wildomar crossings project

Prepared by:

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.7578 El Cajon Boulevard

La Mesa, CA 91942

Prepared for:

Mann Property CompanyP.O. Box 77564

San Francisco, CA 94107

Wildomar Crossings Project

General Biological Resources Assessment

December 19, 2017

i

Report Date: December 19, 2017

Title: General Biological Resources Assessment for the Wildomar Crossings Project

Project Location: The approximately 4.4-acre project site is located the northwest corner of

Clinton Keith Road and Stable Lanes Road in the City of Wildomar, Riverside County, California. The project site is situated on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute Wildomar and Murrieta quadrangle maps in Section 1, Township 7 South, Range 4 West.

Assessor’s Parcel

Numbers: The project site comprises two Assessor Parcel Numbers: 380-120-003 and 380-120-004, as well as road rights-of-way.

Owner/Applicant: Mann Property Company P.O. Box 77564 San Francisco, CA 94107 Principal

Investigator: HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. 7578 El Cajon Blvd. La Mesa, CA 91942 (619) 462-1515 Report Summary: The approximately 4.4-acre project site (including off-site components)

was surveyed for burrowing owl and jurisdictional features. The burrowing owl survey had negative results. The riparian/riverine areas on site were assessed and mapped.

Report Preparer: Rob Hogenauer (562) 537-2426 Benjamin Rosenbaum (619) 462-1515 Field Personnel: Rob Hogenauer (562) 537-2426 Benjamin Rosenbaum (619) 462-1515

ii

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

i

Wildomar Crossings Project

General Biological Resources Assessment Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Title Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location .................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Project Description .............................................................................................. 1

2.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................ 1

2.1 Nomenclature and Literature Review ................................................................. 2

2.2 Field Surveys ...................................................................................................... 2

2.2.1 Vegetation Mapping ................................................................................. 2

2.2.2 Jurisdictional Delineation ......................................................................... 2

2.2.3 Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Habitat Assessment

(MSHCP Section 6.2.1) ........................................................................... 3

2.2.4 Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area ........................................... 5

2.2.5 Criteria Area Species Survey Area ........................................................... 5

2.2.6 Burrowing Owl Habitat Assessment and Survey ..................................... 5

3.0 RESULTS .................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Topography and Soils ......................................................................................... 6

3.2 Vegetation Communities .................................................................................... 7

5.2.1 Southern Willow Scrub ............................................................................ 7

5.2.2 Coast Live Oak Woodland ....................................................................... 7

5.2.3 Riversidean Sage Scrub (including disturbed) ......................................... 8

5.2.4 Non-native Grassland (including Rumex dominated) .............................. 8

5.2.5 Eucalyptus Woodland ............................................................................... 8

5.2.6 Developed ................................................................................................. 9

3.4 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands .................................................................... 9

3.4.1 Potential USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction .................................................. 9

3.4.2 Potential CDFW Jurisdiction .................................................................... 9

3.5 Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Habitat Assessment .................................. 10

3.6 Narrow endemic plant species survey ............................................................... 13

3.7 Criteria Area Plant Species Survey ................................................................... 13

3.8 Burrowing Owl Habitat Assessment and Survey ............................................. 13

3.9 Other Sensitive Species..................................................................................... 13

3.9.1 Sensitive Plants ....................................................................................... 14

3.9.2 Sensitive Animals ................................................................................... 19

4.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT ................................................................................... 24

4.1 Federal............................................................................................................... 24

4.2 State................................................................................................................... 25

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

Section Title Page

4.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT ................................................................................... 24

4.3 Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ...................... 26

5.0 IMPACTS ................................................................................................................ 26

5.1 Vegetation Communities .................................................................................. 27

5.2 Jurisdictional Waters and Wetlands .................................................................. 28

5.2.1 Potential USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction ................................................ 28

5.2.2 Potential CDFW Jurisdiction .................................................................. 28

5.3 MSHCP Consistency Analysis ......................................................................... 29

5.4.1 MSHCP Reserve Assembly Requirements ............................................ 29

5.4.2 MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Protection of Species Associated

with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools .................................. 29

5.4.3 MSHCP Section 6.1.3 Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species .... 30

5.4.4 MSHCP Section 6.1.4 Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands

Interface ................................................................................................. 30

5.4.5 MSHCP Section 6.3.2 Additional Survey Needs and Procedures ......... 31

5.4.6 MSHCP Section 6.4 Fuels Management ................................................ 31

5.5 Nesting Birds .................................................................................................... 32

6.0 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION MEASURES ................. 32

6.1 Sensitive Species ............................................................................................... 32

6.1.1. Burrowing Owl ...................................................................................... 32

6.1.2 Nesting Birds .......................................................................................... 32

6.2 Riparian/Riverine Areas .................................................................................... 33

6.3 Non-native Invasive Species Restrictions ......................................................... 34

6.4 MSHCP Mitigation Fee .................................................................................... 34

6.5 Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat HCP Fee .................................................................... 35

7.0 CERTIFICATION/QUALIFICATION ................................................................... 36

8.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 37

LIST OF APPENDICES

A Plant Species Observed

B Animal Species Observed or Detected

C Site Photographs

D Explanation of Status Codes for Plant and Animal Species

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

LIST OF FIGURES

No. Title Follows Page No.

1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................2

2 Project Vicinity Map (USGS Topography) .........................................................................2

3 Project Vicinity Map (Aerial Photograph) ...........................................................................2

4 MSHCP Criteria Map ..........................................................................................................2

5 Vegetation Communities .....................................................................................................8

6 USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction ...........................................................................................10

7 Vegetation Communities/Impacts ......................................................................................10

8 USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction ...........................................................................................30

9 CDFW Jurisdiction and Riparian/Riverine Areas ..............................................................30

LIST OF TABLES

No. Title Page No.

1 Burrowing Owl Survey Information ....................................................................................6

2 Vegetation Communities .....................................................................................................7

3 USACE/RWQCB Jurisdictional Areas ................................................................................9

4 CDFW Jurisdictional Areas .................................................................................................9

5 Riparian/Riverine Areas .....................................................................................................11

6 Special-status Plant Species Potential to Occur .................................................................14

7 Special-status Animal Species Potential to Occur .............................................................17

8 Impacts to Vegetation Communities ..................................................................................27

9 Impacts to Waters of the U.S./State ...................................................................................28

10 Impacts to CDFW Jurisdiction ...........................................................................................28

11 Impacts to Riparian/Riverine Areas and Proposed Mitigation ..........................................33

iv


General Biological Resources Assessment Report for the Wildomar Crossings Project / MNN-01 / December 19, 2017 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Wildomar Crossings project is located in the City of Wildomar in Riverside County,

California. The purpose of this report is (1) to document field study findings and (2) to address

requirements of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan

(MSHCP; Dudek and Associates [Dudek] 2003). This updated General Biological Resource

Assessment (GBRA) supersedes the previous GBRA.

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION

The approximately 4.4-acre project site is located at the northwest corner of Clinton Keith Road

and Stable Lanes Road in the City of Wildomar (City), Riverside County, California (figure 1).

The site is situated on the U.S. Geological survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Wildomar and Murrieta

quadrangle maps in Section 1, Township 7 South, Range 4 West (Figure 2). In addition, the

project site is within the Santa Margarita watershed.

The site comprises two parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 380-120-003 and -004), as well as

road right-of way on both Stable Lanes Road and Clinton Keith Road, and is bordered by a mix

of rural residential and undeveloped land, with a major road and commercial development

located nearby to the northeast (Figure 3).

The property is located within the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP, but is not with a criteria

cell or cell group. The nearest criteria cell occurs approximately one mile to the northeast

(Figure 4). The area plan subunits each have specific planning species and biological

considerations. These items do not apply to the subject property as it is not within a subunit.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project design is for construction of a commercial retail shopping center consisting

of four buildings ranging from just over 3,000 square feet up to 10,000 square feet in size. The

project also includes parking facilities, off-site roadway and drainage improvements, and other

associated infrastructure.

2.0 METHODS

Project site evaluation involved literature review, a riparian/riverine and Vernal Pool habitat

assessment, a delineation of jurisdictional waters, a focused burrowing owl survey, and

vegetation mapping, along with a general habitat assessment of the potential for sensitive species

to occur on site. The methods used to evaluate the biological resources present on site are

discussed in this section. The plant and animal species detected on site are shown in Appendices

A and B, respectively. Appendix C contains site photographs. Appendix D contains definitions

of plant and animal species designations used throughout this document.


2.1 NOMENCLATURE AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Nomenclature used in this report generally follows MSHCP conventions. Vegetation community

classifications follow Holland (1986) and the MSHCP (Dudek 2003). Latin names of plants

follow Baldwin et al. (2012), and common names follow Hickman or the California Native Plant

Society (CNPS; 2016). Sensitive plant and animal status is taken from the California Natural

Diversity Database (CNDDB) of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW; 2016a,

b, c, and d) and CNPS (2016). nomenclature follows Emmel and Emmel (1973) for butterflies

,Taggart (2014) for amphibians and reptiles, American Ornithologists’ Union (2015) for birds,

and Baker et al. (2003) for mammals.

2.2 FIELD SURVEYS

2.2.1 Vegetation Mapping

The vegetation on the project site was mapped by HELIX biologists W. Larry Sward and Rob

Hogenauer during field work conducted in 2009. The vegetation map was updated by Mr.

Hogenauer on August 29, 2016. Mapping unit size was 0.1 acre for uplands and 0.01 acre for

riparian habitat.

2.2.2 Jurisdictional Delineation

Prior to beginning fieldwork, aerial photographs (1"=100' scale), and topographic maps

(1"=100' scale) were reviewed to determine the location of potential jurisdictional areas that may

be affected by the proposed project. Data were collected in areas that were suspected to support

potential jurisdictional resources by Mr. Hogenauer on August 29, 2016. The 2016 survey

provided an update to the previous field work conducted by Mr. Hogenauer and HELIX biologist

W. Larry Sward in 2009. Sampling points were taken within representative uplands and

wetlands, and mapping of drainage features was performed in the field based on the presence of

a consistent ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and surface indications of hydrology.

Additional information was collected during a November 27, 2017 on site meeting with CDFW,

USFWS, and the City of Wildomar.

Potential U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) wetland boundaries were determined using

the three criteria (vegetation, hydrology, and soils) established for wetland delineations, as

described within the Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and since

updated in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:

Arid West Region (USACE 2008a). Potential USACE non-wetland boundaries were further

determined using methods suggested by the USACE in A Field Guide to the Identification of the

Ordinary High Water Mark in the Arid West Region of the Western United States (USACE

2008b). The same methods were used to determine potential Regional Water Quality Control

Board (RWQCB) jurisdiction in the form of waters of the State.

Potential California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional boundaries were

determined based on the presence of riparian vegetation or regular surface flow. Streambeds

within CDFW jurisdiction were delineated based on the definition of streambed as “a body of

?q

A»

!"a$

!"a$

%&h(

A¦

!"a$

!"a$ Aª

Aª%&h(

A¦

?q

Aª

AÀ

!"̀$

AÚ

?u

AÌ

A¦ A³

Aw

A³

AÌ

A¦

Aª

!

