Baker JN : 195869
Request No.: AWR-03
Date: November 12, 2024
ADDITIONAL WORK REQUEST SUMMARY
Client: City of Murrieta
Project Name: Menifee Road
Summary of Additional Work: Biological Resources Services and Additional Work
As requested, this scope provides the requisite tasks needed for the project to amend and ensure consistency with the Western Riverside Multiple Spe cies Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP).
During the Western Riverside County Regional Conser vation Authority and Wildlife Agencies (RCA/WA) Monthly Meeting in July, it was determined that the project would require a Minor Amendment and focused studies for MSHCP Survey Area species for coverage under the MSHCP. Additionally, during the meeting, the RCA/WA suggested the City consider wildlife movement across Menifee Road; therefore this scope includes preparation of conceptual vertical and horizontal alignments for a modified culvert un der the proposed Menifee Road. The culvert will also facilitate the drainage flows and will be included in the stormwater and hydraulic reports.
Regulatory permitting tasks have also been incorpor ated into this scope. It is assumed that no supplemental topography is needed at this time. We have yet to determine if the proposed project will fall under a Categorical Exemption (CE) as ite ms that may trigger an ISMND (Task 15 from the original scope) are:
• Impacts and mitigation to replace MSHCP Conservati on lands • Habitat present for Crotch's Bumblebee that may re quire mitigation and replacement • Mitigation for impacts on MSHCP riparian/riverine resources and aquatic resources Tasks 6, 7, and 9 will identify if the resources li sted above are present, level of impact, and whether or not mitigation is triggered under CEQA. If mitigation is required MBI will move forward with the ISMND and then Regulatory Permitting under Task 10 (hereon). If mitigation is not required, MBI will continue with the CE and obtain Regulatory Permitting.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
TASK 1 MSHCP MINOR AMENDMENT NOTIFICATION
A notification letter for a proposed Minor Amendment to the MSHCP will be prepared for the City to submit to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (US FWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) also known as the Wildlife Agencies . The notification letter will include a description of the Minor Amendment, the reason for the amendment, and an analysis of the environmental effects including any impacts to the conservation of Covered Species. The analysis will describe why the environmental effects: 1) are not significantly different from, and are biologically equivalent to, the terms in the MSHCP as originally adopted, 2) substantially conform to the terms in the MSHCP as originally adopted; and 3) will not significantly reduce the ability to acquire any Additional Reserve Lands.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes the City will identify and provi de the precise electronic boundaries (GIS shapefiles) of the reduced right-of-way for Los Alamos Road needed for the Minor Amendment. This task includes the preparation and submittal of the MSHCP Minor Amendment Notification and one revision of the Mino r Amendment should the Wildlife Agencies provide comments on the initial submittal. Coordination with the RCA/WAs to facilitate the MSHCP Minor Amendment is included under Task 4.
Deliverable: One draft and one final MSHCP Minor Amendment Noti fication letter submitted electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF format wil l be submitted to the City. If the Wildlife Agencies provided comments on the MSHCP Minor Amendment Notification letter, Michael Baker will provide a revised notification letter.
TASK 2 FOCUSED BURROWING OWL SURVEY AND REPORT
Suitable habitat for burrowing owl was determined t o be present on the project site during the habitat assessment conducted under the original Tas k Order. Michael Baker qualified biologists will conduct Step II (Locating Burrows and Burrowing Owls) of the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions (RCA 2006). The two-part method is as follows:
• Step II – Part A (Focused Burrow Survey): A systematic survey for potentially suitable burrows, burrow complexes, or man-made features (e. g., debris piles) that could be used by burrowing owl as nest structures will be co nducted on foot. All potentially suitable burrow features will be mapped, including GPS coordinates. Burrows encountered will be examined for shape, scat, pellets, white-wash, feathers, tracks, and prey remains. The location of suitable habitat, pot ential burrows, sign, and burrowing owls observed will be recorded and mapped with a ha nd-held GPS unit. Methods to detect presence of burrowing owls include direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence. Where feasible, the focused burrow sur vey will be combined with a site visit in Step II – Part B (below). This has been incorporated into the project’s cost. • Step II – Part B (Focused Burrowing Owl Survey): Four visits will be conducted on four separate days during the breeding season (March 1 through August 31). Surveys Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
will be conducted from one hour before sunrise to two hours after sunrise or two hours before sunset to one hour after sunset.
All surveys will be conducted during weather condit ions conducive to observing burrowing owls outside of their burrows (i.e., not during rain, hi gh winds [> 20 mph], dense fog, or temperatures exceeding 90°F). Walking transects will be spaced approximately 33 feet apart or less to ensure 100% visual coverage of all areas. The survey area will include the project site and a 500-foot buffer, as legally accessible to Michael Baker. Bin oculars will be used in areas that are inaccessible on foot, with more complete, thorough coverage within the proposed project site.
