providesa potentially importantcorridor connection, for tom and fauna, between those open space areas to the north and the main trunk of the arroyo to the south.
Apart from some minor infringementsby several of the proposedpads, a majority of this tributary, and most of the other tributaries present within the map boundaries, will be left undisturbed, as requiredby the Grading Ordinance. It is important that these open space areas be defined and protected in perpetuity. The applicant has agreed to set aside all ungradedportions of the map in an open space conservation easement.
With these areas set aside, there are two options available to maintain this land in its natural state. Staff believes it would be most preferable to dedicate these areas either in fee or with an open space easement to an appropriatenon-profitconservation agency with expertiseand experiencein managingnatural areas, such as the Riverside Land Conservancy. In the event a suitable conservation organization cannot be found to accept this property, it is recommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and chargedwith maintenance and stewardship of these areas. In addition, staff would recommend that an open space management plan be developedto ensure that a maintenance program is developedfor the open space. This plan should also specify fencingaround the streets and padsto protect open space areas.
Biological Considerations
The biological study for the project indicated the presence of coastal sage scrub habitat along the easterly project limit, which serves as potential habitat for the federally endangered California Gnatcatcher. Since no focused gnatcatcher survey was prepared, the site is presumed to be occupied. As such, the applicant will be required to prepare a Habitat Conservation Plan ( HCP) and obtain an incidental take permit from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The biological studyincluded specificmitigation measures related to when and how vegetation may be cleared, property mitigation through off- site habitat conservation, proper site access and project area maintenance. These measures have been incorporatedinto the recommended conditions of approval for the project.
ALUC
This property falls within the jurisdiction of the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission ( ALUC) and is subjectto their review and approval. This map has alreadybeen reviewed and approvedby ALUC. A copy of the conditions of approval have been attached to this report and have been included in the recommended conditions of approval.
Metropolitan Water District Pipeline
A sixty-foot pipeline easement is present in the southeast portion of the map, between Lots 12, 13, 15, 16, 19 and 27. The Metropolitan Water District has reviewed the proposedmap and has provided several required conditions. These have been attached to this report and 12- 378
Cit~ PlanningCommi~ A0d119, 2001 6 TM 29515
at 3. 93 acres in size. The remainingeightlots have an ANS between 16. 3% and 25. 9% and are required to contain at least two acres. These lots range from 1. 38 to 1. 83 acres in size.
The applicant-prepared variance justification findings are attached as Exhibit 6. The applicant cites topographicaland street alignment constraints, along with improved map design and open space retention and maintenance issues as justification for the requested variances. In reviewing the applicant's request, staffis generallysupportive of the requested variances. For eightof the nine lots, the applicanthas demonstrated that they could comply with the lot size requirementby adjusting property lines. In most cases, adjustment of the lot lines to comply with the Code creates a series of awkward, irregularly shapedlots, much of which is within the open space area and not a usable part of the lot. As such, staff sees no benefit in redrawing lot lines to comply with the letter of the Code and would support lot size variances to accommodate a better project design with more logical lot configurations.
The exception is Lot 28, which is approximately 1. 83 acres in size. In this case, minor adjustmentsbetween Lots 27 and 28 and minor modifications to adjoining street alignments would provide sufficient lot area to provide the required 2 acres in a logical manner. Staff recommends that the map be modified so that Lot 28 complieswith the lot size requirements, and the applicant has agreedto make the necessary modifications.
Lot Width for Lot 20
The RC Zone requires that ail lots with an ANS of thirty percent or greater also have a minimum lot width of two hundred feet at the building setback line. Lot 20, with a width of 180 feet does not comply with this standard. The applicant indicates that the common lot line between Lots 20 and 21 will be adjustedin order to allow Lot 20 to comply with the standard.
Open SpaceConservation
Apart from the proposedpad grading and street construction, a majority of the land under this map will be left undisturbed. Much of this undisturbed area lies within protected tributaries to the Alessandro Arroyo as defined in the City's grading ordinance. As such, it is important that these open space areas be defined and protected in perpetuity. The applicant has agreed to set aside all ungraded portions of the map in an open space conservation easement.
With these areas set aside, there are two options available to maintain this land in its natural state. Staffbelieves it would be most preferableto dedicate these areas either in fee or with an open space easement to an appropriate non- profit conservation agencies which have expertiseand experiencein managingnatural arez~, such as the Riverside Land Conservancy.
In the event a suitable conservation organization cannot be found accept this property, it is recommended that a Homeowners Association be formed and chargedwith maintenance and stewardship of these areas. In addition, staff would recommend that an open space management plan be developedto ensure that a maintenance program is developedfor the i2- 384
Environmental Considerations
There are several important environmental issues associated with this project that are discussed in detail in the initial study, and these issues are summarized below.
Gnatcatcher Considerations
The biological studyfor the project indicated the presence of coastal sage scrub habitat along the easterly project limit, which serves as potential habitat for the federally endangered California Gnatcatcher. Since no focused gnatcatcher survey was prepared, the site is presumed to be occupied. As such, the applicant will be required to prepare a Habitat Conservation Plan ( HCP) and obtain an incidental take permit from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The biological studyincluded specificmitigation measures relat~t to when and how vegetation may be cleared, property mitigation through off- site habitat conservation, proper site access and project area maintenance. These measures have been incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval for the project.
Wildlife Corridor
The central drainage feature ( behind Lot 7- 16 and between Lots 29-33) is an important linkage between approximatelyfourteen acres of open space preservedwithin TM 26109 to the southeast and the main branch oftbe Alessandro Arroyo to the northwest ( See Exhibit 5). The crossing of Chateau View Drive and related fill slopeswill effectively create a barrier to animal movement along this corridor. Staff believes it is important to maintain opportunitiesfor movement alongthis corridor. As such, it is recommended that a functional wildlife corridor be provided under Chateau View Drive, as determined by a qualified biologist and approvedby the Planning Department. Options for maintaining the corridor may include the installation of one or more large culverts under the roadway, retention of a short natural span area under the roadway, or other alternative deemed appropriate by the biologist.
Neighborhood Compatibility Considerations
This map will accommodate a public street system and typical RC zoned subdivision of a size and configurationsimilar to what is found in the surroundingarea. With the conditions regardingthe establishment of open space areas and minimized grading, this map should be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood and sensitive to the exisfmg natural features on- site.
