BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
WHITEWOOD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
MURRIETA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Sancerra
2618 San Miguel Dr., Suite 1223
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Adam Smith
[email protected]
WRA, Inc.
3033 Fifth Ave, Suite 315
San Diego, CA 92103
Attn: Michael Nieto
[email protected]
WRA #31314
MAY 2024
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1
1.1 Overview and Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Project Description .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses ........................................................................................ 2
1.5 Results Summary ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................6
2.1 Federal and State Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................. 6
2.1.1 Vegetation and Aquatic Communities ......................................................................................... 6
2.1.2 Special-status Species .................................................................................................................. 7
2.2 Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) ............................. 9
3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover Types .................................................................... 11
3.2 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................................. 11
3.3 Special-status Species ....................................................................................................................... 11
3.3.1 General Assessment ................................................................................................................... 11
3.3.2 Special-status Plants .................................................................................................................. 12
3.3.3 Special-status Wildlife ................................................................................................................ 13
3.3.4 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites ................................................................. 13
4.0 ECOLOGICAL SETTING ................................................................................................................. 13
4.1 Soils and Topography ........................................................................................................................ 14
4.2 Climate and Hydrology ...................................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Land-use ............................................................................................................................................ 15
5.0 ASSESSMENT RESULTS ................................................................................................................ 15
5.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover .............................................................................. 15
5.2 Aquatic Resources ............................................................................................................................. 17
5.3 Special-status Species ....................................................................................................................... 18
5.3.1 Special-status Plants .................................................................................................................. 18
5.3.2 Special-Status Wildlife ............................................................................................................... 19
5.4 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites ........................................................................ 23
5.5 Habitat Conservation Plans ............................................................................................................... 23
5.5.1 Burrowing Owl Survey Area ....................................................................................................... 23
5.5.2 Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area ......................................................................................... 24
5.5.3 Conservation and Reserve Assembly ......................................................................................... 24
5.5.4 Species Associated with Riparian Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools .......................................... 24
6.0 ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA ...................................... 24
7.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION EVALUATION ................................................................................... 26
7.1 General Avoidance and Minimization Measures ...................................................................... 26 Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page ii
7.2 Special-status Species ................................................................................................................ 27
7.3 Sensitive Natural Communities and Land Cover Types ............................................................. 32
7.4 Aquatic Resources ..................................................................................................................... 32
7.5 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites ................................................................. 33
7.6 Local Policies and Ordinances ................................................................................................... 33
7.7 Habitat Conservation Plans ....................................................................................................... 34
7.8 Indirect Impacts ......................................................................................................................... 34
7.9 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................................................................... 34
8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 36
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Figures
Figure 1. Study Area Location
Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of Study Area
Figure 3. Proposed Project Plan
Figure 4. Soils Mapped within Survey Area
Figure 5. Natural Communities and Land Cover within the Study Area Figure 6. Observed Special-Status Plant Species in the Study Area Figure 7a. Potential Jurisdictional Features Located within the Study Area Figure 7b. CDFW 1602 & MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Jurisdiction within Survey Area Figure 8. Project Area in Relation to MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area Figure 9. Potential Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species Figure 10. Potential Impacts to Sensitive Natural Communities Figure 11a. Potential Impacts to Aquatic Resources
Figure 11a. Potential Impacts to CDFW and MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Aquatic resources
Appendix B – Species Documented within and around the Study Area Appendix C – Special-Status Species Potential Table
LIST OF PREPARERS
Michael Nieto – Principal-in-Charge
Tyler Hanson – Associate Plant Biologist
Matt Schliebe – Associate Wildlife Biologist
Neal Jander – GIS Analyst
DEFINITIONS
Study Area: The area throughout which the assessment was performed, inclusive of approximately 17.26 acres spanning across the majority of the parcel of APN 392-330-003, 392-330-007, 392-330- 021, 392- 330-020.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
BIOS Biogeographic Information and Observation System
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFGC California Fish and Game Code
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS California Native Plant Society
County County of Riverside
Corps U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CSRL California Soils Resources Lab
CTS California Tiger Salamander
CWA Clean Water Act
EFH Essential Fish Habitat
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Federal Endangered Species Act
Magnuson-Stevens Act Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation & Management MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NWI National Wetland Inventory
OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark
Rank California Rare Plant Ranks
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SSC Species of Special Concern
SWRCB State Water Resource Control Board
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
WBWG Western Bat Working Group
WRA WRA, Inc.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Biological Technical Report evaluates existing biological resources, potential impacts, and mitigation measures (if required) for the Whitewood (West) Residential Development Project located in Mur rieta, Riverside County, California (Appendix A , Figure 1 and 2 ). The proposed project (Project) involves a residential development on four parcels (Appendix A, Figure 3). The currently undeveloped site contains a mixture of disturbed/developed areas in the form of unpaved access roads, two small single -family homes, as well as blocks of disturbed and undisturbed native habitat types.
1.1 Overview and Purpose
This report provides an assessment of biological resources within the Study Area and immediate vicinity.
The Study Area includes the four parcels composing the project. No offsite areas are anticipated to be needed to construct the project. The biological technical assessment included a habitat assessment for burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia), focused surveys for least Bell’s vireo ( Vireo bellii pusillus , narrow endemic rare plant surveys, and a jurisdictional delineation report). These associated reports are provided under separate covers. The purpose of the assessment was to develop and gather information on sensitive biological communities and special-status plant and wildlife species to support an evaluation of the Project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and evaluates the projects consistency with the MSHCP.
This report describes the results of the site visit, which assessed the Study Area for (1) the presence of sensitive biological communities, special-status plant species, and special -status wildlife species, (2) the potential for the site to support specia l-status plant and wildlife species. Based on the results of the site assessment, potential impacts to sensitive biological communities and special- status species resulting from the proposed project were evaluated. If the project has the potential to result in significant impacts to these biological resources, measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate for those significant impacts are described.
A biological resources assessment provides general information on the presence, or potential presence, of sensitive species and habitats. Information in this assessment has been supplemented by additional focused studies including a burrowing owl habitat a ssessment, focused least Bell’s vireo presence/absence surveys, rare plant surveys, and a jurisdictional wetland delineation. Additional focused studies (such as protocol level species surveys or a wetland delineation) may be required to support regulatory permit applications or to implement mitigation measures included in this report. This assessment is based on information available at the time of the study and on -site conditions that were observed on the dates the site was visited. Conclusions are based on currently available information used in combination with the professional judgement of the biologists completing this study.
The project is subject to the MSHCP, but the survey area is located outside of the MSHCP’s amphibian, criteria area species, mammal species, and is not adjacent to any land designated for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area. The project site is within the MSHCP burrowing owl and narrow endemic plant survey areas.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 2
1.2 Project Description
The Project consists of a Development Plan Permit and Tentative Tract Map for a 17.26 -acre site. The Project would provide for development of 243 multi-family residential homes at a density of 15.1 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The Project also includes construction of a recreational pool area with a ±900sf restroom and pool equipment building, tot lot and 65,120 sf of total common open space areas throughout the site. The proposed 243 dwelling units comprise 2- and 3-story townhomes. A total of 629 parking spaces would be provided with 10% of spaces designated as future electric vehicle (EV) spaces.
Grading proposed by the Project would result in disturbance to 16.64 acres to the Project site. Access to the Project would be provided by two (2) full access driveways, one located on Arendt Lane, and the other located on Whitewood Road.
1.3 Project Location
The Project site consists of approximately 17.26 acres in the northeastern portion of the City of Murrieta.
From a regional perspective, the Project site is located 0.26 mile west of the French Valley area of unincorporated Riverside County. Interstate 215 (I -215) is located 0.6 mile west of the Project site.
Specifically, the Project site is located east of Whitewood Road, north of Clinton Keith Road. The Project site encompasses Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 392-330-003, -007, -020, and -021.
1.4 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site contains two existing residences in the eastern half of site and the western half of the site is undeveloped. Elevations range between approximately 1,385 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the southeast corner to 1,480 feet amsl along the western boundary.
To the west of the Project site is an existing residential development. North and east of the Project site are several existing homes. South of the Project site is undeveloped land designated for multiple- family residential land uses.
1.5 Results Summary
A total of two special- status birds (southern California rufous -crowned sparrow [ Aimophila ruficeps canescens] and Bell’s sage sparrow [Artemisiospiza belli belli]) , one special-status mammal (San Diego pocket mouse [Chaetodipus fallax fallax ]), and two special-status reptiles (orange-throated whiptail [Aspidoscelis hyperythra] and coast horned lizard [Phrynosoma blainvillii]), as well as non-status birds with baseline legal protections, have the potential to occur in the Study Area. Of these, orange thr oated whiptail and coast horned lizard were observed during biological surveys. All sensitive wildlife species identified during database searches and site visit are listed as covered species under the Western Riverside MSHCP. CDFW Species of Special Concern may be afforded certain protections under CEQA; additional consideration for species such as burrowing owl and least Bell’s vireo further detailed below.
Mitigation measures and best management practices have been developed and are provided herein to avoid and mitigate impacts to these resources.
A protocol-level rare plant survey resulted in the detection of four special- status plant species: Parry’s spineflower ( Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi ; CRPR 1B.1 , MSHCP Covered ), long -spined spineflower (Chorizanthe polygonoides var. longispina; CRPR 1B.2 , MSHCP covered), intermediate mariposa lily (Calochortus weedii var. intermedius ; CRPR 1B.2 , MSHCP covered ), and paniculate tarplant ( Deinandra Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 3
paniculata; CRPR 4.2). Populations of all four species will be permanently impacted by the Project, but recommended mitigation measures are provided herein to minimize these impacts.
Approximately 0.05 acres (819 linear feet) of potentially jurisdictional non-wetland Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State are located in the western half of the Study Area. Additionally, approximately 0.59 acres of potentially jurisdictional wetland Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State comprised of southern willow scrub (0.53 acres), ephemeral drainage (0.05 acres), and emergent marsh (<0.01 acres) were observed within the Study Area. Southern willow scrub, non -wetland waters, and wetland waters are considered sensitive natural communities. As the entire study will be developed, avoidance of these wetland features will not be possible and will require mitigation. A total of 0. 93 acre of CDFW 1602 riparian and 0.05 acre (819 linear feet) streambed jurisdiction on site composed of southern willow scrub, mulefat scrub, emergent marsh, ephemeral drainage and coast live oak wood land canopy surrounding streams was also observed on -site. In addition, a total of 0. 98 MSHCP Riparian/Riverine jurisdiction was observed.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 4
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES EVALUATION
1 CEQA Questions have been summarized here; see Section 6.2 for details. 2 As given in this report; see Section 5.0 subheadings
CEQA ASSESSMENT
CATEGORY0F
1IV. -BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
CONSIDERED
RELEVANT LAWS AND
REGULATIONS
RESPONSIBLE REGULATORY
AGENCY
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS &
REPORT SECTION1F
2 Question A. Special-status
species
Special-status Plants
Special-status Wildlife
Designated Critical Habitat
Federal Endangered Species
Act
California Endangered
Species Act
California Native Plant
Protection Act
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Marine Fisheries
Service
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
MSHCP
Potentially significant
impacts were identified and
mitigation measures
included that reduce those
impacts to a level that is less
than significant.
See Section 5.3 for more
information
Question B. Sensitive natural
communities & riparian
habitat
Sensitive Natural
Communities
Streams, Lakes, & Riparian
Habitat
California Fish and Game
Code
Oak Woodland Conservation
Act
Porter-Cologne Act
Clean Water Act
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
State Water Resources
Control Board
Regional Water Quality
Control Board
MSHCP
Potentially significant
impacts were identified and
mitigation measures
included that reduce those
impacts to a level that is less
than significant.
See Section 5.2 for more
information
Question C. State and
federally protected wetlands
Wetlands
Unvegetated surface waters
Clean Water Act Sections
404/401
Rivers and Harbors Act
Section 10
Porter Cologne Act
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
State Water Resources
Control Board
Regional Water Quality
Control Board
Potentially significant
impacts were identified and
mitigation measures
included that reduce those
impacts to a level that is less
than significant.
See Section 5.2 for more
information
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 5
Question D. Fish & wildlife
corridors
Essential Fish Habitat
Wildlife Corridors
California Fish and Game
Code
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
Potentially significant
impacts were not identified
See Section 5.4 for more
information
Question E. Local policies Protected Trees
Coastal zone resources
Other biological protections
Local Tree Ordinance
General Plan (e.g., Stream &
Wetland Setbacks)
Local ordinances
Local and regional agencies
Potentially significant
impacts were identified and
mitigation measures
included that reduce those
impacts to a level that is less
than significant.
See Section 5.5 for more
information
Question F. Local, state,
federal conservation plans
Habitat Conservation Plans
Natural Community
Conservation Plans
Federal Endangered Species
Act
Natural Community
Conservation Planning Act
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
California Department of
Fish and Wildlife
MSHCP
Potentially significant
impacts were not identified.
See Section 5.5 for more
information
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 6
2.0 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
The following sections explain the regulatory context of the biological assessment, including applicable laws and regulations that were applied to the field investigations and analysis of potential project impacts.
Table 1 shows the correlation between these regulations and each Biological Resources question in the Environmental Checklist Form (Appendix G) of the CEQA guidelines.