Areas providing potential habitat for burrowing owl s will be surveyed for suitable burrows, consisting of natural and man-made substrates in ar eas with low, open vegetation within the project site. All burrow features encountered will be 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 will be recorded and mapped with a hand- held GPS unit. Methods to detect presence of burrow ing owls include direct observation, aural detection, and signs of presence.
Following the completion of the final survey, a let ter report will be prepared that includes a summary of the methods, conditions, and results of the surveys. Site photographs taken during the field survey and figures will be included in the report to further enhance written text and visually identify specific biological information as it rela tes to the project site. This task includes time fo r GIS analysis to support the preparation of up to two figures.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes that potentially suitable burrow habitat for burrowing owl occurs on-site, requiring completion of four site visits in accordance with protocols provided in the MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Instruct ions. The site visit for Step I and Step II will be conducted on the same day. If after complet ion of the first survey no burrow habitat is found, the remaining 3 surveys under Step II would not be required. This task assumes that the City will provide full access to the project site, as well as keys to locked gates and advance notice to existing property tenants of our right of entry. This task also assumes one round of review/revisions of the draft burrowing owl survey report by the City before accepted as final.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Focused Burrowing Owl Surv ey Report submitted to the City electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF formats.
TASK 3 FOCUSED SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SURVEY AND REPO RT
Based on the habitat assessment conducted under the original Task Order and feedback from the RCA/WAs that the project is not a covered activ ity, Michael Baker botanists will conduct focused botanical surveys to document the presence and location(s) of narrow endemic plant species and criteria area plant species individuals and/or populations (if present) on the project site and surrounding 100-foot buffer, as legally accessible to Michael Baker. Table 1 summarizes the extent, survey area type, focal species, and bl oom periods at the project site for the Narrow Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Endemic Plant Species and Criteria Area Plant Speci es, as defined in the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
TABLE 1: Summary of Special-Status Plant Survey Area Species Survey Area Type * Focal Species Bloom period
Narrow Endemic Plant
Species
many -stemmed dudleya
Wright’s trichocoronis
April – July
May – September
Criteria Area Plant Species Davidson’s saltscale
thread-leaved brodiaea
smooth tarplant
round leaved filaree
April – October
March – June
April – September
March – May
The survey will be conducted consistent with guidel ines provided by the California Native Plant Society 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2, and California Department of Fish and Wildlife 3. The survey will be floristic in nature and species will be identified to the taxonomic level necessary to determine rarity and listing status. It is anticipated that three separate field visits will be conducted, one in March, May, and late-June 2025.
Prior to conducting the survey, Michael Baker botan ists will also conduct a review of known reference sites to determine whether the target spe cies are identifiable at the time of the survey and to obtain a visual image of the target species, associated habitat, and associated natural community. Each survey area will then be assessed s ystematically on foot by walking transects that will vary between approximately 10 and 50 feet apart depending on plant density and visibility to allow for 100 percent coverage necessary to inventory plant species.
Once the final survey is complete, Michael Baker wi ll prepare a letter report using information gathered from the results of the focused plant survey. The letter report will include documentation and mapping of special-status plant species that are observed (if any). If special-status plants are discovered, Michael Baker will complete and submit to the CNDDB California Native Species Field Survey Form(s), accompanied by a copy of the relevant portion of a 7.5-minute topographic map showing the occurrence mapped. Although an impact analysis in compliance with CEQA and the Western Riverside MSHCP will not be conducted, the report will provide recommendations for avoidance and minimization to reduce potential impacts to special-status plant species if detected.
1 California Native Plant Society. 2001. CNPS Botanical Survey Guidelines. December 9, 1983. Revised June 2, 2001.
2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants. January.
3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Populations and Natural Communities. March 20, 2018. Available online at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes three field surveys will be cond ucted (including one for the reference site) and that the City will provide full access to the project sites and surrounding vicinity (to the extent practicable ). The client will also provide keys to locked gates and advance notice to existing property tenants of Michael Baker’s right of entry. This task also assumes one round of review/revisions to the draft report before accepted as final.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Focused Special-Status Plant Survey Report submitted to the City for review electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF formats.
TASK 4 RESOURCE AGENCY COORDINATION
Our team anticipates up to 24 hours will be necessa ry for coordination with the RCA/WAs to review and process the MSHCP Minor Amendment reques t, Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP; Task 7), and Joint Project Review. Coordination will occur via email correspondence with the resource agencies, phone calls, and up to four (4) virtual conference calls. This task includes a brief meetin g with the City prior to any meeting with the resource agencies. It also includes four hours for GIS to prepare figures or shapefiles that may be necessary to present to the RCA and Wildlife Agencies.