RECOMMENDAT[QI~I
That the City Planning Commission:
1. APPROVE Subdivision Case TM 29606, subjectto the recommended conditions of approval and based on the following findings:
388
Disturbed Rjvcrsidian R~ lstivcb7undisturbed
Sa~e Ser0b PsiverSidian~Sa~¢ Scrub
Total' habitatarea on;site 13. 6-acres 12. 5-acres
at: present
Area o~l~bi~t I~ tpe~b. t)e.' 2. 6-acres 2. 9-acres
lost with' development
l~ liii'g~ itj~.niti°' 3:1 3:1
Recomni~mdedm~!igation~ 7. 8-acres 8. 7-acres
i~ cre~g¢.,
Acreage 'of habil~t lype :to11. 0- acres 9. 6-acres
be. placed:in o~n spsCe
ExCesS acreage over 3. 2-acres 0. 9-acres
mi~ iga!'ior/ requirement
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
applythe 3:1 mitigation ratio to both the relatively
However, in a abundance ofcauuon, even ffwe
ex':ess of dedication -- the mitigation
intact and the disturbed habitats, we have on- site an
requirementsare easily met on-site (see above table).
Wetl:ll'nds and Related Habitats. Wetlandsand similar habitats are also considered to be sensitive by the wildlife agencies, also due Io the excessive loss of such habitats state wide. Both the State of California and the Federal Government have strict policiesgoverningthe filling or alteration of wetlands and both have strict " no net loss" policies -- the acreage of wetland ( as defined) must be. the same after constmotion of a projectas before construction of that project. Developments such as Tract 28728 are regulatedunder Section 1603 of the California Fish and Game Codes and under section 404 o£ the Federal Clean Water Act. Filling or alteration of any wetland ( as defined) requires the issuance ora section 1603 Agreementby the Departmentoffish and Game and the issuance of a section 404-permitby the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
The most obvious wetlands within the bounds of Tract 28728 are those alongthe included reach of Alessandro Arroyo. The developmentas proposed, however, will not directly affect these wetlands no filling or construction is proposedwithin the Alessandro Arroyo riparianor wetland habitats.
This having been said, it should be pointedout that these habitats have been grosslyaltered over the last several months, apparentlyunder the auspi~:es of the Riverside County Flood Control District who holds an easement over this portion of the property. Sand and gravel accrued behind the Alessandro Reservoir (a flood control structure) has been mined as a commodity. This has increased the holding capacityof the flood control basin but it has also resulted in the down- cutting of the arroyo bottom and many of the adjacentcontributory drainages, resulting in the wholesale loss of both wetland and riparianhabitats. This action is entirely outside of the control of the applicantfor Tract 28728.
RBRif~n and AssOClJles -- Biological Assessmgnl of City of Riw~si~l~ Tr~C~ 25728 12- 424
17 of 21
REFERENCES CITED'
American Ornithologists' Union. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7e Edition. Ameriean Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D. C., liv + 829 pp.
American Ornithologists' Union. : 2000. Forty-secondSupplementto tha American Ornithologists' Union Check-list & North American Birds. The Auk 117( 3):847- 858 Atwood, Jonathan L. 1988. SpeCiationand GeographicVariation in Black-tailed Gnatcatchers. American OrnithologistsUnion, OrnithologicalMonographsNo. 42, Wash., D. C.
Bailey, Eric A. and P. J- Mock. 1998. DispersalCapabilityof the California Gnatcatcher:' A Landscape Analysis of Distribution Data. Western Birds 29( 4):351- 360.
Braden, Gerald T., S. L. Love, and R. b. McKernan. 1994. Dispersaland Non- breedingHabitat Use by the Coastal California Gnateatcher (Polioptila californica californica) in Western Riverside County.
Unpublishedmanuscript, preparedfor Southwestam Riverside County Multi- speciesReserve managementCommittee and the MetropolitanWater District, copiesavailable from the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbed Field Office, 28 pp.
Breden, Gerald T., and S. Powell. 1994a. Nesting Biology of the California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica colifornica) in Western Riverside County.
Breden, Gerald T., and S. Pow¢ll. 1994b. Brawling Habitat Use by Polioptila colifornica in Western Riverside County.
Braden, Gerald. 1998. Gnatcatcher Factoids. Unpublishedmanuscript, Fish and Wildlife Scrvioe, Carlsbad, Calif., 3 pp.
California Native Plant Society. : 2000. Electronic Inventory ( of Rare and EndangeredVascular Plants of California), Version 1. 5.2, released I July 2000, The Author, Sacramento, Calif.
Campbell, Kurt F., R. A. Erickson, W. E. Haas, and M. A. Patten. 1998. California Gnatcatcher Use of Habitats Other Than Coastal SageScrub: Conservation and Maria8ement Implications. Western Birds 29( 4):421- 433.
Davis, Liam H., R. b. McKernan, and J. S. Bums. 1998. History and Status &the California Gnatcatcher in San BamardinoCounty, California. Western Birds 29( 4):361- 365.
EnvironmentalLaboratory. 1987a. Corps &Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y- 87-1, U.S. Army EngineerWaterways ExperimentStation, Vicksburg, Mississippi. lac uded r~ this "S~ eferencesCiled" section are both resources specificallycited in thc text of th Biological "' , call relied on in a broader sense for the preparationofthls study and report. All I Assessm~.nt a-'.n-d~ r:~ s~CseeSc~iafircinYcludedbY re ference within the adm. 'mstr~at' ye tee°rd ° f the preparat'°n ° f th~s docum .......
t whether or not they are specificallyreferenced In text. 12- 429
References Cited ( continued)
Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998a. Endangeredand Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Emergency Rule to List the' San Bernardino Kan8arno Rat as Endangered. Federal Register63( 17):383. 5-3843.
F ish and W ildlife Servlce. 2OOOa. QuinoCheckerapotButterfly (EuphydrYaseditha quin°) Year 2OOOsurvey protocol. Unpublishedmanuscript, available from the Carlsbad Field Office, C. arlsbad, Calif., 6 pp appendices,
Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000b. Endangeredand Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Determination of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcber; Final ' Rule. Federal Register 65( 206):63680- 63743
Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001 a. Endangeredand Threatened Wildlife and Plants; ProposezlDetermination of Critical Habitat for the Quino Checkerapot Butterfly; Proposed Rule. Federal Register 66( 26):9476- 950'7.
Fish and Wildlife Service. 200lb. Endangeredand Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designationof Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad; Final Rule. Federal Register66( 26):9414- 9474 Glaser, H.S. Robert, 1970. The Distribution of Amphibiansand Reptilesin Riverside County, Califomla.
Riverside Museum Press, Natural Histo~ Series #1.
Greenwood, Richard B., and D. M. Morton. 1991. Geology of the Santa Aha I: 100,000 Quadrangle, California. California Division of Minas and Geology, Open File Report 91-17, Sacramento, Calif.
Holland, Robert F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptionsof the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
California Departmentof Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. iii + 155 pp.
