1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
This Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Impact Analysis has been completed to determine the air quality, energy, and GHG emissions impacts associated with the proposed Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park project (proposed project). The following is provided in this report:
A description of the proposed project;
A description of the atmospheric setting;
A description of the criteria pollutants and GHGs;
A description of the air quality regulatory framework; A description of the energy conservation regulatory framework; A description of the GHG emissions regulatory framework; A description of the air quality, energy, and GHG emissions thresholds including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) significance thresholds; An analysis of the conformity of the proposed project with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP); An analysis of the short‐term construction related and long‐term operational air quality, energy, and GHG emissions impacts; and
An analysis of the conformity of the proposed project with all applicable energy and GHG emissions reduction plans and policies.
1.2 Site Locations and Study Area
The project site is located in the northern portion of the City of Santa Clarita (City). The project site includes nearly 500 acres of open space, including the Haskell Canyon Open Space and the Blue Cloud Open Space areas. The project site is bounded by open space to the north, open space, canine training and boarding facilities and Blue Cloud Road to the east, open space and single‐family homes to the south, and open space and Pettinger Canyon Road to the west. The proposed site plan and study area is shown in Figure 1.
Sensitive Receptors in Project Vicinity
The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located within the canine training and boarding facilities to the east that are as near as 800 feet from the proposed areas to be disturbed as part of the project. There are also single‐family homes as near as 1,700 feet west and 1,900 feet to the south of the areas to be disturbed as part of the project.
1.3 Proposed Project Description
The proposed project would consist of developing a mountain bike park consisting of approximately 15 miles of trails interspersed throughout the Project Site and two activity/programming areas – the Haskell Bike Park Core and the Blue Cloud Trailhead. Trail types for all skill levels provided within the Blue Cloud Bike Park include approximately 3.7 miles of perimeter and climbing trails (beginner and intermediate),
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
approximately 5.5 miles of downhill bike trails (beginner, intermediate, expert, and pro), and approximately 5 miles of multi‐use trails ((beginner, intermediate, and expert). The proposed trail widths would range 4 to 6 feet wide. The Project would also maintain approximately 1.6 miles of existing multi‐ use trails.
The Haskell Core would include a 56‐space parking lot and a parking/emergency turnaround with eight additional parking spaces, two American Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces, and four spaces for food trucks; an event plaza with picnic tables and a flexible stage; beginner, intermediate, and advanced pump tracks; a dual slalom course; progressive jumplines; and a progressive skills area. Event/spectator areas would be provided adjacent to the main activity areas. Other amenities within the Haskell Core include shade structures at the start zones of the dual slalom course and the progressive jumplines, vault restrooms, bike repair stations, a rest area with benches and shade structure, and cargo containers for storage areas. Several trailheadsleading to perimeter, climbing, and multi‐use trails would also be located in the Haskell Core.
The Blue Cloud Trailhead would include a parking/emergency turnaround with 10 parking spaces and one ADA parking space. This portion of the Project Site would feature a field station with gathering and restoration work spaces for volunteers, designated areas for potential future landscape restoration, and a multi‐use trailhead. Visitor amenities that would be provided at the Blue Cloud Trailhead include vault restrooms, a bike repairstation, and the Saddle Trail Hub (meeting space forriders) with a shade structure.
Specifically, the proposed project is anticipated to disturb approximately 20 acres, would require the import of approximately 4,400 cubic yards of material for road and trail base, would include construction of approximately 3,500 square feet of structures, and would pave approximately 123,000 square feet for parking areas, walkways and event plaza areas.
1.4 Executive Summary
Standard Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Regulatory Conditions The proposed project will be required to comply with the following regulatory conditions from the SCAQMD and State of California (State).
South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules
The SCAQMD rules that are applicable to the proposed project include, but are not limited to, the following:
Rule 402 Nuisance – Controls the emissions of odors and other air contaminants; Rule 403 Fugitive Dust – Controls the emissions of fugitive dust; Rules 1108 and 1108.1 Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt – Controls the VOC content in asphalt; Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings – Controls the VOC content in paints and solvents; and Rule 1143 Paint Thinners – Controls the VOC content in paint thinners; State of California Rules
The State of California Code of Regulations (CCR) air quality emission rules that are applicable to the proposed project include, but are not limited to, the following:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 – In use Off‐Road Diesel Vehicles; CCR Title 13, Section 2025 – On‐Road Diesel Truck Fleets; CCR Title 24 Part 6 – California Building Energy Standards; and CCR Title 24 Part 11 – California Green Building Standards.
Summary of Analysis Results
The following is a summary of the proposed project’s impacts with regard to the State CEQA Guidelines air quality, energy, and GHG emissions checklist questions.
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than significant impact.
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard? Less than significant impact.
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant impact.
Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than significant impact.
Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; Less than significant impact.
Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy; Less than significant impact.
Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant impact.
Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
Less than significant impact.
1.5 Mitigation Measures for the Proposed Project
This analysis found that implementation of the State and SCAQMD air quality, energy, and GHG emissions reductions regulations were adequate to limit criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants, odors, and
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
energy emissions from the proposed project to less than significant levels. No mitigation measures are required for the proposed project with respect to air quality and energy.
Figure 1
Proposed Site Plan and Study Area
SOURCE: Avid Trails.
HASKELL CANYON
ARCHERY RANGE
Multi-use, multi- .atl''l .
directional
-u
f:\
-I
z
G)
rn
;o
()
)>
z
-<
0 z
;o
0 )>
0 ENVIRONMENTAL
I
I
IPROP
nii¥¢_'$... -~~::;;;:I BLUE CLOUD
TRAILHEAD
: 1, _ "'---::Z::: 1' ' I Multi-use
connector trail
.-
1 .
""'-
. '' : I Multi-use trail
connection to Haskell
Canyon Open Space
,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,.
,,, \
' \ \
\
\
tl'ail connection
requires coordination
with US Forest Service
' ' ' ' ' "
Legend
@ Trail Hub/Overlook
8 Bike Park Start Mound
(!) Trailhead
Perimeter Trail
Climbing/Return Trail
-o- Beginner Dow nhill Bike Trail
-o- Intermediate Downhill Bike Trail
-0- Expert Downhill Bike Trail -0- Pro Dow nhill Bike Trail r Proposed Multi-use Trail Existing Multi-use Trail/ Road to Remain
Note: All proposed trail alignments are
conceptual and require field verification.
E9 0 200 400 800 ft
North
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
2.0 AIR POLLUTANTS
Air pollutants are generally classified as either criteria pollutants or non‐criteria pollutants. Federal ambient air quality standards have been established for criteria pollutants, whereas no ambientstandards have been established for non‐criteria pollutants. For some criteria pollutants, separate standards have been set for different periods. Most standards have been set to protect public health. For some pollutants, standards have been based on other values (such as protection of crops, protection of materials, or avoidance of nuisance conditions). A summary of federal and state ambient air quality standards is provided in the Regulatory Framework section.
2.1 Criteria Pollutants and Ozone Precursors
The criteria pollutants consist of: ozone, nitrogen oxides (NOx), CO, sulfur oxides (SOx), lead, and particulate matter (PM). The ozone precursors consist of NOx and VOC. These pollutants can harm your health and the environment, and cause property damage. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls these pollutants “criteria” air pollutants because it regulates them by developing human health‐ based and/or environmentally‐based criteria for setting permissible levels. The following provides descriptions of each of the criteria pollutants and ozone precursors.
Nitrogen Oxides
NOx is the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases which contain nitrogen and oxygen. While most NOx are colorless and odorless, concentrations of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) can often be seen as a reddish‐brown layer over many urban areas. NOx form when fuel is burned at high temperatures, as in a combustion process. The primary manmade sources of NOx are motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fuel. NOx reacts with other pollutants to form, ground‐level ozone, nitrate particles, acid aerosols, as well as NO2, which cause respiratory problems. NOx and the pollutants formed from NOx can be transported over long distances, following the patterns of prevailing winds. Therefore, controlling NOx is often most effective if done from a regional perspective, rather than focusing on the nearest sources.
Ozone
Ozone is not usually emitted directly into the air, instead it is created by a chemical reaction between NOx and VOCs in the presence of sunlight. Motor vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, gasoline vapors, chemical solvents as well as natural sources emit NOx and VOC that help form ozone. Ground‐level ozone is the primary constituent of smog. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground‐level ozone to form with the greatest concentrations usually occurring downwind from urban areas. Ozone issubsequently considered a regional pollutant. Ground‐level ozone is a respiratory irritant and an oxidant that increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and can cause substantial damage to vegetation and other materials. Because NOx and VOC are ozone precursors, the health effects associated with ozone are also indirect health effects associated with significant levels of NOx and VOC emissions.
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas that is formed when carbon in fuel is not burned completely. It is a component of motor vehicle exhaust, which contributes approximately 56 percent of all CO emissions nationwide. In cities, 85 to 95 percent of all CO emissions may come from motor vehicle exhaust. Other sources of CO emissions include industrial processes (such as metals processing and chemical manufacturing), residential wood burning, and naturalsourcessuch asforest fires. Woodstoves,
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
gas stoves, cigarette smoke, and unvented gas and kerosene space heaters are indoor sources of CO. The highest levels of CO in the outside air typically occur during the colder months of the year when inversion conditions are more frequent. The air pollution becomes trapped near the ground beneath a layer of warm air. CO is described as having only a local influence because it dissipates quickly. Since CO concentrations are strongly associated with motor vehicle emissions, high CO concentrations generally occur in the immediate vicinity of roadways with high traffic volumes and traffic congestion, active parking lots, and in automobile tunnels. Areas adjacent to heavily traveled and congested intersections are particularly susceptible to high CO concentrations.
CO is a public health concern because it combines readily with hemoglobin and thus reduces the amount of oxygen transported in the bloodstream. The health threat from lower levels of CO is most serious for those who suffer from heart disease such as angina, clogged arteries, or congestive heart failure. For a person with heart disease, a single exposure to CO at low levels may cause chest pain and reduce that person’s ability to exercise; repeated exposures may contribute to other cardiovascular effects. High levels of CO can affect even healthy people. People who breathe high levels of CO can develop vision problems, reduced ability to work or learn, reduced manual dexterity, and difficulty performing complex tasks. At extremely high levels, CO is poisonous and can cause death.
Sulfur Oxides
SOx gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil is burned, as well as from the refining of gasoline. SOx dissolves easily in water vapor to form acid and interacts with other gases and particlesin the air to form sulfates and other productsthat can be harmful to people and the environment.
Exposure to SOx gases can cause respiratory symptoms (bronchoconstriction, possible wheezing or shortness of breath) during exercise or physical activity in persons with asthma and cause possible allergic sensitization, airway inflammation, and asthma development.
Lead
Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as manufactured products. The major sources of lead emissions have historically been motor vehicles and industrial sources. Due to the phase out of leaded gasoline, metal processing is now the primary source of lead emissions to the air. High levels of lead in the air are typically only found near lead smelters, waste incinerators, utilities, and lead‐acid battery manufacturers. Exposure of fetuses, infants and children to low levels of lead can adversely affect the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased lead levels are associated with increased blood pressure.
Particulate Matter
PM is the term for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. PM is made up of a number of components including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles. The size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health problems.
Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter (PM10) that are also known as Respirable Particulate Matter are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs.
Once inhaled, these particles can affect the heart and lungs and cause serious health effects. Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5) that are also known as Fine Particulate Matter have been designated as a subset of PM10 due to their increased negative health impacts and its ability to remain suspended in the air longer and travel further.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Volatile Organic Compounds
Hydrocarbons are organic gases that are formed from hydrogen and carbon and sometimes other elements. Hydrocarbonsthat contribute to formation of ozoneare referred to and regulated as VOCs(also referred to as reactive organic gases). Combustion engine exhaust, oil refineries, and fossil‐fueled power plants are the sources of hydrocarbons. Other sources of hydrocarbons include evaporation from petroleum fuels, solvents, dry cleaning solutions, and paint.
VOC is not classified as a criteria pollutant, since VOCs by themselves are not a known source of adverse health effects. The primary health effects of VOCsresult from the formation of ozone and itsrelated health effects. High levels of VOCs in the atmosphere can interfere with oxygen intake by reducing the amount of available oxygen through displacement. Carcinogenic forms of hydrocarbons, such as benzene, are considered TACs. There are no separate health standards for VOCs as a group.
2.2 Other Pollutants of Concern
Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to the above‐listed criteria pollutants, TACs are another group of pollutants of concern. TACs is a term that is defined under the California Clean Air Act and consists of the same substances that are defined as Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) in the Federal Clean Air Act. There are over 700 hundred different types of TACs with varying degrees of toxicity. Sources of TACs include industrial processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust. Cars and trucks release at least 40 different toxic air contaminants. The most important of these TACs, in terms of health risk, are diesel particulates, benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3‐butadiene, and acetaldehyde. Public exposure to TACs can result from emissions from normal operations as well asfrom accidentalreleases. Health effects of TACsinclude cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, and death.
TACs are less pervasive in the urban atmosphere than criteria air pollutants, however they are linked to short‐term (acute) or long‐term (chronic or carcinogenic) adverse human health effects. There are hundreds of different types of TACs with varying degrees of toxicity. Sources of TACs include industrial processes, commercial operations (e.g., gasoline stations and dry cleaners), and motor vehicle exhaust.
According to The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition, the majority of the estimated health risk from TACs can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important of which is diesel particulate matter (DPM). DPM is a subset of PM2.5 because the size of diesel particles are typically 2.5 microns and smaller. The identification of DPM as a TAC in 1998 led the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel‐fueled Engines and Vehicles in October 2000. The plan’s goals are a 75‐percent reduction in DPM by 2010 and an 85‐percent reduction by 2020 from the 2000 baseline. Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, composed of gaseous and solid material. The visible emissions in diesel exhaust are known as particulate matter or PM, which includes carbon particles or “soot.” Diesel exhaust also contains a variety of harmful gases and over 40 other cancer‐causing substances. California’s identification of DPM as a TAC was based on its potential to cause cancer, premature deaths, and other health problems. Exposure to DPM is a health hazard, particularly to children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who may have otherserious health problems. Overall, diesel engine emissions are responsible for the majority of California’s potential airborne cancer risk from combustion sources.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Asbestos
Asbestos is listed as a TAC by CARB and as a HAP by the EPA. Asbestos occurs naturally in mineral formations and crushing or breaking these rocks, through construction or other means, can release asbestiform fibers into the air. Asbestos emissions can result from the sale or use of asbestos‐containing materials, road surfacing with such materials, grading activities, and surface mining. The risk of disease is dependent upon the intensity and duration of exposure. When inhaled, asbestos fibers may remain in the lungs and with time may be linked to such diseases as asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma. The nearest likely locations of naturally occurring asbestos, as identified in the General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocksin California, prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology, islocated as near as 65 miles west of the project site in Santa Barbara County. Due to the distance to the nearest natural occurrences of asbestos, the project site is not likely to contain asbestos.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
3.0 GREENHOUSE GASES
3.1 Greenhouse Gases
Constituent gases of the Earth’s atmosphere, called atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in the Earth’s radiation amount by trapping infrared radiation from the Earth’s surface, which otherwise would have escaped to space. Prominent GHGs contributing to this process include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone, water vapor, nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons(CFCs). This phenomenon, known as the Greenhouse Effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate. Anthropogenic (caused or produced by humans) emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for the enhancement of the Greenhouse Effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the Earth’s natural climate, known as global warming or climate change. Emissions of gasesthat induce global warming are attributable to human activities associated with industrial/manufacturing, agriculture, utilities, transportation, and residential land uses. Emissions of CO2 and N2O are byproducts of fossil fuel combustion. Methane, a potent GHG, results from off‐gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Sinks of CO2, where CO2 is stored outside of the atmosphere, include uptake by vegetation and dissolution into the ocean. The following provides a description of each of the GHGs and their global warming potential.
Water Vapor
Water vapor is the most abundant, important, and variable GHG in the atmosphere. Water vapor is not considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life. Changes in its concentration are primarily considered a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change. As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs,soil). Because the air is warmer, the relative humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to “hold” more water when it is warmer), leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a GHG, the higher concentration of water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. The warmer atmosphere can then hold more water vapor and so on and so on. This is referred to as a “positive feedback loop.” The extent to which this positive feedback loop will continue is unknown as there is also dynamics that put the positive feedback loop in check. As an example, when water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth’s surface and heat it up).
Carbon Dioxide
The natural production and absorption of CO2 is achieved through the terrestrial biosphere and the ocean.
However, humankind has altered the natural carbon cycle by burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood.
Since the industrial revolution began in the mid‐1700s, each of these activities has increased in scale and distribution. CO2 was the first GHG demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration with the first conclusive measurements being made in the last half of the 20th century. Prior to the industrial revolution, concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm). The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicates that concentrations were 379 ppm in 2005, an increase of more than 30 percent. Left unchecked, the IPCC projects that concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of anthropogenic sources. This could result in an average global temperature rise of at least two degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Methane
CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, although its atmospheric concentration is less than that of CO2. Its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 to 12 years), compared to some other GHGs (such as CO2, N2O, and CFCs). CH4 has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the biological processesin low oxygen environments,such asin swamplands or in rice production (at the roots of the plants). Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of CH4. Other anthropocentric sources include fossil‐fuel combustion and biomass burning.
Nitrous Oxide
Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution. In 1998, the global concentration of this GHG was documented at 314 parts per billion (ppb). N2O is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel‐fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. N2O is also commonly used as an aerosol spray propellant (i.e., in whipped cream bottles, in potato chip bags to keep chips fresh, and in rocket engines and race cars).
Chlorofluorocarbons
CFCs are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the Earth’s surface). CFCs have no natural source, but were first synthesized in 1928. They were used for refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. Due to the discovery that they are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production was undertaken and in 1989 the European Community agreed to ban CFCs by 2000 and subsequent treaties banned CFCs worldwide by 2010. This effort was extremely successful, and the levels of the major CFCs are now remaining level or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean that some of the CFCs will remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years.
Hydrofluorocarbons
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are synthetic man‐made chemicals that are used as a substitute for CFCs. Out of all the GHGs, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential. The HFCs with the largest measured atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC‐23 (CHF3), HFC‐134a (CF3CH2F), and HFC‐152a (CH3CHF2). Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were HFC‐23. HFC‐134a use is increasing due to its use as a refrigerant. Concentrations of HFC‐23 and HFC‐134a in the atmosphere are now about 10 parts per trillion (ppt) each. Concentrations of HFC‐152a are about 1 ppt. HFCs are manmade for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.
Perfluorocarbons
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular structures and do not break down through the chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. High‐energy ultraviolet rays about 60 kilometers above Earth’s surface are able to destroy the compounds. Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6).
Concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Sulfur Hexafluoride
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. SF6 has the highest global warming potential of any gas evaluated; 23,900 times that of CO2. Concentrations in the 1990s were about 4 ppt. Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.
Aerosols
Aerosols are particles emitted into the air through burning biomass (plant material) and fossil fuels.
Aerosols can warm the atmosphere by absorbing and emitting heat and can cool the atmosphere by reflecting light. Cloud formation can also be affected by aerosols. Sulfate aerosols are emitted when fuel containing sulfur is burned. Black carbon (or soot) is emitted during biomass burning due to the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Particulate matter regulation has been lowering aerosol concentrations in the United States (U.S.); however, global concentrations are likely increasing.
3.2 Global Warming Potential
GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to the reference gas, CO2. The GHGs listed by the IPCC and the CEQA Guidelines are discussed in this section in order of abundance in the atmosphere.
Water vapor, the most abundant GHG, is not included in this list because its natural concentrations and fluctuations far outweigh its anthropogenic (human‐made) sources. To simplify reporting and analysis, GHGs are commonly defined in terms of their GWP. The IPCC defines the GWP of various GHG emissions on a normalized scale that recasts all GHG emissions in terms of CO2 equivalent (CO2e). As such, the GWP of CO2 is equal to 1. The GWP values used in this analysis are based on the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, which are used in CARB’s 2014 Scoping Plan Update and the CalEEMod Model Version 2022.1 and are detailed in Table A. The IPCC has updated the GWP of some gases in their Fifth Assessment Report, however the new values have not yet been incorporated into the CalEEMod model that has been utilized in this analysis.
Table A – Global Warming Potentials, Atmospheric Lifetimes and Abundances of GHGs Gas
Atmospheric Lifetime
(years)1
Global Warming Potential
(100 Year Horizon)2
Atmospheric
Abundance
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 50‐200 1 379 ppm
Methane (CH4) 9‐15 25 1,774 ppb
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 114 298 319 ppb
HFC‐23 270 14,800 18 ppt
HFC‐134a 14 1,430 35 ppt
HFC‐152a 1.4 124 3.9 ppt
PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) 50,000 7,390 74 ppt
PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 12,200 2.9 ppt
Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 22,800 5.6 ppt
Notes:
1 Defined as the half‐life of the gas. 2 Compared to the same quantity of CO2 emissions and is based on the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) 2007 standard, which is utilized in CalEEMod (Version 2022.1),that is used in this report (CalEEMod user guide: Appendix A).
Definitions: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; ppt = parts per trillion
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Source: IPCC 2007, EPA 2015
3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
According to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center1, 9,855 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) emissions were created globally in the year 2014. According to the EPA, the breakdown of global GHG emissions by sector consists of: 25 percent from electricity and heat production; 21 percent from industry; 24 percent from agriculture, forestry and other land use activities; 14 percent from transportation; 6 percent from building energy use; and 10 percent from all other sources of energy use2
.
According to Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990‐2021, prepared by EPA, April 2023, total U.S. GHG emissions in the year 2021 were 6,340.2 MMTCO2e. Total U.S. emissions have decreased by 2.3 percent between 1990 and 2021, which is down from a high of 15.8 percent above 1990 levelsin 2007. Emissionsincreased from 2020 to 2021 by 5.2 percent. There was a decline in 2020 emission due to the impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on travel and other economic activity. Between 2020 and 2021, the increase in GHG emissions were driven largely by an increase in fossil fuel combustion due to economic activity rebounding after the height of the COVID‐19 pandemic.
According to California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2021 Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, prepared by the CARB, December 14, 2023, the State of California created 381.3 MMTCO2e in 2021. The 2021 emissions were 12.6 MMTCO2e higher than 2020 but 23.1 MMTCO2e lower than 2019 levels. Both the 2019 to 2020 decrease and the 2020 to 2021 increase in emissions are likely due in part to the impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic that were felt globally. The transportation sector showed the largest increase in emissions of 10 MMTCO2e (7.4 percent) compared to 2020, which is most likely from passenger vehicles whose activity and emissions rebounded after COVID‐19 shelter in place orders were lifted.
1 Obtained from: https://cdiac.ess‐dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/tre_glob_2014.html 2 Obtained from: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global‐greenhouse‐gas‐emissions‐data
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
4.0 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
The air quality at the project site is addressed through the efforts of various federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to improve air quality through legislation, regulations, planning, policy‐making, education, and a variety of programs. The agencies responsible for improving the air quality are discussed below.
4.1 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency The Clean Air Act, first passed in 1963 with major amendments in 1970, 1977 and 1990, is the overarching legislation covering regulation of air pollution in the U.S. The Clean Air Act has established the mandate for requiring regulation of both mobile and stationary sources of air pollution at the state and federal level. The EPA was created in 1970 in order to consolidate research, monitoring, standard‐setting and enforcement authority into a single agency.
The EPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for atmospheric pollutants. It regulates emission sourcesthat are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain locomotives. NAAQS pollutants were identified using medical evidence and are shown below in Table B.
Table B – State and Federal Criteria Pollutant Standards Air
Pollutant
Concentration / Averaging Time
Most Relevant Effects
California
Standards
Federal Primary
Standards
Ozone (O3)
0.09 ppm / 1‐hour
0.07 ppm / 8‐hour
0.070 ppm, / 8‐hour
a) Pulmonary function decrements and localized lung injury in humans and animals; (b) asthma exacerbation; (c) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation; (d)
respiratory infection; (e) increased school absences, and hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits for combined respiratory diseases; (e) increased mortality; (f) possible metabolic effects.
Vegetation damage; property damage
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
20.0 ppm / 1‐hour
9.0 ppm / 8‐hour
35.0 ppm / 1‐hour
9.0 ppm / 8‐hour
Visibility reduction (a) Aggravation of angina pectoris and other aspects of coronary heart disease; (b) decreased
exercise tolerance in persons with peripheral vascular disease and lung disease; (c) possible impairment of central nervous system functions; (d) possible increased risk to fetuses; (f) possible increased risk of pulmonary disease; (g) possible emergency department visits for respiratory diseases overall and visits for asthma.
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2)
0.18 ppm / 1‐hour
0.030 ppm / annual
100 ppb / 1‐hour
0.053 ppm / annual
Short‐term (a) asthma exacerbations (“asthma attacks”)
Long‐term (a) asthma development; (b) higher risk of all‐ cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality.
Both short and long term NO2 exposure is also associated with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) risk.
Potential impacts on cardiovascular health, mortality and cancer, aggravate chronic respiratory disease.
Contribution to atmospheric discoloration
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Air
Pollutant
Concentration / Averaging Time
Most Relevant Effects
California
Standards
Federal Primary
Standards
Sulfur
Dioxide
(SO2)
0.25 ppm / 1‐hour
0.04 ppm / 24‐hour
75 ppb / 1‐hour
Respiratory symptoms (bronchoconstriction, possible
wheezing or shortness of breath) during exercise or physical activity in persons with asthma.
Possible allergic sensitization, airway inflammation, asthma development.
Respirable
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
50 µg/m3 / 24‐hour
20 µg/m3 / annual
150 µg/m3 / 24‐
hour
Short ‐term (a) increase in mortality rates; (b) increase in respiratory infections; (c) increase in number and severity of asthma attacks; (d) COPD exacerbation; (e) increase in combined respiratory‐diseases and number of hospital
admissions; (f) increased mortality due to cardiovascular or respiratory diseases; (g) increase in hospital admissions for acute respiratory conditions; (h) increase in school
absences; (i) increase in lost work days; (j) decrease in respiratory function in children; (k) increase medication use in children and adults with asthma.
Long‐term (a) reduced lung function growth in children; (b) changes in lung development; (c) development of asthma
in children; (d) increased risk of cardiovascular diseases; (e) increased total mortality from lung cancer; (f) increased risk of premature death.
Possible link to metabolic, nervous system, and
reproductive and developmental effectsforshort‐term and long‐term exposure to PM2.5.
Suspended
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
12 µg/m3 / annual 35 µg/m3 / 24‐hour
12 µg/m3 / annual
Sulfates 25 µg/m3 / 24‐hour No Federal
Standards
(a) Decrease in lung function; (b) aggravation of asthmatic symptoms; (c) vegetation damage; (d) Degradation of
visibility; (e) property damage
Lead 1.5 µg/m3 / 30‐day 0.15 µg/m3 /3‐
month rolling
(a) Learning disabilities; (b) impairment of blood formation and nerve function; (c) cardiovascular effects, including coronary heart disease and hypertension
Possible male reproductive system effects
Hydrogen
Sulfide 0.03 ppm / 1‐hour No FederalStandards
Exposure to lower ambient concentrations above the standard may result in objectionable odor and may be accompanied by symptoms such as headaches, nausea, dizziness, nasal
irritation, cough, and shortness of breath
Source: 2022 AQMP, SCAQMD, 2022.
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with federal nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the national standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local components and regulations to identify specific measuresto reduce pollution, using a combination of performance standards and market‐ based programs within the timeframe identified in the SIP. The CARB defines attainment as the category given to an area with no violations in the past three years. As indicated below in Table C, the South Coast Air Basin (Air Basin), within which the proposed project is located, has been designated by EPA for the national standards as a non‐attainment area for ozone and PM2.5 and partial non‐attainment for lead.
Currently, the Air Basin isin attainment with the national ambient air quality standardsfor CO, PM10, SO2, and NO2.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table C – National Air Quality Standards Attainment Status – South Coast Air Basin Criteria Pollutant Averaging Time Designationa Attainment Dateb Ozone
1979 1‐Hour (0.12 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 2/6/2023 (revised deadline)
2015 8‐Hour (0.07 ppm)d Nonattainment (Extreme) 8/3/2038 2008 8‐Hour (0.075 ppm)d Nonattainment (Extreme) 7/20/2032 1997 8‐Hour (0.08 ppm)d Nonattainment (Extreme) 6/15/2024 PM2.5e
2006 24‐Hour (35 μg/m3
) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2019
2012 Annual (12 μg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2021 1997 Annual (15 μg/m3) Attainment (final determination
pending)
4/5/2015
(attained 2013)
PM10f 1987 24‐Hour (150 μg/m3) Attainment (Maintenance) 7/26/2013 (attained)
Leadg 2008 3‐Months Rolling
(0.15 μg/m3
)
Nonattainment (Partial)
(Attainment determination
requested)
12/31/2015
CO
1971 1‐Hour (35 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 6/11/2007 1971 8‐Hour (9 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 6/11/2007
NO2
h 2010 1‐Hour (100 ppb) Unclassifiable/Attainment N/A (attained) 1971 Annual (0.053 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 9/22/1998 (attained) SO2
i 2010 1‐Hour (75 ppb) Unclassifiable/Attainment 1/9/2018 1971 24‐Hour (0.14 ppm) Unclassifiable/Attainment 3/19/1979 Source: SCAQMD, 2022
Notes:
a) U.S. EPA often only declares Nonattainment areas; everywhere else is listed as Unclassifiable/Attainment or Unclassifiable. b) A design value below the NAAQS for data through the full year or smog season prior to the attainment date is typically required for attainment demonstration.
c) The 1979 1‐hour ozone NAAQS (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005; however, the Basin has not attained this standard and therefore hassome continuing obligations with respect to the revoked standard; original attainment date was 11/15/2010; the revised attainment date is 2/6/2023.
d) The 2008 8‐hour ozone NAAQS (0.075 ppm) was revised to 0.070 ppm, effective 12/28/20115 with classifications and implementation goals to be finalized by 10/1/2017; the 1997 8‐hour ozone NAAQS (0.08 ppm) was revoked in the 2008 ozone implementation rule, effective 4/6/2015; there are continuing obligations under the revoked 1997 and revised 2008 ozone NAAQS until they are attained. e) The attainment deadline for the 2006 24‐Hour PM2.5 NAAQS was 12/31/15 for the former “moderate” classification; the EPA approved reclassification to “serious”, effective 2/12/16 with an attainment deadline of 12/31/2019; the 2012 (proposal year) annual PM2.5 NAAQS was revised on 1/15/2013, effective 3/18/2013, from 15 to 12 μg/m3 ; new annual designations were final 1/15/2015, effective 4/15/2015; on 7/25/2016 the EPA finalized a determination that the Basin attained the 1997 annual (15.0 μg/m3 ) and 24‐hour PM2.5 (65 μg/m3) NAAQS,
effective 8/24/2016.
f) The annual PM10 standard was revoked, effective 12/18/2006; the 24‐hour PM10 NAAQS deadline was 12/31/2006; the Basin’s Attainment Re‐designation Request and PM10 Maintenance Plan was approved by the EPA on 6/26/2103, effective 7/26/2013. g) Partial Nonattainment designation – Los Angeles County portion of the Basin only for near‐source monitors; expect to remain in attainment based on current monitoring data; attainment re‐designation request pending. h) New 1‐hour NO2 NAAQS became effective 8/2/2010, with attainment designations 1/20/2012; annual NO2 NAAQS retained. i) The 1971 annual and 24‐hour SO2 NAAQS were revoked, effective 8/23/2010.
Despite substantial improvements in air quality over the past few decades, some air monitoring stations in the Air Basin still exceed the NAAQS and frequently record the highest ozone levels in the U.S. In 2020, monitoring stations in the Air Basin exceeded the most current federal standards on a total of 181 days (49 percent of the year), including: 8‐hour ozone (157 days over the 2015 ozone NAAQS), 24‐hour PM2.5 (39 days), PM10 (3 days), and NO2 (1 day). Nine of the top 10 stations in the nation most frequently exceeding the 2015 8‐hour ozone NAAQS in 2020 were located within the Air Basin, including stations in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties (SCAQMD, 2022).
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
PM2.5 levels in the Air Basin have improved significantly in recent years. Since 2015, none of the monitoring stations in the Air Basin have recorded violations of the former 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (15.0 μg/m3
). On July 25, 2016 the EPA finalized a determination that the Air Basin attained the 1997 annual (15.0 μg/m3
) and 24‐hour PM2.5 (65 μg/m3) NAAQS, effective August 24, 2016. However, the Air Basin does not meet the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (12.0 μg/m3 ), with six monitoring stations having
design values above the standard for the 2018‐2020 period (SCAQMD, 2022).
4.2 State – California Air Resources Board
The CARB, which is a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California. In this capacity, the CARB conducts research, sets the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), compiles emission inventories, developssuggested control measures, provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP. The CAAQS for criteria pollutants in the Air Basin are shown in Table D.
In addition, the CARB establishes emission standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g. hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbeque lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.
Table D – California Ambient Air Quality Standards Attainment Status – South Coast Air Basin Criteria Pollutant Averaging Time Levela Designationb
Ozone
1‐Hour 0.09 ppm Nonattainment
8‐Hour 0.070 ppm Nonattainment
PM2.5 Annual 12 μg/m3 Nonattainment
PM10
24‐Hour 50 μg/m3 Nonattainment
Annual 20 μg/m3 Nonattainment
Lead 30‐Day Average 1.5 μg/m3 Attainment
CO
1‐Hour 20 ppm Attainment
8‐Hour 9.0 ppm Attainment
NO2
1‐Hour 0.18 ppm Attainment
Annual 0.030 Attainmentc
SO2
1‐Hour 0.25 ppm Attainment
24‐Hour 0.04 ppm Attainment
Sulfates 24‐Hour 25 μg/m3 Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfidec 1‐Hour 0.03 ppm Unclassified
Notes:
a) CA State standards, or CAAQS, for ozone, SO2, NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 are values not to be exceeded; lead, sulfates and H2S standards are values not to be equaled or exceeded; CAAQS are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. b) CA State designations shown were updated by CARB in 2019, based on the 2016‐2018 3‐year period; stated designations are based on a 3‐year data period after consideration of outliers and exceptional events. c) The CA‐60 near road portion of San Bernardino, Riverside and Los Angeles Counties has recently been redesignated as an attainment area based on data collected between 2018 and 2020.
Source: SCAQMD, 2022
As shown in Table D, the Air Basin has been designated by the CARB as a non‐attainment area for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 and. Currently, the Air Basin is in attainment with the ambient air quality standards for lead, CO, NO2, SO2 and sulfates, and is unclassified for Hydrogen Sulfide.
The CCR air quality emission rulesthat are applicable to all land development projectsin the State include, but are not limited to the following:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Assembly Bill 2588
The Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 2588, 1987, Connelly) was enacted in 1987 as a meansto establish a formal air toxics emission inventory risk quantification program.
AB 2588, as amended, establishes a process that requires stationary sources to report the type and quantities of certain substances their facilities routinely release in California. The data is ranked by high, intermediate, and low categories, which are determined by: the potency, toxicity, quantity, volume, and proximity of the facility to nearby receptors.
CARB Regulation for In‐Use Off‐Road Diesel Vehicles
On July 26, 2007, the CARB adopted CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 to reduce DPM and NOx emissions from in‐use off‐road heavy‐duty diesel vehicles in California. Such vehicles are used in construction, mining, and industrial operations. The regulation limits idling to no more than five consecutive minutes, requires reporting and labeling, and requires disclosure of the regulation upon vehicle sale. Performance requirements of the rule are based on a fleet’s average NOx emissions, which can be met by replacing older vehicles with newer, cleaner vehicles or by applying exhaust retrofits. The regulation was amended in 2010 to delay the original timeline of the performance requirement making the first compliance deadline January 1, 2014 for large fleets (over 5,000 horsepower), 2017 for medium fleets (2,501‐5,000 horsepower), and 2019 for small fleets (2,500 horsepower or less). Currently, no commercial operation in California may add any equipment to their fleet that has a Tier 0, Tier 1, or Tier 2 engine. It should be noted that commercial fleets may continue to use their existing Tier 0, 1 and 2 equipment, if they can demonstrate that the average emissionsfrom their entire fleet emissions meet the NOx emissions targets.
CARB Resolution 08‐43 for On‐Road Diesel Truck Fleets
On December 12, 2008 the CARB adopted Resolution 08‐43, which limits NOx, PM10 and PM2.5 emissions from on‐road diesel truck fleets that operate in California. On October 12, 2009 Executive Order R‐09‐010 was adopted that codified Resolution 08‐43 into CCR Title 13, Section 2025. This regulation requires that by the year 2023 all commercial diesel trucks that operate in California shall meet model year 2010 (Tier 4 Final) or latter emission standards. This regulation also provides a few exemptions including a onetime per year 3‐day pass for trucks registered outside of California. All on‐road diesel trucks utilized during construction of the proposed project will be required to comply with Resolution 08‐43.
4.3 Regional – Southern California
The SCAQMD isthe agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the Air Basin.
To that end, as a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG), county transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and state agencies.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of AQMPs. The Final 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (2022 AQMP) was adopted by CARB on January 26, 2023 and has been submitted to the EPA for final approval, which is anticipated to occur sometime this year. After the 2022 AQMP has been adopted by the EPA, the 2022 AQMP will be incorporated into the SIP. The 2022 AQMP
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
establishes actions and strategies to reduce ozone levels to the EPA 2015 ozone standard of 70 ppb by 2037. The 2022 AQMP promotes extensive use of zero‐emission technologies across all stationary and mobile sources coupled with rules and regulations, investment strategies, and incentives.
Although SCAQMD is responsible for regional air quality planning efforts, it does not have the authority to directly regulate air quality issues associated with plans and new development projects throughout the Air Basin. Instead, this is controlled through local jurisdictions in accordance with CEQA. In order to assist local jurisdictions with air quality compliance issues the 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook), prepared by SCAQMD, with the most current updates found at http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/hdbk.html, was developed in accordance with the projections and programs detailed in the AQMPs. The purpose of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook is to assist lead agencies, as well as consultants, project proponents, and other interested parties in evaluating a proposed project’s potential air quality impacts. Specifically, the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook explains the procedures that SCAQMD recommends be followed for the environmental review process required by CEQA. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook provides direction on how to evaluate potential air quality impacts, how to determine whether these impacts are significant, and how to mitigate these impacts. The SCAQMD intends that by providing this guidance, the air quality impacts of plans and development proposals will be analyzed accurately and consistently throughout the Air Basin, and adverse impacts will be minimized.
The SCAQMD rules that are applicable to land development projects in the Air Basin include, but are not limited to, the following:
Rule 402 ‐ Nuisance
Rule 402 prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which causes injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. Compliance with Rule 402 will reduce local air quality and odor impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.
Rule 403‐ Fugitive Dust
Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction activities and requiresthat no person shall cause or allow the emissions of fugitive dust such that dust remains visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line or the dust emission exceeds 20 percent opacity, if the dust is from the operation of a motorized vehicle. Compliance with this rule is achieved through application of standard Best Available Control Measures, which include but are not limited to the measures below. Compliance with these rules would reduce local air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Utilize either a pad of washed gravel 50 feet long, 100 feet of paved surface, a wheel shaker, or a wheel washing device to remove material from vehicle tires and undercarriages before leaving project site.
Do not allow any track out of material to extend more than 25 feet onto a public roadway and remove all track out at the end of each workday.
Water all exposed areas on active sites at least three times per day and pre‐water all areas prior to clearing and soil moving activities.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Apply nontoxic chemical stabilizers according to manufacturer specifications to all construction areas that will remain inactive for 10 days or longer.
Pre‐water all material to be exported prior to loading, and either cover all loads or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
Replant all disturbed area as soon as practical.
Suspend all grading activities when wind speeds (including wind gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. Restrict traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour or less.
Rules 1108 and 1108.1 – Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt
Rules 1108 and 1108.1 govern the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the VOC content in asphalt. This rule regulates the VOC contents of asphalt used during construction as well as any on‐going maintenance during operations. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction and operation of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1108.1.
Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings
Rule 1113 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of architectural coatings and limits the VOC content in sealers, coatings, paints and solvents. This rule regulates the VOC contents of paints available during construction. Therefore, all paints and solvents used during construction and operation of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113.
Rule 1143 – Paint Thinners
Rule 1143 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of paint thinners and multi‐purpose solvents that are used in thinning of coating materials, cleaning of coating application equipment, and other solvent cleaning operations. This rule regulates the VOC content of solvents used during construction. Solvents used during construction and operation of the proposed project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1143.
Southern California Association of Governments
The SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development and the environment. SCAG is the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the majority of the southern California region and isthe largest MPO in the nation. With respect to air quality planning, SCAG has prepared the 2024‐2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal 2024), adopted by SCAG on April 4, 2024 which is based on the regional development and growth forecasts provided in the 2023 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2023 FTIP), adopted October 2022. However, per SB 375, SCAG and CARB are required to work together until CARB staff conclude that the calculations and quantifications provided would yield accurate estimates of GHG emission reductions. Since CARB staff continue to have significant outstanding concerns about the technical methodology utilized in the Connect SoCal 2024, the current approved RTP/SCS is the 2020‐2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal 2020), adopted September 3, 2020, which is based on the 2019 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2019 FTIP), adopted September 2018.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Although the Connect SoCal 2020 and 2019 FTIP are primarily planning documents for future transportation projects, a key component of these plans are to integrate land use planning with transportation planning that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity to existing transit service. These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the 2022 AQMP, which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency analysis included in the 2022 AQMP. The Connect SoCal 2020, 2019 FTIP, and 2022 AQMP are based on projections originating within the City and County General Plans.
4.4 Local – City of Santa Clarita
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Santa Clarita, have the authority and responsibility to reduce air pollution through its police power and decision‐making authority. Specifically, the City is responsible for the assessment and mitigation of air emissions resulting from its land use decisions. The City is also responsible for the implementation of transportation control measures as outlined in the AQMPs.
Examples of such measures include bus turnouts, energy‐efficient streetlights, and synchronized traffic signals. In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the air quality impacts of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant air quality impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such mitigation.
The City does not, however, have the expertise to develop plans, programs, procedures, and methodologies to ensure that air quality within the City and region will meet federal and state standards.
Instead, the City relies on the expertise of the SCAQMD and utilizes the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook as the guidance document for the environmental review of plans and development proposals within its jurisdiction.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
5.0 ENERGY CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT
The regulatory setting related to energy conservation is primarily addressed through State and City regulations, which are discussed below.
5.1 State
Energy conservation management in the State was initiated by the 1974 Warren‐Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act that created the California Energy Resource Conservation and Development Commission (currently named California Energy Commission [CEC]), which was originally tasked with certifying new electric generating plants based on the need for the plant and the suitability of the site of the plant. In 1976 the Warren‐Alquist Act was expanded to include new restrictions on nuclear generating plants, that effectively resulted in a moratorium of any new nuclear generating plants in the State. The following details specific regulations adopted by the State in order to reduce the consumption of energy.
California Code of Regulations Title 20
On November 3, 1976 the CEC adopted the Regulations for Appliance Efficiency Standards Relating to Refrigerators, Refrigerator‐Freezers and Freezers and Air Conditioners, which were the first energy‐ efficiency standardsfor appliances. The appliance efficiency regulations have been updated several times by the CEC and the most current version is the 2016 Appliance Efficiency Regulations, adopted January 2017, which now includes almost all types of appliances and lamps that use electricity, natural gas as well as plumbing fixtures. The authority for the CEC to control the energy‐efficiency of appliances is detailed in CCR Title 20, Division 2, Chapter 4, Article 4, Sections 1601‐1609.
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6
The CEC is also responsible for implementing the CCR Title 24, Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24 Part 6) that were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. In 2008 the State set an energy‐use reduction goal of zero‐net‐energy use of all new homes by 2020 and the CEC was mandated to meet this goal through revisions to the Title 24, Part 6 regulations.
The Title 24 standards are updated on a three‐year schedule and since 2008 the standards have been incrementally moving to the 2020 goal of the zero‐net‐energy use. The 2022 Title 24 standards are the current standards that went into effect on January 1, 2023.
