August
2022
❖ FINDINGS
❖
Figure 4.3-3
SURVEYED SLOPE ON NORTH SIDE OF CALLE CRISTINA;
VIEW TO THE EAST
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ FINDINGS
❖
Figure 4.3-4
SURVEYED SLOPE ON SOUTH SIDE OF CALLE CRISTINA; VIEW TO
THE SOUTHEAST
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
10 August
2022
❖ FINDINGS
❖
Figure 4.3-5
EAST COVINA HILLS ROAD; VIEW TO
THE EAST
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
11 August
2022
❖ FINDINGS
❖
4.4 National Register of Historic
Places
A search of the Built Environmental Resource Directory provided by the Office of Historic
Preservation (2022) was conducted for this project on August 12, 2022. It was determined that the
project area and the half-mile radius does not have any resources present that have been evaluated
under the National Register (Built Environmental Resource Directory). 7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources 12
Inventory
August
2022
❖ MANAGEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS ❖
5.0 5.1
MANAGEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS
Site Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation of significance under CEQA uses criteria found in eligibility descriptions from the CRHR.
Generally, a resource is to be considered historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing in
the California Register [Public Resources Code § 5024.1; California Code of Regulations
§ 15064.5(a)(3)]. These criteria provide that a resource may be listed as potentially significant if it:
• Is associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of California history and cultural heritage.
•
•
Is associated with the lives of persons important
in our past.
Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction,
or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses • high artistic value. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
5.2 Potential
Effects
No listed cultural resources will be adversely affected by the project. However, the presence of buried
cultural (prehistoric and/or historic archaeological) resources cannot be ruled out. If prehistoric
and/or historic artifacts are observed during subsurface excavation during future residential
construction resulting from the MCTA amendment changes, work should be stopped in that area and
a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor should be on call to assess the finds.
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS ❖
6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
No prehistoric or historic archaeologic resources were identified in the SCCIC record literature
search in the project site. One prehistoric era resource, a small village or at least seasonal occupation
(19-000230) was identified within the half mile radius of the project area.
The NAHC noted the
presence of an SLF site in the project area, however the tribal organization contacted concerning this
site did not provide information on its identity or location. No cultural resources were observed
during the pedestrian survey.
There have been three Native American tribal group responses received to date.
Both the Gabrieleno/
Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians indicated that
there are known sites near the project area, near Cal-Poly Pomona campus and Bonelli Park and
expressed concerns about the project site. The Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission
Indians recommend tribal and archaeological monitoring. The Gabrielino Tongva Indians of
California Tribal Council deferred comments to other tribes. (See Section 4.2 and Attachment C.)
The cultural resources study findings suggest that there is a low potential for the presence of
prehistoric cultural resources.
The project consists of approval of the MCTA that will expand the allowable grading (cut and fill) on
each of the 36 residential lots in the project site – see Section 1.1 for further details. As each resident
decides to construct a new patio or other usable space in the expanded area, they are required to
obtain approval from the City and have planning and design plan review and approval. These are
also requirements for construction of new residences on the currently empty lots.
Given the presence of a prehistoric camp site within the project area, the concerns expressed by the
local Native American tribes for the presence of cultural resources in the project area, and that lack
of access prevented field survey of all the project site, the following recommendations are presented.
At a minimum, if prehistoric and/or historic items are observed during subsurface activities, work
should be stopped in that area and a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor should be
called to assess the findings and retrieve the material. A Cultural Resources Work Plan would be
prepared by the qualified archaeologist and implemented that may include archaeological and Native
American monitoring as needed.
Also, prior to the commencement of grading or excavation, workers conducting construction
activities and their foremen should receive Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP)
training from a qualified archaeologist regarding the potential for sensitive archaeological and
paleontological resources to be unearthed during grading activities.
If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with future development resulting
from the Specific Plan amendment, work will halt in that area and the Los Angeles County Coroner
will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The Coroner will determine whether the
remains are of recent human origin or older Native American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of
the supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, they will contact the
NAHC. The NAHC will be responsible for designating the most likely descendant (MLD), who will
make recommendations as to the manner for handling these remains and further provide for the
disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.
Following notification by the NAHC, the MLD will make these recommendations within 48 hours of
having access to the project site following notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS ❖
include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with
Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). 7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ REFERENCES
❖
7.0 REFERENC
ES
Bean, Lowell John, and Charles
R. Smith 1978a Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, William C.
Sturtevant, general editor,
vol. 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 538-549. Smithsonian Institution,
1978b Serrano. In Handbook of North American Indians, William C. Washington, DC.
Sturtevant, general editor,
vol. 8, California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 570-574.
Smithsonian Institution,
Brown, Alan K. (editor) Washington, DC.
2001 A Description of Distant Roads: Original Journals of the First Expedition into California 1769-
1770, by Juan Crespí. San Diego State University Press, San Diego, Chaffey California.
College 2022 The Tongva People ESL-650-20256.
https://canvas.chaffey.edu/courses/23123/pages/thetongva-people. Accessed July 15, 2022.
Chartkoff, Joseph L., and Kerry Kona Chartkoff
1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
Coy, Owen
C. 1923 California County Boundaries. Berkeley. California Historical Commission. https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/hornbeck_usa_3_d/77/.
Accessed June 6, 2022.
Dibblee, Thomas
W., Jr. 2002 Geologic Map of the San Dimas and Ontario Quadrangles, Los Angeles and San Bernardino
Counties. Dibblee Geological Foundation Map #DF-91. The Dibblee Foundation, Santa
Dillon, Brian Barbara, California.
D. 1982 An Archaeological Resource Survey and Impact Assessment of Tract No. 40519 in the City of
Covina, Los Angeles County, California. (LA-001137.) On file, South Central Coastal
Dumke, Glenn Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.
S. 1944 The Boom of the Eighties. Huntington Library, San Marino, California.
Eberhart,
Hal 1961 Archaeological Survey Report; Lan-230. (19-000230.) On file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.
Engelhardt, Zephyrin, O.F.M.
1931 San Gabriel Mission and the Beginnings of Los Angeles. Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago.
Glauthier,
Martha. 1997 The History of San Dimas, California. The San Dimas Historical Society, San Dimas, California
.
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ REFERENCES
❖
Golla,
Victor 2011 California Indian Languages. University of California Press, Berkeley. Guinn, James
Miller. 1915 A history of California and an extended history of Los Angeles and environs Company, Los . Historic Record
Angeles.
Howard, W. J., and L. M. Raab
1993 Olivella Grooved Rectangle Beads as Evidence of an Early Period Southern California Channel Island Interaction Sphere. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 29(3):1-11.
Hoyt,
Franklyn. 1951 The Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley Railroad. Pacific Historical Review 20 (August).
Kroeber,
Alfred 1925 Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin Washington, No. 78,
D.C.
McCawley,
William 1996 The First Angelinos: The Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum Press, Banning, California/Ballena Press, Novato, California.
Meighan, C.
W. 1954 A Late Complex in Southern California Prehistory. Southwest Journal of Anthropology 10(2):215-
227.
Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press,
Orlando, Florida.
NETR
Online 2022 Aerial photographs of the project vicinity, taken in 1948, 1953, 1964, 1965,1966,1972,
1978, 1980, 1985, 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002,
2003, 2004,2005, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018. http://www.historicaerials.com.
Accessed August 15, 2022.
Ogden,
Hoffman. 1862 Reports of Land Cases Determined in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Numa Hubert, San Francisco.
Porcasi, Judith
F. 1998 Middle Holocene Ceramic Technology on the Southern California Coast:
New Evidence from
Little Harbor, Santa Catalina Island. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology
Rice, Glenn 20:270-284.
E. 1976 An Archaeological Survey in the San Jose Hills, Los Angeles County. (LA-00214.) On file, South Central Coastal Information Center, California State University, Fullerton.
San Dimas Chamber of
Commerce
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ REFERENCES
❖
2007 A Brief History of San Dimas. California Historic Route 66 Association. Archived from the original on July 3,
2008.
Spitzzeri, Paul
R. 2007 What a Difference a Decade Makes: Ethnic and Racial Demographic Change in Los Angeles
County during the 1860s. The Branding Iron. Fall 2007.
True, Delbert
L. 1958 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity 23(3):255-263.
1970 Investigations of a Late Prehistoric Complex in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San Diego
County, California. Archaeological Survey Monographs 1. University of California, Los
United States Census Angeles.
Bureau 2022 Quick Facts, San Dimas city, California.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sandimascitycalifo rnia/PST045221.
Accessed June 6, 2022.
USGS (United States Geological Survey, U.S. Department
of the Interior)
1897 San Dimas, Calif. 7.5’, USGS Quadrangle map.
1956 San Dimas, Calif. 7.5’, USGS
Quadrangle map.
1965 San Dimas, Calif. 7.5’, USGS
Quadrangle map.
1963 San Dimas, Calif. 7.5’, USGS
Quadrangle map.
1967 San Dimas, Calif. 7.5’, USGS
Quadrangle map.
Wallace,
William J. 1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology.
Southwestern Journal of Archaeology
11(3):214-230.
1978 Post-Pleistocene Archeology, 9,000 to 2,000 BC. In Robert F. Heizer (ed.), Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8: California; pp. 25-36. Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
D.C.
Warren, Claude
N. 1968 Cultural Traditions and Ecological Adaptations on the Southern California Coast. In Cynthia
Irwin-Williams (ed.), Archaic Prehistory in Western United State, pp. 1-
14. Eastern New
Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3). Portales, New Mexico.
1984 The Desert Region. In Michael J. Moratto (ed.), California Archaeology Academic Press, Orlando, , pp. 339-430.
Florida.
Warren, Claude N., and Robert H.
Crabtree 1986 Prehistory of the Southwestern Area. In Warren L. D'Azevedo (ed.), Handbook of North
American Indians, Vol. 11: Great Basin, pp. 183-193. Smithsonian Institution, Washington,
D.C. 7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
ATTACHMEN
TS
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
ATTACHMEN
T A
PROJECT
MAPS
7145/San Dimas MCTA
Project Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖
ATTACHMENTS❖
Figure 1
PROJECT REGIONAL
LOCATION MAP
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment A,
August
2022
❖
ATTACHMENTS❖
Figure 2
PROJECT STUDY
AREA
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment A,
August
2022
❖
ATTACHMENTS❖
Figure 3
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP WITH APE SHOWN AND HALF-MILE
BUFFER ZONE
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment A,
August
2022
❖
ATTACHMENTS❖
ATTACHMEN
T B PERSONNEL
BACKGROUND
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA
Cultural Resources Manager, Cultural
Anthropology/Archaeology
Educatio
n
▪
▪
M.A., Anthropology (Ethnography emphasis), California State University, Fullerton, CA, 2002
B.A., Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach, CA, 1979 Professional and Institutional
Affiliations
▪
▪
▪
▪
▪
California Mission Studies
Association City of Laguna Beach Environmental Sustainability Committee, appointed 2012
Orange County Natural History Museum; Board Member
Pacific Coast Archaeological Society; Board Member and Past President
Professional Registrations and Society for California Archaeology Licenses
▪
▪
▪
▪
Register of Professional Archaeologists (No.
16104) (current) Riverside County, CA, Cultural Resource Consultant (No. 259) (current) Cultural Resource Field Director, BLM Permit (CA-13-19) – California, 2013 NEPA and CEQ Consultation for Environmental Professionals; course by the National Association of
Environmental Professionals, 2013
Professional
Experience
Mr. O'Neil has 30 years of experience as a cultural anthropologist in California.
He has researched
and written on archaeology, ethnography, and history. Mr. O'Neil has archaeological experience in
excavation, survey, monitoring, and lab work. Most of this has been on Native American prehistoric
sites, but also includes Spanish, Mexican, and American period adobe sites. His supervisory
experience includes excavation and survey crew chief and project director of an adobe house
excavation. He has a wide range of expertise in Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessments,
archaeological resource assessment surveys, salvage operations, and cultural background studies
for various EIR projects. Mr. O'Neil has worked for cultural resource management firms as well as
government agencies and Native American entities. He has prepared technical reports as well as
published journal articles.
Select project
experience
Inglewood Avenue Corridor Widening Project, City of Lawndale, Los Angeles County, CA: 2013-
2014
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. The City of Lawndale is widening
Inglewood Avenue from Marine Avenue north. The project uses Caltrans funds and the cultural
resources report was prepared in Caltrans format. A separate historic properties report was
prepared as well. Prepared for Huitt-Zollars Engineering.
Via Ballena Storm Drain Relocation, City of San Clemente, Orange County, CA: 2013
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. This residential area has a damaged
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment B,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
storm drain under Via Ballena that was causing earth movement and erosion.
The requirements for
state funding, and cultural resources inventory report was required. Prepared for the City of
San Clemente. Pine Canyon Road – Three Points Road to Lake Hughes Road, Los Angeles County, CA: 2013
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological field survey, cultural resource records search,
Native American contacts and report writing for this project. This nine-mile portion of Pine Canyon
Road lies partially within the Angeles National Forest. A series of widening and culvert repairs is
planned by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). An assessment was
made of possible cultural resources, historic and prehistoric that may be affected by the
construction, and four historic sites were recorded. Prepared for LACDPW.
Alton Parkway Extension Project, Cities of Irvine and Lake Forest, Orange County, CA: 2012
Mr. O’Neil directed and conducted archaeological and paleontological monitoring, archaeological
excavation, cultural resource records search, Native American contacts and report writing for this
project. Alton Parkway was extended 2.1 miles between the cities of Irvine and Lake Forest. For the
portion within the City of Irvine, UltraSystems conducted monitoring and excavation services. One
prehistoric site was excavated and reported on; a series of living features were discovered and also
reported. The final monitoring report described the paleontological and archaeological findings. A
separate technical report on the archaeological excavations was also prepared.
Mr. O’Neil directed
research into historic and prehistoric background and prepared the final assessment of potential
impacts. Prepared for the Orange County Department of Public Works.
NEPA and CEQA Documentation, Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System
(LA-RICS), Los Angeles County, CA: 2011-2014 Mr. O’Neil is part of the UltraSystems team currently preparing technical studies and NEPA and
CEQA documentation toward the construction of LA-RICS, an $800-million emergency
communications system due to be operational in 2016. LA-RICS will provide a highly-coordinated
emergency communications system to all first responders to natural and manmade disasters throughout Los Angeles County. Mr. O’Neil is the cultural and historical resources studies team
leader, directing five researchers. These studies include coordination of field visits to all 260-plus
locations for an archaeologist and/or an architectural historian with agency escorts to observe and
record any onsite prehistoric and historic features, performing records and literature searches at
archaeology information centers and local archives, contacting local agencies for historically listed
structures and districts, coordinate public notices of the project throughout Los Angeles County,
consultation with the NAHC and all local tribal organizations, and direct consultation with the
California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). This information was compiled by Mr. O’Neil
and is used to prepare FCC historical resource forms which were submitted to the SHPO for review.
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment B,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
Megan B. Doukakis,
M.A.
Archaeological
Technician Educatio
n
▪
▪
▪
▪
M.A. Public Archaeology, California State University, Northridge, 2012–2018 B.A., Anthropology, California State University, Long Beach, 2011 University of California, Los Angeles - Pimu Catalina Archaeological Field School, 2010
International Scholar Laureate Program: Delegation on Anthropology and Archaeology in China,
2009
▪ Earthwatch Institute, “Unearthing Mallorca’s Past” archaeological excavation, Mallorca, Spain, 2005
Professional and Institutional
Affiliations
▪
▪
▪
Phi Kappa Phi National Honor Society, 2011
Sigma Alpha Lambda, National Leadership and Honor
Organization, 2010
Society for California Archaeology Membership 2012–
Professional 2015
Experience
Mrs. Doukakis has worked in the field of cultural resource management for seven years at
environmental firms. Before this Mrs. Doukakis had participated in multiple field schools in
Southern California and abroad. She has experience in survey, excavation, laboratory work, and
information searches. Mrs. Doukakis holds the title of Archaeological Technician at UltraSystems
Environmental. Prior to this, she completed a CRM internship at UltraSystems.
These positions have
provided her with the opportunity to contribute to proposals, final reports, project scheduling,
archaeological record searches and paleontological, archaeological and Native American monitor
organizing for projects.
Select project
experience
Results of the Condition Assessment, Site Monitoring, and Effects Treatment Plan (CASMET)
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, CA
Client: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Duration: 5/11 to 9/11 Mrs. Doukakis conducted survey and excavation for the USMC Base Camp Pendleton condition
assessment project. Areas were tested around Camp Pendleton for the presence and condition of
cultural material previously recorded. She also conducted laboratory work and curation for the
material collected within excavations. Mrs. Doukakis contributed to the final report with
background records searches and prehistoric and historic background writing for the report.
Archaeological Excavation Results Report for the Alton Parkway Extension Project, Orange
County, CA
Client: Orange County Department of Public Works; Contract: $357,170, 10/10 to 6/12 Mrs. Doukakis participated in the Alton Parkway project, City of Irvine, Orange County, CA. She was
responsible for cleaning and cataloging the artifacts recovered from the excavation and surface
collections. She also contributed to the final report by compiling the historical background
information.
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment B,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
Identification and Evaluation of Historic Properties ADA Wheelchair Access Ramp
Improvement Project, City of Lake Forest, Orange County, CA Client: City of Lake Forest/Penco, Contract: $2,981.62, Duration: 6/12 to 7/12 Mrs. Doukakis contributed to the cultural resource records search, field survey, Native American contacts and report writing for this project. This residential area required wheelchair access ramps
on every corner in this neighborhood. An assessment of the possible cultural resources that may be
affected with this construction was made for the City of Lake Forest. Mrs.
Doukakis contributed the
historic and prehistoric background, and the assessment of the possible resources in the area.
Tenaska Solar Projects Imperial Solar Energy Center–South; Imperial Solar Energy Center–
West; and Wistaria Ranch, Imperial County, CA
Client: Tenaska/CSOLAR Development, Contract: $3,441,809, 10/13 to 8/15. Mrs. Doukakis conducted Native American contacts for field monitoring, coordinated with
subcontractors to initiate cultural and paleontological field surveys, for the several solar energy
projects being handled by UltraSystems Environmental in the El Centro area, Imperial County, CA.
She contributed different parts of the survey report and monitoring program documents, including
historic and prehistoric background, editorial review. At ISEC- West, Mrs.
Doukakis was responsible
for contacting and organizing Tribal monitors for this project. She contacted tribal organizations
and inquired about their interest in providing tribal monitors for this project. directly organized
with Native American groups to sign agreements, and fill out tax paperwork.
She was also
responsible for organizing and keeping track of and gathering field log from monitors from six
tribal groups. She also recovered previously recorded artifacts in the field before the start of the
project.
NEPA and CEQA Documentation, Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications
System -Long Term Evolution, Los Angeles County, CA
Client: LARICS Joint Powers Authority, Contract: $3,051,312, 1/12 to 1/15. UltraSystems’ team prepared technical studies and NEPA and CEQA documentation toward the
construction of LA-RICS-LTE, an $800-million emergency communications system that will provide
a highly coordinated emergency communications system to all first-responders to natural and
man-made disasters throughout Los Angeles County. For this project Mrs.
Doukakis conducted
record searches at the South Central Coastal Information Center for the Department of Commerce
on over 300 project sites throughout the County of Los Angeles. She helped prepare letters to the
NAHC and tribal organizations associated with the project area. Mrs. Doukakis contributed to
contacting, organizing, and scheduling architectural historians to conduct historical research
around the project areas. Letters were written for contact to local agencies and cities. A public
notice was constructed and published in three local newspapers. Mrs.
Doukakis also constructed
hundreds of Federal Communications Commission 620 and 621 forms for submission to California
State Historic Preservation Office.
Newton Canyon Monitoring Project, CA
Client: County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Contract: $2,930.00, Duration: 7/13 to 12/13 Mrs. Doukakis was an archaeological monitor for this project. She monitored all ground disturbing
activities as well as lightly surveying the area for cultural material. Mrs.
Doukakis also conducted
the records center research at the South Central Coastal Information Center at CSUF. Through
email, letter, and telephone correspondence, Mrs. Doukakis contacted the NAHC and associated
tribal groups.
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment B,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
ATTACHMEN
T C NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE
COMMISSION
RECORDS SEARCH
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C,
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
10 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
11 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
12 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
13 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
14 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
San Dimas MCTA Project, San Dimas,
Los Angeles
County, California. [UEI # 7145] Native American
Contact Log
Tribe/
Affiliatio
n
Letter
Contact
s
E-mail
Contact
s
Telephon
e
Contact
Name Comment
s
Andrew Green,
Native
February
28 2021;
April 15,
2022
May 17,
2021
N/A Request for Sacred Lands File
search
and local Native American
representatives contact
information.
Cultural
Resource
American
Heritage
Analyst
Andrew
Salas,
Chairperson
Commissio
n
Gabrieleno
Band of
May 17,
2021
July 22,
2022
Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. There was no answer,
and a
message was left. There has been
no
response to date.
Mission
Indians -
Kiz
h Nation
Anthony
Morales,
Chairperso
n
Gabrieleno/
Tongva San
Gabriel
Band
of Mission
Indians
May 17,
2021
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. Mr. Morales indicated
that the
footprint of the SR-57 and I-10
Freeway
is sensitive to the tribe. There
are sites
at Cal-Poly Pomona and Bonelli
Park.
They recommend tribal and
archaeological monitoring
using their
Charles tribe.
Alvarez,
Councilmemb
e
r
Gabrielino -
Tongva Tribe
2021
May 17, May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. An automatic
delivery
failure email was received on the
same
day. Phone call was made July
22, 2022.
There was no answer, and the
mailbox
was full. No message could be
left.
There has been no response to
date.
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. There was no answer
and a
message was left. Ms. Conley
called
back and left a message
indicating that
the tribe has no comment on the
project
and will leave any comments to
their
sister tribes. .
Robert
Dorame,
Chairperso
n
Gabrielin
o
Tongva
Indians of
California
Tribal
May 17,
2021
May 17,
2021
Council
Christina
Conley, Tribal
Consultant and
Indians of
Administrator
Gabrielin
o
Tongva
May 17,
2021
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. There was no answer
and a
message was left. Ms. Conley
called
back and left a message
indicating that
the tribe has no comment on the
project
California
Tribal
Council
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
15 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
Tribe/
Affiliatio
n
Letter
Contact
s
E-mail
Contact
s
Telephon
e
Contact
Name Comment
s
and will leave any comments
to their
sister tribes. .
Sandonne
Goad,
Chairperso
n
Gabrielin
o
/Tongva
Nation
May 17,
2021
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. There was no answer,
and a
message was left. There has been
no
response to date.
Lovina Redner, Santa Rosa
May 17,
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. There was no answer,
and
there was no voicemail available.
No
message could be left. There has
been
no response to date.
Tribal
Chair
Band of 2021
Cahuilla
Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Soboba Band
May 17,
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. Mr. Ontiveros
indicated that
there are resources in the area
that
have Place names, including sites
at
Bonelli Park and Cal Poly
Pomona
campus. The tribe would defer
any
comments to Chairman Anthony
Chairperso
n
of
Luiseno
Indians
2021
Morales of the San Gabriel
Band of
Joseph Mission Indians.
Ontiveros,
Cultural
Resource
Departmen
t
Soboba Band May
17,
May 17,
2021
July 22, 2022 Letter and email describing
project and
requesting input on concerns
was sent
May 17, 2022. Phone call was
made July
22, 2022. Mr. Ontiveros
indicated that
there are resources in the area
that
have place names, including sites
at
Bonelli Park and Cal-Poly
Pomona
campus. The tribe would defer
any
comments to Chairman Anthony
of
Luiseno
Indians
2021
Morales of the San Gabriel
Band of
Mission Indians.
