Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3656; Interstate 5 Waterline Repair Project; Interstate 5 Waterline Repair Project; 2002-01-17YEAR 1 REPORT FOR SITE REVEGETATION OF THE INTERSTATE 5 WATERLINE REPAIR PROJECT, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for HMS CONSTRUCTION ATTN: MIKE fflGH 2089 FUERTE STREET FALLBROOK, CALIFORNIA 92028 1927 Fifth Avenue, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92101-2358 619/308-9333 fax 308-9334 Prepared by DAVID FLIETNER BIOLOGIST RECON NUMBER 3444B JANUARY 17, 2002 This document printed on recycled paper TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Project Location 1 Project Goals 1 Project Implementation 5 Year 1 Maintenance Activities 5 Year 1 Monitoring Activities 6 Proposed Actions in Year 2 11 Conclusion 11 Reference Cited 11 FIGURES Regional Location of the Project 2 Project Location on U.S.G.S. 7.5 Minute Topographic Map 3 Restoration Site 4 TABLES Coastal Sage Scrub Container Planting 6 Coastal Sage Scrub Container Plant Survival 9 Percent Cover Measurements and Perfomiance Standards 10 PHOTOGRAPHS Disturbance to Site Related to Installation of Irrigation Pipe 8 Project Site, Viewed from Northeast 8 Project Site, Viewed from Southeast 12 Project Site, Viewed from West 12 Executive Summary This report describes the first year (2001) of monitoring for the mitigation program for the riparian restoration project for impacts related to the Interstate 5 Waterline Repau- Project. The project met Year 1 quantitative performance goals for container plant survival with 96 percent survival, and for native plant cover, with 40 percent cover. Standards for less than 10 percent non-native cover were not met. Introduction This report describes maintenance and monitoring from January through December 2001 for the coastal sage scrub restoration as mitigation for the Interstate 5 Waterline Repair Project. Mitigation consists of restoration of 1,125 square feet (0.025 acre) of coastal sage scrub habitat that had been impacted during waterline repair. The party responsible for this restoration project is: HMS Construction 2089 Fuerte Street Fallbrook, CA 92028 Contact: Mikefflgh Project Location The Interstate 5 Waterline Repair site is located in the city of Carlsbad, north of Batiquitos Lagoon and east of Interstate 5. The site is accessed from the west end of Piovana Court. The site is in the northeast quarter of Section 33, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, on the Encinitas 7.5 minute U.S.G.S. topographic quadrangle (Figures 1 and 2). Coastal sage scrub vegetation is present to the immediate south, west, and north of the site, with a landscaped and irrigated slope immediately to the east and a housing tract beyond (Figure 3). Project Goals The restoration plan (RECON 2001) states that the goal of this project is to mitigate for impacts to occupied coastal sage scrub habitat by 1:1 restoration of the area impacted. After three years, the project will have achieved 50 percent native plant cover and less than 5 percent non-native plant cover. Eighty-five percent of the container plants are to have survived, and these plants will cover at least 35 percent of the ground surface. First- 0 ^ Project location t 0 Miles 4 M:\jobs\3444\gis\bioiec,apr\figl (regi) - final 12/19/01 FIGURE 1 Regional Location 0 t Restoration area 0 Feet 200 FIGURES Restoration Site year goals are 90 percent survival of container plantings, with 15 percent native plant cover from the container plants, and 10 percent or less non-native plant cover. Project Implementation The site was planted on January 25, 2001. Planting largely followed the reconunendation of the restoration plan, except that two species that were not then available from locally collected seeds, bladder pod (Isomeris arbored) and Califomia buckwheat {Eriogonum fasciculatum), were not planted. Lemonadeberry {Rhus integrifolia), chaparral mallow {Malacothamnus fasiculatus), and laurel sumac {Malosma laurina) were planted instead. A total of 155 plants were installed, 13 more than the number recommended in the restoration plan. The recommended and actual numbers of plants installed is shown in Table 1. Year 1 Maintenance Activities Maintenance activities specified in the restoration plan are debris removal, weed control, reseeding, and watering of plants, if needed. Little or no debris was found on-site and no removal was needed, Reseeding was not required because of successful plant establishment and flowering and seed set by several species, including common encelia {Encelia californica) golden-yarrow {Eriophyllum confertiflorum), golden tarplant {Hemizonia fasciculata), and black sage {Salvia mellifera). Watering was to be performed monthly from January to June. Watering was not needed due to late season rains, with robust plant growth observed during April and May during site inspections. Weeding was to be performed monthly from January to August, using either herbicide or manual techniques. Weeds were removed when native plants were installed on January 25, May 15 andl6, June 20, and July 24. Site inspections made in April and August indicated that weeding before or after these dates was not required. In May, the primary weed species removed were sourclover {Melilotus indica) and mustard {Brassica nigra)', fennel {Foeniculum vulgare) adjacent to the site was sprayed with herbicide. In June and July, weed species that were removed manually included fennel, scarlet pimpemel {Anagallis arvensis), tree tobacco {Nicotiana glauca), hottentot fig {Carpobrotus