HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-02; CALAVERA HILLS II; REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL; 2002-02-13Calavera Hills II
Resource Agency Permits
rf 00-(/'^
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Order No. R98-2002-0014
Waste Discharge Requirements
and Section 401 Certification
Dated February 13, 2002
Fish and Wildlife Service
Biological Opinion-Section 7
FWS Consultation No. FWS-SDG-1597.4
Dated March 14, 2002
Department of Army-Section 404
Permit No. 200100215-RLK
Dated May 15, 2002
Department of Fish and Game
Streambed Alteration Agreement
Pursuant to Section 1601 of
California Fish and Game Code
#R5-2001-00074
Dated June 3, 2002
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
San Diego Region
Winston H. Hickox Intemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb9/ Gray Davis
Secretary for 9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100, San Diego, Califomia 92123 Govemor
Environmental Phone (858) 467-2952 • FAX (858) 571-6972
Protection
February 14,2002
Mr. Brian Milich In Reply Refer to:
McMillin Companies 401: OOC-135
2727 Hoover Ave. SLB
National City, CA 91950
Mr. David Hauser
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314
Dear Mr. Milich and Mr. Hauser:
RE: ORDER NO. R9-2002-0014, WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND
SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION FOR CALAVERA HILLS II,
LLC AND CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PHASE II,
BRIDGE AND THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT NO. 4, AND DETENTION BASINS
Enclosed please find a copy of Order No. R9-2002-0014, which the Regional Board adopted at
their regularly scheduled February 13, 2002 meeting.
If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact Ms. Stacey Baczkowski at
(858)637-5594.
Respectfully,
)HN H. ROBERTUS
'Executive Officer
Enclosure: Order No. R9-2002-0014
Califomia Environmental Protection Agency
^ Recycled Paper
Mr. Milich and Mr. Hauser - 2 - Febmary 14,2002
DISTRIBUTION
Ms. Shannon Bryant
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
San Diego Field Office
16885 West Bemardo Drive, Suite 300A
San Diego, CA 92127
Ms. Tamara Spear
Califomia Department of Fish and Game
South Coast Region
4949 Viewridge Avenue
SanDiego, CA 92123
Mr. John Martin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
2730 Loker Avenue West
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Califomia Environmental Protection Agency
Recycled Paper
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REGION
ERRATA SHEET NO.l
FOR
ORDER NO. R9-2002-0014
Vy^ASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND
SECTION 401 VS^ATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR
CALAVERA HILLS II, LLC AND CITY OF CARLSBAD
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PIIASE II & BRIDGE AND
THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT NO. 4 & DETENTION BASINS
SANDIEGO COUNTY
The following changes were made at the request of the applicants. Deletions are indicated by
strike-outs and additions are indicated by underlines.
Finding No. 1
McMillin CompanieoCalavera Hills. LLC and the City of Carlsbad (hereinafter discharger)
submitted an application for 401 Water Quality Certification on December 4,2000, and an
Application/Report of Waste Discharge on September 12,2001. The discharger proposes to
construct 781 residential units and associated infrastmcture, extend College Boulevard and
Cannon Road, and constmct two detention basins within the City of Carlsbad, Califomia.
Finding No. 3
To mitigate for the permanent and temporarv fill of 3.77 acres of waters of the United States and
State, the discharger will create a total of 4-^410.7 acres of southem willow scmb adjacent to
Calavera and Little Encinas Creeks.
Finding No. 4
The proposed Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan (RECON; Octobor 36.2001Januarv 10.
2002) will adequately compensate for impacts to waters of the U.S. and State associated with the
discharge of fill material.
rr IS HEREBY ORDERED that McMillin CompaniecCalavera Hills. LLC and the City of
Carlsbad (hereinafter, discharger), in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 ofthe
Califomia Water Code and regulations adopted thereunder, shall comply with the following:
En-ata Sheet No. 1 for Order R9-2002-0014
Provision Bl
The discharger shall develop a Final Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Regional Board
approval, that shall be consistent with the Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan (RECON;
October 26. 2001-Januarv 10,2002), and shall achieve the following performance standards:
Provision B2
a. Proposed channel designs and earthwork for all mitigation areas, including appropriate cross
sections and plan views;
b. A detailed planting plan, including species lists, plant sizes and numbers, and planting
designs;
c. An irrigation plan;
d. Specific details and plans for all creek sections that will be culverted, bridged, or otherwise
crossed or immediately adjoined by paths, stmctures, or similar improvements;
e. Signage and banier designs (as shown in Attachment 1) adequate to prevent intmoion by
golfers, golf carts, and other human intrusion into all creeks and creek buffer zones;
f. Specific details regarding hydrologic and biogeochemical monitoring, including sample
locations, periodicity, and qualitative and quantitative indicators; and
g. All other information, as appropriate.
Provision B9
The discharger shall provide certification that personnel have been trained on the provisions and
prohibitions of this order as well as the management responsibilities detailed in the Habitat
Restoration and Monitoring Plan (RECON; Octobor 26. 2001Januarv 10. 2002).
Provision C8
The maintained portions of d&etention basins BJ and BJB shall not be counted towards
mitigation credit for impacts to waters of the U.S. and State, and shall be maintained in
accordance with the conditions specified in Attachment 1, or in a manner that provides
equivalent protection.
Attachment 1
The following headings were added to the table (from left to right): Village or Road Segment;
Post Constmction BMP; BMP Maintenance; Maintenance Responsibility; Anticipated Pollutants:
and Anticipated BMP Efficiency.
The third column on Attachment 1 on the Basin BJB row (last page of the table) was changed to
"...and outlet as needed downstream of outlet pipe from College Boulevard."
The last row refers to Basin BJB and was changed to identify Basin BJ.
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SANDIEGO REGION
ORDER NO. R9-2002-0014
WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS AND
SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
FOR
CALAVERA HILLS II, LLC AND CITY OF CARLSBAD
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PHASE II & BRIDGE AND
THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT NO. 4 & DETENTION BASINS
SANDIEGO COUNTY
The Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (hereinafter Regional
Board) finds that:
1. McMillin Companies and the City of Carlsbad (hereinafter discharger) submitted an
application for 401 Water Quality Certification on December 4, 2000, and an
Application/Report of Waste Discharge on September 12, 2001. The discharger proposes to
constmct 781 residential units and associated infrastmcture, extend College Boulevard and
Cannon Road, and constmct two detention basins within the City of Carlsbad, Califomia.
2. The project will result in the discharge of waste, defined as the placement of fill material
(e.g., soil, riprap, culverts), into 3.7 acres of waters of the United States, and an additional
0.07 acre of waters of the State, including Calavera Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, Little
Encinas Creek, and unnamed vegetated and unvegetated waters of the U.S. The project's
direct impacts (in acres) are as follows:
Master Plan
Development Cannon Road Colleee Boulevard
Habitat Type* Perm. Temp. Perm. Temp. Perm. Temp. Total
Alkali Marsh 0.1 0.6 0.07 0.77
Riparian Scrub 0.2 0.03 0.3 0.02 0.55
(mfs or sws)
Sycamore Woodland 0.6 0.12 1.3 0.15 2.17
Unvegetated waters 0.2 0.01 0.21
Total 0.3 0.01 1.4 0.22 1.6 0.17 3.7
* mfs = mule fat scrub; sws = southem willow scrub
To mitigate for the permanent fill of 3.77 acres of waters of the United States and State, the
discharger will create a total of 11.6 acres of southem willow scmb adjacent to Calavera and
Order R9-2002-0014
Little Encinas Creeks.
4. The proposed Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan (RECON; October 26, 2001) will
adequately compensate for impacts to waters of the U.S. and State associated with the
discharge of fill material.
5. The project may indirectly impact beneficial uses of waters of the U.S. and State through the
discharge of urban mnoff pollutants (e.g., oil and grease, heavy metals, pathogens, nutrients,
etc.) from the proposed development.
6. The discharger has developed a Summary Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (O'Day
Consultants; August 2001) that identifies constmction and post-constmction Best
Management Practices (BMPs). Post-constmction BMPs identified in the plan include:
a. Creation of detention basins that will be used during constraction and will remain in
place as post-constmction BMPs to receive urban mnoff;
b. Grass-lined swales around individual house pads;
c. Routine street sweeping by the City of Carlsbad;
d. Storm drain inlet filters; and
e. Constiuction of pollution basins (e.g., tieatment wetland).
More specific BMPs are provided in Attachment 1 to this Order.
7. This Order specifies Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) that are necessary to adequately
address impacts to water quality standards resulting from the filling of waters of the U.S., to
meet the objectives of the State Wetiands Conservation Policy (Executive Order W-59-93),
and to accommodate and require appropriate changes over implementation of the project and
its constmction.
8. The Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9) (Basin Plan)
was adopted by the Regional Board on March 17,1975. Subsequent revisions to the Basin
Plan have also been adopted by this Regional Board and approved by the State Board. The
Basin Plan designates beneficial uses, narrative and numerical water quality objectives, and
prohibitions which are applicable to the discharges regulated under this Order. The project,
as described in this Order, will not result in State Water Quality Standards being exceeded.
9. The discharger has avoided and minimized impacts to waters of the U.S. consistent with the
requirements of the Basin Plan.
10. The City of Carlsbad prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to the
Califomia Environmental Quality Act and was certified on January 15,2002. The EIR
identified the following mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to water quality below
a level of significance:
Order R9-2002-0014
a. Comply with State Water Resources Control Board Water Quality Order No. 99-08-
DWQ, the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with
Constmction Activity;
b. Comply with the Municipal Storm Water Pemiit (NPDES No. CAS0108758);
c. Comply with the City of Carlsbad procedures;
d. Create desiltation basins where necessary to minimize erosion and prevent sediment
transport, until the storm drain system is in place and streets are paved;
e. Landscape all exposed, manufactured slopes per City of Carlsbad erosion contiol
standards; and
f. Phase grading operations and slope landscaping to reduce the susceptibility of slopes
to erosion; and control sediment production from graded building pads with low
perimeter berms, desiltation basins, jute matting, sandbags, bladed ditches, or other
appropriate methods.
11. The Board has notified the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Califomia Department of Fish and Game, and interested agencies and persons of its intent to
prescribe WDRs and Section 401 Water Quality Certification for this discharge.
12. The Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pertaining to the
discharge.
rr IS HEREBY ORDERED that McMillin Companies and the City of Carlsbad (hereinafter,
discharger), in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the Califomia Water Code
and regulations adopted thereunder, shall comply with the following:
A. PROHIBITIONS
1. The discharge of fill material in a manner other than as described in the findings of this Order
is prohibited unless the discharger obtains revised waste discharge requirements that provide
for the proposed change.
2. The discharge of fill material and other waste shall not create a pollution, contamination or
nuisance, as defined by Section 13050 of the Califomia Water Code
B MITIGATION PROVISIONS
1. The discharger shall develop a Final Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for Regional Board
approval, that shall be consistent with the Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan
(RECON; October 26,2001), and shall achieve the following performance standards:
a. The created and restored areas must posses the three criteria (wetland hydrology,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils) necessary to be delineated as a Corps
jurisdictional area;
b. All sites must exhibit signs or evidence of wildlife use for two consecutive
monitoring periods;
Order R9-2002-0014
c. All sites must be self-sustaining; and
d. All sites must exhibit evidence of natural recmitment of native wetland and/or
riparian species.
2. The Final Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the
following:
a. Proposed channel designs and earthwork for all mitigation areas, including
appropriate cross sections and plan views;
b. A detailed planting plan, including species lists, plant sizes and numbers, and planting
designs;
c. An irrigation plan;
d. Specific details and plans for all creek sections that will be culverted, bridged, or
otherwise crossed or immediately adjoined by paths, stmctures, or similar
improvements;
e. Signage and barrier designs (as shown in Attachment 1) adequate to prevent intmsion
by golfers, golf carts, and other human intmsion into all creeks and creek buffer
zones;
f. Specific details regarding hydrologic and biogeochemical monitoring, including
sample locations, periodicity, and qualitative and quantitative indicators; and
g. All other information, as appropriate.
3. Implementation of mitigation shall provide the following functional gains:
a. Habitat function - Creation of stmcturally and spatially diverse habitat surrounding
riparian areas will provide nesting and foraging grounds for birds, amphibians, and
other wildlife.
b. Biogeochemical/water quality functions - Expansion of wetiand areas shall increase
areas for natural water quality functions, such as microbial action that removes toxins,
nitiogen, and other nutrients from mnoff.
c. Hydrologic functions - Expansion of wetiand areas will allow greater flood flow
attenuation, energy dissipation, and storage during storm events.
4. Not later than 30 days prior to the beginning of grading, the discharger shall submit,
acceptable to the Regional Board, the Final Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan.
5. The discharger shall implement the Final Wetland and Riparian Mitigation and Monitoring
Plan as approved by the Regional Board. The final plan shall be consistent with the draft
plan included as Attachment 2 to this Order.
6. Implementation of the Final Mitigation and Monitoring Plan shall be completed within the
same calendar year as impacts occur, or at least no later than 9 months following the close of
the calendar year in which impacts first occur (e.g., if impacts occur in June 2001,
constmction of mitigation for all impacts must be completed no later than September 2002).
Order R9-2002-0014
7. No later than 30 days prior to the beginning of clearing, gmbbing, and/or grading, the
discharger shall submit, acceptable to the Regional Board, the name(s) and qualification(s) of
the qualified biologist(s) (defined as possessing a college degree in the biological sciences
and at least 5 years restoration experience in southem Califomia) responsible for compliance
with the certification requirements, as discussed in the above provisions.
8. If mitigation areas do not meet their interim and/or ultimate success criteria, as defined in tiie
draft Habitat restoration and Monitoring Plan, the discharger shall prepare, acceptable to the
Regional Board, remedial measures to be implemented.
9. The discharger shall provide certification that personnel have been tiained on the provisions
and prohibitions of this order as well as the management responsibilities detailed in the
Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan (RECON; October 26, 2001).
10. Not later than 60 days following the completion of the installation of the mitigation areas, the
discharger shall submit, acceptable to the Regional Board, final conservation easements or
deed restrictions for all mitigation and preservation areas.
11. The discharger shall submit an as-built report within 60 days of installation of the proposed
mitigation.
C. SECTION 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PROVISIONS
1. Standard conditions applicable to 401 Water Quality Certification:
a. Every certification action is subject to modification or revocation upon administrative
or judicial review, including review and amendment pursuant to CWC §13330 and 23
CCR §3867.
b. Certification is not intended and shall not be constmed to apply to any activity
involving a hydroelectiic facility and requiring a Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) license or an amendment to a FERC license unless the pertinent
certification application was filed pursuant to 23 CCR §3855(b) and that application
specifically identified that a FERC license or amendment to a FERC license for a
hydroelectric facility was being sought.
c. Certification is conditioned upon total payment of any fee required pursuant to 23
CCR §3833 and owed by the discharger.