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment C, Page
16 August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
ATTACHMENT D
CHRIS RECORDS SEARCH
BIBLIOGRAPHY
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
August
2022
❖ ATTACHMENTS
❖
7145/San Dimas MCTA Project
Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory
Attachment E,
August
2022
❖ APPENDICES
❖
APPENDIX
E
FUEL CONSUMPTION
ANALYSIS
EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions
Inventory
Region Type:
Region:
South Coast Air
Basin
Los Angeles County
2024
Calendar Year:
Vehicle
Classification:
EMFAC2007
Categories Los Angeles County
value:
Project value:
93,671,496,15
7 1,147,401
VMT/Year
VMT/Year
County Fuel
Consumption
1000
Project Fuel Consumption
(gal/yr) Vehicle
Class
Fuel
Type Project VMT County VMT gallons/year Total
21,439
3,020
9,090
7,518
1,748
489
Gasoline
21,408
3,019
9,067
7,445
1,309
236
Diesel
31 gallons/year
1611912.31
6 2327.61037
4 166721.524
7 36.8564322
3 963726.998
6 2407.99996
5 661802.286
7 6476.74018
2 121844.048
5 40887.1981
1 20050.5748
8 21500.9213
2 51731.5674
4 90738.7335
7 239.403781
2 353542.717
9 9706.98181
5 7208.97883
4 2208.41210
4 319.848708
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
GAS
GAS
DSL
GAS
DSL
1611912315.8
4 2327610.37
166721524.6
8 36856.43
4677134085
5 93785850.8
2 4038098956
850865.213
8 2288236459
2 75858778.9
2 1279084564
4 152691946.
9 1646057474
836838983.
6 236565986.
2 370815358.
5 266806703.
8 808797477.
5 970620.533
4 2138217940
48870040.7
9 49722688.4
LDA
LDT1
LDT2
MDV
622424.278
5 1
7.31E+04
963726998.6
1 2407999.97
661802286.7
2 6476740.18
121844048.5
1 40887198.1
1 20050574.8
8 21500921.3
2 51731567.4
4 90738733.5
7 239403.78
353542717.9
4 9706981.82
7208978.83
2208412.10
319848.71
23 215988.099
9 145604.166
4 26675.9491
7158.64107
8 12296.7072
3 9269.86075
8 1059.05204
6 73
LHDT1
LHDT2
MHDT
HHDT
OBUS
439
253
1,037
1,532
77 1,628
1,533
181
591
1 104
10131910.2
8 2043363.74
8 344477993.
3 21534384.5
1 13158807.9
1 51318722.2
UBUS
MCY
144
650
97 126
650
56 18
0 693.030808
28449.8325
9 8357.05460
5 2395.94281
8 1785.74611
4 10594.7716
4 1937.10633
6 8357054.61
2395942.82
1785746.11
10594771.64
1937106.34
Project Totals
SBUS 41 805.47620
4 MH 682 577 105 3846.09150
4 1,147,401
19330213.56
93,671,496,15
7 48,219 44,589 3,630
Notes: Onroad Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption calculated by UltraSystems using EMFAC2021(v1.0.2) emissions inventory web platform tool (ARB, 2022)
and CalEEMod (2020.4.0) (CAPCOA, 2022).
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: County
Region: Los Angeles
Calendar Year: 2024
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories
Units: miles/year for CVMT and EVMT, trips/year for Trips, kWh/year for Energy Consumption, tons/year for Emissions,
1000 gallons/year for Fuel Consumption
Region Calendar YeVehicle
CatModel Year
Speed Fuel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Diesel
Population Total
VMT
Fuel Consumption
239.403781
2 353542.717
9 1611912.31
6 2327.61037
4 166721.524
7 36.8564322
3 963726.998
6 2407.99996
5 121844.048
5 40887.1981
1 20050.5748
8 21500.9213
2 8357.05460
5 661802.286
7 6476.74018
2 10594.7716
4 1937.10633
6 51731.5674
4 90738.7335
7 9706.98181
5 7208.97883
4 2395.94281
8 1785.74611
4 2208.41210
4 319.84870
8 Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
Los
Angeles
2024
HHDT
2024
HHDT
2024 LDA
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
Aggregat
e
43.6959
53754.41
3388823
9079.361
318252.8
122.4469
1590817
5015.834
126446.9
57966.32
19310.4
970620.533
4213821794
0 4677134085
5 93785850.8
2 403809895
6 850865.213
8 2288236459
2 75858778.9
2 164605747
4 836838983.
6 236565986.
2 370815358.
5 344477993.
3 1279084564
4 152691946.
9 51318722.
2 2024 LDA
2024 LDT1
2024 LDT1
2024 LDT2
2024 LDT2
2024
LHDT1
2024
LHDT1
2024
LHDT2
2024
LHDT2
2024 MCY
2024 MDV
2024 MDV
2024 MH
26105.21
150984
961865.5
11173.42
15893.53
5642.202
14868.36
60973.56
3744.202
2141.033
1423.941
1963.212
437.5652
38.73107
2024 MH 19330213.5
6 266806703.
8 808797477.
5 48870040.7
9 49722688.
4 2024
MHDT
2024
MHDT
2024 OBUS
2024 OBUS
2024 SBUS
2024 SBUS
2024 UBUS
2024 UBUS
21534384.5
1 13158807.9
1 10131910.2
8 2043363.74
8 9367149615
7 Gasoline
Diesel
4160462.34
1
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
Emissions
Inventory
This tool provides emissions from onroad and oꢀroad mobile sources in California.
Please note that emissions extracted from this web tool are exactly the same as those
provided by EMFAC2021 soꢁware. Output
Onroad
Emissions
Onroad Emission
Rates
EMFAC2017 v1.0.3
Oꢀroad
Emissions
Model
Version
EMFAC2021
v1.0.2
Region Type
Sub-Area
Statewide
County Metropolitan Planning
Organization
Air
District
Air Basin
Region
Please be mindful not to choose too many regions and calendar years at the same time. It can cause a
download failure. See more info here:
Los
Angeles
×
+
−
⤢
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f1/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
100 mi
© OpenStreetMap
contributors.
Calendar
Year
Select
2024
Range Select All
×
Season
Annual Summer Winter
Vehicle
Category
EMFAC202
x
EMFAC201
1 EMFAC200
7 Deselect
All
LDA × LDT1× LDT2 × MDV × MH × MCY
×
× LHDT1× LHDT2
×
MHDT× HHDT× SBUS× UBUS× OBUS
Model
Year
Aggregate Select Range
Speed
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f2/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
Select All
Gasoline× Diesel×
Output Unit
tons / operation
day
tons /
year
Show
Results
Download as
CSV
Results
Shareable link: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7 b6f
Request
Summary
S o u r c e
EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions
Inventory
R e g i o n T y p
e
County
R e g i o n
Los
Angeles
C a l e n d a r Y e
a r 2024
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f3/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
V e h i c l e C l a s s i f c a t
i o n EMFAC2007
Categories
M o d e l Y e a
r
Aggregate
S p e e d
Aggregat
e
U n i t s
miles/year for CVMT and EVMT, trips/year for Trips, kWh/year for Energy Consumption, tons/year for
Emissions, 1000 gallons/year for Fuel Consumption
Output
Table
V e h i c l e P o p u l a t i o n a n d A c t i
v i t i e s
A l l
Population
Combusion Vehicle Miles Travelled
(CVMT)
Trips Fuel Consumption
Total Vehicle Miles Travelled (Total VMT)
Electric Vehicle Miles Travelled
(EVMT)
Energy Consumption for EVMT
P o l l u t a n t
s
A l l
NOx PM2.5
CO
PM10
SOx
CO2 CH4 N2O ROG
TOG NH3
E m i s s i o n s P r o c e s
s e s
A l l
RUNEX IDLEX
PMTW
STREX
PMBW
TOTEX
TOTAL
DIURN HOTSOA
K
RUNLOS
S
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f4/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
2 3
HHDT
LDA
Diesel 5.38e+4
3.39e+6
9.08e+3
3.18e+5
1.22e+2
1.59e+6
5.02e+3
1.26e+5
5.80e+4
1.93e+4
2.61e+4
1.51e+5
9.62e+5
1.12e+4
1.59e+4
5.64e+3
1.49e+4
6.10e+4
2.14e+9 3.32e+2
9.54e+2
4.61e+0
9.70e+1
2.69e-1
5.08e+2
2.00e+0
1.58e+2
1.03e+2
2.61e+1
5.09e+1
7.35e+0
2.88e+2
4.58e+0
3.22e+0
3.18e+0
1.67e+1
6.13e+1
Gasoline
Diesel
4.68e+10
9.38e+7
4.04e+9
8.51e+5
2.29e+10
7.59e+7
1.65e+9
8.37e+8
2.37e+8
3.71e+8
3.44e+8
1.28e+10
1.53e+8
5.13e+7
1.93e+7
2.67e+8
8.09e+8
4 LDA
5 LDT1
LDT1
LDT2
LDT2
LHDT1
LHDT1
LHDT2
LHDT2
MCY
Gasoline
6 Diesel
7 Gasoline
8 Diesel
9 Gasoline
10 Diesel
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 Gasoline
Diesel
Gasoline
Gasoline
Diesel
MDV
MDV
MH Gasoline
MH Diesel
MHDT
MHDT
Gasoline
Diesel
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f5/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
21 22
23 24
25 OBUS
SBUS
SBUS
UBUS
UBUS
Diesel 2.14e+3
1.42e+3
1.96e+3
4.38e+2
3.87e+1
4.97e+7 6.26e+0
1.33e+0
1.58e+0
1.31e+0
3.42e-1
Gasoline
Diesel
2.15e+7
1.32e+7
1.01e+7
2.04e+6
Gasoline
Diesel
Rows per page All
1-25 of 25
Copyright @ 2022 California Air
Resources Board
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f6/7
9/9/22, 10:12
AM
EMFAC
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/4b31ec8d34d24fe633d0300c783ab16b0c0f7b6f7/7
❖ APPENDICES
❖
APPENDIX
F
PALEONTOLOGICAL RECORDS
SEARCH
Research &
Collections
e-mail:
[email protected]
February 26,
2022
UltraSystems
Environmental
Attn: Stephen O’Neil
re: Paleontological resources for the San Dimas MCTA 20-0005 Project.
UltraSystems Environmental
Project No. 7145
Dear
Stephen:
I have conducted a thorough search of our paleontology collection records for the locality and specimen
data for proposed development at the San Dimas MCTA 20-0005 project area as outlined on the portion
of the San Dimas USGS topographic quadrangle map that you sent to me via email on February 25, 2022. We do not have any fossil localities that lie directly within the proposed project area, but we do
have fossil localities nearby from the same sedimentary deposits that occur in the proposed project area,
either at the surface or at depth.
The following table shows the closest known localities in the collection of the Natural History
Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA).
Locality
Number Location Formatio
n
Taxa Depth
Lot 14 off Calle
Amapola Street in
San
Dimas
LACM VP
7471
LACM VP
6172
Puente
Formation
Puente
Formation(dens
e
tan/yellow
shale)
Mola
(Molidae)
Unknown
Unknown
Calle Andrea and
S.
San Dimas
Avenue
First bike path
Fish
(Osteichthyes)
diverging south
from
Via Verde Road
in
Bonelli Regional
LACM VP
6166
County
Park
Puente
Formation
Sturgeonfish
(Prionurus)
Surface
Ridge overlooking
the
southwestern bank
of
Puddingstone
Puente
Formation
(shale)
LACM VP
6173
LACM VP
6167
Reservoir Extinct bony fish
(Etringus)
Mako shark (Isurus
planus)
Surface
Puddingstone Dam Unknown
W of Monterey
Pass
Road in Coyote
Pass;
E of the Long
Beach
Freeway & S of the
N
boundary of
Section
32; Monterey Park
Puente
Formation
Unknown Formation
(Pleistocene; sand
and
silt)
LACM VP
3363
Horse
(Equus)
Unknown
Fish (Gasterosteus); Snake
(Colubridae), Rodents
(Thomomys,
Microtus, Reithrodontomys);
Rabbit
(Sylvilagus)
Intersection of 26th
St
and Atlantic Blvd,
Bell
Gardens
Unknown
Formation
(Pleistocene; silt)
LACM VP
7702
30 feet
VP, Vertebrate Paleontology; IP, Invertebrate Paleontology; bgs, bgs below ground surface
This records search covers only the records of the NHMLA. It is not intended as a paleontological assessment of the project area for the purposes of CEQA or NEPA. Potentially
fossil-bearing units are present in the project area, either at the surface or in the subsurface. As
such, NHMLA recommends that a full paleontological assessment of the project area be
conducted by a paleontologist meeting Bureau of Land Management or Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology standards.
Sincerely
,
Alyssa Bell, Ph.D.
Natural History Museum of Los
Angeles County
enclosure:
invoice
❖ APPENDICES
❖
APPENDIX
G
HYDROLOGY/DRAINAGE
REPORT
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
GEOTECHNIC
AL
ENVIRONMENT
AL
WATER
RESOURCES
CONSTRUCTION
SERVICES
COASTAL/MARINE
GEOTECHNICS
Project
No.
20200.000.0
August 10, 01
2022
Billye
Breckenridge UltraSystems
Environmental
16431 Scientific Way,
Irvine, CA 92618
Subject: Specific Plan 11, Planning
Area 1 San Dimas, Los Angeles County,
California
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT) INTRODUCTI
ON This Hydrology and Water Quality Technical Report (HWQTR) assesses the potential impacts of
implementation of the proposed Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1 modifications described in the
ISMD (referred to in this Technical Memorandum as the “Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration”) on hydrology and water quality. To evaluate potential impacts from a hydrologic
perspective, hydrologic considerations including flood potential of any proposed modifications
to existing land uses were evaluated. For water quality impacts, regulatory considerations
consistent with the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) and
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit were considered. This
document also summarizes mitigation measures designed specifically to reduce identified
hydrologic and water quality impacts.
BACKGROU
ND The City of San Dimas is located approximately 30 miles east of the City of Los Angeles within
eastern Los Angeles County. Planning Area 1 (PA1) is located within the southwestern portion of
the City and is located within Specific Plan 11. The majority of PA1 has been developed with
single-family residences within hillside areas and is surrounded by existing hillside single-family
residences. Local access to PA1 is provided by Via Verde and regional access is provided by the
San Bernardino Interstate-10 (I-10) Freeway, approximately 1 mile to the south. PA1 generally
drains into a storm drain system on Calle Cristina and connects via an underground storm
drainage system to Walnut Creek Wash to the north. Walnut Creek Wash is a tributary of the
San Gabriel River. Figure 1 shows the boundary of PA1 and its relation to Walnut Creek Wash.
According to available information through National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), the area receives approximately 16 inches of annual precipitation per year
(Reference 16). Soil mapping performed of PA1 by the National Resource Conservation Service
indicates soil with either B or C hydrologic soil group type. Type B and C soil has low to moderate
infiltration potential during rainfall events. On-site slopes range from 5 to 30 percent; and
therefore, have a high proclivity for runoff during rainfall events (Reference 15). Soil mapping of
the project is included in Appendix B.
29025 Avenue Penn, Valencia, CA 91355 (661) 257-4004 Fax (888) 279-2698 www.engeo.co
m
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
According to the ISMD, the City of San Dimas is proposing to amend grading limits within PA1
and make various clean-up text amendments. Currently, Chapter 18.518:
Specific Plan 11 of the
San Dimas Municipal Code allows for unlimited grading (cut and fill) necessary for roadway
access and excavation for retaining-type building foundations for the primary residence and
garage. Additionally, the Municipal Code allows up to 35 percent building lot coverage for the
subject residential lots. The proposed Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA) would allow for
up to 1,000 cubic yards of grading (cut and fill), beyond that grading necessary for the primary
residence, driveway, and garage for properties located within Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
(36 residential lots, up to 36,000 CY grading). Per the previous Development Plan Review Board
policy, a swimming pool and 5 feet of decking surrounding the pool were exempted from the
additional grading calculations. The proposed MCTA would also include development standards
for the grading, landscaping, and any retaining walls that the additional grading would require.
Additional text clean-up items are proposed by removing sections which dealt with the initial
development of the area and codifying previous policies regarding Conditional Uses within the
specific plan.
REGULATORY
SETTING This section provides the regulatory compliance framework related to hydrology and water quality.
3.1 FEDERA
L
3.1.1 Federal Clean Water
Act
In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (later referred to as the Clean Water Act [CWA])
was amended to require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for
the discharge of pollutants into "waters of the United States" from any point source. As defined in
the CWA, "waters of the United States" are surface waters, including rivers, lakes,estuaries,
coastal waters, and wetlands, that are interstate waters used in interstate and/or foreign
commerce, their tributaries, territorial seas at the cyclical high tide mark, and adjacent wetlands.
In 1987, Section 402 of the CWA was amended to require that the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) establish regulations for permitting of municipal and industrial
stormwater discharges under theNPDES permit program. The USEPA published final regulations
regarding stormwater discharges on November 16, 1990. (See 55 Fed. Reg. 47990
(Nov. 16, 1990)). The regulations require that Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
discharges to surface waters be regulated by a NPDES permit. An MS4 is a publicly owned
conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets,
catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains) that are designed or
used for collecting or conveying stormwater separately from wastewater.
In addition, CWA Section 304(a) requires states to adopt water quality standards for receiving
water bodies and to have those standards approved by the USEPA.
These water quality
standards consist of designated beneficial uses for a particular receiving water body (e.g., wildlife
habitat, agricultural supply, fishing, etc.), along with water quality criteria necessary to support
those uses. Water quality criteria consist of either prescribed concentrations or levels of
constituents, such as lead, suspended sediment, fecal coliform bacteria, or narrative statements
describing the quality of water that supports a particular beneficial use.
Because California had
not established a complete list of acceptable water quality criteria, USEPA established numeric
water quality criteria for certain toxic constituents in surface waters with human health or aquatic
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
life designated uses in the form of the California Toxics Rule (CTR). (40 C.F.R. § 131.38.) The
final rule establishes ambient water quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants in the State of
California. 3.1.2 Section 303(d) of the Clean
Water Act
When designated beneficial uses of a particular receiving water body are compromised by
impaired water quality, CWA Section 303(d) requires identifying and listing that water body as
"impaired." Once a water body has been deemed impaired, a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
must be developed for the impairing pollutant(s). A TMDL is an estimate of the total load of
pollutants from point, nonpoint, and natural sources that a water body may receive without
exceeding applicable water quality standards (with a "factor of safety" included). Once
established, the TMDL allocates the loads among current and future pollutant sources for the
impaired water body. The California 303(d) Listing Policy sets the rules for identifying the waters
that do not meet water quality standards. The Policy distinguishes between three categories of
waters that do not meet water quality standards. The categories are:
(1) requiring TMDLs;
(2) water quality limited segments being addressed by a TMDL that has been developed and
approved by USEPA and the approved implementation plan is expected to result in full attainment
of the standard within a specified time frame; and (3) water quality limited segments being
addressed by an existing regulatory program that is reasonably expected to result in the
attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame.
Runoff from the Project discharges to Walnut Creek Wash (State Waterbody
ID: CAR4053100019980918112433). This 303(d) impaired water body is part of the larger
San Gabriel Watershed (USGS #18070106, HUC 8). Water quality impairments from
Walnut Creek Wash near PA1 were considered when selecting the pollutants of concern for this
water quality analysis. As shown on Table 3.1.2-1, CWA Section 303(d) Listings for the Walnut
Creek Wash impairments include benthic-macroinvertebrate toxicity bioassesments, indicator
bacteria, and pH.
TABLE 3.1.2-1: Walnut Creek Wash, TMDLs “List of Water Quality Limited Segments,” Category 5,
2022 GEOGRAPHI
C
ESTIMATE
D
AREA
ASSESSE
D
DESCRIPTIO
N
AND
DISTANCE
FROM
PROJECT
POTENTIA
L
SOURCES
POLLUTANT
S
TMDL
COMPLETION
Approximatel
y
¾ mile
12 miles •
BenthicTMDL Required
2012
Source
Macroinvertebr Unknown
ate
Bioassesments
• Indicator
Bacteria
• pH
TMDL Required
2021
TMDL Required
2007
Source
Unknown
Source
Unknown Source: Final California 2020-2022 Integrated Report (303 (d) List/305(b) Report) Supporting Information.
Regional Board 4- Los Angeles Region
Once established, the TMDL allocates the loads among current and future pollutant sources to
the water body.
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB) has adopted TMDLs for
nitrogen and phosphorus (Basin Plan), discussed below. These TMDLs have become effective
as part of the adoption in March 2012 and fall under the following relevant permits (Reference 13).
•
•
County of Los Angeles MS4: NPDES CAS004004 (Order
R4-2021-0105) General Construction Stormwater: Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, CAS000002, and
amendments.
TMDLs have been assigned to Walnut Creek Wash watershed for benthic macroinvertebrate
biaoassesments, indicator bacteria, and pH. The TMDLs for benthic macroinvertebrate surveys
are assessed through an Index of Biological Integrity (IBI) score (Reference 9). The IBI score is
a cumulative score that takes into account biological stressors of water quality parameters such
as indicator bacteria, lead, zinc, copper, mercury, oil, grease, and other toxics on benthic
macroinvertebrate community structure. IBI habitat scores are ranked as follows.
•
•
•
•
•
Very good (80-
56)
Good (41-55)
Fair (27-40)
Poor (14-26)
Very poor (0-
Sites with a score below 26 are considered to be impaired. IBI scores for 13) Walnut Creek Wash
were 7 (2003) and 6 (2004), placing Walnut Creek Wash on the TMDL list for this criteria
(Reference 10). The criteria for pH is currently under review; however, Walnut Creek Wash is
listed for pH, approved by the USEPA for listing as a TMDL. The current TMDL standard for
E. Coli as the indicator bacteria is shown in Table 3.1.2-2.
TABLE 3.1.2-2: TMDL Final Annual Allowable Exceedances for Walnut Creek Wash, E Coli GEOMETRIC
MEAN
(MPN or cfu)
DAILY
MAXIMUM
(MPN or cfu)
CONSTITUEN
T
235/100m
L
E. Coli 126/100
Reference: 2011 Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles mL Region R4 Basin Plan
Per the MS4 permit, geometric mean values shall be calculated on each sample day based on a
statistically sufficient number of samples (generally not less than five samples equally spaced
over a 30-day period) consistent with the REC-1 Basin Plan bacteria objectives. Lastly, there is
an additional TMDL for lead accounted for under the Los Angeles Regional MS4 permit applicable
through September 30, 2026. For wet weather flows, an effluent limitation of 81.34 micrograms
per liter, as total recoverable metals, must not be exceeded. Also, per the MS4 permit, this is
applicable for San Gabriel River Reach 2 and all of its upstream reaches and tributaries including
Walnut Creek Wash.
3.2 STATE
3.2.1 Fish and Game Code, Sections 1600
through 1617
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is responsible for conserving, protecting,
and managing California's fish, wildlife, and native plant resources. To meet this responsibility,
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
the Fish and Game Code, sections 1600-1605 require the proponent of a project that may impact
a river, stream, or lake to notify the CDFW before beginning the project.
This includes rivers or
streams that flow at least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks and
that support fish or other aquatic life. It also includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface
flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.
In addition, Fish and Game Code, section 1602 requires that any entity notify the CDFW of a
project, prior to beginning construction, that will: (1) divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow
or the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake; (2) use materials from a streambed;
or (3) result in the disposal or deposition of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled,
flaked, or ground pavement where it can pass into any river, stream, or lake. If the CDFW
determines that the project may adversely affect existing fish and wildlife resources, a Lake and
Streambed Alteration Agreement is required.
3.2.2 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Wat. Code, § 13000 et seq.)
The federal CWA places the primary responsibility for the control of surface water pollution, and
for planning the development anduse of water resources, with the states.
However, the CWA
establishes certain guidelines for the states to follow in developing their programs and allows the
USEPA to withdraw control from states with inadequate implementation mechanisms.
California's primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect
to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of
1970 (Porter• Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) authority to protect
water quality. It is the primary vehicle for implementation ofCalifornia's responsibilities under the
federal Clean Water Act. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and the RWQCBs authority
and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges of waste to surface and
groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous
materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements
for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, or oil or petroleum product.
Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan (Basin Plan) for its region.