2.1 Federal and State Regulatory Setting
2.1.1 Vegetation and Aquatic Communities
CEQA provides protections for particular vegetation types defined as sensitive by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFW), and aquatic communities protected by laws and regulations administered by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). The laws and regulations that provide protection for these resources are summarized below.
Sensitive Natural Communities: Sensitive natural communities include habitats that fulfill special functions or have special values. Natural communities considered sensitive are those identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW. CDFW ranks sensitive communities as "threatened" or "very threatened" (CDFW 2022) and keeps records of their occurrences in its California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2022). Vegetation alliances are ranked 1 through 5 in the CNDDB based on NatureServe's (2022) methodology, with those alliances ranked globally (G) or statewide (S) as 1 through 3 considered sensitive. Impacts to sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or those identified by the CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) must be considered and evaluated under CEQA (CCR Title 14, Div. 6, Chap. 3, A ppendix G). In addition, this general class includes oak woodlands that are protected by local ordinances under the Oak Woodlands Protection Act and Section 21083.4 of California Public Resources Code.
Waters of the United States, Including Wetlands: The Corps regulates “Waters of the United States” under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Waters of the United States are defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as including the territorial seas, and waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, such as tribu taries, lakes and ponds, impoundments of waters of the U.S., and wetlands that are hydrologically connected w ith these navigable features (33 CFR 328.3). Potential wetland areas, according to the three criteria used to delineate wetlands as defined in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Corps Manual; Environmental Laboratory 1987) , are identified by the presence of (1) hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3) wetland hydrology. Unvegetated waters including lakes, rivers, and streams may also be subject to Section 404 jurisdiction and are characterized by an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) identified based on field indicators such as the lack of vegetation, sorting of sediments, and other indicators of flowing or standing water. The placement of fill material into Waters of the United States generally requires a permit from the Corps under Section 404 of the CWA.
The Corps also regulates construction in navigable waterways of the U.S. through Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) of 1899 (33 USC 403). Section 10 of the RHA requires Corps approval and a permit for excavation or fill, or alteration or modification of the course, location, condition, or capacity of, any port, roadstead, haven, harbor, canal, lake, harbor or refuge, or enclosure within the limits of any breakwater, or of the channel of any navigable water of the United States. Section 10 requirements apply Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 7
only to navigable waters themselves, and are not applicable to tributaries, adjacent wetlands, and similar aquatic features not capable of supporting interstate commerce.
Waters of the State, Including Wetlands: The term “Waters of the State” is defined by the Porter-Cologne Act as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” The SWRCB and nine RWQCB protect waters within this broad regulatory scope through many different regulatory programs. Waters of the State in the context of a CEQA Biological Resources evaluation include wetlands and other surface waters protected by the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (SWRCB 2019). The SWRCB and RWQCB issue permits for the discharge of fill material into surface waters through the State Water Quality Certification Program, which fulfills requirements of Section 401 of the CWA and the Porter- Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Projects that require a Clean Water Act permit are also required to obtain a Water Quality Certification. If a project does not require a federal permit but does involve discharge of dredge or fill material into surface waters of the State, the SWRCB and RWQCB may issue a permit in the form of Waste Discharge Requirements.
Sections 1600-1616 of California Fish and Game Code: Streams and lakes, as habitat for fish and wildlife species, are regulated by CDFW under Sections 1600 -1616 of California Fish and Game Code (CFGC).
Alterations to or work within or adjacent to streambeds or lakes generally require a 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The term “stream,” which includes creeks and rivers, is defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life [including] watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation” (14 CCR 1.72).
The term “stream” can include ephemeral streams, dry washes, watercourses with subsurface flows, canals, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, and other means of water conveyance if they support aquatic life, riparian vegetation, or stream -dependent terrestrial wildlife (CDFG 1994). Riparian vegetation has been defined as “vegetation which occurs in and/or adjacent to a stream and is dependent on, and occurs because of, the stream itself” (CDFG 1994) . Removal of riparian vegetation also requires a Section 1602 Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW.
MSHCP Riverine/Riparian: The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) serves as a Habitat Conservation Plan pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 and a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the NCCP Act of 2001.
The County identifies areas as riparian/riverine that “contain habitat dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to or which depend upon soil moisture from a nearby fresh water source; or areas with fresh water flow during all or a portion of the year.” Under the guidelines and requirements of MSHCP, areas including those determined to be vernal pools, freshwater marsh, riparian forests, riparian woodlan ds, riparian scrub, open water, disturbed wetlands, flood channel, river and stream beds within the Plan Area.
2.1.2 Special-status Species
Endangered and Threatened Plants, Fish, and Wildlife. Specific species of plants, fish, and wildlife species may be designated as threatened or endangered by the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Specific protections and permitting mechanisms for these species differ under each of these acts, and a species’ designation under one law does not automatically provide protection under the other.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 8
The ESA (16 USC 1531 et seq.) is implemented by the USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The USFWS and NMFS maintain lists of endangered and threatened plant and animal species (referred to as "listed species"). "Proposed" or "candidate" species are those that are being considered for listing and are not protected until they are formally listed as threatened or endangered. Under the ESA, authorization must be obtained from the USFWS or NMFS prior to take of any listed species. “Take” under the ESA is defined as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Take under the ESA includes direct injury or mortality to individuals, disruptions in normal behavioral patterns resulting from factors such as noise and visual disturbance, and impacts to habitat for listed species. Actions that may result in take of an ESA- listed species may obtain a permit under ESA Section 10, or via the interagency consultation described in E SA Section 7. Federally listed plant species are only protected when take occurs on federal land.
The ESA also provides for designation of critical habitat, which are specific geographic areas containing physical or biological features “essential to the conservation of the species .” Protections afforded to designated critical habitat apply only to actions that are funded, permitted, or carried out by federal agencies. Critical habitat designations do not affect activities by private landowners if there is no other federal agency involvement.
The CESA (CFGC 2050 et seq.) prohibits the take of any plant and animal species that the CFGC determines to be an endangered or threatened species in California. CESA regulations include take protection for threatened and endangered plants on private lands, as well as extending this protection to candidate species that are proposed for listing as threatened or endangered under CESA. The definition of a "take" under CESA ("hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill") only applies to direct impact to individuals, and does not extend to habitat impacts or harassment. CDFW may issue an Incidental Take Permit under CESA to authorize take if it is incidental to otherwise lawful activity and if specific criteria are met. Take of these species is also authorized if the geographic area is covered by a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), as long as the NCCP covers that activity.
Fully Protected Species and Designated Rare Plant Species. This category includes specific plant and wildlife species that are designated in the CFGC as protected even if not listed under CESA or ESA. Fully Protected Species includes specific lists of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fish designated in CFGC. Fully protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time. No licenses or permits may be issued for take of fully protected species, except for necessary scientific research and conservation purposes. The definition of "take" is the same under the California Fish and Game Code and the CESA. By law, CDFW may not issue an Incidental Take Permit for Fully Protected Species. Under the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA), CDFW has listed 64 “rare” or “endangered” plant species, and prevents “take”, with few exceptions, of these species. CDFW may authorize take of species protected by the NPPA through the Incidental Take Permit process, or under a NCCP.
Special Protections for Nesting Birds and Bats. The federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act provides relatively broad protections to both of North America’s eagle species (bald eagle [ Haliaeetus leucocephalus] and golden eagle [ Aquila chrysaetos)] that in some regards are similar to those provided by the ESA. In addition to regulations for special- status species, most native birds in the United States, including non-status species, have baseline legal protections under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and CFGC, i.e., sections 3503, 3503.5 and 3513. Under these laws/codes, the intentional harm or collection of adult birds as well as the intentional collection or destruction of active nests, eggs, and young is illegal.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 9
For bat species, the Western Bat Working Group (WBWG) designates conservation status for species of bats, and those with a high or medium-high priority are typically given special consideration under CEQA.
Species of Special Concern, Movement Corridors, and Other Special- status Species under CEQA. To address additional species protections afforded under CEQA, CDFW has developed a list of special species as “a general term that refers to all of the taxa the CNDDB is interested in tracking, regardless of their legal or protection status.” This list includes lists developed by other organizations, including for example, the Audubon Watch List Species, the Bureau of Land Management Sensitive Species, and USFWS Birds of Special Concern. Plant species on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (Inventory) with California Rare Plant Ranks (Rank) of 1 and 2, as well as some with a Rank of 3, are also considered special- status plant species and must be considered under CEQA. Some Rank 3 species and all Rank 4 species are typically only afforded protection under CEQA when such species are particularly unique to the locale (e.g., range limit, low abundance/low frequency, limited habitat) or are otherwise considered locally rare. Additionally, any species listed as sensitive within local plans, policies and ordinances are likewise considered sensitive. Movement and migratory corridors for native wildlife (including aquatic corridors) as well as wildlife nursery sites are given special consideration under CEQA.
2.2 Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP)
The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) serves as a Habitat Conservation Plan pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 and a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the NCCP Act of 2001. The MSHCP allows the participating jurisdictions to authorize “take” of plant and wildlife species identified within the Plan Area. The USFWS and CDFW have the authority to regulate the Take of threatened, endangered, and rare species. Under the MSHCP, USFWS and CDFW grant “take authorization” for otherwise lawful actions such as public or private development that may incidentally take individual species or their habitat in exchange for the assembly and management of a coordinated MSHCP Conservation Area.
The Western Riverside MSHCP Plan Area covers approximately 1.26 million acres, including all unincorporated Riverside County land west of the crest of the San Jacinto Mountains as well as numerous incorporated cities. One-hundred forty-six Covered Species are addressed in the MSHCP. Of these, 118 are considered to be adequately conserved, 16 species will be considered adequately conserved when certain conservation measures are met, and 12 species will be addressed in a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Forest Service.
On February 23, 1998, USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service published the “No Surprises” rule that revised Title 50 of the CFR. This rule provides that as long as a Habitat Conservation Plan is being properly implemented, the federal government will not require additional mitigation (lands or financial compensation) or additional restrictions on the use of land or other natural resources from the Permittee(s) in the event of unforeseen circumstances and that additional measures deemed necessary to respond to changed circumstances would be limited to those specifically identified in the MSHCP. In the event that USFWS makes a finding of unforeseen circumstances and those unforeseen circumstances warrant the requirement of additional mitigation, enhan cement, or compensation measures, those additional measures will be restricted to modification of the management of the MSHCP Conservation Areas and shall be the least burdensome measures available to address the unforeseen circumstances.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 10
3.0 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
WRA, Inc. (WRA) biologists visited the Study Area on the dates listed in Table 2 to map vegetation, aquatic communities, unvegetated land cover types, document plant and wildlife species present, and evaluate on-site habitat for the potential to support special- status species as defined by CEQA. Prior to the site visit, WRA biologists reviewed literature resources and performed database searches to assess the potential for sensitive biological communities (e.g., wetlands) and special-status species (e.g., endangered plants), including:
• California Soil Resources Lab (CSRL 2022)
• Murrieta 7.5-minute U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle (USGS 2018) • Contemporary aerial photographs (Google Earth 2022)
• Historical aerial photographs (NETR 2022)
• National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2022b)
• California Aquatic Resources Inventory (SFEI 2022)
• CDFW 2022
• CNPS Inventory (CNPS 2022)
• Consortium of California Herbaria (CCH1 2022, CCH2 2022) • USFWS List of Federal Endangered and Threatened Species (USFWS 2022a) • California Bird Species of Special Concern in California (Shuford and Gardali 2008) • California Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern (Thomson et al. 2016) • A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003) • A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (CNPS 2022a) • Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities (Holland 1986) • California Natural Community List (CDFW 2022)Murrieta USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles.
Following the remote assessment, WRA biologists completed a field review over the course of eight hours to document: (1) land cover types (e.g., terrestrial communities, aquatic resources), (2) existing conditions and to determine if such provide suitable habitat for any special-status plant or wildlife species, (3) if and what type of aquatic natural communities (e.g., wetlands) are present, and (4) if special-status species are present
.
TABLE 2. SURVEY AREA ASSESSMENT DATES
DATE ASSESSMENT TYPE
November 8, 2021 General Biological Resources
April 29, 2022 Rare Plant Survey, Burrowing Owl Habitat Assessment, LBV Survey
May 9, 2022 LBV Survey
May 20, 2022 Rare Plant Survey, Jurisdictional Delineation, LBV Survey
May 31, 2022 LBV Survey
June 13, 2022 LBV Survey
July 5, 2022 LBV Survey
July 19, 2022 LBV Survey
July 29, 2022 LBV Survey
June 6, 2023 LBV Survey
June 16, 2023 LBV Survey
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 11
June 26, 2023 LBV Survey
July 6, 2023 LBV Survey
July 17, 2023 LBV Survey
July 27, 2023 LBV Survey
3.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover Types
The MSHCP bases its conservation areas on the vegetation map prepared by Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS) and KTU+A in 1995 Mapping was based on the Holland classification (Holland 1986), and 50 vegetation communities mapped by PSBS and KTU+A within the Western Riverside MSHCP area were collapsed to 14 for MSHCP planning and analysis purposes. Impacts from this Project are based on this MSHCP vegetation map. Fine-scale vegetation mapping was conducted according to Manual of California Vegetation standards (Sawyer et al. 2009) by WRA in 2022.