According to the Title 24 Part 6 Fact Sheet, the CEC estimates that over 30 years the 2022 Title 24 standards will reduce 10 MMTCO2e of GHG emissions, which is equivalent to taking nearly 2.2 million cars off the road for a year. For single‐family homes, the CEC estimates that the 2022 Title 24 changes from using natural gasfurnaces to electric heat pumps to heat new homes and would reduce net CO2 emissions by 16,230 MTCO2e per year, when compared to the 2019 Title 24 standards, which is equivalent of taking 3,641 gas cars off the road each year. The 2022 Title 24 standards will: (1) Increase onsite renewable energy generation; (2) Increases electric load flexibility to support grid reliability; (3) Reduces emissions from newly constructed buildings; (4) Reduces air pollution forimproved public health; and (5) Encourages adoption of environmentally beneficial efficient electric technologies.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11
CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building Standards (CalGreen Code) was developed in response to continued efforts to reduce GHG emissions associated with energy consumption. The CalGreen Code is also updated every three years and the current version is the 2022 CalGreen Code that went into effect on January 1, 2023.
The CalGreen Code contains requirements for construction site selection; storm water control during construction; construction waste reduction; indoor water use reduction; material selection; natural resource conservation; site irrigation conservation; and more. The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition.
The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for verifying that all building systems (e.g., heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems) are functioning at their maximum efficiency.
The CalGreen Code provides standards for bicycle parking, carpool/vanpool/electric vehicle spaces, light and glare reduction, grading and paving, energy efficient appliances, renewable energy, graywater systems, water efficient plumbing fixtures, recycling and recycled materials, pollutant controls (including moisture control and indoor air quality), acoustical controls, storm water management, building design, insulation, flooring, and framing, among others. Implementation of the CalGreen Code measures reduces energy consumption and vehicle trips and encourages the use of alternative‐fuel vehicles, which reduces pollutant emissions.
Some of the notable changes in the 2022 CalGreen Code over the prior 2019 CalGreen Code for nonresidential development mandatory requirementsinclude the repeal of designated parking spaces for clean air vehicles and an increase in the number of electric vehicle (EV) ready parking spaces. The 2022 CalGreen Code also added new requirements for installed Level 2 or direct‐current fast charger EV charging stations for autos, EV charging readiness for loading docks, enhanced thermal insulation, and acoustical ceilings.
Executive Order N‐79‐20
The California Governor issued Executive Order N‐79‐20 on September 23, 2020 that requires all new passenger cars and trucks and commercial drayage trucks sold in California to be zero‐emissions by the year 2035 and all medium‐ heavy‐duty vehicles (commercial trucks) sold in the State to be zero‐emission by 2045 for all operations where feasible. Executive Order N‐79‐20 also requires all off‐road vehicles and equipment to transition to 100 percent zero‐emission equipment, where feasible by 2035.
Senate Bill 100
Senate Bill 100 (SB 100) was adopted September 2018 and requires 100 percent of retailsales of electricity to be generated from renewable or zero‐carbon emission sources of electricity by December 1, 2045. SB 100 supersedes the renewable energy requirements set by SB 350, SB 1078, SB 107, and SB X1‐2. SB 100 codified the interim renewable energy thresholds from the prior Bills of: 33 percent by 2020, 40 percent by December 31, 2024, 45 percent by December 31, 2027, and 50 percent by December 31, 2030.
Executive Order B‐48‐18 and Assembly Bill 2127
The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐48‐18 on January 26, 2018 that orders all state entities to work with the private sector to put at least five million zero‐emission vehicles on California roads by 2030 and to install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 EV chargers by 2025. Currently there are approximately 350,000 electric vehicles operating in California, which represents approximately 1.5
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
percent of the 24 million vehicles total currently operating in California. Implementation of Executive Order B‐48‐18 would result in approximately 20 percent of all vehicles in California to be zero emission electric vehicles. Assembly Bill 2127 (AB 2127) was codified into statute on September 13, 2018 and requires that the CEC working with CARB prepare biannual assessments of the statewide EV charging infrastructure needed to support the levels of zero emission vehicle adoption required for the State to meet its goals of putting at least 5 million zero‐emission vehicles on California roads by 2030.
Assembly Bill 1109
California Assembly Bill 1109 (AB 1109) was adopted October 2007, also known as the Lighting Efficiency and Toxics Reduction Act, prohibits the manufacturing of lights after January 1, 2010 that contain levels of hazardous substances prohibited by the European Union pursuant to the Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive. AB 1109 also requires reductions in energy usage for lighting and is structured to reduce lighting electrical consumption by: (1) At least 50 percent reduction from 2007 levels for indoor residential lighting; and (2) At least 25 percent reduction from 2007 levels for indoor commercial and all outdoor lighting by 2018. AB 1109 would reduce GHG emissions through reducing the amount of electricity required to be generated by fossil fuels in California.
Assembly Bill 1493
California Assembly Bill 1493 (also known as the Pavley Bill, in reference to its author Fran Pavley) was enacted on July 22, 2002 and required CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. In 2004, CARB approved the “Pavley I” regulations limiting the amount of GHGs that may be released from new passenger automobiles that are being phased in between model years 2009 through 2016. These regulations will reduce GHG emissions by 30 percent from 2002 levels by 2016. In June 2009, the EPA granted California the authority to implement GHG emission reduction standards for light duty vehicles, in September 2009, amendments to the Pavley I regulations were adopted by CARB and implementation of the “Pavley I” regulations started in 2009.
The second set of regulations “Pavley II” was developed in 2010, and is being phased in between model years 2017 through 2025 with the goal of reducing GHG emissions by 45 percent by the year 2020 as compared to the 2002 fleet. The Pavley II standards were developed by linking the GHG emissions and formerly separate toxic tailpipe emissions standards previously known as the “LEV III” (third stage of the Low Emission Vehicle standards) into a single regulatory framework. The new rulesreduce emissionsfrom gasoline‐powered cars as well as promote zero‐emissions auto technologies such as electricity and hydrogen, and through increasing the infrastructure for fueling hydrogen vehicles. In 2009, the EPA granted California the authority to implement the GHG standards for passenger cars, pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles and these GHG emissions standards are currently being implemented nationwide.
The EPA has performed a midterm evaluation of the longer‐term standards for model years 2022‐2025, and based on the findings of this midterm evaluation, the EPA proposed The Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Proposed Rule for Model Years 2021‐2026 that amends the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) and GHG emissions standards for light vehicles for model years 2021 through 2026. The SAFE Vehicles Rule was published on April 30, 2020 and made effective on June 29, 2020.
5.2 Local ‐ City of Santa Clarita
The applicable energy plan for the proposed project is the Conservation and Open Space Element of the Santa Clarita General Plan, June, 2011. The applicable energy‐related goals and policies that are from Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan are shown below.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Goal CO 8: Development designed to improve energy efficiency, reduce energy and natural resource consumption, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
Objective CO 8.1: Encourage the following green building and sustainable development practices on private development projects, to the extent reasonable and feasible.
Policies
Policy CO 8.3.1: Evaluate site plans proposed for new development based on energy efficiency pursuant to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards for New Construction and Neighborhood Development, including the following: a) location efficiency; b) environmental preservation; c) compact, complete, and connected neighborhoods; and d) resource efficiency, including use of recycled materials and water.
Policy CO 8.3.2: Promote construction of energy efficient buildings through requirements for LEED certification or through comparable alternative requirements as adopted by local ordinance.
Policy CO 8.3.6: Require new development to use passive solar heating and cooling techniques in building design and construction, which may include but are not be limited to building orientation, clerestory windows, skylights, placement and type of windows, overhangs to shade doors and windows, and use of light colored roofs, shade trees, and paving materials.
Policy CO 8.3.7: Encourage the use of trees and landscaping to reduce heating and cooling energy loads, through shading of buildings and parking lots.
Policy CO 8.3.8: Encourage energy‐conserving heating and cooling systems and appliances, and energy‐efficiency in windows and insulation, in all new construction.
Policy CO 8.3.9: Limit excessive lighting levels, and encourage a reduction of lighting when businesses are closed to a level required for security.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
6.0 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE MANAGEMENT
The regulatory setting related to global climate change is addressed through the efforts of various international, federal,state, regional, and local government agencies. These agencies work jointly, as well as individually, to reduce GHG emissions through legislation, regulations, planning, policy‐making, education, and a variety of programs. The agencies responsible for global climate change regulations are discussed below.
6.1 International
In 1988, the United Nations established the IPCC to evaluate the impacts of global climate change and to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the U.S. joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling GHG emissions. The parties of the UNFCCC adopted the Kyoto Protocol, which set binding GHG reduction targets for 37 industrialized countries, the objective of reducing their collective GHG emissions by five percent below 1990 levels by 2012. The Kyoto Protocol has been ratified by 182 countries, but has not been ratified by the U.S. It should be noted that Japan and Canada opted out of the Kyoto Protocol and the remaining developed countries that ratified the Kyoto Protocol have not met their Kyoto targets. The Kyoto Protocol expired in 2012 and the amendment for the second commitment period from 2013 to 2020 has not yet entered into legal force.
The parties to the Kyoto Protocol negotiated the Paris Agreement in December 2015, agreeing to set a goal of limiting global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared with pre‐industrial levels. The Paris Agreement has been adopted by 195 nations with 147 ratifying it, including the U.S. by President Obama, who ratified it by Executive Order on September 3, 2016. On June 1, 2017, President Trump announced that the U.S. is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and on January 21, 2021 President Biden signed an executive order rejoining the Paris Agreement.
Additionally, the Montreal Protocol was originally signed in 1987 and substantially amended in 1990 and 1992. The Montreal Protocol stipulates that the production and consumption of compounds that deplete ozone in the stratosphere—CFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform—were to be phased out, with the first three by the year 2000 and methyl chloroform by 2005.
6.2 Federal – United States Environmental Protection Agency The EPA is responsible for implementing federal policy to address global climate change. The federal government administers a wide array of public‐private partnerships to reduce U.S. GHG intensity. These programs focus on energy efficiency, renewable energy, methane, and other non‐CO2 gases, agricultural practices and implementation of technologies to achieve GHG reductions. EPA implements several voluntary programs that substantially contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions.
In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (Docket No. 05–1120), argued November 29, 2006 and decided April 2, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court held that not only did the EPA have authority to regulate GHGs, but the EPA's reasons for not regulating this area did not fit the statutory requirements.
As such, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the EPA should be required to regulate CO2 and other GHGs as pollutants under the federal Clean Air Act.
In response to the Consolidations Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764; Public Law 110‐161), EPA proposed a rule on March 10, 2009 that requires mandatory reporting of GHG emissions from large sources in the
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
U.S. On September 22, 2009, the Final Mandatory Reporting of GHG Rule was signed and published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2009. The rule became effective on December 29, 2009. This rule requires suppliers of fossil fuels or industrial GHGs, manufacturers of vehicles and engines, and facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more per year of GHG emissions to submit annual reports to the EPA.
On December 7, 2009, the EPA Administrator signed two distinct findings under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. One is an endangermentfinding that finds concentrations of the six GHGsin the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations. The other is a cause or contribute finding, that finds emissions from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG pollution which threatens public health and welfare. These actions did not impose any requirements on industry or other entities, however, since 2009 the EPA has been providing GHG emission standards for vehicles and other stationary sources of GHG emissions that are regulated by the EPA. On September 13, 2013 the EPA Administrator signed 40 CFR Part 60, that limits emissions from new sources to 1,100 pounds of CO2 per mega‐watt hour (MWh) for fossil fuel‐fired utility boilers and 1,000 pounds of CO2 per MWh for large natural gas‐fired combustion units.
On August 3, 2015, the EPA announced the Clean Power Plan, emissions guidelines for U.S. to follow in developing plans to reduce GHG emissions from existing fossil fuel‐fired power plants (Federal Register Vol. 80, No. 205, October 23 2015). On October 11, 2017, the EPA issued a formal proposal to repeal the Clean Power Plan and on June 19, 2019 the EPA replaced the Clean Power Plan with the Affordable Clean Energy rule that is anticipated to lower power sector GHG emissions by 11 million tons by the year 2030.
On April 30, 2020, the EPA and the National Highway Safety Administration published the Final Rule for the Safer Affordable Fuel‐Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021‐2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule). Part One of the Rule revokes California’s authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and zero‐emission vehicle mandates in California, which results in one emission standard to be used nationally for all passenger cars and light trucks that is set by the EPA.
6.3 State
The CARB has the primary responsible for implementing state policy to address global climate change, howeverthere are state regulationsrelated to global climate change that affect a variety ofstate agencies.
CARB, which is a part of CalEPA, is responsible for the coordination and administration of both the federal and state air pollution control programs within California. In this capacity, the CARB conducts research, sets CAAQS, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, provides oversight of local programs, and prepares the SIP. In addition, the CARB establishes emission standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (e.g. hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbeque lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions.
In 2008, CARB approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan that proposes a “comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall carbon GHG emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources,save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health” (CARB 2008). The Climate Change Scoping Plan has a range of GHG reduction actions which include direct regulations; alternative compliance mechanisms; monetary and non‐monetary incentives; voluntary actions; market‐based mechanisms such as a cap‐and‐trade system. In 2014, CARB approved the First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB, 2014) that identifies additional strategies moving beyond the 2020 targets to the year 2050. On December 14, 2017 CARB adopted the California’s 2017
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017 (CARB, 2017) that provides specific statewide policies and measures to achieve the 2030 GHG reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and the aspirational 2050 GHG reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In addition, the State has passed the following laws directing CARB to develop actionsto reduce GHG emissions, which are listed below in chronological order, with the most current first.
Executive Order B‐55‐18 and Assembly Bill 1279
The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐55‐18 in September 2018 that establishes a new statewide goal to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045. This executive order directs the CARB to work with relevant state agencies to develop a framework for implementation and accounting that tracks progress toward this goal as well as ensuring future scoping plans identify and recommend measures to achieve this carbon neutrality goal. Assembly Bill 1279 was passed by the legislature in September 2022 that codifies the carbon neutrality targets provided in Executive Order B‐ 55‐18. The 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality, adopted by CARB on December 16, 2022, was prepared in order to meet the carbon neutrality goal targets developed in Executive Order B‐55‐18 and codified in Assembly Bill 1279.
Executive Order N‐79‐20
Executive Order N‐79‐20 establish targetsfor when all new vehicles and equipment are zero‐emission and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6
The Title 24 Part 6 standards have been developed by the CEC primarily for energy conservation and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management. Itshould be noted that implementation of the Title 24 Part 6 building standards would also reduce GHG emissions since energy use for residential and commercial buildings creates 9.7 percent of the GHG emissionsin the State.
California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11
The CalGreen building standards have been developed by the CEC primarily for energy conservation and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management. It should be noted that implementation of the CalGreen Building standards would also reduce GHG emissions, since as detailed above under Title 24, Part 6, energy usage from buildings creates 9.7 percent of GHG emissions in the State.
Senate Bill 100
SB 100 requires that by December 1, 2045 that 100 percent of retail sales of electricity to be generated from renewable or zero‐carbon emission sources of electricity and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.
Executive Order B‐48‐18 and Assembly Bill 2127
Executive Order B‐48‐18 and AB 2127 provides measuresto put at least five million zero‐emission vehicles on California roads by 2030 and to install 200 hydrogen fueling stations and 250,000 electric vehicle chargers by 2025 and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Executive Order B‐30‐15, Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197 The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐30‐15 on April 29, 2015 that aims to reduce California’s GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. This executive order aligns California’s GHG reduction targets with those of other international governments, such as the European Union that set the same target for 2030 in October, 2014. This target will make it possible to reach the ultimate goal of reducing GHG emissions 80 percent under 1990 levels by 2050 that is based on scientifically established levels needed in the U.S.A to limit global warming below 2 degrees Celsius – the warming threshold at which scientists say there will likely be major climate disruptions such as super droughts and rising sea levels. Assembly Bill 197 (AB 197) (September 8, 2016) and Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) (September 8, 2016) codified into statute the GHG emissionsreduction targets of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 as detailed in Executive Order B‐30‐15. AB 197 also requires additional GHG emissions reporting that is broken down to sub‐county levels and requires CARB to consider the social costs of emissions impacting disadvantaged communities.
Executive Order B‐29‐15
The California Governor issued Executive Order B‐29‐15 on April 1, 2015 and directed the State Water Resources Control Board to impose restrictions to achieve a statewide 25 percent reduction in urban water usage and directed the Department of Water Resources to replace 50 million square feet of lawn with drought tolerant landscaping through an update to the State’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The ordinance also requires installation of more efficient irrigation systems, promotion of greywater usage and onsite stormwater capture, and limits the turf planted in new residential landscapes to 25 percent of the total area and restricts turf from being planted in median strips or in parkways unless the parkway is next to a parking strip and a flat surface is required to enter and exit vehicles. Executive Order B‐29‐15 would reduce GHG emissions associated with the energy used to transport and filter water.
Assembly Bill 341 and Senate Bills 939 and 1374
Senate Bill 939 (SB 939) requires that each jurisdiction in California to divert at least 50 percent of its waste away from landfills, whether through waste reduction, recycling or other means. Senate Bill 1374 (SB 1374) requires the California Integrated Waste Management Board to adopt a model ordinance by March 1, 2004 suitable for adoption by any local agency to require 50 to 75 percent diversion of construction and demolition of waste materials from landfills. Assembly Bill 341 (AB 341) was adopted in 2011 and builds upon the waste reduction measures of SB 939 and 1374, and sets a new target of a 75 percent reduction in solid waste generated by the year 2020.
Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) was adopted September 2008 in order to support the State’s climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG emission reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires CARB to set regional targets for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. In 2010, CARB established targets for 2020 and 2035 for each MPO within the State. It was up to each MPO to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPOs Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) to meet CARB’s 2020 and 2035 GHG emission reduction targets. These reduction targets are required to be updated every eight years and the most current targets are detailed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our‐ work/programs/sustainable‐communities‐program/regional‐plan‐targets, which provides GHG emissions reduction targets for SCAG of 8 percent by 2020 and 19 percent by 2035.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
The Connect SoCal 2020 (SCAG, 2020) provides a 2035 GHG emission reduction target of 19 percent reduction over the 2005 per capita emissions levels. The Connect SoCal 2020 include new initiatives of land use, transportation and technology to meet the 2035 new 19 percent GHG emission reduction target for 2035. CARB is also charged with reviewing SCAG’s RTP/SCS for consistency with its assigned targets.
City and County land use policies, including General Plans, are not required to be consistent with the RTP and associated SCS. However, new provisions of CEQA incentivize, through streamlining and other provisions, qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS and categorized as “transit priority projects.”
Assembly Bill 1109
AB 1109 requires reductions in energy usage for lighting and is described in more detail above in Section
5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.
Executive Order S‐1‐07
Executive Order S‐1‐07 wasissued in 2007 and proclaimsthat the transportation sector is the main source of GHG emissions in the State, since it generates more than 40 percent of the State’s GHG emissions. It establishes a goal to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels sold in the State by at least ten percent by 2020. This executive order also directs CARB to determine whether this Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) could be adopted as a discrete early‐action measure as part of the effort to meet the mandates in AB 32.
In 2009 CARB approved the proposed regulation to implement the LCFS. The standard was challenged in the courts, but has been in effect since 2011 and was re‐approved by the CARB in 2015. The LCFS is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions by about 16 million metric tons per year by 2020. The LCFS is designed to provide a framework that uses market mechanisms to spur the steady introduction of lower carbon fuels. The framework establishes performance standards that fuel producers and importers must meet annually. Reformulated gasoline mixed with corn‐derived ethanol and low‐sulfur diesel fuel represent the baseline fuels. Lower carbon fuels may be ethanol, biodiesel, renewable diesel, or blends of these fuels with gasoline or diesel. Compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas also may be low‐ carbon fuels. Hydrogen and electricity, when used in fuel cells or electric vehicles, are also considered as low‐carbon fuels.
Senate Bill 97
Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) was adopted August 2007 and acknowledges that climate change is a prominent environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. SB 97 directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), which is part of the State Natural Resources Agency, to prepare, develop, and transmit to CARB guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions, as required by CEQA, by July 1, 2009. The Natural Resources Agency was required to certify and adopt those guidelines by January 1, 2010.
Pursuant to the requirements of SB 97 as stated above, on December 30, 2009 the Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines that addresses GHG emissions. The CEQA Guidelines Amendments changed 14 sections of the CEQA Guidelines and incorporated GHG language throughout the guidelines. However, no GHG emissions thresholds of significance were provided and no specific mitigation measures were identified. The GHG emission reduction amendments went into effect on March 18, 2010 and are summarized below:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Climate Action Plans and other GHG reduction plans can be used to determine whether a project has significant impacts, based upon its compliance with the plan. Local governments are encouraged to quantify the GHG emissions of proposed projects, noting that they have the freedom to select the models and methodologies that best meet their needs and circumstances. The section also recommends consideration ofseveral qualitative factorsthat may be used in the determination of significance, such as the extent to which the given project complies with state, regional, or local GHG reduction plans and policies. OPR does not set or dictate specific thresholds of significance. Consistent with existing CEQA Guidelines, OPR encourages local governments to develop and publish their own thresholds of significance for GHG impacts assessment.
When creating their own thresholds of significance, local governments may consider the thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by experts.
New amendments include guidelines for determining methods to mitigate the effects of GHG emissions in Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines.
OPR is clear to state that “to qualify as mitigation, specific measures from an existing plan must be identified and incorporated into the project; general compliance with a plan, by itself, is not mitigation.”
OPR’s emphasizes the advantages of analyzing GHG impacts on an institutional, programmatic level. OPR therefore approves tiering of environmental analyses and highlights some benefits of such an approach.
Environmental impact reports must specifically consider a project’s energy use and energy efficiency potential.
Assembly Bill 32
In 2006, the California State Legislature adopted AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires CARB, to adopt rules and regulations that would achieve GHG emissions equivalent to statewide levels in 1990 by 2020 through an enforceable statewide emission cap which will be phased in starting in 2012. Emission reductions shall include carbon sequestration projects that would remove carbon from the atmosphere and utilize best management practices that are technologically feasible and cost effective.
In 2007 CARB released the calculated Year 1990 GHG emissions of 431 MMTCO2e. The 2020 target of 431 MMTCO2e requiresthe reduction of 78 MMTCO2e, or approximately 16 percent from the State’s projected 2020 business as usual emissions of 509 MMTCO2e (CARB, 2014). Under AB 32, CARB was required to adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 cap by 2020. Early measures CARB took to lower GHG emissions included requiring operators of the largest industrial facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons of CO2 in a calendar year to submit verification of GHG emissions by December 1, 2010. The CARB Board also approved nine discrete early action measures that include regulations affecting landfills, motor vehicle fuels, refrigerants in cars, port operations and other sources, all of which became enforceable on or before January 1, 2010.
CARB’s Scoping Plan that was adopted in 2009, proposes a variety of measures including: strengthening energy efficiency and building standards; targeted fees on water and energy use; a market‐based cap‐
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
and‐trade system; achieving a 33 percentrenewable energy mix; and a fee regulation to fund the program.
The 2014 update to the Scoping Plan identifies strategies moving beyond the 2020 targets to the year 2050.
The Cap and Trade Program established under the Scoping Plan sets a statewide limit on sources responsible for 85 percent of California’s GHG emissions, and has established a market for long‐term investment in energy efficiency and cleaner fuels since 2012.
Assembly Bill 1493
AB 1493 or the Pavley Bill sets tailpipe GHG emissions limits for passenger vehicles in California as well as fuel economy standards and is described in more detail above in Section 5.1 under Energy Conservation Management.
6.4 Regional – Southern California
The SCAQMD isthe agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the Air Basin.
To that end, as a regional agency, the SCAQMD works directly with SCAG, county transportation commissions, and local governments and cooperates actively with all federal and state agencies.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emission sources, and enforces such measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources. The SCAQMD is also responsible for GHG emissions for projects where it is the lead agency.
However, for other projects in the Air Basin where it is not the lead agency, it is limited to providing resourcesto other lead agencies in order to assist them in determining GHG emission thresholds and GHG reduction measures. In order to assist local agencies with direction on GHG emissions, the SCAQMD organized a working group, which is described below.
SCAQMD Working Group
Since neither CARB nor the OPR has developed GHG emissions threshold, the SCAQMD formed a Working Group to develop significance thresholds related to GHG emissions. At the September 28, 2010 Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that includes the following tiers:
Tier 1: Applicable CEQA Exemptions (e.g., SB 97, categorical and statutory exemptions). Tier 2: Consistency with a GHG Reduction Plan (an adopted plan by a local agency). Tier 3: Quantitative Screening Values. The following quantitative thresholds were proposed:
o 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land use types; or
o 3,500 MTCO2e per year for residential;
o 1,400 MTCO2e per year for commercial;
o 3,000 MTCO2e per year for mixed‐use; and
o 10,000 MTCO2e per year for industrial.
Tier 4: Performance Standards. The following options were proposed as performance standards:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
o Option 1: Percent Emission Reduction Target (Provide an undefined percent reduction in GHG emissions over business‐as‐usual emissions).
o Option 2: Early Implementation of Applicable AB32 Scoping Plan Measures (Require a set of AB32 Scoping Plan measures to be implemented).
o Option 3: SCAQMD Efficiency Targets. The following targets were proposed:
Year 2020 Targets
4.8 MTCO2e per year per service population for project level threshold (land use employment only)
6.6 MTCO2e per year per service population for plan level threshold Year 2035 Targets
3.0 MTCO2e per year per service population for project level threshold. 4.1 MTCO2e per year per service population for plan level threshold Tier 5: Mitigation Offsets (either alone or in combination with above tiers to achieve target threshold).
Southern California Association of Governments
As detailed above in Section 4.3, the current applicable RTP/SCS for the project area region isthe Connect SoCal 2020 and 2019 FTIP, which have been prepared to meet the GHG emissions reduction targets set by SB 375 for the SCAG region of 19 percent reduction over the 2005 per capita emissions levels. The Connect SoCal 2020 includes new land use, transportation, and technology strategies to meet the new 19 percent GHG emission reduction target for 2035.
Although the Connect SoCal 2020 and 2019 FTIP are primarily planning documents for future transportation projects, a key component of these plans are to integrate land use planning with transportation planning that promotes higher density infill development in close proximity to existing transit service. These plans form the basis for the land use and transportation components of the 2022 AQMP, which are utilized in the preparation of air quality forecasts and in the consistency analysis included in the 2022 AQMP. The Connect SoCal 2020, 2019 FTIP, and 2022 AQMP are based on projections originating within the City and County General Plans.
5.5 Local – City of Santa Clarita
Local jurisdictions, such as the City of Santa Clarita have the authority and responsibility to reduce GHG emissions through their police power and decision‐making authority. Specifically, the City is responsible for the assessment and mitigation of GHG emissions resulting from its land use decisions. In accordance with CEQA requirements and the CEQA review process, the City assesses the global climate change potential of new development projects, requires mitigation of potentially significant global climate change impacts by conditioning discretionary permits, and monitors and enforces implementation of such mitigation.
City of Santa Clarita General Plan
The Conservation and Open Space Element of the City of Santa Clarita General Plan has identified the following goals, objectives and policies aimed at GHG reduction in private development projects in the City (City of Santa Clarita 2011).
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Goal CO 8: Development designed to improve energy efficiency, reduce energy and natural resource consumption, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
Objective CO 8.1: Comply with the requirements of State law, including AB 32, SB 375 and implementing regulations, to reach targeted reductions of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Policy CO 8.1.1: Create and adopt a Climate Action Plan within 18 months of the OVOV adoption date of the City’s General Plan Update that meets State requirements and includes the following components:
a. Plans and programs to reduce GHG emissions to State‐mandated targets, including enforceable reduction measures;
i. The CAP may establish goals beyond 2020, which are consistent with the applicable laws and regulations referenced in this paragraph and based on current science;
ii. The CAP shall include specific and general tools and strategies to reduce the City’s current and projected 2020 inventory and to meet the CAPs target for GHG reductions by 2020;
iii. The CAP shall consider, among other GHG reduction strategies, the feasibility of development fees; incentive and rebate programs; and, voluntary and mandatory reduction strategies in areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy, water conservation and efficiency, solid waste, land use and transportation.
b. Mechanisms to ensure regular review of progress towards the emission reduction targets established by the Climate Action Plan; c. Procedures for reporting on progress to officials and the public; d. Procedures for revising the plan as needed to meet GHG emissions reduction targets; and,
e. Allocation of funding and staffing for Plan implementation; Policy CO 8.1.2: Participate in the preparation of a regional Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Plan to meet regional targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions, as required by SB 375.
Policy CO 8.1.3: Revise codes and ordinances as needed to address energy conservation, including but not limited to the following:
a. Strengthen building codes for new construction and renovation to achieve a higher level of energy efficiency, with a goal of exceeding energy efficiency beyond that required by Title 24;
b. Adopt a Green Building Program to encourage green building practices and materials, along with appropriate ordinances and incentives; c. Require orientation of buildings to maximize passive solar heating during cool seasons, avoid solar heat gain during hot periods, enhance natural
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
ventilation, promote effective use of daylight, and optimize opportunities for on‐site solar generation;
d. Encourage mitigation of the “heat island” effect through use of cool roofs, light‐colored paving, and shading to reduce energy consumption for air conditioning.
Policy CO 8.1.4: Provide information and education to the public about energy conservation and local strategies to address climate change.
Policy CO 8.1.5: Coordinate various activities within the community and appropriate agencies related to GHG emissions reduction activities.
Objective CO 8.3: Encourage the following green building and sustainable development practices on private development projects, to the extent reasonable and feasible.
Policy CO 8.3.1: Evaluate site plans proposed for new development based on energy efficiency pursuant to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards for New Construction and Neighborhood Development, including the following: a) location efficiency; b) environmental preservation; c) compact, complete, and connected neighborhoods; and d) resource efficiency, including use of recycled materials and water.
Policy CO 8.3.2: Promote construction of energy efficient buildings through requirements for LEED certification or through comparable alternative requirements as adopted by local ordinance.
Policy CO 8.3.3: Promote energy efficiency and water conservation upgrades to existing non‐ residential buildings at the time of major remodel or additions.
Policy CO 8.3.4: Encourage new residential development to include on‐site solar photovoltaic systems, or pre‐wiring, in at least 50% of the residential units, in concert with other significant energy conservation efforts.
Policy CO 8.3.5: Encourage on‐site solar generation of electricity in new retail and office commercial buildings and associated parking lots, carports, and garages, in concert with other significant energy conservation efforts.
Policy CO 8.3.6: Require new development to use passive solar heating and cooling techniques in building design and construction, which may include but are not be limited to building orientation, clerestory windows, skylights, placement and type of windows, overhangs to shade doors and windows, and use of light colored roofs, shade trees, and paving materials.
Policy CO 8.3.7: Encourage the use of trees and landscaping to reduce heating and cooling energy loads, through shading of buildings and parking lots.
Policy CO 8.3.8: Encourage energy‐conserving heating and cooling systems and appliances, and energy‐efficiency in windows and insulation, in all new construction.
Policy CO 8.3.9: Limit excessive lighting levels, and encourage a reduction of lighting when businesses are closed to a level required for security.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Policy CO 8.3.10: Provide incentives and technical assistance for installation of energy‐efficient improvements in existing and new buildings.
Policy CO 8.3.11: Consider allowing carbon off‐sets for large development projects, if appropriate, which may include funding off‐site projects or purchase of credits for other forms of mitigation, provided that any such mitigation shall be measurable and enforceable.
Policy CO 8.3.12: Reduce extensive heat gain from paved surfaces through development standards wherever feasible.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
7.0 ATMOSPHERIC SETTING
7.1 South Coast Air Basin
The project site is located within western Los Angeles County, which is part of the South Coast Air Basin that includes the non‐desert portions of Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles Counties and all of Orange County. The Air Basin is located on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills to the east. Regionally, the Air Basin is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains to the east forming the inland perimeter.
7.2 Local Climate
The climate of the western central portion of Los Angeles County, technically called an interior valley subclimate of the Southern California’s Mediterranean‐type climate, is characterized by hot dry summers, mild moist winters with infrequent rainfall, moderate afternoon breezes, and generally fair weather.
Occasional periods of strong Santa Ana winds and winter storms interrupt the otherwise mild weather pattern. The clouds and fog that form along the area’s coastline rarely extend as far inland as central Los Angeles County. When morning clouds and fog form, they typically burn off quickly after sunrise. The most important weather pattern from an air quality perspective is associated with the warm season airflow acrossthe populated areas of the Air Basin. This airflow brings polluted air into central Los Angeles County late in the afternoon. This transport pattern creates unhealthful air quality that may extend to the project site particularly during the summer months.
Winds are an important parameter in characterizing the air quality environment of a project site because they both determine the regional pattern of air pollution transport and control the rate of dispersion near a source. Daytime winds in central Los Angeles County are usually light breezes from off the coast as air moves regionally onshore from the cool Pacific Ocean to the warm Mojave Desert interior of Southern California. These winds allow for good local mixing, but as discussed above, these coastal winds carry significant amounts of industrial and automobile air pollutants from the densely urbanized western portion of the Air Basin into the interior valleys which become trapped by the mountains that border the eastern edge of the Air Basin.
In the summer, strong temperature inversions may occur that limit the vertical depth through which air pollution can be dispersed. Air pollutants concentrate because they cannot rise through the inversion layer and disperse. These inversions are more common and persistent during the summer months. Over time, sunlight produces photochemical reactions within this inversion layer that creates ozone, a particularly harmful air pollutant. Occasionally, strong thermal convections occur which allows the air pollutants to rise high enough to pass over the mountains and ultimately dilute the smog cloud.
In the winter, light nocturnal windsresult mainly from the drainage of cool air off of the mountainstoward the valley floor while the air aloft over the valley remains warm. This forms a type of inversion known as a radiation inversion. Such winds are characterized by stagnation and poor local mixing and trap pollutants such as automobile exhaust near theirsource. Despite light wind conditions, especially at night and in the early morning, winter is generally a period of good air quality in the project vicinity.
The temperature and precipitation levels for Newhall Station, which is the nearest weather station to the project site with historical data are shown below in Table E. Table E shows that August is typically the warmest month and January istypically the coolest month. Rainfall in the project area varies considerably
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
in both time and space. Almost all the annual rainfall comes from the fringes of mid‐latitude storms from late November to early April, with summers being almost completely dry.
Table E – Monthly Climate Data for Newhall Station
Month
Average Maximum
Temperature (°F)
Average Minimum
Temperature (°F)
Average Total Precipitation
(inches)
January 61.6 40.3 5.67
February 65.2 42.7 5.20
March 69.5 43.8 3.94
April 76.5 47.9 0.27
May 79.2 51.0 0.21
June 88.1 56.1 0.11
July 92.2 59.7 0.02
August 82.2 59.3 0.00
September 89.4 57.0 0.06
October 79.4 51.0 0.46
November 69.7 44.6 0.39
December 62.0 40.0 1.85
Annual 77.1 49.5 18.19
Source: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi‐bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca6165
7.3 Monitored Local Air Quality
The air quality at any site is dependent on the regional air quality and local pollutant sources. Regional air quality is determined by the release of pollutants throughout the Air Basin. Improvements in cleaner technology and strict regulations have reduced ozone levels since its peak in the mid‐twentieth century.
However, ozone levels have remained unacceptably high over the past decade despite significant reductions. This trend is due to the changes in climate and other weather conditions such as the increase in hot, stagnant days that can lead to the formation of ozone that we have experienced in recent years. (SCAQMD, 2022).
SCAQMD has divided the Air Basin into 38 air‐monitoring areas with a designated ambient air monitoring station representative of each area. The project site is located in Air Monitoring Area 13, Santa Clarita Valley, which covers the Santa Clarita Valley. The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is Santa Clarita Monitoring Station (Santa Clarita Station), which is located approximately 7.4 miles south of the project site at 22224 Placerita Canyon Road, Santa Clarita. However, it should be noted that due to the air monitoring station’s distance from the projectsite,recorded air pollution levels at the Santa Clarita Station reflect with varying degrees of accuracy, local air quality conditions at the project site. The monitoring data is presented in Table F and shows the most recent three years of monitoring data from CARB.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table F – Local Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary
Pollutant (Standard)
Year1
2020 2021 2022
Ozone:
Maximum 1‐Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.148 0.125 0.129
Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm) 44 30 28
Maximum 8‐Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.122 0.103 0.114
Days > NAAQS (0.070 ppm) 74 61 66
Days > CAAQs (0.070 ppm) 75 63 68
Nitrogen Dioxide:
Maximum 1‐Hour Concentration (ppb) 46.3 56.9 51.5
Days > NAAQS (100 ppb) 0 0 0
Days > CAAQS (180 ppb) 0 0 0
Inhalable Particulates (PM10):
Maximum 24‐Hour National Measurement (ug/m3) 67.8 47.1 36.9 Days > NAAQS (150 ug/m3
) 0 0 0
Days > CAAQS (50 ug/m3) 1 0 0
Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) (ug/m3) 21.5 20.3 19.0
Annual > NAAQS (50 ug/m3) No No No
Annual > CAAQS (20 ug/m3) Yes Yes No
Ultra‐Fine Particulates (PM2.5):
Maximum 24‐Hour National Measurement (ug/m3) 43.3 30.1 27.2 Days > NAAQS (35 ug/m3
) 4 0 0
Annual Arithmetic Mean (AAM) (ug/m3) 9.0 ND 9.2
Annual > NAAQS and CAAQS (12 ug/m3) No ND No
Notes: Exceedances are listed in bold. CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard; ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; ND = no data available. 1 Data obtained from Santa Clarita Station.
Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/
Ozone
During the last three years, the state 1‐hour concentration standard for ozone has been exceeded between 28 and 44 days each year at the Santa Clarita Station. The state 8‐hour ozone standard has been exceeded between 63 and 75 days each year over the last three years at the Santa Clarita Station. The federal 8‐hour ozone standard has been exceeded between 61 and 74 days each year over the last three years at the Santa Clarita Station. Ozone is a secondary pollutant as it is not directly emitted. Ozone is the result of chemical reactions between other pollutants, most importantly hydrocarbons and NO2, which occur only in the presence of bright sunlight. Pollutants emitted from upwind cities react during transport downwind to produce the oxidant concentrations experienced in the area. Many areas of Southern California contribute to the ozone levels experienced at this monitoring station, with the more significant areas being those directly upwind.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Nitrogen Dioxide
The Santa Clarita Station did not record an exceedance of either the federal orstate 1‐hour NO2 standards for the last three years.
Particulate Matter
The state 24‐hour concentration standard for PM10 has been exceeded for only one day in 2020 over the past three years at the Santa Clarita Station. Over the past three years the federal 24‐hour standard for PM10 has not been exceeded at the Santa Clarita Station. The annual PM10 concentration at the Santa Clarita Station has exceeded the state standard for two of the last three years and has not exceeded the federal standard for the past three years.
The federal 24‐hour concentration standard for PM2.5 has been exceeded between 0 and 4 days each year over the past three years at the Santa Clarita Station. The annual PM2.5 concentrations at the Santa Clarita Station has not exceeded either the federal or state standard for the last three years. There does not appear to be a noticeable trend for PM10 or PM2.5 in either maximum particulate concentrations or days of exceedances in the area. Particulate levels in the area are due to natural sources, grading operations, and motor vehicles.
According to the EPA,some people are much more sensitive than othersto breathing fine particles (PM10 and PM2.5). People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may suffer worsening illness and premature death due to breathing these fine particles. People with bronchitis can expect aggravated symptoms from breathing in fine particles. Children may experience decline in lung function due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5. Other groups considered sensitive are smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive, because many breathe through their mouths during exercise.
7.4 Toxic Air Contaminant Levels
In order to determine the Air Basin‐wide risks associated with major airborne carcinogens, the SCAQMD conducted the Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study (MATES) studies. According to the MATES V study (SCAQMD, 2021), the west side of the project site has an estimated cancer risk of 213 per million persons chance of cancer and the east side of the project site has an estimated cancer risk of 208 per million persons chance of cancer from TAC concentrations. In comparison, the average cancer risk for the Air Basin is 455 per million persons. The MATES V study monitored air toxins between May 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019, found that cancer risk from air toxics has declined significantly in the Air Basin with a 40 percent decrease in cancer risk since the monitoring for the MATES IV study that occurred between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013 and an 84 percent decrease in cancer risk since the monitoring for the MATES II study that occurred between April 1, 1998 and March 31, 1999.
The MATES V study also analyzed impacts specific to the communities experiencing environmental injustices (EJ communities) that were evaluated using the Senate Bill 535 definition of disadvantaged communities, which found that between MATES IV and MATES V, the cancer risk from air toxics decreased by 57 percent in EJ communities overall, compared to a 53 percent reduction in non‐EJ communities.
In order to provide a perspective of risk, it is often estimated that the incidence in cancer over a lifetime for the U.S. population ranges between 1 in 3 to 4 and 1 in 3, or a risk of about 300,000 per million persons.
The MATES‐III study referenced a Harvard Report on Cancer Prevention, which estimated that of cancers associated with known risk factors, about 30 percent were related to tobacco, about 30 percent were
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
related to diet and obesity, and about 2 percent were associated with environmental pollution related exposures that includes hazardous air pollutants.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
8.0 MODELING PARAMETERS AND ASSUMPTIONS
8.1 CalEEMod Model Input Parameters
The criteria air pollution and GHG emissions impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed through use of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1.1.21. CalEEMod is a computer model published by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) for estimating air pollutant and GHG emissions. The CalEEMod program uses the EMFAC2021 computer program to calculate the emission rates specific for the South Coast Air Basin portion of Los Angeles County for employee, vendor and haul truck vehicle trips and the OFFROAD2011 computer program to calculate emission rates for heavy equipment operations. EMFAC2021 and OFFROAD2011 are computer programs generated by CARB that calculates composite emission rates for vehicles. Emission rates are reported by the program in grams per trip and grams per mile or grams per running hour.
The project characteristics in the CalEEMod model were set to a project location of the South Coast Air Basin portion of Los Angeles County, utility companies of Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas (with 2025 forecast factors) and a project opening year of 2025.
Land Use Parameters
The proposed project is anticipated to disturb approximately 20 acres, would require the import of approximately 4,400 cubic yards of material for road and trail base, would include construction of approximately 3,500 square feet of structures, and would pave approximately 123,000 square feet for parking areas, walkways, trails, and event plaza areas. The proposed project’s land use parameters that were entered into the CalEEMod model are shown in Table G.
Table G – CalEEMod Land Use Parameters
Proposed Land Use
Land Use Subtype in
CalEEMod
Land Use
Size1
Lot
Acreage2
Building3
(sq ft)
Landscaped
Area4 (sq ft)
Bike Park City Park 17 AC 17.18 3,500 149,640
Paved Areas (parking,
walkways, trails, event plaza) Other Asphalt Surfaces 2.82 AC 2.82 ‐‐ 24,600 Notes: 1 AC = Acre. 2
Lot acreage calculated based on the total area disturbed of 20 acres. 3 Building square feet represent area where architectural coatings will be applied 4 Landscaped area based on a total of 4 acres of irrigated landscaped area, divided proportionally for each land use.
Construction Parameters
Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to start around October 2024 and be completed by December 2025. The Building Construction phase was reduced from the default timing of 370 working days to 239 working days to match the construction schedule provided by the applicant. All other phases were based on the CalEEMod default timing. The construction‐related GHG emissions were based on a 30‐year amortization rate as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group meeting on November 19, 2009. The phases of construction activities that have been analyzed are detailed below and include:
1) Site Preparation, 2) Grading, 3) Building construction, 4) Paving, and 5) Application of architectural coatings.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
CalEEMod provides the selection of reduction measures to account for project conditions that would result in less emissions than a project without these conditions, however it should be noted that these reduction measures may represent regulatory requirements. This includes the required adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires that the Best Available Control Measures be utilized to reduce fugitive dust emissions and was modeled in CalEEMod by selection of the reduction measures of watering all exposed areas three times per day during grading and watering unpaved roads twice daily. In addition, this analysis has utilized the default off‐road construction equipment listsfrom CalEEMod, which provides an overestimation of the off‐road equipment emissions created from the project.