Assumptions and Exclusions: As the permittee, the City will be responsible for submitting a written request to the RCA to appear on the agenda of a Wildlife Agency meeting and correspondence with the RCA.
Deliverables: Illustrative figures to present to the RCA and Wil dlife Agencies during review meetings.
TASK 5 WILDLIFE CROSSING RESEARCH AND DESIGN
The proposed project was initially presented as a l imited road paving effort that would not result in an increase to width/capacity in order to ensure public safety while streamlining the MSHCP consistency analysis. Due to recent design consider ations, project impacts are now anticipated to extend beyond the existing and maintained right- of-way into adjacent conserved lands identified in the MSHCP (Core Area). The project fo otprint now overlaps with a Core Area and must comply with the MSHCP guidelines in Section 7.5.2 (Guidelines for Construction of Wildlife Crossings) of the Plan. A Michael Baker biologist w ill work internally with project engineers to provide and define the MSHCP guidelines and conside rations that need to be incorporated into the project design, including latest scientific dat a and research available from the resource agencies and other scientific literature. The biolo gist will also help the City facilitate discussions with the RCA and Wildlife Agencies (under Task 4) t o ensure the proposed design is consistent with the MSHCP. Up to three (3) conceptual designs will be submitted to the City based on feedback from the RCA/WAs.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes attendance at up to three (3) co nceptual designs and meetings requiring up to 20-person hours for research, preparation, and assistance with project design considerations.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Deliverables: No deliverable is associated with this task.
TASK 6 ADDED-ON SUPPORT FOR THE HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND MSHCP
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
The original Task Order for the proposed project in cluded the Biological Resources Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis. Based on the discussions with the resource agencies, the draft Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Report will be updated with the findings of the focused studies in Task 2, 3 and 9, a revised impact analysis to MSHCP species, and incorporate the results of the coordination with the RCA/WAs on the MSHCP Minor Amendment (Task 4). In addition, as requested by th e CDFW, Michael Baker will analyze the potential habitat and impact to Crotch’s bumble bee ( Bombus crotchii ), a species that is a candidate for protection under the California Endangered Species Act and not currently analyzed in the MSHCP as a Covered Species. Results of the h abitat suitability and impact assessment will be incorporated into the report.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes the RCA and Wildlife Agencies wi ll approve the MSHCP Minor Amendment (Task 4) for Menifee Road Paving and the project will be considered an MSHCP Covered Activity.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Habitat Assessment and MSH CP Consistency Analysis submitted to the City for review electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF formats.
TASK 7 DETERMINATION OF BIOLOGICALLY EQUIVALENT OR SUPERIOR
PRESERVATION REPORT
Since the proposed project now has the potential to potentially impact riparian/riverine resources, special-status plants, and/or burrowing owl, a DBESP will be required to comply with the MSHCP.
The DBESP Report will be prepared and submitted to the RCA and Wildlife Agencies for review and approval. The DBESP Report will be prepared in accordance with the RCA’s most recent DBESP template and will include the following:
• Definition of the project area
• A written project description, demonstrating why an avoidance alternative is not feasible • A written description of biological information available for the project site including the results of resource mapping
• Quantification of unavoidable impacts to riparian/riverine areas, vernal pools, burrowing owl, or other MSHCP-covered resources associated with the project, including direct and indirect effects
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
• A written description of project design features and mitigation measures that reduce indirect effects, such as edge treatments, landscaping, elevation difference, minimization, and/or compensation through restoration or enhancement:
o Compensatory mitigation measures developed during the pre-application meetings with the RCA, USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and USFW S will be used to offset impacts as appropriate.
• A finding demonstrating that although the propos ed project would not avoid impacts, with proposed design and compensation measures, the proposed project would be biologically equivalent or superior to that which w ould occur under an avoidance alternative without these measures, based on one or more of the following factors:
o Effects on Conserved Habitats
o Effects on the riparian/riverine species listed in MSHCP Section 6.1.2 o Effects on riparian Linkages and function of the M SHCP Conservation Area This task includes GIS staff time to analyze and cr eate the figures or exhibits, which will be prepared on an aerial photograph base at a scale of 1:2,400 (1 inch = 200 feet) and time for coordination with the wildlife agencies.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This report will be included in the Joint Project Review (JPR; Task 8) submittal package. Submittal of the report to the RCA will trigger the start of a 10-day (business day) review. Once the RCA concurs with those findings, they will forward the report to the Wildlife Agencies which will trigger the start of their 60-day review period. Four hours have been included in this scope for RCA and wildlife ag ency coordination that may be necessary if they provide additional comments. This task also as sumes one round of review/revisions to the draft report before submittal to the RCA/Wildlife Agencies and a second round of review/revisions to the draft report before submitting the final DBESP to the RCA/Wildlife Agencies for their review and concurrence.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Determination of Biologica l Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report submitted to the City electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF formats.
