HomeMy WebLinkAboutEA 11-13; 6607 CMP Replacement Program; Administrative Permits (ADMIN) (3)(~ CITY OF
~CARLSBAD
I!!\ -
Memorandum
June 27, 2012
To:
From:
Via
Re:
Q. Sherri Howard, Associate Engineer
"?• 11 Pam Drew, Associate Planner
{)?U/oave De Cordova, Principal Planner
EA 11-13-6607 CMP REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
On August 16, 2011 you submitted an Early Assessment (EA 11-13) to replace and/or rehabilitate
sections of 12-, 15- 18-and 21-inch corrugated metal pipeline (CMP) by either replacing the existing
pipeline or installing a cured-in-place liner at two different locations. Staff asked for a Biological and
Archaeological report to determine if there would be any impacts to biological or cultural resources. You
submitted a Biological Resources Report and Archaeological Survey Report, prepared by Dudek and
dated April 2012, for staffs review.
After reviewing the reports, staff has determined that the project could have significant impacts on
natural resources if mitigation measures were not implemented. Therefore, an Environmental Initial
Study Part II must be completed for the project. Furthermore, since the project will have temporary and
permanent impacts to Coastal Sage Scrub, a Habitat Management Plan permit may also be required.
Staff will make that determination once the California Coastal Commission {CCC) determines if a COP will
need to be issued for those portions of the project located in their area of deferred certification (Agua
Hedionda Land Use Plan).
After further review of the project boundaries with the FEMA maps, the section of piping and riprap
energy dissipater that is proposed to the north of the lagoon is not within the 100-year floodplain, and
would not require a Special Use Permit {SUP).
If you would like to schedule a meeting to discuss this letter with your staff planner, please contact Pam
Drew, Associate Planner at ext. 4644, or your staff engineer, Tecla Levy, Associate Engineer, at ext. 2733.
DD:PD:bd
c: Don Neu, City Planner
Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
Bill Plummer, Deputy City Engineer
Tecla Levy, Associate Engineer
File Copy
Data Entry
Community & Economic Development
1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 I 760-602-8560 fax
DUDEK
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
MAIN Off!Cl
MEMORANDUM
Ms. Sherri Howard, City of Carlsbad
Brian Grover, Dudek
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report for the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Program
August 27, 2012
cc: David Deckman, Dudek
Attachment(s): Appendix A, URBEMIS Model Results
Appendix B, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations
Dudek has estimated the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with construction of the
proposed Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program Project (proposed project) in the City of
Carlsbad, California. The following analysis makes significance findings consistent with the
guidance outlined in the County of San Diego's Guidelines for Determining Significance for
Climate Change (County of San Diego 2012).
1.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The proposed project occurs in two separate locations. One project is located along Hoover
Street, southwest of Adams Street, and within vacant land adjacent to the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon (Hoover/Lagoon), and the other project is located at the intersection of Highland Drive
and Adams Street (Highland/Adams) within the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County. Both
project areas are located on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute San Luis Rey
quadrangle, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, Section 8.
Both projects are located northeast of the Agua Hedionda lagoon. A patch of vacant land is
located between the lagoon and Adams Street that is identified as Hedionda Point in the Agua
Hedionda Land Use Plan. Residential development surrounds the vacant land and both project
areas to the north, south, and east. Interstate 5 is located west of the lagoon and both project
areas. The General Plan Land Use designation is Residential low to medium density and the
zoning is R-1-15000 for vacant and adjacent lots.
WWW.DUDEt:.COM
Memorandum
Subject: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report for the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Program
The Hoover/Lagoon project involves rehabilitating approximately 4 7 4 lineal feet of 21-inch
corrugated metal pipeline (CMP) with a cured-in-place liner. The project also includes replacing
approximately 24 linear feet of 21-inch CMP with 18-inch high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
pipe via open trench immediately upstream of the damaged drainage outfall structure. The
project is located within the public right-of-way of Hoover Street and vacant land between the
southern end of Hoover Street and the northern edge of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. In addition,
the project includes the construction of a 1) storm drain cleanout, 2) headwall, and 3) riprap
energy dissipater.
The Highland/ Adams portion of the proposed project consists of replacing approximately 132
linear feet of 12-and 15-inch damaged and degraded CMP with an 18-inch reinforced concrete
pipe (RCP) within the public right-of-way at the intersection of Highland Drive and Adams
Street. In addition, the project includes construction of 1) two catch basins, 2) two storm drain
cleanouts, 3) a concrete drainage swale, 4) a concrete drainage ditch, 5) a concrete spillway; and
6) a riprap energy dissipater.
Construction of the proposed project would begin on September 1, 2013 and last approximately
one month, with an average of one to five workers on any given day. Construction equipment
would include two crew trucks, one water truck, one backhoe, one compressor, and one dump
truck. Staging for equipment storage, etc., during construction for both projects is assumed to
occur within roadways or other disturbed, vacant lots.
Following construction, no operational activities would be associated with the proposed project.
2.0 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the
County of San Diego's Guidelines for Determining Significance for Climate Change, the
proposed project would result in a significant greenhouse gas emission impact if it would result
in a net increase of more than 2,500 metric tons (MT) of"C02 equivalent" (C02E) per year.
The County of San Diego published its Guidelines for Determining Significance for Climate
Change on February 17, 2012 (County of San Diego 2012). As stated in this document, the
guidelines are based on regional data, including the incorporated cities, and may be used by lead
agencies in the region other than the County of San Diego. The purpose of the guideline
document is to ensure that new development achieves its fair share of emissions reductions
needed to meet the statewide AB 32 mandate. The County's guidelines establish a screening
level threshold of 2,500 MT of C02E emitted annually during either construction or operation.
Projects that would emit more than 2,500 MT C02E annually during either construction or
operation would result in a potentially significant cumulatively considerable impact. The
DUDEK 2
7439
August 2012
Memorandum
Subject: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report for the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Program
guidelines include screening criteria specific to construction to determine whether a construction
project would potentially result in annual emissions of greater than 2,500 MT C02E:
• Grading and clearing of more than 1,285 acres of land.
• Grading and clearing of more than 100 acres of land requiring more than 3,100 cubic
yards per day of soil hauling.
• A project that would haul more 3,300 cubic yards per day.
• New roadway, trail, or pathway construction of more than 3 miles that would disturb
more than 80 acres of land area and would involve more than 3,100 cubic yards per day
of soil hauling.
• Repaving of an existing roadway, trail, or pathway of more than 6 miles that would
disturb more than 241 acres of land area per year.
• New pipeline of more than 11 miles that would disturb more than 81 acres of land and
result in more than 3,100 cubic yards per day of soil hauling.
The above threshold was determined to be applicable by the City of Carlsbad, based on its
independent review and consideration of the County's guidelines. Section 15064.4(b) of the
CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency should consider the following factors when assessing
the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment:
1. The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to
the existing environmental setting.
2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency
determines applies to the project.
3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to
implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG
emissions.
Additionally, Section 15064.4(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that the determination of the
significance of GHG emissions should rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based
standards.
The significance threshold is consistent with the first and third considerations because the
County determined a significance threshold of 2,500 MT C02E based on the existing regional
DUDEK 3
7439
August 2012
Memorandum
Subject: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report for the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Program
environmental setting and future compliance with regulations pertaining to GHG emissions, such
as AB 32. The threshold is consistent with the second consideration because it establishes a
numeric threshold for comparison to the project's GHG emissions. The City of Carlsbad has
analyzed and independently reviewed this information and has determined that the thresholds of
significance comply with Section 15064.4(a) of the CEQA Guidelines because the thresholds
require a qualitative analysis and establish performance based standards
3.0 CONSTRUCTION GHG EMISSIONS
GHG emissions would be associated with the construction phase of the proposed project through
use of construction equipment and vehicle trips. Emissions of carbon dioxide (C02) were
estimated using the URBEMIS 2007, Version 9.2.4, land use and air emissions model (Jones &
Stokes 2007). The model results were adjusted to estimate methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide
(N20) emissions in addition to C02 • The effect each GHG has on climate change is measured as
a combination of the mass of its emissions and the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the
atmosphere, known as its global warming potential (GWP). The GWP varies between GHGs; for
example, the GWP of methane is 21, and the GWP of nitrous oxide is 310. Total GHG emissions
are expressed as a function of how much warming would be caused by the same mass of C02.
Thus, GHG gas emissions are typically reported in terms of pounds or tons of "C02 equivalent"
(C02E), which is the sum of the emission rates of each GHG times its GWP.
URBEMIS model inputs such as the construction schedule and equipment are included in
Appendix A. The C02 emissions from off-road equipment and on-road trucks, which are
assumed by URBEMIS 2007 to be diesel fueled, were adjusted by a factor derived from the
relative C02, CH4, and N20 for diesel-fuel equipment and trucks as reported in the California
Climate Action Registry's (CCAR) General Reporting Protocol (CCAR 2009) for transportation
fuels and the GWP for each GHG to estimate the emissions in units of C02E. The C02
emissions associated with construction worker trips were multiplied by a factor based on the
assumption that C02 represents 95% of the C02E emissions associated with passenger vehicles
(EPA 2005). The results were then converted from annual tons per year to metric tons per year.
Table 1 shows the estimated GHG emissions associated with the 1-month construction period for
the proposed project.
DUDEK 4
7439
August2012
Memorandum
Subject: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report for the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
Program
Table 1
Estimated Construction GHG Emissions
(metric tons per year)
SOURCE: See Appendix 8 for complete results.
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
This report analyzes the GHG emissions resulting from construction-related activities associated
with the proposed project. As indicated in Section 2.0, the City of Carlsbad currently utilizes the
County of San Diego's 2,500 MT C02E annual threshold. Table 1 above indicates that the
project's construction GHG emissions would be approximately 18 MT of C02E in 2013.
Following construction, no operational activities would be associated with the proposed project.
As such, the proposed project's GHG emissions would not exceed the County's 2,500 MT C02E
annual threshold, and impacts would be less than significant.
5.0 REFERENCES
CCAR (California Climate Action Registry). 2009. General Reporting Protocol, Reporting
Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Version 3.1. January.
http:/ /climateregistry .org/resources/ docs/protoco Is/ grp/ GRP _ V3 _ April2008 _FINAL. pdf
County of San Diego. 2012. Guidelines for Determining Significance for Climate Change.
February 17.
EPA. 2005. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle (EPA420-F-05-004).
EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
Jones & Stokes. 2007. Software User's Guide: URBEMIS2007 for Windows. November.
http://www.urbemis.com.
DUDEK 5
7439
August 2012
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
APPENDIX A
URBEMIS Model Results
Page: 1
8/27/2012 6:06:43 PM
Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4
Combined Annual Emissions Reports (Tons/Year)
File Name:
Project Name: Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Project
Project Location: South Coast AQMD
On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006
Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007
Summary Report:
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES
2013 TOTALS (tons/year unmitigated)
.QQZ
18.90
Page: 2
8/27/2012 6:06:43 PM
Construction Unmitigated Detail Report:
CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES Annual Tons PerYeard.Jnmitigated
2013
Building 09/0112013-1 0/0112013
Building Off Road Diesel
Building Vendor Trips
Building o orc:er Trips
QQ2
18.90
18.90
12.23
4.16
2.00
phase Assymptjons
Phase: Building Construction 9/1/2013-10/1/2013-CMP Replacement Project
Off-Road Eouipment:
1 Air Compressors (106 hp) operating at a 0.481oad factorfor8 hours per day
1 Tractors/Loaders/Bacehoes (1 08 hp) operating at a 0. rn load factor for 8 hours per day
1 cater Trucos (189 hp) operating at a O.o load factor for 8 hours per day
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
APPENDIX B
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program
Construction Emissions
C02 C02E
(tons/yr)1 • {Mtons/yr)
Construction Year
Off-Road Diesel
Worker/Vendor Trips
Total for 2013
Source:
1. URBEMIS Output
Notes:
C02E
Mtons
2013
12.23
6.66
18.89
Carbon dioxide equivalent
metric tons (= 1.1023 tons)
11.20
6.36
17.56
Global Warming Potential
Diesel Equipment
Diesel Trucks
Passenger Vehicles
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program
C02-to-C02 Equivalent Factors
Source Units C02 CH4
1 21
1 kg/gal 10.15 0.00058
2 g/mi 1,450.00 0.0051
3
1. California Climate Action Registry. 2009. General Reporting Protocol: Reporting
Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, Tables C.6 and C.7.
2. California Climate Action Registry. 2009. General Reporting Protocol: Reporting
Entity-W1de Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, Tables C.3 and C.4.
N20
310
0.00026
0.0048
3. US EPA, Office of Transportation and Air Quality. 2005. Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a
Typical Passenger Vehicle (EPA420-F-05-004), p. 4.
C02EIC02
1.009
1.001
1.053
RECEIVED
AUG 2 0 2012
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DIVISION
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
City of Carlsbad, California
Prepared by:
~t·rA M~
David Stone, M.A., RPA
Ken Victorino, M.A., RPA
DUDEK
621 Chapala Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Tel. (805) 963-0651
Prepared for:
City of Carlsbad-Utilities Engineering Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
USGS San Luis Rey, California 7.5 Minute Quadrangle
April 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page No.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ................................................ !
3.0 SOURCES CONSULTED ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 5
3.1 Cultural Resources Records Search ........................................................ 5
3.2 Native American Consultation ................................................................ 7
4.0 BACKGROUND ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• &
4.1 Environment ......................................................................................... 8
4.2 Prehistory ............................................................................................. 9
4.3 Ethnohistory ....................................................................................... 11
4.4 History ............................................................................................... 14
5.0 FIELD METHODS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15
6.0 STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................. 17
7.0 OTHER RESOURCE$ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 18
8.0 REFERENCES •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 19
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Table 1
Regional Map ........................................................................................ 2
Vicinity Map .......................................................................................... 3
Area of Potential Effect (APE) ................................................................ 4
Native American Consultation Summary ................................................. 8
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A Cultural Resources Records Search (Bound Separately)
Appendix B Native American Consultation
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The City of Carlsbad (City) proposes to either replace or repair sections of pipe at two
locations: Adams Street/Highland Drive; and Hoover Street/Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Dudek
prepared this Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) at the request of the City to document
archaeological resources that might be affected by the proposed Project.
An archaeological literature and records search was conducted at the California Historical
Resources Information System (CHRIS) at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC), for the
proposed Project in March, 2012. At least two investigations have been undertaken within the
proposed Area of Potential Effect (APE). Two prehistoric archaeological sites are located
within or adjacent to the APE.
The proposed APE was the subject of an intensive archaeological survey by Dudek Senior
Archaeologist Ken Victorino in March, 2012. The APE has been disturbed by construction
activities associated with the installation of the existing corrugated metal pipe (CMP) storm
drain. Weathered shell fragments were observed in the proposed Hoover/Lagoon location.
However, the shell was observed in an area disturbed by installation of the existing CMP
storm drain and no other prehistoric cultural material such as chipped stone artifacts was
identified.
If unexpected archaeological materials are encountered during construction, work should stop
in that area until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the
find. If human remains are unearthed during construction, State Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has
made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98.
ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Carlsbad (City) proposes to repair and replace approximately 630 linear feet of
corrugated metal pipe (CMP) in two separate locations along the northern edge of Agua
Hedionda Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad, in San Diego County (see Figures 1 and 2). The
Project Area of Potential Effect (APE) (see Figure 3) includes areas where repair and/or
replacement of CMP will occur.
This report documents the background research, Native American consultation, and
archaeological survey conducted for the proposed Project. The report was prepared by Dudek
archaeologists David Stone, M.A., RPA, and Ken Victorino, M.A., RPA. Mr. Stone has over 30
years' experience in central and southern California and Mr. Victorino has 20 years'
experience.
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project area is located in Section 8 of Township 12 South, Range 4 West of the
San Luis Rey, California U.S. Geological Service (USGS) 7.5' topographic quadrangle, within
the County of San Diego (see Figure 2). The proposed Project is located in two separate
locations along the northern edge of Agua Hedionda Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad: along
Hoover Street, southwest of Adams Street, adjacent to the lagoon (Hoover/Lagoon Location)
and; at the intersection of Highland Drive and Adams Street (Highland/ Adams Location). The
proposed Project is the repair and replacement of approximately 630 linear feet of CMP (see
Figure 3).
Hoover /Lagoon Location
The Hoover/Lagoon location involves repairing approximately 474 linear feet of CMP with a
cured-in-place liner and replacing approximately 24 linear feet of CMP with high-density
polyethylene (HOPE) pipe. The Hoover/Lagoon location also includes the construction of the
following components: a catch basin, storm drain cleanout, concrete drainage ditch, concrete
dike, curb, headwall, and riprap energy dissipater.