The regional plan must conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and established
by the SWRCB in its state water policy. To implement state and federal law, the regional plan
establishes beneficial uses for surface and groundwater in the region, and sets forth narrative and
numeric water quality standards to protect those beneficial uses. The Porter-Cologne Act also
provides that a RWQCB may include, within its regional plan, water discharge prohibitions
applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste.
3.2.3 Basin
Plan
The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (Basin Plan) (LARWQCB 1994, as
amended) provides quantitative and narrative criteria for a range of water quality constituents
applicable to certain receiving water bodies and groundwater basins within the Los Angeles
region. Specific criteria are provided for the larger, designated water bodies within the region, as
well as general criteria or guidelines for ocean waters, bays and estuaries, inland surface waters,
and groundwater. In general, the narrative criteria require that degradation of water quality does
not occur dueto increases in pollutant loads that will adversely impact the designated beneficial
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
uses of a water body. For example, the Basin Plan requires that "inland surface waters shall not
contain suspended or settleable solids in amounts which cause a nuisance or adversely affect
beneficial uses as a result of controllable water quality factors." Water quality criteria apply within
receiving waters as opposed to applying directly to runoff; therefore, water quality criteria from
the Basin Plan are utilized as benchmarks to evaluate the potential ecological impacts of
PA1 runoff on the receiving waters of the proposed PA1.
The Basin Plan lists beneficial uses of major water bodies within this region.
Walnut Creek Wash
is listed and has specific beneficial uses assigned to it seen in Table 3.2.3-1 (Reference 17). TABLE 3.2.3-1:Beneficial Uses of Walnut Creek Wash
BENEFICIAL CODE
DESCRIPTION USE
CODE Uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to,
preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including
invertebrates.
WARM
Uses of water that support wetland ecosystems, including, but not limited to, preservation
or enhancement of wetland habitats, vegetation, fish, shellfish, or wildlife, and other unique
wetland functions which enhance water quality, such as providing flood and erosion control,
stream bank stabilization, and filtration and purification of naturally occurring contaminants.
WET
Uses of water for recreational activities involving body contact with water, where ingestion
of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming,
wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, white water activities, fishing, or use
of natural hot springs.
REC1
Uses of water for recreational activities involving proximity to water, but not normally
involving body contact with water, where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These
uses include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beachcombing, camping,
boating, tidepool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, or aesthetic enjoyment in
conjunction with the above activities.
REC2
Uses of water for natural or artificial recharge of ground water for purposes of future
extraction, maintenance of water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into freshwater
aquifers.
GWR
MUN
WILD
Uses of water for community, military, or individual water supply systems including, but not
limited to, drinking water supply. Uses of water that support terrestrial ecosystems including but not limited to, preservation
and enhancement of terrestrial habitats, vegetation, wildlife (e.g., mammals, birds, reptiles,
3.2.4 NPDES General Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements amphibians, invertebrates), or wildlife water and food sources. for Discharges of
Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity
Pursuant to CWA Section 402(p), the SWRCB issued a statewide general permit for stormwater
discharges from construction sites [Water Quality Order 2009-0009- DWQ as well as its
subsequent amendments 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ, State Water Board NPDES
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (NPDES
No. CAR000002; adopted by the State Water Board on September 2, 2009, and became effective
on July 1, 2010)]. Under the Construction General Permit (CGP), discharges of stormwater from
construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres are required to either obtain
individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or be covered by the CGP.
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
The SWRCB is currently in the process of re-issuing an updated CGP, anticipated to become
effective on July 1, 2023, and would likely be in-place prior to implementation of any future
proposed projects within PA1. The re-issued permit is anticipated to contain additional reporting
and sampling requirements for construction projects that disturb greater than 1 acre (Draft Order
WQ 2022-XXXX-DWQ, NPDES CAS00002).
3.3 LOS ANGELES REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
CONTROL BOARD
3.3.1 Los Angeles County MS4
Permit
In 2012, the LARWQCB issued a revised NPDES Permit and WDRs (Order No. R4-2012-0175;
NPDES Permit No. CAS004001) under the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Act for
discharges of urban runoff in public storm drains in Los Angeles County (County). In addition, the
Regional Board issued a revised permit in September 2021 (Order No. R4- 2021-0105; NPDES
Permit No. CAS004004 (the MS4 Permit)). The Permittees include the City of San Dimas. The
MS4 Permit regulates stormwater discharges from MS4s in PA1, and details specific
requirements for new development and significant redevelopment projects, including selection,
sizing, and design criteria for Low Impact Development (LID), treatment control, and
hydromodification control BMPs. These requirements apply to Projects equal to 1 acre or greater
of disturbed area and adding more than 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area
for operation purposes.
During construction activities, the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit specifies minimum
construction BMPs for projects under 1 acre, which do not require a CGP from the SWRCB. 3.4 LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
3.4.1 Los Angeles County Low Impact Development
Standards
Los Angeles County developed a “LID Standards Manual” (LACDPW 2014) (the “LID Manual”)
that outlines stormwater runoff quantity and quality control development principles, technologies,
and design standards for achieving the LID standards of the MS4 permit. The LID Manual provides
guidance for the implementation of stormwater quality control measures in new development and
redevelopment projects in the County, including within the City of San Dimas, with the intention
of improving water quality and mitigating potential water quality impacts from stormwater and
non-stormwater discharges.
Pages 1-2 of the LID Manual addresses the following objectives and goals (LACDPW 2014).
•
•
•
Lessen the adverse impacts of stormwater runoff from development and urban runoff on
natural drainage systems, receiving waters, and other water bodies; Minimize pollutant loadings from impervious surfaces by requiring development projects to
incorporate properly designed, technically appropriate BMPs and other LID strategies. Minimize erosion and other hydrologic impacts on natural drainage systems by requiring
development projects to incorporate properly designed,
technically appropriate
hydromodification control development and technologies.
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
3.5 CITY OF SAN
DIMAS
3.5.1 Model Efficient Landscape
Ordinance
On January 17, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown proclaimed the State of Emergency in the State of
California due to severe drought conditions, and on April 25, 2014, the Governor declared a
continued State of Emergency to exist throughout the state due to the ongoing drought.
Subsequently, on April 1, 2015, the Governor issued Executive Order B-29-15 to impose
restrictions to achieve a statewide 25 percent reduction in potable urban water usage through
February 28, 2016.
Also, the Executive Order directed the Department of Water Resources to update the State’s
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) to be more efficient in water conservation. As a result, the City of San Dimas revised its Water Efficient Landscapes Ordinance and its
implementation Guidelines to comply with the State’s revisions. The amended Ordinance and
Guidelines implement the state’s water conservation efforts but also include guidance in creating
landscapes that will preserve the character of the City and continue to uphold an appealing
community environment.
The primary purpose of these Guidelines is to provide procedural and design guidance for
applicants proposing new landscape or landscape rehabilitation projects that are subject to
Chapter 18.14 of the City of San Dimas Municipal Code. Beginning February 1, 2016, and
consistent with Executive Order No. B-29-15, this ordinance applies to all new landscape projects
with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 500 square feet, requiring a building
or landscape permit, plan check or design review landscape projects.
Rehabilitated landscape
projects with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet are also
subject to the Guidelines, if they require a building or landscape permit, plan check, or design
review. (Reference 18).
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE,
IMPACTS, AND
MITIGATION Based on Appendix G of The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and other
relevant criteria, the City of San Dimas Planning Department has determined that a project would
have a potentially significant impact related to water quality based on the following criteria.
•
•
Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the
basin? • Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would: (i) result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; (iii) create or contribute
runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect
flood flows?
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
•
•
Would the project have impacts in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation? Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan?
It has been noted that additional stormwater regulatory requirements may be in order as the
project develops.
4.1 IMPACT 1 - CONSTRUCTION WATER
QUALITY ISSUES
The development of future proposed projects within PA1 could result in temporary disturbance of
surface soil and removal of vegetative cover, potentially causing temporary sediment mobilization
in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation. In addition, during construction,
other temporary potential pollutants, such as paint, asphalt, or other compounds could become
mobilized by wind or rain events. If erosion, siltation, or other constructionrelated pollutants of concern entered downstream watercourses during construction operations, the project would
potentially violate water quality standards. This impact is related to CEQA significance criteria
‘A’ and ‘D’.
During any grading activities, BMPs would be implemented in compliance with the State’s
Construction General Permit and the 2021 Los Angeles County MS4 Permit.
In accordance with
these regulatory requirements, any potential project within the Planning Area would reduce or
prevent erosion and sediment transport and the transport of other potential pollutants from the
site through implementation of BMPs meeting BAT/BCT (Best Available Technology/Best Control
Technology). BAT/BCT are Clean Water Act technology-based standards that are applicable to
construction site stormwater discharges. If any potential project would impact more than 1 acre,
the BMPs to be implemented would be documented in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP), which will be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board and receive a Waste
Discharge Identification (WDID) number before commencement of construction activities.
Projects under 1 acre would be subject to the BMPs outlined in the 2021 Los Angeles County
MS4 Permit.
The following types of BMPs would be included in the permit documents and implemented
as-needed during construction.
• Erosion control. Vegetation and other materials (such as straw, fiber, stabilizing emulsion,
etc.) placed to stabilize areas of disturbed soil, reduce loss of soil due to the action of water
or wind, and prevent water pollution. • Sediment control. Practices that trap soil particles on site after they have been eroded by rain,
flowing water, or wind. They include those practices that intercept and slow or detain the flow
of storm water to allow sediment to settle and be trapped (e.g., silt fence, sediment basin,
fiber rolls, etc.).
• Waste and Materials Management. Measures include covered storage and secondary
containment for material storage areas, secondary containment for portable toilets, covered
dumpsters, dedicated and lined concrete washout/waste areas, proper application of
chemicals, and proper disposal of all manner of waste products including solid, liquid, sanitary,
concrete, hazardous, and equipment-related wastes.
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
•
•
•
Non-Stormwater Management. Practices designed to reduce or eliminate the addition of
pollutants to construction site runoff through analysis of pollutant sources, implementation of
proper handling/disposal practices, employee education, water conservation practices,
vehicle and equipment cleaning and fueling practices, street sweeping, and other actions.
Training and Education. Training of individuals responsible for BMP implementation and
permit compliance, including contractors and subcontractors, and include appropriate
certification through the State Water Board for Qualified SWPPP Developers and Qualified
SWPPP Practitioners.
Inspection, Maintenance, Monitoring and Sampling. Includes site inspections before, during,
and after storm events, construction site monitoring plans to address leaks and spills of
Construction activities will be conducted in compliance with the State’s non-visible pollutants, and water quality sampling for turbidity and pH.
Construction General
Permit and the LA Regional Water Board’s 2021 MS4 Permit. With incorporation of these
regulatory compliance measures, the Project would not result in any new significant impacts
related to construction waste discharge requirements, or obstruction of a water quality control
plan, as described in the CEQA significance criteria ‘A’ and ‘E’.
4.2 IMPACT 2 – POST- CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONAL IMPACTS
(WATER
QUALITY, ALTERATION OF DRAINAGE PATTERNS OR
RESULT IN FLOODING
The development of future proposed projects within PA1 could result in OFF-SITE) operational water quality
impacts to nearby water bodies by affecting storm runoff quality, which could violate water quality
standards and otherwise substantially degrade water quality after construction is completed. The
project could also increase runoff by adding additional impervious areas that would potentially
impact downstream drainage conveyance structures and channels. These impacts are related to
CEQA significance criteria ‘A’, ‘C’, and ‘E’.
The proposed PA1 does not have enough specific information to conduct a complete analysis of
hydrologic impacts at this time. However, we can assume that additional activities in the proposed
project would create additional impervious areas as well as increase the size of on-lot drainage
management areas, which would increase the amount of rainfall runoff directed into the on-site
storm drain system as compared to the existing condition.
As shown in Figure 2, we have estimated the existing and potential proposed drainage areas
(north and south sections) within the proposed PA1. The PA1 area was subdivided into these two
sections based on the direction of existing storm drain systems within the PA1 area. Using
Los Angeles County Flood Control Standards, we used a runoff coefficient of 0.1 for existing,
undeveloped conditions and a runoff coefficient of 0.7 for areas where development may occur.
We estimated the tributary watershed areas, corresponding slope, flow path length, and soil type
(rating 089) for use in Los Angeles County approved HydroCalc software (Reference 19). Slope
and flow path lengths were calculated from Figure 2 and the corresponding design storm depth
was obtained from Reference 21.
HydroCalc provided estimates for the predicted pre- and post-development scenarios of peak flow
runoff expected from an 85th percentile storm, 10-year recurrence interval storm, and 100-year
recurrence interval storm. The recurrence interval is based on the probability that the given event
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
will be equaled or exceeded in any given year. For example, there is a 1 in 50 chance that a
50-year recurrence interval storm of rain will occur during any given year. An 85th percentile storm
has an 85 percent chance in occurring in any given year. The peak stormwater flows for each
assumed watershed are summarized in Table 4.2.1:
TABLE 4.2-1: Hydrocalc Pre and Post Project Peak
Flow Estimates NORTH
PRE-PROJECT
SUBWATERSHED SUBWATERSEHD
SUBWATERSHED
NORTH
POSTPROJECT
SOUTH
PREPROJECT
SOUTH POSTPROJECT
SUBWATERSHED
Area
(acres)
8.29 1.29
8.38 1.30
14.17 1.74
16.85 2.06 85th
Percentile
Peak Flow
(cfs) 10-year
Peak
Flow (cfs)
14.80 28.40
14.96 28.71
19.37 37.28
23.04 44.32 100-year
Peak
Flow (cfs)
In summary, if PA1 were developed, we estimate a negligible (approximately 1 percent) increase
in unmitigated post-project runoff from the northern subwatershed area and approximately a 16
percent increase in the southern subwatershed area based on our assumptions and per the
results on Table 4.2-1. This is in direct proportion to the amount of developed land added in
post-project conditions. For detailed results of the HydroCalc analysis, please see Appendix A.
Prior to issuing a grading permit for future proposed projects within PA1, a grading and drainage
plan would be required for review and approval by the Building Official and City Engineer. The
grading and drainage plan would evaluate the ability of existing downstream infrastructure to
safely collect and convey any additional runoff created by future projects into the existing storm
drainage system in accordance with San Dimas and LA County standards. Also, any future
projects which intend to develop greater than 10,000 square feet of impervious area would be
subject to water quality requirements outlined in the LA Regional Water Board’s 2021 MS4 Permit,
the Los Angeles County LID Manual, or future MS4 permits that would become effective in the
future. Lastly, any new project would conform to the local ordinance from the City of San Dimas
or local Water Agency to limit excess irrigation water into the PA1 storm drainage system.
Post-construction operational activities of any future projects within PA1 will be conducted in
compliance with a City of San Dimas approved grading and drainage plan as well as the
Los Angeles Regional Water Board’s 2021 MS4 Permit, Los Angeles County LID Manual where
applicable, and local drought-tolerant landscaping ordinances. With incorporation of these
regulatory compliance measures, the project would not substantially violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements, not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site that would result in substantial erosion, not substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site, nor create or contribute
runoff that exceeds the capacity of existing or planned drainage systems, nor provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff; nor impede or redirect flood flows, nor conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control plan as described in the CEQA significance criteria
‘A’, ‘C’, and ‘E’.
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
UltraSystems Environmental
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area 1
ISMD HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ANALYSIS
(HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
TECHNICAL REPORT)
20200.000.0
01 August 10,
2022
4.3 IMPACT 3 – (FLOOD HAZARD, TSUNAMI, OR
SEICHE ZONES).
There are no oceans, lakes, reservoirs or other flood hazards near the project site; therefore,
flooding or water quality impacts from seiche and tsunami, or seiche zones are not anticipated.
Any proposed future project within PA1 would have no risk of release of pollutants because of
project inundation due to a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones as described in the CEQA
significance criteria ‘D’.
4.4 IMPACT 4 – (SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN).
The project site is developed with existing residential homes and additional residential
development is proposed. Given the hillside nature of PA1, significant groundwater recharge from
the area is unlikely. Therefore, any future project in PA1 would not interfere with implementation
of a groundwater recharge of a groundwater management plan, as described in the CEQA
significance criteria ‘B’ and ‘E’.
SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT AFTER
MITIGATION
It is our assessment that in review of the description of the modifications described to the area
proposed by the City of San Dimas, proper mitigation and regulatory compliance would result in
less than significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. As summarized above, the
Project would not result in any new significant impacts with respect to hydrology or water quality
with implementation of stormwater BMPs, adherence to the mitigation measures already
proposed for the Project, and compliance regulatory requirements.
Sincerely
,
ENGEO
Incorporated
Randall
Rettig
Jonathan Buck, GE,
QSD
Julia A. Moriarty, GE,
QSD
jb/rr/jam/ca
Attachments: List of Selected
References
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map Figure 2 – Hydrologic Analysis PA1 Appendix A1 - HydroCalc Summary
Appendix A2 – Los Angeles County Soil Map
Appendix B1 – USDA NRCS Regional Soil Map
Appendix B2 – USDA NRCS Soil Description of ZacaApollo Complex
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
SELECTED
REFERENCES
1. Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region, California Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Los Angeles Region 4, February 23, 1995.
2. State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board-Los Angeles Region, 2012, Order No.
R4-2012-0175 (NPDES No. CAS 004001), Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer Systems (MS4), Discharges Within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County,
Except Those Discharges Originating from the Long Beach MS4.
3. State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board-Los Angeles Region, September 2021,
Order No. R4-2021-0105; NPDES Permit No. CAS004004. Waste Discharge Requirements for
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4), Discharges Within the Coastal Watersheds of
Los Angeles County, Except Those Discharges Originating from the Long Beach MS4.
4. State of California, State Water Resources Control Board – Sacramento, 2022, Order
WQ-2022-XXXX-DWQ; DRAFT NPDES Permit for Stormwater
Discharges Associated with
5. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), 2000, Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (General Permit).
Los Angeles County
1994-2000 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report.
6. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture, Web Soil Survey. Available online at:
7. Musgrave, G.W., 1955, “How Much Water Enters the Soils,” U.S.D.A. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/.
Yearbook, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, pp. 151-159.
8. Los Angeles County, 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report, Section 4,
San Gabriel River Watershed Management Area, pp 4.1 - 4.36.
9. A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams, 2005. Appendix 7-B, Environmental Management Vo. 35, No. -4, pp 493 – 504.
10. State of California, State Water Resources Control Board, 2020-2022 Integrated Report Map
(Clean Water Act Section 303 (d) List/305(b) Report, Available online at:
https://gispublic.waterboards.ca.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id =6cca2a3a1815465
11. State of California, Regional Water Quality Control Board-Los Angeles 599201266373cbb7b Region, 2011 Water Quality
Control Plan, Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan.
12. 2006-2007 Monitoring Data (MS4) for Tributaries of the San Gabriel River Watershed-CI 6948 for
order no. 01-182, NPDES No. CAS00401 Municipal Storm Water and Urban Runoff Discharges
within County of Los Angeles & incorporated cities, except City of Long Beach.
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX. Los Angeles Area Lakes Total Maximum Daily
Loads for Nitrogen, Phosphorous, Mercury, Trash, Organochlorine Pesticides and PCBs. Alexis
Strauss, March 2012.
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/tmdl/Est ablished/Lakes/LAL
akesTMDLsEntireDocument.pdf
14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, How’s My Waterway? Searchable Online Database of Impaired Waterbodies,
https://mywaterway.epa.gov/ 20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
SELECTED REFERENCES
(Continued)
15. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
Custom Soil Resource Report for Los Angeles County, California, Southeastern Part. September
16. NOWData-NOAA Online Weather Data. Pomona-Fairplex Historical 21, 2021.
Data. 1980-2022.
https://www.weather.gov/wrh/Climate?wfo=lox
17. State of California, State Water Resources Control Board, California Basin Plan Beneficial Use Viewer.
https://gispublic.waterboards.ca.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id =116f7daa9c4d410
3afda1257be82eb16
18. City of San Dimas; Guidelines for Implementation of the City of San Dimas Model Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), 2015.
19. Public Works Los Angeles County. Hydrologic Report, 2006 Hydrology Manual, Hydrology Map
GIS, HydroCalc Software. http://ladpw.org/wrd/publication/. Current as of
20. LA County Sanitary Sewer Network – Consolidated Sewer Maintenance August 2022.
District. Online GIS map tool available as of August 2022:
https://pw.lacounty.gov/smd/sewernetwork/.
21. NOAA’s National Weather Service, Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center. Precipitation Frequency Data Server (PFDS). https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/.
Current as of August 2022.
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
FIGURE
S
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Hydrologic
Analysis PA1
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
APPENDIX
A1
HydroCalc
Summary
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
8.29 Flow Path Length (ft)
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)
85th Percentile Rainfall
Depth (in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
1178.7
30.0648
1.0 0.7
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
85th percentile
storm 0
True
Output
Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)
1.0 0.2359
0.1 0.66
36.0 1.2908
1.2908
0.4522
19697.366
9
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
8.38 Flow Path Length (ft)
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)
85th Percentile Rainfall
Depth (in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
1178.7
30.0648
1.0 0.7
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
85th percentile
storm 0
True
Output
Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)
1.0 0.2359
0.1 0.66
36.0 1.3048
1.3048
0.4571
19911.210
5
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
14.17 Flow Path Length (ft)
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)
85th Percentile Rainfall
Depth (in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
2081.3
0.0279
1.0 0.7
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
85th percentile
storm 0
True
Output
Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)
1.0 0.1856
0.1 0.66
60.0 1.7354
1.7354
0.7729
33669.497
1
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
16.85 Flow Path Length (ft)
Flow Path Slope (vft/hft)
85th Percentile Rainfall
Depth (in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
2081.3
0.0279
1.0 0.7
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
85th percentile
storm 0
True
Output
Results Modeled (85th percentile storm) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
Undeveloped Runoff Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient (Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
Burned Peak Flow Rate (cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume (cu-ft)
1.0 0.1856
0.1 0.66
60.0 2.0636
2.0636
0.9191
40037.475
3
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
8.29 1178.7
3 0.0648
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
10-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
5.0194
2.1621
Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
0.6529
0.8259
10.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
14.802
8 14.802
8 2.3515
Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
102429.660
5
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
8.38 1178.7
3 0.0648
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
10-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
5.0194
2.1621
0.6529
0.8259
10.0 Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
14.963
5 14.963
5 2.377
Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
103541.683
4
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
14.17 2081.3
0.0279
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
10-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
5.0194
1.6849
Undeveloped Runoff 0.605
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
0.8115
17.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
19.3738
19.3738
4.0176
175008.646
8 Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
16.85 2081.3
0.0279
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
10-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (10-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
5.0194
1.6849
Undeveloped Runoff 0.605
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
0.8115
17.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
23.038
23.038
4.7775
208108.376
7 Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
8.29 1178.7
3 0.0648
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
100-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
7.8877
4.0176
0.7423
0.8527
7.0 28.4002
28.4002
3.7833
164801.871
3 Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs) Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
North Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
8.38 1178.7
3 0.0648
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
100-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
7.8877
4.0176
0.7423
0.8527
7.0 28.7085
28.7085
3.8244
166591.035
1 Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs) Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Pre
Area Development
(ac)
14.17 2081.3
0.0279
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
100-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
7.8877
3.1185
Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
0.7118
0.8435
12.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
37.275
5 37.275
5 6.4657
Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
281646.916
4
Peak Flow Hydrologic
Analysis File location: //engeo.com/files/Active Projects/_20000 to 21999/20200/20200000001 - San Dimas Specific Plan Hydro Study/HydroCalc Data/San Dimas
Version: HydroCalc 1.0.3
Input
Parameters Project
Name
San Dimas
Subarea WQTR
ID
South Drainage Post
Area Development
(ac)
16.85 2081.3
0.0279
7.03 0.7
Flow Path Length
(ft)
Flow Path Slope
(vft/hft)
50-yr Rainfall Depth
(in)
Percent Impervious
Soil Type
89 Design Storm
Frequency
Fire Factor
LID
100-yr
0 False
Output
Results Modeled (100-yr) Rainfall
Depth (in)
Peak Intensity (in/hr)
7.8877
3.1185
Undeveloped Runoff
Coefficient (Cu)
Developed Runoff Coefficient
(Cd)
Time of Concentration (min)
0.7118
0.8435
12.0 Clear Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
44.325
5 44.325
5 7.6886
Burned Peak Flow Rate
(cfs)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(ac-ft)
24-Hr Clear Runoff Volume
(cu-ft)
334915.352
3
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
APPENDIX
A2
Los Angeles County Soil
Map
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
APPENDIX
B1
USDA NRCS Regional
Soil Map
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
Soil Map—Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern Part
(USDA Soil Survey San Dimas PA1
Region)
420800 421100 421400 421700 422000 422300 422600 422900 423200 423500 34° 5' 2'' N 34° 5' 2'' N
Soil Map may not be valid at this
scale.