Project Site

Norco

Riverside

Corona

Moreno Valley

LakeElsinore

Murrieta

Temecula

Hemet

San Jacinto

Beaumont

BanningDesert Hot Springs

PerrisPalm Springs

Palm Desert

Coachella

Salton Sea

LakeCahuilla

HemetLake

DiamondValley Lake

Lake Perris

Lake Skinner

Vail Lake

LakeElsinore

LakeMathews

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYRIVERSIDE COUNTY

SAN DIEGO COUNTYRIVERSIDE COUNTY

RIVER

SIDE C

OUNTY

ORANGE COUNTY

Figure 1

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSRegional LocationI:

\PR

OJE

CT

S\M

\MN

N\M

NN

-01_

Wil

dom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig1_R

egio

nal.

mxd M

NN

-01 0

9/1

2/1

6 -

RK

0 10MilesN

Project Site

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig2_U

SG

S_V

icin

ity.m

xd M

NN

-01 09

/12

/16

-R

K

Figure 2

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSProject Vicinity Map (USGS Topography)

0 2,000FeetN

Copyright:© 2011 National Geographic Society, i-cubed; USGS Wildomar and Murrieta 7.5' Quadrangles

Palomar Street Clinton Keith Road

Grand AvenueGe

orge

Ave

nue

Boylan Springs Road

Central

Stree

t

Catt Road

Baxter Road

Washington Avenue

Prielipp Road

!"a$

Project Site

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig3_A

eria

l_V

icin

ity.m

xd

M

NN

-01 09/1

2/1

6 -

RK

Figure 3

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSProject Vicinity Map (Aerial Photograph)

0 2,000FeetN

; USGS Wildomar and Murrieta 7.5' Quadrangles

Palomar Street Clinton Keith Road

Grand AvenueGe

orge

Ave

nue

Boylan Springs Road

Central

Stree

t

Catt Road

Baxter Road

Washington Avenue

Prielipp Road

!"a$

Project Site

5988 5983

5558

5455

5350 5351

L'

K'

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig4_M

SH

CP

.mxd

M

NN

-01 09/1

2/1

6 -

RK

Figure 4

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSMSHCP Criteria Map

0 2,000FeetN

; USGS Wildomar and Murrieta 7.5' Quadrangles

Project Boundary

MSHCP Cell Group

MSHCP Cell


water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and

supporting fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface

flow that supports riparian vegetation” (Title 14, Section 1.72). Additional details are included in

the complete jurisdictional delineation report (HELIX 2016a).

2.2.3 Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Habitat Assessment (MSHCP Section 6.2.1)

The MSHCP defines Riparian/Riverine habitat “as lands which contain Habitat dominated by

[trees], shrubs, persistent emergents, or emergent mosses and lichens, which occur close to or

which depend upon soil moisture from a nearby fresh water source; or areas with fresh water flow

during all or a portion of the year.” The MSHCP defines Vernal Pools as “seasonal wetlands that

occur in depression areas that have wetlands indicators of all three parameters (soils, vegetation,

and hydrology) during the wetter portion of the growing season but normally lack wetlands

indicators of hydrology and/or vegetation during the drier portion of the growing season”

(Dudek 2003).

In accordance with the MSHCP, a Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitat assessment was

conducted by Mr. Hogenauer on August 29, 2016. The assessment was conducted concurrently

with the jurisdictional water survey and vegetation mapping field effort. Topographic maps and

satellite photos were used to aid in the mapping. The on-site evaluation consisted of a directed

search for field characteristics indicative of Riparian/Riverine or Vernal Pool habitats. Field

indicators include certain plants, drainage courses, drainage patterns, ponded water, changes in

soil character, changes in vegetation character, and deposits of water-borne debris.

Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitats (if present) were mapped on an aerial photograph

(1"=200' scale).

The MSHCP also states that “areas demonstrating characteristics [of riparian/riverine habitat]

which are artificially created are not included in these definitions” of riparian/riverine habitat.

The identification of riparian/riverine habitats is based on potential for the habitat to support

Riparian/Riverine Covered Species, which are identified in MSHCP Section 6.1.2. These species

include least Bell’s vireo (LBV; Vireo bellii pusillus) and a suite of other animals and plants

outlined in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

Riparian/Riverine Plants

The MSHCP lists 23 sensitive plant species that have potential to occur in Riparian/Riverine and

Vernal Pool habitats. These species are:

• California black walnut (Juglans californica var. californica),

• Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii),

• Coulter’s matilija poppy (Romneya coulteri),

• San Miguel savory (Clinopodium chandleri),

• spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis),

• graceful tarplant (Holocarpha virgata ssp. elongata),

• California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica),

• prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata),


• San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii),

• Orcutt’s brodiaea (Brodiaea orcuttii),

• thread-leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia),

• Fish’s milkwort (Polygala cornuta var. fishiae),

• lemon lily (Lilium parryi),

• San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. notatior),

• ocellated Humboldt lily (L. humboldtii ssp. ocellatum),

• Mojave tarplant (Deinandra mohavensis),

• vernal barley (Hordeum intercedens),

• Parish’s meadowfoam (Limnanthes gracilis var. parishii),

• slender-horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras),

• Santa Ana River woolly-star (Eriastrum densifolium ssp. sanctorum),

• Brand’s phacelia (Phacelia stellaris),

• mud nama (Nama stenocarpum), and

• smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis)

Riparian Birds

The project site was assessed for habitat that could support the LBV, southwestern willow

flycatcher (WIFL; Empidonax traillii extimus), and western yellow-billed cuckoo (YBCU;

Coccyzus americanus occidentalis). Typical habitat for LBV consists of well-developed riparian

scrub, woodland, or forest dominated by willows (Salix spp.), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia),

and western cottonwood (Populus fremontii). The LBV will also use small patches of trees

adjacent to dense riparian habitat. The WIFL and YBCU require mature riparian forest with a

stratified canopy and nearby water. The MSHCP requires surveys to be conducted for projects

that have impacts to suitable habitat for the aforementioned riparian birds. The 0.08-acre

southern willow scrub on the property was determined not to have size, density, or layering to

support LBV, WIFL, or YBCU. Surveys for LBV, WIFL, or YBCU are not required and were

not conducted.

Both the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) occur

primarily in and adjacent to open water habitats, with the peregrine falcon possibly occurring

adjacent to riparian areas. The peregrine falcon nests on large cliffs that are generally 200 to

300 feet in height. Habitat to support the bald eagle or peregrine falcon does not occur on

the property.

Fairy Shrimp

There are three species of sensitive fairy shrimp that occur in western Riverside County:

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp (Linderiella

santarosae), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi). The property was surveyed for

habitat, such as vernal pools or ephemeral ponds, which could support fairy shrimp. Indicators of

potential fairy shrimp habitat that were searched include basins, ruts, cracked mud, algal mats,

and drift lines.


Fish

The Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) is the only fish shown in the list of MSHCP

Riparian/Riverine species. The property was searched for streams with potential to support

this species.

Amphibians

The MSHCP has three amphibians in the list of Riparian/Riverine species: arroyo toad (Anaxyrus

californicus), mountain yellow-legged frog (Rana muscosa), and the California red-legged frog

(Rana aurora draytonii). The property was searched for habitat with potential to support these

three species.

The Riparian/Riverine habitat assessment conducted on August 29, 2016 included a directed

search for the aforementioned species. The search focused on the riparian area (proposed for

avoidance) along with walking transects throughout the remainder of the property. If these

species occur, they are required to be mapped and avoided. If avoidance is not feasible, then a

Determination of Biologically Equivalent Superior Preservation (DBESP) is required to quantify

impacts and establish mitigation for the impacted species.

2.2.4 Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area

The project site is not within a Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA) of the

MSHCP. No surveys for NEPSSA species are required.

2.2.5 Criteria Area Species Survey Area

The project site does not occur within a Criteria Area Species Survey Area (CASSA) of the

MSHCP. No surveys for CASSA species area required.

2.2.6 Burrowing Owl Habitat Assessment and Survey

The site occurs within an area that requires protocol surveys for the burrowing owl (BUOW;

Athene cunicularia) if suitable habitat is found to be present. The BUOW habitat assessment and

focused survey efforts completed for the project were conducted in accordance with the

Burrowing Owl Survey Instructions for the Western Riverside MSHCP (County of Riverside

2006) and meets applicable conditions under Section 6, Volume I of the Western Riverside

County MSHCP.

Mr. Hogenauer conducted the initial BUOW habitat assessment concurrent with the initial general

habitat assessment and plant survey. Suitable habitat was confirmed and focused BUOW surveys

were completed at the site in years 2009 and 2016. HELIX completed a total of four survey visits

from August 28 through 31, 2009, and a total of four survey visits from August 12 through 29,

2016 during the BUOW breeding season (Table 1). Mr. Hogenauer conducted both the 2009 and

2016 surveys, with help from HELIX biologist Benjamin Rosenbaum who conducted survey 1

in 2016.


HELIX biologists surveyed transects no greater than 30 yards apart through potential BUOW

habitat located on the property. The biologists walked slowly and methodically, closely checking

the areas that met the basic requirements of BUOW habitat:

• Open expanses of sparsely vegetated areas (less than 30 percent canopy cover for trees

and shrubs),

• Gently rolling or level terrain,

• An abundance of small mammal burrows, especially those of California ground squirrel

(Otospermophilus beecheyi), and

• Fence posts, rock, or other low perching locations.

The BUOW survey information is summarized below within Table 1.

Table 1

BURROWING OWL SURVEY INFORMATION

DATE TIME

(hours) WEATHER CONDITIONS

8/28/09 1740-1810 Clear, 96°F, wind 1-3 mph

8/29/09 1910-1930 Cloudy, 92-93°F, wind 2-4 mph

8/30/09 1800-1820 Clear, 96°F, wind 3-5 mph

8/31/09 1855-1915 Clear, 88-89°F, wind 1-3 mph

8/12/16 0630-0730 Clear, 63-67°F, wind 0-2 mph

8/16/16 0600-0630 Clear, 68°F, wind 0-1 mph

8/24/16 0605-0640 Clear, 64-65°F, wind 0-1 mph

8/29/16 0615-0745 Clear, 68-70°F, wind 1-2 mph

Potential owl burrow locations including fossorial animal burrows, rock outcrops, and debris

piles were checked for signs of recent owl occupation, which include:

• Pellets/Casting – regurgitated fur, bones, and insect parts,

• White wash – excrement, and

• Feathers.

3.0 RESULTS

This section addresses the results of research and fieldwork conducted as part of the biological

resources technical study, including discussions on the existing conditions and sensitive

biological resources that occur or have potential to occur on the project site.

3.1 TOPOGRAPHY AND SOILS

The MSHCP lists nine sensitive soil types as occurring within the Plan Area (Dudek 2003). None

of the MSHCP sensitive soils occurs on the project site. Three soil types are mapped within the

project site: Ramona and Buren loams (RnE3; 5 to 25 percent, slopes, severely eroded), San


Timoteo loam (SmE2; 8 to 25 percent slopes, eroded), and Hanford coarse sandy loam (HcC;

2 to 8 percent slopes; USDA 2013).

3.2 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

The project site currently comprises six vegetation communities/land uses: southern willow

scrub, coast live oak woodland, Riversidean sage scrub, non-native grassland (including Rumex

dominated), Eucalyptus woodland, and developed (Table 2; Figure 5).

5.2.1 Southern Willow Scrub

Southern willow scrub consists of dense, broadleaved, winter-deciduous stands of trees

dominated by shrubby willows (Salix sp.) in association with mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia).

This habitat occurs on loose, sandy, or fine gravelly alluvium deposited near stream channels

during flood flows. Frequent flooding or limited hydrology maintains this early seral community,

preventing succession to a riparian woodland or forest (Holland 1986). The property supports

0.08 acre of this vegetation community in the southern corner (Figure 5). Species present include

red willow (Salix laevigata), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), and Fremont cottonwood (Populus

fremontii ssp. fremontii).