Jennings, Mark R. and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibianand ReptileSpeciesof SpecialConcern in California.
California Departmentoffish and Game, Rancho Cordova, Calif., final report, Contract No. 8023, 255 pp.
Kelly, Patrick A., and John T. Rotenberry. 1993. Buffer Zones for Ecological Reserves in California:
ReplacingGuesswork with Science. In: Keoley, Jon E., ed., Symposiumon the Interface Between Ecology and Land DevelopmentIn California, Southern California Academy of Sciences, Los Angel~s, Calif., pP. 85- 92.
Ma~oni, Rudi, et al. 1995 (1997). The endangeredQuino Checkerspot Butterfly, £uphydryas editha quino bepidoptcra: Nymphalidae). J. of Rasearch on the Lepidoptera34( I-4): 99-118.
O' Farrell, M.J. and Curt Uptain. 1989. Assessment of Populationand Habitat Status of the Stephens' KangarOo Rat ( Dipodomys stephensi). California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife ManagementDivision, Sacramento, California.
Parmesan, Camille. 1995. Traversing the Checkerboard of ZuphydryasIdentification. American Butlerflics 3(4): 12-22.
References Cited
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1980. The United States distribution of the ' California Black-tailed Gnatcatcher. Western Birds I 1( 2):65- 78.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1988. Speciationand GeographicVariation in Black-tailed Gnatcatchers.
American OrnithologistsUnion, OrnithologicalMonographsNo. 42, Wash., D. C.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1990. Status review of the California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila ~.
Unpublishedtechnical report, Manomet Bird Observatory, Manomet, Massachusetts. 79 pp.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1991. Subspecieslimits and geographicpatterns of morPhologicalvariation in California Gnatcatchers (£olioptila caiifornica) Bull. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 90: 118-133.
Atwood, Jonathan L., and J. S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational Distribution of California Gnatcatchers in the United States. J. Field Omithol. 63( 2):159- 168.
Atwood, Jonathan L., D. R. Bontrager, and A. L. Gorospe. 1998. Use of Refugia by California Gnatcatchers Displacedby Habitat Loss. Western Birds 29( 4):406- 412.
Atwood, Jonathan L., et al. 1998. Factors Affecting Estimates of California Gnatcatcher Territory Size. Western Birds 29( 4):269- 279.
Braden, Gerald T., S. L. Love, and R. L. McKernan. 1994. Dispersaland Non- breedingHabitat Use by the Coastal California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica californica) in Western Riverside County. Unpublishedmanuscript, preparedfor Southwestern Riverside County Multi- speciesReserve managementCommittee and the MetropolitanWater District, copies available from the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office, 28 pp.
Braden, Gerald T., R. L. McKernan, and, S. M. Powell. 1997. Association of within- territory vegetationcharacteristics and fitness components of California Gnatcatchers. Auk 114( 4):601- 609.
Braden, Gerald. 1998. Gnatcatcher Factoids. Unpublishedmanuscript, Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad, Calif., 3 pp.
Davis, Liana H., R. L. McKeman, and J. S. Burns. 1998. History and Status of the California Gnatcatcherfin San Bemardino County, California. Western Birds 29( 4):361- 365.
Duma, J. L., and K.L. Garrett. 1987. The identification of North American gnatcatchers. Birding 19: 17-29.
Famolaro, Peter and J. Newman. 1998. Occurrence and Management Considerations of California GnatcatchersAlong San Diego County Highways. Western Birds 29( 4):447- 452. 12- 471
MITIGATION FOR IN[ PACTSTO WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Please identify the pollutantsthat may be associated with the proposeddevelopment. Describe the short- and long-term water quality impactson the receivingwaters and downstream waters that may result fi. om dischargeof these pollutants.
Typical pollutantsassociated with residential developments, such as oil and gasolinefrom automobiles, detergents from car washing, and fertilizer and pesticides.
Please list any beneficial uses ( as defined in the Basin Plan) of the receiving water(s) and dowaslmam water(s) that may be lost or impactedthroughprojectimplementation.
None.
What are the proposedmitigation measures to limit impactson water qualitystandards in re~ ivingwater(s) and also downstream water(s)? List the avoidance or alternative measures considered ( if described in CEQA document, pleasereference page number). Please indicate if no such measures were considered.
A water quality bio- swale will be installed immediate downstream of the road crossing. The bio- swale will be installed in an uplandlocation to providepretreatmentof urban runoffprior to discharge into the drainage feature. The Homeowners Association will providelong-term maintenance of the bioswale, consisting of installation of native grasses, and sediment removal as needed.
The proposedproiectimprovements will comply with Section 402 ( Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan) regulations as administered by the RWQCB.
FILL~ EXCAVATIONAND DREDGE MITIGATION ( Indicate in ACRES and LINEAR FEET ( where appropriate) the total quantity of waters of the United States proposedto be created, restored, enhanced and/or preservedfor purposes of roviding compensatory mitigation and indicate the water body type).
Water Body Type Created Restored Enhanced Preserved
Ephemeraldrainage 0. 007-aeres
immediately
adjacentto the
affected area
Alesandro
Perennial drainage
Arroyo
Other proposedcompensatory mitigation related to fill/ excavationand dredgeactivities ( e. g., mitigation banks) (omit if not applicable):
See enclosed Jurisdictional Delineation
How many acres of proposedmitigation area are considered waters of the United States?. All Location of compensatory mitigation site(s) ( attach map of suitable quality and detail):
Onsite
City or Area City of Riverside
County: Riverside
Longitude/Latitude Township/Range
Will a mitigationplan be preparedin accordance with the Army Corps of Engineers' guidelines and submitted to the RegionalBoard office?
X noyes __
12- 486
STORM WATER PERMIT STATUS*
Obtained storm water permit
Filed Notice of Intent with the SWRCB yes X
PreparedStorm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
fyou believe that a Storm Water permitis not necessary, state why no
yes X no
date
yes __ no
forthcoming
Please list ( Best Management Practices) BMPs that will be used to minimize impactsto water quality standards (i. e., water quality and beneficial uses) during and after construction.
Construction phase: compliance with the NPDES General Construction Permit including soil stabilization, sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, non- storm water management, waste management and materials.
Operationsphase: A waler quality bio- swale, as discussed on Page 5.
Please discuss BMP maintenance and monitoring activities and duration, including the party(ies) responsible for long4erm maintenance of any BMP installed. If maintenance and monitoring will be provided through another agency/party, submit a letter from that agency/party demonstratingthat an agreement for such long- term maintenance/monitoring has been or will be reached.