34° 4' 0'' N 34° 4' 0'' N
420800 421100 421400 421700 422000 422300 422600 422900 423200 423500 Map Scale: 1:13,400 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Meters
900
Feet
3000
N 0
0 150
500
300 600
1000 2000
Map projection: Web Mercator Cornercoordinates:WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 11N WGS84
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Soil Map—Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern Part
(USDA Soil Survey San Dimas PA1
Region)
MAP
LEGEND
MAP
INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest
(AOI)
Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
Stony Spot 1:24,000.
Soils Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at
this scale. Very Stony
Spot
Wet Spot
Soil Map Unit
Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping
can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and
accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small
areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a
more detailed
scale.
Other
Special Line
Special Point Features
Features Water Features
Streams and
Canals
Blowout
Please rely on the bar scale on each map
sheet for map
measurements.
Borrow Pit
Transportatio
Clay Spot n Source of Map: Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator
(EPSG:3857)
Rails
Closed
Depression
Gravel Pit
Interstate
Highways
US Routes Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but
distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area,
such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if
more
accurate calculations of distance or area are
required.
Gravelly
Spot
Landfill
Major
Roads
Local Roads Lava Flow Backgroun
d This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS
certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous
Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Aerial
Photography
Soil Survey Area: Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern
Part
Survey Area Data: Version 8, Sep 13, 2021 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 5, 2020—Feb 6,
2021
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded
Spot
Sinkhole
The orthophoto or other base map on which the
soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the
background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result,
some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Slide or
Slip
Sodic Spot
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Soil Map—Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Map Unit
Legend
Map Unit
Symbol
Map Unit
Name
Acres in
AOI
Percent of
AOI
1007
1138
Urban land-BiscailuzPico
complex, 0 to 2
percent
slopes
61.3 9.1
7.4%
Urban land-AzuvinaMontebello complex, 0
to 5
percent slopes
1.1%
1141
1232
Zaca-Apollo, warm
complex,
20 to 55 percent
slopes
387.5
368.4
46.9%
Counterfeit-Urban land 44.6%
complex, 10 to 35
percent
slopes, terraced Totals for Area of
Interest
826.3 100.0%
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
PRIVILEGED AND
CONFIDENTIAL
APPENDIX
B2
USDA NRCS Soil Description of ZacaApollo Complex
20200.000.00
1 August 10,
2022
Map Unit Description: Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes---Los Angeles
County, California, Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Map Unit
Description
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions in this
report, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and
properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or
more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and
named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a
taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils.
On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is
made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named, soils that are
similar to the named components, and some minor components that differ in use
and management from the major soils.
Most of the soils similar to the major components have properties similar to those
of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and
management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They
may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit
description. Some minor
components, however, have properties and behavior
characteristics divergent
enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called
contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and
could not be mapped separately because of the scale used.
Some small areas of
strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special
symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting
minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some
characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been
observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions,
especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make
enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the
landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management
requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned,
however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and
miscellaneous areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Map Unit Description: Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes---Los Angeles
County, California, Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, . All the soils of thickness, and
arrangement. Soils of a given series can differ in texture of the surface layer,
slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect
their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil
phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil
series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or
management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of
the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or
undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an
intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on
the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or
miscellaneous areas are
somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an
example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps.
Because of
present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not
considered practical or necessary to map the soils or
miscellaneous areas
separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous
areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an
example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and
proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform.
An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or
it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is
an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas
have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Additional information about the map units described in this report is available in
other soil reports, which give properties of the soils and the limitations,
capabilities, and potentials for many uses. Also, the narratives that accompany
the soil reports define some of the properties included in the map unit
descriptions.
Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern Part
1141—Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55
percent slopes
Map Unit
Setting National map unit symbol: 2pt45
Elevation: 220 to 1,630 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 14 to 21
inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 66
degrees F
Natural Resources Frost-free period: 355 to 365 days
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Map Unit Description: Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes---Los Angeles
County, California, Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Farmland classification: Not prime
farmland
Map Unit
Composition Zaca and similar soils: 50 percent
Apollo, warm, and similar soils: 35
percent
Minor components: Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, 15 percent and transects of the
mapunit.
Description of
Zaca
Setting Landform:
Hillslopes Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side
slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Colluvium and/or residuum
weathered from
sandstone and siltstone Typical
profileA - 0 to 8 inches:
clay Bkss1 - 8 to 21 inches:
clay
Bkss2 - 21 to 37 inches:
clay
Bk - 37 to 53 inches:
clay
Cr - 53 to 63 inches:
bedrock
Properties and
qualities Slope: 20 to 55 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 37 to 69 inches to
paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water
(Ksat): Very low
to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate
(about 8.2
inches)
Interpretive
groups Land capability classification (irrigated):
None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated):
6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating:
No
Description of Apollo,
Warm
Setting
Landform:
Hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):
Natural Side slope ResourcesWeb Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Conservation
Service
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
Map Unit Description: Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes---Los Angeles
County, California, Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Colluvium and/or residuum
weathered from
sandstone and siltstone Typical
profileA - 0 to 4 inches: clay
loam Btk1 - 4 to 11 inches: clay
loam
Btk2 - 11 to 26 inches: clay
loam
Bk - 26 to 45 inches: clay
loam
Cr - 45 to 55 inches:
bedrock
Properties and
qualities Slope: 20 to 55 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 31 to 55 inches to
paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water
(Ksat): Very low
to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15 percent
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate
(about 7.7
inches)
Interpretive
groups Land capability classification (irrigated):
None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated):
6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating:
No
Minor Components
Boades
Percent of map unit: 8
Landform: percent
Hillslopes Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder, backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No Balcom
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Landform: Hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional):
Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional):
Side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape:
Convex
Natural
Resources
Web Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Conservation
Service
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
Map Unit Description: Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes---Los Angeles
County, California, Southeastern Part
USDA Soil Survey San
Dimas PA1
Region
Hydric soil rating:
No
Data Source
Information
Soil Survey Area: Los Angeles County, California,
Southeastern Part
Survey Area Data: Version 8, Sep 13, 2021
Natural Resources
Conservation
Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil
Survey
8/9/2022
Appendix B
Updated Biological Technical
Report
January 2024
Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text
Amendment
(20-0005), City of San Dimas, Los
Angeles County,
California
Prepared
for
City of San
Dimas 245 East Monita
Avenue
San Dimas, California
91773
Contact: Luis Torrico
Prepared
by
Psomas
5 Hutton Centre Drive,
Suite 300
Santa Ana, California
92707
T: 714.751.7373 Contact: Amber Heredia
Senior Project Manager, Resource
Management
January
2024
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 Introduction
................................................................................................................. ....1 1.1
1.2 1.3
1.4 1.5
1.6 Project
Location.......................................................................................... ...........1
Project
Background................................................................................... ............3
Project Description
................................................................................................3 Proposed Municipal Code Text Amendments
.......................................................4 Project Operation
..................................................................................................4 Regulatory
Setting........................................................................................... ......4
1.6.1 Federal
......................................................................................................5
1.6.2 State
........................................................................................................ ..9
1.6.3 Regional
..................................................................................................13
2.0 3.0
Methods
................................................................................................................. ........15 2.1
2.2 2.3
2.4 UltraSystems Surveys
(2022)..............................................................................15 Literature Review
................................................................................................16 Vegetation Mapping and General
Surveys..........................................................16 Jurisdictional
Assessment.................................................................................. .17
Existing Biological
Resources.....................................................................................18 3.1 Physical Environmental Setting...........................................................................18 3.1.1 Regional Environment .............................................................................18
3.1.2 Climate........................................................................................... ..........18
3.1.3 Local
Environment.................................................................................. .19
3.1.4 Soils................................................................................................ .........19
3.2 Vegetation Types and Other
Areas.....................................................................19 3.2.1 Coastal Sage Scrub.................................................................................21
3.2.2 Native Woodland
.....................................................................................22
3.2.3 Non-Native
Woodland..............................................................................23
3.2.4 Non-Native Herbaceous
..........................................................................24
3.2.5 Developed Areas
.....................................................................................24
3.3 3.4
Wildlife Populations and Movement
Patterns......................................................25 3.3.1 Fish................................................................................................. .........25
3.3.2 Amphibians..................................................................................... .........25
3.3.3 Reptiles........................................................................................... .........25
3.3.4 Birds
........................................................................................................ 26 3.3.5 Mammals
.................................................................................................26
3.3.6 Wildlife Movement
...................................................................................26 Special Status Biological
Resources...................................................................29 3.4.1 Definitions....................................................................................... .........29
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
i Table of
Contents
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
3.5 Special Status Vegetation
Types.........................................................................31 3.5.1 Coastal Sage Scrub.................................................................................31
3.5.2 Native
Woodlands....................................................................................3 1 3.6
3.7 Jurisdictional Resources
.....................................................................................31 Special Status Plants
..........................................................................................32 3.7.1 Thread-leaved Brodiaea ..........................................................................47
3.7.2 Nevin’s Barberry
......................................................................................47
3.7.3 Southern California Black
Walnut............................................................47
3.7.4 Protected
Trees.......................................................................................48
3.8 Special Status
Wildlife......................................................................................... 483.8.1 Monarch
Butterfly.....................................................................................58
3.8.2 Crotch
Bumblebee................................................................................... 58 3.8.3 Swainson’s
Hawk.....................................................................................59
3.8.4 Golden
Eagle...........................................................................................5 9 3.8.5 White-tailed
Kite.......................................................................................59
3.8.6 Burrowing Owl
.........................................................................................59
3.8.7 Coastal California
Gnatcatcher................................................................60
3.8.8 Mountain
Lion..........................................................................................60
4.0 Project Impacts
.............................................................................................................62 4.1
4.2 Significance Criteria
............................................................................................63 Direct Impacts
.....................................................................................................6 5 4.2.1 Vegetation Types and Other Areas
.........................................................65
4.2.2 Jurisdictional
Resources..........................................................................68
4.2.3 Wildlife.......................................................................................... ...........68
4.2.4 Wildlife Movement
...................................................................................69
4.2.5 Special Status Biological Resource Impacts
...........................................69
4.3 4.4
Indirect
Impacts......................................................................................... ..........73 4.3.1 Noise
Impacts......................................................................................... .73
4.3.2 Increased Dust and Urban
Pollutants......................................................73
4.3.3 Invasive Exotic Plant
Species..................................................................73
4.3.4 Night
Lighting........................................................................................... 74 4.3.5 Bird Strikes
..............................................................................................74
4.3.6 Human
Activity.........................................................................................7 4 Mitigation Measures
............................................................................................75 4.4.1 Mitigation Measure 1: Environmentally Sensitive Areas..........................75
4.4.2 Mitigation Measure 2: Protected
Trees....................................................75
4.4.3 Mitigation Measure 3: Jurisdictional Permitting
.......................................76
4.4.4 Mitigation Measure 4: Nesting Birds/Raptors
..........................................76
4.4.5 Mitigation Measure 5: Special Status Plant Species ...............................77
4.4.6 Mitigation Measure 6: Crotch Bumble Bee
..............................................78
4.4.7 Mitigation Measure 7: Coastal California Gnatcatcher ............................79
4.4.8 Mitigation Measure 8 Burrowing
Owl.......................................................79
4.4.9 Mitigation Measure 9: Roosting
Bats.......................................................80
4.4.10 Mitigation Measure 10: Water
Quality......................................................80
4.4.11 Mitigation Measure 11: Invasive Species
................................................81
4.4.12 Mitigation Measure 12: Night Lighting
.....................................................81 R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
ii Table of
Contents
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
4.4.13 Mitigation Measure 13: Bird
Strikes.........................................................81
5.0 6.0
Level of Significance After
Mitigation.........................................................................82 References............................................................................................. ........................83
TABLE
S
Table Page
1 2
3 4
5 6
Parcel
Information............................................................................................. ................2
Grading Permitted Under Existing Specific Plan and Proposed Amendments .................4
Vegetation Types and Other Areas in the
BSA...............................................................20 Special Status Plant Species Reported from the Project
Region....................................34
Special Status Wildlife Species Reported from the Project Region ................................50
Vegetation Types and Other Areas in the
BSA...............................................................65
EXHIBIT
S
Exhibit Follows
Page
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
Regional
Location............................................................................................... .........1
Project Boundary and Biological Study Area
(BSA)....................................................1 USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map
.........................................................................1 Parcel Map
............................................................................................................ ......2
USDA
Soils.................................................................................................... ............19
Vegetation Types and Other
Areas...........................................................................19 Potential Jurisdictional Resources
............................................................................32 Project
Impacts................................................................................................ ..........62
Project Impacts – Vegetation Types and Other Areas
..............................................65
9A–9D
10A–10D Project Impacts – Potential Jurisdictional
Resources................................................68
APPENDICE
S
A
B
C
Representative
Photographs
Plant and Wildlife
Compendia
Project Impacts by
Parcel
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
iii Table of
Contents
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
1.0 INTRODUCTI
ON
This Biological Technical Report has been prepared to support California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) documentation for the San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA)
20-0005. The City of San Dimas is proposing MCTA 20-005 of Title 18- Zoning, Chapter 18.518:
Specific Plan 11 of the San Dimas Municipal Code (“Project”), to amend grading limits within
Specific Plan 11, Planning Area I (“planning area”) and to make various clean-up text
amendments. The proposed MCTA would also include development standards for grading,
landscaping, and retaining walls. Additional text amendments include removing sections that dealt
with the initial development and codifying previous policies regarding Conditional Uses within the
Specific Plan. The City of San Dimas is the Lead Agency for the purposes of the CEQA. The
information has been reported in accordance with accepted scientific and technical standards that
are consistent with the requirements of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The area assessed in this report is referred
to as the Biological Study Area (BSA).
Ultrasystems conducted a literature review and biological surveys of the BSA in 2022. Following
the surveys, Ultrasystems (2022) prepared a Biological Resources Evaluation to support the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) that was publicly circulated for the Project. The
City received extensive public comments on the mitigation approach for biological resources and
hired Psomas to conduct a peer review of the Biological Resources Evaluation and ultimately to
prepare a mitigation approach that addressed public comments. Psomas conducted a field visit
to verify the vegetation mapping and subsequently updated the findings and mitigation approach
based on their professional judgement. As requested by the City, this Biological Technical Report
incorporates the extensive information collected by Ultrasystems during their literature review and
2022 biological surveys to describe existing conditions, including use of figures prepared by
Ultrasystems (2022). Psomas has supplemented information in this report with additional
literature review and observations made during Psomas’ 2023 field visit.
The findings within this
report are based on the professional opinion of Psomas.
1.1 PROJECT
LOCATION
The BSA is located in the City of San Dimas, Los Angeles County, California. It is generally
located north of Interstate 10 (I-10), west of State Route 57 (SR-57), and south and east of Walnut
Creek (Figure 1). The BSA includes the neighborhoods along Calle Cristina and Paseo Lucinda
and surrounding open space north to East Puente Street and south to East Covina Hills Road
(Figure 2).
The BSA is located on the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS’) San Dimas
7.5-minute quadrangle
and occupies Township 1 South, Range 8 West, Sections 17 and 20 (Figure 3). The BSA is
located in the San Jose Hills with the San Gabriel Valley to the north and west and the Pomona
Valley to the east. Elevations within the BSA range from approximately 680 to 980 feet above
mean sea level (msl). Topography slopes down moderately from Calle Cristina to East Covina
Hills Road. Surrounding land uses include residential development and undeveloped open space
on slopes, ridgelines, and canyons between the residences.
The BSA is within the Big Dalton Wash Hydrologic Unit (HU) 180701060402 within the larger San
Gabriel Watershed. The Big Dalton Wash HU drains an area of approximately 80.7 square miles
(USEPA 2022a). No blueline streams or waterbodies are shown within the BSA on the USGS
quadrangle (Figure 3).
The BSA is in Area I of Specific Plan 11, which is located within the southwestern portion of the
City of San Dimas. The BSA comprises the western half of Area I of Specific Plan 11. The BSA R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
1 Biological Technical
Report
San
Bernardin
o
Los County
Angeles
County
Project
Locatio
n
Riversid
e
County
Orange
Project County
Location
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
P a c i f i c O c e
a n
Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend.
Project parameter information supplied by
others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does not
replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes.
Source: UltraSystems
2022
ESRI Basemap Regional 2022
Location
Figure
San Dimas
MCTA 1
(10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\Ex_RegionalLocation.pdf
San Dimas
MCTA 20-
0005Legend
Project
Boundary
Biological Study Area
(BSA)
Key Map
Kern
County
San
Bernardin
o
Los County
Angeles
County
Ventura
County Project
Location
Orange
County
Riverside
County P a c i f i c
O c e a n
¯
Map not to
scale
Source: UtlraSystems
2022
Project Boundary and
Biological Study Area
(BSA) Figure ꢀ
Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes.
Path:
\\gissvr\GIS\Projects\7145_SanDimas_MunicipalCode_ISMND\MXDs\BIO\7145_San_Dimas_MCTA_Project_Location _BSA_2022_10_21.mxd
(10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\ex_BSA.pdf
7 8 9 10
17 16 15 18
22 21 19
San
Bernardin
o
County
20 Los
Angeles
Ventura County
County Project
Location
Riverside
County 29 28 27
Orange
County P a c i f i c
O c e a n
Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend.
Project parameter information supplied by
others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does not
replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. USGS Quadrangle: San Dimas
Towns hip: 1S Range: 9W
0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Sections:17,20
Source: UltraSystems
2022
ESRI Basemap USGS Topographic 2022
Quadrangle Map
Figure
San Dimas
MCTA 3
(10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\Ex_USGS.pdf
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
is subdivided into 36 residential lots; 29 lots are developed with singlefamily residences and 7 lots are vacant (Table 1; Figure 4). According to the City of San Dimas Zoning Map and General
Plan, the area is zoned “single family, very low”, which is very low-density, single family detached
residential and large estate developments (City of San Dimas 1991).
TABLE 1
PARCEL
INFORMATION
Residential
Lot
Number
Size of
Parcel
(acres)
Assessor Parcel
Number
844-803-8031
844-803-8032
844-803-8033
844-803-8034
844-803-8035
844-803-8036
844-803-8037
844-803-8038
844-803-8039
844-803-8040
844-800-8041
844-803-8041
844-803-8042
844-803-8043
844-803-8044
844-800-8042
844-800-8043
844-800-8044
844-803-8045
844-803-8046
844-803-8047
844-800-8045
844-800-8046
844-800-8047
844-800-8048
844-800-8055
844-803-8048
844-803-8049
844-803-8050
844-803-8051
844-803-8052
844-803-8053
844-803-8054
844-803-8055
844-806-8056
844-803-8057
844-800-8050
1 2.276
2.265
1.311
1.122
1.065
1.682
1.410
1.923
3.704
3.026
21.397
2.080
0.946
3.600
2.190
3.112
1.551
1.107
0.995
0.697
0.929
1.053
1.442
3.832
3.613
2.907
1.666
2.420
1.495
0.450
1.582
1.627
1.374
1.118
0.904
1.179
11.613
96.663
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 Open
Space Total
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
2 Biological Technical
Report
San
Los
Angeles
County
Bernardin
o
County
Riverside
Project County
Location Orange
County
Pacific
Ocean
Pas
e
7.43 3031
Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend.
Project parameter information supplied by
others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does not
replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes.
Source: UltraSystems
2022
ESRI Basemap
2022 Parcel
Map
Figure
San Dimas
MCTA 4
(10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\Ex_ParcelMap.pdf
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
The Project is not located within an area designated by the County of Los Angeles as a Significant
Ecological Area (SEA). The East San Gabriel Valley SEA includes Walnut Creek to the north,
Bonelli Regional Park/Puddingstone Reservoir to the east, and various open spaces referred to
as the Walnut Islands to the south; the nearest SEA boundaries to the BSA are located
approximately 0.5 mile to the north and approximately 0.5 mile to the east.
1.2 PROJECT
BACKGROUND
The existing San Dimas Municipal Code Chapter 18.518: Specific Plan 11 (SP-11) allows for
unlimited grading (cut and fill) for roadway access and excavation to construct building retaining
foundations for the primary residence and garage. The Municipal Code also allows up to
35 percent of building lot coverage for the subject residential lots. Specifics are listed below:
The average lot size for SP-11, Planning Area 1 is 109,021 square feet (sf) (with lots
ranging between 30,371 sf and 932,170 sf). The average existing 1st floor lot coverage is 6.5 percent of the lot (with lots ranging
between 0.81 percent and 14.69 percent of the lot). The average additional first floor building area for the existing homes is 34,251 sf (ranging
between 7,253 sf and 318,718 sf). The estimated average available grading to accommodate the additional 1st floor building
area is 21,500 cubic yards (cy) (ranging between 850 cy to over
1.3 200,000 cy). PROJECT
DESCRIPTION
The Project proposes to expand the allowable grading (cut and fill) on each of the 36 residential
lots within the Project boundary by 1,000 cubic yards (cy) per lot, or a total of 36,000 cy over all
lots. The increase in allowable grading would be to allow owners to grade a portion of their
backyards. The current grading quantity permitted by SP-11 is insufficient for grading backyards;
therefore, owners generally use decks in the rear portions of their lots to extend their usable
space. The text amendment would allow the owners to grade for swimming pools or do other
improvements to extend the usable space in their backyard, which is not currently allowed under
the existing municipal code. It should be noted that the existing municipal code allows unlimited
grading for the primary residence, driveway, and garage; the text amendment would not change
this. Additionally, the proposed text amendment would not allow for the primary residences to be
expanded to fill a larger portion of the lot.
The current municipal code allows a total grading quantity of approximately 774,000 cy
(approximately 21,500 cy per lot) to establish the primary residence, driveway, and garage. The
proposed text amendment would increase the amount by 36,000 cy (approximately 1,000 cy per
lot); thus, the proposed increase would increase the allowable grading by about 4.7 percent
(Table 2).
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
3 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE
GRADING PERMITTED UNDER EXISTING 2
SPECIFIC PLAN AND
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Existing Grading
Allowed
Under SP-11
Proposed Additional
Grading
with Text Amendment 774,000 total cubic
yards;
average 21,500 cubic
yards
per lot
36,000 total cubic yards;
1,000
cubic yards per lot
Grading
Quantity
Grading for usable
backyards
(currently decking is only
option
for backyard use).
Additional
grading would not be
used to
expand primary
residences,
garages, and
driveways.
Mass grading;
grading
building pads for
primary
residences, garages,
and
driveways
Purposes
Source: City of San Dimas
(2022).
1.4 PROPOSED MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT
AMENDMENTS
The proposed Project includes the following text amendments to San Dimas Municipal Code
Chapter 18.518 Specific Plan No. 11 to preserve the original intent of the specific plan, minimize
the visual impacts of potential grading and retaining walls, codify existing policies/practices, and
eliminate defunct sections of the code:
Requires that proposed grading and retaining walls follow the existing topographic
contours present on the lot. The proposed grading cuts and/or retaining walls should not
cut directly across contour lines. Limits retaining walls to a maximum exposed height of 12 feet per wall and a maximum
combined exposed height of multiple retaining walls to 24 feet. This language is consistent
with existing retaining wall height limit standards used in other hillside areas.
Requires that if more than one retaining wall would be constructed directly adjacent to one
another, the two walls must be separated by half the height of the taller of the two adjacent
walls.