Project Site
Pac1fic
0 c e a n
--------;
i \ 6 10 1s ·,
.I ~~~--~~~==~~~~-~M~Ies_l ______ ~L\ ____________________ ~~~ ~1-FIGURE 1 ~ DUDEK Regional Map ~~------------~ f;:
MEXICO
7216 ~L_ _______ l_C~or~ru~g~a~te~d~~Me~ta~I~P~ip~e~R:e~p:la~ce~m:e~n~t----------------------------~
1,000 2,000 --==--=::::::!Feet
DUDEK SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series San Luis Rey Quadrangle.
7216
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement
FIGURE 2
Vicinity Map
SOURCE: Bing 2012 FIGURE 3
Area of Potential Effect (APE)
Corrugated Metal Pipe
Highland/ Adams Location
The Highland/Adams location involves replacing approximately 132 linear feet of damaged
and degraded CMP with reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). This location also includes the
construction of the following components: two catch basins; two storm drain cleanouts; a
concrete drainage swale; a concrete drainage ditch; a concrete spillway; and a riprap energy
dissipater. The APE includes areas where CMP will be repaired and replaced and other
components will be constructed.
3.0 SOURCES CONSULTED
This section describes the methods and results of the records search conducted at the
California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), and summarizes correspondence
with the Native American Heritage Commission and Native Americans regarding the proposed
project.
3.1 Cultural Resources Records Search
An archaeological site records and literature search of the California Historical Resources
Information System (CHRIS) South Coastal Information Center (SCIC), was conducted on March
26, 2012 by Nick Doose, SCIC Information Officer, to identify all recorded archaeological sites
within 1/2 mile of the proposed project area (see Appendix A). The records search identified
all known archaeological sites and historic resources, within this distance, and any previous
cultural resource surveys within the project site. The SCIC records indicate that 45
investigations have been completed within 1/2 mile of the APE. Of these, two investigations
have addressed the northern and southern portions of the Hoover/Lagoon site (Mooney 1993,
Gallegos 2003), and one has addressed the entirety of the Highland/Adams site (Mooney
1993).
Two prehistoric archaeological sites are recorded within or adjacent to the Project site: CA-
SDI-13701 encompasses the Highland/Adams Project area; and CA-SDI-18613 is located
adjacent to the southeast corner of the Hoover/Lagoon Project area.
5
CA-SDI-13701 (W-130)
CA-SDI-13701 was originally recorded by M. Rogers as a large shell midden (soils resulting
from the decomposition of organic food remains including shellfish, and animal meats
resulting in a darker, silty loam context) with ground and chipped stone artifacts. In 1994,
Gallegos & Associates conducted a survey for the Moffatt Parcel and identified a "relatively
undisturbed portion of the midden" with chipped and ground stone artifacts in a level area
near the top of a ridge in the western portion of the archaeological site, just south of Adams
Street and approximately 100 meters (328 feet) away from the proposed Project APE. Fewer
numbers of chipped and ground stone artifacts were also identified in an area just north of
the Highland Drive and Adams Street intersection and just north the proposed Project APE.
Despite this, the overall integrity of the site was recorded as poor.
In 2004, Gallegos & Associates conducted a survey of the Adams Street Property and
indicated that the archaeological deposit within the Adams Street Property project area had
been destroyed by activities associated with the construction of a concrete ditch and brick
wall, the installation of a metal fence, grading, and landscaping. Based on the disturbances
within the Adams Street Property project area and the resulting destruction of the
archaeological deposit within the Adams Street Property project area, no further
archaeological investigation including testing and/or construction monitoring for the Adams
Street Property project was recommended.
Based on the CA-SDI-13701 Archaeological Site Record, in 2006, Brian F. Smith & Associates
excavated a portion of CA-SDI-13701 located south of Adams Street, south and east of the
current Highland/Adams location and approximately 35 meters (115 feet) away from the
proposed Project APE, for the Adams Street Subdivision project. Excavations consisted of
shovel test pits and one 1 x 1 meter unit. The excavations indicated that the archaeological
deposit in this particular area was a result of erosion from archaeological deposits located up-
slope. It was determined that the archaeological deposit in this particular area lacked the
ability to answer research questions and was not eligible for listing on the California Register
of Historical Resources (CRHR). It was not considered a significant archaeological resource
according to CEQA and City of Carlsbad guidelines. It therefore would not be considered
6
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Adams Street
Subdivision project impacts on archaeological resources were characterized as less than
significant. No data recovery excavation program was proposed but archaeological
monitoring of construction was recommended in the event that unknown, potentially
significant resources might be encountered during grading.
In 2009, ASM Affiliates conducted a Phase II testing program at CA-SDI-13701 as part of the
North Agua Hedionda Interceptor (NAHI) Western Segment Realignment Project (ASM 2009).
The testing determined the portion of CA-SDI-13701 within the NAHI project area is not
eligible for listing on the CRHR or the NRHP. Archaeological and Native American monitoring
during NAHI project construction identified only sparsely scattered shell.
CA-SDI-18613 (NAHI-S-1)
CA-SDI-18613 was recorded by Gallegos & Associates in 2007 as an artifact scatter consisting
of two "battered implements" and two ground stone fragments during a survey for the NAHI
Sewer Project, adjacent to the southeast corner of the Hoover/Lagoon location. In 2009, ASM
Affiliates conducted a Phase II testing program at CA-SDI-18613 as part of the NAHI Western
Segment Realignment Project (ASM 2009). The testing determined that CA-SDI -18613
represents a secondary (disturbed and imported) deposit of prehistoric archaeological
materials, and is not eligible for listing on the CRHR or the NRHP.
3.2 Native American Consultation
A search of the Native American Heritage Commission's (NAHC) Sacred Land File was requested
on March 9, 2012, and was conducted on March 26, 2012 (Dave Singleton, NAHC Program
Analyst) to determine the presence of any Native American cultural resources within the
proposed project area (see Appendix B). The NAHC indicated that no known Native American
heritage resources are identified within the proposed project area. The NAHC identified nine
Native American contacts, both tribes and individuals, who would potentially have specific
knowledge as to whether or not other cultural resources are identified in the APE that could be
at-risk. Letters to these contacts were sent out on April 10, 2012. Table 3 summarizes this
consultation.
7
Table 1. Native American Consultation Summary
Contact Name Contact Dates/Method Response
Pala Band of Mission Indians, April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Tribal Historic Preservation Shasta Gaughen
Office Shasta Gaughen
Pauma Valley Band of Luisefio April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Indians, Bennae Calac, Tribal Bennae calac
Council Member
Rincon Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to Bo No Response
Indians, Bo Mazzetti, Mazzetti
Chairperson
Pauma & Yuima Reservation, April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Randall Majel, Chairperson Randall Majel
Pechanga Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to Paul No Response
Indian, Paul Macarro, Cultural Macarro
Resources Manager
San Luis Rey Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to Tribal No Response
Indians Tribal Council Council
Rincon Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Indian, Cultural & Tiffany Wolfe
Environmental Tiffany Wolfe
San Luis Rey Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Indians Cultural Department Cultural Department
La Jolla Band of Mission April 10, 2012, Letter to No Response
Indians, James Trujillo, Vice James Trujillo
Chair
4.0 BACKGROUND
4.1 Environment
The project site is located along the northern edge of Agua Hedionda Lagoon, in the City of
Carlsbad. The existing environment is characterized by residential development and
undeveloped open space.
Soils within the APE consist of Carlsbad gravelly loamy sand and marina loamy coarse sand.
The topography slopes southwest toward the lagoon, and elevation ranges from 0 feet mean
sea level (msl) to 80 feet above msl.
8
4.2 Prehistory
Various cultural sequences have been defined for coastal California and San Diego County
(e.g., Bull 1987; Ezell 1987; Moriarty 1966; Warren 1987). For consistency, this report will
rely on a terminological sequence (i.e., Paleoindian, Archaic, Late Prehistoric).
Paleoindian Period (12,000-8,000 B.P.)
The Paleoindian period, also known as the San Dieguito complex, dates from circa 12,000 to
8,000 Before Present ("B.P .") and is typified by artifact assemblages consisting of typical
hunter-gatherer flaked lithic tools, such as scrapers, scraper planes, choppers, and large
projectile points (Davis et al. 1969; Moratto 1984; Warren 1987). A cooler and wetter climate
during this period resulted in more widespread pinion-juniper and riparian plant communities.
Sites occupied during this time suggest that the hunting of deer and smaller mammals was
central to the San Dieguito economy. Typical Paleoindian assemblages do not contain
millingstone technology.
Although no consensus has been reached among archaeologists, some information suggests
that the San Dieguito complex may have evolved into the La Jolla complex or Archaic Period
between about 9,000 and 8,000 years B.P. (Erlandson 1994). This transitional period is
supported by the presence of artifacts such as eccentric crescents and spire-ground Olive/fa
beads in both complexes. A "type" site that demonstrates this relationship is CA-SDI-210, a
multi-component midden site located south of Carlsbad on the north shore of Agua Hedionda
Lagoon {Moriarty 1967). In the upper levels, the nearly 2-meter-deep midden contained
milling tools attributed to the La Jolla Complex. No milling stones were found below 130
centimeters, but scrapers, choppers, and hammerstones typical of the La Jolla Complex were
found throughout all levels of the midden, and the soil profile exposed a homogeneous
deposit lacking obvious stratification. A sample of shell from the base of the midden returned
a radiocarbon date of 9020 ± 500 radiocarbon years before present.
There has been significant debate over the past two decades regarding the relationship
between sites relating to the San Dieguito complex and the later La Jolla complex. These
9
arguments have produced an alternative interpretation that considers both cultural
phenomena as "functional variants of a single adaptive system" (Reddy and Byrd 1997). This
hypothesis has gained support from the development of the paleocoastal model that suggests
the initial occupants of coastal California were generalized hunter-gatherers rather than big-
game specialists.
Archaic Period (8,000-2,000 B.P.)
The Archaic period (La Jolla/Pauma complex) lasted until approximately 2,000 B.P. Archaic
period adaptations are expressed in the La Jolla complex as a shift from generalized hunting
and gathering to a subsistence strategy focused on the exploitation of marine resources
(primarily shellfish and fish). Most La Jollan sites are located along the coast and major
drainage systems and are characterized by the appearance of millingstone technology (basin
metates and manos), shell middens, cobble tools, discoidals, a small number of Pinto and Elko
series points, and flexed burials. In the interior of San Diego County, Archaic adaptations are
represented by the Pauma complex (True 1958). Although the Pauma complex shares
similarities with the coastal adaptation, Pauma sites generally reflect reduced exploitation of
marine resources, contain a greater frequency of milling equipment, and have fewer
hammer/chopper and planning/scrapping tools (True and Beemer 1982). In addition,
archaeological manifestations of the Pauma complex are generally located in upland contexts,
overlooking drainages.
Late Prehistoric Period (2,000-200 B.P.)
The Late Prehistoric period is characterized by the introduction of ceramics and changes in
burial traditions and lithic technology. Flexed inhumations are replaced with cremation
burials, and small pressure-flaked projectile points make an appearance. There is a shift from
littoral resource exploitation to an emphasis on inland plant (especially acorns) food
collection, processing, and storage. These changes are believed to be associated with a
migration of Yuman-speaking people from the eastern Colorado River region around 2,000
B.P. (Rogers 1945) and Shoshonean speakers after 1,500 B.P. (Moratto 1984; True 1966).
10
During this period, inland semi-sedentary villages were established along major watercourses,
and mountain areas were seasonally occupied to exploit acorns and pinon nuts.
In the northern part of San Diego County, the Late Prehistoric period is represented by the
San Luis Rey complex (Meighan 1954; True et al. 1974), which is considered to represent the
Shoshonean predecessors of the Luisefio. The San Luis Rey complex is divided into two
phases: San Luis Rey I, a pre-ceramic phase lasting from circa A.D. 1400-1750 (Meighan
1954; True et al. 1974); and San Luis Rey II, a ceramic phase from A.D. 1750-1850 (Meighan
1954). The San Luis Rey II complex differs primarily in the appearance of cremation urns,
ceramics, and red and black pictographs. Ceramics may have entered into the San Diego
region as early as circa A.D. 1200-1600 (True et al. 1974), but did not become common until
the ceramic phase of the San Luis Rey complex.
True and Waugh (1982) describe a diachronic model of settlement and subsistence change
during the Late Prehistoric period of Luisefio occupation. They suggest that settlement
patterns during approximately A.D. 1-1500 were characterized by small, briefly occupied
campsites located in a variety of locations, a classic indication of what is now called a foraging
strategy. After A.D. 1500, they suggest that settlement patterns became more territorial,
focused on specific drainages, and reflected a collector-oriented strategy. Sites included
permanent villages in the western foothills and permanent summer camps in the mountains.
4.3 Ethnohistory
A wide range of historical, ethnohistorical, and ethnographic sources provide an outline of the
ethnohistory of the region. Historical documents include the sacramental and census registers
(padrones) of the Franciscan missions, as well as various documents from early explorers
(e.g., Bolton's 1927 translation of the Crespi diary of the Portola Expedition). A large body of
ethnographic and ethnohistorical sources provides information on a wide range of topics
including settlement, subsistence, social organization, population size, and cosmology of the
people who lived in the region when the Spanish arrived (Bean and Shipek 1978; Earle and
O'Neil 1994; Harrington 1933, 1986; Johnson 1998; Kroeber 1925; McCawley 1995, 1996;
Rivers 1991; Sparkman 1908).
11
-------------------------------· --·--·--·--
Cultural Affiliation
The Shoshonean inhabitants of northern San Diego County were called Luisenos by
Franciscan friars, who named the San Luis Rey River and in 1798 established the San Luis Rey
Mission in the heart of Luiseno territory. Their territory encompassed an area roughly from
Agua Hedionda Creek north to Aliso Creek on the coast, and inland to Santiago Peak and
Palomar Mountain (Bean and Shipek 1978). The Luiseno shared boundaries with the
Gabrielino and Serrano to the west and northwest, the Cahuilla from the deserts to the east,
the Cupeno to the southeast, and the Ipai or Kumeyaay to the south. Luiseno, Gabrielino,
Serrano, Cahuilla, and Cupeno belong to the Takic subfamily of Uta-Aztecan, but the Ipai are
classified in the Yuman language family (Bean and Shipek 1978).
Social and Settlement Organization
The Luisenos were divided into several autonomous lineages or kin groups based on a
patrilineal and patrilocal social system. The lineage represented the basic political unit among
most southern Californian Native Americans. The exact nature of settlement dynamics of the
Luiseno is still debated. According to Bean and Shipek (1978), the Luiseno exploited a wide
range of resources in a bimodal seasonal system. Most inland groups had fishing and
gathering sites on the coast that they visited annually when the tides were low or when inland
foods were scarce from January to March. The mountain camp was occupied by most of the
village population during October and November, when acorns were harvested and game
animals hunted. Each lineage had exclusive hunting and gathering rights in their procurement
ranges, and trespassers were seriously punished (Bean and Shipek 1978).
It has been suggested that coastal Luiseno groups stayed along the seashore the entire year
instead of utilizing the bimodal system discussed above (Koerper 1981). Alternatively, Shipek
(1977) suggests that the Luiseno occupied permanent villages in a variety of ecological zones
and made seasonal forays to procure specific resources from particular localities.
12
Subsistence Patterns
Acorns were an important food source to the Luisefio, as they were with most inland
communities of Takic speakers in southern California. Acorns were collected in the fall and
then stored in either conical shaped granaries or in ceramic storage pots (McCawley 1995). It
is unclear how important acorns were to the coastal inhabitants, but many researchers believe
that these nuts may have composed up to 25 percent of the diet (Bean and Shipek 1978;
Earle and O'Neil 1994; White 1963). Coastal groups may have visited more interior areas
during harvest time or may have exchanged goods with more inland residents in order to
acquire enough acorns for the community.
Besides acorns, people utilized various seeds, greens, bulbs, roots, and fruits. This includes a
wide variety of cacti and even edible reeds. The greens may have been an important
springtime food, when other supplies were relatively scarce. Edible reeds could have provided
a supplementary resource during times of food scarcity, such as late winter. Bean and Shipek
(1978) believe seeds provided a large bulk of the nutritional needs of the people. They
mention the use of grass seeds, manzanita, sunflower, sage, chia, lemonade berry, wild rose,
holly-leaf cherry, prickly pear, lamb's-quarters, and pine nuts.