The Applicant will be responsiblefor the installation, maintenance and monitoring of the bio- swale until establishment o£ the Homeowners Association ( HOA), which is anticipatedto be formed after year 2 of proiect initiation.
The HOA will be responsiblefor the long-term maintenance of the bio- swale, including but not limitedto vegetationcontrol and sediment removal, as required.
If project is a new development within the San Jacinto Watershed ( i. e., coverage under SWRCB's generalpermit not obtained prior to January 19, 2001) coverage under Order No. 01-34 " Watershed-wide Waste Discharge Requirementsfor Storm Water DischargesAssociated with New Developmentsin the San Jacinto Watershed" is required. Please visit our website at http:// www.swmb. ca.gov/ rwqcbS/and click on the "Adopted Orders" button or go directly to the "Adopted Orders" web page at http:// www.swrcb. ca.gov/ rwqcb8/html/ adopted orders.html for more information on the RegionalBoard's Order No. 01-34 " Watershed-wide Waste Discharge Requirements for Storm Water DischargesAssociated with New Developmentsin the San Jacinto Watershed". To view a map of the San Jacinto Watershed, pleasevisit http:// www.swrcb. ca.gov/ rwqcbS/html/ san iacinto watershed.html.
Mr. Yan/ 4tc.qtlong, P~.D.
Sanda G- Youp, LTD
Date
t 2- 488
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 - Jurisdictional Delineation These features are the Alessandro Arroyo, which flows perennially, and one unnamed tributary to the Arroyo located in the eastern portionof the projectsite. Alessandro Arroyo will be preservedas open space and therefore not impacted. The urmamed ~'ibutary contains 0. 097 acres of USACE and 0. 338 acres of CDFG jurisdictionalwaters. Numerous non- jurisdictionaluplandswales are also present onsite.
Impacts: Project impacts are limited to improvement of one mad crossing affecting the unnamed drainage feature. The improvement will result in the permanentloss of approximately0. 028 acres 370 linear feet) of USACE and 0. 077 acres of CDFG jurisdictionalwaters. Affected vegetationis limited to rudeml speciesand scarce mulefat. No wetlands are presentwithin the projectimpact area.
M._~ation:
Waters: The permanent loss of jurisdictionalwaters will be offset by the expansionof the unnamed drainage feature at a 1:1 ratio. The mitigation site will be located immediate downstream of the road crossing and adjacent to the proposedupland water quality bio- swale. It is anticipated that the bio- swale will provide sufficient hydrolog3' to support riparianvegetation.
Water Quality: A water quality bio- swale will be installed immediate downstream of the road crossing. The bio- swale will be installed in an uplandlocation to provide pretreatment of urban runof/q prior to discharge into the drainage feature. The Homeowners Association will provide long-term maintenance, consisting of installation of native grasses, and sediment removal as needed.
Endangered Species:
The entire project site is located within United States Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS) designatedcritical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN). The project site contains
12.5 acres of moderate quality Riversidean Sage Scrub (RSS) and 13.6 acres of Iow quality RSS. No CAGN are presentonsite.
The projectsite is located within the Riverside County Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan Fee Assessment Area, and therefore subject to current fee requirementsas administered by the City of Riverside.
up to the 85 percentileof the 3 year 24- hoar storm
2 12' 501 Sec,lo. 1 - Summary
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 - Jurisdictional Delineation
REGULATED ACTIVITIES
Regulatedactivities involve a regulateddischarge of dredgedor fill material include, but are not limited to, grading, placing of rip-rap for erosion control, pouring concrete, laying sod, and stockpilingexcavated material. Activities that generallydo not involve a regulateddischarge (if performedspecifically in a manner to avoid discharges) include driving pilings, drainage channel maintenance, temporary mining and farm/ forest roads, and excavatingwithout stockpiling.
4.2 CDFG SECTION 1600 REGULATIONS
The Fish and Game Code of California mandates that " it is unlawful for any person to substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designatedby the department, or use any material from the streambeds, without first notifying the department of such activity." CDFG jurisdictionincludes ephemeral, intermittentand perennialwatercourses ( including dry washes) characterized by (l) ~ he presence of hydrophytic vegetation; (2) the location of definable bed and banks; and ( 3) the presence of existing fish or wildlife resources. Furthermore, CDFG jurisdiction is often extended to habitats adjacent to watercourses, such as oak woodlands in canyon boaoms or willow woodlands that function as part of the riparian system.
S:~ 24880001- GUlJlri¢¢.gelcY submittal~tD.doc '~ 2' 509 Section 4 - Regulatory Backgroun,!
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 - Jurisdictional Delineation Hydric soils may be present at the southern end of the Arroyo upstream from the Alessandro Dam.
This area has been heavily altered by the Riverside County Flood Control Dislxict, which mines the area for sand and graveldeposits, per a permittedeasement. 63 HYDROLOGY
WATERSHED CONDITIONS
The project site is located within the Santa Aha River ( SAR) watershed. The two major components of total flow in the SAR wateshed are storm flow and base flow. Storm flow occurs primarily during the rainy season. Base flow is composedof non-point source discharges (runoff from agriculturaland urban areas).
Storm flows exiting the project site are conveyedto the SAR via the Alessandro Arroyo, which is undergroundeddownstream of the project site within the Lincoln Avenue and Magnolia Avenue storm drains
The FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map for the project area indicates the Alessandro Arroyo as susceptible to flooding during a 100-year storm. Adherence to Riverside County Flood Control District's 100-year flood zone setback requirementswill reduce the flood bnTard risk to less than significant (sec NegativeDeclaration adoptedin 1998).
ONSITEHYDROLOGY
The project contains two ( 2) onsite drainages, namely Alessandro Arroyo, a USGS- designated "blue line" stream, and one unnamed tributary to the Arroyo located in the eastern portion of the project site. Numerous non- jurisdictionalswales occur on the project site, however, these features do not exhibit a definable bed and bank or riparian vegetation.
The onsite drainage features convey natural runoff originating from direct precipitation within the natural slopeson- site and immediately north, east, and west of the site.
6.4 WETLANDS
Three criteria, hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology, must be present to classify an area as a jurisdictional wetland ( as discussed in Appendix B - Determination of Jurisdictional Wetlands).
2- 51tl Section 6 - Jurisdictional Delineation Resulta
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 - Jurisdictional Delineation Portions of the Alessandro Arroyo show evidence of ponding or retention of water. Therefore, evidence of wetland hydrology exists within the Arroyo. The tributary drainage does not exhibit wetland hydrology.