Table 2

VEGETATION COMMUNITIES*

VEGETATION COMMUNITY ACRES

Riparian/Wetland Southern Willow Scrub 0.08 Coast live oak woodland 0.03 Eucalyptus woodland (associated with stream)

0.07

Developed-rip/rap (streambed) 0.02 Subtotal Riparian/Wetland 0.2

Upland Riversidean sage scrub 0.2 Riversidean sage scrub - disturbed 0.7 Eucalyptus Woodland 0.1 Non-native grassland (including Rumex-dominated)

2.0

Developed land 1.2 Subtotal Upland 4.2

TOTAL 4.4

* Upland habitats are rounded to the nearest 0.1 acre, while wetland habitats

are rounded to the nearest 0.01; thus, totals reflect rounding.

5.2.2 Coast Live Oak Woodland

Coast live oak woodland is an evergreen woodland community dominated by coast live oak

(Quercus agrifolia), which may reach a height of 35 to 80 feet. This vegetation community is

generally found on north-facing slopes and shaded ravines often with a poorly developed

shrub understory.


The site supports a single small area of this vegetation community in the southern corner.

Species present include coast live oak with an herbaceous understory.

5.2.3 Riversidean Sage Scrub (including disturbed)

Riversidean sage scrub (RSS) occupies xeric sites such as steep slopes, severely drained soils, or clays that slowly release stored soil moisture. It is dominated by sub-shrubs with leaves that are deciduous during drought, an adaptation that allows the habitat to withstand the prolonged drought period in the summer and fall. Sage scrub species have relatively shallow root systems and open canopies that allow for the occurrence of a substantial herbaceous (annual plant) component. Typical stands are fairly open and dominated by species such as California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), brittlebush (Encelia farinosa), and California buckwheat (Holland 1986). Undisturbed sage scrub occurs along the north, west, and southern edge of the property. Sage scrub disturbed from disking occurs on the central and southwestern slopes of the property.

5.2.4 Non-native Grassland (including Rumex dominated)

Non-native grassland is a dense to sparse cover of annual grasses often associated with numerous species of showy-flowered native annual forbs. This association occurs on gradual slopes with deep, fine-textured, usually clay soils. This vegetation community typically supports species such as oats (Avena spp.), foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), ripgut grass (B. diandrus), filaree (Erodium spp.), and mustard (Brassica nigra). Non-native grassland is the dominant habitat on the property. A small portion (0.07 acre) of the non-native grassland is dominated by curly dock. Although this patch of non-native grassland is different from the majority of the non-native grassland on the property, it is does not meet the definition of separate vegetation community description due to its landscape position and other plant species observed.

5.2.5 Eucalyptus Woodland

Eucalyptus woodland is dominated by eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.), an introduced species that produces a large amount of leaf and bark litter. The chemical and physical characteristics of this litter limit the ability of other species to grow in the understory, with a resultant decrease in floristic diversity. Eucalyptus trees have been planted historically for a variety of reasons, but they are particularly popular owing to their rapid growth rate. Given sufficient moisture, eucalyptus woodland has become naturalized and its range has expanded greatly, to the detriment of many riparian areas. There are two patches of eucalyptus woodland in the center of the property. The majority of this habitat occurs within or adjacent to the stream in the southern corner of the property. The portion of the habitat rooted within the streambed is considered Riparian/Riverine. The eucalyptus woodland along the streambed includes a couple sapling coast live oaks.

Clinton Keith Road

Stable Lanes Road

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig5_V

eget

ati

on

.mx

d M

NN

-01 0

9/2

8/2

016 -

RK

Figure 5

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSVegetation Communities

0 100FeetN

Project Site

Riprap

Vegetation CommunitiesCoast Live Oak Woodland

Southern Willow Scrub

Riversidean Sage Scrub

Riversidean Sage Scrub Disturbed

Eucalyptus Woodland

Non-native Grassland

Non-native GrasslandRumex crispus Dominated

(Upland, Disked)

Developed


5.2.6 Developed

Developed land is where permanent structures and/or pavement have been placed, which

prevents the growth of vegetation, or where landscaping is clearly tended and maintained.

Developed land on the property consists of the recently improved Stable Lanes Road, a portion

of Clinton Keith Road, and the slope adjacent to the Clinton Keith Road that was recently

impacted from improvements to the road. The rip-rap that occurs at the storm drain outlets is

developed and is also considered to be an unvegetated jurisdictional habitat.

3.4 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS

The delineation of waters revealed that waters on the property include waters that are

jurisdictional to the USACE and the CDFW.

3.4.1 Potential USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction

The delineation revealed that a total of 0.05 acre of waters of the U.S. occur on the property. It

consists of 0.01 acre of wetland waters of the U.S. (southern willow scrub) and 0.04 acre of

non-wetland waters of the U.S. (Table 3; Figure 6). All USACE/RWQCB jurisdictional areas

occur within the streambed that crosses the southern corner of the property.

Table 3

USACE/RWQCB JURISDICTIONAL AREAS

USACE/RWQCB JURISDICTION ACRE LINEAR FEET

Wetland Waters of the U.S./State

Southern willow scrub 0.01 64

Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S./State

Streambed (unnamed tributary to Murrieta Creek) 0.02 145

Sheet flow (Inconsistent OHWM) 0.02 248

TOTAL 0.05 457

3.4.2 Potential CDFW Jurisdiction

Potential CDFW jurisdiction on the site consists of 0.08 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.03 acre

of coast live oak woodland, 0.07 acre of eucalyptus woodland, 0.02-acre drainage pattern (sheet

flow), and 0.02 acre of developed/ rip-rap (Table 4, Figure 7). A total of 0.18 acre of riparian

habitat and 0.04 acre of unvegetated streambed/sheet flow occurs on site.

Table 4

CDFW JURISDICTIONAL AREAS

CDFW JURISDICTION ACRE* LINEAR FEET

Riparian Habitat


Coast live oak woodland 0.03 26

Eucalyptus woodland 0.07 105


Table 4 (cont.)

CDFW JURISDICTIONAL AREAS

CDFW JURISDICTION ACRE* LINEAR FEET

Unvegetated Streambed

Developed/rip-rap 0.02 25

Drainage pattern, Sheet flow 0.02 248

TOTAL 0.22 468 *Acres rounded to nearest 0.01 acre.

Potential CDFW jurisdictional riparian habitat and streambed that are also Riparian/Riverine

areas are discussed below.

3.5 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AND VERNAL POOL HABITAT ASSESSMENT

The identification of Riparian/Riverine Areas is based on the potential for the habitat to support

or contribute to downstream habitat that supports Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine

Areas, as identified in MSHCP Section 6.1.2.

The Riparian/Riverine habitat assessment identified a total of 0.22 acre of Riparian/Riverine

habitat on the property. The habitat comprises approximately 0.08 acre of southern willow scrub,

0.03 acre of coast live oak woodland, 0.07 acre of eucalyptus woodland (associated with stream),

0.02-acre drainage pattern/sheet flow, and 0.02 acre of unvegetated rip/rap streambed (Table 5).

The Riparian/Riverine habitats that meet the MSHCP definition mainly occur in the southern

corner of the site, and also include a streambed/sheet flow that crossing the site from north to

south. The rip-rap adjacent to Stable Lanes Road is a manufactured feature that is part of an

outfall structure. As a manufactured feature, it does not meet the MSHCP definition of a

Riparian/Riverine habitat. The rip-rap streambed is included with the Riparian/Riverine habitats

as it occurs within the limits of a natural riverine habitat. Southern willow scrub is typically

habitat for sensitive riparian birds but this habitat on site is small (0.08 acre), of low quality, and

lacks an understory, resulting in it not having potential to support LBV, WIFL, or YBCU (Dudek

2003). As such, surveys for these sensitive riparian birds are not required.

The drainage/sheet flow that crosses the site from north to south originates at the Stable Lanes

culvert and crosses the site primarily via sheet flow to connect to the streambed in the southern

corner of the property. This feature lacks a discernible bed and bank except at the north and

south ends.

The majority of the Riparian/Riverine habitats are at the southern end of the site where an

unnamed drainage/streambed crosses the corner of the property. The vegetation in and along this

drainage includes the aforementioned southern willow scrub, coast live oak woodland, and

eucalyptus woodland. The functions and services of the on-site reaches of the drainages are

minimal, consisting of conveying small amounts of water, sediment trapping and transport,

toxicant trapping, and nutrient trapping and transport. This drainage connects to downstream

resources (Murrieta Creek) approximately 2,000 feet to the south that have potential to support

species shown in Section 6.1.2 of the MSHCP.

!(

!(

!(!(

Clinton Keith Road

Stable Lanes Road

SP4SP3

SP2

SP1Culvert

Culvert

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig6_U

SA

CE

.mxd M

NN

-01 0

9/2

8/2

016 -

RK

Figure 6

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSUSACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction

0 100FeetN

Project Site

!( Sampling Point

Riprap

Non-wetland Waters of the U.S./StateStreambed

Wetland Waters of the U.S./StateSouthern Willow Scrub

Clinton Keith Road

Stable Lanes Road

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig7_V

eget

ati

on

Imp

acts

.mxd

M

NN

-01

10/2

4/2

016 -

RK

Figure 7

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSVegetation Communities/Impacts

0 100FeetN

Project Site

Impact Area

Riprap

Vegetation CommunitiesCoast Live Oak Woodland

Southern Willow Scrub

Riversidean Sage Scrub

Riversidean Sage Scrub Disturbed

Eucalyptus Woodland

Streambed


Non-native GrasslandRumex crispus Dominated

(Upland, Disked)

Developed


Table 5

RIPARIAN/RIVERINE HABITATS

HABITAT ACRE LINEAR FEET

Riparian Habitat


Coast live oak woodland 0.03 26

Eucalyptus woodland 0.07 105

Riverine/Unvegetated Streambed

Developed/rip-rap 0.02 25

Drainage Pattern, sheet flow 0.02 248

TOTAL 0.22 468 *Acres are rounded to nearest 0.01 acre.

Project impacts to this drainage will require a DBESP to be completed under a separate report.

The measures outlined in the DBESP report will demonstrate how the proposed project will

provide for biologically equivalent or superior mitigation for the unavoidable impacts in

accordance with the MSHCP.

Riparian/Riverine Plants

Twenty-three plant species are identified in the MSHCP as potentially occurring in

Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool habitats. None of the 23 species occur on the property.

The plant species associated with Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool areas were confirmed to be

absent from the site. A number of the species including California Orcutt grass, spreading

navarretia, thread-leaved brodiaea, San Miguel savory, graceful tarplant, prostrate navarretia,

San Diego button-celery, Orcutt’s brodiaea, Fish’s milkwort, lemon lily, San Jacinto Valley

crownscale, Mojave tarplant, Brand’s phacelia, Santa Ana River woolly-star, vernal barley, and

Parish’s meadowfoam, occur in habitats that do not occur on the property (e.g., vernal pools) or

have distributions well outside of the property. The remaining species have a distribution that

includes the property or occur in habitats found on the property and are discussed in greater

detail below.

Engelmann oak is a conspicuous tree species associated with alluvial fans and slopes with a

mesic aspect. Coast live oak trees occur on the property. No Engelmann oaks were observed; this

species is presumed to be absent from the property.

Mud nama is restricted to muddy embankments of marshes and swamps and within lake margins

and riverbanks (CNPS 2016). Three populations are known from Riverside County, with

two occurring along the San Jacinto River (Dudek 2003). This species was not observed and is

presumed to be absent from the property.

Smooth tarplant is found in southwestern California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico

(Baja), and occurs in San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego counties. This species occurs in

open spaces within a variety of habitats, including alkali scrub and playas, riparian woodland,

watercourses, and grasslands with alkaline affinities (Dudek 2003; CNPS 2016). This species

was not observed and is presumed to be absent from the property.