The Luisefio hunted large and small terrestrial game, including black-tailed deer, pronghorn,
jackrabbits, various birds, grasshoppers, and rodents. Deer were hunted with bow and arrow,
captured in snares, or driven off cliffs (McCawley 1995). Smaller mammals, such as rabbits
and rodents, were hunted with bow and arrows, throwing sticks, snares, traps, and draw
nets. McCawley (1995), however, lists a series of animals that were not eaten by the Luisefio
during pre-mission times. This list includes tree squirrels, wild pigeons or doves, dogs,
coyotes, foxes, wolves, badgers, skunks, raccoons, wildcats, gophers, moles, eagles,
buzzards, crows, hawks, owls, mockingbirds, lizards, snakes, rattlesnakes, turtles, tortoises,
frogs, and toads.
Fish and other marine animals played an important dietary role to the people living along the
coast. Fishing equipment included bone and shell fishhooks, yucca fishing line, and
detachable-point harpoons (McCawley 1995). In addition, coastal groups used dugout or rush
13
bundled canoes (Earle and O'Neil 1994; Harrington 1986; McCawley 1995). Such crafts would
have given the coastal inhabitants access to offshore fishing grounds. In addition to fish, the
coastal groups subsisted off of a wide variety of locally available shellfish, marine mammals,
and crustaceans (Bean and Shipek 1978).
4.4 History
First contact between Europeans and the Luisefio came in 1769 with the arrival of Gaspar de
Portola's expedition. The expedition was traveling between San Diego and Monterey in order
to investigate possible mission sites (Rivers 1991). Mission San Juan Capistrano was
established in 1776, the seventh of California's 21 missions. Mission San Luis Rey was
founded 22 years later as the eighteenth mission (Rivers 1991). By 1830, the holdings of
Mission San Luis Rey included San Onofre, Santa Margarita, San Marcos, Pala, Temecula, San
Jacinto, Agua Caliente, and Las Flores (Brigandi 1982, revised 1995).
Fifty Luisefio villages, each with a population of about 200 people (a total population of
10,000), are estimated to have been populated at the time of Spanish contact (White 1963).
The mission records registered 3,683 Luisefio in 1828 (Bean and Shipek 1978), indicating a
drastic decrease. Earle and O'Neil (1994) have recently recalculated population estimates
based on mission sacramental register information, and they suggest this decline was not
quite as great. Whatever the case, the Luisefio clearly suffered a catastrophic decline in
population from introduced European diseases as well as living conditions under the mission
system. The Native American populations under the jurisdiction of the San Luis Rey Mission,
however, fared better than most California mission communities (Hornbeck 1983; Jackson
1994; Johnson 1998).
The indigenous communities brought into the mission system were taught the Roman Catholic
faith, Spanish language, farming skills, animal husbandry, adobe brickmaking, carpentry, and
other European crafts (Bean and Shipek 1978). The policy at Mission San Luis Rey was to
maintain the Luisefio settlement pattern, and priests visited the villages to hold masses,
perform marriages, and supervise agricultural activities. Although, for the most part,
traditional economic methods continued as the basic subsistence mode and leadership
14
continued as it had always been, ethnohistoric data and new information indicate that a major
cattle ranch operation was in place earlier than 1810 (Cagle et al. 1996). The policy at Mission
San Luis Rey of less-direct or minimal interference was probably one of the reasons that the
local communities in the area of California saw less-devastating population decreases than in
other mission communities. The Luisenos social and political organization was drastically and
forever changed by the policies of missionization (McCawley 1995, 1996).
In 1834, the missions were secularized, resulting in political imbalance and Native American
revolts and uprisings against the Mexican rancheros, who used the local populations as
indentured labor. In theory, this secularization was supposed to act as a transition from
mission-controlled to Native American-controlled pueblos (McCawley 1996). This would allow
the missions to continue developing new territories in more inland areas while leaving the
"Christianized" Native Americans in charge of their original holdings. In reality, the
secularization movement allowed self-aggrandizing individuals, mostly Mexican citizens, to
control the wealth of vast amounts of lands. By 1845, Pio Pico, temporary governor of
California and last governor of Mexican California, and his family acquired over 133,000 acres
of land, including San Onofre, Santa Margarita, and Las Flores (Rivers 1991).
At this time, many Luiseno left the missions and sought refuge among inland groups, while a
few acquired land grants and entered into the mainstream Mexican culture. Several local
pueblos were established for some of the San Luis Rey rancherias, among them Santa
Margarita and Las Flores by the Mexican government. These pueblos were intended to be
governmental units within the Mexican political system. Most, like Las Flores and Santa
Margarita, disappeared under Mexican rancho rule.
5.0 FIELD METHODS
The APE incorporates all of the proposed construction areas associated with the proposed
Project. The Phase 1 pedestrian survey of proposed Project areas was conducted March 13,
2012 by Dudek Senior Archaeologist Ken Victorino, M.A., RPA, using3-meter (9.8-foot)
meandering transect intervals.
15
Hoover I Lagoon Location
At the northeast corner of the Hoover Street and Adams Street intersection, where the catch
basin, concrete drainage ditch, concrete dike, and curb will be constructed, ground surface
visibility was excellent (90 to 100 percent). This area has been disturbed by activities
associated with installation of a fire hydrant and fire water line, installation of a wood
power/utility pole, and construction of a storm drain and curb.
Along Hoover Street where the CMP will be repaired with a cured-in-place liner, ground
surface visibility was fair to good (10 to 90 percent). This area has been disturbed by
activities associated with the !nstallation of the existing CMP. Approximately 20 to 30 pieces
of weathered shell, mainly Venus clam (Chione spp.) roughly %-to 112-inch in size, were
observed on the ground surface. No other prehistoric archaeological materials such as bone,
chipped stone artifacts, or ground stone artifacts were identified. Examination of rodent holes
and backdirt piles did not reveal any shell or darkened/discolored soil. Modern trash,
including white ceramic tile, and imported gravel was observed on the ground surface in
association with the shell.
Ground surface visibility was fair (10 to 50 percent) in the undeveloped open space between
Hoover Street and Agua Hedionda Lagoon, where CMP will be replaced with HOPE pipe and a
storm drain cleanout, headwall, and riprap energy dissipater will be constructed,. This area
has been disturbed by activities associated with the installation of the existing CMP. Silt
fences and straw wattles have been installed to control erosion in this area, suggesting that
this area has been previously graded. Approximately 10 pieces of weathered shell were
observed on the ground surface. Again, no other prehistoric archaeological materials were
identified. An approximately 3-foot high bank along the shore of the lagoon was examined.
No prehistoric archaeological materials or darkened/discolored soils were identified.
Highland/ Adams Location
The Highland/Adams location has been disturbed by activities associated with the installation
of the existing CMP. The area north of Highland Drive where the concrete drainage ditch,
16
catch basin, and concrete drainage swale will be constructed has been disturbed by activities
associated with construction of a 3-to 4-foot high retaining wall. Areas where RCP will be
installed and a storm drain cleanout constructed within Highland Drive and Adams Street has
been disturbed by the installation of underground utilities. A storm drain cleanout and riprap
energy dissipater will be constructed at the base of a gravel covered slope south of Adams
Street. Based on the surrounding topography, this area appears to have been filled for the
construction of Adams Street. This area has also been disturbed by erosion and scouring
from the existing CMP outlet. No prehistoric archaeological materials were identified.
6.0 STUDY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The intensive survey of the Project APE identified weathered, small shell fragments within the
Hoover/Lagoon location. However, no other prehistoric archaeological materials such as
chipped stone artifacts or ground stone artifacts were observed. Disturbances associated
with installation of the existing CMP storm drain have most likely destroyed any intact
archaeological materials. These observations are consistent with previous archaeological
investigation conclusions. The shellfish fragments may be associated with the previously
recorded archaeological site CA-SDI-18613. They are located within soils that have been
disturbed as a result of installation of the existing CMP. The shellfish fragments therefore do
not display integrity of location. The loss of this integrity compromises the ability of the
sparse shell fragments to address criteria for eligibility for listing on the CRHR and NRHP.
Specifically, the disturbed shellfish fragments:
(A) Are not associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage;
(B) Are not associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
(C) Do not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method
of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or
possesses high artistic values; or
(D) Have not yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or
history.
17
Given the reliable conditions characterizing the present intensive archaeological survey, no
further investigations are needed to determine the potential existence of CRHR-or NRHP-
eligible properties in the Project APE.
7.0 OTHER RESOURCES
Unidentified Cultural Materials
If previously unidentified archaeological materials are unearthed during construction, work
should be halted in that area until a qualified archaeologist can assess the significance of the
find.
18
8.0 REFERENCES
ASM Affiliates, Inc.
2009. Results of Archaeological Testing at SDI-13701 and NAHI-S-1 for the North Agua
Hedionda Interceptor Western Segment Realignment Project, Carlsbad, San Diego
County, California. Unfiled draft.
Bean, Lowell, and Florence Shipek
1978. Luiseno. In California, edited by R. Heizer, pp. 550-563. Handbook of North
American Indians, vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general editor. Smithsonian Institution.
Washington.
Brian F. Mooney & Associates (Mooney)
1993. Archaeological Survey Report for a Portion of Adams Street Widening Project in
the City of Carlsbad, California. Ms. on file, SCIC, San Diego State University.
Brigandi, Phil
1982. A BriefHistoryofLas Flores. Revised 1995.
Bull, Charles S.
1987. A New Proposal: Some Suggestions for San Diego Prehistory. In San Dieguito-La
Jolla: Chronology and Controversy, edited by Dennis Gallegos, pp. 35-42. San Diego
County Archaeological Society Research Paper No. 1.
Cagle, Chantal, C. Woodman, L. Haslouer, and B. Bowser
1996. Management Summary: CA-SDI-812/H, Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, San
Diego County, California, Preliminary Results of Test Excavations and a Determination of
NRHP Eligibility. Science Applications International Corporation. Submitted to the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District.
Davis, E.L., C.W. Brott, and D.L. Weide.
1969. The Western Lithic Co-Tradition. San Diego Museum Papers 6.
Earle, David and Stephen O'Neil
1994. An Ethnohistoric Analysis of Population, Settlement, and Social Organization in
Coastal Orange County at the End of the Late Prehistoric Period. Keith Companies.
Submitted to Coastal Community Builders, Newport Beach.
Erlandson, Jon M.
1994. Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast New York: Plenum Press.
19
Ezell, Paul H.
1987. The Harris Site -An Atypical San Dieguito Site or Am I Beating a Dead Horse? In
San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology and Controversy, edited by D. Gallegos. San Diego
County Archaeological Society Research Paper 1:15-22.
Gallegos & Associates (Gallegos)
2003. Cultural Resource Survey and Test Program for the Carlsbad Sewer Line Project
Carlsbatt California. Ms. on file, SCIC, San Diego State University.
Graham, William.
1981. A Cultural Resource Survey of the Laguna Mountain Recreation Area, San Diego
County, California. ASM Affiliates Inc. Submitted to U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Forest Service, Cleveland National Forest, San Diego.
Harrington, John P.
1986. The Papers of John Peabody Harrington in the Smithsonian Institution, 1907-
1957, Vol. 3: Native American History, Language, and Culture of Southern
California/Basin. White Plains: Kraus International Publications.
1933. Annotations. In Chinigchinich: A Revised and Annotated Version of Alfred
Robinson's Translation, edited by P. Hanna. Santa Ana, california: Fine Arts Press.
Hornbeck, D.
1983. california Patterns: A Geographical and Historical Atlas. Palo Alto: Mayfield
Publishing.
Jackson, R.
1994. Indian Population Decline: The Missions of Northwestern New Spain, 1687-1840.
Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Johnson, John
1998. The Ethnohistorical Basis for Cultural Affiliation in the Camp Pendleton Marine
Base Area. Science Applications International Corporation. Submitted to the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District.
Koerper, H.
1981. Prehistoric Subsistence and Settlement in the Newport Bay Area and Environs,
Orange County, California. Doctoral dissertation, University of california, Riverside.
20
Kroeber, Alfred
1925. Handbook of the Indian of california. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
Kowta, Makoto
1969. The Sayles Complex, A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from the Cajon Pass and
the Ecological Implications of its Scraper Planes. University of california Publications in
Anthropology6:35-69. Berkeley, California
McCawley, William
1996. From Rancheria to Rancho: The Ethnohistory of Topamai -Rancho Santa
Margarita, CA-SDI-10156/12599/H. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Society for California Archaeology, Bakersfield.
1995. Ethnohistoric Report. Results of Archaeological Significance Testing at Site CA-
SDI-10156/SDI-12599/H MCAS camp Pendleton, San Diego County, California, Vol. 2.
LSA Associates Inc. Submitted to the Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Air Station,
El Toro.
Moratto, M.
1984. california Archaeology. Academic Press. New York.
Moriarty, James R. III.
1967. Transitional Pre-Desert Phase in San Diego County, California. Science 155:553-
556.
1966. Cultural Phase Divisions Suggested by Typological Change Coordinated with
Stratigraphically Controlled Radiocarbon Dating at San Diego. Anthropological Journal of
Canada 4:20-30
Reddy, Seetha, and Brian Byrd
1997. The Pendleton Coast District: An Ethnographic and Historical Background. In The
Cultural Resources of the Pendleton Coast District Ms. on file at SAIC, Santa Barbara,
California.
Rivers, Betty
1991. The Pendleton Coast District: An Ethnographic and Historical Background. In The
Cultural Resources of the Pendleton Coast District Ms. on file at SAIC, Santa Barbara,
California.
21
Rogers, Malcolm J.
1945. An Outline of Yuman Prehistory. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1(1):167-
198.
Shipek, Florence C.
1977. A Strategy for Change: The Luisefio of Southern California. PhD Dissertation,
Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii.
Sparkman, Philip S.
1908. The Culture of the Luisefio Indians. University of California Publications in
American Archaeology and Ethnology, Berkeley University Press. Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 187-
234.
True, Delbert L.
1970. Investigation of a Late Prehistoric Complex in Cuyamaca Rancho State Park, San
Diego County, california. Archaeological Survey Monographs No. 1. University of
california, Los Angeles.
1966. Archaeological Differentiation of Shoshonean and Yuman Speaking Groups in
Southern california. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology,
University of california, Los Angeles.
1958. An Early Complex in San Diego County, california. American Antiquity23:255-263
True D.L. and Eleanor Beemer.
1982. Two Milling Stone Inventories from Northern San Diego County, california.
Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4, pp. 233-261.
Wallace, William
1978. Post-Pleistocene Archaeology, 9000 to 2000 BC. In California, edited by R.
Heizer, pp. 25-36. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 8, W. Sturtevant, general
editor. Smithsonian Institution. Washington.
1955. A Suggested Chronology for Southern california Coastal Archaeology.
Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214-230.
Warren, Claude N.
1987. San Dieguito and La Jolla: Some Comments. In San Dieguito-La Jolla: Chronology
and Controversy, edited by Dennis Gallegos. San Diego County Archaeological Society,
Research Paper No. 1, pp. 73-85
22
1968. Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In
Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by C. Irwin-Williams, pp. 1-14.
Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1-14.
White, Raymond
1963. Luiseno Social Organization. University of california Press, Berkeley.
23
APPENDIX A
Cultural Resources Records Search
(CONFIDENTIAL, BOUND SEPARATELY)
APPENDIX B
Native American Consultation
03/28/2012 15:09 FAX 918 857 5390 NAHC
_,.AfP' rzn
March 26, 2012
Mr. Ken VIctorino
DUDEK
621 Chapala Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Sent by FAX to;
No. of Pages:
805-983-2074
5
Re: Sacred Lands File Search and Native American Contacts list for the •Cg!uqatl4d
Mttal PIP' Replaclment Project lfl211l:" located In northern San Diego Countv,
kllfomla;
Dear Mr. Victorino :
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) conducted a Sacred Landa
Fie search of the ·area of potential effect,· (APE) based on the USGS coordinates provided
and Native American cu1tuta1 resources were not Identified In the project area of
potantlal effect (e.g. APE): you specified. Also, please note; the NAHC sacred Lands
Inventory Is not exhaustive and does not pntelude the dlscovety of cultural resources
during any project groundbrealdng activity.
CaUfomla Public Resources Code §§5097.94 (a) and 5097.96 authoriZe the NAHC
to establish • S8CJ8d land Inventory to 18C0rd Native American aacred sites and burial
site&. These recorda are exempt from the provisions of the California Public Records Act
puniuant to. California Government Code§6254 (r). The purpose of this code iS to protect
such aites from vandalism, theft and destruction.
