fairy shrimp habitat. Fairy shrimp require astatic conditions and a complete drying of occupied ponds so that the fairy shrimp cysts will not rot. As a result, none of the sensitive plant or wildlife species associated with vernal pools are expected to occur on the project site. Sensitive plant and wildlife species associated with vernal pools and clay soils, including fairy shrimp, are presumed absent from the project site.

DBESP Report
specifically adaptedto a regime of winter inundation, followedby an extendedperiod when the pool soils are dry.

Vernal pools are seasonally inundated, ponded areas that only form in regions where specialized soil and climatic conditions exist. During fall and winter rains typical of Mediterranean climates, water collects in shallow depressions where downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of a hard pan or clay pan layer (duripan) below the soil surface. Later in the spring when rains decrease and the weather warms, the water evaporates and the pools generally disappear by May. The shallow depressions remain relatively dryuntil late fall andearly winter withthe advent ofgreaterprecipitation andcooler temperatures.

Vernal pools provide unusual "flood and drought" habitat conditions to which certainplant and wildlife specieshave specifically adaptedas well as invertebrate species such as fairy shrimp.

The MSHCEPlists two general classesof soils known to be associatedwith special-statusplant species;clay soils and Traver-Domino Willow association soils. The specific clay soils known to be associated with special-status specieswithin the MSHCPplan areaincludeBosanko, Auld, Altamont, andPorterville series soils, whereas Traver-Domino Willows association includes saline-alkali soils largely located along floodplain areas of the San Jacinto River and Salt Creek. Without the appropriate soils to create the impermeable restrictive layer, none of the special-status species associatedwith vernal pools can occur on the project site. Exeter sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and Madera fine sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes) are mapped ashistorically underlying the project site. In addition, agricultural land uses spanning much of the past century have thoroughly mixed and compactedon-site soils, such that conditions suitable for the formation of vernal pools are no longer present.

A review of recent and historic aerial photographs (1985-2023) of the project site did not provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernal pool conditions within the project site. Ponding was observed within the flood control channel; however, this was due to a storm that had passedthrough the vicinity of the site in the daysleadingup to the fieldinvestigation. Theproposedproject is designedto avoidimpacts to the flood control channel, and no impacts are expectedto occur fromproject implementation. No surface water was present outside of the flood control channel, further supporting the fact that the drainagepatterns currently occurring on the project site do not follow hydrologic regimes needed for vernal pools. From this review ofhistoric aerialphotographs andobservationsduring the fieldinvestigations, it canbe concludedthat there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat occurring within the proposed project site.

Therefore, the project is consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

Based on the historical aerial review, existing human disturbances, and current hydrologic regimes of the project site, it can be concluded that the project site lacks astatic conditions, and, therefore, would not provide suitable fairy shrimp habitat. Fairy shrimp require astatic conditions and a complete drying of occupiedponds so that the fairy shrimp cysts will not rot. As aresult, none of the sensitiveplant or wildlife species associatedwith vernal pools are expectedto occur on the project site. Sensitive plant and wildlife species associatedwith vernalpools andclay soils,including fairy shrimp, arepresumedabsent from the project site.
873
DBESP Report
9 Below is a summary of the fairy shrimp included in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP and their potential to occur onsite.

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni)
Riverside fairy shrimp, a federally endangered species, are restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools, vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and stock ponds and other human modified depressions The prefer warm-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are less predictable, and remained filled for extended periods of time. Basins that support Riverside fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of the year, but usually are filled by late fall, winter or spring rains, and may persist through May. Typical habitat occurs within annual grasslands, which may be interspersed through chaparral or coastal sage scrub vegetation. In Riverside County, Riverside fairy shrimp have been found in pools formed over the following soils:

Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series, Wyman clay loam, Willows soils.

The project site is underlain by Hanford coarse sandy loam and San Emigdio loam soils. The aforementioned soils that Riverside fairy shrimp are typically associated within Riverside County do not occur on-site. Due to the lack of soils associated with Riverside fairy shrimp, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
Vernal pool fairy shrimp, a federally threatened species, is restricted to seasonal vernal pools (vernal pools and alkali vernal pools) and prefer cool-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are unpredictable, and often short lived. The vernal pool fairy shrimp is known from four locations in Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area: Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, Salt Creek, and the vicinity of the Pechanga Indian Reservation. Since the project site is not located within or adjacent to the four known populations, the site was determined to have a low potential to provide suitable habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp.

3.2 Results/Impacts
The on-site drainage collectively perform the following functions within the local area of the watershed:
regulation of nuisance flows, energy dissipation, nutrient cycling, retention of particulates, nutrient/particulate uptake from off-site, upstream development, and connectivity with similar habitat upstream. Drainage 1, within the project footprint, will be considered riverine habitat under the MSHCP.

The project proposes to concrete line the existing earthen storm drain onsite which will result in permanent impacts to approximately 1.4-acre of riverine habitat within Drainage 1.

DBESP Report
Below is a summary ofthe fairy shrimp includedin Section 6.1.2 oftheMSHCP andtheir potential to occur onsite.

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni)
Riversidefairy shrimp, a federally endangered species, are restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools, vernal pool like ephemeralponds, and stock ponds and other humanmodified depressionsThe prefer warm-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are less predictable, and remained filled for extended periods oftime.Basins that supportRiverside fairy shrimp aretypically dry aportionofthe year,butusually are filled by late fall, winter or spring rains, and may persist through May. Typical habitat occurs within annual grasslands, which may be interspersed through chaparral or coastal sage scrub vegetation. In Riverside County, Riverside fairy shrimp have been found in pools formed over the following soils:

Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series,Wyman clay loam, Willows soils.

Vernalpool fairy shrimp(Branchinectalynchi)
Vernalpoolfairy shrimp, a federally threatened species,is restricted to seasonal vernalpools (vernalpools and alkali vernal pools) and prefer cool-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are unpredictable, and often short lived. The vernal pool fairy shrimp is known from four locations in Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area: Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, Salt Creek, and the vicinity ofthePechangaIndianReservation. Sincetheproject siteisnot locatedwithinor adjacentto the four known populations, the site was determined to have alow potential to provide suitable habitat for vernalpool fairy shrimp.

3.2 Results/Impacts
The on-site drainage collectively perform the following functions within the local area of the watershed:
regulation of nuisance flows, energy dissipation, nutrient cycling, retention of particulates, nutrient/particulate uptake from off-site, upstream development, and connectivity with similar habitat upstream.Drainage 1, within the project footprint, will be consideredriverine habitat under the MSHCP.

Theproject proposes to concreteline the existing earthenstorm drain onsite which will result inpermanent impacts to approximately 1.4-acre ofriverine habitat withinDrainage 1. 874
DBESP Report
10 Table 1: Impacts to Riparian/Riverine Habitat
Jurisdictional Feature
Riparian/Riverine Habitat
On-Site Jurisdiction
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Impacts
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)
TOTAL 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)

3.3 Mitigation and Equivalency

3.3.1 Direct Effects
The proposed project design will result in permanent impacts to 1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of riverine habitat within Drainage 1.

3.3.2 Indirect Effects
The following minimization measures have been incorporated into the project design to ensure that all indirect project-related impacts to riparian/riverine habitat, including impacts from fugitive dust, toxics, invasive plant species, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized to the greatest extent feasible.

3.3.1 DirectEffects
The proposed project design will result in permanent impacts to 1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of riverine habitat withinDrainage 1.

3.3.2 IndirectEffects
The following minimization measures have been incorporated into the project design to ensure that all indirect project-related impacts to riparian/riverine habitat, including impacts from fugitive dust, toxics, invasive plant species, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized to the greatest extent feasible.

FugitiveDust
During soil excavation, grading, or other subsurface disturbance within 100 feet of conserved riparian/riverine habitat onsite, the construction superintendent shall superviseprovision and maintenance of all standarddust controlbestmanagementpractices (BMPs) to reduce fugitive dust emissions,including but not limited to the following actions:
e Water any exposedsoil areasaminimum oftwiceper day, or asallowedunder any imposeddrought restrictions. On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the construction site, 10 875
DBESP Report
11 additional water shall be applied at a frequency to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent.
• Pave, periodically water, or apply chemical stabilizer to construction access/egress points. • Minimize the amount of area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations at all times.
• Operate all vehicles on graded areas at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. • Cover all stockpiles that will not be utilized within three days with plastic or equivalent material, to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent, or spray them with a non-toxic chemical stabilizer.

DBESP Report
additional water shall be applied at a frequency to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent.
e Pave, periodically water, or apply chemical stabilizer to construction access/egresspoints. e Minimize the amount of areadisturbedby clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations at all times.
e Operate all vehicles on graded areas at speeds less than 15 miles per hour. e Cover all stockpiles that will not be utilized within three days with plastic or equivalent material, to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent, or spray them with a non-toxic chemical stabilizer.

Runoff- Toxics
To address potential short-term impacts to water quality from construction runoff that may carry storm water pollutants downstream, a Storm Water PollutionPreventionProgram (SWPPP) shall be implemented by the construction contractor as required by the California General Construction Storm Water Permit pursuant to StateWater Quality ControlBoard andRegionalBoardregulations. The SWPPPshall identify BMPs related to the control of toxic substances, including construction fuels, oils, and other liquids. These BMPs will be implemented by the Applicant’s contractor prior to the start of any ground clearing activity, shall be subject to periodic inspections by the City and the project’s hydrological consultant, and shall be maintainedthroughout the constructionperiodandremaininplaceuntil all landscapeandpermanentBMPs areinplace. BMPs shallbe monitored andrepairedif necessary to ensuremaximum erosion, sediment,and pollution control.
e Permittee shallprohibit the use of erosion control materials potentially harmful to fish and wildlife species, such as mono-filament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material, within and adjacent to CDFW jurisdictional areas.
e All fiberroles’, straw waddles, and/or hay balesutilizedwithin andadjacentto theproject site shall be free ofnon-native plant materials.
e Permittee shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contractors, subcontractors, and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of Permittee to ensure compliance.
e Permittee shall not allow water containing mud, silt, or other pollutants from grading, aggregate washing, or other activities to enter a lake, streambed, or flowing streamor be placed in locations that may be subjectedto high storm flows.
e Spoil sites shallnot be located within a lake, streambed,or flowing streamor locations that may be subjectedto high storm flows, where spoil shall be washedback into a lake, streambed,or flowing stream where it will impact streambed habitat and aquatic or riparian vegetation. 1 Fiber rolls or erosion control mesh shall be made of loose-weave mesh that is not fused at the intersections of the weave, such as jute, or coconut (coir) fiber, or other products without welded weaves. Non-welded weaves reduce entanglementrisks to wildlife by allowing animals to push through the weave, which expands when spread. 11 876
DBESP Report
12 • Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint, or other coating material, oil or other petroleum products, or any other substances which could be hazardous to fish and wildlife resources resulting from project related activities shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the State. These materials, placed within or where they may enter a lake, streambed, or flowing stream by Permittee or any party working under contract or with the permission of Permittee, shall be removed immediately.
• No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any lake, streambed, or flowing stream where petroleum products or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any flow.
• No broken concrete, cement, debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products, or other organic or earthen material from any construction or associated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the State. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area. No rubbish shall be deposited within 150 feet of the edge of any lake, streambed, or flowing stream.

Accidental Encroachments During Construction
The following measures shall also be incorporated into the construction documents and specifications, and implemented by the contractor, to avoid potential construction-related impacts to conserved riparian/riverine habitat outside of the approved disturbance limits:
• Construction worker training shall be provided by a qualified biologist at the first pre-construction meeting;
• Exclusionary fencing and signs shall be erected near the top of slope adjacent to conserved riparian/riverine habitat to prevent accidental/unauthorized intrusions during construction; • No equipment shall be operated in areas of flowing water; • Construction access and staging areas for storage of materials and heavy equipment, and for fueling, cleaning, or maintenance of construction vehicles or equipment, shall be prohibited within 20 feet from the top of slope adjacent to conserved riparian/riverine habitat; and • A qualified biologist shall be onsite during initial clearing/grubbing, grading, and/or construction activities within the riparian/riverine habitat that will be impacted within the onsite drainage features, or within 100 feet of the habitat to be avoided, and shall periodically monitor these activities to ensure they do not exceed the fenced construction limits.

Post-Construction Human Disturbances
The project shall incorporate special edge treatments designed to minimize edge effects by providing a safe transition between developed areas and conserved riparian/riverine habitat, and which would be compatible with project operation and the protection and sustainability of conserved areas. Special edge treatments shall include native landscaping on manufactured slopes within the conserved areas and fencing/signage near the top of slope adjacent to conserved areas to prevent unauthorized public access, vandalism, illegal dumping, and other adverse human disturbances.

DBESP Report
Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint, or other coating material, oil or other petroleumproducts, or any other substanceswhichcouldbehazardousto fishandwildliferesources resulting from project related activities shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or entering the waters of the State. These materials, placed within or where they may enter a lake, streambed, or flowing stream by Permittee or any party working under contract or with the permissionofPermittee,shallberemovedimmediately.

No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any lake, streambed, or flowing stream where petroleumproducts or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areasunder any flow.

No broken concrete, cement, debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, rubbish, or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products, or other organic or earthen material from any construction or associatedactivity of whatever nature shall be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washedby rainfall or runoff into waters of the State. When operations are completed, any excess materials or debris shallbe removed from the work area.No rubbish shallbe deposited within 150 feet of the edge of any lake, streambed,or flowing stream.

Construction worker training shall be providedby a qualifiedbiologist at the first pre-construction meeting;
Exclusionary fencing and signs shall be erected near the top of slope adjacent to conserved riparian/riverine habitat to prevent accidental/unauthorized intrusions during construction; No equipment shall be operatedin areas of flowing water; Construction access and staging areas for storage of materials and heavy equipment, and for fueling, cleaning, or maintenance of construction vehicles or equipment, shallbeprohibited within 20 feet from the top of slope adjacent to conservedriparian/riverine habitat; and A qualified biologist shall be onsite during initial clearing/grubbing, grading, and/or construction activities within the riparian/riverine habitat that will be impacted within the onsite drainage features, or within 100 feet of the habitat to be avoided, and shall periodically monitor these activities to ensurethey do not exceedthe fenced construction limits.

Post-ConstructionHumanDisturbances
Theproject shall incorporate special edgetreatmentsdesignedto minimize edgeeffects byproviding a safe transitionbetweendeveloped areasand conservedriparian/riverinehabitat, andwhich wouldbe compatible with project operation and the protection and sustainability of conserved areas. Special edge treatments shall include native landscaping on manufactured slopes within the conserved areas and fencing/signage near the top of slope adjacent to conserved areas to prevent unauthorized public access, vandalism, illegal dumping, and other adversehuman disturbances.
12 877
DBESP Report
13 4 ADDITIONAL SURVEY NEEDS (SECTION 6.3.2)

4.1 Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl is currently designated as a California Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with level to gently-sloping areas characterized by open vegetation and bare ground. The western burrowing owl (A.c. hypugaea), which occurs throughout the western United States including California, rarely digs its own burrows and is instead dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (i.e., California ground squirrels, coyotes, and badgers) whose burrows are often used for roosting and nesting. The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes, and dry culverts. They also require low growth or open vegetation allowing line-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage and watch for predators. In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from the beginning of February through the end of August.

4.1.1 Methods
Under the MSHCP, burrowing owl is considered an adequately conserved covered species that may still require focused surveys in certain areas as designated in Figure 6-4 of the MSHCP. The project site occurs within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area and a habitat assessment was conducted for the species to ensure compliance with MSHCP guidelines for the species. In accordance with the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (2006), survey protocol consists of two steps, Step I – Habitat Assessment and Step II – Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls. The following section describes the methodology followed during the burrowing owl habitat assessment conducted for this project. • Step I – Habitat Assessment: Step 1 of the MSHCP habitat assessment for burrowing owl consists of a walking survey to determine if suitable habitat is present onsite. The habitat assessment was conducted on January 26, 2023. Upon arrival at the project site, and prior to initiating the assessment survey, binoculars were used to scan all suitable habitats on and adjacent to the property, including perch locations, to establish owl presence.

DBESP Report
4 ADDITIONAL SURVEY NEEDS (SECTION 6.3.2)

4.1 Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl is currently designatedas a California Speciesof Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a grasslandspecialist distributed throughout westernNorth America where it occupies open areaswith short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grasslandenvironments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with level to gently-sloping areas characterized by open vegetation and bare ground. The western burrowing owl (4.c. hypugaea), which occurs throughout the western United States including California, rarely digs its own burrows and is instead dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (i.e., California ground squirrels, coyotes, and badgers) whose burrows are often used for roosting and nesting. The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such asburied and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes,and dry culverts. They alsorequire low growth or open vegetation allowingline-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage and watch for predators. In California, the burrowing owl breeding seasonextends from the beginning ofFebruary through the end of August.

4.1.1 Methods
Under the MSHCP, burrowing owl is considered an adequately conserved covered species that may still require focused surveysin certain areasas designatedinFigure 6-4 of the MSHCP. The project site occurs within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area and a habitat assessment was conducted for the species to ensure compliance with MSHCP guidelines for the species. In accordance with the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (2006), survey protocol consists of two steps, Step I — Habitat Assessment and Step II — Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls. The following section describes the methodology followed during the burrowing owl habitat assessment conducted for this project. eo Step I — Habitat Assessment: Step 1 of the MSHCP habitat assessment for burrowing owl consists of a walking survey to determine if suitable habitat is present onsite. The habitat assessment was conducted on January 26, 2023. Upon arrival at the project site, and prior to initiating the assessment survey, binoculars were used to scan all suitable habitats on and adjacent to the property, including perch locations, to establish owlpresence.

All suitable areas of the project site were surveyed on foot by walking slowly and methodically while recording/mapping areas that may represent suitable owl habitat onsite. Primary indicators of suitableburrowing owlhabitat in westernRiverside County include,but arenot limitedto,native and non-native grassland, interstitial grassland within shrub lands, shrub lands with low density shrub cover, golf courses, drainage ditches, earthen berms, unpaved airfields, pastureland, dairies, fallow fields, and agricultural use areas.Burrowing owls typically use burrows made by fossorial mammals, but they often utilize man-made structures, such as earthen berms, cement culverts, cement, asphalt,rock, wood debris piles, openings beneath cement or asphalt pavement.Burrowing owls are often found within, under, or in close proximity to man-made structures. 13 878
DBESP Report
14 According to the MSHCP guidelines, if suitable habitat is present, the biologist should also walk the perimeter of the property, which consists of a 150-meter (approximately 500 feet) buffer zone around the project site boundary. If permission to access the buffer area cannot be obtained, the biologist shall not trespass, but visually inspect adjacent habitats with binoculars. In addition to surveying the entire Project Site all bordering natural habitats located immediately adjacent to the Project Site were assessed. Results from the habitat assessment indicate that suitable resources for burrowing owl are present throughout the Project Site. Accordingly, if suitable habitat is documented onsite or within adjacent habitats, both Step II, focused surveys and the 30-day preconstruction surveys are required in order to comply with the MSHCP guidelines. • Step II – Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls: Concurrent with the initial habitat assessment, a detailed focused burrow survey was conducted and included documentation of appropriately sized natural burrows or suitable man-made structures that may be utilized by burrowing owl - as part of the MSHCP protocol, which is described below under Part A, Focused Burrow Survey.

Transect routes were also adjusted to account for topography and in general ground surface visibility. Areas providing potential habitat for burrowing owls were surveyed for suitable burrows, consisting of natural and non-natural substrates in areas with low, open vegetation. All burrows encountered were examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and nonnatural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. o Part B – Focused Burrow Survey: Due to surrounding development to the north, south, and west, a zone of influence was not able to be surveyed. Areas east of the project site within 500 feet, east of Redlands Boulevard, were surveyed from public right of way with binoculars. Survey transects on the project site were oriented east to west and were conducted at a maximum of 30-meter (approximately 100 feet) intervals to ensure 100% visual coverage of all areas in suitable habitat on the project site and within the survey area.

DBESP Report
According to the MSHCP guidelines, if suitable habitat is present, the biologist should also walk the perimeter of the property, which consists of a 150-meter (approximately 500 feet) buffer zone around the project site boundary. If permission to access the buffer area cannot be obtained, the biologist shall not trespass, but visually inspect adjacent habitats with binoculars. In addition to surveying the entire Project Site all bordering natural habitats located immediately adjacent to the Project Site were assessed.Results from the habitat assessmentindicate that suitable resources for burrowing owl are present throughout the Project Site. Accordingly, if suitable habitat is documented onsite or within adjacent habitats, both Step II, focused surveys and the 30-day preconstruction surveys arerequired in order to comply with the MSHCP guidelines.

Step II — LocatingBurrows andBurrowing Owls: Concurrent with the initial habitat assessment, a detailed focusedburrow survey was conducted and included documentation of appropriately sized naturalburrows or suitable man-made structures that may be utilizedby burrowing owl - aspart of the MSHCP protocol, which is described below under Part A, Focused Burrow Survey.

Transectroutes were also adjustedto account for topography andin general ground surface visibility. Areasprovidingpotential habitat for burrowing owls were surveyed for suitable burrows, consisting of natural and non-natural substrates in areas with low, open vegetation. All burrows encountered were examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and nonnatural substrates,were thoroughly examined for signs ofpresence. o PartB —FocusedBurrow Survey: Due to surrounding development to the north, south, and west, a zone of influence wasnot able to be surveyed. Areas eastof the project site within 500 feet, east of Redlands Boulevard, were surveyed from public right of way with binoculars. Survey transects on the project site were oriented east to west and were conducted at a maximum of 30-meter (approximately 100 feet) intervals to ensure 100% visual coverageofall areasin suitablehabitat ontheproject site andwithinthe survey area.

The focusedburrowing owl surveys were conducted during the recognized timeframe (the breeding seasonis typically March throughAugust) in the morning onehour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise.
14 879
DBESP Report
15 Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non-natural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. All burrows encountered were examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. The location of all suitable burrowing owl habitat, potential owl burrows, burrowing owl sign, and any owls observed were recorded and mapped, with a hand-held GPS unit, if observed. Methods to detect presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence. Binoculars were used to observe distant birds and their activity around potential nesting habitat. During the focused surveys, the survey area was assessed on foot by qualified biologists Jacob H. Lloyd Davies and Rachael A. Lyons who are knowledgeable in the habitats and behavior of burrowing owls.

4.1.2 Results/Impacts
Four focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted on June 27, July 7, July 18, and July 26, 2023. All surveys were completed between 0600 and 1030. The surveys were conducted to document the presence/absence of burrowing owl on the project site. Refer to Table 1, Burrowing Owl Survey Data, for a summary of the survey dates and times, personnel, weather conditions, and general findings.

Table 2: Burrowing Owl Survey Data
Survey
No.

Survey
Date Surveyors Time Temperature(˚F)
Cloud
Cover
Wind
Speed
(mph)
Burrowing
Owl Detected
On-Site
1 6/27/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 52-74 0% 1-3 No
2 7/7/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 70-84 0% 1-5 No
3 7/18/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 65-80 0% 1-5 No
4 7/26/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0830-
1030 82-96 0% 1-5 No
Based on the results of the 2023 burrowing owl focused surveys, no burrowing owls or evidence of recent or historic use by burrowing owls were observed on the project site. As a result, burrowing owls are presumed to be absent from the project site.

4.1.3 Mitigation and Equivalency

4.2.3.4 Direct Effects
To ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site, it is recommended that a 30-day burrowing owl pre-construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls and/or birds displaying nesting behaviors are observed within the DBESP Report
Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non-natural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. All burrows encounteredwere examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. The location of all suitable burrowing owl habitat,potential owl burrows, burrowing owl sign, and any owls observed were recorded and mapped, with a hand-held GPS unit, if observed. Methods to detect presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence.Binoculars were used to observe distant birds and their activity aroundpotential nesting habitat. During the focused surveys, the survey area was assessed on foot by qualifiedbiologists JacobH. LloydDavies andRachael A. Lyons who areknowledgeable in the habitats andbehavior ofburrowing owls.

4.1.2 Results/Impacts
Four focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted on June 27, July 7, July 18, and July 26, 2023. All surveys were completed between 0600 and 1030. The surveys were conducted to document the presence/absence ofburrowing owl on the project site. Refer to Table 1,Burrowing OwlSurveyData, for a summary of the survey dates and times, personnel, weather conditions, and general findings.

4.1.3 Mitigation andEquivalency

4.1.3.2 Indirect Effects
If no burrowing owls are found onsite during the pre-construction clearance survey, and with, no indirect effects to burrowing owl are expected to occur.

4.2 Mammals
The southeast corner of the project site is located within the MSHCP Mammal Survey Area for Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus; LAPM). The habitat of the LAPM is confined to lower elevation grasslands and coast sage scrub habitats, in areas with soils composed of fine sands. The present known distribution of this species extends from Rancho Cucamonga east to Morongo and south to the San Diego County border. LAPM forages in open ground and underneath shrubs. Pocket mice in general dig burrows in loose soil, although this has not been completely documented for this subspecies. The LAPM is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the CDFW.

4.2.1 Methods
A habitat suitability assessment specific to LAPM was conducted during the initial field investigation. The portion of the site within the LAPM Survey Area lacked suitable habitat conditions that would support LAPM. Specifically, the areas away from the onsite storm drain are dominated by non-native grasses and have high vegetative cover that would preclude LAPM. The soils in these areas are periodically disturbed due to disking, which is not conducive to burrowing species.

4.2.2 Results/Impacts
The Project site and off-site improvement areas contain non-native grassland and disturbed and developed land. The parcels contain developed/disturbed land as mapped by the Western Riverside MSHCP (Vegetation 2012). Habitat on site is not what is typically associated with LAPM. While soils underlying the southwest portion of the site are mapped as being sandy loam that is preferred by LAPM, there are no plant communities present that would offer shelter and forage preferred by this species. The non-native ruderal weeds found on site are not the typical alluvial fan scrub and coastal scrub habitat where this species occurs. No burrows potentially occupied by small mammals such as LAPM were observed at the site.

Occupation by LAPM at the site is not likely. No trapping studies are recommended.

No mitigation pertaining to LAPM is expected.

4.2.3 Mitigation and Equivalency

4.2.3.1 Direct Effects
No direct effects to LAPM are expected to occur.

DBESP Report
project site during future construction, further review may be needed to ensure compliance with the MSHCP, MBTA andFish and Game Code.

4.1.3.2IndirectEffects
If no burrowing owls are found onsite during the pre-construction clearance survey, and with, no indirect effects to burrowing owl are expectedto occur.

4.2 Mammals
The southeast corner oftheproject siteis locatedwithintheMSHCP Mammal Survey Area for Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus; LAPM). The habitat of the LAPM is confined to lower elevation grasslands and coast sage scrub habitats, in areas with soils composed of fine sands. The presentknown distribution of this species extends from Rancho Cucamonga east to Morongo and south to the SanDiego Countyborder. LAPM foragesin opengroundandunderneathshrubs.Pocket mice in general digburrows inloose soil, althoughthishasnot beencompletely documentedfor this subspecies.TheLAPM is listed as a Species of Special Concernby the CDFW.

4.2.1 Methods
A habitat suitability assessment specific to LAPM was conducted during the initial field investigation. The portion of the site within the LAPM Survey Area lacked suitable habitat conditions that would support LAPM. Specifically, the areas away from the onsite storm drain are dominated by non-native grasses and have high vegetative cover that wouldpreclude LAPM. The soils in these areas areperiodically disturbed due to disking, which is not conducive to burrowing species.

4.2.2 Results/Impacts
The Project site and off-site improvement areas containnon-native grasslandand disturbed and developed land. The parcels contain developed/disturbed land as mapped by the Western Riverside MSHCP (Vegetation 2012). Habitat on site is not what is typically associatedwith LAPM. While soils underlying the southwestportion of the site are mapped asbeing sandy loam that is preferred by LAPM, there areno plant communities present that would offer shelter and forage preferred by this species. The non-native ruderal weeds foundon site arenot the typical alluvial fan scrub andcoastal scrubhabitat where this species occurs. No burrows potentially occupied by small mammals such as LAPM were observed at the site.

Occupationby LAPM at the site is not likely.No trapping studies arerecommended.

No mitigationpertaining to LAPM is expected.

4.2.3 Mitigation andEquivalency

4.2.3.1DirectEffects
No direct effects to LAPM are expectedto occur.
16 881
DBESP Report
17 4.2.3.2 Indirect Effects
No indirect effects to LAPM are expected to occur.

DBESP Report

4.2.3.2IndirectEffects
No indirect effects to LAPM are expectedto occur.
17 882
DBESP Report
18 5 REFERENCES
Google, Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.4.8248. Build date 7/16/2021.

ELMT Consulting Inc. 2023. Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis for the Proposed Belago Park Project.

ELMT Consulting Inc. 2023. Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters for the Proposed Belago Park Project.

Riverside County. 2003 (June). Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Available online at http://www.rcip.org/.

USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service). 2000. Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Protocol Revision 2000. Sacramento, California: USFWS.
https://www.fws.gov/pacific/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/documents/SWWFlycatcher.2000. protocol.pdf
USFWS. 2001. Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Guidelines. January 19, 2001. Sacramento, California:

USFWS. https://www.fws.gov/cno/es/Recovery_Permitting/birds/least_bells_vireo/ LeastBellsVireo_SurveyGuidelines_20010119.pdf
USFWS. 2015. A Natural History Summary and Survey Protocol for the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo. Prepared by M. Halterman, M.J. Johnson, J.A. Holmes, and S.A. Laymon. Sacramento, California: USFWS. April 2015. https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/Documents/R2ES/YBCU_SurveyProtocol_FINAL_DRAFT_2 2Apr2015.pdf
DBESP Report
5 REFERENCES
Google, Inc. 2021. Google EarthPro version 7.3.4.8248. Build date 7/16/2021.

ELMT Consulting Inc. 2023. Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis for the Proposed Belago Park Project.

ELMT Consulting Inc. 2023. Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters for the Proposed Belago Park Project.

Riverside County. 2003 (June). Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. Available online at http://www.rcip.org/.

USFWS (United StatesFish and Wildlife Service). 2000. SouthwesternWillow Flycatcher Protocol Revision 2000. Sacramento, California: USFWS.
https://www.fws.gov/pacific/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/documents/SW WFlycatcher.2000. protocol.pdf
USFWS. 2001. Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Guidelines. January 19, 2001. Sacramento,California:

USFWS. https://www.fws.gov/cno/es/Recovery Permitting/birds/least bells vireo/ LeastBellsVireo SurveyGuidelines 20010119.pdf
USFWS. 2015. A NaturalHistory Summary and Survey Protocol for the WesternDistinct Population Segment of the Yellow-Billed Cuckoo. Preparedby M. Halterman, M.J. Johnson, J.A. Holmes, and S.A. Laymon. Sacramento,California: USFWS. April 2015. https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/Documents/R2ES/YBCU_SurveyProtocol FINAL, DRAFT 2 2Apr2015.pdf
18 883
Appendix Appendix AA Project Project Exhibits Exhibits
884
^_

RIVERSIDE

SAN BERNARDINO

SAN DIEGO
ORANGE

LOS ANGELES
Regional Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 1
O
Source: World Street Map, Riverside County
0 2.5 5 10
Miles

PROJECT

LOCATION
^_

PROJECT

LOCATION
L CNWX 7 - NEF
i
leValley ~ se
ne.’ Arrowhead
,. -. SanBernadino
fT Natona-- “Ag
Fomst pL hE
SwmRedlands ‘t va
PROJECT]
LOCATION .
[errace
SER Ie | REE ra" AN PR OUECT
oN Sy MRP [OCATION
Lo { - - Se PIES ~~ Moreno BS Se - I] 2s Nl y f TL on a oo } g hp 4
bY ~
.XY
=e
OS
x R
IN
«
AS
\
wv!
) \
“N.
2) w_ :

NG df Ff ifr oF ~
B74 1 . [] 0 PCAN oN AE EN
v if ‘ Hr al I 4 ily ! - 3 3 r wo - fa - NE © ATEN CT
- Su ¢Elsinore.

ORA ta vid jg / J ] Ea a } 4
.
2 e est ] ; ! ES p “ j » 7 * Mission Yiejo +. 77 ~ oo 7, ; idpmder, . vis Il “ . Vd field . i . pot
? oF re AEE, L aNiguel y £8 RY Ap 7 7.Purity
zg : ry Ag ~y” ERE ~ ; . Za ' = 4 J Pl h
; 2. yd _— 7 2 D ra r 4 N 7
| fy 20% oY. | LEA WF
| as os gd ve
i NA ih
’ : g EY TA 37
\ Be - Ks 4 r Sap Ciemente a oO. EY San aim 2 semen
s § Am arts ’ : Lo Rada) $4" i Ea, CEPR ‘ N ’ ob > af ,r" Faimrook: : y oS Camp Pendleton ii #9 R ET PZ 4 : ‘ 6 3 Ady 7,
to, ” bf] fad << MarineCorps Bass - . ip : 76 j fr * I SIE > \.D/EcoZ ing 1h, of J . / vy ‘ L PRP 7) . PR AF , LT “Age a ! NJ C7NNd - Pa | -
! 7
J Ea i. Sdn Po ) 3) SL nd rai
“ Ip i Ei CYR IE, Sod? DL: A

BELAGO PARK
0 25 5 10 20 FA A ee ed ile R egional | VicinityVicinit Source: World Street Map, Riverside County Exhibit 1 AELNMT CD] CONSULTING 885
Site Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 2
O
Source: USA Topographic Map, Riverside County
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Legend
Project Site

BELAGO PARK
A — Foo Site Vicinity
Source: USA Topographic Map, Riverside County Exhibit 2 AIA) | NIT Lali CONSULTING 886
Project Site

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 3 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500
O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Ca oo apeal
2 #3758 CC Cactus Ave Cactus #Tom

BELAGO PARK
0 125 250 500 ) ] A Feet ProjectSite
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 3 a CONSULTING 887
SgA
HcC
SgC
SgC
HcD2
GyC2
Soils

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 4 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County 0 125 250 500
O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2)
Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC)
Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2)
San Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA)
San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC)
SCLIN Ave | dA ay TH. © 20008
Legend
Project Site [ Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC) / J Street Improvements [ Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2) NN Proposed City Park [ San Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA) [] Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2) San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC) Redland:

Brodiaea Ave
Witmol
J 2:1 = pr— RS Ga
Redlands Biv SS SS SS SS SN SN NN
NTT
5(Sg
rea ~~
Zs vara Tal Jo) J J LS an] JT TT a TT CD at ar a SE 0ge tee — alta Ry Cactus AVE Cactus AVE ° { po - an a m- Ie - g SPW WNP WW ah a UN Ee A Ae Sedans ah

BELAGO PARK
0 125 250 500 . A Feet Soils
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County Exhibit 4 nnwwSELL 888
Riparian/Riverine Habitat

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 5 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500
O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Riverine Habitat
(1.4 acres)
a
wu GY a
{ > Pst -
. X 1 BY
‘o¥
[J Dimialt pres
7 a
Brodiacam=Ave A a
»’
| Riverine Habitat
Cl =o peat ~~ Redlands”Blvd ND, Shinn. es. ER.CD. WE.TS Ta 14483 Cactus #Tom
0 125 » 500 | | oo | - "BELAGOPARK
A Foot Riparian/Riverine Habitat
Exhibit 5

CONSULTING
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 889
Appendix B Habitat Assessment and Western
Riverside County MSHCP Consistency
Analysis
Appendix B Habitat Assessment and Western
Riverside County MSHCP Consistency
Analysis
890

BELAGO PARK
TTM 38157 AND 38158

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUNNYMEAD USGS 7.5-MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE
SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST
APNS: 478-100-012 AND -035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, AND -007; AND 478-120-001, -002, -005, AND -006; AND 478-120-025 AND 478-120-027 Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis
Prepared For:

EPD Solutions
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Contact: Selena Kelaher
Prepared By:

ELMT Consulting, Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 2711
Contact: Travis J. McGill
909.816.1646
March 2025

BELAGO PARK
TTM 38157 AND38158

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SUNNYMEAD USGS 7.5-MINUTE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE
SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST
APNS: 478-100-012 AND-035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, AND-007; AND478-120-001, -002, -005, AND-006; AND478-120-025 AND478-120-027 Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis
PreparedFor:

EPD Solutions
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Contact: Selena Kelaher
PreparedBy:

ELMT Consulting,Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 2711
Contact: Travis J. McGill
909.816.1646
March 2025
891

BELAGO PARK

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis
The undersigned certify that the statements furnished in this report and exhibits present data and information required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presented is a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge and beliefs.

Travis J. McGill
Director/Biologist
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D.

Managing Director
March 2025

BELAGO PARK

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis
Theundersignedcertify that the statements furnishedin thisreport andexhibitspresentdataandinformation required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presentedis a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge andbeliefs. avian
Travis J. McGill
Director/Biologist
onVols
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D.