Site Preparation
The site preparation phase would consist of removing any vegetation, tree stumps, and stones onsite prior to grading. The site preparation was modeled asstarting in October 2024 and occurring over 10 workdays.
The site preparation activities would generate an average of 17.5 worker trips per day. In order to account for water truck emissions, three onsite truck trips per day with a one‐mile length was added to the site preparation phase. The onsite equipment would consist of three rubber‐tired dozers, and four of either tractors, loaders, or backhoes.
Grading
The grading phase was modeled as starting after completion of the site preparation phase and was modeled as occurring over 35 workdays. During the grading phase it is anticipated that 4,400 cubic yards of material will be imported to the projectsite. The import of material would generate an average of 15.7 haul truck trips per day over the duration of the grading phase. The grading activities would generate an average of 20 automobile trips per day for the workers. In order to account for water truck emissions, three onsite truck trips per day with a one‐mile length was added to the grading phase. The onsite equipment would consist of two excavators, one grader, one rubber‐tired dozer, two scrapers, and two of either tractors, loaders, or backhoes.
Building Construction
The building construction would occur after the completion of the grading phase and was modeled as occurring over 239 workdays (11 months). The building construction phase would generate an average of 10 worker trips and 2 vendor trips per day. In order to account for water truck emissions, three onsite truck trips per day with a one‐mile length was added to the building construction phase. The onsite equipment would consist of the simultaneous operation of one crane, three forklifts, one generator, one welder, and three of either tractors, loaders, or backhoes.
Paving
The paving phase would consist of paving parking areas, walkways, trails, and event plaza area. The paving phase was modeled as occurring after completion of the building construction phase and occurring over 20 workdays. The paving phase would generate 15 worker trips per day. The onsite equipment would consist of the simultaneous operation of two pavers, two paving equipment, and two rollers.
Architectural Coating
The application of architectural coatings was modeled as occurring after completion of the paving phase and occurring over 20 workdays. The architectural coating phase was modeled based on covering 5,250 square feet of non‐residential interior area, 1,750 square feet of non‐residential exterior area, and 7,380
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
square feet of paved area. The architectural coating phase would generate an average of 2 worker trips per day. The onsite equipment would consist of one air compressor, which is based on the CalEEMod default equipment mix.
Operational Emissions Modeling
The operations‐related criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions created by the proposed project have been analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model. The proposed project was analyzed in the CalEEMod model based on the land use parameters provided above and the parameters entered for each operational source is described below.
Mobile Sources
Mobile sources include emissions from the additional vehicle trips generated by the proposed project.
According to the project applicant, operation of the project would generate up to 40 vehicle trips per weekday and up to 200 vehicle trips per weekend day (a vehicle trip is either to or from project site, so one vehicle visit to the project site would generate two trips), which the trip rate in CalEEMod was set to.
No other changes were made to the CalEEMod default mobile source parameters.
Area Sources
Area sources include emissions from consumer products, landscape equipment, and architectural coatings. The area source emissions were based on the on‐going use of the proposed project in the CalEEMod model. No changes were made to the default area source parameters in the CalEEMod model.
Energy Usage
Energy usage includes emissions from electricity and natural gas used onsite. Since there will be no utility connections to the proposed project, the operational electricity and natural gas usage was set to zero in the CalEEMod Model.
Solid Waste
Waste includes the GHG emissions associated with the processing of waste from the proposed project as well as the GHG emissions from the waste once it is interred into a landfill. The analysis was based on the default CalEEMod waste generation rate of 1.48 tons of solid waste per year from the proposed project.
No changes were made to the default solid waste parameters or mitigation measures in the CalEEMod model.
Water and Wastewater
No water connections will be provided to the proposed project, however water will be trucked in and stored in tanks for trail and parking lot maintenance, dust suppression, and potentially for limited watering of trees. The CalEEMod model calculates the GHG emissions associated with the energy used to transport and filter the water. The analysis was based on one water truck delivery per week of 3,000 gallons, or 156,000 gallons per year of water use. No changes were made to the default water and wastewater parameters in the CalEEMod model.
Off‐Road Equipment and Generators
According to the project applicant, operation of the project would include monthly use of a mini‐excavator or a dozer for trail maintenance. In addition, a small generator may be used for music events or food
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
trucks. In order to account for these equipment, a skid steer loader and a generator were added to the CalEEMod model run, based on the skid steer loader operating 8 hours per day and 12 days per year and the generator operating 8 hours per day and 26 days per year. In order to account for water truck deliveries, one off‐highway truck operating one hour per day for 52 days per year (one delivery per week) was also added to the CalEEMod model run.
8.2 Energy Use Calculations
The proposed project is anticipated to consume energy during both construction and operation of the proposed project and the parameters utilized to calculate energy use from construction and operation of the proposed project are detailed separately below.
Construction‐Related Energy Use
Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to use energy in the forms of petroleum fuel for both off‐road equipment as well as from the transport of workers and materials to and from the project site and the calculations for each source are described below.
Off‐Road Construction Equipment
The off‐road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the CalEEMod model’s default off‐road equipment assumptions detailed above in Section 8.1. For each piece of off‐road equipment, the fuel usage was calculated through use of the 2017 Off‐road Diesel Emission Factors spreadsheet, prepared by CARB (https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/ordiesel.htm). The Spreadsheet provides the following formula to calculate fuel usage from off‐road equipment:
Fuel Used = Load Factor x Horsepower x Total Operational Hours x BSFC / Unit Conversion Where:
Load Factor – Obtained from CalEEMod default values
Horsepower – Obtained from CalEEMod default values
Total Operational Hours – Calculated by multiplying CalEEMod default daily hours by CalEEMod default number of working days for each phase of construction BSFC – Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (pounds per horsepower‐hour) – If less than 100 Horsepower = 0.408, if greater than 100 Horsepower = 0.367 Unit Conversion – Converts pounds to gallons = 7.109
Table H shows the off‐road construction equipment fuel calculations based on the above formula. Table H showsthat the off‐road equipment utilized during construction of the proposed project would consume 41,236 gallons of diesel fuel.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table H – Off‐Road Equipment and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Horse‐
power
Load
Factor
Operating Hours
per Day
Total Operational
Hours1
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 3 367 0.40 8 240 1,819
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 84 0.37 8 320 571
Grading
Excavators 2 36 0.38 8 560 440
Grader 1 148 0.41 8 280 877
Rubber Tired Dozer 1 367 0.40 8 280 2,122
Scrapers 2 423 0.48 8 560 5,870
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 84 0.37 8 560 999
Building Construction
Crane 1 367 0.29 7 1,673 9,192
Forklifts 3 82 0.20 8 5,736 5,399
Generator Set 1 14 0.74 8 1,912 1,137
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 84 0.37 7 5,019 8,953
Welder 1 46 0.45 8 1,912 2,271
Paving
Pavers 2 81 0.42 8 320 625
Paving Equipment 2 89 0.36 8 320 588
Rollers 2 36 0.38 8 320 251
Architectural Coating
Air Compressor 1 37 0.48 6 120 122
Total Off‐Road Equipment Diesel Fuel Used during Construction (gallons) 41,236 Notes:
1 Based on: 10 days for Site Preparation, 35 days for Grading; 239 days for Building Construction; 20 days for Paving; and 20 days for Architectural Coating.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1 (see Appendix A); CARB, 2017.
On‐Road Construction‐Related Vehicle Trips
The on‐road construction‐related vehicle trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the construction vehicle trip assumptions from the CalEEMod model run as detailed above in Section 8.1. The calculated total construction miles was then divided by the fleet average for the South Coast Air Basin portion of Los Angeles County miles per gallon rates for the year 2024 calculated through use of the EMFAC2021 model and the EMFAC2021 model printouts are shown in Appendix B. The worker trips were based on the combined fleet average miles per gallon rates for gasoline powered automobiles, SUVs and pickup trucks and the vendor and haul truck trips were based on the combined T6 and T7 diesel trucks fleet average miles per gallon rate. Table I shows the on‐road construction vehicle trips modeled in CalEEMod and the fuel usage calculations.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table I – On‐Road Vehicle Trips and Fuel Consumption from Construction of the Proposed Project Vehicle Trip Types/
Fuel Type Daily Trips
Trip Length
(miles)
Total Miles
per Day
Total Miles
per Phase1
Fleet Average
Miles per Gallon2
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Site Preparation
Worker (Gasoline) 17.5 18.5 324 3,238 25.4 127
Water Trucks (Diesel) 3 1.0 3 30 7.3 4
Grading
Worker (Gasoline) 20 18.5 370 12,950 25.4 509
Haul Trucks (Diesel) 15.7 20 314 10,990 7.3 1,496
Water Trucks (Diesel) 3 1.0 3 105 7.3 14
Building Construction
Worker (Gasoline) 10 18.5 185 44,215 25.4 1,739
Vendor Truck (Diesel) 2 10.2 20 4,876 7.3 664
Water Trucks (Diesel) 3 1.0 3 717 7.3 98
Paving
Worker (Gasoline) 15 18.5 278 5,550 25.4 218
Architectural Coatings
Worker (Gasoline) 2 18.5 37 740 25.4 29
Total Gasoline Fuel Used from On‐Road Construction Vehicles (gallons) 2,623 Total Diesel Fuel Used from On‐Road Construction Vehicles (gallons) 2,276 Notes:
1 Based on: 10 days for Site Preparation, 35 days for Grading; 239 days for Building Construction; 20 days for Paving; and 20 days for Architectural Coating. 2 From EMFAC 2021 model (see Appendix B). Worker Trips based on entire fleet of gasoline vehicles and Vendor Trips based on only truck fleet of diesel vehicles.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1; EMFAC2021.
Table I showsthat the on‐road construction‐related vehicle trips would consume 2,623 gallons of gasoline and 2,276 gallons of diesel fuel. As detailed above, Table H shows that the off‐road construction equipment would consume 41,236 gallons of diesel fuel. This would result in the total consumption of 2,623 gallons of gasoline and 43,512 gallons of diesel fuel from construction of the proposed project.
Operations‐Related Energy Use
The operation of the proposed project is anticipated to use energy in the forms of petroleum fuel, electricity, and natural gas, and the calculations for each source are described below.
Operational Petroleum Fuel
Operation of the proposed project is anticipated to use energy in the forms of petroleum fuel for both off‐road equipment as well as from vehicle trips to and from the project site and the calculations for each source are described below.
Off‐Road Equipment
According to the project applicant, skip loaders, mini‐excavators, and/or a trail dozer would be utilized for monthly maintenance of the trails. In addition, a portable generator would be utilized for events for the operation of a food truck and/or for music events and there would be weekly water truck deliveries to the project site. The off‐road equipment utilized during operation of the proposed project was modeled
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
based on a skid steer loader,since that is a similarsize to a mini excavator or mini dozer, operating 8 hours per day and 12 days per year and a generator operating 8 hours per day and 26 days per year. In addition, an off‐highway truck was modeled to account for the weekly water truck deliveries based on 1 hour per day and 52 days per year. The off‐road equipment fuel usage was modeled based on the same methodology described above for the off‐road construction equipment and the results are shown below in Table J that shows that off‐road equipment operational activities would utilize 652 gallons of diesel fuel per year.
Table J – Off‐Road Equipment and Fuel Consumption from Operation of the Proposed Project Equipment Type
Equipment
Quantity
Horse‐
power
Load
Factor
Operating Hours
per Day
Total Operational
Hours1
Fuel Used
(gallons)
Skid Steer Loader 1 71 0.37 8 96 145
Generator 1 14 0.74 8 208 124
Off‐Highway Truck 1 376 0.38 1 52 384
Total Off‐Road Equipment Diesel Fuel Used during Operations (gallons) 652 Notes:
1 Based on 12 days per year for the skid steer loader, 26 days for the generator, and 52 days for the off‐highway truck.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1 (see Appendix A); CARB, 2017.
On‐Road Operations‐Related Vehicle Trips
The on‐road operations‐related vehicle trips fuel usage was calculated through use of the total annual vehicle miles traveled assumptions from the CalEEMod model run as detailed above in Section 8.1, which found that operation of the proposed project would generate 469,265 vehicle miles traveled per year.
The calculated total operational miles were then divided by 25.4 miles per gallon, which was calculated through use of the EMFAC2021 model and based on the South Coast Air Basin portion of Los Angeles County miles per gallon rates for the year 2024. The EMFAC2021 model printouts are shown in Appendix B. Based on the above calculation methodology, operational vehicle trips generated from the proposed project would consume 18,458 gallons of gasoline per year.
Operational Electricity Use
The operations‐related electricity usage was calculated in the CalEEMod model run that is detailed above in Section 8.1 that found the operation of the proposed project will not utilize any electricity, other than what was detailed above from the occasional generator use.
Operational Natural Gas Use
The operations‐related natural gas usage was calculated in the CalEEMod model run that is detailed above in Section 8.1 that found the operation of the proposed project will not utilize any natural gas.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
9.0 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
9.1 Regional Air Quality
Many air quality impacts that derive from dispersed mobile sources, which are the dominant pollution generators in the Air Basin, often occurs hours later and miles away after photochemical processes have converted primary exhaust pollutants into secondary contaminants such as ozone. The incremental regional air quality impact of an individual project is generally very small and difficult to measure.
Therefore, SCAQMD has developed significance thresholds based on the volume of pollution emitted rather than on actual ambient air quality because the direct air quality impact of a project is not quantifiable on a regional scale. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in the Air Basin with daily emissions that exceed any of the identified significance thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. For the purposes of this air quality impact analysis, a regional air quality impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds identified in Table K.
Table K – SCAQMD Regional Criteria Pollutant Emission Thresholds of Significance Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Lead
Construction 75 100 550 150 150 55 3
Operation 55 55 550 150 150 55 3
Source: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd‐air‐quality‐significance‐thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2
9.2 Local Air Quality
Project‐related construction air emissions may have the potential to exceed the state and federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the Air Basin. In order to assess local air quality impacts the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) to assess the project‐related air emissions in the project vicinity. SCAQMD has also provided Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (LST Methodology), July 2008, which details the methodology to analyze local air emission impacts. The LST Methodology found that the primary emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.
The LST Methodology provides Look‐Up Tables with different thresholds based on the location and size of the project site and distance to the nearest sensitive receptors. As detailed above in Section 6.3, the project site is located in Air Monitoring Area 13, Santa Clarita Valley. The Look‐Up Tables provided in the LST Methodology include project site acreage sizes of 1‐acre, 2‐acres and 5‐acres. Although the proposed project would disturb up to 20 acres, it is unlikely that more than 5 acres would be disturbed in any day.
As such, the 5‐acre threshold has been utilized in this analysis.
The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located within the canine training and boarding facilities to the east that are as near as 800 feet (244 meters) from the proposed areas to be disturbed as part of the project. As such, the 200 meter thresholds were utilized in order to provide a conservative analysis. Table L below shows the LSTs for NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 for both construction and operational activities.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table L – SCAQMD Local Air Quality Thresholds of Significance Activity
Allowable Emissions (pounds/day)1
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Construction 275 4,608 79 26
Operation 275 4,608 19 7
Notes:
1 The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site are homes located as near as 800 feet (244 meters) from the areas to be disturbed. The 200 meter thresholds were utilized to provide a conservative analysis.
Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for 5 acres in Air Monitoring Area 13, Santa Clarita Valley.
9.3 Toxic Air Contaminants
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, any project that has the potential to expose the public to TACs in excess of the following thresholds would be considered to have a significant air quality impact:
If the Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk is 10 in one million or greater; or Toxic air contaminants from the proposed project would result in a Hazard Index increase of 1 or greater.
In order to determine if the proposed project may have a significant impact related to TACs, the Health Risk Assessment Guidance for analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis, (Diesel Analysis) prepared by SCAQMD, August 2003, recommends that if the proposed project is anticipated to create TACs through stationary sources or regular operations of diesel trucks on the project site, then the proximity of the nearest receptors to the source of the TAC and the toxicity of the HAP should be analyzed through a comprehensive facility‐wide health risk assessment (HRA).
9.4 Odor Impacts
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that an odor impact would occur if the proposed project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402, which states:
“A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.
The provisions of this rule shall not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.” If the proposed project results in a violation of Rule 402 with regards to odor impacts, then the proposed project would create a significant odor impact.
9.5 Energy Conservation
The 2022 CEQA California Environmental Quality Act Statutes & Guidelines(2022 CEQA Guidelines) include an Energy Section that analyzes the proposed project’s energy consumption in order to avoid or reduce inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy. Appendix F of the 2022 CEQA Statute and Guidelines, states the following:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
The goal of conserving energy impliesthe wise and efficient use of energy. The means of achieving this goal include:
(1) Decreasing overall per capita energy consumption,
(2) Decreasing reliance on fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas and oil, and (3) Increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.
Since the Energy Section was recently added, no state or local agencies have adopted specific criteria or thresholds to be utilized in an energy impact analysis. However, Appendix F, Subsection II.C of the 2022 CEQA Guidelines provides the following criteria for determining significance.
1. The project’s energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for each stage of the project life cycle including construction, operation, maintenance and/or removal. If appropriate, the energy intensiveness of materials may be discussed.
2. The effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies and on requirement for additional capacity.
3. The effects of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy.
4. The degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards.
5. The effects of the project on energy resources.
6. The project’s projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient transportation alternatives.
If the proposed project creates inefficient, wasteful or unnecessary consumption of energy during construction or operation activities or conflicts with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, then the proposed project would create a significant energy impact.
9.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In order to identify significance criteria under CEQA for development projects, SCAQMD initiated a Working Group, which provided detailed methodology for evaluating significance under CEQA. At the September 28, 2010 Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft GHG emissions thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that provides a quantitative annual threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e for all land use projects. Although the SCAQMD provided substantial evidence supporting the use of the above threshold, as of November 2017, the SCAQMD Board has not yet considered or approved the Working Group’s thresholds. As such, the SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTCO2e annual threshold has been included in this analysis for informational purposes only and determination of significance for GHG emissions has been based on determination of consistency with the applicable GHG emission reduction plans.
The GHG emissions analysis for both construction and operation of the proposed project can be found below in Sections 10.8 and 10.9.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
10.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS
10.1 CEQA Thresholds of Significance
Consistent with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to air quality, energy, and GHG emissions would occur if the proposed project is determined to:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; Result in other emissions(such asthose leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people;
Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy; Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
10.2 Air Quality Compliance
The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the SCAQMD AQMP. The following section discusses the proposed project’s consistency with the SCAQMD AQMP.
SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan
CEQA requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable general plans and regional plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies to the proposed project includesthe SCAQMD AQMP. Therefore, thissection discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed project with the AQMP.
The purpose of this discussion is to set forth the issues regarding consistency with the assumptions and objectives of the AQMP and discuss whether the proposed project would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. If the decision‐makers determine that the proposed project is inconsistent, the lead agency may consider project modifications or inclusion of mitigation to eliminate the inconsistency.
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended GP Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required. A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency:
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
(1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. (2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.
Both of these criteria are evaluated in the following sections.
Criterion 1 ‐ Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations? Based on the air quality modeling analysis contained in this report, short‐term regional construction air emissions would not result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.1 or local thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2. The ongoing operation of the proposed project would generate air pollutant emissions that are inconsequential on a regional basis and would not result in significant impacts based on SCAQMD thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.1. The analysis for long‐term local air quality impacts showed that local pollutant concentrations would not be projected to exceed the air quality standards. Therefore, a less than significant long‐term impact would occur and no mitigation would be required.
Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed project would be consistent with the first criterion.
Criterion 2 ‐ Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the proposed project with the assumptions in the AQMP. A project would not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP if it is consistent with the growth projections utilized in the preparation of the AQMP. The AQMP is developed through use of the planning forecasts provided in SCAG’s RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal 2020) and FTIP (2019 FTIP). The RTP/SCS is a major planning document for the regional transportation and land use network within Southern California. The RTP/SCS is a long‐range plan that is required by federal and state requirements placed on SCAG and is updated every four years. The FTIP provides long‐range planning for future transportation improvement projects that are constructed with state and/or federal funds within Southern California. SCAG’s forecasts are based on population, employment, and housing data provided in the general plans of local governments, including the City of Santa Clarita General Plan and the Los Angeles County (County) General Plan. As such, the proposed project would be consistent with AQMP if it is consistent with City and County General Plans.
The western portion of the project site is designated as Open Space (OS) in the City’s General Plan and is zoned Open Space (OS). The eastern portion of the project site is designated as Rural Land 10 (RL10) and zoned Heavy Agriculture (A‐2‐2) in the County’s General Plan. The proposed bike park project is an allowed use within the City’s OS land use designation and zoning the County’s RL10 land use designation and A‐2‐ 2 zone. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the current zoning and land use designations and would not require a General Plan Amendment or zone change. Additionally, the proposed bike park use would not increase population or housing and would generate a minimal number of employeesto maintain the park. Thus, the proposed project would not exceed the population, housing, or employment forecasts in the City and County General Plans. As such, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Based on the above, the proposed project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP and impacts would be a less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
10.3 Cumulative Net Increase in Non‐Attainment Pollution The proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. The SCAQMD has published a report on how to address cumulative impacts from air pollution:
White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution (http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default‐source/Agendas/Environmental‐Justice/cumulative‐impacts‐ working‐group/cumulative‐impacts‐white‐paper.pdf). In this report the AQMD clearly states (Page D‐3):
“…the AQMD uses the same significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts for all environmental topics analyzed in an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The only case where the significance thresholds for project specific and cumulative impacts differ is the Hazard Index (HI) significance threshold for TAC emissions. The project specific (project increment) significance threshold is HI > 1.0 while the cumulative (facility‐ wide) is HI > 3.0. It should be noted that the HI is only one of three TAC emission significance thresholds considered (when applicable) in a CEQA analysis. The other two are the maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) and the cancer burden, both of which use the same significance thresholds(MICR of 10 in 1 million and cancer burden of 0.5) for project specific and cumulative impacts. Projects that exceed the project‐specific significance thresholds are considered by the SCAQMD to be cumulatively considerable. This is the reason project‐specific and cumulative significance thresholds are the same. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project‐specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant.”
Therefore, this analysis assumes that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for project‐specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Air Basin is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact. Alternatively, individual project‐related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project‐specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable.
The following section calculates the potential air emissions associated with the construction and operations of the proposed project and compares the emissions to the SCAQMD standards.
Construction Emissions
The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include construction of a bike park.
The CalEEMod model has been utilized to calculate the construction‐related emissions from the proposed project and the input parameters utilized in this analysis have been detailed in Section 8.1. The maximum daily construction‐related criteria pollutant emissions from the proposed project segmented by season and year are shown below in Table M.
Table M shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed either the regional or local emissions thresholds during construction of the proposed project. Therefore, a less than significant regional or local air quality impact would occur from construction of the proposed project.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table M – Construction‐Related Criteria Pollutant Emissions Maximum Daily Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Season and Year of Construction VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5 Daily Summer Maximum
2025 1.17 10.6 13.8 0.02 2.57 0.63
Daily Winter Maximum
2024 3.72 36.1 34.1 0.07 8.93 4.35
2025 3.47 10.6 13.7 0.02 2.57 0.63
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 3.72 36.1 34.1 0.07 8.93 4.35 SCQAMD Regional Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
SCAQMD Local Thresholds1 ‐‐ 275 4,608 ‐‐ 79 26
Exceeds Thresholds? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site are homes located as near as 800 feet (244 meters) from the areas to be disturbed. The 200 meter thresholds were utilized to provide a conservative analysis. Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for 5 acres in Air Monitoring Area 13, Santa Clarita Valley.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1.
Operational Emissions
The on‐going operation of the proposed project would result in a long‐term increase in air quality emissions. This increase would be due to emissions from the project‐generated vehicle trips, onsite area source emissions created from the on‐going use of the proposed project, and the use of off‐road equipment. The operations‐related regional criteria air quality impacts created by the proposed project have been analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model and the input parameters utilized in this analysis have been detailed in Section 8.1. The worst‐case summer or winter VOC, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 daily emissions created from the proposed project’s long‐term operations have been calculated and are summarized below in Table N. The CalEEMod daily emissions printouts are provided in Appendix A.
Table N – Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources1 0.79 0.88 9.43 0.02 2.14 0.55
Area Sources2 0.19 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Usage3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Off‐Road Equipment4 0.22 2.00 2.40 0.01 0.07 0.06
Total Emissions 1.20 2.88 11.83 0.03 2.21 0.61
SCQAMD Regional Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 SCAQM Local Operational Thresholds5 ‐‐ 275 4,608 ‐‐ 19 7 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust. 2 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. 3 Energy usage consists of emissions from natural gas usage. No natural gas would be consumed from operation of the proposed project. 4 Off‐road equipment was modeled based on a skid steer loader operating up to 8 hours per day and 12 days per year, a generator operating up to 8 hours per day and 26 days per year, and an off‐highway truck making weekly water truck deliveries 1 hour per day and 52 days per year during operation of project. 5 The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site are homes located as near as 800 feet (244 meters) from the areas to be disturbed. The 200 meter thresholds were utilized to provide a conservative analysis. Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look‐up Tables for 5 acres in Air Monitoring Area 13, Santa Clarita Valley.
Source: Calculated from CalEEMod Version 2022.1.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
The data provided in Table N shows that none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed either the regional or local emissions thresholds. Therefore, less than significant regional and local air quality impacts would occur from operation of the proposed project.
Friant Ranch Case
In Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502 (also referred to as “Friant Ranch”), the California Supreme Court held that when an EIR concluded that when a project would have significant impacts to air quality impacts, an EIR should “make a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project’s air quality impacts to likely health consequences.” In order to determine compliance with this Case, the Court developed a multi‐part test that includes the following:
1) The air quality discussion shall describe the specific health risks created from each criteria pollutant, including DPM.
This analysis details the specific health risks created from each criteria pollutant above in Section 4.1 and specifically in Table B. In addition, the specific health risks created from DPM is detailed above in Section
2.2 of this analysis. As such, this analysis meets the part 1 requirements of the Friant Ranch Case. 2) The analysis shall identify the magnitude of the health risks created from the project. The ruling details how to identify the magnitude of the health risks. Specifically, on page 24 of the ruling it states “The Court of Appeal identified several ways in which the EIR could have framed the analysis so as to adequately inform the public and decision makers of possible adverse health effects. The County could have, for example, identified the Project’s impact on the days of nonattainment per year.”
The Friant Ranch Case found that an EIR's air quality analysis must meaningfully connect the identified air quality impacts to the human health consequences of those impacts, or meaningfully explain why that analysis cannot be provided. As noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD in the Friant Ranch case (https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/9‐s219783‐ac‐south‐coast‐air‐quality‐mgt‐dist‐041315.pdf) (Brief), SCAQMD has among the most sophisticated air quality modeling and health impact evaluation capability of any of the air districts in the State, and thus it is uniquely situated to express an opinion on how lead agencies should correlate air quality impacts with specific health outcomes. The SCAQMD discusses that it may be infeasible to quantify health risks caused by projects similar to the proposed project, due to many factors. It is necessary to have data regarding the sources and types of air toxic contaminants, location of emission points, velocity of emissions, the meteorology and topography of the area, and the location of receptors (worker and residence). The Brief states that it may not be feasible to perform a health risk assessment for airborne toxics that will be emitted by a generic industrial building that was built on "speculation" (i.e., without knowing the future tenant(s)). Even where a health risk assessment can be prepared, however, the resulting maximum health risk value is only a calculation of risk, it does not necessarily mean anyone will contract cancer as a result of the project. The Brief also cites the author of the CARB methodology, which reported that a PM2.5 methodology is not suited for small projects and may yield unreliable results. Similarly, SCAQMD staff does not currently know of a way to accurately quantify ozone‐related health impacts caused by NOx or VOC emissions from relatively small projects, due to photochemistry and regional model limitations. The Brief concludes, with respect to the Friant Ranch EIR, that although it may have been technically possible to plug the data into a methodology, the results would not have been reliable or meaningful.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
On the other hand, for extremely large regional projects(unlike the proposed project), the SCAQMD states that it has been able to correlate potential health outcomes for very large emissions sources – as part of their rulemaking activity,specifically 6,620 pounds per day of NOx and 89,180 pounds per day of VOC were expected to result in approximately 20 premature deaths per year and 89,947 school absences due to ozone. As shown above in Table M, project‐related construction activities would generate a maximum of
3.72 pounds per day of VOC and 36.1 pounds per day of NOx. In addition, as shown above in Table N, operation of the proposed project would generate 1.20 pounds per day of VOC and 2.88 pounds per day NOx. The proposed project would not generate anywhere near these levels of 6,620 pounds per day of NOx or 89,190 pounds per day of VOC emissions. Therefore, the proposed project’s emissions are not sufficiently high enough to use a regional modeling program to correlate health effects on a basin‐wide level.
Notwithstanding, this analysis does evaluate the proposed project’s localized impact to air quality for emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 by comparing the proposed project’s onsite emissions to the SCAQMD’s applicable LST thresholds. As evaluated in this analysis, the proposed project would not result in emissions that exceeded the SCAQMD’s LSTs. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to exceed the moststringent applicable federal orstate ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5.
Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project‐Generated Vehicular Trips CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the state and federal CO standards of 20 ppm over one hour or 9 ppm over eight hours.
At the time of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (1993), the Air Basin was designated nonattainment under the CAAQS and NAAQS for CO. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrationsin the Air Basin and in the state have steadily declined. In 2007, the Air Basin was designated in attainment for CO under both the CAAQS and NAAQS. SCAQMD conducted a CO hot spot analysis for attainment at the busiest intersections in Los Angeles during the peak morning and afternoon periods and did not predict a violation of CO standards3
. Since the nearby intersections to the proposed project are much smaller with less traffic than what was analyzed by the SCAQMD, no local CO Hotspot are anticipated to be created from the proposed project and no CO Hotspot modeling was performed. Therefore, a less‐than‐significant long‐term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on‐going use of the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
3 The four intersections analyzed by the SCAQMD were: Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway; Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue; Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue; and La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard. The busiest intersection evaluated (Wilshire and Veteran) had a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day with LOS E in the morning and LOS F in the evening peak hour.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
10.4 Sensitive Receptors
The proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The local concentrations of criteria pollutant emissions produced in the nearby vicinity of the proposed project, which may expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations have been calculated above in Section 10.3 for both construction and operations, which are discussed separately below. The discussion below also includes an analysis of the potential impacts from TAC emissions. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located within the canine training and boarding facilities to the east that are as near as 800 feet from the proposed areas to be disturbed as part of the project.
There are also single‐family homes as near as 1,700 feet west and 1,900 feet to the south of the areas to be disturbed as part of the project.
Construction‐Related Sensitive Receptor Impacts
The construction activities for the proposed project are anticipated to include construction of a bike park.
Construction activities may expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of localized criteria pollutant emissions and from TAC emissions created from onsite construction equipment, which are described below.
Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Construction
The local air quality impacts from construction of the proposed project have been analyzed above in Section 10.3. The analysis found that the construction of the proposed project would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would create a less than significant construction‐related impact to local air quality and no mitigation would be required.
Toxic Air Contaminants Impacts from Construction
The greatest potential for TAC emissions would be related to DPM emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the proposed project. According to SCAQMD methodology, health effects from carcinogenic air toxics are usually described in terms of “individual cancer risk”. “Individual Cancer Risk” is the likelihood that a person exposed to concentrations of TACs over a 70‐year lifetime will contract cancer, based on the use of standard risk‐assessment methodology. It should be noted that the most current cancer risk assessment methodology recommends analyzing a 30 year exposure period for the nearby sensitive receptors (OEHHA, 2015).
Given the relatively limited number of heavy‐duty construction equipment, the varying distances that construction equipment would operate to the nearby sensitive receptors, and the short‐term construction schedule, the proposed project would not result in a long‐term (i.e., 30 or 70 years) substantial source of TAC emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk. In addition, CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 regulates emissionsfrom off‐road diesel equipment in California. Thisregulation limitsidling of equipment to no more than five minutes, requires equipment operators to label each piece of equipment and provide annual reports to CARB of their fleet’s usage and emissions. This regulation also requires systematic upgrading of the emission tier level of each fleet, and currently no commercial operator is allowed to purchase Tier 0, Tier 1 or Tier 2 equipment. In addition to the purchase restrictions, equipment operators need to meet fleet average emissionstargetsthat become more stringent each year between years 2014 and 2023. As of January 2022, 50 percent or more of all contractor’s equipment fleets must by Tier 2 or higher; by January 2026, 75 percent or more of all contractors’ equipment fleets must be Tier 2 or higher and by January 2029, 100 percent of all equipment fleets must be Tier 2 or higher.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Therefore, no significant short‐term toxic air contaminant impacts would occur during construction of the proposed project. As such, construction of the proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Operations‐Related Sensitive Receptor Impacts
The on‐going operations of the proposed project may expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of local CO emissions from the project‐generated vehicular trips and from the potential local criteria pollutant emissions from onsite operations. The following analyzes the vehicular CO emissions, local criteria pollutant emissions from onsite operations, and TAC emissions.
Local CO Hotspot Impacts from Project‐Generated Vehicle Trips CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential impacts to sensitive receptors. The analysis provided above in Section 10.3 shows that no local CO Hotspots are anticipated to be created at any nearby intersections from the vehicle traffic generated by the proposed project. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant exposure of offsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Local Criteria Pollutant Impacts from Onsite Operations The local air quality impacts from the operation of the proposed project would occur from onsite sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, and onsite usage of natural gas appliances. The analysis provided above in Section 10.3 found that the operation of the proposed project would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance discussed above in Section 9.2.
Therefore, the on‐going operations of the proposed project would result in a less‐than‐significant operations‐related impact to local air quality due to on‐site emissions and no mitigation would be required.
Operations‐Related Toxic Air Contaminant Impacts
Particulate matter from diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in most areas and according to The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition, prepared by CARB, about 80 percent of the outdoor TAC cancer risk is from diesel exhaust. Some chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde have been listed as carcinogens by State Proposition 65 and the Federal Hazardous Air Pollutants program. Due to the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, the nominal number of diesel truck trips that are anticipated to be generated by the on‐going operation of the proposed bike park that would be primarily limited to weekly water truck deliveries, and the occasional use of diesel fuel to operate generators and off‐road equipment, a less than significant TAC impact would be created from the on‐going operations of the proposed project and no mitigation would be required.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
10.5 Odor Emissions
The proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
Individual responses to odors are highly variable and can result in a variety of effects. Generally, the
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
impact of an odor results from a variety of factors such as frequency, duration, offensiveness, location, and sensory perception. The frequency is a measure of how often an individual is exposed to an odor in the ambient environment. The intensity refers to an individual’s or group’s perception of the odor strength or concentration. The duration of an odor refers to the elapsed time over which an odor is experienced. The offensiveness of the odor is the subjective rating of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of an odor. The location accounts for the type of area in which a potentially affected person lives, works, or visits; the type of activity in which he or she is engaged; and the sensitivity of the impacted receptor.
Sensory perception hasfour major components: detectability, intensity, character, and hedonic tone. The detection (or threshold) of an odor is based on a panel of responses to the odor. There are two types of thresholds: the odor detection threshold and the recognition threshold. The detection threshold is the lowest concentration of an odor that will elicit a response in a percentage of the people that live and work in the immediate vicinity of the project site and is typically presented as the mean (or 50 percent of the population). The recognition threshold is the minimum concentration that is recognized as having a characteristic odor quality, this is typically represented by recognition by 50 percent of the population.
The intensity refersto the perceived strength of the odor. The odor character is what the substance smells like. The hedonic tone is a judgment of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of the odor. The hedonic tone varies in subjective experience, frequency, odor character, odor intensity, and duration. Potential odor impacts have been analyzed separately for construction and operations below.
Construction‐Related Odor Impacts
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of coatings such as asphalt pavement, paints and solvents and from emissions from diesel equipment. Standard construction requirements that limit the time of day when construction may occur as well as SCAQMD Rule 1108 that limits VOC content in asphalt and Rule 1113 that limits the VOC content in paints and solvents would minimize odor impacts from construction. As such, the objectionable odors that may be produced during the construction process would be temporary and would not likely be noticeable for extended periods of time beyond the project site’s boundaries. Through compliance with the applicable regulations that reduce odors and due to the transitory nature of construction odors, a less than significant odor impact would occur and no mitigation would be required.
Operations‐Related Odor Impacts
The proposed project would consist of a bike park development. The proposed project would not generate or contain any known sources of odors. Therefore, no significant impact related to odors would occur during the on‐going operations of the proposed project.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
10.6 Energy Consumption
The proposed project would impact energy resources during construction and operation. Energy resources that would be potentially impacted include electricity, natural gas, and petroleum based fuel supplies and distribution systems. This analysis includes a discussion of the potential energy impacts of the proposed projects, with particular emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. A general definition of each of these energy resources are provided below.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Electricity, a consumptive utility, is a man‐made resource. The production of electricity requires the consumption or conversion of energy resources, including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal, and nuclear resources, into energy. The delivery of electricity involves a number of system components, including substations and transformersthat lower transmission line power (voltage) to a level appropriate for on‐site distribution and use. The electricity generated is distributed through a network of transmission and distribution lines commonly called a power grid. Conveyance of electricity through transmission lines is typically responsive to market demands. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed 68,485 gigawatt‐hours per year of electricity4
.
Natural gas is a combustible mixture of simple hydrocarbon compounds (primarily methane) that is used as a fuelsource. Natural gas consumed in California is obtained from naturally occurring reservoirs, mainly located outside the State, and delivered through high‐pressure transmission pipelines. The natural gas transportation system is a nationwide network and, therefore, resource availability is typically not an issue. Natural gas satisfies almost one‐third of the State’s total energy requirements and is used in electricity generation,space heating, cooking, water heating, industrial processes, and as a transportation fuel. Natural gas is measured in terms of cubic feet. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed 2,820 million therms of natural gas5
.
Petroleum‐based fuels currently account for a majority of the California’s transportation energy sources and primarily consist of diesel and gasoline types of fuels. However, the State has been working on developing strategies to reduce petroleum use. Over the last decade California has implemented several policies, rules, and regulations to improve vehicle efficiency, increase the development and use of alternative fuels, reduce air pollutants and GHG emissions from the transportation sector, and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Accordingly, petroleum‐based fuel consumption in California has declined.
In 2022, 3,070 million gallons of gasoline and 295 million gallons of diesel was sold in Los Angeles County6 .
The following section calculates the potential energy consumption associated with the construction and operations of the proposed project and provides a determination if any energy utilized by the proposed project is wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.
Construction Energy
The proposed project would consume energy resources during construction in three (3) general forms:
1. Petroleum‐based fuels used to power off‐road construction vehicles and equipment on the project site, construction worker travel to and from the Project Site, as well as delivery and haul truck trips (e.g. hauling of demolition material to off‐site reuse and disposal facilities);
2. Electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power; and,
3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.
4 Obtained from: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx 5 Obtained from: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx 6 Obtained from: https://www.energy.ca.gov/media/3874
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Construction‐Related Electricity
During construction the proposed project would consume electricity to construct the proposed bike park and infrastructure. Electricity would be supplied to the project site by portable generators that was accounted for in the CalEEMod model. Electricity consumed during project construction would vary throughout the construction period based on the construction activities being performed. Various construction activities include electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power. Such electricity demand would be temporary, nominal, and would cease upon the completion of construction. Therefore, the use of electricity during project construction would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.
Construction‐Related Natural Gas
Construction of the proposed project typically would not involve the consumption of natural gas. Natural gas would not be supplied to support construction activities, thus there would be no demand generated by construction. Development of the proposed project would not require any natural gas connections and no natural gas lines would be moved as part of the proposed project. Therefore, there would be no construction‐related impacts to natural gas supply and infrastructure.
Construction‐Related Petroleum Fuel Use
Petroleum‐based fuel usage represents the highest amount of transportation energy potentially consumed during construction, which would be utilized by both off‐road equipment operating on the projectsite and on‐road automobilestransporting workersto and from the projectsite and on‐road trucks transporting equipment and supplies to the project site.
The off‐road construction equipment fuel usage was calculated through use of the off‐road equipment assumptions and fuel use assumptions shown above in Section 8.2, which found that construction of the proposed project would consume 2,623 gallons of gasoline and 43,512 gallons of diesel fuel. This equates to 0.0001 percent of the gasoline and 0.01 percent of the diesel used annually in Los Angeles County. As such, the construction‐related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current county‐wide petroleum usage rates.
Construction activities associated with the proposed project would be required to adhere to all state and SCAQMD regulations for off‐road equipment and on‐road trucks, which provide minimum fuel efficiency standards. As such, construction activities for the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts regarding transportation energy would be less than significant. Development of the project would not result in the need to manufacture construction materials or create new building material facilities specifically to supply the proposed project. It is difficult to measure the energy used in the production of construction materials such as asphalt,steel, and concrete. However, it isreasonable to assume that the production of building materials such as concrete, steel, etc., would employ all reasonable energy conservation practices in the interest of minimizing the cost of doing business.
Operational Energy
The on‐going operation of the proposed project would require the use of energy resources limited to generators for food trucks and music and from off‐road equipment used for the maintenance of the trails.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Energy would also be consumed during operationsrelated to water usage,solid waste disposal, landscape equipment and vehicle trips.
Operations‐Related Electricity
Operation of the proposed project would project will not utilize any electricity, other than from the occasional generator use that has been analyzed below under off‐road equipment.
Operations‐Related Natural Gas
Operation of the proposed project would not utilize any natural gas.
Operations‐Related Off‐Road Equipment
According to the project applicant, skip loaders, mini‐excavators, and/or a trail dozer would be utilized for monthly maintenance of the trails. In addition, a portable generator would be utilized for events for the operation of a food truck and/or for music events. The modeling of the operational off‐road equipment is detailed above in Section 8.2, which found that the off‐road equipment would consume 652 gallons of diesel fuel per year. Operational activities associated with the proposed project would be required to adhere to all state and SCAQMD regulations for off‐road equipment. As such, operational activities for the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of diesel fuel. Impacts regarding operational off‐road equipment energy usage would be less than significant Operations‐Related Vehicular Petroleum Fuel Usage
Operation of the proposed project would result in increased consumption of petroleum‐based fuels related to vehicular travel to and from the project site. As detailed above in Section 8.2 the proposed project would consume 18,458 gallons of gasoline per year from vehicle travel. This equates to 0.0005 percent of the gasoline consumed annually in Los Angeles County. As such, the operations‐related petroleum use would be nominal, when compared to current petroleum usage rates.
It should be noted that, the proposed project would comply with all federal, state, and City requirements related to the consumption of transportation energy and the proposed project would be promoting the use of alternative modes of travel (i.e., bicycles). Therefore, impacts with regard transportation energy supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.
In conclusion, the proposed project would comply with regulatory compliance measures outlined by the State and City related to air quality (see section 4.0 above, energy (see section 5.0 above, and GHGs (see section 6.0 above). Additionally, the proposed project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable City Building and Fire Codes. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
10.7 Energy Plan Consistency
The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The applicable energy plan for the proposed project is the Conservation and Open Space Element of the Santa Clarita General Plan, June, 2011. The proposed project’s consistency with the applicable energy‐related policies in the General Plan are shown in Table O.
Table O – Proposed Project Compliance with Applicable General Plan Energy Policies Policy
No. General Plan Policy Proposed Project Implementation Actions Goal CO 8: Development designed to improve energy efficiency, reduce energy and natural resource consumption, and reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
CO 8.3.1 Evaluate site plans proposed for new development based on energy efficiency pursuant to LEED
(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design)
standards for New Construction and Neighborhood
Development, including the following: a) location
efficiency; b) environmental preservation; c)
compact, complete, and connected neighborhoods;
and d) resource efficiency, including use of recycled
materials and water
Consistent. All proposed structures will be
designed to not utilize any energy.
CO 8.3.2 Promote construction of energy efficient buildings through requirements for LEED certification or
through comparable alternative requirements as
adopted by local ordinance
Consistent. All proposed structures will be
designed to not utilize any energy.
CO 8.3.6 Require new development to use passive solar
heating and cooling techniques in building design
and construction, which may include but are not be
limited to building orientation, clerestory windows,
skylights, placement and type of windows,
overhangs to shade doors and windows, and use of
light colored roofs, shade trees, and paving
materials
Consistent. Proposed shade structures vault
restrooms will be designed to use passive solar
heating and cooling techniques.