In the 1985 Appellate Court decision (170 Cal App 3rd 604), the court held that the
NAHC has jurisdiction and special expertise. as a state agency, over affected NatiVe AmeriCan
resources, impacted by proposed projects Including archaeological, places of religious
significance to Nlltiv& Americana and burial sites
iJOOl
The CaUfomla Environmental Quality Act (CEQA-CA Public Resources Code§§
21000-21177, amendments effective 31181201 O) requires that any project that causes a
substantial advtne change in the signifiCance of an historical resource, that inCludes
archaeological raaourcea, Ia a ·significant effect' requiring the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) per the CEQA Guidelines defines a aignlficant impact on the environment
as 'a substantial, or potentially subetantial, adverse change in any of physical conditions within
an area affected by the proposed proJect. including .•• objacts of historic or aesthetic
lignificance. • In cm:ter to comply with 'U1is provision, the lead agency is required to •••••
whether the project wil have an adverse impact on these resources within the 'area of potential
effect (APE), and If so, to mltlg.te that effect CA Government Code §85040.12(e) defines
"environmental justice" provlalons and Is applicable to the environmental review processes.
----------------~----------------------------------------
i I
i'
03/26/2012 15:09 PAX 916 657 5390 NAHC rzrooz
Earty consultation with NatiVe American tribeS in your area Is the beat way to avoid
unanticipated discoveries once a project Is .undwway. Local Native Americana may have
knowledge of the rallgloua and cultural &ignificance of the hl&tortc properties of the proposed
project for the area (e.g. APE). Consullatlon with Native American communities Is also a matter
of environmental justice a defined by catlfomia Government Code §85040.12(e). We urge
COI18Uitetlon with those trtbM and intereated Native Americans on tb•!ilt the ~c has
attached in order to sea If your proposed project might impact NatiVe American cultun~l
resoun:es. Lead agendas should consider avoldallCI• defined in §15370 of the CEQA
Guidelines when significant cullural resources as defined by the CECA Guidelines §15064.5
(b)(c)(f) may be affected by a proposed pmject. If so, Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines
defines a signlftcant impact on the environment as •substantial,· and Section 2183.2 which
requires documentation, data recovery of cultural resources.
The 1992 SeclfltiJry of the lntedors Standards for the Treatment of Hiatoric Properties
ware revised so that they could ba appled to all historic resource types Included in the National
Reglater of Historic Places and Including cultural landscapes. Also, federal Executive Ord~~r~
Nos. 11593 (~ation of cultural environment), 13175 (coordination & consultation) and
13007 (Sacred Sites) are helpful, supportive guides for Section 106 oonsuftatlon. The
atoNmentioned Secretary of the lnteriO(s Standards include recommendations for all 'lead
agenciel' to consider the bistoric centm of proposed prajects and to •...earch" the cultural
landscape that might Include the ·area of potential affect. •
Partnering with local tribes and intereated Native American consulting parties, on the
NAHC lilt, snould be QXlducted In compliance with the raqulrements of fHeral NEPA (42 u.s.C
4321-43351) and Section 106 4(f), Section 110 (f)(k) of federal NHPA (16 U.S. C. 470 et seq),
36 CFR Part 800.3 (1) (2) & .5, the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CSQ. 42
U.S.C 4371 et seq. and NAGPRA (25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) as appropriate. The 1992 Sectetaty of
the Interiors standards for ttJe TINtment of Historic Properties were revised SO that they could
be applied to all historic: resource types included In the National Register of HIStoric Places and
inCluding c:utturallandscapes. Alao, federal Executive Orders Nos. 11593 (preservation of
culturaJ envir'Onment), 13175 (coordination & consultation) and 13007 (Sacred Sites) are helpful,
supportive guides for Section 106 consultation. The NAHC remains concemed about the
limttatione and l'llllthOd8 employed for NHPA Section 106 Consultation.
Abo, california Public; Re&ourcas Code Section 5097.98, California Government Code
§27491 and Health & Safety Code Section 7050.5 provide for provisions for accidentally
clileovered archeological resources during construction and mandate the procesaaa to be
followed in the event of an accidental di8eovery of tillY hurrw.n remains In a project location other
than a 'dedicated cemetery', another important reason to have Native American Monitors on
bOard with the project.
To be effective. consultation on spacific projects must be the result of an ongoing
relationship between Native American tribe& and lead agencies~, project proponents and thefr
contractors, in the opiniOn of the NAHC. An excellent way to relnforoe the relationship betWeen
a project and local tribes ill to employ Native American Monitors in all phases of proposed
projects lncludJng the planning phases.
Confidentiality of "historic properties of raUgiow and CUltUral significance• may also be
prot8ct8d under Section 304 of he NHPA or at the Secretary of the Interior discretion if not
eligible for lsting on the National Register of HiStOric Places. The Secretary may aleo be
advised by the federal Indian Relgious Freedom Ad. (cf. 42 U.S. C., 1998) In Issuing a deds\on
'
I\
~ ~
03/26/ZOlZ 15:09 FAI 918 857 5390 NARC Ia! 003
on whether or not to dllldoae items of relglou& and/or cultural significance identified in or ~
tha APE and poalbillly threatened by propOMd piojad activity. ·
ca.llor• about this response to your request, plaa8e do not hesitate to
03/26/2012 15:09 FAX 916 857 5390 NARC
Paia Band of Mission Indians
Tribal Historic Preservation omceJShasta Gaugher
36008 Pala.Temecula Road, PMB luiseno so· eupeno
Pala, CA 92059
(760) 891-3515
sgaughenOpalatribe.com
(760) 742-3189 Fax
Pauma & Yuima Reservation
Randall Majel, Chairperson
P.O. Box369 Lulseno
Pauma Valley CA 92061
paumareservatiOn@aol.com
(760) 742-1289
(760) 7 42-3422 Fax
P~a Band of Mission IndianS
Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources Manager
P .0. Box 1477 Lulseno
Temecula , CA 92593
(951) 770..8100
prnacarroOpechanga-nsn.
gov
(951) 606-9491 Fax
Rincon Band of Mission Indians
Tiffany Wolfe, CUltUral & Environmental
P .0. Box 68 LuiSeno
Valley Center. CA 92082
twolfeOrincontribe.org
(760) 297·2632
(760) 297-2639 Fax
Native American Contacts san Diego County
March 28, 2012
Pauma Vall~ Band of Lulseno Indians Bennae Catac, Tribal Council Member
P.O. Box 369 luiseno
Pauma Valley CA 92061
benna•ca-.cGaol.com
(760) 617-2872
(760) 742-3422-FAX
Rincon Band of Mission Indians
Bo Mazzetti, Chairperson
P .0. Box 68 Luiseno
Valley Center, CA 92082
bomazzettl®aol.com
(760) 749-1051
(760) 749-8901 Fax
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
Tribal CounCil
1889 Sunset Drive Luiseno
ViSta • CA 92081
760-724-8505
700-724-2172. tax
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
Cultural Department
1889 Sunset Drive Luiseno
VIsta , CA 92081 Cupeno
760-724-8505
760-724-2172 -fax
laJ 004
DiStllbuCian vAINII n.td .. not ......,__, __.. ,. ... ......, 181ponllblllr • dllnlcllns.oaaa 7010.5 tJifllle Htlllh ... sat'el1 ea..
llei:ltiOn 1017.14 oftM Jlublo ••aurDIS Coda.ml 8Ktlan 1017 • ,. ... Ptdlllc ........_ Cade.
ThiSIIIt .. .......,..faroontactlrviOUI....._~wiltt ...... tDoulbnl ...... farlht~
Corrull*d ..... Pipe Rlpi•MIIIM'Il ,..._(No. 7111): loaiiM M _. s.n Diego eo-tr, Cdfu;alla forWhlcft a SacNd La'* Pile-"*'
-~Ainellan ~ lllt .... fllqlllllfd
03/26/2012 15:09 FAX .~16 657 5390
La Jolla Band of Mission Indians
James Trujillo, VIce Chair
22000 HighWay 76 Lulseno
Patma Valley CA 92061
rob.royCtlajolla-nan.gov
(760) 742-3796
(760) 742·1704 Fax
NARC
Native Amarlcan Contacts
San Diego County
March 26,2012
!Coos
lblreUIIoft ciW.IIIII:IIOia ....... .., ,..... viU........., ,..,of~elbllfr ........... Section '7111.5 oftlw ........... s.tillJ COde.
leciiOn 1017.M of liNt P\!DIIc ~ras CoOt.,. &eolian ...,_.of .... Public .......... CodL
Thii!Mtll ........... tGrGOIDI:ttnglcaiNtiiM~wilh ...... tooulllnl ........... for .... ~
Corrug!IIMI.._. Pipe ...... ...._.. PlqKt (1110.. 72tl);......., in..,... ... Diego Couni.J, Clllifolllla far which a s.cr-1 Llndll Pile ....-ch
llld ,....,. .......... c:o..en. -................ ~~..
DUDEK
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
cc:
MEMORANDUM
Sherri Howard, City of Carlsbad
Charles Greely, PE
RECEIVED
AUG i. U i:tnt
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DIVISION
CMP Replacement Program -Engineering Peer Review
Aprilll, 2012
Vipul Joshi, Patricia Schuyler
Dear Ms. Howard;
This memorandum has been prepared in response to the City's request that Dudek provide
review services for the proposed storm drain improvements at two intersections in the City of
Carlsbad. The proposed improvements are part of the City's Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP)
replacement program, and we have reviewed each set of plans for issues focused on a) alignment
and constructability concerns related to habitat impact, b) potential inclusion of water quality
BMPs to mitigate pollutant discharge, c) erosion immediately adjacent to and downstream of
outlet structures, and d) review of stormwater management requirements.
Our comments, following review of the 2 proposed projects are as follows:
INTERSECTION OF ADAMS AND HOOVER STREET
The proposed improvements consist of CIPP lining of an existing CMP storm drain, with a small
segment of new pipe and associated structures. The project alignment runs through both existing
disturbed habitat, non-native grassland, and lagoon beach habitat. Due to the existing alignment
and minimal impacts associated with the alignment and CIPP rehab, it is not feasible to consider
any alternative alignments for this project. The headwall outlet could however be pulled back
from the beach area into DH designated areas.
This project does present an opportunity for the introduction of a bioswale natural treatment
BMP. The existing street ROW for Hoover St appears to provide enough width that a bioswale
drainage system could be installed on the east side of the street. This would have no impact to
sensitive habitats, but would require the demolition of the existing SD system that is proposed to
be rehabilitated. A bubbler type structure could be installed at the upstream end of the alignment,
with a wide, moderate slopped swale lined with native drought tolerant planting to function as
WWW.DUDEK.COM
Memorandum
Subject: CMP Replacement Program-Engineering Peer Review
the pollutant removal system. A catch basin structure would then be introduced at the
downstream end of the alignment to direct water to the proposed outlet structure on or near the
beach. Though this proposed solution would provide water quality enhancements, its
effectiveness would be negated by the relative small water shed area that drains to the existing
catch basin system and the cost of the system would be high.
INTERSECTION OF ADAMS AND HIGHLAND DRIVE
The proposed improvements consist of removal and replacement of an existing storm drain and
basin structure. The project would provide additional points of collections for storm water and a
new outlet headwall adjacent to Adams St. The headwall structure would be located at the top of
the vegetated slope adjacent to Adams with the effluent directed down slope along an existing
drainage "ravine". Due to the presence of coastal sage scrub habitat immediately adjacent to the
road ROW, the outlet structure would require disturbance of this native habitat.
Several alternate alignments exist for the proposed storm drain. The pipeline could be installed
through the coastal sage scrub habitat with an outlet in the beach area. This could be
accomplished through open trench or trenchless techniques. Open trench would still require
disturbance of coastal sage scrub habitat (thought the impact would be temporary) and trenchless
methods are deemed to be cost prohibitive for this application. An additional alignment would
include running the storm drain pipe east in the existing ROW to an area of disturbed habitat.
This may avoid all impacts to sensitive habitat, but would require additional pipe installation and
would result in a conflict with private property development opportunities. There also may be
sensitive habitats at the outlet of this potential eastern location. Both potential alignments are
therefore deemed infeasible.
Water quality BMPs could be introduced in place of the impervious lined depressions planned
near the catch basin structures. Though these areas are likely too small to provide high pollutant
removal efficiency, vegetated and pervious surfaces would provide some effectiveness as a
BMP. This would require ongoing maintenance and cost for the City that the proposed solution
does not necessitate.
Erosion downstream of the headwall outlet does not appear to be a concern as this duplicates the
outlet of the previous system which shows minimal signs of ongoing erosion. In addition, the
vegetated nature of the slope, and the field observed presence of clay content in the surrounding
soils suggests that erosion should not be a significant concern.
DUDEK 2
7216
April2012
, •
Memorandum
Subject: CMP Replacement Program-Engineering Peer Review
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Dudek also reviewed the City's Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan and Storm Water
Management Plan programs and requirements. Based on our understanding of the scope and
nature of the project, it is our opinion that the project would not full under the Priority Project
definition of the Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan and would therefore not require a
project specific Storm Water Management Plan. In addition, since the project is not considered a
Priority Development project and would result in no net increase in impervious surface areas, it
is considered exempt for County hydro modification management requirements.
RECOMENDATIONS
Based on our review of the proposed improvements, and our assessment of such as outlined
above, Dudek recommends that the City proceed with the 2 projects with the current design.
DUDE I< 3
7216
April 2012
•
RECEIVED
AUG 2 0 2012
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DIVISION
DRAFT
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/ Adams
Prepared for:
City of Carlsbad -Utilities Engineering Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact: Sherri Howard, Associate Engineer
Prepared by:
DUDEK
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contact: Vipul Joshi
APRIL 2012
Section
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. l
2.0 REGULATORY SETTING .............................................................................................. l
2.1 North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan ................................................ 1
2.2 Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and Local Coastal Program .................................. 2
2.3 California Coastal Commission .............................................................................. 2
3.0 PROJECT SETTING ........................................................................................................ 2
3.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Topography and Soils ............................................................................................. 3
3.3 On-site and Surrounding Land Uses ....................................................................... 3
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 3
5.0 METHODS ......................................................................................................................... 4
5.1 Literature Review .................................................................................................... 4
5.2 Field Reconnaissance .............................................................................................. 4
5.2.1 Vegetation Community and Land Cover Mapping ................................... 19
5.2.2 Flora .......................................................................................................... 19
5.2.3 Fauna ......................................................................................................... 19
5.2.3 Jurisdictional Delineation ......................................................................... 19
5.2.5 Survey Limitations .................................................................................... 21
6.0 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 22
6.1 Vegetation Communities, Land Covers, and Floral Diversity .............................. 22
6.1.1 OpenWater-64100 ................................................................................. 23
6.1.2 Beach -64400 ........................................................................................... 23
6.1.3 Coastal Brackish Marsh -52200 .............................................................. 23
6.1.4 Coastal Sage Scrub (including disturbed)-32500 ................................... 23
6.1.5 Non-native Grassland-42200 .................................................................. 24
6.1.6 Disturbed Habitat-11300 ........................................................................ 25
6.1. 7 Developed-12000 ................................................................................... 25
6.1.8 Floral Diversity ......................................................................................... 25
6.2 Wildlife ................................................................................................................. 25
6.3 Special-Status and/or Regulated Resources .......................................................... 27
6.3 .1 Special-status Plant Species ......................................................................... 27
6.3.2 Special-status Wildlife Species ................................................................. 27
6.4 Jurisdictional Delineation ..................................................................................... 46
7216 DUDEK April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
7.0 IMP ACTS ......................................................................................................................... 46
7.1 Permanent Impacts ................................................................................................ 47
7 .1.1 Hoover/Lagoon ......................................................................................... 48
7 .1.2 Highland/ Adams ....................................................................................... 48
7.2 Temporary Impacts ............................................................................................... 48
7 .2.1 Hoover/Lagoon ......................................................................................... 48
7 .2.2 Highland/ Adams ....................................................................................... 49
7.3 Determination of Significance .............................................................................. 49
7.3 .1 Direct Permanent ...................................................................................... 49
7.3 .2 Direct Temporary ...................................................................................... 50
7.3.3 Indirect Temporary ................................................................................... 50
8.0 RECOMMENDED A VOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES ................... 50
8.1 HMP Compliance .................................................................................................. 50
8.2 Recommended Mitigation Measures .................................................................... 50
9.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 52
APPENDICES
A Cumulative List of Plant Species within the Project Area
B Cumulative List of Wildlife Species within the Project Area
FIGURES
1 Regional Map ....................................................................................................................... 5
2 Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................ 7
3 Regional Planning ................................................................................................................ 9
4a Biological Resources Map-Hoover/Lagoon Project Area .............................................. .11
4b Biological Resources Map -Highland/ Adams Project Area ............................................. 13
Sa Proposed Impacts -Hoover/Lagoon Project Area ............................................................ .15
5b Proposed Impacts -Highland/ Adams Project Area ........................................................... 17
TABLES
Survey Conditions ................................................................................................................ 4
2 Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types within the Project Area ........................ 22
3 Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site ........ 29
4 Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the
Project Area ....................................................................................................................... 37
5 Results of Jurisdictional Delineation ................................................................................ .46
6 Impacts to Vegetation Communities within the Project Area .......................................... .47
DUDEK 7216
Apri12012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report describes the existing biological conditions within 250 feet oftwo projects proposed
as part of the Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program (proposed project). The proposed
project consists of either replacing or repairing sections of pipe at two separate locations: Adams
Street/Highland Drive and Hoover Street/ Agua Hedionda Lagoon, both located within the City
of Carlsbad (City), California (Figures 1 and 2).