2. Any proposed change in constmction that may alter flow pattems and/or change the approved
impact footprint is prohibited without Regional Board approval. Not later than 30 days prior
to the beginning of any proposed change, the discharger shall submit, acceptable to the
Regional Board, detailed plans and specifications showing the proposed change in
relationship to the approved project.
OrderR9-2002-0014
3. The discharger is prohibited from maintaining (e.g., mowing, pmning, etc.) riparian
vegetation within Agua Hedionda Creek for the purposes of increasing the hydrologic
capacity of the creek or to provide protection to the proposed bridge.
4. All waters of the United States and State that are to be preserved shall be fenced no less than
10 days prior to the start of any clearing and/or grading activities. A qualified biologist shall
show all preservation areas to all constmction personnel and shall explain the conditions of
this Order and other permits regarding impacts.
5. The discharger shall staff a qualified biologist on site during project constmction to ensure
compliance with the certification requirements. The qualified biologist shall be onsite at least
once a week when grading and/or constmction activities occur more than 100 feet firom a
waters of the U.S. or State that is to be preserved. When grading and/or constmction
activities occur within 100 feet of a waters of the U.S. or State that is to be preserved, the
biologist shall be onsite daily. The biologist shall be given the authority to stop all work
onsite if a violation occurs or has the potential to occur.
6. Not later than 30 days prior to the beginning of grading, the discharger shall submit,
acceptable to the Regional Board, a detailed Final Water Quality Plan. This plan shall
include, but not be limited to, identification of pollutants expected to be generated by the
proposed project identification of specific Best Management Practices, their tieatment
efficiency with regards to expected pollutants, specific locations, specific maintenance
requirements, and maintenance responsibilities. Implementation of the Final Water Quality
Plan shall occur in conjunction with project initiation.
7. The discharger shall notify the Regional Board in writing at least 15 days prior to actual start
dates for each project component (e.g., clearing, gmbbing, grading, installation of
mitigation).
8. Detention basins BJ and BJB shall not be counted towards mitigation credit for impacts to
waters of the U.S. and State, and shall be maintained in accordance with the conditions
specified in Attachment 1, or in a manner that provides equivalent protection.
D. STANDARD PROVISIONS
1. The discharger shall notify the Regional Board by telephone within 24 hours whenever an
adverse condition occurs as a result of this discharge. Such a condition includes, but is not
limited to, a violation of the conditions of this Order, a significant spill of pettoleum products
or toxic chemicals, or damage to control facilities that would cause noncompliance. Pursuant
to CWC § 13267(b), a written notification of the adverse condition shall be submitted to the
Board within one week of occurrence. The written notification shall identify the adverse
condition, describe the actions necessary to remedy the condition, and specify a timetable,
subject to the modifications of the Regional Board, for the remedial actions.
Order R9-2002-0014
2. The discharge of any hazardous, designated or non-hazardous waste as defined in Titie 23,
Division 3, Chapter 15 of the Califomia Administiative Code, shall be disposed of in
accordance with applicable state and federal regulations.
3. This Order is not transferable to any person except after notice to the Regional Board. In
accordance with CWC § 13260, the discharger shall file with the Board a report of any
material change or proposed change in the ownership, character, location, or quantity of tiiis
waste discharge. The notice must include a written agreement between the existing and new
discharger containing a specific date for the tiansfer of this Order's responsibility and
coverage between the curtent discharger and the new discharger. This agreement shall
include an acknowledgment that the existing discharger is liable for violations up to tiie
transfer date and that the new discharger is liable from the tiansfer date on. Any proposed
material change in operation shall be reported to the RegionalBoard at least 30 days in
advance of the proposed implementation of any change. This shall include, but not be limited
to, all significant new soil disturbances, all proposed expansion of development, or any
change in drainage characteristics at the project site. For the purpose of this Order, tiiis
includes any proposed change in the boundaries of the wetiand/waters ofthe United States
fill sites. The Regional Board may require modification or revocation and reissuance of this
Order to change the name of the discharger and incorporate such other requirements as may
be necessary under the Califomia Water Code.
4. The discharger shall maintain a copy of this Order at the project site so as to be available at
all times to site operating personnel and agencies.
5. The discharger shall permit the Board or its authorized representative at all times, upon
presentation of credentials:
a. Entry onto project premises, including all areas on which wetiand fill or wetiand
mitigation is located or in which records are kept.
b. Access to copy any records required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this
Order.
c. Inspection of any treatment equipment, monitoring equipment, or monitoring metiiod
required by this Order.
d. Sampling of any discharge or surface water covered by this Order.
6. This Order does not authorize commission of any act causing injury to the property of anotiier
or of the public; does not convey any property rights; does not remove liability under federal,
state, or local laws, regulations or mles of other programs and agencies, nor does this Order
authorize the discharge of wastes without appropriate pennits from other agencies or
organizations.
7. The Regional Board will consider recission of tiiis Order upon notification of successful
completion of mitigation for all creation, and enhancement projects required or otherwise
permitted now or subsequentiy under this Order, completion of project constiuction, and tiie
Regional Board's acceptance of tiiese notifications. Determination of mitigation success will
Order R9-2002-0014
be based on the provisions discussed above.
8. The discharger must comply with all conditions of this Order. Any noncompliance with this
Order constitutes a violation of the Califomia Water Code and is grounds for (a) enforcement
action; (b) termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification of this Order; or (c) denial
of a report of waste discharge in application for new or revised waste discharge requirements.
9. The discharger shall report any noncompliance which may endanger health or the
environment. Any such information shall be provided orally to the Regional Board within 24
hours from the time the discharger becomes aware of the circumstances. A written
submission shall also be provided within five days of the time the discharger becomes aware
of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain a description of the
noncompliance and its cause; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times,
and if the noncompliance has not been corrected; the anticipated time it is expected to
continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent recurtence of the
noncompliance. The Regional Board, or an authorized representative, may waive the written
report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours.
10. The discharger shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or correct any adverse impact on
the environment resulting from noncompliance with this Order, including such accelerated or
additional monitoring as may be necessary to determine the nature and impact of the
noncompliance.
11. In an enforcement action, it shall not be a defense for the discharger that it would have been
necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with this
Order. Upon reduction, loss, or failure of the treatment facility, the discharger shall, to the
extent necessary to maintain compliance with this Order, control production or all discharges,
or both, until the facility is restored or an altemative method of treatment is provided. This
provision applies for example, when the primary source of power of the tieatment facility is
failed, reduced, or lost.
12. This Order may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause including, but not
limited to, the following:
a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this Order;
b. Obtaining this Order by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant facts;
or
c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or
elimination of the authorized discharge.
13. The filing of a request by the discharger for tiie modification, revocation and reissuance, or
termination of this Order, or notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance
does not stay any condition of this Order.
Order R9-2002-0014
E. REPORTING AND RECORD KEEPING REQUIREMENTS
1. The discharger shall submit copies of all necessary approvals and/or permits for the project
and mitigation projects from applicable govemment agencies, including, but not limited to,
the Califomia Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, prior to the start of clearing/grading.
2. The discharger shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and
maintenance records, copies of all reports required by this Order, and records of all data used
to complete the application for this Order. Records shall be maintained for a minimum of five
years from the date of the sample, measurement, report, or application. This period may be
extended during the course of any unresolved litigation regarding tiiis discharge or when
requested by the Regional Board.
3. The discharger shall fumish to the Regional Board, within a reasonable time, any information
which the Regional Board may request to detemiine whether cause exists for modifying,
revoking and reissuing, or terminating this Order. The discharger shall also fumish to the
Regional Board, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this Order.
4. Where the discharger becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a Report of
Waste Discharge or submitted inconrect information in a Report of Waste Discharge or in any
report to the Regional Board, it shall promptiy submit such facts or information.
5. All applications, reports, or information submitted to the Regional Board shall be signed and
certified as follows:
a. The Report of Waste Discharge shall be signed as follows:
i For a corporation - by a principal executive officer of at least the level of vice-
president.
ii For a partnership or sole proprietorship - by a general partner or tiie proprietor,
respectively.
iii For a municipality, state, federal or other public agency - by eitiier a principal
executive officer or ranking elected official.
b. All other reports required by this Order and other infonnation required by the
Regional Board shall be signed by a person designated in paragraph (a) of this
provision, or by a duly autiiorized representative of that person. An individual is a
duly authorized representative only if:
i The authorization is made in writing by a person described in paragraph (a) of tiiis
provision; and
ii The authorization specifies eitiier an individual or a position having responsibility
for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity; and
iii The written authorization is submitted to the Regional Board.
c. Any person signing a document under this Section shall make the following
certification:
Order R9-2002-0014
"I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar
with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that,
based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining
the information, I believe that the information is tme, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment."
6. The discharger shall submit reports required under this Order, or other information required
by the Regional Board, to:
Executive Officer
Califomia Regional Water Quality Contiol Board
San Diego Region
9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100
San Diego, Califomia 92123
F. NOTIFICATIONS
1. This Order does not convey any property rights of any sort or any exclusive privileges. The
requirements prescribed herein do not authorize the commission of any act causing injury to
persons or property, nor protect the discharger from liability under federal, state or local laws,
nor create a vested right for the discharger to continue the waste discharge.
2. These requirements have not been officially reviewed by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency and are not issued pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act.
3. The provisions of this Order are severable, and if any provision of this Order, or the
application of any provision of this Order to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application
of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this Order, shall not be
affected thereby.
4. The adoption of these waste discharge requirements constitutes certification of water quality
certification for the project as described in this Order pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act.
This Order becomes effective on the date of adoption by the Regional Board
/, John H. Robertus, Executive Officer, do hereby certify theforegoing is a full, true, and correct
copy ofan Order adopted by the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego
Region, on February 13, 2002.
rOHNH. ROBERTUS
Executive Officer
10
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REGION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NO.
R9-2002-0014
FOR
CALAVERA HILLS II, LLC AND CITY OF CARLSBAD
CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN PHASE II & BRIDGE AND
THOROUGHFARE DISTRICT NO. 4 & DETENTION BASINS
SANDIEGO COUNTY
1. Constmction monitoring reports shall be submitted quarteriy during all grading activities
associated with the proposed project. Constmction monitoring reports shall include, but
not be limited to the following:
a. Names, qualifications, and affiliations of the persons contributing to the report;
b. Summary of constmction activities that include general locations, project
component (e.g., school site, mitigation site), approximate acreage;
c. Quantification of impacts to waters of the U.S. authorized under this Order;
d. Dates, times, and names of qualified biologist(s) onsite;
e. Summary of any problems, resolution, and notification that occuned during this
monitoring period; and
f. Photodocumentation, if necessary, of consttnction activities.
2. Mitigation monitoring shall occur, at a niinimum, quarteriy during the first year following
installation of mitigation areas, semi-annually during the second and third years, and
annually until mitigation has been determined to be successful (as defined in the
provisions of this Order, and mitigation success has been agreed to in writing by the
Regional Board and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Monitoring shall begin
immediately after the completion of the first planting period.
3. Mitigation monitoring reports shall be submitted quarterly during the first year following
installation, semi-annually during the second and third years, and annually until
mitigation has been deemed successful. Monitoring reports shall be submitted no later
than 30 days following the end of tiie monitoring period. Monitoring reports shall
include, but not be limited to, tiie following:
a. Names, qualifications, and affiliations of the persons contiributing to the report;
b. Tables presenting the raw data collected in the field as well as analyses of tiie
physical and biological data;
Order R9-2002-0014
c. Qualitative and quantitative comparisons of cunent mitigation conditions with
pre-constmction conditions and previous mitigation monitoring results;
d. Photodocumentation from established reference points; and
e. Other items specified in the draft and final Wetiand and Riparian Mitigation and
Monitoring Plan.
Monitoring Reports shall be submitted to:
Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board
San Diego Region
9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100
San Diego, Ca 92123
Ordered by:
H. ROBERTUS
tecutive Officer
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Carlsbad Field Office
2730 Loker Avenue West
Carlsbad, California 92008
MAR 1 4 2002 In Reply Refer To: FWS-SDG-1597.6
Colonel Richard G. Thompson
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 532711
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
Attn: Mr. Russ Kaiser
Re: Response to Comments on Draft Biological Opinion for tiie Calavera Hills Development
Project, Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califomia. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service File
No. FWS-SDG-1597.4; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers File No.200100215-SKB)
Dear Colonel Carroll:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) issued a draft biological opinion to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) on Febmary 14,2002 for the Calavera Hills Phase U project in
Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califomia. It is our understanding that die Corps shared the draft
biological opinion witii the applicant because we received a letter from Brian Milich of McMillin
Land Development, on March 5,2002, commenting on the Febmary 14,2002, draft biological
opinion." During a phone conversation with Mr. Russ Kaiser from the Corps on March 5, 2002,
he indicated that tiie Corps would consider the March 5,2002, letter from Mr. Milich to represent
all conunents on the draft biological opinion. As a result, the Service revised tiie draft biological
opinion and a final biological opinion is enclosed witii this letter. We have provided a summary
of how we responded in the final biological opinion to each of the items presented in Mr.
Milich's letter below.
1. "We recommend that the last sentence of Conservation Measure #3, on page 9, be revised
to eliminate the requirement of deposit of $1.5 million, and replace it with the following
wording: '...funding for acquisition of an additional 51.3 acres of coastal sage scmb off-
site at a location acceptable to the Service and the City of Carlsbad will be provided
through deposit of $1,128,600 (equal to $22,000/acre), into the Califomia Gnatcatcher
Conservation Fund, and the establishment of an endowment fund for maintenance and
management in an amount to be ascertained through a Property Analysis Report
[sic](PAR) by a qualified open space manager.'
Colonel Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.6) 2
We have revised the language in the final biological opinion to reflect the suggested changes by
inserting the following language: "...If the acquisition of this land is not accomplished prior to
issuance of a mass grading permit by the City, funding for acquisition of an additional 51.3 acres
of coastal sage scmb off-site at a location Acceptable to the Service and the City of Carisbad will
be provided through deposit of $1,128,600 and $394,650.00 into the Califomia Gnatcatcher
Conservation Fund (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Account No. 97-166). The
$1,128,600 is to be used for property acquisition and the and the $394,650.00 is to be used for
the creation of an endowment fund for maintenance and management of the acquired site (the
$394,650.00 dollar amount may be revised if a Property Analysis Report [sic](PAR) prepared by
a qualified open space manager determines less money is needed for the endowment)."