During the site visit, WRA evaluated the species composition and area occupied by distinct vegetation communities, aquatic communities, and other land cover types. Mapping of these classifications utilized a combination of aerial imagery and ground surveys. In most instances, communities are characterized and mapped based on distinct shifts in plant assemblage (vegetation) and follow the California Natural Community List (CDFW 2022b) and A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (CNPS 2022a). These resources cannot anticipate every component of every potential vegetation assemblage in California, and so in some cases, it is necessary to identify other appropriate vegetative classifications based on best professional judgment of WRA biologists. When undescribed variants are used, it is noted in the description. Vegetation alliances (natural communities) with a CDFW Rank of 1 through 3 (globally critically imperiled [S1/G1], imperiled [S2/G2], or vulnerable [S3/G3]) (CDFW 202 2b), were evaluated as sensitive as part of this evaluation.
3.2 Aquatic Resources
The site was reviewed for the presence of wetlands and other aquatic resources on May 20, 2022 according to the methods described in the Corps Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Arid West; Corps 2008), and A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (Lichvar and McColley 2008). Areas meeting these indicators were mapped as aquatic resources and categorized using the vegetation community classification methods described above. The presence of riparian habitat was evaluated based on woody plant species meeting the definition of riparian provided in A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Section 1600-1607, California Fish and Game Code (CDFG 1994) and based on best professional judgement of biologists completing the field surveys.
3.3 Special-status Species
3.3.1 General Assessment
Potential occurrence of special-status species in the Study Area was evaluated by first determining which special-status species occur in the vicinity of the Study Area through a literature and database review as described above. Presence of suitable habitat for special-status species was evaluated during the site visits based on physical and biological conditions of the site as well as the professional expertise of the investigating biologists. Rare plant surveys and focused least Bell’s vireo surveys were conducted during Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 12
the dates presented in Table 2. The potential for each special- status species to occur in the Study Area was then determined according to the following criteria:
• No Potential. Habitat on and adjacent to the site is clearly unsuitable for the species requirements (foraging, breeding, cover, substrate, elevation, hydrology, plant community, site history, disturbance regime).
• Unlikely. Few of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or the majority of habitat on and adjacent to the site is unsuitable or of very poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on the site.
• Moderate Potential. Some of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present, and/or only some of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is unsuitable. The species has a moderate probability of being found on the site.
• High Potential. All of the habitat components meeting the species requirements are present and/or most of the habitat on or adjacent to the site is highly suitable. The species has a high probability of being found on the site.
• Present. Species is observed on the site or has been recorded (i.e., CNDDB, other reports) on the site in the recent past.
If a special- status species was observed during the site visit, its presence was recorded and discussed below in Section 5.2.
3.3.2 Special-status Plants
Special status plant species surveys entailed using meandering transects across the entirety of the Study Area, with a disproportionate focus in areas thought to be suitable for rare species and sensitive natural communities. The survey dates correspond to the peak blooming periods for observing and accurately identifying hundreds of plant species in Riverside County, including the various species with a moderate or high potential to occur in the Study Area.
The surveys followed the protocol for plant surveys described in recommended resource agency guidelines (CDFW 20 22, CNPS 2022, USFWS 2022). All plants were identified using the Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora Project 2022) to the taxonomic level necessary to determine whether or not they were rare.
Names given follow the Jepson Flora Project (20 22). Sensitive natural communities were identified following A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition (CNPS 2022a), the California Fish and Game Code, or other applicable regulations (such as the Clean Water Act). Plant surveys were floristic in nature with all observed species recorded and included on a species list provid ed in Appendix B. All rare plant populations and sensitive natural community locations were mapped using a combination of handheld Global Positioning System equipment with sub-meter accuracy and interpretation of recent aerial imagery (Google Earth 2022) based on field observations.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 13
3.3.3 Special-status Wildlife
Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)
Survey methodology followed guidelines described in the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. On April 29, 2022, a site visit was conducted to determine the Study Area’s general suitability for burrowing owl, to locate burrows (or other suitable substrates), and to search for burrowing owls or burrowing owl sign. Owl sign consists of feathers, regurgitated pellets, and/or whitewash and is typically found near the entrances to occupied burrows. Burrowing owl foraging perches also often show these characteristics as well. The entirety of the Study Area was accessible and surveyed during the site visit as well as surrounding areas visible from the Study Area.
Least bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)
Focused surveys were conducted in accordance with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s “Least Bell’s Vireo Survey Guidelines” dated January 19, 2001. The protocol requires eight surveys conducted between April 10 and July 31 under normal circumstances, with a minimum of 10 days between surveys in order to maximize the detection of late and early arrivals, females, non-vocal birds, and nesting pairs. Surveys were conducted between dawn and 11:00 a.m. In 2022, protocol-level presence/absence surveys for LBV were conducted by WRA biologist Matthew Schliebe. 2023 protocol LBV surveys were conducted by Matt Schliebe and Patty Jaramillo (see Table 2).
3.3.4 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites To account for potential impacts to wildlife movement/migratory corridors, biologists reviewed maps from the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project (CalTrans 2022), and habitat connectivity data available through the CDFW Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS; CDFW 2022).
Additionally, aerial imagery (Google Earth 2022) for the local area was referenced to assess if local core habitat areas were present within, or connected to the Study Area. This assessment was refined based on observations of on-site physical and/or biological conditions, including topographic and vegetative factors that can facilitate wildlife movement, as well as on-site and off-site barriers to connectivity.
The potential presence of native wildlife nursery sites is evaluated as part of the site visit and discussion of individual wildlife species below. Examples of native wildlife nursery sites include nesting sites for native bird species (particularly colonial nesting sites), marine mammal pupping sites, and colonial roosting sites for other species.
4.0 ECOLOGICAL SETTING
The approximately 17.59 Study Area is located in the Murrieta, Riverside County, northeast of the intersection of Clinton Keith Road and Whitewood Road. The Study Area consists of four parcels of roughly equal size (APNs 392-330-003, 392-330-007, 392-330- 021, 392-330-020). The four parcels are typical of sparse rural development in the area and contain a mixture of disturbed/developed habitat in the form of unpaved access roads and driveways, as well as small single -family homes. The Study Area is located within a region of Murrieta that has been designated for development under the MSCHP. As a result, adjacent lands include a combination of recent high-density development, new road infrastructure, older, rural single -family homes, and open space. The biolo gical condition at the site reflects this land use Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 14
history, containing elements of rural development, native vegetation, ruderal habitats, and new influences of high-density infrastructure. Additional details of the local setting are below.
4.1 Soils and Topography
The overall topography of the Study Area is gently sloping with elevations ranging from approximately 1,430 to 1,490 feet above sea level . According to the Soil Survey of 2022 (USDA 2022), the Study Area is underlain by 4 soil mapping units: Cajalco fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes (CaC2), Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (CbD2), Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 15 to 50 percent slopes (CbF2), and Las Posas loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (LaD2). Soils within the Study Area are shown in Appendix A – Figure 4. The parent soil series of all the Study Area’s mapping units are summarized below.
Cajalco Series: Soils in the Cajalco series consist of well-drained soils formed in decomposing gabbro and other simple igneous rocks. They are also near Temescal, Las Posas, Honcut, and Wyman soils. They occur on uplands. The vegetation is chiefly annual grasses, forbs, and chamise. The surface layer is yellowish - brown fine sandy loam that is about 10 inches thick. Its subsoil is brown fine sandy loam and loam. These soils are used for dryland pasture, grain, and range.
• Cajalco fine sandy loam (CaC2), 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded. The depth of this soil to partly weathered rock is 30 to 36 inches. It has slow to medium runoff. It is used for dryland grain, pasture, and range, irrigated citrus and nonfarming purposes. This soil is not considered hydric (USDA 2022).
• Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam (CbD2), 5 to 15 percent slopes, eroded. These soils occur on uplands. They have medium runoff with moderate soil permeability. It is 18 to 24 inches deep to weathered rock. Natural fertility is low. This soil is not considered hydric (USDA 2022). • Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam (CbF2), 15 to 50 percent slopes, eroded. The depth of this soil to partly weathered rock is 29 to 34 inches. It has rapid runoff. It is used for dryland grain, pasture, and range, irrigated citrus and nonfarming purposes. This soil is not considered hydric (USDA 2022).
Las Posas Series : This series of well- drained soils occurs on uplands. The vegetation is chiefly annual grasses, forbs, flat-top buckwheat, black sage, and chamise. They are near Temescal, Cajalco, and Murrieta soils. The surface layer is reddish -brown loam and clay loam that is about 12 inches thick. Its subsoil is dark red clay and red heavy clay loam.
• Las Posas loam (LaD2), 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded. These soils occur on uplands. Its typical profile is on a north-facing slope of 8 percent. This soil is not considered hydric (USDA 2022).
4.2 Climate and Hydrology
The Study Area is located in the inland region of Murrieta, Riverside County. The average monthly maximum temperature in the area is 80.6 degrees Fahrenheit, while the average monthly minimum temperature is 47.2 degrees Fahrenheit. Predominantly, precipitation falls as rainfall between November and March with an annual average precipitation of 12.01 inches (WRCC 2022).
The local watershed is Warm Springs Creek (HUC 12: 180703020401) and the regional watershed is the Santa Margarita River (HUC 8: 18070302). The Study Area is located in the central portion of the Santa Margarita watershed. There are no blue -line streams in the Study Area ( USGS 2018), nor any mapped Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 15
resources in the NWI (USFWS 202 2b) and California Aquatic Resources Inventory (CARI; SFEI 20 22). The jurisdictional wetland delineation conducted on May 20, 2022, did find potential wetlands and non - wetland waters within the Study Area. Detailed descriptions of those aquatic resources are provided in Section 5.1 below.
4.3 Land-use
The Study Area is a mosaic of lightly developed lands, ruderal vegetation, and chaparral scrub.
Undeveloped areas consist of chamise chaparral, riparian woodlands, and disturbed vegetation communities dominated by a mixture of annual non -native species and native species adapted to disturbance such as deerweed ( Acmispon glaber) and California buckwheat ( Eriogonum fasciculatum).
Developed areas include single-family residences and dirt roads. Detailed plant community descriptions are included in Section 5.1 below, and all observed plant species are included in Appendix B. Surrounding land uses include suburban development, rural single -family residences, and open space (Google Earth 2022). Historically, the Study Area was open space with some amount of ranching in the immediate vicinity (NETR 2022).
5.0 ASSESSMENT RESULTS
5.1 Vegetation Communities and Other Land Cover
WRA observed eight land cover types within the Study Area: developed , disturbed/ruderal, coastal sage scrub, chamise chaparral, coast live oak woodland, emergent wetland, streams, mulefat scrub, and southern willow scrub (Table 3) . Land cover types within the Study Area are illustrated in Figure 5 (Appendix A).
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF VEGETATION COMMUNITIES MAPPED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
COMMUNITY/LAND COVERS MSHCP MAPPING UNIT CDFW RARITY RANKING ACRES WITHIN
STUDY AREA
Developed Area Developed/Disturbed Land
(Residential/Urban/Exotic)
N/A 1.24
Disturbed/Ruderal Developed/Disturbed Land
(Residential/Urban/Exotic)
N/A 6.94
Coastal sage scrub Coastal Sage Scrub
(Riversidean Sage Scrub)
G5/S5 1.18
Chamise chaparral Chaparral (Chaparral) G5/S5 7.25
Coast live oak woodland Oak Woodland (Coast Live Oak) G5/S4 0.35 Southern willow scrub Riparian Forest/Woodland/Scrub
(Riparian Scrub)
G4/S3 0.53
Mulefat Scrub Riparian Forest/Woodland/Scrub
(Riparian Scrub)
0.04 Emergent marsh Meadows and Marshes G2?/S2? 0.01
Stream Water
(Open Water/Reservoir/Pond)
N/A 0.05
Developed Area (no vegetation alliance). CDFW Rank: None. Approximately 1.24 acres of the Study Area is developed area. In these areas, vegetation is minimal and is primarily bare ground (i.e., dirt roads and driveways) or structures. What vegetation is present is composed of scattered annual weeds such as Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 16
short-pod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana) or ornamental trees such as Eucalyptus sp. This community is not considered sensitive by CDFW or any other regulatory entity.
Disturbed/Ruderal Area (no vegetation alliance). CDFW Rank: None. Developed/ruderal areas total 6.9 4 acres within the Study Area. These areas intergrade with areas of mature chamise chaparral and are potentially managed as defensible space or for fuels management reasons. Vegetation is varied in terms of dominance across the Study Area but typically include one or more of the following species: California buckwheat, deerweed, paniculate tarplant, short -pod mustard, and yellow annual sweet clover.
Additional species that are found within these areas include tocalote, red brome, rattail sixweeks grass, and common sand aster. This community is not considered sensitive by CDFW or any other regulatory agency.
Coastal Sage Scrub ( restored). G5/S5. CDFW Rank: Not sensitive . Approximately 1.18 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub (restored) were observed within the study area. The Diegan coastal sage scrub is associated with the cut slope facing Clinton Keith Road along the southern boundary of the survey area.
Given the standard plant palette, evidence of irrigation, and land use history, this vegetation type is likely planted as a part of a native plant erosion control/habitat restoration program.
Chamise Chaparral ( Adenostoma fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance). G5/S5. CDFW Rank: Not sensitive .