The purpose of this report is to (1) describe the conditions of biological resources within the
project area in terms of vegetation, flora, wetlands, wildlife, and wildlife habitats; (2) quantify
potential direct and indirect impacts to biological resources that will result from the project; (3)
discuss those impacts in terms of biological significance in view of federal, state, and local laws
and City policies; and (4) specify measures to mitigate any impacts that would occur to
biological resources requiring mitigation in accordance with the City's Biology Guidelines
(Technology Associates 2008).
2.0 REGULATORY SETTING
2.1 North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan
The City is a member of the North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP;
SANDAG 2001) and has adopted a Habitat Management Plan (HMP), which is a subarea plan
under the MHCP. The MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple-jurisdictional planning tool designed
to create, manage, and monitor an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. The
HMP is a citywide program with the purpose of preserving the diversity of species and habitats
as well as sensitive biological resources while allowing for development that is consistent with
City plans. The objectives of the HMP are to develop a plan that conserves the full range of
vegetation types with the focus on rare species and habitat, conserves areas capable of supporting
covered species in perpetuity, and maintains functional wildlife corridors and habitat linkages.
Based on proposed development and biological resources, hard-and soft-line Focus Planning
Areas (FPAs) are designated in the HMP. Hard-line areas generally require I 00% conservation
and soft-line areas generally require specific conservation standards to be implemented during
development review. Portions of the Hoover/Lagoon project area are within an existing hardline
FPA, while a portion of the Highland/ Adams project area is located within a proposed standards
area (Figure 3).
DUDEK 7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
2.2 Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and Local Coastal Program
Agua Hedionda Lagoon and surrounding properties are also regulated by the City's Agua
Hedionda Land Use Plan and Local Coastal Program (LCP) (City of Carlsbad 1982). The LCP
identifies the lagoon as supporting water quality, viewshed, public use, and biological values that
require protection. According to the Land Use Plan, portions of the open space in which the
projects are located are designated as low-to-medium residential and recreation commercial. The
portions ofthe shoreline are designated as open space (Exhibit C, City ofCarlsbad 1982).
2.3 California Coastal Commission
Both projects are located within the boundaries of the coastal zone within a coastal deferred
certification area. Under the California Coastal Act (CCA), the California Coastal Commission
(CCC) regulates the "coastal zone" and requires a coastal development permit for almost all
development within this zone. The CCA also protects designated sensitive coastal areas by
providing additional review and approvals for proposed actions in these areas. The CCA defines
wetlands as "lands within the coastal zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with
shallow water and include saltwater marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens" (California Public
Resources Code, Section 30121). The CCA allows diking, filling, or dredging of wetlands for
certain uses, such as restoration. The CCA also directs each city or county within the coastal zone
to prepare an LCP for CCC certification (California Public Resources Code, Section 30500).
Certain coastal areas located within a county or city jurisdiction area are known as "areas of
deferred certification" (ADCs). Such geographic areas are not considered by the CCC to be part
of the final, certified LCP, even while surrounded by other areas that are addressed by the LCP.
The creation of an ADC results generally from a lack of agreement between the CCC and a
county or city regarding the LCP policies or zoning provisions that should apply to a specific
geographic area. Certification by the CCC of the remainder of the LCP jurisdiction area may
occur, but the site of the disagreement remains "uncertified."
3.0 PROJECT SETTING
3.1 Project Location
The proposed projects occur in two separate locations. One project is located along Hoover
Street, southwest of Adams Street, and within vacant land adjacent to the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon (Hoover/Lagoon), and the other project is located at the intersection of Highland Drive
and Adams Street (Highland/Adams) within the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County (Figures 1
and 2). Both project areas are located on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute San Luis
Rey quadrangle, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, Section 8.
DUDEK 2
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
3.2 Topography and Soils
The Hoover/Lagoon project area is located immediately adjacent to Hoover Street, which slopes
southwest toward the lagoon. The pipeline extends southwest of Hoover Street, into disturbed
habitat, and continues to slope toward that lagoon. Elevations range from approximately 0 to 80
feet above mean sea level (amsl). The Highland/Adams project area is located primarily within
roadways, and only a small portion of the project is located within native habitat. Topography
within the immediate project vicinity is relatively flat. A slope of native vegetation that leads to
the lagoon is located just south of this project area.
Two soil types are located within the entire project area. Soils within the Hoover/Lagoon project
consist of Carlsbad gravelly loamy sand, 9% to 15% slopes. These moderately well-drained soils
are derived from ferruginous sandstone. The soils within the Highland/ Adams are marina loamy
coarse sand, 9% to 30% slopes. These soils are classified as somewhat excessively drained, and
the parent material is eolian sand derived from mixed sources.
3.3 On-site and Surrounding Land Uses
Both proposed projects are located northeast of the Agua Hedionda lagoon. A patch of vacant
land is located between the lagoon and Adams Street (Figures 4a and 4b) that is identified as
Hedionda Point in the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan (City of Carlsbad 1982). Residential
development surrounds the vacant land and both project areas to the north, south, and east.
Interstate 5 is located west of the lagoon and both project areas. The General Plan Land Use
designation is Residential low to medium density and the zoning is R-1-15000 for vacant and
adjacent lots.
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Hoover/Lagoon project involves rehabilitating approximately 474 lineal feet of 21-inch
corrugated metal pipeline (CMP) with a cured-in-place liner. The project also includes replacing
approximately 24 lineal feet of 21-inch CMP with 18-inch high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
pipe via open trench immediately upstream of the damaged drainage outfall structure. The
project is located within the public right-of-way of Hoover Street and vacant land between the
southern end of Hoover Street and the northern edge of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. In addition,
the project includes the construction of a 1) storm drain cleanout, 2) headwall, and 3) riprap
energy dissipater (Figure 5a).
The Highland/Adams portion of the proposed project consists of replacing approximately 132
lineal feet of 12-and 15-inch damaged and degraded CMP with an 18-inch reinforced concrete
pipe (RCP) within the public right-of-way at the intersection of Highland Drive and Adams
DUDEK 3
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Street. In addition, the project includes construction of 1) two catch basins, 2) two storm drain
cleanouts, 3) a concrete drainage swale, 4) a concrete drainage ditch, 5) a concrete spillway, and
6) a riprap energy dissipater (Figure 5b ).
Staging for equipment storage, etc., during construction for both projects is assumed to occur
within roadways or other disturbed, vacant lots that are devoid of biological resources.
5.0 METHODS
Data regarding biological resources present in the project area were obtained through a review of
pertinent literature and field reconnaissance; both are described in detail as follows.
5.1 Literature Review
Special-status biological resources present or potentially present on site were identified through a
literature search using the following sources: Habitat Management Plan for Natural
Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad 1999); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) (2012); California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) (2011a-b and 2012a--c);
and the California Native Plant Society's (CNPS's) online Inventory of Rare and Endangered
Vascular Plants (CNPS 2012).
5.2 Field Reconnaissance
Dudek biologists Callie Ford and Patricia Schuyler conducted vegetation mapping, a botanical
inventory, a general wildlife survey, and a jurisdictional delineation on January 27, 2012. Survey
conditions are included in Table 1.
DUDEK
Table 1
Survey Conditions
4
7216
April 2012
Project Site
Pac1fic
0 c e a n
10 15
---.t::===---..,jMiles
DUDEK
7216
MEXICO
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
FIGURE 1
Regional Map
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
6
7216
April2012
0 o•-o::::::=1,o.,oo-o::::::2:::1,ooo ~ Feet
DUDEK SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series San Luis Rey Quadrangle.
7216
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
FIGURE 2
Vicinity Map
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
8
7216
Apri12012
FIGURE3
Regional Planning
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
10
7216
April2012
FIGURE 4a
Biological Resources Map -Hoover/lagoon Project Area
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
12
7216
April2012
.,.._
FIGURE 4b
Biological Resources Map -Highland/Adams Project Area
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
14
7216
April2012
-....~oonc.-o.~~ ...
,.._~ .. ..._.. -ON·Cioooo""""' ------··· •· -· • ..._..._A_.,...., •• (aO ~----..
-------~·--·· -OOI·Do-
FIGURE 5a
Proposed Impacts -Hoover/Lagoon Project Area
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
16
7216
April2012
CSS eo-ISageSollb
FIGURE Sb
Proposed Impacts-Highland/Adams Project Area
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
18
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
5.2.1 Vegetation Community and Land Cover Mapping
Plant communities were mapped in the field directly onto a 1 00-scale (1 inch = 100 feet) color
digital orthographic map of the property. These boundaries and locations were digitized by
Dudek geographic information system (GIS) technician Tyler Friesen using ArcGIS software.
Vegetation community classifications used in this report follow Holland (1986), as revised by
Oberbauer et al. (2008).
5.2.2 Flora
All plant species encountered during the field surveys were identified and recorded. Those
species that could not be identified immediately were brought into the laboratory for further
investigation. Latin and common names for plant species with a California Rare Plant Rank
(CRPR) (formerly CNPS List) follow the CNPS On-Line Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and
Endangered Plants ofCalifornia (2010). For plant species without a CRPR, Latin names follow
the Jepson Interchange List of Currently Accepted Names of Native and Naturalized Plants of
California (Jepson Flora Project 2010), and common names follow the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service Plants Database (USDA 201 0).
5.2.3 Fauna
Dudek biologists walked both project areas to identify and record all wildlife species, as detected
during field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs. In addition to species actually
observed, expected wildlife usage of the site was determined according to known habitat
preferences of regional wildlife species and knowledge oftheir relative distributions in the area. No
trapping or focused surveys for special-status or nocturnal species was conducted. Latin and
common names of animals follow Stebbins (2003) for reptiles and amphibians, American
Ornithologists' Union (AOU 2012) for birds, Wilson and Reeder (2005) for mammals, and
Emmel and Emmel (1973) for butterflies.
5.2.3 Jurisdictional Delineation
A jurisdictional delineation was conducted within the project boundary to delineate areas under
the jurisdiction of the CDFG, pursuant to Sections 1600-1603 of the California Fish and Game
Code, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), pursuant to Section
404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), under jurisdiction of Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB), pursuant to CWA Section 401 and the Porter-Cologne Act, and under
the jurisdiction of the CCC under the CCA. The ACOE jurisdictional wetlands delineation was
conducted in accordance with the US. Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual
DUDEK 19
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
(ACOE 1987), the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Arid West Region (ACOE 2008), and Rapanos Guidance (ACOE and EPA 2008);
hydrology, vegetation, and soils were examined at potential wetland sites and were recorded on
wetland determination data forms.
A predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, where associated with a stream channel, was used to
define CDFG-regulated riparian vegetation. The limits of areas under the jurisdiction of the
RWQCB generally match those areas delineated as ACOE-jurisdictional. However, stream
channels with evidence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) that lack connectivity to
"waters of the U.S." may be considered to be under the jurisdiction of RWQCB and CDFG but
not under the jurisdiction of ACOE. CCC jurisdiction was based on presence of any one of the
three wetland criteria. ACOE jurisdiction of tidal wetlands, regardless of the presence/absence of
indicators, extends to 18 inches above mean ordinary high tide elevation. Based on tide charts for
the Carlsbad area, ordinary mean high tide was determined to be approximately 3 feet amsl, and
therefore tidal wetlands jurisdiction extends to the 4.5-foot contour amsl (Anderson 2011). It is
presumed that RWQCB and CCC also take jurisdiction over this tidal area. Additional wetlands
jurisdiction may occur above the 4.5-foot contour, but would be based on presence of appropriate
wetlands indicators. CDFG, under the Lake and Streambed Alteration program, does not regulate
impacts to marine wetlands that are supported by tidal influences. The extent of wetland features
was determined in the field by collecting data using a Global Positioning System (GPS) unit; the
shapes were then transferred to topographic base, and GIS coverage was created.
The results of the study include areas delineated as jurisdictional by the ACOE, RWQCB, and
the CCC. Since the project area is solely influenced by tides, none of the wetlands on site is
under the jurisdiction of the CDFG.
Hydrophytic Vegetation
Seasonal changes in species composition, human land-use practices, wildfires, and other natural
disturbances can adversely affect the wetlands vegetation determination. During the delineation, a
data station point was considered positive for hydrophytic vegetation if it passed the basic
dominance test (Indicator 1 ), meaning that more than 50% of the dominant species sampled were
characterized as either obligate, facultative wetland, and/or facultative per the National List of
Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988). In those cases where
the dominance test failed, the vegetation parameter was reevaluated using the prevalence index
(Indicator 2), which takes into account all plant species in the community, not just dominants. The
standard plot sampling technique was used to sample vegetation within a 5-foot radius for
herbaceous vegetation and a 10-foot radius for trees, shrubs, and woody vines. All plant species
DUDEK 20
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
observed during the surveys were identified and recorded. Where plant identification could not be
made in the field, a sample was taken and later identified in the laboratory.
Hydric Soils
According to the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, hydric soils are "soils that are
formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing
season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part" (USDA Soil Conservation Service 1994).
Soil pits were prepared using a "sharp shooter" shovel to determine whether hydric soils were
present. The presence of hydric soils was determined through consultations with the 1987 Manual
as well as Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States v. 7. 0 (NRCS 201 0) and the Interim
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region
(ACOE 2008). Munsell Soil Color Charts were used to determine soil chroma and value. Soil pits
were prepared to a depth of 12 inches. Dry soils were moistened to obtain the most accurate color.
In general, soils from test pits were determined to be hydric if they exhibited redoximorphic
features (e.g., redox concentrations, redox depletions, reduced matrix or depleted matrix).
Hydrology
In accordance with the guidelines prescribed in the Arid West supplement (ACOE 2008),
wetland hydrology indicators are separated into four major groups: A, B, C, and D. Group A
indicators are based on direct observations of surface flow, ponding, and soil
saturation/groundwater. Group B indicators consist of evidence that the project area has been or
is currently subjected to ponding-including, but not limited to, water marks, drift deposits, and
sediment deposits. Group C indicators include signs of previous and/or current saturation,
including oxidized rhizospheres surrounding living roots and the presence of reduced iron or
sulfur, both of which are indicative of extended periods of soil saturation. Group D indicators
consist of "vegetation and soil features that are indicative of current rather than historic wet
conditions and include a shallow aquitard and results of the Facultative (FAC)-Neutral test"
(ACOE 2008). Each group is subdivided into primary and secondary categories based on their
frequency and reliability to occur in the Arid West region.
5.2.5 Survey Limitations
Limitations of the survey include a diurnal bias and the absence of trapping for small mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians. The survey was conducted during the daytime to maximize the
detection of most animals. Birds represent the largest component of the vertebrate fauna, and
because most birds are active in the daytime, diurnal surveys maximize the number of bird
observations. Conversely, diurnal surveys usually result in few observations of mammals, many
DUDEK 21
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
of which may only be active at night. In addition, many species of reptiles and amphibians are
secretive in their habits and are difficult to observe using standard meandering transects.
The survey was conducted during the winter season, which resulted in detection and
identification of most perennial plant species that occur in the area. However, spring and summer
blooming herbaceous plants would not have been observed. The purpose of the field survey was
to determine the likelihood of occurrence of any special-status plant or wildlife species based on
the presence/absence of suitable habitat and other natural history elements that might predict
their occurrence.
6.0 RESULTS
6.1 Vegetation Communities, Land Covers, and Floral Diversity
Based on species composition and general physiognomy, four native plant communities and three
non-native plant communities or land cover types were observed within the project area. The
Hoover/Lagoon project area is located within and surrounded by developed lands, coastal sage scrub
(including disturbed), non-native grasslands, disturbed habitat, beach, open water, and coastal
brackish marsh. The Highland/ Adams project area is located within and surrounded by developed
lands to the north and east and coastal sage scrub from Adams Street to the lagoon. Of these
communities, coastal brackish marsh and coastal sage scrub are the only special-status communities.