2. 'The second sentence of Conservation Measure #4, on page 9 should be revised as
follows: 'The biological conservation easements will be granted to a public or private
entity agreed to by the Service and with input from the CDFG to ensure that the
management of the biological resources is implemented.'
We have revised the language in the final biological opinion to that suggested.
3. "On page 22, we recommend that the third paragraph summarizing gnatcatcher survey
data be revised to include a discussion of recentiy conducted surveys, which could be
accomplished as follows: 'Gnatcatcher surveys have been conducted several times over
the past ten years. Surveys conducted in 1992 and 1995 recorded observations of
gnatcatchers in open space north and south of Village H. And four observations within
Village K. During surveys conducted from November 2,1999 to January 2,2000, three
gnatcatcher territories were observed on-site and an additional tenitory was niapped
immediately off-site. Recent protocol surveys (5 total) for the gnatcatcher have been
conducted on the Calavera Phase n area in January and late Febmary 2002. During these
surveys a total of six pair of gnatcatchers were observed within the Phase II development
area and adjacent open space areas. The locations of these pairs were; one pair within
Village K open space, one pair on the southem edge of the development area of Village
K, one pair in the open space east of Village U, one pair within the Village R open space,
and two pair within the development area of Villages W and X.'"
We have revised the language in the final biological opinion to tiiat suggested and included the
following additional language: "On March 7, 2002, Service personnel observed an additional
gnatcatcher on the soutiiem end of tiie development area of Village U. Spatial relationship
between this observation and mapped survey observations suggest that this observation
represents an additional pair."
4. "On page 23, in the paragraph under the heading "Direct effects," there is a reference to a
gnatcatcher at the proposed intersection of College and El Camino Real. This
observation (which apparently was of a single male) occuned during the November 1999
to January 2000 surveys. Since tiiat time. College has been consttucted from El Camino
Real to a point south of Agua Hedionda Creek in connection witii development of a
residential and commercial development project in that area (the Terraces at Sunny
Colonel Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.6) 3
Creek). USFWS may also wish to incorporate the recent survey information into the
discussion set forth in this paragraph."
We have revised the language in the direef'effects section of the final biological opinion to reflect
recent survey information and constmction of the Tenaces at Sunny Creek project.
5. "On page 30, under the heading "Amount or Extent of Take," the discussion should be
revised to reflect the recent gnatcatcher survey data...."
We have revised the language in amount or extent of take section of the final biological opinion
to reflect the most recent survey data.
6. 'Term and Condition #la, on page 31 should be revised to add a sentence as follows:
'Any deviation from this schedule will require coordination with, and approval by, the
Service.'
We have revised the language in term and condition number lb of the final biological opinion to
reflect the suggested changes by inserting the following language: "A deviation from this
schedule to initiate work in August, prior to August 31,2002, would require coordination with,
and approval by, the Service after the applicant has demonstrated that all gnatcatchers have
completed nesting and all young have fledged and dispersed."
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact John Martin, of my staff, at
(760)431-9440.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
Nancy Gilbert
Assistant Field Supervisor
United States Department ofthe Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Carisbad Fjsh and Wildlife OfRce
2730.Loker Avenue West
Caiisbad, Califomia 92008
In Reply Refer To: FWS-SDG-1597.7 (^AR 1 4 2002
Colonel Richard G. Thompson
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 532711
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
Attn: Mr. Russ Kaiser
Re: Biological Opinion on the Calavera Hills Phase n Housing Development Project, San
Diego County, Califomia (FWS Consultation No. 1-6-01-F-1597; Corps File No.
200100215-SKB)
Dear Colonel Thompson:
This document transmits the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) biological opinion based
on our review ofthe proposed Calavera Hills Phase E development project located in Carlsbad,
San Diego County, California, and its effects on tiie Califomia gnatcatcher {Polioptila
califomica; gnatcatcher), its critical habitat, and tiie least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus;
vireo) in accordance with section 7 ofthe Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amaided
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Critical habitat for tiie vireo has been designated. However, this
action does not occur within the area designated, therefore, it will not be discussed further. Your
August 3, 2001, request for fonnal consultation was received on August 7, 2001, and we
initiated consultation upon receipt of your request
This biological opinion is based on information provided in tiie August 21, 2000, biological
assessment (Recon, No. 3226B), tiie Febmary 2001 draft Environmental Impact Report, an April
4, 2001, field investigation conducted by Service staff, and other information available in our
files. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at this office.
CONSULTATION HISTORY
To facilitate compliance witii environmental regulations, Ogden Environmental and Energy
Services prepared a Biological Technical Report addressing a proposed housing development on
the Calavera Hills site, for Lyon Communities, Inc., in September, 1992. A Calavera Heights
Califomia Gnatcatcher Mitigation Preserve Management Plan was prepared by Ogden, on March
9, 1993. The Service met with representatives of Lyon Communities on April 18, 1995, for an
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597) 2
1995, the Service requested that additional biological surveys be conducted. Between May 16,
1996, and September 13, 2001, the Service, the Califomia Department of Fish and Game
(CDFG), and the City of Carlsbad, met with project proponents, to try to reach an agreement that
would allow inclusion of the Calavera Hiljs Phase H project in the City of Carlsbad's Habitat
Management Plan (HMP) as a "hardlined" project. Boundaries of developed areas and areas to
be preserved as open space were changed several times in the course of these discussions. On
July 28,1999, Service biologists and project proponents agreed on a project design that would
provide a corridor for wildlife south of Village K. This agreement allowed the Calavera Hills
project to be included in the City of Carlsbad's (City) Habitat Management Plan (HMP).
On Febmary 2,2001, tiie City of Carlsbad issued a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
On April 6,2001, the Service and CDFG provided joint comments on the DEIR. At an April 18,
2001, meeting witii Service and CDFG biologists and City Planning Department personnel,
McMillin Land Development indicated that fuel management activities would be conducted
within the wildlife preserve. In meetings held on May 1, May 18, and July 13,2001, Service and
CDFG biologists. City personnel, and developers met to discuss fuel modification in the wildlife
corridor south of Village K.
On August 7,2001, the Service received a request from the Corps to initiate formal consultation
on this project, and we initiated formal consultation on that day. On September 13,2001, the
Wildlife Agencies agreed to a reduced vegetation thinning regimen within the preserve, which
requires that a glass wall be erected between the preserve and the residential lots, for fire
protection. On September 13,2001, a meeting was held between Service personnel. City
planners, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and the Regional Water QuaUty Control
Board, to discuss mitigation and other issues related to impacts to wetlands. On November 2,
2001, project proponents met with the Service to plan acquisition of off-site gnatcatcher habitat
to offset project impacts.
On October 19,2001, the Corps issued a Public Notice of Application for a permit to fill
wetlands pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1344). Due to mail
delays, the comment period on the Public Notice was extended to November 26,2001. We
received the Public Notice on November 2,2001. On November 26,2001, the Service requested
and was granted a one-week extension to the comment period on the public notice. On
December 3, 2001, the Service sent a letter to the Corps commenting on the Public Notice for
this project. On December 5,2001, the Service received a fax from the Corps summarizing the
extensive public comments received on the Public Notice. On December 10,2001, the Service
requested a 60-day extension for providing a Biological Opinion to the Corps under section 7,
citing the likelihood of substantial changes to the project description as a result of comments on
the Public Notice. On December 14, 2001, that request was granted. "On January 8, 2002,
representatives of the City, McMillin Land Development, the Service, CDFG, the Corps, and the
Regional Water Quality Contiol Board met to discuss the location of the proposed intersection of
College Boulevard and Cannon Road, to address the Corps' concem that the location may not
have represented the least environmentally damaging practTcable altemative. At that meeting, it
was agreed to divide the proposed Cannon Road extension into two reaches, and withdraw the
northem reach from the project description. Due to the revised project, the Corps requested a
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 3
revised project description. The Service continued the consultation unintermpted, but changed
the biological opinion in progress to reflect the revised project description.
On Febmary 14, 2002, the Service issued,a draft biological opinion to tiie Corps for the Calavera
Hills Phase II project. It is our understanding that the Corps shared the draft biological opinion
with the applicant because we received a letter from Brian Milich of McMillin Land
Development, on March 5,2002, commenting on the Febmary 14,2002, draft biological opinion.
During a phone conversation with Mr. Russ Kaiser from the Corps on March 5,2002, he
indicated that the Corps would consider the March 5,2002, letter from Mr. Milich to represent
all comments on the draft biological opinion. As a result, tiie Service revised the draft biological
opinion to address the comments.
On March 4,2002, tiie Service was made aware that tiie applicant's contiactor cleared native
vegetation from Febmary 20,2002, to March 1,2002, during tiie gnatcatcher breeding season, in
order to erect a fence, intended to demarcate tiie boundary between lands tiiat are to be preserved
as biological open space, and lands tiiat are proposed for development to allow constiuction
personnel to know where to work and where not to work, histallment of the fence was nearly
finished when die City of Carlsbad learned that native vegetation was being cleared during the
gnatcatcher breeding season and issued a stop-work order, halting tiie fence consttnction. On
March 7,2002, Service staff met witii tiie City of Carlsbad (Eric Munoz), McMillin Land
Development (Brian Milich, Don Mitchell, and Skip Haman) and tiieir legal council (Mark
McGuire) to examine tiie area where vegetation had been removed for installation oftiie fence.
The entire project perimeter was cleared to an average approximate width of 82 inches. The
fence was placed in tiie appropriate location, with respect to tiie planned boundary between tiie
open space and tiie development, but tiie swath of vegetation removed to accommodate tiie fence
included areas on tiie open space side as well as the development side. Approximately half of the
vegetation removed was in tiie area proposed for open space. The approximate acreage of
gnatcatcher habitat impacted in the open space is estimated to be between 1 to 2 acres. The
installment of such a fence was a condition of the draft Biological Opinion. However, no
clearing of vegetation was to occur witiiin the areas designated as open space and no clearing was
to occur during tiie gnatcatcher breeding season. The Service is cunently working with botii tiie
City of Carlsbad and the applicant to resolve tiiis issue.
BIOLOGICAL OPINION
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The City of Carlsbad and Calavera Hills H, LLC are joint applicants seeking authorization from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to impact wetlands and jurisdictional waters pursuant to
Section 404 in connection with the development of a residential complex, the extension of two
existing arterial roadways, (College Boulevard and Cannon Road), and constmction of two
detention basins, located within the northeast portion of the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County,
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 4
Califomia. (Figure 1). Specifically, the project consists of the following development and public
infrastmcture components:
1. The constmction of the Calavera Hi lis Phase n project, which consists of a maximum of
781 units of residential housing, local infrastmcture and their associated neighborhood
improvements, and community facilities and open space, totaling approximately 300
acres. The development would occur within the seven remaining undeveloped "villages"
which constitutes the final phase of the Calavera Hills Master Planned Community
ORgure 2).
2. The constmction, in phases, of Bridge and Thoroughfare District No. 4 (BTD), which
consists of College Boulevard, between Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino Real, and
Cannon Road from El Camino Real to approximately 1,200 feet easterly of the proposed
College/Cannon intersection. College Boulevard (Reaches A, B and C) would be
extended from Carlsbad Village Drive southerly to El Camino Real (approximately 9,500
feet). Cannon Road (Reaches 3 and 4A) would be extended (approximately 4,400 feet)
from El Camino Real easterly to approximately 1,200 feet east of the College/Cannon
intersection) (Figure 2).
3. The installation, in phases, of two detention basins, identified as Basins BJ and BJB, to
control flood waters along Little Encinas Creek and Calavera Creek upstream of the
Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park (Figure 2)
Under the preferred altemative, the proposed project would impact 3.7 acres of jurisdictional
waters, consisting of 0.7 acres of alkali marsh, 0.5 acres of riparian scmb, 1.9 acres of riparian
woodland, 0.2 acres of non-wetland waters of the U.S, and 0.4 acres of temporary impacts.
According to the Biological Technical Report (Recon 2001), nine vegetation communities exist
within the Phase n portion of the proposed project: Diegan coastal sage scmb (250.3 ac.);
southem mixed/chamise chaparral (66.6 ac); non-native grassland (20.2 ac.); riparian woodland
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5)
OCEANSID
PROJECT LOCATION
ENCINITASV
t
0 MILES 2.2 4.4 FIGURE 1
Regional Location of the Project
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5)
CALAVERA WLLS _ MASTER PUN BOUNDARY
MlDlta.4lle«MMy*
Figure 2
CALAVERA HILLS PHASE li
BRIDGE & THdR0U6HFi^ DISTRICT NO. 4
AND DETENTION BASIN
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 7
(0.2 ac); eucalyptus woodland (9.9 ac); native grassland (9.3 ac); riparian scmb (7.2 ac);
cismontaine alkali marsh (0.1 ac); and freshwater marsh (0.5 ac). Developed (25.8 ac.) and
disturbed (22.5 ac.) lands also occur onsite. Ten vegetation communities are found within the
expanded inventory area of the road exterjsion footprint: Diegan coastal sage scmb (137.3 ac);
southem mixed/chamise chaparral (24.8 ac); non-native grassland (16.3 ac); riparian woodland
(15.1 ac); eucalyptus woodland (5.0 ac); riparian scmb (3.3 ac); riparian forest (2.0 ac);
cismontaine alkali marsh (1.5 ac.) and freshwater marsh (0.2 ac). Remaining land within the
footprint is classified as agricultural (133.6 ac), disturbed (28.0 ac), and developed (54.1 ac).
Calavera Hills Phase II
The Calavera Hills Master Plan, originally approved in 1974 and amended several times since,
includes approximately 900 total acres in the northeast quadrant of Carlsbad. Existing Phase I
development accounts for about 500 acres (and 1,619 dwelling units). The master plan allows
for construction, in Phase H, of a maximum of 781 dwelling units on the approximately 300 acres
remaining on the site. The residential units would consist of single family,, multi-family
condominiums, and apartment villages, clustered on the urban areas of the property. The
development plan allows for five single family villages, totaling approximately 331 single family
units, with lots ranging from a minimum 4,000 sq. ft. in area to 8,000 sq. ft. in area. This
development plan will also include two condominium sites, which will accommodate no more
than 338 attached two-and three-story attached condominiums. The apartment project will
provide for up to 141 affordable housing units. Approximately 3.5 total miles of local residential
streets will serve these villages. Local infrastmcture, including sewer, storm drain and water
distribution lines will also be provided to the units. Two community facility sites totaling three
acres, intended to accommodate daycare and/or church uses are also designated within the plan.