ManagingDirector
March 2025
892
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis i
Table of Contents
Section 1 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location.................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................. 2 Section 2 Methodology...................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Literature Review ............................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Field Investigation .............................................................................................................. 7

2.3 Soils Series Assessment...................................................................................................... 8

2.4 Plant Communities.............................................................................................................. 8

2.5 Plants................................................................................................................................... 8

2.6 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................... 9

2.7 Jurisdictional Drainages and Wetlands............................................................................... 9 Section 3 Existing Conditions......................................................................................................... 10

3.1 Local Climate.................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Topography and Soils....................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Surrounding Land Uses .................................................................................................... 10 Section 4 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 13

4.1 Site Conditions.................................................................................................................. 13

4.2 Vegetation......................................................................................................................... 13

4.2.1 Non-Native Grassland....................................................................................................... 13

4.2.2 Disturbed........................................................................................................................... 14

4.2.3 Developed ......................................................................................................................... 14

4.3 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................. 14

4.3.1 Fish ................................................................................................................................... 14

4.3.2 Amphibians....................................................................................................................... 15

4.3.3 Reptiles............................................................................................................................. 15

4.3.4 Birds .................................................................................................................................. 15

4.3.5 Mammals .......................................................................................................................... 15

4.4 Nesting Birds .................................................................................................................... 16

4.5 Wildlife Corridors and Linkages ...................................................................................... 16

4.6 State and Federal Jurisdictional Areas.............................................................................. 16

4.7 Special-Status Biological Resources................................................................................. 17

4.7.1 Special-Status Plants......................................................................................................... 18 Table of Contents
Section 1 Introduction 1

1.1 Project LOCAtION.....c.cciiiiiieeeeeeeects reteseteee este eee essenees1

1.2 Project DeSCTIPLION ......cccieiiiieiieeieeie etree errr seessessane 2 Section 2 Methodology 7

2.1 Literature REVIEW .........coiiiiiiiiieie eects ees ese stesso sme esate see nne ns 7

2.2 Field INVESHIGALION .....coeiiiieiieiierieece teeters esters setesetestereoeteseessessateen7 23 S0ilS Series ASSESSIMENL.......coiueriieriieriereiiaettreetreeteet estestestestesseeseeesatesetesatesaeestesteeeenns8 24 Plant COMMUNILIES.......coeerieriierieriereieete etreestereos eseteeeetesatestereoeeesatesseesseessesesas8

2.5 PLANES... etre eee eee este eee sae sbeebs nents e eee eee sues 8

2.6 WILALITE«..c..oeeeeere reece etree esate sees erases eerste stems eran nesses emeaas9

2.7 JurisdictionalDrainages and Wetlands...........c.cccooiiiiieiiiincineenereeeeee eee 9 Section 3 Existing Conditions 10

3.1 LOCAL CIIMALE....c...eoiueeiieriereieeetee teeters tester teetereatssatesatestestest estatesseassesesaneaas10 32 Topography and SOILS.......ccc.ceeiieiieiiee eerste stereos sae settee ees 10 33 Surrounding Land USES........ccceeeiiriuiieiieiieeeteetcetera sees stenoses resents enes 10 Section 4 Discussion 13

4.1 Site CONAILIONS.....ceieiiniiieiteeteeiereteeeeteeterte rteeteeteeteestesseessesesetesseestesete seassesesasenas13

4.2 VEZELALION.....eeeeieieeeriereece etree eee sees eee be ese s bess s state este smee sate sabe sase nase nasenaseannt13

4.2.1 Non-Native Grassland...........ccoooieiiriiiiiieree eee sees 13 422 DASTUIDEA....c..eeeeeeeee rere eres eset satestesrestentessenene14 423 DIEVEIOPEA..... eit eerstesbeebs estesatestesrestentessere 14

4.3 WILALIE«..c..oereeeects teesareesestes essesectestereens naeneneneteneen14

4.3.1 FISH center ctr estesecresenna eeenananeeetentenerenen14

43.2 AMPRIDIANS....c.eeieieirereenter rbesser eeemtesatestentestessessenneeaen15 433 REPLIES eerste eee teerssteereretsemeestate teeta teens15

4.34 BLAS...eects enone serenesennaene eeeasesennaeneronenaees15

43.5 IMAAIMIMIALS coerce eter eect treet estes estes ete st ete ses eset erate ame e meee e stent eee eens 15

4.4 NESHNG BIAS .c...eeineeiieiiieeeerste stereosree ssesssessessatesanesnesaeeas16

4.5 Wildlife Corridors and Linkages ..........ccceeireiieiiniiniceneeienieneneeeee eerstestesso 16

4.6 StateandFederal Jurisdictional Areas..........ccoccoriiiioirinieenieeiieeiierrerer eee 16

4.7 Special-StatusBiological Resources..........cccoeveriiriiriniiniiniineeeeeereere reece neeeeeee17

4.7.1 Special-StatusPIAnts...........ccooioioriiniii teeter etree eee eee 18 Belago Park
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis i
893
Table of Contents
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis ii

4.7.2 Special-Status Wildlife ..................................................................................................... 18

4.7.3 Special-Status Plant Communities.................................................................................... 19

4.8 Critical Habitat.................................................................................................................. 19 Section 5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis....................................................................................... 22

5.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools....................................................................... 22

5.1.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas ................................................................................................... 22

5.1.2 Vernal Pools...................................................................................................................... 23

5.2 Narrow Endemic Plant Species......................................................................................... 25

5.3 Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines ............................................................................. 25

5.4 Additional MSHCP Considerations.................................................................................. 25 Section 6 Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan.................................................. 30 Section 7 Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................... 31 Section 8 References........................................................................................................................ 35

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity................................................................................................................ 4 Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity ........................................................................................................................ 5 Exhibit 3: Project Site.......................................................................................................................... 6 Exhibit 4: Soils .................................................................................................................................. 12 Exhibit 5: Vegetation......................................................................................................................... 20 Exhibit 6: Critical Habitat.................................................................................................................. 21 Exhibit 7: MSHCP Conservation Areas ............................................................................................ 29

APPENDIX
Appendix A Site Photographs
Appendix B Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Appendix C Regulations
Table of Contents

4.7.2 Special-StatusWIldLife.........coceoiiiiiiii erences estes 18

4.7.3 Special-StatusPlant Communities............cceceereriirinerreniineire teers eee nes19

4.8 CriticalHabitat..........ooiuiriiiii creer eteretree eects eeereeseseas19 Section 5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis 22

5.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas and VernalPools.........cccccoeiiiiiiiiiiiiiininccreeeesceneries 22

5.1.1 Riparian/RivVerineATES .......ccecoieeieriieeiiieiinrterteit erect ceterisereseressreesees eeesnesmeans22

5.1.2 Vernal POOLS......oouiiie eerste esteeetesseraesateentessaseen23

5.2 Narrow Endemic Plant SPecies.......ccoocoiiriiiireireieereererre reneenents eeesees eee25 53 Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines ...........cccceeeieierieniieniiensensinctrcetesee stesso 25 54 Additional MSHCP Considerations............cocceetretrrniernieriiensiensieeseeeeeteeeteseneseeseesseesseenne25 Section 6 Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat ConservationPlan 30 Section 7 Conclusion andRecommendations 31
Section 8 References 35

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: REGIONAL VICIILY...c.eeiieiiieiieeieeiee etter estereect eersteesoteric seesasesasamas4 Exhibit 2: STEVICTIILY ce eeneieeieieieieeit erect eee etree eer ee sree eee be eben eset setae esses suas sabe sabe nase neseaneanne5 Exhibit 3: PIOJECT SHEE... neice etree ects eeeseesreeseeseeeaeserenesessease sane6 Exhibit 4: SOILS«eerste reste eeseteeeebenbenbeeneeeeereeeneeearen12 Exhibit 5: VEEELALION.....eeuieeieeerieereece rere ete eee sees ee sabe ssa sabes bes st asta emt e sate sabes abe nase nsesasesaseannt20 Exhibit 6: CriticalHabitat..........ooieiiiiiieieetete teeter etereee eects sees sees21 Exhibit 7: MSHCP CONSErvationATEaS ..........cccceeeuererieetreterterteeteetessteesteeseseses esetesasesssessseeseeseeens29

APPENDIX
Appendix A Site Photographs
Appendix B Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Appendix C ~~ Regulations
Belago Park
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis ii
894
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 1
Section 1 Introduction
This report contains the findings of ELMT Consulting’s (ELMT) Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) consistency analysis for the proposed Belago Park project in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California, and off-site improvement areas, which consist of roadway improvement areas (along Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street), a city park, and surrounding area improvements (on APN 478- 120-027). The report was prepared to document baseline conditions and assess the potential for specialstatus 1 plant and wildlife species to occur within the proposed project site and off-site improvement areas that could pose a constraint to implementation of the proposed project. Special attention was given to the suitability of the on-site habitat to support special-status species identified by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and other electronic databases as potentially occurring in the general vicinity of the project. Additionally, the report also addresses resources protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (FGC), federal Clean Water Act (CWA) regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) respectively, and Section 1602 of the FGC administered by CDFW.

The City of Moreno Valley is a signatory to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Since the City of Moreno Valley will be the lead agency for the proposed project, the project will need to be consistent with the rules and regulations set forth in the MSHCP. The Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map was queried to determine if the MSHCP identifies any potential survey requirements for the project. Further, the project site and off-site improvement areas were reviewed against the MSHCP to determine if the site is located within any MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells (core habitat and wildlife movement corridors) or areas proposed for conservation. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan of the MSHCP but are not located within any Criteria Cells or MSHCP Conservation Areas. Further, portions of the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within designated survey areas for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus).

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site and off-site improvement areas are generally located south of State Route 60, west of State Route 79, north of State Route 74, and east of Interstate 215 City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California (Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity). The site is depicted on the Sunnymead quadrangle of the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West (Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of 1 As used in this report, “special-status” refers to plant and wildlife species that are federally, State, and MSHCP listed, proposed, or candidates; plant species that have been designated with a California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank; wildlife species that are designated by the CDFW as fully protected, species of special concern, or watch list species; and specially protected natural vegetation communities as designated by the CDFW.

Section 1 Introduction
This report contains the findings of ELMT Consulting’s (ELMT) Habitat Assessment and Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) consistency analysis for the proposed Belago Park project in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California, and off-site improvement areas,which consist ofroadway improvement areas(along CactusAvenue,Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street), a city park, and surrounding areaimprovements (on APN 478- 120-027). The report was prepared to document baseline conditions and assess the potential for specialstatus’plant and wildlife species to occur within the proposed project site and off-site improvement areas that could pose a constraint to implementation of the proposed project. Special attention was given to the suitability of the on-site habitat to support special-status speciesidentifiedby the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and other electronic databases as potentially occurring in the general vicinity of the project. Additionally, the report also addressesresourcesprotectedunder the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and CaliforniaFish andGame Code (FGC), federal Clean Water Act (CWA) regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) andRegional Water Quality ControlBoard(RegionalBoard) respectively, and Section 1602 ofthe FGC administeredby CDFW.

The City of Moreno Valley is a signatory to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). Since the City of Moreno Valley will be the lead agency for the proposed project, the project will need to be consistent with the rules and regulations set forth in the MSHCP. The WesternRiverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCPInformationMap was queried to determine if the MSHCP identifies any potential survey requirements for the project. Further, the project site and off-site improvement areas were reviewed against the MSHCP to determine if the site is located within any MSHCP areas including Criteria Cells (core habitat and wildlife movement corridors) or areas proposed for conservation.Based on theRCA MSHCP InformationMap query andreview of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan of the MSHCP but are not located within any Criteria Cells or MSHCP Conservation Areas.Further, portions of the project site and off-site improvement areas arelocated within designated survey areas for burrowing owl (Athene cumicularia) and Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus).

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Theproject site and off-site improvement areasare generally located south of StateRoute 60, west of State Route 79, north of State Route 74, and east of Interstate 215 City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California (Exhibit 1,Regional Vicinity). The site is depicted on the Sunnymeadquadrangle of the United StatesGeological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map seriesin Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West (Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of Asusedinthisreport,“special-status”referstoplant andwildlife speciesthatarefederally,State,andMSHCPlisted,proposed, or candidates; plant species that have been designated with a California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank; wildlife species that are designated by the CDFW as fully protected, species of special concern, or watch list species; and specially protected naturalvegetationcommunitiesasdesignatedby theCDFW.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 1
895
Introduction
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 2
the intersection of Cactus Avenue and Redlands Boulevard Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 478-100-012 and - 035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; and 478-120-001, -002, -005, -006, and -025.

The off-site street improvement areas are located on the adjacent Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street and the off-site city park improvement is located at Assessor’s Parcel Number 478-120-027 northeast from the project site (Exhibit 3, Project Site).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project proposes the development of 310 single-family residential units, two neighborhood parks, and associated landscaping, perimeter fencing/walls, sidewalk, and lighting improvements on 14 applicantowned parcels that expands 36.82 acres (identified as Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B, and 3). Additionally, the Project would develop a 3.84-acre public park on behalf of the City in the northeastern portion of the site, on portion of a 7.6-acre City-owned parcel (APN 478-120-027). The public park is proposed to include a 10,000 SF splash pad; a restroom building; shaded picnic area; open space with lawns walkways, and fitness stations; and a parking lot with 100 spaces. In addition, the Project applicant will dedicate a 0.63- acre portion of remnant parcels to the City, which will be transferred to APN 478-120-027, increasing the parcel from 7.6 acres to 8.22 acres. Therefore, upon development of the 3.84-acre park, the remaining

4.38-acres on consolidated APN 478-120-027 would be graded but would not be developed as part of the proposed Project.

The Project would implement infrastructure improvements, which include the extension of an existing potable water line beneath Wilmot Street, the connection to adjacent water, sewer, and stormwater facilities, and the implementation of 9.72 acres of off-site roadway improvements on Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, and Wilmot Street. Flood control improvements to the existing RCFCWCD channel on the Project site would also be carried out as part of the Project. The Project would include vacation of a planned (unbuilt) roadway alignment (Richards Avenue).

Approvals required for the Project include a General Plan Amendment, zone change, two Tentative Tract Maps, condition use permits for Planned Unit Development permits (PUD)s, and a Development Agreement. Refer to Attachment A, Site Plan. Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3 are distributed throughout the two Tentative Tract Maps. Map 38157 includes Planning Area 1, which is located within the southwest portion of the Project Map 38158 includes of Planning Area 2A, 2B, and 3.

The following offsite areas will be a part of the Project as described below:

Street Improvements
The proposed Project would widen the northerly half of the Cactus Avenue roadway by 44 feet along the entire Project site frontage, which would encompass 2.39 acres and would result in a fully built 88-foot-wide roadway. The proposed Project would also implement a Class II bike lane along Cactus Avenue.

The proposed Project would widen the easterly portion of Wilmot Street by 19 feet, resulting in a 66-foot-wide roadway and would also extend the existing road approximately 0.12 miles south to Introduction
the intersection of Cactus Avenue andRedlandsBoulevard Assessor’sParcelNumbers 478-100-012 and - 035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; and 478-120-001, -002, -005, -006, and -025.

The off-site street improvement areas are located on the adjacent Cactus Avenue, Brodiaca Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street and the off-site city park improvement is located at Assessor’s ParcelNumber 478-120-027 northeast from the project site (Exhibit 3,Project Site).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project proposes the development of 310 single-family residential units, two neighborhoodparks, and associatedlandscaping, perimeter fencing/walls, sidewalk, and lighting improvements on 14 applicantownedparcels that expands 36.82 acres (identified asPlanning Areas 1, 2A, 2B, and 3). Additionally, the Project would develop a 3.84-acrepublic park onbehalf of the City in the northeasternportion of the site, on portion of a 7.6-acre City-ownedparcel (APN 478-120-027). The public park is proposed to include a 10,000 SF splashpad; arestroombuilding; shadedpicnic area; open spacewith lawns walkways, and fitness stations; and aparking lot with 100 spaces.In addition, theProject applicant will dedicate a 0.63- acre portion of remnant parcels to the City, which will be transferred to APN 478-120-027, increasing the parcel from 7.6 acres to 8.22 acres. Therefore, upon development of the 3.84-acrepark, the remaining

4.38-acres on consolidated APN 478-120-027 wouldbe gradedbut wouldnot be developed aspart of the proposedProject.

The Project would implement infrastructure improvements, which include the extension of an existing potable water line beneath Wilmot Street, the connection to adjacent water, sewer, and stormwater facilities, and the implementation of 9.72 acres of off-site roadway improvements onBrodiaecaAvenue, RedlandsBoulevard, Cactus Avenue, and Wilmot Street.Flood control improvements to the existing RCFCWCD channel on the Project site would also be carried out aspart of theProject. The Project would include vacation of aplanned (unbuilt) roadway alignment (Richards Avenue).

Approvals required for the Project include a GeneralPlan Amendment, zone change, two Tentative Tract Maps, conditionuse permits for PlannedUnit Development permits (PUD)s, and a Development Agreement. Refer to Attachment A, Site Plan. Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3 are distributed throughout the two Tentative Tract Maps. Map 38157 includes Planning Area 1, which is located within the southwestportion of theProject Map 38158 includes ofPlanning Area 2A, 2B, and 3.

The following offsite areaswill be apart of the Project as describedbelow:

Street Improvements
The proposedProject would widen the northerly half of the Cactus Avenue roadway by 44 feet along the entire Project site frontage, which would encompass 2.39 acres and wouldresult in a fully built 88-foot-wide roadway. The proposedProject would also implement a ClassII bike lane along CactusAvenue.

The proposedProject would widen the easterlyportion of Wilmot Streetby 19 feet,resulting in a 66-foot-wide roadway and would also extend the existing road approximately (0.12miles south to BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 2
896
Introduction
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 3
build out the existing gravel portion of the road that connects to Cactus Avenue. Wilmot Street improvements would encompass approximately 1.39 acres.

In addition, Brodiaea Avenue, which is currently a gravel road, would be built out and widened to its full width of 79 feet, along the Project site frontage from the Wilmot Street/ Brodiaea Avenue intersection east to the Brodiaea Avenue/ Redlands Boulevard intersection. Completion of street improvements would also include sidewalk improvements along the northern boundary of the road. Brodiaea Avenue improvements would encompass approximately 2.69 acres.

Redlands Boulevard would also be widened to its full width of 79 feet, along the Project site frontage from the Brodiaea/ Redlands Boulevard intersection south to the Redlands Boulevard/ Cactus Avenue intersection. Completion of street improvements would also include the addition of a raised median on Redlands Boulevard and sidewalk improvements along the eastern boundary of the road. Redlands Boulevard improvements would encompass approximately 3.25 acres.

Utility Improvements
The proposed Project off-site water utility improvements would include extension of the existing 12-inch water line in Wilmot Street approximately 0.12 miles south with the buildout of the road to connect to the 24-inch water line in Cactus Avenue.

Flood Control Improvements
The project would improve Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes, with a base width of 12’, a depth of 10’ and 20’ access roads along each side of the channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing of Redlands Boulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existing pipe culvert crossing. See attached typical section. TTM 38157 will extend RCFCD SD Line G-11 from its westerly boundary to Wilmot Street within Cactus Avenue. The nominal size will be 36” to 48” RCP.

Introduction
build out the existing gravelportion of the road that connects to Cactus Avenue. Wilmot Street improvements would encompass approximately 1.39 acres.

In addition, Brodiaea Avenue, which is currently a gravel road, wouldbe built out and widened to its full width of 79 feet, along the Project site frontage from the Wilmot Street/Brodiaca Avenue intersection east to the Brodiaea Avenue/ RedlandsBoulevard intersection. Completion of street improvements would also include sidewalk improvements along the northernboundary of the road. Brodiaea Avenue improvements would encompass approximately 2.69 acres.

RedlandsBoulevard would also be widened to its full width of 79 feet, along theProject site frontage from the Brodiaea/ RedlandsBoulevard intersection south to the RedlandsBoulevard/ Cactus Avenue intersection. Completion of streetimprovements would also include the addition of a raisedmedian onRedlandsBoulevard and sidewalk improvements along the eastern boundary of the road. RedlandsBoulevard improvements would encompass approximately 3.25 acres.

Utility Improvements
The proposedProject off-site water utility improvements would include extension of the existing 12-inch water line in Wilmot Street approximately 0.12 miles south with the buildout of the road to connect to the 24-inch water line in Cactus Avenue.

Flood Control Improvements
The project would improve Riverside County Flood ControlDistrict (RCFCD) LineF with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes,with abase width of 12°, a depth of 10° and 20’ accessroads along each side of the channel as apart of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend fromRedlandsBoulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing ofRedlandsBoulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existingpipe culvert crossing. See attachedtypical section. TTM 38157 will extendRCFCD SD Line G-11 from its westerly boundary to Wilmot Street within CactusAvenue. The nominal size will be 36” to 48” RCP.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 3
897
^_

RIVERSIDE

SAN BERNARDINO

SAN DIEGO
ORANGE

LOS ANGELES
Regional Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 1
O
Source: World Street Map, Riverside County
0 2.5 5 10
Miles

PROJECT

LOCATION
^_

PROJECT

LOCATION
+
I
Fi]
Pans d vo, F > FA
i is
: Ed B YJ.

L Zn, ome La 7 - . . EWSANBERNARDINO on?
=. Arrowhead fe Sgt Tr ne. ] ATPAST Big Bear Lake Le we I eaTy pee, "of ork ] MLA f iy oY Lr pe Ar TT 5le iP) Bo JL iy ! a ~» ; “mn Py <5 ia Zend A? 3 ¥ TE tee KET) Sl Rt TF nid
P
r ] ot ET Th
2 ERE Yl ' oo. . 3a pe 1
& 7: : & Votre VE —~ er or
gay Pell Lohse
) Rand Ps Ts ys 7 pra ASvay z se SAE ’ .r “Yucaipa , 4 LIAR N.C Th. id forrace PA lim = ay. FE x; ‘&3| "INPRO ECT,
! ar Moreno
¢
NS, GCsmp Pendleton 1 BE 49 {
“NW /; Matine Corps Base + a ;
\ f 1 A 4 . ' \ J py
\J ; : 4 ity poe, I
\ “% -r PE or. ! 4
\ [3

BELAGO PARK
0 25 5 10 20 FA A ee ed Wiles R egional | VicinityVicinit Source: World Street Map, Riverside County Exhibit 1
ald F| NT Kalkz CONSULTING 898
Site Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 2
O
Source: USA Topographic Map, Riverside County
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
SEER. VE LL ) ;
Legend
snl
Project Site
le cm cms aD GES WE Gut a= re FEY r-:2 fF 1 Fr 2 31 0) A 5 a
BE
|
[)\
; | 4
. oo N-C: J § ~~ [s =m
aa Hard
Py rr
s {A =
0 1,000 2,000 BELAGO PARK
A Foo Site Vicinity
Source: USA Topographic Map, Riverside County Exhibit 2 ald F| NT Kalkz CONSULTING 899
Project Site

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 3 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500 O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
»
Wilmot St
Se)
ie ml
Rediands”Bivd?
- Ap
TRLA ny LD) CHCtusTAVE
| | oo © BELAGOPARK
0 125 250 500 i ] A Feet Project Site
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 3 as CONSULTING 900
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 7
Section 2 Methodology
A literature review and records search were conducted to determine which special-status biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site and off-site improvement areas. In addition to the literature review, a general habitat assessment or field investigation was conducted. The field investigation was conducted to document existing conditions within the project site and off-site improvement areas to assess the potential for special-status biological resources to occur.

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to conducting the field investigation, species and habitat information was gathered from the reports related to the specific project and relevant databases for the Sunnymead USGS quadrangles to determine which species and/or habitats would be expected to occur on-site. These sources include:
• California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) database; • California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5; • CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS); • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers • Google Earth Pro historic aerial imagery (1985-2023); • Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), Soil Survey2
;
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Critical Habitat designations for Threatened and Endangered Species;
• USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI);
• Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map; and
• 2006 Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area.

The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the biological resources potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. The CNDDB database was used, in conjunction with ArcGIS software, to locate the nearest recorded occurrences of special-status species and determine the distance from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION
Following the literature review, biologists Megan E. Peukert inventoried and evaluated the condition of the habitat within the project site and off-site improvement areas on January 26, 2024. Plant communities 2 A soil series is defined as a group of soils with similar profiles developed from similar parent materials under comparable climatic and vegetation conditions. These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics, which may promote favorable conditions for certain biological resources.

Section 2 ~~Methodology
A literature review and records search were conducted to determine which special-status biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site and off-site improvement areas.In addition to the literature review, a generalhabitat assessment or field investigation was conducted. The field investigation was conducted to document existing conditions within the project site and off-site improvement areas to assess the potential for special-statusbiologicalresources to occur.

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to conducting the field investigation, species and habitat information was gathered from the reports related to the specific project and relevant databases for the SunnymeadUSGS quadrangles to determine which species and/or habitats wouldbe expectedto occur on-site. These sources include:
e (CaliforniaNative Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) database; e (CaliforniaNatural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5; eo CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS); e EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” datalayers e Google EarthPro historic aerial imagery (1985-2023);
e Stephen’sKangaroo Rat Habitat ConservationPlan
e UnitedStatesDepartment ofAgriculture (USDA)NaturalResourceConservationService(NRCS), Soil Survey?;
e United StatesFish andWildlife Service (USFWS) CriticalHabitat designations for Threatenedand EndangeredSpecies;
eo USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI);
eo Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) MSHCP Information Map; and
eo 2006 Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat ConservationPlan Area.

The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the biological resources potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. The CNDDB database was used, in conjunction with ArcGIS software, to locate the nearestrecorded occurrencesof special-status species and determine the distance from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

2.2 FIELD INVESTIGATION
Following the literature review,biologists MeganE.Peukert inventoried and evaluatedthe condition ofthe habitat within the project site and off-site improvement areas on January 26, 2024. Plant communities 2 A soil seriesis definedasa group of soils with similarprofiles developed from similarparentmaterialsunder comparable climatic and vegetation conditions. These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics, whichmay promote favorable conditions for certainbiologicalresources.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 7
901
Methodology
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 8
identified on aerial photographs during the literature review were verified by walking meandering transects through the plant communities and along boundaries between plant communities.

All plant and wildlife species observed, as well as dominant plant species within each plant community, were recorded. Plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field. Unusual and less familiar plant species were photographed during the field survey and identified in the laboratory using taxonomical guides. Wildlife detections were made through observation of scat, trails, tracks, burrows, nests, and/or visual and aural observation. In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, condition of on-site plant communities, and presence of potential jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were noted.

Special attention was given to special-status habitats and/or undeveloped areas, which have higher potentials to support special-status plant and wildlife species. Areas providing suitable habitat for burrowing owl were closely surveyed for signs of presence during the field survey. Methods to detect the presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence including pellets, whitewash, feathers, or prey remains. Methods to detect the presence of Los Angeles pocket mouse included assessing the suitability of on-site habitats, direct observation, and signs of presence including potential burrows.

No limitations significantly affected the results and conclusions given herein. Surveys were conducted during the appropriate season to observe the target species, in good weather conditions, by qualified biologists who followed all pertinent protocols.

2.3 SOILS SERIES ASSESSMENT
On-site and adjoining soils were researched prior to the field survey using the USDA NRCS Soil Survey for Western Riverside Area, California. In addition, a review of the local geological conditions and historical aerial photographs was conducted to assess the ecological changes that the project site and offsite improvement areas have undergone.

2.4 PLANT COMMUNITIES
Plant communities were mapped using 7.5-minute USGS topographic base maps and aerial photography.

The plant communities were delineated on an aerial photograph, classified in accordance with those described in the MSHCP, and then digitized into GIS Arcview. The Arcview application was used to compute the area of each plant community in acres

2.5 PLANTS
Common plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unusual and less-familiar plants were photographed in the field and identified in the laboratory using taxonomic guides. Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows the 2012 Jepson Manual (Hickman 2012). In this report, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only).

Methodology
identified on aerialphotographs during the literature review were verifiedby walkingmeandering transects through the plant communities and along boundaries betweenplant communities.

All plant and wildlife species observed, as well as dominant plant species within eachplant community, were recorded. Plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field. Unusual andless familiar plant species were photographed during the field survey and identified in the laboratory using taxonomical guides. Wildlife detections were made through observation of scat, trails, tracks, burrows, nests, and/or visual and aural observation. In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, condition of on-site plant communities, and presence of potential jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were noted.

Special attention was given to special-status habitats and/or undeveloped areas, which have higher potentials to support special-status plant and wildlife species. Areas providing suitable habitat for burrowing owl were closely surveyed for signs ofpresence during the field survey. Methods to detect the presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence including pellets, whitewash, feathers,or prey remains. Methods to detect the presenceofLos Angeles pocket mouse included assessing the suitability of on-site habitats, direct observation, and signs of presence including potential burrows.

2.3 SOILS SERIES ASSESSMENT
On-site and adjoining soils were researchedprior to the field survey using the USDA NRCS Soil Survey for Western Riverside Area, California. In addition, a review of the local geological conditions and historical aerial photographs was conducted to assess the ecological changes that the project site and offsite improvement areashave undergone. 24 PLANT COMMUNITIES
Plant communities were mapped using 7.5-minute USGS topographic basemaps and aerial photography.

2.5 PLANTS
Common plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unusual and less-familiar plants were photographedinthe fieldandidentifiedinthe laboratory using taxonomic guides.Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows the 2012 JepsonManual (Hickman 2012). In this report, scientific names are provided immediately following common names ofplant species (first reference only).

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 8
902
Methodology
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 9

2.6 WILDLIFE
Wildlife species detected during field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other sign were recorded during surveys in a field notebook. Field guides were used to assist with identification of wildlife species during the survey included The Sibley Field Guide to the Birds of Western North America (Sibley 2003), A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003), and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Although common names of wildlife species are well-standardized, scientific names are provided immediately following common names in this report (first reference only).

2.7 JURISDICTIONAL DRAINAGES AND WETLANDS
Aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting a field investigation in order to locate and inspect any potential natural drainage features, ponded areas, or water bodies that may fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or CDFW. In general, surface drainage features indicated as blue-line streams on USGS maps that are observed or expected to exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and are also subject to state and federal regulatory jurisdiction. In addition, ELMT reviewed jurisdictional waters information through examining historical aerial photographs to gain an understanding of the impact of land-use on natural drainage patterns in the area. The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers were also reviewed to determine whether any hydrologic features and wetland areas have been documented on or within the vicinity of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

Methodology

2.6 WILDLIFE
Wildlife speciesdetectedduringfieldsurveysby sight,calls,tracks,scat,or other signwererecordedduring surveys in a field notebook. Field guides were used to assist with identification of wildlife species during the survey included The Sibley Field Guide to the Birds of WesternNorth America (Sibley 2003), A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003), and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Although commonnamesof wildlife species are well-standardized, scientific names areprovided immediately following commonnamesin this report (first reference only).

2.7 JURISDICTIONAL DRAINAGES AND WETLANDS
Aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting a field investigation in order to locate and inspect any potential natural drainage features,ponded areas, or water bodies that may fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps ofEngineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or CDFW. In general, surface drainage features indicated asblue-line streams onUSGS maps that are observed or expected to exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and are also subject to state and federal regulatory jurisdiction. In addition, ELMT reviewed jurisdictional waters information through examininghistorical aerialphotographs to gain anunderstanding of the impact of land-use on natural drainagepatterns in the area. The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers were also reviewed to determine whether any hydrologic features and wetland areas have been documented on or within the vicinity of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 9
903
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 10
Section 3 Existing Conditions

3.1 LOCAL CLIMATE
Western Riverside County features a somewhat cooler version of a Mediterranean climate, or semi-arid climate, with warm, sunny, dry summers and cool, rainy, mild winters. Relative to other areas in Southern California, winters are colder with frost and with chilly to cold morning temperatures common.

Climatological data obtained from nearby weather stations indicates the annual precipitation averages 11.2 inches per year. Almost all of the precipitation in the form of rain occurs in the months between December and March, with hardly any occurring between the months of April and November. The wettest month is February, with a monthly average total precipitation of 3.31 inches, and the driest months are June and July, both with monthly average total precipitation of 0.04 inch. The average maximum and minimum temperatures are 82.6 and 46.5 degrees Fahrenheit (° F) respectively with July and August (monthly average high 100° F) being the hottest months and December (monthly average low 34° F) being the coldest. The temperature during the site visit was in the high-60s°F with clear skies and calm winds.

3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS
The project site and off-site improvement areas are relatively flat and are located at an approximate elevation of 1,565 to 1,620 feet above mean sea level. Topographical relief is provided by a paved road (Wilmot Street) that transects the western portion of the site from north to south, the off-site improvement roads that border the project site, a low berm that extends roughly northward from the middle of the southern boundary, and an earthen flood control channel that directs flows from the northeast corner of the site to the middle of the southern boundary. Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the project site and offsite improvement areas are underlain by the following soil units: Hanford coarse sandy loam (2 to 8 percent slopes), Hanford coarse sandy loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), San Emigdio loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and San Emigdio loam (2 to 8 percent slopes). Refer to Exhibit 4, Soils. Soils on-site have been mechanically disturbed and heavily compacted from historic land uses (i.e., agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and on-site and surrounding development).

Climatological data obtained fromnearby weather stationsindicates the annualprecipitation averages 11.2 inches per year. Almost all of the precipitation in the form ofrain occurs in the months betweenDecember and March, with hardly any occurring between the months of April andNovember. The wettest month is February, with amonthly averagetotalprecipitation of3.31 inches, andthe driest months areJuneand July, both with monthly average total precipitation of 0.04 inch. The average maximum and minimum temperatures are 82.6 and46.5 degreesFahrenheit(°F)respectively withJuly andAugust (monthly average high 100° F) being the hottest months and December (monthly average low 34° F) being the coldest. The temperature during the site visit was in the high-60s°F with clear skies and calm winds.

3.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS
The project site and off-site improvement areas are relatively flat and are located at an approximate elevation of 1,565 to 1,620 feet above mean sea level. Topographical relief is provided by a paved road (Wilmot Street) that transects the westernportion of the site from north to south, the off-site improvement roads thatborder theproject site, alowbermthat extendsroughlynorthward fromthemiddle ofthe southern boundary, and an earthen flood control channel that directs flows from the northeast corner of the site to the middle ofthe southernboundary.Based on theNRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the project site and offsite improvement areasareunderlainby the following soilunits:Hanford coarse sandyloam (2 to 8percent slopes), Hanford coarse sandy loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), SanEmigdio loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and SanEmigdio loam (2 to 8 percent slopes). Refer to Exhibit 4, Soils. Soils on-site have been mechanically disturbed andheavily compacted fromhistoric landuses (i.e., agricultural landuses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and on-site and surrounding development).

3.3 SURROUNDINGLAND USES
Theproject site and off-site improvement areasoccur in an areathat historically supportedagricultural land uses that have been gradually replaced by urban land uses. Land use in the vicinity of the site primarily supportsresidential development withcommercial andindustrial developmentsintermixed. Theproject site and off-site improvement areas are located within a predominantly residential area that is either undeveloped vacant land, open space,residential land, or residential agricultural land. The surrounding areas are describedbelow:
e North: Area north of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is developed with a singleresidential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R2 Residential (R2) and zoned as Residential Agriculture 2 (RA2). The northeast area adjacent to the Project site and off-site improvement areas are currently undeveloped and vacant. The land use is designated as Open BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 10
904
Existing Conditions
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 11
Space/Park (OS) and is zoned as Open Space (OS). Additionally, the northwest area directly adjacent to the Project site and off-site improvement areas is developed with single-family residential, designated as R5 Residential (R5) and zoned as Residential 5 (R5). • South: The area to the south of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is bound by Cactus Avenue and is developed with a single-family residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R10 Residential and zoned as SP-193 Moreno Valley Ranch. • East: The area to the east of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is bound by Redlands Boulevard followed by vacant and undeveloped land designated as Commercial (C) and zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (NC).
• West: The area site to the west of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is undeveloped and developed with a single-family residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as R5 Residential (R5) and is zoned as Residential 5 (R5).

Existing Conditions
Space/Park (OS) and is zoned as Open Space (OS). Additionally, the northwest area directly adjacent to the Project site and off-site improvement areas is developed with single-family residential, designatedasR5 Residential (R5) and zoned asResidential 5 (RS). e South: The areato the south of theProject site and off-site improvement areasis boundby Cactus Avenue and is developedwith a single-family residentialneighborhood. The landuseis designated asR10 Residential and zoned as SP-193 Moreno Valley Ranch. e East: The areato the east of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is boundby Redlands Boulevard followed by vacant and undeveloped land designatedas Commercial (C) and zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (NC).
eo West: The area site to the west of the Project site and off-site improvement areas is undeveloped and developed with a single-family residential neighborhood. The land use is designated as RS Residential (R5) and is zoned asResidential 5 (RS).

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 11
905
SgA
HcC
SgC
SgC
HcD2
GyC2
Soils

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 4 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County 0 125 250 500 O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2)
Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC)
Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2)
San Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA)
San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC)
Legend — Project Site [ Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC) lr/| Street Improvements [ Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2) ER TEN = 1 INN! Proposed City Park Il san Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA) | yA Ta 4 ry [] Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2) San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC) f A ; ‘ N [44 { RE - ZH
Bare GFOdra Vl ho 3 ss aaLaat
CS 8
Sarai. va.

RY
Cady Redlands yhIvo
%
Ce
viaTT 7 ILL oF 7 7 7 TT re FT Cad GET Te nag comsme CACHE AY A CaTInE AVE a EN RE J NE a ar ASCE TL meme ET RT SS

BELAGO PARK
IA 0 125 250 500
Feet Soils
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County as OMNSULTNG
Exhibit 4
906
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 13
Section 4 Discussion

4.1 SITE CONDITIONS
The project site and off-site improvement areas primarily support undeveloped land with some developed areas. The entirety of the site has been subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding developments. Historic aerials show these activities have been ongoing since at least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at some point as well as pavement installed on the off-site street improvements on Redlands Boulevard and Cactus Avenue between 1985 and 1996.

The disturbances outlined above have eliminated the natural plant communities that historically occurred on the project site and off-site improvement areas. As a result, no native plant communities occur on-site, nor will any native plant communities be impacted from implementation of the proposed project. Refer to Appendix A, Site Photographs, for representative site photographs of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

4.2 VEGETATION
No native plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

The project site and off-site improvement areas support one (1) plant community: non-native grassland. In addition, the site supports two (2) land cover types that would be classified as disturbed and developed.

Refer to Exhibit 5, Vegetation. The vegetation community and land cover types are described in further detail below.

4.2.1 Non-Native Grassland
The majority of the project site and off-site improvement areas support non-native grassland that occurs in varying densities throughout the site, except the northeast corner and portions of the site perimeter that support disturbed land. This plant community is dominated by non-native grasses such as oats (Avena spp.) and bromes (Bromus spp.) and supports primarily weedy/early successional species.

The non-native grassland plant community supported by the project site and off-site improvement areas is almost entirely comprised of non-native grasses such as barley (Hordeum vulgare) and bromes (Bromus spp.) with other weedy species interspersed throughout. Common plant species observed in the non-native grassland include black mustard (Brassica nigra), lambs quarters (Chenopodium album), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), lupine (Lupinus bicolor), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), spiny sowthistle (Sonchus asper), stinknet (Oncosiphon pilulifer), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), and tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus). In addition, two gum trees (Eucaluptus sp.) are present near the southeast corner of the site along Redlands Boulevard and a small stand of palo verde (Parkinsonia sp.) are present near the northeast corner of the site along Brodiaea Avenue.

Section 4 Discussion

4.1 SITE CONDITIONS
The project site and off-site improvement areasprimarily support undeveloped land with some developed areas.The entirety of the site hasbeen subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding developments.Historic aerials show theseactivities have been ongoing since at least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at some point as well as pavement installed on the off-site street improvements on Redlands Boulevard and CactusAvenue between 1985 and 1996.

4.2 VEGETATION
No nativeplant communities occur withintheboundaries oftheproject site and off-site improvement areas.

The project site and off-site improvement areas support one (1) plant community: non-native grassland.In addition, the site supports two (2) land cover types that would be classified as disturbed and developed.

Refer to Exhibit 5, Vegetation. The vegetation community and land cover types are described in further detail below.

4.2.1 Non-Native Grassland
The majority of the project site and off-site improvement areas support non-native grasslandthat occurs in varying densities throughout the site, except the northeast corner and portions of the site perimeter that support disturbedland. This plant community is dominatedby non-native grasses such as oats (4vena spp.) andbromes (Bromus spp.) and supports primarily weedy/early successional species.

The non-native grasslandplant community supportedby the project site and off-site improvement areas is almost entirely comprised of non-native grasses such as barley (Hordeum vulgare) and bromes (Bromus spp.) with other weedy species interspersed throughout. Commonplant species observed in the non-native grassland include black mustard (Brassica nigra), lambs quarters (Chenopodium album), London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), lupine (Lupinus bicolor), mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), spiny sowthistle (Sonchusasper), stinknet (Oncosiphonpilulifer), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandiflora), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), and tumbleweed (Amaranthus albus). In addition, two gum trees (Kucaluptus sp.) are present near the southeast corner ofthe site alongRedlandsBoulevard and a small stand of palo verde (Parkinsonia sp.) are present near the northeast corner of the site along Brodiaea Avenue.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 13
907
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 14

4.2.2 Disturbed
Disturbed areas supported by the project site areas occur along site boundaries, adjacent to on-site development, and within and surrounding earthen portions of the on-site flood control channel. Disturbed areas supported by the off-site improvement areas include Brodiaea Avenue, and the majority of the adjacent city park improvement area. These areas vary in vegetative density from unvegetated to densely vegetated and, with the exception of the flood control channel and existing unpaved roads, generally support the same weedy/early successional species observed in the non-native grassland, without dominance by non-native grass species. Disturbed areas supported within the flood control channel are generally barren with the exception of pockets of non-native species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta).

4.3 WILDLIFE
Plant communities provide foraging habitat, nesting and denning sites for wildlife species, and shelter from adverse weather or predation. This section provides a discussion of wildlife species that were observed during the field survey or that are expected to occur within the project site and off-site improvement areas.

The discussion is to be used as a general reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather condition in which the field survey was conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation.

4.3.1 Fish
The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special-status fish species as potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would provide suitable habitat for fish were observed on the project site and off-site improvement areas. While surface water was observed in the flood control channel beneath and adjacent to Redlands Boulevard, this was due to a storm that had passed through the area in the days preceding the field investigation. Outside of the rainy season, the flood control channel does not support sufficient surface water to support fish populations. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur and are presumed to be absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

Discussion

4.2.2 Disturbed
Disturbed areas supported by the project site areas occur along site boundaries, adjacent to on-site development, and within and surrounding earthenportions of the on-site flood control channel. Disturbed areas supported by the off-site improvement areas include Brodiaea Avenue, and the majority of the adjacent city park improvement area. These areas vary in vegetative density from unvegetated to densely vegetatedand,withthe exceptionofthe floodcontrol channelandexistingunpavedroads,generally support the same weedy/early successional species observed in the non-native grassland, without dominance by non-native grass species.Disturbed areas supported within the flood control channel are generally barren with the exception of pockets of non-native species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), and Mexican fanpalm (Washingtonia robusta).

4.2.3 Developed
Developedlandoccursalong siteboundaries, withinon-siteportions ofWilmot Street,andwithinandalong portions of the flood control channel that occur near site boundaries. Developed land supportedby the offsite improvement areas includes the existing roadways including Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Wilmot Street and a concrete slab laid on the northern portion of the adjacentproposed city park improvement area. Developed land supported by the site and off-site improvement areas are generally barren with the exception of the terminus of the flood control channel at Cactus Avenue, which supports emergent saltcedar andblack willow (Salix gooddingii). 43 WILDLIFE
Plant communities provide foraginghabitat, nesting and denning sites for wildlife species,and shelter from adverse weather or predation. This section provides a discussion of wildlife species that were observed during the field survey or that are expectedto occur within the project site and off-site improvement areas.

The discussion is to be used as a generalreference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather condition in which the field survey was conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation.

4.3.1 Fish
The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special-status fish species as potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas.No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that wouldprovide suitable habitat for fish were observed on the project site and off-site improvement areas. While surface water was observed in the flood control channel beneath and adjacent to Redlands Boulevard, this was due to a storm that had passed through the area in the days preceding the field investigation. Outside of the rainy season, the flood control channel does not support sufficient surface water to support fish populations. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur and are presumed to be absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 14
908
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 15

4.3.2 Amphibians
The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special-status amphibian species as potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. During the rainy season, the flood control channel supported by the project may provide limited foraging and cover habitat for local amphibian species adapted to degraded conditions; however, suitable conditions are not present outside of the rainy season. Amphibian species that may be expected to occur on-site include Baja California tree frog (Pseudacris hypochondriaca), slender salamander (Batrachoseps major), and western toad (Anaxyrus boreas). Due to the high level of anthropogenic disturbances on-site, and surrounding development, no special-status amphibian species are expected to occur on-site.