Acreages for the seven vegetation communities and land cover types are provided in Table 2.
Table 2
Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types within the Project Area
*Totals may not sum due to rounding.
DUDEK 22
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
6.1.1 Open Water-64100
This habitat type refers to the lagoon area beyond the shore/beach that permanently contains
water and does not contain emergent vegetation. A total of 1.92 acres of open water is mapped
within the Hoover/Lagoon project area.
6.1.2 Beach -64400
According to Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County (Oberbauer et al. 2008), beach
is described as sandy and/or cobbly habitat on coastal strands, lagoons, or lakes. Ocean beaches
are a shoreline feature of deposited sand formed by waves and tides off the coast. Beaches on
lakes may be a result of waves, disturbance, or geological formations. These are mainly
unvegetated areas; however, upper portions may be thinly populated with herbaceous species.
On site, the transitional zone between the lagoon and vegetation is mapped as beach. This area
lacks vegetation and is composed of sandy soils. A total of 0.47 acre of beach is mapped within
the Hoover/Lagoon project area.
6.1.3 Coastal Brackish Marsh -52200
Coastal brackish marsh is dominated by perennial, emergent, herbaceous monocots to 2 meters
(6.5 feet) tall, and cover is often complete and dense. This vegetation community is similar to
salt and freshwater marshes and contains some plants characteristic of each; however, the water
in the lagoon is brackish from both freshwater and ocean inputs. Salinity may vary considerably
within this area and may increase at high tide or during seasons of low freshwater runoff or both.
A small patch of coastal brackish marsh is located on 0.062 acre within the Hoover/Lagoon
project area. Species within this vegetation community include salt grass (Distichlis spicata),
Virginia glasswort (Salicornia virginica), California seablite (Suaeda californica), and
southwestern spiny rush (Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii).
6.1.4 Coastal Sage Scrub (including disturbed) -32500
Coastal sage scrub is composed of a variety of soft, low shrubs, characteristically dominated by
drought-deciduous species such as California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), flat-top
buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and sages (Salvia spp.), with scattered evergreen shrubs,
including lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia) and laurel sumac (Malosma laurina). It typically
develops on xeric slopes (Oberbauer et al. 2008).
DUDEK 23
7216
Apri12012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Coastal sage scrub and all its variants generally are recognized as sensitive plant communities by
local, state, and federal resource agencies. It supports a diversity of sensitive plants and animals,
and it is estimated that it has been reduced by 75% to 80% of its historical coverage throughout
Southern California. It is the focus of the current State of California Natural Communities
Conservation Planning Program (NCCP).
Both the Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/ Adams project areas support coastal sage scrub
vegetation (Figures 4a and 4b ). There are two patches of coastal sage scrub located within the
Hoover/Lagoon project area (totaling 0.76 acre), and they include both undisturbed and disturbed
coastal sage scrub. Undisturbed coastal sage scrub is dominated by California sagebrush and
laurel sumac. Regions mapped as disturbed coastal sage scrub contain few shrubs and appear to
have been mowed or cleared. Hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis) and non-native grasslands from
surrounding areas encroach upon the coastal sage scrub found within the Hoover/Lagoon project
area. Almost the entire Highland/ Adams project area south of Adams Street is mapped as coastal
sage scrub; this area totals 2.92 acres. This project area is dominated by California sagebrush and
laurel sumac; thickleafyerba santa (Eriodictyon crassifolium) is also present throughout much of
the project area.
6.1.5 Non-native Grassland -42200
Non-native grassland contains a dense-to-sparse cover of annual grasses and is often associated
with numerous species of showy-flowered, native annual forbs (Oberbauer et al. 2008); the
presence of wild oat (Avena spp.), bromes (Bromus spp.), filaree (Erodium spp.), and mustards
(Brassica spp.) are common indicators of this community in San Diego County. Non-native
grassland may occur where disturbance by maintenance (mowing, scraping, disking, spraying,
etc.), grazing, repetitive fire, agriculture, or other mechanical disruption has altered soils and
removed native seed sources from areas formerly supporting native vegetation. Non-native
grassland typically occurs adjacent to roads or other developed areas where there has been some
historic disturbance. Non-native grassland may support sensitive plant and animal species and
provide valuable foraging habitat for raptors.
On site, non-native grassland occurs on the north and south side of Adams Street within the
Hoover/Lagoon project area and totals 1.43 acres. These areas are dominated by non-native
species including red brome (Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens), slender oat (Avena barbata), and
filaree (Erodium botrys and E. cicutarium). Some native annual forbs including cryptantha
(Cryptantha spp.) and miniature suncup (Camissonia micrantha) are also present.
DUDEK 24
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
6.1.6 Disturbed Habitat-11300
Disturbed habitat is characterized by predominately non-native species introduced and
established through human action. These areas have been physically disturbed and are no longer
recognizable as a native or naturalized vegetation association, but continue to retain a soil
substrate (Oberbauer et al. 2008). The disturbed habitat within the Hoover/Lagoon project area,
totaling 2.68 acres, is primarily dominated by Hottentot fig. The disturbed habitat from Hoover
Street to the lagoon has been subject to grading in the past and currently contains straw waddles
for erosion control. Some native vegetation has begun to establish in the area, including Menzies'
goldenbush (lsocoma menziesii) and big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis); however, these shrubs
are scattered and do not provide enough cover to be categorized into a vegetation community.
6.1. 7 Developed -12000
Developed areas include areas that have been constructed upon or otherwise physically altered to
an extent that native vegetation is no longer supported. Developed land is characterized by
permanent or semipermanent structures, pavement or hardscape, and landscaped areas that often
require irrigation (Oberbauer et al. 2008). Within both project areas, developed areas include
roads, homes, and associated non-native landscaping. A total of 3.66 acres is developed in the
Hoover/Lagoon project area and 3. 78 acres within the Highland/ Adams project area.
6.1.8 Floral Diversity
A total of 34 species of vascular plants, 23 native (68%) and 11 non-native (32%), was recorded
within the project areas (Appendix A). The recorded flora of the site is limited because surveys
were conducted during winter and fall, and vegetation communities within the project area are
limited in diversity and extent.
6.2 Wildlife
Birds
Twelve bird species were observed during the survey visit (Appendix B). The diversity of birds
is limited due to the small amount of habitat, relatively low habitat quality, and small size of the
project area. The coastal sage scrub and non-native grassland on site provide habitat for a variety
of birds, including black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), lesser goldfinch (Spinus psaltria),
Bewick's wren (Thryomanes bewickii), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), and yellow-
romped warbler (Dendroica coronata). The federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher
(Polioptila californica californica) is known to occur near the project area and is presumed
present within coastal sage scrub found in the project area. The coastal brackish marsh, beach,
DUDEK 25
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
and open water areas provide habitat for a number of birds, including the CDFG Species of
Special Concern (SSC) American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), killdeer
(Charadrius vociferus), spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularius), and American coot (Fulica
americana). One California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus), a CDFG fully
protected species, was observed foraging in the lagoon during surveys, but was not recorded
within the project area.
Reptiles and Amphibians
No reptile species were observed on site. However, reptiles common in the area and likely to
occur on site include side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), western fence lizard (Sceloporus
occidentalis), gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber),
coachwhip (Masticophisflagellum), and common kingsnake (Lampropeltis getulus).
No amphibian species were observed during the survey; however, one or more of the following
species may occur on site: garden slender salamander (Batrachoseps attenuatus), western toad
(Bufo boreas), and Pacific treefrog (Hyla regilla).
Diversity of reptiles and amphibians is low in the project areas due to low habitat quality, limited
availability of suitable habitat, and the likely negative effects of the adjacent urban development.
Mammals
Mammal species, or their sign, observed on site during the survey include brush rabbit
(Sylvilagus bachmani) and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi). Mammals not
observed on site but likely to be present include Botta's pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae),
California mouse (Peromyscus californicus), California pocket mouse (Chaetodipus
californicus), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), Dulzura California pocket mouse
(Chaetodipus californicus femora/is), cactus mouse (Peromyscus eremicus), woodrat (Neotoma
spp.), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and coyote
(Canis latrans).
Invertebrates
No invertebrate species were observed during the survey visit. A number of intertidal species is
presumed to occur within the Hoover/Lagoon project area, especially within the beach habitat.
Terrestrial invertebrates not observed on site but likely to be present include cabbage butterfly
(Pieris rapae), west coast lady (Vanessa annabella), pygmy blue (Brephidium exile), fiery
skipper (Hylephila phyleus), salt marsh skipper (Panoquina errans), and buckeye (Junonia
coenia).
DUDEK 26
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
6.3 Special-Status and/or Regulated Resources
Special-status biological resources are defined as follows: (1) species that have been given
special recognition by federal, state, or local conservation agencies and organizations due to
limited, declining, or threatened population sizes; (2) species and habitat types recognized by
local and regional resource agencies as sensitive; (3) habitat areas or plant communities that are
unique, are of relatively limited distribution, or are of particular value to wildlife; and ( 4)
wildlife corridors and habitat linkages. Regulated biological resources may or may not be
considered special status, but they meet jurisdictional determination criteria under any of several
local, state, and/or federal laws. Such resources may be species locations, habitat, or topographic
features such as drainage courses.
The following discussion addresses special-status plant and wildlife species. The nature of the
project area is such that special-status habitat areas or plant communities are not of substantial
extent within the project area to be of considerable value to wildlife. There are no corridors or
linkages within the project area and, as such, do not warrant discussion.
6.3.1 Special-status Plant Species
Southwestern spiny rush, a CRPR 4.2 species, was the only special-status plant species that was
observed during focused surveys. One individual was mapped within coastal sage scrub in the
Hoover/Lagoon project area (Figure 4a). Another individual was mapped south of the project
area as well.
Other special-status species that occur adjacent to the project study area or have the potential to
occur within the project study area, based on the presence of suitable habitat and soils, as well as
on occurrence records based on a CNPS (CNPS 2012) and California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB; CDFG 2012a) search, are listed in Table 3.
6.3.2 Special-status Wildlife Species
American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), a CDFG SSC, was recorded within the
Hoover/Lagoon project area. One additional special-status bird species, brown pelican
(Pelecanus occidentalis californicus), a CDFG fully protected and HMP covered species, was
observed outside the limits of the project area, but was presumed to utilize the project area. The
brown pelican was observed foraging in the lagoon, and this species likely is found within the
Hoover/Lagoon project area. Coastal California gnatcatcher, a federally threatened species, is
also presumed to utilize the coastal scrub habitat within the project area, and is known from the
vicinity of the project area.
DUDEK 27
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
The observed and other special-status species that have the potential to occur within the site are
listed in Table 4. The species' potential to occur is based on the presence of suitable habitat and
distribution, as well as their occurrence based on the CNDDB search (CDFG 2012a). This list
includes species listed by the state and federal government as threatened or endangered, those
species proposed for state and/or federal listing or candidates; and those wildlife species
generally considered to be rare or declining, state species of concern, state regulated species,
other federal status species.
DUDEK 28
7216
April 2012
Adelphia califomica
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
San Diego thorn-mint FTISEINE1
California adelphia None/
None/None
Dwarf burr ambrosia FE/Nonel
Covered!, NE
Del Mar manzanita
Coastal dunes milk-vetch
18.1
2.1
18.1
29
Chaparral, coastal scrub, desert dunes/annual
herb/January-September/246 to 5,250 feet
valley and foothill
clay/annual herb/April-
Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland; clay/deciduous shrub/December-
May/150 to 2,430 feet
Chaparral, ooastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools; often disturbed,
sometimes alkaline/rhizomatous herb/May-
October/50 to 1,360 feet
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal
prairie; mesic, often vernally mesic/annual
herb/March-May/< 170 feet
Low potential to occur.
Although there is suitable
coastal scrub habitat on site,
the project area is located
below the elevation range for
this ·
Low potential to occur. There is
suitable vegetative habitat but
soils.
Absent. There
vegetative habitat but not
suitable clay soils and this
species would have been
observed i
Not observed during previous
surveys in the area. Low
potential to occur. Coastal
scrub may provide suitable
habitat, but suitable alkaline
soils are not
7216
April2012
A triplex pacifica
Atriplex serenana var.
Baccharis vanessae
Brodiaea filifo/ia
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
None/
None/None
Thread-leaved brodiaea FT /SE/Covered,
NE
30
I , I
coastal scrub, playas, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools; often clay/bulbiferous
herb/March-June/400 to 2,800 feet
7216
April2012
var.
longispina
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
TableJ
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
31
Low potential to occur. There is
suitable vegetative habitat but
not suitable soils.
7216
April2012
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
None/None
32
scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal
pools; clay/perennial herb/April-June/< 1,900
feet
occur.
suitable vegetative habitat, but
the project area lacks suitable
soils.
7216
April2012
Eryngium pendletonensis
Heterotheca sessi/iflora ssp.
sessili6ora
DUDEK
-------------------------------
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement.Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
Pendleton button-celery
Beach goldenaster
None/
None/None
None/
None/None
None/None/
Covered
None/
None/None
18.1
18.2
2.2
2.1
33
Coastal bluff scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools; clay, vernally mesic/
perennial herb/April-June/50 to 360 feet
Maritime chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal
scrub; sandy, openings/ perennial herb/
Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub, Mojavean
desert scrub; rocky/shrub/December-AugusV
30 to 1,650 feet
dunes, coastal scrub, coastal
chaparral/annual herb/July to November/< 35
feet
Low potential to occur. There is
suitable vegetative habitat, but
the project area lacks suitable
soils.
Absent. species would
have been observed if present.
7216
April2012
acutus ssp. leopoldii
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
southwestern spiny rush
None
None/
None/None
18.2
34
seeps
coastal marshes and swamps; mesic/
rhizomatous herb/May-June/9 to 2,950 feet.
Chaparral, coastal scrub (sandy, often
disturbed areas)/shrub/Aprii-November/30 to
450feet
sage scrub in the
Hoover/Lagoon project area.
One individual was observed
adjacent to the impact area, at
the periphery of the 250-foot
buffer. Another individual was
observed off site, south of the
7216
Aprll2012
Phace/ia stel/aris
Pinus torreyana spp. torreyana
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
California Orcutt grass
Brand's phacelia
Torrey pine
Covere<F, NE
FC!None!None
None/None/
Covered2
18.1
18.2
35
Coastal dunes, coastal scrub/annual herb/
March-June/<1 ,300 feet
chaparral;
to 550feet
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 3
Special-Status Plant Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on the Project Site
This table includes all HMP species and CNPS and CNDDB species within an 8-quad search of the surrounding quadrangles: Las Pulgas Canyon, Morro Hill, Bonsall, Oceanside, San Luis Ray, San
Marcos, Encinitas, and Rancho Santa Fe.
Legend
FE: Federally listed as endangered
FT: Federally listed as threatened
FC: Federal species of concern
SE: State-listed as endangered
ST: State-listed as threatened
HMPStatus:
Covered:
NE:
OW:
Take of species permitted under HMP
Take of species permitted subject to HMP conditions for Narrow Endemic species
Take of species permitted subject to HMP conditions for Obligate Wetlands species
Species Coverage contingent on other MHCP Subarea Plans being permitted (List 2)
Species Coverage contingent on funding for management of conserved areas (List 3)
DUDEK
------------------------·-
36
7216
April2012
Aspidoscelis hyperythra
tigris
Crotalus ruber
Diadophis puncta/us
simi/is
Emys marmora/a
Phrynosoma blain vi/Iii
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
None/None/None
rosy boa None/Nonl;l/None
red-diamond None/SSC/None
rattlesnake
San Diego None/None/None
ring neck snake
western pond None/SSC/None
turtle
coast horned None/SSC/None
lizard
Rocky chaparral, coastal sage scrub, oak
woodlands, desert and semi-desert scrub
Variety of shrub habitats where there is
heavy brush, large rocks, or boulders
Open, rocky areas in moist habitats near
intermittent streams: marsh, riparian
scrub
Slow-moving permanent or intermittent
streams, ponds, small lakes, reservoirs with
emergent basking sites; adjacent uplands
used winter
Coastal sage scrub, annual grassland,
chaparral, oak and riparian woodland,
coniferous forest
37
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable stream
habitat.
Moderate potential; suitable habitat is present.
Moderate potential; suitable habitat is present.
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present, rocky habitat is not present. In addition, current
disturbance and nearby development may preclude
their
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present, rocky habitat is not present. In addition, current
disturbance and nearby development may preclude
their
Low potentia/to occur due to lack of suitable stream,
riparian habitat, or otherwise moist microhabitat
features.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable stream or
pond habitat.