This final phase of the Calavera Hills community involves the final nine villages (300 acres) of
the 900 acres of urban villages and open space that make up Calavera Hills. The applicant
proposes to begin constmction in Febmary of 2002, with the entire constmction process for
Calavera Hills Phase n taking up to three years to complete.
The project is consistent with the City's Draft Habitat Management Plan (HMP). While not formally
approved, the Draft HMP reflects the regionally significant habitat areas and corridors desired for
establishment within the City of Carlsbad. The HMP was drafted in conjunction with consultation
and input from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Califomia Department of Fish and Game and
the City of Carlsbad.
College Boulevard and Cannon Road
The proposed project involves the constmction of Reaches A, B and C of College Boulevard
(Fig. 2). Reaches B and C will be constmcted in conjunction with development of Calavera Hills
Phase n. Reach A is projected to be constmcted prior to 2006. In addition. Cannon Road Reach
3 will be developed with Calavera Hills Phase II to provide a link between the homes and El
Camino Real.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 8
College Boulevard through Calavera Hills Phase fl (College Reach C - approx. 3,600 ft. in
lenglh) and from Calavera Hills to its proposed intersection with Cannon Road (College Reach B
- approx. 1,800 ft. in length), and Cannon Road from this proposed intersection to El Camino
Real (Cannon Reach 3 - approx. 3,600 ft. ;n length) would be constmcted as part of Calavera
Hills Phase II. Constmction of these reaches of roads is proposed to begin in Febraary 2002 and
take approximately one year to complete. Constmction of College Boulevard from the
College/Cannon intersection, south to El Camino Real (College Reach A - approx. 3,500 ft. in
length) will be constmcted as a second phase, and is expected to begin in approximately 2004.
Cannon Road east of the College/Cannon intersection some 1,200 feet into the CUSD high
school site (Reach 4A) will be the last phase of the proposed project road development, and is
expected to begin concurrentiy with consttuction of the high school. Constmction of the BTD
will impact native vegetation (Table 1).
Both College Boulevard and Cannon Road are major arterials on the City of Carlsbad Circulation
Element As such, tiieir design includes two 12-foot ttavel lanes in each direction, with an 18-
foot median separating the ttavel directions. Curi>-to-curb widtii is 82-feet. Speed limits on the
roadways are expected to be posted at 45 mph.
Table 1.
Impacts to native vegetation associated with construction of Bridge and Thoroughfare
Roadway Segment Constructed with
Development Phase
Permanent and
Temporary
Wetlands and
Waters Impacts
Coastal Sage
Scrub Impacts
College Reach C Calavera Hills Phase
n
0.0 ac. 5.7 ac.
College Reach B Calavera Hills Phase
n
0.8 ac. 3.2 ac.
Cannon Reach 3 Calavera Hills Phase
n
1.6 ac. 0.0 ac.
College Reach A By 2006 1.0 ac 1.5 ac
Cannon Reach 4A High school
development
0.0 ac. 0.0 ac.
TOTAL 3.4 ac. 10.4 ac.
Detention Ba.sins B.T and B.TB
In conjunction with constmction of College Boulevard, the City of Carlsbad plans to install two
permanent detention basins for flood conttol purposes. These basins are needed because
downstream homeowners in the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park experience flooding during
heavy storni events. The earthen roadway bed of College Boulevard is designed to provide the
embankment necessary to impound the floodwaters, and release them gradually, to avoid the
downstteam flood damage. As a result, all impacts associated with the detention basins are
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 9
included in the College Boulevard impacts. Detention Basin BJB (north of the intersection of
Cannon Road and College Boulevard) will be constmcted concunently with College Boulevard
Reach B; thus constraction is proposed to begin in Febraary 2002 and take approximately one
year to complete. Constmction of Basin l^J is proposed to begin in 2004-2005, and take
approximately one year.
The action area extends 5.5 kilometers sunounding the impact area, and encompasses a large
area of Carlsbad, Vista, Oceanside, and portions of unincorporated San Diego County.
Conservation Measures
The proposed action contains the following conservation measures which will be implemented as
part of the project in order to avoid or otherwise minimize potential adverse effects of the action
on sensitive and listed species.
1. A wildlife corridor will be retained through tiie project site. The Calavera EBUs site
contains the last significant corridor of native vegetation connecting wildlife preserves in
Carisbad and points south with Camp Pendleton, via the proposed "stepping stone"
habitat linkages in Oceanside. Therefore, the estabUshment of a wildlife corridor in the
location discussed with the Service and CDFG —and agreed upon in the HMP- is a major
component of this master plan amendment, which is reflected in the proposed Phase n
development plan. The proposed project accommodates the creation of a biological
habitat corridor through the centtal portion of the master plan area by adjusting the land
uses, and transferring densities and allowing for clustered development Specifically, the
southem portion of Village K will be preserved as open space, and the northem portion
will be developed with clustered single-family homes. A customized fire suppression
program for the area of interface between the residential housing and the corridor has
been approved by the developers, the Service, and the Carlsbad Fire Department This
program entails the constmction of a perimeter wall and fire sprinkler program which will
also serve to protect the corridor from house pets. The tinted glass portion of the wall
will be constmcted at a 21 degree angle in an effort to reduce bird mortality of birds
flying into the glass.
2. The removal of and temporary impacts to 3.4 acres of riparian scrab, riparian forest and
marsh habitat will be mitigated by creating 10.7 acres of wetland habitat to ensure that no
net loss of riparian habitat occurs. Mitigation for vegetated habitat would be
accomplished through creation and/or enhancement/preservation of appropriate riparian
and marsh habitat. The mitigation for these impacts will occur in two locations, (1) an
expansion of the Calavera Creek riparian habitat in the upper "end of Detention Basin
BJB, and within the overflow area of Basin BJ.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 10
Table 3.
Wetiand Plant Community Mitigation (Including temporary impacts)
Plant Community Prqject Impacts Mitigation Ratio Required On-site
Mitigation
Riparian woodland 2.17 ac 3:1 (temp. 1 1) 6.5 ac.
Riparian scrab 0.55 ac. 3:1 (temp. 1 1) 1.7 ac.
Riparian forest 0.00 ac. 3:1 (temp. 1 •1) Oac.
Cismontaine alkali marsh 0.77 ac. 3:1 (temp. 1 2.3 ac.
Wetland TOTAL 10.5 ac.
Non-wetiand jurisdictional
waters
0.21 ac. 1:1 0.2 ac.
Grand TOTAL 3.7 ac. 10.7 ac.
3. Compensation for impacts to tiie federally threatened coastal Califomia gnatcatcher and
removal of 91.2 acres of coastal sage scrab vegetation will be accomplished through the
on-site avoidance of 87.3 acres of existing coastal sage scrab and revegetation of 2.4
acres of the site with coastal sage scrab. This totals 89.7 acres of on-site coastal sage
scrab conservation. In addition, 35.6 acres of the Carlsbad Nature Preserve property has
been purchased to offset impacts of the project (Table 2). The applicants will preserve an
additional 51.3 acres of gnatcatcher-occupied coastal sage scrab off-site, within the
coastal portion of the MHCP area, at a location acceptable to the Service. If the
acquisition of this land is not accomplished prior to issuance of a mass grading permit by
the City, funding for acquisition of an additional 51.3 acres of coastal sage scrab off-site
at a location acceptable to tiie Service and the City of Carlsbad will be provided tiirough
deposit of $1,128,600 and $394,650.00 into tiie Califomia Gnatcatcher Conservation
Fund (National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Account No. 97-166). The $1,128,600 is to
be used for property acquisition and the and the $394,650.00 is to be used for the creation
of an endowment fund for maintenance and management of the acquired site (the
$394,650.00 dollar amount may be revised if a Property Analysis Report [sic](PAR)
prepared by a qualified open space manager detennines less money is needed for the
endowment).
Table 2.
CSS Mitigation Activity Acreage
On-site Preservation . 87.3 ac.
On-site revegetation -2.4 ac.
Carlsbad Nature Preserve
Credit
35.6 ac.
Offsite CSS acquisition 51.3 ac.
TOTAL 176.6 ac
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 11
4. The applicant will ensure that long-term conservation of the on- and off-site preservation
areas will occur through biological conservation easements. The biological conservation
easements will be granted to a public or private entity agreed to by the Service and with
input from the CDFG to ensure that the management of the biological resources is
implemented. In addition, the applicant will ensure that the long-term management of the
on-site preservation areas will occur in perpetuity by the funding of an endowment to a
conservation management group.
5. Mitigation for potential impacts to least Bell's vireo will include avoidance of removal of
riparian habitat between March 15 and September 1. Any deviation from this schedule
will require coordination with, and approval by, the Service. If constraction will occur
adjacent to occupied vireo habitat during the breeding season, pre-constmction surveys
will be conducted in the adjacent habitat to determine the location of the nesting birds.
During constraction, no activity will occur directiy adjacent to active nesting territories of
the vireo, unless measures are implemented to minimize the noise and disturbance to
those adjacent birds. Exceptions to this measure will require coordination with, and
approval by, the Service, and may include cases where surveys for the vireo confirm that
adjacent habitat is not occupied or where noise studies confirm that noise levels are below
60 dBA within vireo habitat. If grading occurs during the breeding season and noise
levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers will be constracted to reduce noise impacts to
occupied habitat to below 60 dBA L^.
6. The natural drainage (i.e., the pre-development hydrology) will be maintained as much as
possible. Drainage from the development site will not drain directiy into open space
areas without some form of tteatment.
7. During constraction, gravel bag check dams will be used in street sections, gravel bag
ring basins will be used at all inlets, silt fences will be installed at the toe of slopes,
constraction entrances will be covered with gravel, and slopes will be hydroseeded or
otherwise protected pursuant to a City of Carlsbad-approved erosion control plan.
8. All lighting of developed areas adjacent to the open space is proposed to be shielded and
directed away from undeveloped areas.
9. The applicant will ensure that the constraction limits will be clearly defined prior to
ground disturbing activities and clearly visible to personnel on foot and heavy equipment
ojjerators. Employees will strictly limit their activities and vehicles to the proposed
project areas, staging areas, and routes of ttavel. The applicant and/or the biological
monitor will contact the Service to verify that the limits of constraction have been
properly staked and are readily identifiable.
10. All equipment maintenance, staging and dispensing of fuel, oil, or any other such
activities, will occur in designated upland areas. The designated upland areas will be
located in such a manner as to prevent any ranoff from entering waters of the United
States, including wetiands.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 12
11. An employee education program will be developed and implemented. The applicant will
submit the contents of the Worker Environmental Awareness Program and the
qualifications of the proposed instractor(s) to the Service prior to initiation of the
employee education program. For'the life of the constraction project, each employee
(including temporary conttactors and subcontractors) will receive a training/awareness
program within two weeks of working on the proposed project. They will be advised of
the potential impacts to the listed species and the potential penalties for taking such
species. At a minimum, the program will include the following topics: occunence of the
listed and sensitive species in the areas, their general ecology, sensitivity ofthe species to
human activity, impacts from free-roaming pets (particularly domestic and feral cats),
legal protection afforded these species, penalties for violation of Federal and State laws,
reporting requirements, and project features designed to reduce tiie impacts to these
species and promote continued successful occupation of tiie preserved areas.
12. The applicant will designate a field contact representative (FCR) or biological
consttnction monitor who will be responsible for overseeing compliance witii protective
measures for the listed species and sensitive areas during constinction. The FCR will
have tiie autiiority to halt all associated project activities, which may be in violatidn of tiie
terms and conditions of this biological opinion.
13. A draft monitoring/management plan(s) that addresses botii tiie habitat and tiie species
will be developed and implemented in coordination with the Service. The
monitoring/management plan(s) will be submitted to tiie Service and tiie Corps for
approval witiiin 60 days of tiie date of your 404 pennit and provide a description of any
measures the applicant has implemented to avoid and minimize tiie effects of tiie project,
and a description of the funding mechanism that assures that tiie conservation measures
are fully implemented and meet success criteria. Management issues to be addressed in
tiie plan include: biological monitoring for listed and other MHCP-covered species,
fencing as necessary to provide adequate protection of conserved on-site habitat from
human encroachment and domestic pets, shielding of any lighting adjacent to tiie
conserved areas to minimize lighting effects in these areas, restrictions on tiie use of
invasive landscaping plants in areas adjacent to the conserved areas, and tt-ail use and
signs to minimize effects of trail use on conserved areas, weed removal and ttrash removal
from conserved areas.
14. A wildlife undercrossing will be incorporated into the design of College Boulevard Reach
B, to facilitate movement of large mammalian predators (e.g., coyotes and bobcats)
between habitat to the northeast (including Calavera Nature Preserve) and habitat to the
soutiiwest (including Robertson Ranch and Agua Hedionda lagoon) (Figure 3).
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 13
mtAL cKossm am
Figiure 3.
Location of wildlife crossing under College Boulevard, Reach B
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 14
STATUS OF THE SPECIES/CRITICAL HABITAT
Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica califomica)
' I
• t
Listing Status
The Service listed the coastal Califomia gnatcatcher as threatened on March 30,1993 {Federal
Register 58: 16742). As part of the Federal listing, the Service issued a special mle, pursuant to
section 4(d) of the Act defining the conditions under which take of tiie gnatcatcher would not be
a violation of section 9. This special mle recognized tiie State's Natural Community
Conservation Planning (NCCP) Program, and several local govemments' ongoing multi-species
conservation planning efforts (e.g., the MHCP) tiiat intend to apply Act standards to activities
affecting tiie gnatcatcher. An interim process was established whereby jurisdictions actively
involved in NCCP planning would be allowed to take up to five percent of tiie remaining coastal
sage habitat for projects that were consistent witii tiie NCCP conservation guideUnes.
Species Description
The coastal Califomia gnatcatcher is a small (lengtii: 11 centimeters; weight: 6 grams), long-
tailed member ofthe old-worid warbler and gnatcatcher family Sylviidae (American
Omithologists' Union 1998). The bird's plumage is dark blue-gray above and grayish-white
below. The tail is mostiy black above and below. The male has a distinctive black c^ which is
absent during tiie winter. Botii sexes have a distinctive white eye-ring.
The coastal Califomia gnatcatcher is one of tiiree subspecies of tiie Califomia gnatcatcher
(Polioptila califomica) (Atwood 1991). Prior to 1989, ttie Califomia gnatcatcher was classified
as a subspecies ofthe Black-tailed gnatcatcher (Polioptila melanura). Atwood (1980,1988)
concluded tiiat tiie species was distinct from P. melanura, based on differences in ecology and
behavior. Recent mitochondrial DNA sequencing confinned the species-level recognition of the
Califomia gnatcatcher (Zink and Blackwell 1998).