Requires the use of gravity-type retaining walls unless on-site conditions prohibit their use. Requires that wall materials be either slump stone or split-face stone with a tan or earth
tone color.
Includes landscape and irrigation standards that require the planting of trees at the base
of the lowest retaining wall and drought-tolerant shrubs at the base of every wall. Also
requires installation of permanent irrigation to ensure that the required landscaping
survives and is healthy enough to provide screening.
1.5 PROJECT
OPERATION
The proposed text amendments would not change the land use designation of the existing or
future residences in the planning area.
1.6 REGULATORY
SETTING
Projects are required to comply with various federal, State, and local regulations designed to
protect and promote environmental quality. These regulations are summarized below.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
4 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
It should be noted that because the environmental document for SP-11 is being modified, the
Project must be evaluated according to the current regulatory requirements, some of which have
changed since the initial Specific Plan was adopted. For example, new species have been listed
under the federal and State Endangered Species Acts; the potential for these species to occur
and the requirements resulting from potential impacts must be evaluated by today’s standards
within this Biological Technical Report.
1.6.1 Federal
National Environmental
Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) establishes a broad national framework for
protecting the environment. NEPA’s basic policy is to assure that all branches of government give
proper consideration to the environment prior to undertaking any major federal action that
significantly affects the environment (42 United States Code [USC] 4321-4347). NEPA
established the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) with the following roles and
functions: (1) to establish and enforce environmental protection standards consistent with national
environmental goals; (2) to conduct research on the adverse effects of pollution and on methods
and equipment for controlling it; the gathering of information on pollution; and the use of this
information in strengthening environmental protection programs and recommending policy
changes; (3) to assist, through grants, technical assistance, and other means, in arresting
pollution of the environment; and (4) to assist the Council on Environmental Quality in developing
and recommending to the President new policies for the protection of the environment.
Federal Endangered
Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) designates and protects plants and animals that
are listed as “Endangered” or “Threatened.” The USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) share responsibility for administration of the FESA. The USFWS is primarily
responsible for terrestrial and freshwater organisms while the NMFS is primarily responsible for
marine wildlife. Under Section 9 of the FESA, federally listed species are protected from
unauthorized “take,” which is defined in the FESA as acts to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct”
(16 USC Sections 1532[19] and 1538[a]). In this definition, “harm” includes “any act which actually
kills or injures fish or wildlife, and emphasizes that such acts may include significant habitat
modification or degradation that significantly impairs essential behavioral patterns of fish or
wildlife” (50 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], Title 50, Section
17.3). Section 9 take
prohibitions apply to listed wildlife and fish species, but not to plants.
Endangered plants are not
protected from take, although it is unlawful to remove, possess, or maliciously damage or destroy
them on federal lands. Removing or damaging listed plants on State and private lands in knowing
violation of State law, or in the course of violating a State criminal trespass law, is also illegal
under the FESA.
Two sections of the FESA authorize incidental take. Section 7 regulates take associated with
federal projects or projects that require a federal permit. It also requires federal agencies to use
their authority to carry out conservation programs to benefit Endangered and Threatened species.
Under Section 7, federal agencies are required to consult with the USFWS or the NMFS to ensure
that any action they carry out, including those they fund or authorize (such as through a permit)
would “not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any Endangered species or Threatened
species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of such species” (16 USC
1536[a]). Under Section 7, consultations can be either informal or formal. An incidental take permit
pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(B) is required when non-federal, otherwise lawful activities, including
lawful project development, would result in take of Threatened or Endangered wildlife. Under this
provision, the USFWS and/or the NMFS may, where appropriate, authorize the taking of federally
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
5 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
listed wildlife or fish if such taking occurs incidentally during otherwise legal activities. Section
10(a)(2)(B) requires an application for an incidental take permit to include a Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP). The purpose of the habitat conservation planning process associated with the permit
is to ensure there are adequate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to address the
effects of the authorized incidental take. Section 10 provides a clear regulatory mechanism to
permit the incidental take of federally listed fish and wildlife species by private interests and
non-federal governmental agencies.
FESA also provides for designation of Critical Habitat: specific areas within the geographical
range occupied by a species where physical or biological features “essential to the conservation
of the species” are found and “which may require special management considerations or
protection” (16 USC 1538[5][A]). Critical Habitat may also include areas outside the current
geographical area occupied by the species that are nonetheless essential for the conservation of
the species.
Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with the USFWS and the fish and
wildlife agencies of States where the “waters of any stream or other body of water are proposed
or authorized, permitted or licensed to be impounded, diverted . . . or otherwise controlled or
modified” by any agency under a federal permit or license. Consultation is to be undertaken for
the purpose of “preventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources.” Clean Water Act of
1972
Section
404
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC 1251 et seq.) regulates the discharge of
dredged or fill material into waters of the United States (WOTUS), including wetlands. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the designated regulatory agency responsible for
administering the 404 permit program and for making jurisdictional determinations. This permitting
authority applies to all WOTUS where the material has the effect of (1) replacing any portion of
WOTUS with dry land or (2) changing the bottom elevation of any portion of WOTUS. These fill
materials would include sand, rock, clay, construction debris, wood chips, and materials used to
create any structure or infrastructure in WOTUS. Dredge and fill activities are typically associated
with development projects; water resource-related projects; infrastructure development; and
wetland conversion to farming, forestry, or urban development.
Authorizations are conducted
through the issuance of Nationwide (or General) Permits, through Individual (or Standard)
Permits, or through Letters of Permission. Wetlands and other waters that do not meet the
definition of WOTUS are not covered by the CWA; however, they are regulated by the State of
California through the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) Resolution No. 2019-0015 for California.
Under Section 401 of the CWA, an activity requiring a USACE Section 404 permit must obtain a
State Water Quality Certification (or waiver thereof) to ensure that the activity will not violate
established federal or State water quality standards. The SWRCB, in conjunction with the nine
California Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs), is responsible for administering the
Section 401 water quality certification program.
The definition of WOTUS has been the subject of shifting regulations. Past federal revisions to
regulations addressing the extent of USACE jurisdiction and the definition of WOTUS have been
issued by the Obama Administration in 2015 and the Trump Administration in 2020. On January
18, 2023, the USEPA published a final Water Rule in the Federal Register that went into effect
on March 20, 2023 (“the 2023 Rule”) (USACE and USEPA 2023a).
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
6 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
The definition of WOTUS changed again in response to the Supreme Court decision in the case
of Sackett v. USEPA. On September 8, 2023, the USEPA and the USACE amended the Code of
Federal Regulations to conform the definition of WOTUS to the Supreme Court decision (USACE
and USEPA 2023b). This conforming rule amends the provisions of the agencies’ definition of
WOTUS that were invalid under the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the CWA under Sackett.
Based on these changes, tributaries must have at least relatively permanent flow to be considered
WOTUS from the federal definition. This would exclude ephemeral drainages from being WOTUS.
This represents a substantial change to areas under federal jurisdiction in the arid west.
Section
402
Pursuant to Section 402(p) of the CWA, stormwater permits are required for discharges from a
municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) serving a population of 100,000 or more. The
SWRCB and RWQCBs have been authorized by the USEPA to
implement and enforce the
Municipal Storm Water Program (SWRCB 2023).
In the County of Los Angeles, Order No. R4-2012-0175 as amended by State Water Board Order
WQ 2015-0075 and Los Angeles Water Board Order R4-2012-0175-A01 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS004001 Waste Discharge Requirements
for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of
Los Angeles County, Except Those Discharges Originating from the City of Long Beach MS4
(MS4 Permit), is currently in effect; the City of San Dimas is a signatory to this permit, and is
subject to the Waste Discharge Requirements set forth in this Order.
Section VI(D)(8) of the MS4 Permit applies exclusively to construction sites with construction
activities involving soil disturbance with the exception of agricultural activities. Activities covered
by this permit include but are not limited to grading, vegetation clearing, soil compaction, paving,
re-paving, and linear underground/overhead projects. The City of San Dimas, as signatory to the
MS4 Permit, shall, though their erosion and sediment control ordinance and/or building permit,
require the implementation of an effective combination of erosion and sediment control Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and sediment loss, and the discharge of
construction wastes.
Section
401
Under Section 401 of the federal CWA, an activity involving discharge into a water body must
obtain a federal permit and a State Water Quality Certification to ensure that the activity will not
violate established water quality standards. The SWRCB’s and RWQCB’s jurisdiction also extend
to all “waters of the State” when no WOTUS are present, including wetlands and non-wetland
waters of the State (isolated and non-isolated). The USEPA is the federal regulatory agency
responsible for implementing the CWA. However, it is the SWRCB, in conjunction with the nine
RWQCBs, who has been delegated the responsibility of administering the water quality
certification (Section 401) program.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
of 1918
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703–711), as amended in 1972, makes
it unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, unless permitted by regulations, to
“pursue; hunt; take; capture; kill; attempt to take, capture, or kill; possess; offer for sale; sell; offer
to barter; barter; offer to purchase; purchase; deliver for shipment; ship; export; import; cause to
be shipped, exported or imported; deliver for transportation; transport or cause to be transported;
carry or cause to be carried; or receive for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export, any
migratory bird; any part, nest, or eggs of any such bird; or any product, whether or not
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
7 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
manufactured, which consists, or is composed in whole or part, of any such bird or any part, nest,
or egg thereof. . . .” (16 USC 703).
The MBTA covers the taking of any nests or eggs of migratory birds, except as allowed by permit
pursuant to 50 CFR, Part 21. This regulation seeks to protect migratory birds and active nests.
The MBTA protects over 800 species, including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds, and
many relatively common species. Bird species protected under the provisions of the MBTA
include all species native to the United States or its territories, which are those that occur as a
result of natural biological or ecological processes. The MBTA does not protect non-native
species whose occurrences in the U.S. are solely the result of intentional or unintentional
human-assisted introduction. The List of Migratory Birds (50 CFR 10.13) was updated by the
USFWS (effective August 30, 2023) (USFWS 2023a).
In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (e.g., raptors).
Six families of raptors occurring in North America were included in the amendment: Accipitridae
(kites, hawks, and eagles); Cathartidae (New World vultures); Falconidae (falcons and
caracaras); Pandionidae (ospreys); Strigidae (typical owls); and Tytonidae (barn owls). The
provisions of the 1972 amendment to the MBTA protect all species and subspecies of these
families.
Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668) provides for the protection of bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) by prohibiting, except under
certain specified conditions, the taking, possession, and commerce of such birds. The 1972
amendments increased penalties for violating provisions of the Act and strengthened other
enforcement measures. A 1978 amendment authorized the Secretary of the Interior to permit the
taking of golden eagle nests that interfere with resource development or recovery operations.
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act defines "take" as "pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison,
wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb." Regulations further define "disturb" as “to
agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes, or is likely to cause, based on
the best scientific information available, 1) injury to an eagle, 2) a decrease in its productivity, by
substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior, or 3) nest
abandonment, by substantially interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior"
(50 CFR 22.6).
In addition to immediate impacts, this definition also covers effects that result from human-induced
alterations initiated around a previously used nest site during a time when eagles are not present,
if, upon the eagle’s return, such alterations agitate or bother an eagle to a degree that interferes
with or interrupts normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering habits, and causes injury, death, or nest
abandonment.
A 1994 Memorandum from President William Clinton to the heads of Executive Agencies and
Departments established the policy concerning collection and distribution of eagle feathers for
Native American religious purposes. Prevention and Control of Invasive Species – Executive Order 13112
Executive Order 13112 (February 3, 1999) directs all federal agencies to work cooperatively to
prevent and control the introduction of invasive, non-native species in a cost-effective and
environmentally sound manner to minimize their economic, ecological, and human health
impacts. Executive Order 13112 established the National Invasive Species Council made up of
federal agencies and departments and a supporting Invasive Species Advisory Committee
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
8 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
composed of State, local, and private entities. The Invasive Species Council and Advisory
Committee oversees and facilitates implementation of the Executive Order, including preparation
of a National Invasive Species Management Plan. 1.6.2
State
California Environmental
Quality Act
CEQA (13 Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) is a statute that requires State and
local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or
mitigate those impacts, if feasible. The CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations
Chapter 3) are the regulations that explain and interpret the law for both public agencies and
private development required to administer CEQA. The CEQA Guidelines specify that a project
has a significant impact to the environment if, among other things, it has the potential to
“substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or an animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range
of an Endangered, Rare, or Threatened species. . . .” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065[a][1]).
With regards to plants and animals, Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines independently defines
“Endangered” and “Rare” species separately from the definitions of the California Endangered
Species Act (CESA). Under CEQA, Endangered species of plants or animals are defined as those
whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy, while Rare species are
defined as those that (1) have such low numbers that they could become Endangered if their
environment worsens or (2) are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future (i.e.,
“threatened” as used in the FESA). In addition, a Lead Agency can consider a non-listed species
(e.g., species with a California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR], California Species of Special Concern,
or species of Local Concern) to be treated as if it were Endangered, Rare, or Threatened for the
purposes of CEQA if the species can be shown to meet the criteria in the definition of “Rare” or
“Endangered” in the Project region.
The CEQA Guidelines designate certain “trustee agencies” that have jurisdiction by law over
natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of California. CDFW
is the trustee responsible for conservation, protection, and management of wildlife, native plants,
and habitat necessary to maintain biologically sustainable populations.
Trustee agencies are
generally required to be notified of CEQA documents relevant to their jurisdiction, whether or not
these agencies have actual permitting authority or approval power over aspects of the underlying
project. CDFW shall provide the requisite biological expertise to review and comment upon
environmental documents and impacts arising from project activities and shall make
recommendations regarding those resources held in trust for the people of California (California
Fish and Game Code §1802).
California Endangered
Species Act
The State of California implements the CESA, which is enforced by the CDFW. While the
provisions of the CESA are similar to the FESA, CDFW maintains a list of California Threatened
and Endangered species, independent of the FESA Threatened and Endangered species list. It
also lists species that are considered Rare and Candidates for listing, which also receive
protection. The California list of Endangered and Threatened species is contained in Title 14,
Sections 670.2 (plants) and 670.5 (animals) of the California Code of Regulations.
State-listed Threatened and Endangered species are protected under provisions of CESA.
Activities that may result in take of individuals (defined in CESA as acts to “hunt, pursue, catch,
capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) are regulated by CDFW. While
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
9 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of “take” under CESA, the
CDFW has interpreted “take” to include the destruction of nesting, denning, or foraging habitat
necessary to maintain a viable breeding population of protected species. If it is determined that the “take” would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species, an
Incidental Take Permit (ITP) can be issued by CDFW per Section 2081 of the California Code of
Regulations. If a State-listed species is also federally listed, and the USFWS has issued an ITP
that satisfies CDFW’s requirements, CDFW may issue a consistency finding in accordance with
Section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code.
California Fish and Game
Code
CDFW administers the California Fish and Game Code. Particular sections of the Code are
applicable to natural resource management.
Native Plant
Protection
Sections 1900–1913 of the California Fish and Game Code were developed to preserve, protect,
and enhance Endangered and Rare plants in the State of California. The act requires all State
agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve Endangered and Rare native
plants. Provisions of the Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the
wild and require notification of the CDFW at least ten days in advance of any change in land use
that would adversely impact listed plants. This allows the CDFW to salvage listed plant species
that would otherwise be destroyed.
Unlawful Take or Destruction of Nests
or Eggs
These sections duplicate federal protection under the MBTA. Section 3503 of the California Fish
and Game Code makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any bird’s nest or any bird’s eggs.
Further, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (i.e., birds of prey, such as hawks,
eagles, and owls) and their nests and eggs are protected under Section 3503.5 of the California
Fish and Game Code. Section 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the take and
possession of any migratory nongame bird, as designated in the MBTA.
California Fully Protected
Species
The State of California created the “Fully Protected” classification in an effort to identify and
provide additional protection to those animals that are rare or that face possible extinction. Lists
were created for fish (§ 5515), amphibians, and reptiles (§ 5050), birds (§ 3511), and mammals
(§ 4700). Most of the species on these lists have subsequently been listed under the State and/or
Federal Endangered Species Acts; however, some have not been formally listed. Fully protected
species may not be taken or possessed at any time, except as provided in Sections 2081.7,
2081.9, or 2835. CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these
species, except for necessary scientific research.
California Fish and Game Code (Sections 1600
through 1616)
California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq. establish a process to ensure that projects
conducted in and around lakes, rivers, or streams do not adversely impact fish and wildlife
resources or, when adverse impacts cannot be avoided, ensures that adequate mitigation and/or
compensation is provided.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
10 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 requires any person, State, or local governmental
agency or public utility to notify CDFW before beginning any activity that will do one or more of
the following:
substantially obstruct or divert the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream,
or lake; or
deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or
ground pavement where it can pass into a river, stream, or lake.
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code applies to all perennial, intermittent, and
ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the State. CDFW’s regulatory authority extends to include
riparian habitat (including wetlands) supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the
presence or absence of hydric soils and saturated soil conditions.
Generally, CDFW takes
jurisdiction to the top bank of the stream or to the outer limit of the adjacent riparian vegetation
(outer drip line), whichever is greater. Notification is generally required for any project that will
take place in or in the vicinity of a river, stream, lake, or their tributaries.
This includes rivers or
streams that flow at least periodically or permanently through a bed or channel with banks that
support fish or other aquatic life and watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that
support or have supported riparian vegetation. A Section 1602 Lake or Streambed Alteration
Agreement would be required if impacts to identified CDFW jurisdictional areas occur.
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality
Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne) broadly defines “waters of the
State” as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the
State.” In 2020, the Office of Administrative Law began implementing the State Wetland Definition
and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to waters of the State. Under these
new regulations, the SWRCB and its nine RWQCBs assert jurisdiction over all existing WOTUS,
and all waters that would have been considered WOTUS under any historical definition.
Impacts to WOTUS are authorized by the RWQCBs through a Water Quality Certification per
Section 401 of the CWA. Impacts to “waters of the State” that are not considered WOTUS would
be authorized by Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) issued by the RWQCB, pursuant to
Porter-Cologne.
Pursuant to Porter-Cologne, the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs may require permits (known as
“Waste Discharge Requirements” or WDRs) for the fill or alteration of the waters of the State. The
term “waters of the State” is defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters,
within the boundaries of the state” (California Water Code, Section 13050[e]). The SWRCB and
RWQCB have interpreted their authority to require WDRs to extend to any proposal to fill or alter
waters of the State, even if those same waters are not under USACE jurisdiction. Pursuant to this
authority, the State and Regional Boards may require the submission of a “report of waste
discharge” under Section 13260, which is treated as an application for WDRs.
Porter-Cologne charges the SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs statewide with protecting water
quality throughout California. Typically, the SWRCB and RWQCB act in concert with the USACE
under Section 401 of the CWA in relation to permitting fill of federal WOTUS.
However, SWRCB
and the RWQCBs may require permits (i.e., WDRs) for the fill or alteration of the waters of the
State that are outside WOTUS.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
11 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
State Water Resources Control Board Resolution
No. 2019-0015
The California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Section 3831(w) states that “all waters of the United
States are also ‘waters of the state.’” This regulation has remained in effect despite Supreme
Court decisions such as Rapanos and SWANCC, which added limitations to what could be
considered a WOTUS. Because the interpretation of WOTUS in place at the time § 3831(w) was
adopted was broader than any post-Rapanos or post-SWANCC regulatory definitions that
incorporated more limitations into the scope of federal jurisdiction, it is consistent with the Water
Boards’ intent to include both historic and current definitions of WOTUS into the SWRCBs wetland
jurisdictional framework.
As set forth in Resolution No. 2009-0026, although the State of California has historically relied
primarily on requirements in the CWA to protect wetlands, U.S. Supreme Court rulings reducing
the jurisdiction of the CWA over wetland areas by limiting the definition of WOTUS necessitated
the use of California’s independent authorities under Porter-Cologne to protect these vital
resources.
The inclusion of both current and historic definitions of WOTUS ensures some regulatory stability
in an area that has otherwise been in flux. The status of a WOTUS may only be used to establish
that a wetland or water qualifies as waters of the State; it cannot be used to exclude a wetland or
water from qualifying as waters of the State. In other words, wetlands that are categorically
excluded from qualifying as a WOTUS may nevertheless qualify as waters of the State under
another jurisdictional category. Examples of waters of the State include (but are not limited to)
ephemeral streams and isolated wetlands.
On April 2, 2019, the SWRCB adopted Resolution No. 2019-0015, Amendment to the Water
Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California and the Water Quality Control Plan for Inland
Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California to Establish a State Wetland
Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of
the State (Procedures) for inclusion in the forthcoming Water Quality Control Plan for Inland
Surface Waters and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries and Ocean Waters of California (SWRCB
2019).
On January 26, 2021, the Superior Court in San Joaquin Tributaries Authority v. California State
Water Resources Control Board issued a judgment upholding the adoption of the Procedures as
part of the (1) California Ocean Plan and (2) Inland Surface Waters and Enclosed Bays and
Estuaries Water Quality Control Plan (ISWEBE Plan) for WOTUS as defined by the CWA.
On April 6, 2021, the SWRCB issued Resolution No. 2021-0012 confirming that the “State
Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the
State” (1) are in effect as state policy for water quality control for all waters of the State and
(2) shall be applied via the inland surface waters and enclosed bays and estuaries plan to only
waters of the United States. (SWRCB 2021).
The SWRCB and its nine RWQCBs have the authority to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill
material under § 401 CWA and Porter-Cologne. Dischargers that obtain a federal permit or license
that authorizes impacts to waters of the U.S. (i.e., waters that are within federal jurisdiction), such
as § 404 CWA and § 10 of the Safe Rivers and Harbors Act, must obtain certification from the
SWRCB or a RWQCB to ensure that the discharge does not violate State water quality standards
or any other appropriate requirement of State law. When a discharge is proposed to waters
outside of federal jurisdiction, the SWRCB and the RWQCBs regulate the discharge under
Porter-Cologne through the issuance of WDRs.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
12 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
Construction General Permit; Order 2009-
0009-DWQ
If a project will disturb one or more acres of soil during construction, project owners are required
by the SWRCB to obtain coverage under a General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water
Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009 0009 DWQ, as
authorized by § 402 CWA, [NPDES permit]). The Construction General Permit requires potential
dischargers of pollutants into waters of the U.S. to prepare a site-specific Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan, which establishes enforceable limits on discharges, requires effluent monitoring,
designates reporting requirements, and requires construction BMPs to reduce or eliminate point
and non-point source discharges of pollutants. Additionally, BMPs must be maintained, inspected
before and after each precipitation event, and repaired or replaced as necessary. The SWRCB
authorizes Construction General Permits.
For projects that would disturb less than one acre of soil, applicants for grading permits pursuant
to the proposed Project would be required to comply with the WDRs for Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County (except
those discharges originating from the City of Long Beach MS4), Order No. R4-2012-0175 as
mended by State Water Board Order WQ 2015-0075 and Los Angeles Water Board Order
R4-2012-0175-A01 NPDES Permit No. CAS004001 (referred to as the MS4 Permit), to which the
City of San Dimas is a Permittee. The MS4 Permit applies to the discharge of pollutants from
anthropogenic sources into WOTUS through stormwater and urban runoff conveyance systems,
including flood control facilities (e.g., storm drains).
Section IV(D)(8)(d)(1) of the MS4 applies to construction sites of less than one acre and requires
the implementation of an effective combination of erosion and sediment control BMPs to prevent
erosion and sediment loss. Sections IV(D)(8)(e) and IV(D)(8)(f) of the MS4 require operators of
public and private construction sites within its jurisdiction to select, install, implement, and
maintain BMPs that comply with its erosion and sediment control ordinance, and state that the
requirements contained in this part apply to all activities involving soil disturbance with the
exception of agricultural activities. Activities covered by this permit include but are not limited to
grading, vegetation clearing, soil compaction, paving, repaving, and linear underground/overhead projects. Grading projects of less than one acre would, with compliance
with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit, minimize or avoid potential violations of water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements, and would not substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality.