Low potential; not observed; although suitable habitat is
present, current disturbance and nearby development
their
7216
Apri\2012
Plestiodon skiltonianus
interparietalis
Salvadora hexalepis
virgultea
Spea hammondii
Thamnophis hammondii
Thamnophis sirtalis ssp.
Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
Coronado Island
skink
coast patch-nosed
snake
western spadefoot
two-striped garter
snake
south coast garter
snake
Cooper's hawk
southern
California rufous-
crowned sparrow
None/SSC/None
None/SSC/None
None/SSC/None
None/SSC/None
None/SSC/None
None/WUCovered
None/WUCovered
Grassland, woodlands, pine forests,
chaparral, especially in open sunny areas
such as clearings and the edges of creeks
and rivers; prefers rocky areas near
streams with lots of vegetation; also found
in areas from water
Chaparral, washes, sandy flats, rocky areas
Most common in grasslands, coastal sage
scrub near rain pools or vernal pools;
habitats
Grass-covered hillsides, coastal sage
scrub, chaparral with boulders and outcrops
38
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present, appropriate litter or cover is generally not
present. In addition, current disturbance and nearby
development may preclude their presence.
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present, rocky habitat is not present. In addition, current
disturbance and nearby development may preclude
their
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable pools or
riparian habitats.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable pond or
stream habitat.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat.
Not expected to nest due to lack of suitable habitat.
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present, boulders and outcrops not present. In addition,
current disturbance and nearby development may
their
7216
April2012
a/exandrinus nivosus
(nesting)
Circus cyaneus
Dendroica petechia
brewsteri
Elanus /eucurus
Empidonax tra1lhl
extimus (nesting)
Eremophi/a alpestris
actia
Fa/co peregrinus
anatum
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
northern harrier None/SSC/None
yellow warbler BCC/SSC/None
white-tailed kite None/FP/None
southwestern FEISE/Covered
willow flycatcher
California horned None/WUNone
lark
American (FD), BCC/(SD),
peregrine faloon FP/Covered
Nests primarily on ooastal beaches, in flat
open areas, with sandy or saline substrates;
less oommonly in salt pans, dredged spoil
disposal sites, dry salt ponds and levees
Open wetlands (nesting), pasture, old fields,
dry uplands, grasslands, rangelands,
ooastal scrub
Nests in lowland and foothill riparian
woodlands dominated by cottonwoods,
alders and willows; winters in a variety of
habitats
Open grasslands, savanna-like habitats,
agriculture, wetlands, oak woodlands,
riparian
Riparian woodlands along streams and
rivers with mature, dense stands of willows
or alders; may nest in thickets dominated by
tamarisk
Open habitats, grassland, rangeland,
shortgrass prairie, montane meadows,
ooastal plains, fallow grain fields
Nests on cliffs, buildings, bridges; forages in
wetlands, riparian, meadows, croplands,
where waterfowl are
39
Low potential; grassland on site is of small extent and
of little foraging value. In addition, adjacent
occurrence.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable riparian
woodland habitat.
Low potential; grassland on site is of small extent and
of little foraging value. No breeding opportunities. In
addition, adjacent development may preclude
occurrence.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable riparian
habitat.
Low potential; although suitable vegetative habitat is
present. This species may forage in the ooastal sage
scrub and ruderal habitat; little suitable nesting habitat
within area.
Moderate potential; may occur as a winter visitor to
forage in the lagoon. Would not nest. Not observed
7216
April2012
lxobrychus exilis
Lateral/us jamaicensis
cotumiculus
Pandion haliaetus
(nesting)
Pasaerculus
sandwichensis beldingi
Passerculus
sandwichensis rostra/us
Pelecanus
erythrorhynchos
(nesting colony)
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
least bittern
California black
rail
osprey
Belding's
savannah sparrow
large-billed
savannah sparrow
American white
pelican
BCC/SSC/None
BCC/ST, FP/None
NoneiWUCovered
None/SE/Covered
None/SSC/Covered
None/SSC/None
Saltmarsh, pickleweed
Saltmarsh, pickleweed
Coastal bays, inlets, estuaries with forage
fish for winter range; breeds on isolated
islands in freshwater lakes and forages on
inland marshes, or rivers
40
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable riparian
habitat.
Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat;
suitable habitat may occur elsewhere in the lagoon.
Not expected; while suitable habitat is found in the
lagoon, only limited suitable habitat is found within the
project area. Historical records (1973) for this species
are from nearby San Elijo Lagoon (CDFG 2012a);
however, very few of these birds have been observed
within the in the last 30
Not expected to nest. No suitable nesting opportunities.
Moderate potential to forage nearby in wetland habitat.
Not observed
Low to moderate potential; not observed; very little
suitable habitat within project area but may be able to
use it for foraging. Known occurrence recorded from the
vicinity of the project area in pickleweed marsh habitat
in 2001
Moderate potential; not observed; suitable foraging
habitat present. Usually occurs within mixed flocks of
the winter.
Not expected to nest. Very rare breeder in county and
not in colonial situations. Recorded foraging in open
water within the Hoover/Lagoon project area.
7216
April2012
Pelecanus occidentalis
califomicus (nesting
colony and communal
roosts)
Plegadis chihi (rookery
site)
Polioptila califomica
ca/ifornica
Ral/us longirostris
levi pes
Riparia riparia
Sternula [=Sterna]
antillarum browni
(nesting colony)
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
California brown (FD)I(SD), Open sea, large water bodies, coastal bays
pelican FPICovered and harbors
white-faced ibis None/WUCovered Nests in marsh; winter foraging in shallow
lacustrine waters, muddy ground of wet
meadows, marshes, ponds, lakes, rivers,
flooded fields and estuaries
coastal California FT/SSCICovered Coastal sage scrub, coastal sage scrub-
gnatcatcher chaparral mix, coastal sage scrub-
ecotone, in late summer
light-footed FEISE, FP/Covered Coastal saltmarsh
clapper rail
bank swallow None/ST /None Vertical banks or cliffs in lowland areas
along coasts, rivers, streams lakes,
reservoirs, wetlands
California least FE/SE, FPICovered Coastal waters, estuaries, large bays and
tern harbors, mudflats; nests on sandy beaches
elegant tern None/WUCovered Coastal waters, estuaries, large bays and
harbors, mudflats
41
Not expected to nest or colonially roost. Unsuitable
Moderate potential to utilize open water in project area;
observed foraging within lagoon but not within project
area; no nesting or foraging habitat is within the project
area.
Not expected to nest. Site does not include suitable
rookery habitat.
High potential. Suitable coastal sage scrub habitat on
site and in the vicinity of the project area. Known to
occur in the of the area.
Low potential; not observed; no suitable habitat in
project area but may forage adjacent to the lagoon
elsewhere. Known from occurrence data within the
in 2007
Not expected to nest; not observed; no nesting habitat
available; may forage in lagoon; may rest on beach
area within site.
7216
April2012
lh'reo be/Iii pusil/us
(nesting)
Antrozous pallidus
Chaetodipus
ca/ifomicus femora/is
Chaetodipus fa/lax
fa/lax
Choeronycteris
mexican a
Dipodomys stephensi
Eumops perotis
calffomicus
Lasiurus cinereus
Lasiurus xanthinus
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
least Bell's vireo FE/SE/Covered Nests in southern willow scrub with dense Not expected to occur; not observed; no suitable
cover within 1to 2 rneters of the ground; southern willow scrub habitat in project area.
habitat includes willows, cottonwoods,
baocharis, wild blackberry, or mesquite on
desert areas
pallid bat None/SSC/None Rocky outcrops, cliffs, and crevices with Moderate potential; no suitable rocky outcrops or cliffs
access to open habitats for foraging associated with the project area. Open habitats
be utilized for
Dulzura pocket None/SSC/None Coastal sage scrub, chaparral, riparian-Moderate potential; project area contains moderately
mouse scrub ecotone; more mesic areas suitable habitat and the species is fairly common within
the
northwestern San None/SSC/None Coastal sage scrub, grassland, sage scrub-Low potential; project area contains some suitable
Diego pocket grassland ecotones, sparse chaparral; habitat but does not contain required rocky habitat.
mouse substrates, loams, and loams
Mexican long-None/SSC/None I i in desert and Not expected to oocur; no suitable vegetative habitat or
tongued bat rocky outcrops or cliffs associated with the project area.
Stephens' FE/ST/None Not expected to occur due to lack of suitable habitat
kangaroo rat and soil types. Outside of range.
western mastiff None/SSC/None Moderate potential; no suitable rocky outcrops or cliffs
bat associated with the project area. Open habitats
be utilized
hoary bat None/None/None
western yellow None/SSC/None
bat
7216
42 April2012
Myotis yumanensis
Neotoma lepida
intermedia
Nyotinomops
femorosaccus
Paragnathus
longimembris pacificus
T axidea laxus
Eucyo/ogobius
newberryi
G1la orcuffii
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
Yuma myotis None/None/None
San Diego desert None/SSC/None
woodrat
pocketed free-None/SSC/None
tailed bat
Pacific pocket FE/SSC/NE
mouse
American badger None/SSC/None
tidewater goby FE/SSC/None
arroyo chub None/SSC/None
Grassland, coastal sage scrub with sandy
soils; along immediate coast
Dry, open, treeless areas; grasslands and
coastal sage scrub
Low-salinity waters in coastal wetlands
Slow-flowing or backwater areas, sand or
mud substrate in cool to warm streams.
43
Not expected; no outcrops or cliffs
associated with
Low potential; within range and suitable habitat;
however, vicinity has been surveyed extensively over
the past 15 years and none have been located. The
closest known extant Pendleton.
Not expected; no suitable stream habitat in project
area.
7216
April2012
Cicindela senill's frosti
Danaus plexippus
Euphyes vestris
harbisoni
Euphydryas editha
quino
Lycaena hermes
Panoquina errans
Stroptocephalus
woo/toni
DUDEK
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
area.
senile tiger beetle None/None/None Marine saltmarsh Moderate potential; suitable brackish marsh habitat
within the project area although it is minimal in extent.
No recent records exist for the species near the project
area.
monarch butterfly None/None/None Overwinters in eucalyptus groves Moderate potential; no eucalyptus groves within the
project area to roost in, but likely occurs during
i
Harbison's dun None/None/Covered, Not expected; host plant is not recorded within the
skipper NE project area.
Qui no FE/None/None Not expected; host plant is not recorded within the
checkerspot project area, and outside of currently accepted range.
butterfly
Hermes copper None/None/N E Coastal sage scrub, southern mixed Not expected; host plant is not recorded within the
chaparral supporting at least 5% cover of project area and outside of currently accepted range.
host Rhamnus crocea
Wandering (= None/None/Covered Saltmarsh from Los Angeles to Baja, Moderate potential; suitable brackish marsh habitat
saltmarsh) skipper Mexico within the project area although it is minimal in extent.
Riverside fairy FE/None/Covered1 Deep, long-lived vernal pools, vernal pool-
shrimp like seasonal ponds, stock ponds; warm
water pools that have low to moderate
dissolved solids
44
No recent records exist for the near the area.
Not expected; no suitable vernal pool habitat in project
area.
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Table 4
Special-status Wildlife Species Observed or Potentially Occurring in the Project Area
This table includes all HMP species and CNDDB species within an 8-quad search of the surrounding quadrangles: Las Pulgas Canyon, Morro Hill, Bonsall, Oceanside, San Luis Rey, San
Marcos, Encinitas, and Rancho Santa Fe.
Federal Designations:
FC:
FD:
FE:
FT:
State Designations:
Candidate for federal listing as threatened or endangered
Federally delisted; monitored for five years
Federally listed Endangered
Federally listed as Threatened
SSG: Species of Special Concern
P: California Department of Fish and Game Protected and Fully Protected Species
SE: State-listed as Endangered
ST: State-listed as Threatened
HMPStatus:
Covered: Take of species permitted under HMP
NE: Take of species permitted subject to HMP conditions for Narrow Endemic species
FP: Fully protected
Species Coverage contingent on funding for management of conserved areas {List 3)
DUDEK 45
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program-
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
6.4 Jurisdictional Delineation
The jurisdictional determinations provided in this report are considered preliminary; final
determinations would require completion of significant nexus analysis and confirmation with the
wetlands resource agencies staff. The preliminary determinations are provided to determine the
maximum extent of potential jurisdictional areas and, therefore, define the area of necessary
impact avoidance to avoid any requirement for wetlands permits.
A jurisdictional delineation was completed for the Hoover/Lagoon project area; there are no
wetland features within the Highland/Adams project area. Three agencies (ACOE, RWQCB, and
CCC) have jurisdiction up to 18 inches above mean ordinary high tide elevation, regardless of
whether the lands within that area support any of the three wetland criteria (vegetation, soils, and
hydrology). Based on the results of the jurisdictional delineation, it was determined that one area
above this jurisdictional line also meets the wetland definition of supporting all three wetland
criteria: coastal brackish marsh. The coastal brackish marsh is, therefore, under the jurisdiction
of ACOE, RWQCB, and CCC (Table 5). CDFG, under its Lake and Streambed program, does
not regulate marine environments and wetland mainly supported by tidal conditions. The
shoreline and wetlands within the Hoover/Lagoon area are marine environments supported by
tidal conditions and therefore not regulated by CDFG.
Table 5
Results of Jurisdictional Delineation
*A portion of the area mapped as beach is within 18 inches of mean ordinary high tide and is therefore jurisdictional; a portion is above this
elevation and is not jurisdictional. The total area mapped as beach is 0.47 acre.
**Totals may not sum due to rounding.
7.0 IMPACTS
Impacts associated with the proposed project are both permanent and temporary, direct and
indirect. Direct permanent impacts consist of the footprint of pipe outlets and associated drainage
structures within both of the project areas. Indirect permanent impacts could result from the type
of discharge/runoff associated with the project such as polluted runoff or erosive velocities.
However, the projects are repair projects and do not alter existing discharges. Furthermore, the
DUDEK 46
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
design of the rehabilitation projects has been evaluated by project engineers to determine
appropriate siting in relation to existing topography and sizing of pipes, headwall, and energy
dissipaters, to avoid erosion, sedimentation, or other forms of hydromodification. Therefore,
indirect permanent impacts would not occur at either project location.
Direct temporary impacts result from construction areas surrounding the pipe outlets and
trenching for an estimated 24 linear feet of pipe immediately upstream of the drainage outfall at
the Hoover/Lagoon project site. Indirect temporary impacts would include noise, dust, and foot
traffic associated with construction activities.
Relining of the existing pipelines will not result in impacts (either temporary or permanent)
because all construction will be completed within the existing pipeline. All staging of materials,
vehicles, and other equipment will occur within developed roadways or disturbed lots devoid of
biological resources, and therefore no impacts would occur due to staging.
Anticipated direct impacts to vegetation communities and land cover types are listed in Table 6.
There will be permanent and temporary impacts to coastal sage scrub and beach; temporary
impacts to coastal sage scrub, beach, and disturbed habitat will result. The areas of impact to
beach are located the jurisdictional elevation limit and therefore, no impacts to jurisdictional
resources would occur. There will be no impacts to open water, coastal brackish marsh, disturbed
coastal sage scrub, non-native grassland, or developed areas.
Table 6
Impacts to Vegetation Communities within the Project Area
*Totals may not sum due to rounding.
7.1 Permanent Impacts
A total of 97 square feet of permanent impacts will result from the construction of pipe outlets
within the Highland! Adams and Hoover/Lagoon project areas.
DUDE I< 47
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
7 .1.1 Hoover/Lagoon
Permanent impacts associated with this project are limited to replacement of the drainage outfall
structure within an area mapped as non-jurisdictional beach (Table 6). Permanent impacts will
occur to 48 square feet of beach resulting from construction of 1) catch basin, 2) storm drain
cleanout, 3) concrete drainage ditch, 4) concrete dike, 5) 6-inch curb, 6) headwall, and 7) riprap
energy dissipater.
7.1.2 Highland/Adams
Permanent impacts associated with this project are limited to replacement of the drainage outfall
structure within an area mapped as coastal sage scrub (Table 6). Permanent impacts will occur to
49 square feet of coastal sage scrub resulting from construction of 1) two catch basins, 2) two
storm drain cleanouts, 3) a concrete drainage swale, 4) a concrete drainage ditch, 5) a concrete
spillway, and 6) a riprap energy dissipater.
7.2 Temporary Impacts
A total of 1,110 square feet of temporary impacts will result from the utilization of work areas
within the Highland/ Adams and Hoover/Lagoon project areas.
7 .2.1 Hoover/Lagoon
7.2.1.1 Direct Impacts
Near the drainage outfall, a section of pipe, estimated at 24 linear feet, will need to be replaced.