CO 8.3.7 Encourage the use of trees and landscaping to
reduce heating and cooling energy loads, through
shading of buildings and parking lots.
Consistent. Where possible, trees will be planted
to provide shade to the proposed event and
parking areas.
CO 8.3.8 Encourage energy‐conserving heating and cooling systems and appliances, and energy‐efficiency in
windows and insulation, in all new construction.
Not Applicable. No heating and cooling systems or
appliances will be installed into any of the
proposed project’s structures.
CO 8.3.9 Limit excessive lighting levels, and encourage a reduction of lighting when businesses are closed to
a level required for security.
Not Applicable. No permanent lighting would be
installed as part of the proposed project.
Source: City of Santa Clarita, 2011.
As shown in Table O, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable energy‐related policies from the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
10.8 Generation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. The proposed project would consist of the development of a bike park. The proposed project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions from area sources, mobile sources, waste disposal, water usage, off‐road equipment and construction equipment. The proposed project would not include any utility connections, so would not utilize any energy usage as modeled in CalEEMod, however operation of the project would occasionally utilize electricity through generators that was modeled as part of the off‐road equipment. The project’s GHG emissions have been calculated with the CalEEMod model based on the construction and operational parameters detailed above in Section 8.1. A summary of the results is shown below in Table P and the CalEEMod model run is provided in Appendix A.
Table P – Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
Category CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mobile Sources1 164 0.01 0.01 166
Area Sources2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy Usage3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water and Wastewater4 0.13 <0.01 <0.01 0.13
Solid Waste5 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.46
Refrigeration6 ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 0.00
Operational Off‐Road Equipment7 22.2 <0.01 <0.01 22.3
Construction8 15.03 <0.01 <0.01 15.10
Total GHG Emissions 201 0.02 0.01 204
SCAQMD Draft Threshold of Significance 3,000
Exceed Thresholds? No
Notes:
1 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles. 2 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment. 3 Energy usage consists of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage. 4Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater. 5Waste includes the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills. 6 Refrigeration includes GHG emissions from refrigerants in air conditioning units. No refrigeration would be provided as part of project. 7 Operational Off‐Road Equipment was modeled based on a skid steer loader operating 8 hours per day and 12 days per year, a generator operating up to 8 hours per day and 26 days per year, and an off‐highway truck making weekly water truck deliveries 1 hour per day and 52 days per year. 8 Construction emissions amortized over 30 years as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group on November 19, 2009.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1 (see Appendix A)
The data provided in Table P shows that the proposed project would create 204 MTCO2e per year, which has been provided in this analysis for informational purposes only. The determination of significance of GHG emissionsimpactsis provided in the following Section 10.9, which showsthe proposed project would be consistent with all applicable measures and strategies in the applicable reduction plans for the proposed project. For reference purpose only, Table P shows that the proposed project’s GHG emissions would be well below the SCAQMD’s draft threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, the proposed
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
project would not generate GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
10.9 Greenhouse Gas Plan Consistency
The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The applicable plans for the proposed project include the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan, the Connect SoCal 2020, and the Connect SoCal 2024. The project consistency analysis to each of these plans is detailed below.
Consistency with the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan
The 2022 Scoping Plan identifies additional GHG reduction actions and strategies necessary to achieve the AB 1279 target of 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045. These actions and strategies build upon those identified in the first update to the Scoping Plan (2013) and in the second update to the Scoping Plan (2017). Although a number of these measures are currently established as statewide regulations, some measures have not yet been formally proposed or adopted. It is expected that these measures or similar actions to reduce GHG emissions will be adopted asrequired to achieve statewide GHG emissionstargets.
Provided in Table Q, Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan, is an evaluation of applicable reduction actions/strategies by emissions source category to determine how the proposed project would be consistent with or exceed reduction actions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan.
Table Q – Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan
AB 32 GHG Inventory Sector (shown in Bold)
and Scoping Plan Action Proposed Project Consistency with Scoping Plan Actions GHG Emissions Reductions Relative to the SB 32 Target
40% below 1990 levels by 2030. No Conflict. As shown above in Table P, almost all of the GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from vehicle trips. AB 1493 controls GHG emissions from vehicles in California. Through adherence with the AB 1493 tailpipe GHG emissions standards, the proposed project would not conflict with this strategy.
Smart Growth / Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
VMT per capita reduced 25% below 2019 levels
by 2030, and 22% below 2019 levels by 2045.
No Conflict. Senate Bill 375 directs each regional MPO (SCAG is MPO for project area) to adopt a SCS/RTP that meet this reduction target. The Connect SoCal 2024 was prepared to meet these reduction targets. Table R, below details how the proposed project would not conflict with the Connect SoCal 2024. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with this strategy.
Light‐Duty Vehicle (LDV) Zero‐Emission Vehicles (ZEVs)
100% of LDV sales are ZEV by 2035. Not Applicable. Executive Order N‐79‐20 requires all new LDVs sold in California to be zero‐emission by the year 2035. The proposed project would not include any vehicle sales activities.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
AB 32 GHG Inventory Sector (shown in Bold)
and Scoping Plan Action Proposed Project Consistency with Scoping Plan Actions Truck ZEVs
100% of medium‐duty (MDV)/HDC sales are ZEV
by 2040 (AB 74 University of California Institute
of Transportation Studies [ITS] report).
Not Applicable. Executive Order N‐79‐20 requires all new LDVs sold in California to be zero‐emission by the year 2045. The proposed project would not include any truck sales activities.
Aviation
10% of aviation fuel demand is met by electricity
(batteries) or hydrogen (fuel cells) in 2045.
Sustainable aviation fuel meets most or the rest
of the aviation fuel demand that has not already
transitioned to hydrogen or batteries.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not utilize any aviation fuel.
Ocean‐going Vessels (OGV)
2020 OGV At‐Berth regulation fully
implemented, with most OGVs utilizing shore
power by 2027.
25% of OGVs utilize hydrogen fuel cell electric
technology by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not utilize any OGVs.
Port Operations
100% of cargo handling equipment is zero‐
emission by 2037.
100% of drayage trucks are zero emission by
2035.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not impact any operations at any ports.
Freight and Passenger Rail
100% of passenger and other locomotive sales
are ZEV by 2030.
100% of line haul locomotive sales are ZEV by
2035.
Line haul and passenger rail rely primarily on
hydrogen fuel cell technology, and others
primarily utilize electricity.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not impact any freight or passenger rail operations.
Oil and Gas Extraction
Phase out oil and gas extraction operations by
2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not impact any oil and gas extraction activities.
Petroleum Refining
CCS on majority of petroleum refining
operations by 2030.
Production reduced in line with petroleum
demand.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not impact any petroleum refining activities.
Electricity Generation
Electric sector GHG target of 38 MMTCO2e in
2030 and 31 MMTCO2e in 2045.
Retail sales load coverage
Not Applicable. Senate Bill 1020 requires that 100 percent of retail sales of electricity be generated by renewable or zero‐ carbon source of electricity by December 1, 2045. The proposed project would not include any electrical utility connections.
New Residential and Commercial Buildings
All electric appliances beginning 2026
(residential) and 2029 (commercial).
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any electrical utility connections and would not include the installation of any appliances.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
AB 32 GHG Inventory Sector (shown in Bold)
and Scoping Plan Action Proposed Project Consistency with Scoping Plan Actions Existing Residential Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030 and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2035.
Appliances are replaced at end of life.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any existing residential buildings.
Existing Commercial Buildings
80% of appliance sales are electric by 2030, and
100% of appliance sales are electric by 2045.
Appliances are replaced at end of life.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any existing commercial buildings.
Food Products
7.5% of energy demand electrified directly
and/or indirectly by 2030; 75% by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any commercial food production activities.
Construction Equipment
25% of energy demand electrified by 2030 and
75% electrified by 2045.
No Conflict. Executive Order N‐79‐20 requires all off‐road vehicles and equipment to transition to 100 percent zero‐ emission equipment, where feasible, by 2035. All construction equipment fleets utilized during construction of the proposed project are required to be registered with CARB and meet CARB’s current emission reductions regulations, which are anticipated to be updated to meet Executive Order N‐79‐20 requirements. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with this strategy.
Chemicals and Allied Products; Pulp and Paper
Electrify 0% of boilers by 2030 and 100% of
boilers by 2045.
Hydrogen for 25% of process heat by 2035 and
100% by 2045.
Electrify 100% of other energy demand by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any pulp and paper production activities.
Stone, Clay, Glass, and Cement
CCS on 40% of operations by 2035 and on all
facilities by 2045.
Process emissions reduced through alternative
materials and CCS.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any stone, clay, glass and cement production activities.
Other Industrial Manufacturing
0% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 50%
by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any other industrial manufacturing activities.
Combined Heat and Power
Facilities retire by 2040. Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any existing combined heat and power facilities.
Agriculture Energy Use
25% energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75%
by 2045.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any commercial agriculture activities.
Low Carbon Fuels for Transportation
Biomass supply is used to produce conventional
and advanced biofuels, as well as hydrogen.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any production of fuels for transportation.
Low Carbon Fuels for Buildings and Industry
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
AB 32 GHG Inventory Sector (shown in Bold)
and Scoping Plan Action Proposed Project Consistency with Scoping Plan Actions In 2030s, renewable natural gas (RNG) blended
in pipeline
Renewable hydrogen blended in natural gas
pipeline at 7% energy (~20% by volume),
ramping up between 2030 and 2040.
In 2030s, dedicated hydrogen pipelines
constructed to serve certain industrial clusters.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any production of fuels for buildings and industry.
Non‐combustion Methane Emissions
Increase landfill and dairy digester methane
capture.
Some alternative manure management
deployed for smaller dairies.
Moderate adoption of enteric strategies by
2030.
Divert 75% of organic waste from landfills by
2025.
Oil and gas fugitive methane emissions reduced
50% by 2030 and further reductions as
infrastructure components retire in line with
reduced fossil gas demand.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include the operation of any landfill or dairy.
High GWP Potential Emissions
Low GWP refrigerants introduced as building
electrification increases, mitigating HFC
emissions.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include the manufacturing of appliances that use low GWP refrigerants.
Compensate for Remaining Emissions
Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) demonstration
projects deployed by 2030.
CDR scaled to compensate for remaining GHG
emissions in 2045
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any CDR demonstration projects
Source: CARB, 2022.
As shown above in Table Q, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable proposed action or strategy in the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan and potential impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Consistency with Connect SoCal 2020
SB 375 requires CARB to set regional targets for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. It is up to each MPO in the State (SCAG is the MPO for Southern California) to adopt a RTP/SCS to meet the reduction target set by CARB for the Southern California region. The Connect SoCal 2020 was adopted by SCAG that was prepared to meet a 2035 GHG emission reduction target of 19 percent reduction over the 2005 per capita emissions levels through the implementation of new land use, transportation and technology strategies. Provided in Table R, Consistency with the Connect SoCal 2020, is an evaluation of applicable goals and strategies to determine how the proposed project would be consistent with or exceed reduction strategies outlined in the Connect SoCal 2020.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Table R – Consistency with the Connect SoCal 2020
Strategies Consistency Assessment
Connect SoCal Goals
Goal 1: Encourage regional economic
prosperity and global competitiveness.
Not Applicable. This Goal is directed at SCAG and does not apply to the proposed project. This strategy calls on encouraging regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness. The proposed project would not interfere with such policymaking.
Goal 2: Improve mobility, accessibility,
reliability, and travel safety for people and
goods.
Consistent. The project proposes to construct a bike park in an area that is in close proximity to existing commercial and residential uses. The proposed project would promote the enjoyment and use of alternative modes of travel (i.e., bike riding) and would construct new trails that would connect to the existing multi‐use trails, thereby improving public accessibility to the trail system in the project area. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this goal.
Goal 3: Enhance the preservation, security,
and resilience of the regional transportation
system.
Consistent. The project proposes to construct a bike park with approximately 15 miles of maintained bike and multi‐use trails that would connect to the existing trail system. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with this goal.
Goal 4: Increase person and goods
movement and travel choices within the
transportation system.
Not Applicable. This strategy calls on SCAG to increase person and goods movement and travel choices across the transportation system. The proposed project would not interfere with this goal.
Goal 5: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and improve air quality.
Consistent. The project would result in criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions during construction and operation. However, emissions would be nominal. Moreover, the proposed project would encourage biking as an alternative mode of transportation that would reduce VMTs and associated GHG emissions. Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.
Goal 6: Support healthy and equitable
communities.
Consistent. The project would be consistent with this goal by constructing a public bike park that would facilitate athletic activities (i.e., bike riding), which would aid in supporting healthy and equitable communities.
Goal 7: Adapt to a changing climate and
support an integrated regional development
pattern and transportation network.
Not Applicable. This goal is directed towards SCAG and does not apply to individual development projects. Nevertheless, the project would support this goal by expanding the trail network in the project area.
Goal 8: Leverage new transportation
technologies and data‐driven solutions that
result in more efficient travel.
Not Applicable. This goal is directed towards SCAG and does not apply to the proposed project. This strategy calls on SCAG to use new transportation technologies and data‐driven solutions to increase efficiency. The proposed project would not interfere with this goal.
Goal 9: Encourage development of diverse
housing types in areas that are supported by
multiple transportation options.
Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include the development of housing. However, the proposed project would develop a bike park in close proximity to existing residential uses, which would provide existing residents with an alternative transportation options (i.e., bike riding).
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Strategies Consistency Assessment
Goal 10: Promote conservation of natural
and agricultural lands and restoration of
habitats.
Consistent. The project site is not currently used for any agricultural uses. Except for the proposed 15 miles of trails and the two programming areas, the remainder of the project site would remain undeveloped. Moreover, disturbed areas of the project site would be revegetated upon completion of the project construction.
Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.
Connect SoCal Strategies
Strategy 1: Focus growth near destinations
and mobility options.
Consistent. The proposed project would consist of development of a bike park in close proximity to existing commercial and residential uses. The bike park is intended to serve as a recreational destination for residents and would promote biking as an alternative mode of transportation.
Strategy 2: Promote diverse housing choices. Not Applicable. The proposed project would not include any new housing. It should be noted that the project is being constructed on land designated for open space and would not impede on the development of any potential future housing.
Strategy 3: Leverage technology innovations. Not Applicable. This strategy is directed to SCAG and jurisdictions and does not apply to the proposed project. This strategy aims to promote low emission technologies, improve access to services through technology, and identify ways to incorporate micro power grids into communities. The proposed project would not interfere with this strategy.
Strategy 4: Support implementation of
sustainability policies.
Consistent. The proposed project would not be connected to any utilities and would utilize vault toilets. As such, the project would result in low water and energy consumption.
Strategy 5: Promote a Green Region. Consistent. Development of the proposed bike park within existing open space would not interfere with regional wildlife connectivity or convert agricultural land. Upon completion of project construction, the project would revegetate disturbed areas within the project site. The proposed project would also improve public accessibility to park space and encourage biking as an alternative mode of transportation that would reduce VMT and GHG
emissions. Therefore, the project would support this strategy.
Source: SCAG, 2020.
As shown above in Table Q, the proposed project would not conflict with any proposed goal or strategy in the Connect SoCal 2020. Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Connect SoCal 2020 plan and potential impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Consistency with Connect SoCal 2024
As detailed above in Section 4.3, the Connect SoCal 2024 was adopted by SCAG on April 4, 2024. However, per SB 375, SCAG and CARB are required to work together until CARB staff conclude that the calculations and quantifications provided would yield accurate estimates of GHG emission reductions. Since CARB staff continue to have significant outstanding concerns about the technical methodology utilized in the Connect SoCal 2024, the current approved RTP/SCS is the Connect SoCal 2020. Consistency with the Connect SoCal 2024 has been included in order to provide a comprehensive consistency analysis.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
The Connect SoCal 2024 includes over 90 implementation strategies in order to meet the year 2035 GHG emission reduction targets set for the Southern California region as mandated by SB 375. The implementation strategies are directed toward SCAG and other regional agencies to implement and are not directly applicable to individual development projects. Regardless, the proposed project, which consists of development of a bike park in the nearby proximity to existing commercial and residential uses would conform to and promote many of these implementation strategies by encouraging the use of alternative transportation modes (i.e., bike riding) and providing access to an equitable and active recreational activity area. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with any proposed goal or strategy in the Connect SoCal 2024. The proposed project would be consistent with the Connect SoCal 2024 plan and potential impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
11.0 REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User Guide Version 2022.1, April 2022.
California Air Resources Board, 2017 Off‐Road Diesel Emission Factor Update for NOx and PM, 2017.
California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017.
California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2021 Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators, December 14, 2023.
California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017.
California Air Resources Board, First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, May 2014.
California Air Resources Board, Resolution 08‐43, December 12, 2008.
California Air Resources Board, Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel‐ Fueled Engines and Vehicles, October 2000.
California Air Resources Board, Final Staff Report Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets, October 2017.
California Air Resources Board, The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition.
California Department of Conservation, A General Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos, August, 2000.
California Energy Commission, 2022 Reference Appendices for the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, August 2022
City of Santa Clarita, City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan, August 2012.
City of Santa Clarita, City of Santa Clarita General Plan, June 2011.
Environmental Protection Agency, Nonattainment Major New Source Review Implementation Under 8‐ Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: Reconsideration, June 30, 2005.
Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990‐2020, April 15, 2022
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments, February 2015.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2022 Air Quality Management Plan, December 2, 2022.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, December, 2012.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, March, 2017.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, Revised July 2008.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Revised Draft – 2012 Lead State Implementation Plan Los Angeles County, May 4, 2012.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 402 Nuisance, Adopted May 7, 1976.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 403 Fugitive Dust, Amended June 3, 2005.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 445 Wood‐Burning Devices, Amended October 27, 2020.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1108 Cutback Asphalt, Amended February 1, 1985.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1108.1 Emulsified Asphalt, Amended November 4, 1983.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings, Amended September 6, 2013.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Rule 1143 Consumer Paint Thinners & Multi‐Purpose Solvents, Amended December 3, 2010.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, March 2015.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Draft Report Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast Air Basin, MATES III, January 2008.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, MATES V Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study in the South Coast AQMD Final Report, August 2021.
Southern California Association of Governments, 2020‐2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal 2020), September 3, 2020.
Southern California Association of Governments, 2020‐2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect SoCal 2024), April4, 2024.
Southern California Association of Governments, Final 2023 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP) Guidelines, October 2022.
University of California, Davis, Transportation Project‐Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, December 1997.
U.S. Geological Survey, Reported Historic Asbestos Mines, Historic Asbestos Prospects, and Other Natural Occurrences of Asbestos in California, 2011.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Appendix A
APPENDIX A
CalEEMod Model Printouts
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 1 / 43
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 2 / 43
3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.1. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 3 / 43
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 4 / 43
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 5 / 43
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 6 / 43
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 7 / 43
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park
Construction Start Date 10/1/2024
Operational Year 2025
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.50
Precipitation (days) 19.6
Location 34.46891648717852, -118.5010731109193
County Los Angeles-South Coast
City Santa Clarita
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 3606
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.22
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 8 / 43
City Park 17.2 Acre 17.2 0.00 149,640 149,640 — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
123 1000sqft 2.82 0.00 24,600 — — —
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.17 10.6 13.8 0.02 2.57 0.63 2,615 0.11 0.04 0.70 2,629 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 3.72 36.1 34.1 0.07 8.93 4.35 7,990 0.34 0.24 0.10 8,071 Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.96 6.78 8.84 0.02 1.50 0.41 1,655 0.07 0.03 0.20 1,663 Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.17 1.24 1.61 < 0.005 0.27 0.07 274 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 275 Exceeds (Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 — — — — —
Unmit. No No No No No No — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 75.0 100 550 150 150 55.0 — — — — —
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 9 / 43
Unmit. No No No No No No — — — — —
2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily - Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.17 10.6 13.8 0.02 2.57 0.63 2,615 0.11 0.04 0.70 2,629 Daily - Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
2024 3.72 36.1 34.1 0.07 8.93 4.35 7,990 0.34 0.24 0.10 8,071 2025 3.47 10.6 13.7 0.02 2.57 0.63 2,608 0.11 0.04 0.02 2,621 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.52 5.08 4.80 0.01 0.99 0.41 1,067 0.05 0.03 0.18 1,076 2025 0.96 6.78 8.84 0.02 1.50 0.39 1,655 0.07 0.02 0.20 1,663 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
2024 0.10 0.93 0.88 < 0.005 0.18 0.07 177 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 178 2025 0.17 1.24 1.61 < 0.005 0.27 0.07 274 0.01 < 0.005 0.03 275
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.20 2.80 11.8 0.03 2.21 0.62 2,899 0.20 0.09 8.87 2,940 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.19 2.88 10.8 0.03 2.21 0.62 2,798 0.20 0.09 0.23 2,831 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 10 / 43
Average Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.57 0.71 4.09 0.01 0.92 0.25 1,125 0.13 0.04 1.64 1,142 Annual (Max) — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.10 0.13 0.75 < 0.005 0.17 0.04 186 0.02 0.01 0.27 189 Exceeds (Daily
Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 — — — — —
Unmit. No No No No No No — — — — —
Exceeds
(Average Daily)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold 55.0 55.0 550 150 150 55.0 — — — — —
Unmit. No No No No No No — — — — —
Exceeds
(Annual)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Threshold — — — — — — — — — — 3,000
Unmit. — — — — — — — — — — No
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.79 0.80 9.43 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,382 0.10 0.09 8.87 2,419 Area 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Water — — — — — — 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Waste — — — — — — 0.80 0.08 0.00 — 2.79
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 11 / 43
Off-Road 0.22 2.00 2.40 0.01 0.07 0.06 515 0.02 < 0.005— 517 Total 1.20 2.80 11.8 0.03 2.21 0.62 2,899 0.20 0.09 8.87 2,940 Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Mobile 0.78 0.88 8.44 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,281 0.10 0.09 0.23 2,310 Area 0.19——————————
Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Water—————— 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005— 0.80
Waste—————— 0.80 0.08 0.00— 2.79
Refrig.————————— 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 0.22 2.00 2.40 0.01 0.07 0.06 515 0.02 < 0.005— 517 Total 1.19 2.88 10.8 0.03 2.21 0.62 2,798 0.20 0.09 0.23 2,831 Average Daily———————————
Mobile 0.33 0.38 3.74 0.01 0.91 0.23 989 0.04 0.04 1.64 1,004 Area 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Water—————— 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005— 0.80
Waste—————— 0.80 0.08 0.00— 2.79
Refrig.————————— 0.00 0.00
Off-Road 0.05 0.33 0.35 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 134 0.01 < 0.005— 135 Total 0.57 0.71 4.09 0.01 0.92 0.25 1,125 0.13 0.04 1.64 1,142 Annual———————————
Mobile 0.06 0.07 0.68 < 0.005 0.17 0.04 164 0.01 0.01 0.27 166 Area 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Energy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Water—————— 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005— 0.13
Waste—————— 0.13 0.01 0.00— 0.46
Refrig.————————— 0.00 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 12 / 43
Off-Road 0.01 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 22.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.3 Total 0.10 0.13 0.75 < 0.005 0.17 0.04 186 0.02 0.01 0.27 189
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Site Preparation (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
3.65 36.0 32.9 0.05 1.60 1.47 5,296 0.21 0.04 — 5,314
Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — 5.11 2.63 — — — — —
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.06 0.04 < 0.005 1.99 0.20 15.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.4 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.10 0.99 0.90 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 145 0.01 < 0.005 — 146 Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — 0.14 0.07 — — — — —
Onsite truck < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.01 0.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.45 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.18 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.1 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 13 / 43
Dust From — — — — 0.03 0.01 — — — — —
Material
Movement
Onsite truck < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.10 1.12 0.00 0.23 0.05 234 0.01 0.01 0.03 237 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 6.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.60 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.09 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.3. Grading (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 14 / 43
Off-Road
Equipment
3.52 34.3 30.2 0.06 1.45 1.33 6,598 0.27 0.05 — 6,621
Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — 2.39 0.95 — — — — —
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.06 0.04 < 0.005 1.99 0.20 15.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.4 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.34 3.29 2.89 0.01 0.14 0.13 633 0.03 0.01 — 635
Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — 0.23 0.09 — — — — —
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.18 0.02 1.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.57 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.06 0.60 0.53 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 105 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 105 Dust From
Material
Movement
— — — — 0.04 0.02 — — — — —
Onsite truck < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 < 0.005 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.26 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.09 0.11 1.28 0.00 0.26 0.06 268 0.01 0.01 0.03 271 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.02 1.44 0.53 0.01 0.31 0.09 1,108 0.06 0.18 0.07 1,163 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.02 0.01 26.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 26.4 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.14 0.05 < 0.005 0.03 0.01 106 0.01 0.02 0.11 112 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 15 / 43
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.31 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.37 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 17.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 18.5
3.5. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.20 11.2 13.1 0.02 0.50 0.46 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.06 0.04 < 0.005 1.99 0.20 15.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.4 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.07 0.64 0.74 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 136 0.01 < 0.005 — 137 Onsite truck < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.01 0.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.93 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.12 0.14 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 22.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.6 Onsite truck < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 < 0.005 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.15 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.06 0.64 0.00 0.13 0.03 134 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 135 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 16 / 43
Vendor < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 64.5 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 67.3 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 7.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.81 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.66 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.82 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.29 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.61 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.63 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 0.40 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 1.99 0.20 15.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 16.0 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 0.40 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.06 0.04 < 0.005 1.99 0.20 15.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 16.1 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.67 6.21 7.76 0.01 0.26 0.24 1,426 0.06 0.01 — 1,431
Onsite truck < 0.005 0.03 0.02 < 0.005 1.12 0.11 9.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 9.56 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 17 / 43
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.12 1.13 1.42 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 236 0.01 < 0.005 — 237 Onsite truck < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.20 0.02 1.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.58 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.70 0.00 0.13 0.03 138 0.01 < 0.005 0.51 140 Vendor < 0.005 0.07 0.04 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 63.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.17 66.3 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.05 0.59 0.00 0.13 0.03 131 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 133 Vendor < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 63.5 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 66.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.37 0.00 0.08 0.02 79.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 80.2 Vendor < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 37.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 39.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 0.01 0.07 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 13.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 13.3 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 6.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.53 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.9. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 18 / 43
Daily, Summer
(Max)
———————————
Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.80 7.45 9.98 0.01 0.35 0.32 1,511 0.06 0.01— 1,517
Paving 0.37——————————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily———————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.41 0.55 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005— 83.1 Paving 0.02——————————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual———————————
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005— 13.8 Paving < 0.005——————————
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite———————————
Daily, Summer
(Max)
———————————
Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.20 0.05 197 0.01 0.01 0.02 199 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily———————————
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 10.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 11.1 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 19 / 43
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.81 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.83 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.11. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architectural
Coatings
3.33 — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.34 Architectural
Coatings
0.18 — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 Architectural
Coatings
0.03 — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite truck 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 20 / 43
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.01 26.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 26.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average Daily — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.48 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.24 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.79 0.80 9.43 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,382 0.10 0.09 8.87 2,419 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 21 / 43
Total 0.79 0.80 9.43 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,382 0.10 0.09 8.87 2,419 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.78 0.88 8.44 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,281 0.10 0.09 0.23 2,310 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.78 0.88 8.44 0.02 2.14 0.55 2,281 0.10 0.09 0.23 2,310 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.06 0.07 0.68 < 0.005 0.17 0.04 164 0.01 0.01 0.27 166 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.06 0.07 0.68 < 0.005 0.17 0.04 164 0.01 0.01 0.27 166
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 22 / 43
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 23 / 43
4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
0.17 — — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
0.02 — — — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
0.17 — — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
0.02 — — — — — — — — — —
Total 0.19 — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Consumer
Products
0.03 — — — — — — — — — —
Architectural
Coatings
< 0.005 — — — — — — — — — —
Landscape
Equipment
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.1. Unmitigated
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 24 / 43
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.80
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.13
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.80 0.08 0.00 — 2.79
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 25 / 43
Total — — — — — — 0.80 0.08 0.00 — 2.79
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.80 0.08 0.00 — 2.79
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.80 0.08 0.00 — 2.79
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — 0.13 0.01 0.00 — 0.46
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — 0.13 0.01 0.00 — 0.46
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 26 / 43
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Skid Steer
Loaders
0.06 0.86 1.51 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 245 0.01 < 0.005 — 246 Generator Sets 0.10 0.79 0.52 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 104 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 104 Off-Highway
Trucks
0.06 0.34 0.37 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 167 0.01 < 0.005 — 167 Total 0.22 2.00 2.40 0.01 0.07 0.06 515 0.02 < 0.005 — 517 Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Skid Steer
Loaders
0.06 0.86 1.51 < 0.005 0.03 0.02 245 0.01 < 0.005 — 246 Generator Sets 0.10 0.79 0.52 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 104 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 104 Off-Highway
Trucks
0.06 0.34 0.37 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 167 0.01 < 0.005 — 167 Total 0.22 2.00 2.40 0.01 0.07 0.06 515 0.02 < 0.005 — 517 Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Skid Steer
Loaders
< 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.34 Generator Sets < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.23 Off-Highway
Trucks
0.01 0.04 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 19.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 19.7 Total 0.01 0.06 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 22.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.3 Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 27 / 43
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipment
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 28 / 43
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetation ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land Use ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily, Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily, Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 29 / 43
Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10T PM2.5T CO2T CH4 N2OR CO2e
Daily, Summer
(Max)
———————————
Avoided———————————
Subtotal———————————
Sequestered———————————
Subtotal———————————
Removed———————————
Subtotal———————————
————————————
Daily, Winter
(Max)
———————————
Avoided———————————
Subtotal———————————
Sequestered———————————
Subtotal———————————
Removed———————————
Subtotal———————————
————————————
Annual———————————
Avoided———————————
Subtotal———————————
Sequestered———————————
Subtotal———————————
Removed———————————
Subtotal———————————
————————————
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 30 / 43
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Site Preparation Site Preparation 10/1/2024 10/14/2024 5.00 10.0 — Grading Grading 10/15/2024 12/2/2024 5.00 35.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 12/3/2024 10/31/2025 5.00 239 — Paving Paving 11/3/2025 11/28/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/1/2025 12/26/2025 5.00 20.0 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Scrapers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 423 0.48
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 31 / 43
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Pavers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck 3.00 1.00 HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 20.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 15.7 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck 3.00 1.00 HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 2.00 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck 3.00 1.00 HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 15.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 32 / 43
Paving Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 2.00 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water unpaved roads twice daily 55% 55%
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 5,250 1,750 7,380
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (cy) Material Exported (cy) Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (sq. ft.) Acres Paved (acres) Site Preparation — — 15.0 0.00 —
Grading 4,400 — 105 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.82
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 33 / 43
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 3 74% 74%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
City Park 0.00 0%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 2.82 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2025 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year City Park 40.0 200 200 31,291 600 2,999 2,999 469,265
Other Asphalt
Surfaces
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 34 / 43
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 5,250 1,750 7,380
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) City Park 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 349 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) City Park 0.00 156,000
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 35 / 43
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
City Park 1.48 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Skid Steer Loaders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 71.0 0.37
Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74
Off-Highway Trucks Diesel Average 1.00 1.00 376 0.38
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 36 / 43
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Year Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 37 / 43
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 21.6 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 5.30 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 21.8 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events.
Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 38 / 43
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 93.6
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 39 / 43
AQ-PM 45.4
AQ-DPM 6.24
Drinking Water 85.7
Lead Risk Housing 17.0
Pesticides 0.00
Toxic Releases 36.7
Traffic 26.9
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 0.00
Groundwater 2.11
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 7.35
Impaired Water Bodies 12.5
Solid Waste 0.00
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 12.6
Cardio-vascular 33.3
Low Birth Weights 35.0
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 32.6
Housing 27.8
Linguistic 28.8
Poverty 36.5
Unemployment —
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 40 / 43
Economic —
Above Poverty 80.803285
Employed 46.86256897
Median HI 72.73193892
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 51.84139612
High school enrollment 18.81175414
Preschool enrollment 17.40023098
Transportation —
Auto Access 90.86359553
Active commuting 19.06839471
Social —
2-parent households 97.36943411
Voting 48.71038111
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.31861927
Park access 2.194276915
Retail density 84.10111639
Supermarket access 18.11882459
Tree canopy 27.46054151
Housing —
Homeownership 96.99730527
Housing habitability 83.11305017
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 39.89477736 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 72.47529834
Uncrowded housing 44.45014757
Health Outcomes —
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 41 / 43
Insured adults 63.64686257
Arthritis 53.0
Asthma ER Admissions 90.0
High Blood Pressure 79.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 27.6
Asthma 65.7
Coronary Heart Disease 63.8
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 59.8
Diagnosed Diabetes 79.4
Life Expectancy at Birth 33.9
Cognitively Disabled 52.2
Physically Disabled 62.2
Heart Attack ER Admissions 36.2
Mental Health Not Good 62.3
Chronic Kidney Disease 79.8
Obesity 59.2
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 67.2
Stroke 75.8
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 9.5
Current Smoker 60.5
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 81.7
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 81.4
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 71.1
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 42 / 43
Elderly 68.4
English Speaking 69.6
Foreign-born 32.8
Outdoor Workers 62.4
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 73.8
Traffic Density 22.9
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 40.8
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 57.1
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 13.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 59.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Detailed Report, 4/8/2024 43 / 43
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases No Demolition required. Building construction reduced from 370 days to 239 days Operations: Vehicle Data Trip Rate set to 40 weekday trips and 200 weekend trips Operations: Off-Road Equipment A skid steer loader (12 days per year) and a generator (26 days per year) added to operations 8 hours per day. 1 Off-Hwy truck operating 1 hour per day and 52 days per year also added to account for weekly water deliveries.
Construction: Trips and VMT 10 Worker trips and 2 vendor truck trips per day added to Building Construction and 2 worker trips added to Painting
Operations: Water and Waste Water One water truck delivery per week of 3,000 gallons or 156,000 gallons per year
Santa Clarita Blue Cloud Bike Park Project, Air Quality, Energy, and GHG Emissions Impact Analysis City of Santa Clarita
Appendix B
APPENDIX B
EMFAC2021 Model Printouts
Source: EMFAC2021 (v1.0.2) Emissions Inventory
Region Type: Sub‐Area
Region: Los Angeles (SC)
Calendar Year: 2024
Season: Annual
Vehicle Classification: EMFAC202x Categories
Units: miles/day for CVMT and EVMT, trips/day for Trips, kWh/day for Energy Consumption, tons/day for Emissions, 1000 gallons/day for Fuel Consumption Region CalendarVehicle Category Model Year Speed Fuel Population Total VMT Trips Fuel Consumption Los Angeles (S 2024 LDA Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 3312060 130838318 15395682 4512 Los Angeles (S 2024 LDT1 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 311829 11357947 1373845 469Los Angeles (S 2024 LDT2 Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 1566130 64695889 7373138 2726Los Angeles (S 2024 MCY Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 146992 969261 293984 24Los Angeles (S 2024 MDV Aggregate Aggregate Gasoline 941105 35897503 4364748 1858Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3824 129079 54562 15 Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 3907 134105 55747 15Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 11998 410120 171216 46Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 2969 164154 42373 18Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Other Class 4 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4737 196364 54762 22 Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Other Class 5 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 10509 458727 121479 52Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Other Class 6 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 9468 406400 109454 46Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Other Class 7 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 4263 203758 49285 23Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 130 6800 1505 1 Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1624 98742 18776 10Los Angeles (S 2024 T6 Public Class 5 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 480 16864 2461 2 Los Angeles (S 2024 T7 Single Concrete/Transi Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 712 48780 6706 8Los Angeles (S 2024 T7 Single Dump Class 8 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1959 113612 18457 19Los Angeles (S 2024 T7 SWCV Class 8 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 1156 75005 5315 29 Los Angeles (S 2024 T7 Tractor Class 8 Aggregate Aggregate Diesel 14354 1100935 208570 179 Worker (Autos) vehicle miles per day 243,758,918 9,588 1,000 gall per day Workers (Autos) Avg Miles per gallon 25.4 9,588,025 gallons per day Diesel Truck vehicle miles per day 3,563,446 485 1,000 gall per day Diesel Truck Fleet Avg Miles per gallon 7.3 485,140 gallons per day APPENDIX B:
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
This page intentionally left blank.
Biological Resources Technical Report
Haskell Canyon Bike Park
Santa Clarita, California
April 23, 2025
Prepared for: Prepared by:
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 120
Santa Clarita, California 91355
Tel. (661) 284-1414
Contact: Amber Rodriguez
Michael Baker International
5 Hutton Centre Drive Suite 500
Santa Ana, CA 92707
949-330-4147
Contact: Stephen Anderson
[email protected]
JN 195477
INTERNATIONAL
We Make a Difference —1
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary............................................................................................................................1
1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................................3
1.1 Background and Purpose ..............................................................................................................3
1.2 Project Description........................................................................................................................3
1.3 Project Site Location .....................................................................................................................4
2.0 Regulatory Setting...............................................................................................................8
2.1 State and/or Federally Listed Plants or Wildlife............................................................................8
2.2 Jurisdictional Waters of the United States/State, Including Wetlands .......................................10
2.3 California Environmental Quality Act..........................................................................................11
3.0 Environmental Setting.......................................................................................................12
3.1 Regional Context.........................................................................................................................12
3.2 Climate ........................................................................................................................................12
3.3 Soils.............................................................................................................................................12
3.4 Land Uses....................................................................................................................................12
3.5 Watersheds and Hydrology.........................................................................................................14
4.0 Methods...........................................................................................................................15
4.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................15
4.2 Field Investigations......................................................................................................................16
5.0 Results..............................................................................................................................22
5.1 Vegetation Communities, Land Cover, and Floral Diversity ........................................................22
5.2 Wildlife Diversity .........................................................................................................................25
5.3 Special-Status/Regulated Resources...........................................................................................26
5.4 Regional Connectivity, Wildlife Movement Corridors, and Habitat Linkages .............................41
5.5 Regional Resource Planning Context...........................................................................................44
6.0 Project Impacts.................................................................................................................45
6.1 Definition of Impacts...................................................................................................................45
6.2 Impacts to Vegetation Communities and Land Covers...............................................................45
6.3 Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species......................................................................................46
6.4 Impacts to Special-Status Wildlife Species..................................................................................47
6.5 Impacts to Critical Habitat...........................................................................................................47
6.6 Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters/Wetlands................................................................................47
6.7 Impacts to Wildlife Corridors and Habitat Connectivity .............................................................48
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page ii
6.8 Impacts to Regional Resource Planning ......................................................................................48
7.0 Significant Impacts............................................................................................................49
7.1 Explanation of Findings of Significance.......................................................................................49
7.2 Federal and State Regulations and Protections ..........................................................................50
7.3 Special-Status Plant Species........................................................................................................50
7.4 Sensitive Natural Communities...................................................................................................50
7.5 Special-Status Wildlife Species....................................................................................................51
7.6 Jurisdictional Waters/Wetlands..................................................................................................51
7.7 Wildlife Corridors and Linkages...................................................................................................52
7.8 Regional Resource Planning/Local Policies and Ordinances.......................................................52
8.0 Mitigation.........................................................................................................................53
8.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts.................................................................................................55
9.0 References........................................................................................................................56 List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Surveys and Survey Conditions.................................................................................16 Table 2. Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types..................................................................................22 Table 3. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Plant Species........................................................................28 Table 4. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Wildlife Species....................................................................32 Table 5. State and Federal Jurisdictional Resources....................................................................................41 Table 6. Impacts to Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types................................................................46 List of Figures
Figure 1: Regional Vicinity
Figure 2: Site Vicinity
Figure 3: Project Site
Figure 4: USDA Soils
Figure 5: Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 6: Critical Habitat
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Site Photographs
Appendix B: Literature Review Results
Appendix C: USFWS National Wetlands Inventory
Appendix D: Species Observed List
Appendix E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report contains the findings of Michael Baker International’s biological resources assessment for the proposed Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project (project) located in the City of Santa Clarita, California. Michael Baker biologists conducted a field survey/habitat assessment of the project site on February 13 and 14, 2024. The field survey was conducted to characterize existing site conditions and assess the potential for special-status biological resources to occur within the project site that could pose a constraint to implementation of the proposed project.
1 Any areas with steep or unsafe terrain were not accessed and were examined with binoculars from within the project site.
The project site is approximately 380.82 acres in size and comprises mostly natural vegetation communities. Six (6) vegetation communities and land cover types were observed within the project site:
black sage scrub, disturbed black sage scrub, scrub oak woodland, chaparral, non-native grassland, and developed/disturbed.
No special-status plant species were observed during the field survey. Based on the results of the literature review and the field survey, Michael Baker determined that the native vegetation communities within the project site have a moderate or high potential to support three (3)special-status plant species: club-haired mariposa-lily (Calochortus clavatus var. clavatus; California Rare Plant Rank [CRPR] 4.3), slender mariposalily (Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis; CRPR 1B.2), and short-jointed beavertail (Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada; CRPR 1B.2). All remaining special-status plant species identified by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) either have a low potential to occur or are not expected to occur within the project site based on existing site conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions. Species with a CRPR of 4 or 3 are generally not evaluated for potential significant impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and generally do not require additional permitting or mitigation for impacts. However, species that can be shown to meet the criteria for endangered, rare, or threatened status under CEQA Section 15380(d) or that can be shown to be regionally rare or unique as defined in CEQA Section 15125(c) must be fully analyzed in a CEQA document. Impacts to any species with a CRPR rank of 1 or 2 would require mitigation.
One (1) special-status wildlife species was observed during the field survey: Lawrence’s goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei; US Fish and Wildlife Service’s [USFWS] Bird of Conservation Concern). Based on the results of the literature review and the field survey and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review, 1 As used in this report, “special-status” refers to species that are either federally/State-listed, proposed, or candidates; species that have been designated a California Rare Plant Rank by the California Native Plant Society; species designated as Fully Protected, Species of Special Concern, or Watch List by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; or State/locally rare vegetation communities.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 2
Michael Baker determined that the project site has a moderate or high potential to support four (4) special-status wildlife species: southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens; California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s [CDFW] Watch List [WL]), Bell’s sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli belli; WL), coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri; CDFW species of special concern [SSC]), and coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii; SSC). All remaining special-status wildlife species identified by the CNDDB either have a low potential to occur or are not expected to occur within the project site based on existing site conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions. Impacts to these species would require mitigation.
Eleven (11) potentially state or federal jurisdictional features were observed within the project site.
Impacts to these features may potentially occur from the proposed project.
The project is not located within any area covered by natural community conservation plan or habitat conservation plan documents, including a multiple species conservation plan or multiple species habitat conservation plan. In addition, the project site is not located within any identified Significant Ecological Areas designated within Los Angeles County. The project is also not located within any USFWS designated critical habitat.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Purpose
This report contains the findings of Michael Baker InternaƟonal’s biological resources assessment for the proposed Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project (project or project site). Michael Baker biologists conducted a field survey/habitat assessment of the project site on February 13 and 14, 2024. The field survey was conducted to characterize exisƟng site condiƟons and assess the potenƟal for special-status biological resources to occur within the project site, defined as the area within which all project-related disturbances would occur that could pose a constraint to implementaƟon of the proposed project. Special aƩenƟon was given to assessing the suitability of the habitat within the project site and its potenƟal to support special-status biological resources that were idenƟfied as potenƟally occurring in the vicinity of the project site by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database RareFind 5 (CNDDB 2024a), the California NaƟve Plant Society’s (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (CIRP; CNPS 2024), and the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) InformaƟon for Planning and ConsultaƟon (IPaC) database (USFWS 2024a).
The submiƩal of this report is intended to saƟsfy the biological resource needs of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. The City of Santa Clarita is requesƟng administraƟve and discreƟonary acƟon to approve the implementaƟon of a recreaƟonal use project in the City of Santa Clarita (City), Los Angeles County (County), California.
1.2 Project DescripƟon
The project would develop a bike park that would consist of approximately 15 miles of trails interspersed throughout the project site and two acƟvity/programming areas – the Haskell Bike Park Core (Haskell Core) and the Blue Cloud Trailhead. Trail types for all skill levels provided within the Haskell Canyon Bike Park include approximately 3.7 miles of perimeter and climbing trails, approximately 5.5 miles of downhill bike trails, and approximately 5 miles of mulƟ-use trails. The proposed trail widths would range 4 to 6 feet wide.