TASK 8 JOINT PROJECT REVIEW APPLICATION
The application package for a Joint Project Review (JPR) will be prepared for submittal to the RCA and Wildlife Agencies. The application will be prepared using the data from the Habitat Evaluation and MSHCP Consistency Analysis, focused surveys (Task 2 and 3), DBESP (Task 7), and GIS shapefiles.
Assumptions and Exclusions: Michael Baker will submit the JPR package to the City for review and approval. As the permittee, the City will be responsible for submitting the JPR package to the RCA. Submittal of the JPR package will trigger the start of a 14-calendar day review by the RCA.
Once the RCA concurs with the JPR, they will forward the package to the Wildlife Agencies which Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
will trigger the start of their 10-day review perio d. This task also assumes one round of review/revisions to the draft JPR package before su bmittal to the RCA/Wildlife Agencies and a second round of review/revisions to the draft repor t before submitting the final DBESP to the RCA/Wildlife Agencies for their review and concurrence.
Deliverable: One draft and one final JPR application will be submitted to the City.
OPTIONAL TASK 9 CROTCH’S BUMBLE BEE HABITAT EVALUAT ION
MEMORANDUM
Based on initial feedback from the CDFW, there is a potential that focused surveys will be necessary for the Crotch’s bumble bee on the projec t site. The CDFW’s Survey Considerations for California Endangered Species Act Candidate Bumble Bee Species document that was issued June 6, 2023 will be used for evaluating the presence of the species. Unfortunately, there are no definitive survey methods provided though references to the California Bee Atlas and Rusty Patch Bumble Bee protocols. Therefore, close coordination with the CDFW is required to conduct these focused survey efforts. Other key considerations in clude the preferred survey windows as occurring between April and August, and that the CD FW considers Crotch’s bumble bee survey results only valid for one year following completio n. As a result, Michael Baker recommends documenting the results of a comprehensive habitat evaluation to support resource agency coordination as part of Task 4 and updates to the Habitat Assessment and MSHCP Consistency Analysis Report as part of Task 6.
A Michael Baker biologist will review reliable historical and current occurrence records for Crotch’s bumble bee, including but not limited to, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the Bumble bees of North America occurrence database, and citizen science data platforms such as iNaturalist and Bumble Bee Watch. A memorandum w ill be prepared summarizing the data review and vegetation mapping of areas providing suitable foraging, nesting, and/or overwintering resources for Crotch’s bumble bee.
Assumptions and Exclusions: The results and impacts of the memorandum will be integrated directly into the Habitat Assessment report (Task 6 ). Based on CDFW Survey Considerations, Crotch’s Bumble Bee can move from site to site acro ss years, therefore a negative result in one year, does not mean the species would not be present in a subsequent year. The memorandum prepared under this task will inform the City, cons ulting team, and CDFW of the potential for the species to occur on the project site, and help the project team to determine if focused surveys will be necessary, if the species should be assumed pres ent, and potential mitigation or permitting that may be necessary.
Deliverables: One draft and one final memorandum of the Crotch’s Bumble Bee habitat assessment.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
TASK 10 REGULATORY PERMITTING
Michael Baker will complete the following tasks as the project will impact mapped jurisdictional aquatic resources. This task replaces OPTIONAL TASK 3 in AWR-2.
TASK 10A RWQCB WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS
Impacts to non-federal waters of the State are permitted through Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. A written request for a WDR will be submitted to the RWQCB, San Diego Region. The WDR request generally includes the following items:
- A completed application form;
- A detailed project description;
- A description of project impacts;
- A description of best management practices provided by the applicant to avoid erosion and sedimentation or discharge of materials into stormwater, both during construction and long-term project operation;
- A discussion of the approvals being obtained from other federal, state, and local agencies
- The project CEQA document;
- An alternatives analysis;
- Application fee assessed using the RWQCB schedule (to be assessed by Michael Baker and provided by the applicant).
Under the new State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State, the RWQCB requires that a r equest for pre-application meeting be submitted 30 days prior to submitting the applicati on. Michael Baker will submit the request by email and facilitate the pre-application meeting, w hich is typically held online via Zoom or Microsoft Teams. Pursuant to the State Permit Strea mlining Act, the RWQCB has 30 days following receipt of the application to deem it complete or request additional information. Following a determination that the application is complete, the RWQCB has an additional 60 days to issue the permit.