Coulter’s Matilija poppy occurs in dry washes and canyons below 3,600 feet. It often occurs

within sage scrub and chaparral habitats. Dense shrub cover may limit expansion of this species

(Dudek 2003). This species is easily detected when present. It was not observed and is presumed

absent from the property.

Ocellated Humboldt lily is associated with riparian corridors in coniferous forest and chaparral

habitats. Within Western Riverside County, ocellated Humboldt lily is restricted to canyons

along the east slope of the Santa Ana Mountains and the north slope of the Palomar Mountains.

The riparian habitat on site is not associated with coniferous forest. This species was not

observed and is presumed to be absent from the property.

Slender-horned spineflower is typically found in mature alluvial scrub with sandy soils but is

also found in rocky soils and open chamise chaparral. Ideal habitat is thought to be benches or

terraces that receive overbank flow every 50 to 100 years. Habitat for this species does not occur

on site. This species was not observed and is presumed to be absent from the property.

None of the 23 MSHCP Riparian/Riverine and Vernal pool plant species was observed on site

and none is expected to occur within the project site.

Riparian Birds

The LBV, WIFL, and YBCU are found in southern willow scrub, cottonwood forest, mule fat

scrub, sycamore alluvial woodland, and arroyo willow riparian forest habitats that typically

feature dense cover. The project site includes 0.08 acre of southern willow scrub that lacks

understory. This habitat is not a significant stand and is not expected to support LBV, WIFL, or

YBCU. No LBV, WIFL, or YBCU were heard or observed during the other surveys conducted

on the property.

Fairy Shrimp

Vernal pool fairy shrimp occurs throughout the Central Valley and in several disjunct

populations in Riverside County. This species exists in vernal pools and other ephemeral basins

often located in patches of grassland and agriculture interspersed in Diegan coastal sage scrub

and chaparral. Riverside fairy shrimp occurs in Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties, as

well as in northern Baja California, Mexico. This species is typically found in deeper vernal

pools and other ephemeral basins that hold water for long periods (30 or more days). Santa Rosa

Plateau fairy shrimp are limited to the Santa Rosa Plateau.

The site was searched for the presence of vernal pools and vernal pool indicators. Clay soils

typically associated with vernal pools are not present on site. No vernal pool or vernal pool

indicator species was observed on site. The non-native grassland, Rumex dominated, may

occasional hold water following heavy rains, but the water does not remain for a duration long

enough to support fairy shrimp.


Fish

The Santa Ana sucker is restricted to the Santa Ana River watershed with year-round flows. This

species generally lives is small shallow streams less than seven meters wide with various current

strengths. They require permanent streams with a preferred gravel bottom. They prefer cool,

clear water but can tolerate turbid waters. The drainage feature on site is not suitable for this

species. This species is not expected to occur on the project site.

Amphibians

Arroyo toads occur in streams that have breeding pools that are shallow with minimal current.

Requirements also include sandy banks with area of minimal vegetative cover. Arroyo toad

habitat does not occur on the project site. Mountain yellow-legged frog and California red-legged

frog are not known to occur in the project vicinity. The mountain yellow-legged frog occurs in

mountain streams and is currently only known within Riverside County in the San Jacinto

Mountains. The California red-legged frog is only known within Riverside County on the Santa

Rosa Plateau. It required deep water with adjacent uplands to move between breeding sites.

Habitat for these species does not occur on the project site. The drainage feature is not suitable

for sensitive amphibians known to occur within the MSHCP planning area. None of the MSHCP

sensitive amphibian species are expected to occur on the project site.

3.6 NARROW ENDEMIC PLANT SPECIES SURVEY

The project site is not within a NEPSSA survey area.

3.7 CRITERIA AREA PLANT SPECIES SURVEY

The project site is not within a CASSA species survey area.

3.8 BURROWING OWL HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND SURVEY

As discussed above, the site was surveyed for BUOW as required by the MSHCP. Focused

BUOW surveys were conducted in 2009 and 2016. The property has approximately three acres

of habitat with low potential to support BUOW. Burrows with potential to support BUOW were

observed in a few scattered locations on site. No BUOW or sign of BUOW were observed during

the habitat assessment and focused BUOW surveys. The site has very low potential to support

BUOW. With surrounding development and current disturbed nature of the site, it is unlikely that

BUOW would occur on site.

3.9 OTHER SENSITIVE SPECIES

A nine-quadrangle search (Wildomar, Murrieta, Bachelor Mountain, Fallbrook, Lake Elsinore,

Pechanga, Romoland, Temecula, and Winchester) centered on the Murrieta quadrangle of the

California Natural Diversity Database and CNPS was conducted along with an in-house database

search for sensitive plants and animals that have potential to occur in the project vicinity. A list

of plant and animal species observed or detected in the study area is included as Appendix A


and B, respectively. Below is a discussion of the sensitive plants and animals from the database

search. Plant and animal species already discussed in the report above are not included here to

avoid duplicate discussions.

3.9.1 Sensitive Plants

A total of 54 sensitive plant species were analyzed for their potential to occur on the site, six of

which are federal and/or state listed (Table 6). The listed species are Munz’s Onion (Allium

munzii), Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevinii), San Diego Ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila),

thread-leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia), Vail Lake ceanothus (Ceanothus ophiochilus), and

San Jacinto Valley crownscale (Atriplex coronata var. notatior). None of the listed species was

observed on the property. One of the listed species, Munz’s onion, has low potential to occur on

the property.

One of the 48 non-listed species was observed on the property. Paniculate tarplant was observed

in the grassland on the property. The exact number of individual plants was not able to be

determined due to the regular disking of the property.

Table 6

SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Listed Species

Vail Lake ceanothus

(Ceanothus

ophiochilus)

FT/SE

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Gabbroitic, chaparral. Not expected. Habitat is not present

on property. Species not observed

on property and is conspicuous

year-round.

Thread-leaved

brodiaea

(Brodiaea filifolia)

FT/SE

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Semi alkaline mud

flats and vernal pools,

in clay soils.

Not expected. No vernal pools or

mud flats present.

San Jacinto Valley

crownscale

(Atriplex coronata var.

notatior)

FE/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Occurs in playas,

chenopod scrub,

valley and foothill

grassland, and vernal

pools. From 1,250 to

1,805 feet in

elevation.

Not expected. Playa and vernal pool

habitat not present.

San Diego Ambrosia

(Ambrosia pumila)

FE/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Floodplain terraces

and vernal pool

margins.

Not expected. Vernal pools not

present, property highly disturbed.

Nevin’s barberry

(Berberis nevinii)

FE/SE

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Coarse soils, rocky

slopes, chaparral, and

gravelly wash banks.

Not expected. Species not observed

on property, and is conspicuous

year-round.

Munz’s Onion

(Allium munzii)

FE/ST

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Clay soils, opening in

grassland, sage scrub.

Low. Openings occur on property,

possible clay inclusions, property

highly disturbed.


Table 6 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species

Bottle liverwort

(Sphaerocarpos

drewei)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Chaparral or coastal

scrub below 2,000

feet amsl.

Low. Sage scrub present but is

sparse and mostly disturbed.

California ayenia

(Ayenia compacta)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 2B.3

Washes associated

with creosote bush

scrub.

Not expected. Habitat does not

occur on property.

California screw moss

(Tortula californica)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Sandy soils in

chenopod scrub or

native grasslands.

Not expected. Chenopod scrub and

native grasslands not present.

Campbell’s liverwort

(Geothallus tuberosus)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Mesic soil, in

wetlands, vernal

pools, grassland,

chaparral and coastal

scrub.

Not expected. No vernal pool

habitat present.

Chaparral nolina

(Nolina cismontana)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Chaparral and coastal

scrub.

Low. Sage scrub present but is

sparse and mostly disturbed.

Chaparral Sand

verbena

(Abronia villosa

aurita)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Sandy soils, requires

bare ground; not

tolerant of weeds.

Not expected. Loose sand no

present. High level of weeds on

property.

Coulter’s goldfields

(Lasthenia glabrata

ssp. coulteri)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Alkaline habitats

associated with

Travers soils.

Not expected. No Travers or

alkaline soils on property.

Davidson’s saltscale

(Atriplex serenana var.

davidsonii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Alkaline lowlands

with saline soil.

Not expected. Habitat not present.

Delicate clarkia

(Clarkia delicata)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral and

woodland, often on

gabbroic soil.


Felt-leaved monardella

(Monardella

hypoleuca spp. lanata)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral and

woodland.

Not expected. Native woodland and

chaparral not present.

Gander’s ragwort

(Senecio ganderi)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral, burn, and

gabbroic outcrops.

Not expected. Preferred habitat

does not occur on property.

Hall’s monardella

(Monardella

macrantha ssp. hallii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.3

Broad leaf forest,

coniferous forest,

chaparral, cismontane

woodland, and

grassland.

Not expected. Grassland is non-

native, other habitats not present.


Table 6 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species

Hammitt’s clay cress

(Sibaropsis hammittii)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Clay soils. In

openings in chaparral

or grassland.

Low. Non-native grassland present,

but is highly disturbed.

Heart-leaved pitcher

sage

(Lepechinia

cardiophylla)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Perennial shrub found

in coniferous forests,

chaparral and

cismontane

woodland.


Intermediate mariposa

lily

(Calochortus weedii

var. intermedius)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Rocky, chaparral,

scrub, and grassland.

Low. Limited amount of potential

habitat (scrub and grassland)

present.

Intermediate

monardella

(Monardella

hypoleuca ssp.

intermedia)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.3

Chaparral,

cismontane

woodland, and

occasionally

coniferous forest.


Jaeger’s milk-vetch

(Astragalus pachypus

var. jaegeri)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Open sandy or rocky

slopes, dry ridges,

sage scrub, chaparral,

grassland, and

woodland


habitat (scrub and grassland)

present.

Lakeside ceanothus

(Ceanothus cyaneus)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Inland mixed

chaparral.


Latimer’s woodland-

gilia

(Saltugilia latimeri)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral, Mojavean

desert scrub, Pinyon

and juniper woodland

/rocky or sandy, often

granitic, sometimes

washes.


Lewis evening

primrose

(Camissoniopsis

lewisii)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 3

Sandy or clay soils,

cismontane

woodland, coastal

dunes, coastal scrub,

grassland.

Low. Sage scrub and grassland

present, but property highly

disturbed.

Long-spined

spineflower

(Chorizanthe

polygonoides

longispina)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral, sage scrub,

grassland, often in

clay soils.

Low. Sage scrub and grasslands

present. Potential for clay

inclusions. Property highly

disturbed.

many-stemmed

dudleya

(Dudleya multicaulis)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Clay soils in barren,

rocky areas with

limited vegetation.

Not expected. Property not rocky

and is highly disturbed.


Table 6 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species

Mesa horkelia

(Horkelia cuneata ssp.

puberula)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Chaparral, woodland,

and scrub, sandy, or

gravelly.


habitat present.

Orcutt’s brodiaea

(Brodiaea orcuttii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Mesic clay woodland,

chaparral scrub, and

vernal pools.

Not expected. No vernal pool

habitat.

Orcutt’s pincushion

(Chaenactis

glabriuscula var.

orcuttiana)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Coastal scrub, dunes,

sandy soils.


habitat (scrub) present.

Palmer’s

grapplinghook

(Harpagonella

palmeri)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 4.2

Clay soil, chaparral,

sage scrub, and

grassland.

Low. Sage scrub and grassland

present. Potential for clay

inclusions, property highly

disturbed.