4.3.3 Reptiles
The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special-status reptilian species as potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. The project site and off-site improvement areas provides limited habitat for a few reptile species adapted to degraded conditions and a high degree of human disturbance associated with the on-site weed abatement activities. No reptiles were observed during the field investigation. Common reptilian species that could be expected to occur on-site include common sideblotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans), Great Basin fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis longipes), and San Diego gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer annectens). Due to the high level of anthropogenic disturbances on-site, and surrounding development, no special-status reptilian species are expected to occur on-site.

4.3.4 Birds
In accordance with the MSHCP, the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl. The project site and off-site improvement areas provides suitable foraging habitat and limited nesting habitat for bird species adapted to a high degree of human disturbance.

Avian species detected during the field survey include mountain bluebird (Sialia currucoides), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), common raven (Corvus corax), Say's phoebe (Sayornis saya), white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), and Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna).

4.3.5 Mammals
In accordance with the MSHCP, the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designated survey area for Los Angeles pocket mouse. The project provides limited foraging and denning habitat for mammalian species adapted to degraded conditions and routine anthropogenic disturbance.

Mammalian species observed during the field investigation included coyote (Canis latrans), pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi).

Other common mammalian species expected to occur include opossum (Didelphis virginiana) and domestic cat (Felis catus).

Discussion

4.3.2 Amphibians
The MSHCP doesnot identify any covered or special-status amphibian species aspotentially occurring on theproject site andoff-site improvement areas.During therainy season,the floodcontrol channel supported by the project may provide limited foraging and cover habitat for local amphibian species adapted to degradedconditions; however, suitable conditions arenot present outside of the rainy season. Amphibian species that may be expected to occur on-site include Baja California tree frog (Pseudacris hypochondriaca), slender salamander (Batrachoseps major), and western toad (Anaxyrus boreas). Due to the high level of anthropogenic disturbances on-site, and surrounding development, no special-status amphibian species are expected to occur on-site.

4.3.3 Reptiles
The MSHCP does not identify any covered or special-status reptilian species as potentially occurring on the project site and off-site improvement areas. The project site and off-site improvement areasprovides limited habitat for a few reptile species adapted to degraded conditions and a high degree of human disturbance associated with the on-site weed abatement activities. No reptiles were observed during the fieldinvestigation. Commonreptilian species that couldbe expectedto occur on-site include common sideblotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans), Great Basin fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis longipes), and San Diego gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer annectens). Due to the high level of anthropogenic disturbanceson-site, and surrounding development,no special-statusreptilian speciesareexpectedto occur on-site.

4.3.4 Birds
In accordance with the MSHCP, the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designatedsurvey areafor burrowing owl. Theproject site andoff-site improvement areasprovides suitable foraginghabitat and limitednestinghabitat for bird species adaptedto ahigh degreeofhuman disturbance.

4.3.5 Mammals
In accordance with the MSHCP, the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designatedsurvey area for Los Angeles pocket mouse. The project provides limited foraging and denning habitat for mammalian species adapted to degraded conditions and routine anthropogenic disturbance.

Mammalian species observedduring the fieldinvestigation included coyote (Canis latrans),pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi).

Other commonmammalian speciesexpectedto occurinclude opossum(Didelphis virginiana) anddomestic cat (Felis catus).

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 15
909
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 16

4.4 NESTING BIRDS
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was conducted outside of the breeding season. Several remnant swallow (family Hirundinidae) nests were observed beneath the bridge that spans the flood control channel at Redlands Boulevard. No swallows were observed during the field investigation. Although heavily disturbed, the gum trees in the southeast portion of the project site and off-site improvement areas have the potential to provide nesting habitat for yearround and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to a high degree of disturbance. In addition, the disturbed habitats have to potential to support birds that nest on the open ground such as killdeer (Charadrius vociferus).

Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs). If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds should be conducted prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.

4.5 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND LINKAGES
Habitat linkages provide links between larger undeveloped habitat areas that are separated by development.

Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for animals to disperse or migrate between areas. A corridor can be defined as a linear landscape feature of sufficient width to allow animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed habitat fragments. Adequate cover is essential for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement area. It is possible for a habitat corridor to be adequate for one species yet inadequate for others. Wildlife corridors are significant features for dispersal, seasonal migration, breeding, and foraging. Additionally, open space can provide a buffer against both human disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources.

The project site and off-site improvement areas have not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages. While flood control channels can provide wildlife movement opportunities for local wildlife, the channel onsite does not support vegetation that would support wildlife movement. In addition, there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the site to a recognized wildlife corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.

4.4 NESTING BIRDS
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was conducted outside of the breeding season. Several remnant swallow (family Hirundinidae) nests were observedbeneaththebridge that spans the flood control channel at RedlandsBoulevard.No swallows were observed during the field investigation. Although heavily disturbed, the gum trees in the southeastportion of the project site and off-site improvement areas have the potential to provide nesting habitat for yearround and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adaptedto ahigh degreeof disturbance.In addition, the disturbedhabitats have to potential to supportbirds that nest on the open ground such askilldeer (Charadrius vociferus).

Nestingbirds areprotectedpursuant to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and CaliforniaFish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs).If construction occurs between February 1%and August 31%, apre-construction clearancesurvey for nestingbirds shouldbe conductedprior to the startofany vegetationremoval or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.

4.5 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS AND LINKAGES
Habitat linkagesprovide links betweenlarger undevelopedhabitat areasthat are separatedby development.

Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for animals to disperse or migrate between areas.A corridor canbe defined as a linear landscape feature of sufficient width to allow animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed habitat fragments. Adequate cover is essential for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement area.It is possible for ahabitat corridor to be adequate for one species yet inadequate for others. Wildlife corridors are significant features for dispersal, seasonal migration, breeding, and foraging. Additionally, open space can provide a buffer against both human disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources.

The project site and off-site improvement areashave not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The proposedproject will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages. While flood control channels can provide wildlife movement opportunities for local wildlife, the channel onsite does not support vegetation that would support wildlife movement. In addition, there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the site to a recognized wildlife corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.

4.6 STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps RegulatoryBranchregulates dischargeof dredgeand/or fill materials into “waters of the United States” pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers andHarbors Act. Ofthe State agencies,theRegionalBoardregulates dischargesinto surface waters pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and the BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 16
910
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 17
CDFW regulates alterations to streambed and associated plant communities pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code.

The National Wetlands Inventory does not depict any water resources on or immediately bordering the project site and off-site improvement areas. Additionally, no blueline streams, ponded areas, pits, or water features have been documented on the topographic maps for the project site and off-site improvement areas.

A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site at Redlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering off-site to the south. The onsite drainage feature is designated as Line F by the RCFCD.

According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed to accommodate storm flows associated with the agricultural activities that once occurred within and surrounding the site. This drainage receives flows via a box culvert under Redlands Boulevard. This drainage exits the middle of the southern boundary of the project site where it flows into four box culverts under Cactus Avenue. Drainage 1 receives flows via direct precipitation, road runoff, and from the discharge of waters east of the project site.

Approximately 0.37 acre (1,296 linear feet) of Corps and Regional Board jurisdiction, and approximately

1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of CDFW jurisdictional waters occur within boundaries of the project site, consisting of 0.37 acre of jurisdictional streambed and 1.03 acre of associated streambed that includes the banks of the channel.

The project proposes to improve RCFCD Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing of Redlands Boulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existing pipe culvert crossing. The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; Regional Board CWA Section Report of Waste Discharge; and CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA).

4.7 SPECIAL-STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A records search was conducted for reported locations of special-status plant and wildlife species as well as natural communities of special concern in the Sunnymead USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. One quadrangle was used due to the proximity of the site to quadrangle boundaries and regional topography. Special-status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site and off-site improvement areas based on habitat requirements, availability, and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Thirteen (13) special status plant species, seventy (70) special-status wildlife species, and one (1) special-status plant communities have been recorded in the Sunnymead USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle.

Discussion
CDFWregulates alterations to streambedandassociatedplant communities pursuant to Section 1602 ofthe California Fish and Game Code.

The National Wetlands Inventory does not depict any water resources on or immediately bordering the project site and off-site improvement areas.Additionally, no blueline streams,ponded areas,pits, or water featureshavebeen documentedon the topographic maps for theproject site andoff-site improvement areas.

A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site atRedlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feetbefore veering off-site to the south. The onsite drainage feature is designatedasLineF by the RCFCD.

According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed to accommodate storm flows associatedwith the agricultural activities that once occurred within and surrounding the site. This drainagereceives flows via a box culvert under Redlands Boulevard. This drainage exits the middle of the southern boundary of the project site where it flows into four box culvertsunder CactusAvenue. Drainage 1receives flows via direct precipitation, road runoff, and from the discharge of waters eastof the project site.

Approximately 0.37 acre (1,296 linear feet) of Corps and Regional Board jurisdiction, and approximately

1.4 acres (1,296 linear feet) of CDFW jurisdictional waters occur within boundaries of the project site, consisting of 0.37 acre of jurisdictional streambedand 1.03 acre of associated streambedthat includes the banks of the channel.

The project proposes to improve RCFCD Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel as apart of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing ofRedlandsBoulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existing pipe culvert crossing. The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; Regional Board CWA Section Report of Waste Discharge; and CDFW Section 1602 StreambedAlteration Agreement (SAA).

4.7 SPECIAL-STATUS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A records searchwas conducted for reported locations of special-statusplant and wildlife species as well asnatural communities of special concernin theSunnymeadUSGS 7.5-minute quadrangle.One quadrangle was used due to the proximity of the site to quadrangle boundaries and regional topography. Special-status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site and off-site improvement areas based on habitat requirements, availability, and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Thirteen (13) special statusplant species, seventy (70) special-status wildlife species,and one (1) special-statusplant communities have been recorded in the SunnymeadUSGS 7.5-minute quadrangle.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 17
911
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 18
Species determined to have the potential to occur within the general vicinity are provided in Appendix B\, Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources.

4.7.1 Special-Status Plants
According to the CNDDB and CNPS, thirteen (13) special-status plant species have been recorded in the Sunnymead quadrangle (refer to Appendix B). No special-status plant species were observed on the project site and off-site improvement areas during the field investigation. The project site and off-site improvement areas have been subject to decades of anthropogenic disturbances which have removed native plant communities that historically occurred. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined that of the 13 special-status plant species the site has a potential to support only paniculate tarplant (Deinandra paniculata). It was further determined that the site does not have potential to support any of the other special-status plant species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent.

Paniculate tarplant is neither federally nor state listed as threatened or endangered. It is designated as a CNPS Rare Plant Rank 4.2. It is not listed as a covered species under the MSHCP. While the historic and ongoing land uses supported by the project site and off-site improvement areas have removed the natural plant communities that once occurred in the area, paniculate tarplant is known for tolerating disturbed conditions and is commonly found in similar areas in western Riverside County. Further, local records indicate that this species is known to occur in the vicinity of the site. Therefore, paniculate tarplant was determined to have a low potential to occur within the project. The project site and off-site improvement areas are isolated from known occupied areas and aforementioned observations are scant and widespread.

Although no paniculate tarplant were found onsite during the field survey, any future growth of paniculate tarplant on-site prior to project construction is not expected to contribute to the long-term conservation of the value for the species. No further surveys related to this species are recommended.

4.7.2 Special-Status Wildlife
According to the CNDDB, seventy (70) special-status wildlife species have been reported in the Sunnymead quadrangle (refer to Appendix B). No special-status wildlife species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined further that the project site and off-site improvement areas has a high potential to support Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), Costa’s hummingbird (Calypte costae), and California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia); and a low potential to support great egret (Ardea alba), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber), snowy egret (Egretta thula), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). It was further determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas donot have the potential to support any of the other special-status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent.

None of the other species are federally or state listed as threatened or endangered. In addition, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, California horned lark, great blue heron, burrowing owl, red-diamond rattlesnake, and loggerhead shrike are covered species under the MSHCP. Of the avian species, only Cooper’s hawk, Costa’s hummingbird, California horned lark, and burrowing owl might be expected to Discussion
Species determined to have the potential to occur within the general vicinity areprovided in Appendix B\, Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources.

4.7.1 Special-StatusPlants
According to the CNDDB and CNPS, thirteen (13) special-statusplant specieshave been recorded in the Sunnymeadquadrangle(refer to Appendix B). No special-statusplant species were observedon the project site and off-site improvement areasduring the fieldinvestigation. Theproject site and off-site improvement areas have been subject to decades of anthropogenic disturbances which have removed native plant communities that historically occurred. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined that of the 13 special-statusplant species the site has a potential to support only paniculate tarplant (Deinandrapaniculata). It was further determined that the site doesnot have potential to support any of the other special-statusplant speciesknown to occur in the vicinity of the site and all arepresumed to be absent.

Paniculate tarplant is neither federally nor state listed as threatened or endangered. It is designated as a CNPS Rare Plant Rank 4.2. It is not listed as a covered speciesunder the MSHCP. While the historic and ongoing land uses supportedby the project site and off-site improvement areas have removed the natural plant communities that once occurred in the area, paniculate tarplant is known for tolerating disturbed conditions and is commonly found in similar areas in western Riverside County. Further, local records indicate that this species is known to occur in the vicinity of the site. Therefore, paniculate tarplant was determined to have a low potential to occur within the project. The project site and off-site improvement areas are isolated from known occupied areas and aforementioned observations are scant and widespread.

Althoughno paniculate tarplant were found onsite during the field survey, any future growth ofpaniculate tarplant on-site prior to project construction is not expectedto contribute to the long-term conservation of the value for the species.No further surveys related to this species arerecommended.

4.7.2 Special-StatusWildlife
According to the CNDDB, seventy(70) special-statuswildlife specieshavebeenreportedin theSunnymead quadrangle (refer to Appendix B). No special-status wildlife species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined further that the project site and off-site improvement areashas a highpotential to support Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus), Costa’s hummingbird(Calypte costae), andCaliforniahornedlark (Eremophila alpestris actia); andalowpotential to support great egret(Ardea alba), greatblueheron(Ardea herodias),burrowing owl(Athene cunicularia), red-diamondrattlesnake(Crotalus ruber), snowy egret(Egretta thula), westernmastiffbat (Fumopsperotis californicus), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). It was further determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas donot have the potential to support any of the other special-status wildlife speciesknown to occur in the vicinity of the site and all arepresumed to be absent.

None of the other species are federally or state listed as threatened or endangered.In addition, Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, California horned lark, great blue heron, burrowing owl, red-diamond rattlesnake, and loggerhead shrike are covered species under the MSHCP. Of the avian species, only Cooper’s hawk, Costa’s hummingbird, California horned lark, and burrowing owl might be expected to BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 18
912
Discussion
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 19
nest on-site. Sharp-shinned hawk do not nest in the region, and no suitable nesting habitat is present for great egret, great blue heron, snowy egret, and loggerhead shrike.

To ensure impacts to aforementioned avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted during the nesting bird season prior to ground disturbance. With implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species would be less than significant.

4.7.3 Special-Status Plant Communities
The CNDDB lists one (1) special-status plant community as being identified within the Sunnymead quadrangle: Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland, which does not occur on the project site and off-site improvement areas. No CDFW special-status plant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

4.8 CRITICAL HABITAT
Under the federal Endangered Species Act, “Critical Habitat” is designated at the time of listing of a species or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species. Maintenance of these physical and biological features requires special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or not. All federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which may affect a federally listed species or its designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that projects will not jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing is on federal lands, uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highways Administration or a CWA Permit from the Corps). If there is a federal nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS.

The project site and off-site improvement areas are not located with federally designated Critical Habitat (Exhibit 6, Critical Habitat). The nearest designated Critical Habitat is located approximately 3.12 miles to the southeast for northwest for spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossallis).

Discussion
nest on-site. Sharp-shinnedhawk do not nest in the region, and no suitable nesting habitat is present for great egret, great blue heron, snowy egret, and loggerhead shrike.

To ensure impacts to aforementioned avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, apre-constructionnesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted during the nesting bird season prior to ground disturbance. With implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species wouldbe less than significant.

4.7.3 Special-StatusPlant Communities
The CNDDB lists one (1) special-status plant community as being identified within the Sunnymead quadrangle: Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland, which does not occur on the project site and off-site improvement areas.No CDFW special-statusplant communities occur within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

4.8 CRITICAL HABITAT
Under the federalEndangeredSpeciesAct, “CriticalHabitat” is designatedat the time oflisting ofa species or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a speciesat the time it is listed that include thephysical or biological featuresthat areessentialto the survival andeventualrecovery ofthat species.Maintenance ofthesephysical andbiological featuresrequires special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or not. All federal agencies arerequired to consult with theUSFWS regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which may affect a federally listed species or its designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that projects will not jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing is on federal lands, uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highways Administration or a CWA Permit from the Corps). If there is a federal nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS.

The project site and off-site improvement areas are not located with federally designatedCritical Habitat (Exhibit 6, CriticalHabitat). The nearest designatedCritical Habitat is located approximately 3.12 miles to the southeast for northwest for spreadingnavarretia (Navarretiafossallis).

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 19
913
Vegetation

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 5 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500 O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Disturbed
Non-Native Grassland
Developed
Brod aga=Ave a rer
| mm Disturbed
Non-Native Grassland
[| Developed
5 NNN il iNN, SN 14327 Redlands Biva\
Pek3
Caw Ee. FD) CHEELUSTATE CEGITS AVE
| | ] BR 'BELAGO PARK
0 125 250 500 . A Feet Vegetation
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 5 OMNSULTNG 914
Critical Habitat

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 6
O
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, USFWS Critical Habitat, Riverside County 0 0.5 1 2
Miles
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Spreading navarretia
Thread-leaved brodiaea
Legend
[1] Project Site Ie Spreading navarretia
”o Street Improvements J Thread-leaved brodiaea
2 BELAGO PARK
Miles Critical Habitat
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, USFWS Critical Habitat, Riverside County Exhibit 6 2 Wh
[4=
z
915
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 22
Section 5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis
The project site and off-site improvement areas are located in the Sun City/Moreno Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas (Exhibit 7, MSHCP Conservation Areas). Additionally, the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the MSHCP designated survey areas for burrowing owl and Los Angeles pocket mouse.

Since the City of Moreno Valley is a permittee under the MSHCP and, while the project is not specifically identified as a Covered Activity under Section 7.1, Covered Activities Outside Criteria Area and PQP Lands, of the MSHCP, public and private development that are outside of Criteria Areas and Public/QuasiPublic (PQP) 3 Lands are permitted under the MSHCP, subject to consistency with MSHCP policies that apply to area outside of Criteria Areas. As such, to achieve coverage, the project must be consistent with the following policies of the MSHCP:
• The policies for the protection of species associated with Riparian/Riverine areas and vernal pools as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP;
• The policies for the protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species as set forth in Section 6.1.3; • The Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4; and • The requirements for conducting additional surveys as set forth in Section 6.3.2

5.1 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AREAS AND VERNAL POOLS

5.1.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas
As defined under Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools, riparian/riverine areas are areas dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent plants, or emergent mosses and lichens which occur close to or are dependent upon nearby freshwater, or areas with freshwater flowing during all or a portion of the year. Conservation of these areas is intended to protect habitat that is essential to a number of listed or special-status water-dependent fish, amphibian, avian, and plant species. Any alteration or loss of riparian/riverine habitat from development of a Project will require the preparation of a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis to ensure the replacement of any lost functions and values of habitats in regards to the listed species. This assessment is independent from considerations given to waters of the United States and waters of the State under the CWA, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CDFW jurisdictional streambed under the California Fish and Game Code.

As previously noted, One (1) unnamed ephemeral drainage feature/flood control channel was observed onsite that will qualify as riparian/riverine habitat under the MSHCP. The existing flood control channel is 3 PQP Lands are a subset of MSHCP Conservation Area lands totaling approximately 347,000 acres of lands known to be in public/private ownership and expected to be managed for open space value and/or in a manner that contributes to the Conservation of Covered Species (including lands contained in existing reserves). The acreage of PQP Lands has been accounted for in the MSHCP tracking process for assembling the Conservation Area.

Section 5 MSHCP Consistency Analysis
The project site and off-site improvement areas are located in the Sun City/Moreno Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP but is not located within any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas (Exhibit 7, MSHCP ConservationAreas).Additionally,theproject siteandoff-siteimprovementareasarelocatedwithintheMSHCP designatedsurveyareas for burrowing owl andLos Angelespocketmouse.

Since the City ofMoreno Valley is a permittee under the MSHCP and, while the project is not specifically identified as a Covered Activity under Section 7.1, Covered Activities Outside Criteria Area andPOP Lands, of theMSHCP,public andprivate development that are outside of Criteria Areas andPublic/QuasiPublic (PQP)* Lands are permitted under the MSHCP, subject to consistency with MSHCP policies that apply to area outside of Criteria Areas. As such, to achieve coverage, the project must be consistent with the followingpolicies of the MSHCP:
e The policies for the protection of species associatedwithRiparian/Riverine areas and vernalpools as set forth in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP;
e The policies for the protection ofNarrow Endemic Plant Species as set forth in Section 6.1.3; eo The Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines as set forth in Section 6.1.4; and e The requirements for conducting additional surveys as set forth in Section 6.3.2

5.1 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AREAS AND VERNAL POOLS

5.1.1 Riparian/Riverine Areas
As defined under Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, Protection ofSpeciesAssociated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and VernalPools, riparian/riverine areas are areas dominated by trees, shrubs,persistent emergent plants, or emergent mosses and lichens which occur close to or are dependent upon nearby freshwater, or areaswith freshwater flowing during all or aportion of the year. Conservation of these areasis intended to protect habitat that is essential to a number of listed or special-status water-dependent fish, amphibian, avian, and plant species. Any alteration or loss ofriparian/riverine habitat from development of a Project will require the preparation of a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) analysis to ensure the replacement of any lost functions and values of habitats in regards to the listed species.This assessmentis independent from considerations given to waters of theUnited Statesand waters of the State under the CWA, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CDFW jurisdictional streambedunder the CaliforniaFish and Game Code.

As previously noted, One (1) unnamed ephemeral drainage feature/flood control channel was observed onsitethatwill qualify asriparian/riverinehabitatunderthe MSHCP.Theexistingflood controlchannelis 3 PQPLands are a subset of MSHCP ConservationArea lands totaling approximately 347,000 acres of lands known to be in public/private ownership and expected to be managed for open space value and/or in a manner that contributes to the ConservationofCoveredSpecies(including lands containedin existingreserves). The acreageofPQPLands hasbeenaccounted for in theMSHCPtrackingprocess for assemblingtheConservationArea.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 22
916
MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 23
proposed to be improved from an earthen channel to a concrete lined channel. A DBESP has been prepared under separate cover to document the mitigation for the loss of riparian/riverine habitat.

5.1.2 Vernal Pools
Vernal pools are seasonally inundated, ponded areas that only form in regions where specialized soil and climatic conditions exist. During fall and winter rains typical of Mediterranean climates, water collects in shallow depressions where downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of a hard pan or clay pan layer (duripan) below the soil surface. Later in the spring when rains decrease and the weather warms, the water evaporates and the pools generally disappear by May. The shallow depressions remain relatively dry until late fall and early winter with the advent of greater precipitation and cooler temperatures.

Vernal pools provide unusual "flood and drought" habitat conditions to which certain plant and wildlife species have specifically adapted as well as invertebrate species such as fairy shrimp.

One of the factors for determining the suitability of the habitat for fairy shrimp would be demonstrable evidence of seasonal ponding in an area of topographic depression that is not subject to flowing waters.

These astatic pools are typically characterized as vernal pools. More specifically, vernal pools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depression areas without a continual source of water. They have wetland indicators of all 3 parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetland indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Obligate hydrophytes and facultative wetlands plant species are normally dominant during the wetter portion of the growing season. The determination that an area exhibits vernal pool characteristics and the definition of the watershed supporting vernal pool hydrology is made on a case-by-case basis. Such determinations should consider the length of time the area exhibits upland and wetland characteristics and the manner in which the area fits into the overall ecological system as a wetland. The seasonal hydrology of vernal pools provides for a unique environment, which supports plants and invertebrates specifically adapted to a regime of winter inundation, followed by an extended period when the pool soils are dry.

The MSHCP lists two general classes of soils known to be associated with special-status plant species; clay soils and Traver-Domino Willow association soils. The specific clay soils known to be associated with special-status species within the MSHCP plan area include Bosanko, Auld, Altamont, and Porterville series soils, whereas Traver-Domino Willows association includes saline-alkali soils largely located along floodplain areas of the San Jacinto River and Salt Creek. Without the appropriate soils to create the impermeable restrictive layer, none of the special-status species associated with vernal pools can occur on the project site and off-site improvement areas. Exeter sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and Madera fine sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes) are mapped as historically underlying the project site and off-site improvement areas. In addition, agricultural land uses spanning much of the past century have thoroughly mixed and compacted on-site soils, such that conditions suitable for the formation of vernal pools are no longer present.

A review of recent and historic aerial photographs (1985-2023) of the project site and off-site improvement areas did not provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernal pool conditions within the project site. Ponding was observed within the flood control channel; however, this was due to a storm that had passed through the vicinity of the site in the days leading up to the field investigation. No surface water was present outside of the flood control channel, further supporting the fact that the drainage patterns currently occurring on MSHCP Consistency Analysis
proposed to be improved from an earthenchannel to a concretelined channel. ADBESP hasbeenprepared under separatecover to document the mitigation for the loss ofriparian/riverine habitat.

5.1.2 Vernal Pools
Vernal pools are seasonally inundated, ponded areas that only form in regions where specialized soil and climatic conditions exist. During fall and winter rains typical of Mediterranean climates, water collects in shallow depressions where downward percolation of water is prevented by the presence of a hard pan or clay pan layer (duripan) below the soil surface. Later in the spring when rains decrease and the weather warms, the water evaporates and the pools generally disappear by May. The shallow depressions remain relatively dryuntil late fall andearly winter withthe advent ofgreaterprecipitation andcooler temperatures.

Vernal pools provide unusual "flood and drought" habitat conditions to which certainplant and wildlife specieshave specifically adaptedaswell asinvertebrate species such as fairy shrimp.

One of the factors for determining the suitability of the habitat for fairy shrimp would be demonstrable evidence of seasonalponding in an area of topographic depression that is not subject to flowing waters.

These astatic pools are typically characterized as vernalpools. More specifically, vernalpools are seasonal wetlands that occur in depressionareas without a continual source of water. They have wetland indicators of all 3 parameters (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing seasonbut normally lack wetland indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season. Obligate hydrophytes and facultative wetlands plant species are normally dominant during the wetter portion of the growing season. The determination that an area exhibits vernal pool characteristics and the definition ofthe watershedsupporting vernalpoolhydrology is made on a case-by-casebasis. Such determinations should consider the length of time the area exhibits upland and wetland characteristics and the manner in which the area fits into the overall ecological system as a wetland. The seasonalhydrology of vernal pools provides for a unique environment, which supports plants and invertebrates specifically adaptedto aregime of winter inundation, followedby an extendedperiod when the pool soils are dry.

The MSHCEPlists two general classesof soils known to be associatedwith special-statusplant species;clay soils and Traver-Domino Willow association soils. The specific clay soils known to be associated with special-status specieswithin the MSHCPplan areaincludeBosanko, Auld, Altamont, andPorterville series soils, whereas Traver-Domino Willows association includes saline-alkali soils largely located along floodplain areas of the San Jacinto River and Salt Creek. Without the appropriate soils to create the impermeable restrictive layer, none of the special-status species associatedwith vernal pools can occur on the project site and off-site improvement areas.Exeter sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), andMadera fine sandy loam (0 to 2 percent slopes) are mapped as historically underlying the project site and off-site improvement areas.In addition, agricultural landuses spanning much of the past century have thoroughly mixed and compacted on-site soils, such that conditions suitable for the formation of vernal pools are no longer present.

A review ofrecent andhistoric aerialphotographs (1985-2023) of theproject site and off-site improvement areas didnot provide visual evidence of an astatic or vernalpool conditions within the project site. Ponding was observed within the flood control channel; however, this was due to a storm that had passedthrough the vicinity ofthe site in the daysleadingup to the fieldinvestigation.No surfacewater waspresent outside of the flood control channel, further supportingthe fact that the drainagepatterns currently occurring on BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 23
917
MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 24
the project site and off-site improvement areas do not follow hydrologic regimes needed for vernal pools.

From this review of historic aerial photographs and observations during the field investigations, it can be concluded that there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat occurring within the proposed project site and off-site improvement areas. Therefore, the project is consistent with Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

Below is a summary of the fairy shrimp known to occur in Western Riverside County and their potential to occur on-site.

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni)
Riverside fairy shrimp are restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools, vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and stock ponds and other human modified depressions The prefer warm-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are less predictable, and remained filled for extended periods of time. Basins that support Riverside fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of the year, but usually are filled by late fall, winter or spring rains, and may persist through May. Know habitat occur within annual grasslands, which may be interspersed through chaparral or coastal sage scrub vegetation. In Riverside County, Riverside fairy shrimp have been found in pools formed over the following soils: Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series, Wyman clay loam, and Willows soils.

No soils that are known to support Riverside fairy shrimp occur on the project site and off-site improvement areas. Furthermore, no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed during the field investigation, and no ponding was observed on historic aerials during the wet season due to existing activities onsite. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp.

Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp (Linderiella santarosae) Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp are restricted to seasonal southern basalt flow vernal pools with cool clear to milky waters that are moderately predictable and remain filled for extended periods of time and are known only from vernal pool on the Santa Rosa Plateau. Since the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within the known area where Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp have been documented, and no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on site, Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp are not expected to occur onsite. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
Vernal pool fairy shrimp are restricted to seasonal vernal pools (vernal pools and alkali vernal pools) and prefer cool-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, are unpredictable, and often short lived.

The vernal pool fairy shrimp is known from four locations in Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area:

Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, Salt Creek, and the vicinity of the Pechanga Indian Reservation.

Since the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or adjacent to the four known populations, and no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on-site, the project site and off-site improvement areas were determined not to provide suitable habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp.

MSHCP Consistency Analysis
the project site and off-site improvement areas do not follow hydrologic regimes needed for vernal pools.

From this review of historic aerial photographs and observations during the field investigations, it can be concluded that there is no indication of vernal pools or suitable fairy shrimp habitat occurring within the proposedproject site and off-site improvement areas.Therefore, the project is consistentwith Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

Below is a summary of the fairy shrimp known to occur in WesternRiverside County and their potential to occur on-site.

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni)
Riverside fairy shrimp are restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools, vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and stockponds andother humanmodifieddepressionsThe prefer warm-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, arelesspredictable, andremained filled for extendedperiods of time. Basins that support Riverside fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of the year, but usually are filled by late fall, winter or spring rains, and may persist through May. Know habitat occur within annual grasslands, which may be interspersedthrough chaparral or coastal sagescrub vegetation.In Riverside County,Riverside fairy shrimp have been found in pools formed over the following soils: Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series, Wyman clay loam, and Willows soils.

No soils that areknownto supportRiverside fairy shrimp occur on theproject site andoff-site improvement areas. Furthermore, no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed during the field investigation, and no ponding was observed on historic aerials during the wet seasondue to existing activities onsite. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp.

SantaRosa Plateau fairy shrimp (Linderiella santarosae) SantaRosaPlateau fairy shrimp arerestricted to seasonal southernbasalt flow vernalpools with cool clear to milky waters that are moderately predictable and remain filled for extended periods of time and are known only from vernal pool on the SantaRosa Plateau. Since the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within the known area where SantaRosaPlateau fairy shrimp have been documented, and no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on site, SantaRosa Plateau fairy shrimp are not expected to occur onsite. Therefore, the site was determined not to provide suitable habitat for SantaRosaPlateau fairy shrimp.

Vernalpool fairy shrimp(Branchinectalynchi)
Vernal pool fairy shrimp are restricted to seasonal vernal pools (vernal pools and alkali vernal pools) and prefer cool-water pools that have low to moderate dissolved solids, areunpredictable, andoften short lived.

The vernalpool fairy shrimp is known from four locations in WesternRiverside CountyMSHCPPlanArea:

Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, Salt Creek, and the vicinity of the Pechanga Indian Reservation.

Since the project site and off-site improvement areas arenot located within or adjacent to the four known populations, and no indicators of water ponding or astatic water conditions were observed on-site, the project site and off-site improvement areas were determined not to provide suitable habitat for vernal pool fairy shrimp.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 24
918
MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 25

5.2 NARROW ENDEMIC PLANT SPECIES
Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP, Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species, states that the MSHCP database does not provide sufficient detail to determine the extent of the presence/distribution of Narrow Endemic Plant Species within the MSHCP Plan Area. Additional surveys may be needed to gather information to determine the presence/absence of these species to ensure that appropriate conservation of these species occurs. Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within any designated survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species.

5.3 URBAN/WILDLANDS INTERFACE GUIDELINES
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface, is intended to address indirect effects associated with development in proximity to MSHCP Conservation Areas. The Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are intended to ensure that indirect project-related impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Area, including drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized. The project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the proposed project will not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.

5.4 ADDITIONAL MSHCP CONSIDERATIONS
In accordance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, additional surveys may be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. The query of the RCA MSHCP Information Map and review of the MSHCP determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl, and Los Angeles pocket mouse. No other special-status wildlife species surveys were identified.

Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl is currently designated as a California Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with level to gently-sloping areas characterized by open vegetation and bare ground. The western burrowing owl (A.c. hypugaea), which occurs throughout the western United States including California, rarely digs its own burrows and is instead dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (i.e., California ground squirrels, coyotes, and badgers) whose burrows are often used for roosting and nesting. The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes, and dry culverts. They also require low growth or open vegetation allowing line-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage and watch for predators. In California, the burrowing owl breeding season extends from the beginning of February through the end of August.

MSHCP Consistency Analysis

5.2 NARROW ENDEMIC PLANT SPECIES
Section6.1.3 oftheMSHCP,Protection ofNarrowEndemicPlantSpecies,statesthat the MSHCP database doesnot provide sufficient detail to determine the extent of the presence/distribution of Narrow Endemic Plant Species within the MSHCP Plan Area. Additional surveys may be needed to gather information to determine the presence/absence of these species to ensure that appropriate conservation of these species occurs.Based on the RCA MSHCP Information Map query and review of the MSHCP, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within any designated survey area for Narrow Endemic Plant Species.

5.3 URBAN/WILDLANDSINTERFACE GUIDELINES
Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP, Guidelines Pertaining to Urban/Wildlands Interface, is intended to address indirect effects associated with development in proximity to MSHCP Conservation Areas. The Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines are intended to ensure that indirect project-related impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Area, including drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, invasive plant species, barriers, and grading/land development, are avoided or minimized. The project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or in close proximity of any Criteria Cells or designated conservation areas. Therefore, the proposedproject will not need to comply with the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines.

5.4 ADDITIONAL MSHCP CONSIDERATIONS
In accordance with Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, additional surveysmay be needed for certain species in order to achieve coverage for these species. The query of the RCA MSHCP Information Map and review of the MSHCP determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the designated survey area for burrowing owl, and Los Angeles pocket mouse. No other special-statuswildlife species surveys were identified.

Burrowing Owl
Burrowing owl is currently designatedas a California Speciesof Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a grasslandspecialist distributed throughout westernNorth America where it occupies open areaswith short vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grasslandenvironments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with level to gently-sloping areas characterized by open vegetation and bare ground. The western burrowing owl (4.c. hypugaea), which occurs throughout the western United States including California, rarely digs its own burrows and is instead dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (i.e., California ground squirrels, coyotes, and badgers) whose burrows are often used for roosting and nesting. The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such asburied and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes,and dry culverts. They alsorequire low growth or open vegetation allowingline-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage and watch for predators. In California, the burrowing owl breeding seasonextends from the beginning ofFebruary through the end of August.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 25
919
MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 26
Under the MSHCP, burrowing owl is considered an adequately conserved covered species that may still require focused surveys in certain areas as designated in Figure 6-4 of the MSHCP. The project site and off-site improvement areas occur within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area and a habitat assessment was conducted for the species to ensure compliance with MSHCP guidelines for the species. In accordance with the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (2006), survey protocol consists of two steps, Step I – Habitat Assessment and Step II – Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls. The following section describes the methodology followed during the burrowing owl habitat assessment conducted for this project. • Step I – Habitat Assessment: Step 1 of the MSHCP habitat assessment for burrowing owl consists of a walking survey to determine if suitable habitat is present onsite. The habitat assessment was conducted on January 26, 2023. Upon arrival at the project site and off-site improvement areas, and prior to initiating the assessment survey, binoculars were used to scan all suitable habitats on and adjacent to the property, including perch locations, to establish owl presence.

All suitable areas of the project site and off-site improvement areas were surveyed on foot by walking slowly and methodically while recording/mapping areas that may represent suitable owl habitat onsite. Primary indicators of suitable burrowing owl habitat in western Riverside County include, but are not limited to, native and non-native grassland, interstitial grassland within shrub lands, shrub lands with low density shrub cover, golf courses, drainage ditches, earthen berms, unpaved airfields, pastureland, dairies, fallow fields, and agricultural use areas. Burrowing owls typically use burrows made by fossorial mammals, but they often utilize man-made structures, such as earthen berms, cement culverts, cement, asphalt, rock, wood debris piles, openings beneath cement or asphalt pavement. Burrowing owls are often found within, under, or in close proximity to man-made structures.

According to the MSHCP guidelines, if suitable habitat is present, the biologist should also walk the perimeter of the property, which consists of a 150-meter (approximately 500 feet) buffer zone around the project site boundary. If permission to access the buffer area cannot be obtained, the biologist shall not trespass, but visually inspect adjacent habitats with binoculars. In addition to surveying the entire Project Site all bordering natural habitats located immediately adjacent to the Project Site were assessed. Results from the habitat assessment indicate that suitable resources for burrowing owl are present throughout the Project Site. Accordingly, if suitable habitat is documented onsite or within adjacent habitats, both Step II, focused surveys and the 30-day preconstruction surveys are required in order to comply with the MSHCP guidelines. • Step II – Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls: Concurrent with the initial habitat assessment, a detailed focused burrow survey was conducted and included documentation of appropriately sized natural burrows or suitable man-made structures that may be utilized by burrowing owl - as part of the MSHCP protocol, which is described below under Part A, Focused Burrow Survey.

Additionally, since suitable burrows were observed onsite during the Focused Burrow Survey, Focused Burrowing Owl Surveys were conducted as part of the MSCHP protocol, which is described below under Part B.
o Part A – Focused Burrow Survey: A systematic survey for burrows, including burrowing owl signs, was conducted by walking across all suitable habitats mapped within the project MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Under the MSHCP, burrowing owl is considered an adequately conserved covered species that may still require focused surveys in certain areas as designatedin Figure 6-4 of the MSHCP. The project site and off-site improvement areas occur within the MSHCP burrowing owl survey area and a habitat assessment was conducted for the species to ensure compliance with MSHCP guidelines for the species. In accordance with the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (2006), survey protocol consists of two steps,Step1 —Habitat AssessmentandStepII —LocatingBurrows andBurrowingOwls. The following sectiondescribes the methodology followed during the burrowing owl habitat assessment conducted for this project. eo Step I — Habitat Assessment: Step 1 of the MSHCP habitat assessment for burrowing owl consists of a walking survey to determine if suitable habitat is present onsite. The habitat assessment was conductedon January 26, 2023.Upon arrival at theproject site and off-site improvement areas, and prior to initiating the assessment survey, binoculars were used to scanall suitable habitats on and adjacent to the property, includingperch locations, to establish owlpresence.

All suitable areas of theproject site and off-site improvement areas were surveyedon foot by walking slowly and methodically while recording/mapping areas that may represent suitable owl habitat onsite. Primary indicators of suitable burrowing owl] habitat in western Riverside County include, but are not limited to, native and non-native grassland, interstitial grassland within shrub lands, shrub lands with low density shrub cover, golf courses, drainage ditches, earthen berms, unpaved airfields, pastureland, dairies, fallow fields, and agricultural use areas.Burrowing owls typically useburrowsmadeby fossorialmammals,but they oftenutilize man-made structures,such as earthen berms, cement culverts, cement, asphalt, rock, wood debris piles, openings beneath cement or asphaltpavement. Burrowing owls are often found within, under, or in close proximity to man-made structures.