Distribution
Gnatcatchers occur on coastal slopes in soutiiem Califomia, ranging from southern Ventura
soudiward through Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County through Orange, Riverside,
San Bemardino and San Diego Counties into Baja Califomia to El Rosario, Mexico, at about 30
degrees north latitude (Atwood 1991). hi 1990, Atwood reported that ninety-nine percent of all
gnatcatcher locality records occuned at or below an elevation of 300 meters (m) (984 feet (ft)).
In 1992, Atwood and Bolsihger reported that, of 324 sites of recent occunence, 272 (84 percent)
were located below 250 m (820 ft) in elevation, 315 (97 percent) were below 500 m (1,640 ft),
and 324 (100 percent) were below 750 m (2,460 ft). Since tiiat time, additional data collected at
higher elevations shows that this species may occur as high as 912 m (3,000 ft) and diat more
than 99 percent of the known gnatcatcher locations occurred below 770 m (2,500 ft) (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 2000).
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 15
Habitat Affinities
Gnatcatchers typically occur in or near coastal sage scmb habitat. Coastal sage scrab is patchily
distributed throughout the range of the gqatcatcher, and the gnatcatcher is not unifonnly
distributed within the stracturaUy and floristically variable coastal sage scrab community.
Rather, the subspecies tends to occur most frequently within Califomia sagebmsh (Artemisia
ca/i/orrKca)-dominated stands on mesas, gently sloping areas, and along the lower slopes of the
coast ranges (Atwood 1990). An analysis of the percent gap in shrab canopy supports the
hypothesis that gnatcatchers prefer relatively open stands of coastal sage scrab (Weaver 1998).
The gnatcatcher occurs in high frequencies and densities in scrab with an open or broken canopy
while it is absent fi-om scrab dominated by tall shrabs and occurs in low frequencies and
densities in low scmb with a closed canopy (Weaver 1998). Territory size increases as
vegetation density decreases and with distance from the coast, probably due to food resource
availability.
Gnatcatchers also use chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur adjacent to
sage scrab (Campbell et al. 1998). The use of these habitats appears to be most frequent during
late summer, autumn, and winter, with smaller numbers of birds using such areas during the
breeding season. These non-sage scrab habitats are used for dispersal, but data on dispersal use
are largely anecdotal (Campbell et al. 1998). Linkages of habitat along linear features such as
highways and power-line corridors may be of significant value in linking populations of the
gnatcatcher (Famolaro and Newman 1998). Although existing quantitative data may reveal
relatively little about gnatcatcher use of these other habitats, these areas may be critical during
certain times of year for dispersal or as foraging areas during drought conditions (Campbell et dl.
1998). Breeding territories have also been documented in non-sage scrab habitat Campbell et
al. (1998) discuss likely scenarios explaining why habitats other than coastal sage scmb are used
by gnatcatchers including food source availability, dispersal areas for juveniles, temperature
extremes, fire avoidance, and lowered predation rate for fledglings.
Critical Habitat
On October 24,2000, the Service published the final determination of critical habitat for the
gnatcatcher (Federal Register 65: 63680), including 207,868 hectares (ha) (513,650 acres (ac)) of
Federal, state, local, and private land in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bemardino, and
San Diego Counties. Primary constituent elements for the gnatcatcher are those habitat
components that are essential for the primary biological needs of foraging, nesting, rearing of
young, intra-specific communication, roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering.
Primary constituent elements are provided in (1) undeveloped areas, including agricultural lands,
that support or have the potential to support, through natural successtonal processes, various
types of sage scrab, or (2) undeveloped areas that support chapanal, grassland, or riparian
habitats where they occur proximal to sage scrab and where they may be utilized for the
biological needs of dispersal and foraging, and (3) undeveloped areas, including agricultural
areas, that provide or could provide connectivity or linkage between or within larger core areas,
including open space and disturbed areas that may receive only periodic use (Federal Register
65:63680).
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 16
Life History
The Califomia gnatcatcher is primarily insectivorous, nonmigratory, and exhibits strong site
tenacity (Atwood 1990). Diet deduced fi;dm fecal samples resulted in leaf- and plant-hoppers
and spiders predominating the samples. Trae bugs, wasps, bees, and ants were only minor
components of the diet (Burger et al. 1999). Gnatcatcher adults selected prey to feed tiieir young
that was larger than expected given the distribution of arthropods available in their environment.
Both adults and young consumed more sessile than active prey items (Burger et al. 1999).
The Califomia gnatcatcher seems to become highly territorial by late Febraary or early March
each year, as males become more vocal during this time period (Mock et aL 1990). In
southwestem San Diego County the mean breeding season territory size ranged from 5 to 11 ha
(12 to 27 ac) per pair and non-breeding season territory size ranged from 5 to 17 ha (12 to 42 ac)
per pair (Preston etai. 1998). During the nonbreeding season, gnatcatchers have been observed
to wander in adjacent territories and unoccupied habitat increasing their home range size to
approximately 78 percent larger than their breeding territory (Preston et al. 1998).
The breeding season of the gnatcatcher extends from mid-Febraary through the end of August,
with the peak of nesting activity occuning from mid-March through mid-May. The gnatcatcher's
nest is a small, cup-shaped basket usually found 0.3 to 1 m (1 to 3 ft) above the ground in a small
shrab or cactus. Clutch sizes range between three and five eggs, with the average being four.
Juvenile birds associate with their parents for several weeks (sometimes months) after fledging
(Atwood 1990). Nest building begins in mid-March witii tiie earliest recorded egg date of March
20 (Mock et al. 1990). Post-breeding dispersal of fledglings occurs between late May and late
November. Nest predation is the most common cause of nest failure (Grishaver et aL 1998).
Gnatcatchers are persistent nest builders and often attempt multiple broods, which is suggestive
of a high reproductive potential. This is, however, typically offset by high rates of nest predation
and brood parasitism (Atwood 1990). Nest site attendance by male gnatcatchers was determined
to be equal to that of females for the first nest attempt and then decline to almost a third of
female nest attendance for later nesting attempts (Sockman 1998).
Gnatcatchers typically live for two to tiiree years, although ages of up to five years have been
recorded for some banded birds (Dudek and Associates 2000). Observations indicate that
gnatcatchers are highly vulnerable to extteme cold, wet weather (Mock et al. 1990). Predation
occurs in greater proportion in the upper and lower third of the nest shrab. Predation is lower in
nests with full clutch sizes (Sockman 1997). Potential nest predators are numerous, and include
snakes, raccoons, and corvids (Grishaver et al. 1998). The Califomia gnatcatcher also is known
to be affected by nest parasitism of the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater). Nest parasitism
apparently has resulted in eariier nesting dates of the gnatcatcher whfch may help compensate for
the negative effect of parasitism (Patten and Campbell 1998). However, tiie gains in nest success
from decreased nest parasitism appear to be negated by increased nest abandonment due to
predation before cowbirds have migrated into an area (Braden et al. 1997).
The natal dispersal, for a nonmigratory bird, such as tiie gnatcatcher, is an important aspect of the
biology of the species (Galvin 1998). The mean dispersal distance of gnatcatchers bmided in San
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 17
Diego County is reported at less than 3 kilometers (km) (1.9 miles (mi)) (Bailey and Mock 1998).
Although the mean dispersal distances that have been documented above are relatively low,
dispersal of juveniles is difficult to observe and to document without extensive banding studies.
Therefore, it is likely that the few cunent studies underestimate the gnatcatcher's typical dispersal
capacity (Bailey and Mock 1998). Juvenile gnatcatchers are apparentiy able to ttaverse highly
man-modified landscapes for a least short distances (Bailey and Mock 1998). Natural and
restored coastal sage scrab habitat along highway corridors is used for foraging and nesting by
gnatcatchers and may serve important dispersal functions (Famolaro and Newman 1998).
Typically, however, the dispersal of juveniles requires a conidor of native vegetation which
provides foraging and cover opportunities to link larger patches of appropriate sage scrab
vegetation (Soule 1991). These dispersal corridors may facilitate the exchange of genetic
material and provide a path for recolonization of areas from which the species has been
extirpated (Soule 1991, Galvin 1998).
Population Trend
The gnatcatcher was considered locally common in the mid-1940's, but by the 1960's this
subspecies had decUned substantially in the United States owing to widespread destmction of its
habitat (Atwood 1990). By 1980, Atwood (1980) estimated tiiat no more tiian 1,000 to 1,500
pairs remained in the United States. In 1993, at the time the gnatcatcher was listed as threatened,
the Service estimated that approximately 2,562 pairs of gnatcatchers occurred in the United
States. Of these, 30 pairs occuned in Los Angeles County, 757 pairs occurred in Orange County,
261 pairs occurred in Riverside County, and 1,514 pairs occurred in San Diego County. In 1997,
the total number of gnatcatchers in the United States was estimated at 2,899 pairs with two-thirds
occurring in San Diego County (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996), after subttacting out all
gnatcatcher pairs authorized for take under Habitat Loss Pemiits, approved Natural Community
Conservation Plans, Habitat Conservation Plans, and section 7 consultations. These population
estimates were intended to represent a coarse approximation of the number of gnatcatchers in
southem Califomia. Confidence intervals have not been calculated for these estimates and
therefore, we can not be sure of their precision.
Threats
The loss, fragmentation, and adverse modification of habitat are the principal reasons for the
gnatcatcher's federally threatened status (Federal Register 58: 16742). The amount of coastal
sage scrab available to gnatcatchers has continued to decrease during the period after the listing
of the species. It is estimated that up to 90 percent of coastal sage scrab vegetation has been lost
as a result of development and land conversion (Westman 1981a, 1981b, Barbour and Major
1977), and coastal sage scrub is considered to be one of the most depleted habitat-types in the
United States (Kirkpatrick and Hutchinson 1977, O'Leary 1990). The fragmentation of habitat
may artificially increase populations in adjacent preserved habitat; however, these population
surpluses may be lost in subsequent years due to crowding and lack of resources (Scott 1993). In
addition, agricultural use, such as grazing and field crops, urbanization, air pollution, and the
introduction of non-native plants have all had an adverse impact on extant sage scrab habitat. A
consequence of urbanization that is contributing to the loss, degradation, and fragmentation of
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 18
coastal sage scrab is an increase in wildfires due to anthropogenic ignitions. High fire
frequencies and the lag period associated with recovery of the vegetation may significantly
reduce the viability of affected subpopulations (Dudek and Associates 2000). Furthermore, nest-
parasitism by the brown-headed cowbird (tJnitt 1984) and nest predation threaten the recovery of
the gnatcatcher (Atwood 1980, Unitt 1984).
Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)
Listing Status
The least Bell's vireo was federally-listed as endangered on May 2,1986 (Federal Register 51:
16474) and state listed as endangered in Califomia on October 2,1980. A draft recovery plan
was prepared for tiiis species in March 1998 (U.S. Fish and WildUfe Service 1998).
Species Description
The least Bell's vireo is a small migratory songbird. It is olive-gray above and pure white on its
underparts with two dull white wing stripes and dull white to olive nanow margins on the outer
border of its wings and tail. Males and females are identical in plumage. This vireo is easily
distinguished by its song, a rapid bubbling series of rough notes, increasing in tempo and
intensity toward a rapid climax. Phrases of tiie song are altematively slurred upward and
downward. Eggs are on average 17.5 millimeters (mm) (0.7 inches (in)) long, and duU white,
often with fine brown, black, or reddish-brown dots concentiated on the larger end (Brown
1993).
The least Bell's vireo is in tiie family Vireonidae, and is one of four subspecies of Bell's vireo
(Vireo bellii) that have been recognized. Although all subspecies are similar in behavior and Ufe
history, they are isolated from one another on both tiie breeding and wintering grounds (Hamilton
1962).
Distribution
The least Bell's vireo formeriy was found in valley bottom riparian habitats from Tehama
County, Califomia southward locally to northwestem Baja Califomia, Mexico in the south, and
as far east as Owens Valley, Death Valley, and along the Mojave River (Grinnell and Miller
1944). Except for a few outlying pairs, the subspecies is currentiy restricted to southem
California south of the Tehachapi Mountains and northwestem Baja Califomia (Garrett and
Dunn 1981). Least Bell's vireo breeding pairs currentiy occur in Monterey, San Benito, Inyo,
San Bemardino, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Diego Counties. The highest
reported concentt^ation is in San Diego County along tiie Santa Margarita River (Small 1994).
According to Grinnell and Miller (1944) 1,200 meters (m) (4,000 feet (ft)) is the upper limit
where least Bell's vireo occur in coastal southem Califomia.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 19
Habitat Affinities
The least Bell's vireo primarily occupies riparian habitats that typically feature dense cover
within 1 to 2 m (3 to 7 ft) of the ground aqd a dense, sttatified canopy. It inhabits low, dense
riparian growth along water or along dry parts of intermittent streams. The understory is
typically dominated by sandbar willow (Salix hindsiana), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), young
individuals of other willow species, such as anoyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) or black willow
(5a/ix gooddingii) and one or more herbaceous species (Salata 1983a, 1983b, Zembal 1984,
Zembal et al. 1985). Important overstory species include mature arroyo willows and black
willows. Other overstory species that may contribute to vireo habitat include cottonwoods
(Populus spp.), westem sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and coast Uve oak (Quercus agrifolia).
The vireo uses habitat which is limited to the immediate vicinity of water courses (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1986, Small 1994). It primarily nests in small, remnant segments of vegetation
typically dominated by willows and mule fat but may also use a variety of shrabs, trees, and
vines. Nests are typically built within 1 m (3 ft) of the ground in the fork of willows, wild rose
(Rosa califomica), mule fat or other understory vegetation (Franzreb 1989). Cover sunounding
nests is usually a moderately open midstory with an overstory of willow, cottonwood, sycamore,
or oak. Crown cover is usually more than 50 percent and contains occasional small openings.
The most critical stractural component to least Bell's vireo breeding habitat is a dense shrab layer
at 0.6 to 3 m (2 to 10 ft) above the ground (Franzreb 1989). The birds forage in riparian and
adjoining chaparral habitat (Salata 1983b).
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat was designated for the least Bell's vireo on Febraary 2,1994 (Federal Register
59: 34982) at 10 areas encompassing about 15,200 hectares (ha) (38,000 acres (ac)) in Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego Counties. In San
Diego County, the following areas contain designated critical habitat for the least Bell's vireo:
Coyote Creek, Santa Margarita River, San Luis Rey River, San Diego River, Sweetwater River,
Jamul-Dulzura Creeks, and Tijuana River. Primary constituent elements that support feeding,
nesting, roosting and sheltering are essential to the conservation of the least Bell's vireo. These
primary constituent elements can be described as riparian woodland vegetation that generally
contains both canopy and shmb layers and some associated upland habitats.