Paniculate tarplant

(Deinandra

paniculata)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 4.2

Usually found in

vernally mesic areas

and sometimes sandy

areas within coastal

scrub, grassland, and

vernal pools.

Present. Species observed in

grassland on property.

Parish’s brittlescale

(Atriplex parishii)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Alkaline lowlands

with saline soil.

Not expected. Alkaline/saline soils

not present.

Parry’s spineflower

(Chorizanthe parryi

parryi)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Openings in chaparral

and sage scrub, sandy

or rocky soil.



Parry’s tetracoccus

(Tetracoccus dioicus)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral and coastal

scrub.



Payson’s jewel-flower

(Caulanthus simulans)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 4.2

Pinyon-juniper

woodland, chaparral,

and sage scrub.

Typically, on slopes

and ridgelines with

sandy granitic soil.

Not expected. Preferred habitat not

present.

Plummer’s mariposa

lily

(Calochortus

plummerae)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Rocky, sandy,

alluvial or granite,

sage scrub, woodland,

and grassland.

Low. Minimal habitat for species

occurs on property.

Rainbow manzanita

(Arctostaphylos

rainbowensis)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Chaparral. Not expected. Not observed on

property, species is conspicuous

year-round. Suitable habitat does

not occur on property.


Table 6 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species

Ramona horkelia

(Horkelia truncata)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.3

Clay, woodland, and

chaparral.


Robinson’s pepper-

grass

(Lepidium virginicum

var. robinsonii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 4.3

Openings in chaparral

and sage scrub,

typically dry sites.



Round-leaved filaree

(Erodium California

macrophylla)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 2

Clay soils, woodland,

and grassland.

Low. Potential for clay inclusions,

grassland present.

San Bernardino aster

(Symphyotrichum

defoliatum)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Near ditches, streams,

seeps, marshes in

grassland, scrub,

forest.

Not expected. Flowing streams,

seeps, and marshes not present.

Santa Lucia dwarf rush

(Juncus luciensis)

--/-- CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Meadows, seeps,

vernal pool in

chaparral, coniferous

forest, and great basin

scrub.

Not expected. Habitat not present

on property.

Santa Rosa basalt

brodiaea

(Brodiaea santarosae)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Valley and foothill

grasslands on basaltic

soils.

Not expected. Species typically

only found on Santa rosa plateau.

Shevock’s copper

moss

(Schizymenium

shevockii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Cismontane

woodland, rocky,

mesic. Often on rocks

along roads.

Low. Rocks in wetlands present to

south, property highly disturbed.

South coast branching

phacelia (Phacelia

ramosissima var.

austrolitoralis)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 3.2

Sandy, and

sometimes rocky

soils. Chaparral,

coastal dunes, coastal

scrub, marshes, and

coastal salt swamps.

Not expected. Marsh and swamp

habitat not present. Minimal sage

scrub, property highly disturbed.

Southern mountains

skullcap

(Scutellaria bolanderi

spp. austromontana)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Woodland, chaparral,

mesic.

Not expected. Limited amount of

potential habitat (woodland)

present. Typically occurs at 1,800

feet AMSL or higher.

Sticky dudleya

(Dudleya viscida)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.2

Chaparral, scrub,

coastal bluffs, rocky.

Not expected. Rocky bluffs not

present.

Tecate cypress

(Hesperocyparis

forbesii)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 1B.1

Clay, gabbroic or

metavolcanic soils in

coniferous forest or

chaparral.


Species obvious when present.


Table 6 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species

vernal barley

(Hordeum intercedens)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 3.2

Mesic grasslands,

vernal pools, and

large saline flats or

depressions.


White rabbit-tobacco

(Pseudognaphalium

leucocephalum)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 2B.2

Riparian areas,

woodland, sandy or

gravelly areas.

Not expected. Species easily

detected and was not observed.

Wiggin’s cryptantha

(Cryptantha wigginsii)

--/--

CNPs

Rank 1B.2

Sage scrub habitat

often with clay soils.

Low. Minimal sage scrub present.

Potential for clay inclusions.

Property highly disturbed.

Woven spored lichen

(Texosporium sancti-

jacobi)

--/--

CNPS

Rank 3

Chaparral openings,

usually on animal

pellets, dead twigs, or

detritus rich soil.


*Refer to Appendix D for an explanation of MSHCP designation and sensitivity status codes

3.9.2 Sensitive Animals

A total of 45 sensitive animal species, five of which are listed at the federal or state level, were

analyzed for their potential to occur (Table 7). The listed species are Quino checkerspot butterfly

(Euphydryas editha quino), Stephens’ kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), Coastal California

gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus

nivosus), and Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). Two of the listed species have low potential

to occur on the property. The coastal California gnatcatcher is known to occur in Riversidean

sage scrub; however, the scrub on site is sparse, fragmented, disturbed, and too low quality to

support breeding gnatcatchers. Stephens’ kangaroo rat occurs on sparsely vegetated area with

loose soils similar to those on site, but the soils on site are disturbed from disking. Additionally,

the site is somewhat isolated from adjacent open lands due to development. Neither species was

observed, and both species are covered via compliance with the MSHCP and payment of

associated fees.

None of the remaining 40 non-listed species occurs on site. As with the listed species,

compliance with the MSHCP and payment of the associated fees mitigates potential impacts to

the species with potential to occur on site.


Table 7

SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES POTENTIAL TO OCCUR

SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Listed Species

Quino checkerspot

butterfly

(Euphydryas editha

quino)

FE/SC

Open areas, sparse

vegetation, and

flowers. Host plants

are Plantago spp.,

Antirrhinum

coulterianum, and

Cordylanthus rigidus.

Not expected. Host plants not

observed on property.

Stephen’s kangaroo

rat

(Dipodomys

stephensi)

FE/ST

Open areas with

sparse perennial cover

and loose soil.

Low to not expected. Limited

habitat occurs on property.

Coastal California

gnatcatcher

(Polioptila

californica

californica)

FT/SC Coastal sage and other

low scrub.

Low. Limited amount of habitat

occurs on property and is primarily

disturbed.

Western snowy

plover

(Charadrius

alexandrinus

nivosus)

FT/SC Coastal beaches, sand

dune beaches, river

mouths, estuaries.


occur on property.

Swainson’s Hawk

(Buteo swainsoni)

--/ST Open desert, sparse

scrub with large trees.

Not expected. Property small and

surrounding by development.

Non-Listed Species

FISH

arroyo chub

(Gila orcuttii)

--/SC Prefers slow moving

streams or backwaters

with sand or mud

bottoms. Streams

typically deeper than

40 centimeters (16

inches).

Not expected. Streams with regular

flow do not occur on property.

REPTILES AND AMPHIBIANS

Coast horned lizard

(Phrynosoma

coronatum

blainvillei)

--/SC Grassland, scrub,

chaparral, and

woodland.

Low. Although preferred habitat

occurs on property, property may

be too disturbed and urbanized for

species.

coast patch-nosed

snake

(Salvadora

hexalepis virgultea)

--/SC Coastal and desert

scrub, chaparral,

washes. A generalist.

Low. Habitats on property are

disturbed.

coast range newt

(Taricha torosa

torosa)

--/SC Grassland, woodland

associated with ponds,

slow-moving streams.


occur on property.


Table 7 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species


Coastal western

whiptail

(Cnemidophorus

tigris stenjnegeri)

--/SC Open rocky areas with

sparse vegetation,

usually scrub or

grassland.

Low to moderate. Limited amount

of habitat occurs on property.

Bell’s sage sparrow

(Amphispiza belli

belli)

--/SC Evenly spaced sage

scrub.

Low. Limited habitat occurs on

property.

Black crowned night

heron

(Nycticorax

nycticorax)

--/--

State Rank S4

Marshes, ponds,

estuaries, and other

like habitats.

Not expected. Preferred habitat

does not occur on property.

California horned

lark

(Eremophila

alpestris actia)

--/SC Grassland, agriculture

fields, and disturbed

fields.

Moderate. Property contains

preferred habitat.

Northern red-

diamond rattlesnake

(Crotalus ruber)

--/SC Heavy brush,

boulders, can use a

variety of habitats;

prey density

determining factor.


occurs on property.

Orange-throated

whiptail

(Cnemidophorus

hyperthrus)

--/WL Chaparral, sage scrub,

grassland, woodland,

and riparian areas.

Moderate. Habitat present on

property.

two-striped garter

snake

(Thanmophis

hammondii)

--/SC Stream course with

adjacent dense

vegetation.

Low. Habitat occur on south edge

of property, but stream has no flow

most of year.

Western spadefoot

(scaphiopus

hammondii)

--/SC Grassland, sage scrub,

or occasionally

chaparral; standing

water, puddles, vernal

pools, needed for

reproduction.

Not expected. No vernal pools

occur on property.

Rosy boa

(Lichanura

trivirgata)

--/-- Chaparral, desert

scrub, and sage scrub;

prefers rocky areas.


habitat, no rock outcrops.

Coronado skink

(Eumeces

skiltonianus

interparietalis)

--/-- Mesic pockets in sage

scrub, chaparral, and

woodlands.


occurs on property.


Table 7 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

Non-Listed Species


Western pond turtle

(Clemmys

marmorata pallida)

--/SC Slow moving stream,

ponds, reservoirs, and

other water bodies

deeper than 6 feet with

logs or other

submerged cover.

Not expected. No deep pools or

perennial streams occur on

property.

BIRDS

coastal cactus wren

(Campylorhynchus

brunneicapillus

sandiegensis)

--/SC Scrub, desert thickets,

and areas with large

branching cacti.


occur.

Cooper’s hawk

(Accipiter cooperii)

--/SC Forest and woodland

habitats; will forage in

grasslands.

Moderate. Property contains

preferred habitat.

Ferruginous hawk

(Buteo regalis)

--/SC Large areas of open

grassland or shrub

with elevated nest

sites.

Not expected. Property small and

surrounding by development.

Species uncommon.

Golden eagle

(Aquila chrysaetos)

--/SC Open country, prefers

mountains or hills.


Species avoids populated areas.

loggerhead shrike

(Lanius

ludovicianus)

--/SC Open grassland or

shrubland with trees,

utility poles, fence

post, or other perch

sites.

Low. Habitat occurs on property,

but property is small and

surrounded by development.

Northern harrier

(Circus cyaneus)

--/SC Meadows, grassland,

scrub, rarely in

woodland; roosts on

ground.

Low. Foraging habitat occurs on

property. Species uncommon.

Southern California

rufous crowned

sparrow

(Aimophila ruficeps

canescens)

--/SC Hillsides, with

grassland, sage scrub,

or chaparral.


property.

Tricolored blackbird

(Agelaius tricolor)

--/SC Wetland with dense

cattails, tall grasses, or

thickets of willows.

Not expected. Riparian habitat

present not typical for species.

white-faced ibis

(Plegadis chihi)

--/SC Shallow marshes,

spoils banks,

meadows, marshes.


White-tailed kite

(Elanus leucurus)

--/--

State Rank S3S4

Fully Protected

Grassland, agriculture

with nearby woodland

for nesting.

Moderate. Nesting and foraging

habitats present.


Table 7 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT

STATUS

ON SITE

BIRDS

Yellow breasted

chat

(Icteria virens)

--/SC Wide riparian

woodland, dense

willow thickets, with

well-developed

understory.

Not expected. Riparian habitat not

dense or well developed.

MAMMALS

Dulzura pocket

mouse

(Chaetodipus

californicus

femoralis)

--/SC Grassland and

chaparral ecotone,

sage scrub.

Not expected. No ecotone on

property. Sage scrub disturbed and

property surrounding by

development.