According to the MSHCP guidelines, if suitable habitat is present, the biologist should also walk the perimeter of the property, which consists of a 150-meter (approximately 500 feet) buffer zone around the project site boundary. If permission to access the buffer area cannot be obtained, the biologist shall not trespass, but visually inspect adjacent habitats with binoculars. In addition to surveying the entire Project Site all bordering natural habitats located immediately adjacent to the Project Site were assessed.Results from the habitat assessmentindicate that suitable resources for burrowing owl are present throughout the Project Site. Accordingly, if suitable habitat is documented onsite or within adjacent habitats, both Step II, focused surveys and the 30-day preconstruction surveys arerequired in order to comply with the MSHCP guidelines. eo Step II — LocatingBurrows andBurrowing Owls: Concurrent with the initial habitat assessment, a detailed focusedburrow survey was conducted and included documentation of appropriately sized naturalburrows or suitable man-made structures that may be utilizedby burrowing owl - aspart of the MSHCP protocol, which is described below under Part A, Focused Burrow Survey.

Transect routes were also adjusted to account for topography and in general ground surface visibility. Areas providing potential habitat for burrowing owls were surveyed for suitable burrows, consisting of natural and non-natural substrates in areas with low, open vegetation. All burrows encountered were examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and nonnatural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. o Part B – Focused Burrow Survey: Due to surrounding development to the north, south, and west, a zone of influence was not able to be surveyed. Areas east of the project site within 500 feet, east of Redlands Boulevard, were surveyed from public right of way with binoculars. Survey transects on the project site and off-site improvement areas were oriented east to west and were conducted at a maximum of 30-meter (approximately 100 feet) intervals to ensure 100% visual coverage of all areas in suitable habitat on the project site, off-site improvement areas, and within the survey area. The focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted during the recognized timeframe (the breeding season is typically March through August) in the morning one hour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise.

Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non-natural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. All burrows encountered were examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. The location of all suitable burrowing owl habitat, potential owl burrows, burrowing owl sign, and any owls observed were recorded and mapped, with a hand-held GPS unit, if observed. Methods to detect presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence. Binoculars were used to observe distant birds and their activity around potential nesting habitat. During the focused surveys, the survey area was assessed on foot by qualified biologists Jacob H. Lloyd Davies and Rachael A. Lyons who are knowledgeable in the habitats and behavior of burrowing owls.

Four focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted on June 27, July 7, July 18, and July 26, 2023. All surveys were completed between 0600 and 0930. The surveys were conducted to document the presence/absence of burrowing owl on the project site and offsite improvement areas. Refer to Table 1, Burrowing Owl Survey Data, for a summary of the survey dates and times, personnel, weather conditions, and general findings.

MSHCP Consistency Analysis
site on January 26, 2023. Pedestrian survey transects were spaced to allow 100% visual coverage of the ground surface. The distancesbetween transect centerlines were no more than30meters (approximately 100 feet) apart, and owingto the terrain, oftenmuch smaller.

PartB —FocusedBurrow Survey: Due to surrounding development to thenorth, south, and west, a zone of influence wasnot able to be surveyed. Areas eastof the project site within 500 feet, east of Redlands Boulevard, were surveyed from public right of way with binoculars. Survey transects on the project site and off-site improvement areas were oriented east to west and were conducted at a maximum of 30-meter (approximately 100 feet) intervals to ensure100% visual coverageof all areasin suitable habitat on the project site, off-site improvement areas, and within the survey area. The focused burrowing owl surveys were conducted during the recognized timeframe (the breeding seasonis typically March through August) in the morning one hour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise.

Suitable burrows/sites, including rock piles and non-natural substrates, were thoroughly examined for signs of presence. All burrows encounteredwere examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. The location of all suitable burrowing owl habitat,potential owl burrows, burrowing owl sign, and any owls observed were recorded and mapped, with a hand-held GPS unit, if observed. Methods to detect presence of burrowing owls included direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence.Binoculars were used to observe distant birds and their activity aroundpotential nesting habitat. During the focused surveys, the survey area was assessed on foot by qualifiedbiologists JacobH. LloydDavies andRachael A. Lyons who areknowledgeable in the habitats andbehavior ofburrowing owls.

Four focusedburrowing owl surveys were conducted on June27, July 7, July 18, and July 26, 2023. All surveys were completed between 0600 and 0930. The surveys were conducted to document the presence/absenceofburrowing owl on the project site and offsite improvement areas.Refer to Table 1,Burrowing OwlSurveyData, for a summary of the survey dates and times, personnel, weather conditions, and general findings.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 27
921
MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 28
Table 1: Burrowing Owl Survey Data
Survey
No.

Survey
Date Surveyors Time Temperature(˚F)
Cloud
Cover
Wind
Speed
(mph)
Burrowing
Owl Detected
On-Site
1 6/27/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 52-74 0% 1-3 No
2 7/7/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 70-84 0% 1-5 No
3 7/18/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0600-
1100 65-80 0% 1-5 No
4 7/26/23 Jacob H. Lloyd Davies
and Rachael A. Lyons
0830-
1030 82-96 0% 1-5 No
Based on the results of the 2023 burrowing owl focused surveys, no burrowing owls or evidence of recent or historic use by burrowing owls were observed on the project site and off-site improvement areas. As a result, burrowing owls are presumed to be absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

To ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas, it is recommended that a 30-day burrowing owl pre-construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls and/or birds displaying nesting behaviors are observed within the project site and off-site improvement areas during future construction, further review may be needed to ensure compliance with the MSHCP, MBTA and Fish and Game Code.

Los Angeles Pocket Mouse (LAPM)
The habitat of the LAPM is confined to lower elevation grasslands and coast sage scrub habitats, in areas with soils composed of fine sands. The present known distribution of this species extends from Rancho Cucamonga east to Morongo and south to the San Diego County border. LAPM forages in open ground and underneath shrubs. Pocket mice in general dig burrows in loose soil, although this has not been completely documented for this subspecies. The LAPM is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the CDFW.

The Project site and off-site improvement areas contain non-native grassland and disturbed and developed land. The parcels contain developed/disturbed land as mapped by the Western Riverside MSHCP (Vegetation 2012). Habitat on site is not what is typically associated with LAPM. While soils underlying the southwest portion of the site are mapped as being sandy loam that is preferred by LAPM, there are no plant communities present that would offer shelter and forage preferred by this species. The non-native ruderal weeds and cereal grain crop found on site are not the typical alluvial fan scrub and coastal scrub habitat where this species occurs. No burrows potentially occupied by small mammals such as LAPM were observed at the site. Occupation by LAPM at the site is not likely. No trapping studies are recommended.

MSHCP Consistency Analysis
Table 1: Burrowing Owl Survey Data
Temperature
om mE eb |
[om |Reto 00 | sw
si ARID 090 sy |g us |
| AIA 00s us |
Based on the results of the 2023 burrowing owl focused surveys,no burrowing owls or evidence ofrecent or historic use by burrowing owls were observed on the project site and off-site improvement areas.As a result, burrowing owls arepresumed to be absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas.

To ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site and off-site improvement areas, it is recommended that a 30-day burrowing owl pre-construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat ConservationPlanArea prior to any grounddisturbing activities. If burrowing owls and/orbirds displaying nesting behaviors are observed within the project site and off-site improvement areas during future construction, further review may be needed to ensure compliance with the MSHCP, MBTA and Fish and Game Code.

Los Angeles Pocket Mouse (LAPM)
The habitat of the LAPM is confined to lower elevation grasslands and coast sage scrub habitats, in areas with soils composed of fine sands. The present known distribution of this species extends from Rancho Cucamonga east to Morongo and south to the SanDiego County border. LAPM forages in open ground and underneath shrubs. Pocket mice in general dig burrows in loose soil, although this has not been completely documented for this subspecies. The LAPM is listed as a Species of Special Concern by the CDFW.

The Project site and off-site improvement areas containnon-native grasslandand disturbed and developed land. The parcels contain developed/disturbed land as mapped by the Western Riverside MSHCP (Vegetation 2012). Habitat on site is not what is typically associatedwith LAPM. While soils underlying the southwestportion of the site are mapped asbeing sandy loam that is preferred by LAPM, there areno plant communities present that would offer shelter and forage preferred by this species. The non-native ruderal weeds and cereal grain crop found on site are not the typical alluvial fan scrub and coastal scrub habitat where this species occurs.No burrows potentially occupiedby smallmammals such asLAPM were observedat the site. Occupationby LAPM at the site is not likely.No trapping studies arerecommended.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 28
922
MSHCP Criteria Area

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 7
O
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County
841 836 831
1364 1370
1577
1483
747 746 743
1377
1482
0 1,250 2,500 5,000
Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Criteria Cells
PQP Conserved Lands
=
[| Project Site
£2] Street Improvements
NN Proposed City Park
[1] Criteria Cells
[ PQP Conserved Lands
Sm deSs
rd

BELAGO PARK
AE | N/T] a — MSHCP Criteria Area
wits} CONSULTING =
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 7 923
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 30
Section 6 Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan
Separate from the consistency review against the policies of the MSHCP, Riverside County established a boundary in 1996 for protecting the Stephens’ kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), a federally endangered and state threatened species. The Stephens’ kangaroo rat is protected under the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (County Ordinance No. 663.10; SKR HCP). As described in the MSHCP Implementation Agreement, a Section 10(a) Permit, and California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Management Authorization were issued to the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) for the Long-Term SKR HCP and was approved by the USFWS and CDFW in August 1990 (RCHCA 1996). Relevant terms of the SKR HCP have been incorporated into the MSHCP and its Implementation Agreement. The SKR HCP will continue to be implemented as a separate HCP; however, to provide the greatest conservation for the largest number of Covered Species, the Core Reserves established by the SKR HCP are managed as part of the MSHCP Conservation Area consistent with the SKR HCP. Actions shall not be taken as part of the implementation of the SKR HCP that will significantly affect other Covered Species. Take of Stephens’ kangaroo rat outside of the boundaries but within the MSHCP area is authorized under the MSHCP and the associated permits.

The project site and off-site improvement areas are located within the Mitigation Fee Area of the SKR HCP but are not located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas. Since the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas, no focused SKR surveys or on-site mitigation would be required. On-site mitigation is only recommended in Ordinance 663.10 when a site is located within or adjacent to a Core Reserve Area. As a result, the applicant will only be required to pay the SKR HCP Mitigation Fee prior to development of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

Section 6 Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Plan
Separate from the consistency review against the policies of the MSHCP, Riverside County establisheda boundary in 1996 for protecting the Stephens’kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), a federally endangered and state threatened species. The Stephens’ kangaroo rat is protected under the Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan (County Ordinance No. 663.10; SKR HCP). As described in the MSHCP Implementation Agreement, a Section 10(a) Permit, and California Fish and Game Code Section 2081 Management Authorization were issued to the Riverside County Habitat Conservation Agency (RCHCA) for the Long-Term SKR HCP and was approved by the USFWS and CDFW in August 1990 (RCHCA 1996). Relevant terms of the SKR HCP have been incorporated into the MSHCP and its Implementation Agreement. The SKR HCP will continue to be implemented as a separateHCP; however, to provide the greatest conservation for the largest number of Covered Species,the Core Reserves establishedby the SKR HCP are managed aspart of the MSHCP Conservation Area consistent with the SKR HCP. Actions shall not be taken as part of the implementation of the SKR HCP that will significantly affect other Covered Species.Take ofStephens’kangaroo rat outside oftheboundariesbut withintheMSHCP areais authorized under the MSHCP and the associatedpermits.

Theproject site and off-site improvement areasarelocatedwithin theMitigationFeeArea ofthe SKRHCP but arenot located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas. Since the project site and off-site improvement areas are not located within or adjacent to any of the Core Reserve Areas, no focused SKR surveys or on-site mitigation would be required. On-site mitigation is only recommended in Ordinance 663.10 whena site is located within or adjacentto a Core ReserveArea. As aresult, the applicant will only be required to pay the SKR HCP Mitigation Fee prior to development of the project site and off-site improvement areas.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 30
924
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 31
Section 7 Conclusion and Recommendations
The discussion below provides a summary of survey results; avoidance and minimization efforts; direct, indirect, and cumulative project impacts; and compensatory mitigation measures for each biological resource area required to be analyzed according to CEQA, based on Appendix G (Environmental Checklist Form) of the CEQA Guidelines:

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
Special-Status Plant Species
No special-status plant species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for the identified special-status species, known species distributions, and the quality and availability of habitats present, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement area have a low potential to support paniculate tarplant. The proposed project will be confined to existing developed and heavily disturbed areas that have been subject to several decades of agricultural activities, and the site is isolated from known occupied areas. Although no paniculate tarplant were found onsite during the field surveys, any future growth of paniculate tarplant on-site prior to project construction is not expected to contribute to the long-term conservation of the value for the species. . No additional surveys are recommended.

Special-Status Wildlife Species
Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined further that the project site and off-site improvement areas has a high potential to support Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, Costa’s hummingbird, and California horned lark; and a low potential to support great egret, great blue heron, burrowing owl, red-diamond rattlesnake, snowy egret, western mastiff bat, and loggerhead shrike. It was further determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas does not have the potential to support any of the other special-status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity of the site and all are presumed to be absent.

To ensure impacts to aforementioned avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance if construction occurs during nesting season. With implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species will be less than significant.

Recommendations for avoidance and minimization:

1. Prior to grading or construction activities, including vegetation removal, occuring between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.

The Project Applicant shall ensure that impacts to nesting bird species at the project site Section 7 Conclusion and Recommendations
The discussion below provides a summary of survey results; avoidance and minimization efforts; direct, indirect, and cumulative project impacts; and compensatory mitigation measures for each biological resource area required to be analyzed according to CEQA, based on Appendix G (Environmental Checklist Form) of the CEQA Guidelines:

CEQA Threshold: WouldtheproposedProject have a substantialadverseeffect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identifiedas a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regionalplans,policies, or regulations, or by the CaliforniaDepartment ofFish and Wildlife or the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service?
Special-StatusPlant Species
No special-statusplant specieswere observedduring the field investigation. Based onhabitat requirements for the identified special-status species, known species distributions, and the quality and availability of habitats present, it was determined that the project site and off-site improvement areahave a low potential to support paniculate tarplant. The proposed project will be confined to existing developed and heavily disturbed areas that have been subject to several decades of agricultural activities, and the site is isolated from known occupied areas. Although no paniculate tarplant were found onsite during the field surveys, any future growth of paniculate tarplant on-site prior to project construction is not expected to contribute to the long-term conservation of the value for the species. . No additional surveys are recommended.

Special-Status Wildlife Species
Based onhabitat requirements for specific speciesand the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined further that the project site and off-site improvement areas has a high potential to support Cooper’s hawk, sharp-shinnedhawk, Costa’shummingbird, andCaliforniahornedlark; and alowpotential to support great egret, great blue heron, burrowing owl, red-diamond rattlesnake, snowy egret, western mastiffbat, and loggerhead shrike. It was further determined that the project site and off-site improvement areas doesnot have the potential to support any of the other special-status wildlife speciesknown to occur in the vicinity of the site and all arepresumed to be absent.

To ensure impacts to aforementioned avian species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance if construction occurs during nesting season. With implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned species will be less than significant.

Recommendations for avoidance and minimization:

1. Prior to grading or construction activities, including vegetationremoval, occuringbetween February 1st and August 31st, apre-construction clearance survey for nestingbirds should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.

The Project Applicant shall ensure that impacts to nesting bird species at the project site BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 31
925
Conclusion and Recommendations
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 32
and off-site improvement areas are avoided through the implementation of preconstruction surveys, ongoing monitoring, and if necessary, establishment of minimization measures.

The Project Applicant shall adhere to the following:
a. Applicant shall designate a biologist (Designated Biologist) experienced in: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques, recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and nest success; determining/establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimization measures.
b. Surveys shall be conducted by the Designated Biologist at the appropriate time of day/night, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of project activities. Surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs, bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the project site and off-site improvement areas; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shall be sufficient to ensure the data collected is complete and accurate.

If a nest is suspected, but not confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall establish a disturbance-free buffer until additional surveys can be completed, or until the location can be inferred based on observations. If a nest is observed, but thought to be inactive, the Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest for one hour (four hours for raptors during the non-breeding season) prior to approaching the nest to determine status. The Designated Biologist shall use their best professional judgement regarding the monitoring period and whether approaching the nest is appropriate.

If an active avian nest is confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall immediately establish a conservative avoidance buffer surrounding the nest based on their best professional judgement and experience. The Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such project activities (e.g., increase in number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy of the buffer. If the Designated Biologist determines that such project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the Designated Biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within these buffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished (i.e., the juveniles are surviving independent from the nest). The onsite qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found. Upon completion of the survey and nesting bird monitoring, a report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Moreno Valley for mitigation monitoring compliance record keeping.

Conclusion andRecommendations
and off-site improvement areasare avoided through the implementation ofpreconstruction surveys, ongoing monitoring, and if necessary, establishment of minimization measures.

The Project Applicant shall adhereto the following:
a. Applicant shalldesignateabiologist (DesignatedBiologist) experiencedin: identifying local and migratory bird species of special concern; conducting bird surveys using appropriate survey methodology; nesting surveying techniques,recognizing breeding and nesting behaviors, locating nests and breeding territories, and identifying nesting stages and nest success; determining/establishing appropriate avoidance and minimization measures; and monitoring the efficacy of implemented avoidance and minimizationmeasures.
b. Surveys shall be conducted by the Designated Biologist at the appropriate time of day/night, during appropriate weather conditions, no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of project activities. Surveys shall encompass all suitable areas including trees, shrubs,bare ground, burrows, cavities, and structures. Survey duration shall take into consideration the size of the project site and off-site improvement areas; density, and complexity of the habitat; number of survey participants; survey techniques employed; and shallbe sufficient to ensurethe datacollectedis complete and accurate.

If a nest is suspected, but not confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall establish a disturbance-freebuffer until additional surveys canbe completed, or until the location canbe inferred based on observations. If a nest is observed, but thought to be inactive, the Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest for one hour (four hours for raptors during the non-breeding season)prior to approaching the nest to determine status.The Designated Biologist shall use their best professional judgement regarding the monitoringperiod and whether approaching the nest is appropriate.

If an active avian nest is confirmed, the Designated Biologist shall immediately establish a conservative avoidance buffer surrounding the nest based on their best professional judgement and experience. The Designated Biologist shall monitor the nest at the onset of project activities, and at the onset of any changes in such project activities (e.g., increasein number or type of equipment, change in equipment usage, etc.) to determine the efficacy ofthebuffer. If theDesignatedBiologist determinesthat such project activities may be causing an adverse reaction, the Designated Biologist shall adjust the buffer accordingly or implement alternative avoidance and minimization measures, such as redirecting or rescheduling construction or erecting sound barriers. All work within thesebuffers will be halted until the nesting effort is finished (i.e., the juveniles are surviving independent from the nest). The onsite qualified biologist will review and verify compliance with these nesting avoidance buffers and will verify the nesting effort has finished. Work can resume within these avoidance areas when no other active nests are found. Upon completion of the survey and nesting bird monitoring, a report shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Moreno Valley for mitigationmonitoring compliance recordkeeping.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 32
926
Conclusion and Recommendations
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 33
CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Riparian Habitat and Special-Status Natural Communities A flood control channel was observed transecting the site from the northeast limits to the middle of the southern boundary. The onsite ephemeral drainage feature is not relatively permanent, standing, or a continuously flowing body of water and, therefore, will not qualify as waters of the United States under the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v. EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336). However, the onsite drainage feature will qualify was waters of the State and fall under the regulatory authority of the Regional Board and CDFW.

The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; Regional Board Report of Waste Discharge; and CDFW Section 1602 SAA.

Further, no sensitive habitats were identified within the Project site and off-site improvement areas. Thus, no sensitive natural communities will be impacted from Project implementation.

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Federally Protected Wetlands
No inundated areas, wetland features, or wetland plant species that would be considered wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur within the proposed Project footprint. As a result, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any impacts or have substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Wildlife Corridors
The project site and off-site improvement areas have not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors. Therefore, the project site and off-site improvement areas do not function as a major wildlife movement corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to have a significant impact to wildlife movement opportunities or prevent local wildlife movement through the area. Due to the lack of any identified impacts to wildlife movement, migratory corridors or linkages or native wildlife nurseries, no mitigation is required. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.

Conclusion andRecommendations
CEQA Threshold: Would theproposedProject have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regionalplans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department ofFish andGame or USFish and Wildlife Service? RiparianHabitat andSpecial-Status Natural Communities
A flood control channel was observed transecting the site from the northeast limits to the middle of the southern boundary. The onsite ephemeral drainage feature is not relatively permanent, standing, or a continuously flowingbody of water and, therefore, willnot qualify as waters of theUnited Statesunder the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v. EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336). However, the onsite drainage feature will qualify was waters of the State and fallunder the regulatory authority of the Regional Board and CDFW.

The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; RegionalBoardReport of WasteDischarge; and CDFW Section 1602 SAA.

Further, no sensitive habitats were identified within the Project site and off-site improvement areas. Thus, no sensitive natural communities will be impacted from Project implementation.

CEQA Threshold: Would theproposedProject have a substantial adverse effect onfederally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Federally Protected Wetlands
No inundatedareas,wetland features, or wetlandplant speciesthat wouldbe considered wetlands asdefined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur within the proposed Project footprint. As a result, implementation of the proposedProject would not result in any impacts or have substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use ofnative wildlife nursery sites? Wildlife Corridors
The project site and off-site improvement areashave not been identified as occurring in a wildlife corridor or linkage. The proposedproject will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated from regional wildlife corridors. Therefore, the project site and off-site improvement areas do not function asamajor wildlife movement corridor orlinkage. As such,implementationoftheproposedproject is not expected to have a significant impact to wildlife movement opportunities or prevent local wildlife movement through the area. Due to the lack of any identified impacts to wildlife movement, migratory corridors or linkages or native wildlife nurseries, no mitigation is required. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 33
927
Conclusion and Recommendations
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 34
CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Local Policies or Ordinances
There are no local policies or ordinances that pertain to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to local polices or ordinances are not expected to occur from development of the proposed project, and mitigation is not required.

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state Habitat Conservation Plan?
Local, Regional, and State Plans
The project site and off-site improvement areas is located in the within the Sun City/Moreno Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP, but is not located within any designated Criteria Cells or conservation areas. Based on the analysis provided in this report and with completion of recommendations provided below and payment of the MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee, development of the project site will be fully consistent with the MSHCP. Additionally, the project site is also located within the fee area for the SKR HCP. With payment of the Stephen’s kangaroo rat mitigation fee, development of the project will be consistent with the SKR HCP.

Recommendations for avoidance and minimization:

1. In order to comply with the conservation goals of the MSCHP, a 30-day burrowing owl pre-construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls and/or birds displaying nesting behaviors are observed within the project site and off-site improvement areas during future construction, further review may be needed to ensure compliance with the MSHCP, MBTA and Fish and Game Code.

Conclusion andRecommendations
CEQA Threshold: Would theproposedProject conflict with any localpolicies or ordinancesprotecting biologicalresources, such as a treepreservationpolicy or ordinance? LocalPolicies or Ordinances
There are no local policies or ordinances that pertain to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to local polices or ordinances arenot expectedto occur from development of the proposedproject, and mitigation is not required.

CEQA Threshold: Would the proposed Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state Habitat ConservationPlan?
Local, Regional, andStatePlans
The project site and off-site improvement areas is located in the within the Sun City/Moreno Valley Area Plan of the MSHCP,but is not located within any designatedCriteria Cells or conservation areas.Based on the analysisprovided in this report and with completion ofrecommendations providedbelow andpayment of the MSHCP LocalDevelopment MitigationFee, development of the project site will be fully consistent with the MSHCP. Additionally, the project site is also located within the fee area for the SKR HCP. With payment of the Stephen’s kangaroo rat mitigation fee, development of the project will be consistent with the SKR HCP.

Recommendations for avoidance and minimization:

1. In order to comply with the conservation goals of the MSCHP, a 30-day burrowing owl pre-construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with the Burrowing Owl SurveyInstructionsfor the WesternRiversideMultiple SpeciesHabitat ConservationPlan Area prior to any ground disturbing activities. If burrowing owls and/or birds displaying nesting behaviors are observed within the project site and off-site improvement areas during future construction, further review may be needed to ensure compliance with the MSHCP, MBTA andFish and Game Code.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 34
928
Belago Park Center
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 35
Section 8 References
California Burrowing Owl Consortium, 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines.

Accessed on the internet at:
www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/docs/boconsortium.pdf
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (Natural Communities List). Available online at
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/vegcamp/natural_comm_list.asp.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2023. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California. Data Base report on threatened, endangered, rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Sunnymead7.5-minute USGS quadrangle.

California Native Plant Society. 2023. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society.

Sacramento, California. Available at: http://www.cnps.org/inventory.

Google, Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.6.9285, build date 11/7/2022. Historical aerial imagery from 1994 to 2022.

Hickman, J.C., ed. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press.

Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Calif.

Dept. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.

Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.

Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, 1999. Historic Aerials Viewers. Available online at https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.

Riverside County. 2003 (June). Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. http://rctlma.org/
Riverside County. 2006. Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Mulitple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area. Available online at
http://rctlma.org/Portals/1/EPD/consultant/burrowing_owl_survey_instructions.pdf.

Sibley, D.A. 2014. The Sibley Guide to Birds, Second Edition. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York.

Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, New York.

Section 8 References
CaliforniaBurrowing Owl Consortium, 1993.Burrowing OwlSurveyProtocolandMitigation Guidelines.

Accessed on the internet at:
www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/docs/boconsortium.pdf
California Department ofFish and Wildlife (CDFW), 2012. StaffReport onBurrowing OwlMitigation.

California Department ofFish and Wildlife. 2010. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (Natural Communities List). Available online at
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/vegcamp/natural comm list.asp.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2023. RareFind 5, California Natural Diversity Data Base, California. Data Base report on threatened, endangered,rare or otherwise sensitive species and communities for the Sunnymead7.5-minuteUSGS quadrangle.

California Native Plant Society. 2023. Inventory of Rare andEndangeredPlants of California. Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee,DavidP. Tibor, ConveningEditor. CaliforniaNativePlant Society.

Sacramento, California. Available at: http://www.cnps.org/inventory.

Google, Inc. 2021. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.6.9285, build date 11/7/2022. Historical aerial imagery from 1994 to 2022.

Hickman, J.C., ed. 2012. TheJepsonManual:HigherPlants ofCalifornia. University of CaliforniaPress.

Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptions of the TerrestrialNatural Communities of California. Calif.

Dept. of Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.

Munz,P.A. 1974. 4 Flora ofSouthern California. University of CaliforniaPress,Berkeley, California.

Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC, 1999. Historic Aerials Viewers. Available online at https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer.

Riverside County. 2003 (June). Final Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan. http://rctlma.org/
Riverside County. 2006. Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside Mulitple Species Habitat ConservationPlan Area. Available online at
http://rctlma.org/Portals/1/EPD/consultant/burrowing owl survey instructions.pdf.

Sibley, D.A. 2014. The Sibley Guide to Birds, Second Edition. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York.

Stebbins,R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to WesternReptiles and Amphibians, ThirdEdition. HoughtonMifflin Company,New York,New York.

BelagoPark Center
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 35
929
References
Belago Park
Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis 36
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Web Soil Survey. Online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/.

References
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. WebSoil Survey. Online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/.

BelagoPark
Habitat AssessmentandMSHCP Consistency Analysis 36
930
Appendix Appendix A A Site Site Photographs Photographs 931
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Photograph 1: From the northeast corner of the project site looking south along across the site.

Photograph 2: From the northeast corner of the project site looking west along the northern boundary.

Appendix A —SitePhotographs
Photograph 2: From the northeast corner of the project site looking west along the northernboundary. 932
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Photograph 3: From the middle of the project site looking west.

Photograph 4: From the middle of the southern boundary of the project site looking west along the southern boundary.

Appendix A —SitePhotographs
Photograph 3: From the middle of the project site looking west.

Photograph 4: From themiddle ofthe southernboundary oftheproject site lookingwest along the southern boundary.
933
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Photograph 5: From the middle of the southern boundary looking northeast along the existing flood control challe.

Photograph 6: From the southwest corner of the project site looking east.

Appendix A —SitePhotographs
HAN
Photograph 5: From the middle ofthe southernboundary lookingnortheast along the existing flood control challe.

Photograph 6: From the southwest corner of the project site looking east. 934
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Photograph 7: From the southeast corner of the site looking west across the site.

Photograph 8: From the middle of the flood control channel looking southwest.

Appendix A —SitePhotographs
Photograph 7: From the southeast corner of thesitelooking west across the site.

Photograph 8: From the middle of the flood control channel looking southwest. 935
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Photograph 9: Suitable burrow for burrowing owl on the bank of the flood control channel.

Photograph 10: Suitable burrow (>4 inches) for roosting by burrowing owl were observed onsite.

Appendix A —SitePhotographs
Photograph 10: Suitableburrow(>4 inches)forroostingby burrowingowl wereobservedonsite. 936
Appendix B Potentially Occurring Special-Status
Biological Resources
Appendix B Potentially Occurring Special-Status
Biological Resources
937
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Table B-1: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur

SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper’s hawk
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Generally found in forested areas up to 3,000 feet in elevation, especially near edges and rivers. Prefers hardwood stands and mature forests but can be found in urban and suburban areas where there are tall trees for nesting. Common in open areas during nesting season.

Yes No
High
Suitable foraging habitat
and limited nesting
opportunities are present
within the project site.

This species is adapted to
urban environments and
occurs commonly.

Accipiter striatus
sharp-shinned hawk
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Found in pine, fir and aspen forests. They can be found hunting in forest interior and edges from sea level to near alpine areas. Can also be found in rural, suburban and agricultural areas, where they often hunt at bird feeders. Typically found in southern California in the winter months.

Yes No
High
Suitable foraging habitat
is present within the
project site. This species
does not nest in the
region. This species is
adapted to urban
environments and occurs
commonly.

Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
Fed:

CA:

None
THR;
SSC
Range is limited to the coastal areas of the Pacific coast of North America, from Northern California to upper Baja California. Can be found in a wide variety of habitat including annual grasslands, wet and dry vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands, agricultural fields, cattle feedlots, and dairies. Occasionally forage in riparian scrub habitats along marsh borders. Basic habitat requirements for breeding include open accessible water, protected nesting substrate (freshwater marsh dominated by cattails, willows, and bulrushes [Schoenoplectus sp.]), and either flooded or thorny or spiny vegetation and suitable foraging space providing adequate insect prey.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
southern California rufouscrowned sparrow
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Typically found between 3,000 and 6,000 feet in elevation. Breed in sparsely vegetated scrubland on hillsides and canyons. Prefers coastal sage scrub dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), but they can also be found breeding in coastal bluff scrub, low-growing serpentine chaparral, and along the edges of tall chaparral habitats.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Table B-1: Potentially Occurring Special-Status BiologicalResources Habitat
Covered
Potential to Oc
Generally found in forested areas up to 3,000 feet in elevation, especially near edges and rivers. Prefers hardwood stands and High
Suitable foraging habitat
and limitednesting
Accipiter coopertt Fed: None mature forestsbut canbe foundinurbanandsuburbanareaswhere Yes No opportunitiesarepresent Cooper’shawk CA: WL there are tall trees for nesting. Common in open areas during within theproject site. nesting season. This species is adapted to
urbanenvironments and
occurs commonly.

High
Suitable foraging habitat
Foundinpine, fir andaspenforests.They canbe foundhuntingin is presentwithin the Accipiter striatus Fed: None forest interior and edges from sea level to near alpine areas. Can project site. This species . ] also be found in rural, suburban and agricultural areas, where they Yes No doesnot nest in the sharp-shinnedhawk CA: WL oftenhunt atbird feeders.Typically foundinsouthernCaliforniain region. This speciesis thewintermonths. adaptedtourban
environments and occurs
commonly.

Range is limited to the coastal areas of the Pacific coast of North America, from Northern California to upper Baja California. Can be foundin a wide variety of habitat including annual grasslands, wet anddry vernalpools andother seasonalwetlands, agricultural PresumedAbsent Agelaius tricolor Fed: None fields, cattle feedlots, anddairies. Occasionally foragein riparian Thereis no suitable tricoloredblackbird CA: THR; scrub‘habitats along marsh borders. Basic habitat requirements for Yes No habitat present within or colored blackolr : SSC breeding include open accessible water, protectednesting substrate adjacent to the project (freshwater marsh dominated by cattails, willows, and bulrushes site. [Schoenoplectus sp.]), and either flooded or thorny or spiny vegetation and suitable foraging space providing adequate insect prey.

Typically foundbetween3,000 and6,000 feet in elevation.Breed Aimophila ruficeps in sparsely vegetated scrubland on hillsides and canyons.Prefers PresumedAbsent canescens Fed: None coastal sage scrub dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia v N There 1s no suitable southern California rufous- CA: WL californica), but they can also be found breeding in coastal bluff os 0 habitat present within or crowned sparrow scrub, low-growing serpentine chaparral, andalong the edgesoftall adjacent fo theproject chaparral habitats.
[4] 938 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Ammodramus
savannarum
grasshopper sparrow
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in grassland, upland meadow, pasture, hayfield, and old field habitats. Optimal habitat contains short- to medium-height bunch grasses interspersed with patches of bare ground, a shallow litter layer, scattered forbs, and few shrubs. May inhabit thickets, weedy lawns, vegetated landfills, fence rows, open fields, or grasslands.

Yes (e) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Anniella stebbinsi
southern California legless
lizard
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in sparsely vegetated habitat types including coastal sand dunes, chaparral, pine-oak woodland, desert scrub, open grassland, and riparian areas. Requires sandy or loose loamy substrates conducive to burrowing.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Aquila chrysaetos
golden eagle
Fed:

CA:

None
FP; WL
Occupies nearly all terrestrial habitats of the western states except densely forested areas. Favors secluded cliffs with overhanging ledges and large trees for nesting and cover. Hilly or mountainous country where takeoff and soaring are supported by updrafts is generally preferred to flat habitats. Deeply cut canyons rising to open mountain slopes and crags are ideal habitat.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Ardea alba
great egret
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Yearlong resident throughout California, except for the high mountains and deserts. Feeds and rests in fresh, and saline emergent wetlands, along the margins of estuaries, lakes, and slow-moving streams, on mudflats and salt ponds, and in irrigated croplands and pastures.

No No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present within and
adjacent to the project
site. No suitable nesting
opportunities are present.

Ardea herodias
great blue heron
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Forages along streams, marshes, lakes, and meadows. Nests colonially in tall trees (typically Eucalyptus sp.), on cliffsides, or in isolated spots in marshes.

Yes No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present within and
adjacent to the project
site. No suitable nesting
opportunities are present.

Artemisiospiza belli belli
Bell’s sparrow
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Generally prefers semi-open habitats with evenly spaced shrubs 1 – 2 meters in height. Dry chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Less common in tall dense, old chaparral.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Ammodramus
FyWe } —
Occurs in grassland, upland meadow, pasture, hayfield, and old field habitats. Optimal habitat contains short- to medium-height Presumed Absent
There is no suitable Fed: None bunch grasses interspersed with patches of bare ground, a shallow : CE savannarum CA: SSC litter layer, scattered forbs, and few shrubs. May inhabit thickets, Yes(c) No habitatpresentwithinor grasshopper sparrow weedy lawns, vegetated landfills, fence rows, open fields, or adjacent tothe project grasslands. site.

Anniella stebbinsi Occurs in sparsely vegetatedhabitat types including coastal sand PresumedAbsent ce . Fed: None dunes,chaparral,pine-oak woodland, desert scrub,opengrassland, There 1s 10 suitable southern California legless CA: SSC and riparian areas. Requires sandy or loose loamy substrates No No habitat present within or lizard conducive to burrowing. adjacent fo theproject
Occupies nearly all terrestrial habitats of the western states except densely forested areas. Favors secluded cliffs with overhanging Presumed Absent Aquila chrysaetos Fed: None ledges andlarge trees for nesting and cover. Hilly or mountainous v N Thereis no suitable golden eagle CA: FP; WL | country where takeoff and soaring are supported by updrafts is es 0 habitat present within or generally preferred to flat habitats. Deeply cut canyons rising to adjacent tothe project openmountainslopesandcragsareidealhabitat. site.
. . . . Low
Yearlong resident throughout California, except for the high .. . ; Ardea alba Fed: None mountains anddeserts.Feeds andrests in fresh, andsaline emergent Limited foraginghabitat wetlands, along the margins of estuaries, lakes, and slow-moving No No 1s presentwithinand greategret CA: None streams,onmudflats andsaltponds,andinirrigatedcroplandsand adjacenttotheproject pastures. site. No suitable nesting
opportunities are present.

Low
Ardeaherodias Fed: None Forages along streams, marshes, lakes, and meadows. Nests Limited foraging habitat colonially in tall trees (typically Eucalyptus sp.), on cliffsides, or in Yes No Pp : great blue heron CA: None isolated spots in marshes. adjacent to the project site. No suitable nesting
opportunities are present.

Presumed Absent
Artemisiospiza bellibelli Fed: None Generallyprefers semi-openhabitats with evenly spacedshrubs 1 — There is no suitable II's sparrow CA: WL 2 metersin height. Dry chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Less Yes No habitatpresentwithinor Be Pp : common in tall dense, old chaparral. adjacent to the project site.
[4] 939 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Asio flammeus
short-eared owl
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Suitable habitats include salt- and freshwater marshes, irrigated alfalfa or grain fields, and ungrazed grasslands and old pastures.

Tule marsh or tall grasslands with cover 30 to 50 cm in height can support nesting pairs.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Asio otus
long-eared owl
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Hunts mostly at night over grasslands and other open habitats.

Nesting occurs in dense trees such as oaks and willows where it occupies stick nests of other species, particularly raptors or corvids.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Aspidoscelis hyperythra
Orange-throated whiptail
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Semi-arid brushy areas typically with loose soil and rocks, including washes, streamsides, rocky hillsides, and coastal chaparral.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
coastal whiptail
Fed:

CA:

None
SCC
Found in a variety of ecosystems, primarily hot and dry open areas with sparse foliage - chaparral, woodland, and riparian areas. Yes No Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in open, annual or perennial grasslands, deserts, and scrublands characterized by low-growing vegetation. Dependent upon fossorial mammals for burrows, most notable ground squirrels.

Yes (c) No
Low
Although heavily
disturbed, the site
provides line-of-sight
opportunities favored by
burrowing owls. Suitable
burrows (>4 inches) for
roosting are present.

Aythya valisineria
canvasback
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Breeds in small lakes, deep-water marshes, bays, and ponds. Occurs more commonly in waters with a border of dense vegetation, which they use to construct their nests.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Suitable habitats include salt- and freshwater marshes, irrigated Presumed Absent There is no suitable Asioflammeus Fed: None alfalfa or grain fields, andungrazed grasslands and old pastures. No No habi ithi short-earedowl CA: SSC Tulemarshor tall grasslandswith cover 30 to 50 cm inheight can apo preser wit mnor support nestingpairs. adjacent of © project
Presumed Absent
Asio otus Fed: None Hunts mostly at night over grasslands and other open habitats. There is no suitable l dowl CcA SSC Nesting occurs in dense trees such as oaks and willows where it No No habitatpresentwithinor ong-earcd ow: : occupies sticknestsofother species,particularlyraptorsor corvids. adjacentto theproject site.

Presumed Absent
. . . Semi-arid brushy areas typically with loose soil and rocks Thereis no suitable Aspidoscelis h th Fed: N > pt 4 ee oti ol oA. wr including washes, streamsides, rocky hillsides, and coastal Yes No habitatpresentwithinor ange-throated whiptal : chaparral. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Aspidoscelisnigris Fed: None Foundin a varietyof ecosystems,primarily hot anddry openareas Yes No h phere is no suitable nes Lo CA: SCC with sparse foliage- chaparral,woodland,andriparianareas. abitatpresentwithinor coastal whiptail : adjacent to the project
site.

Low
Althoughheavily
Occurs in open, annual or perennial grasslands, deserts, and disturbed,the site Athenecunicularia Fed: None scrublands characterizedby low-growing vegetation. Dependent Yes(¢) No provides line-of-sight burrowingowl CA: SSC upon fossorial mammals for burrows, most notable ground opportunities favoredby squirrels. burrowing owls. Suitable
burrows (>4 inches) for
roosting arepresent.

Presumed Absent
Aythya valisineria Fed: None Breedsinsmalllakes,deep-watermarshes,bays,andponds.Occurs Thereis no suitable canvasback CA: None morecommonlyinwaterswithaborderof densevegetation,which No No habitatpresentwithinor ’ they use to construct their nests. adjacent to the project site.
[4] 940 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
Fed:

CA:

None
Candidate
Exclusive to coastal California east towards the Sierra-Cascade Crest; less common in western Nevada. No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Occurs primarily in open grasslands and fields, but may be found in sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills, or along the edges of pinyon-juniper woodland. Feeds primarily on small mammals and typically found in agricultural or open fields.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Buteo swainsoni
Swainson’s hawk
Fed:

CA:

None
THR
Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in stands with few trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and in oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages in adjacent grassland or suitable grain or alfalfa fields or livestock pastures.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Calypte costae
Costa’s hummingbird
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Desert and semi-desert, arid brushy foothills and chaparral. A desert hummingbird that breeds in the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts.