Assumptions: This task includes one impact analysis of the proposed project’s development footprint (at least 30% engineering design) and one round of review/revisions on the draft application package before accepted as final. A reasonable range of alternatives will be provided to Michael Baker in order to prepare the alternatives analysis. Compensatory mitigation options will be provided to Michael Baker if deemed necessary. The application package will be finalized based upon one round of comments.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Waste Discharge Requirement application package.
Submittal to the RWQCB will be made by Michael Baker through email/RWQCB ftp site.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
TASK 10B CDFW STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT
Michael Baker will prepare the SAA application for submittal to CDFW (Inland Deserts, Region 6) to request authorization to temporarily and permane ntly impact Waters of the State associated with construction of the roadway. The SAA request generally includes the following items:
- A completed application form;
- A detailed project description;
- A description of project impacts;
- A discussion of the approvals and certifications being obtained from other federal, state, and local agencies;
- The project CEQA document;
- The SAA application fee using the 2025 fee schedule (to be assessed by Michael Baker and provided by the Applicant).
CDFW is a state agency; therefore, under the state Permit Streamlining Act, when the term of the requested agreement is 5 years or less, CDFW has 30 days following receipt of the 1602 application to deem an application complete or requ est additional information. Following a determination that the application is complete, CDFW has an additional 60 days to issue the draft 1602 SAA for review/signature by the Applicant.
Assumptions: This task includes one impact analysis of the proposed project’s development footprint (at least 30% engineering design) and one round of review/revisions to the draft report before accepted as final.
Deliverables: One draft and one final 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement application package.
Compensatory mitigation options will be provided to Michael Baker if deemed necessary. The application and supporting materials will be uploaded by Michael Baker using the CDFW EPIMS online system.
TASK 10C USACE APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIO N
This task includes the preparation of an Approved J urisdictional Determination (USACE concurrence). The determination is the USACE’s form al approval, which locks in jurisdictional and/or non-jurisdictional findings for up to five ( 5) years. This is an optional task that will be required if it is determined that the project will result in impacts to jurisdictional aquatic resources.
Michael Baker shall use the Streamflow Duration Flow Method (SDAM) to classify project aquatic features to support the regulatory permit processing with the USACE. SDAMs are rapid field assessment methods that use hydrological, geomorphological, and/or biological indicators, observable in a single site visit, to classify streamflow duration as perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral at the reach scale.
Michael Baker shall use the current Field Form for the beta Arid West SDAM, dated December 2020. Site photographs and GPS points shall also be gathered during the site reconnaissance.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Upon completion of the field assessment, Michael Baker shall prepare a technical memorandum that identifies the stream flow duration of the given study areas. The memorandum shall include backup data from the literatures review as well as site reconnaissance.
Assumptions and Exclusions: This task assumes one ( 1) round of reviews/revisions to the draft Approved Jurisdictional Determination before accepted as final. This task assumes Michael Baker will submit the Approved Jurisdictional Determination request to the USACE via email and provide as-needed assistance to support the USACE with their determination.
Deliverables: One draft and one final Approved Juri sdictional Determination will be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word and PDF formats.
TASK 10D PERMIT TRACKING AND RESOURCE AGENCY COORDI NATION Once the application packages are submitted, the st atus of AJD and applications will be coordinated with the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW through out processing to ensure that any potential issues are communicated to the City and r esolved at the earliest possible opportunity.
This critical coordination may include telephone, e mail, or written correspondence, or meetings with the agencies. This task includes one site visit with regulatory agency staff and the applicant, if requested by the agencies.
Deliverables: Digital copies of all agency correspo ndence, including emails, phone log, and meeting minutes associated with regulatory permitting consultations.
TASK 11 ADDITIONAL WORK TO EXISTING SCOPE
Original Task 5 Hydrology and Hydraulic
Michael Baker shall add hydraulic capacity of the p roposed culvert in addition to the existing culvert. The relevant tributary area to the new culvert will be investigated to see if there are any concerns. Michael Baker will discuss hydraulic con cerns, if any, related to the proposed design with the City.
Original Task 6 Vertical Alignment Design
Michael Baker shall redesign the preliminary vertical alignment to provide enough cover over the proposed culvert.
Original Task 7 Horizontal Alignment Design
Michael Baker shall use the redesigned vertical ali gnment to update the horizontal alignment.
With the addition of the culvert, the roadway will be slightly elevated. This elevation will cause the daylight line to exceed the existing requested considered right of way.
Updates to the Right of Way (ROW) and Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) Areas Exhibit will be made based on the findings.