Replacement will occur through trenching, removal of the existing pipe, replacement with new
pipe, and backfilling the trench. This area of temporary impact will also allow for construction of
the drainage outfall structure. The temporary construction area will occupy approximately 358
square feet of beach and 352 square feet of disturbed habitat, totaling 709 square feet (Table 6).
If it is determined during construction that more than 24 linear feet of pipe require replacement
through trenching (as opposed to cured-in-place relining, currently planned), additional
temporary impacts would occur to disturbed habitat between the current limits of temporary
impact and the terminus of Hoover Street.
7.2.1.2 Indirect Impacts
Temporary indirect impacts during construction may include noise and ground vibration from the
equipment used to perform the pipeline replacement and related construction activities. These
indirect impacts may result in disturbance to native wildlife species, such as the coastal
DUDEK 48
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
California gnatcatcher and other observed or potentially occurring special-status species as listed
in Table 4.
The short-term nature of this project is not expected to result in indirect impacts to wildlife
movement, even if work is conducted during the nesting season.
Indirect impacts to adjacent plant communities, incl~ding jurisdictional wetlands and habitat
potentially supporting several special-status species (as listed in Tables 3 and 4), may occur from
fugitive dust, poilution discharge from runoff, and litter/trash/debris.
7.2.2 Highland/Adams
7.2.2. 1 Direct Impacts
The temporary impact area at the Highland/ Adams site is only associated with installation of the
drainage outfall structure. This area is located directly adjacent to Adams Street, occupying 400
square feet of coastal sage scrub, on the edge of a large contiguous area of coastal sage scrub
habitat (Table 6).
7.2.2.2 Indirect Impacts
The indirect impacts in the Highland/ Adams project area are similar to those described
previously for Hoover/Lagoon. In summary, if construction activities occur within the nesting
season, impacts to nesting birds, including from noise and ground vibration, will be significant,
absent mitigation. Potential fugitive dust, polluted runoff, and litter/trash/debris during
construction activities may potentially impact coastal sage scrub supporting several special-status
species. Additionally, the short-term nature of this project is not expected to indirectly impact
wildlife movement, even if work is conducted during the nesting season.
7.3 Determination of Significance
7 .3.1 Direct Permanent
Permanent impacts to 48 square feet of non-jurisdictional beach and 49 square feet of coastal
sage scrub are not considered significant.
Non-jurisdictional beach is not a special-status vegetation community. No special-status species
that may potentially occur within this area would be significantly impacted by the loss of 48
square feet of beach. Wildlife movement within the area would not be significantly impacted. As
a repair and rehabilitation project for existing infrastructure, the proposed drainage outfall
structure would not conflict with the Carlsbad HMP or Agua Hedionda LCP.
DUDEK 49
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Coastal sage scrub is a special-status vegetation community; however, the loss of 49 square feet
would not appreciably reduce the value of coastal sage scrub for special-status species in this
area. As a repair and rehabilitation project for existing infrastructure, the project complies with
the Carlsbad HMP, which ensures adequate conservation of coastal sage scrub and most
associated special-status species that occur within this community. No special-status species that
may potentially occur within this area would be significantly impacted by the loss of 49 square
feet of coastal sage scrub. Wildlife movement within the area would not be significantly
impacted. The project complies with both the Carlsbad HMP and Agua Hedionda LCP.
7.3.2 Direct Temporary
The direct temporary disturbance of 709 square feet at the Hoover/Lagoon site and 400 square
feet at the Highland/ Adams site is considered significant, absent mitigation. If additional
trenching is required at the Hoover/Lagoon site, the additional impacts to disturbed habitat would
be considered significant. These areas are located adjacent to Agua Hedionda Lagoon with
multiple habitats supporting several special-status species that could be adversely affected by
disturbance of these areas.
7.3.3 Indirect Temporary
If construction activities occur within the nesting season, impacts to nesting birds from noise and
ground vibration will be significant, absent mitigation. Potential fugitive dust, polluted runoff,
and litter/trash/debris during construction activities would also be significant, absent mitigation.
8.0 RECOMMENDED AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES
8.1 HMP Compliance
The proposed project does not require an HMP permit per Section 21.210.020(A)(4) of the City of
Carlsbad Code of Ordinances. This section defmes a development project in the context of the HMP,
as the ''use of a property, including grading, clearing and grubbing, construction, alteration of any
magnitude or activities incidental thereto, which requires a discretionary or ministerial permit,
entitlement, or approval issued under Titles 15, 18, 20, or 21 of the municipal code." Because no city
permits are needed for completion of the proposed project, no HMP permit is required.
8.2 Recommended Mitigation Measures
Significant direct and indirect temporary impacts to special-status vegetation communities and
special-status species can be mitigated to below a level of significance with implementation of
the following measures.
DUDEK 50
7216
April 2012
BI0-1
BI0-2
BI0-3
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
If the construction activities occur during the nesting bird season (February 15
through September 15), the following measures must be taken (per Section 8.1.3,
Species-Specific Mitigation, from the Guidelines for Biological Studies (Technology
Associates 2008)):
• Surveys will also be conducted by a qualified biologist in appropriate habitat for
nesting raptors and migratory birds and within an additional 500-foot buffer
within three days of construction.
• The USFWS will be notified immediately of any federally listed species that are
located during preconstruction surveys.
• If nests of listed birds, migratory birds, raptors, or other sensitive species are
located, no construction activity will occur within 500 feet from active nests of
raptors and listed species and 300 feet from other sensitive bird species.
• During the breeding season, construction noise will be measured regularly to
maintain a threshold at or below 60 dBA hourly Leq within 500 feet of breeding
habitat occupied by listed species. If noise levels supersede the threshold, the
construction array will be changed or noise attenuation measures will be
implemented.
A biological monitor shall be present during the construction process in order to
review the limits of work and best management practices (BMPs) prior to
commencement of construction and to periodically check the compliance of
environmental regulations.
BMPs will be installed during construction within the temporary disturbance areas to
minimize potential adverse effects of construction, including fugitive dust, polluted
runoff, and liter/trash/debris. Potential BMPs may include installation of silt fencing,
implementation of dust control measures, and restricting vehicle maintenance to
developed roadway areas.
Post-construction BMPs will include reestablishment of preconstruction conditions
through reestablishment of preconstruction grade and soil substrate within the non-
jurisdictional beach (Hoover/Lagoon site) and application of a hydroseed mix
composed of native species within coastal sage scrub (Highland/ Adams site). A
qualified biologist will review and approve the hydroseed mix prior to application.
For the Hoover/Lagoon site, the biologist will confirm reestablishment of
preconstruction grades and soil substrate following construction. For the
Highland/ Adams site, the biologist will conduct quarterly monitoring visits for up to
DUDEK 51
7216
April 2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
1 year and recommend remedial measures, if necessary, to ensure reestablishment of
coastal sage scrub.
With implementation of these avoidance and minimization measures, the project will not result
in significant impacts to any biological resources.
9.0 REFERENCES
ACOE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual.
Online ed. Environmental Laboratory, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-
87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station. January 1987. Accessed April9, 2012.
http://www .fedcenter .gov/Bookmarks/index.cfm ?id=6403&pge _ id= 1606.
ACOE. 2008. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual:
Arid West Region (Version 2.0). Final Version. Environmental Laboratory, ERDC/EL
TR-08-28. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development
Center. September 2008. Accessed April9, 2012.
http://www.usace.army.mil/Portals/2/docs/civilworks/regulatory/reg_supp/trel08-28.pdf.
ACOE and EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction
Following the US. Supreme Court's Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v.
United States. Guidance originally issued June 2007. Revised December 2, 2008.
http://water .epa.gov /lawsregs/ guidance/wetlands/upload/2008 _12 _ 3 _wetlands_ CW A _J ur
isdiction_Following_Rapanosl20208.pdf.
AOU (American Ornithologist's Union). 2012. "Check-List ofNorth American Birds: List of the
2,078 Bird Species Known from the AOU Check-list Area." AOU J Check-List ofNorth
American Birds. Accessed April2012. http://www.aou.org/checklist/northlfull.php,_
Anderson, D. 2011. "Current Carlsbad Tide." Carlsbad, California, USA. Accessed March \27,
2012. http://www.carlsbad.ca.us/tide.html.:.
California Public Resources Code, Section 30000--30900. California Coastal Act, 1976.
CDFG (California Department ofFish and Game). 201la. "Special Animals (898 taxa)."
California Natural Diversity Database. CDFG, Biogeographic Data Branch. January
2011. Accessed April9, 2012.
http://www .dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata!cnddb/plants _and_ animals.asp.
DUDEK 52
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
CDFG. 2011 b. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). California Natural Diversity
Database. CDFG, Biogeographic Data Branch. January 2011. Accessed April 9, 2012.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodatalcnddb/plants_and_animals.asp.
CDFG. 2012a. List of California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) species for eight quads:
Las Pulgas Canyon, Morro Hill, Bonsall, Oceanside, San Luis Rey, San Marcos,
Encinitas, and Rancho Santa Fe. CNDDB Quick Viewer. Accessed April 2012.
http:/ /imaps.dfg.ca.gov /viewers/cnddb _ quickviewer/app.asp.
CDFG. 2012b. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Special Vascular Plants,
Bryophytes, and Lichens List. January 2012. Accessed April2012.
http://www .dfg.ca. gov /biogeodatalcnddb/plants _and_ animals.asp.
CDFG. 2012c. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). State and Federally Listed
Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants ofCalifornia. January 2012. Accessed April
2012. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodatalcnddb/plants_and_animals.asp.
City of Carlsbad. 1982. Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and Local Coastal Program (LCP).
Adopted May 1982.
City of Carlsbad. 1999. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of
Carlsbad. Finalized in 2004.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2010. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online
ed. Version 7-11 ). Sacramento, California: CNPS. Accessed November 201 0.
http:/ I cnps.site.aplus.net/cgi-binlinv/inventory .cgi.
CNPS. 2012. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Online ed. Version 8-10a. Sacramento,
California: CNPS. Quadrangles used in query: Las Pulgas Canyon, Morro Hill, Bonsall,
Oceanside, San Luis Rey, San Marcos, Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe. Accessed April
2012. http:/ /www.rareplants.cnps.org.
Emmel, T.C., and J.F. Emmel. 1973. The Butterflies of Southern California. Science Series 26:1-
148. Los Angeles, California: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.
Jepson Flora Project. 2010. Jepson Interchange List ofCurrently Accepted Names of Native and
Naturalized Plants ofCalifornia. Berkeley, California: University of California.
Accessed October 8, 2010. http://ucjeps. berkeley .edu/interchange/I _status _1 + 2.html.
DUDEK 53
7216
April2012
Corrugated Metal Pipe Replacement Program -
Hoover/Lagoon and Highland/Adams
Oberbauer, T., M. Kelly, and J. Buegge. 2008. Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego
County. Based on "Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of
California," by Robert F. Holland, PhD, October 1986. March 2008.
NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service). 2010. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the
United States: A Guide for IdentifYing and Delineating Hydric Soils, Version 7. 0, 2010.
Prepared in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. Edited
by L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and C.V. Noble.
Reed, P.B. Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: California
(Region 0). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bioi. Rep. 88(26.10).
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2001. Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan.
Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. Boston, Massachusetts:
Houghton Mifflin Co.
Technology Associates. 2008. Guidelines for Biological Studies. Prepared for City of Carlsbad
Planning Department. Carlsbad, California. May 29.
USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2010. "California." State Plants Checklist." Accessed
October 8, 2010. http://plants.usda.gov/dl_state.html.
USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal
Register 59(133): 35680-35681, July 13.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2012. "Critical Habitat and Occurrence Data."
Geospatial Services. Accessed April2012. http://www.fws.gov/data.
Wilson, D.E., and D.M. Reeder, eds. 2005. Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and
Geographic Reftrence. Online version. 3rd ed. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins
University Press. http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/
DUDEK 54
7216
April2012
APPENDIX A
Cumulative List of Plant Species
within the Project Area
Appendix A
Cumulative List of Plant Species within the Project Area
VASCULAR SPECIES
DICOTS
ASTERACEAE--SVNFLOWER FAMILY
Artemisia californica--coastal sagebrush
Baccharis salicifolia-mule-fat
Heterotheca grandiflora-telegraphweed
/socoma menziesii-Menzies' goldenbush
Pseudognaphalium biolettii-two-color rabbit tobacco
BORAGINACEAE--BORAGE FAMILY
Cryptantha sp. -cryptantha
POLYGONACEAE--BUCKWHEAT FAMILY
Eriogonum fasciculatum-Eastem Mojave buckwheat
CACTACEAE-CACTUS FAMILY
Opuntia littoralis--coastal pricklypear
APIACEAE--CARROT FAMILY
*Conium maculatum-poison hemlock
CLEOMACEAE--CLEOME FAMILY
Carsonia sparsifolia-fewleaf spiderflower
ONAGRACEAE--EVENING PRIMROSE FAMILY
Camissonia micrantha-miniature suncup
NYCTAGINACEAE-FOVR O'CLOCK FAMILY
Mirabilis laevis--desert wishbone-bush
GERANJACEAE--GERANIUM FAMILY
*Erodium botrys-longbeak stork's bill
*Erodium cicutarium-redstem stork's bill
CHENOPODJACEAE--GOOSEFOOT FAMILY
*Sa/sola tragus-prickly Russian thistle
Atriplex lentiformis-big saltbush
Salicornia virginica-Virginia glasswort
Suaeda californica-Califomia seablite
DUDEK A-1
7216
April2012
Appendix A
Cumulative List of Plant Species within the Project Area
PLUMBAGINACEAE---LEADWORT FAMILY
*Limonium perezii-Perez's sea lavender
FABACEAE-LEGVME FAMILY
Acmispon glaber-common deerweed
LAMIACEAE---MINT FAMILY
Salvia mellifera-black sage
BRASSICACEAE---MVSTARD FAMILY
*Brassica nigra-black mustard
SOLANACEAE-NIGHTSHADE FAMILY
Datura wrightii-sacred thorn-apple
Solanum parishii-Parish's nightshade
Solanum xanti-chaparral nightshade
OXALIDACEAE---OXALIS FAMILY
*Oxalis pes-caprae-Bermuda buttercup
EUPHORBIACEAE-SPVRGE FAMILY
*Ricinus communis-castorbean
ANACARDIACEAE-SVMAC OR CASHEW FAMILY
Malosma laurina-laurel sumac
POACEAE---GRASS FAMILY
*Avena barbata-slender oat
MONOCOTS
*Bromus madritensis ssp. rubens-red brome
*Cortaderia selloana-Vruguayan pampas grass
Distichlis spicata-saltgrass
AGAVACEAE---AGAVE FAMILY
Yucca whipplei-chaparral yucca
JUNCACEAE---RVSH FAMILY
Juncus acutus spp. leopoldii-southwestern spiny rush
* Signifies introduced (non-native) species
DUDEK A-2
7216
April2012
APPENDIX B
Cumulative List of Wildlife Species
within the Project Area
Appendix B
Cumulative List of Wildlife Species within the Project Area
WILDLIFE SPECIES
BIRDS
CORVIDAE-JAYS AND CROWS
Corvus brachyrhynchos -American crow
TROCHILIDAE-HUMMINGBIRDS
Calypte anna -Anna's hummingbird
PARULIDAE-WOOD WARBLERS AND ALLIES
Dendroica coronate-yellow-rumped warbler
TROGLODYTIDAE-WRENS
Thryomanes bewickii-Bewick's wren
FRINGILLIDAE-FINCHES
Spinus psaltria -lesser goldfinch
ACCJPITRIDAE-HAWKS
Buteo jamaicensis-red-tailed hawk
RALLIDAE-RAILS & GALLINULES
Fulica americana-American coot
LARIDAE-GULLS AND TERNS
Larus occidentalis-western gull
TYRANNIDAE-FLYCATCHERS
Sayornis nigricans -black phoebe
CHARADRIIDAE-SHOREBIRDS
Charadrius vociferus-killdeer
SCOLOPACIDAE-SHOREBIRDS
Actitis macularius -spotted sandpiper
PELECANIDAE-PELICANS
Pelecanus erythrorhynchos-American white pelican
MAMMALS
SCIURIDAE-SQUIRRELS
Spermophilus beecheyi -California ground squirrel
DUDEK B-1
7216
April2012
Appendix B
Cumulative List of Wildlife Species within the Project Area
LEPORIDAE-HARES AND RABBITS
Sylvilagus bachmani-brush rabbit
Signifies introduced (non-native) species
DUDEK B-2
7216
April2012
,