Departs desert heat moving into chaparral, scrub, and woodland habitats.

No No
High
Suitable foraging habitat
and nesting habitat are
present within and
surrounding the project
site. This species is
adapted to urban
environments and occurs
commonly.

Chaetodipus fallax fallax
northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Occurs in desert and coastal habitats in southern California, Mexico, and northern Baja California, from sea level to at least 1,400 meters. Found in a variety of temperate habitats ranging from chaparral and grasslands to scrub forests and deserts. Requires low growing vegetation or rocky outcroppings, as well as sandy soils for burrowing.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Chaetura vauxi
Vaux's swift
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Prefers redwood and Douglas-fir habitats with nest-sites in large hollow trees and snags, especially tall, burned-out snags. Fairly common migrant throughout most of the state in April and May, and August and September.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources pr «ifn.

Presumed Absent
There is no suitable Bombus crotchii Fed: None Exclusive to coastal California east towards the Sierra-Cascade N N ; Co Crotchbumble bee CA: Candidate | Crest; less common in westernNevada. © © habitat present within or adjacent to the project site.

Occursprimarily inopengrasslandsandfields,butmaybe foundin PresumedAbsent Buteo regalis Fed: None sagebrush flats, desert scrub, low foothills, or along the edges of y N Thereis no suitable ferruginoushawk CA: WL pinyon-juniper woodland.Feedsprimarily on smallmammals and es 0 habitatpresentwithinor typically foundin agricultural or open fields. adjacent fo theproject Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing PresumedAbsent Buteo swainsoni Fed: None scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in stands with few There is no suitable A } treesin juniper-sage flats,riparian areas,andin oak savannahin the Yes No habitatpresentwithinor Swainson’shawk CA: THR Central Valley. Forages in adjacent grassland or suitable grain or adjacentto theproject alfalfa fields or livestock pastures. site.

High
Suitable foraging habitat
Desertandsemi-desert,aridbrushyfoothillsandchaparral.A desert andnestinghabitatare Calyptecostae Fed: None hummingbird that breeds in the Sonoran and Mojave Deserts. N present within and 5 Lo . A o No surrounding the project Costa’s hummingbird CA: None Departs desert heat moving into chaparral, scrub, and woodland . . La habitats. site.This species is adaptedtourban environments and occurs
commonly.

Occurs in desert and coastal habitats in southern California, PresumedAbsent Chaetodipusfallaxfallax Mexico, and northern Baja California, from sea level to at least . f Fed: None 1,400 meters. Foundina variety of temperate habitats ranging from There 1s 0 suitable northwestern SanDiego CA: None chaparral and grasslands to scrub forests and deserts. Requires low Yes No habitat present within or pocketmouse growingvegetationorrocky outcroppings,aswellassandysoils for adjacenttotheproject burrowing. site.

Prefers redwood and Douglas-fir habitats with nest-sites in large Presumed Absent Chaetura vauxi Fed: None hollow trees and snags, especially tall, burned-out snags. Fairly N N Thereis no suitable Vaux's swift CA: SSC commonmigrant throughout most of the state in April andMay, 0 0 habitatpresentwithinor and August and September. adjacent fotheproject site.
[4] 941 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Circus hudsonius
northern harrier
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Frequents meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, desert sinks, fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands; seldom found in wooded areas. Mostly found in flat, or hummocky, open areas of tall, dense grasses moist or dry shrubs, and edges for nesting, cover, and feeding.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
western yellow-billed
cuckoo
Fed:

CA:

THR
END
Obligate riparian species with a primary habitat association of willow-cottonwood riparian forest. Nests are typically placed (72% of the time) in willows (Salix spp.), particularly in black willow (S. gooddingii), red willow (S. laevigata), and sandbar willow (S. exigua). This species typically requires large blocks of intact riparian habitat, with anything less than 37 acres in size and 328 feet wide generally considered unsuitable. Breeding season home ranges can be as much as 100 acres per individual bird. Yellowbilled cuckoos are considered rare anywhere in southern California outside of the Colorado River.

Yes (a) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Coleonyx variegatus
abbotti
San Diego banded gecko
Fed:

CA:

None
SCC
Occurs in coastal and cismontane southern California from interior Ventura County south, although it is absent from the extreme outer coast. It is uncommon in coastal scrub and chaparral, most often occurring in granite or rocky outcrops in these habitats.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Crotalus ruber
red-diamond rattlesnake
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
It can be found from the desert, through dense chaparral in the foothills (it avoids the mountains above around 4,000 feet), to warm inland mesas and valleys, all the way to the cool ocean shore. It is most commonly associated with heavy brush with large rocks or boulders. Dense chaparral in the foothills, cactus or boulder associated coastal sage scrub, oak and pine woodlands, and desert slope scrub associations are known to carry populations of the northern red-diamond rattlesnake; however, chamise and red shank associations may offer better structural habitat for refuges and food resources for this species than other habitats.

Yes No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present within the
project site. Local records
indicate that this species
occurs in the hills to the
southeast.

Diadophis punctatus
modestus
San Bernardino ringneck
snake
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Common in open, relatively rocky areas within valley-foothill, mixed chaparral, and annual grass habitats. No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources PY Frequents meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, desert sinks, fresh and saltwater emergent wetlands; seldom found in wooded «ifn.

Presumed Absent
Clreus There is no suitable ndsonis oo os areas.Mostly found in flat, or hummocky, open areas of tall, dense Yes No habitat present within or : grasses moist or dry shrubs, and edges for nesting, cover, and adjacentto theproject feeding. site.

Obligate riparian species with a primary habitat association of willow-cottonwoodriparian forest.Nests are typically placed (72% of thetime)in willows (Salix spp.),particularlyinblack willow (S.

Coccyzus americanus gooddingii), red willow (S. laevigata), and sandbar willow (S. Presumed Absent occidentalis Fed: THR exigua). This species typically requires large blocks of intact | N Thereis no suitable western yellow-billed CA: END riparianhabitat, withanything less than37 acresin size and328 feet es (a) 0 habitat present within or cuckoo wide generally considered unsuitable. Breeding season home adjacent tothe project ranges can be as much as 100 acres per individual bird. Yellow- site. billed cuckoos are consideredrare anywhere in southern California outside of the Colorado River.

Coleonyxvariegatus Occursincoastalandcismontane southernCalifornia frominterior rome Aen abbotti Fed: None Ventura County south, although it is absent from the extreme outer vy N Jere 1s no suitable . CA: SCC coast. It is uncommon in coastal scrub and chaparral, most often es 0 habitat present within or SanDiego bandedgecko occurring in granite or rocky outcropsin thesehabitats. adjacent fo theproject It can be found from the desert, through dense chaparral in the foothills (it avoids the mountains above around4,000 feet), to warm Low inlandmesasandvalleys,all theway to the cool oceanshore. It is . . ; most commonly associated with heavy brush with large rocks or Limited foraginghabitat Crotalus ruber Fed: None | boulders. Dense chaparral in the foothills, cactus or boulder v ispresent within the . . - . es No project site. Localrecords red-diamondrattlesnake CA: SSC associatedcoastal sage scrub, oak andpine woodlands, anddesert BN ” 5 slope scrub associations are known to carry populations of the indicatethatthis species northernred-diamondrattlesnake; however, chamise andred shank occurs in the hills to the associationsmayofferbetter structuralhabitat forrefugesandfood southeast. resources for this species than other habitats.

Diadophispunctatus PresumedAbsent
modestus Fed: None Common in open, relatively rocky areas within valley-foothill, N N There 1s no suitable SanBernardino ringneck CA: None mixed chaparral,and annualgrasshabitats. 0 0 habitatpresentwithin or snake adjacent fo theproject
site.
[4] 942 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Dipodomys merriami
parvus
San Bernardino kangaroo
rat
Fed:

CA:

END
CE; SSC
Primarily found in Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub and sandy loam soils, alluvial fans and flood plains, and along washes with nearby sage scrub. May occur at lower densities in Riversidian upland sage scrub, chaparral and grassland in uplands and tributaries in proximity to Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub habitats. Tend to avoid rocky substrates and prefer sandy loam substrates for digging of shallow burrows.

Yes (c) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Dipodomys simulans
Dulzura kangaroo rat
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in stands with few trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and in oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages in adjacent grassland or suitable grain or alfalfa fields or livestock pastures.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Dipodomys stephensi
Stephens' kangaroo rat
Fed:

CA:

THR
THR
Occur in arid and semi-arid habitats with some grass or brush.

Prefer open habitats with less than 50% protective cover. Require soft, well-drained substrate for building burrows and are typically found in areas with sandy soil.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Egretta thula
snowy egret
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Widespread in California along shores of coastal estuaries, fresh and saline emergent wetlands, ponds, slow-moving rivers, irrigation ditches, and wet fields. In southern California, common yearlong in the Imperial Valley and along the Colorado River.

No No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present within and
adjacent to the project
site. No suitable nesting
opportunities are present.

Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
Fed:

CA:

None
FP
Occurs in low elevation, open grasslands, savannah-like habitats, agricultural areas, wetlands, and oak woodlands. Uses trees with dense canopies for cover.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Empidonax traillii
willow flycatcher
Fed:

CA:

None
END
A rare to locally uncommon, summer resident in wet meadow and montane riparian habitats (2,000 to 8,000 ft) in the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Range. Most often occurs in broad, open river valleys or large mountain meadows with lush growth of shrubby willows.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Dipodomys merriami
Primarily found in Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub and sandy loam soils, alluvial fans and flood plains, and along washes with nearby sage scrub. May occur at lower densities in Riversidian Presumed Absent
Fed: END There is no suitable
parvus . oA. CE: SSC upland sage scrub, chaparral and grassland in uplands and Yes(¢) No habitatpresentwithinor SanBernardino kangaroo : > tributaries in proximity to Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub adjacentto theproject rat habitats. Tend to avoid rocky substrates and prefer sandy loam site. substrates for diggingof shallowburrows.

Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or cropland containing Presumed Absent Dipodomys simulans Fed: None scattered, large trees or small groves. Breeds in stands with few There is no suitable Dulzurakan. CA: N treesin juniper-sage flats,riparian areas,andin oak savannahin the Yes No habitatpresentwithinor garoorat : one CentralValley. Forages in adjacent grassland or suitable grain or adjacentto theproject alfalfa fields or livestock pastures. site.

P d Absent
Occur in arid and semi-arid habitats with some grass or brush. i Dipodomysstephensi Fed: THR Prefer openhabitats with less than 50%protective cover.Require Yes No here1s no suitable Stephens’kangaroo rat CA: THR soft, well-drained substrate for building burrows and are typically habitat present within or foundinareaswith sandy soil. adjacentfotheproject site.

Low
Widespread in California along shores of coastal estuaries, fresh Limited foraginghabitat Egretta thula Fed: None andsalineemergentwetlands,ponds,slow-movingrivers,irrigation No No is presentwithinand snowyegret CA: None ditches,andwet fields.InsouthernCalifornia,commonyearlongin adjacentto theproject the Imperial Valley and along the Colorado River. site. No suitable nesting opportunities are present.

Presumed Absent
Elanus leucurus Fed: None Occurs in low elevation, open grasslands, savannah-like habitats, Thereis no suitable hite-tailedkit CA: FP agricultural areas, wetlands, and oak woodlands. Uses trees with Yes No habitatpresentwithinor white-tailed kite : densecanopies for cover. adjacentto theproject site.
; ] Presumed Absent
A rare to locally uncommon, summer resident in wet meadow and ] Empidonax traillii Fed: None montaneriparianhabitats (2,000 to 8,000 ft) in the SierraNevada No No Thereis no suitable willow flycatcher CA: END and CascadeRange. Most often occurs in broad, openriver valleys habitat present within or orlargemountainmeadowswithlushgrowthof shrubbywillows. adjacentfotheproject site. [4] 943 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Empidonax traillii extimus
southwestern willow
flycatcher
Fed:

CA:

END
END
Occurs in riparian woodlands in southern California. Typically requires large areas of willow thickets in broad valleys, canyon bottoms, or around ponds and lakes. These areas typically have standing or running water, or are at least moist.

Yes (a) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches, with abundant vegetation, either rocky or muddy bottoms, in woodland, forest, and grassland. In streams, prefers pools to shallower areas. Logs, rocks, cattail mats, and exposed banks are required for basking. May enter brackish water and even seawater. Found at elevations from sea level to over 5,900 feet (1,800 m).

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Eremophila alpestris actia
California horned lark
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Generally found in shortgrass prairies, grasslands, disturbed fields, or similar habitat types along the coast or in deserts. Trees are shrubs are usually scarce or absent. Generally rare in montane, coniferous, or chaparral habitats. Forms large flocks outside of the breeding season.

Yes No
High
Suitable foraging and
nesting habitat are
present on-site. This
species is adapted to
urban environments and
occurs commonly.

Eumops perotis
californicus
western mastiff bat
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Primarily a cliff-dwelling species, roost generally under exfoliating rock slabs. Roosts are generally high above the ground, usually allowing a clear vertical drop of at least 3 meters below the entrance for flight. In California, it is most frequently encountered in broad open areas. Its foraging habitat includes dry desert washes, flood plains, chaparral, oak woodland, open ponderosa pine forest, grassland, and agricultural areas.

No No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present on-site.

Suitable roosting
opportunities may be
found off-site in the hills
to the southeast.

Falco columbarius
merlin
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Nest in forested openings, edges, and along rivers across northern North America. Found in open forests, grasslands, and especially coastal areas with flocks of small songbirds or shorebirds.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Commonly occur in arid and semiarid shrubland and grassland community types. Also occasionally found in open parklands within coniferous forests. During the breeding season, they are found commonly in foothills and mountains which provide cliffs and escarpments suitable for nest sites.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Empidonax traillii extimus Occurs in riparian woodlands in southern California. Typically Presumed Absent
There is no suitable h 0 Fed: END requires large areas of willow thickets in broad valleys, canyon Yes(a) No habi ithi ou ostem willow CA: END bottoms, or around ponds and lakes. These areas typically have apo present wit 10 or ycatcher standingor running water, or areat leastmoist. adjacentof eproject Found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams, crecks, marshes, and irrigation ditches, with abundant vegetation, either rocky or muddy Presumed Absent Emys marmorata Fed: None bottoms, in woodland, forest, and grassland. In streams, prefers There is no suitable d tut] CA: SSC pools to shallower areas. Logs, rocks, cattail mats, and exposed Yes No habitatpresentwithinor westernpond turtle : banks arerequired for basking. May enterbrackish water and even adjacent to theproject seawater. Found at elevations from sea level to over 5,900 feet site. (1,800m).

High
Generally foundin shortgrassprairies,grasslands,disturbedfields, Suitable foragingand Eremophila alpestrisactia | Fed: None or similar habitat types along the coast or in deserts. Trees are nestinghabitatare California horned lark CA: WL shrubs are usually scarce or absent. Generally rare in montane, Yes No present on-site. This altiornia horned far : coniferous, or chaparral habitats. Forms large flocks outside of the species is adapted to breedingseason. urbanenvironmentsand
occurs commonly.

Primarily a cliff-dwelling species,roost generallyunder exfoliating Low . rock slabs. Roosts are generally high above the ground, usually Limited foraginghabitat Eumopsperotis Fed: None allowingaclearverticaldropofatleast3metersbelowtheentrance is presenton-site. californicus CA. SSC for flight. In California,it is most frequently encounteredinbroad No No Suitableroosting westernmastiffbat : open areas. Its foraging habitat includes dry desert washes, flood opportunities may be plains, chaparral, oak woodland, open ponderosa pine forest, found off-site in the hills grassland, and agricultural areas. to the southeast.

Presumed Absent
Falco columbarius Fed: None Nest in forested openings, edges, and along rivers across northern There is no suitable , ] North America.Found in open forests, grasslands, and especially Yes No habitatpresentwithinor merin CA: WL coastal areas with flocks of small songbirds or shorebirds. adjacent to the project site.

Commonly occur in arid and semiarid shrubland and grassland PresumedAbsent Falco mexicanus Fed: None communitytypes.Alsooccasionallyfoundinopenparklandswithin Thereis no suitable ] coniferous forests. During the breeding season, they are found Yes No habitat present within or prairie falcon CA: WL commonly in foothills and mountains which provide cliffs and adjacent to the project escarpments suitable for nest sites. site.
[4] 944 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Falco peregrinus anatum
American peregrine falcon
Fed:

CA:

DL
DL; FP
Uncommon winter resident of the inland region of southern California. Active nesting sites are known along the coast north of Santa Barbara, in the Sierra Nevada, and in other mountains of northern California. Breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal habitats. Riparian areas and coastal and inland wetlands are important habitats yearlong, especially in nonbreeding seasons.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
Fed:

CA:

DL
END; FP
Occur primarily at or near seacoasts, rivers, swamps, and large lakes. Need ample foraging opportunities, typically near a large water source.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Hydroprogne caspia
Caspian tern
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Occurs near large lakes, coastal waters, beaches, and bays. Found on both fresh and salt water, favoring protected waters such as bays and lagoons, rivers, not usually foraging over open sea. Nests on open ground on islands, coasts.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Icteria virens
yellow-breasted chat
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Primarily found in tall, dense, relatively wide riparian woodlands and thickets of willows, vine tangles, and dense brush with welldeveloped understories. Nesting areas are associated with streams, swampy ground, and the borders of small ponds. Breeding habitat must be dense to provide shade and concealment. It winters south the Central America.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Often found in broken woodlands, shrublands, and other habitats.

Prefers open country with scattered perches for hunting and fairly dense brush for nesting.

Yes No
Low
Limited foraging habitat
is present within and
surrounding the project
site. Suitable nesting
habitat is present nearby.

Larus californicus
California gull
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Require isolated islands in rivers, reservoirs and natural lakes for nesting, where predations pressures from terrestrial mammals are diminished. Uses both fresh and saline aquatic habitats at variable elevations and degrees of aridity for nesting and for opportunistic foraging.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Uncommon winter resident of the inland region of southern California. Active nesting sites are known along the coast north of Presumed Absent
There is no suitable Falcoperegrinus anatum Fed: DL Santa Barbara, in the Sierra Nevada, and in other mountains of v N ! tab Americanperegrine falcon CA: DL; FP northern California. Breeds mostly in woodland, forest, and coastal os ° habitat present within or habitats. Riparian areas and coastal and inland wetlands are adjacenttotheproject important habitats yearlong, especially in nonbreeding seasons. site.

Presumed Absent
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Fed: DL Occur primarily at or near seacoasts,rivers, swamps, and large There is no suitable bald cagle CA: END: FP lakes. Need ample foraging opportunities, typically near a large Yes No habitat present within or ’ i water source. adjacentto theproject
site.

Occurs near large lakes, coastal waters, beaches, and bays. Found Presumed Absent Hydroprogne caspia Fed: None onboth fresh and salt water, favoringprotected waters such asbays N N Thereis no suitable Caspian tern CA: None and lagoons, rivers, not usually foraging over open sea. Nests on 0 0 habitat present within or open ground on islands, coasts. adjacent fo theproject Primarily found in tall, dense,relatively wide riparian woodlands andthickets of willows, vine tangles, and densebrush with well- PresumedAbsent Icteria virens Fed: None developed understories. Nesting areas are associated with streams, vy N There 1s no suitable yellow-breasted chat CA: SSC swampy ground, and the borders of small ponds. Breeding habitat es 0 habitat present within or must be dense to provide shade and concealment. It winters south adjacent tothe project the Central America. sie.

Low
Often found in broken woodlands, shrublands, and other habitats Limited foraginghabitat Lanius ludovicianus Fed: None > > : ; ithi . Prefers opencountry with scatteredperches for huntingand fairly Yes No 18 presentwithinand loggerhead shrike CA: SSC dense brush for nesting. surrounding the project site. Suitable nesting
habitat is present nearby.

Require isolatedislands in rivers,reservoirs andnatural lakes for PresumedAbsent Larus californicus Fed: None nesting, where predations pressures from terrestrial mammals are There is no suitable California gull CA: WL diminished. Uses both freshand saline aquatic habitats at variable No No habitat present within or : elevations and degrees of aridity for nesting and for opportunistic adjacent to the project foraging. site.
945
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Lasiurus xanthinus
western yellow bat
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Roosts in palm trees in foothill riparian, desert wash, and palm oasis habitats with access to water for foraging. No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Lepus californicus
bennettii
San Diego black-tailed
jackrabbit
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Occurs in diverse habitats, but primarily is found in arid regions supporting shortgrass habitats. Openness of open scrub habitat is preferred over dense chaparral.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Lynx rufus pallescens
pallid bobcat
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Found on the western edge of the great basin habitat in extreme northeast California. Live in a variety of habitats including forests, deserts, mountains, swamps and farmland.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Myotis ciliolabrum
western small-footed
myotis
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Occurs in a wide range of habitats, mostly arid wooded and brushy uplands near water. Prefers open stands in forests and woodlands.

Roosts in caves, buildings, mines, and crevices.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Myotis yumanensis
Yuma myotis
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Found in forests and woodlands near water. Roosts in caves, buildings, mines, and crevices. No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Nannopterum auritum
double-crested cormorant
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Common yearlong resident in southern California. Occurs widely in freshwater and marine habitats along coastlines. Require open water where they can forage for schooling fish.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Neotoma lepida
intermedia
San Diego desert woodrat
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in coastal scrub communities between San Luis Obispo and San Diego Counties. Prefers moderate to dense canopies, and especially rocky outcrops.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Presumed Absent
There is no suitable Lasiurus xanthinus Fed: None Roostsinpalmtreesinfoothillriparian,desertwash,andpalmoasis No No habitat t with . . . abitat present within or western yellow bat CA: SSC habitats with access to water for foraging. adiner t to the project site.
. , Presumed Absent Lepus californicus LL . Lo Lo . . . bennettii Fed: None Occurs in diverse habitats, but primarily is found in arid regions Thereis no suitable . ; ] supporting shortgrasshabitats. Openness of open scrub habitat is Yes No habitatpresentwithinor SanDiego black-tailed CA: None preferred over densechaparral. adjacent to the project jackrabbit site Presumed Absent
Lynx rufuspallescens Fed: None Found on the western edge of the great basinhabitat in extreme There is no suitable J ] northeastCalifornia.Live in a varietyofhabitatsincluding forests, Yes No habitatpresentwithinor pallidbobcat CA: None | deserts, mountains, swamps and farmland. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Myotis ciliolabrum Fed: None Occursinawiderangeofhabitats,mostly arid woodedandbrushy Thereis no suitable westernsmall-footed CA. N uplandsnear water.Prefers openstands in forests andwoodlands. No No habitatpresentwithinor myotis : one Roosts in caves,buildings, mines, and crevices. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Myotisyumanensis Fed: None Found in forests and woodlands near water. Roosts in caves, No No Thereis no suitable Yumamyotis CA: None buildings,mines,andcrevices. habitatpresentwithinor adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Nannopterum auritum Fed: None Common yearlong resident in southern California. Occurs widely There is no suitable ] in freshwater and marine habitats along coastlines. Require open Yes No habitat present within or double-crested cormorant CA: WL water where they can forage for schooling fish. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Neotomalepida Fed: None OccursincoastalscrubcommunitiesbetweenSanLuis Obispoand Thereis no suitable intermedia CA. SSC San Diego Counties. Prefers moderate to dense canopies, and Yes No habitatpresentwithinor SanDiego desertwoodrat : especiallyrocky outcrops. adjacentto theproject site.
[4] 946 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Numenius americanus
long-billed curlew
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Preferred winter habitats include large coastal estuaries, upland herbaceous areas, and croplands. On estuaries, feeding occurs mostly on intertidal mudflats.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Nycticorax nycticorax
black-crowned night heron
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Fairly common, yearlong resident in lowlands and foothills throughout most of California, including the Salton Sea and Colorado River areas, and very common locally in large nesting colonies. Feeds along the margins of lacustrine, large riverine, and fresh and saline emergent habitats and rarely, on kelp beds in marine sub tidal habitats. Nests and roosts in dense-foliaged trees and dense emergent wetlands.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
pocketed free-tailed bat
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Often found in pinyon-juniper woodlands, desert scrub, desert succulent shrub, desert riparian, desert wash, alkali desert scrub, Joshua tree, and palm oasis.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Pandion haliaetus
osprey
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Remain close to still or slow-moving bodies of water including oceans, rivers, lakes, mangroves, coastal wetlands, lagoons, reefs, estuaries and marshes. Generally nest in high places, such as trees, power poles, or cliffs.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Pelecanus
erythrorhynchos
American white pelican
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Locally common winter resident of southern California. Typically forage in shallow inland waters, such as open areas in marshes and along lake or river edges. Also occur in shallow coastal marine habitats.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Perognathus
longimembris brevinasus
Los Angeles pocket mouse
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in lower elevation grasslands and coastal sage scrub communities in and around the Los Angeles Basin. Prefers open ground with fine sandy soils. May not dig extensive burrows, but instead will seek refuge under weeds and dead leaves instead.

Yes (c) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Pr
Preferred winter habitats include large coastal estuaries, upland «ifn.

Presumed Absent
Numenius There is no suitable americanus Fed: None . . 1 billed curl CA: WL herbaceous areas, and croplands. On estuaries, feeding occurs No No habitat present within or ong-bilied curiew : mostly onintertidal mudflats. adjacent to the project site.

Fairly common, yearlong resident in lowlands and foothills throughout most of California, including the Salton Sea and PresumedAbsent Nycticorax nycticorax Fed: None Colorado River areas, and very common locally in large nesting Thereis no suitable black d nicht h CA: N colonies. Feeds along the margins of lacustrine, large riverine, and Yes No habitat present within or ack-crowned night heron : one freshandsalineemergenthabitatsandrarely,onkelpbedsinmarine adjacentto theproject subtidalhabitats.Nestsandroostsindense-foliagedtreesanddense site. emergent wetlands.

Presumed Absent
Nyctinomops Fed: None Often found in pinyon-juniper woodlands, desert scrub, desert Thereis no suitable femorosaccus CA. SSC succulent shrub, desert riparian, desert wash, alkali desert scrub, No No habitat present within or pocketed free-tailedbat : Joshua tree, andpalm oasis. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Remain close to still or slow-moving bodies of water including There i tab] Pandionhaliaetus Fed: None oceans,rivers,lakes,mangroves, coastal wetlands,lagoons,reefs, Yes No habi Cre 15 no ste N osprey CA: WL estuaries andmarshes.Generallynestinhighplaces, suchas trees, apo presentwit Inor power poles, or cliffs. adjacent or eproject site. P d Absent Pelecanus Locally common winter resident of southern California. Typically resume sen erythrorhynchos Fed: None foragein shallowinland waters,suchasopenareasinmarshesand No No There1s 0 suitable A . CA: SSC along lake or river edges. Also occur in shallow coastal marine habitatpresentwithinor American white pelican habitats adjacent to the project ) site.

Presumed Absent
Occurs in lower elevation grasslands and coastal sage scrub . P th lomginnp-ris brevinasus Fed: None communities in and aroundtheLos AngelesBasin. Prefers open Yes(c) No There110 suitable CA: SSC ground with fine sandy soils. May not dig extensive burrows, but habitat present within or Los Angeles pocket mouse instead will seekrefuge under weeds and dead leaves instead. adjacent fotheproject site. 947
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Occurs in a wide variety of vegetation types including coastal sage scrub, annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, riparian woodland and coniferous forest. In inland areas, this species is restricted to areas with pockets of open microhabitat, created by disturbance (i.e. fire, floods, roads, grazing, fire breaks). The key elements of such habitats are loose, fine soils with a high sand fraction; an abundance of native ants or other insects; and open areas with limited overstory for basking and low, but relatively dense shrubs for refuge.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Plegadis chihi
white-faced ibis
Fed:

CA:

None
WL
Prefers to feed in fresh emergent wetland, shallow lacustrine waters, muddy ground of wet meadows, and irrigated or flooded partures and croplands. Nests in dense, fresh emergent wetland.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Polioptila californica
californica
coastal California
gnatcatcher
Fed:

CA:

THR
SSC
Obligate resident of sage scrub habitats that are dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). This species generally occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet inland. Ranges from the Ventura County, south to San Diego County and northern Baja California and it is less common in sage scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs. Prefers habitat with more low-growing vegetation.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Salvadora hexalepis
virgultea
coast patch-nosed snake
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Found in brushy or shrubby vegetation along the coast and requires small mammal burrows for refuge and overwintering. No No Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Setophaga petechia
yellow warbler
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Nests over all of California except the Central Valley, the Mojave Desert region, and high altitudes and the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada. Winters along the Colorado River and in parts of Imperial and Riverside Counties. Nests in riparian areas dominated by willows, cottonwoods, sycamores, or alders or in mature chaparral.

May also use oaks, conifers, and urban areas near stream courses.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly soils, in a variety of habitats including mixed woodlands, grasslands, coastal sage scrub, chaparral, sandy washed, lowlands, river floodplains, alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats, foothills, and mountains. Rainpools which do not contain bullfrogs, fish, or crayfish are necessary for breeding.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Occurs in a wide variety of vegetation types including coastal sage scrub, annual grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, riparian woodland and coniferous forest. In inland areas, this species is restricted to areas with pockets of open microhabitat, created by Presumed Absent
Ph There is no suitable blainvillii Fed: N
Tynosoma i ammvii N ] one disturbance (i.e. fire, floods, roads, grazing, fire breaks). The key Yes No habitat present within or coasthornedlizard CA: SSC elements of such habitats are loose, fine soils with a high sand adjacentto theproject fraction; an abundance of native ants or other insects; and open site. areas with limited overstory for basking and low, but relatively dense shrubs for refuge.

Presumed Absent
Plegadischihi Fed: None Prefersto feedinfreshemergentwetland,shallowlacustrinewaters, Thereis no suitable ) Yo ] muddy ground of wet meadows, and irrigated or flooded partures Yes No habitat present within or white-facedibis CA: WL andcroplands.Nestsindense,freshemergentwetland. adjacentto theproject site.

Obligate resident of sage scrub habitats that are dominated by Polioptila californica Californiasagebrush(4rtemisiacalifornica).Thisspeciesgenerally PresumedAbsent californica Fed: THR occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastalregions andbelow 1,500 There is no suitable . ] feet inland.Ranges from theVenturaCounty, south to SanDiego Yes No habitatpresentwithinor coastalCalifornia CA: SSC CountyandnorthernBajaCaliforniaandit is less commonin sage adjacentto theproject gnatcatcher scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs. Prefers habitat with site. more low-growing vegetation.

Presumed Absent
Salvadora hexalepi i i
irguon exaiepts Fed: None Foundinbrushyor shrubbyvegetationalongthecoastandrequires No No There1810 suitable CA: SSC smallmammalburrows for refugeandoverwintering. habitatpresentwithinor coast patch-nosed snake adjacent to the project
site.

Nests over all of California except the Central Valley, the Mojave P d Absent Desert region, and high altitudes and the eastern side of the Sierra resume sen Setophagapetechia Fed: None Nevada.WintersalongtheColoradoRiver andinparts ofImperial Thereis no suitable . ; CL : No No habitatpresentwithinor yellow warbler CA: SSC and Riverside Counties. Nests in riparian areas dominated by pe h . willows, cottonwoods,sycamores,or aldersor inmaturechaparral. adjacenttotheproject May also use oaks, conifers, andurban areasnear stream courses. site.

Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly soils, in a variety of PresumedAbsent Spea hammond Fed: None habitats includingmixedwoodlands,grasslands, coastal sagescrub, There is no suitable ] chaparral, sandywashed,lowlands,river floodplains,alluvial fans, Yes No habitatpresentwithinor westernspadefoot CA: SSC playas, alkali flats, foothills, andmountains. Rainpools which do adjacentto theproject not containbullfrogs, fish, or crayfish are necessary for breeding. site. [4] 948 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Scientific Name
Common Name
Status Habitat
Covered
by
MSHCP
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Spinus lawrencei
Lawrence's goldfinch
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Open woodlands, chaparral, and weedy fields. Closely associated with oaks. Nests in open oak or other arid woodland and chaparral near water.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Spizella breweri
Brewer’s sparrow
Fed:

CA:

None
None
Lives in arid sagebrush steppe habitat. Prefers to nest, feed, and roost in sagebrush. Can also be found along foothill tree lines, brushy plains, and weedy fields.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Taxidea taxus
American badger
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Primarily occupy grasslands, parklands, farms, tallgrass and shortgrass prairies, meadows, shrub-steppe communities and other treeless areas with sandy loam soils where it can dig more easily for its prey. Occasionally found in open chaparral (with less than 50% plant cover) and riparian zones.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell’s vireo
Fed:

CA:

END
END
Primarily occupy Riverine riparian habitat that typically feature dense cover within 1 -2 meters of the ground and a dense, stratified canopy. Typically it is associated with southern willow scrub, cottonwood-willow forest, mule fat scrub, sycamore alluvial woodlands, coast live oak riparian forest, arroyo willow riparian forest, or mesquite in desert localities. It uses habitat which is limited to the immediate vicinity of water courses, 2,000 feet elevation in the interior.

Yes (a) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

Xanthocephalus
xanthocephalus
yellow-headed blackbird
Fed:

CA:

None
SSC
Uncommon yearlong resident of southern California throughout freshwater emergent wetlands, and moist, open areas along agricultural areas, and mudflats of lacustrine habitats. Prefers to nest in dense wetland vegetation characterized by cattails, tules, or other similar plant species along the border of lakes and ponds.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable
habitat present within or
adjacent to the project
site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources Open woodlands, chaparral, and weedy fields. Closely associated Presumed Absent
There is no suitable Spinus 1 i Fed: N
woHus h oA. Nowe with oaks.Nestsin openoakor other arid woodlandandchaparral No No habitatpresentwithinor awrence's goldine : one near water. adjacent to the project site.

Presumed Absent
Spizellabreweri Fed: None Lives in arid sagebrush steppe habitat. Prefers to nest, feed,and Thereis no suitable B , CA: N roost in sagebrush. Can also be found along foothill tree lines, No No habitatpresentwithinor TEWCT'S Sparrow : one brushy plains, and weedy fields. adjacent to the project site.

Primarily occupy grasslands, parklands, farms, tallgrass and PresumedAbsent Taxidea taxus Fed: None shortgrassprairies, meadows, shrub-steppe communities andother There is no suitable . ] treeless areaswith sandy loam soils where it candigmore easily for No No habitat present within or Americanbadger CA: SSC its prey. Occasionally foundin openchaparral(with less than50% adjacentto theproject plant cover) andriparianzones. site.

Primarily occupy Riverine riparian habitat that typically feature densecover within 1 2 meters of theground and a dense, stratified Presumed Absent canopy. Typically it is associated with southern willow scrub, . . Vireobellipusillus Fed: END cottonwood-willow forest, mule fat scrub, sycamore alluvial Yes(a) No Thereis no suitable least Bell’s vireo CA: END woodlands, coast live oak riparian forest, arroyo willow riparian habitat present within or forest, or mesquite in desert localities. It uses habitat which is adjacenttotheproject limited to the immediate vicinity of water courses, 2,000 feet sife. elevationin theinterior.

Uncommon yearlong resident of southern California throughout PresumedAbsent Xanthocephalus Fed: None freshwater emergent wetlands, and moist, open areas along There is no suitable xanthocephalus CA: SSC agricultural areas, and mudflats of lacustrine habitats. Prefers to No No habitatpresentwithinor yellow-headedblackbird : nestin densewetlandvegetationcharacterizedby cattails,tules,or adjacentto theproject other similar plant species along the border of lakes andponds. site. 949
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Abronia villosa var. aurita
chaparral sand-verbena
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.1
Grows in sandy soils in coastal sage scrub and in chaparral habitats.

Grows in elevation from 262 to 5,249 feet. Blooming period ranges from January to September.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Artemisia palmeri
San Diego sagewort
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Found in sandy and mesic soils within chaparral, coastal scrub, riparian forest, riparian scrub, and riparian woodland. Found at elevations ranging from 49 to 3,002 feet. Blooming period is from February to September.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Calochortus plummerae
Plummer's mariposa-lily
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Prefers openings in chaparral, foothill woodland, coastal sage scrub, valley foothill grasslands, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous forest and yellow pine forest. Often found on dry, rocky slopes and soils and brushy areas. Can be very common after a fire.

Found at elevations ranging from 459 to 6,299 feet. Blooming period is from May to July.

Yes (e) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Caulanthus simulans
Payson's jewelflower
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Occurs on granitic sandy soils in chaparral and coastal scrub habitats. Found at elevations ranging from 295 to 7,218 feet.

Blooming period is from February to June.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Centromadia pungens ssp.
laevis
smooth tarplant
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.1
Found in alkaline soils within chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland habitats.

Found at elevations ranging from 0 to 2,100 feet. Blooming period is from April to September.

Yes (d) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Chorizanthe leptotheca
Peninsular spineflower
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Found in granitic soils within chaparral, coast scrub, and lower montane coniferous forest habitats. Found at elevations ranging from 984 to 6,234 feet. Blooming period is from May to August.

Yes (e) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Chorizanthe parryi var.
parryi
Parry's spineflower
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.1
Occurs on sandy and/or rocky soils in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and sandy openings within alluvial washes and margins. Found at elevations ranging from 951 to 3,773 feet. Blooming period is from April to June.

Yes (e) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Chorizanthe xanti var.
leucotheca
white-bracted spineflower
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.2
Grows on sandy or gravelly soils within coastal scrub (alluvial fans), Mojavean desert scrub, pinyon and juniper woodland habitats.

Found at elevations ranging from 984 to 3,937 feet. Blooming period is from April to June.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources .....

Presumed Absent
is from April to June.

Ab LL 1 . . ’ Fed: None | Growsin sandy ly soilsincoastalsa ge scrub b and andin in chaparral ch: 1habitat habitats. . . . hie hy aura CA: None | Growsin elevationfrom 262to 5,249 feet.Bloomingperiodranges No No There. nosuitablehabitat chaparral sand-verbena ] from J to September. present within or adjacent CNPS: 1B.1 om Januaty fo September to theproject site.

Fed: None | Found in sandy and mesic soils within chaparral, coastal scrub, Presumed Absent Artemisiapalmeri CA: None riparian forest, riparian scrub, and riparian woodland. Found at No No Thereis no suitablehabitat SanDiego sagewort CNPS: 42 elevations ranging from 49 to 3,002 feet. Blooming period is from present within or adjacent : : February to September. to theproject site.

Prefers openings inchaparral, foothill woodland, coastal sage scrub, Fed: None | Valley foothill grasslands, cismontane woodland, lower montane PresumedAbsent Calochortusplummerae CA: None coniferous forest and yellow pine forest. Often found on dry, rocky Yes (c) No There is no suitable habitat Plummer'smariposa-lily ’ slopesandsoilsandbrushyareas. Canbevery commonaftera fire. presentwithinor adjacent CNPS: 42 | Foundat elevationsranging from459to 6,299feet.Bloomingperiod to theproject site. is fromMay to July.
. i” oo P d Absent Caulanthussimulans Fed: Nome | Occurs on granitic sandy soils in chaparral and coastal scrub resume. wen . CA: None | habitats. Found at elevations ranging from 295 to 7,218 feet. Yes No There is nosuitable habitat Payson's jewelflower CNPS: 42 | Blooming period is fromFebruary to June. present within or adjacent : - to the project site.

Centromadia pungens ssp Fed: None | Foundin alkaline soilswithinchenopodscrub,meadowsandseeps, PresumedAbsent laevis ’ CA: None playas, riparian woodland, valley and foothill grassland habitats. Yes (d) No Thereis no suitablehabitat th tarplant - Foundat elevations ranging from 0 to 2,100 feet.Bloomingperiod presentwithinor adjacent Smooth farplan CNPS: IB. | js from April to September. to theproject site. . . . . fo P d Absent Chorizantheleptotheca Fed: Nome | Found in granitic soils within chaparral, coast scrub, and lower restme . sen . sul ef CA: None | montane coniferous forest habitats. Found at elevations ranging Yes (e) No There is nosuitable habitat Peninsular spineflower CNPS: 4.2 | from 984 to 6,234 feet. Bloomingperiod is fromMay to August. present wi 1mor adjacent : : to the project site.

Chorizantheparryi var Fed: None | Occurs on sandy and/or rocky soils in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, Presumed Absent parryi ) CA: None and sandy openings within alluvial washes andmargins.Found at Yes(¢) No Thereis no suitablehabitat Parry's spineflower - elevations ranging from 951 to 3,773 feet. Bloomingperiod is from present within or adjacent Ty's Sp CNPS: 1B.1 April to June. to theproject site.