Exclusions
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Consulting services relating to any of the followin g tasks may be completed by consultant if negotiated under a separate contract for an additional fee; but are presently specifically excluded from this Agreement:
1. Any other services not specifically set forth in the above Scope of Services
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Estimated Fee for Additional Work:
ITEM WORK TASK FEE
Task 1 MSHCP Minor Amendment ..................... ................................................... ....... $8,320 Task 2 Focused Burrowing Owl Survey and Report ... ................................................ $11,598 ODCs............................................. ................................................... ................... $764 Task 3 Special Status Plant Surveys and Report ... ................................................... . $12,774 ODCs............................................. ................................................... ................... $573 Task 4 Resource Agency Coordination .............. ................................................... ....... $4,980 Task 5 Wildlife Crossing Design Concepts ......... ................................................... ....... $2,902 Task 6 Additional Support for MSHCP Consistency An alysis ....................................... $4,876 Task 7 Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report ...... $10,552 Task 8 Joint Project Review Application .......... ................................................... .......... $1,845 Task 9 Crotch’s Bumble Bee Survey and Report (Opti onal) ......................................... $2,512 ODCs............................................. ................................................... ................... $191 Task 10a RWQCB Waste Discharge Requirements ........................................................ . 10,542 Task 10b CDFW Streambed Alteration Agreement ....................................................... ... $7,182 Task 10c USACE Approved JD ......................................................................... ............... $7,182 Task 10d Permit Processing and Coordination ........................................................ ....... $11,972 ODCs ....................................... ................................................... .......................... $81 Task 11 Additional Work to Existing Scope ......... ................................................... ...... $12,460 Original Task 5 – Hydrology & Hydraulic Study .... ........ $4,594 Original Task 6 – Vertical Alignment ............. ................ $5,244 Original Task 7 – Horizontal Alignment ........... .............. $2,622
TOTAL FEES ....... $111,306
** This scope of work will be completed on a time-and-materials, not-to-exceed basis and will not exceed the estimated budget unless prior consent is obtained. All work will be invoiced on a monthly basis. Should the total of the monthly billings reach eighty percent (80%) of the budget amount, Client and Michael Baker will review the status of the work to determine the need for an increase in the budget amount, and whether addition al budget authorization to complete the project is appropriate.
The fees proposed herein shall apply until 12/31/20 25. Michael Baker International reserves the right to increase those portions of the contract fee for which work must continue after 12/31/2025.
Table 2 provides a breakdown of costs per task included in the Scope of Work.
Baker JN 195869, AWR 03
11/12/2024
Prepared By:
Lonnie Druliner Date:
Michael Baker International Inc.
Department Manager Public Works/Transportation
Authorized By:
City of Murrieta Date:
Name
Title
Department
Manager
Technical
Manager Biologist I
Restoration
Ecologist
Restoration
Ecologist
Technical
Editor
Biologist
II
Technical
Manager
Regulatory
Analyst
Regulatory
Specialist
Project
Manager
Senior
Engineer
Project
Engineer
Design
Engineer
Bill Rate: $284 $200 $100 $144 $161 $116 $139 $223 $105 $168 $237 $200 $17 9 $146 1 — MSHCP Minor Amendment 2 30 0 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 $8,320 2 — Focused Burrowing Owl Survey and Report 2 30 36 0 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78 $11,598 3 — Special-Status Plant Surveys and Report 2 0 0 48 30 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 $12,774 4 — Resource Agency Coordination 4 16 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 $4,980 5 — Wildlife Crossing Design Concepts 4 4 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 $2,902 6 — Additional Support for MSHCP Consistency Analysis 2 16 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 $4,876 7 — Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report 2 36 8 0 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 $10,552 8 — Joint Project Review Application 1 2 