Chamise chaparral totals 7.25 acres of the Study Area with the largest stands of the vegetation community located in the far eastern and central sections of the Study Area. Chamise chaparral occurs throughout cismontane California from lower mountain slopes to coastal bluffs. Chamise chaparral stands in the Study Area is dominated by chamise with other shrubs such as deerweed, California buckwheat, and lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) providing less than five percent cover. Annual groundcover is sparse within the community and include common annual species found across the Study Area such as red brome, tocalote, short-pod mustard, and Cryptantha sp. This community is not considered sensitive by CDFW or any other regulatory agency.
Coast Live Oak Woodland ( Quercus agrifolia Forest & Woodland Alliance). G5/S4. CDWF Rank: Not sensitive. Coast live oak woodland total 0.35 acres in the northwest corner of the Study Area. Coast live oak woodland occurs along cismontane coastal foothills and valleys from San Diego County to southern Mendocino County. Coast live oak is the dominant species o f the upper canopy for this alliance with red willow (Salix laevigata), blue elderberry ( Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea), and poison oak ( Toxicodendron diversilobum) forming a mixed, woody mid canopy. Herbaceous groundcover is sparse and primarily composed of ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus) and iris-leaved rush (Juncus xiphioides). This community is not considered sensitive; however, within the Study Area the community is associated with a stream, which may be considered riparian habitat and sensitive by CDFW as riparian habitat.
Mulefat Scrub (Baccharis salicifolia shrubland alliance). G4/S4, CDFW Rank: Not sensitive . Mulefat scrub total 0.04 acres in the southwest corner of the Study Area and is associated with a culvert at the intersection of Clinton Keith Road and Whitewood Road. The culvert drains a natural stream course beneath Clinton Keith Road. As such, the mulefat should be considered natural and not exempt from Federal, State, or local regulation. The mulefat shrubland alliance occurs throughout the state except for the southeast deserts, high elevations of the Sierra Nevada range, and in the far northeast of the state.
The alliance is commonly found in canyon bottoms, floodplains, and stream margins. This community is not considered sensitive; however, within the Study Area the community is associated with a stream, which may be considered riparian habitat and sensitive by CDFW and the MSHC, as discussed below.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 17
Unvegetated Streambed. (no vegetation alliance). CDFW Rank: Sensitive . Approximately 0.05 acres of unvegetated streambed habitat was observed within the project area. Stream bed habitat is composed of small, linear unvegetated features caused by the flow of water.
Emergent Marsh. ( Juncus xiphioides Provisional Herbaceous Alliance). G2?/S2? CDFW Rank: Sensitive.
Emergent marsh totals 0.01 acre and includes areas dominated by herbaceous, low-growing hydrophytic vegetation often rooted in shallow water adjacent to a larger waterbody such as a stream or lake.
Emergent marsh within the Study Area is associated with a northeast trending drainage. The dominant vegetation within the emergent marsh is iris -leaved rush, and included annual beard grass ( Polypogon monspeliensis), seep monkeyflower (Erythranthe guttata), poison hemlock ( Conium maculatum ), and curly dock (Rumex crispus). Emergent marshlands are sensitive biological communities.
Southern Willow Scrub. ( Salix gooddingii - Salix laevigata Forest & Woodland Alliance). G4/S3. CDFW Rank: Sensitive. Southern willow scrub totals 0.53 acres located in the northwest quarter of the Study Area. The forest and woodland alliance occurs throughout the state except for high elevation in the Sierra Nevada range and in the far northeast of the state. The alliance is commonly found along large rivers and canyon terraces, lake edges, seeps, springs, and stream floodplains. The dominant vegetation wit hin the southern willow scrub is red willow ( Salix laevigata) in the tree canopy with Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii) and coast live oak also present. Shrub cover within the alliance included coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) and poison oak. Herbaceous cover was light and included iris -leaved rush, annual beard grass, annual yellow sweet clover, and poison hemlock. Southern willow scrub are sensitive biological communities.
5.2 Aquatic Resources
Wetlands and non-wetland waters considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) were observed onsite totaling 0.59 acre and 819 linear feet ( Appendix A, Figures 7a and 7b Table 4). R iparian, Riverine, and Streambeds considered jurisdictional by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Program (MSHCP) were also observed and total 0.98 acres and 819 linear feet (Table 5)
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF 404/401 WETLANDS AND NON-WETLAND WATERS MAPPED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
FEATURE TYPE CLASSIFICATION
POTENTIAL SECTION 404 WATERS OF
THE U.S.
POTENTIAL 401 WATERS OF THE STATE
ACRES LINEAR FEET ACRES LINEAR FEET
Wetlands
Southern willow scrub R4UB 0.53 N/A- 0.53 N/A-
Emergent marsh R4UB 0.01 N/A- 0.01 N/A-
Non-Wetland Water
Ephemeral Drainage R4SBA 0.05 819 0.05 819
Total: 0.59 819 0.59 819
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 18
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF CDFW 1602 AND MSHCP RIPARIAN/RIVERINE MAPPED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA
FEATURE TYPE CLASSIFICATION
CDFW 1602 MSHCP RIPARIAN/RIVERINE
ACRES LINEAR FEET ACRES LINEAR FEET
Wetlands
Southern willow scrub R4UB 0.53 N/A 0.53 N/A-
Emergent marsh R4UB 0.01 N/A 0.01 N/A-
Ephemeral Drainage R4SBA 0.05 819 0.05 819
Mule fat scrub R4UB 0.04 N/A 0.04 N/A
Coast Live Oak
Woodland R4UB 0.35 N/A 0.35 N/A
Total: 0.98 819 0.98 819
5.3 Special-status Species
5.3.1 Special-status Plants
Based upon a review of the resource databases listed in Section 3.0, seven special -status plant species have been documented within two miles of the Study Area. Five of these species have the potential to occur in the Study Area. The remaining species documented from the greater vicinity are unlikely or have no potential to occur for one or more of the following:
• Hydrologic conditions (e.g., seasonal inundation) necessary to support the special-status plant species are not present in the Study Area;
• Associated natural communities (e.g., vernal pools) necessary to support the special- status plant species are not present in the Study Area;
WRA biologists conducted protocol-level rare plant surveys during a period sufficient to identify all seven special-status plant species with the potential to occur. A total of 40 plant species were observed by WRA in the Study Area during the 2022 surveys, including four (4) sensitive plant species.: No MSHCP narrow endemic plant species were observed during sensitive species surveys. The four special-status plants were observed in the Study Area during protocol -level surveys including one species that was not identified during the database search: Intermediate mariposa lily (Calochortus weedii var. intermedius; CRPR 1B.2), Parry’s spineflower ( Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi; CRPR 1B.1), long -spined spineflower ( Chorizanthe polygonoides var. longispina; 1B.2), and paniculate tarplant ( Deinandra paniculata; CRPR 4.2). Species observed in the Study Area are summarized below in Table 6 and are shown in Appendix A, Figure 6) .
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 19
TABLE 6. SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED IN THE SURVEY AREA
COMMON NAME SPECIES NAME SENSITIVITY POPULATION
Intermediate mariposa lily Calochortus weedii var.
intermedius
MSHCP,
CRPR 1B.2
6 ind.
Parry’s spineflower Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi MSHCP, CRPR 1B.1
~12,000 ind.
Long-spined spineflower Chorizanthe polygonoides var.
longispina
MSHCP,
CRPR 1B.2
150 ind.
San Diego tarweed Deinandra paniculata CRPR 4.2 ~ 22,000 ind.
Intermediate mariposa lily ( Calochortus weedii var. intermedius). CRPR 1B.2. Present. Intermediate mariposa lily is a perennial bulbiferous herb in the lily family (Liliaceae) that blooms from May to July. It typically occurs in calcareous and rocky micro habitats within chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grasslands at elevations ranging from 345 to 2,805 feet (CNPS 2022) Six individuals were observed in the northwest corner of the Study Area within the Disturbed/Ruderal vegetation community.
Individuals were often associated with shrubs such as California buckwheat and deerweed that were used as nurse plants for the population.
Parry’s spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi). CRPR 1B.1. Present. Parry’s spineflower is an annual herb in the smartweed -buckwheat family (Polygonaceae) that blooms from April to June. It typically occurs in rocky or sandy openings within chaparral, coastal scrub, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grasslands at elevations ranging from 900 to 4,005 feet (CNPS 2022). Approximately 12,000 Parry’s spineflower individuals were observed within two populations in the southern half of the Study Area. Both locations were open, disturbed chamise chaparral habitat scars.
Long-spined spineflower ( Chorizanthe polygonoides var. longispina). CRPR 1B.2. Present . Long -spined spineflower is an annual herb in the smartweed-buckwheat family (Polygonaceae) that blooms from April to July. It is often found in clay microhabitats within chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, and also meadows, seeps, a nd vernal pools at grasslands from 100 to 5,020 feet. Approximately 1 50 individuals were observed near the center of the Study Area in an open, disturbed chamise chaparral scar.
San Diego tarweed (Deinandra paniculata).
CRPR 4.2. Present. Paniculate tarplant is an annual herb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) that blooms from April to November. It is usually found in vernally mesic soils within vernal pools and valley and foothill grasslands but can also be found in sandy soils within coastal scrub. It is found from 80 to 3, 085 feet in elevation. Approximately 22,000 p aniculate tarplant individuals within scattered populations in most open, disturbed areas within the western half of the Study Area.
5.3.2 Special-Status Wildlife
Based on a review of the resource databases listed in Section 3.0 seven special-status wildlife species have been documented within two miles of the Study Area. Five of these species have the potential to occur in the Study Area. The remaining species documented from the greater vicinity are unlikely or have no potential to occur due to a lack of necessary habitat features for those species. Features not found within the Study Area that are required to support special-status wildlife species include:
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 20
• Aquatic habitats (e.g., perennial ponds and rivers, vernal pools, etc.) • Open grasslands and sparse shrublands
• Complex, multi-tiered riparian woodland
• Lack of larval host plants
The absence of such habitat features eliminates components critical to the survival or movement of some special-status species found in the vicinity of the Study Area . For instance, western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) is known to occur in the vicinity ; however, suitable perennial aquatic habitats and basking habitats are absent, precluding this species from existing on the Study Area.
Five special-status species have potential to occur in the immediate vicinity of or in portions of the Study Area: southern California rufous -crowned sparrow ( Aimophila ruficeps canescens ), Bell’s sage sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli belli), northwestern San Diego pocket mouse ( Chaetodipus fallax fallax ), orange - throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii). These species are shown in Table 7 and discussed in greater detail below.
TABLE 7. SENSITIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED IN THE STUDY AREA COMMON NAME SPECIES NAME SENSITIVITY OBSERVED ?
Sensitive Wildlife Species
Southern California rufous-
crowned sparrow
Aimophila ruficeps canescens MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
No, Available
habitat-
Bell’s sage sparrow Artemisiospiza belli belli MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
No, Available
habitat-
Northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse
Chaetodipus fallax fallax MSHCP
CDFW SSC
No, Available
habitat--
Orange-throated whiptail Aspidoscelis hyperythra MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
Yes
Coast horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii) MSHCP
CDFW SSC
Yes
Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii). CDFW Species of Special Concern. Present. The coast horned lizard is a medium-sized lizard with a compressed body and short tail. It is widespread in much of California west of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges and in the southern deserts. Habitat is variable and in southern California includes chaparral, coastal sage scrub, oak and riparian woodland, and grassland.
Important microhabitat components are loose, sandy soil; open, sunny areas with dense, low shrubbery; and abundant ants (especially harvest ants) and other insects for forage (Jennings and Hayes 1994).
One individual and several scats were observed in the western half of the Study Area in open areas within chamise chaparral. Additional suitable habitat for the species encompasses most of the eastern half of the Study Area.
Orange-throated whiptail ( Aspidoscelis hyperythra). CDFW Watch List. Present. The orange -throated whiptail occurs in highly fragmented habitats ranging from Southern California to the southern tip of Baja California. It inhabits washes, streams, terraces, and other sandy areas associated with rocks and patches of brush. Appropriate habitat is often found in coastal chaparral, thornscrub, and streamside growth.
Insects and spiders make up the majority of their diet, but they have been known to eat small mamm als and other lizards. These are active, diurnal, and alert lizards (Stebbins 2003).
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 21
Several individuals were observed within open shrubland habitats including within chamise chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Suitable habitat encompasses most of the eastern and southern halves of the Study Area.
Southern California rufous crowned sparrow ( Aimophila ruficeps canescens ). CDFW Watch List. High Potential. The southern California rufous -crowned sparrow is a non- migratory bird ranging from the transverse and coastal ranges in northern Los Angeles County and Santa Barbara County to Baja California.
Its habitat includes rocky slopes with scattered cover in open oak woodlands, scrubland, and chaparral.
Typically, a ground forager, it also usually nests on the ground with rare exceptions occurring in low shrubs (Unitt 2004). The species breeds from mid-March to mid-June and usually lays a clutch of 3-4 eggs.
There is suitable habitat for southern California rufous crowned sparrow in the southern and eastern halves of the Study Area. Suitable habitat also extends into the open space located south of the Study Area, although none were observed. Nevertheless, southern California rufous crowned sparrow has a high potential to occur within the Study Area.