6.5 DESCRIPTIONS OF ONSITE DRAINAGE FEATURES
The Alessandro Arroyo enters the project site at its south- eastern boundary. At the project boundary the Ordinary High Water Mark ( OHWM) of the streambed is approximately3 fe~t wide with adjacent, associated wetlands that span another I to 2 feet of both sides of the drainage. Associated riparian vegetationincludes willows, mulefat, and watercress and spans 10 feet across the drainage.
As the drainage opens up to the west, before the Alessandro Dam, it is heavily disturbed from sediment dredging activity by Riverside County Flood Control District ( RCFCD). The RCFCD retains an easement within this portionof the Arroyo.
Tributary Drainage: The unnamed drainage feature originates in the north- east portion of the TTM 28728 and flows southwesterly. The streambed is approximately I to 2 feet in width and associated riparianvegetationspans 10 feet across the drainage. Such riparian vegetation includes a canopy of willow and popper trees with a mix of mostly non- native weeds plus a few individuals of mulefat and coastal sage scrub. No evidence ofwatland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetationexists within the drainage. Towards its headwaters near the northern project boundary, the drainagegains in elevation. It contains rock riprap near its confluence with the Alessandro Arroyo and just before the confluence it drops in elevation by 30 to 40 feet. Otherwise, the drainage is relatively flat. The existing dirt road crossing is proposed for improvement, consisting of widening, paving and installation ora 36- inch culvert ( corrugated metal pipe).
Non- jurisdictionalSwales: Numerous small upland swales are located within the project site. These swales have a round- bottom, and contain no evidence of an Ordinary High Water Mark ( OHWM) or riparianvegetation.
6.6 PROJECT IM]) ACTS WITHIN JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
lmpacts are limited to the improvement of an existing road crossing of the onsite unnamed drainage feature. The improvement will result in the permanent loss of 0. 028 acres ( 370 linear feet) of" waters of the United States", and 0. 077 acres of" waters of the State" subject to CDFG jurisdiction (Exhibit 4 - Jurisdictional Impacts). Affected vegetationis limited to ruderal speciesand a few sparse Mulefat Baccaris salicifolia).
S:~. 4~$~l. Guti~e~.~ etlCysub~mttaJ'~ D.d~ c 12-- 515 12 Section 6- Jurisdictional DelineationResults
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728- JurisdictionalDelineation warm, wild, and rare uses. The Temescal hydrologic unit is not listed in the 1998 Section 303(d) for Region 8.
Post-projectstorm flow quantityand velocity at the point of offsite discharge will be consistent with pre- projectdischargequantityand velocity, per County of Riverside flood control standards.
Urban runoff has been shown to contain potentially high levels of heavy mctals, oil, and grease, as well as silt and organic loads, plastics and other general trash, and bacterial populations.
Additionally, improper use of chemicals for landscapemaintenance may have a detrimenlal effect on water quality. Proposedmitigation for project-specific impacts to water quality are included in Section 8 of this document.
7.5 CDFG 1600 STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT
Approximately 0. 077 acres of CDFG jurisdiction would be permanently affected by project implementation. A CDFG Section 1600 agreement is requiredprior to any alteration ora streambed or riparian habitat. Mitigation to offset the potential impacts to waters of the state is proposedin Section 8 of this document.
s:~ asa000,-ou0~ e~y , u~ mi~m. a~ '~ 2- 320 16 Section 7 - Permits/ AgreementsProcessing Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728- Jurisdictional Delineation SECTION 8
MITIGATION MEASLrRES
8.1 AVOIDANCE~ MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS The following measures are proposedto avoid, minimize and mitigate potential waters, biology, and water quality effects associated with project implementation.
WATERS
Onsite mitigation is proposedto offset the permanent loss of jurisdictional waters, as discussed below:
Expansionof the unnamed drainage feature immediately downstream of thc road crossing and adjacent to the proposedupland water quality bio- swale. It is anticipatedthat the bio- swale will provide sufficient hydrology to suppor~ riparian vegetation. The mitigation site will be 0. 077-acres and contain a minimum of 0. 028 acres created waters of the U. S.
Riparianvegetationwill be installed within the mitigation site consisting of native grasses.
A three year maintenance and monitoring plan is proposedto ensure the successful establishment of the native cover within the mitigation area.
BIOLOGY
The 86. 31-acre project development area is composed of 26 acres of varying quality RSS, 49.81 acres of NNG, and 10.5 acres of riparian/wetland vegetation (preserved within the proposed Alessandro Arroyo open space area).
Project implementationwould result in the permanent loss of approximately2.9 acres of moderate qualityRiversidean Sage Scrub ( RSS) and 2.6 acres of low quality RSS within critical habitat.
Onsite Preservation: Thc project is designedto avoid impacts to the Alessandro Arroyo, a sensitive habitat. Approximately43. 78 acres will be dedicated as open space, including thc Alessandro Arroy9 area. This area contains approximately 10.5 acres of riparian/wetlandvegetation.
Impacts to RSS will be mitigated at a greater than 3:1 ratio through the onsite preservation of 20.6 acres RSS of moderate to Iow quality adjacentto the Alesandro Arroyo. 12' 521sec'i°" s- Mitiga,ion
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 - Jurisdictional Delineation
WATER QUALITY
The proposedproject improvements will comply with Section 402 ( Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan) regulations as administered by the RWQCB. Water pollution control measures incorporatedinto project design, construction, and operationswould establish compliance With current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations.
A water quality bio- swale will be installed immediate downstream of the road crossing; The bio- swale will be located in an upland area to providepretrealment of urban runoff' prior to discharge into the drainage feature. The Homeowners Association will provide long-term maintenance, consisting of installation of native grasses, and sediment removal as needed.
2 up to the 85 percentileof the 3 year 24- hour storm
12- 522 Sectio. 8- Mitigation Measure
Sanda Group, LTD, Tentative Tract 28728 -Jurisdictional Delineation SECTION 9
REFERENCES
California, State of. 1989. Fis..__.[h And Game Code.
Department of Army. 1986 (Nov 13). 33 CFR Parts 320 Through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Federal Register. 51 (219): 41206-260.
Department of Army. 2000 ( Mar 9). 33 CFR Parts 320 Through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Federal Register. Vol. 65 No. 47: 12818-899.
Department of Army. 2002 ( Jan 15). 33 CFR Parts 320 Through 330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. Federal Register. Vol. 67 No. 10: 2020- 2095.
Department of Army--South Pacific Division 2001 ( June). Guidelines for Jurisdictional Delineations for Waters of the United States In the Arid Southwest.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Riverside County California unincorporatedareas), Community-Panel Number 060245 2085 C, revised November 20, 1996.
Federal Intcragency Committee For Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual For Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, and U. S.D. A. Soil Conservation Service. Washington, D. C. CooperativeTechnical Publication.