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 $1,845 9 — OPTIONAL: Crotch's Bumble Bee Survey and Report 1 2 0 0 2 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 $2,512 10a — OPTIONAL: RWQCB WDR 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 4 16 40 0 0 0 0 67 $10,542 10b — OPTIONAL: CDFW 1602 SAA 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 4 16 20 0 0 0 0 47 $7,182 10c — OPTIONAL: USACE Approved JD 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 4 16 20 0 0 0 0 47 $7,182 10d — OPTIONAL: Permit Processing and Coordination 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 16 20 32 0 0 0 0 73 $11,972 11a - Original Task 5 - Hydrology & Hydraulic Study 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 20 28 $4,594 11b - Original Task 6 - Vertical Alignment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 24 0 28 $5,244 11c - Original Task 7 - Horizontal Alignment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 12 0 14 $2,622 Subtotal - Hours 24 136 54 48 91 23 10 28 68 112 8 6 36 20 664 Subtotal $109,697
ODCs $1,609
Total $111,306
Total Hours Total Cost
AWR 3 - Biological Resources Services and Additional Work
ID Task Name Start Finish
1 Minor Amendment Mon 11/18/24 Sat 5/3/25
2 Draft Minor Amendment Mon 11/18/24 Fri 11/29/24
3 Presubmittal Check-In with Wildlife Agency Mon 12/2/24 Fri 12/13/24 4 Revise Minor Amendment Mon 12/16/24 Fri 12/20/24
5 Submit Minor Amendment Fri 12/20/24 Tue 2/18/25
6 Address Comments Wed 2/19/25 Tue 3/4/25
7 Resubmittal Minor Amendment for Final Tue 3/4/25 Sat 5/3/25 8 Focused Studies/Habitat Evaluation Sat 3/1/25 Sun 8/31/25 9 Burrowing Owl Focused Study Sat 3/1/25 Sun 8/31/25
10 Rare Plant Focused Study Tue 4/1/25 Mon 6/30/25
11 Croch's Bumble Bee Habitat Evaluation Tue 4/1/25 Sun 8/31/25 12 JPR & DBESP Mon 9/1/25 Fri 2/13/26
13 Draft JPR & DBESP Mon 9/1/25 Fri 9/12/25
14 Submit Draft JPR & DBESP to RCA Mon 9/15/25 Fri 9/26/25 15 RCA to submit to USFWS/CDFW Mon 9/29/25 Fri 11/28/25 16 Address Comments Mon 12/1/25 Fri 12/12/25
17 Resubmittal for Final to USFWS/CDFW Mon 12/15/25 Fri 2/13/26 18 19
20 21 AFTER ENVIRONMENTAL
22 Regional Water Quality Control Board Waste
Discharge Requirement (RWQCB WDR)
23 California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Streambed Alteration Agreement (CDFW SAA)
24 CDFW Incidental Take Permit - Crotch’s Bumble
Bee ITP
6 to 9 Months
6 to 9 Months
9 to 12 Months
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 2025 2026
Menifee Road
Biological Critical Path
Menifee Road MSHCP Flow Chart
*Original scope of work
These tasks are not in
current AWR request
FOCUSED BIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Proceed with MSHCP Consistency Process (see MSHCP consistency report [Task 6], DBESP [Task 7] , and JPR [Task 8])
MAJOR AMENDMENT
(not an cipated )
BURROWING OWL FOCUSED SURVEY & REPORT (TASK 2)
Species Absent.
Preconstruc on survey will be needed.
Summarize results and document findings of consistency in the MSHCP Consistency Analysis (see Task 6 for next steps) If species present, determine if DBESP is needed (see Task 7 for next steps).
Is project in the MSHCP BUOW Survey Area? No. Document finding of no suitable habitat in MSHCP Consistency Report (Task 1*)
Yes. Are suitable burrows/burrow features
present ? (Task 2 -Part A )
Yes. Conduct BUOW focused survey (Task 2 – Part B)?
Species Present
No. Document O&M ac vity in MSHCP Consistency
Report (Task 1*); no focused studies required.
No. Addi onal focused surveys not required.
MINOR AMENDMENT (TASK 1)
Prepare and Submit Minor Amendment No fica on to USFWS/CDFW (triggers 60 -day review period)
Not Approved Approved No Response
WITHIN 60 DAYS
Concurrence Met
No Concurrence
(not an cipated)
Informal meet and confer process
Yes. Will the ac vity result in new construc on
and not O&M?
RARE PLANT FOCUSED SURVEY & REPORT (TASK 3)
Species Absent . N o addi onal surveys required.
Is project in the MSHCP Narrow Endemic
Survey or Criteria Area Species Survey Area?
No. Document finding of no suitable habitat in
MSHCP Consistency Report (Task 1*)
Yes. Conduct focused survey during appropriate
species blooming period
No. Document O&M ac vity in MSHCP Consistency Report
(Task 1*); no addi onal studies required.
Summarize results and document findings of consistency in the MSHCP Consistency Analysis (see Task 6 for next steps).
If species present, determine if DBESP is needed (see Task 7 for next steps).
Species Present
Yes. If avoidance is infeasible, prepare DBESP (see Task 7).
Document findings in the MSHCP Consistency Analysis (see Task 6).
Present:
• describe func ons and values of the riparian/riverine areas
• quan fy acreage of riparian/riverine areas
• provide a map of the loca on of riparian/riverine areas Determina on if riparian/riverine areas:
• provide suitable habitat for riparian birds
• cannot be avoided
Yes. Will the ac vity result in new
construc on and not O&M?