The project would also maintain approximately 1.6 miles of exisƟng mulƟ-use trails. The Haskell Core, located on the western porƟon of the project site, would include an event plaza with picnic tables, pump tracks, a dual slalom course, progressive jumplines, and a progressive skills area. Event/spectator areas would be provided adjacent to the main acƟvity areas. Other ameniƟes within the Haskell Core would include shade structures at the start zones of the dual slalom course and the progressive jumplines, two vault restrooms, a bike repair staƟon, a rest area with benches and shade structure, and cargo containers for storage areas. Parking for the Haskell Core would be provided within a 40-space parking lot, which would include a parking/emergency turnaround, four American DisabiliƟes Act (ADA) parking spaces, and unstructured space for four food trucks. The Blue Cloud Trailhead area would also include space for potenƟal future landscape restoraƟon, a mulƟ-use trailhead, a single vault restroom, a bike repair staƟon,
INTRODUCTION
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 4
and the Saddle Trail Hub (meeƟng space for riders with a shade structure). Parking for the Blue Cloud Trailhead would be provided within an unstructured parking area and along Blue Cloud Road.
1.3 Project Site LocaƟon
The 380.82-acre project site is generally located roughly 6 miles east of Interstate 5 and roughly 5 miles north of State Route 14 in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California (Figure 1, Regional Vicinity). The project site is depicted in SecƟon 31, Township 5 North, Range 15 West on the US Geological Survey (USGS) Mint Canyon, California 7.5-minute quadrangle map and SecƟon 36, Township 5 North, Range 16 West on the USGS Newhall, California 7.5-minute quadrangle map (Figure 2, Site Vicinity).
Specifically, the project site is located within the Haskell Canyon Open Space south of the Angeles NaƟonal Forest, north of Copper Hill Drive, east of City Highline Motorway Fire Road adjacent to Haskell Canyon Wash, and northwest of Blue Cloud Road, which bisects the project site in a northwesterly direcƟon. The project site is primarily located on Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 2813-010-273, 2813-010-274, 2813-010- 275, 2813-010-276, 2813-010-900, 2813-010-901, 2813-010-902, 2813-025-270, and 3244-031-901 at laƟtude 34.476908° and longitude -118.499045° (Figure 3, Project Site).
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Project
Site
KERN COUNTY
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
VENTURA COUNTY
°
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USGS, Los Angeles County
Regional Vicinity
Figure 1
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx 0 3 6
Miles
EAñ
!"^$
?ßE
!"^$
EAå
EAÝ
%&g(
!"^$
?íE
IÆ
AmE
%&l(
?óE
?×E
IÆ
EAØ
!"`$
%&g(
.Lebec
r Park
\7 I
ANT pV
X 138
i —tatewenlcual State\Vehicular
Recreation Area
\
er 7 •otMOUNTAIN
Project Location
Palme
Regie
Airp
\
v
,yN‘l Palm
SIERRA PClo^ 4
1 \\
5 Site
Acton
)
SOLED AD-CANYON
Santa Clarita
L h end_hakk J—
L 5
Mooripar-118 Simi Valley San Fernando * D
_ _ 1 Los Angeles
5 SIMI HILLS
Burbank Thousand Oaks
Agoura Hills Calabasas Glendal Ga21 4 U
405
MOUNTAINS 1 SANTA MONICA MONICA ay L
— __________ <Los Angeles
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
VERDUGO^
MOUNTAINS
J
yX
\
)
\
V
\
\
V
\
\
\
\
b
3 i -
. SAWMILL
SAN FERNANDO
V ALLEY
s
Pasad
3,
_____
La Canada
Flintridge
1 V
1 \
Hur\gry Valley
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
w) y‘"N‘a/s
\
\
\
\
y
LIEBRE' s
MOUNTAIN
— SANTA SUSAN
°
Source: USGS 7.5-Minute topographic quadrangle maps: Warm Springs Mountain, Green Valley, Newhall, and Mint Canyon, California Site Vicinity
Figure 2
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx Legend
Project Site
0 0.5 1
Miles
l
r
.^0ht,
I A/
N 13
e —A 0
ou". D -I /
Po “ba‘* ' 490
A
1 8 o
t
s S —8
0 30
C ,
6W
22 ¥ 0
3007 As
TEP s < ; —P A P
Dr VAsEZ TRUCK TRL
33 32 A -33. 34
0 1
Ai
5K7
1 (X. ESGUERRA RO
A
of
ANN
<7
4091
c
YEPARKo. §
$7
j
AALSe
-
- 0
LOST CREEK RD
sm15.1
n522
fl
sOSEDELLDP
L <%
XeaWol
3 ,o%
"Mowr’sr $o
-FAIRVIEW DR. %
!
noC 135V
A0- auso 2
Pwaro, $
1 1e” BRIDGEPORT LN
R
d Y
T4 /
Bouquet $
" -Junction
TR0< % /
VO.
"s'
3 Swo
erc...
caakcs*.
5 0 % AP7 &
coveesl SP) f
3' 6 -6- Cruzan’Mes 5
—8/
5 1 @ 9
Ze2 13 ----- 76 t
19% PY
sDk Co
"SAGaor
I * I
1600°
G %,
5 doROTHYSf
s R4 28 1600” OLD ERIENI B
al
15 C"Y 16 18 ?% /on aol
SAHTA CLARA ST CEDARCREEK ST
5WT FAIRWEATHER ST 3
LEDADST £ A L
$(
T4N R15w
<
• 4
La
P■ (nC-OC
D
a2J 3/ 503
1 fl 7
C15 16
a. 5503
I
O
22 3 w02A &
4 324))
20, 22
0 70 -
-f* as
ir Ric7 1V Texas Canyon
TUAS CANrOA RD
N1)5
-
28 Zanyon - ( '
/
0 14
tr A
4 2
% -Drinhwate ; 0
(
$
a
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
1 HIDDEN HILLS DR (A—SC les Aqueduct Los Any
0%
is e
‘CANYON RD SEcc CLARTaRD)
"CREEK DR %
U I 4
l
%
Ro
Nos
G
% “e
Y
59 u\t MCB
(-.2)7
%
!>
!>
34.285844
-118.290207
34.281282
-118.304064
°
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, Los Angeles County
Project Site
Figure 3
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx Legend
!> Reference Point
Project Site
0 500 1,000
Feet
City Highline
M
otorwa
y
Fire
R
d
Blue Cloud Rd
. i F
ee.
- " -
_ X
. ■ id
y. Fi
sh ye m
f
aPre
A6. s
i
th
3 4 ft
w s
ale Sed ..
t
er‘‘s i
3 i
£
0 .
f
Al V %
J’h
' 42re 20se
’ ’ FAC
I
_ obs — 5. w w
i
St ji $ se P —
_ J__ s
]
INTERNATIONAL
u
4-
Michael Baker
-
Ca
£Y _
US 31et
____
hss
20y)3
aT-.G
• J 34 r
%
y. this
9 >
9Me
A
v. ■' —el e .
1 U M Feet rfeH_
FPU i" '
2 eDA
T J
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 8
2.0 REGULATORY SETTING
2.1 State and/or Federally Listed Plants or Wildlife
2.1.1 State of California Endangered Species Act
In addition to federal laws, the State of California has its own California Endangered Species Act (CESA), enforced by the CDFW. The CESA program maintains a separate listing of species beyond the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), although the provisions of each act are similar.
State-listed threatened and endangered species are protected under provisions of CESA. Activities that may result in “take” of individuals (defined in CESA as to “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill”) are regulated by the CDFW. Habitat degradation or modification is not included in the definition of “take” under CESA. Nonetheless, 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.
The State of California considers an endangered species as one whose prospects of survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy. A threatened species is considered as one present in such small numbers throughout its range that it is likely to become an endangered species in the near future in the absence of special protection or management. A rare species is one that is considered present in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens.
State threatened and endangered species are fully protected against take, as defined above.
The CDFW has also produced a species of special concern list to serve as a species watch list. Species on this list are either of limited distribution or their habitats have been reduced substantially, such that a threat to their populations may be imminent. Species of special concern may receive special attention during environmental review, but they do not have formal statutory protection.
2.1.2 California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513) The CDFW administers the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC). There are particular sections of the CFGC that are applicable to natural resource management. For example, Section 3503 makes it unlawful to destroy any birds’ nest or any birds’ eggs that are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
Further, any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey), such as hawks, eagles, and owls, are protected under Section 3503.5, which makes it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy their nest or eggs. A consultation with the CDFW may be required prior to the removal of any bird of prey nest that may occur in the project site. Section 3511 lists fully protected bird species, where the CDFW is unable to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take these species. Pertinent species that are state fully protected include golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). In addition, Section 3513 makes it unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA
REGULATORY SETTING
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 9
or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA.
2.1.3 Native Plant Protection Act
Sections 1900–1913 of the CFGC were developed to preserve, protect, and enhance rare and endangered plants in the State of California. The act requires all state agencies to use their authority to carry out programs to conserve endangered and rare native plants. Provisions of the Native Plant Protection Act prohibit the taking of listed plants from the wild and require notification of the CDFW at least 10 days in advance of any change in land use which would adversely impact listed plants. This allows the CDFW to salvage listed plant species that would otherwise be destroyed.
2.1.4 Federal Endangered Species Act
As defined within the federal ESA of 1973, an endangered species is any animal or plant listed by regulation as being in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its geographical range. A threatened species is any animal or plant that is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its geographical range. Without a special permit, federal law prohibits the “take” of any individuals or habitat of federally listed species. Under Section 9 of the ESA, take is defined as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The term “harm” has been clarified to include “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.” ESA enforcement is administered by the USFWS.
Under the ESA definition, “Critical Habitat” refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a species that were occupied at the time it was listed that contain the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species and that may require special management considerations or protection, regardless of whether the species is still extant in the area. Areas that were not known to be occupied at the time a species was listed can also be designated as Critical Habitat if they contain one or more of the physical or biological features that are essential to that species’ conservation and if the occupied areas are inadequate to ensure the species’ recovery. If a project may result in take or adverse modification to a species’ designated Critical Habitat and the project has a federal nexus, the project proponent may be required to provide suitable mitigation. Projects with a federal nexus may include projects that occur on federal lands, require federal permits [e.g., Clean Water Act Section 404 permit], or receive any federal oversight or funding. If there is a federal nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for providing funds or permits would be required to consult with the USFWS under the ESA.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
REGULATORY SETTING
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 10
Whenever federal agencies authorize, fund, or carry out actions that may adversely modify or destroy Critical Habitat, they must consult with the USFWS under Section 7 of the federal ESA. The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (i.e., funding from the Federal Highway Administration or a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers [Corps]).
2.1.5 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
Pursuant to the MBTA (16 U.S. Code 703) of 1918, as amended in 1972, federal law prohibits the taking of migratory birds or their nests or eggs (16 U.S. Code 703; 50 Code of Federal Regulations 10, 21). The statute states:
“Unless and except as permitted by regulations made as hereinafter provided in this subchapter, it shall be unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill…any migratory bird, any part, nest, or egg of any such bird...included in the terms of the [Migratory Bird] conventions…” The MBTA covers the taking of any nests or eggs of migratory birds, except as allowed by permit pursuant to 50 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21. Disturbances causing nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (i.e., killing or abandonment of eggs or young) may also be considered a “take.” This regulation seeks to protect migratory birds and active nests.
In 1972, the MBTA was amended to include protection for migratory birds of prey (e.g., raptors). Six families of raptors occurring in North America were included in the amendment: Accipitridae (kites, hawks, and eagles); Cathartidae (New World vultures); Falconidae (falcons and caracaras); Pandionidae (ospreys); Strigidae (typical owls); and Tytonidae (barn owls). The provisions of the 1972 amendment to the MBTA protects all species and subspecies of the families listed above. The MBTA protects over 800 species including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds, and many relatively common species.
2.2 Jurisdictional Waters of the United States/State,
Including Wetlands
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland lakes, streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in California. The Corps regulates activities that result in the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. (WoUS), including wetlands, pursuant to Section 404 of Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. Of the state agencies, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) regulates discharges to waters of the State, including wetlands, pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, Section 13263 of the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State; and, the CDFW regulates alterations to lakes, streambeds, and riparian habitats pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
REGULATORY SETTING
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 11
2.3 California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA provides for the protection of the environment within the State of California by establishing state policy to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures for projects. It applies to actions directly undertaken, financed, or permitted by state lead agencies. If a project is determined to be subject to CEQA, the lead agency will be required to conduct an initial study; if the initial study determines that the project may have significant impacts on the environment, the lead agency will subsequently be required to prepare an environmental impact report.
A finding of non-significant effects will require either a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration instead of an environmental impact report.
Section 15380 of the CEQA Guidelines independently defines “endangered” species as those whose survival and reproduction in the wild are in immediate jeopardy, while “rare” species are defined as those who are in such low numbers that they could become endangered if their environment worsens.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 12
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 Regional Context
The project site is located within an undeveloped plot of land just south of the Angeles National Forest.
The topography of the project site is mountainous with generally moderate to steep slopes throughout.
The project site is at an elevation range of approximately 1,450 to 1,920 feet above mean sea level (amsl).
The topographic high point is within the southern portion of the project site, along Kathleen Avenue. The topographic low point is at the western end of the project site, along Haskell Canyon Wash.
3.2 Climate
The Santa Clara River Watershed, in which the project site is located, is characterized by a year-round Mediterranean climate, or semi-arid climate, with warm, sunny, dry summers and cool, rainy, mild winters.
Most of the precipitation occurs between November and March in the form of rain. The climatological cycle of the region results in higher surface water flows in the spring and early summer and lower flows during the dry season. Winter and spring floods generated by storms are not uncommon in wet years and generally occur from December to March. Similarly, during the dry season, infrequent summer storms can cause torrential floods in local streams and usually occur from July through September.
3.3 Soils
According to the Custom Soil Resource Report for Antelope Valley Area, California (US Department of Agriculture [USDA] 2024a), the project site is underlain by four soil map units: Castaic-Balcom silty clay loams, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (CmF2); Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded (ScF2); Sorrento loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes (SsB); and Yolo loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes (YoC) (refer to Figure 4:
USDA Soils). Michael Baker also reviewed the Hydric Soils List for California (USDA 2024b) to preliminarily verify whether the soil map units listed above were classified as a “hydric soil” in the Antelope Valley and Los Angeles areas. According to the list, the soil map units that overlie the project site are not listed as hydric.
3.4 Land Uses
On-site land uses consist mainly of recreational mountain biking and hiking. A wide range of existing singletrack trails and fire roads are present throughout the project site. Outside of the existing trails, the project site is mainly undeveloped, with some evidence of historical mining activities. The surrounding land use consists mainly of commercial and residential development south of the project site, while undeveloped land associated with the Angeles National Forest and the Castaic Lake State Recreation Area is present north, west, and east of the project site.
!>
!>
34.285844
-118.290207
34.281282
-118.304064
YoC
SsB
ScF2
CmF2
°
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, Los Angeles County, USDA
USDA Soils
Figure 4
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx Legend
Castaic-Balcom silty clay loams,
30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded
Saugus loam, 30 to 50 percent
slopes, eroded
Sorrento loam, 2 to 5 percent
slopes
Yolo loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes
!> Reference Point
Project Site
0 500 1,000
Feet
CmF2
ScF2
SsB
YoC
City Highline
M
otorwa
y
Fire
R
d
Blue Cloud Rd
- r
at 3
)
5 1.
y33 w.
F
1 she—
-
$ C
th___
is* 1
- -.
' sot a
—
■ 5. we.
s’ tte
tee), 0 UCf " A We
r: ► 9. 5
Y
_____
V V _
itoceat
s
■ R i
1 5
f
72 “Df
b
C
4y
B
g
84 e
J
2.1,
V.
) t
[ ]
]
]
523
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
T
W
S 2
gack
3__
s t $ 24" ))3
I
1 A
So 4
. P)
15 J Us ty
TV.
. 'L . i
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 14
3.5 Watersheds and Hydrology
The project site is located within the Lower Bouquet Canyon (HUC 180701020202) portion of the Santa Clara River Watershed (HUC 18070102). The project site occurs approximately 0.06 miles east of Haskell Canyon Wash, which is a tributary to the Santa Clara River. The Santa Clara River is a perennial direct tributary to the Pacific Ocean. The Santa Clara River Watershed comprises approximately 1,040,515 acres in Los Angeles County. The watershed is divided into numerous subwatersheds based on flow direction and landscape, all of which ultimately connect to the Santa Clara River. The Santa Clara River is not a Designated River under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 15
4.0 METHODS
Michael Baker conducted a thorough literature review and records search to determine which specialstatus biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site.
Subsequently, a general field survey/habitat assessment was conducted to document existing conditions and determine the potential for special-status plant and wildlife species to occur within the project site.
No focused surveys for special-status species were conducted.
4.1 Literature Review
Prior to conducting the field survey, literature reviews and records searches were conducted for specialstatus biological resources potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the project site, specifically within a 5-mile radius. Previous special-status plant and wildlife species occurrence records within the USGS Warm Springs Mountain, Newhall, Mint Canyon, Agua Dulce, Sleepy Valley, Burnt Peak, Lake Hughes, Del Sur, and Green Valley, California 7.5-minute quadrangle maps were determined through a query of the CNDDB (CNDDB 2024a) and the CIRP (CNPS 2024), and for the project region in IPaC (USFWS n.d.). Current conservation status of species was verified through lists and resources provided by the CDFW, specifically the Special Animals List (CNDDB 2024b), State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CNDDB 2024d), Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CNDDB 2024c), and State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California (CNDDB 2024e).
In addition to the databases and reports referenced above, Michael Baker reviewed available reports, survey results, and literature detailing the biological resources previously observed on or within the vicinity of the project site to understand existing site conditions, confirm previous species observations, and note the extent of any disturbances, if present, that have occurred in or around the project site that would otherwise limit the distribution of special-status biological resources. Standard field guides and texts were reviewed for specific habitat requirements of special-status and common biological resources.
On-site and adjoining soils were identified prior to conducting the field survey using the USDA’s Custom Soil Resource Report for Antelope Valley Area, California (USDA 2024a). In addition, local geological conditions and historical aerial photographs were reviewed to assess the ecological changes and disturbances that may have occurred within the project site. Aerial photography was reviewed prior to the field survey to locate potential natural corridors and linkages that may support the movement of wildlife through the area using Historic Aerials (Historic Aerials 2024). The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the existing biological resources and evaluate the ability of the project site to support special-status biological resources. Additional occurrence records of those species that have been documented on or within the vicinity of the project site were derived from database queries including the Calflora database (Calflora 2024). Additionally, standard field guides, texts, and sources were used, such as species accounts provided by Birds of the World (Billerman et al. 2020) and the USFWS Critical Habitat
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 16
Mapper and Environmental Conservation Online System (USFWS 2024b). The CNDDB was used, in conjunction with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) ArcView software, to identify special-status species occurrence records within the USGS Warm Springs Mountain, Newhall, Mint Canyon, Agua Dulce, Sleepy Valley, Burnt Peak, Lake Hughes, Del Sur, and Green Valley, California 7.5-minute quadrangle maps.
Refer to Section 9 for a complete list of technical references that were reviewed by Michael Baker.
4.2 Field Investigations
Michael Baker biologists John Parent, Anna Jullie, and Stephen Anderson conducted a field survey/habitat assessment on February 13 and 14, 2024, to document the extent and conditions of the vegetation communities occurring within the boundaries of the project site. Vegetation communities preliminarily identified on aerial photographs during the literature review were verified in the field by walking along established single track and fire roads, and off-trail areas when accessible, and noting conditions within the limits of disturbance. Binoculars were used to observe conditions where access was not possible due to steep slopes or other safety concerns. All plant and wildlife species observed during the field survey, as well as dominant plant species within each vegetation community, were recorded in a field notebook.
In addition, site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator species, the overall condition of on-site vegetation, and the presence of potentially regulated jurisdictional features (e.g., streams, flood control channels) were noted within the project site. Michael Baker used GIS ArcView software to digitize the mapped vegetation communities and then transferred these data onto an aerial photograph to further document existing conditions and quantify the acreage of each vegetation community. Table 1 summarizes the field surveys.
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF SURVEYS AND SURVEY CONDITIONS
Date Survey Type Surveyors Survey Time
(start-end)
Weather Conditions
(start-end)
02/13/2024 Habitat Assessment JP, AJ 0800–1345 1-2 mph, 20% cc, 46°F 3-4 mph, 5% cc, 69°F
02/13/2024 Jurisdictional Delineation AN, MM N/A N/A
02/14/2024 Habitat Assessment JP, AJ, SA 0745–1200 1-2 mph, 20% cc, 47°F 3-5 mph, 50% cc, 68°F
02/14/2024 Jurisdictional Delineation AN, MM N/A N/A
02/15/2024 Jurisdictional Delineation AN, MM N/A N/A
Surveyors: JP – John Parent; AJ – Anna Jullie; SA – Stephen Anderson, AN – April Nakagawa, MM – Megan Minter Weather Conditions: Temperature (F - Fahrenheit), Skies (cc – cloud cover), Wind (mph – miles per hour)
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 17
4.2.1 Vegetation Community and Land Cover Mapping
Vegetation communities occurring within the project site were delineated on a 300-scale (1”=300’) aerial photograph during the field survey and later digitized using the GIS ArcView software to quantify the area of each vegetation community in acres. Vegetation communities occurring within the project site were classified in accordance with vegetation descriptions provided in the Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf, and Evens 2009) and cross referenced with Preliminary Descriptions of Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland 1986).
4.2.2 General Plant Inventory
Plant species observed during the field survey were identified by visual characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unfamiliar plants were photographed in the field and later identified using taxonomic guides. Plant nomenclature used in this report follows the Jepson Manual:
Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012). In this report, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only). All plant species observed are included in Appendix D, Species Observed List. Special-status plant species are discussed below in Section 5.3.1.
4.2.3 General Wildlife Inventory
Wildlife species detected during the field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other types of signs were recorded in a field notebook. Field guides used to assist with identification of species during the field surveys included The Sibley Guide to Birds (Sibley 2014) for birds, A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2018) for herpetofauna, and A Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Although common names of wildlife species are well standardized, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of wildlife species in this report (first reference only). To the extent possible, nomenclature of birds follows the most recent annual supplement of the American Ornithological Union’s Checklist of North American Birds (Chesser et al. 2023); nomenclature of amphibians and reptiles follows Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in Our Understanding (Crother 2017); and nomenclature of mammals follows the Bats of the United States and Canada (Harvey et al. 2011) and Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico (Bradley et al. 2014).
Amphibian Surveys
General surveys for amphibians were conducted in appropriate habitat only during diurnal activity periods.
The intent of these surveys was not to extensively search for individual amphibians, but to ascertain the presence of potential amphibian habitat and the location of amphibians within the project site. The discussions in this document of amphibians potentially present within the project site are based on the habitats used by the species and their geographic ranges. Surveys were conducted on foot in suitable habitat types concurrently with all other surveys within the project site. Habitats were examined for
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 18
diagnostic amphibian sign such as egg masses, larvae, vocalizations, and direct observations. Surface litter, stones, fallen bark, tree branches, and cracks in mud were examined. Observed amphibian species, as well as diagnostic sign, were recorded in field notes.
Reptile Surveys
General surveys for reptiles were conducted in appropriate habitat only during diurnal activity periods.
The intent of these surveys was not to extensively search for individual reptiles, but to ascertain the presence of potential reptile habitat and the location of reptiles within the project site. The discussions in this document of reptiles potentially present within the project site are based on the habitats used by the species and their geographic ranges. Surveys were conducted on foot in suitable habitat types concurrently with all other surveys within the project site. Habitats were examined for diagnostic reptile sign such as eggs, shed skins, scat, tracks, snake prints, lizard tail drag marks, and direct observations. All areas containing potentially suitable habitat were surveyed. While searching for resting reptiles, surface litter, stones, fallen bark, tree branches, and cracks in mud were examined. Observed reptile species, as well as diagnostic sign, were recorded in field notes.
Avian Surveys
General surveys for birds were conducted in appropriate habitat only during diurnal activity periods. The intent of these surveys was not to extensively search for individual birds, but to ascertain the presence of potential bird habitat and the location of birds within the project site. The discussions in this document of birds potentially present within the project site are based on the habitats used by the species and their geographic ranges. Surveys were conducted on foot in suitable habitat types concurrently with all other surveys within the project site. Birds were detected both by direct observations and by vocalizations. All areas containing potentially suitable habitat were surveyed. Bird species observed were recorded in field notes. Special attention was made to identify any bands or markings on avian species. Surveys for the presence of nesting raptors (birds of prey) within and in the vicinity of the project site were conducted simultaneously with other field surveys. Such efforts included directed and incidental observation of raptor nests and owl pellets, and the identification of raptor species flying over the project site. Observed raptor species, as well as diagnostic sign, were recorded in field notes.
Mammal Surveys
General surveys for mammals were conducted in appropriate habitat only during diurnal activity periods.
The intent of these surveys was not to extensively search for individual mammals, but to ascertain the presence of potential mammal habitat and the location of mammals within the project site. The discussions in this document of mammals potentially present within the project site are based on the habitats used by the species and their geographic ranges. Surveys were conducted on foot in suitable habitat types concurrently with all other surveys within the project site. Many mammals are nocturnal and secretive, making daytime observations difficult. Therefore, the majority of the information on mammals within the project site comes from diagnostic sign. Habitats were examined for diagnostic mammal sign
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 19
such as scat, burrows, tracks, dens, browsed vegetation or other feeding sign, hair, nests, bones, vocalizations, and direct observations. All areas containing potentially suitable habitat were surveyed.
Methods employed while searching for mammals included searching the ground and adjacent vegetation, locating and following mammal trails, surveying muddy banks of small streams and pools, and noting road kill while traveling to and from the project site. Observed or expected mammal species, as well as diagnostic sign, were recorded in field notes.
4.2.4 Special-Status/Regulated Resources
Special-status resources typically require a more in-depth analysis to determine whether a species has the potential to occur within the project site, and what any potential impacts to that species may be. If a special-status species is determined to have a moderate or high potential to occur within the project site, then additional surveys and/or coordination with the appropriate resource agencies (CDFW, USFWS, etc.) may be required. The determination is done after surveying the project site and identifying all biological resources within the site, and using the literature review results to determine if a species has the potential to occur within the site based on the existing site conditions and known occurrences of a species in the area.
4.2.5 Special-Status Plant Surveys
Special-status plant species surveys are typically done on project sites that have the potential to impact listed plant species, in particular species on the CNPS lists with a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1A, 1B, 2B, 3, and 4 ranking. CRPR 1A consists of plant species that are presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere; CRPR 1B consists of plant that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; and CRPR 2 consists of plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. Plants with a CRPR 3 rank require more information to determine their status, while plants with a CRPR 4 rank are determined to have a limited distribution. Based on the results of the literature review and the field surveys, and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions of the special-status plant species identified in the literature review, Michael Baker determined that the project site has a moderate or high potential to support three special-status plant species: club-haired mariposa-lily (Calochortus clavatus var. clavatus; CRPR 4.3), slender mariposa-lily (Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis; CRPR 1B.2), and short-jointed beavertail (Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada; CRPR 1B.2). Focused surveys were not conducted for these species due to the field surveys being conducted outside of their typical blooming period(s).
4.2.6 Special-Status Wildlife Surveys
As with special-status plant species, some special-status wildlife species require focused surveys to determine if a species is present or absent from the project site. Michael Baker observed one specialstatus wildlife species during the field survey: Lawrence’s goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei; USFWS Bird of Conservation Concern [BCC]). Based on the results of the literature review and the field surveys, and a
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 20
review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review, Michael Baker determined that the project site has a moderate or high potential to support four additional special-status wildlife species: southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens; CDFW Watch List [WL]), Bell’s sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli belli; WL), coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri; CDFW Species of Special Concern [SSC]), and coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii; SSC). However, these species do not require focused surveys to be conducted; therefore, special-status species surveys were not conducted for this project.
4.2.7 Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources
Michael Baker certified wetland delineators April Nakagawa and Megan Minter conducted a jurisdictional delineation/field survey of the project site on February 13, 14, and 15, 2024, using the most recent agencyapproved methodology, to identify and map the extent of state and federal jurisdictional features (i.e., wetland and non-wetland WoUS, waters of the State, streambed, riparian vegetation) located within the boundaries of the project site. Based on the project’s location, potential state and federal wetlands were delineated in accordance with the methods and guidance provided in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0 (Arid West Regional Supplement; USACE 2008), and the State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State (State Water Resources Control Board 2019b).
While in the field, jurisdictional features were recorded on an aerial photograph at a scale of 1"=400' using topographic contours and visible landmarks as guidelines. Data points were recorded in the field using a Garmin Global Positioning System Map 64sx to identify specific widths and length of jurisdictional features and the location of any ordinary high-water mark indicators, photograph points, soil pits, and other pertinent site characteristics. These data were then uploaded as a .shp file and confirmed/refined to ensure accuracy and consistency with hard copy notes and aerial mapping completed in the field. Michael Baker then used Esri ArcGIS Pro software to calculate the total acreage of jurisdictional features and prepare final project figures.
4.2.8 Survey Limitations
Survey limitations consisted mainly of site access limitations due to property rights and steep terrain. A majority of the project site consists of steep slopes and mountainous terrain, which was unsafe to access.
In addition, the field survey was conducted late in winter, which is outside of the typical blooming periods for many plant species found in the area.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
METHODS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 21
4.2.9 Regional Connectivity/Wildlife Movement Corridor Assessment The analysis of wildlife movement corridors associated with the project site and its immediate vicinity is based on information compiled from the literature, analysis of aerial photographs and topographic maps, and direct observations made in the field during survey work. A literature review was conducted that included documents on island biogeography (studies of fragmented and isolated habitat “islands”), reports on wildlife home range sizes and migration patterns, and studies on wildlife dispersal. Wildlife movement studies conducted in Southern California were also reviewed. The relationship of the project site to large open space areas in the immediate vicinity (i.e., Angeles National Forest) was also evaluated in terms of connectivity and habitat linkages. Relative to corridor issues, the discussions in this report are intended to focus on wildlife movement associated with the project site and immediate vicinity.
The focus of this study Is to determine if the alteration of current land use on the subject property will have significant impacts on the regional movement of wildlife. This study did not include the use of track plates, camera stations, scent stations, or snares. Instead, notation was made during all site visits of the locations of animal sign to determine the species potentially utilizing the project site. The results of the literature review and site visits were used to draw conclusions about the wildlife potentially utilizing the project site and vicinity.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 22
5.0 RESULTS
5.1 Vegetation Communities, Land Cover, and Floral Diversity Six vegetation communities and land cover types were identified on-site during the habitat assessment field surveys. Vegetation communities and land cover types mapped in the project site are depicted on Figure 5: Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses and described in further detail below. Refer to Appendix D for a complete list of plant species that were observed within the project site during the field surveys. Refer to Table 2 below for a summary of vegetation communities within the project site.
TABLE 2. VEGETATION COMMUNITIES/LAND COVER TYPES
Vegetation Community/
Land Cover Type Acreage
Black Sage Scrub 17.18
Disturbed Black Sage Scrub 2.74
Scrub Oak Woodland 8.23
Chaparral 293.26
Non-native Grassland 50.60
Developed/Disturbed 8.81
Total 380.82
5.1.1 Black Sage Scrub (Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance) Approximately 17.18 acres of black sage scrub (Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance) are located within the project site. This community is dominated by black sage (Salvia mellifera), with other shrub species occurring in lesser quantities. Associated species observed include white sage (Salvia apiana), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), and coastal sagebrush (Artemisia californica). This vegetation community is concentrated on the western portion of the project site.
5.1.2 Disturbed Black Sage Scrub (disturbed Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance)
Approximately 2.74 acres of disturbed black sage scrub (disturbed Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance) are located within the project site. This community has a similar composition of plant species as the undisturbed black sage scrub located within the project site but has a high concentration of non-native species and less dense shrub layer throughout. Non-native species present within this community include big heron bill (Erodium botrys), red brome (Bromus rubens), and cheese weed (Malva parviflora). This !>
!>
34.285844
-118.290207
34.281282
-118.304064
°
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, Los Angeles County
Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses
Figure 5
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx Legend
0 500 1,000
Feet
!> Reference Point
Project Site
Black Sage Scrub
Chaparral
Developed/Disturbed
Disturbed Black Sage Scrub
Non-Native Grassland
Scrub Oak Woodland
City Highline
M
otorwa
y
Fire
R
d
Blue Cloud Rd
r.
____
it
e
l
t
" 1
E
J?' 1, iL falv
soer P
.0. caale" 4
sr P
2 V
s m.v
. -
$
% gr P I i
ala s
__ _ ____
[ ]
]
INTERNATIONAL
Ask
fx
Michael Baker
)
S14
emey W
■' —el ,5) V . ' w
Elen,
99kA ). s2.mbe
“A
ooeuts. ‘s
■ Pg ■ 77
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 24
disturbance has likely been brought on by human visitation within the project site. Disturbed black sage scrub on-site consists of a small area along the western border of the project site.
5.1.3 Scrub Oak Woodland (Quercus john-tuckeri Shrubland Alliance) Approximately 8.23 acres of scrub oak woodland (Quercus john-tuckeri Shrubland Alliance) are located within the project site. This community is dominated by Tucker’s oak (Quercus john-tuckeri), with other chaparral species occurring in lesser quantities, such as chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), and giant wild rye (Elymus condensatus). This vegetation community occurs in somewhat moderate sized patches throughout the project site, and mainly occurs within the valley bottom of the steep sloped hillsides within the project site.
5.1.4 Chaparral (Adenostoma fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance) Approximately 293.26 acres of chaparral (Adenostoma fasciculatum Shrubland Alliance) are located within the project site. This community is dominated by chamise and toyon, with other shrub species occurring in lesser quantities, including black sage and coastal sagebrush. This vegetation community is found throughout the project site and is the site’s most dominant vegetation community.
5.1.5 Non-native Grassland
Approximately 50.60 acres of non-native grassland are located within the project site. This community is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs, including red brome, tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), big heron bill, London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), prickly sowthistle (Sonchus asper), and cheese weed. This vegetation community is located along the flat valley bottom and south-facing hillside within the northwestern portion of the project site.
5.1.6 Developed/Disturbed
Approximately 8.81 acres of disturbed/developed land cover are located within the project site.
Disturbed/developed areas include areas with preexisting trails for both recreational use and maintenance/utility access throughout the project site, and areas that have had some disturbance in the past and are devoid of vegetation and/or contain evidence of historical development. Evidence of historical development includes graded areas that contain equipment appearing to be related to old mining activities that had occurred in the area.
5.1.7 Floral Diversity
A total of 26 plant species were recorded in the project site, including 18 native species (69%) and 8 nonnative species (31%). The somewhat low number of plant species represented indicatesthe lower diversity of vegetation communities and floral richness of the project site. In addition, the survey was conducted outside of the blooming period for many plant species, and all species present on-site may not have been
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 25
able to be detected. The project site is mostly dominated by a single vegetation type (chaparral) with other vegetation types occurring in lesser quantities. The more common plant species observed within the project site were identified in the description of the vegetation communities above. The cumulative list of plant species observed on the project site is provided in Appendix D. Special-status plant species are discussed in Section 5.4.1.
5.2 Wildlife Diversity
The plant communities discussed above provide wildlife habitat. While a few wildlife species are entirely dependent on a single natural community, the entire mosaic of all the natural communities within the project site and adjoining areas constitutes a functional ecosystem for a variety of wildlife species, both within the project site and as part of the regional ecosystem. Natural vegetation communities provide foraging habitat, nesting/denning sites, and shelter from adverse weather or predation. Following are discussions of wildlife populations within the project site, segregated by taxonomic group. This section provides a general discussion of those wildlife species that were observed during the field survey or that are expected to occur based on existing site conditions. The discussion is to be used as a general reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather conditions during which the field survey was conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation.
Refer to Appendix D for a complete list of wildlife species observed during the field survey. Due to access being limited to the project site boundaries, and the steep terrain within the project site, the only species recorded during the field survey were those that were detectable from within the project site. Specialstatus wildlife species occurring or potentially occurring are discussed further in Section 5.4.2.
5.2.1 Invertebrates
No directed surveys for common invertebrates were conducted; however, invertebrate species that were observed during all site visits were recorded in field notes. Common invertebrate species observed include honeybee (Apis mellifera), darkling beetle (Eleodes osculans), and cicada (Cicada sp.). Special-status invertebrate species are discussed further in Section 5.4.2. All invertebrate species observed are listed in Appendix D.
5.2.2 Amphibians
The potential presence of amphibians varies greatly between habitats within the project site. Terrestrial species may or may not require standing water for reproduction. Terrestrial species avoid desiccation by burrowing underground; within crevices in trees, rocks, and logs; and under stones and surface litter during the day and dry seasons. Due to their secretive nature, terrestrial amphibians are rarely observed, but may be quite abundant if conditions are favorable. Aquatic amphibians are dependent on standing or flowing water for reproduction. Such habitats include freshwater marshes and open water (reservoirs, permanent and temporary pools and ponds, and perennial streams). Many aquatic amphibians will use temporary pools as nesting sites. These pools are temporary in duration and form following winter and
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 26
spring rains common to Southern California. The project site has the potential to support amphibians that do not require a permanent water source. No amphibian species were observed during the field surveys.
Special-status amphibian species are discussed further in Section 5.4.2. All amphibian species observed are listed in Appendix D.
5.2.3 Reptiles
Reptilian diversity and abundance typically vary with habitat type and character. Some species prefer only one or two natural communities; however, most will forage in a variety of communities. Several reptile species prefer open habitats that allow free movement and high visibility. Most species occurring in open habitats rely on the presence of small mammal burrows for cover and escape from predators and extreme weather.
The project site has many essential reptilian habitat characteristics and possesses the potential to support several species. One reptile species was observed within the project site: western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis). A number of additional species have a potential to occur, including San Diego alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata webbii) and Great Basin gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer deserticola). Specialstatus reptile species are discussed in Section 5.4.2. All reptile species observed are listed in Appendix D.
5.2.4 Birds
Much of the habitat within the project site provides foraging opportunities for avian species, including California scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), and common raven (Corvus corax), which were observed during field surveys. The project site supports chaparral, which provides additional foraging opportunities for species such as American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and provides habitat for small mammals, which has the potential to result in a sizeable rodent population. Collectively, the availability of prey and perches would suggest that the project site is being used by a variety of avian species. All avian species observed are included in Appendix D. Special-status avian species are discussed in Section 5.4.2.
5.2.5 Mammals
Mammals observed within the project site include coyote (Canis latrans), bobcat (Lynx rufus), and California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). A number of other species are expected to be resident within the region and may use the project site to forage or for cover, including mountain lion (Puma concolor). All mammals observed within the project site are listed in Appendix D. Special-status mammal species are discussed in Section 5.4.2.
5.3 Special-Status/Regulated Resources
The CNDDB, CIRP, and IPaC were queried for reported locations of special-status plant and wildlife species as well as special-status natural vegetation communities in the USGS Warm Springs Mountain, Newhall,
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 27
Mint Canyon, Agua Dulce, Sleepy Valley, Burnt Peak, Lake Hughes, Del Sur, and Green Valley, California 7.5- minute quadrangles. The field survey was conducted to assess and evaluate the existing condition of the habitat(s) within the boundaries of the project site to determine if the existing vegetation communities, at the time of the field survey, have the potential to provide suitable habitat(s) for special-status plant and wildlife species. Additionally, the reported locations of the CNDDB and CIRP species records in relation to the project site were considered. The following categories were used to assign the potential for each species to occur within the project site:
• Present: the species was observed or detected within the project site during the field survey. • High: Occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known to occur on or within 1 mile of the project site and the site is within the normal expected range of this species.
Intact, suitable habitat preferred by this species occurs within the project site and/or there is viable landscape connectivity to a local known extant population(s) or sighting(s). • Moderate: Occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known to occur within 1 mile of the project site and the site is within the normal expected range of this species.
There is suitable habitat within the project site, but the site is ecologically isolated from any local known extant populations or sightings.
• Low: Occurrence records (within 20 years) indicate that the species has been known to occur within 5 miles of the project site, but the site is outside of the normal expected range of the species and/or there is poor quality or marginal habitat within the project site. • Not Expected: There are no occurrence records of the species occurring within 5 miles of the project site, there is no suitable habitat within the project site, and/or the project site is outside of the normal expected range for the species.
Special-status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site based on habitat requirements, availability and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions.
Special-status biological resources identified during the literature review as having the potential to occur within the vicinity of the project site are presented in Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources, in Appendix E. In addition, potential jurisdictional aquatic features occurring on-site are described in detail below.
5.3.1 Special-Status Plant Species
Michael Baker observed no special-status plant species during the field surveys. Based on the results of the literature review and the field survey, existing site conditions, and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions, Michael Baker determined that the native vegetation communities within the project site have a moderate or high potential to support three specialstatus plant species: club-haired mariposa-lily (CRPR 4.3), slender mariposa-lily (CRPR 1B.2), and shortjointed beavertail (CRPR 1B.2). Michael Baker determined that these vegetation communities also have a
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 28
low potential to support three special-status plant species: Nevins barberry (Berberis nevinii; FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1), Catalina mariposa lily (Calochortus catalinae; CRPR 4.2), and island mountain-mahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides var. blancheae; CRPR 4.3). All remaining special-status plant species identified by the CNDDB and CNPS are not expected to occur within the project site due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of recent extant occurrences near the project site, and/or the project site is not within the elevation range of those species. Because the field survey occurred outside of the blooming period of these species, special-status plant species were not conducted. Those species that have a moderate or high potential to occur within the project site, or that are state or federally listed or regionally significant, are described in more detail below. All special-status plant species reviewed are included in Appendix E.
TABLE 3. POTENTIALLY OCCURRING SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Arenaria paludicola
marsh sandwort
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial stoloniferous herb. Found on
sandy, openings within marshes and swamps
(freshwater or brackish). Found at elevations
ranging from 12 to 558 feet amsl. Blooming
period is from May to August.
No Not Expected: The project site
is not within the elevation
range for this species.
Berberis nevinii
Nevin’s barberry
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial evergreen shrub. Occurs on sandy
or gravelly soils in chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub, and riparian scrub.
Found at elevations ranging from 899 to
2,707 feet amsl. Blooming period is March
through June.
No Low: Although suitable
habitat is present within the
project site, there are no
occurrence records within 3
miles of the project site.
Calochortus clavatus var.
clavatus
club-haired mariposa-lily
4.3 G4T3
S3
Perennial herb (bulb). Occurs on
serpentinite, clay, and rocky soils within
chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub, and valley and foothill grassland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
246 to 4,265 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from May to June.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat is
present within the project
site. In addition, there is a
recent occurrence record
(Calflora 2024) roughly 1.5
miles southeast of the project
site.
Calochortus clavatus var.
gracilis
slender mariposa-lily
1B.2
G4T2T3
S2S3
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Found in
chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 1,050 to 3,280 feet
amsl. Blooming period is March through
June (November).
No High: Suitable habitat is
present within the project
site. In addition, there is a
recent occurrence record
(CNDDB; Occ. 113) roughly 0.4
miles southwest of the project
site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 29
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Chorizanthe parryi var.
fernandina
San Fernando Valley
spineflower
FPT
SE
1B.1
G2T1
S1
Annual herb. Found in sandy soils within
coastal scrub habitat and valley and foothill
grassland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 492 to 4,003 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from April to July.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
Dodecahema leptoceras
slender-horned spineflower
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Annual herb. Occurs on flood deposited
terraces and washes in chaparral, coastal
scrub, and alluvial fan sage scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from 1,181 to
2,690 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
April to June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
Nasturtium gambelii
Gambel's water cress
FE
ST
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Occurs in
marshes and swamps (freshwater or
brackish) habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 16 to 1,083 feet amsl. Blooming
period is from April to October.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
Opuntia basilaris var.
brachyclada
short-jointed beavertail
1B.2
G5T3
S3
Perennial stem succulent. Grows in
chaparral, Joshua tree woodland, Mojavean
desert scrub, and pinyon and juniper
woodland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 1,394 to 5,906 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from April to June.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat
preferred by this species is
present within the project
site. In addition, the nearest
extant occurrence (CNDDB;
Occ. 108) is roughly 1.3 miles
northwest of the project site.