Life History
The least Bell's vireo exhibits year-round diumal activity and is known to be a noctumal migrant
(Brown 1993). This subspecies feeds primarily on insects and spiders, and rarely on fmit (Brown
1993). Insects consumed include trae bugs, beetles, bees, wasps, ants, snails, grasshoppers,
moths, and butterflies (Terres 1980). The vireo forages primarily within willow (Salix spp.)
stands or associated riparian vegetation with forays into non-riparian vegetation including
chapanal and oak woodlands later in the breeding season (Gray and Greaves 1984, Salata 1983b,
Kus and Minor 1987). Individuals travel between 3 and 61 m (10 and 200 ft) while foraging,
with the majority of these destinations occurring within 30 m (98 ft) of the edge of riparian
vegetation (Kus and Minor 1987). Least Bell's vireo forage in all vertical vegetation layers from
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 20
0 to 20 m (0 to 66 ft) but most feeding is concentrated above the ground surface in the lower
vegetation layers between 0 to 6 m (0 to 20 ft) (Kus and Minor 1987, Salata 1983b). Feeding
behavior largely consists of collecting prey from leaves or in bark crevices while perched or
hovering, and less frequentiy by capturing'prey by aerial pursuit (Salata 1983a, 1983b).
Least Bell's vireo are mainly monogamous, however, some individuals of both sexes are
sequentially polygamous within the breeding season (Greaves 1987). The male vireo contests
and establishes breeding territories (Barlow 1962) which range in size from 0.2 to 3.0 ha (0.5 to
7.4 ac) (Gray and Greaves 1984, Collins et al. 1992) with most averaging between 0.4 and 1.2 ha
(1 and 3 ac) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). Territories in Bell's vireo are maintained by
tiireat and physical confrontation early in the breeding season, tapering to vocal wamings later in
the season (Barlow 1962).
The breeding season for least Bell's vireo extends from mid-March to mid- or late-September
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1986). A majority of the birds arrive from tiie Mexican
wintering areas by tiie end of March, and depart by end of August (Zeiner et al. 1990). Most
breeding vireos depart the breeding grounds by tiie third week of September, and only very few
are found wintering in the United States (Garrett and Dunn 1981, Salata 1983b). Nests are
typically suspended in forked branches of many different riparian species with no clear
preference for any particular species (Nolan 1960, Barlow 1962, Gray and Greaves 1984). Least
Bell's vireo nests are usually placed between 0.9 and 1.5 m (3.0 and 4.9 ft) from the ground with
a range between 0.2 and 3.6 m (0.7 and 11.8 ft) (Dudek and Associates 2000). Females probably
select the nesting sites but botii genders participate in nest constmction (Barlow 1962). Nests
appear to only be used once with new ones constmcted for failed or successive broods (Greaves
1987). Between 2 to 5 (typically 3 or 4) eggs are laid shortly after nest constmction (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 1998). A typical clutch is incubated by botii parents for about 14 days with
the young remaining in the nest for anotiier 10-12 days (Pitelka and Koestner 1942, Nolan 1960,
Barlow 1962). Least Bell's vireo may produce two broods of young and occasionally up to four
per season, although it is thought that most are capable of successfully raising only one brood
(Franzreb 1989).
Banding records have documented Bell's vireo that have lived approximately seven years,
however, maximum life-span is probably longer (Brown 1993). Over two different time periods,
within die same population. Greaves and Gray (1991) found that only a small percentage of tiie
vireos were older than 3 and 4 years (8 percent and 15 percent). Survival rates measured as
average nesting success has been recorded for several large drainages in southem Califomia
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). The average percentage of nests to successfully produce
fledglings ranges over several study areas from 46 percent (on the Santa Ana River) to a high of
74 percent (on the westem portion of the San Luis Rey River) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1998). Beyond one year, survivorship increases averaging approximately 47 percent (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 1998). Predation is common in least Bell's vireo owing in part to the close
proximity between nest and ground (Franzreb 1989). Nest predation among least Bell's vireo has
been reported as high as 45 percent in tiie San Luis Rey river to as low as 8 percent on tiie San
Diego River (Salata 1983b).
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 21
Additional long-term research is needed over long periods of time to detennine dispersal
characteristics of least Bell's vireo (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998). Fledgling Bell's vireo
expand their dispersal distances from about 10 m (33 ft) the first day to approximately 60 m (197
ft) several weeks after fledging (Hensley" 1950, Nolan 1960). This distance has been shown to
increase to approximately 1.6 kilometer (km) (1 mile (mi)) during the same breeding season
(Gray and Greaves 1984). Studies by Kus and Greaves have provided estimates of
extra-watershed dispersal rates and distances for least Bell's vireo, with approximately 20 percent
dispersing outside their natal drainages over distances of 210 km (130 mi) (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 1998). Data collected by Kus also suggests that males are more likely to
disperse from their natal sites tiian females (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1998).
Population Trend
No other passerine (perching songbird) species in Califomia is known to have declined as
dramatically as the least Bell's vireo (Brown 1993). The nanow and limited nature of the habitat
of the least Bell's vireo makes the subspecies more susceptible to major population reductions
than the other subspecies of Bell's vireo. Intensive surveys between 1977 and 1985 of virtually
all potential breeding habitat were conducted (Gaines 1977, Goldwasser 1978, Goldwasser et al.
1980), resulting in occurrences at only 46 of over 150 former localities. Once common, the vireo
populations had decreased substantially by the late 1980's due to loss and degradation of habitat
as well as from brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater) parasitism (Goldwasser et al. 1980).
The regional population has increased from 300 pairs in 1986 to 1,500 pairs in 1996, primarily
due to the management of local cowbird populations (Kus 1998).
Although the vireo has begun to recover and approximately 2,000 least Bell's vireos pairs were
on territories in 1998, data indicate that the United States breeding population in 1999 apparentiy
declined. In recent years, the populations of vireos at Camp Pendleton and the Prado Basin
collectively represented approximately 60 percent of all known territories within Califomia and
the United States as a whole. Population declines were noted at Marine Corps Base, Camp
Pendleton, the Prado Basin, and at other locales tiiroughout the range of the species in 1999, and
the Camp Pendleton vireo population continued to decrease by 8 percent (78 fewer locations) in
2000 (Service, unpublished data). The reason for this apparent population decline is unknown.
However, during the 2001 breeding season, a minimum of 714 known fledged young were
detected within the Prado Basin study area, which was a 10 percent increase over the
conesponding total (649) in 1999 (Pike et al. 2001). Approximately 2,000 vireo territories were
detected within Califomia during 2000, with the largest population located at Camp Pendleton.
Threats
Causes for decline of the least Bell's vireo include destmction of habitat, river channelization,
water diversions, lowered water tables, gravel mining, agricultural development and cowbird
parasitism. Vireos are known to be sensitive to many forms of disturbance including noise, night
lighting, and consistent human presence in an area. Excessive noise can cause vireos to abandon
an area.. Greaves (1989) hypothesized that the lack of breeding vireos in apparently suitable
habitat was due to human disturbances (e.g., bulldozers, off-road vehicles, and hiking tt^ails). He
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 22
further suggested that buffer zones between natural areas and sunounding degraded and
disturbed areas could be used to increase the suitability of some vireo habitat. It appears that
vireos nesting in areas containing a high proportion of degraded habitat have lower productivity
(e.g., hatching success) than those in areas of high quality riparian woodland (Pike and Hays
1992). Additionally, widespread habitat losses have fragmented most remaining populations into
small, disjunct widely dispersed subpopulations (Franzreb 1989). As much as 90 percent of the
original extent of riparian woodland in Califomia has been eliminated, and most of the remaining
10 percent is in a degraded condition (Smith 1977, Dahl 1990). Oberbauer (1990) reported a 61
percent loss of riparian habitat for San Diego County. Habitat fragmentation negatively affects
abundance and distiibution of neottopical migratory songbirds, in part by increasing incidence of
nest predation and parasitism (Small and Hunter 1988, Yahner and DeLong 1992). Management
programs aimed at reducing numbers of cowbirds have been considered very successful at
maintaining some local populations (Small 1994).
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE
Regulations implementing tiie Act (50 CFR §402.02) define tiie environmental baseline as tiie
past and present impacts of all Federal, State, or private actions and other human activities in tfie
action area. Also included in the environmental baseline are the anticipated impacts of all
proposed Federal projects in tiie action area tiiat have undergone section 7 consultation, and tiie
impacts of State and private actions which are contemporaneous witii tiie consultation in
progress.
The proposed project area is witiiin the planning area for MHCP: a subregional plan that will
address north coastal San Diego County under tiie NCCP program. Furtiiermore, tiiis area is
within the planning area of tiie City's draft HMP (City of Carlsbad 1994), which is a subarea plan
under tiie IvfflCP. The HMP was used as a guideline in formulation of biological resource
conservation measures, core and linkage areas, and open space boundaries associated witfi tfiis
and other large development projects in Carlsbad.
Land to the north of Calavera Hills Phase H is cunentiy covered primarily in residential
development built as part of Calavera Hills Phase I. Further to the north is tiie city of Oceanside.
Corridors of native vegetation (ranging in width between 550 and 75 feet) extend tfirough tfiis
residential area, connecting witii undeveloped land immediately soutii of state route 78, tfiat
cunentiy consist of native and non-native vegetation, occupied by gnatcatchers. Lands to the
west, between the Pacific Ocean and Calavera Hills are entirely covered in residential
development Immediately to the south of Calavera Hills is Robertson Ranch. Robertson Ranch
is cunently fanned, but the eastem portion of the ranch is expected to be converted to residential
development within 5 years, and the westem portion within 10 yearsj(Brian Milich, Marie
McGuire, pers. comm.). The eastem portion of the project site consists of the Calavera Nature
Preserve:' an area set aside to compensate for impacts of the Calavera Hills development. Native
vegetation, ranging in width from about 100 feet to about 500 feet, extends about 1,200 feet east
of tiie eastem border of the Calavera Nature Preserve, before it is sunounded by residential
development Otherwise, lands to tiie east of tiie master plan area are covered with residential
and commercial development of various densities, throughout the City of Vista.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 23
The Calavera Hills site is characterized by diverse topography and rocky rolling hills with distant
views. Vegetation includes high quality Diegan coastal sage scrab, chaparral and non-native
grasslands. The general area is noted for having some of the highest quality coastal sage scrab
habitat in the City. The proposed project site occupies a significant portion of the largest
contiguous area of undeveloped land in Carlsbad; an area roughly 2.5 miles long and one mile
wide, extending southeast from the comer of College Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive
nearly to Carisbad Raceway, at the proposed intersection of Melrose Drive and Palomar Airport
Road. This area encompasses most of Biological Core Areas 3 and 5, and Link C, in the HMP,
and is not bisected by any paved roads. This large block of native wildlife habitat and fragments
of agricultural land, of which Calavera Hills Phase EE and the associated BTD are a part, supports
populations of several federally and State listed species. State Species of Concem, species
proposed for coverage under the HMP, and regionally sensitive species. This area supports
critical populations of gnatcatchers (City of Carlsbad 1999), and constitutes the only remaining
north-south Unkage corridor of native wildlife habitat along the northem border of the cities of
Carlsbad and Vista.
Proposed impact areas and proposed open space areas on the project site overlap broadly with
gnatcatcher critical habitat unit 3 (North San Diego County MHCP). The critical habitat areas
on site contain constituent elements of gnatcatcher habitat.
Gnatcatcher surveys have been conducted several times over tiie past ten years. Surveys
conducted in 1992 and 1995 recorded observations of gnatcatchers in open space north and south
of Village H. and four observations within Village K. During surveys conducted from November
2,1999 to January 2,2000, three gnatcatcher territories were observed on-site and an additional
territory was mapped immediately off-site. Recent protocol surveys (5 total) for the gnatcatcher
have been conducted on tiie Calavera Phase n area in January and late Febraary 2002. During
these surveys a total of six pair of gnatcatchers were observed within the Phase H development
area and adjacent open space areas. The locations of these pairs were; one pair witiiin Village K
open space, one pair on the southem edge of the development area of Village K, one pair in the
open space east of Village U, one pair witfiin the Village R open space, and two pair within the
development area of Villages W and X. In addition, on March 7,2002, Service personnel
observed an additional gnatcatcher on the southem end of the development area of Village U.
Spatial relationship between this observation and mapped survey observations suggest that ttiis
observation represents an additional pair.
It is reasonable to assume that the project site functions as a wildlife corridor. While it is
difficult to determine the degree to which wildlife use the corridor witiiout conducting marking
studies, there is evidence that coyotes use the corridor. On December 18,2001, a discarded
watermelon, with numerous tooth marks suggesting consumption by-ioyotes, was found at tiie
Carlsbad Recreation Center at the intersection of Carlsbad Village Drive and Tamarack Avenue.
On the same date, reddish coyote scat containing watermelon seeds was found at several
locations within the open space corridor, as far south as proposed Village X. Coyote tracks are
routinely seen in tiie corridor, and bobcat tracks have been positively identified (Oriowski, pers.
comm.).
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 24
The riparian habitat proposed for impact by the BTD is part of a strip of riparian vegetation along
Calavera Creek, approximately 100 feet wide, extending approximately 4,200 feet to the north
from the northeast comer of the Rancho Carisbad Mobile Home Park. This riparian vegetation
consists primarily of an overstory of western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) with an understory
of mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia). However, the southem end of this riparian strip includes a
significant component of willow, which is the typical overstory tree of vireo habitat. This area
including the willow has more dense vegetation from approximately 2-10 feet above tiie ground,
than does tiie sycamore-dominated riparian vegetation to the north. Franzreb (1989) considered
a dense vegetation layer at this level to be the most critical sttnctural component to least Bell's
vireo breeding habitat The proposed intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road is
situated within tiie south end of tiiis riparian stiip, in tiie area witfi significant willows. Vireo
surveys were conducted according to Service guidelines between April 27 and July 14,2000.
One pair of vireos, detected at tfie site of tfie proposed intersection of College Boulevard and
Cannon Road, persisted at that location through the breeding season and nested successfiilly. An
additional vireo was detected once, north of tiie territory of tiie paired birds.
EFFECTS OF THE ACTION
Effects of tiie action refer to tiie direct and indirect effects of an action on tfie species or critical
habitat together witii tfie effects of otfier activities that are intenelated and interdependent witfi
that action, that will be added to tiie environmental baseline. Interrelated actions are tiiose tiiat
are part of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification. Interdependent
actions are those that have no independent utility apart from the action under consideration.
Indirect effects are those tiiat are caused by tiie proposed action and are later in time, but arc still
reasonably certain to occur.