Chorizanthe xanti var. Fed: None | Grows on sandy or gravelly soils withincoastal scrub (alluvial fans), Presumed Absent lencotheca CA: None | Mojavean desert scrub, pinyon and juniper woodland habitats. Thereis no suitablehabitat ; g . . No No 1s . white-bractedspineflower CNPS: 1B Foundatelevationsranging from984to 3,937feet.Bloomingperiod presentwithinor adjacent to theproject site.
[4] 950 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

Deinandra paniculata
paniculate tarplant
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Typically found in vernally mesic, sometimes sandy soils in coastal scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Found at elevations ranging from 82 to 3,084 feet. Blooming period is from April to November.

No No
Low
Limited habitat is present
within the project site.

This species is adapted to
disturbed conditions.

Juglans californica
southern California black
walnut
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.2 Occurs in alluvial soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and riparian woodlands. From 15 to 5,875 feet in elevation.

Blooming period is from May to June.

Yes No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Lasthenia glabrata ssp.
coulteri
Coulter’s goldfields
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.1
Prefers playas, vernal pools, and coastal salt marshes and swamps.

Found at elevations ranging from 3 to 4,003 feet. Blooming period is from February to June.

Yes (d) No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Lepidium virginicum var.
robinsonii
Robinson's pepper-grass
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None

4.3 Dry soils on chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Found at elevations ranging from 3 to 2,904 feet. Blooming period is from January to July.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

Symphyotrichum
defoliatum
San Bernardino aster
Fed:

CA:

CNPS:

None
None
1B.2
Grows in grasslands and disturbed areas in the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains and Peninsular Range. Occurs in vernally wet sites including ditches, streams, and springs in many plant communities including meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps, coastal scrub, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous woodland, and grassland. Found at elevations ranging from 7 to 6,693 feet. Blooming period is from July to November.

No No
Presumed Absent
There is no suitable habitat
present within or adjacent
to the project site.

CDFW SENSITIVE HABITATS
Southern Sycamore Alder
Riparian Woodland
CDFW
Sensitive
Habitat
Occurs below 2,000 meters in elevation, sycamore and alder often occur along seasonally-flooded banks; cottonwoods and willows are also often present. Poison oak, mugwort, elderberry and wild raspberry may be present in understory.

NA No Absent
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Fed) - Federal
END- Federal Endangered
THR- Federal Threatened
California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CA) - California
END- California Endangered
THR- California Threatened
Candidate- Candidate for listing
under the California Endangered
Species Act
FP- California Fully Protected
SSC- Species of Special Concern
WL- Watch List
California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
California Rare Plant Rank
1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in
California and Elsewhere
2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in
California, But More Common Elsewhere
3 Plants About Which More Information is
Needed – A Review List
4 Plants of Limited Distribution – A Watch
List
CNPS Threat Ranks

0.1- Seriously
threatened in
California

0.2- Moderately
threatened in
California

0.3- Not very
threatened in
California
Western Riverside County MSHCP
Yes- Fully covered
No- Not covered
Yes (a)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.1.2
Yes (b)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.1.3
Yes (c)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.3.2
Yes (d)- May require surveys under
AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources . . . . oo Low
. . Fed: None | Typically found in vernally mesic, sometimes sandy soils in coastal LL. oo Deinandrapaniculata . scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools. Found at Limitedhabitat15present ) CA: None . . - A No No within theproject site. paniculate tarplant elevations ranging from 82 to 3,084 feet. Blooming period is from ’ wp CNPS: 42 April to November. This species is adapted to disturbed conditions.
ry . . . I . P d Absent Juglans californica Fed: None | Occurs in alluvial soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal resume ; sen . southernCaliforniablack CA: None scrub, andriparian woodlands.From 15 to 5,875 feet in elevation. Yes No Thereis nosuitablehabitat walnut CNPS: 4.2 | Blooming period is fromMay to June. present within or adjacent to the project site.
. . P d Absent Lastheniaglabrata ssp. Fed: None | prefers playas, vernalpools,andcoastal salt marshes andswamps. resume ; sen . coulteri CA: None | Found at elevations ranging from 3 to 4,003 feet. Blooming period Yes (d) No There " nosuitable habitat , . is from Feb to June. present within or adjacent Coulter’sgoldfields CNPS: 1B.1 | 18 from Tebruary to June to theproject site.

Le LoL P d Absent
Lepidium virginicum var. Fed: None | Dry soils on chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Found at elevations h resume . or bi robinsonii CA: None | ranging from 3 to 2,904 feet. Blooming period is from January to No No There is nopa Nf abitat Robinson's pepper-grass CNPS: 43 July. present wi n or a jacent : : to the project site.

Growsin grasslands anddisturbedareasin theSanGabrielandSan Bernardino Mountains andPeninsular Range. Occurs in vernally P d Absent Symphyotrichum Fed: Nome | wet sites including ditches, streams, and springs in many plant ™ resume i _ bi defoliatum CA: None | communities including meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps, No No CIC 1S nopa Nf abitat SanBernardino aster CNPS: 1B.2 | coastal scrub, cismontane woodland, lower montane coniferous present 1tainor adjacent woodland, and grassland. Found at elevations ranging from 7 to to theproject site. 6,693 feet. Bloomingperiod is from July to November.

CDFW Occurs below 2,000 meters in elevation, sycamore and alder often Southern Sycamore Alder .. occur along seasonally-floodedbanks;cottonwoods and willows are — Sensitive . . NA No Absent Riparian Woodland Habitat also often present. Poison oak, mugwort, elderberry and wild raspberrymaybepresentinunderstory.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife California Department ofFish California Native Plant Society (CNPS) CNPS ThreatRanks Western Riverside County MSHCP Service (Fed) - Federal
END- FederalEndangered
THR- Federal Threatened
and Wildlife (CA) - California
END- CaliforniaEndangered
THR- California Threatened
Candidate- Candidate for listing
under the California Endangered
SpeciesAct
FP- California Fully Protected
SSC- Species ofSpecial Concern
‘WL- WatchList
CaliforniaRarePlantRank
1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangeredin
California andElsewhere
2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangeredin
California, But More CommonElsewhere
3 Plants About Which More Informationis
Needed —A Review List
4 Plants ofLimitedDistribution — AWatch
List

0.1- Seriously
threatenedin
California

0.2- Moderately
threatenedin
California

0.3- Not very
threatenedin
California
Yes- Fully covered
No- Not covered
Yes (a)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.1.2
Yes (b)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.1.3
Yes (c)- May require surveys under
MSHCP Section 6.3.2
Yes (d)- May require surveys under
[4] 951 b] vl ELM
Appendix B – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources

MSHCP Section 6.3.2
Yes (e)- Conditionally covered pending
the achievement of species-specific
conservation measures
AppendixB —Potentially OccurringSpecial-StatusBiologicalResources MSHCP Section 6.3.2
Yes (e)- Conditionally coveredpending
the achievement of species-specific
conservationmeasures
952
Appendix Appendix C C Regulations Regulations
953
Appendix C – Regulations
Special status species are native species that have been afforded special legal or management protection because of concern for their continued existence. There are several categories of protection at both federal and state levels, depending on the magnitude of threat to continued existence and existing knowledge of population levels.

Federal Regulations
Endangered Species Act of 1973
Federally listed threatened and endangered species and their habitats are protected under provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). Section 9 of the ESA prohibits “take” of threatened or endangered species. “Take” under the ESA is defined as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any of the specifically enumerated conduct.” The presence of any federally threatened or endangered species that are in a project area generally imposes severe constraints on development, particularly if development would result in “take” of the species or its habitat. Under the regulations of the ESA, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may authorize “take” when it is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful act.

Critical Habitat is designated for the survival and recovery of species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. Critical Habitat includes those areas occupied by the species, in which are found physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation of an ESA listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. Critical Habitat may also include unoccupied habitat if it is determined that the unoccupied habitat is essential for the conservation of the species.

Whenever federal agencies authorize, fund, or carry out actions that may adversely modify or destroy Critical Habitat, they must consult with USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the Federal Highway Administration or a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)).

If USFWS determines that Critical Habitat will be adversely modified or destroyed from a proposed action, the USFWS will develop reasonable and prudent alternatives in cooperation with the federal institution to ensure the purpose of the proposed action can be achieved without loss of Critical Habitat. If the action is not likely to adversely modify or destroy Critical Habitat, USFWS will include a statement in its biological opinion concerning any incidental take that may be authorized and specify terms and conditions to ensure the agency is in compliance with the opinion.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) makes it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, possess, or attempt to do the same to any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in wildlife protection treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the countries of the former Soviet Union, and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking of migratory birds. It establishes seasons and bag limits for hunted species and protects migratory birds, their occupied nests, and their eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21).

Appendix C —Regulations
Special status species are native species that have been affordedspecial legal or managementprotection becauseofconcernfor their continuedexistence. There are several categories ofprotection at bothfederal and state levels, depending on the magnitude of threat to continued existence and existing knowledge of population levels.

FederalRegulations
EndangeredSpecies Act of 1973
Federally listed threatenedand endangered species and their habitats areprotectedunder provisions of the FederalEndangeredSpeciesAct (ESA). Section 9 oftheESA prohibits “take” of threatenedor endangered species. “Take” under theESA is defined as to “harass, harm,pursue,hunt, shoot, wound,kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any of the specifically enumerated conduct.” The presence of any federally threatened or endangered species that are in a project area generally imposes severe constraints on development, particularly if development would result in “take” of the species or its habitat. Under the regulations of the ESA, the United StatesFish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may authorize “take” when it is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful act.

Critical Habitat is designated for the survival and recovery of species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. Critical Habitat includes those areas occupied by the species,in which are found physical andbiological featuresthat areessentialto the conservation ofanESA listed speciesandwhichmay require specialmanagement considerations or protection. CriticalHabitat may also include unoccupiedhabitat if it is determined that the unoccupiedhabitat is essential for the conservation of the species.

If USFWS determines that CriticalHabitat will be adverselymodified or destroyed from aproposed action, the USFWS will develop reasonable and prudent alternatives in cooperation with the federal institution to ensure the purpose of the proposed action can be achieved without loss of Critical Habitat. If the action is not likely to adverselymodify or destroy CriticalHabitat,USFWS will include a statementin its biological opinion concerning any incidental take that may be authorized and specify terms and conditions to ensure the agency is in compliance with the opinion.

MigratoryBird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) makes it unlawful to pursue, capture, kill, possess, or attempt to do the same to any migratory bird or part, nest, or egg of any such bird listed in wildlife protection treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the countries of the former Soviet Union, and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking ofmigratory birds. It establishes seasons andbag limits for hunted species andprotects migratory birds, their occupiednests, and their eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21).

KIS MI)
954 <
Appendix C – Regulations
The MBTA covers the taking of any nests or eggs of migratory birds, except as allowed by permit pursuant to 50 CFR, Part 21. Disturbances causing nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (i.e., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) may also be considered “take.” This regulation seeks to protect migratory birds and active nests.

In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (e.g., raptors). Six families of raptors occurring in North America were included in the amendment: Accipitridae (kites, hawks, and eagles); Cathartidae (New World vultures); Falconidae (falcons and caracaras); Pandionidae (ospreys); Strigidae (typical owls); and Tytonidae (barn owls). The provisions of the 1972 amendment to the MBTA protects all species and subspecies of the families listed above. The MBTA protects over 800 species including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds and many relatively common species.

State Regulations
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides for the protection of the environment within the State of California by establishing State policy to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures for projects. It applies to actions directly undertaken, financed, or permitted by State lead agencies. If a project is determined to be subject to CEQA, the lead agency will be required to conduct an Initial Study (IS); if the IS determines that the project may have significant impacts on the environment, the lead agency will subsequently be required to write an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A finding of non-significant effects will require either a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration instead of an EIR. Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines independently defines “endangered” and “rare” species separately from the definitions of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Under CEQA, “endangered” species of plants or animals are defined as those whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy, while “rare” species are defined as those who are in such low numbers that they could become endangered if their environment worsens.

California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
In addition to federal laws, the state of California implements the CESA which is enforced by CDFW. The CESA program maintains a separate listing of species beyond the FESA, although the provisions of each act are similar.

State-listed threatened and endangered species are protected under provisions of the CESA. Activities that may result in “take” of individuals (defined in CESA as; “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) are regulated by CDFW. Habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of “take” under CESA. Nonetheless, CDFW has interpreted “take” to include the destruction of nesting, denning, or foraging habitat necessary to maintain a viable breeding population of protected species.

The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy. A threatened species is considered as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an endangered species in the near future in the Appendix C —Regulations
The MBTA covers the taking of any nestsor eggsofmigratory birds, except asallowedby permit pursuant to 50 CFR, Part 21. Disturbances causing nest abandonment and/or loss ofreproductive effort (i.e., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) may also be considered “take.” This regulation seeks to protect migratory birds and active nests.

In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (e.g., raptors). Six families ofraptors occurringinNorthAmerica were includedin the amendment:Accipitridae (kites,hawks, and eagles);Cathartidae (New World vultures);Falconidae (falcons and caracaras);Pandionidae (ospreys); Strigidae (typical owls); and Tytonidae (barn owls). The provisions of the 1972 amendment to the MBTA protects all species and subspecies of the families listed above. The MBTA protects over 800 species including geese,ducks, shorebirds,raptors, songbirds andmany relatively common species.

State Regulations
CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides for the protection of the environment within the State of California by establishing State policy to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment throughtheuse ofalternatives or mitigationmeasures for projects.It applies to actions directly undertaken, financed, or permittedby Statelead agencies.If aproject is determined to be subject to CEQA, the lead agency will be required to conduct an Initial Study (IS); if the IS determines that the project may have significant impacts on the environment, the lead agency will subsequently be required to write an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A finding of non-significant effects will require either a Negative Declaration or aMitigatedNegative Declarationinstead of anEIR. Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines independently defines “endangered” and “rare” species separately from the definitions of the California Endangered SpeciesAct (CESA). Under CEQA, “endangered” species ofplants or animals are defined as those whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy, while “rare” species are defined as those who are in such low numbers that they could become endangered if their environment worsens.

CaliforniaEndangeredSpeciesAct (CESA)
In addition to federallaws, the stateofCalifornia implements the CESA which is enforcedby CDFW. The CESA program maintains a separate listing of species beyond the FESA, although the provisions of each act are similar.

State-listed threatenedand endangeredspecies areprotectedunder provisions of the CESA. Activities that may result in “take” ofindividuals (defined in CESA as;“hunt,pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) are regulated by CDFW. Habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of“take” under CESA. Nonetheless,CDFW has interpreted “take” to include the destruction of nesting, denning, or foraging habitat necessary to maintain a viable breeding population of protected species.

CONSULTING
n
id
i)
955
Appendix C – Regulations
absence of special protection or management. A rare species is one that is considered present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. State threatened and endangered species are fully protected against take, as defined above.

The CDFW has also produced a species of special concern list to serve as a species watch list. Species on this list are either of limited distribution or their habitats have been reduced substantially, such that a threat to their populations may be imminent. Species of special concern may receive special attention during environmental review, but they do not have formal statutory protection. At the federal level, USFWS also uses the label species of concern, as an informal term that refers to species which might be in need of concentrated conservation actions. As the Species of Concern designated by USFWS do not receive formal legal protection, the use of the term does not necessarily ensure that the species will be proposed for listing as a threatened or endangered species.

Fish and Game Code
Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 are applicable to natural resource management.

For example, Section 3503 of the Code makes it unlawful to destroy any birds’ nest or any birds’ eggs that are protected under the MBTA. Further, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (Birds of Prey, such as hawks, eagles, and owls) are protected under Section 3503.5 of the Fish and Game Code which makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy their nest or eggs. A consultation with CDFW may be required prior to the removal of any bird of prey nest that may occur on a project site. Section 3511 of the Fish and Game Code lists fully protected bird species, where the CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these species. Pertinent species that are State fully protected by the State include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). Section 3513 of the Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA.

Native Plant Protection Act
Sections 1900–1913 of the Fish and Game Code were developed to preserve, protect, and enhance Rare and Endangered plants in the state of California. The act requires all state agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve Endangered and Rare native plants. Provisions of the Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFW at least ten days in advance of any change in land use which would adversely impact listed plants. This allows the CDFW to salvage listed plant species that would otherwise be destroyed.

California Native Plant Society Rare and Endangered Plant Species Vascular plants listed as rare or endangered by the CNPS, but which have no designated status under FESA or CESA are defined as follows:

California Rare Plant Rank
1A- Plants Presumed Extirpated in California and either Rare or Extinct Elsewhere 1B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and Elsewhere Appendix C —Regulations
absence of specialprotection or management. A rare species is one that is consideredpresent in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. State threatenedand endangeredspeciesare fully protected against take, as defined above.

The CDFW has also produced a species of special concern list to serve as a species watch list. Species on this list are either oflimited distribution or their habitats have beenreduced substantially, suchthat a threat to their populations may be imminent. Species of special concern may receive special attention during environmental review, but they do not have formal statutory protection. At the federal level, USFWS also uses the label species of concern, as an informal term that refers to species which might be in need of concentratedconservation actions. As the Speciesof Concern designatedby USFWS do not receive formal legalprotection, the use of the term doesnot necessarily ensurethat the specieswill be proposed for listing as a threatened or endangered species.

Fish and Game Code
FishandGameCode Sections3503, 3503.5, 3511, and3513 areapplicable tonaturalresourcemanagement.

For example, Section 3503 of the Code makes it unlawful to destroy any birds’ nest or any birds’ eggs that are protected under the MBTA. Further, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (Birds of Prey, such as hawks, eagles, and owls) are protected under Section 3503.5 of the Fish and Game Code whichmakes it unlawful to take, possess,or destroy their nest or eggs.A consultation with CDFW may be requiredprior to the removal of any bird ofprey nest that may occur on aproject site. Section 3511 of the Fish and GameCode lists fully protectedbird species,where the CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these species. Pertinent species that are State fully protected by the State include golden eagle(Aquila chrysaetos) and white-tailedkite (Flanus leucurus). Section 3513 of the Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of suchmigratory nongamebird except asprovidedby rules andregulations adoptedby the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA.

NativePlant Protection Act
Sections 1900-1913 of the Fish and Game Code were developed to preserve, protect, and enhance Rare andEndangeredplants in the state of California. The act requires all state agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve Endangered and Rare native plants. Provisions of the Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFW at least ten daysin advanceof any changein landuse which would adversely impact listedplants. This allows the CDFW to salvagelistedplant species that would otherwise be destroyed.

CaliforniaNativePlantSocietyRare andEndangeredPlantSpecies Vascular plants listed asrare or endangeredby the CNPS,but whichhaveno designatedstatusunder FESA or CESA are defined as follows:

California Rare Plant Rank
1A- Plants PresumedExtirpated in California and either Rare or Extinct Elsewhere 1B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California andElsewhere

KIS MI)
956 <
Appendix C – Regulations
2A- Plants Presumed Extirpated in California, But More Common Elsewhere 2B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere 3- Plants about Which More Information is Needed - A Review List 4- Plants of Limited Distribution - A Watch List
Threat Ranks
.1- Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat)
.2- Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened / moderate degree and immediacy of threat)
.3- Not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened / low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known).

Local Policies
Western Riverside County MSHCP
The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional HCP focusing on conservation of species and their associated habitats in western Riverside County. The goal of the MSHCP is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within a rapidly urbanizing region.

The approval of the MSHCP and execution of the Implementing Agreement (IA) by the wildlife agencies allows signatories of the IA to issue “take” authorizations for all species covered by the MSHCP, including state- and federal-listed species as well as other identified sensitive species and/or their habitats. Each city or local jurisdiction will impose a Development Mitigation Fee for projects within their jurisdiction. With payment of the mitigation fee to the County and compliance with the survey requirements of the MSHCP where required, full mitigation in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), CESA, and FESA will be granted. The Development Mitigation Fee varies according to project size and project description. The fee for industrial development is $7,382 per acre (County Ordinance 810.2). Payment of the mitigation fee and compliance with the requirements of Section 6.0 of the MSHCP are intended to provide full mitigation under CEQA, NEPA, CESA, and FESA for impacts to the species and habitats covered by the MSHCP pursuant to agreements with the USFWS, the CDFW, and/or any other appropriate participating regulatory agencies and as set forth in the IA for the MSHCP.

Appendix C —Regulations
2A- Plants PresumedExtirpated in California, But More CommonElsewhere 2B- Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere 3- Plants about WhichMore Information is Needed - A Review List 4- Plants ofLimitedDistribution - AWatch List
Threat Ranks
.1- Seriously threatenedin California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/ high degree and immediacy of threat)
.2- Moderately threatenedin California (20-80% occurrences threatened/ moderate degree and immediacy of threat)
.3- Not very threatenedin California (<20% of occurrences threatened/ low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threatsknown).

LocalPolicies
Western Riverside CountyMSHCP
The MSHCP is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional HCP focusing on conservation of species and their associated habitats in western Riverside County. The goal of the MSHCP is to maintain biological and ecological diversity within arapidly urbanizing region.

The approval of the MSHCP and execution of the Implementing Agreement (IA) by the wildlife agencies allows signatories of theIA to issue “take” authorizations for all species coveredby the MSHCP, including state- and federal-listed species as well as other identified sensitive species and/or their habitats. Each city or local jurisdiction will impose a Development MitigationFee for projects within their jurisdiction. With payment of the mitigation fee to the County and compliance with the survey requirements of the MSHCP where required, full mitigation in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), CESA, and FESA will be granted. The Development MitigationFee varies according to project size andproject description. The fee for industrial development is $7,382 per acre (County Ordinance 810.2). Payment of the mitigation fee and compliance with the requirements of Section 6.0 of the MSHCP are intended to provide full mitigation under CEQA, NEPA, CESA, and FESA for impacts to the species and habitats covered by the MSHCP pursuant to agreements withtheUSFWS, the CDFW, and/or any other appropriateparticipatingregulatory agenciesandas setforth in the IA for the MSHCP.

KIS MI)
957 <
Appendix C – Regulations
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps Regulatory Branch regulates activities pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the State agencies, the CDFG regulates activities under the Fish and Game Code Section 1600-1616, and the Regional Board regulates activities pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.

FederalRegulations
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
In accordance with the RevisedDefinition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming (September 8, 2023), “waters of the United Sates” are defined as follows:
(a) Waters of the UnitedStates means:
(1) Waters which are:
(i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptibleto use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas;or
(iii) Interstate waters;
(2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United Statesunder this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section; (3) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that arerelatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water; (4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters:
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters; (5) Intrastate lakes andponds not identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowingbodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified inparagraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section (b) The following arenot “waters of the United States” even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(2) through (5) of this section:
(1) Waste treatment systems,including treatment ponds or lagoons, designedto meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act;
(2) Prior converted cropland designatedby the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change ofuse, whichmeans that the areais no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status asprior converted KIS MI) 958 <
Appendix C – Regulations
cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA; (3) Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;
(4) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing;
(6) Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and
(8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow.
(c) In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Wetlands means 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. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
(2) Adjacent means having a continuous surface connection (3) High tide line means the line of intersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reached by a rising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data, by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, a more or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages, or other suitable means that delineate the general height reached by a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur with periodic frequency but does not include storm surges in which there is a departure from the normal or predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coast by strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm.
(4) Ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.

Appendix C —Regulations
croplandby any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdictionremains withEPA;
(3) Ditches (includingroadside ditches) excavatedwholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;
(4) Artificially irrigated areas that wouldrevert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds createdby excavating or diking dry land to collect andretain water and which areused exclusively for suchpurposes as stock watering, irrigation, settlingbasins, or rice growing;
(6) Artificialreflecting or swimmingpools or other small ornamental bodies of water createdby excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions createdin dry land incidental to construction activity andpits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless anduntil the construction or excavation operation is abandonedand the resultingbody of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and
(8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterizedby low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow.
(c) In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Wetlands means those areas that areinundated or saturatedby surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adaptedfor life in saturatedsoil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
(2) Adjacent meanshaving a continuous surface connection (3)High tide line means the line ofintersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reachedby arising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data,by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, amore or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages,or other suitable means that delineate the generalheight reachedby arising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur withperiodic frequency but doesnot include storm surges in which there is a departure from the normal or predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coastby strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm.
(4) Ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore establishedby the fluctuations of water and indicatedby physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changesin the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.

CONSULTING
n
id
i)
959
Appendix C – Regulations
(5) Tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a predictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects.

Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity which may result in any discharge to waters of the United States must provide certification from the State or Indian tribe in which the discharge originates. This certification provides for the protection of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters, addresses impacts to water quality that may result from issuance of federal permits, and helps insure that federal actions will not violate water quality standards of the State or Indian tribe. In California, there are nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Regional Board) that issue or deny certification for discharges to waters of the United States and waters of the State, including wetlands, within their geographical jurisdiction. The State Water Resources Control Board assumed this responsibility when a project has the potential to result in the discharge to waters within multiple Regional Boards.

State Regulations
Fish and Game Code
Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et. seq. establishes a fee-based process to ensure that projects conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or compensation is provided.

Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any person, state, or local governmental agency or public utility to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that will do one or more of the following:
(1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; (2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or
(3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake.

Fish and Game Code Section 1602 applies to all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the State. CDFW’s regulatory authority extends to include riparian habitat (including wetlands) supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions. Generally, the CDFW takes jurisdiction to the top of bank of the stream or to the outer limit of the adjacent riparian vegetation (outer drip line), whichever is greater. Notification is generally required for any project that will take place in or in the vicinity of a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries. This includes rivers or streams that flow at least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks that support fish or other aquatic life and watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that support or have supported riparian vegetation. A Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement would be required if impacts to identified CDFW jurisdictional areas occur.

Appendix C —Regulations
(5) Tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in apredictable andmeasurablerhythm or cycle due to the gravitationalpulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in apredictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects.

Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity which may result in any discharge to waters of the United Statesmust provide certification from the State or Indian tribe in which the discharge originates. This certification provides for the protection of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters, addresses impacts to water quality that may result from issuance of federal permits, and helps insure that federal actions will not violate water quality standards of the State or Indian tribe. In California, there arenine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RegionalBoard) that issue or deny certification for discharges to waters of theUnited Statesand waters of the State, including wetlands, within their geographical jurisdiction. The State Water Resources Control Board assumedthis responsibility whenaproject has thepotential to result in the dischargeto waters within multiple Regional Boards.

State Regulations
Fish and Game Code
FishandGameCode Sections1600 et. seq.establishesa fee-basedprocessto ensurethatprojects conducted in and aroundlakes,rivers, or streams do not adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequatemitigation and/or compensationis provided.

Fish andGame Code Section 1602 requires any person, state,or local governmental agency or public utility to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that will do one or more of the following:
(1) substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; (2) substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or
(3) deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it canpass into ariver, stream, or lake.

Fish and Game Code Section 1602 applies to allperennial, intermittent, and ephemeralrivers, streams,and lakes in the State. CDFW’s regulatory authority extends to include riparian habitat (including wetlands) supportedby ariver, stream,or lake regardlessof the presence or absence ofhydric soils and saturatedsoil conditions. Generally, the CDFW takes jurisdiction to the top ofbank of the streamor to the outer limit of the adjacent riparian vegetation (outer drip line), whichever is greater. Notification is generally required for any project that will take place in or in the vicinity of a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries. This includes rivers or streamsthat flow at leastperiodically or permanently through abedor channelwithbanks that support fish or other aquatic life and watercourseshaving a surface or subsurface flow that support or have supportedriparian vegetation. A Section 1602 StreambedAlteration Agreement wouldbe required if impacts to identified CDFW jurisdictional areas occur.

KIS MI)
960 <
Appendix C – Regulations
Porter Cologne Act
The California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives the State very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Porter-Cologne Act has become an important tool in the post SWANCC and Rapanos regulatory environment, with respect to the state’s authority over isolated and insignificant waters. Generally, any person proposing to discharge waste into a water body that could affect its water quality must file a Report of Waste Discharge in the event that there is no Section 404/401 nexus. Although “waste” is partially defined as any waste substance associated with human habitation, the Regional Board also interprets this to include fill discharged into water bodies.

Appendix C —Regulations
Porter Cologne Act
The CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality ControlAct gives the State very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Porter-Cologne Act has become an important tool in the post SWANCC and Rapanos regulatory environment, with respect to the state’s authority over isolated and insignificant waters. Generally, any personproposing to dischargewasteinto a water body that could affect its water quality must file aReport of Waste Discharge in the event that there is no Section 404/401 nexus. Although “waste” is partially defined as any waste substance associatedwith human habitation, the Regional Board also interprets this to include fill dischargedinto water bodies.

MI)
961 <
Appendix C Delineation of State and Federal
Jurisdictional Waters
Appendix C Delineation of State and Federal
Jurisdictional Waters
962

BELAGO PARK
TTM 38157 AND 38158

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

DELINEATION OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Prepared For:

EPD Solutions
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Contact: Selena Kelaher
Prepared By:

ELMT Consulting, Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 2711
Contact: Travis J. McGill
909.816.1646
March 2025

BELAGO PARK
TTM 38157 AND38158

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

DELINEATION OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
PreparedFor:

EPD Solutions
3333 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Contact: Selena Kelaher
PreparedBy:

ELMT Consulting,Inc.
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098
Santa Ana, California 2711
Contact: Travis J. McGill
909.816.1646
March 2025
963

BELAGO PARK

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

DELINEATION OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
The undersigned certify that the statements furnished in this report and exhibits present data and information required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presented is a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge and beliefs.

Travis J. McGill
Director
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D.

Managing Director
March 2025

BELAGO PARK

CITY OF MORENO VALLEY, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

DELINEATION OF STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL WATERS
Theundersignedcertify that the statements furnishedin thisreport andexhibitspresentdataandinformation required for this biological evaluation, and the facts, statements, and information presentedis a complete and accurate account of the findings and conclusions to the best of our knowledge andbeliefs.

Travis J. McGill
Director
ow!Ihe
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D.

ManagingDirector
March 2025
964
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters ES-1 Executive Summary
ELMT Consulting (ELMT) has prepared this Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional report for the Belago Park Project and associated off-site improvement areas located in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California. The jurisdictional delineation documents the regulatory authority of the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Section 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and Sections 1600 et. seq. of the California Fish and Game Code. 1
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site at Redlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering off-site to the south.

The onsite ephemeral drainage feature is not relatively permanent, standing, or a continuously flowing body of water and, therefore, will not qualify as waters of the United States under the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v. EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336). However, the onsite drainage feature will qualify was waters of the State and fall under the regulatory authority of the Regional Board and CDFW. Table ES-1 identifies the on-site jurisdictional including the total acreage of jurisdiction and anticipated impacts for each regulatory agency within the boundaries of the project site.

Table ES-1: Jurisdictional Area and Impact Analysis
Jurisdictional
Feature
Regional Board Jurisdiction CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed On-Site Jurisdiction
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Jurisdictional Impacts
Acreage (Linear Feet)
On-Site Jurisdiction
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Jurisdictional Impacts
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) TOTAL 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; Regional Board CWA Section Report of Waste Discharge; and CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA). Refer to Sections 1-7 for a detailed analysis of site conditions and regulatory requirements.
1 The field surveys for this jurisdictional delineation were conducted on January 26, 2023 pursuant to the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0 (Corps 2008); and Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports (Corps 2017); The MESA Field Guide: Mapping Episodic Stream Activity (CDFW 2014); and a Review of Stream Processes and Forms in Dryland Watersheds (CDFW 2010).

Executive Summary
ELMT Consulting (ELMT) has prepared this Delineation of State andFederal Jurisdictional report for the Belago Park Project and associated off-site improvement areas located in the City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California. The jurisdictional delineation documents the regulatory authority of the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), and the California Department ofFish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Section 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and Sections 1600 et. seq. of the CaliforniaFish and Game Code."
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends to the southwest from the northeast corner of the project site at Redlands Avenue for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering off-site to the south.

According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed to accommodate storm flows associatedwith the agricultural activities that once occurred within and surrounding the site. This drainagereceives flows via a box culvert under Redlands Boulevard. This drainage exits the middle of the southern boundary of the project site where it flows into four box culverts under Cactus Avenue.

The onsite ephemeraldrainage featureis notrelatively permanent, standing, or a continuously flowingbody of water and, therefore, will not qualify as waters of the United Statesunder the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v.EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336). However, the onsite drainage feature will qualify was waters of the State and fall under the regulatory authority of the Regional Board and CDFW. Table ES-1 identifies the on-site jurisdictional including the total acreage of jurisdiction and anticipated impacts for eachregulatory agency within the boundaries of the project site.

Table ES-1: Jurisdictional Area andImpact Analysis
On-Site Jurisdiction JurisdictionalImpacts On-Site Jurisdiction JurisdictionalImpacts Acreage (Linear Feet) Acreage (Linear Feet) Acreage (Linear Feet) | Acreage (Linear Feet) Drainage 1 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) TOTAL 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296) The project applicant will likely be required to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas: Corps Approved Jurisdictional Determination/Waiver; RegionalBoard CWA SectionReport of WasteDischarge; and CDFW Section 1602 StreambedAlteration Agreement (SAA). Refer to Sections 1-7 for a detailed analysis of site conditions and regulatory requirements.
1 The field surveys for this jurisdictional delineation were conducted on January 26, 2023 pursuant to theRegionalSupplement to the Corps ofEngineers WetlandDelineationManual:Arid WestRegion, Version 2.0 (Corps 2008); andMinimum Standards for Acceptance ofAquatic Resources Delineation Reports (Corps 2017); TheMESA Field Guide: MappingEpisodic Stream Activity (CDFW 2014); and aReview ofStreamProcesses andForms inDryland Watersheds (CDFW 2010).

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters ES-1 965
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters i Table of Contents
Section 1 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................ 1 Section 2 Regulations.......................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ..................................................................................................... 7

2.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board......................................................................................... 7

2.3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ................................................................................. 8 Section 3 Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 9

3.1 Waters of the United States........................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Waters of the State ...................................................................................................................... 11

3.2.1 Regional Water Quality Control Board....................................................................................... 11

3.2.2 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ............................................................................... 11 Section 4 Literature Review ............................................................................................................. 12

4.1 Watershed Review ...................................................................................................................... 12

4.2 Local Climate.............................................................................................................................. 12

4.3 USGS Topographic Quadrangle ................................................................................................. 13

4.4 Aerial Photograph ....................................................................................................................... 13

4.5 Soils............................................................................................................................................. 13

4.6 Hydric Soils List of California.................................................................................................... 14

4.7 National Wetlands Inventory ...................................................................................................... 14

4.8 Flood Zone .................................................................................................................................. 14 Section 5 Site Conditions .................................................................................................................. 16

5.1 Jurisdictional Features................................................................................................................. 16

5.1.1 Drainage Features ....................................................................................................................... 16

5.1.2 Wetland Features......................................................................................................................... 17 Section 6 Findings.............................................................................................................................. 18

6.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Determination ........................................................................... 18

6.1.1 Waters of the United States Determination................................................................................. 18

6.1.2 Wetland Determination............................................................................................................... 18

6.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board....................................................................................... 18

6.3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ............................................................................... 18 Section 7 Regulatory Approval Process .......................................................................................... 21

7.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ................................................................................................... 21

7.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board....................................................................................... 21

7.3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ............................................................................... 21 Table of Contents
Section 1 INEFOAUCLION.......cceeeeiirieieecte eccentrics cere cre rer eer r esse erent ene cree nen ene nanenanenees1

1.1 Project LOCATION.....cooueiiiiiiieieeteeter eres tester erates tesa teste sates b estes at esas esse te eet esate sates atest enntenn1

1.2 Project DeSCIIPLION. «.. cece rereeet ee teee esate ste nse s beste e stents emt e sane sane sarenaeenn 1 Section 2 REGUIALIONS ........ooeeeeiiiierreeeter teeter errr reneecreecaesar ernestsennasaesnesserenenanenerenens7

2.1 U.S. Army Corps of ENZINEETS .....cccueeiiiiiiiieiieiie rere eects eeseersseensenesesnes eens7

2.2 Regional Water Quality ControlBoard............ccooceeeiiiiiiniiieiieeeneniente sees 7 23 California Department ofFish and Wildlife..........cccociieiiiiiniieceecentre 8 Section 3 MEthOAOLOZY.........ooeieiiee eect ernest esteseeseessensensesmeeeenereene9

3.1 Waters of theUnited States..........coceriirieientinenreree reer ceerereerrs erronseesesseeeserneneronenanen9

3.2 Waters Of the State........cccoiriiiieir cerns errors tsetsesateen eraneasenenanenee11

3.2.1 Regional Water Quality ControlBoard..............cocciieiiieiiiininenieneeerer cetera eeeeee 11

3.2.2 California Department ofFish and Wildlife...........ccoeiiiiininioiiiiee cere 11 Section 4 Literature REVIEW ........c.cocccieiriieriniecteeenierereerr creer tetera serenesanesesenesasensesarsaeneseraneneses12

4.1 WatershedREVIEW ........cociriiiieinecerre rrr renee err sereerreraeestseteresareesresoneesenenanenee12

4.2 LOCA] CHIMALE........ccceriiirereneeeeceeeeererere trent eseteresaeesereresareesonessessesareeaerosarenesesersnenessenneenne12

4.3 USGS Topographic Quadrangle............cccceeieriieiiniiniintertert erecteeteeseeereeereesreeeeeeeee 13 44 AerialPhotograph..........ccooioiiic eet eters terete etcetera esate sense estes eat 13

4.5 SOLIS. coerce eee eterno sects sateen ese erase sare renee reat erent ere sateen ene naneaeenene 13

4.6 Hydric Soils List ofCalifornia...........ccoeiiriiiiiieinreeereee reneerenters essesseeseesree14

4.7 National Wetlands INVENTOTY .......coooiiiiiiierereee rerereece eerste estes esateensnes 14

4.8 FLOOAZONE... oneness teteraretroratersneseeraserssanesereennesseerenteresanenenenenane14 Section5 Site COMAILIONS .....c..coiiiieeieeeerr erencesteste rrr rereresertesteeesareerereranenessesaeones16

5.1 JurisdictionalFeatures........c.cceveeueriererreirrerre rte sereneserenaerasesesteresereneraneneseresanones16

5.1.1 Drainage FEAUIES ......c.coerieiiriiiieiieeie eereiereteeter seestestentesatestessessetesetesatesatesanesatestestenn16

5.1.2 WetlandFeatures........ccouerieirienenrircteencrcree rrereeerenececereerneserenessenseeresseenecaneserenenanensnenesanen17 Section 6 FAIAIIES.. coerce reese scree eer ere eee rresse sae e ees an esas ene nan eas sme sn ene naeene 18

6.1 U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers Determination..........c.cccceceeerrcennenienienseneeeeereeeeeeeseeseeseen18

6.1.1 Waters of the United States Determination............cveereeeerceeeenirrnererirerenirereeencrceeererreneeenenane18

6.1.2 WetlandDetermination...........ccocevrerrererrerercreerererrerererrereeeneresessesstssteesersreneseserresessseessensesarenes 18

6.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board.............cooeriiiieiiiineeenienereeeeeteeete sessonee18

6.3 California Department ofFish and Wildlife...........ccoooiiiiiiiiiiniiii cece 18 Section 7 Regulatory ApprovalProcess ............cccoiieirnenenienteneninnerererneseeesesseeeeserssereresreneses21

7.1 U.S. Army Corps of ENZINEETS ........coiuiiiiriiiiieireitrete etreeste teetenies eetesetesateseeseeseeseeene21

7.2 Regional Water Quality ControlBoard............cooeeiriiieiieiineneeenenereeeeeeee sees 21

7.3 California Department ofFish and Wildlife ...........ccooiiiniiiiiniincceeeeeereeeceeees 21 BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters i
966
Table of Contents
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters ii

7.4 Recommendations....................................................................................................................... 21 Section 8 References.......................................................................................................................... 22

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity................................................................................................................ 4 Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity ........................................................................................................................ 5 Exhibit 3: Project Site.......................................................................................................................... 6 Exhibit 4: Soils .................................................................................................................................. 15 Exhibit 5: Jurisdictional Areas........................................................................................................... 20 TABLES
Table 1: Regional Board Jurisdictional Waters .............................................................................. 18 Table 2: CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed ...................................................................................... 19

APPENDIX
Appendix A Documentation
Appendix B Site Photographs
Appendix C Methodology
Table of Contents
74 RecoOMMENAALIONS.......cocuiiiiiiiieiere eect seeeeeersteseesessessatesrensensenseeens21 Section8 REFETEIICES eee etcetera estesteesete eeesseseeeseesmas22

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1: REGIONAL VICIILY...c.eeiieiiieiieeieeiee etter estereect eersteesoteric seesasesasamas4 Exhibit 2: SHEEVICTIILY.eeeneieeieieieieeit erect eee etree eer ee sree see be eben eset setae eases suas sabe sabe nase neseaneanne5 Exhibit 3: PIOJECT SHEE... neice etree ects eeeseesreeseeseeeaeserenesessease sane6 Exhibit 4: SOILS«eee eeereneeeeeeeeeeeeeeebenbenbeeneeeeereeeneeearen15 Exhibit 5: JUriSAICtioNalATEAS.......eiiiuiiiieeieeieeteter tetera esreeseesbeeen ean20 TABLES
Table 1: RegionalBoard Jurisdictional Waters ..........ccceecierericerirnineerenieneere teetersseeseeseen 18 Table 2: CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed..........ccoociiiiiiieinieniieeieeieere reeceeeeeee eres 19

APPENDIX
Appendix A Documentation
Appendix B Site Photographs
Appendix C ~~Methodology
BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters ii
967
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 1 Section 1 Introduction
This delineation has been prepared for the proposed Belago Park Project and in order to document the jurisdictional authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ (Corps), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Section 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code. The analysis presented in this report is supported by a field survey of site conditions conducted on January 26, 2023.