Los Angeles pocket

mouse

(Perognathus

longimembris

brevinasus)

--/SC Fine sandy soils with

sparse vegetation.

Low. Habitat is present, but

disturbed.

Northwestern San

Diego pocket mouse

(Chaetodipus fallax

fallax)

--/SC Sage scrub, grassland,

and sandy soils.

Low. Some grassland and sandy

soils occur on property but are

disturbed from disking.

Pallid bat

(Antrozous pallidus)

--/SC Coniferous forests,

various woodlands,

deserts, and rocky

terrain.


occur on property.

San Diego black-

tailed jackrabbit

(Lepus

califonrinicus

bennettii)

--/SC Primarily open scrub

with short grasses.


property.

San Diego desert

woodrat

(Neotoma lepida)

--/SC Scrub and desert, rock

outcrops, or areas of

dense cover.


amount of habitat occurs on

property.

western mastiff bat

(Eumops perotis

californicus)

--/SC Rocky areas, cliff

faces, known to roost

in buildings.


western yellow bat

(Lasiurus xanthinus)

--/SC Desert grassland and

scrub with an

associated water

feature.



Table 7 (cont.)


SPECIES SENSITIVITY

STATUS* HABITAT STATUS ON SITE

MAMMALS

Yuma myotis

(Myotis yumanensis)

--/--

State Rank S4

Juniper and riparian

woodland, near open

water. Roosts in

caves, mines, bridges.


*Please refer to Appendix D for an explanation of MSHCP designation and sensitivity status codes.

4.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT

4.1 FEDERAL

Administered by the USFWS, the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) provides the legal

framework for the listing and protection of species (and their habitats) identified as being

endangered or threatened with extinction. Actions that jeopardize endangered or threatened

species and the habitats upon which they rely are considered a “take” under the ESA.

Section 9(a) of the ESA defines take as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,

capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” “Harm” and “harass” are further

defined in federal regulations and case law to include actions that adversely impair or disrupt a

listed species’ behavioral patterns.

Sections 4(d), 7, and 10(a) of the federal ESA regulate actions that could jeopardize endangered

or threatened species. Section 7 describes a process of federal interagency consultation for use

when federal actions may adversely affect listed species. A biological assessment is required for

any major construction activity if it may affect listed species. In this case, take can be authorized

via a letter of Biological Opinion (BO), issued by the USFWS for non-marine related listed

species issues. A Section 7 consultation is required when there is a nexus between federally

listed species’ use of the site and impacts to USACE jurisdictional areas. Section 10(a) allows

the issuance of permits for “incidental” take of endangered or threatened species. The term

“incidental” applies if the taking of a listed species is incidental to and not the purpose of an

otherwise lawful activity. The MSHCP is the Section 10(a) permit for this portion of Riverside

County, including the City of Wildomar and the subject property.

All migratory bird species that are native to the United States or its territories are protected under

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), as amended under the MBTA of 2004 (Federal Register

[FR] Doc. 05-5127). This law is generally protective of migratory birds from the direct physical

take of the species.

Federal wetland regulation (non-marine issues) is guided by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899

and the Clean Water Act (CWA). The Rivers and Harbors Act deals primarily with discharges

into navigable waters, while the purpose of the CWA is to restore and maintain the chemical,

physical, and biological integrity of all waters of the U.S. Permitting for projects filling waters of


the U.S. (including wetlands and vernal pools) is overseen by the USACE under Section 404 of

the CWA. Projects may be permitted on an individual basis or may be covered under one of

several approved Nationwide Permits. Individual Permits are assessed individually based on the

type of action, amount of fill, etc. A CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification, which is

administered by the RWQCB, must be issued prior to any 404 Permit. Impacts to waters of the

U.S. would result in a need for both a USACE 404 permit and a RWQCB 401 certification.

4.2 STATE

The California ESA is similar to the federal ESA in that it contains a process for listing of

species and regulating potential impacts to listed species. Section 2081 of the California ESA

authorizes the CDFW to enter into a memorandum of agreement for the take of listed species for

scientific, educational, or management purposes. The MSHCP is the regional 2081 for this

portion of Riverside County, including the subject property.

State Fully Protected species may not be taken or possessed at any time and no state licenses or

permits may be issued for their take except for collecting these species necessary for scientific

research and relocation of the bird species for the protection of livestock (CFG Code Sections

3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515).

The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) enacted a process by which plants are listed as rare or

endangered. The NPPA regulates the collection, transport, and commerce of listed plants.

The California ESA follows the NPPA and covers both plants and animals that are determined to

be endangered or threatened with extinction. Plants listed as rare under NPPA were designated

threatened under the California ESA.

CFG Code Sections 1600 et seq. requires an agreement with CDFW for projects affecting

riparian and wetland habitats through the issuance of a Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA).

CFG Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 prohibit the take or possession of birds, their nests,

or eggs. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (killing or

abandonment of eggs or young) is considered a take. Such a take would also violate federal law

protecting migratory birds. Incidental Take Permits are required from the CDFW for projects that

may result in the incidental take of species listed by the state as endangered, threatened, or

candidate species. The wildlife agencies require that impacts to protected species be minimized

to the extent possible and mitigated to a level of insignificance.

The California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 1991 is designed to conserve

habitat-based natural communities at the ecosystem scale while accommodating compatible land

uses in coordination with California ESA. The CDFW is the principal state agency implementing

the Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program. The Act established a process

to allow for comprehensive, long-term, regional, multi-species, and habitat-based planning in a

manner that satisfies the requirements of the state and federal ESAs (through a companion

regional habitat conservation plan). The NCCP program has provided the framework for

innovative efforts by the state, local governments, and private interests to plan for the protection

of regional biodiversity and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The NCCP program seek


to ensure the long-term conservation of multiple species, while allowing for compatible and

appropriate economic activity to proceed. The MSHCP was prepared as part of regional planning

pursuant to the NCCP Act.

4.3 WESTERN RIVERSIDE MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN

The MSHCP is a comprehensive multi-jurisdictional effort that includes Riverside County and

multiple cities, including the City of Corona in western Riverside County. Rather than address

sensitive species on an individual basis, the MSHCP focuses on the conservation of 146 species,

proposing a reserve system of approximately 500,000 acres and a mechanism to fund and

implement the reserve system (Dudek 2003). Most importantly, the MSHCP allows participating

entities to issue take permits for listed species so that individual applicants need not seek their

own permits from the USFWS and/or CDFW. The MSHCP was adopted on June 17, 2003, by

the Riverside County Board of Supervisors. The Incidental Take Permit was issued by both the

USFWS and CDFW on June 22, 2004. As this property is in the City of Corona, the City is the

lead agency/permittee.

As noted above, the project is located within the Elsinore Area Plan of the MSHCP. The

property is not within a criteria cell or cell group and, therefore, also not within a subunit of the

Elsinore Area Plan. The site is required to show MSHCP compliance through specific habitat

assessments, applicable biological surveys, and the provision of an MSHCP compliance analysis.

Additionally, the property is not within a cell and is, therefore, not targeted for conservation that

would contribute to the assembly of the MSHCP reserve.

5.0 IMPACTS

This section describes potential direct and indirect impacts associated with the proposed project.

Direct impacts immediately alter the affected biological resources such that those resources are

eliminated temporarily or permanently. Indirect impacts consist of secondary effects of a project

including noise, decreased water quality (e.g., through sedimentation, urban contaminants, or

fuel release), fugitive dust, colonization of non-native plant species, animal behavioral changes,

and night lighting. The magnitude of an indirect impact can be the same as a direct impact;

however, the effect usually takes a longer time to become apparent.

According to Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,

project impacts to biological resources would be considered significant if they would:

• Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any

special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW

and or USFWS.

• Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by

Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)

through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.


• Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or

wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or

impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

• Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a

tree preservation policy or ordinance.

• Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural

Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat

conservation plan.

5.1 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

The project proposes to impact approximately 3.6 acres that consist of 3.4 acres on site and

0.2 acre off site (Figure 7; Table 8). The impacts comprise 0.02 acre of southern willow scrub,

0.02 acre of rip-rap, 0.004-acre eucalyptus woodland (riparian-streambed) 0.2 acre of

Riversidean sage scrub, 0.7 acre of Riversidean sage scrub-disturbed, 0.06 acre of eucalyptus

woodland-upland, 1.8 acres of non-native grassland, 0.07 acre of non-native grassland-rumex

dominated, and 0.5 acre of developed. The developed impacts include 0.2 acre of

off-site impacts.

Table 8

IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNITIES

HABITAT EXISTING

ACRES

PROPOSED

IMPACTS1 AVOIDED

On-site Off-site

Riparian/Wetland

Southern Willow Scrub 0.08 0.02 0 0.06

Coast Live Oak Woodland 0.03 0 0 0.03

Eucalyptus Woodland-Riparian 0.07 <0.01 0 0.07

Developed-Rip/Rap 0.02 0.02 0 0.00

Subtotal 0.20 0.04 0 0.16

Upland

Riversidean sage scrub 0.2 0.2 0 0

Riversidean sage scrub-disturbed 0.7 0.7 0 0

Eucalyptus Woodland 0.1 0.06 0 0.04


(including Rumex-dominated) 2.0 1.9 0 0.1

Developed 1.2 0.5 0.2 0.7

Subtotal 4.2 3.36 0.2 0.84

TOTAL 4.4 3.4 0.2 1.0 1Existing acres rounded to nearest 0.1 except for wetlands rounded to nearest 0.01. Impacts of less than 0.5 acre are all rounded

to 0.01 acre due to small size of impacts.

Under CEQA, impacts to certain sensitive natural communities (Riversidean sage scrub) and

riparian habitats (southern willow scrub, coast live oak woodland) are considered significant.


5.2 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS AND WETLANDS

5.2.1 Potential USACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction

As currently planned, the project proposes impacts to 0.001 acre of waters of the U.S./State

(Figure 8; Table 9). The impacts consist entirely of non-wetland waters of the U.S./State.

Table 9

IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE U.S./STATE

USACE/RWQCB

JURISDICTION

EXISTING

ACRES*

PROPOSED

IMPACTS*

LINEAR

FEET OF

IMPACTS

AVOIDED*

Wetland Waters of the U.S./State

Southern Willow Scrub 0.01 0 0 0.01

Subtotal 0.01 0 0 0.01

Non Wetland Waters of the U.S./State

Streambed 0.02 0.002 39 0.018

Sheet flow 0.02 0.02 248 0

Subtotal 0.04 0.022 25 0.018

TOTAL 0.05 0.022 287 0.028 *Acreage for wetlands rounded to nearest 0.01. Impacts of less than 0.01 acre are all rounded to 0.001 acre due to small size

of impacts.

Impacts to waters of the U.S./State will require a Section 404 permit from the USACE and a

Section 401 water quality certification from the RWQCB.

5.2.2 Potential CDFW Jurisdiction

The project proposes impacts to 0.06-acre waters of the State: 0.02 acre of southern willow

scrub, 0.02-acre sheet flow, and 0.02 acre of developed-rip/rap streambed (Figure 9: Table 10).

Table 10

IMPACTS TO CDFW JURISDICTION1

CDFW JURISDICTION EXISTING

ACRES

PROPOSED

IMPACTS AVOIDED

Riparian

Southern willow scrub 0.08 0.02 0.06

Coast live oak woodland 0.03 0 0.03

Eucalyptus woodland 0.07 0.004 0.07

Subtotal 0.18 0.02 0.16

Unvegetated Streambed

Developed/rip-rap 0.02 0.02 0.0

Drainage pattern, Sheet flow 0.02 0.02 0

Subtotal 0.04 0.04 0.0

TOTAL 0.22 0.06 0.16 1Acreage rounded to nearest 0.01, except when item is less than 0.01


Impacts to areas determined to be under CDFW jurisdiction may require a CDFW SAA.