Orcuttia californica
California Orcutt grass
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Annual herb. Restricted to vernal pool
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
49 to 2,165 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from April to August.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
Yucca brevifolia
western Joshua tree
SCT Tree. Found within mesic canyons in
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
broadleafed upland forest, lower montane
coniferous forest, and riparian woodland.
Found at elevations ranging from 1000 to
7350 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
March through June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 30
*Comprehensive PTO table is in Appendix E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources. ** U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
FE Endangered – any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
FCE Proposed Endangered - the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the USFWS has formally noticed as being under review by the USFWS for addition to the list of endangered species, or a species for which the Service has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of endangered species.
FT Threatened – any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
FPT Proposed Threatened – the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the USFWS has formally noticed as being under review by the USFWS for addition to the list of threatened species, or a species for which the Service has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of threatened species.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
SE Endangered – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.
SCE State Candidate for Listing as Endangered – the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the Fish and Game Commission has formally noticed as being under review by the Department of Fish and Wildlife for addition to the list of endangered species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of endangered species.
ST Threatened – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required under the California Endangered Species Act.
SCT State Candidate for Listing as Threatened – the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the Fish and Game Commission has formally noticed as being under review by the Department of Fish and Wildlife for addition to the list of threatened species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of threatened species.
FP Fully Protected – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, or reptile that were determined by the State of California to be rare or face possible extinction.
SSC Species of Special Concern – any species, subspecies, or distinct population of fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, or mammal native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
- is extirpated from California or, in the case of birds, in its primary seasonal or breeding role; - is listed as Federally-, but not State-, threatened or endangered; meets the State definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed.
- is experiencing, or formerly experienced, serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for State threatened or endangered status; or - has naturally small populations exhibiting high susceptibility to risk from any factor(s), that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for State threatened or endangered status.
WL Watch List - taxa that were previously designated as “Species of Special Concern” but no longer merit that status, or which do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank 1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 4 Plants of limited distribution – Watch List.
Threat Ranks
.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree any immediacy of threat). .2 Moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat).
.3 Not very threatened in California (less than 20 percent of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known).
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 31
NatureServe Conservation Status Rank
The Global Rank (G#) reflects the overall condition and imperilment of a species throughout its global range. The Infraspecific Taxon Rank (T#) reflects the global situation of just the subspecies or variety. The State Rank (S#) reflects the condition and imperilment of an element throughout its range within California. (G#Q) reflects that the element is very rare but there are taxonomic questions associated with it; the calculated G rank is qualified by adding a Q after the G#). Adding a ? to a rank expresses uncertainty about the rank.
G1/T1 Critically Imperiled – At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors.
G2/T2 Imperiled— At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors.
G3/T3 Vulnerable— At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors.
G4/T4 Apparently Secure— Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
S1 Critically Imperiled – Critically imperiled in the state because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences) or because of some factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the State.
S2 Imperiled – Imperiled in the State because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the nation or State.
S3 Vulnerable – Vulnerable in the State due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.
5.3.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species
Michael Baker observed one special-status wildlife species during the field survey: Lawrence’s goldfinch (BCC). Based on the results of the literature review and the field surveys, and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions of the special-status wildlife species identified in the literature review, Michael Baker determined that the project site has a moderate or high potential to support four additional special-status wildlife species: southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (WL), Bell’s sparrow (WL), coastal whiptail (SSC), and coast horned lizard (SSC). In addition, Michael Baker determined that the project site has a low potential to support nine special-status wildlife species:
grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum; SSC), California legless lizard (Anniella spp.; SSC), California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis; SSC), Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii; Candidate State Endangered [CSE]), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni; State Threatened [ST]), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii; SSC), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; Fully Protected [FP]), spotted bat (Euderma maculatum; SSC), and western spadefoot (Spea hammondii; SSC).
All remaining special-status wildlife species identified by the CNDDB are not expected to occur within the project site based on existing site conditions and a review of specific habitat requirements, occurrence records, and known distributions. Those species that have a moderate or high potential to occur within the project site, or that are state or federally listed or regionally significant, are described in more detail below. The complete list of special-status wildlife species reviewed is attached in Appendix E.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 32
TABLE 4. POTENTIALLY OCCURRING SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
FT
SSC
G1G2
S2
Range is limited to the coastal areas of the
Pacific coast of North America, from
Northern California to upper Baja California.
Can be found in a wide variety of habitat
including annual grasslands, wet and dry
vernal pools and other seasonal wetlands,
agricultural fields, cattle feedlots, and
dairies. Occasionally forages in riparian
scrub habitats along marsh borders. Basic
habitat requirements for breeding include
open accessible water, protected nesting
substrate freshwater marsh dominated by
cattails (Typha spp.), willows (Salix spp.), and
bulrushes (Schoenoplectus spp.), and either
flooded or thorny/spiny vegetation and
suitable foraging space providing adequate
insect prey.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
southern California rufouscrowned sparrow
WL
G5T3
S4
Yearlong resident that is typically found
between 2,000 and 6,000 feet amsl, and can
occur in lower elevations during winter
months. Breeds in sparsely vegetated
scrubland on hillsides and canyons. Prefers
coastal sage scrub dominated by California
sagebrush (Artemisia californica), but can
also be found breeding in coastal bluff scrub,
low-growing serpentine chaparral, and along
the edges of tall chaparral habitats.
No High: Suitable foraging and
nesting habitat is present
within the project site. In
addition, the closest extant
occurrence (CNDDB; Occ. 178)
is roughly 0.6 miles east of the
project site.
Anaxyrus californicus
arroyo toad
FE
SSC
G2G3
S2
Occurs in semi-arid regions near washes or
intermittent streams, including valleyfoothill grasslands, desert riparian, desert washes, and oak woodlands. Breeding
habitat consists of shallow streams with a
mixture of sandy and gravelly substrate and
sandy terraces. Generally, requires mulefat
(Baccharis salicifolia) and willow (Salix spp.)
in the streambed for vegetative canopy for
breeding areas and forages for insects
primarily under oak (Quercus spp.), Fremont
cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and
California sycamore (Platanus racemosa)
trees. Occurs at elevations from near sea
level to about 4,600 feet amsl.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitats preferred by this
species are not present within
the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 33
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Artemisiospiza belli belli
Bell's sparrow
WL
G5T2T3
S3
Yearlong resident on the coastal side of
southern California mountains. Breeds in
coastal sage scrub and chaparral habitats
from February to August. Requires semiopen habitats with evenly spaced shrubs one to two meters high. Occurs in chaparral
dominated by fairly dense stands of chamise
(Adenostoma fasciculatum).
No High: Suitable foraging and
nesting habitats preferred by
this species are present within
the project site. In addition,
the nearest extant occurrence
(CNDDB; Occ. 57) is roughly
0.6 miles east of the project
site.
Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri
coastal whiptail
SSC
G5T5
S3
This subspecies is found in coastal southern
California, mostly west of the Peninsular
Ranges and south of the Transverse Ranges,
and north into Ventura County. Ranges south
into Baja California. Found in a variety of
ecosystems, primarily hot and dry open
areas with sparse vegetation in chaparral,
woodland, and riparian areas. Associated
with rocky areas with little vegetation or
sunny microhabitats within shrub or
grassland associations.
No High: Suitable habitat is
located within the project site,
and there are known
occurrences within 0.6 miles
of the project site.
Bombus crotchii
Crotch’s bumble bee
SCE
G2
S2
Found from coastal California east to the
Sierra-Cascade crest and south into Mexico.
Primarily occurs in California, including the
Mediterranean region, Pacific coast, western
desert, great valley, and adjacent foothills
through most of southwestern California.
Has also been recorded in Baja California,
Baja California Sur, and in southwest
Nevada. Inhabits open grassland and scrub
habitats. Primarily nests underground. Food
plant genera include Antirrhinum, Phacelia,
Clarkia, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, and
Eriogonum.
No Low: Marginally suitable
foraging habitat available on
site; additionally, there are no
occurrences within 3 miles of
the project site.
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
FT
G3
S3
Endemic to California and only found in
vernal pools. Vernal pool habitats form in
depressions above an impervious substrate
layer, or claypan/duripan. This species does
not occur in riverine, marine, or other
permanent bodies of water. When the
temporary pools dry, offspring persist in
suspended development as desiccationresistant embryos (commonly called cysts) in the pool substrate until the return of winter
rains and appropriate temperatures allow
some of the cysts to hatch.
No Not Expected: Suitable vernal
pool habitat preferred by this
species are not present within
the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 34
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson’s hawk
ST
G5
S4
Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or
cropland containing scattered, large trees or
small groves. Breeds in stands with few trees
in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, and in
oak savannah in the Central Valley. Forages
in adjacent grassland or suitable grain or
alfalfa fields or livestock pastures.
No Low (foraging): Potential to
occur within the site as a
transient during migration.
Catostomus santaanae
Santa Ana sucker
FT
G1
S1
Occur in the watersheds draining the San
Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains of
southern California. Streams that Santa Ana
sucker inhabit are generally perennial
streams with water ranging in depth from a
few inches to several feet and with currents
ranging from slight to swift.
No Not Expected: Suitable habitat
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
western yellow-billed cuckoo
FT
SE
G5T2T3
S1
Uncommon summer resident where its
breeding distribution is restricted to isolated
sites in the Sacramento, Armargosa, Kern,
Santa Ana, and Colorado River valleys. The
species requires large patches of multilayered riparian forest, with cottonwoods and willows. The presence of standing or
flowing surface water under the riparian
canopy is also preferred. Mesquite (Prosopis
spp.) groves may also be used, but usually
only when cottonwood-willow habitat is
unavailable.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
Danaus plexippus
monarch butterfly
FCE
G4T1T2Q
S2
Winter roost sites extend along the coast
from northern Mendocino to Baja California,
Mexico. Roosts are located in windprotected tree groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and water
sources nearby.
No Not Expected
(overwintering): Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present within
the project site.
Empidonax traillii extimus
southwestern willow
flycatcher
FE
SE
G5T2
S3
Uncommon summer resident in Southern
California primarily found in lower elevation
riparian habitats occurring along streams or
in meadows. The structure of suitable
breeding habitat typically consists of a dense
mid-story and understory and can also
include a dense canopy. Nest sites are
generally located near surface water or
saturated soils. The presence of surface
water, swampy conditions, standing or
flowing water under the riparian canopy are
preferred.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 35
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Gasterosteus aculeatus
williamsoni
unarmored threespine
stickleback
FE
SE
FP
G5T1
S1
Small, scaleless freshwater fish of up to 2
inches in length inhabiting slow-moving
reaches or quiet-water microhabitats in
streams and rivers. Restricted to three areas:
the upper Santa Clara River and its
tributaries in Los Angeles County, San
Antonio Creek on Vandenberg Air Force Base
in Santa Barbara County, and the Shay Creek
vicinity (Shay Pond, Sugarloaf Pond, Juniper
Springs, Motorcycle Pond, Shay Creek,
Wiebe Pond, and Baldwin Lake) in San
Bernardino County. Favorable habitats are
shaded by dense and abundant vegetation.
In open reaches, algal mats or barriers (e.g.,
sand bars, floating vegetation, low-flow road
crossings) provide refuge.
No Not Expected: Suitable habitat
preferred by this species is not
present within the project site.
Gymnogyps californianus
California condor
FE
SE
FP
G1
S1
Current distribution of California condor is
considered to be all of the Los Padres
National Forest and western half of the
Angeles National Forest (USDA Forest
Service 2000), with some occasionally found
in the Sequoia National Forest. Nest sites are
typically located in chaparral, conifer forest,
or oak woodland habitats. Nest sites are in
cliff caves in the mountains. Some have
nested in large cavities within sequoias
(Sequoiadendron giganteum).
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
SE
FP
G5
S3
Locally common yearlong resident of
Southern California. Typically prefers areas
near large water bodies such as sea coasts,
coastal estuaries and inland lakes and rivers;
in many areas, these birds are found within
two miles of a water source. Most
populations, specifically those in northern
regions, migrate to southern, milder
climates annually. Generally, these birds nest
in the canopy of tall, coniferous trees,
surrounded by smaller trees. They have
been reported nesting on the ground, on
cliffs, on cellular phone towers, on electrical
poles and in artificial nesting towers.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 36
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
SSC
G4
S4
Occurs in a wide variety of vegetation types
including coastal sage scrub, annual
grassland, chaparral, oak woodland, riparian
woodland, and coniferous forest. Its
elevational range extends up to 4,000 feet in
the Sierra Nevada foothills and up to 6,000
feet in the mountains of Southern California.
In inland areas, this species is restricted to
areas with pockets of open microhabitat,
created by disturbance (e.g., fire, floods,
unimproved roads, grazing lands, and fire
breaks). The key elements of such habitats
are loose, fine soils with a high sand fraction;
an abundance of native ants or other insects;
and open areas with limited overstory for
basking and low, but relatively dense shrubs
for refuge.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat is
located within the project site,
and there are known
occurrences within 3 miles of
the project site.
Polioptila californica
coastal California gnatcatcher
FT
SSC
G4G5T3Q
S2
Yearlong resident of sage scrub habitats that
are dominated by California sagebrush. This
species generally occurs below 750 feet amsl
in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet amsl
inland. Ranges from Ventura County, south
to San Diego County and northern Baja
California and it is less common in sage scrub
with a high percentage of tall shrubs. Prefers
habitat with more low-growing vegetation.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
Rana boylii pop. 6
foothill yellow-legged frog –
south coast DPS
FT
ST
G3T1
S1
Isolated populations are also known from
the mountains of Los Angeles County. Occurs
in streams flowing through a variety of
vegetation types, including valley-foothill
hardwood, valley-foothill hardwood-conifer,
valley-foothill riparian, yellow pine (Pinus
ponderosa), mixed conifer, mixed chaparral,
and wet meadows. Rarely occurs in areas
with greater than 90 percent canopy closure.
Breeding and rearing habitat is generally
located in gently flowing, low-gradient
stream sections with variable substrates
predominated by cobble and boulder.
No Not Expected: Suitable habitat
preferred by the species is not
present within the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 37
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
FT
SSC
G2G3
S2S3
The species historically occurred in the San
Gabriel Wilderness Area of the Angeles
National Forest; there were no post-1970
observations in this area or nearby parts of
the Angeles National Forest. In 1999, a
population (estimated between 15 and 25
adults) was located on the Angeles National
Forest in the San Francisquito drainage.
Breeding sites are in a variety of aquatic
habitats including streams, deep pools,
backwaters within streams and creeks,
ponds, marshes, sag ponds, dune ponds,
lagoons, and artificial impoundments (i.e.,
stock ponds). Breeding adults are often
associated with deep (greater than 2 feet)
still or slow-moving water and dense
shrubby riparian or emergent vegetation.
No Not Expected: Suitable habitat
preferred by the species is not
present within the project site.
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
SSC
FPT
G2G3
S3S4
Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly
soils, in a variety of habitats including mixed
woodlands, grasslands, coastal sage scrub,
chaparral, sandy washes, lowlands, river
floodplains, alluvial fans, playas, alkali flats,
foothills, and mountains. Rain pools that do
not contain American bullfrogs (Lithobates
catesbeianus), predatory fish, or crayfish are
necessary for breeding. Estivates in upland
habitats adjacent to potential breeding sites
in burrows approximating 3 feet in depth.
No Low: Suitable breeding habitat
is not located within the
project site, and the most
recent extant occurrence is
located within 2.3 miles of the
project site.
Spinus lawrencei
Lawrence’s goldfinch
BCC
G3G4
S4
Nests in open oak or other arid woodland
and chaparral, near water. Nearby
herbaceous habitats are also used for
feeding. This species can also be found in
broadleaved upland forest and pinon and
juniper woodlands. This species is closely
associated with oaks (Quercus sp.).
Yes Present: This species was
observed on-site during the
field surveys.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 38
Scientific Name
Common Name
SpecialStatus
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Streptocephalus woottoni
Riverside fairy shrimp
FE
G1G2
S1S2
Restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools,
vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and stock
ponds and other human modified
depressions. Basins that support Riverside
fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of the
year, but usually are filled by late fall, winter,
or spring rains, and may persist through May.
Endemic to western Riverside, Orange, and
San Diego Counties in tectonic swales/earth
slump basins in grassland and coastal sage
scrub. In Riverside County, the species been
found in pools formed over the following
soils: Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas
series, Wyman clay loam, and Willows soils.
All known habitat lies within annual
grasslands, which may be interspersed
through chaparral or coastal sage scrub
vegetation.
No Not Expected: Vernal pool
habitat required by the
species is not present within
the project site.
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell’s vireo
FE
SE
G5T2
S3
Summer resident in Southern California.
Breeding habitat generally consists of dense,
low, shrubby vegetation in riparian areas,
and mesquite brushlands, often near water
in arid regions. Early successional
cottonwood-willow riparian groves are
preferred for nesting. The most critical
structural component of nesting habitat in
California is a dense shrub layer that is 2 to
10 feet (0.6 to 3.0 meters) aboveground. The
presence of water, including ponded surface
water or moist soil conditions, may also be a
key component for nesting habitat.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting habitats
preferred by this species are
not present within the project
site.
*Comprehensive PTO table is in Appendix E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources.
5.3.3 Sensitive Natural Communities
Thirteen special-status vegetation communities have been reported in the CNDDB within the USGS Warm Springs Mountain, Newhall, Mint Canyon, Agua Dulce, Sleepy Valley, Burnt Peak, Lake Hughes, Del Sur, and Green Valley, California 7.5-minute quadrangles: California walnut woodland, mainland cherry forest, Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub, southern California three-spine stickleback stream, southern coast live oak riparian forest, southern cottonwood willow riparian forest, southern mixed riparian forest, southern riparian forest, southern riparian scrub, southern sycamore alder riparian woodland, southern willow scrub, valley needlegrass grassland, and valley oak woodland. None of these special-status vegetation communities were identified within the project site during the field surveys.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 39
5.3.4 Critical Habitat
Critical habitat for California red-legged frog is located approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the project site. In addition, critical habitat for spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis; FT, CRPR 1B.1) is located approximately 2 miles southeast of the project site. However, no critical habitat is present within the project site (refer to Figure 6: Critical Habitat).
5.3.5 Jurisdictional Aquatic Resources
Eleven potentially state or federal jurisdictional features were observed within the project site. All of the mapped aquatic features are tributaries to the Santa Clara River. These features exhibit an ephemeral flow regime based on the results of the Streamflow Duration Assessment Method assessment, are not relatively permanent waters, and do not exhibit a continuous surface connection to a downstream traditional navigable water. Accordingly, these features would not be considered subject to Corps jurisdiction pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. However, these features will likely be subject to jurisdiction by the CDFW and the Regional Board. Due to the dominance of upland plant species and ephemeral flow regime of all drainages within the project site, it was determined that no potential wetland conditions or wetland features were present within the project site. Therefore, no soil pits were investigated within the project site. Table 5 below shows potential jurisdictional resources present within the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
!>
!>
Drinkwater
Reservoir
Copper Hill
Santa Clara River
Central Park
Saugus
Santa Clara River
Canyon Country
34.313099
-118.264959
34.253356
-118.330496
°
Source: Esri, ArcGIS Online, USFWS, Los Angeles County
Critical Habitat
Figure 6
HASKELL CANYON BIKE PARK PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
2/24/2025 JN 195477 \\santca1hub\irvica1fs1\HROOT\pdata\195477\GIS\APRX\195477_Blue Cloud Bike Park Bio\Blue Cloud Bike Park Biological Resources Report.aprx Legend
!> Reference Point
Project Site
California Red-Legged Frog (Rana draytonii)
Spreading Navarretia (Navarretia fossalis)
0 0.5 1
Miles
-118.264959
2 ( men)S5
2 2
id
4 A
-
(f f
Ys
' 1
E
J
“Fw
6 ven -
:
------------------
------------------ P
S d. f / ‘u. Frl
H
*
151 fyTo
oe <r 1. y
44 y casall. 5 cod
i ■ T
5 S
ar
hi d 1
w i
/
( g 3
/i
A
fek N s’ z ch♦
1d. 2 T
els. 2
n
‘ I uulu)’ ca) J'
5 eTh J Cy t /
3, A
4 I
t
P fgt 5 254
2 t
51 1.11.7
a were C
Vht s 5 a Sat
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
nh
J24 erd
[
[
—f
h&
FP’a HPrs
fete .7
<
ae- 7
g e
r
l
2_____1
]
“aegy” rwAcrhetnl-Y. : “ STpanrd e t 322, 211.7 122284
2 b Y
Ulesat
T452! 17. "
T
Ge 2
sai.
his s
Fv
r
8 =s
-
5we esPsma ett -smt Ptemanle
- i
r - Pr t
"Il 4.
Tllg
-
a
P ")F2 Sc
afee PPT "Sell i, - w
s
DrtoMtor
Rsservolr
tsr faoerp M
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 41
Table 5: State and Federal Jurisdictional Resources
Feature Name Location Lat/Long
Cowardin
Type
Linear
Feet
Acreage within Project Site
Regional Board CDFW
NonWetland
WotS
Wetland
WotS
Vegetated
Streambed
Riparian
Aquatic Feature 1
34.478566°
-118.505720°
Riverine 174 0.01 - 0.04 -
Aquatic Feature 2
34.476463°
-118.504156°
Riverine 1,724 0.14 - 0.43 -
Aquatic Feature 3
34.476294°
-118.502707°
Riverine 288 0.03 - 0.10 -
Aquatic Feature 4
34.477001°
-118.496221°
Riverine 952 0.04 - 0.17 -
Aquatic Feature 5
34.472952°
-118.496707°
Riverine 493 0.01 - 0.03 -
Aquatic Feature 6
34.472277°
-118.495826°
Riverine 258 0.02 - 0.06 -
Aquatic Feature 7
34.479145°
-118.494172°
Riverine 732 0.03 - 0.34 -
Aquatic Feature 8
34.479166°
-118.491190°
Riverine 1,891 0.07 - 0.49 -
Aquatic Feature 9
34.479576°
-118.491490°
Riverine 400 0.01 - 0.11 -
Aquatic Feature 10
34.479316°
-118.492216°
Riverine 208 0.01 - 0.07 -
Aquatic Feature 11
34.475834°
-118.495172°
Riverine 450 0.02 - 0.21 -
TOTAL 7,570 0.39 - 2.05 -
WotS = Waters of the State
5.4 Regional Connectivity, Wildlife Movement Corridors, and Habitat Linkages
5.4.1 Overview
Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable 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 material (MacArthur and Wilson 1967; Soulé 1987; Harris and Gallagher 1989; Bennet 1990). Corridors effectively act as links between different populations of a species. A group of smaller populations (termed “demes”) linked together via a system of
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 42
corridors is termed a “metapopulation.” The long-term health of each deme within the metapopulation is dependent upon its size and the frequency of interchange of individuals (immigration versus emigration).
The smaller the deme, the more important immigration becomes, because prolonged inbreeding with the same individuals can reduce genetic variability. Immigrant individuals that move into the deme from adjoining demes mate with individuals and supply that deme with new genes and gene combinations that increases overall genetic diversity. An increase in a population’s genetic variability is generally associated with an increase in a population’s health.
Corridors mitigate the effects of habitat fragmentation by: (1) allowing animals to move between remaining habitats, which allows depleted populations to be replenished and promotes genetic diversity; (2) providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances, thus reducing the risk that catastrophic events (such as fires or disease) will result in population or local species extinction; and (3) serving as travel routes for individual animals as they move within their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other needs (Noss 1983, Fahrig and Merriam 1985, Simberloff and Cox 1987).
Wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories: (1) dispersal (e.g., juvenile animals from natal areas, individuals extending range distributions); (2) seasonal migration; and (3) movements related to home range activities (foraging for food or water, defending territories, searching for mates, breeding areas, or cover). A number of terms have been used in various wildlife movement studies, such as “travel route,” “wildlife corridor,” and “wildlife crossing,” to refer to areas in which wildlife move from one area to another. To clarify the meaning of these terms and facilitate the discussion on wildlife movement in this study, these terms are defined as follows:
• 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 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; contains adequate food, water, and/or cover while moving between habitat areas; and provides a relatively direct link between target habitat areas. • 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 bounded by urban land areas or other areas unsuitable for wildlife. The corridor generally contains suitable cover, food, and/or water to support species and facilitate movement while in the corridor. Larger, landscape-level corridors (often referred to as “habitat or landscape linkages”) can provide both transitory and resident habitat for a variety of species. • 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.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 43
It is important to note that, within a large open space area in which there are 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 provide a variety of travel routes (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 mammals. 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, remaining landscape features or travel routes that connect the larger open space areas can “become” corridors as long as they provide adequate space, cover, food, and water, and do not contain obstacles or distractions (man-made noise, lighting) that would generally hinder wildlife movement.
5.4.2 Wildlife Movement within the Project Site
As described in the previous section, wildlife movement activities usually fall into one of three movement categories: dispersal, seasonal migration, and movements related to home range activities. Although the nature of these movements are species specific, large open spaces will generally support a diverse wildlife community representing all types of movement. Each type of movement may also be represented at a variety of scales from non-migratory movement of amphibians, reptiles, and some birds on a “local” level to many square mile home ranges of large mammals moving at a “regional” level. The location of the project site supports all types of wildlife movement on some scale.
Movement on a smaller or “local” scale occurs throughout the surrounding vicinity as well as the project site. Data gathered from biological surveys indicate that the project site contains habitat that supports a variety of species of invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The home range and average dispersal distance of many of these species may be entirely contained within the project site and immediate vicinity. Populations of animals such as insects, amphibians, reptiles, small mammals, and a few bird species may find all their resource requirements without moving far or outside of the project site at all. Occasionally, individuals expanding their home range or dispersing from their parental range will attempt to move outside of the project site. Mammals known to occur within the project site either by direct observation or by the presence of sign include the California ground squirrel, coyote, and bobcat.
Movement on a larger, “regional” scale is likely to occur to and from the project site due to the availability of resources within the project site and in the surrounding area. The project site is within a large open space area of the San Gabriel Mountains. The undisturbed nature of the area, in addition to the resources provided within the unnamed drainages (e.g., prey, water, and vegetative cover), ridgelines, and dirt roads, facilitate wildlife movement in the form of travel routes (as defined above).
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
RESULTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 44
5.5 Regional Resource Planning Context
The project is not located within any natural community conservation plan (NCCP) or habitat conservation plan (HCP) documents, including a multiple species conservation plan or multiple species habitat conservation plan. In addition, the project site is not located within any identified Significant Ecological Areas designated within Los Angeles County.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 45
6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS
6.1 Definition of Impacts
6.1.1 Project Description
The proposed project includes the creation of multiple mountain bike trails and associated development, including a new roadway and parking lot, staging areas, and restrooms and other associated facilities.
6.1.2 Direct Impacts
Direct permanent impacts typically refer to 100 percent permanent loss of a biological resource. It is also often referred to as the “project footprint” and refers to the area where vegetation clearing, grubbing, and mass grading occurs. It may include brush management zones or fuel modification zones. Essentially, wherever the existing vegetation or land cover would be permanently affected, it is considered to be a permanent direct impact.
Direct temporary impacts typically refer to short-term removal of a biological resource where the resource is expected to fully recover its function upon completion of the project. Areas subject to temporary disturbance may include slope remediation sites, construction access roads, staging areas, stockpiles, mowing, and dredging. Such sites would not have permanent structures.
6.1.3 Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts are reasonably foreseeable effects caused by project implementation on remaining or adjacent biological resources outside the direct construction disturbance zone. Indirect impacts may affect areas within the defined project area but outside the construction disturbance zone, including open space and areas outside the project area, such as downstream effects. Indirect impacts include short-term effects immediately related to construction activities and long-term or chronic effects related to the human occupation of developed areas (i.e., development-related long-term effects). In most cases, indirect effects are not quantified, but in some cases, quantification might be included, such as total dissolved solids released to downstream areas or using a noise contour to quantify indirect impacts to nesting birds.
6.2 Impacts to Vegetation Communities and Land Covers
Impacts to vegetation communities and land cover types within the project site are limited to active construction or staging areas and areas of proposed trail alignments. Table 6 below shows the acreage of impacts to each vegetation community and land cover type by the proposed project.
PROJECT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 46
TABLE 6. IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNITIES/LAND COVER TYPES Vegetation Community/
Land Cover Type Acreage
Black Sage Scrub 3.16
Disturbed Black Sage Scrub 0.35
Scrub Oak Woodland 0.74
Chaparral 18.88
Non-native Grassland 9.97
Developed/Disturbed 2.48
Total 35.58
6.3 Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species
6.3.1 Direct Impacts
Permanent direct impacts to special-status plant species may occur during implementation of the proposed project. As described in Section 5.4.1 above, there is a moderate and high potential for three special-status plant species to occur on the project site: club-haired mariposa-lily (CRPR] 4.3), slender mariposa-lily (CRPR 1B.2), and short-jointed beavertail (CRPR 1B.2). In addition, Michael Baker determined that the native vegetation communities within the project site have a low potential to support three special-status plant species: Nevins barberry (FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1), Catalina mariposa lily (CRPR 4.2), and island mountain-mahogany (CRPR 4.3). Impacts to these species can occur through the loss of counted or estimated individuals, loss of occurrence, loss of occupied habitat, and/or loss of suitable habitat. To determine if the project will directly impact any special-status plant species, a rare plant survey will need to be conducted to document any special-status plants that may potentially occur within the project site.
6.3.2 Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts to special-status plants may be short-term construction-related impacts or long-term development-related impacts. These impacts could include the accumulation of construction-related dust on plants, which may affect their ability to photosynthesize, or the alteration of waterways that may affect plant species that require a source of surface or groundwater to survive. In addition, the introduction of invasive species, pollutants, or hazardous materials may occur during construction and have an indirect impact on any special-status plant species near any active construction zone. As previously mentioned, a rare plant survey will need to be conducted to document any special-status plant species that may be indirectly affected by the proposed project.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
PROJECT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 47
6.4 Impacts to Special-Status Wildlife Species
6.4.1 Direct Impacts
Permanent direct impacts to special-status wildlife species may occur during implementation of the proposed project. As mentioned in Section 5.4.2 above, one special-status wildlife species was observed during the field survey: Lawrence’s goldfinch (BCC). There is also a moderate and high potential for four special-status wildlife species to occur within the project site:southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (WL), Bell’s sparrow (WL), coastal whiptail (SSC), and coast horned lizard (SSC). In addition, Michael Baker determined that the project site has a low potential to support nine special-status wildlife species:
grasshopper sparrow (SSC), California legless lizard (SSC), California glossy snake (SSC), Crotch’s bumble bee (CSE), Swainson’s hawk (ST), Townsend’s big-eared bat (SSC), white-tailed kite (FP), spotted bat (SSC), and western spadefoot (SSC). Impacts to these species, which include both bird and reptile species, include the loss of individuals, loss of important resources, and/or the loss of suitable habitat. Although most adult birds are mobile and can escape direct injury or mortality by fleeing from a construction site, a displaced animal may be more vulnerable to injury or mortality if its territory has been impacted. Most reptiles are unable to escape direct impacts and may be crushed or entombed by construction equipment.
6.4.2 Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts to special-status wildlife species may occur during implementation of the proposed project. These impacts include construction noise that may temporarily affect a bird attempting to nest in the area, or with an active nest. Construction-related noise has been documented to cause birds to abandon their nests and young, ultimately having an impact on that species’ survival. Reptilian species have the potential to nest and burrow underground and ground vibration from construction can cause premature emergence due to vibrations mimicking rain, or burrow abandonment. Increased lighting due to night work may also potentially affect nearby sensitive species or attract predators to that area.
6.5 Impacts to Critical Habitat
Critical habitat for California red-legged frog (FT) is located approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the project site. In addition, critical habitat for spreading navarretia (FT, CRPR 1B.1) is located approximately 2 miles southeast of the project site. However, no critical habitat is present within the project site. Therefore, impacts to critical habitat are not anticipated and no further discussion is warranted.
6.6 Impacts to Jurisdictional Waters/Wetlands
Impacts to potentially jurisdictional waters may occur as a result of the proposed project. As noted above, the project site is estimated to include approximately 0.39 acre (7,570 linear feet) of non-wetland waters of the State that may potentially be under Regional Board jurisdiction. In addition, there are approximately
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
PROJECT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 48
2.05 acres (7,570 linear feet) of vegetated streambed potentially under CDFW jurisdiction. However, final jurisdictional limits can only be determined by the respective regulatory agencies.
6.7 Impacts to Wildlife Corridors and Habitat Connectivity
6.7.1 Direct Impacts
The project site consists mostly of undeveloped land and open space with natural vegetation communities.
A small portion of the project site consists of developed/disturbed land that is devoid of vegetation or has current or historical development. The project site is not identified as a wildlife corridor within any NCCP, HCP, or subarea plan. The proposed project consists of the establishment of recreational mountain bike trails and associated development. Although the establishment of these trails and amenities will decrease the amount of native vegetation within the project site, the project is not anticipated to cause any impacts to wildlife movement or connectivity within the project site or to the surrounding area.
6.7.2 Indirect Impacts
The project is not anticipated to result in any impacts to wildlife corridors or connectivity within the project site or surrounding area.
6.8 Impacts to Regional Resource Planning
The project site is not located within any NCCP, HCP, associated subarea plan, Significant Ecological Areas of Los Angeles County, or any other regional resources planning effort. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to impact any regional resource planning effort.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 49
7.0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
7.1 Explanation of Findings of Significance
Impacts to sensitive natural communities or riparian habitat, special-status plant species, special-status wildlife species, wildlife corridors and habitat connectivity, and regional resource planning must be analyzed to determine whether such impacts are significant. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b) states that an ironclad definition of “significant” effect is not possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting. However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) lists impacts that are helpful in defining whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. Mandatory findings of significance, which require preparation of an environmental impact report, occur when there is substantial evidence that a project could (1) substantially degrade the quality of the environment, (2) substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, (3) cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, (4) threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or (5) reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.
The following are the significance thresholds for biological resources provided in the CEQA Appendix G environmental checklist, which states that a project could potentially have a significant effect if it:
• Has a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS.
• Has a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFW or USFWS. • Has a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
• Interferes substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impedes the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
• Conflicts with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
• Conflicts with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
The evaluation of whether an impact to a particular biological resource is significant must consider both the resource itself and the role of that resource in a regional context. Substantial impacts are those that contribute to, or result in, permanent loss of an important resource, such as a population of a rare plant
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 50
or animal. Impacts may be important locally because they result in an adverse alteration of existing site conditions but considered not significant because they do not contribute substantially to the permanent loss of that resource regionally. The severity of an impact is the primary determinant of whether that impact can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
7.2 Federal and State Regulations and Protections
Impacts to federally and state-listed threatened or endangered plant and animal species and their habitats or species otherwise protected by state or federal regulations, such as state Fully Protected species or the federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, would usually have low thresholds for significance. However, unless a lead agency requires a mandatory finding of significance for impacts to listed species, not all direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to a listed species are necessarily significant.
Other federal and state statutes that may need to be considered in the significance determination include the National Environmental Policy Act; the Clean Water Act, Section 404 (for protection of wetlands); the MBTA; Executive Order 11990 (wetlands protection); Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10; Marine Protection, Sanctuary, and Research Act; Marine Mammal Protection Act; and Sections 1601 and 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreements.
7.3 Special-Status Plant Species
7.3.1 Significant Impacts
Impact BIO-1
Project construction may result in direct impacts to special-status plant species considered rare, threatened, or endangered by the CNPS: slender mariposa-lily (CRPR 1B.2), Catalina mariposa lily (CRPR
4.2), club-haired mariposa-lily (CRPR 4.3), short-jointed beavertail (CRPR 1B.2), Nevins barberry (FE, SE, CRPR 1B.1), and island mountain-mahogany (CRPR 4.3). Construction activities related to the establishment of recreational mountain bike trails and the associated development may result in direct mortality of individuals of this species. Without the results of focused special-status plant species surveys, impacts are considered potentially significant.
7.3.2 Less than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to special-status plant species.
7.4 Sensitive Natural Communities
7.4.1 Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to sensitive natural communities because no sensitive natural communities occur within the project site.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 51
7.4.2 Less than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to sensitive natural communities because no sensitive natural communities occur within the project site.
7.5 Special-Status Wildlife Species
7.5.1 Significant Impacts
Impact BIO-2
Project construction could result in direct impacts to nesting birds, causing injury or mortality. Nesting birds are protected under the MBTA; therefore, impacts are considered potentially significant.
For special-status bird species with potential to nest in the project area, direct impacts could include the loss of nests, eggs, and fledglings if vegetation clearing and ground-disturbing activities occur during the nesting season (generally between February 15 and August 31). These species include southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (WL), Bell’s sparrow (WL), and Lawrence’s goldfinch (BCC).
This impact would be potentially significant because substantial direct impacts to individuals of designated special-status species would occur during a critical period of these species’ life cycles and would result in reduced reproductive success during the construction period.
Impact BIO-3
Project construction could result in direct impacts to special-status reptiles such as coastal whiptail (SSC) and coast horned lizard (SSC), causing injury or mortality. Impacts could include the loss of burrows, eggs, and adult and juvenile individuals during vegetation clearing and ground-disturbing activities.
This impact would be potentially significant because substantial direct impacts to individuals of designated special-status species would occur during a critical period of these species’ life cycles and would result in reduced reproductive success during the construction period.
7.5.2 Less than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to special-status wildlife.
7.6 Jurisdictional Waters/Wetlands
7.6.1 Significant Impacts
Impact BIO-4
The project may result in impacts to aquatic features that are potentially under jurisdiction by the Regional Board and CDFW. These potential impacts would include any permanent impacts made by the establishment of trails and/or the associated development, and any temporary impacts during
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 52
construction. These impacts may potentially decrease the amount of jurisdictional waters within the project site and would be considered a significant impact without mitigation.
7.6.2 Less Than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to jurisdictional waters/wetlands.
7.7 Wildlife Corridors and Linkages
7.7.1 Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages.
7.7.2 Less than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages.
7.8 Regional Resource Planning/Local Policies and
Ordinances
7.8.1 Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to regional resource planning or any local policies or ordinances.
7.8.2 Less than Significant Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to result in any less than significant impacts to regional resource planning or any local policies or ordinances.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 53
8.0 MITIGATION
The purpose of this section is to identify mitigation measures that would reduce the significant impacts to less than significant.
Impact BIO-1: (Impacts to special-status plant species) BIO-1.1: Prior to the construction of the proposed project, a preconstruction survey will be conducted by qualified botanists within the appropriate blooming period(s) to ensure no special-status plant species are present or will be impacted within the proposed impact areas. If no special-status plant species are found during the preconstruction survey, no further mitigation is required and there will be no impact to special-status plant species.
If populations of special-status plants are found during the preconstruction survey and they are located within permanent or temporary impact areas, avoidance and minimization measures will be explored to protect the special-status plant population(s).
If avoidance is not possible, consultation with CDFW will be required prior to project initiation to identify suitable compensatory mitigation for the unavoidable loss of these species. Preparation of a Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) detailing relocation, salvage, and/or restoration of impacted species and subsequent maintenance and monitoring; payment of an in-lieu fee to an agency approved mitigation bank; or acquisition of off-site lands to be held in a restrictive deed for perpetuity would be required to compensate for the loss of habitat occupied by any non-listed special-status plant species found on-site. In the unlikely event a State or federally-listed plant species is present and avoidance is not feasible, consultation with CDFW and/or USFWS would be required prior to initiating any on-site project activities to coordinate any take permits pursuant to State and/or federal regulations and requisite compensatory mitigation. With implementation of these actions, impacts to special-status plant species would be reduced to less than significant.
Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts to special-status plant species to less than significant because they will identify any potential special-status plants that may be impacted by the project site and develop a plan to mitigate impacts or avoid those species if present.
Impact BIO-2 and BIO-3: (Impacts to special-status wildlife species) BIO-3.1: Prior to the start of construction, every individual working on the project must attend a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program training session delivered by the project biologist. The biological awareness training would include a description of special-status species and sensitive habitats, species identification characteristics, best management
MITIGATION
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 54
practices to be implemented, project-specific avoidance measures that must be followed, and the steps necessary if special-status species are encountered at any time.
BIO-3.2: A qualified biologist shall be present during vegetation clearing and ground disturbance activities to conduct daily clearance surveys of work areas for special-status reptile species. If any wildlife species are found, the project biologist shall relocate the animal(s) to appropriate habitat off-site. Daily monitoring logs will be prepared to document work activities and any relocations that were conducted.
BIO-3.3: All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures that are stored in the project area during construction for one or more overnight periods shall be either securely capped prior to storage or thoroughly inspected by the contractor and/or the biological monitor for special-status wildlife species or other animals before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way.
BIO-3.4: To prevent inadvertent entrapment of special-status wildlife species or other animals during construction, the project biologist and/or construction foreman/manager shall ensure all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 6 inches deep are provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen fill or wooden planks.
Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals by the project biologist and/or construction foreman/manager.
BIO-3.5: If vegetation removal is required during the migratory bird nesting season (February 15 to August 31), a preconstruction nesting bird survey must be conducted within one week prior to vegetation removal.
A minimum 300-foot no-disturbance buffer will be established around any active nest of migratory birds and a minimum 500-foot no-disturbance buffer will be established around any nesting raptor or CESA/ESA listed species. A reduced buffer can be established if determined appropriate by the project biologist. The contractor must immediately stop work until the appropriate buffer is established and is prohibited from conducting work that could disturb the birds until a qualified biologist determines the young have fledged or the nest is inactive. In the unlikely event that a State and/or federally listed species is detected, the buffer shall not be reduced and CDFW and/or USFWS shall be notified immediately to coordinate any further measures to avoid impacts to a listed species. The project biologist will monitor any known identified nest site(s) within or adjacent to the project site to confirm buffers are sufficient to avoid impacts to nesting birds and track nesting status.
BIO-3.6: During construction and operation, project materials will not be cast from the project site into nearby habitats; further, project-related trash will be contained and removed to a
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
MITIGATION
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 55
proper disposal facility. Any excess soil unearthed during construction will be used to create the proposed trail alignments.
BIO-3.7: All construction equipment shall be cleaned prior to use in the project footprint and inspected by the project biologist to confirm it is free of non-native plant material in order to minimize the importation of such material into the project site. All mulch, topsoil, and seed mixes used during post-construction landscaping activities and erosion control BMPs will be free of invasive plant species propagules. A weed abatement program will be implemented should invasive plant species colonize the area within the project footprint post-construction.
Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to special-status wildlife species to less than significant because they will identify any potential special-status wildlife that may be impacted by the project site and develop a plan to mitigate impacts or avoid those species if present.
Impact BIO-4: (Impacts to jurisdictional waters)
BIO-4.1: Temporary and/or permanent impacts resulting from the proposed project would require a Water Discharge Requirement from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) pursuant to the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act prior to impacts occurring within jurisdictional areas. The Regional Board also requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to obtaining authorization. Compensatory mitigation for impacts would be determined during the formal notification process and must be approved by the Regional Board prior to work occurring. Mitigation is anticipated to include one or more of the following: restoration of impacted features and/or preservation of unaffected features on-site; payment of an in-lieu fee to an agency approved mitigation bank; or acquisition of off-site lands that contain similar jurisdictional features that would be held in a restrictive deed for perpetuity. impacts.
The CDFW regulates alterations to lakes, streambeds, and riparian habitats pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the CFGC. Therefore, formal notification to and subsequent authorization from the CDFW would be required prior to commencement of any construction activities within the CDFW jurisdictional areas. The CDFW also requires that CEQA compliance be obtained prior to issuing the final Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. Compensatory mitigation for impacts would be determined during the formal notification process and must be approved by CDFW prior to work occurring. Mitigation is anticipated to include one or more of the following: restoration of impacted features and /or preservation of unaffected features on-site; payment of an in-lieu fee to an agency approved mitigation bank; or acquisition of off-site lands that contain similar jurisdictional features that would be held in a restrictive deed for perpetuity.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
MITIGATION
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 56
BIO-4.2: During construction and operation, project materials will not be cast from the project site into nearby habitats; further, project-related debris, excess spoils, and trash will be contained and removed to a proper disposal facility.