This jurisdictional delineation explains the methodology undertaken by ELMT Consulting (ELMT) to define the regulatory authority of the aforementioned regulatory agencies and documents the findings made by ELMT. This report presents our best effort at documenting the jurisdictional boundaries using the most up-to-date regulations, written policy, and guidance from the regulatory agencies. Ultimately the regulatory agencies make the final determination of jurisdictional boundaries.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site and off-site improvement areas are generally located south of State Route 60, west of State Route 79, north of State Route 74, and east of Interstate 215 City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California (Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity). The site is depicted on the Sunnymead quadrangle of the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series in Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West (Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cactus Avenue and Redlands Boulevard Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 478-100-012 and - 035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; and 478-120-001, -002, -005, and -006. The offsite street improvement areas are located on the adjacent Cactus Avenue, Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street and the off-site city park improvement is located at Assessor’s Parcel Number 478-120-027 northeast from the project site (Exhibit 3, Project Site).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The The Project proposes the development of 310 single-family residential units, two neighborhood parks, and associated landscaping, perimeter fencing/walls, sidewalk, and lighting improvements on 14 applicantowned parcels that expands 36.82 acres (identified as Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B, and 3). Additionally, the Project would develop a 3.84-acre public park on behalf of the City in the northeastern portion of the site, on portion of a 7.6-acre City-owned parcel (APN 478-120-027). The public park is proposed to include a 10,000 SF splash pad; a restroom building; shaded picnic area; open space with lawns walkways, and fitness stations; and a parking lot with 100 spaces. In addition, the Project applicant will dedicate a 0.63-acre portion of remnant parcels to the City, which will be transferred to APN 478-120-027, increasing the parcel from 7.6 acres to 8.22 acres. Therefore, upon development of the 3.84-acre park, the remaining 4.38-acres on consolidated APN 478-120-027 would be graded but would not be developed as part of the proposed Project.

The Project would implement infrastructure improvements, which include the extension of an existing potable water line beneath Wilmot Street, the connection to adjacent water, sewer, and stormwater facilities, Section 1 Introduction
This delineation has been prepared for the proposed Belago Park Project and in order to document the jurisdictional authority of theU.S. Army Corps ofEngineers’ (Corps), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), and the California Department ofFish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to Section 401 and 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, andSections 1600 ef seq. of theCaliforniaFish andGameCode.Theanalysispresentedin this report is supportedbya field survey of site conditions conducted on January 26, 2023.

This jurisdictional delineation explains the methodology undertaken by ELMT Consulting (ELMT) to define the regulatory authority ofthe aforementionedregulatory agenciesand documents the findings made by ELMT. This report presents our best effort at documenting the jurisdictionalboundaries using the most up-to-dateregulations, writtenpolicy, andguidance from theregulatory agencies.Ultimately the regulatory agenciesmake the final determination of jurisdictional boundaries.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Theproject site and off-site improvement areasare generally located south of StateRoute 60, west of State Route 79, north of State Route 74, and east of Interstate 215 City of Moreno Valley, Riverside County, California (Exhibit 1,Regional Vicinity). The site is depicted on the Sunnymeadquadrangle of the United StatesGeological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map seriesin Section 14 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West (Exhibit 2, Site Vicinity). Specifically, the project site is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cactus Avenue andRedlandsBoulevard Assessor’sParcelNumbers 478-100-012 and - 035; 478-110-001, -002, -003, -004, -005, -006, and -007; and 478-120-001, -002, -005, and -006. The offsite street improvement areas are located on the adjacent Cactus Avenue, Brodiaca Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, and Wilmot Street and the off-site city park improvement is located at Assessor’s Parcel Number 478-120-027 northeast from the project site (Exhibit 3,Project Site).

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The The Project proposes the development of 310 single-family residential units, two neighborhoodparks, andassociatedlandscaping,perimeter fencing/walls, sidewalk, andlightingimprovements on 14 applicantownedparcels that expands 36.82 acres (identified asPlanning Areas 1, 2A, 2B, and 3). Additionally, the Project would develop a 3.84-acrepublic park on behalf of the City in the northeasternportion of the site, on portion of a 7.6-acre City-owned parcel (APN 478-120-027). The public park is proposed to include a 10,000 SF splashpad; arestroombuilding; shadedpicnic area;open spacewithlawns walkways, and fitness stations; and a parking lot with 100 spaces. In addition, the Project applicant will dedicate a 0.63-acre portion ofremnant parcels to the City, which will be transferred to APN 478-120-027, increasing theparcel from 7.6 acres to 8.22 acres. Therefore, upon development of the 3.84-acrepark, the remaining 4.38-acres on consolidated APN 478-120-027 would be graded but would not be developed as part of the proposed Project.

The Project would implement infrastructure improvements, which include the extension of an existing potable water linebeneathWilmot Street, the connection to adjacent water, sewer, and stormwater facilities, BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 1
968
Introduction
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 2 and the implementation of 9.72 acres of off-site roadway improvements on Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, and Wilmot Street. Flood control improvements to the existing RCFCWCD channel on the Project site would also be carried out as part of the Project. The Project would include vacation of a planned (unbuilt) roadway alignment (Richards Avenue).

The following offsite areas will be a part of the Project as described below:

The proposed Project would widen the easterly portion of Wilmot Street by 19 feet, resulting in a 66-foot-wide roadway and would also extend the existing road approximately 0.12 miles south to build out the existing gravel portion of the road that connects to Cactus Avenue. Wilmot Street improvements would encompass approximately 1.39 acres.

Brodiaea Avenue improvements would encompass approximately 2.69 acres.

Flood Control Improvements
The project would improve Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes, with a base width of 12’, a depth of Introduction
and the implementation of 9.72 acres of off-site roadway improvements on Brodiaea Avenue, Redlands Boulevard, Cactus Avenue, and Wilmot Street. Flood control improvements to the existing RCFCWCD channel on the Project site would also be carried out as part of the Project. The Project would include vacation of a planned (unbuilt) roadway alignment (Richards Avenue).

Approvals required for the Project include a General Plan Amendment, zone change, two Tentative Tract Maps, condition use permits for Planned Unit Development permits (PUD)s, and a Development Agreement. Refer to Attachment A, SitePlan. Planning Areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3 are distributed throughout the two Tentative Tract Maps. Map 38157 includes Planning Area 1, which is located within the southwest portion of theProject Map 38158 includes ofPlanning Area 2A, 2B, and 3.

The following offsite areaswill be apart of the Project as describedbelow:

Street Improvements
The proposed Project would widen the northerly half of the Cactus Avenue roadway by 44 feet along the entireProject site frontage, which would encompass2.39 acresand wouldresult in a fully built 88-foot-wide roadway. The proposedProject would also implement a ClassII bike lane along Cactus Avenue.

The proposedProject would widen the easterly portion of Wilmot Streetby 19 feet, resulting in a 66-foot-wide roadway and would also extend the existing road approximately 0.12 miles south to build out the existing gravel portion of the road that connects to Cactus Avenue. Wilmot Street improvements would encompass approximately 1.39 acres.

In addition, Brodiaea Avenue, which is currently a gravel road, wouldbe built out and widened to its full width of 79 feet, along the Project site frontage from the Wilmot Street/ Brodiaea Avenue intersection east to the Brodiaea Avenue/ Redlands Boulevard intersection. Completion of street improvements would alsoinclude sidewalk improvements along thenorthernboundary ofthe road.

Brodiaea Avenue improvements would encompass approximately 2.69 acres.

Redlands Boulevard would also be widened to its full width of 79 feet, along the Project site frontage from the Brodiaea/ Redlands Boulevard intersection south to the Redlands Boulevard/ CactusAvenue intersection. Completion of streetimprovements would alsoinclude the addition of araisedmedian onRedlandsBoulevard and sidewalk improvements along the easternboundary of the road. RedlandsBoulevard improvements would encompass approximately 3.25 acres.

Flood Control Improvements
The project would improve Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD) Line F with a concrete lined trapezoidal channel with 1.5 to 1 side slopes, with a base width of 12°, a depth of BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 2
969
Introduction
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 3 10’ and 20’ access roads along each side of the channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend from Redlands Boulevard with a connection to the existing box culvert crossing of Redlands Boulevard and extend downstream to Cactus Avenue to join the existing pipe culvert crossing. See attached typical section. TTM 38157 will extend RCFCD SD Line G-11 from its westerly boundary to Wilmot Street within Cactus Avenue. The nominal size will be 36” to 48” RCP.

Introduction
10° and 20’ access roads along each side of the channel as a part of the development of TTM 38158. This line will extend fromRedlandsBoulevardwithaconnectionto the existingbox culvert crossing ofRedlandsBoulevard and extend downstream to CactusAvenue to join the existingpipe culvert crossing. Seeattachedtypical section. TTM 38157 will extendRCFCD SD Line G-11 from its westerly boundary to Wilmot Streetwithin CactusAvenue. The nominal size will be 36” to 48” RCP.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters
970
^_

RIVERSIDE

SAN BERNARDINO

SAN DIEGO
ORANGE

LOS ANGELES
Regional Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 1
O
Source: World Street Map, Riverside County
0 2.5 5 10
Miles

PROJECT

LOCATION
^_

PROJECT

LOCATION
+
I
Fi]
Pans d vo, F > FA
i is
: Ed B YJ.

BELAGO PARK
0 25 5 10 20 FA A ee ed Wiles R egional | VicinityVicinit Source: World Street Map, Riverside County Exhibit 1
ald F| NT Kalkz CONSULTING 971
Site Vicinity

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 3 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500 O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
»
Wilmot St
Se)
ie ml
Rediands”Bivd?
- Ap
TRLA ny LD) CHCtusTAVE
| | oo © BELAGOPARK
0 125 250 500 i ] A Feet Project Site
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 3 as CONSULTING 973
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 7 Section 2 Regulations
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps Regulatory Division regulates activities pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.

The Regional Board regulates activities pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act and the CDFW regulates activities under Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code.

2.1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Since 1972, the Corps and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have jointly regulated the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. The Corps and EPA define “fill material” to include any “material placed in waters of the United States where the material has the effect of: (i) replacing any portion of a water of the United States with dry land; or (ii) changing the bottom elevation of any portion of the waters of the United States.” Examples include, but are not limited to, sand, rock, clay, construction debris, wood chips, and “materials used to create any structure or infrastructure in the waters of the United States.” The terms waters of the United States and wetlands are defined under CWA Regulations 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §328.3 (a) through (b).

2.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity which may result in any discharge to waters of the United States must provide certification from the State or Indian tribe in which the discharge originates. This certification provides for the protection of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters, addresses impacts to water quality that may result from issuance of federal permits and helps insure that federal actions will not violate water quality standards of the State or Indian tribe. In California, there are nine Regional Boards that issue or deny certification for discharges to waters of the United States and waters of the State, including wetlands, within their geographical jurisdiction. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) assumes this responsibility when a project has the potential to result in the discharge to waters within multiple Regional Boards.

Additionally, the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives the State very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act has become an important tool post Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. United States Corps of Engineers 2 (SWANCC) and Rapanos v. United States 3 (Rapanos) court cases with respect to the State’s regulatory authority over isolated and insignificant waters. Generally, any applicant proposing to discharge waste into a water body must file a Report of Waste 2 Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001) 3 Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006) Section 2 Regulations
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The CorpsRegulatoryDivisionregulates activitiespursuant to Section 404 ofthe CWA, Section 10 of the Rivers andHarbors Act, and Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act.

2.1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Since 1972, the Corps and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have jointly regulated the dischargeofdredgedor fill materialinto watersoftheUnitedStates,including wetlands,pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. The Corps andEPA define “fill material” to include any “materialplacedin waters of the United States where the material has the effect of: (i) replacing any portion of a water of the United States with dry land; or (ii) changing the bottom elevation of any portion of the waters of the United States.” Examples include, but are not limited to, sand, rock, clay, construction debris, wood chips, and “materials used to create any structure or infrastructure in the waters of the United States.” The terms waters of the United States and wetlands are defined under CWA Regulations 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §328.3 (a) through (b).

2.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity which may result in any discharge to waters of the United Statesmust provide certification from the State or Indian tribe in which the discharge originates. This certification provides for the protection of the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of waters, addresses impacts to water quality that may result fromissuanceof federalpermits andhelps insure that federal actions willnot violate water quality standards of the Stateor Indian tribe. In California, there arenine RegionalBoards that issue or deny certification for discharges to waters of the United States and waters of the State, including wetlands, within their geographical jurisdiction. The State Water Resources ControlBoard (SWRCB) assumes this responsibility when aproject has the potential to result in the discharge to waters withinmultiple RegionalBoards.

Additionally, the CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives the Statevery broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act has become an important tool post Solid Waste Agency ofNorthern Cook County vs. UnitedStatesCorps ofEngineers’(SWANCC) andRapanos v. United States’ (Rapanos) court caseswithrespectto the State’sregulatory authority over isolated andinsignificant waters. Generally, any applicant proposing to discharge waste into a water body must file aReport of Waste 2 Solid Waste Agency ofNorthern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers, 531U.S. 159 (2001) 3 Rapanos v. United States,547 U.S. 715 (2006)
BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 7
974
Regulations
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 8 Discharge in the event that there is no Section 404/401 nexus. Although “waste” is partially defined as any waste substance associated with human habitation, the Regional Board also interprets this to include discharge of dredged and fill material into water bodies.

Under the State Water Resources Control Board Sate Wetland Definition, an area is a wetland if, under normal circumstances, (1) the area has continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate caused by groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both; (2) the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and (3) the area’s vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the area lacks vegetation.

2.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code establishes a fee-based process to ensure that projects conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not substantially adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or compensation is provided. Pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, a notification must be submitted to the CDFW for any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow or alter the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated biological resources) of a river or stream or use material from a streambed. One CDFW guidance document, although not a formally adopted rule or policy, requires notification for activities taking place within rivers or streams that flow perennially or episodically and that are defined by the area in which surface water currently flows, or has flowed, over a given course during the historic hydrologic regime, and where the width of its course can reasonably be identified by physical and biological indicators. If the project will not “substantially adversely affect an existing fish or wildlife resource,” following notification to CDFW, the project may commence without an agreement with CDFW. (Fish & G. Code, § 1602(a)(4)(A)(i).)
Regulations
Discharge in the event that there is no Section 404/401nexus. Although “waste” is partially defined as any waste substance associated with human habitation, the Regional Board also interprets this to include discharge of dredged and fill material into water bodies.

Under the State Water Resources Control Board Sate Wetland Definition, an area is a wetland if, under normal circumstances,(1) the areahas continuous or recurrent saturation of the upper substrate causedby groundwater, or shallow surface water, or both; (2) the duration of such saturation is sufficient to cause anaerobic conditions in the upper substrate; and (3) the area’s vegetation is dominated by hydrophytes or the arealacks vegetation.

2.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Sections 1600 ef seq. of the California Fish and Game Code establishes a fee-basedprocess to ensure that projects conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not substantially adversely impact fish and wildlife resources, or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or compensation is provided. Pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, a notification must be submitted to the CDFW for any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow or alter the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associatedbiological resources) of a river or stream or use material from a streambed.One CDFW guidance document, althoughnot a formally adoptedrule orpolicy,requires notification for activities takingplace withinrivers or streamsthat flowperennially or episodically and that are defined by the area in which surface water currently flows, or has flowed, over a given course during the historic hydrologic regime, and where the width of its course can reasonably be identified by physical andbiological indicators. If the project will not “substantially adversely affect an existing fish or wildlife resource,” followingnotification to CDFW, theproject may commencewithout an agreementwithCDFW. (Fish & G. Code, § 1602(a)(4)(A)(1).)
BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 8
975
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 9 Section 3 Methodology
The analysis presented in this report is supported by field surveys and verification of site conditions conducted on January 26, 2023. ELMT conducted a field delineation to determine the jurisdictional limits of “waters of the State” and jurisdictional streambed (including potential wetlands), located within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas. While in the field, jurisdictional features were recorded on an aerial base map at a scale of 1" = 50' using topographic contours and visible landmarks as guidelines. Data points were obtained with a Garmin Map62 Global Positioning System to record and identify specific widths for ordinary high water mark (OHWM) indicators and the locations of photographs, soil pits, and other pertinent jurisdictional features, if present. This data was then transferred as a .shp file and added to the Project's jurisdictional exhibits. The jurisdictional exhibits were prepared using ESRI ArcInfo Version 10 software.

3.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
In the absence of adjacent wetlands, the limits of the Corps jurisdiction in non-tidal waters extend to the OHWM, which is defined as “ . . . that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.”3F3F4 Indicators of an
OHWM are defined in A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (Corps 2008). In addition to characteristics listed above, wracking; vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; sediment sorting; leaf litter disturbed or washed away; scour; deposition; multiple observed flow events; bed and banks; water staining; and/or change in plant community.

In accordance with the Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming (September 8, 2023), “waters of the United Sates” are defined as follows:
(a) Waters of the United States means:
(1) Waters which are:
(i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas; or
(iii)Interstate waters;
(2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section; (3) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water; (4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters:
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or 4 CWA regulations 33 CFR §328.3(e).

Section3 Methodology
The analysis presented in this report is supported by field surveys and verification of site conditions conducted on January 26, 2023. ELMT conducteda field delineation to determine the jurisdictional limits of “waters of the State” and jurisdictional streambed (including potential wetlands), located within the boundaries oftheproject site andoff-site improvement areas.While in the field,jurisdictional featureswere recorded on an aerial basemap at a scale of 1" = 50' using topographic contours and visible landmarks as guidelines. Data points were obtained with a Garmin Map62 Global Positioning System to record and identify specific widths for ordinary highwater mark (OHWM) indicators andthe locations ofphotographs, soil pits, and other pertinent jurisdictional features,if present. This data was then transferred as a .shp file and added to the Project's jurisdictional exhibits. The jurisdictional exhibits were prepared using ESRI ArcInfo Version 10 software.

3.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
In the absence of adjacent wetlands, the limits of the Corps jurisdiction in non-tidal waters extendto the OHWM, which is defined as “... that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicatedbyphysical characteristics such as a clear, naturalline impressedon thebank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.”3F3F* Indicators of an OHWM are defined in 4 Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in theArid WestRegion ofthe Western UnitedStates (Corps 2008). In addition to characteristics listed above, wracking; vegetation matted down, bent, or absent; sediment sorting; leaf litter disturbed or washed away; scour; deposition; multiple observed flow events; bed and banks; water staining; and/or change in plant community.

In accordance with the RevisedDefinition of “Waters of the United States”; Conforming (September 8, 2023), “waters of the United Sates” are defined as follows:
(a) Waters of the UnitedStates means:
(1) Waters which are:
(i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) The territorial seas;or
(iii)Interstate waters;
(2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United Statesunder this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section; (3) Tributaries of waters identified inparagraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that arerelatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water; (4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters:
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or 4 CWA regulations 33 CFR §328.3(¢).

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 9
976
Methodology
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 10 (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters;
(5) Intrastate lakes and ponds not identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section (b) The following are not “waters of the United States” even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(2) through (5) of this section:
(1) Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act;
(2) Prior converted cropland designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change of use, which means that the area is no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status as prior converted cropland by any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction remains with EPA; (3) Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;
(4) Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing;
(6) Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and
(8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow.
(c) In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Wetlands means 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. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
(2) Adjacent means having a continuous surface connection (3) High tide line means the line of intersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reached by a rising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data, by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, a more or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages, or other suitable means that delineate the general height reached by a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur with periodic frequency but does not include storm surges in which there is a departure from the normal or predicted reach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coast by strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm.

Methodology
(ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (2)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surfaceconnection to those waters;
(5) Intrastate lakes andponds not identified inparagraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowingbodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified inparagraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section (b) The following arenot “waters of the United States” even where they otherwise meet the terms of paragraphs (a)(2) through (5) of this section:
(1) Waste treatment systems,including treatmentponds or lagoons, designedto meet the requirements of the Clean Water Act;
(2) Prior converted cropland designatedby the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change ofuse, which means that the areais no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area's status asprior converted croplandby any other Federal agency, for the purposes of the Clean Water Act, the final authority regarding Clean Water Act jurisdictionremains withEPA;
(3) Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavatedwholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively permanent flow of water;
(4) Artificially irrigated areas that wouldrevert to dry land if the irrigation ceased; (5) Artificial lakes or ponds createdby excavating or diking dry land to collect andretain water and which areused exclusively for suchpurposes as stock watering, irrigation, settlingbasins, or rice growing;
(6) Artificialreflecting or swimmingpools or other small ornamental bodies of water createdby excavating or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons; (7) Waterfilled depressions createdin dry land incidental to construction activity andpits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless anduntil the construction or excavation operation is abandonedand the resultingbody of water meets the definition of waters of the United States; and
(8) Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterizedby low volume, infrequent, or short duration flow.
(c) In this section, the following definitions apply:
(1) Wetlands means those areas that areinundated or saturatedby surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adaptedfor life in saturatedsoil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
(2) Adjacent meanshaving a continuous surfaceconnection (3) High tide line means the line ofintersection of the land with the water's surface at the maximum height reachedby arising tide. The high tide line may be determined, in the absence of actual data,by a line of oil or scum along shore objects, amore or less continuous deposit of fine shell or debris on the foreshore or berm, other physical markings or characteristics, vegetation lines, tidal gages,or other suitable means that delineate the generalheight reachedby a rising tide. The line encompasses spring high tides and other high tides that occur withperiodic frequency but doesnot include storm surgesin which there is a departure from the normal or predictedreach of the tide due to the piling up of water against a coastby strong winds such as those accompanying a hurricane or other intense storm.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 10
977
Methodology
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 11 (4) Ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.
(5) Tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in a predictable and measurable rhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface can no longer be practically measured in a predictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects.

Pursuant to the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps 1987), the identification of wetlands is based on a three-parameter approach involving indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. In order to qualify as a wetland, a feature must exhibit at least minimal characteristics within each of these three parameters. It should also be noted that both the Regional Board and CDFW follow the methods utilized by the Corps to identify wetlands. For this Project , Corps jurisdictional wetlands are delineated using the methods outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0 (Corps 2008).

3.2 WATERS OF THE STATE

3.2.1 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
The California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives the Regional Board very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The Regional Board shares the Corps’ methodology for delineating the limits of jurisdiction based on the identification of OHWM indicators and utilizing the three parameter approach for wetlands. The Regional Board shares the Corps’ jurisdictional methodology, unless SWANCC or Rapanos conditions are present. In the latter case, the Regional Board considers such drainage features to be jurisdictional waters of the State.

3.2.2 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code applies to all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the State. Generally, the CDFW’s jurisdictional limit is not defined by a specific flow event, nor by the presence of OHWM indicators or the path of surface water as this path might vary seasonally. Instead, CDFW’s jurisdictional limit is based on the topography or elevation of land that confines surface water to a definite course when the surface water rises to its highest point. Further, the CDFW’s jurisdictional limit extends to include any habitat (e.g. riparian), including wetlands and vernal pools, supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions. For this project location, CDFW jurisdictional limits were delineated using the methods outlined in the MESA Field Guide (Brady, III and Vyverberg 2013) and A Review of Stream Processes and Forms in Dryland Watersheds (Vyverberg 2010), which were developed to provide guidance on the methods utilized to describe and delineate episodic streams within the inland deserts region of southern California.

Methodology
(4) Ordinary high water mark means that line on the shore establishedby the fluctuations of water and indicatedby physical characteristics such as clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changesin the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas.
(5) Tidal waters means those waters that rise and fall in apredictable andmeasurablerhythm or cycle due to the gravitational pulls of the moon and sun. Tidal waters end where the rise and fall of the water surface canno longer be practically measuredin apredictable rhythm due to masking by hydrologic, wind, or other effects.

Pursuant to the Corps WetlandDelineationManual(Corps 1987), the identification of wetlands is basedon a three-parameter approach involving indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology. In order to qualify as a wetland, a feature must exhibit at least minimal characteristics within eachof thesethreeparameters.It should alsobe noted that both the RegionalBoard and CDFW follow the methods utilized by the Corps to identify wetlands. For this Project , Corps jurisdictional wetlands are delineated using the methods outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers Wetland DelineationManual: Arid WestRegion, Version 2.0 (Corps 2008).

3.2 WATERS OF THE STATE

3.21 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
The CaliforniaPorter-Cologne Water Quality ControlAct gives the Regional Board very broad authority to regulate waters of the State, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters. The RegionalBoard shares the Corps’ methodology for delineating the limits of jurisdictionbased on the identification of OHWM indicators and utilizing the three parameter approach for wetlands. The RegionalBoard shares the Corps’ jurisdictionalmethodology,unless SWANCC or Rapanos conditions are present. In the latter case,the RegionalBoard considers such drainage features to be jurisdictional waters of the State.

3.2.2 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Sections 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code applies to all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeralrivers, streams,and lakes in the State.Generally, the CDFW’s jurisdictional limit is not defined by a specific flow event, nor by the presence ofOHWM indicators or the path of surface water as this path might vary seasonally.Instead, CDFW’s jurisdictional limit is basedon the topography or elevation ofland that confines surfacewater to a definite coursewhen the surface water rises to its highest point.Further, the CDFW?’s jurisdictional limit extends to include any habitat (e.g. riparian), including wetlands and vernal pools, supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions. For this project location, CDFW jurisdictional limits were delineated using the methods outlined in the MESA Field Guide (Brady, III and Vyverberg 2013) and A Review of Stream ProcessesandForms inDryland Watersheds(Vyverberg 2010), which were developedtoprovide guidance on the methods utilized to describe and delineate episodic streams within the inland deserts region of southern California.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 11
978
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 12 Section 4 Literature Review
ELMT conducted a thorough review of relevant literature and materials to preliminarily identify areas that may fall under the jurisdiction of the regulatory agencies. A summary of materials utilized during ELMT’s literature review is provided below and in Appendix A. In addition, refer to Section 8 for a complete list of references used throughout the course of this delineation.

4.1 WATERSHED REVIEW
The project site and off-site improvement areas is located within the Perris hydrologic area in the Lower San Jacinto River Watershed, which is a subset of the larger San Jacinto River Watershed (HUS 18070202).

The Perris Valley Storm Drain flows approximately 3.84 miles to the southwest of the project site. This feature consolidates surface flows from Reche Canyon and the surrounding area to the north and west of the site and conveys them to the San Jacinto River. The San Jacinto River conveys flows through Canyon Lake (Railroad Canyon Reservoir) and terminates at Lake Elsinore.

The Lower San Jacinto Watershed encompasses approximately 765 square miles in western Riverside County. This watershed is bounded by several mountain ranges, including the Badlands Mountain Range to the north, San Jacinto Mountains to the east, the Santa Ana Mountains to the west, and the Santa Margarita Mountains to the south. Currently, this watershed is primarily undeveloped. With natural open spaces at the headwaters areas and mostly agricultural and urban development in the middle and downstream areas.

The San Jacinto River Watershed consists of a single major drainage, the San Jacinto River, which is comprised of several smaller tributaries. The San Jacinto River begins in the San Jacinto Mountains and veers northwest to follow the lower elevations of the San Jacinto Valley. The mainstem begins at the confluence of South Fork San Jacinto River and North Fork San Jacinto River. The most notable southflowing tributary is the Perris Valley Storm Drain and Salt Creek flows westward from the San Jacinto Mountains to meet the San Jacinto River at Canyon Lake. The San Jacinto River is approximately 42 miles long, supports the majority of existing agricultural land in the San Jacinto Valley, and discharges into Canyon Lake, the overflow from which discharges into Lake Elsinore, which qualifies as a traditional navigable water (TNW). Discharges from Lake Elsinore drain into Walker Canyon, which is a tributary to Temescal Wash, and Temescal Wash is a tributary to the Santa Ana River, which ultimately conveys flows to the Pacific Ocean, a TNW.

4.2 LOCAL CLIMATE
Riverside County features a somewhat cooler version of a Mediterranean climate, or semi-arid climate, with warm, sunny, dry summers and cool, rainy, mild winters. Relative to other areas in Southern California, winters are colder with frost and with chilly to cold morning temperatures common.

Climatological data obtained from nearby weather stations indicates the annual precipitation averages 11.2 inches per year. Almost all of the precipitation in the form of rain occurs in the months between December and March, with hardly any occurring between the months of April and November. The wettest month is February, with a monthly average total precipitation of 3.31 inches, and the driest months are June and July, Section 4 Literature Review
ELMT conducted a thoroughreview ofrelevant literature and materials to preliminarily identify areas that may fallunder the jurisdiction ofthe regulatory agencies. A summary ofmaterials utilized duringELMT’s literature review is providedbelow and in Appendix A. In addition,refer to Section 8 for a complete list of referencesused throughout the course of this delineation. 41 WATERSHED REVIEW
The project site and off-site improvement areas is located within the Perris hydrologic area in the Lower SanJacintoRiver Watershed,whichis a subsetofthe larger SanJacintoRiver Watershed(HUS 18070202).

The Perris Valley Storm Drain flows approximately 3.84 miles to the southwest of the project site. This feature consolidates surface flows from Reche Canyon and the surrounding area to the north and west of the site and conveys them to the San Jacinto River. The SanJacinto River conveys flows through Canyon Lake (Railroad CanyonReservoir) and terminates at Lake Elsinore.

The Lower San Jacinto Watershed encompasses approximately 765 square miles in western Riverside County. This watershedis bounded by severalmountain ranges, including the Badlands Mountain Range to the north, San Jacinto Mountains to the east, the Santa Ana Mountains to the west, and the Santa Margarita Mountains to the south. Currently, this watershed is primarily undeveloped. With natural open spaces at the headwaters areas and mostly agricultural and urban development in the middle and downstream areas.

The San Jacinto River Watershed consists of a single major drainage, the San Jacinto River, which is comprised of several smaller tributaries. The San Jacinto River begins in the San Jacinto Mountains and veers northwest to follow the lower elevations of the San Jacinto Valley. The mainstem begins at the confluence of South Fork San Jacinto River and North Fork San Jacinto River. The most notable southflowing tributary is the Perris Valley Storm Drain and Salt Creek flows westward from the San Jacinto Mountains to meet the SanJacintoRiver at CanyonLake. The SanJacinto River is approximately 42 miles long, supports the majority of existing agricultural land in the San Jacinto Valley, and discharges into Canyon Lake, the overflow from which discharges into Lake Elsinore, which qualifies as a traditional navigable water (TNW). Discharges from Lake Elsinore drain into Walker Canyon, which is a tributary to TemescalWash, and TemescalWash is a tributary to the SantaAnaRiver, whichultimately conveys flows to the Pacific Ocean, a TNW.

Climatological data obtained fromnearby weather stationsindicates the annualprecipitation averages 11.2 inches per year. Almost all of the precipitation in the form ofrain occurs in the months betweenDecember and March, with hardly any occurring between the months of April andNovember. The wettest month is February, with amonthly averagetotalprecipitation of3.31inches, andthe driest months areJuneand July, BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 12
979
Literature Review
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 13 both with monthly average total precipitation of 0.04 inch. The average maximum and minimum temperatures are 82.6 and 46.5 degrees Fahrenheit (° F) respectively with July and August (monthly average high 100° F) being the hottest months and December (monthly average low 34° F) being the coldest.

4.3 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE
The USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle maps show geological formations and their characteristics, describing the physical setting of an area through contour lines and major surface features including lakes, rivers, streams, buildings, landmarks, and other factors that may fall under an agency’s jurisdiction. Additionally, the maps depict topography through color and contour lines, which are helpful in determining elevations and latitude and longitude within a project site.

4.4 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
Prior to conducting the field delineation, ELMT reviewed current and historical aerial photographs (1985- 2023) of the project as available from Google Earth Pro Imaging. Aerial photographs can be useful during the delineation process, as they often indicate the presence of drainage features and riverine habitat within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas, if any.

The project site and off-site improvement areas occurs in an area that historically supported agricultural land uses that have been gradually replaced by urban land uses. Land use in the vicinity of the site primarily supports residential development with commercial and industrial developments intermixed. At present, the site is bounded to the north by residential development and undeveloped, vacant land; to the east by Redlands boulevard with undeveloped, vacant land beyond; to the south by Cactus Avenue with residential development beyond; and to the west by residential development.

The project site and off-site improvement areas primarily supports undeveloped land with some developed areas. The entirety of the site has been subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding development. Historic aerials show these activities have been ongoing since at least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at some point between 1985 and 1996.

4.5 SOILS
On-site and adjoining soils were researched prior to the field visits using the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Resources Conservation Service and Soil Survey for Western Riverside Area, California. Soil LiteratureReview
both with monthly average total precipitation of 0.04 inch. The average maximum and minimum temperatures are 82.6 and46.5 degreesFahrenheit(°F)respectively withJuly andAugust (monthly average high 100° F) being the hottest months andDecember (monthly averagelow 34° F) being the coldest.

4.3 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE
The USGS 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Quadrangle maps show geological formations and their characteristics, describing the physical setting of an areathrough contour lines and major surface features including lakes, rivers, streams, buildings, landmarks, and other factors that may fall under an agency’s jurisdiction. Additionally, the maps depict topography through color and contour lines, which are helpful in determining elevations and latitude and longitude within aproject site.

The proposedproject site and off-site improvement areas is depicted on the Sunnymeadquadrangle of the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map series within Section 13 of Township 3 South, Range 3 West. The project site is ranges in elevation from 1,565 to 1,620 feet above mean sealevel. On-site topography is largely flat with the exception of a paved road (Wilmot Street) that transects the western portion of the site from north to south, a low berm that extends roughly northward from the middle of the southernboundary, and an earthen flood control channel that directs flows from the northeast corner of the site to the middle of the southernboundary. 44 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH
Prior to conducting the field delineation, ELMT reviewed current andhistorical aerial photographs (1985- 2023) of the project as available from Google EarthPro Imaging. Aerial photographs canbe useful during the delineationprocess, as they often indicate the presence of drainage features and riverine habitat within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas,if any.

The project site and off-site improvement areas occurs in an area that historically supported agricultural landusesthat have beengradually replacedby urbanlanduses.Landusein the vicinity ofthe siteprimarily supportsresidential development with commercial and industrial developmentsintermixed. At present, the site is bounded to the north by residential development and undeveloped, vacant land; to the east by Redlandsboulevard withundeveloped, vacant landbeyond; to the southby CactusAvenue withresidential development beyond; and to the west by residential development.

The project site and off-site improvement areasprimarily supportsundeveloped land with some developed areas. The entirety of the site has been subject to several decades of anthropogenic disturbances associated with historic agricultural land uses, grading activities, flood control infrastructure, weed abatement, and other on-site and surrounding development. Historic aerials show these activities have been ongoing since at least 1966. The flood control channel that presently traverses the site replaced a naturally occurring drainage at somepoint between 1985 and 1996.

4.5 SOILS
On-site andadjoining soils wereresearchedprior to the fieldvisitsusing theU.S.Department ofAgriculture National Resources Conservation Service and Soil Survey for Western Riverside Area, California. Soil BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 13
980
Literature Review
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 14 surveys furnish soil maps and interpretations originally needed in providing technical assistance to farmers and ranchers; in guiding other decisions about soil selection, use and management; and in planning, research and disseminating the results of the research. In addition, soil surveys are now heavily utilized in order to obtain soil information with respect to potential wetland environments and jurisdictional areas (i.e., soil characteristics, drainage, and color). Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the project site and offsite improvement areas is underlain by Hanford coarse sandy loam (2 to 8 percent slopes), Hanford coarse sandy loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), San Emigdio loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and San Emigdio loam (2 to 8 percent slopes) (Exhibit 4, Soils).

4.6 HYDRIC SOILS LIST OF CALIFORNIA
ELMT reviewed the USDA NRCS Hydric Soils List of California in an effort to verify whether on-site soils are considered to be hydric5
. It should be noted that lists of hydric soils along with soil survey maps provide off-site ancillary tools to assist in wetland determinations, but they are not a substitute for field investigations. The presence of hydric soils is initially investigated by comparing the mapped soil series for the site to the County list of hydric soils. According to the hydric soils list, none of the on-site soils have been listed as hydric in Western Riverside County.

4.8 FLOOD ZONE
The Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) website was searched for flood data for the project site and off-site improvement areas. Based on Flood Insurance Rate Map Nos. 06065C0770G the northern portion of the project site and off-site improvement areas is located within Zone A – areas determined to be within the 1.0% annual chance floodplain; Zone X – areas determined to be within the 0.2% annual chance floodplain; and Zone X – areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain, minimal risk of flooding. Refer to Appendix A, Documentation.
5 A hydric soil is a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part.

LiteratureReview
surveys furnish soil maps andinterpretations originally neededinproviding technical assistanceto farmers andranchers;in guiding other decisionsabout soil selection,use andmanagement;andinplanning,research and disseminating the results of the research.In addition, soil surveys arenow heavily utilized in order to obtain soil information with respect to potential wetland environments and jurisdictional areas (i.e., soil characteristics, drainage, and color). Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the project site and offsite improvement areas is underlainby Hanford coarse sandy loam (2 to 8 percent slopes),Hanford coarse sandy loam (8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded), SanEmigdio loam (0 to 2 percent slopes), and SanEmigdio loam (2 to 8 percent slopes)(Exhibit 4, Soils).

4.6 HYDRIC SOILS LIST OF CALIFORNIA
ELMT reviewed the USDA NRCS Hydric Soils List of California in an effort to verify whether on-site soils are considered to be hydric’. It should be noted that lists of hydric soils along with soil survey maps provide off-site ancillary tools to assist in wetland determinations, but they are not a substitute for field investigations. Thepresenceofhydric soils is initially investigatedby comparing the mapped soil series for the site to the County list of hydric soils. According to the hydric soils list, none of the on-site soils have been listed ashydric in Western Riverside County.

4.7 NATIONAL WETLANDSINVENTORY
TheUSFWSNWIandtheUSGSNationalHydrographyDatasetwerereviewedto determineif anyblueline streams or riverine resources have been documented within or immediate surrounding the project site and off-site improvement areas.Based on this review, no riverine features were observedwithin or adjacent to the boundaries of the site. Refer to Appendix A,Documentation. 48 FLOOD ZONE
The FederalEmergency Management Act (FEMA) website was searchedfor flood data for the project site and off-site improvement areas. Based on Flood Insurance Rate Map Nos. 06065C0770G the northern portion of the project site and off-site improvement areas is located within Zone A — areas determined to be within the 1.0% annual chance floodplain; Zone X — areas determined to be within the 0.2% annual chancefloodplain; andZone X —areasdeterminedtobe outside the 0.2% annual chancefloodplain,minimal risk of flooding. Refer to Appendix A,Documentation.
3 A hydric soil is a soil that formedunder conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to developanaerobic conditionsin theupperpart.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 14
981
SgA
HcC
SgC
SgC
HcD2
GyC2
Soils

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 4 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County 0 125 250 500 O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2)
Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC)
Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2)
San Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA)
San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC)
Legend — Project Site [ Hanford coarse sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (HcC) lr/| Street Improvements [ Hanford coarse snady loam, 8 to 15% slopes (HcD2) ER TEN = 1 INN! Proposed City Park Il san Emigdio loam, 0 to 2% slopes (SgA) | yA Ta 4 ry [] Greenfield sandy loam, 2 to 8% slopes (GyC2) San Emigdio loam, 2 to 8% slopes (SgC) f A ; ‘ N [44 { RE - ZH
Bare GFOdra Vl ho 3 ss aaLaat
CS 8
Sarai. va.