Applicants for grading permits pursuant to the proposed Project would be required to comply with
§ IV(D)(8)(d) of the MS4 Permit, which requires construction BMPs to reduce or eliminate point
and non-point source discharges of pollutants, including sediment. 1.6.3 Regional
Significant Ecological
Areas
The SEA Program was originally established as a part of the 1980 County General Plan, to help
conserve the genetic and physical diversity within Los Angeles County by designating biological
resource areas capable of sustaining themselves into the future. The General Plan 2035 (General
Plan) updated the SEA boundary map, goals, and policies in 2015.
SEAs are places where the County deems it important to facilitate a balance between
development and biological resource conservation. Where occurring within SEAs, development
activities are carefully guided and reviewed with a key focus on site design as a means for
conserving fragile resources such as streams, woodlands, and Threatened or Endangered
species and their habitats.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
13 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
The SEA Ordinance (Title 22 Planning and Zoning Code) implements the goals and policies of
the General Plan by establishing permitting requirements, design standards, and review
processes for development within SEAs. The goal of the SEA Ordinance is to guide development
to the least impactful areas on a property to avoid adverse impacts to biological resources
(LACRP 2019, pp. 6-7).
City of San Dimas Municipal Code – Tree
Preservation
Chapter 18.162 Tree Preservation Ordinance of the San Dimas Municipal Code states the goal
of preserving and protecting the mature significant trees, as well as other trees which are
determined to be desirable, growing within the City. A “mature significant tree” is defined as “any
tree within the city of an oak genus which measures eight inches or more in trunk diameter and/or
any other species of trees which measure ten inches or more in trunk diameter and/or a multi-trunk
tree(s) having a total circumference of thirty-eight inches or more; the multitrunk tree shall include at least one trunk with a diameter of a minimum of four inches”.
Exceptions are provided in §
18.162.080.
Mature significant trees may be removed from developed property with the approval of the
Director of Development Services or Development Plan Review Board, subject to procedures
listed in Section 18.162.040. “Developed” property refers to property that has been improved with
structures, buildings, surface materials, landscaping, and similar improvements in accordance
with all City ordinances.
A tree removal permit is required for undeveloped property. No issuance of any grading or building
permits or commencement of work shall be allowed on undeveloped property prior to the approval
of a permit. No mature significant tree which conforms to the standards and definitions of this
chapter shall be removed or relocated without obtaining the written approval of the Director of
Development Services. “Undeveloped” property refers to any parcel or parcels of land which does
not contain physical man-made improvements, and may be improved in conformance with
applicable development standards of the zoning classification where the property is located.
Undeveloped property shall also refer to any parcel or parcels of land which may or may not
contain improvements and on which development applications, including but not limited to,
development plan review board, variance, zone change, and subdivision, have been submitted.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
14 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
2.0 METHOD
S
This section summarizes survey methods used to conduct biological surveys for the Project. The
BSA includes approximately 96 acres. Surveys did not extend beyond the BSA (Figure 2). As discussed in the Introduction, Ultrasystems conducted biological surveys of the BSA in 2022.
As part of this effort, Ultrasystems conducted a literature review, vegetation mapping, general
plant and wildlife surveys, habitat assessments for special status species, and a jurisdictional
assessment of potential WOTUS and waters of the State; methods for these efforts are described
below. The Biological Resources Evaluation prepared by Ultrasystems (2022) was used to
support the IS/MND that was publicly circulated for the Project. The City received extensive public
comments on the mitigation approach for biological resources and hired Psomas to conduct a
peer review of the Biological Resources Evaluation and ultimately to prepare a mitigation
approach that addressed public comments. Psomas conducted a field visit to verify the vegetation
mapping and habitat assessment and subsequently updated the findings and mitigation approach
based on their professional judgement. As requested by the City, this Biological Technical Report
incorporates the extensive information collected by Ultrasystems during their literature review and
2022 biological surveys to describe existing conditions, including use of their figures. Psomas has
supplemented information with additional literature review and observations made during
Psomas’ 2023 field visit; methods for this field visit are described below.
The findings within this
report are based on the professional opinion of Psomas.
2.1 ULTRASYSTEMS SURVEYS
(2022)
Prior to fieldwork, Ultrasystems (2022) conducted an extensive literature review to identify habitat,
special status plant and wildlife species, potential jurisdictional areas, critical habitat, and wildlife
movement corridors potentially associated with the BSA. Ultrasystems Biologists visited the BSA
to conduct the following biological surveys: vegetation mapping; general plant and wildlife
surveys; habitat assessment for special status species, including burrowing owl (Athene
cunicularia); wildlife corridor evaluation; and jurisdictional assessment (Ultrasystems 2022).
Field work was conducted on June 30; July 1 and 19; August 4 and 5, 2022 by Michelle Tollett,
accompanied by Joyce Mak or Erik Segura. The general biological assessment covered
accessible areas of the BSA, including areas that would be impacted by the Project. The fieldwork
was conducted during the daytime walking slowly on foot. The burrowing owl habitat assessment
covered habitat types that are considered suitable for that species.
Biologists used binoculars
from strategic vantage points whenever direct access was not possible due to private property,
chain link fences, and locked gates; inaccessible areas were assessed using aerial photography
(Ultrasystems 2022).
Vegetation was mapped in the field on an aerial photograph or delineated using a Global
Positioning System (GPS) unit. Vegetation classification general follows A Manual of California
Vegetation, Second Edition (Sawyer et al. 2009) with modification to better represent existing site
conditions. Each habitat type identified was cross-referenced with Preliminary Descriptions of
Terrestrial Communities of California (Holland 1986) and CDFW’s California Natural Community
List (CDFW 2023b). Plant species were identified using The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of
California, second edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). All plant species observed were recorded in field
notes (Ultrasystems 2022).
Wildlife species were identified visually or audibly in the field during field surveys. Biologists
recorded signs of wildlife including tracks, burrows, dens, nest sites, scat, or remains. They also
surveyed areas that would potentially serve as roosting habitat or hibernacula for bat species.
Biologists also searched for natural and man-made travel routes that wildlife could use to traverse
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
15 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
the site as well as barriers to wildlife movement. All wildlife species observed were recorded in
field notes (Ultrasystems 2022).
2.2 LITERATURE
REVIEW
Prior to the start of surveys, Psomas reviewed the Ultrasystems (2022) Biological Resources
Evaluation for the Project and public comments submitted on the IS/MND.
Psomas then conducted an updated literature search to identify special status plants, wildlife,
habitats, and potential jurisdictional water resources reported from the vicinity of the Project. The
Project region is generally defined as the USGS San Dimas quadrangle and the eight surrounding
quadrangles, with the understanding that the northernmost quadrangles extend to elevations well
outside those found in the BSA. The following sources of information were reviewed during the
literature review:
CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB); USGS Baldwin Park, San
Dimas, Ontario, La Habra, Yorba Linda, Prado Dam, Azusa, Glendora, and Mt. Baldy
7.5-minute quadrangles (CDFW 2023a) The California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS’) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants;
USGS Baldwin Park, San Dimas, Ontario, La Habra, Yorba Linda, Prado Dam, Azusa,
Glendora, and Mt. Baldy 7.5-minute quadrangles (CNPS 2023a) CDFW’s Natural Communities List (CDFW 2023b), Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes,
and Lichens List (CDFW 2023c); and Special Animals List (CDFW 2023d)
Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora
Project 2023) Web Soil Survey data provided by the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service
(USDA NRCS 2023a)
The National Hydric Soils List (USDA
NRCS 2023b)
The National Wetlands Inventory’s Wetland Mapper
(USFWS 2023b)
VEGETATION MAPPING AND GENERAL SURVEYS
2.3 Psomas Senior Biologists Allison Rudalevige and Jonathan Aguayo performed a general plant
and wildlife survey and field verified vegetation mapping prepared by Ultrasystems on July 11,
2023. The map was updated, as necessary, based on current (i.e., July 11, 2023) conditions. To
update the existing vegetation map, an aerial photograph at a scale of 1- inch equals 400-feet
(1″=400′) was overlaid with the 2022 UltraSystems vegetation layer.
These base layers were
loaded onto Avenza Maps application on an Apple iPad. Vegetation that was inaccessible due to
steep topography or access issues was mapped from a distance with the use of binoculars.
Nomenclature of vegetation types generally follows that of A Manual of California Vegetation
(CNPS 2023b), which is the most current vegetation classification system used by CDFW for
assessing sensitive natural communities (CDFW 2023b). Nomenclature of plant taxa conform to
the Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CDFW 2023c) for special status
species and the Jepson eFlora (Jepson Flora Project 2023) for all other taxa. Representative
photographs of the BSA from Ultrasystems (2022) are included in Appendix A.
All plant and wildlife species detected during the survey were documented in field notes and are
listed in Appendix B. Active searches for reptiles and amphibians included lifting, overturning, and
carefully replacing rocks and debris. Birds were identified by visual and auditory recognition.
Surveys for mammals were conducted during the day and included searching for and identifying
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
16 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
diagnostic sign, including scat, footprints, scratch-outs, dust bowls, burrows, and trails. Taxonomy
and nomenclature for wildlife follows the Special Animals List (CDFW 2023c) for special status
species and, for other species, Crother (2017) for amphibians and reptiles, the American
Ornithological Society (AOS 2023) for birds, and the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural
History (SNMNH 2011) for mammals.
2.4 JURISDICTIONAL
ASSESSMENT
Jurisdictional water resources include WOTUS under the regulatory authority of the USACE;
waters of the State under the regulatory authority of the RWQCB; and the bed, bank, and channel
of all lakes, rivers, and/or streams (and associated riparian vegetation), under the regulatory
authority of CDFW. A formal jurisdictional delineation was not performed.
However, information
from the National Wetlands Inventory Wetland Mapper was used to identify potential jurisdictional
water resources in the BSA.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
17 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
3.0 3.1
EXISTING BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
3.1.1 Regional SETTING
Environment
The BSA is located in southeastern Los Angeles County. The BSA is located in the San Jose
Hills, between the San Gabriel Mountains that are approximately four miles to the north and the
Puente-Chino Hills that are approximately five miles to the south. Walnut Creek is located along
the northern boundary of the San Jose Hills; it is approximately 0.5 mile north of the BSA and is
vegetated with oak woodlands along the creek. Bonelli Regional Park/Puddingstone Reservoir
and associated open space areas are located at the eastern end of the San Jose Hills; it is
approximately 1.3 miles east of the BSA (and across SR-57). Open space hillsides, known as the
Walnut Islands, are located in the southern portion of the San Jose Hills; they are approximately
0.5 mile to the southeast of the BSA (and across I-10). All of these open space areas are within
the designated East San Gabriel Valley SEA. High density development and roadways surround
each of these areas just outside their designated SEA boundaries.
The BSA is located in an area consisting of a mix of residential development interspersed with
undeveloped canyons, ridgelines, and slopes. Higher density residential development and
roadways surrounds the BSA in all directions, although there is some additional natural open
space located to the south between East Covina Hills Road and I-10.
3.1.2 Climate
Southern California experiences a Mediterranean climate characterized by mild, rainy winters and
hot, dry summers. The temperature is moderated by the coastal influence of the Pacific Ocean,
which creates mild conditions throughout most of the year. The most distinguishing characteristic
of a Mediterranean climate is its seasonal precipitation. In Southern California, precipitation is
characterized by brief, intense storms between November and March. It is not unusual for the
majority of the annual precipitation to fall during a few storms over a short span of time.
The California Irrigation Management System operates a station at Cal Poly Pomona (Station 78),
approximately two miles southeast of the BSA. Based on data collected between January 1, 1990,
and December 31, 2022, this station recorded an average maximum air temperature of 76.8
degrees Fahrenheit (°F), an average minimum air temperature of 50.5°F, and an average annual
air temperature of 62.5°F (CIMIS 2023).
Rainfall patterns in the region are subject to extreme variations from year to year and longer-term
wet and dry cycles. Based on data collected between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2022,
this station recorded an average annual precipitation of approximately 15.2 inches (CIMIS 2023).
The minimum annual precipitation over that time period was 4.2 inches (in 2013) and the
maximum was 32.5 inches (in 1993). From January 1 and August 30, 2023, the station received
36.4 inches.
Climate change refers to any significant change in climate, such as the average temperature,
precipitation, or wind patterns over a period of time. Significant changes in global climate patterns
have been associated with an accumulation of greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere.
Some greenhouse gases occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural
processes, while others are created and emitted solely through human activities; the majority of
global warming is attributed to human activities. In addition to affecting temperature and
precipitation patterns, climate change is believed to be contributing to more extreme weather
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
18 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
events such as more frequent larger storms and extended periods of drought (USFS 2018;
USEPA 2017).
In Southern California’s forests, climate change effects are changing fire patterns and disease
outbreaks and affecting water supplies (USFS 2018). Fires are a natural part of the landscape,
but each year the fire season is coming earlier and ending later. In addition, the fires themselves
are burning hotter and have become more damaging and dangerous.
Similarly, insects are a
natural part of forested landscapes, but now the insects are spreading more rapidly because the
winter is not cold enough to reduce their populations. Also, insect-caused disease epidemics are
larger and last longer, killing more trees and increasing fire risk. The warmer winters are affecting
water supplies because the snowpacks are thinner and melt earlier in spring, so the water runs
out from the forest earlier in summer. Extended droughts also make trees more vulnerable to both
fire and insects (USFS 2018).
3.1.3 Local
Environment
The BSA is located in an area consisting of a mix of residential development interspersed with
natural open space. Generally, single family residences are located on the ridges of the BSA with
parcels that slope down to natural open space in the canyon bottoms.
Elevations within the BSA
range from approximately 680 to 980 feet above msl. Topography slopes down moderately from
Calle Cristina to East Covina Hills Road. There are no blueline streams in the BSA. Areas of
herbaceous vegetation are periodically mowed.
3.1.4 Soils
Soils mapped in the BSA include Urban land-Biscailuz-Pico complex, 0 to 2 percent slopes;
Zaca-Apollo, warm complex, 20 to 55 percent slopes; and Counterfeit-Urban land complex, 10 to
35 percent slopes, terraced (USDA NRCS 2022) (Figure 5). None of these soils are listed as
hydric on the National Hydric Soils List (USDA NRCS 2023).
The Zaca-Apollo, warm complex covers most of the BSA. It has clay or clay loam horizons over
bedrock. The parent material is colluvium and/or residuum weathered from sandstone and
siltstone. It is well drained and primarily found on hillslopes. The Urban land-Biscailuz-Pico complex has surface horizons of loam with sandy lower horizons.
The parent material is discontinuous human-transported material over mixed alluvium derived
from granite and/or sedimentary rock. It is found on alluvial fans and floodplains. Biscailuz is
somewhat poorly drained while Pico is well drained.
The Counterfeit-Urban land complex has clay loam, clay, and sandy loam horizons. The parent
material is human-transported material consisting mostly of colluvium and/or residuum weathered
from sedimentary rock. It is somewhat poorly drained and found on hillslopes.
3.2 VEGETATION TYPES AND OTHER
AREAS
Fourteen vegetation types and other landcovers were mapped in the BSA (Table 3, Figure 6).
The text below describes the vegetation composition in the BSA; the corresponding vegetation
classification as provided by A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b); and whether the
vegetation type would be considered a sensitive natural community (CDFW 2023b).
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
19 Biological Technical
Report
San
Dimas MCTA
Legend
Project
Boundary
500ft Biological Study
Area 1232
Soil Map
Unit 1007-Urban landBiscailuz-Pico
complex, 0 to 2 percent
slopes 1141-Zaca-Apollo, warm
complex,
20 to 55 percent slopes 1232 1232-Counterfeit-Urban
land
complex, 10 to 35 percent
slopes,
terraced
1232
Key Map
Kern
County 1232 1007 San
Bernardin
o
County
1141 1141
Ventura
County Los
Angeles County Project
Location
1232 1232
1141
Riverside
County
P a c i f i c
O c e a n Orange
County 1007
¯
1007 Map not to
scale 1141 Source: UtlraSystems
2022
86'$ꢀ6RLO
V
Figure ꢀ
Disclaimer: Representations on this map or illustration are intended only to indicate locations of project parameters reported in the legend. Project parameter information supplied by others (see layer credits) may not have been independently verified for accuracy by UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. This map or illustration should not be used for, and does not replace, final grading plans or other documents that should be professionally certified for development purposes. Path:
\\gissvr\GIS\Projects\7145_SanDimas_MunicipalCode_ISMND\MXDs\BIO\7145_SanDimas_MCTA_4_4_Soil_11 x17_2022_09_29.mxd
(10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\ex_USGS Map.pdf
San Dimas
MCTA
Legend
Project
Boundary Conservation
Easement
Parcel Coastal Sage
ScrubCalifornia Sagebrush Scrub
(Disturbed)
California Buckwheat Scrub Rancho
California Buckwheat Scrub (Disturbed)
California Sagebrush - California
Buckwheat Scrub
California Sagebrush - Black Sage Scrub
Coast Prickly Pear Scrub Native
Woodland California Walnut
Groves
California Walnut Groves
(Disturbed)
Coast Live Oak Woodland Non-Native (Disturbed) Woodland Pepper Tree Groves
Eucalyptus Non-Native Groves Herbaceous Upland Mustards or Star-thistle Fields Upland Mustards or Star-thistle Fields
(Mowed)
Developed Areas Developed/Orname
ntal
²
0 0
175
50 350
Feet
100
Meters Scale:
1:4,200
Data Source: Vegetation map developed by
UltraSystems (2022)
and updated by Psomas
(2023)
Aerial Source: Nearmap
2023
Vegetation Types and Other
Areas
Figure 6
(Rev: 10/09/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\ex_VegetationTypes.pdf
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE
VEGETATION TYPES AND OTHER 3
AREAS
IN THE BSA
Sensitive
Vegetation
Community
(CDFW
2023b)
Total
Vegetation
in BSA
A Manual of California
Vegetation Type or Other Vegetation
Area
Alliance (acres)
Coastal Sage
Scrub Artemisia californica –
(Salvia
leucophylla) Shrubland
Alliance
California Sagebrush Scrub
(Disturbed)
No
No
No
0.089
2.000
1.927
Eriogonum fasciculatum
Shrubland California Buckwheat
Scrub Alliance
Eriogonum fasciculatum
Shrubland California Buckwheat Scrub
(Disturbed) Alliance
Artemisia californica –
(Salvia
leucophylla) Shrubland
Alliance with
Eriogonum fasciculatum
Shrubland
Alliance
California Sagebrush – California
Buckwheat
Scrub
No 0.251
3.480 Artemisia californica –
Salvia
mellifera Shrubland
Alliance
California Sagebrush – Black
Sage Scrub
Coast Prickly Pear Scrub
No
Opuntia littoralis – Opuntia
oricola –
Cylindropuntia prolifera
Shrubland
Alliance
Yes 3.848
Subtotal Coastal Sage
Scrub
11.595
Native
Woodland Juglans California
Forest & California Walnut
Groves
Yes
Yes
No
27.057
12.529
Woodland
Juglans California Alliance
Forest & California Walnut Groves
(Disturbed)
Coast Live Oak Woodland
(Disturbed)
Woodland
Quercus agrifolia Alliance Woodland &
Forest 1.801 Alliance
Subtotal Native
Woodland
41.387
Non-Native
Woodland Schinus (molle,
terebinthifolius) –
Myoporum laetum Forest
&
Woodland Semi-Natural
Alliance
Pepper Tree
Groves
Eucalyptus
Groves
No
No
0.657
Eucalyptus spp. – Ailanthus
altissima
– Robinia pseudoacacia
Woodland
Semi-Natural Alliance
0.797
Subtotal Non-Native
Woodland
1.454
Non-Native
Herbaceous Brassica nigra –
Centaurea
(solstitialis, melitensis)
Herbaceous
Semi-Natural Alliance
Upland Mustards or Star-thistle
Fields
No
No
9.179
Brassica nigra –
Centaurea
(solstitialis, melitensis)
Herbaceous
Semi-Natural Alliance
Upland Mustards or Star-thistle Fields
(mowed)
12.094
Subtotal Non-Native
Herbaceous
Developed Areas
21.273
Developed/Ornamenta
l
Subtotal Developed
Areas
Total
N/A No 20.954
20.954
96.663
a
b
Ranked as sensitive based on less than 10 stands sampled; may be more widespread (CDFW 2023d).
This blended community would be characterized more as riparian herb than southern black willow forest; therefore, it would not be considered a
sensitive community. BSA: Biological Survey
Area
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
20 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
3.2.1 Coastal Sage
Scrub
Coastal sage scrub communities mapped in the BSA consist of California sagebrush scrub
(disturbed), California buckwheat scrub, California buckwheat scrub (disturbed), California
sagebrush – California buckwheat scrub, California sagebrush – black sage scrub, and coast
prickly pear scrub.
California Sagebrush Scrub
(Disturbed)
Approximately 0.089 acre of California sagebrush scrub (disturbed) occurs in the BSA. It is
located in a small patch in the southern half of the BSA. In the BSA, this vegetation type is
dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). Other native species observed include
laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), phacelia (Phacelia sp.), and largebracted morning-glory (Calystegia macrostegia). It is categorized as disturbed because it is degraded by the presence
of non-native species such as black mustard (Brassica nigra) and tocalote (Centaurea melitensis).
The California sagebrush scrub (disturbed) in the BSA corresponds to the Artemisia californica –
(Salvia leucophylla) Shrubland Alliance mixed with the Brassica nigra – Centaurea [solstitialis,
melitensis] Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance (CNPS 2023b). The Artemisia californica –
(Artemisia californica) Shrubland Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural community by
CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
California Buckwheat
Scrub
Approximately 2.000 acres of California buckwheat scrub occurs in the BSA.
It is located in a few
small, isolated patches. This vegetation type is dominated by California buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculatum). A small amount of oat (Avena sp.) and grayish shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia
incana) is also present.
The California buckwheat scrub in the BSA corresponds to the Eriogonum fasciculatum Shrubland
Alliance (CNPS 2023b). The Eriogonum fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance is not considered a
sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b). California Buckwheat Scrub (Disturbed)
Approximately 1.927 acres of California buckwheat scrub (disturbed) occurs in the BSA. It is
located in patches along East Covina Hills Road. In the BSA, this vegetation type consists of an
open cover of California buckwheat shrubs. These areas are characterized as disturbed because
there is a low cover of California buckwheat and they are heavily degraded by the presence of
non-native grasses and forbs, including grayish shortpod mustard, black mustard, ripgut grass
(Bromus diandrus), oat, and prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola). Some native species are also
present, including rocky malacothrix (Malacothrix saxatilis), phacelia, and Wright’s jimsonweed
(Datura wrightii).
The California buckwheat scrub (disturbed) in the BSA corresponds to the Eriogonum
fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance mixed with the Brassica nigra – Centaurea [solstitialis,
melitensis] Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS
2023b). As noted above, the Eriogonum fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance is not considered a
sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
California Sagebrush – California
Buckwheat Scrub
Approximately 0.251 acre of California sagebrush – California buckwheat scrub occurs in the
BSA. It is located near the northeastern edge of the BSA. In the BSA, this vegetation type is R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
21 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
co-dominated by California sagebrush and California buckwheat. A small amount of grayish
shortpod mustard is also present.
The California sagebrush – California buckwheat scrub in the BSA corresponds most closely to
the Artemisia californica – Eriogonum fasciculatum Association in A Manual of California
Vegetation (CNPS 2023b). This Association is not considered a sensitive natural community by
CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
California Sagebrush – Black
Sage Scrub
Approximately 3.480 acres of California sagebrush – black sage scrub occurs in the BSA. It is
located on a slope near the southwest corner of the BSA. In the BSA, this vegetation type is
co-dominated by California sagebrush and black sage (Salvia mellifera). A small amount of oat
and grayish shortpod mustard is also present.
The California sagebrush – black sage scrub in the BSA corresponds to the Artemisia californica
– Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b). The
Artemisia californica – Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural
community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
Coast Prickly Pear
Scrub
Approximately 3.848 acres of coast prickly pear scrub occurs in the BSA.