BIO-4.3: All construction equipment shall be cleaned prior to use in the project footprint and inspected by the project biologist to confirm it is free of non-native plant material in order to minimize the importation of such material into the project site. All mulch, topsoil, and seed mixes used during post-construction landscaping activities and erosion control BMPs will be free of invasive plant species propagules. A weed abatement program will be implemented should invasive plant species colonize the area within the project footprint post-construction.
Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce potentially significant impacts to jurisdictional waters/wetlands to less than significant because they will identify any potential waters/wetlands that may be impacted by the project site and develop a plan to mitigate impacts or avoid these resources.
8.1 Unavoidable Significant Impacts
The proposed project, inclusive of mitigation measures, will mitigate all significant adverse impacts to any special-status plant and wildlife species and jurisdictional areas.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 57
9.0 REFERENCES
Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, Editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Bennett, A. F. 1990. Habitat corridors and the conservation of small mammals in a fragmented forest environment. Landscape Ecol. 4:109-122.
Billerman, S.M., B. K. Keeney, P. G. Rodewald, and T. S. Schulenberg (Editors). 2020. Birds of the World.
Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://birdsoftheworld.org/bow/home.
Bradley, D.R., Ammerman, L.K., Baker, R.J., Bradley, L.C., Cook, J.A., Dowler, R.C., Jones, C., Schmidly, D.J., Stangl Jr., F.B., Van Den Bussche, R.A., and B. Würsig. 2014. Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 2014. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University. 327. 1-
27. Calflora. 2024. Online database. https://www.calflora.org/search.html Chesser, R. T., S. M. Billerman, K. J. Burns, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J. Lovette, N. A. Mason, P. C.
Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., D. F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2023. Check-list of North American Birds (online). American Ornithological Society. Accessed online at: http://checklist.aou.org/taxa.
CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database). 2024a. RareFind 5 [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [March 1, 2024]. Accessed February 10, 2024. ———. 2024b. Special Animals List. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA. ———. 2024c. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
———. 2024d. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
———. 2024e. State and Federally Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society), Rare Plant Program. 2024. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5).
Accessed February 10, 2024. https://www.rareplants.cnps.org.
Corps (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 2008. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region, Version 2.0.
REFERENCES
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 58
Crother, B. I. (ed.). 2017. Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in Our Understanding pp. 1–102. SSAR Herpetological Circular 43.
Fahrig, L. and G. Merriam. 1985. Habitat Patch Connectivity and Population Survival. Ecology. 66:1762-1768.
Harris, L. D. and P. B. Gallagher. 1989. New initiatives for wildlife conservation: the need for movement corridors. Pages 11-34 in G. Mackintosh, ed. Preserving communities and corridors. Defenders of Wildlife. Washington D.C. 96 pp.
Harvey, M. J., J. S. Altenbach, and T.L. Best. 2011. Bats of the United States and Canada. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
Historic Aerials. 2024. Online historical aerial viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. NongameHeritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game.
MacArthur, R. M. and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press:
Princeton, New Jersey.
Noss, R. F. 1983. A regional landscape approach to maintain diversity. BioScience. 33:700-706.
Reid, F.A. 2006. A Field Guide to Mammals of North America, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, New York.
Sawyer, John O., Todd Keeler-Wolf, and Julie Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation. 2nd edition.
Sacramento, California: California Native Plant Society.
Sibley, D.A. 2014. The Sibley Guide to Birds, Second Edition. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, New York.
Simberloff, D. and J. Cox. 1987. Consequences and costs of conservation corridors. Conserv.Biol. 1:63-71.
Soule, M. E. 1987. Viable Populations for Conservation. Sinaur Associates Inc., Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
State Water Resources Control Board. 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to Waters of the State
Stebbins, R.C., McGinnis, S.M. 2018. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Fourth Edition.
Houghton Mifflin Company, New York, New York.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
REFERENCES
Biological Resources Technical Report April 23, 2025
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project Page 59
USDA (US Department of Agriculture). 2024a. Custom Soil Resource Report for Antelope Valley Area, California. USDA, Web Soil Survey. Accessed February 7, 2024. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/.
———. 2024b. State Soil Data Access Hydric Soils List. Accessed February 10, 2024. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/publications/query-by-state.html.
USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 2024a. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPac). Accessed February 10, 2024. https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/index.
USFWS. 2024b. ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System: Threatened and Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. Accessed online at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/criticalhabitat.html.
INTERNATIONAL
Michael Baker
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project A-1
Biological Resources Technical Report
Photograph 1: Looking east from the western side of the project site.
Photograph 2: Looking east from the western side of the project site red
3 1"
e
2orne 2
-a sse
--- 2 Pst es
o
• 22. are(
th 4 2x
w
It’ .
\ (
_ E i — J
: WEse w*“d
slr
s
' th
4 e
T
gtv
t z
1.4 Y - en
b —oye o) 1
es
s 1
anh s
e 42
2 me o prsy.
Ad Is
eages fhsshtba
-.
“he ”
Ek
-
-
-
"sS .. (es
h
f e
- ws
— 5
perrer,
ao
' "v —fee- ‘
- —=
- -
fad
ouc
ies
Jed mmie TTees
- -
gr
tt
o.
’ ‘4
t.
7 Appendix A – Site Photographs
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project A-2
Biological Resources Technical Report
Photograph 3: Looking north from the western side of the project site.
Photograph 4: Looking west from the western side of the project site. 1 wr U
-v --252 .
< - — v. tee
s 7a
-- i
. ■
t
get . wanes AA— YPiy
s zt amene J terreral
e
319 ft t A
hy Jovs a H
i
l» w Ute tils Is 5
fsK
4 io se AAU 166
ii 2
-ett—-
utas g ■' jfessf a
. a
t
**
rep t
P
:.. ■ - veeg 7
- me
Mane -
' ■ ■
oh
PS
A
r h
are
-- te
seitte
A
ST
■ cllbc, n
. —s
Isrrs V.,. o
wuns
f
. / ■ — - — ■
= -
iao. . • wuty W , tge ' .
t E
me 1
phoe, Sas
2 - 4
UPes ebtthe ■ sMer NUs
2h
ait
e
s
..‘s
* •
2, '
—19e
1 i ■-
mEAPcaepe
, a
6 - ... t f e mint s-s
■
h
"TV hut
«
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project A-3
Biological Resources Technical Report
Photograph 5: Looking north near the middle of the project site.
Photograph 6: Looking west near the middle of the project site. r
s
-
“s
r
wrt - - ' ' s
3- ss 1
B y ‘ 9
A
o
re svls V .. .e e. "eXu
",
—oni a d p’hni .-si
1 ‘e
fh
t
Na
77 A
E
rietal
th
2- I
-
al
of
L :
te m i
DEev th. t
I
A
oae
7y
i \ a
oiy
t
. wt
—as
fu
1 - 4 • Em
WM=e wes s
W2s
25 . tal
thhe
ew n‘ -EP
J ■ - 4
pen-r .
g" -a
3. 2
Cr Uosd
777
«"
e 3hi
Se • s tie
it
"ih
, oeet
n"
■
er)
7 '
o . w
,alac —Bms —a"a
ttic “eidy3
Per,"., ereu..") ssnraf"
—
‘ W se ) ■
wed "Ns
-=
edn Td42
" ■ =
- —
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project A-4
Biological Resources Technical Report
Photograph 7: Looking southwest from Blue Cloud Road near the northern end of the project site.
Photograph 8: Looking southeast along Blue Cloud near the middle of the project site. we
sooge -dhaes
J t ioi
l
/
,tr
—55 T up
cjar" -==--- w . te. ' -
e
f Ton A221 ~ EFIL Jit a
t
ta
et 253
> - . ' t ’ / . . -
S r
TR5
- —t Re. -e --
C, "rme " w
- s ■ '
- —
e cte reads .
--- _.k
arh s
I
I
—7 •
i—*m
ahsey —7,
se . - "a=! ---
sretder g - —nt 2 . her
-===--?
ader"
1 t.
/
/
--29
—9
—
2 M
— /
s
—— - 4 - ‘
• . s CB.
-■ coshi rPol
s 2 #"
-oeus
s ■ T 4 * s. s ,) * *.
—*"s -ad
2 o .
su".t ( Otire
sdnt
Appendix A – Site Photographs
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project A-5
Biological Resources Technical Report
Photograph 9: Looking west along Blue Cloud near the middle of the project site.
Photograph 10: Looking northeast from the south end of the project site. [h
anile
sr
d
—P5 ulv fj
Dar
a)
ed
— a 2
"L.
Lee
. snAMooze_______
>
a
a? 2(9- si ■
*,
s
-““4
-t
e 28
J
Jere fern.
LA dhadae
WEE
Y9 -0530 "MAEpEEUU2.10. — •
re seeesea - ■
, 2.
i
- s-ueg rejen= 3 --1 d Yr
.3.
0 2— —
-------- -9
--T
a-arere."L. _ 3 * T-' - -2 1 - . - .
' _ £ w
APPENDIX B
LITERATURE REVIEW RESULTS
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
ABPBXB0020 None Threatened G1G2 S2 SSC
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
southern California rufous-crowned sparrow
ABPBX91091 None None G5T3 S4 WL
Ammodramus savannarum
grasshopper sparrow
ABPBXA0020 None None G5 S3 SSC
Anaxyrus californicus
arroyo toad
AAABB01230 Endangered None G2G3 S2 SSC
Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless lizard
ARACC01020 None None G3 S2S3 SSC
Anniella spp.
California legless lizard
ARACC01070 None None G3G4 S3S4 SSC
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
AMACC10010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Arizona elegans occidentalis
California glossy snake
ARADB01017 None None G5T2 S2 SSC
Artemisiospiza belli belli
Bell's sparrow
ABPBX97021 None None G5T2T3 S3 WL
Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri
coastal whiptail
ARACJ02143 None None G5T5 S3 SSC
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
ABNSB10010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Berberis nevinii
Nevin's barberry
PDBER060A0 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Bombus crotchii
Crotch bumble bee
IIHYM24480 None Candidate
Endangered
G2 S2
Bombus pensylvanicus
American bumble bee
IIHYM24260 None None G3G4 S2
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
ICBRA03030 Threatened None G3 S3
Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
ABNKC19120 None None G4 S3S4 WL
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson's hawk
ABNKC19070 None Threatened G5 S4
Quad<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Warm Springs Mountain (3411855)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Newhall (3411845)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Mint Canyon (3411844)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Agua Dulce (3411843)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Sleepy Valley (3411853)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Burnt Peak (3411865)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Lake Hughes (3411864)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Del Sur (3411863)<span style='color:Red'> OR </span>Green Valley (3411854))
Query Criteria:
Report Printed on Monday, February 12, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 2 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 5 Information Expires 8/2/2024
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database %
2 OFFIS
CALIFORNIA
w DEPARTMENT OF
&FISH& WWILDLIFE
eI T ton)
-=v= /
7-7 PYE RSIC
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
California Walnut Woodland
California Walnut Woodland
CTT71210CA None None G2 S2.1
Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis
slender mariposa-lily
PMLIL0D096 None None G4T2T3 S2S3 1B.2
Calochortus palmeri var. palmeri
Palmer's mariposa-lily
PMLIL0D122 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2
Calochortus plummerae
Plummer's mariposa-lily
PMLIL0D150 None None G4 S4 4.2
Calystegia peirsonii
Peirson's morning-glory
PDCON040A0 None None G4 S4 4.2
Catostomus santaanae
Santa Ana sucker
AFCJC02190 Threatened None G1 S1
Charadrius montanus
mountain plover
ABNNB03100 None None G3 S2 SSC
Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina
San Fernando Valley spineflower
PDPGN040J1 None Endangered G2T1 S1 1B.1
Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi
Parry's spineflower
PDPGN040J2 None None G3T2 S2 1B.1
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend's big-eared bat
AMACC08010 None None G4 S2 SSC
Cryptantha clokeyi
Clokey's cryptantha
PDBOR0A3M0 None None G3 S3 1B.2
Dodecahema leptoceras
slender-horned spineflower
PDPGN0V010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP
Empidonax traillii extimus
southwestern willow flycatcher
ABPAE33043 Endangered Endangered G5T2 S3
Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
ARAAD02030 Proposed
Threatened
None G3G4 S3 SSC
Eremophila alpestris actia
California horned lark
ABPAT02011 None None G5T4Q S4 WL
Euderma maculatum
spotted bat
AMACC07010 None None G4 S3 SSC
Euphydryas editha quino
quino checkerspot butterfly
IILEPK405L Endangered None G4G5T1T2 S1S2
Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
ABNKD06090 None None G5 S4 WL
Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni
unarmored threespine stickleback
AFCPA03011 Endangered Endangered G5T1 S1 FP
Gila orcuttii
arroyo chub
AFCJB13120 None None G2 S2 SSC
Report Printed on Monday, February 12, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 2 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 5 Information Expires 8/2/2024
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
A s
%
a
z
I.%
AOrrSr
CALIFORNIA
w DEPARTMENT OF MFISH& WWILDLIFE
eI T ton)
-== 7
PYE RSIC7-7
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
ABNKC10010 Delisted Endangered G5 S3 FP
Harpagonella palmeri
Palmer's grapplinghook
PDBOR0H010 None None G4 S3 4.2
Helianthus inexpectatus
Newhall sunflower
PDAST4N250 None None G1 S1 1B.1
Helminthoglypta fontiphila
Soledad shoulderband
IMGASC2250 None None G1 S1
Helminthoglypta traskii pacoimensis
Pacoima shoulderband
IMGASC2472 None None G1G2T1 S1
Helminthoglypta vasquezi
Vasquez shoulderband
IMGASC2660 None None G1 S1
Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
ABPBR01030 None None G4 S4 SSC
Lasiurus cinereus
hoary bat
AMACC05032 None None G3G4 S4
Lepechinia rossii
Ross' pitcher sage
PDLAM0V060 None None G1 S1 1B.2
Lepus californicus bennettii
San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit
AMAEB03051 None None G5T3T4 S3S4
Mainland Cherry Forest
Mainland Cherry Forest
CTT81820CA None None G1 S1.1
Navarretia fossalis
spreading navarretia
PDPLM0C080 Threatened None G2 S2 1B.1
Navarretia setiloba
Piute Mountains navarretia
PDPLM0C0S0 None None G2 S2 1B.1
Neotamias speciosus speciosus
lodgepole chipmunk
AMAFB02172 None None G4T3T4 S2
Onychomys torridus ramona
southern grasshopper mouse
AMAFF06022 None None G5T3 S3 SSC
Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada
short-joint beavertail
PDCAC0D053 None None G5T3 S3 1B.2
Orcuttia californica
California Orcutt grass
PMPOA4G010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1
Perognathus alticola inexpectatus
Tehachapi pocket mouse
AMAFD01082 None None G2T1T2 S1S2 SSC
Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
ARACF12100 None None G4 S4 SSC
Polioptila californica californica
coastal California gnatcatcher
ABPBJ08081 Threatened None G4G5T3Q S2 SSC
Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum
white rabbit-tobacco
PDAST440C0 None None G4 S2 2B.2
Report Printed on Monday, February 12, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 2 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 5 Information Expires 8/2/2024
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
A s
%
a
z
I.%
AOrrSr
CALIFORNIA
w DEPARTMENT OF MFISH& WWILDLIFE
eI T ton)
-== 7
PYE RSIC7-7
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Rana boylii pop. 6
foothill yellow-legged frog - south coast DPS
AAABH01056 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S1
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC
Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
CTT32720CA None None G1 S1.1
Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 2B.2
Sidalcea neomexicana
salt spring checkerbloom
PDMAL110J0 None None G4 S2 2B.2
Southern California Threespine Stickleback Stream
Southern California Threespine Stickleback Stream
CARE2320CA None None GNR SNR
Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest
Southern Coast Live Oak Riparian Forest
CTT61310CA None None G4 S4
Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest
Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest
CTT61330CA None None G3 S3.2
Southern Mixed Riparian Forest
Southern Mixed Riparian Forest
CTT61340CA None None G2 S2.1
Southern Riparian Forest
Southern Riparian Forest
CTT61300CA None None G4 S4
Southern Riparian Scrub
Southern Riparian Scrub
CTT63300CA None None G3 S3.2
Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
CTT62400CA None None G4 S4
Southern Willow Scrub
Southern Willow Scrub
CTT63320CA None None G3 S2.1
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
AAABF02020 Proposed
Threatened
None G2G3 S3S4 SSC
Streptanthus campestris
southern jewelflower
PDBRA2G0B0 None None G3 S3 1B.3
Symphyotrichum greatae
Greata's aster
PDASTE80U0 None None G2 S2 1B.3
Taxidea taxus
American badger
AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC
Thamnophis hammondii
two-striped gartersnake
ARADB36160 None None G4 S3S4 SSC
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
CTT42110CA None None G3 S3.1
Valley Oak Woodland
Valley Oak Woodland
CTT71130CA None None G3 S2.1
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
ABPBW01114 Endangered Endangered G5T2 S3
Report Printed on Monday, February 12, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 2 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 5 Information Expires 8/2/2024
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
A s
%
a
z
I.%
AOrrSr
CALIFORNIA
w DEPARTMENT OF MFISH& WWILDLIFE
eI T ton)
-== 7
PYE RSIC7-7
Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank Rare Plant
Rank/CDFW
SSC or FP
Wildflower Field
Wildflower Field
CTT42300CA None None G2 S2.2
Record Count: 82
Report Printed on Monday, February 12, 2024
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 2 2024 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 5 of 5 Information Expires 8/2/2024
Selected Elements by Scientific Name
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
A s
%
a
z
I.%
AOrrSr
CALIFORNIA
w DEPARTMENT OF MFISH& WWILDLIFE
eI T ton)
-== 7
PYE RSIC7-7
4/1/24, 10:56 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3411855:3411845:3411844:3411843:3411853:3411865:3411864:3411863:3411854:&elev=:m:o 1/4 Search Results
CNPS Rare Plant Inventory
41 matches found. Click on scientific name for details
Search Criteria: Quad is one of [3411855:3411845:3411844:3411843:3411853:3411865:3411864:3411863:3411854] ▲ SCIENTIFIC
NAME
COMMON
NAME FAMILY LIFEFORM
BLOOMING
PERIOD
FED
LIST
STATE
LIST
GLOBAL
RANK
STATE
RANK
CA
RARE
PLANT
RANK
CA
ENDEMIC
DATE
ADDED PHOTO
Androsace
elongata ssp.
acuta
California
androsace
Primulaceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G5?
T3T4
S3S4 4.2 1994-
01-01
© 2008
Aaron
Schusteff
Berberis nevinii Nevin's
barberry
Berberidaceae perennial
evergreen
shrub
(Feb)MarJunFE CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1980-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
catalinae
Catalina
mariposa lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
(Feb)MarJunNone None G3G4 S3S4 4.2 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
clavatus var. avius
Pleasant Valley
mariposa-lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
May-Jul None None G4T2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1980-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
clavatus var.
clavatus
club-haired
mariposa lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
(Mar)MayJunNone None G4T3 S3 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
clavatus var.
gracilis
slender
mariposa-lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
MarJun(Nov)None None G4T2T3 S2S3 1B.2 Yes 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
palmeri var.
palmeri
Palmer's
mariposa-lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
Apr-Jul None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 Yes 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calochortus
plummerae
Plummer's
mariposa-lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
May-Jul None None G4 S4 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Calystegia
peirsonii
Peirson's
morning-glory
Convolvulaceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
Apr-Jun None None G4 S4 4.2 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Cercocarpus
betuloides var.
blancheae
island
mountainmahogany
Rosaceae perennial
evergreen
shrub
Feb-May None None G5T4 S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
A
( Yv
t
CALIFORNIA
NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY
4/1/24, 10:56 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3411855:3411845:3411844:3411843:3411853:3411865:3411864:3411863:3411854:&elev=:m:o 2/4 Chorizanthe parryi
var. fernandina
San Fernando
Valley
spineflower
Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Jul None CE G2T1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Chorizanthe parryi
var. parryi
Parry's
spineflower
Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Jun None None G3T2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1994- 01-01
© 2012 Keir
Morse
Cryptantha clokeyi Clokey's
cryptantha
Boraginaceae annual herb Apr None None G3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Deinandra
paniculata
paniculate
tarplant
Asteraceae annual herb (Mar)AprNovNone None G4 S4 4.2 2001- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Delphinium parryi
ssp. purpureum
Mt. Pinos
larkspur
Ranunculaceae perennial
herb
May-Jun None None G4T4 S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Dodecahema
leptoceras
slenderhorned
spineflower
Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Jun FE CE G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 1980- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Gilia latiflora ssp.
cuyamensis
Cuyama gilia Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jun None None G5?T4 S4 4.3 Yes 1974- 01-01
© 2012
Michael
Charters
Harpagonella
palmeri
Palmer's
grapplinghook
Boraginaceae annual herb Mar-May None None G4 S3 4.2 1980- 01-01
© 2015 Keir
Morse
Helianthus
inexpectatus
Newhall
sunflower
Asteraceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
Aug-Oct None None G1 S1 1B.1 Yes 2010-
08-16
© 2012
Anuja Parikh
and Nathan
Gale
Hordeum
intercedens
vernal barley Poaceae annual herb Mar-Jun None None G3G4 S3S4 3.2 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Hulsea vestita ssp.
gabrielensis
San Gabriel
Mountains
sunflower
Asteraceae perennial
herb
May-Jul None None G5T3 S3 4.3 Yes 1994-
01-01
© 2013
Anuja Parikh
and Nathan
Gale
25 5
0 ■
Yrst
4/1/24, 10:56 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3411855:3411845:3411844:3411843:3411853:3411865:3411864:3411863:3411854:&elev=:m:o 3/4 Juglans californica Southern
California
black walnut
Juglandaceae perennial
deciduous
tree
Mar-Aug None None G4 S4 4.2 Yes 1994-
01-01
© 2020 Zoya
Akulova
Juncus acutus ssp.
leopoldii
southwestern
spiny rush
Juncaceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
(Mar)MayJunNone None G5T5 S4 4.2 1988-
01-01
© 2019
Belinda Lo
Lepechinia
fragrans
fragrant
pitcher sage
Lamiaceae perennial
shrub
Mar-Oct None None G3 S3 4.2 Yes 1974-
01-01
© 2014
Debra L.
Cook
Lepechinia rossii Ross' pitcher
sage
Lamiaceae perennial
shrub
May-Sep None None G1 S1 1B.2 Yes 2006-
10-26 No Photo
Available
Lilium humboldtii
ssp. ocellatum
ocellated
Humboldt lily
Liliaceae perennial
bulbiferous
herb
MarJul(Aug)None None G4T4? S4? 4.2 Yes 1980-
01-01
© 2008
Thomas
Stoughton
Lupinus elatus silky lupine Fabaceae perennial
herb
Jun-Aug None None G4 S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Monardella exilis Mojave
monardella
Lamiaceae annual herb Apr-Sep None None G3? S3 4.2 2022- 08-04 No Photo
Available
Navarretia fossalis spreading
navarretia
Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jun FT None G2 S2 1B.1 1980- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Navarretia setiloba Piute
Mountains
navarretia
Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jul None None G2 S2 1B.1 Yes 1974- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Opuntia basilaris
var. brachyclada
short-joint
beavertail
Cactaceae perennial
stem
AprJun(Aug)None None G5T3 S3 1B.2 Yes 1980-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Orcuttia californica California
Orcutt grass
Poaceae annual herb Apr-Aug FE CE G1 S1 1B.1 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Perideridia pringlei adobe yampah Apiaceae perennial
herb
AprJun(Jul)None None G4 S4 4.3 Yes 1974-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Phacelia
mohavensis
Mojave
phacelia
Hydrophyllaceae annual herb Apr-Aug None None G4Q S4 4.3 Yes 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Pseudognaphalium
leucocephalum
white rabbittobaccoAsteraceae perennial
herb
(Jul)AugNov(Dec)None None G4 S2 2B.2 2006-
11-03 No Photo
Available
4 F
4/1/24, 10:56 AM CNPS Rare Plant Inventory | Search Results https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/result?frm=T&sl=1&quad=3411855:3411845:3411844:3411843:3411853:3411865:3411864:3411863:3411854:&elev=:m:o 4/4 Quercus durata
var. gabrielensis
San Gabriel
oak
Fagaceae perennial
evergreen
shrub
Apr-May None None G4T3 S3 4.2 Yes 2001-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Senecio aphanactis chaparral
ragwort
Asteraceae annual herb JanApr(May)None None G3 S2 2B.2 1994- 01-01 No Photo
Available
Sidalcea
neomexicana
salt spring
checkerbloom
Malvaceae perennial
herb
Mar-Jun None None G4 S2 2B.2 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Streptanthus
campestris
southern
jewelflower
Brassicaceae perennial
herb
(Apr)MayJulNone None G3 S3 1B.3 1994-
01-01 No Photo
Available
Symphyotrichum
greatae
Greata's aster Asteraceae perennial
rhizomatous
herb
Jun-Oct None None G2 S2 1B.3 Yes 1974-
01-01
© 2006
Michael
Charters
Yucca brevifolia CC CBR 2011-
12-13 No Photo
Available
Showing 1 to 41 of 41 entries
Suggested Citation:
California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2024. Rare Plant Inventory (online edition, v9.5). Website https://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 1 April 2024].
P
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 1/16 IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the project area.
However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specific (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s) with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.
Location
Los Angeles County, California
Local office
Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office
(805) 644-1766
(805) 644-3958
[email protected]
IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
A
to
,7 c GU
S
%
— .
115 VI
1 N 15
Ju
- -
—
Py
N
I
z. o.
“Iooyo
, "Jd
■ ■ 50 e Csk
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 2/16 2493 Portola Road, Suite B
Ventura, CA 93003-7726
https://www.fws.gov/Ventura
< P
0%
&
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 3/16 Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific and project-specific information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an official species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ). 1 2
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 4/16
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Birds
Amphibians
NAME STATUS
California Condor Gymnogyps californianus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8193
Endangered
Coastal California Gnatcatcher Polioptila californica
californica
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8178
Threatened
Least Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii pusillus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5945
Endangered
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6749
Endangered
Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3911
Threatened
NAME STATUS
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 5/16 Fishes
Insects
Crustaceans
Arroyo (=arroyo Southwestern) Toad Anaxyrus californicus Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3762
Endangered
California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891
Threatened
NAME STATUS
Unarmored Threespine Stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7002
Endangered
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate
NAME STATUS
Riverside Fairy Shrimp Streptocephalus woottoni
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8148
Endangered
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 6/16 Flowering Plants
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
NAME STATUS
California Orcutt Grass Orcuttia californica
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4923
Endangered
Gambel's Watercress Rorippa gambellii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4201
Endangered
Marsh Sandwort Arenaria paludicola
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2229
Endangered
Nevin's Barberry Berberis nevinii
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8025
Endangered
Slender-horned Spineflower Dodecahema leptoceras
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4007
Endangered
Spreading Navarretia Navarretia fossalis
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1334
Threatened
< P
OC
„S5
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 7/16 Critical habitats
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.
There are no critical habitats at this location.
You are still required to determine if your project(s) may have effects on all above listed species.
Bald & Golden Eagles
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply). To see a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs of bald and golden eagles in my specified location?
There are no documented cases of eagles being present at this location. However, if you believe eagles may be using your site, please reach out to the local Fish and Wildlife Service office.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-takemigratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/nationwide-standard-conservationmeasures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-andgolden-eagles-may-occur-project-action 2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 8/16 The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.
It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Please contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field Office if you have questions.
Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below.
Specifically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-takemigratory-birds Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-andgolden-eagles-may-occur-project-action 1 2
3 2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 9/16 The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON
Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637
Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Jan 1 to Jul 31
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 10/16 Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specifically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
Lawrence's Goldfinch Carduelis lawrencei
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9464
Breeds Mar 20 to Sep 20
Nuttall's Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 11/16 probability of presence breeding season survey effort no data
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.
Survey Effort ( )
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Allen's
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Belding's
Savannah
Sparrow
BCC - BCR
Bullock's Oriole
BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
l HII nil nil nil nil 11 ■ ■ ■ ... 1 . .
-+-+ I Ul i 1 ------------------ H I
1+1+ -+- 'III UH UH UH UH । + ■ II" '
HIIHIIIII+ III- UN — I UH I II ■■ ....................... ii oC I
0>
.0
I 0
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 12/16 California
Thrasher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Lawrence's
Goldfinch
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Nuttall's
Woodpecker
BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure.
To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specified location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and filtered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identified as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.
It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
—
L
1 1
■
lib in in III 1111 IHl IHl i H in ii i ir
I
1 ■ 1 1 ■ 1 ' | ........................................... Hi IHl ini in i i H i i HI ■ Illi IlH III IHl IHl IHl IHl I I' ■ ■
I | I. I . UH H I I. ............... . II I
J
-III Illi nil III- I II Illi ll"
1 —
i
—
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 13/16 The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the profiles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and
3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 14/16 If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint.
On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.
There are no refuge lands at this location.
Fish hatcheries
There are no fish hatcheries at this location.
OC
OC
«P „63
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 15/16 Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on site.
This location overlaps the following wetlands:
NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or
RIVERINE
R4SBA
R4SBC
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website
< P
0%
S
2/12/24, 1:04 PM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/VVZ2KHXZTRE3FJQ2C2TUP65JDQ/resources 16/16 submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies.
Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
O
00 <0°
APPENDIX C
USFWS NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY
Blue Cloud Bike Park
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected]
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
February 12, 2024
0 0.125 0.25 0.5 mi
0 0.2 0.4 0.8 km
1:15,047
This page was produced by the NWI mapper
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.
J
National Wetlands Invento
994
‘ 250 au” .Or
T. 4 i
39 9 ‘Fya
k I f
y
in 3 Ar r j ‘s
whE ■
w’s . I1
P3 r
1 I Y 7 y 3
2y 1
1 1
— t
Wk —WCeIY uf d 1
4 - •
a 23 1420 —.w
p
k S5uP tg 5 J < A
4 Hoy
‘h
- ✓ ■
J C.
f
IraiBY 1
4. !
%
s H
—ef -
l
V
His d I Us a r
J.
.1 t W"0W 4" I st i
' * ‘s
A V 20 —y 1 Vas Sies. . y
? 7
r Zi 8 a n
. J 4 - /
2 44
K! t * ‘
y. I
Car (r?
“H r
+ + + + + + + T 2 sr 2) ) 3
i” 4
is 0
_ ______ -13 ____
• )w
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
7 ■a
" 2t n _
P
yENAI awuIM n/s:
SEAVA ►
P7
i
—
rp
7 “u
6 5
EEj
Awihs.) i
ea
w
J
w53
>. ST 15)
----------------------------"------
,2945
y‘9
g
6o
Is. • Be 51’
as, A:
2 4 AI Her
7 y
—
fco
A—
s CA
p re setas ay, Hsore
gay"
r % /
2 edus
.4,e v
%
P‘
w
—0
yea 11.
g v e.
eLx 10oow 2,145 A
"""l (3 w CJ
2 - 3C
Y
rt
oe •
. 2rg
. gPty
aS
•* pl watr
etya
aw]
... —
17 y
-. t
E
6‘)
, The • 59
a WiU.S wg
77v
APPENDIX D
SPECIES OBSERVED LIST
Appendix D –Species Observed List
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project D-1
Biological Resources Techical Report
Table D-1: Wildlife Species Observed List
Scientific Name* Common Name Special-Status Rank**
Reptiles
Sceloporus occidentalis western fence lizard
Birds
Aeronautes saxatalis white-throated swift
Aphelocoma californica California scrub jay
Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird
Cathartes aura turkey vulture
Chamaea fasciata wrentit
Colaptes auratus northern flicker
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow
Corvus corax common raven
Falco sparverius American kestrel
Haemorhous mexicanus house finch
Melospiza melodia song sparrow
Melozone crissalis California towhee
Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird
Phainopepla nitens phainopepla
Spinus lawrencei** Lawrence’s goldfinch BCC
Spinus psaltria lesser goldfinch
Sturnella neglecta western meadowlark
Thryomanes bewickii Bewick’s wren
Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher
Troglodytes aedon house wren
Zonotrichia leucophrys white-crowned sparrow
Mammals
Canis latrans coyote
Lynx rufus bobcat
Otospermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel
Sylvilagus audubonii desert cottontail
Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher
Invertebrates
Apis mellifera* honeybee
Eleodes osculans darkling beetle
Cicada sp. cicada
* Non-native species
** Special-Status Rank
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
BCC Bird of Conservation Concern – migratory and non-migratory bird species (beyond those already designated as federally threatened or endangered) that represent highest conservation priorities. The list is based on an assessment of several factors, including population abundance and trends, threats on breeding and Appendix D –Species Observed List
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project D-2
Biological Resources Techical Report
nonbreeding grounds and size of breeding and nonbreeding ranges. Bird species considered for the BCC include: nongame birds gamebirds without hunting seasons subsistence-hunted nongame birds in Alaska ESA candidate, proposed, and recently delisted species
Appendix D –Species Observed List
Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project D-3
Biological Resources Techical Report
Table D-2: Plant Species Observed List
Scientific Name* Common Name Cal-IPC Rank** Special-Status Rank*** Acmispon glaber deerweed
Adenostoma fasciculatum chamise
Amsinckia intermedia common fiddleneck
Astragalus trichopodus Santa Barbara milk vetch
Artemisia californica coastal sage brush
Atriplex canescens fourwing saltbush
Bromus rubens* red brome High
Centaurea melitensis* tocalote Moderate
Elymus condensatus giant wild rye
Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat
Erodium botrys* big heron bill
Gutierrezia californica California matchweed
Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon
Hirschfeldia incana* short-podded mustard Moderate
Lonicera subspicata southern honeysuckle
Malva parviflora* chesseweed
Opuntia sp. cactus sp.
Phoradendron leucarpum American mistletoe
Quercus john-tuckeri Tucker’s oak
Salvia apiana white sage
Salvia mellifera black sage
Sambucus mexicana blue elderberry
Schinus molle* Peruvian peppertree Limited
Sisymbrium irio* London rocket Moderate
Sonchus asper* prickly sowthistle
Stipa lepida foothill needle grass
* Non-native species
** California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) Ratings
High These species have severe ecological impacts on physical processes, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal and establishment. Most are widely distributed ecologically.
Moderate These species have substantial and apparent—but generally not severe—ecological impacts on physical processes, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Their reproductive biology and other attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal, though establishment is generally dependent upon ecological disturbance. Ecological amplitude and distribution may range from limited to widespread.
Limited These species are invasive, but their ecological impacts are minor on a statewide level or there was not enough information to justify a higher score. Their reproductive biology and other attributes result in low to moderate rates of invasiveness. Ecological amplitude and distribution are generally limited, but these species may be locally persistent and problematic.
APPENDIX E
POTENTIALLY OCCURRING SPECIAL-STATUS
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-1
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
SPECIAL-STATUS WILDLIFE SPECIES
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper’s hawk
WL
G5
S4
Yearlong resident of California. Generally,
found in forested areas up to 3,000 feet
above mean sea level (amsl) in elevation,
especially near edges and rivers. Prefers
hardwood stands and mature forests, but
can be found in urban and suburban areas
where there are tall trees (25 to 50 feet
high) for nesting. Prefers pines, oaks,
Douglas-firs, beeches, spruces for nesting.
Common in open areas during nesting
season.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Agelaius tricolor
tricolored blackbird
FT
SSC
G1G2
S2
Range is limited to the coastal areas of the
Pacific coast of North America, from
Northern California to upper Baja
California. Can be found in a wide variety of
habitat including annual grasslands, wet
and dry vernal pools and other seasonal
wetlands, agricultural fields, cattle
feedlots, and dairies. Occasionally forage in
riparian scrub habitats along marsh
borders. Basic habitat requirements for
breeding include open accessible water,
protected nesting substrate freshwater
marsh dominated by cattails (Typha spp.),
willows (Salix spp.), and bulrushes
(Schoenoplectus spp.), and either flooded
or thorny/spiny vegetation and suitable
foraging space providing adequate insect
prey.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
southern California rufouscrowned sparrow
WL
G5T3
S4
Yearlong resident that is typically found
between 3,000 and 6,000 feet amsl. Breed
in sparsely vegetated scrubland on hillsides
and canyons. Prefers coastal sage scrub
dominated by California sagebrush
(Artemisia californica), but they can also be
found breeding in coastal bluff scrub, lowgrowing serpentine chaparral, and along the edges of tall chaparral habitats.
No High: Suitable foraging and
nesting habitat is present
within the project site. In
addition, the closest extant
occurrence (CNDDB; Occ.
178) is roughly 0.6 mile east
of the project site.
Ammodramus savannarum
grasshopper sparrow
SSC
G5
S3
Yearlong resident along the coast of
southern California. Occurs in grassland,
upland meadow, pasture, hayfield, and old
field habitats. Optimal habitat contains
short- to medium-height bunch grasses
interspersed with patches of bare ground,
a shallow litter layer, scattered forbs, and
few shrubs. May inhabit thickets, weedy
lawns, vegetated landfills, fence rows, open
fields, or grasslands.
No Low: Marginally suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are present within
the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-2
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Anaxyrus californicus
arroyo toad
FE
SSC
G2G3
S2
Occurs in semi-arid regions near washes or
intermittent streams, including valleyfoothill grasslands, desert riparian, desert washes, and oak woodlands. Breeding
habitat consists of shallow streams with a
mixture of sandy and gravelly substrate and
sandy terraces. Generally, requires mulefat
(Baccharis salicifolia) and willow (Salix spp.)
in the streambed for vegetative canopy for
breeding areas and forages for insects
primarily under oak (Quercus spp.),
Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii),
and California sycamore (Platanus
racemosa) trees. Occurs at elevations from
near sea level to about 4,600 feet amsl.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Anniella pulchra
Northern California legless
lizard
SSC
G3
S2S3
Occurs from the southern edge of the San
Joaquin River in northern Contra Costa
County south to the Ventura County, south
of which there is a wide area where the
species of Anniella is or are unknown.
Occurs in moist warm loose soil with plant
cover. Moisture is essential. Occurs in
sparsely vegetated areas of beach dunes,
chaparral, pine-oak woodlands, desert
scrub, sandy washes, and stream terraces
with California sycamores (Platanus
racemosa), Fremont cottonwoods (Populus
fremontii), or oaks (Quercus spp.). Leaf
litter under trees and bushes in sunny areas
and dunes stabilized with bush lupine
(Lupinus sp.) and mock heather (Ericameria
ericoides) often indicate suitable habitat.
Often can be found under surface objects
such as rocks, boards, driftwood, and logs.
Can also be found by gently raking leaf litter
under bushes and trees. Sometimes found
in suburban gardens in southern California.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Additionally, the project is
located outside the known
range for this species.
Anniella pulchra
California legless lizard
SSC
G3G4
S3S4
Resemble small snakes. Rarely found
crawling in the open, except at night.
Typically found under objects or leaves,
often in gardens in southern California. Not
commonly seen.
No Low: Suitable soils and
preferred by this species are
not present within the
project site.
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
SSC
G4
S3
Locally common species locally common in
the Great Basin, Mojave, and Sonoran
deserts (specifically Sonoran life zone) and
grasslands throughout the western U.S.
Also occurs in shrublands, woodlands, and
forests from sea level to 8,000 ft amsl.
Prefers rocky outcrops, cliffs, and crevices
for roosting with access to open habitats
for foraging. May also roost in caves, mines,
bridges, barns, porches, and bat boxes, and
even on the ground under burlap sacks,
stone piles, rags, baseboards, and rocks.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Arizona elegans
occidentalis
California glossy snake
SSC
G5T2
S2
Inhabits arid scrub, rocky washes,
grasslands, and chaparral habitats. Appears
to prefer microhabitats of open areas and
areas with soil loose enough for easy
burrowing.
No Low: Suitable soils
preferred by this species are
not present within the
project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-3
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Artemisiospiza belli belli
Bell's sparrow
WL
G5T2T3
S3
This species has a wide, but sparse
distribution in western Riverside County,
specifically within the “Riverside lowlands,
San Jacinto Foothills, Santa Ana Mountains,
and Desert Transition Bioregions. Yearlong
resident on the coastal side of southern
California mountains. Breeds in coastal
sage scrub and chaparral habitats from
February to August. They require semiopen habitats with evenly spaced shrubs one to two meters high. Occurs in chaparral
dominated by fairly dense stands of
chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum).
No High: Suitable foraging and
nesting habitats preferred
by this species are present
within the project site. In
addition, the nearest extant
occurrence (CNDDB; Occ.
57) is roughly 0.6 mile east
of the project site.
Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
coastal whiptail
SSC
G5T5
S3
This subspecies is found in coastal southern
California, mostly west of the Peninsular
Ranges and south of the Transverse
Ranges, and north into Ventura County.
Ranges south into Baja California. Found in
a variety of ecosystems, primarily hot and
dry open areas with sparse vegetation in
chaparral, woodland, and riparian areas.
Associated with rocky areas with little
vegetation or sunny microhabitats within
shrub or grassland associations.
No High: Suitable habitat is
located within the project
site, and there are known
occurrences within 0.60
miles of the project site.
Athene cunicularia
burrowing owl
SSC
G4
S2
Yearlong resident of California. Primarily a
grassland species, but it persists and even
thrives in some landscapes highly altered
by human activity. Occurs in open, annual
or perennial grasslands, deserts, and
scrublands characterized by low-growing
vegetation. The overriding characteristics
of suitable habitat appear to be burrows for
roosting and nesting and relatively short
vegetation with only sparse shrubs and
taller vegetation.
No Not Expected: Marginally
suitable habitat is located
within the project, however
due to frequent
anthropogenic
disturbances, the species is
not expected.
Bombus crotchii
Crotch’s bumble bee
SCE
G2
S2
Found from coastal California east to the
Sierra-Cascade crest and south into
Mexico. Primarily occurs in California,
including the Mediterranean region, Pacific
coast, western desert, great valley, and
adjacent foothills through most of
southwestern California. Has also been
recorded in Baja California, Baja California
Sur, and in southwest Nevada. Inhabits
open grassland and scrub habitats.
Primarily nests underground. Food plant
genera include Antirrhinum, Phacelia,
Clarkia, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, and
Eriogonum.
No Low: Marginally suitable
foraging habitat available
on site, additionally there
are no occurrences within 3
miles of the project site.
Branchinecta lynchi
vernal pool fairy shrimp
FT
G3
S3
Endemic to California and only found in
vernal pools. Vernal pool habitats form in
depressions above an impervious substrate
layer, or claypan/duripan. This species does
not occur in riverine, marine, or other
permanent bodies of water. When the
temporary pools dry, offspring persist in
suspended development as desiccationresistant embryos (commonly called cysts) in the pool substrate until the return of
winter rains and appropriate temperatures
allow some of the cysts to hatch.
No Not Expected: Suitable
vernal pool habitat
preferred by this species are
not present within the
project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-4
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Buteo regalis
ferruginous hawk
WL
G4
S3S4
Endemic to California and only found in
vernal pools. Vernal pool habitats form in
depressions above an impervious substrate
layer, or claypan/duripan. This species does
not occur in riverine, marine, or other
permanent bodies of water. When the
temporary pools dry, offspring persist in
suspended development as desiccationresistant embryos (commonly called cysts) in the pool substrate until the return of
winter rains and appropriate temperatures
allow some of the cysts to hatch.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat is not present within
the project site.
Buteo swainsoni
Swainson’s hawk
ST
G5
S4
Typical habitat is open desert, grassland, or
cropland containing scattered, large trees
or small groves. Breeds in stands with few
trees in juniper-sage flats, riparian areas,
and in oak savannah in the Central Valley.
Forages in adjacent grassland or suitable
grain or alfalfa fields or livestock pastures.
No Low (foraging): Potential to
occur within the site as a
transient during migration.