RY
Cady Redlands yhIvo
%
Ce
viaTT 7 ILL oF 7 7 7 TT re FT Cad GET Te nag comsme CACHE AY A CaTInE AVE a EN RE J NE a ar ASCE TL meme ET RT SS

BELAGO PARK
IA 0 125 250 500
Feet Soils
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Soil Series Geographic Database, Riverside County as OMNSULTNG
Exhibit 4
982
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 16 Section 5 Site Conditions
ELMT biologists Jacob H. Lloyd Davies and Rachael A. Lyons conducted a field delineation on January 26, 2023, to verify existing site conditions and document the extent of potential jurisdictional areas within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas. ELMT field staff encountered no limitations during the field delineation. Refer to Appendix B for representative photographs taken throughout the project site and off-site improvement areas.

5.1 JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES

5.1.1 DRAINAGE FEATURES
ELMT carefully assessed the site for depressions, inundation, presence of hydrophytic vegetation, staining, cracked soil, ponding, and indicators of active surface flow and corresponding physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris. Suspected jurisdictional areas were checked for the presence of definable channels, soils, and hydrology.

Drainage 1
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends southwest from the northeast corner of the project site near Redlands Boulevard for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering slightly southwards offsite to the west and ultimately southwest. The onsite drainage feature is designated as Line F by the Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD).

Drainage 1 is mostly earthen flood control channel that receives flows via a box culvert beneath Redlands Drive and exits the project site at the middle of the southern boundary, where flows are conveys beneath Cactus Avenue via four box culverts, to a golf course. The downstream limits of Drainage 1 are overlain with riprap and concrete. This drainage only conveys flows during and immediately following storm events.

According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed between 1985 and 1996, replacing an ephemeral drainage that extended from the east/northeast. The historic drainage remains in place upstream of Redlands Drive.

Minimal surface water was present within the lower points of Drainage 1 due to a storm that had passed through the area the day prior to the field investigation. Evidence of an OHWM was observed via scour, changes in substrate, shelving, and lack of vegetation. The OHWM ranged from approximately 1-8 feet in width throughout the length of the drainage within site boundaries.

In-channel vegetation within site boundaries consisted primarily of non-native plant species such as Russian thistle (Salsola tragus, UPL), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca, FACU), and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta, FACW). In addition, a couple individual black willow (Salix gooddingii, FACW) trees were observed growing through the riprap in the downstream limits near Cactus Avenue.

Section 5 Site Conditions
ELMT biologists JacobH. Lloyd Davies and Rachael A. Lyons conducted a field delineation on January 26, 2023, to verify existing site conditions and document the extent ofpotential jurisdictional areas within the boundaries of the project site and off-site improvement areas. ELMT field staff encountered no limitations during the field delineation. Refer to Appendix B for representative photographs taken throughout the project site and off-site improvement areas.

5.1 JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES

5.1.1 DRAINAGE FEATURES
ELMT carefully assessedthe site for depressions,inundation,presenceofhydrophytic vegetation, staining, cracked soil,ponding, andindicators of active surface flow and correspondingphysical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris. Suspectedjurisdictional areas were checked for the presenceof definablechannels,soils,andhydrology.

Drainage 1
A single unnamed drainage feature (Drainage 1) extends southwest from the northeast corner oftheproject site near Redlands Boulevard for approximately 1,296 linear feet before veering slightly southwards offsite to the west and ultimately southwest. The onsite drainage feature is designated as Line F by the Riverside County Flood Control District (RCFCD).

Drainage 1 is mostly earthen flood control channel that receives flows via a box culvert beneathRedlands Drive and exits the project site at the middle of the southern boundary, where flows are conveys beneath Cactus Avenue via four box culverts, to a golf course. The downstream limits of Drainage 1 are overlain withriprap andconcrete. This drainage only conveys flows during andimmediately following storm events.

According to historic aerials, this drainage was installed between 1985 and 1996, replacing an ephemeral drainagethat extendedfromthe east/northeast.Thehistoric drainageremains inplaceupstream ofRedlands Drive.

In-channel vegetationwithinsiteboundaries consistedprimarily ofnon-nativeplant species suchasRussian thistle (Salsola tragus, UPL), saltcedar (Tamarix ramosissima), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca, FACU), andMexican fanpalm (Washingtonia robusta,FACW).In addition, acouple individualblack willow (Salix gooddingii, FACW) trees were observed growing through the riprap in the downstream limits near Cactus Avenue.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 16
983
Site Conditions
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 17

5.1.2 WETLAND FEATURES
In order to qualify as a wetland, a feature must exhibit all three wetland parameters (i.e., vegetation, soils, and hydrology) described in the Corps Arid West Regional Supplement. No riparian vegetation or wetland obligate plant species were observed within Drainage 1. Further, Drainage 1 only conveys flows during and after storm events and does not hold water for long enough to create anaerobic conditions, ultimately forming hydric soils. Therefore, Drainage 1 does not meet wetland requirements.

Site Conditions

5.1.2 WETLAND FEATURES
In order to qualify as a wetland, a featuremust exhibit all three wetland parameters (i.e., vegetation, soils, andhydrology) describedin the Corps Arid West Regional Supplement.No riparian vegetation or wetland obligateplant specieswere observed withinDrainage 1.Further,Drainage 1 only conveys flows during and after storm events and does not hold water for long enough to create anaerobic conditions, ultimately forming hydric soils. Therefore, Drainage 1 doesnot meet wetland requirements.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 17
984
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 18 Section 6 Findings
This report presents the extent of jurisdictional features using the most up-to-date regulations, written policy, and guidance from the regulatory agencies. Please refer to the following sections for a summary of jurisdictional areas within the Project site.

6.1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DETERMINATION

6.1.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES DETERMINATION
The onsite ephemeral drainage feature is not relatively permanent, standing, or continuously flowing body of water and, therefore, will not qualify as waters of the United States under the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v. EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336).

6.1.2 WETLAND DETERMINATION
Drainage 1 does not meet the wetland requirements and does not qualify as a wetland.

6.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Drainage 1 exhibits characteristics consistent with the Regional Board’s methodology and would likely be considered jurisdictional waters of the State. Approximately 0.37 acre (1,296 linear feet) of Regional Board jurisdiction is located within the boundaries of the project site. Based on the proposed project, the entire channel will become a concrete lined channel, impacting its entire reach onsite. Refer to Table 1 for a summary of on-site jurisdictional areas, and Exhibit 5, Jurisdictional Areas, for an illustration of on-site Regional Board jurisdictional areas and anticipated impacts.

Table 1: Regional Board Jurisdictional Waters
Jurisdictional Feature
Regional Board Jurisdiction
On-Site Jurisdiction
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Jurisdictional Impacts
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296)
TOTAL 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296)

6.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Drainage 1 exhibits characteristics consistent with CDFW’s methodology and would be considered CDFW streambed totaling approximately 1.4 acre (1,296 linear feet) within boundaries of the project site, consisting of 0.37 acre of jurisdictional streambed and 1.03 acre of associated streambed that includes the banks of the channels. Refer to Table 2 for a summary of CDFW on-site jurisdictional areas, and Exhibit 5, Jurisdictional Areas, for an illustration of on-site CDFW jurisdictional areas. Based on the proposed project description, the entire channel will be impacted and replaced with a concrete lined channel.

Section 6 Findings
This report presents the extent of jurisdictional features using the most up-to-date regulations, written policy, and guidance from the regulatory agencies.Pleaserefer to the following sections for a summary of jurisdictional areas within the Project site.

6.1 U.S.ARMY CORPSOFENGINEERS DETERMINATION

6.1.1 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES DETERMINATION
The onsite ephemeraldrainage feature is not relatively permanent, standing, or continuously flowing body of water and, therefore, will not qualify as waters of the United Statesunder the regulatory authority of the Corps (Sackett v.EPA (2022) 143 S. Ct. 1322, 1336).

6.1.2 WETLAND DETERMINATION
Drainage 1 doesnot meet the wetlandrequirements and doesnot qualify as a wetland.

6.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
Drainage 1 exhibits characteristics consistent with the RegionalBoard’s methodology and would likely be consideredjurisdictional waters ofthe State.Approximately 0.37 acre(1,296 linear feet) ofRegionalBoard jurisdiction is located within the boundaries of the project site. Based on the proposed project, the entire channel will become a concrete lined channel, impacting its entire reach onsite. Refer to Table 1 for a summary of on-site jurisdictional areas, and Exhibit 5, Jurisdictional Areas, for an illustration of on-site RegionalBoard jurisdictional areas and anticipated impacts.

Table 1: RegionalBoard Jurisdictional Waters
On-Site Jurisdiction JurisdictionalImpacts
Acreage (Linear Feet) Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296)
TOTAL 0.37 (1,296) 0.37 (1,296)

6.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Drainage 1 exhibits characteristics consistent with CDFW’s methodology andwouldbe consideredCDFW streambed totaling approximately 1.4 acre (1,296 linear feet) within boundaries of the project site, consisting of 0.37 acre of jurisdictional streambedand 1.03 acre of associated streambedthat includes the banks of the channels. Refer to Table 2 for a summary of CDFW on-site jurisdictional areas, andExhibit 5, Jurisdictional Areas, for an illustration of on-site CDFW jurisdictional areas. Based on the proposed project description, the entire channel will be impacted andreplaced with a concretelined channel.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 18
985
Findings
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 19 Table 2: CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed
Jurisdictional Feature
CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed/Riparian Habitat
On-Site Jurisdiction
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Jurisdictional Impacts
Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)
TOTAL 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)
Findings
Table 2: CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed
On-Site Jurisdiction JurisdictionalImpacts
Acreage (Linear Feet) Acreage (Linear Feet)
Drainage 1 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)
TOTAL 1.4 (1,296) 1.4 (1,296)
BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 19
986
Jurisdictional Areas

BELAGO PARK
Exhibit 5 Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County 0 125 250 500
O Feet
Legend
Project Site
Street Improvements
Proposed City Park
RWQCB/CDFW Jurisdictional Waters
(0.37 acre / 1,296 linear feet)
CDFW Associated Streambed
(1.03 acres)
NN Proposed City Park
RWQCB/CDFW Jurisdictional Waters
Hl (0.37 acre/ 1,296 linear feet)
CDFW Associated Streambed
HH (1.03 acres)
EasalpiL
f
TE
wv = SB wa Blvd or —— NRT Redlands)
= yi. NaN So
A . . ToCactus Ave =CactusAVE op IEE TE YulTAALWig
¥7, 30 nerd FEET: A
0 125 250 500 BELAGO PARK
A Foot Jurisdictional Areas
Source: ESRI Aerial Imagery, Riverside County Exhibit 5 nnwwSELL 987
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 21 Section 7 Regulatory Approval Process
The following is a summary of the various permits, certifications, and agreements that may be necessary prior to construction and/or alteration within jurisdictional areas. Ultimately the regulatory agencies make the final determination of jurisdictional boundaries and permitting requirements.

7.1 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
The Corps regulates discharges of dredged or fill materials into waters of the United States and wetlands pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA. No Corps jurisdictional areas were identified within the project site and a CWA Section 404 permit would not be required for the proposed project.

7.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
The Regional Board regulates discharges to surface waters pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Any impacts to on-site jurisdictional areas will require a Report of Waste Discharge prior to project implementation. Therefore, it will be necessary for the applicant to acquire a Report of Waste Discharge prior to impacts occurring within Regional Board jurisdictional areas. The Regional Board also requires that California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance be obtained prior to obtaining the 401 Certification. A Regional Board Application fee is required with the application package and is calculated based on the acreage and linear feet of jurisdictional impacts.

7.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, the CDFW regulates any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow or alter the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated biological resources) of a river or stream. Therefore, impacts to the on-site jurisdictional areas will require a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW prior to project implementation. The notification will require a processing fee which is based on the term and cost of the proposed Project. It should also be noted that the CDFW requires that the payment of the process fee be paid and CEQA compliance be obtained prior to the issuance of the final Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. In addition to the above fees, mitigation will be needed to offset impacts to the jurisdictional resources and will be finalized during the permit processing with the CDFW.

7.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that this delineation be forwarded to the regulatory agencies for their review and concurrence. The concurrence/receipt would solidify findings noted within this report.

Section 7 Regulatory ApprovalProcess
The following is a summary of the various permits, certifications, and agreements that may be necessary prior to construction and/or alteration within jurisdictional areas.Ultimately the regulatory agenciesmake the final determination of jurisdictional boundaries andpermitting requirements.

7.2 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
The Regional Board regulates discharges to surface waters pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Any impacts to on-site jurisdictional areas will require aReport ofWasteDischarge prior to project implementation. Therefore, it will be necessary for the applicant to acquire a Report of Waste Discharge prior to impacts occurring within Regional Board jurisdictional areas. The Regional Board also requires that California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance be obtained prior to obtaining the 401 Certification. A Regional Board Application fee is required with the applicationpackageandis calculatedbasedon the acreageandlinear feet ofjurisdictional impacts.

7.3 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Pursuant to Section 1602 of the CaliforniaFish andGame Code, the CDFW regulates any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow or alter the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated biologicalresources) of ariver or stream.Therefore, impacts to the on-site jurisdictional areaswill require a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFW prior to project implementation. The notification will require a processing fee which is based on the term and cost of the proposed Project. It should also be noted that the CDFW requires that the payment of the process fee be paid and CEQA compliance be obtainedprior to the issuance of the final Section 1602 StreambedAlteration Agreement. In addition to the above fees, mitigation will be needed to offset impacts to the jurisdictional resources and will be finalized during the permit processing with the CDFW.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 21
988
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 22 Section 8 References
Brady, III, Roland H. and Kris Vyverberg. 2013. Methods to Describe and Delineate Episodic Stream Processes on Arid Landscapes for Permitting Utility-Scale Solar Power Plants. California Energy Commission, Publication Number: CEC-500-2014-013.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Lake and Streambed Alteration Program. (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA)
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 1987.

Faber, Phyllis M., Common Riparian Plants of California, Pickleweed Press 1996.

Faber, Phyllis M., Common Wetland Plants of Coastal California, Pickleweed Press 1996.

Google, Inc. 2013. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.4.8248, build date 07/16/2021. Historical aerial imagery from 1985 to 2020.

Munsell. 2009. Soil Color Charts, Year Revised/2009 Production. Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C.

Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2006. Distribution of Ordinary High Water Mark Indicators and their Reliability in Identifying the Limits of “Waters of the United States” in the Arid Southwestern Channels. February 2006.

Corps. 2008. A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. August 2008.

Corps. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Nobel. ERDC/EL TR-08-28.

Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

Corps. 2016. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 16-01: Jurisdictional Determinations. October 2016.

Corps. 2016. Arid West 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List. 2016 NWPL v3.3. Accessed online at http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/nwpl_static/index.html.

Corps. 2016. Updated Map and Drawing Standards for the South Pacific Regulatory Division Regulatory Program. February 2016.

Corps. 2017. Los Angeles District Regulatory Program (www.spl.usace.army.mil/).

Corps. 2017. Minimum Standards for Acceptance of Aquatic Resources Delineation Reports. March 2017.

Section 8 References
Brady, III, Roland H. and Kris Vyverberg. 2013. Methods to Describe and Delineate Episodic Stream Processes on AridLandscapesfor Permitting Utility-Scale SolarPowerPlants. CaliforniaEnergy Commission, PublicationNumber: CEC-500-2014-013.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Lake and Streambed Alteration Program. (https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/LSA)
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps ofEngineers WetlandDelineation Manual. Technical Report Y87-1. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 1987.

Faber, Phyllis M., CommonRiparianPlants ofCalifornia, PickleweedPress 1996.

Faber, Phyllis M., Common WetlandPlants ofCoastal California,PickleweedPress 1996.

Google, Inc. 2013. Google Earth Pro version 7.3.4.8248, build date 07/16/2021. Historical aerial imagery from 1985 to 2020.

Munsell. 2009. Soil Color Charts, Year Revised/2009 Production. Lichvar, R.-W., M. Butterwick, N.C.

Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). 2006. Distribution of Ordinary High WaterMarkIndicators and theirReliability inIdentifying theLimits of “Waters ofthe UnitedStates” in theAridSouthwestern Channels. February 2006.

Corps. 2008. 4 Field Guide to theIdentification of the OrdinaryHigh WaterMark in theArid WestRegion of the Western UnitedStates. August 2008.

Corps. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. 1.S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Nobel. ERDC/EL TR-08-28.

Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer ResearchandDevelopment Center.

Corps. 2016. Regulatory GuidanceLetterNo. 16-01: JurisdictionalDeterminations. October 2016.

Corps. 2016. Arid West 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List. 2016 NWPL v3.3. Accessed online at http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/nwpl_static/index.html.

Corps. 2016. UpdatedMap andDrawingStandardsfor the South Pacific Regulatory DivisionRegulatory Program. February 2016.

Corps. 2017.Los Angeles DistrictRegulatoryProgram (www.spl.usace.army.mil/).

Corps. 2017.Minimum Standardsfor Acceptance ofAquatic ResourcesDelineation Reports. March 2017.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 22
989
References
Belago Park
Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters 23 Corps. 2017. Reissuance of the Nationwide Permits and Issuance of Final Regional Conditions for the Los Angeles District. March 2017.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). List of Hydric Soils. Accessed online at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/.

USDA NRCS. 2017. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide to Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 8.1. 2017.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Program, Flood Insurance Rate Map Nos. 06065C2715G and 06065C2720G U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Habitat and Resource Conservation. 2017. Wetland Geodatabase. Accessed online at http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/NWI/index.html.

Vyverberg, Kris. 2010. A Review of Stream Processes and Forms in Dryland Watersheds. California Department of Fish and Game. December 2010.

References
Corps. 2017.Reissuance oftheNationwidePermits andIssuance ofFinalRegional Conditionsfor theLos Angeles District. March 2017.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS). List ofHydric Soils. Accessedonline at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/.

USDA NRCS. 2017. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States: A Guide to Identifying and DelineatingHydric Soils, Version 8.1. 2017.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood InsuranceProgram,FloodInsuranceRateMapNos. 06065C2715G and 06065C2720G U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Habitat and Resource Conservation. 2017. Wetland Geodatabase. Accessed online at http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov/NWI/index.html.

Vyverberg, Kris. 2010. A Review of Stream Processes and Forms in Dryland Watersheds. California Department ofFish and Game.December 2010.

BelagoPark
Delineation ofState andFederalJurisdictional Waters 23
990
Appendix AppendixAA Documentation Documentation
991
Belago Park
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected]
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
May 10, 2023
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km
1:15,047
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service romafig
Ly, National Wetlands Inventor Belago Park
as alRY. Jy
. — oo a 4
Tacs oe
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife May 10, 2023 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.

Other
Wetlands B Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Ml Estuarine and Marine Deepwater I Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland [ Estuarine and Marine Wetland I Freshwater Pond Riverine National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper 992
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Feet
Ü

SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT

SPECIAL FLOOD

HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zone A, V, A99
With BFE or DepthZone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR
Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mileZone X
Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood HazardZone X
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes.Zone X
Area with Flood Risk due to LeveeZone D
NO SCREENArea of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X
Area of Undetermined Flood HazardZone D
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance

17.5 Water Surface Elevation
Coastal Transect
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Effective LOMRs
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.

The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 4/11/2023 at 9:23 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.

Legend

OTHER AREAS OF

FLOOD HAZARD

OTHER AREAS

GENERAL

STRUCTURES
OTHER

FEATURES

MAP PANELS
8 B

20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
1:6,000
117°9'54"W 33°54'56"N
117°9'17"W 33°54'26"N
Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
117°9'54"W 33°54'56"N
06065C07706
efi 8/38/2008" A
oC.ESLr Fave " NE| AREAOF MILINMALELOODIHAZARD APY
117°917"W 33°5426"N Feet 1:6,000
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000
Basemap: USGSNational Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020 Legend
SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V,A99 SPECIALFLOOD With BFEor Depth Zone AE,AO, AH, VE,AR HAZARD AREAS | p747 Regulatory Floodway

0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average h depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mile ZoneX
Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zonex
PF 4 Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to OTHER AREASOF Levee.See Notes.ZoneX FLOODHAZARD yo | Area with FloodRisk due to Levee Zone D NOSCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zonex
[1] EffectiveLOMRs OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zoneb GENERAL| = — == Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
STRUCTURES [1111111 Levee,Dike, or Floodwall
Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance — 17.5 WaterSurfaceElevation s — — — Coastal Transect ww iim Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) ——— Limit of Study —— Jurisdiction Boundary —_—— — Coastal Transect Baseline OTHER |- —— Profile Baseline FEATURES Hydrographic Feature
[J DpigitalData Available N
[2] No Digital Data Available
MAPPANELS| BJ unmapped
¢ The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location.

This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 4/11/2023 at 9:23 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time.

This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes.
993
Appendix Appendix BB Site Photographs Site Photographs
994
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Photograph 1: From Redlands Boulevard looking southwest at the Drainage 1 (flood control channel that travers the project site)
Photograph 2: Looking southwest at the headwall where water enters the project site on Drainage 1.

AppendixB —SitePhotographs
Photograph 1: From Redlands Boulevard looking southwest at the Drainage 1 (flood control channel that travers the project site)
Photograph 2: Looking southwest at the headwall where water enters theproject site onDrainage 1.

AIA | NT
(vl CONSULTING 995
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Photograph 3: From the western portion of Drainage 1 looking southwest within Drainage 1.

Photograph 4: From the middle of the portion of Drainage 1 that occurs on-site looking southwest.

AppendixB —SitePhotographs
Photograph 4: From themiddleof theportion ofDrainage 1 that occurson-sitelooking southwest.

AIA | NT
(vl CONSULTING 996
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Photograph 5: Looking southwest at the middle portion of Drainage 1.

Photograph 6: Looking southwest at the western portion of Drainage 1.

AppendixB —SitePhotographs
Photograph 6: Looking southwest at the westernportion ofDrainage 1.

AIA | NT
(vl CONSULTING 997
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Photograph 7: Looking at the western end of Drainage 1 onsite.

Photograph 8: Culverts under Cactus Avenue where Drainage 1 flows offsite.

AppendixB —SitePhotographs
Photograph 7: Looking atthewesternendofDrainage 1 onsite.

Photograph 8: Culverts under Cactus Avenue where Drainage 1 flows offsite.

AIA | NT
(vl CONSULTING 998
Appendix B – Site Photographs
Photograph 9: Overview of the culverts under Cactus Avenue.

Photograph 10: From Cactus Avenue looking northeast at Drainage 1.

AppendixB —SitePhotographs
Photograph 9: Overview of the culverts under Cactus Avenue.

Photograph 10: From Cactus Avenue looking northeast at Drainage 1.

AIA | NT
(vl CONSULTING 999
Appendix Appendix CC Methodology Methodology
1000
Appendix C – Methodology

WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
In accordance with the Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States” (March 20, 2023), “waters of the United Sates” are defined as follows:

The ‘‘waters of the United States’’ are defined in paragraph (a) of this rule:
(1) traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, and interstate waters; (2) impoundments of ‘‘waters of the United States’’;
(3) tributaries to traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, interstate waters, or impoundments when the tributaries meet either the relatively permanent standard or the significant nexus standard (‘‘jurisdictional tributaries’’); (4) wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters; wetlands adjacent to and with a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent paragraph impoundments or to jurisdictional tributaries when the jurisdictional tributaries meet the relatively permanent standard; and wetlands adjacent to impoundments or jurisdictional tributaries when the wetlands meet the significant nexus standard (‘‘jurisdictional adjacent wetlands’’); and (5) intrastate lakes and ponds, streams, or wetlands not identified in (1) through (4) above that meet either the relatively permanent standard or the significant nexus standard.

The ‘‘relatively permanent standard’’ means relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing waters connected to traditional navigable waters, and waters with a continuous surface connection to such relatively permanent waters or to traditional navigable waters. The ‘‘significant nexus standard’’ means waters that, either alone or in combination with similarly situated waters in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, or interstate waters.

WETLANDS
For this project location, Corps jurisdictional wetlands are delineated using the methods outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version

2.0 (Corps 2008). This document is one of a series of Regional Supplements to the Corps Wetland Delineation Manual (Corps 1987). The identification of wetlands is based on a three-parameter approach involving indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology. In order to be considered a wetland, an area must exhibit at least minimal characteristics within these three (3) parameters. The Regional Supplement presents wetland indicators, delineation guidance, and other information that is specific to the Arid West Region. In the field, vegetation, soils, and evidence of hydrology are examined using the methodology listed below and documented on Corps wetland data sheets, when applicable. It should be noted that both the Regional Board and the CDFW jurisdictional wetlands encompass those of the Corps.

Appendix C —Methodology

WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
In accordance with the RevisedDefinition of “Waters of theUnited States”(March 20, 2023), “waters of the United Sates” are defined as follows:

The ““waters of the United States’ are defined inparagraph (a) of this rule:
(1) traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, and interstate waters; (2) impoundments of ‘waters of the United States’’;
(3) tributaries to traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, interstate waters, or impoundments when the tributaries meet either the relatively permanent standard or the significant nexus standard (‘ ‘jurisdictional tributaries’”); (4) wetlands adjacent to traditional navigable waters; wetlands adjacent to and with a continuous surface connection to relatively permanent paragraph impoundments or to jurisdictional tributaries when the jurisdictional tributaries meet the relatively permanent standard; and wetlands adjacent to impoundments or jurisdictional tributaries when the wetlands meet the significant nexus standard (‘ ‘jurisdictional adjacent wetlands’); and (5) intrastate lakes and ponds, streams, or wetlands not identified in (1) through (4) above that meet either the relatively permanent standard or the significant nexus standard. 29 The ‘relatively permanent standard’’ means relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing waters connected to traditional navigable waters, and waters with a continuous surface connection to such relatively permanent waters or to traditional navigable waters. The ‘significant nexus standard’’ means waters that, either alone or in combination with similarly situated waters in the region, significantly affect the chemical, physical, or biological integrity of traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, or interstate waters.

WETLANDS
For this project location, Corps jurisdictional wetlands are delineatedusing the methods outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers WetlandDelineation Manual: Arid WestRegion, Version

Vegetation
Nearly 5,000 plant types in the United States may occur in wetlands. These plants, often referred to as hydrophytic vegetation, are listed in regional publications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In general, hydrophytic vegetation is present when the plant community is dominated by species that can tolerate prolonged inundation or soil saturation during growing season. Hydrophytic vegetation decisions are based on the assemblage of plant species growing on a site, rather than the presence or absence of particular indicator species. Vegetation strata are sampled separately when evaluating indicators of hydrophytic vegetation. A stratum for sampling purposes is defined as having 5 percent or more total plant cover. The following vegetation strata are recommended for use across the Arid West:
♦ Tree Stratum: Consists of woody plants 3 inches or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of height;
♦ Sapling/shrub stratum: Consists of woody plants less than 3 inches DBH, regardless of height; ♦ Herb stratum: Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including herbaceous vines, regardless of size; and,
♦ Woody vines: Consists of all woody vines, regardless of size.

The following indicator is applied per the test method below.1 Hydrophytic vegetation is present if any of the indicators are satisfied.

Indicator 1 – Dominance Test
Cover of vegetation is estimated and is ranked according to their dominance. Species that contribute to a cumulative total of 50% of the total dominant coverage, plus any species that comprise at least 20% (also known as the “50/20 rule”) of the total dominant coverage, are recorded on a wetland data sheet. Wetland indicator status in California (Region 0) is assigned to each species using the National Wetland Plant List, version 2.4.0 (Corps 2012). If greater than 50% of the dominant species from all strata were Obligate, Facultative-wetland, or Facultative species, the criteria for wetland vegetation is considered to be met.

Plant indicator status categories are described below:
♦ Obligate Wetland (OBL): Plants that almost always occur in wetlands; ♦ Facultative Wetland (FACW): Plants that usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in nonwetlands; ♦ Facultative (FAC): Plants that occur in wetlands and non-wetlands; 1 Although the Dominance Test is utilized in the majority of wetland delineations, other indicator tests may be employed. If one indicator of hydric soil and one primary or two secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are present, then the Prevalence Test (Indicator 2) may be performed. If the plant community satisfies the Prevalence Test, then the vegetation is hydric. If the Prevalence Test fails, then the Morphological Adaptation Test may be performed, where the delineator analyzes the vegetation for potential morphological features.

Appendix C —Methodology
Vegetation
Nearly 5,000 plant types in the United States may occur in wetlands. These plants, often referred to as hydrophytic vegetation, are listed in regional publications by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). In general, hydrophytic vegetation is present when the plant community is dominated by species that can tolerate prolonged inundation or soil saturation during growing season. Hydrophytic vegetation decisions are based on the assemblage of plant species growing on a site, rather than the presence or absence of particular indicator species. Vegetation strata are sampled separately when evaluating indicators of hydrophytic vegetation. A stratum for sampling purposes is defined as having 5 percent or more total plant cover. The following vegetation strata are recommended for use across the Arid West:
¢ Tree Stratum: Consists of woody plants 3 inches or more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardlessofheight;
¢ Sapling/shrubstratum: Consists of woody plants less than 3 inches DBH, regardless of height; ¢ Herb stratum: Consists of all herbaceous (non-woody) plants, including herbaceous vines, regardless of size; and,
¢ Woody vines: Consists of all woody vines,regardless of size.

The following indicator is appliedper the test methodbelow.! Hydrophytic vegetation is present if any of the indicators are satisfied.

Indicator 1 —Dominance Test
Cover of vegetation is estimated and is ranked according to their dominance. Species that contribute to a cumulative total of 50% of the total dominant coverage,plus any species that comprise at least 20% (also known as the “50/20 rule”) of the total dominant coverage, arerecorded on a wetland data sheet.Wetland indicator status in California (Region 0) is assignedto each speciesusing theNational WetlandPlantList, version 2.4.0 (Corps 2012). If greater than 50% of the dominant species from all strata were Obligate, Facultative-wetland, or Facultative species, the criteria for wetland vegetation is considered to be met.

Plant indicator status categories are describedbelow:
¢ Obligate Wetland (OBL): Plants that almost always occur in wetlands; ¢ Facultative Wetland (FACW): Plants that usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in nonwetlands; ¢ Facultative (FAC): Plants that occur in wetlands andnon-wetlands; 1 Although theDominance Test is utilized in the majority of wetland delineations, otherindicator testsmay be employed.If one indicator of hydric soil and one primary or two secondary indicators of wetland hydrology are present, then the Prevalence Test (Indicator 2) may be performed. If the plant community satisfies the Prevalence Test, then the vegetation is hydric. If the Prevalence Test fails, then the Morphological Adaptation Test may be performed, where the delineator analyzes the vegetation for potential morphological features.

Se AA) LMT
CONSULTING 1002
Appendix C – Methodology

♦ Facultative Upland (FACU): Plants that usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands; and,
♦ Obligate Upland (UPL): Plants that almost never occur in wetlands.

Hydrology
Wetland hydrology indicators are presented in four (4) groups, which include:

Group A – Observation of Surface Water or Saturated Soils Group A is based on the direct observation of surface water or groundwater during the site visit.

Group B – Evidence of Recent Inundation
Group B consists of evidence that the site is subject to flooding or ponding, although it may not be inundated currently. These indicators include water marks, drift deposits, sediment deposits, and similar features.

Group C – Evidence of Recent Soil Saturation
Group C consists of indirect evidence that the soil was saturated recently. Some of these indicators, such as oxidized rhizospheres surrounding living roots and the presence of reduced iron or sulfur in the soil profile, indicate that the soil has been saturated for an extended period.

Group D – Evidence from Other Site Conditions or Data
Group D consists of vegetation and soil features that indicate contemporary rather than historical wet conditions, and include shallow aquitard and the FAC-neutral test.

If wetland vegetation criteria is met, the presence of wetland hydrology is evaluated at each transect by recording the extent of observed surface flows, depth of inundation, depth to saturated soils, and depth to free water in the soil test pits. The lateral extent of the hydrology indicators are used as a guide for locating soil pits for evaluation of hydric soils and jurisdictional areas. In portions of the stream where the flow is divided by multiple channels with intermediate sand bars, the entire area between the channels is considered within the OHWM and the wetland hydrology indicator is considered met for the entire area.

Soils
A hydric soil is a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 16-20 inches.2 The concept of hydric soils includes soils developed under sufficiently wet conditions to support the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. Soils that are sufficiently wet because of artificial measures are included in the 2 According to the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version

2.0 (Corps 2008), growing season dates are determined through on-site observations of the following indicators of biological activity in a given year: (1) above-ground growth and development of vascular plants, and/or (2) soil temperature.

Appendix C —Methodology
¢ Facultative Upland (FACU): Plants that usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands; and,
¢ Obligate Upland(UPL): Plants that almost never occur in wetlands.

Hydrology
Wetlandhydrology indicators arepresentedin four (4) groups, which include:

Group A — Observation of Surface Water or Saturated Soils Group A is based on the direct observation of surface water or groundwater during the site visit.

Group B — Evidence of Recent Inundation
Group B consists of evidence that the site is subject to flooding or ponding, although it may not be inundated currently. These indicators include water marks, drift deposits, sediment deposits, and similar features.

Group C — Evidence of Recent Soil Saturation
Group C consists of indirect evidence that the soil was saturatedrecently. Some of these indicators, such as oxidized rhizospheres surrounding living roots and the presence of reduced iron or sulfur in the soil profile, indicate that the soil hasbeen saturatedfor an extendedperiod.

Group D — Evidence from Other Site Conditions or Data
Group D consists of vegetation and soil features that indicate contemporary rather than historical wet conditions, and include shallow aquitard and the FAC-neutral test.

If wetland vegetation criteria is met, the presence of wetland hydrology is evaluated at each transect by recording the extent of observed surface flows, depth of inundation, depth to saturated soils, and depth to free water in the soil test pits. The lateral extent of the hydrology indicators are used as a guide for locating soil pits for evaluation ofhydric soils and jurisdictional areas.In portions of the stream where the flow is divided by multiple channels with intermediate sandbars, the entire areabetween the channels is considered within the OHWM and the wetlandhydrology indicator is consideredmet for the entire area.

Soils
A hydric soil is a soil that formedunder conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper 16-20 inches.” The concept of hydric soils includes soils developedunder sufficiently wet conditions to support the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation. Soils that are sufficiently wet because of artificial measures are included in the 2 According to the Regional Supplement to the Corps ofEngineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version

2.0 (Corps 2008), growing seasondates are determined through on-site observations of the following indicators ofbiological activity in agivenyear:(1) above-groundgrowthanddevelopmentof vascularplants,and/or(2) soil temperature.

AJA | NAT
4 CONSULTING 1003
Appendix C – Methodology

concept of hydric soils. It should also be noted that the limits of wetland hydrology indicators are used as a guide for locating soil pits. If any hydric soil features are located, progressive pits are dug moving laterally away from the active channel until hydric features are no longer present within the top 20 inches of the soil profile.

Once in the field, soil characteristics are verified by digging soil pits along each transect to an excavation depth of 20 inches; in areas of high sediment deposition, soil pit depth may be increased. Soil pit locations are usually placed within the drainage invert or within adjoining vegetation. At each soil pit, the soil texture and color are recorded by comparison with standard plates within a Munsell Soil Chart (2009). Munsell Soil Charts aid in designating color labels to soils, based by degrees of three simple variables – hue, value, and chroma. Any indicators of hydric soils, such as organic accumulation, iron reduction, translocation, and accumulation, and sulfate reduction, are also recorded.

Hydric soil indicators are present in three groups, which include:

All Soils
“All soils” refers to soils with any United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil texture. Hydric soil indicators within this group include histosol, histic epipedon, black histic, hydrogen sulfide, stratified layers, 1 cm muck, depleted below dark surface, and thick dark surface.

Sandy Soils
“Sandy soils” refers to soil materials with a USDA soil texture of loamy fine sand and coarser. Hydric soil indicators within this group include sandy mucky mineral, sandy gleyed matrix, sandy redox, and stripped matrix.

Loamy and Clayey Soils
“Loamy and clayey soils” refers to soil materials with a USDA soil texture of loamy very fine sand and finer. Hydric soil indicators within this group include loamy mucky mineral, loamy gleyed matrix, depleted matrix, redox dark surface, depleted dark surface, redox depressions, and vernal pools.

Appendix C —Methodology
concept of hydric soils. It should also be noted that the limits of wetland hydrology indicators areused as a guide for locating soil pits. If any hydric soil features are located, progressive pits are dug moving laterally away from the active channel until hydric features are no longer present within the top 20 inches of the soil profile.

Once in the field, soil characteristics are verified by digging soil pits along each transect to an excavation depth of 20 inches; in areas of high sediment deposition, soil pit depth may be increased. Soil pit locations areusually placed within the drainageinvert or within adjoining vegetation. At each soil pit, the soil texture and color are recorded by comparison with standard plates within a Munsell Soil Chart (2009). Munsell Soil Charts aid in designating color labels to soils, based by degrees of three simple variables — hue, value, and chroma. Any indicators of hydric soils, such as organic accumulation, iron reduction, translocation, and accumulation, and sulfate reduction, are also recorded.

Hydric soil indicators arepresentin three groups, which include:

All Soils
“All soils” refers to soils with any United StatesDepartment of Agriculture (USDA) soil texture. Hydric soil indicators within this group include histosol, histic epipedon, black histic, hydrogen sulfide, stratified layers, 1 cm muck, depleted below dark surface, and thick dark surface.

Loamy and Clayey Soils
“Loamy and clayey soils” refers to soil materials with aUSDA soil texture of loamy very fine sand and finer. Hydric soil indicators within this group include loamy mucky mineral, loamy gleyed matrix, depletedmatrix,redox dark surface, depleted dark surface,redox depressions, and vernalpools.

SWANCC WATERS
The term “isolated waters” is generally applied to waters/wetlands that arenot connectedby surface water to a river, lake, ocean, or other body of water. In the presence of isolated conditions, the Regional Board and CDFW take jurisdiction through the application of the OHWM/streambed and/or the 3 parameter wetlandmethodology utilizedby the Corps.
1004
Appendix C
Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix E
Cultural Resources Assessment
Kimley»Horn
1005
Material Culture Consulting, Inc. | 2701-B North Towne Avenue, Pomona CA 91767 | www.materialcultureconsulting.com *REVISED March 2024* June 2021
Submitted to:

EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Dr #500
Irvine, CA 92612

CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT

MATERIAL CULTURE

C ONS UULT I NG
Submitted to:

EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Dr #500
Irvine, CA 92612
Evi
—~—
Material Culture Consulting, Inc. | 2701-B North Towne Avenue, Pomona CA91767 | www.materialcultureconsulting.com 1006
PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT:

BELAGO PARK PROJECT, CITY OF MORENO VALLEY,

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Dr #500
Irvine, CA 92612
Prepared by:

Erika McMullin, B.A.

Hannah Johnston, M.Sc.

Principal Investigator:

Tria Belcourt, M.A., RPA, Riverside County Qualified Archaeologist Material Culture Consulting, Inc.
2701-B North Towne Avenue
Pomona, CA 91767
626-205-8279
March 2024
Type of Study: Cultural resources assessment
Cultural Resources within Area of Potential Impact: None USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle: Sunnymead, Section 14 of Township 3 S, Range 3 W APN(s): 478-100-012, 478-100-035 ,478-100-001, 478-120-001, 478-120 -002, 478-120-005, 478-120-006, 478-120-025, 478-110-002, 478-110-007, 478-110-003, 478-110-004, 478-110-005, 478-110-006, 478-120-027 Survey Area: Approx. 50-acres
Date of Fieldwork: February 15, 2021 and February 23, 2024 Key Words: Archaeology, CEQA, Phase I Survey, Negative Cultural Survey, Negative SLF, Riverside County \
4 MATERIALCULTURE

CONSULTING
PHASE| CULTURALRESOURCESASSESSMENT:

BELAGOPARKPROJECT,CITYOF MORENO VALLEY,

RIVERSIDECOUNTY,CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:

EPD Solutions, Inc.
3333 Michelson Dr #500
Irvine, CA 92612
Prepared by:

Erika McMullin, B.A.

Hannah Johnston, M.Sc.

Principal Investigator:

Tria Belcourt, M.A., RPA, Riverside County Qualified Archaeologist Material Culture Consulting, Inc.
2701-B North Towne Avenue
Pomona, CA 91767
626-205-8279
March 2024
Type of Study: Cultural resources assessment
CulturalResources withinArea ofPotentialImpact: None
USGS7.5-minute Quadrangle: Sunnymead, Section 14 of Township 3 S, Range 3W APN(s): 478-100-012, 478-100-035 ,478-100-001, 478-120-001, 478-120 -002, 478-120-005, 478-120-006, 478-120-025, 478-110-002, 478-110-007, 478-110-003, 478-110-004, 478-110-005, 478-110-006, 478-120-027 Survey Area: Approx. 50-acres Date of Fieldwork: February 15, 2021and February 23, 2024 Key Words: Archaeology, CEQA,Phase | Survey, Negative Cultural Survey, Negative SLF,Riverside County 1007

Moreno Valley City CouncilOctober 6, 2026

Moreno Valley City Council
October 6, 2026