5.3 MSHCP CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS

The purpose of this section is to provide an analysis of the project with respect to compliance

with biological resources aspects of the MSHCP.

The project was evaluated for consistency with the following MSHCP issue areas:

• MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements;

• Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and

Vernal Pools);

• Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species);

• Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface);

• Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures); and

• Section 6.4 (Fuels Management).

The discussions below provide a summary demonstrating how the project is consistent with

MSHCP requirements for each of the above-listed issue areas.

5.4.1 MSHCP Reserve Assembly Requirements

The project site is not located within a Cell or Cell Group and does not have target goals for

conservation. The project site does not include land conservation requirements to contribute to

the MSHCP reserve assembly. No sensitive species were determined to occupy the site that

would warrant conservation.

5.4.2 MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine

Areas and Vernal Pools

Section 6.1.2, Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools,

states:

The purpose of the procedures described in this section is to ensure that the

biological functions and values of these areas throughout the MSHCP Plan Area

are maintained such that Habitat values for species inside the MSHCP

Conservation Area are maintained.

The project site supports 0.22 acre of Riparian/Riverine Areas consisting of 0.02-acre drainage

pattern (sheet flow) and 0.20 acre in the southern corner associated with an unnamed tributary to

Murrieta Creek (Figure 7). The habitat comprises 0.08 acre of low-quality southern willow scrub,

0.03 acre of coast live oak woodland, 0.07 acre of eucalyptus woodland, and 0.02-acre rip-rap

streambed. No Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Area species have potential to occur. As

discussed above, no sensitive species were determined to occupy the Riparian/Riverine Areas.

No vernal pools occur on the property.


5.4.3 MSHCP Section 6.1.3 Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species

The project is not within a survey area for NEPSSA species. No surveys are required.

5.4.4 MSHCP Section 6.1.4 Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface

Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP addresses potential indirect impacts to MSHCP Conservation Area

lands via the Urban/Wildlands Interface Guidelines (UWIG). The project site does not occur

adjacent to an MSHCP Conservation Area. The project is not within or adjacent to a MSHCP

criteria cell. The UWIG guidelines are discussed to show how the project will reduce/prevent

potential impacts to off-site conservation areas.

Drainage

Although the project does not directly drain into an MSHCP Conservation Area, flows from the

site could ultimately reach a Conservation Area. The project will incorporate measures, including

those required through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

requirements, to ensure that the quantity and quality of runoff discharged to the MSHCP

Conservation Area (tributaries to Murrieta Creek) is not altered in an adverse way when

compared with existing conditions. In particular, measures will be put in place to avoid discharge

of untreated surface runoff from the project into the MSHCP Conservation Area. The project

shall be designed to prevent the release of toxins, chemicals, petroleum products, exotic plant

materials, or other elements that might degrade or harm biological resources or ecosystem

processes within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Specifically, the project proposes to include a

basin adjacent to the Stable Lanes culvert and a basin in the southeast (to the north of and outside

of the existing riparian habitat) adjacent to Clinton Keith Road. Regular maintenance shall occur

to ensure effective operations of runoff control systems. Adjustments may be made to these

measures in the final project design.

Toxics

Land uses proposed in proximity to the potential sensitive species’ habitat that use chemicals or

generate bio-products such as oil from roads and cars that are potentially toxic or may adversely

affect wildlife species, habitat, or water quality shall incorporate measures to ensure that the

application of such chemicals does not result in discharge to the potential sensitive species’

habitat. Measures such as those employed to address drainage issues shall be implemented to

ensure no indirect impacts from toxic substances occur to species or their habitat.

Lighting

The project does not occur close to a conservation area; therefore, this does not apply.

!(

!(

!(!(

Clinton Keith Road

Stable Lanes Road

SP4SP3

SP2

SP1Culvert

Culvert

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig8_U

SA

CE

_Im

pact

s.m

xd M

NN

-01 1

0/2

4/2

016 -

RK

Figure 8

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSUSACE/RWQCB Jurisdiction

0 100FeetN

Project Site

Impact Area

!( Sampling Point

Riprap

Non-wetland Waters of the U.S./StateStreambed

Wetland Waters of the U.S./StateSouthern Willow Scrub

Clinton Keith Road

Stable Lanes Road

Culvert

Culvert

I:\P

RO

JEC

TS

\M\M

NN

\MN

N-0

1_W

ildom

arC

ross

ings\

Map\G

BR

A\F

ig9_C

DF

W_Im

pacts

.mxd M

NN

-01 1

0/2

4/2

016 -

RK

Figure 9

WILDOMAR CROSSINGSCDFW Jurisdiction and Riparian/Riverine Areas

0 100FeetN

Project Site

Impact Area

Riprap

Riparian-Vegetated StreambedSouthern Willow Scrub

Coast Live Oak Woodland

Eucalyptus Woodland


Invasives

The project shall not use invasive plants for erosion control, landscaping, wind rows, or other

purposes. The project will comply with the MSHCP and avoid the use of invasive, non-native

plants in accordance with MSHCP Table 6.2.

Barriers

The project site is not anticipated to directly abut MSHCP Conservation Area, therefore, this

does not apply. However, the project does propose to install a fence and signage around the

avoided Riparian/Riverine habitat located in the southern portion of the property.

Grading/Land Development

The project site is not anticipated to directly abut MSHCP Conservation Area, therefore, this

does not apply.

5.4.5 MSHCP Section 6.3.2 Additional Survey Needs and Procedures

Burrowing Owl

The MSHCP requires a habitat assessment and survey if burrowing habitat occurs on site. The

project site was determined to have low potential for BUOW. Focused protocol BUOW surveys

were conducted in 2009 and 2016 with negative results. No impacts are expected to occur to

BUOW. Pre-construction take avoidance surveys are proposed in accordance with

MSHCP requirements.

Least Bell’s Vireo

The MSHCP requires that LBV surveys be conducted on project sites that include riparian

habitat with potential to support the species. The project site does not support riparian habitat

with potential to support the species. The project also proposes only 0.01 acre of impacts and

0.17 acre of avoidance of Riparian/Riverine habitats on the property.

Based on the negative surveys for BUOW and LBV, the project is consistent with MSHCP

Section 6.3.2.

5.4.6 MSHCP Section 6.4 Fuels Management

The fuel modification zone is included within the project impact limits and will not extend into

undeveloped land adjacent to the project that has potential to support sensitive species. The

proposed project is consistent with Section 6.4 of the MSHCP.


5.5 NESTING BIRDS

Development of the proposed project could disturb or destroy active migratory bird nests

including eggs and young. Disturbance to or destruction of migratory bird eggs, young, or adults

is in violation of the MBTA and is, therefore, considered to be a potentially significant impact.

6.0 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

6.1 SENSITIVE SPECIES

6.1.1. Burrowing Owl

To ensure the project does not result in indirect impacts to BUOWs potentially occurring off site

within the 500-foot-wide buffer, pre-construction surveys should be conducted in accordance

with mitigation measure BIO 1.

BIO 1: Pre-Construction BUOW Survey and Avoidance. Within 30 days prior to

initiating ground-disturbance activities, the project applicant shall retain a

qualified biologist to complete a pre-construction take avoidance survey in

accordance with the MSHCP. If the take avoidance survey is negative and

BUOWs are confirmed to be absent, then ground-disturbing activities shall be

allowed to commence, and no further mitigation would be required.

If the survey is positive and BUOWs are confirmed to be present, the project

applicant shall consult with the CDFW and prepare and implement a

project-specific BUOW mitigation plan. The plan shall be reviewed and approved

by the CDFW. To avoid take, any impacted individuals shall be relocated outside

of the impact area by a qualified biologist using passive or active methodologies

approved by CDFW. The project applicant shall further mitigate BUOW-occupied

habitat in accordance with the MSHCP.

6.1.2 Nesting Birds

Implementation of mitigation measure BIO 2 would ensure that potential impacts to birds

protected under the MBTA and CFG Code are avoided during project construction.

BIO 2: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance. Vegetation clearing

should be conducted outside the nesting season, which is generally defined as

January 15 to August 31. If vegetation clearing must take place during the nesting

season, a qualified biologist shall be retained to perform a pre-construction survey

for nesting birds. A pre-construction nesting bird survey would not be required

unless direct impacts to vegetation are proposed to occur. The nesting bird survey

shall occur no more than seven days prior to vegetation removal.

If active bird nests are confirmed to be present during the pre-construction survey,


temporary avoidance of the nests shall be required until a qualified biologist has

verified that the young have fledged, or the nest has otherwise become inactive.

6.2 RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AREAS

The project proposes impacts to 0.04 acre of Riparian/Riverine habitat in the form of 0.02-acre

sheet flow (streambed), and 0.02-acre low-quality southern willow scrub. The project also

proposes impacts to 0.02 acre of rip/rap streambed. These impacts are relatively minimal.

Impacts will require the completion of a DBESP. The DBESP will provide the details of the

impacts and mitigation, and will be completed under separate documentation. The conceptual

mitigation proposal is provided herein. Table 11 below provides a summary of the proposed

impacts and mitigation for Riparian/Riverine habitat.

Table 11

IMPACTS TO RIPARIAN/RIVERINE AREAS AND PROPOSED MITIGATION

HABITAT EXISTING

ACRES

PROPOSED

IMPACTS

ON-SITE AVOIDANCE

/ PRESERVATION

OFF-SITE

MITIGATION

CREDITS/RATIO

Riparian

Southern

willow scrub 0.08 0.02 0.06 0.06/3:1

Coast live oak

woodland 0.03 0 0.03 0

Eucalyptus

woodland 0.07 0.004 0.07 0.01/2:1

Riverine

(sheet flow) 0.02 0.02 0 0.04/2:1

Rip/Rap

Streambed 0.02 0.02 0 0

TOTAL 0.20 0.04 0.16 0.11

The mitigation proposed above for impacts to Riparian/Riverine habitat also is also proposed to

satisfy mitigation obligations for impacts to wetland waters of the U.S./State pending approval

during the permitting process.

Implementation of mitigation measure BIO 3 would reduce impacts on Riparian/Riverine habitat

to less than significant.

BIO 3: Compensatory Mitigation. A total of 0.16 acre of Riparian/Riverine habitat,

including 0.06 acre of southern willow scrub, shall be avoided and placed within

open space on site. The open space is proposed to be protected by a restrictive

covenant to be held with the land in perpetuity. Compliance monitoring and as

needed maintenance is to be conducted by Urban Corps. The property is

proposed to be divided into lots with the avoided habitat comprising one of the

lots. This lot is proposed to be protected by fencing, with signage in accordance

the MSHCP. The specific fencing to be used will be incorporated in the final

project plans/landscaping documents. The impacts to 0.02 acre rip/rap streambed


will be mitigation in kind on site at 1:1. To compensate for the loss of 0.02 acre

of southern willow scrub, 0.02 acre sheet flow and a 0.004 acre of eucalyptus

vegetated streambed, the project applicant shall purchase 0.11 acre of In-Lieu Fee

(ILF) rehabilitation credits from the Riverside Corona Resource Conservation

District (RCRCD), Riverpark Bank (approval anticipated in early 2018), or other

approved mitigation bank in consultation with the Regional Conservation

Authority (RCA), USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW.

Additional measures to be employed to prevent impacts to the avoided waters include:

• Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to prevent the impacts

during construction.

• Construction-related equipment will be stored in upland areas, outside of drainages.