Kollmorgan Corporation, 1975. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division of Kollmorgen Corporation, Baltimore, Md.
Reed, P. B. 1988. National List of Plant SpeciesThat Occur In Wetlands: California ( Region 0).
National Wetlands Inventory, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9).
U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service. 1973. Soil Survey of Orange County And Eastern Part of Riverside County, California.
U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service. 1988 (May). National List of Plant Speciesthat Occur in Wetlands:
Califo~. Biological Report 88( 26.10). Washington, D. C.: USFWS.
U. S. Geological Survey. 1967 and Photorevised 1980. Riverside East, California. 7. 5-minute topographicmap.
19 12- 523 Section 9- Reference~
References Cited
Atwood,..Jonathan L. 1980. The United States distribution of the California Black-tailed Gnatcatcher. Western Birds 11 (2): 65-78.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1988. Speciationand GeographicVariation in Black-tailed Gnatcatchers.
American Ornithologists Union, OrnithologicalMonographsNo. 42, Wash., D. C.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1990. Status review of the California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila ~.
Unpublishedtechnical report, Manomet Bird Observatory, Manomet, Massachusetts. 79 Pp.
Atwood, Jonathan L. 1991. Subspecieslimits and geographicpatterns of morphologicalvariation in California Gnatcatchers (£olioptila californica) Bull. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 90: 118-133.
Atwood, Jonathan L., and J. S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational Distribution of California Gnatcatchers in the United States. J. Field omithol. 63( 2):159- 168.
Atwood, Jonathan L., D. R. Bontrager, and A. L. Gorospe. 1998. Use of Refugia by California Gnatcatchers Displacedby Habitat Loss. Western Birds 29( 4):406- 412.
Atwood, Jonathan L., et al. 1998. Factors Affecting Estimates of California Gnatcatcher Territory Size. Western Birds 29( 4):269- 279.
Braden, Gerald T., S. L. Love, and R. L. McKernan. 1994. Dispersaland Non- breedingHabitat Use by the Coastal California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica californica) in Western Riverside County. Unpublishedmanuscript, preparedfor Southwestern Riverside County Mulli- speciesReserve management Committee and the MetropolitanWater District, copies available from the Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office, 28 pp.
Braden, Gerald T., R. L. McKernan, and, S. M. Powell. 1997. Association of within- territory vegetationcharacteristics and fitness components of California Gnatcatchers. Auk 114(4):60 t -609.
Braden, Gerald. 1998. Gnatcatcher Factoids. Unpublishedmanuscript, Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad, Calif., 3 pp.Davis, LiamH., R. L. McKernan, and J. S. Burns. 1998. Historyand Statusof theCalifornia
Tract28' 128: Focused Surve~ for Coastal California Gna[ catcher CampbellBioConsultin~ Inc..,
5.0 CITED REFERENCES
AOU] American Ornithologists' Union. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th ed. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 829 pp.
Anderson, E. R. 1991. Habitat preferencesof the California Gnatcatcher in San Diego County. M. A. thesis, San Diego State Univ. 132 pp.
Atwood, J. L. 1993. California Gnatcatchersand coastal sage scrub: the biological basis for endangered specieslisting. Pages149-169 in Keeley, J. E. Interface between ecology and land' developmentin California. S. Calif. Acad. Sci., Los Angeles.
Atwood, J. L., and J. S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational distribution of California Gnatcatchers in the United States. J. Field Ornithol. 63: 159-168.
Atwood, J. L., and D. R. Bontrager. 2001. California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica). In A. Poole and F.
Gill, eds., The Birds of North America, No. 574. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.
Bontrager, D. R. 1991. Habitat requirements, home range and breeding biology of the California Gnatcatcher Polioptila californica) in south Orange County, California. Preparedfor Santa Margarita Company.
Braden, G., R. L. McKernan, S. Love, and S. Powell. 1995. Draft report: Nesting biology of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica californica) in western Riverside County: 1993- 1994.
Unpubl. rep. prep. for Southwestern Riverside County Multi- speciesReserve Management Committee and The Metropolitan Water District, by The San Bernardino County Museum, for U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad, CA. 29 pp.[L. Skinner, L. Mathews, Motte Rimrock E. R.] Braden, G. T., R. L. McKernan, and S. Powell. 1997. Association of within- territory vegetation characteristics and fitness components of California Gnatcatchers. Auk 114: 601-609.
Burger, J. C., M. A. Patten, J. T. Rotenberry, and R. A. Redak. 1999. Foraging ecology oftbe California gnatcatcherdeduced from fecal samples. Oecologia:304-310.
R. A., and K. L. Miner. 1998. Six Years of Synchronous California Gnatcatcher Population Fluctuations at Two Locations in Coastal Orange County, California. W. Birds 29: 333- 339.
Grinnell, J. 1898. Birds of the Pacific Slope of Los Angeles County. Pasadena Acad. Sci., Publ. no. 11.
Hanski, 1. A., and M. E. Gilpin, eds. 1997. MetapopulationBiology: Ecology, Genetics, and Evolution.
Academic Pr., San Diego, CA. 512+ pp.
Hickman, J. C., ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. Univ. of Calif. Press, Berkeley. 1400 pp.
Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary descriptionsof the terrestrial natural communities of California. Nongame- Heritage Program, Calif. Dept. Fish & Game.
Laudenslayer, W. F., Jr., W. E. Grenfell, Jr., and D. C. Zeiner. 1991. A check-list of the amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals of California. Calif. Fish and Game 77( 3):109- 141.
Preston, K. L., P. J. Mock, M. A. Grishaver, E. A. Bailey, and D. F. King. 1998. California Gnatcatcher Territorial Behavior. W. Birds 29: 242-257.
Pulliam, H. R., and J. B. Dunning. 1997. DemographicProcesses: PopulationDynamics on Heterogeneous Landscapes. Pages 203- 232 in Meffe, G. K., and C. R. Carroll. 1997. Principles of Conservation Biology. Sinauer Assoc., Inc., Sunderland, MA.
RBR] RBRiggan and Associates. 200la. A Biological Assessment of Tentative Tract 28728 in the City of Riverside, California. Unpubl. rpt. prep. for Dr. Yang C. Hong. 30 October 2000, revised 15 August 2001.
RBR] RBRiggan and Associates. 200lb. An Assessment of the California Gnatcatcher on Tentative Tract 28728 in the City of Riverside, California. Unpubl. rpt. prep. for Dr. Yang C. Hong. 07 September 2001.
Riverside East. 1980. Riverside East, California 7. 5-minute topographicmap. Reston, VA: U. S. Geological Survey. Color, revised 1980, scale 1: 24,000.
page 9 - ,~
12- 570
RC zone to one story with a maximum height of 20'. Compliance with this limitation will assure that the residences constructed on the site will not result in significant aesthetic impacts within the surrounding neighborhood.