Direct effects
The proposed project will result in the loss of 91.2 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrab (80.8 acres
from Phase H , and 10.4 acres witiiin the BTD, 36.4 percent of the coastal sage scrab on-site),
29 5 acres of other habitat types (27.5 acres of chaparral, and 2.0 acres of non-native grassland)
tiiat may be used by gnatcatchers, and 2.5 acres of potential vireo habitat (1.9 acres of riparian
woodland, and 0.6 acre of riparian scrab). The gnatcatcher found during surveys conducted in
November 1999 to January 2000 beside El Camino Real, at tiie proposed intersection witfi
College Boulevard, is likely to have been already impacted by the portion of El Camino Real and
College Boulevard tiiat has already been completed for the Tenaces at Sunny Creek project The
gnatcatchers found in areas that will be cleared for development will be directiy impacted and
may be killed or injured. Because habitat clearing will occur in the non-breeding season, no
direct intenuption of reproduction is expected. Gnatcatchers found on the Phase H site are
mapped in areas that are not proposed for direct impact However, the extent of their use areas is
not reflected on tiie map included in the Biological Technical Report (Recon 2001), because tiie
map represents gnatcatcher tenitories as points, rather than polygons. The extent to which tiie
birds' use areas overiap the area proposed for impact is not known. Therefore an unknown
portion of these tenitories may also be directly impacted, and this impact may kill the
gnatcatchers or cause tiiem to relocate. Gnatcatchers displaced from tiie Calavera Hills impact
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 25
area by habitat destraction- and gnatcatchers already occupying areas to which displaced
gnatcatchers may emigrate— may have depressed lifetime reproductive success due to disraptive
effects of overcrowding in response to habitat loss. Atwood et al. (1998a) observed elevated
populations of gnatcatchers in intact habitat adjacent to recently destroyed habitat. Their
observations suggest that some gnatcatchers relocated to adjacent habitat upon destraction of the
habitat they occupied. However, elevated gnatcatcher populations in habitat adjacent to impacted
habitats persisted for only one breeding season, after which populations in refugia declined.
Hagan et al. (1996) hypothesized tiiat such influxes of immigrants resulting from adjacent habitat
loss may increase territorial interactions such that reproductive success is temporarily reduced.
Because gnatcatchers have a lifetime breeding expectancy of only one to two years (Atwood et
al. 1998b, Bontrager unpubl. data), such effects could have important ramifications for dynamics
of local populations. Survival and reproductive success of displaced gnatcatchers would
probably be affected by the density of gnatcatchers in the intact habitat Density of gnatcatcher
occupation of potential habitat adjacent to Calavera Hills is unknown.
A portion of the proposed project lies within designated critical habitat for the gnatcatcher.
Direct impacts to gnatcatcher critical habitat total 84.6 acres, consisting of 65.4 acres of Diegan
coastal sage scrab and 19.2 acres of chapanal. Though sage scrab is the gnatcatcher's preferred
habitat and is a primary constituent element of critical habitat, chaparral is also considered to be a
constituent element of gnatcatcher critical habitat where it occurs near sage scrab and where
gnatcatchers may use it for dispersal and foraging, or if it could provide connectivity or linkage
between or within larger core areas, including open space and disturbed areas that may receive
only periodic use.
A number of ephemeral drainages which have been identified as "waters of the U.S." are located
within the open space areas of Calavera Hills Phase n. However, the upstream ends of several of
these 'Svaters" are located within area proposed for the development described above, and will be
impacted.
The project will result in the direct elimination of the territory of the pair of vireos at the
proposed intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. Reaction of vireos to destmction
of tiieir habitat is not well understood. Because habitat removal will be limited to the non-
breeding season, migratory vireos are unlikely to be present to be directiy killed. Upon retum to
breeding territories from their winter range, vireos may select new territories in nearby suitable
habitat Suitable vireo nesting habitat occurs approximately 1.5 miles from the site (at the inlet
of Lake Calavera) and 0.6 mile from the site (near the intersection of Cannon Road and El
Camino Real). Conversely, vireos may attempt to remain on a territory that they have established,
even after habitat destmction. The related white-eyed vireo (Vireo griseus) has been observed
remaining on-territory after habitat destraction, perching on remnantsticks and rnachinery,
exhibiting tenitorial behavior (Hopp, pers. comm.). This individual did not nest successfully in
the year following the loss of his territory, but persisted in occupying suboptimal habitat. Least
Bell's vireos may exhibit similar behavior.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 26
Indirect effects
Another significant effect of Calavera Hills development on gnatcatcher populations is habitat
fragmentation, which tends to disrapt various ecosystem processes within the remaining habitat.
Habitat fragmentation negatively affects abundance and distribution of songbirds, m part by
increasing incidence of nest predation and parasitism (Whitcomb et al. 1981, Small and Hunter
1988) and by decreasing probability of recolonization of vacant habitat after local extirpation
(Crooks et al in press). Recolonization of vacant habitat occurs through natal dispersal (i.e.,
gnatcatchers in tiieir first year, leaving their natal tenitory to establish tenitones elsewhere).
Thus gnatcatchers dispersing from areas north of Calavera Hills may recolomze vacant habitat
soutii' of Calavera Hills, or vice versa. The principle of interaction of local populations of
gnatcatchers through natal dispersal underiies the Service's rationale for our definition oftfie
action area in this biological opinion.
The impact of fragmentation on gnatcatchers should be analyzed with respect to otiier proposed
and existing preserves in Carlsbad. "Core Area 3 Preserve Planning Area" in tiie Draft Habitet
Management Plan for tfie City of Carlsbad, is intended to provide a relatively secure source
population of gnatcatchers. tiiat may disperse via links A, B. and C to Core Areas 2.4,5 and
beyond. To an unquantified extent, constiuction of tiie BTD and tfie residential stteets of
C^avera Hills, and increased auto traffic in the area associated witii tiie addition of 781 homes,
will increase the risk of ttaffic-related mortality of wildlife, including gnatcatchers, attempting to
move within Core Area 3 and Unks A and B.
Connectivity between habitat reserve areas is essential for long tenn maintenance oftiie viability
of tiie wide range of species in tfiis biological community, including the gnatcatcher. Movement
conidors between isolated patches of gnatcatcher habitat (i.e., tfie remaimng patches of
gnatcatcher habitat in coastal cities of San Diego County) serve to (1) allow exchange of genetic
material between separate populations, (2) allow recolonization of habitat patches from which
gnatcatchers have been extirpated, and (3) allow relatively safe ttavel for gnatcatchers moving
from one area to another (whetiier in natal dispersal or otiier movements). Nanowmg of
conidors intended for movement of gnatcatchers is thought to reduce tiie function and value of
those conidors. Nanow conidors are more difficult for a dispersing animal to find. Comdors
that are occupied by conspecifics may be difficult for dispersing gnatcatchers to ti-averse. due to
aggression from occupying gnatcatchers. A nanower conidor is easier for a temtonal bird to
defend against inttusion, and thus more difficult for a dispersing bird to traverse. Nanow
conidors have a higher edge/area ratio, making the habitat within the conidor more subject to
deleterious edge effects (i.e., human disturbance, noise, house cats, exotic plants, dumpin^etc.).
The proposed project site includes a conidor of native habitat identified as Link A in the HMP.
This conidor rans roughly north and south, connecting Core Areas 2.and 3, and in a larger
context connects aU of the gnatcatcher habitat within the City of Carlsbad south of this pomt
witii tiie "stepping stone" conidor of gnatcatcher habitat patches extending through Oceanside to
core populations of gnatcatchers on Camp Pendleton. The area west of Link A is developed, all
the way to the Pacific Ocean, approximately 3 miles (4.8 kilometers), offering no conidors of
native habitat for north-soutii movement of gnatcatchers. East of Unk A, no significant north-
south conidors of native vegetation remain between Unk A and the east side of Vista, about 5.5
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 27
miles (9 kilometers) east of Link A, nearly to Interstate 15. Thus, Link A is a regionally
significant corridor, the only significant north-south corridor of native vegetation at this latitude
within approximately 8 to 8.5 miles (12.8 - 14 kilometers) of the coast, connecting core
populations of gnatcatchers in the MHCP'core area (the area of unincorporated San Diego
County east of Carlsbad, north of Encinitas, and south of San Marcos) to core populations on
Camp Pendleton.
The proposed project would substantially nanow a portion of Unk A that is cunentiy about
1,350 feet wide to a width of about 450 feet. The degree to which this additional constriction
would reduce the function and value of the wildlife corridor for gnatcatcher movement is not
known. Unkages that support resident populations of animals are more likely to function
effectively as long-distance dispersal conduits for those species (Bennett 1990). Assuming that
an occupying gnatcatcher uses a rectangular home range twice as long as wide (Harrison 1992) .
a suitable long-distance corridor for gnatcatchers would need to be 110-300 meters (328-984
feet) wide, depending on local habitat quality: However, edge effects would necessitate wider
corridors. For example, if cowbird parasitism extends 200 meters (656 feet) into a conidori as it
does in Wisconsin forests (Brittingham and Temple 1983), then a linkage with successfully
breeding pairs of gnatcatchers would need to be 510-700 meters (1,673-2.296 feet) wide.
Movements of suburban house cats routinely extend over 250 meters (820 feet) into adjacent
wildlife habitat (Barratt 1997), and presence of house cats is expected to decrease probability of
gnatcatcher population persistence. It is expected that a narrower corridor would no longer
provide live-in gnatcatcher habitat just transitory habitat (Noss 1992).
The nanowing of existing corridors of native habitat, in conjunction with increased human
density and auto traffic, may be a significant impediments to movement of coyotes and bobcats.
Coyote and bobcat prey includes smaller animals that depredate gnatcatchers and their nests.
Absence of coyotes and bobcats may thus result in local extirpation of gnatcatchers (Crooks and
So\il6 1999). The presence of a full complement of resident species is important to the health
and viability of a naturally functioning ecosystem. Connectivity between proposed and existing
preserve units must be provided through wildlife crossings. The proposed wildlife undercrossing
beneath College Boulevard may offset to some extent the degradation in long-term viability of
the on-site preservation areas as gnatcatcher habitat, caused by the development of Calavera
Hills.
Several indirect impacts are associated with constraction and occupancy of Calavera Hills, and
have the potential to cause significant adverse affects to the vireos and gnatcatchers within the
action area. Some of these indirect effects are addressed in the proposed conservation measures.
These indirect impacts include night lighting. Except during emergencies, constraction will only
occur during daylight hours, eliminating the need for night lighting during road constraction.
Constraction is expected to increase noise in gnatcatcher habitat. Noise monitoring and
abatement measures will be in place, to minimize effects of constraction noise on gnatcatchers.
The project is expected to facilitate human access to sensitive habitat, but risk of human
disturbance will be reduced by clear demarcation of areas to be impacted and areas to be
preserved. Project personnel will be briefed on the sensitive natural resources in the area and the
measures they must take to conserve them. Human activity in the project area may result in
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 28
accumulation of trash and food, atttacting predators that may prey on gnatcatchers. Efforts will
be made to keep the constraction site free of trash or food that may attract predators. The
Calavera Hills development and BTD may also result in increased potential for vehicle-related
mortality to gnatcatchers, changes in fire frequency (e.g., suppression/fuel modification), and
invasion of the area by exotic flora and fauna.
Impacts to gnatcatchers affected by project development may affect gnatcatchers well outside of
the immediate vicinity of the project through competition with displaced birds, reduced mate
availability, and reduced genetic diversity. The distance from the project at which gnatcatchers
outside the project footprint may be affected by effects to gnatcatchers within or near tiie project
footprint depends on the dispersal distance (primarily natal dispersal) of gnatcatchers. Mock and
Bolger (1992) observed gnatcatcher natal dispersal distances in westem San Diego County of up
to 9 kilometers; however, their data suggests tiiat over 90 percent of gnatcatchers disperse witiiin
5.5 kilometers of their natal territory. This is probably a conservative estimate of gnatcatcher
dispersal capability, because dispersing gnatcatchers are more likely to escape detection fartiier
from the natal tenitory. Conversely, birds tiiat disperse shorter distances are more likely to be
observed, resulting in a bias toward observed dispersal distances that are shorter than average.
For purposes of defining tfie action area, the Service estimates tfiat impacts to gnatcatchers in the
area of impact of Calavera HiUs may affect mate availabiUty, territory availability, and exchange
of genetic material witii gnatcatchers up to 5.5 kilometers from the edge of the impact area.
The preservation of 87.3 acres of existing coastal sage scrab and revegetation of 2.4 acres witfi
coastal sage scrab on-site, the preservation of 35.6 acres of coastal sage scrab in the adjacent
Calavera Nature Preserve, and the off-site preservation of 51.3 acres of coastal sage scmb habitat
is expected to increase likelihood of gnatcatcher population persistence by precluding up to 176.6
acres of potential future habitat loss. Active management (i.e., conttol of off-road vehicles,
exotic vegetation removal, ti^h removal, access conttol, fire management, etc.) of these
preserved areas is expected to reduce indirect impacts exaceri)ated by sunounding development,
and to improve gnatcatcher habitat quality within these areas, which are already subject to
deleterious indirect effects. The 125.3 acres of on-site and adjacent areas to be preserved and
actively managed to conserve and improve their function and value as gnatcatcher habitat all lie
within critical habitat for the gnatcatcher.
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
Cumulative effects are those impacts of future non-Federal (State, local govemment, or private)
activities on endangered or threatened species or critical habitat tiiat are reasonably certain to
occur during the course of the Federal activity subject to consultation. Future Federal actions are
subject to the consultation fequirements established in section 7 of tiie Act, and, therefore, are not
considered cumulative in the proposed project.
We anticipate that a wide range of activities will be determined to affect tiie gnatcatcher. Such
activities include, but are not limited to urijan development, flood contixil, highway, and utility
projects; as well as conversion or degradation of habitat resulting from agricultural and grazing
use. The future MHCP Subarea Plan for tfie City is subject to consultation under section 7 of the
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 29
Act. Therefore any projects potentially affecting the gnatcatcher and vireo would thus have a
federal nexus and be subject to section 7 of the Act, and cumulative effects of such projects
would not be considered under this consultation. Should this process not result in the Service's
issuance of a 10(a)(1)(b) permit future land development projects in the City would continue to
be regulated in accordance with NCCP guidelines and the 4(d) special mle, or through an
incidental take pennit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(b) of tiie Act (which, as it is permitted by a
federal agency, is subject to consultation under section 7 of the Act and is not considered a
cumulative effect). Future projects that impact wetlands would require permits from the Army
Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, tiierefore these would
constitute federal actions that would not be considered as contributing to cumulative effects.