Aqua c Resources Delinea on Report
(AWR 2 JD task- Completed in February
2024)
)
RIPARIAN/RIVERINE RESOURCES
Determine if Riparian/Riverine
Resources Are Located on Site
Not Present
No. Document findings in
the MSHCP Consistency
Analysis ( see Task 6) .
CROTCH’S BUMBLE BEE SURVEY & REPORT ( OPTIONAL TASK 9)
Consulta on with CDFW
Poten ally Required (at a minimum):
• Incidental Take Permit (approx. 9 months to process)
• Focused Survey Prior to Construc on by a qualified biologist (April to August) • Preconstruc on Survey and Monitoring during Construc on Likely no addi onal ac on required;
Depending on how close suitable
habitat is to impact area, may need to
include Preconstruc on Surveys and
monitoring during construc on.
Conduct survey to map all suitable habitat
(w ithin 500 -D of project site )
Prepare Habitat Evalua on Memorandum
Summarize Results and Impacts Analysis in the Habitat
Assessment /MSHCP Consistency Report (Task 6)
Impacts
to Suitable Habitat
No Impacts
to Suitable Habitat
Confirm feedback from CDFW regarding
poten al for species and City’s desire to
conducted habitat evalua on
HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND MSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
(TASK 6)
Prepare i mpacts analysis for each resource (above)
Submit Report with the JPR Package (See JPR ApplicaBon Task 8) Develop Avoidance/Minimiza on/Mi ga on Measures
MSHCP CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR EACH
(SecBon 6.1.2, SecBon 6.1. 4, SecBon 6.1.3, SecBon 6.3.2) Riparian/Riverine Resources Resource (Sec on 6.1.2) Narrow Endemic Plants Species (Sec on 6.1.3) Burrowing Owl (Sec on 6.3.2) Urban Wildlands Interface Guidelines (Sec on 6.1.4) Incorporate MSHCP Appendix C Measures , Construc on
Guidelines in Sec on 7.5.3, and Guidelines for Construc on of Wildlife Crossings in Sec on 7.5.2 (Task 5)
Make Final Consistency DeterminaBon
Criteria Area Plant Species (Sec on 6.3.2)
If any one of the following are present and
avoidance is NOT feasible
1:
1 If the resource is not present or there is no LCTV, document finding in the Consistency Determina on (see Task 6).
Riparian/Riverine Resources Resource (Sec on 6.1.2)
Burrowing Owl (Sec on 6.3.2)
Narrow Endemic Plants Species (Sec on 6.1.3)
AND 3 or more pairs are present
on 35+ acre site
DeterminaBon of Biologically Equivalent or Superior
PreservaBon (TASK 7)
AND the area onsite provides long-
term conserva on value (LCTV)
Criteria Area Plant Species (Sec on 6.3.2)
AND 1-2 pairs are present
Document Equivalency Finding in the DBESP
(Task 7) DBESP
Avoid 90% of areas with LTCV
Avoidance of 90% areas with
LTCV NOT feasible
Document in MSHCP Consistency
DeterminaBon (see Task 6 above)
No fy RCA/WA; may
need to prepare a BUOW
Protec on and Reloca on
Plan
AND the area onsite provides long-
term conserva on value (LCTV)
Avoid 90% of areas with LTCV
Avoidance of 90% areas with
LTCV NOT feasible
Submit DBESP for Joint Project Review (See Task 8)
*
Joint Project Review (JPR) (Task 8)
City Submits JPR Package to the Western Riverside
County Regional Conserva on Authority (RCA)
Prepare JPR Package:
• JPR Applica on
• MSHCP Consistency Report (Task 4)
• DBESP Report (Task 7), if prepared
•
• Site Plan Shapefiles
• Applica on Fee
RCA determines project is in
compliance with MSHCP
RCA Review (14 calendar days)
(City may receive comments, extending reviews)
RCA submits Non -Consistency Findings to
PermiMee (City) & Wildlife Agencies
Meet & Confer within 30 days
RCA provides Consistency Findings to
City & Wildlife Agencies
RCA submits Consistency Findings to
PermiMee (City) & Wildlife Agencies (WA’s)
WA’s review JPR (10 Business days )
Note: If there is a DBESP , WA’s finding will be provided aDer 60 calendar days.
WA’s provide MSHCP Findings to PermiMee & RCA
WA’s provide City with comments
CITY COMPLETES JPR, CEQA,
& PROJECT APPROVAL City addresses comments and resubmits to WA’s
WA’s provides Consistency Findings to City & RCA
RCA determines project is NOT in
compliance with MSHCP
WA’s Concur with the RCA