Bell’s sage sparrow ( Artemisiospiza belli belli). CDFW Watch List. High Potential. Bell’s sage sparrow is a characteristic chaparral and coastal sage scrub bird found most in drier, more inland areas of the Coast Ranges and southern California. It is closely associated with chamise ( Adenostoma fasciculatum) (Chase & Carlson 2002). This species seeks cover in dense chaparral and forages for seeds and insects on the ground and in low foliage. Nests either on the ground or low in shrubs.
There is suitable habitat for Bell’s sage sparrow over in the eastern and southern halves of the Study Area where dense stands of chamise chaparral are present. Additionally, suitable habitat is located in the open space south of the Study Area. Therefore, Bell’s sage sparrow has a high potential to occur within the Study Area.
Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax). CDFW Species of Special Concern. High Potential. The northwestern San Diego pocket mouse occurs in chamise chaparral, desert scrub, and coastal sage scrub, including Diegan and Riversidean upland sage scrub and alluvial fan sage scrub. The species has a strong affinity for sandy herbaceous areas often in association with moderately gravelly and rocky substrates. The species primarily forages on grass seeds, but will also include insects, forb seeds, and shrub seeds in its diet (Brylski 1990).
There is suitable habitat for the Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse over the eastern and southern halves of the Study Area where chamise chaparral with rocky outcrops are present . Therefore, the Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse has a high potential to occur within the Project Area.
Focused wildlife surveys
In addition to general sensitive wildlife species, the Study Area is located within the MSCHP Burrowing Owl Survey Area (Appendix A, Figure 7). Also, the preponderance of southern willow scrub (and MSHCP Riparian/Riverine jurisdiction) in the Study Area dictated the need for protocol level surveys for the Federally and State riparian bird, least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus).
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 22
Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) CDFW Species of Special Concern, MSHCP Burrowing owls generally inhabit flat, open areas with sparse or nonexistent tree or shrub canopies.
Typical habitat is annual or perennial grassland, although human-modified areas such as agricultural land and airports are also used. While capable of creating their own burrows, burrowing owls in the west rely on burrowing mammals to provide the burrows that are characteristically used for shelter and nesting. In California, burrowing owls are often found in close association with California ground squirrel s (Otospermophilus beecheyi). Anthropogenic substrates such as debris piles or pipes may also be occupied in place of burrows. In southern California, burrowing owls are non -migratory with the population increasing in the fall as birds from northern regions arrive for overwintering. The nesting period in southern California is roughly from March through July.
No burrowing owls, burrowing owl sign, or potential burrows were observed within the Study Area, and the Study Area does not provide suitable habitat for this species. Most vegetated portions of the Study Area support vegetation that is too tall and too de nse (e.g., chamise chaparral and willow woodland) to be suitable for burrowing owls. Flatter, open areas with more scattered perennial vegetation do exist on site, but those areas generally did not have friable soils and appear to be at least semi- regularly mowed as defensible space. There was evidence of low California ground squirrel activity across the study area .
Some ground squirrel burrows were observed but were currently inhabited by ground squirrels and no whitewash, feathers, or other sign of burrowing owl were observed during the survey.
Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus). Federal Endangered; State Endangered. MSHCP This subspecies of Bell’s vireo is a neotropical migrant and summer resident in California and northern Baja California, wintering in southern Baja California ( Brown 1993). This vireo was once common in lowland riparian habitats throughout California but declined precipitously during the twentieth century (USFWS 1998). By the time of federal listing in 1986, an estimated 300 pairs were restricted to southern California, primarily San Diego County ( USFWS 1998). The population has increased since, with the number of nesting territories in the state in 2006 estimated to be approximately ten times greater than in 1986 (USFWS 2006). However, the distribution of the vireo at that time remained almost entirely within southern California (USFWS 2006).
Least Bell's vireo breeding habitat consists of riparian vegetation, usually in an early successional state (i.e., between five and 10 years old), and near water (USFWS 1998). Such habitat is preferred because it provides both dense cover in the lower shrub layer for nest concealment, and a stratified canopy structure favorable to insect abundance and thus vireo foraging (USFWS 1998). Riparian habitat types used for breeding include those dominated by willows (Salix sp.), Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremo ntii), and/or oaks ( Quercus sp.), with a dense understory of species such as willows, mulefat ( Baccharis salicifolia), California wild rose (Rosa californica), poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), and mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana.) (USFWS 1998). Nests are typically placed within three feet of the ground. Least Bell's Vireo may attempt multiple broods during the breeding season from mid-March to late September, although one brood is typical (Brown 1993). Habitats such as chaparral and coastal sage scrub adjacent to riparian areas are used for foraging and even nesting, and thus provide another potentially important habitat component (Kus and Miner 1989). Along with habitat destruction, brood parasitism by the brown- headed cowbird ( Molothrus ater) is widely considered a major contributor to the decline of least Bell's vireo, and a continuing challenge to its recovery.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 23
No LBV were detected during the eight presence/absence surveys. The closest documented occurrences are between 1.5 and 4.5 miles to the south of the Survey Area along Warm Springs Creek, Santa Gertrudis Creek, an unnamed tributary to Murrieta Creek, and Murrieta Creek. The occurrences date between 1999 and 2016 (CDFW 2022). The closest LBV Critical Habitat is approximately 15 miles to the southwest along the Santa Margarita River. Habitat requirements for LBV include the presence of a dense understory within 1-2 meters of the ground for nesting and a dense, stratified canopy for foraging ( USFWS 1998)..
Generally, the coast live oak woodland provides a robust canopy and an open understory, while the southern willow scrub provides a dense understory and a moderately stratified canopy. The available habitat within the Study Area is small in relation to rip arian habitat in the immediate region, such as the riparian corridors associated with Warm Springs Creek and Murrieta Creek, and especially in comparison to major riparian corridors that support LBV population centers such as the El Prado Basin and Santa Margarita River (USFWS 2006). Despite the presence of suitable habitat for LBV within the Study Area, the size of the habitat, distance of the habitat from potential source populations, and connectivity of the habitat to adjacent riparian corridors are all potential factors that may explain why LBV were not observed utilizing suitable habitat within the Study Area.
5.4 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites No native wildlife nursery sites are present in the Study Area. The Study Area is not within any designated regional wildlife corridor or linkage as determined by the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project (CalTrans 2022) or the MSHCP. The vegetated drainage may serve as a minor wildlife corridor for small and medium sized mammals; however, the drainage meets a four-lane road with suburban development immediately to the west of the Study Area so any connectivity would be extremely lim ited. Additionally, the Study Area does not contain any vegetative or topographical features that would be conducive to wildlife movements.
5.5 Habitat Conservation Plans
The entire project lies within the MSHCP boundaries. An analysis of the Study Area’s proximity to multiple MSHCP-designated areas found that the Study Area does not fall within any of the following areas:
• Amphibian Survey Area
• Area Plan Subunit
• Criteria Areas or Criteria Cells
• Stephen’s kangaroo rat habitat Area or Preserves
5.5.1 Burrowing Owl Survey Area
Approximately 70% of the study area is included in the MSHCP Burrowing owl survey area and will require a burrowing owl habitat assessment (see Appendix A: Figure 7). If s uitable habitat conditions are found, protocol-level surveys for burrowing owls may be required. A burrowing owl habitat Assessment will be required for MSCHP Project Consistency Analysis under Section 6.3.2: Additional Needs and Procedures of the MSHCP.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 24
5.5.2 Narrow Endemic Plants Survey Area
Approximately 70% of the study area is included in this MSHCP narrow endemic survey area and will require a narrow endemic focused rare plant survey (see Appendix A: Figure 8). The Narrow endemic rare plant survey and report will be required to complete the MSCHP consistency analysis under Section 6.1.3:
Narrow Endemic Plant Species Requirements of the MSHCP.
5.5.3 Conservation and Reserve Assembly
The project site is not in a criteria area for the MSHCP (not within a Criteria Cell, Cell Group, habitat core or linkage). The project is north of criteria cell 5673 and RCA conserved lands “Calvary Chapel of Murrietta,” but is separated from preserved lands by Clinton Keith Road, a six-lane, 130 foot wide highway. In addition, the preserved area is separated from the project and highway by an approximately 25 foot high road cut built as a part of the road construction. the project which serves as a distinct, lit, barrier between the project and preserved lands. Due to the extensive transportation infrastructure (and its associated light, noise, and drainage sources) as well as topographical boundaries separating the project from nearby preserved areas , the project has little potential of contributing indirect impacts to nearby preserves. As such, the project is not required to comply with the Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface of the MSHCP (Section 6.1.4).
5.5.4 Species Associated with Riparian Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools MSHCP riverine/riparian areas were mapped within the project area (see Figure 7b) . The implications of this are discussed below. MSHCP riverine/riparian areas may support habitat for species that are not adequately conserved under the MSHCP , such as least Bell’s vireo ( Vireo bellii pusillus ), southwestern willow flycatcher ( Empidonax traillii extimus ), and western yellow - billed cuckoo ( Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) which are discussed below. Riverine/riparian designated areas also includes drainages within MSHCP conservation areas or which might have downstream effects on the MSHCP conservation area.
The habitat assessment for the project determined that habitat was present for the least Bell’s vireo within the riparian woodland vegetation, therefore, the MSHCP requires focused surveys for them pursuant to the MSHCP Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/ Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools. Focused surveys in accordance with USFWS protocols were conducted for the least Bell’s vireo in 2022 with negative results (see section 5.3.2). The project site does not contain habitat for fairy shrimp.
6.0 ANALYTICAL METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD CRITERIA Pursuant to Appendix G, Section IV of the State CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would:
1. 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 25
2. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
3. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means
4. 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;
5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and/or,
6. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
These thresholds were utilized in completing the analysis of potential project impacts for CEQA purposes.
For the purposes of this analysis, a “substantial adverse effect” is generally interpreted to mean that a potential impact could directly or indirectly affect the resiliency or presence of a local biological community or species population. Potential impacts to natural processes that support biological communities and special-status species populations that can produce similar effects are also considere d potentially significant. Impacts to individuals of a species or small areas of existing biological communities may be considered less than significant if those impacts are speculative, beneficial, de minimis, and/or would not affect the resiliency of a local population.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 26
7.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION EVALUATION
Using the CEQA analysis methodology outlined in Section 6.2 above, the following section describes potential significant impacts to sensitive resources within the Project Area as well as suggested mitigation measures which are expected to reduce impacts to less than significant.
7.1 General Avoidance and Minimization Measures
To reduce the potential for impacts to sensitive communities and special-status species, the following general best management practices (BMPs) are recommended for implementation. Implementation of these general BMPs, in combination with the species- and habitat-specific measures provided in the subsequent sections, will reduce construction-related impacts to a less than significant level. Standard best management practices (BMPs) from Volume I, Appendix C of the MSHCP shall be implemented to avoid impacts to biological resources of the MSHCP, as follows:
1 A condition shall be placed on grading permits requiring a qualified biologist to conduct a training session for project personnel prior to grading. The training shall include a description of the species of concern and its habitats, the general provisions of the Endangered Species Act (Act) and the MSHCP, the need to adhere to the provisions of the Act and the MSHCP, the penalties associated with violating the provisions of the Act, the general measures that are being implemented to conserve the species of concern as they relate to the project, and the access routes to and project site boundaries within which the project activities must be accomplished.
2 Water pollution and erosion control plans shall be developed and implemented in accordance with RWQCB requirements and approved by the City of Murietta.
3 The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. Access to the Project site shall be via pre-existing access routes to the greatest extent possible.
4 The upstream and downstream limits of the Project disturbance plus lateral limits of disturbance on either side of the stream shall be clearly defined and marked in the field and reviewed by the biologist prior to initiation of work.
5 Construction planning shall include designs to avoid the placement of equipment and personnel within the stream channel or on sand and gravel bars, banks, and adjacent upland habitats used by target species of concern.
6 Construction activities and phasing that cannot be conducted without placing equipment or personnel in sensitive habitats should be timed to avoid the breeding season of riparian species identified in MSHCP Global Species Objective No. 7.
7 When stream flows must be diverted, the diversions shall be conducted using sandbags or other methods requiring minimal instream impacts. Silt fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed at the downstream end of construction activity to minimize the transport of sediments offsite. Settling ponds where sediment is collected shall be cleaned out in a manner Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 27
that prevents the sediment from reentering the stream. Care shall be exercised when removing silt fences, as feasible, to prevent debris or sediment from returning to the stream.
8 Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located on upland sites with minimal risks of direct drainage into riparian areas or other sensitive habitats. These designated areas shall be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering sensitive habitat. Necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent the release of cement or other toxic substances into surface waters. Project related spills of hazardous materials shall be reported to appropriate entities including but not limited to City of Murietta, USFWS, and CDFW, RWQCB and shall be cleaned up immediately and contaminated soils removed to approved disposal areas.
9 Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on its banks.
10 The qualified project biologist shall monitor construction activities for the duration of the project to ensure that all practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and species of concern outside the project footprint.
11 The removal of native vegetation shall be avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Temporary impacts shall be returned to pre-existing contours and revegetated with appropriate native species.
12 Exotic species that prey upon or displace target species of concern should be permanently removed from the site to the extent feasible.
13 To avoid attracting predators of the species of concern, the project site shall be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site(s).