2. Create light or glare: The introduction of light sources typically associated with residential use to the Project area is not anticipated to result in a significant impact ( Initial Study, pg. 27). Any ancillary lighting shall be reviewed as part of the Design Review process ( Ibid). Tennis court lighting shall be hooded and directed downward and designedto avoid off- site light spillage (Ibid).
3. Affect a scenic vista or roadway: The Project does not contain any scenic roadways. The Design Review process, together with the provision in the RC zone limiting houses to one story, and a maximum of 20' in height, will ensure that the residences developed on TM 31930 will not affect scenic vistas ( Initial Study, pg. 28).
B. Air Quality
1. Create a CO hotspot, or expose individuals to CO concentrations above established standards: The Project is located in an area of the South Coast Air Quality Management District that is designated as attainment for CO.
Project traffic is not anticipated to result in a significant impact at intersections in the Project vicinity, resulting CO levels from Project traffic will not rise to a level of significance.
2. Expose Sensitive Receptors to Pollutants: The neighborhood surrounding the Project is zoned RC and contains lots an average of I- 2 acres in size.
The large lots prevent the transfer of air pollutants between the proposed project and the existing homes to the northeast. Sensitive receptors to the northeast of the Project may be exposedto an increase in PM10 during grading, however, compliance with the mitigation measures identified herein will reduce PM10 impacts to a less than significant level.
3. Create objectionable odors: This Project will not result in emission odors likely to be found objectionable by reasonablysensitive persons in nearby neighborhoods.
4. Be Subject to Transportation Demand Measures: This project will not result in any new employees and therefore, Transportation Demand Management requirementsdo not apply.
C. Biological Resources: The Project would not result in impacts to:
1. Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors:
space along the Alessandro Arroyo will provide wildlife opportunities. (IS., p. 21.)
The proposed open
corridor movement
2 12- 575
complete the 167. 5-acre residential tract previously envisioned when TM 23027 was approved in 1994.
I. Noise
1. Increase in existing noise levels: The Project does not involve uses, activities, or increased traffic levels that would result in an increase in ambient noise levels. ( IS., pg. 23.)
J. Population and Housing:
1. Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections: The area proposedfor residential developmentis already zoned Residential Conservation. A 7- acre portion is currently zoned Official Zone, and is proposed to be rezoned to Residential Conservation, however that area will be contained in an Open Space lot which is not proposed for development of any kind. The Project site is also consistent with the General Plan, and the growth projections contained therein.
2. Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly ( e. g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure). The Project involves in/ ill within a partially urbanized area, and will include the extension of the sewer line previously installed for the development of an earlier iteration of the Project, TM 28728-2, approved in 1998. The extension of the sewer line will serve the 29 lots contained in TM 31930 only and is not sized with adequatecapacity to serve other residential projects, or induce growth.
3. Eliminate existing housing, especially affordable housing: The Project will not result in the removal of any existing residences.
K. Public Services: TM 31930 will not have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:
1. Police Protection: The Project will result in an incremental additional demand for public services. However because the Project is consistent with the adopted General Plan, which provides for adequate public services, no significant adverse impacts will result from Project implementation.
2. Schools: The payment of school fees pursuant to state law requirements shall be required prior to project construction. Payment of the required fees will offset any impacts related to students transferring within the district or new students attending local schools.
3. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads: The Project will be conditioned to pay Traffic Uniform Mitigation Fee and Transportation Fees in the amount required by City ordinance. The payment of these fees will reduce impactsrelated to maintenance of public facilities to a level of less than significant. 12- 579
surrounding vicinity by connecting Century Drive to the east, and Crest Haven Drive, to thenorth. ( IS.,p. 17.)
5. Insufficient parking capacity on- site or off- site: Each lot in TM 31930 will be requiredto designateparking facilities that comply with City standards during the design review process required for each residence. ( CF, MC § 19. 09.090.)
6. Hazards of barriers for pedestrians of bicyclists: TM 31930 will be a private gated community accessible to residents and invited guests only. The gates at thc Project entrance at thc top of Crest Haven Drive and Century Hills Drive will be equippedwith a keypad, which can be used, by pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists to gain access to the Project. (IS., p. 17.)
7. Conflicts with Adopted Policies Supporting Alternative Transportation ( e. g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks): Thc Project consists of 29 residences and no business uses. The Project docs not conflict with adoptedpolicies supporting alternative transportation, but because the Project consists of residences only, no measures promoting alternative transportation are required. (IS., p. 17.) N. Utilities and Service Systems: The Project will not result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
1. ' Power or Natural Gas, and Communication Systems: The Project will result in an incremental additional demand for utilities. However, the Project is consistent with the General Plan, which provides, in conjunction with the City's Capital improvement Program, for the adequateprovision of infrastructure and utility services. Therefore, no impacts with regard to infrastructure or services will result from the Project.
2. ( a) Local or Regional Water Treatment or Distribution Facilities, ( b) Storm Water Drainage, ( c) Solid Waste Disposal, ( d) Local or Regional Water Supplies: The Public Utilities Department indicated a concern regarding the proposed private street system relative to the installation and maintenance of water lines and the provision of water to the subdivision. To address these concerns, conditions of approval have been imposed by the City Water Department.
3. Sewer or Septic Tanks: The Project will require the installation ora new sewer line and access road. The sewer line shall be subject to the specifications and approvalof e Public Works Department to ensure that it is constructed consistent with City requirements.
O. Water:
1. Exposure of People or Property to Water Related Hazards such as Flooding: The proposed Project will not result in a significant impact related to flooding. No development is proposed within thc 100-year flood plain and, therefore, thc 12- 581
Wash truck wheels before the trucks leave the construction site.
When operating on site, do not leave trucks idling for periods in excess of 10 minutes.
Operate clean fuel van(s), preferably vans that run on compressed natural gas or propane, to transport construction workers to and from the construction site.
Provide documentation to the County of Riverside prior to beginning construction demonstrating that the project proponents will comply with all SCAQMD regulationsincluding402, 403, 2224, and 1403.
Suspend use of all construction equipment operations during second stage smog alerts. For daily forecast, call ( 800) 367- 4710 ( San Bemardino and Riverside counties).
All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properlyserviced and maintained.
Grading
Apply nontoxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications to all inactive construction areas ( previously gradedareas inactive for 10 daysor more).
Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply nontoxic soil binders, according to manufacturers' specifications, to exposed piles ( i. e., gravel, sand, dirt) with 5 percent or greater silt content.