It is located in the
southwest corner of the BSA. This vegetation type is characterized by the presence of scattered
patches of coast prickly pear (Opuntia littoralis) that is greater than 30 percent relative cover and
is mixed with other coastal sage scrub species. The dominant species growing between the
patches of cactus include California buckwheat and California sagebrush with a small amount
deerweed (Acmispon glaber). A member of the Boraginaceae (either dessicated [dried out]
popcorn flower [Cryptantha sp.] or fiddleneck [Amsinckia sp.]) was also observed but was not
identifiable due to the timing of the survey, which was well past the blooming period. A small
amount of non-native vegetation is present and includes tocalote and grayish shortpod mustard.
The coast prickly pear scrub in the BSA corresponds to the Opuntia littoralis – Opuntia
oricola – Cylindropuntia prolifera Shrubland Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS
2023b). The Opuntia littoralis – Opuntia oricola – Cylindropuntia prolifera Shrubland Alliance is
considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
3.2.2 Native
Woodland
Native woodland communities mapped in the BSA consist of California walnut groves, California
walnut groves (disturbed), and coast live oak woodland (disturbed).
California Walnut
Groves
Approximately 27.057 acres of California walnut groves occurs in the BSA.
They are located on
slopes and drainage edges throughout the BSA. In the BSA, this vegetation type is dominated by
southern California black walnut (Juglans californica) that is more than 50 percent relative cover.
Some areas have a closed canopy while other areas have a canopy that is open; a few individual
trees are mapped. A few scattered coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) are also present. The
understory contains a mix of native and non-native species. Native species include phacelia,
chilicothe (Marah macrocarpa), and western poison oak
(Toxicodendron diversilobum).
Non-native species include tocalote, Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus ssp. pycnocephalus),
grayish shortpod mustard, and oats.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
22 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
The California walnut groves in the BSA correspond to the Juglans californica Forest & Woodland
Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b). The Juglans californica Forest &
Woodland Alliance is considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
Southern California black walnut is also considered a special status plant species and is
discussed below in Section 3.7.
California Walnut Groves
(Disturbed)
Approximately 12.529 acres of California walnut groves (disturbed) occurs in the BSA. They are
located on slopes throughout the BSA. This vegetation type contains an open canopy of southern
California black walnut that is more “savannah-like” than the undisturbed form of California walnut
groves (described above). The understory and areas between the trees are dominated by
non-native species such as grayish shortpod mustard and oat.
The California walnut groves (disturbed) in the BSA corresponds to the Juglans californica Forest
& Woodland Alliance mixed with the Brassica nigra – Centaurea [solstitialis, melitensis]
Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b). The
Juglans californica Forest & Woodland Alliance is considered a sensitive natural community by
CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
Coast Live Oak Woodland
(Disturbed)
Approximately 1.801 acres of coast live oak woodland (disturbed) occurs in the BSA. It is located
on slopes throughout the BSA. This vegetation type is co-dominated by coast live oak and
non-native species such as pepper (Schinus molle). The understory and areas between trees
contain non-native species such as grayish shortpod mustard and oat.
It is categorized as
disturbed because coast live oak makes up less than 50 percent relative cover of the tree layer
and because it is mixed with non-native trees.
The coast live oak woodland (disturbed) in the BSA corresponds to the Quercus agrifolia
Woodland & Forest Alliance mixed with the Schinus (molle, terebinthifolius) – Myoporum laetum
Forest & Woodland Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b). The Quercus
agrifolia Woodland & Forest Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW
(CDFW 2023b).
3.2.3 Non-Native
Woodland
Non-native woodland communities mapped in the BSA consist of pepper tree groves and
eucalyptus groves.
Pepper Tree
Groves
Per A Manual of California Vegetation, pepper tree groves occur in coastal canyons, washes,
slopes, riparian areas, and roadsides. The tree canopy is open to continuous. Shrubs are
infrequent or common while the herbaceous layer is simple to diverse. For groves of pepper trees,
this vegetation type has greater than 60 or 80 percent relative cover in the tree layer.
Approximately 0.657 acre of pepper tree groves occurs in the BSA. It is located in small patches
adjacent to roads, either as an extension of ornamental landscaping or on natural slopes. This
vegetation type has a canopy of pepper tree (Schinus molle). The area adjacent to Paseo Lucinda
has a turf understory while the areas adjacent to East Covina Hills Road have an understory
dominated by non-native vegetation such as Italian thistle and horehound (Marrubium vulgare).
Scattered native species, such as chilicothe and phacelia, are also present.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
23 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
The pepper tree groves in the BSA correspond to the Schinus (molle, terebinthifolius) – Myoporum
laetum Forest & Woodland Semi-Natural Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS
2023b). This Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
Eucalyptus
Groves
Approximately 0.797 acre of Eucalyptus groves occur in the BSA. This vegetation type is located
in patches along Calle Cristina. This vegetation type has a canopy of gum; scattered coast live
oak and pine ( The Eucalyptus groves in the BSA correspond to the Pinus sp.) are also present. Eucalyptus spp. – Ailanthus
altissima – Robinia pseudoacacia Semi-Natural Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation
(CNPS 2023b). The Eucalyptus spp. – Ailanthus altissima – Robinia pseudoacacia Semi-Natural
Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
3.2.4 Non-Native
Herbaceous
Non-native herbaceous communities mapped in the BSA consist of upland mustards or star-thistle
fields and upland mustards or star-thistle fields (disturbed). These areas are dominated by
non-herbaceous species, many of which are considered invasive. Upland Mustards or Star-thistle Fields
Approximately 9.179 acres of upland mustards or star-thistle fields occurs in the BSA. This
vegetation type occurs on slopes throughout the BSA. This vegetation type is dominated
non-native grasses and forbs, primarily grayish shortpod mustard and black mustard. Tocalote
and oats are also present. Some areas have scattered native species and intergrade with native
vegetation types such as California walnut groves and California buckwheat scrub.
The upland mustards or star-thistle fields in the BSA correspond to the Brassica nigra – Centaurea
(solstitialis, melitensis) Herbaceous Semi-Natural Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation
(CNPS 2023b). The Brassica nigra – Centaurea (solstitialis, melitensis) Herbaceous Semi-Natural
Alliance is not considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
Upland Mustards or Star-thistle Fields
(Mowed)
Approximately 12.094 acres of upland mustards or star-thistle fields (mowed) occurs in the BSA.
At the time of the 2023 surveys, mowed vegetation consisted primarily of a thatch of oats with
grayish shortpod mustard. Some areas had barley (Hordeum vulgare), common sow thistle
(Sonchus oleraceus), castor bean (Ricinus communis), Wright’s jimsonweed, and climbing
milkweed (Funastrum cynanchoides var. hartwegii).
The upland mustards or star-thistle fields (mowed) in the BSA correspond to a mix of Brassica
nigra – Centaurea (solstitialis, melitensis) and Avena spp. – Bromus spp. Herbaceous
Semi-Natural Alliances in A Manual of California Vegetation (CNPS 2023b).
Neither the Brassica
nigra – Centaurea (solstitialis, melitensis) or the Avena spp. – Bromus spp. Herbaceous
Semi-Natural Alliances are considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b).
3.2.5 Developed
Areas
Developed/Orname
ntal
Approximately 20.954 acres of developed/ornamental areas occur in the BSA. This landcover
includes residential structures, roadways, and associated landscaping throughout the BSA. R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
24 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
Ornamental vegetation is varied and includes trees, shrubs, herbs, and turf grass. Representative
landscaping species include olive (Olea europaea), pine, pepper, jacaranda (Jacaranda sp.),
bougainvillea (Bougainvillea sp.), night-blooming jasmine (Cestrum nocturnum), and cultivated
roses (Rosa sp.).
As this landcover is developed with associated landscaping that is primarily non-native and
ornamental, it does not correspond to a vegetation Alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation
(CNPS 2023b). These areas would not be considered sensitive natural communities by CDFW
(CDFW 2023b).
3.3 WILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND MOVEMENT
PATTERNS
Vegetation in the BSA provide habitat for many wildlife species.
Common wildlife species
observed or expected to occur are discussed below.
3.3.1 Fish
Most creeks and waterways in southern California are ephemeral (subject to periods of high water
flow in winter and spring and little to no flow in late summer and fall).
Drainages in the BSA would
be expected to convey flow due to nuisance runoff or after precipitation events. There is no
aboveground connectivity to a larger downstream waterway. Therefore, fish are not expected to
occur in the BSA.
3.3.2 Amphibians
Amphibians require moisture for at least a portion of their life cycle, and many require standing or
flowing water for reproduction. Terrestrial species may or may not require standing water for
reproduction; they survive in dry areas by aestivating (i.e., remaining beneath the soil in burrows
or under logs and leaf litter and emerging only when temperatures are low and humidity is high).
Many of these species’ habitats are associated with water, and they emerge to breed once the
rainy season begins. Soil moisture conditions can remain high throughout the year in some habitat
types, depending on factors such as amount of vegetation cover, elevation, and slope/aspect.
Habitat for amphibians in the BSA is relatively limited due to the lack of standing or flowing water
sources. No amphibians were observed during 2022 surveys conducted by Ultrasystems or the
2023 surveys conducted by Psomas (Ultrasystems 2022). Amphibian species that may occur in
the BSA include western toad (Anaxyrus boreas), Baja California treefrog (Pseudacris
hypochondriaca), and black-bellied salamander (Batrachoseps nigriventris).
3.3.3 Reptiles
Reptiles are well-adapted to life in arid habitats. They have several physiological adaptations that
allow them to conserve water. Reptiles can also become dormant during weather extremes,
allowing them to survive prolonged droughts and paucity of food (Ruben and Hillenius 2005).
Reptilian diversity and abundance typically vary with vegetation type and character.
Common reptile species observed in the BSA during either the 2022 surveys conducted by
Ultrasystems or the 2023 surveys conducted by Psomas include common side-blotched lizard
(Uta stansburiana) and western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) (Ultrasystems 2022). Other
reptile species expected to occur include southern alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata), western
skink (Plestiodon skiltonianus), red racer (Coluber flagellum piceus), California striped racer
(Coluber lateralis lateralis), California kingsnake (Lampropeltis californiae), gopher snake
(Pituophis catenifer), and southern Pacific rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus helleri).
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
25 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
3.3.4 Birds
A variety of bird species are expected to be residents in the BSA, using the habitats throughout
the year. Other species are present only during certain seasons. For example, the white-crowned
sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys) is expected to occur during the winter and migrates to the
northern forests for breeding in the spring.
The following resident bird species were observed in the BSA during either the 2022 surveys
conducted by Ultrasystems or the 2023 surveys conducted by Psomas:
California quail (Callipepla
californica), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), acorn
woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California scrub jay
(Aphelocoma californica), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), oak titmouse (Baeolophus
inornatus), Bewick’s wren (Thryomanes bewickii), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos),
European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), lesser goldfinch
(Spinus psaltria), and California towhee (Melozone crissalis).
Migratory species observed in the BSA that are present during the nesting season include
ash-throated flycatcher (Myiarchus cinerascens) and phainopepla (Phainopepla nitens).
Wintering species that may occur in the BSA include ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula),
cedar waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum), yellow-rumped warbler (Setophaga coronata), and
white-crowned sparrow.
Raptors (birds of prey) observed in the BSA include Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), red-tailed
hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), and red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus). Other raptor species that
are expected to occur include great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus), barn owl (Tyto alba), western
screech owl (Megascops kennicottii), and American kestrel (Falco sparverius). The turkey vulture
(Cathartes aura), a scavenger, would also be expected to occur.
3.3.5 Mammals
Small mammals observed in the BSA during either the 2022 surveys conducted by Ultrasystems
or the 2023 surveys conducted by Psomas include Eastern fox squirrel (Sciurus niger), western
gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), Botta’s
pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), and desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Medium to
large-sized mammals, or their sign, observed include coyote (Canis latrans).
Other species that
may occur include northern raccoon (Procyon lotor), Virginia opossum (Didelphia virginiana), and
striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis).
Bats occur throughout most of Southern California and may use any portion of the BSA as
foraging habitat. Most of the bats that could potentially occur in the BSA are inactive during the
winter and either hibernate or migrate, depending on the species. Bats may roost in crevices of
structures or large trees in the BSA. Bat species that may occur in the BSA for foraging and/or
roosting include Mexican free-tailed bat (Tadarida brasiliensis), canyon bat (Parastrellus
hesperus), California myotis (Myotis californicus), and Yuma bat (Myotis yumanensis).
3.3.6 Wildlife
Movement
Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by
rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space
areas by urbanization creates isolated “islands” of wildlife habitat. In the absence of habitat
linkages that allow movement to adjoining open space areas, various studies have concluded that
some wildlife species, especially the larger and more mobile mammals, will not likely persist over
time in fragmented or isolated habitat areas because they prohibit the infusion of new individuals
and genetic information (MacArthur and Wilson 1967; Soule 1987; Harris and Gallagher 1989;
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
26 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
Bennett 1990). Corridors mitigate the effects of this fragmentation by (1) allowing animals to move
between remaining habitats, thereby permitting depleted populations to be replenished and
promoting genetic exchange; (2) providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human
disturbances, thus reducing the risk that catastrophic events (such as fire or disease) will result
in population or local species extinction; and (3) serving as travel routes for individual animals as
they move in their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other necessary resources
(Noss 1983; Farhig and Merriam 1985; Simberloff and Cox 1987; Harris and Gallagher 1989).
Wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories: (1) dispersal (e.g.,
juvenile animals from natal areas or individuals extending range distributions); (2) seasonal
migration; and (3) movements related to home range activities (e.g., foraging for food or water;
defending territories; or searching for mates, breeding areas, or cover). A number of terms such
as “wildlife corridor,” “travel route,” “habitat linkage,” and “wildlife crossing” have been used in
various wildlife movement studies to refer to areas in which wildlife move from one area to
another. To clarify the meaning of these terms and to facilitate the discussion on wildlife
movement in this analysis, these terms are defined as follows:
A. Travel route – a landscape feature (such as a ridgeline, drainage, canyon, or riparian
strip) within a larger natural habitat area that is used frequently by animals to facilitate
movement and to provide access to necessary resources (e.g., water, food, cover, den
sites). The travel route is generally preferred because it provides the least amount of
topographic resistance in moving from one area to another. It contains adequate food,
water, and/or cover while moving between habitat areas; and it provides a relatively direct
link between target habitat areas.
B. Wildlife corridor – a piece of habitat, usually linear in nature, that connects two or more
habitat patches that would otherwise be fragmented or isolated from one another. Wildlife
corridors are usually bound by urban land areas or other areas unsuitable for wildlife. The
corridor generally contains suitable cover, food, and/or water to support species and to
facilitate their movement while in the corridor. Larger, landscapelevel corridors (often referred to as “habitat linkages” or “landscape linkages”) can provide both transitory and
resident habitat for a variety of species.
C. Wildlife crossing – a small, narrow area, relatively short in length and generally
constricted in nature that allows wildlife to pass under or through an obstacle or barrier
that otherwise hinders or prevents movement. Crossings typically are man-made and
include culverts, underpasses, drainage pipes, and tunnels to provide access across or
under roads, highways, pipelines, or other physical obstacles.
These often represent
“choke points” along a movement corridor, which may impede wildlife movement and
increase the risk of predation.
It is important to note that in a large, open space area with few or no man-made or naturally
occurring physical constraints to wildlife movement, wildlife corridors (as defined above) may not
yet exist. Given an open space area that is both large enough to maintain viable populations of
species and to provide a variety of travel routes (e.g., canyons, ridgelines, trails, riverbeds, and
others), wildlife will use these “local” routes while searching for food, water, shelter, and mates
and will not need to cross into other large, open space areas. Based on their size, location,
vegetative composition, and availability of food, some of these movement areas (e.g., large
drainages and canyons) are used for longer lengths of time and serve as source areas for food,
water, and cover, particularly for small- and medium-sized animals. This is especially true if the
travel route is within a larger open space area. However, once open space areas become
constrained and/or fragmented as a result of urban development or construction of physical
obstacles (such as roads and highways), the remaining landscape features or travel routes that
connect the larger open space areas become corridors as long as they provide adequate space,
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
27 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
cover, food, and water and do not contain obstacles or distractions (e.g., man-made noise,
lighting) that would generally hinder wildlife movement.
In general, wildlife corridor discussions typically focus on larger, more mobile mammal species
such as southern mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), mountain lion (Puma concolor), and coyote.
Discussing the needs of larger mammal species typically also captures the needs of mid-sized
mammals such as foxes (Vulpes sp.), northern raccoon, striped skunk, and American badger
(Taxidea taxus). Most mammal species have relatively large home ranges through which they
move to find adequate food, water, and breeding and wintering habitat. It is assumed that corridors
that serve larger, more mobile mammal species also serve as corridors for many smaller, less
mobile species, such as reptiles, amphibians, and rodents. Regional movement for these species
facilitates gene flow and requires at least some local “stepping stone” movement of individuals
between populations.
Discussions of wildlife corridors generally focus less on bird species because they are more
mobile and can fly over inhospitable habitat. Long-distance migrants are able to move great
distances over unsuitable habitat; however, they must have stopover sites to rest and forage in
order to continue their migration. Many resident species are habitat-specific, moving only through
their preferred habitat type(s), or similar adjacent habitat; wildlife corridors would be more
important for these bird species.
Ideally, an open space corridor should encompass a heterogeneous mix of vegetation types to
accommodate the ecological requirements of a wide variety of resident species in any particular
region. Most species typically prefer adequate vegetation cover during movement, which can
serve as both a food source and as protection from weather and predators.
Drainages, riparian
areas, and forested canyon bottoms typically serve as natural movement corridors because these
features provide cover, food, and often water for a variety of species. Very few species will move
across large expanses of open, uncovered habitat unless it is the only option available to them.
Landscape linkages must also provide “live-in” habitat (food and cover) to support smaller and
less mobile species, such as amphibians, reptiles, and rodents, that require longer periods to
traverse a corridor.
Although the BSA includes undeveloped open space mixed with residential development, it is
surrounded by higher density residential development and roadways/highways in all directions,
although there is some additional natural open space located to the south between East Covina
Hills Road and I-10. There are significant barriers to wildlife movement surrounding the BSA,
including I-10 to the south and SR-57 to east. More mobile species (e.g., birds) and species that
can cross through urban areas (e.g., coyotes, raccoons) may be able to navigate through urban
areas to reach larger areas of open space, such as those in the East San Gabriel Valley SEA
(e.g., Walnut Creek, Bonelli Regional Park/Puddingstone Reservoir).
However, because the BSA
does not provide a connection between areas of open space, it would not serve as a wildlife
corridor. This was confirmed by reviewing the CDFW Habitat Connectivity Viewer; the BSA is not
within any area identified for wildlife movement (e.g., Essential Connectivity Areas, Natural
Landscape Blocks, or Small Natural Areas) (CDFW 2023e). Natural drainages and ridgelines
serve as travel routes for local wildlife movement within the BSA and the open space south of
East Covina Hills Road. Local wildlife movement could occur across all habitat types but is
expected to be concentrated in native habitat types with shrub and tree cover (i.e., coastal sage
scrub, native woodland), and to some extent, also in the non-native woodland. Species that are
less restricted in movement (e.g., birds) and/or are well-adapted to urbanized areas (e.g., northern
raccoon, striped skunk, or coyote) are more likely to move between the BSA and adjacent areas.
Predators (e.g., coyotes) and smaller mammals (e.g., northern raccoon and striped skunks) are
known to use medium- to low-density residential neighborhoods, golf courses, and washes for
hunting and foraging, using washes (natural and channelized), culverts, underpasses, and city
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
28 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
streets for travelling (Baker and Timm 1998; Grubbs and Krausman 2009; Ng et al. 2004). Urban
areas also provide anthropogenic food sources such as discarded human food, pet food, fruit
trees, and domestic animals (Larson et al. 2020). 3.4 SPECIAL STATUS BIOLOGICAL
RESOURCES
The following section addresses special status biological resources that were observed, reported,
or have the potential to occur in the BSA. These resources include plant and wildlife species that
have been afforded special status and/or recognition by federal and State resource agencies, as
well as private conservation organizations. In general, the principal reason an individual taxon
(i.e., species, subspecies, or variety) is given such recognition is the documented or perceived
decline or limitations of its population size, geographic range, and/or distribution resulting in most
cases from habitat loss. In addition to species, special status biological resources include
vegetation types and habitats that are either unique; of relatively limited distribution in the region;
or provide a high value for wildlife. These resources have been defined by federal, State, and
local government conservation programs. Sources used to determine the special status of
biological resources are listed below.
Habitats – the CNDDB (CDFW 2023a) and the California Natural Communities List
(CDFW 2023b). Plants – the CNDDB (CDFW 2023a); the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants
(CNPS 2023a); various USFWS Federal Register notices regarding listing status of plant
species; and the List of Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens (CDFW 2023c).
Wildlife – the CNDDB (CDFW 2023a); the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships
Database System (CDFW 2014); various USFWS Federal Register notices regarding
listing status of wildlife species; and the List of Special Animals (CDFW 2023d).
3.4.1 Definitions
A federally Endangered species is one facing extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its geographic range. A federally Threatened species is one likely to become Endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
The presence of any
federally listed Threatened or Endangered species in a project impact area generally imposes
constraints on development, particularly if development would result in “take” of the species or its
habitat. The term “take” means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture,
collect, or attempt to engage in such conduct. “Harm” in this sense can include any disturbance
of species’ habitats during any portion of its life history.
Federally Proposed or Candidate species are those officially proposed by the USFWS to be
added to the federal Threatened and Endangered species list. Because proposed species may
soon be listed as Threatened or Endangered, these species could become listed prior to or during
implementation of a proposed project. The presence of a Proposed or Candidate species within
a project impact area may impose constraints on development if they are listed prior to issuance
of project permits, particularly if a project would result in “take” of the species or its habitat.
The State of California considers an Endangered species to be one whose prospects of survival
and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy, a Threatened species as one present in such small
numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an Endangered species in the near future
in the absence of special protection or management, and a Rare species as one present in such
small numbers throughout its range that it may become Endangered if its present environment
worsens. “Rare species” only applies only to California native plants. Statelisted Threatened and Endangered species are protected against take unless an Incidental Take Permit is obtained from
the resource agencies. The presence of any State-listed Threatened or Endangered species in a
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
29 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
project impact area generally imposes constraints on development, particularly if a project would
result in “take” of the species or its habitat.
California Species of Special Concern is an informal designation used by CDFW for some
declining wildlife species that are not State Candidates for listing. This designation does not
provide legal protection but signifies that these species are recognized as special status by
CDFW. A few years ago, CDFW down-listed several species from Species of Special Concern to
the Watch List. Although not considered special status, Watch List species are tracked by the
CNDDB.
Species that are California Fully Protected and Protected include those protected by special
legislation for various reasons, such as the mountain lion and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus).
Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time.
California Protected species
include those species that may not be taken or possessed at any time except under special permit
from CDFW issued pursuant to Sections 650 and 670.7 of the California Code of Regulations, or
Section 2081 of the California Fish and Game Code.
Species of Local Concern are those that have no official status with the resource agencies but
are being watched because either the region has a unique population or the species is declining
in the region. Special Animal is a general term that refers to species that the CNDDB is interested in tracking,
regardless of legal or protective status. This term includes species designated as any of the above
terms but also includes species that may be considered biologically rare; restricted in distribution;
declining throughout their range; have a critical, vulnerable stage in their life cycle that warrants
monitoring; are on the periphery of their range and are threatened with extirpation in California;
are associated with special status habitats; or are considered by other State or federal agencies
or private organizations to be sensitive or declining.
The CRPR, formerly known as CNPS List, is a ranking system by the Rare Plant Status Review
group1 and managed by the CNPS and CDFW (CNPS 2023a). A CRPR summarizes information
on the distribution, rarity, and endangerment of California’s vascular plants.
Plants with a CRPR
of 1A are presumed extirpated from the State because they have not been seen in the wild in
California for many years and they are either rare or extinct elsewhere. Plants with a CRPR of 1B
are Rare, Threatened, or Endangered throughout their range. Plants with a CRPR of 2A are
presumed extirpated from California but are more common elsewhere. Plants with a CRPR of 2B
are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but are more common elsewhere.