14 Construction employees shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the proposed project footprint and designated staging areas and routes of travel.
The construction area(s) shall be the minimal area necessary to complete the project and shall be specified in the construction plans. Construction limits will be fenced with orange snow screen. Exclusion fencing should be maintained until the completion of all construction activities. Employees shall be instructed that their activities are restricted to the construction areas.
15 The Permittee (City of Murietta) shall have the right to access and inspect any sites of approved projects including any restoration/enhancement area for compliance with project approval conditions including these BMPs.
7.2 Special-status Species
This section analyzes the Project’s potential impacts and mitigation for special-status species in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (a):
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 28
Does the project have the potential to have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potential impacts and mitigation for potentially significant impacts are discussed below.
As the entirety of the survey area is within the rough grading footprint. All observed sensitive plants populations and sensitive wildlife habitat will be permanently impacted by project activities. There are no anticipated temporary impacts to sensitive species associated with the project.
A total of four (4) special status plant species will be permanently impacted by project activities including Intermediate mariposa lily, Parry’s spineflower, long -spined spineflower, and paniculate tarplant (Table 8, Appendix A - Figure 8)
In addition, a total of five (5) special-status wildlife species have potential to occur in the immediate vicinity of or in portions of the Study Area: southern California rufous -crowned sparrow ( Aimophila ruficeps canescens), Bell’s sage sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli belli), northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax ), orange -throated whiptail ( Aspidoscelis hyperythra ), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) and may be impacted by project activities.
T
ABLE 8 . PERMANENT IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE SPECIES
COMMON NAME SPECIES NAME SENSITIVITY IMPACT
Sensitive Plant Species
Intermediate mariposa lily Calochortus weedii var.
intermedius
MSHCP,
CRPR 1B.2
6 ind.
Parry’s spineflower Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi MSHCP, CRPR 1B.1
~12,000 ind.
Long-spined spineflower Chorizanthe polygonoides var.
longispina
MSHCP,
CRPR 1B.2
150 ind.
San Diego tarweed Deinandra paniculata CRPR 4.2 ~ 22,000 ind.
Sensitive Wildlife Species
Southern California rufous-
crowned sparrow
Aimophila ruficeps canescens MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
-
Bell’s sage sparrow Artemisiospiza belli belli MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
-
Northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse
Chaetodipus fallax fallax MSHCP
CDFW SSC
-
Orange-throated whiptail Aspidoscelis hyperythra MSHCP
CDFW Watch List
-
Coast horned lizard Phrynosoma blainvillii) MSHCP
CDFW SSC
-
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 29
MM-BIO-1 MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fee
The project applicant shall pay MSHCP Local Development Mitigation Fees to the City of Murrieta as required by the County of Riverside MSHCP. The following are provisions within the Counties Municipal Code that are relevant to this measure:
Sec. 4.62.070 – Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fee. In order to assist in providing revenue to acquire and conserve lands necessary to implement the MSHCP, the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fee shall be paid for each residential unit, development project or portion thereof to be constructed. Five categories of the fee are defined and include: (1) residential units, density less than 8.0 dwelling units per acre; (2) residential units, density between 8.1 and 14.0 dwelling units per acre; (3) residential, density greater than 14.1 dwelling units per acre; (4) commercial acreage; and (5) industrial acreage. Because there can be mixed traditional commercial, industrial and residential uses within the same project, for fee assessment purposes only, the commercial or industrial acreage fee shall be applied to the whole project based upon the existing underlying zoning classification of the property at the time of issuance of a building permit. Subject to an adjustment of the fee as set forth in Section
4.62.160 of this chapter, the following fee shall be paid for each development project within the boundaries of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan fee area:
Sec. 4.62.090 – Imposition of Fees. Notwithstanding any provision of Ordinance No. 457 to the contrary, no building permit shall be issued for any residential unit or development project except upon the condition that the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan fee required by this chapter be paid.
Sec. 4.62.100 Payment of Fees. The fee shall be paid as follows:
• The fee shall be paid in full at the time a certificate of occupancy is issued for the residential unit or development project or upon final inspection, whichever occurs first. No final inspection shall be made, and no certificate of occupancy shall be issued, prior to full payment of the Western Riverside County MSHCP Fee. However, this section shall not be construed to prevent payment of the fee prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit or final inspection.
• A fee shall be assessed one time per lot or parcel except in cases of changes in land use. The fee required to be paid when there is a change in land use shall be reduced by the amount of any previously paid fee for that property.
No refunds shall be provided for changes in land use to a lower fee category. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to provide documentation of any previously paid fee.
• The fee for commercial and industrial development projects shall be paid in its entirety for the project area and shall not be prorated. The fee required to be paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of payment.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 30
• There shall be no deferment of the fee beyond final inspection or issuance of certificate(s) of occupancy.
• Notwithstanding any other written requirements to the contrary, the fee shall be paid whether or not the development project is subject to city conditions of approval imposing the requirement to pay the fee.
• If all or part of the development project is sold prior to payment of the fee, the project shall continue to be subject to the requirement to pay the fee as provided herein.
• For development projects which the city does not require a final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the fee shall be paid prior to any use or occupancy.
• For purposes of this chapter, congregate care residential facilities and recreational vehicle parks shall pay the commercial acreage fee.”
MM-BIO- 2 Burrowing Owl 30-Day Preconstruction Survey
Prior to the onset of Project activities, one pre-construction survey no more than 30 days prior to initial ground disturbance shall be performed in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Game 2012). The pre-construction survey shall include suitable habitat up to 656 feet (200 meter s) from proposed activities and be conducted prior to the start of staging and construction, regardless of the time of year.
Occupied burrows will not be disturbed during the nesting season (February 1 through August 31) unless a qualified biologist verifies that either: (1) the birds have not begun egg -laying and incubation; or (2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are f oraging independently and capable of independent survival.
If burrowing owl is detected within the disturbance area during the non-nesting season and the burrow cannot be avoided, burrowing owl exclusion shall be implemented. At least 1 week will be allowed to accomplish this and allow the owls to acclimate to alternate burrows.
If burrowing owl is detected outside the disturbance area but within the Project Area during the non-nesting season, vehicle traffic and construction noise and visual disturbance shall be minimized to reduce the potential for flushing overwintering owls from protective burrows. The results of all preconstruction surveys for burrowing owl shall be provided in a written report to the City of Murrieta Planning Department and other agencies when required by applicable permits and survey protocols.
MM-BIO- 3 Pre-construction Nesting Bird Surveys
Initiation of construction activities during the avian nesting season (February 1 through August 31) will be avoided to the extent feasible. If construction initiation during the nesting season cannot be avoided, pre -construction nesting bird surveys will b e conducted within 14 days of Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 31
initial ground disturbance or vegetation removal to avoid disturbance to active nests, eggs, and/or young of nesting birds. Surveys can be used to detect the nests of special -status as well as non - special-status birds. Surveys will encompass the entire construction area and the surrounding 500 feet. If an active nest is located, an exclusion zone where no construction would be allowed will be established around any active nests of any protected avian species. A qualified biologist will determine an appropri ate exclusion zone based on the species, location, and placement of the nest. A minimum exclusion zone of 50 feet from non -raptor species and 300 feet from raptors (including white-tailed kite and northern harrier) will be employed to assure protection of any nesting birds on or near the Project Area. The exclusion zone will remain until a qualified biologist has determined that all young have fledged and are independent of the nest. These surveys shall remain valid as long as construction activity is consistently occurring in a given area and will be completed again if there is a lapse in construction activities of more than 14 consecutive days during the breeding bird season.
MM-BIO-4 Worker Environmental Education Program (WEEP)
A qualified biologist shall hold a training session for staff responsible for performing ground disturbing construction activities (e.g. operation of heavy equipment, vegetation removal, grading) in suitable habitat. Staff will be trained to recognize special- status species and their habitat. Staff will also be trained to use protective measures to ensure that special-status species are not adversely impacted by ground disturbing construction activities.
MM-BIO-5 Wildlife Exclusion Fencing
Prior to ground disturbing activities, exclusion barriers and/or fencing shall be installed to exclude sensitive wildlife from areas of active construction. The design of the exclusion barriers and fencing will be approved by a qualified biologist and shall be installed in the presence of a qualified biological monitor. The fence will be made of a material that does not allow sensitive reptiles and mammals to pass through, and the bottom will be buried to a depth of a minimum of 4 inches so that these species cannot crawl under the fence. All support for the exclusion fencing will be placed on the inside of the Project footprint.
MM-BIO-6 Biological Monitoring
A qualified biological monitor will be present during wildlife exclusion fence installation and removal, and during all vegetation clearing, grubbing, and initial ground disturbance. The monitor will have demonstrated experience in biological construction monitoring and knowledge of the biology of the special-status species that may be found in the Study Area., The monitor(s) will have the authority to halt construction, if necessary, if noncompliance actions occur. The biologist will conduct weekly site checks to provide guidance for fence maintenance, provide environmental sensitivity training, and document compliance with permit conditions.
MM-BIO- 7 Site Housekeeping and Cleanliness
Food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps will be disposed of in solid, closed containers (trash cans) and removed at the end of each work day from the investigation site to eliminate an attraction to predators of listed species.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 32
7.3 Sensitive Natural Communities and Land Cover Types This section addresses the question:
b) Does the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; As the entire survey will need to be graded to mee the project purpose, all sensitive natural communities within the Survey Area will be impacted by project activities (Table 9).
T
ABLE 9. PERMANENT IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES AND LAND COVER TYPES
VEGETATION COMMUNITY /LAND COVER TYPE ACRE (S)
Coast live oak woodland 0.11
Southern willow scrub 0.41
Mulefat Scrub 0.04
Emergent marsh 0.01
Stream 0.02
All sensitive natural communities present within and adjacent to the Project footprint are wetlands and other areas subject to Section 404/401, CDDW 1602, County MSHCP Riparian/Riverine jurisdiction (see Section 5.3) and as such will be mitigated via each agency’s discretionary permitting and mitigation framework. Native vegetation communities impacted by the project (Figure 10) will be mitigated via MM- BIO-1 and MM-BIO-08.
7.4 Aquatic Resources
This section analyzes the Project’s potential impacts and mitigation for wetlands and other areas presumed or determined to be within the jurisdiction of the Corps , RWQCB, CDFW, or MSHCP Riverine/Riparian in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (c):
c) Does the Project have the potential to have a substantial adverse effect on state or 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, fi lling, hydrological interruption, or other means;
Significant impacts to wetlands jurisdictional to USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and the MSHCP are anticipated as a result of project activities (see Section 5.2). (Table 10, Appendix A, Figure 11a-b)
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 33
TABLE 10. PERMANENT IMPACTS TO JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY REGULATORY PATHWAY ACRE(S) LINEAR FEET U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CWA 404 Individual Permit 0.44 607 Regional Water Quality Control Board 401 Water Quality Certification 0.44 607 California Department of Fish and
Wildlife
1602 Streambed Alteration
Agreement 0.59 607
County of Riverside MSHCP Riparian/ Riverine 0.59 607
MM-BIO-8 Aquatic Resource Permitting
Aquatic resource permitting and compensatory mitigation will be required for impacts on jurisdictional resources associated with the project. P ermitting from the USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB will be required for permanent and temporary impacts to WUS and waters of the state (CDFW). As the onsite WUS and waters of the state also meet the definition of riparian and riverine areas in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP, a MSHCP Determination of Biological Equivalent or Superior Preservation (DBESP) is required as 100% avoidance of onsite riparian/riverine areas cannot be met with the proposed project.
7.5 Wildlife Corridors and Native Wildlife Nursery Sites This section analyzes the Project’s potential impacts and mitigation for habitat corridors and linkages in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (d):
d) Does the Project have the potential to interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;
As noted in Section 5.3 no portions of the Project Area provide connectivity between areas of suitable habitat. No impact will occur to migratory corridors for terrestrial and aquatic species.
7.6 Local Policies and Ordinances
This section analyzes the Project’s potential impacts and mitigation based on conflicts with local policies and ordinances in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (e):
e) Does the Project have the potential to conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; Local plans and policies related to biological resources examined in this analysis are:
• City of Murrieta Municipal Code 16.42
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 34
The Project would require removal of a total of 106 trees qualified as protected and covered by the tree ordinance of the City of Murietta. The impacts and mitigation required to comply with this ordinance are covered under a separate report. (Tree Survey and Arborist Report, Cal Pacific Sciences 2022).
7.7 Habitat Conservation Plans
This section analyzes the Project’s potential impacts and mitigation based on conflicts with any adopted local, regional, and state habitat conservation plans in reference to the significance threshold outlined in CEQA Appendix G, Part IV (f):
f) Does the Project have the potential to conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
The Project is located in an area that is covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP and, as such, is subject to the policies of the MSHCP. The Project does not interfere with any MSHCP and does not pose any impacts on a local or regional level. The project does not impact burrowing owl, MSHCP narrow endemic plant species, nor MSHCP Riparian/Riverine species.
Implementation of the proposed project will be consistent with all provision of the County of Riverside Municipal Codes and objectives of the MSHCP Fees following implementation of MM-BIO-1. Payment of the MSHCP fee and compliance with Section 6 of the MSHCP provides complete mitigation for the project’s impacts on covered species. No additional mitigation related to local or regional conservation plans is necessary.