• Source control and treatment control BMPs will be implemented to minimize the

potential contaminants that are generated during the operation of the facility. Source

control BMPs include landscape planning, roof runoff controls, trash storage areas, and

education of future tenants. Treatment control BMPs include detention basins, vegetated

swales (bio-swales), and vegetated buffers. Water quality BMPs will be implemented

throughout the project to capture and treat contaminants (see also Section 5.6.1 above).

• To avoid attracting predators during construction, the project shall be kept clean of debris

to the extent possible. All food-related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers

and regularly removed from site.

• Employees shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction

material to the proposed project footprint, staging areas, and designated routes of travel.

• Project impact limits shall be fenced with orange snow screen and exclusion fencing

should be maintained until the completion of construction activities.

• A restrictive covenant shall be placed over the Riparian/Riverine areas and adjacent

upland buffers prior to initiating work on the site.

6.3 NON-NATIVE INVASIVE SPECIES RESTRICTIONS

In accordance with the MSHCP, no species on List 6.2 of the MSHCP shall be utilized on the

site (including any hydroseed mix used for interim erosion control) for consistency with

Section 6.1.4 of the MSHCP.

6.4 MSHCP MITIGATION FEE

As mentioned above, the project is subject to the MSHCP fee. The applicant shall pay MSHCP

Local Development Mitigation fees as determined by the City. The fee schedule is adjusted

annually by the Western Riverside County RCA and was recently adjusted. When multiple uses


are proposed, the commercial per acre fee is used. The current fee is $6,914 per acre for

industrial or commercial uses (RCA 2017). The residential development fee currently ranges

from $1,056 to $2,031 per dwelling unit depending on the density per acre.

6.5 STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT HCP FEE

The project is also within the Stephens’ kangaroo rat fee area and is subject to the Stephens’

kangaroo rat fee of $500 per acre (County 1996).


7.0 CERTIFICATION/QUALIFICATION

I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data

and information required for this biological evaluation, and that the facts, statements, and

information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DATE: October 19, 2017 SIGNED:

Karl L. Osmundson

Biology Group Manager

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.

Fieldwork Performed By:

Robert Hogenauer

Biologist, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.

B.S., Biology, California State Polytechnic University, 2004

Benjamin Rosenbaum

Biologist, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.

B.S. Biology, Ecology Emphasis, San Diego State University, 2009


8.0 REFERENCES

American Ornithologists’ Union. 2015. AOU Checklist of North and Middle America Birds.

Online: http://checklist.aou.org.

Baker, R.J., et al. 2003. Natural Science Research Laboratory at the Museum of Texas Tech

University. Occasional papers Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of

Mexico. December 1.

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.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database

(CNDDB). 2016a. RareFind 5 [https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx#].

California Department of Fish and Wildlife Data updated April 1.

2016b. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). State and Federally Listed

Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. State of California, The Resources

Agency, Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data Branch. Available at:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/TEAnimals.pdf. April.

2016c. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Special Animals. State of

California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game Biogeographic Data

Branch. Available at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs/SPanimals.pdf. April.

2016d. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). State and Federally Listed

Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California. State of California, The

Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game Habitat Conservation Division,

Wildlife & Habitat Data Analysis Branch. Available at:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs/TEPlants.pdf. April.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare Plant Program. 2016. Inventory of Rare and

Endangered Plants. Online edition, v8-02. Available at: http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-

bin/inv/inventory.cgi. Updated quarterly. Accessed 28 April 2016.

County of Riverside Environmental Programs Department. 2006. Burrowing Owl Survey

Instructions for the Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Area.

URL: http://www.tlma.co.riverside.ca.us/epd/documents/Burrowing_Owl_Survey_

Instructions.pdf. March 29.

1996. Ordinance 663.10. An Ordinance of the County of Riverside Amending

Ordinance No. 663 Establishing the Riverside County Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Habitat

Conservation Plan, Plan Fee Assessment Area and Setting Mitigation Fees.

http://checklist.aou.org/

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/TEAnimals.pdf

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs/SPanimals.pdf

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs/TEPlants.pdf

http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi

http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi


Dudek and Associates. 2003. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation

Plan (MSHCP). Final MSHCP, Volume I. Prepared for the County of Riverside

Transportation and Land Management Agency. Approved June 17.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. USACE of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical

Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,

Mississippi. 100 pp. with Appendices.

Emmel, T.C. and J.F. Emmel. 1973. The Butterflies of Southern California. Natural History

Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 26: 1-148.

HELIX Environmental Planning Inc. 2016a. Jurisdictional Delineation conducted for the

Wildomar Crossings Project.

2016b. Focused Burrowing Owl Survey for the Wildomar Crossings Project.

Holland R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of

California. Nongame-Heritage Program, State of California, Department of Fish and

Game, Sacramento. 156 pp.

RCA. 2017. Regional Conservation Authority Permits and Fees. https://www.wrc-

rca.org/development-applications/permits-and-fees/ accessed October 5.

Travis W. Taggart. 2014. The Center for North American Herpetology (CNAH): The Academic

Portal to North American Herpetology. Available at: http://www.cnah.org/ November 11.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2008a. Regional Supplement to the Corps of

Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Eds. J.S.

Wakely, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-06-16. Vicksburg, MS: U.S.

Army Engineer Research and Development Center. September.

2008b. Jurisdictional Delineations. RGL No. 08-02. 26 June. 11 pp.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2013. National Resource Conservation Service. Web Soil

Survey online. Access April 28, 2016. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/

App/HomePage.htm. December 6.

http://www.cnah.org/

Appendix A

PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED

A-1

Appendix A

PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED

WILDOMAR CROSSINGS

FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME HABITAT‡

MONOCOTS

Poaceae Avena barbata slender wild oat DCSS

Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens foxtail chess NNG

Distichlis spicata saltgrass

EUDICOTS

Amaranthaceae Chenopodium album pigweed NNG

Asteraceae Ambrosia psilostachya western ragweed NNG

Baccharis salicifolia mule fat SWS

Centaurea melitensis star thistle NNG

Conyza canadensis horseweed NNG

Corethrogyne filaginifolia California-aster NNG

Deinandra paniculata† paniculate tarplant NNG

Filago gallica narrow-leaf filago NNG

Helianthus annuus western sunflower NNG

Heterotheca grandiflora telegraph weed DCSS

Boraginaceae Amsinckia menziesii var. intermedia rancher's fiddleneck NNG

Brassicaceae Brassica nigra black mustard NNG

Euphorbiaceae Croton setigerus dove weed

Fabaceae Lotus scoparius deerweed DCSS

Geraniaceae Erodium moschatum green-stem filaree DCSS

Myrtaceae Eucalyptus sp. eucalyptus NNG

Phrymaceae Mimulus guttatus common monkey-flower SWS

Plantaginaceae Veronica peregrina ssp. xalapensis speedwell

Polygonaceae Eriogonum fasciculatum buckwheat DCSS

Polygonum arenastrum common knotweed

Rumex crispus curly dock NNG

Salicaceae Populus fremontii ssp. fremontii Fremont cottonwood SWS

Salix laevigata red willow SWS

Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow SWS

Solanaceae Datura wrightii jimson weed NNG

‡Habitats: DCSS=Diegan coastal sage scrub; NNG=non-native grassland; SWS=southern willow scrub

†=Sensitive species

A-2


Appendix B

ANIMAL SPECIES OBSERVED OR DETECTED

B-1

Appendix B ANIMAL SPECIES OBSERVED OR DETECTED

WILDOMAR CROSSINGS FAMILY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME INVERTEBRATES Apiidae Apis mellifera mellifera honey bee Formicidae Messor spp. harvester ant Pogonomyrex spp. harvester ant Theraphosidae Aphonopelma sp. tarantula VERTEBRATES Reptile Phrynosomatidae Uta stansburiana common side-blotched lizard Birds Accipitridae Buteo jamaicensis red-tailed hawk Aegithalidae Psaltriparus minimus bushtit Cathartidae Cathartes aura turkey vulture Columbidae Zenaida macroura mourning dove Corvidae Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow Emberizidae Chondestes grammacus lark sparrow Pipilo crissalis California towhee Falconidae Falco sparverius American kestrel Fringillidae Carduelis psaltria lesser goldfinch Carpodacus mexicanus house finch Icteridae Sturnella neglecta western meadowlark Passeridae Passer domesticus house sparrow Picidae Melanerpes formicivorus acorn woodpecker Picoides nuttallii Nuttall’s woodpecker Caloptes auratus northern flicker Trochilidae Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Tyrannidae Sayornis nigricans black phoebe Mammals Canidae Canis latrans coyote Geomyidae Thomomys bottae Botta’s pocket gopher Leporidae Sylvilagus audubonii desert cottontail Mephitidae Mephitis mephitis striped skunk Sciuridae Spermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel

B-2


Appendix C

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

G:\PROJECTS\M\MNN-ALL\MNN-01_WildomarCrossingsRetailDev\_Photos\Photo page Site Photographs GENERAL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE

WILDOMAR/AUTOZONE SHOPPING CENTER PROJECTAppendix C

Concrete drainage on the east side of the project site.

The southwest corner of the project site. A drainage exists with riparian trees.



The north east corner of the project site, facing west.

The south east corner of the project site, facing north.



The south east corner of the project site, facing west.

The south west corner of the project site, facing northeast.

Appendix D

EXPLANATION OF STATUS CODES FOR PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES

D-1

Appendix D EXPLANATION OF STATUS CODES FOR PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) FE Federally listed endangered SE State listed endangered FT Federally listed threatened ST State listed threatened FC Federal Candidate SSC State species of special concern County of Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Covered MSHCP Covered Species indicates that the species is part of a proposed list of species (146 total) considered at this time to be adequately conserved by the Western Riverside MSHCP, provided that participants meet all conditions listed in the Final MSHCP. Some of these species require surveys. MSHCP Not Covered Not Covered refers to species that are not among the 146 species conserved under the MSHCP. Impacts to such species are assessed on an individual basis. If impacts are considered significant, additional mitigation may be required. MSHCP Special Species Acronyms/Abbreviations NEPSSA Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area species – Plant species that are

highly restricted by their habitat affinities, edaphic requirements, or other ecological factors, and for which specific conservation measures have been identified in Section 6.1.3 of the MSHCP, Volume I.

CASSA Criteria Area Species Survey Area – Species for which existing available information is not sufficient and for which specific conservation measures have been identified in Section 6.3.2 of the MSHCP, Volume I.

Planning Species Refers to species for which conservation requirements of a Subunit or Linkage are specifically designed to provide long-term conservation for the species. Planning species are also MSHCP covered species.

D-2

Appendix D (cont.) EXPLANATION OF STATUS CODES FOR PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES

California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Codes Lists List/Threat Code Extensions 1A = Presumed extinct. 1B = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. Eligible for state listing. 2 = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere. Eligible for state listing. 3 = Distribution, endangerment, ecology, and/or taxonomic information needed. Some eligible for state listing. 4 = A watch list for species of limited distribution. Needs monitoring for changes in population status. Few (if any) eligible for state listing.

.1 = Seriously endangered in California (over 80 percent of occurrences threatened/high

degree and immediacy of threat) .2 = Fairly endangered in California (20 to 80 percent occurrences threatened) .3 = Not very endangered in California (less than 20 percent of occurrences threatened, or no current threats known) All List 1A (presumed extinct in California) and some List 3 (need more information; a review list) plants lacking threat information receive no threat code extension. Threat Code guidelines represent only a starting point in threat level assessment. Other factors, such as habitat vulnerability and specificity, distribution, and condition of occurrences are considered in setting the Threat Code.

wildomar crossings project

Documents