Plants with a CRPR of 3 require more information before they can be assigned to another rank or
rejected; this is a “review” list. Plants with a CRPR of 4 are of limited distribution or are infrequent
throughout a broader area in California; this is a “watch list”. The Threat Rank is an extension that
is added to the CRPR to designate the plant’s endangerment level. An extension of .1 is assigned
to plants that are considered to be “seriously threatened” in California (i.e., over 80 percent of the
occurrences are threatened or have a high degree and immediacy of threat). Extension .2
indicates the plant is “fairly threatened” in California (i.e., between 20 and 80 percent of the
occurrences are threatened or have a moderate degree and immediacy of threat). Extension .3
is assigned to plants that are considered “not very threatened” in California (i.e., less than 20
percent of occurrences are threatened or have a low degree and immediacy of threat or no current
threats are known). The absence of a threat code extension indicates that this information is
lacking for the plant(s) in question.
1 This group consists of over 300 botanical experts from the government, academia, non-governmental
organizations, and the private sector.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
30 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
In addition to providing an inventory of special status plant and wildlife species, CDFW also
provides an inventory of vegetation types that are considered special status by the State and
federal resource agencies, academic institutions, and various conservation groups (e.g., the
CNPS) (CDFW 2023b). Special status natural communities are “of limited distribution statewide
or within a county or region and are often vulnerable to environmental effects of projects”; they
may or may not contain special status species. Determination of the level of imperilment (i.e.,
exposure to injury, loss, or destruction) is based on the NatureServe Heritage Program Status
Ranks that rank both species and vegetation types on a global and statewide basis according to
their rarity, trend in population size or area, and recognized threats (e.g., proposed developments,
habitat degradation, and non-native species invasion) (Faber-Langendoen et al. 2012).
3.5 SPECIAL STATUS VEGETATION
TYPES
3.5.1 Coastal Sage
Scrub
Coastal sage scrub has declined approximately 70 to 90 percent in its historic range in California
(Noss and Peters 1995). It has largely been lost to land use changes in Southern California basins
and foothills. Coastal sage scrub vegetation types have potential to support special status plant
and wildlife species. Coastal sage scrub communities mapped in the BSA consist of California
sagebrush scrub (disturbed), California buckwheat scrub, California buckwheat scrub (disturbed),
California sagebrush – California buckwheat scrub, California sagebrush – black sage scrub, and
coast prickly pear scrub. Of these, only coast prickly-pear scrub is considered a sensitive natural
community by CDFW (CDFW 2023b). The other coastal sage scrub vegetation types may be
considered of local concern.
3.5.2 Native
Woodlands
California walnut forests and woodlands are found only in southern California, with a very limited
distribution within that range (Quinn 1989). Walnuts can occur singly, in nearly pure stands, or in
mixtures with other trees (e.g., oak woodland). Walnut stands are often within or near urban areas;
continued development is further reducing the limited extent of this species. The BSA includes
California walnut groves and California walnut groves (disturbed); both vegetation types are
considered sensitive natural communities by CDFW (2023b).
Coast live oak woodlands are most common along the southern Coast Ranges and at low
elevations in Southern California (Schoenherr 1992). Woodlands provide habitat for many
vertebrate and invertebrate species, including food sources and cavities and cover for nesting or
roosting. Coast live oak woodland (disturbed) occurs in the BSA and provides high-quality habitat
for wildlife. The coast live oak trees in the BSA are large enough to provide cavities for shelter
(e.g., roosting) and breeding (e.g., cavity-nesting) for wildlife species.
Downed wood provides
important cover for amphibians, reptiles, and small to medium-sized mammals; nest sites for
cavity-nesting and ground-nesting birds; nutrients into the soil as they decompose; and favorable
microhabitat for emerging seedlings (Tietje et al. 2005). Coast live oak woodland is not considered
a sensitive natural community but is generally considered of local concern because of the habitat
value that it provides.
3.6 JURISDICTIONAL
RESOURCES
A formal jurisdictional delineation was not performed by UltraSystems or Psomas in the BSA.
Elements of the literature review (i.e., aerial imagery, the USGS topographic quadrangle, web soil
survey data [USDA NRCS 2023], National Hydric Soils List [USDA NRCS 2023], and the National
Wetlands Inventory’s Wetland Mapper [USFWS 2023]) were used to identify potential
jurisdictional water resources.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
31 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
Based on the literature review, potential jurisdictional waters occur in the BSA (Figure 7). The
National Wetlands Inventory identified freshwater forested/shrub wetlands and riverine areas
within the BSA. These include Palustrine forested areas with a temporarily flooded water regime
(PFOA) and riverine streambeds with temporarily flooded (R4SBA) or seasonally flooded (R4SBJ)
water regimes. These may or may not be present in the BSA; the mapping needs to be field
verified during a formal jurisdictional delineation.
Parcels containing streambeds, channels, or converging slopes may contain jurisdictional
features. Based on the field surveys, it is expected that the potential jurisdictional waters shown
on Figure 7 could be considered WOTUS, waters of the State, and/or CDFW jurisdictional waters.
Additionally, there may be some areas that are jurisdictional that were not mapped by the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI) (Figure 7).
The limits of non-wetland WOTUS and waters of the State are identified by the presence of an
Ordinary High Water Mark. The determination of wetlands is based on the USACE’s
three-parameter approach in which wetlands are defined by the presence of hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology indicators.
It is important to note that there have been multiple changes to the definition of WOTUS in recent
years resulting in substantial changes to areas under federal jurisdiction.
Most recently, the
USEPA amended the definition of WOTUS to conform to the recent Supreme Court decision in
Sackett v. USEPA which took effect on September 8, 2023. The amended definition excludes all
waters that are not determined to be “relatively permanent” in their flow regime (i.e., ephemeral
waters).
The limits of RWQCB waters and wetlands include ephemeral and isolated waters along with all
other USACE waters. The limits of CDFW jurisdictional waters are identified as either the top of
bank or the outer drip line of riparian vegetation associated with the feature. A formal delineation of the BSA has not been conducted; however, the field surveys observed
that the drainages in the BSA are generally ephemeral and vegetated with facultative upland or
upland vegetation. Under the current USACE definition, drainages in the BSA would likely not be
considered WOTUS because they are ephemeral. However, the drainages would likely be under
the jurisdiction of RWQCB and CDFW. A formal jurisdictional delineation would need to be
conducted to confirm this. Additionally, given the evolving definition of WOTUS, the definition
could change; therefore, a jurisdictional delineation would be needed to confirm the jurisdiction of
each agency prior to disturbance of any potentially jurisdictional areas.
3.7 SPECIAL STATUS
PLANTS
Table 4 provides a summary of special status plant species reported to occur in the Project region
(i.e., the USGS’ Baldwin Park, San Dimas, Ontario, La Habra, Yorba Linda, Prado Dam, Azusa,
Glendora, and Mt. Baldy 7.5-minute quadrangles). This list includes species reported by the
CNDDB and the CNPS, supplemented with species from the Project Biologist’s experience that
either occur nearby or could occur based on the presence of suitable habitat. The table includes
information on the status, species habitat, and potential for occurrence.
Note that these species
are listed alphabetically according to their scientific name.
Of the 76 species reported from the Project region, one species (southern California black walnut)
was incidentally observed during the general surveys and 25 species have potential or limited
potential to occur in the BSA based on the presence of suitable habitat. The remaining 51 species
would not be expected to occur because the BSA lacks suitable habitat or because it is outside
the current known geographic or elevation range of the species. Species observed in the BSA
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
32 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas
!( MCTA
!(!(
!( !( Legend !(
!(
!( Project
Boundary
!(
Conservation
Easement
Parcel !(
!(
!( !( Wetland
!( Type !( Freshwater Forested/Shrub
Wetland
Freshwater Pond
!(
Rancho !( !(
Riverine
Rp1FO PUBHx Riparian Type
Forested/Shrub
Riparian
Infrastructure
!(
PFOA Culvert PFOA
PFOA
!(!(
!( Catch
Basin Rp1FO
Ribbon
Drain
Open
Rp1FO Channel
I Underground Culvert
Gravity Underground
Culvert Rp1FO Note: Jurisdictional resources shown are based on remote data
and may not represent actual jurisdictional resources in the Project
Boundary. A jurisdictional delineation would be
required to map
resources under the regulatory authority of the U.S.
Army Corps of
Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board,
and/or the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
PFOA
PFO/EM1Ah
R4SBA
Key Map
§¨15
!(!( §¨
ANGELES
NATIONA Rp1SS L
210 FOREST San §¨215 Project
Location ST2 no
Los
Angeles
!(
!( ST §¨ 30 210 ST110 Rp1SS ST §¨10
Rp1SS 710
§¨10 §¨
R4SBA 605 ST60 ST142 §¨ Riverside
710 ST71 ST91
R4SBJ
Rp1SS
§¨105
ST72 ST Orange ST90
ST91
19 §¨5 ST57 R4SBJ ²
R4SBJ 0
0 175
50 !( 350
!( Feet
Rp1SS Rp1SS 100
Meters Scale:
1:4,200 Rp1SS
!(
!(
Data Source: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; National Wetlands Inventory (2023);
UltraSystems
(2022)
Aerial Source: Nearmap
2023
Potential Jurisdictional
Resources
Figure 7
!( R4SBA !(
Rp1FO R4SBAx
(Rev: 09/06/2023 JMC)
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Graphics\Bio\ex_Potential_JD_Resources.pdf
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
and federally or State-listed species with potential or limited potential to occur are discussed
further below.
Focused surveys have not been conducted for special status plant species in the BSA.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
33 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Sandy areas in chaparral, Occur
coastal scrub, and desert
dunes between 245 and 5,250 current known
geographic
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable soils;
outside
Abronia villosa var.
aurita
chaparral sandverbena—
—
—
—
—
—
1B.1
feet above
msl.
range.
Gravelly or sandy soils
in
chaparral and lower
montane
coniferous forest
between
4,005 and 8,530 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Acanthoscyphus parishii
var.
parishii
Parish’s
oxytheca
Watson’s
amaranth
4.2 4.3
Mojavean desert scrub
and
Sonoran desert
scrub
between 65 and 5,580
feet
above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
range.
Amaranthus
watsonii
Chaparral,
cismontane
woodland, coastal
scrub,
meadows and seeps,
pinyon
and juniper woodland,
and
valley and foothill
grassland
between 490 and 4,280
feet
above msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
from
Bonelli Regional Park
(CCH
2023).
Androscce elongate ssp. acuta California
androsace
— — 4.2
Granitic soil in chaparral
and
pinyon and juniper
woodland
between 3,380 and 6,560
feet
above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Aphyllon validum ssp. validum Rock Creek
broomrape
—
—
—
—
—
—
1B.2
1B.2
4.2 Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Rocky soil in chaparral
between 1,950 and 4,920
feet
above msl.
Arctostaphylos
glandulosa San Gabriel
manzanita
western spleenwort
ssp.
gabrielensis
Rocky soil in
chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
and
coastal scrub between
590
and 3,280 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
from
Bonelli Regional Park
(CCH
2023).
Asplenium
vespertinum
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
34 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Carbonate (usually), Occur
rocky, or
sandy soils in lower
montane
coniferous forest and
upper
montane coniferous
forest
between 5,580 and 9,005
feet
above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Astragalus
bicristatus
crested milkvetch— —
—
4.3 Recent burns or
disturbed
areas, usually on
sandstone
with carbonate layers
in
chaparral, coastal
scrub,
valley and foothill
grassland
between 15 and 2,100
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable soils.
Astragalus
brauntonii
Braunton’s milkvetchFE 1B.1
Alkaline or clay soils
in
coastal bluff scrub,
coastal
dunes, coastal scrub,
and
valley and foothill
grassland
between 10 and 1,510
feet
above msl.
Limited potential to
occur;
suitable habitat; at
edge of
current known
geographic
range.
Atriplex
coulteri
Atriplex
parishii
Coulter’s
saltbush
Parish’s
brittlescale
—
—
—
—
1B.2
1B.1
Alkaline or clay soils
in
chenopod scrub, playas,
and
vernal pools between 80
and
6,235 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Gravelly or sandy
soil in
chaparral,
cismontane
Limited potential to
occur;
suitable habitat;
reported
approximately eight
miles to
the east (CCH 2023).
woodland, coastal scrub,
and
riparian scrub between
230
and 2,705 feet above
msl.
Perennial, evergreen
species
observable yearround.
Berberis
nevinii
Brodiaea
filifolia
Nevin’s
barberry
FE
FT
SE
SE
1B.1
1B.1
Often clay soils in
chaparral
openings,
cismontane
woodland, coastal
scrub,
playas, valley and
foothill
grassland, and vernal
pools
between 80 and 3,675
feet
above msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported approximately
five
miles to the north
(CCH
2023).
thread-leaved
brodiaea
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
35 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Chaparral, Occur
cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub,
and
valley and foothill
grassland
between 50 and 2,295
feet
above msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
approximately two
miles to
the north (CCH
2023).
Calochortus
catalinae
Catalina mariposa
lily
— — 4.2
Clay, rocky, or
serpentinite
soil in chaparral,
cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub,
and
valley and foothill
grassland
between 100 and 4,265
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic range.
Calochortus clavatus
var.
clavatus
club-haired mariposa
lily
slender mariposa lily
—
—
—
—
4.3 Chaparral, coastal scrub,
and
valley and foothill
grassland
between 1,050 and 3,280
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic and
elevation
range.
Calochortus clavatus
var.
gracilis
1B.2
Rocky and sandy
sites,
usually of granitic or
alluvial
material, in coastal
scrub,
chaparral, valley and
foothill
grassland, cismontane
woodland, lower
montane
coniferous forest between
330
and 5,580 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported approximately
one
mile to the southeast
(CDFW 2023a).
Calochortus
plummerae
Plummer’s
mariposa-lily
— — 4.2
Dry, rocky calcareous
slopes
and rock outcrops in
coastal
scrub, chaparral, valley
and
foothill grassland
between
345 and 2,805 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported approximately
one
mile to the southeast
(CCH
2023).
Calochortus weedii
var.
intermedius
intermediate
mariposa-lily
lucky morning-glory
—
—
—
—
—
—
1B.2
1B.1
1A
Alkaline or loamy soils
in
meadows and seeps
and
alluvial riparian scrub
between
100 and 705 feet above
msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Calystegia
felix
Coastal marshes and
swamps
at 15 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
considered extirpated,
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Calystegia sepium
ssp.
binghamiae
Santa Barbara morningglory
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
36 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Sand or clay soil in Occur
coastal
bluff scrub, cismontane
woodland, coastal
dunes,
coastal scrub, and valley
and
foothill grassland
between sea
level and 985 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported approximately
14 miles to the west
(CCH
2023).
Camissoniopsis
lewisii
Lewis’ eveningprimrose—
—
— 3
Granitic soil in
chaparral,
lower montane
coniferous
forest, and pinyon and
juniper
woodland between 3,805
and
7,120 feet above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Castilleja
gleasoni
Mt. Gleason
paintbrush
southern tarplant
SR 1B.2
1B.1
Disturbed sites and
alkaline
soils in marshes and
swamp
margins, vernally mesic
valley
and foothill grassland,
and
vernal pools between
sea
level and 1,575 feet
above
msl.
Centromadia parryi
ssp.
australis
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
—
—
—
—
Alkaline (generally) soils
in
chenopod scrub,
meadows
and seeps, playas,
riparian
woodland, and valley
and
foothill grassland
between sea
level and 1,200 feet
above
msl.
Limited potential to
occur;
suitable habitat; at
edge of
current known
geographic
range.
Centromadia pungens
ssp.
laevis
smooth
tarplant
1B.1
Granitic soil in
chaparral,
coastal scrub, and
lower
montane coniferous
forest
between 985 and 6,235
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic range.
Chorizanthe
leptotheca
Peninsular
spineflower
Parry’s spineflower
—
—
—
—
4.2 Sometimes rocky or sandy
soils in openings of chaparral, May occur;
suitable habitat;
cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub, and valley and foothill
grassland between 900 and
4,005 feet above msl.
historically reported
approximately four
miles to
the north (CCH
2023).
Chorizanthe parryi var.
parryi
1B.1
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
37 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Alkaline freshwater Occur
marshes
and swamps and
meadows
and seeps between 195
and
5,250 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Cladium
californicum
California sawgrass— —
—
2B.2
Clay, seeps,
occasionally
serpentine soils in
chaparral
openings, coastal
scrub,
valley and foothill
grasslands
between 100 and 2,430
feet
above msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
approximately seven
miles
to the east (CCH
2023).
Convolvulus
simulans
small-flowered morningglory
paniculate tarplant
— 4.2
4.2 Usually vernally mesic,
sometimes sandy substrate in May occur;
suitable habitat;
coastal scrub, valley and
foothill grassland, and vernal
pools between 80 and 3,085
feet above msl.
reported
approximately
seven miles to the
east
(CCH 2023).
Deinandra
paniculata
— —
Sandy soil in
chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
and
alluvial fan coastal
scrub
between 655 and 2,495
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable soils.
Dodecahema
leptoceras
slender-horned
spineflower
San Gabriel River
dudleya
FE
—
SE
—
1B.1
1B.2
Granitic soil in
chaparral
between 900 and 1,500
feet
above msl.
Dudleya 38cymosa
ssp.
crebrifolia
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Granitic soil in
chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
coastal
scrub, lower montane
coniferous forest, and
riparian
woodland between 800
and
2,000 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic range.
San Gabriel
Mountains
dudleya
Dudleya
densiflora
Dudleya
multicaulis
—
—
—
—
1B.1
1B.2
Heavy, often clayey
soils or
grassy slopes in
chaparral,
coastal scrub, valley
and
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported from Bonelli
many-stemmed
dudleya foothill grassland between 50 Regional Park
(CCH 2023).
and 2,590 feet above msl.
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
38 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Sandy or gravelly soils Occur
on
river floodplains or
terraced
fluvial deposits in
coastal
scrub and chaparral
between
300 and 2,000 feet above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
range (i.e., the Santa
Ana
River watershed).
Eriastrum densifolium
ssp.
sanctorum
Santa Ana River
woollystar
FE
—
—
SE
—
1B.1
Alkaline soils near hot
springs, meadows, and
seeps
between 360 and 4,395
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Fimbristylis
thermalis
hot springs
fimbristylis
2B.2
4.3 Granitic, rocky, or sandy
soil
in chaparral and lower
montane coniferous
forest
between 3,935 and 8,695
feet
above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Galium angustifolium
ssp.
gabrielense
San Antonio Canyon
bedstraw
—
Broad-leafed upland
forest,
chaparral, cismontane
woodland, and lower
montane
coniferous forest
between
1,395 and 4,920 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Galium
grande
Galium
jepsonii
San Gabriel
bedstraw
Jepson’s bedstraw
—
—
—
—
1B.2
4.3 Granitic, gravelly, or
rocky soil
in lower montane
coniferous
forest and upper
montane
coniferous forest
between
5,055 and 8,205 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range. Rocky soil in
cismontane
woodland, lower
montane
coniferous forest,
montane
riparian forest, and
upper
montane coniferous
forest
between 3,790 and 8,695
feet
above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic and
elevation
range.
Heuchera
caespitosa
urn-flowered
alumroot
— — 4.3
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
39 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Sandy or gravelly Occur
soils in
maritime chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
and
coastal scrub between
230
and 2,660 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
approximately four
miles to
the east (CCH 2023).
Horkelia cuneata var. puberula mesa
horkelia
— —
—
1B.1
Mesic areas of
chaparral,
coastal scrub, often
alkali
meadows and seeps,
Mojavean desert scrub,
and
riparian scrub between
sea
level and 3,985 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Imperata
brevifolia
Juglans
californica
California
satintail
— 2B.1
4.2 Chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub,
and
riparian woodland
between
165 and 2,955 feet above
msl.
Perennial species
observable
year-round.
Southern
walnut
California black Observed during
general
surveys.
—
—
—
—
Moist, saline places
including
coastal dunes, coastal
scrub,
coastal salt marshes
and
swamps, and alkaline
Not expected to
occur;
perennial species
not
observed during
general
Juncus acutus ssp.
leopoldii
southwestern spiny
rush
4.2 meadows and seeps
between 10 and 2,955 feet above msl. surveys; no
suitable habitat.
Perennial species observable yearUsually on alkaline round.
Lasthenia glabrata soils in
ssp.
coulteri
coastal salt marsh,
playas,
and vernal pools
between 5
and 4,005 feet above
msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Coulter’s
goldfields
pride-ofCalifornia
—
—
—
—
1B.1
4.3 Chaparral between 655
and
5,005 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur; no
suitable habitat.
Lathyrus
splendens
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
40 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Chaparral between 65 Occur
and
4,300 feet above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
range.
Lepechinia
fragrans
fragrant pitcher
sage
—
—
—
—
4.2 Dry soils in chaparral
and
coastal scrub between 5
and
2,905 feet above msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
historically reported
approximately five
miles to
the east (CCH 2023).
Lepidium virginicum
var.
robinsonii
Robinson’s peppergrass
ocellated Humboldt
lily
4.3 4.2
Openings in chaparral,
cismontane woodland,
coastal
scrub, lower montane
coniferous forest, and
riparian
woodland between 100
and
5,905 feet above msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
range.
Lilium humboldtii
ssp.
ocellatum
—
—
—
—
Mesic areas in lower
montane
coniferous forest,
meadows
and seeps, riparian
forest,
and upper montane
coniferous forests
between
4,005 and 9,005 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Lilium
parryi
lemon lily 1B.2
Rocky openings in
chaparral,
lower montane
coniferous
forest, and upper
montane
coniferous forest
between
4,985 and 9,185 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Linanthus
concinnus
San Gabriel
linanthus
—
—
—
—
1B.2
4.2 Clay soil in
cismontane
woodland, coastal
scrub,
valley and foothill
grassland,
and vernal pools
between 50
and 3,510 feet above
msl.
May occur; suitable
habitat;
reported
approximately
three miles to the
southeast
(CCH 2023).
Microseris douglasii
ssp.
platycarpha
small-flowered
microseris
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
41 Biological Technical
Report
San Dimas Municipal Code Text Amendment
(20-0005)
TABLE 4
SPECIAL STATUS PLANT SPECIES REPORTED FROM THE
PROJECT REGION
Federal
Status
State
Species Common Status
Name
CRPR Habitat* Potential to
Alluvial terraces, Occur
scree,
slopes, talus, and
washes in
chaparral and lower
montane
coniferous forest
between
4,430 and 5,740 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Monardella australis
ssp.
jokerstii
Jokerst’s
monardella
—
—
—
—
1B.1
Dry openings in chaparral
and
lower montane
coniferous
forest between 4,265
and
4,920 feet above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Monardella breweri
ssp.
glandulifera
Brown’s Flat
monardella
Hall’s monardella
1B.2
1B.3
Broad-leafed upland
forest,
chaparral,
cismontane
woodland, lower
montane
coniferous forest, valley
and
foothill grassland
between
2,395 and 7,200 feet
above
msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
geographic and
elevation
range.
Monardella macrantha
ssp.
hallii
— —
Rocky, usually
serpentinite
soil in chaparral, closedcone
coniferous forest, and
lower
montane coniferous
forest
between 1,640 and 5,905
feet
above msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
and elevation range.
Monardella
saxicola
Monardella viridis
rock
monardella
green
monardella
California
muhly
—
—
—
—
—
—
4.2 4.3
4.3 Broad-leafed upland
forest,
chaparral, and
cismontane
woodland between 330
and
3,315 feet above
msl.
Not expected to
occur;
outside current
known
Mesic seeps geographic range.
streambanks in and
chaparral,
coastal scrub, lower
montane
coniferous forest, and
meadows and seeps
between
330 and 6,560 feet above
msl.
Not expected to occur;
no
suitable habitat;
outside
current known
geographic
range.
Muhlenbergia
californica
R:\Projects\SAN04\3SAN040200\Documentation\BioTech\San Dimas BioTech-010524.docx
42 Biological Technical
Report