The Project will comply with all requirements of the MSHCP, and will not conflict with the plan’s provisions. Therefore, there is no impact to the function of the Habitat Plan.
7.8 Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts on surrounding areas as a result of the project likely include both construction related and persistent impacts including increased dust, noise, lighting, traffic, and storm water runoff. The project would implement Best Management Practices as part of the required Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan, which would minimize these potential indirect project impacts.
7.9 Cumulative Impacts
The design and intent of the MSHCP is to preserve sensitive species and native vegetation/habitats across a regional scale meeting the conservation needs of multiple species rather than focusing preservation efforts on one species at a time. The MSHCP includes USFWS and CDFW take authorization and habitat mitigation for listed species and special-status plant and animal species. The MSHCP Final EIR/EIS states that “implementation of the MSHCP and Covered Projects will not result in a cumulative adverse effe ct, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any of the Covered Species, including the 31 species that are currently listed as threatened or endangered and the one species that is currently proposed for listing. Implementation of the MSHCP will benefit the Covered Species by preserving their habitat in order to address their life cycle needs. Thus, based on the features of the Plan itself, impacts to Covered Species Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 35
are mitigated below a level of significance.” Since the proposed project will be in compliance with the MSHCP, cumulative impacts on covered species and habitat will be mitigated by participation in the MSHCP.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 36
8.0 REFERENCES
Brown 1993
Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii). In: Poole, A. and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, No. 35. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and the American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C.
Brylski 1990 San Diego Pocket Mouse. R. Duke, ed. California's Wildlife. Vol. I -III.
California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California.
CDFG 1994 A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Sections 1600-1607. Environmental Services Division, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Riverside, California.
CDFW 2022 California Natural Diversity Database. Biogeographic Data Branch, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Riverside, California.
Available online at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and- Data; most recently accessed: April 2022.
CDFW 2022b Natural Communities. Biogeographic Data Branch. Available online at:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/data/VegCAMP/Natural-
Communities/Background#sensitive%20natural%20communities; most recently accessed: May 2022.
Caltrans 2022 California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California. Prepared for California Department of Transportation, California Department of Fish and Game, and Federal Highways Administration. Available online at:
https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Planning/Connectivity/CEHC.
Most recently accessed: May 2022.
CNPS 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v9 -01 1.5).
Riverside, California. Online at: http://rareplants.cnps.org/; most recently accessed: May 2022.
CNPS 2022a. A Manual of California Vegetation, Online Edition. Available online at:
http://vegetation.cnps.org. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
CSRL 2022. Online Soil Survey. Online at:
http://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/drupal; most recently accessed:
May 2022.
Chase and Carlson 2002 Sage Sparrow (Amphispiza belli). In The Coastal Scrub and Chaparral Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for protecting and managing coastal scrub and chaparral habitats and associated birds in California.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 37
California Partners in Flight.
http://www.prbo.org/calpif/htmldocs/scrub.html
Consortium of California
Herbaria 1 (CCH1). 2022
CCH1: Featuring California Vascular Plant Data from the Consortium of California Herbaria and Other Sources. Data provided by the Consortium of California Herbaria. Available online at:
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/consortium/; most recently accessed:
March 2022.
Consortium of California
Herbaria 2 (CCH2). 2022.
CCH2 Portal. Online at: http://cch2.org/portal/index.php; most recently accessed: May 2022.
Corps 2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Page 135. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, ERDC/EL TR-08-28, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Environmental Laboratory
1987
Corp of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report Y-87-1, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Google Earth 2022 Aerial Imagery 1993-2015. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
Holland 1986 Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game, Riverside, CA.
Jennings and Hayes 1994 Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Report prepared for the California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, California.
Jepson Flora Project 2022 Jepson Flora Project (eds.). 2022. Jepson eFlora. Online at:
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/IJM.html; most recently accessed: April 2022.
Kus and Miner 1989
Use of Non-riparian Habitats by Least Bell's Vireos. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-110, 299-303.
Lichvar and McColley 2008 A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. A Delineation Manual. ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Page 84. Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, ERDC/CRREL TR-08-12, Hanover, New Hampshire.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 38
NETR 2022 Historic Aerials. Available online at: https://historicaerials.com/viewer.
Most recently accessed: May 2022.
NatureServe 2022 NatureServe Conservation Status. Available online at:
http://explorer.natureserve.org/ranking.htm. Most recently accessed:
May 2022.
SFEI 2022 California Aquatic Resource Inventory (CARI) version 0.3. Available online at: https://www.sfei.org/data/california-aquatic-resource- inventory-cari-version-03-gis-data#sthash.9SjW0wBH.dpbs. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
Sawyer et al 2009 A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd Edition, Second edition.
California Native Plant Society in collaboration with California Department of Fish and Game, Riverside, CA.
Shuford and Gardali 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Riverside.
SWRCB 2019 State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State, May 14, 2019.
Stebbins 2003
A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA and New York, NY.
Thomson et al 2016 California amphibian and reptile species of special concern. Co- published by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and University of California Press, Oakland, California.
Unitt 2004 San Diego County Bird Atlas. San Diego: Ibis Publishing Company.
USDA 2022 U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2022. Soil Survey of Western Riverside County, California. Soil Conservation Service. In cooperation with the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station.
USFWS 1998
Draft Recovery Plan for the Least Bell's Vireo. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR. 139 pp.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 39
USFWS 2006
Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) 5-Year Review Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad, CA. September.
USFWS 2022 Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting Botanical Inventories for Federally Listed, Proposed, and Candidate Plants. Riverside Fish and Wildlife Office. September.
USFWS 2022a
List of Federal Endangered and Threatened Species. Available online at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
USFWS 2022b National Wetlands Inventory. Available online at:
http://www.fws.gov/nwi. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
USGS 2018 U.S. Geological Survey. 2018. Murrieta Quadrangle, California. 7.5 - minute topographic map.
WBWG 2022 Western Species Accounts. Available online at:
http://wbwg.org/western-bat-species/. Most recently accessed: May 2022.
WRCC 2022 Record for Elsinore, California (04805), Period of Record Monthly Climate Summary. Period of Record: 03-10-1897 to 05-17-2022.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Page 40
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix A – Figures
APPENDIX A – FIGURES
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix A – Figures
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx Project Area
View Extent
0 10.5
Miles
Sources: National Geographic, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 12/13/2021
Figure 1. Study Area Location
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Arendt L
n
Clin ton K eith Rd
Clinton Ke ith Rd
Whitewood
Rd
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 100 50
US Feet
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 12/13/2021
Figure 2. Aerial Photograph of Study Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Figure 3. Site Plan
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx
Arendt L
n
Clin ton K eith Rd
Clinton Ke ith Rd
Whitewood
Rd
CaC2
LaD2
CbF2
CbD2
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 100 50
US Feet
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 8/5/2022 Figure 4. Soils Mapped within Survey Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
CaC2 Cajalco fine sandy loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded CbD2 Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes, eroded CbF2 Cajalco rocky fine sandy loam, 15 to 50 percent slopes, eroded LaD2 Las Posas loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
W
hite w
ood
Rd
Mooref ield St
W
hitew
ood R
d
Wh
itewo
d Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rocky Glen Pl
Cli nt on Ke it h R d
Rocky Glen Pl
Arendt L
n
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 10050
F
eet
o
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, Western Riverside Co Regional Conservation Authority, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024
Figure 5. Vegetation Communities within Project Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Land Co
ver Type
Chamise Chaparral (7.25 ac.)
Coastal sage scrub (restored) (1.18 ac.)
Developed (1.24 ac.)
Disturbed/Ruderal (6.94 ac.)
Mulefat Scrub (0.04 ac.)
Stream (0.05 ac.)
Coast Live Oak Woodland (0.35 ac.)
Emergent Marsh (0.01 ac.)
Southern Willow Scrub (0.53 ac.)
Moorfield S t
Whitewood Rd
W
hitewood Rd
Clinton Ke ith Rd Clinton Ke ith Rd
Arendt Ln
Arendt Ln
Clinton Keith Rd
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, Western Riverside Co Regional Conservation Authority, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 10/7/2022 0 10050
Feet
Figure 6. Observed Special-Status Plant Species
in the Study Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Chorizathe parryi var. parryi (0.38 ac.)
Deinandra paniculata (1.05 ac.)
Calochortus weedii
Chorizathe parryi var. parryi
Chorizathe poligoniides var. longispina
Deinandra paniculata
W
hit
ew
ood
Rd
Mooref ield St
W
hitew
ood
Rd
Wh
itewo
d
Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rock
y Gle
n Pl
Cli nt on Ke it h R d
Roc
ky G
len
Pl
Arendt
Ln
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
S1
S2
S3
W1
W2
W3
S4
-117.162732,
33.599793
-117.158559,
33.598038
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 10050
Feet
Sources: US
o
DA NAIP Imagery 2020, USFWS, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024 Figure 7a. Potential Jurisdictional Features Located within the Survey Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Control Point
Culvert
Potential 404/401 Jurisdiction
Emergent marsh (0.01 ac.)
Ephemeral drainage (0.05 ac. | 819 ln. ft.)
Southern willow scrub (0.53 ac.)
ID Type Acres Linear Feet
S1 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 520
S2 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 71
S3 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 163
S4 Ephemeral drainage 0.03 65
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.43 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub 0.10 N/A
W3 Emergent marsh 0.01 N/A
S1 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 520
S2 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 71
S3 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 163
S4 Ephemeral drainage 0.03 65
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.43 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub 0.10 N/A
W3 Emergent marsh 0.01 N/A
Waters of the U.S.
Waters of the State
W
hite w
ood
Rd
Mooref ield St
W
hitew
ood R
d
Wh
itewo
d Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rocky Glen Pl
Cli nt on Ke it h R d
Rocky Glen Pl
Arendt L
n
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base_20240514.aprx 0 10050
F
eet
Sources: US
o
DA NAIP Imagery 2020, USFWS, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024 Figure 7b. CDFW 1602 & MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Jurisdiction within Survey Area Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California ±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Culvert
P
otential MSHCP Features
MSHCP Riparian/Riverine (0.98 ac.)
P
otential CDFW 1602 Features
Ephemeral drainage (0.05 ac. | 819 ln. ft.)
Riparian (0.93 ac.)
Breda Ave
Whitewood
Rd
Cli nton K eith Rd
Cli nton Ke it h R d
W
hite ood Rd
Arendt Ln
Arendt Ln
Clinto n Keith Rd
Clinton Kei th Rd
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 100 50
Fee
t
w
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, Western Riverside Co Regional Conservation Authority, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 12/13/2021 Figure 8. Project Area in Relation to MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
MSHCP Burrowing Owl Survey Area
Mo orfi eld S t
W
hitew
ood R
d
Cl in to n Ke ith R d Cli nton Ke ith Rd Clinton Ke ith Rd Arendt L n
Ar
en
dt Ln
Clinton Keith Rd
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, Western Riverside Co Regional Conservation Authority, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 12/6/2023 Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Site Plan
Impacts T
o Rare Plant Species
Calochortus weedii
Chorizathe parryi var. parryi
Chorizathe poligoniides var. longispina
Deinandra paniculata
Chorizathe parryi var. parryi (0.38 ac.)
Deinandra paniculata (1.05 ac.)
0 10050
F
eet
Figure 9. Impacts to Rare Plants
within Project Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
White
w
oo
d
Rd
Mooref ie ld St
W
hitewo
od R
d
Whitewood Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rocky Glen Pl
Cli nt on Ke it h R d
Rocky Glen Pl
Arendt L
n
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, Western Riverside Co Regional Conservation Authority, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024 Site Plan
Permanent Impacts (16.97 ac.)
Avoide
d Land Cover Types
Chamise Chapparal (0.09 ac.)
Coast Live Oak Woodland (0.24 ac.)
Disturbed/Ruderal (0.13 ac.)
Southern Willow Scurb (0.12 ac.)
Stream (0.03 ac.)
Permanently Impacted Land Cover Types
Chamise Chaparral (7.16 ac.)
Coastal sage scrub (restored) (1.18 ac.)
Developed (1.23 ac.)
Disturbed/Ruderal (6.81 ac.)
Mulefat Scrub (0.04 ac.)
Stream (0.02 ac.)
Coast Live Oak Woodland (0.11 ac.)
Emergent Marsh (0.01 ac.)
Southern Willow Scrub (0.41 ac.)
0 10050
Fee
t
Figure 10. Impacts to Vegetation
Communities within Project Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Whitew
oo
d
Rd
Mooref ie ld St
W
hitewo
od R
d
Whitewo d Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rocky Glen Pl
Cli nt on Ke it h R d
Rocky Glen Pl
Arendt L
n
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
S1
S2
S3
W1
W2
W3
S4
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 10050
Feet
o
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, USFWS, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024 Figure 11a. Impacts to Potential
Jurisdictional Features Located within the
Project Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Culvert
Avoided F
eatures Potential 404/401 Jurisdiction
Ephemeral drainage (0.03 ac. | 212 ln. ft.)
Southern willow scrub (0.12 ac.)
Permanent Impacts to Potential 404/401 Jurisdictional Features Emergent marsh (0.01 ac.)
Ephemeral drainage (0.02 ac. | 607 ln. ft.)
Southern willow scrub (0.41 ac.)