edulis), and sow thistle {Sonchus sp.). TABLE 1 COASTAL SAGE SCRUB CONTAINER PLANTING Species Number Reconmiended Number Planted Califomia sagebrush 40 40 Artemisia californica Common encelia 20 20 Encelia californica Califomia buckwheat 4 0 Eriogonum fasiculatum Bladder pod 4 0 Isomeris arborea Chaparral mallow 0 1 Malacothamnus fasciculatus Laurel sumac 0 ^ Malosma laurina Purple needlegrass 30 30 Nassela pulchra Lemonade berry 5 18 Rhus integrifolia 40 40 TOTAL 143 155 Black sage Salvia mellifera Year 1 Monitoring Activities The restoration plan calls for twice-annual monitoring of the site, both qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative monitoring focuses primarily on container plant establishment and non-native plant encroachment in spring and plant survival in late fall. Quantitative monitoring measures container plant survival, and percent cover of container plants, other native species, and non-native plants. Qualitative monitoring was conducted on April 10, May 15, June 20, July 24, August 23, September 6, and December 13 by RECON biologist David Rietner or Victor Novik. Observations included: • Planted species had high survival and good growth. Common encelia {Encelia californica), black sage {Salvia mellifera), and Califomia sagebmsh {Artemisia californica) produced flowers or seeds. • Purple needlegrass {Nassella pulchra) were grazed to near ground level, but most appeared to have survived. • Additional plants established from seed rain from tiie surrounding coastal sage scmb (e.g., golden tarplant [Hemizonia fasciculata]) and from the adjacent landscaping (plantain [Plantago sp.]). • Vegetation in a small area of approximately 70 square feet near the nortiieastem portion of the site was buried or removed, apparently in conjunction with installation of an irrigation Une around the nearby housing tract (Photograph 1). Quantitative monitoring was conducted on April 10 and December 13. Plant survival data are shown in Table 2. Because tiie site was originally planted with more species tiian required and 137 plants survived (i.e., 96 percent of 143, the recommended number), the survival performance goal for Year 1 is considered to be met. Percent cover was measured in December, using 50 point intercepts to estimate cover. Results are shown in Table 3. The 15 percent cover standard for native plant species was exceeded, witii planted native species covering 40 percent of the ground surface and 42 percent cover of all native species. The 10-percent cover or less criterion for non-native species was not considered to be achieved. A large number of grass and broadleaf plant seedlings that were present had germinated in response to recent rains, and most were Hkely to be non-native species. PHOTOGRAPH 1 View of Disturbance to Site Related to Installation of Irrigation Pipe BE! 0 PHOTOGRAPH 2 Project Site, Viewed from the Northeast M:\jobs\3444\graphics\photos 1 -2,ai 12/20/01 TABLE 2 COASTAL SAGE SCRUB CONTAINER PLANT SURVIVAL Species Planted 1/25/01 Survived to 4/26/01 Survived to 12/13/01 Califomia sagebmsh Artemisia californica 40 40 38 Common encelia Encelia californica 20 20 18 Chaparral mallow Malacothamnus fasciculatus 1 1 1 Laurel sumac Malosma laurina 6 6 6 Purple needlegrass Nassela pulchra 30 28 25 Lemonade berry Rhus integrifolia 18 17 16 Black sage Salvia mellifera 40 38 33 TOTAL 155 150 137 TABLE 3 PERCENT COVER MEASUREMENTS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Category Cover from Container Plants Total Native Plant Cover Bare Soil Non-native Plant Cover Point count 20 21 23 7* Percent cover 40% 42% 56% 14% Performance standard 15% 15% N/A 10% *Point count = 50, but 51 data points are recorded because botii a weed and a native plant were intercepted at one point. Site conditions in December 2001 are shown in Photographs 2, 3, and 4. Proposed Actions for Year 2 (2002) Continued monthly weeding and site maintenance is recommended. Montiily weeding throughout tiie growing season should be able to maintain non-native plant cover below the 5 percent standard established for Year 2, particularly as the shmb canopy closes. The damage to 70 square feet in tiie nortiieastem part of tiie site does not require rectification because tiie impacted area is near intact coastal sage scmb, which is likely to seed the area naturally. The restoration plan recommends tiiat seeds of native plants be collected and sown to supplement tiie container plants. This is not deemed necessary for Year 2 because native cover already exceeded Year 2 success criteria and because native species adjacent to and on the site are producing seed, and native seedlings are establishing on-site without additional intervention. Conclusion Year 1 success criteria have been essentially achieved. The survival criterion was achieved because additional plants were planted at tiie outset. Altiiough tiie non-native plant cover criterion was not met due to seed germination after tiie first winter rains. Year 2 goals should be easily achieved and maintained. Percent cover of planted and all native species greatiy exceeded tiie Year 1 success criterion of 15 percent cover. Witii continued maintenance and monitoring, tiie project is expected to successfully integrate tills vegetation into tiie surrounding habitat. Reference Cited RECON 2001 Site Restoration plan for tiie Interstate 5 Waterline Repair Project, Carlsbad, Califomia. January 22. 11 PHOTOGRAPH 3 Project Site, Viewed from the Southeast PHOTOGRAPH 4 Project Site, Viewed from the West M:\jobs\3444\graphics\photos3-4.ai 12/20/01