Water active sites at least twice daily.
Suspendall excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph.
Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials on site or maintain at least two feet of freeboard ( i. e., minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of CDC Section 23114.
Cover all trucks hauling these materials off site.
Finish grading area - up to once every two hours.
Paved Roads
Sweep streets at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent publicpavedroad ( water sweepers with reclaimed water are recommended).
Sweep public streets at the conclusion of construction work.
Install adequatestorm water control systems to prevent mud deposition onto paved areas.
Unpaved Roads
Apply water two times daily or nontoxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specificationsto all unpavedparking or staging areas or unpavedroad surfaces.
Roads Traveled by autos, rock trucks, water trucks, fuel trucks, and maintenance trucks - up to twice per hour.
Roads traveled by scrapers and graders; active excavation area - up to twice per hour.
12 12- 585
Additional Mitigation Measures:
i) To reduce fugitive dust by up to 65%:
Regular watering, at least three times a day, of construction site including all unpaved parking or stagingareas or unpaved road surfaces shall be utilized in order to reduce the fugitive dust generatedduring grading and construction operations.
Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
Appoint a construction relation's officer to act as a community liaison concerning on- site construction activity, including resolution of issues related to PM10 generation.
ii) To Further Reduce Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx):
Ambient background concentrations of NOx have been well below the state and federal standard since 1999. The residential developmentproposed by TM 31930 was included in the General Plan, and for that reason has been taken into consideration in the preparation of the South Coast Air Quality Management district's air Quality Management Plan. Therefore, the emissions generated during construction will not delay the attainment of the ambient air quality standards.
Implementing these mitigation measures is feasible and the Commission adopts and incorporatesthese measures into the Project.
Supporting Explanation: The mitigation measures identified above will reduce air quality impacts related to construction grading to a less than significant level. Air quality emissions from the operation of grading equipment will be reduced by prohibiting trucks from idling of more than 10 minutes, phasing the grading equipment, using low emissions fuel, suspending grading during second stage smog alerts, maintaining all construction equipment in good operating condition, and complying with the SCAQMD rules 402, 403, 2224, and 1403. Watering the construction site twice per day reduces the fugitive dust emissions by 50%. By increasingthe schedule for watering the construction site to three times per day, impacts from fugitive dust will be reduced by 65%. The increase in watering will reduce daily construction impacts from dust to 129 pounds or less per day, which is below the SCAQMD daily construction threshold. ( Memo from LSA, dated July 30, 2004, p. 2.) Impacts from NOx will be reduced through compliance with the mitigation measures for construction equipment identified above. In the July 30' 2004 memo, LSA states that because background concentrations of NOx have not exceeded the State 0. 25 parts per million one- hour standard or the federal 0. 053 ppm annual average standard in the past five years, no new exceedances of the NOx ambient air quality standards are anticipated. Also, because TM 31930 is consistent with the General Plan, the development of 29 residences on the subject property was taken into consideration in the preparation of the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan.
Because the development of TM 31930 was considered in the Air Quality Management Plan, NOx emissions generated during construction will not delay the attainment of the 13 12- 586
Habitat Conservation Plan Assessment Area will mitigate impacts resulting from the loss of low- density, occupied SKR habitat. As a result, impacts to biological resources will be reduced to less than significant. ( IS., pgs. 19 and 20.) 2) Potentially Significant Impact: The Project site is located in an area which contains a moderate potential to contain the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, a special status species. No sensitive plant communities occur on the project site.
Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce potential impacts to sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans or listings maintained by the California Department of Fish and Game to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure:
No. 15 The project site is located within the Riverside County SKR Habitat Conservation Plan Fee Assessment Area, and therefore subject to current fee requirements as administered by the City of Riverside.
Implementing this mitigation measure is feasible, and the Commission adoptsand incorporates this measure into the Project.
Supporting Explanation: This mitigation measure will reduce impacts to a level of less than significant because pursuant to the City's Habitat Conservation Plan, the payment of this per- acre fee is appropriate to mitigate the loss of occupied habitat. The fee will be applied to the purchaseof occupied habitat for the SKR, and therefore, will reduce impacts resulting from the loss of habitat occupied by the SKR to a level of less than significant.
3) Potentially Significant Impact: The loss of locally important natural communities ( i. e. sage scrub) consisting of ( i) about 31.8 acres of non- native grassland,
2.9 acres of moderate quality RSS and 2. 6-acres o£ 1ow quality RSS within the designated Gnatcatcher Critical Habitat Area, and ( ii) the loss of about 46 acre of low density, occupied habitat of the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat.
Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level:
Mitigation Measures:
8) A three-year maintenance and monitoring plan will be required to ensure the successful establishment of the native cover within the mitigation area.
Riparian vegetation will be installed within the mitigation site consisting of native grasses.
15 12- 588
10) The project site is located within the Riverside County SKR Habitat Conservation Plan Fee Assessment Area; and therefore, is subject to current fee requirementsas administered by the City of Riverside. 16) The applicant shall prepare a Coastal Sage Scrub and riparian enhancement plan subject to review and approval by the Planning Department prior to grading permit issuance.
21) The applicant shall comply with the long term SKR Habitat Conservation Plan ("HCP") and the City's policies for implementing the HCP.
Implementing these mitigation measures is feasible and the Commission adopts and incorporatesthese measures into the Project.
Supporting Explanation: The mitigation measures will reduce impacts to locally important natural communities to a level of less than significant because the Coastal Sage Scrub and riparian enhancement plan, combined with the three-year maintenance and monitoring plan will ensure that the RSS will thrive. The payment of the fee required for impacts to the SKR HCP Assessment , axea, and compliance with the long term SKR HCP will ensure that impacts to the low densityoccupied SKR habitat are mitigated to a less than significant. (IS., p. 21 .)
4) Potential Significant Impacts: The loss of wetland habitats ( e.g. riparian and vernal pool) including approximately . 028 acres ( 370 linear feet) of USACE and 077 acres of CDFG jurisdictional waters.
Finding: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to wetland habitats to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
No. 1 Expansion of the unnamed drainage feature immediately downstream of the road crossing and adjacent to the proposed upland water quality bio- swale. It is anticipated that the bio- swale will provide sufficient hydrology to support riparian vegetation. The mitigation site will be 0. 077-acres and contain a minimum lf0. 028 acres created waters of the U. S.
No. 2: Riparian vegetation will be installed within the mitigationsite consisting of native grasses.
No. 3: A three-year maintenance and monitoring plan is proposed to ensure the successful establishment of the native cover within the mitigation area.
Implementing these mitigation measures is feasible and the Commission adopts and incorporates these measures into the Project.
16 12- 589