ID Type Acres Linear Feet
S3 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 163
S4 Ephemeral drainage 0.03 65
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.12 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub <0.01 N/A
S3 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 163
S4 Ephemeral drainage 0.03 65
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.12 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub <0.01 N/A
ID Type Acres Linear Feet
S1 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 520
S2 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 71
S3 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 16
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.31 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub 0.10 N/A
W3 Emergent marsh 0.01 N/A
S1 Ephemeral drainage 0.01 520
S2 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 71
S3 Ephemeral drainage <0.01 16
W1 Southern willow scrub 0.43 N/A
W2 Southern willow scrub 0.10 N/A
W3 Emergent marsh 0.01 N/A
Avoided Waters of the State
Avoided Waters of the U.S.
Permanent Impacts to Waters of the U.S.
Permanent Impacts to Waters of the State
Whitew
oo
d
Rd
Mooref ield St
W
hitewo
od R
d
Whitewo d Rd
Clinton Keith Rd
Rocky Glen Pl
Clint on Ke ith R d
Rocky Glen Pl
Arendt L
n
Clinton Keith Rd
Arendt Ln
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\31000\31314\GIS\ArcMap\31314Base.aprx 0 10050
Feet
o
Sources: USDA NAIP Imagery 2020, USFWS, WRA | Prepared By: njander, 5/14/2024 Figure 11b. Impacts to CDFW 1602 & MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Jurisdiction within Survey Area
Whitewood Residential Development Project
Riverside County, California
±
Project Area (17.59 ac.)
Culvert
Site Plan
Avoided Potential CDFW and MSCHP Features
MSHCP Riparian/Riverine (0.39 ac.)
Ephemeral drainage (0.03 ac. | 212 ln. ft.)
Riparian (0.36 ac.)
Impacts to Potential CDFW and MSHCP Features
MSHCP Riparian Riverine (0.59 ac.)
Ephemeral drainage (0.02 ac. | 607 ln. ft.)
Riparian (0.57 ac.)
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix B – Species Observed in and around the Study Area APPENDIX B – SPECIES OBSERVED IN AND AROUND THE STUDY AREA Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix B – Species Observed in and around the Study Area THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species with the Potential to Occur within the Study Area.
SPECIES CONSERVATION STATUS MSHCP STATUS HABITAT POTENTIAL TO OCCUR Special Status Plant Species
California orcutt grass
Orcuttia californica
Federal Endangered
California Endangered
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
Narrow Endemic
DBESP species
Vernal pools. 10-660 m. No potential. The Study
Area consists primarily of
disturbed native scrub,
southern willow scrub and
lacks suitable vernal pool
features for this species.
Intermediate Mariposa Lily
Calochortus weedii var.
intermedius
CRBR 1B.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Smooth tarplant
Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
DBESP species
Additional Survey
needs
Valley and foothill grassland, chenopod
scrub, meadows and seeps, playas,
riparian woodland. Alkali meadow, alkali
scrub; also in disturbed places. 5-1170 m.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Parry’s spineflower
Chorizanthe parryii var. parri
CRPR 1B.1
Covered Annual herb; openings in chapparal and
coastal sage scrub. 30-2,500 m
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Long-spined spineflower
Chorizanthe polygonoides var.
longispina
CRBR 1B.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Palmer’s grapplinghook
Harpagonella palmeri
CRBR 4.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Spreading navarretia
Navarretia fossalis
Federal Threatened
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
Narrow Endemic
Vernal pools, chenopod scrub, marshes
and swamps, playas. San Diego hardpan
and San Diego claypan vernal pools; in
swales & vernal pools, often surrounded
by other habitat types. 15-850 m.
No potential. The Study
Area consists primarily of
disturbed native scrub,
southern willow scrub and
lacks suitable vernal pool
features for this species.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Birds
Southern California rufous-
crowned sparrow
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
CDFW Watch List
Covered Year-round resident subspecies on the
southern California coast, from
northwest Los Angeles County
southward. Occurs on rocky slopes with
scattered bushes and grasses. Nests on
the ground.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Bells sage sparrow
Artemisiospiza belli belli
CDFW Watch List Covered Chaparral and arid scrub habitat, with a preference for chamise or coastal sage in
the coast ranges.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site
Burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered,
Additional Survey
needs
Year-round resident and winter visitor.
Occurs in open, dry grasslands and scrub
habitats with low-growing vegetation,
perches and abundant mammal burrows.
Preys upon insects and small vertebrates.
Nests and roosts in old mammal burrows,
most commonly in ground squirrel
burrows.
Moderate potential.
Suitable habitat for
burrowing owl exists within
and immediately adjacent
to the Study Area. Site is
within a mapped burrowing
owl Survey area
Coastal California gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica californica
Federal Threatened
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Year-round, obligate resident of sage
scrub below 2,500 feet in coastal
southern California. Favors scrub
dominated by California sagebrush
(Artemisia).
Low potential. While the
Study Area contains CSS, it
is dominated by California
buckwheat and lacks a
significant sagebrush
component.
Least bell's vireo
Vireo bellii pusillus
Federal Endangered
California Endangered
Covered,
DBESP species
Summer resident. Breeds in riparian
habitat along perennial or intermittent
rivers and creeks; prefers a multi-tiered
canopy with dense early successional
vegetation in the understory. Willows,
mulefat and other understory species are
typically used for nesting.
Moderate potential.
Isolated southern willow
scrub vegetation occurs on
site.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Mammals
Northwestern San Diego Pocket
mouse
Cheatodipus fallax fallax
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered San Diego County west of mountains in
sparse, disturbed coastal sage scrub or
grasslands with sandy soils.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site
Stevens’ kangaroo rat
Dipodomys stephensi
Federal Endangered
California Threatened
Covered Grassland and open areas with less than
50% cover. Prefers areas dominated by
filaree (Erodium spp.) and annual brome
grasses
(Bromus spp). Well-drained and friable
soils
Low potential. The Study
Area lacks suitable habitat
features for this species.
San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit
Lepus californicus bennettii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Intermediate canopy stages of shrub
habitats and open shrub / herbaceous
and tree / herbaceous edges. Coastal
sage scrub habitats in southern
California.
High potential. Suitable
habitat for this species is
found within and adjacent
to the Study Area.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Reptiles / Amphibians
Southwestern pond turtle
Emys marmorata
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered,
DBESP Species
Found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches,
with abundant vegetation, and 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.
Low potential, site does
not contain open water
habitat elements needed
for pond turtle.
Coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Frequents a wide variety of habitats,
most common in lowlands along sandy
washes with scattered low bushes.
Prefers friable, rocky, or shallow sandy
soils for burial; open areas for sunning;
bushes for cover; and an abundant supply
of ants and other insects.
High potential. Suitable
habitat for this species is
found on site.
Western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered
DBESP species
Occurs primarily in grassland habitats and
vernal pool habitats, but can be found in
valley-foothill hardwood woodlands.
Shallow temporary pools formed by
winter rains are essential for breeding
and egg-laying.
Low potential. The Study
Area lacks suitable habitat
features for this species.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Invertebrates
Quino checkerspot butterfly
Euphydryas editha quino
Federally Endangered Covered Sparse chaparral and arid scrub habitat, associated with larval host plant
California plantain (Plantago erecta).
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Riverside fairy shrimp
Streptocephalus wootoni
Federal Endangered Covered,
DBESP species
Vernal pools No potential, site does not
contain evidence or
topography necessary for
the formation of vernal
pool habitat.
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix C – Special-status Species Potential Table APPENDIX C – SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES POTENTIAL TABLE
Biological Resources Technical Report WRA, Inc.
May 2024 Appendix C – Special-status Species Potential Table THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species with the Potential to Occur within the Study Area.
SPECIES CONSERVATION STATUS MSHCP STATUS HABITAT POTENTIAL TO OCCUR Special Status Plant Species
California orcutt grass
Orcuttia californica
Federal Endangered
California Endangered
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
Narrow Endemic
DBESP species
Vernal pools. 10-660 m. No potential. The Study
Area consists primarily of
disturbed native scrub,
southern willow scrub and
lacks suitable vernal pool
features for this species.
Intermediate Mariposa Lily
Calochortus weedii var.
intermedius
CRBR 1B.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Smooth tarplant
Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
DBESP species
Additional Survey
needs
Valley and foothill grassland, chenopod
scrub, meadows and seeps, playas,
riparian woodland. Alkali meadow, alkali
scrub; also in disturbed places. 5-1170 m.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Parry’s spineflower
Chorizanthe parryii var. parri
CRPR 1B.1
Covered Annual herb; openings in chapparal and
coastal sage scrub. 30-2,500 m
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Long-spined spineflower
Chorizanthe polygonoides var.
longispina
CRBR 1B.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Palmer’s grapplinghook
Harpagonella palmeri
CRBR 4.2 Covered Coastal Sage Scrub, Chaparral, Valley Grassland
High. Habitat available
onsite and specimens have
been documented in
adjacent, similar habitats.
Spreading navarretia
Navarretia fossalis
Federal Threatened
CRPR 1B.1
Covered,
Narrow Endemic
Vernal pools, chenopod scrub, marshes
and swamps, playas. San Diego hardpan
and San Diego claypan vernal pools; in
swales & vernal pools, often surrounded
by other habitat types. 15-850 m.
No potential. The Study
Area consists primarily of
disturbed native scrub,
southern willow scrub and
lacks suitable vernal pool
features for this species.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Birds
Southern California rufous-
crowned sparrow
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
CDFW Watch List
Covered Year-round resident subspecies on the
southern California coast, from
northwest Los Angeles County
southward. Occurs on rocky slopes with
scattered bushes and grasses. Nests on
the ground.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Bells sage sparrow
Artemisiospiza belli belli
CDFW Watch List Covered Chaparral and arid scrub habitat, with a preference for chamise or coastal sage in
the coast ranges.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site
Burrowing owl
Athene cunicularia
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered,
Additional Survey
needs
Year-round resident and winter visitor.
Occurs in open, dry grasslands and scrub
habitats with low-growing vegetation,
perches and abundant mammal burrows.
Preys upon insects and small vertebrates.
Nests and roosts in old mammal burrows,
most commonly in ground squirrel
burrows.
Moderate potential.
Suitable habitat for
burrowing owl exists within
and immediately adjacent
to the Study Area. Site is
within a mapped burrowing
owl Survey area
Coastal California gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica californica
Federal Threatened
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Year-round, obligate resident of sage
scrub below 2,500 feet in coastal
southern California. Favors scrub
dominated by California sagebrush
(Artemisia).
Low potential. While the
Study Area contains CSS, it
is dominated by California
buckwheat and lacks a
significant sagebrush
component.
Least bell's vireo
Vireo bellii pusillus
Federal Endangered
California Endangered
Covered,
DBESP species
Summer resident. Breeds in riparian
habitat along perennial or intermittent
rivers and creeks; prefers a multi-tiered
canopy with dense early successional
vegetation in the understory. Willows,
mulefat and other understory species are
typically used for nesting.
Moderate potential.
Isolated southern willow
scrub vegetation occurs on
site.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Mammals
Northwestern San Diego Pocket
mouse
Cheatodipus fallax fallax
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered San Diego County west of mountains in
sparse, disturbed coastal sage scrub or
grasslands with sandy soils.
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site
Stevens’ kangaroo rat
Dipodomys stephensi
Federal Endangered
California Threatened
Covered Grassland and open areas with less than
50% cover. Prefers areas dominated by
filaree (Erodium spp.) and annual brome
grasses
(Bromus spp). Well-drained and friable
soils
Low potential. The Study
Area lacks suitable habitat
features for this species.
San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit
Lepus californicus bennettii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Intermediate canopy stages of shrub
habitats and open shrub / herbaceous
and tree / herbaceous edges. Coastal
sage scrub habitats in southern
California.
High potential. Suitable
habitat for this species is
found within and adjacent
to the Study Area.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Reptiles / Amphibians
Southwestern pond turtle
Emys marmorata
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered,
DBESP Species
Found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches,
with abundant vegetation, and 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.
Low potential, site does
not contain open water
habitat elements needed
for pond turtle.
Coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered Frequents a wide variety of habitats,
most common in lowlands along sandy
washes with scattered low bushes.
Prefers friable, rocky, or shallow sandy
soils for burial; open areas for sunning;
bushes for cover; and an abundant supply
of ants and other insects.
High potential. Suitable
habitat for this species is
found on site.
Western spadefoot
Spea hammondii
CDFW Species of
Special Concern
Covered
DBESP species
Occurs primarily in grassland habitats and
vernal pool habitats, but can be found in
valley-foothill hardwood woodlands.
Shallow temporary pools formed by
winter rains are essential for breeding
and egg-laying.
Low potential. The Study
Area lacks suitable habitat
features for this species.
Special Status Wildlife Species: Invertebrates
Quino checkerspot butterfly
Euphydryas editha quino
Federally Endangered Covered Sparse chaparral and arid scrub habitat, associated with larval host plant
California plantain (Plantago erecta).
Moderate potential.
Degraded habitat for the
species occurs on the site.
Riverside fairy shrimp
Streptocephalus wootoni
Federal Endangered Covered,
DBESP species
Vernal pools No potential, site does not
contain evidence or
topography necessary for
the formation of vernal
pool habitat.