Catostomus santaanae
Santa Ana sucker
FT
G1
S1
Occur in the watersheds draining the San
Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains of
southern California. Streams that Santa
Ana Sucker inhabit are generally perennial
streams with water ranging in depth from a
few inches to several feet and with currents
ranging from slight to swift.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Charadrius montanus
mountain plover
SSC
G3
S2
Uncommon winter resident in southern
California, primarily from September to
mid-March, with peak numbers from
December through February. At all
seasons, mountain plovers are strongly
associated with short-grass prairie habitats,
or their equivalents, that are flat and nearly
devoid of vegetation. Overall, it avoids high
and dense cover. Within southern
California, the largest numbers occur in
grasslands and agricultural areas in the
interior. Does not nest in California.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
western yellow-billed
cuckoo
FT
SE
G5T2T3
S1
Uncommon summer resident where its
breeding distribution is restricted to
isolated sites in the Sacramento,
Armargosa, Kern, Santa Ana, and Colorado
River valleys. The species requires large
patches of multi-layered riparian forest,
with cottonwoods and willows. The
presence of standing or flowing surface
water under the riparian canopy is also
preferred. Mesquite (Prosopis spp.) groves
may also be used, but usually only when
cottonwood-willow habitat is unavailable.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Corynorhinus townsendii
Townsend’s big-eared bat
SSC
G4
S2
Found throughout California, but the
details of its distribution area not well
known. Now considered uncommon in
California. Details of its distribution are not
well known. This species is found in all but
subalpine and alpine habitats and may be
found at any season throughout its range.
Most abundant in mesic habitats. Requires
caves, mines, tunnels, buildings, or other
human-made structures for roosting.
No Low (foraging): Suitable
roosting habitat preferred
by the species is not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-5
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Danaus plexippus
Monarch butterfly
FCE
G4T1T2Q
S2
Winter roost sites extend along the coast
from northern Mendocino to Baja
California, Mexico. Roosts are located in
wind-protected tree groves (eucalyptus,
Monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and
water sources nearby.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site
Elanus leucurus
white-tailed kite
FP
G5
S3S4
Yearlong resident along the coastal ranges
and valleys of California. Occurs in low
elevation, open grasslands, savannah-like
habitats, agricultural areas, wetlands, and
oak woodlands. Uses trees with dense
canopies for cover. Important prey item is
the California vole (Microtus californicus).
Nests in tall (20 to 50 feet) coast live oaks
(Quercus agrifolia).
No Low (foraging): Suitable
nesting habitats preferred
by this species are not
present within the project
site.
Empidonax traillii extimus
southwestern willow
flycatcher
FE
SE
G5T2
S3
Uncommon summer resident in southern
California primarily found in lower
elevation riparian habitats occurring along
streams or in meadows. The structure of
suitable breeding habitat typically consists
of a dense mid-story and understory and
can also include a dense canopy. Nest sites
are generally located near surface water or
saturated soils. The presence of surface
water, swampy conditions, standing or
flowing water under the riparian canopy
are preferred.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Emys marmorata
western pond turtle
FPT
SSC
G3G4
S3
Found in ponds, lakes, rivers, streams,
creeks, marshes, and irrigation ditches,
with abundant vegetation, either rocky or
muddy bottoms, in woodland, forest, and
grassland. In streams, prefers pools to
shallower areas. Logs, rocks, cattail mats,
and exposed banks are required for
basking. May enter brackish water and
even seawater. Found at elevations from
sea level to over 5,900 feet amsl.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Eremophila alpestris actia
California horned lark
WL
G5T4Q
S4
Yearlong resident of California. This
subspecies is typically found in coastal
regions. Breed in level or gently sloping
shortgrass prairie, montane meadows,
"bald" hills, open coastal plains, fallow
grain fields, and alkali flats. Within
southern California, California horned larks
breed primarily in open fields, (short)
grasslands, and rangelands. Nests on the
open ground.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Euderma maculatum
spotted bat
SSC
G4
S3
Found in a small number of localities,
mostly in the foothills, mountains, and
desert regions of southern California.
Preferred habitats include arid deserts,
grasslands and mixed conifer forests from
sea level to 10,000 feet amsl. Forages over
water and near the ground. Roosts in rock
crevices on cliffs, occasionally found in
caves and buildings.
No Low: Marginally suitable
foraging habitat preferred
by the species present
within the project site
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-6
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Euphydryas editha quino
quino checkerspot butterfly
FE
G4G5T1T2
S1S2
Occupies a variety of habitat types that
support California plantain (Plantago
erecta), the species primary larval host
plant, including grasslands, coastal sage
scrub, chamise chaparral, red shank
chaparral, juniper woodland, and semidesert scrub. Can also be found in desert canyons and washes at the lower edge of
chaparral habitats.
No Not Expected: Although
marginally suitable foraging
habitat preferred by the
species present within the
project site, today, the
Quino checkerspot
butterfly is only known from
western Riverside County,
southern San Diego County,
and northern Baja
California, Mexico.
Falco mexicanus
prairie falcon
WL
G5
S4
The prairie falcon is associated primarily
with perennial grasslands, savannahs,
rangeland, some agricultural fields during
the winter season, and desert scrub areas,
all typically dry environments of western
North American where there are cliffs or
bluffs for nest sites. The species requires
sheltered cliff ledges for cover and nesting
which may range in height from low rock
outcrops of 30 feet to vertical, 400 feet high
(or more) cliffs and typically overlook some
treeless country for hunting. Open terrain
is used for foraging.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Gasterosteus aculeatus
williamsoni
unarmored threespine
stickleback
FE
SE
FP
G5T1
S1
Small, scale less freshwater fish of up to 2
inches in length inhabiting slow-moving
reaches or quiet-water microhabitats in
streams and rivers. Restricted to three
areas: the upper Santa Clara River and its
tributaries in Los Angeles County, San
Antonio Creek on Vandenberg Air Force
Base in Santa Barbara County, and the Shay
Creek vicinity (Shay Pond, Sugarloaf Pond,
Juniper Springs, Motorcycle Pond, Shay
Creek, Wiebe Pond, and Baldwin Lake) in
San Bernardino County. Favorable habitats
are shaded by dense and abundant
vegetation. In open reaches, algal mats or
barriers (e.g. sand bars, floating vegetation,
low-flow road crossings) provide refuge.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Gila orcuttii
arroyo chub
SSC
G2
S2
Warm streams of the Los Angeles Plain,
which are typically muddy torrents during
the winter, and clear quiet brooks in the
summer, possibly drying up in places. They
are found both in slow-moving and fastmoving sections, but generally deeper than 16 inches.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site
Gymnogyps californianus
California condor
FE
SE
FP
G1
S1
Current distribution of California condor is
considered to be all of the Los Padres
National Forest and western half of the
Angeles National Forest (USDA Forest
Service 2000), with some occasionally
found in the Sequoia National Forest. Nest
sites are typically located in chaparral,
conifer forest, or oak woodland habitats.
Nest sites are in cliff caves in the
mountains. Some have nested in large
cavities within sequoias (Sequoiadendron
giganteum).
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-7
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
bald eagle
SE
FP
G5
S3
Locally common yearlong resident of
southern California. Typically prefer areas
near large water bodies such as sea coasts,
coastal estuaries and inland lakes and
rivers, in many areas, these birds are found
within two miles of a water source. Most
populations, specifically those in northern
regions, migrate to southern, milder
climates annually. Generally, these birds
nest in the canopy of tall, coniferous trees,
surrounded by smaller trees. They have
been reported nesting on the ground, on
cliffs, on cellular phone towers, on
electrical poles and in artificial nesting
towers.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Lanius ludovicianus
loggerhead shrike
SSC
G4
S4
Yearlong resident of California. Prefers
open habitats with bare ground, scattered
shrubs, and areas with low or sparse
herbaceous cover including open-canopied
valley foothill hardwood, riparian, pinyonjuniper desert riparian, creosote bush scrub, and Joshua tree woodland. Requires
suitable perches including trees, posts,
fences, utility lines, or other perches. Nests
in branches up to 14 feet above the ground
frequently in a shrub with thorns or with
tangled branching habitats.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Onychomys torridus
ramona
southern grasshopper
mouse
SSC
G5T3
S3
Common in arid desert habitats of the
Mojave and southern Central Valley of
California. Known elevation range is
generally below 3,000 feet amsl. Little is
known about habitat requirements;
however, it is commonly found in scrub
habitats with friable soils for digging in
desert areas. It is believed that alkali desert
scrub and desert scrub habitats are
preferred, with somewhat lower densities
expected in other desert habitats, including
succulent shrub, wash, and riparian areas.
Also occurs in coastal scrub, mixed
chaparral, sagebrush, low sage, and
bitterbrush habitats.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site.
Perognathus alticola
inexpectatus
Tehachapi pocket mouse
SSC
G2T1T2
S1S2
Found in arid annual grassland and desert
shrub communities, but also in fallow grain
fields and within Russian thistle. This small
mammal burrows for cover and nesting and
aestivates and hibernates during extreme
weather. Forages on open ground and
under shrubs.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-8
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Phrynosoma blainvillii
coast horned lizard
SSC
G4
S4
Occurs in a wide variety of vegetation types
including coastal sage scrub, annual
grassland, chaparral, oak woodland,
riparian woodland and coniferous forest.
Its elevational range extends up to 4,000
feet in the Sierra Nevada foothills and up to
6,000 feet in the mountains of southern
California. In inland areas, this species is
restricted to areas with pockets of open
microhabitat, created by disturbance (e.g.
fire, floods, unimproved roads, grazing
lands, and fire breaks). The key elements of
such habitats are loose, fine soils with a
high sand fraction; an abundance of native
ants or other insects; and open areas with
limited overstory for basking and low, but
relatively dense shrubs for refuge.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat
is located within the project
site, and there are known
occurrences within 3 miles
of the project site.
Polioptila californica
coastal California
gnatcatcher
FT
SSC
G4G5T3Q
S2
Yearlong resident of sage scrub habitats
that are dominated by California
sagebrush. This species generally occurs
below 750 feet amsl in coastal regions and
below 1,500 feet amsl inland. Ranges from
Ventura County, south to San Diego County
and northern Baja California and it is less
common in sage scrub with a high
percentage of tall shrubs. Prefers habitat
with more low-growing vegetation.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Rana boylii pop. 6
foothill yellow-legged frog –
south coast DPS
FT
ST
G3T1
S1
Isolated populations are also known from
the mountains of Los Angeles County.
Occur in streams flowing through a variety
of vegetation types, including valleyfoothill hardwood, valley-foothill hardwood-conifer, valley-foothill riparian,
yellow pine (Pinus ponderosa), mixed
conifer, mixed chaparral, and wet
meadows. Rarely occur in areas with
greater than 90% canopy closure. Breeding
and rearing habitat is generally located in
gently flowing, low-gradient stream
sections with variable substrates
predominated by cobble and boulder.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site
Rana draytonii
California red-legged frog
FT
SSC
G2G3
S2S3
The species historically occurred in the San
Gabriel Wilderness Area of the Angeles
National Forest; there were no post-1970
observations in this area or nearby parts of
the Angeles National Forest. In 1999, a
population (estimated between 15 and 25
adults) was located on the Angeles National
Forest in the San Francisquito drainage.
Breeding sites are in a variety of aquatic
habitats including streams, deep pools,
backwaters within streams and creeks,
ponds, marshes, sag ponds, dune ponds,
lagoons, and artificial impoundments (i.e.,
stock ponds). Breeding adults are often
associated with deep (greater than 2 feet)
still or slow-moving water and dense
shrubby riparian or emergent vegetation.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-9
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Spea hammondii
western spadefoot
SSC
FPT
G2G3
S3S4
Prefers open areas with sandy or gravelly
soils, in a variety of habitats including
mixed woodlands, grasslands, coastal sage
scrub, chaparral, sandy washes, lowlands,
river floodplains, alluvial fans, playas, alkali
flats, foothills, and mountains. Rain pools
which do not contain American bullfrogs
(Lithobates catesbeianus), predatory fish,
or crayfish are necessary for breeding.
Estivates in upland habitats adjacent to
potential breeding sites in burrows
approximating 3 feet in depth.
No Low: Marginally suitable
habitat is located within the
project site, and there are
known occurrences within
2.3 miles of the project
site.
Spinus lawrencei
Lawrence’s goldfinch
BCC
G3G4
S4
Nests in open oak or other arid woodland
and chaparral, near water. Nearby
herbaceous habitats are also used for
feeding. This species can also be found in
broadleaved upland forest and pinon and
juniper woodlands. This species is closely
associated with oaks (Quercus sp.).
Yes Present: This species was
observed on-site during the
field surveys.
Streptocephalus woottoni
Riverside fairy shrimp
FE
G1G2
S1S2
Restricted to deep seasonal vernal pools,
vernal pool like ephemeral ponds, and
stock ponds and other human modified
depressions. Basins that support Riverside
fairy shrimp are typically dry a portion of
the year, but usually are filled by late fall,
winter, or spring rains, and may persist
through May. Endemic to western
Riverside, Orange, and San Diego Counties
in tectonic swales/earth slump basins in
grassland and coastal sage scrub. In
Riverside County, the species been found in
pools formed over the following soils:
Murrieta stony clay loams, Las Posas series,
Wyman clay loam, and Willows soils. All
known habitat lies within annual
grasslands, which may be interspersed
through chaparral or coastal sage scrub
vegetation.
No Not Expected: Vernal pool
habitat required by the
species is not present
within the project site
Taxidea taxus
American badger
SSC
G5
S3
Occupies a wide variety of habitats
including dry, open grassland, sagebrush,
and woodland habitats. Require dry,
friable, often sandy soil to dig burrows for
cover, food storage, and giving birth.
Occasionally found in riparian zones and
open chaparral with less than 50% plant
cover.
No Not Expected: Due to the
highlight disturbed nature
of the project site, this
species is not expected to
occur.
Thamnophis hammondii
two-striped garter snake
SSC
G4
S3S4
Occurs in or near permanent fresh water,
often along streams with rocky beds and
riparian growth up to 7,000 feet amsl.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by the
species is not present
within the project site
Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell’s vireo
FE
SE
G5T2
S3
Summer resident in southern California.
Breeding habitat generally consists of
dense, low, shrubby vegetation in riparian
areas, and mesquite brushlands, often near
water in arid regions. Early successional
cottonwood-willow riparian groves are
preferred for nesting. The most critical
structural component of nesting habitat in
California is a dense shrub layer that is 2 to
10 feet (0.6 to 3.0 meters) above ground.
The presence of water, including ponded
surface water or moist soil conditions, may
also be a key component for nesting
habitat.
No Not Expected: Suitable
foraging and nesting
habitats preferred by this
species are not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-10
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Arenaria paludicola
marsh sandwort
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial stoloniferous herb. Found on
sandy, openings within marshes and
swamps (freshwater or brackish). Found at
elevations ranging from 12 to 558 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from May to
August.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Androsace elongate ssp.
acuta
California androsace
4.2 G5?T3T4
S3S4
Annual herb. Occurs in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, coastal scrub,
meadows and seeps, pinyon and juniper
woodland, and valley and foothill grassland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
492 to 4,281 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from March to June.
No Not Expected: There are no
occurrence records within 5
miles of the project site.
Berberis nevinii
Nevin’s barberry
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial evergreen shrub. Occurs on
sandy or gravelly soils in chaparral,
cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, and
riparian scrub. Found at elevations ranging
from 899 to 2,707 feet amsl. Blooming
period is (February) March through June.
No Low: Although suitable
habitat is present within the
project site, there are no
occurrence records within 3
miles of the project site.
Calochortus catalinae
Catalina mariposa-lily
4.2 G3G4
S3S4
Perennial herb (bulb). Habitats include
chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Found
at elevations ranging from 49 to 2,297 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from February to
June.
No Low: Although suitable
habitat is present within the
project site, there are no
occurrence records within 3
miles of the project site.
Calochortus clavatus var.
avius
Pleasant Valley mariposa-lily
1B.2
G4T2
S2
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Occurs in lower
montane coniferous forest (Josephine silt
loam and volcanic). Found at elevations
ranging from 1,000 to 5,906 feet amsl.
Blooming period is May through July.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Calochortus clavatus var.
clavatus
club-haired mariposa-lily
4.3 G4T3
S3
Perennial herb (bulb). Occurs on
serpentinite, clay, and rocky soils within
chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub, and valley and foothill grassland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
246 to 4,265 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from May to June.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat
is present within the project
site, In addition, there is a
recent occurrence record
(Calflora 2024) roughly 1.5
miles southeast of the
project site.
Calochortus clavatus var.
gracilis
slender mariposa-lily
1B.2
G4T2T3
S2S3
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Found in
chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and
foothill grassland habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 1,050 to 3,280 feet
amsl. Blooming period is March through
June (November).
No High: Suitable habitat is
present within the project
site, In addition, there is a
recent occurrence record
(CNDDB; Occ. 113) roughly
0.4 miles southwest of the
project site
Calochortus palmeri var.
palmeri
Palmer's mariposa-lily
1B.2
G3T2
S2
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Occurs in mesic
soils within chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest, and meadows and seeps.
Grows in elevations ranging from 2,329 to
7,841 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
April to July.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Calochortus plummerae
Plummer’s mariposa-lily
4.2 G4
S4
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Occurs on
granitic and rocky soils within chaparral,
cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, lower
montane coniferous forest, and
valley/foothill grassland. Grows in
elevations ranging from 328 to 5,577 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from May to July.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-11
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Calystegia peirsonii
Peirson’s morning-glory
4.2 G4
S4
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Habitats
include chaparral, chenopod scrub,
cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, lower
montane coniferous forest, and valley and
foothill grassland. Found at elevations
ranging from 98 to 4,921 feet. Blooming
period is from April to June.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Cercocarpus betuloides var.
blancheae
island mountain-mahogany
4.3 G5T4
S4
Perennial evergreen shrub. Found in
closed-cone coniferous forest and
chaparral habitats. Grows in elevation from
98 to 1,970 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from February to May.
No Low: Although suitable
habitat is present within the
project site, the closest
extant occurrence (CNPS) is
roughly 4 miles southeast of
the project site.
Chorizanthe parryi var.
fernandina
San Fernando Valley
spineflower
FPT
SE
1B.1
G2T1
S1
Annual herb. Found in sandy soils within
coastal scrub habitat and valley and foothill
grassland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 492 to 4,003 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from April to July.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Chorizanthe parryi var.
parryi
Parry’s spineflower
1B.1
G3T2
S2
Annual herb. Occurs on sandy and/or rocky
soils in chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and
sandy openings within alluvial washes and
margins. Found at elevations ranging from
951 to 3,773 feet amsl. Blooming period is
April through June.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Cryptantha clokeyi
Clokey's cryptantha
1B.2
G3
S3
Annual herb. Occurs in Mojavean desert
scrub. Found at elevations ranging from
2,379 to 4,478 feet amsl. Blooming month
is April.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Deinandra paniculate
paniculate tarplant
4.2 G4
S4
Annual herb. Occurs in coastal scrub, vernal
pools, and valley/foothill grassland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
82 to 3,084 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from April to November.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Delphinium parryi ssp.
purpureum
Mt. Pinos larkspur
4.3 G4T4
S4
Perennial herb. Habitats include chaparral,
Mojavean desert scrub, and pinyon and
juniper woodland. Found at elevations
ranging from 3,281 to 8,530 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from May to June.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Dodecahema leptoceras
slender-horned spineflower
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Annual herb. Occurs on flood deposited
terraces and washes in chaparral, coastal
scrub, and alluvial fan sage scrub habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from 1,181 to
2,690 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
April to June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Gilia latiflora ssp.
cuyamensis
Cuyama gilia
4.3 G5?T4
S4
Annual herb. Occurs in sandy flats and river
valleys in pinyon and juniper woodland.
Found at elevations ranging from 0 to 7500
feet amsl. Blooming period is from April to
June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Harpagonella palmeri
Palmer's grapplinghook
4.2 G4
S3
Annual herb. Occurs on clay soils within
open grassy areas within chaparral, coastal
scrub, and valley and foothill grassland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
66 to 3,133 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from March to May.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Helianthus inexpectatus
Newhall sunflower
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Occurs in
freshwater, seeps within marshes and
swamps and riparian woodland habitats.
This species does not have an elevation
range. Blooming period is from August to
October.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-12
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Hordeum intercedens
vernal barley
3.2 G3G4
S3S4
Annual herb. Habitat includes coastal
dunes, coastal scrub, vernal pools, and
valley/foothill grassland. Grows in
elevations ranging from 16 to 3,281 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from March to
June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Hulsea vestita ssp.
gabrielensis
San Gabriel Mountains
sunflower
4.3 G5T3
S3
Perennial herb. Grows on rocky soils in
lower montane coniferous forest and
upper montane coniferous forest. Found at
elevations ranging from 4,921 to 8,202 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from May to July.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Juglans californica
Southern California black
walnut
4.2 G4
S4
Perennial deciduous tree. Found in
chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal
scrub, and riparian woodland habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from 164 to
2,953 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
March to August.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site, this
species would have been
identified during the field
survey if present.
Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii
southwestern spiny rush
4.2 G5T5
S4
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Occurs within
coastal dunes (mesic), meadows and seeps
(alkaline seeps), and marshes and swamps
(coastal salt). Found at elevations ranging
from 9 to 2,955 feet amsl. Blooming period
is (March) May through June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Lepechinia fragrans
fragrant pitcher sage
4.2 G3
S3
Perennial shrub. Occurs in chaparral
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
66 to 4,298 feet amsl. Blooming period is
March through October.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Lepechinia rossii
Ross’ pitcher sage
1B.2
G1
S1
Shrub. Occurs in soil derived from finegrained, reddish sedimentary rock in chaparral. Found at elevations ranging
from 0 to 7480 feet amsl. Blooming period
is May through September.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Lilium humboldtii ssp.
ocellatum
ocellated Humboldt lily
4.2 G4T4?
S4?
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Found in
openings within chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub, lower montane
coniferous forest, and riparian woodland
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
98 to 5,906 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from March to August.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Lupinus elatus
silky lupine
4.3 G4
S4
Perennial herb. Habitats include lower
montane coniferous forest and upper
montane coniferous forest. Found at
elevations ranging from 4,921 to 9,842 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from June to
August.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Monardella exilis
Mojave monardella
4.2 G3?
S3
Annual herb. Occurs in sandy soils within
desert dunes, Mojavean desert scrub,
Great Basin scrub, chenopod scrub, pinyon
and juniper woodland, Joshua tree
woodland, and lower montane habitats.
Found at elevations ranging from 1970 feet
to 7940 feet amsl. Blooms April-September.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Nasturtium gambelii
Gambel's water cress
FE
ST
1B.1
G1
S1
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Occurs in
marshes and swamps (freshwater or
brackish) habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 16 to 1,083 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from April to October.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-13
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Navarretia fossalis
spreading navarretia
FT
1B.1
G2
S2
Annual herb. Habitats include chenopod
scrub, marshes and swamps (assorted
shallow freshwater), playas, and vernal
pools. Grows in elevation ranging from 98
to 2,149 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
April to June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Navarretia setiloba
Piute Mountains navarretia
1B.1
G2
S2
Annual herb. Found on clay or gravelly loam
soils within cismontane woodland, pinyon
and juniper woodland, and valley and
foothill grassland habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 935 to 6,890 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from April to June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Opuntia basilaris var.
brachyclada
short-joint beavertail
1B.2
G5T3
S3
Perennial stem succulent. Grows in
chaparral, Joshua tree woodland,
Mojavean desert scrub, and pinyon and
juniper woodland habitats. Found at
elevations ranging from 1,394 to 5,906 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from April to June.
No Moderate: Suitable habitat
preferred by this species is
present within the project
site. In addition, the nearest
extant occurrence (CNDDB;
Occ. 108) is roughly 1.3
miles northwest of the
project site.
Orcuttia californica
California Orcutt grass
FE
SE
1B.1
G1
S1
Annual herb. Restricted to vernal pool
habitats. Found at elevations ranging from
49 to 2,165 feet amsl. Blooming period is
from April to August.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Perideridia pringlei
adobe yampah
4.3 G4
S4
Perennial herb. Occurs in serpentine and
clay soils within grassland hillsides and
within seasonally wet sites. Also found in
chaparral, cismontane woodland, pinyon
and juniper woodland, and coastal scrub.
Found at elevations ranging from 245 feet
to 7645 feet amsl. Blooms April-June.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Phacelia mohavensis
Mojave phacelia
4.3 G4Q
S4
Annual herb. Occurs on sandy or gravelly
soils within cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest, meadows and
seeps, pinyon and juniper woodland. Found
at elevations ranging from 4,593 to 8,202
feet amsl. Blooming period is from April to
August.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
Pseudognaphalium
leucocephalum
white rabbit-tobacco
2B.2
G4
S2
Perennial herb. Found on sandy and
gravelly soils within chaparral, cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub, and riparian
woodland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 0 to 6,890 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from July to December.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Quercus durata var.
gabrielensis
San Gabriel oak
4.2 G4T3
S3
Perennial evergreen shrub. Habitats
include chaparral and cismontane
woodland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 1,476 to 3,281 feet amsl.
Blooming period is April through May.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Senecio aphanactis
chaparral ragwort
2B.2
G3
S2
Annual herb. Grows on alkaline soils within
chaparral, cismontane woodland, and
coastal scrub habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 49 to 2,625 feet amsl.
Blooming period is from January to April.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Sidalcea neomexicana
salt spring checkerbloom
2B.2
G4
S2
Perennial herb. Found on alkaline and
mesic soils within chaparral, coastal scrub,
lower montane coniferous forest,
Mojavean desert scrub, and playas. Found
at elevations ranging from 49 to 5,020 feet
amsl. Blooming period is from March to
June.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-14
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
Stroptanthus campestris
southern jewelflower
1B.3
G3
S3
Perennial herb. Occurs in open, rocky areas
within chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest, and pinyon and juniper
woodland. Found at elevations ranging
from 1985 to 8500 feet amsl. Blooming
period is from May to July.
No Not Expected: The project
site is not within the
elevation range for this
species.
Symphyotrichum greatae
Greata's aster
1B.3
G2
S2
Perennial rhizomatous herb. Found on
mesic soils within broadleaf upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest, and riparian
woodland habitats. Found at elevations
ranging from 984 to 6,594 feet amsl.
Blooming period is June to October.
No Not Expected: Although
suitable habitat is present
within the project site,
there are no recent extant
occurrences within 5 miles
of the project site.
Yucca brevifolia
western Joshua tree
SCT Tree. Found within mesic canyons in
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
broadleafed upland forest, lower montane
coniferous forest, and riparian woodland.
Found at elevations ranging from 1000 –
7350 feet amsl. Blooming period is from
March through June.
No Not Expected: Suitable
habitat preferred by this
species is not present
within the project site.
SPECIAL-STATUS VEGETATION COMMUNITIES
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
California Walnut Woodland
MCV (1995)
California Walnut Series
NVCS (2009)
Juglans californica
Woodland Alliance
G2
S2.1
Found at elevations ranging from 490 to
2,952 feet amsl in riparian corridors, but
most stands cover all hillslopes. Southern
California black walnut is dominant or codominant in the tree canopy with white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), two petaled ash
(Fraxinus dipetala), toyon (Heteromeles
arbutifolia), coast live oak (Quercus
agrifolia), valley oak (Quercus lobata),
polished willow (Salix laevigata), arroyo
willow (Salix lasiolepis), black elderberry
(Sambucus nigra), and California bay
(Umbellularia californica). Trees are less
than 50 feet tall; canopy is open to
continuous. Shrub layer is sparse to
intermittent. Herbaceous layer is sparse or
grassy.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-15
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Mainland Cherry Forest
MCV (1995)
Hollyleaf Cherry Stands
NVCS (2009)
Heteromeles arbutifolia
Shrubland Alliance, Prunus
ilicifolia Shrubland Alliance
G1
S1.1
Found at elevations ranging from 164 to
4,265 feet amsl on slopes that are often
steep and north-facing. Soils are derived
from bedrock or colluvium. Redheart
(Ceanothus spinosus), toyon, hollyleaf
cherry (Prunus ilicifolia), is dominant or codominant in the shrub canopy with California sagebrush, big pod ceanothus
(Ceanothus megacarpus), island mountainmahogany (Cercocarpus betuloides var. blancheae), chaparral clematis (Clematis
lasiantha), sticky monkeyflower (Diplacus
aurantiacus), California buckwheat
(Eriogonum fasciculatum), California ash
(Fraxinus dipetala), chaparral beard tongue
(Keckiella antirrhinoides), climbing
penstemon (Keckiella cordifolia), inland
scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia),
evergreen buckthorn (Rhamnus ilicifolia),
sugar bush (Rhus ovata), and black sage
(Salvia mellifera). Emergent trees may be
present at low cover, including California
black walnut and coast live oak. Shrubs are
less than 50 feet; canopy is open to
continuous. Herbaceous layer is sparse to
continuous.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage
Scrub
MCV (1995)
Scalebroom Series
NVCS (2009)
Lepidospartum squamatum
intermittently flooded
Shrubland Alliance
G1
S1.1
Found at elevations ranging from 164 to
4,922 feet amsl on intermittently or rarely
flooded, low-gradient alluvial deposits
along streams, washes, and fans.
Scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum) is
dominant, co-dominant, or conspicuous in
the shrub canopy with burrobrush
(Ambrosia salsola), California sagebrush,
mulefat, bladderpod (Cleome isomeris),
California cholla (Cylindropuntia
californica), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa),
thick leaved yerba santa (Eriodictyon
crassifolium), hairy yerba santa (Eriodictyon
trichocalyx), California buckwheat,
chaparral yucca (Hesperoyucca whipplei),
deerweed (Acmispon glaber), laurel sumac
(Malosma laurina), prickly-pear cactus
(Opuntia littoralis), lemonade berry (Rhus
integrifolia), sugar bush, skunkbrush (Rhus
aromatica), and poison oak (Toxicodendron
diversilobum). Emergent trees or tall shrubs
may be present at low cover, including
mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus
betuloides), southern California black
walnut, California juniper, California
sycamore, Fremont cottonwood, or black
elderberry. Shrubs are less than 7 feet tall;
canopy is open to continuous, and two
tiered. Herbaceous is layer variable and
may be grassy.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-16
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern California
Threespine Stickleback
Stream
MCV (1995)
Not Identified
NVCS (2009)
Not Identified
GNR
SNR
Permanent slow-moving streams and rivers
characterized by freshwater, shallow
stream edges or braids in dense vegetation.
Also consists of slow to moderate current
with clear water; southern California
threespine stickleback have been found
perishing in areas with reduced water
quality.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Coast Live Oak
Riparian Forest
MCV (1995)
Coast Live Oak Series
NVCS (2009)
Quercus agrifolia Woodland
Alliance
G4
S4
Found at elevations ranging from sea level
to 3,937 feet amsl in alluvial terraces,
canyon bottoms, stream banks, slopes, and
flats, Soils are deep, sandy or loamy with
high organic matter. Coast live oak is a
dominant or co-dominant in the tree
canopy with bigleaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum), box elder (Acer negundo),
madrono (Arbutus menziesii), southern
California black walnut, California
sycamore, Fremont cottonwood, blue oak
(Quercus douglasii), Engelmann oak
(Quercus engelmannii), California black oak
(Quercus kelloggii), valley oak, arroyo
willow, and California bay. Trees are less
than 98 feet tall; canopy is open to
continuous. Shrub layer is sparse to
intermittent. Herbaceous layer is sparse or
grassy.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Cottonwood
Willow Riparian Forest
MCV (1995)
Fremont Cottonwood Series
NVCS (2009)
Populus fremontii Forest
Alliance
G3
S3.2
Found at elevations ranging from sea level
to 7,874 feet amsl on floodplains, along
low-gradient rivers, perennial or seasonally
intermittent streams, springs, in lower
canyons in desert mountains, in alluvial
fans, and in valleys with a dependable
subsurface water supply that varies
considerably during the year. Fremont
cottonwood is a dominant or co-dominant
in the tree canopy with box elder, desert
baccharis (Baccharis sergiloides), Oregon
ash (Fraxinus latifolia), northern California
black walnut (Juglans hindsii), California
sycamore, coast live oak, narrowleaf willow
(Salix exigua), Goodding’s willow (Salix
goodingii), polished willow, arroyo willow,
pacific willow (Salix lasiandra ssp.
lasiandra), and yellow willow (Salix lutea).
Trees and less than 25 meters tall; canopy
is continuous to open. Shrub layer is
intermittent to open. Herbaceous layer is
variable.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Mixed Riparian
Forest
MCV (1995)
N/A
NVCS (2009)
N/A
G2
S2.1
Similar to willow riparian forests and
woodlands in species occurrences. Found
in and along margins of an intermittent and
perennial streams. Generally, no single
species dominates the canopy and species
composition is dependent on elevation,
aspect, hydrology, and channel type.
Species that are usually present in the
canopy include California black walnut,
willow, California buckeye (Aesculus
californica), Fremont cottonwood, and
bigleaf maple.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-17
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Riparian Forest
MCV (1995)
N/A
NVCS (2009)
N/A
G4
S4
Riparian zones dominated by larger,
mature trees consisting of various species
of willows, cottonwoods, and sycamores.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Riparian Scrub
MCV (1995)
N/A
NVCS (2009)
N/A
G3
S3.2
Riparian zones dominated by small trees or
shrubs, lacking taller riparian trees.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Sycamore Alder
Riparian Woodland
MCV (1995)
California Sycamore Series
NVCS (2009)
Platanus racemosa
Woodland Alliance
G4
S4
Found at elevations ranging from sea level
to 7,874 feet amsl in gullies, intermittent
streams, springs, seeps, stream banks, and
terraces adjacent to floodplains that are
subject to high-intensity flooding. Soils are
rocky or cobbly alluvium with permanent
moisture at depth. California sycamore is a
dominant or co-dominant in the tree
canopy with white alder, southern
California black walnut, Fremont
cottonwood, coast live oak, valley oak,
narrowleaf willow, Gooding’s willow,
polished willow, arroyo willow, yellow
willow, Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus
mole), and California bay.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Southern Willow Scrub
MCV (1995)
N/A
NVCS (2009)
N/A
G3
S2.1
Dense, broadleaved, winter-deciduous
riparian thickets dominated by several
willow species, with scattered emergent
Fremont’s cottonwood and California
sycamore. Most stands are too dense to
allow much understory development.
Loose, sandy or fine gravelly alluvium
deposited near stream channels during
flood flows. This early seral type required
repeated flooding to prevent succession to
Southern Cottonwood-Sycamore Riparian
Forest.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-18
Biological Resources Technical Report
Table E: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Scientific Name
Common Name
Special-Status
Rank*
Habitat Preferences and Distribution
Affinities
Observed
On-site
Potential to Occur
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Valley Needlegrass
Grassland
MCV (1995)
N/A
NVCS (2009)
N/A
G3
S3.1
Occurs at elevations ranging from 0 to
5,577 feet amsl on all topographic
locations. Soils may be deep with high clay
content, loamy, sandy, or silty derived from
mudstone, sandstone, or serpentine
substrates. California melicgrass (Melica
californica), Torrey melic (Melica
torreyana), nodding needle grass (Stipa
cernua), foothill needle grass (Stipa lepida)
and/or purple needle grass (Stipa pulchra)
is dominant or characteristically present in
the herbaceous layer with other perennial
grasses and herbs including spidergrass
(Aristida ternipes), milkvetch (Astragalus
spp.), wild oat (Avena spp.), bromes
(Bromus spp.), fire reedgrass
(Calamagrostis koelerioides), mariposa
(Calochortus spp.), morning glory
(Calystegia spp.), amole (Chlorogalum
pomeridianum), clarkia (Clarkia spp.),
common sandaster (Corethrogyne
filaginifolia), turkey-mullein (Croton
setiger), cryptantha (Cryptantha spp.),
American wild carrot, (Daucus pusillus),
blue dicks (Dichelostemma capitatum),
blue wildrye (Elymus glaucus), buckwheat
(Eriogonum spp.), erodium (Erodium spp.),
California poppy (Eschscholzia californica),
California fescue (Festuca californica),
shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana),
narrow tarplant (Holocarpha virgata),
meadow barley (Hordeum
brachyantherum), June grass (Koeleria
macrantha), goldfields (Lasthenia spp.),
plantain (Plantago spp.), one sided blue
grass (Poa secunda), sanicle (Sanicula spp.),
western blue eyed grass (Sisyrinchium
bellum), clover (Trifolium spp.) and/or
fescue (Vulpia spp.). Emergent trees and
shrubs may be present at low cover. Herbs
are less than 3 feet; cover is open to
continuous.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
CNDDB/Holland (1986)
Valley Oak Woodland
MCV (1995)
Valley Oak Series
NVCS (2009)
Quercus lobata Woodland
Alliance
G3
S3
Occurs at elevations ranging from 0 to
2,543 feet amsl in valley bottoms
seasonally saturated soils that may
intermittently flood, lower slopes, and
summit valleys. Soils are alluvial or residual.
Valley Oak is dominant or co-dominant in
the tree canopy with boxelder maple (Acer
negundo), white alder, Oregon ash,
northern California walnut, English walnut
(Juglans regia), western sycamore,
Fremont cottonwood, coast live oak, blue
oak, California black oak, interior live oak
(Quercus wislizeni), Goodding’s black
willow, and arroyo willow. Shrubs and
lianas may include California pipevine
(Aristolochia californica) or California wild
grape (Vitis californica). Trees are less than
98 feet tall; canopy is open to continuous.
Shrub layer is open to intermittent.
Herbaceous layer may be grassy.
No Absent. This vegetation
community does not occur
within the project site.
* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-19
Biological Resources Technical Report
FE Endangered – any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
FCE Proposed Endangered - the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the USFWS has formally noticed as being under review by the USFWS for addition to the list of endangered species, or a species for which the Service has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of endangered species.
FT Threatened – any species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
FPT Federally Proposed - Threatened – The classification provided to an animal or plant that is proposed for federal listing as Threatened in the Federal Register under Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
SE Endangered – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.
SCE State Candidate for Listing as Endangered – the classification provided to a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the Fish and Game Commission has formally noticed as being under review by the Department of Fish and Wildlife for addition to the list of endangered species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to the list of endangered species.
ST Threatened – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required under the California Endangered Species Act.
SCT State Candidate Threatened - any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that has been accepted as a candidate species for listing as threatened. The species is temporarily afforded the same protections as a state-listed endangered or threatened species. The Commission must decide at a public meeting whether the species will be removed from candidacy or added to the list of threatened species.
FP Fully Protected – any native species or subspecies of bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, or reptile that were determined by the State of California to be rare or face possible extinction.
SSC Species of Special Concern – any species, subspecies, or distinct population of fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, or mammal native to California that currently satisfies one or more of the following criteria:
- is extirpated from California or, in the case of birds, in its primary seasonal or breeding role; - is listed as Federally-, but not State-, threatened or endangered; meets the State definition of threatened or endangered but has not formally been listed.
- is experiencing, or formerly experienced, serious (noncyclical) population declines or range retractions (not reversed) that, if continued or resumed, could qualify it for State threatened or endangered status; or - has naturally small populations exhibiting high susceptibility to risk from any factor(s), that if realized, could lead to declines that would qualify it for State threatened or endangered status.
WL Watch List - taxa that were previously designated as “Species of Special Concern” but no longer merit that status, or which do not yet meet SSC criteria, but for which there is concern and a need for additional information to clarify status.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank 1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. 4 Plants of limited distribution – Watch List.
Threat Ranks
.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree any immediacy of threat).
.2 Moderately threatened in California (20 to 80 percent of occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat).
.3 Not very threatened in California (less than 20 percent of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known).
NatureServe Conservation Status Rank
The Global Rank (G#) reflects the overall condition and imperilment of a species throughout its global range. The Infraspecific Taxon Rank (T#) reflects the global situation of just the subspecies or variety. The State Rank (S#) reflects the condition and imperilment of an element throughout its range within California. (G#Q) reflects that the element is very rare but there are taxonomic questions associated with it; the calculated G rank is qualified by adding a Q after the G#). Adding a ? to a rank expresses uncertainty about the rank.
G1/T1 Critically Imperiled – At very high risk of extinction due to extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer populations), very steep declines, or other factors.
G2/T2 Imperiled— At high risk of extinction due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors.
Appendix E – Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project E-20
Biological Resources Technical Report
G3/T3 Vulnerable— At moderate risk of extinction due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors.
G4/T4 Apparently Secure— Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
G5/T5 Secure – Common; widespread and abundant.
GNR Unranked – Global rank not yet assessed.
S1 Critically Imperiled – Critically imperiled in the state because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences) or because of some factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the State.
S2 Imperiled – Imperiled in the State because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the nation or State.
S3 Vulnerable – Vulnerable in the State due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.
S4 Apparently Secure – Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors.
SNR Unranked – National or subnational conservation status not yet assessed.
APPENDIX C:
AQUATIC RESOURCES DELINEATION OF
STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONAL
WATERS REPORT
Amber Rodriguez
Regional Vicinity
Mint Canyon, California
Newhall, California Project Vicinity
Michael Baker
INTERNATIONAL
April 10, 2025
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Attn:
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 120
Santa Clarita, California 91355
We Make a Difference
JN 195477
SUBJECT: Aquatic Resources Delineation of State and Federal Jurisdictional Waters for the proposed Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project - City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California
Dear Ms. Rodriguez:
Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) has prepared this report to document the results of a literature review and formal delineation of state and federal jurisdictional waters, including wetlands, that was conducted for the proposed Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project (project or project site) located in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California. Specifically, the delineation was conducted to identify and document the extent of aquatic features within the project site that potentially fall under the jurisdictional authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). This report summarizes the methodology utilized throughout the course of the delineation, defines the jurisdictional authority of the regulatory agencies, and documents the findings made by Michael Baker. This report presents Michael Baker's determination of jurisdictional boundaries based on the most up-to-date regulations, written policy, and guidance approved by the regulatory agencies. However, please note that only the regulatory agencies can make a final determination of jurisdictional limits.
PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is generally located north and east of Interstate 5, north and west of State Route-14 in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California (Figure 1, , in Attachment A). The project site is depicted in Section 31, Township 5 North, Range 15 West on the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle and Section 36, Township 5 North, Range 16 West on the USGS 7 .5-minute quadrangle (refer to Figure 2, , in Attachment A). Specifically, the project site is located within Haskell Canyon Open Space south of the Angeles National Forest, north of Copper Hill Drive, east of City Highline Motorway Fire Road, and northeast of Blue Cloud MBAKERINTL.COM
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500 I Santa Ana, CA 92707
Office: 949-472.3505 I Fax: 949-472.8373 I mbakerintl.com Haskell Canyon Bike Park Project 2
Aquatic Resources Delineation Report
Drive. The project site is located on the assessor’s parcel numbers (APN) shown in Table 1 and at latitude
34.476908° and longitude -118.499045° (refer to Figure 3, Project Site, in Attachment A).
Table 1: Assessor’s Parcel Numbers Associated with Haskell Canyon Bike Park APN
2813-010-273
2813-010-274
2813-010-275
2813-010-276
2813-010-900
2813-010-901
2813-010-902
2813-025-270
3244-031-901
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project would develop a bike park that would consist of approximately 15 miles of trails interspersed throughout the project site and two activity/programming areas – the Haskell Bike Park Core (Haskell Core) and the Blue Cloud Trailhead. Trail types for all skill levels provided within the Haskell Canyon Bike Park include approximately 3.7 miles of perimeter and climbing trails, approximately 5.5 miles of downhill bike trails, and approximately 5 miles of multi-use trails. The proposed trail widths would range 4 to 6 feet wide.
The project would also maintain approximately 1.6 miles of existing multi-use trails. The Haskell Core, located on the western portion of the project site, would include an event plaza with picnic tables, pump tracks, a dual slalom course, progressive jumplines, and a progressive skills area. Event/spectator areas would be provided adjacent to the main activity areas. Other amenities within the Haskell Core would include shade structures at the start zones of the dual slalom course and the progressive jumplines, two vault restrooms, a bike repair station, a rest area with benches and shade structure, and cargo containers for storage areas. Parking for the Haskell Core would be provided within a 40-space parking lot, which would include a parking/emergency turnaround, four American Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces, and unstructured space for four food trucks. The Blue Cloud Trailhead area would include space for potential future landscape restoration, a multi-use trailhead, a single vault restroom, a bike repair station, and the Saddle Trail Hub (meeting space for riders with a shade structure). Parking for the Blue Cloud Trailhead would be provided within an unstructured parking area and along Blue Cloud Road.