Unauthorized grading and filling of habitat would continue to affect the long-term viability of
these species in a regional context In recent years, there have been several incidents of illegal
grading of habitat within the City of Carlsbad and adjacent lands within adjacent cities and
unincorporated areas of the County of San Diego. Illegal grading is expected to continue to
occur, affecting the multiple species planning efforts in the area.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing the current status of the gnatcatcher. its critical habitat and the vireo, the
environmental baseline for the action area, the effects of the proposed Calavera Hills
development, BTD, and the detention basins, and the cumulative effects, it is the Service's
biological opinion that the project, as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of tfie gnatcatcher or the vireo, and is not likely to desttoy or adversely modify
designated critical habitat for the gnatcatcher.
The Service reached this conclusion for the following reasons:
1. Impacts to the gnatcatcher through the direct loss of approximately 91.2 acres of
coastal sage scrab (some of which is occupied by gnatcatchers) will be adequately
offset through implementation of the conservation measures, as described in the
project description:
a. the on-site preservation and management of approximately 87.3 acres of
coastal sage scrab
b. the preservation and management of approximately 35.6 acres of coastal sage
scrab on the adjacent Calavera Nature Preserve
c. the preservation and management of 51.3 acres of coastal sage scmb off-site
These measures are intended to maintain a population of gnatcatchers and other sage
scrab dependent species through the preservation and management of moderate-sized
blocks of sage scrab that will be conserved and managed in perpetuity.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 30
2. The number of gnatcatchers expected to be affected by the project is not expected to
have a significant effect on the species' overall numbers, distribution, or reproductive
potential. This number is a small proportion of the total and regional populations.
* »
3. Impacts to the vireo through the direct loss of 2.72 acres of riparian habitat will be
adequately offset through implementation of the conservation measures, as described
in the project description:
a. the on-site creation and management of 10.7 acres of southem willow scrab
on Calavera and Littie Encinas Creeks, as described in the Habitat Restoration
and Monitoring Plan for the City of Carlsbad Bridge and Thoroughfare
Disttict No. 4, tiie Calavera Hills Project, and the Detention Basins Project in
Carlsbad, Califomia (Recon, January 10,2002).
4. The number of vireos expected to be affected by the project is not expected to have a
significant effect on the species' overall numbers, distiibution, or reproductive
potential. This number is a small proportion of tiie total and regional populations.
5. The anticipated level of impact will not preclude the design and implementation of a
habitat preserve system in tiie City of Carlsbad, and will provide for corridors linking
HMP core areas 2 and 3, thus linking Carlsbad's preserve system to tiiat of
Oceanside.
INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT
Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulation pursuant to section 4(d) of tiie Act prohibit tiie take
of endangered and tiireatened species, respectively, without special exemption. Take is defined
as to harass, hami, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, tt-ap, capture, collect or to attempt to engage
in any such conduct Harai is further defined by the Service to include significant habitat
modification or degradation tiiat results in death or injury to listed species by significantiy
impairing essential behavior pattems, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Harass is
defined by tfie Service as intentional or negligent actions that create the likelihood of injury to
listed species to such an extent as to significantiy disrapt nonnal behavior pattems which
include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Incidental take is defined as take
that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the canying out of an otiierwise lawful activity.
Under tiie temis of section 7(b)(4) and 7(o)(2), taking that is incidental to and not intended as
part of the agency action is not considered to be prohibited taking underthe Act provided that
such taking is in compliance witii the terms and conditions of this Incidental Take Statement.
The measures described below are non-discretionary, and must be undertaken by the Corps so
tiiat they become binding conditions of any grant or pennit issued to the applicant, as
appropriate, for the exemption in section 7(o)(2) to apply. The exemption in section 7(o)(2) for
incidental take is only granted to the applicant once thc Corps issues a final permit for tiie
project, pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Corps has a continuing duty to
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 31
regulate the activity that is covered by this incidental take statement. If the Corps (1) fails to
assume and implement the terms and conditions or (2) fails to require the applicant to adhere to
the terms and conditions of this incidental take statement through enforceable terms that are
added to the permit or grant document, the protective coverage of section 7(o)(2) may lapse. In
order to monitor the impact of incidental take, the Corps or the applicant must report the progress
of the action and its impact on the species to the Service as specified in the incidental take
statement. [50 CFR §402.14(i)(3)]
AMOUNT OR EXTENT OF TAKE
The Service anticipates three pair of gnatcatchers could be taken as a result of this proposed
action. The take may be in the form of harm and harassment as a result of the permanent
removal of 91.2 acres of coastal sage scrab and 27.5 acres of chapanal, and disturbances to the
remaining 87.3 acres of coastal sage scrab and 63.9 acres of chaparral due to adjacent project
constraction and subsequent occupation of the homes.
The Service anticipates one pair of vireos could be taken as a result of this proposed action. The
take may be in the form of harm and harassment during project constraction or operation
activities, as a result of the removal of 2.72 acres of riparian scrab and riparian woodland, which
is used by the on-site pair of vireos.
The Rsh and Wildlife Service will not refer the incidental take of any migratory bird or bald
eagle for prosecution under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§
668-668d). if such take is in compliance with the terms and conditions (including amount and/or
number) specified herein.
REASONABLE AND PRUDENT MEASURES
The Service believes the following reasonable and pradent measures are necessary and
appropriate to minimize take of gnatcatchers and vireos:
1. Take of gnatcatchers and vireos. through harm or harassment, shall be minimized to
the extent possible by implementation of best management practices.
2. Unavoidable project impacts shall be offset by the implementation of the
Conservation Measures as described in the project description.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
In order to be exempt from the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act, the Corps and the project
proponent must comply with the following terms and conditions, which implement the
reasonable and pmdent measures described above and outiine required reporting/monitoring
requirements. These terms and conditions are non-discretionary.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 32
1 The Corps and the project proponent shall implement reasonable and pmdent measure
1 through the following terms and conditions:
a. The Service hereby incorporates by reference the Conservation Measures 4-13
identified in the "Project Description" of this biological opinion into this
Incidental Take Statement as terms and conditions.
b. No clearing or grabbing activity in coastal sage scrab or southem mixed
chapanal shall occur between Febraary 15 to August 31 to avoid impacts to
nesting gnatcatchers. A deviation from this schedule to initiate work in
August prior to August 31.2002, would require coordination with, and
approval by, the Service after the applicant has demonstrated tiiat all
gnatcatchers have completed nesting and all young have fledged and
dispersed.
c. If constinction will occur witiiin 500 feet of occupied gnatcatcher habitat
(considered by tiie Service to be all coastal sage scrab and chaparral on-site)
between Febraary 15 and August 31, pre-consttuction surveys shall be
conducted in tiie adjacent habitat to determine tiie location of tiie nesting
birds. During consttuction, no activity will occur witiiin 500 feet of active
nests of the gnatcatcher, unless measures are implemented to minimize tiie
noise and disturijance to those adjacent birds. These measures shall include
sound walls that ensure tiiat the hourly L,, sound levels reaching gnatcatcher
habitat areas do not exceed tfie 60 dBA L^ tfireshold.
d. Treatment of ranoff from tiie project site, refened to in Conservation Measure
5 shall be approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as
addressed in Tentative Order No. R9-2002-^14: Waste Discharge
Requirements and Section 401 Water Quality Certification for Calavera Hills
n, LLC and City of Carlsbad Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase H and Bridge
and Thoroughfare Disttict No. 4 and Detention Basins, San Diego County.
2. The Corps and the project proponent shall implement reasonable and pradent measure
2 through the following terms and conditions:
a. The Service hereby incorporates by reference the Conservation Measures 1-3
identified in the "Project Description" of this biological opinion into tiiis
Incidental Take Statement as terms and conditions.
The project proponent shall ensure that long-tenn management of the on-site
preserved habitat areas will occur through the establishment of an endowment
account. The amount oftiie endowment will be determined in consultation
with tfie Service, after preparation of a Property Analysis Record (PAR) to
detemiine management costs and amount of endowment necessary to supply
sufficient management funds. Within three montiis of the acquisition of off-
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 33
site preservation parcels, a draft management plan shall be developed in
coordination with the Service. The plan shall be finalized and implemented
within six months. A conservation organization mutually acceptable to the
Service and the Corps shall manage the preserved habitat areas in accordance
with the management plan. If the off-site preservation parcel or parcels
acquired are part of an established conservation bank with a Service-approved
management plan implemented, the requirement for establishment of a
separate management endowment and plan may be waived.
c. A report summarizing how the project is in compliance with the reasonable
and pradent measures and the terms and conditions of this biological opinion
shall be submitted to the Service monthly during the grading phase of
constmction, and annually for the duration of constraction of the project, to
demonstrate that the conservation measures and Terms and Conditions have
been achieved.
The Service's Carlsbad Office is to be notified within three working days should any endangered
or threatened species be found dead or injured during this project Notification must include the
date, time, and location of the carcass, and any other pertinent information. Dead animals may
be marked in an appropriate manner, photographed, and left on-site. Injured animals should be
transported to a qualified veterinarian. Should any treated animals survive, the Service should be
contacted regarding the final disposition of the animals. The Service contact person is John
Martin and may be contacted at the letterhead address or at (760) 431-9440.
The Service retains the right to access and inspect the project site for compliance with the
proposed project description and with the terms and conditions of this biological opinion. Any
habitat desttoyed that is not in the identified project footprint should be disclosed immediately to
the Service for possible reinitiation of consultation. Compensation for such habitat loss will be
requested at a minimum ratio of 5:1.
The Service believes that no more than two pair of gnatcatchers and one pair of vireos will be
incidentally taken as a result of the proposed action. The reasonable and pradent measures, with
their implementing terms and conditions, are designed to minimize the impact of incidental take
that might otherwise result from the proposed action. If, during the course of the action, this
level of incidental take is exceeded, such incidental take represents new information requiring
reinitiation of consultation and review of the reasonable and pradent measures provided. The
Federal agency must immediately provide an explanation of the causes of the taking and review
with the Service the need for possible modification of the reasonable and pradent measures.
CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Section 7(a)(1) of the Act directs Federal agencies to utilize their authorities to further the
purposes of the Act by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of endangered and
threatened species. Conservation recommendations are discretionary agency activities to
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 34
minimize or avoid adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or critical habitat, to
help implement recovery plans or to develop information.
1. The Service recommends tiiat -riparian habitat creation/restoration described in
conservation measure number 1 be completed prior to project-related loss of willow
scmb, to avoid temporal loss of riparian habitat.
In order for the Service to be kept informed of actions minimizing or avoiding adverse effects or
benefitting listed species or their habitats, the Service requests notification of tiie implementation
of any conservation recommendations.
REINITIATION NOTICE
This concludes formal consultation on tiie development of Calavera Hills Phase n, the BTD, and
Detention Basins, as outiined in the request for initiation. As provided in 50 CFR §402.16.
reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary Federal agency involvement or
conttol over tiie action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if (1) tiie amount or extent
of incidental take is exceeded; (2) new infonnation reveals effects of tiie agency action that may
affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in this opinion;
(3) the agency action is subsequentiy modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed
species or critical habitat not considered in this opinion; or (4) a new species is Usted or critical
habitat designated that may be affected by tiie action. In instances where the amount or extent of
incidental take is exceeded, any operations causing such take must cease pending reinitiation. If
you have any questions or concems about tiiis biological opinion, please contact John Martin of
my staff at (760) 431-9440.
Sincerely,
Nancy Gilbert
Assistant Field Supervisor
Colonel Richard G.Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 35
LITERATURE CITED
American Ornithologists' Union. 1998. Checklist of North American Birds, Seventh Edition.
American Omithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. 829 pages.
Atwood, J. L. 1980. The United States distribution of the Califomia black-tailed gnatcatcher.
Westem Birds 11: 65-78.
. 1988. Speciation and geographic variation in black-tailed gnatcatchers.
Ornithological Monographs No. 42.
. 1990. Status review of the Califomia gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica). Manomet
Bird Observatory, Manomet Mass.
. 1991. Subspecies Umits and geographic pattems of morphological variation in
Califomia gnatcatchers (Polioptila califomica). BuUetin Southem Califomia
Academy of Sciences 90:118-133.
Atwood, J. L.. and J. S. Bolsinger. 1992. Elevational distribution of Califomia gnatcatchers in
tfie United States. J. Field Omithology 63: 159-168.
Bailey, E . A. And P. J. Mock. 1998. Dispersal Capability of the Califomia gnatcatcher A
landscape analysis of distribution data. Westem Birds 29: 351-360.
Barbour, M. J., and J. Major, eds. 1977. Terrestrial Vegetation of Califomia (2nd ed.). John
Wiley and Sons. New York.
Barlow. J. 1962. Natural History of the Bell Vireo, Vireo bellii Audubon. Univ. of Kansas
Publ. Mus. of Nat Hist 12 (5): 241-296.
Barratt, D. G. 1997. Home range size, habitat utilisation and movement pattems of suburban
and farm cats Felis catus. Ecography 20:271-280.
Bennett, A. F. 1990. Habitat Corridors: Their role in Wildlife Management and Conservation.
Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Conservation and
Environment, Melboume, Australia.
Braden, G. T, R. L. McKeman, and S. M. Powell. 1997. Effects of nest parasitism by tiie
brown-headed cowbird on nesting success of the California gnatcatcher.
Condor 99: 858-865.
Brittingham, M. C, and S. A. Temple. 1983. Have cowbirds caused forest songbirds to decline?
Bioscience 33:31-35.
Brown, B.T. 1993. Bell's Vireo. In The Birds of North America, No. 34 (A. Poole, P.Stettenheim,
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 36
and F. Gill, Eds) Philadelphia: The Academy of Natural Sciences; Washington D.C:
The American Ornithologists' Union.
Burger, J. C, M. A. Patten, J. T. Rotenbei^, and R. A. Redak. 1999. Foraging ecology of the
Califomia gnatcatcher deduced from fecal samples. Oecologia (Beriin) 120: 304-310.
Campbell, K., R. Erickson, W. Haas and M. Patten. 1998. Califomia Gnatcatcher Use of
Habitats other than Coastal Sage Scrab: Conservation and Management hnplicattons.
Westem Birds 29:421-433.
City of Carlsbad. 1999. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in tfie City of
Carlsbad. Carlsbad, California. 225 pp.
Collins C T L.R. Hays, M. Wheeler, and D. Willick. 1992. The Stams and Management of tfie
'Least'Bell's Vireo within tfie Prado Basin, Califomia, 1986-1990. Final Report to Orange
County Water Disttict Founttdn Valley, CA.
Crooks, K. R., and M. E. Sould. 1999. Mesopredator release and avifaunal extinctions in a
fragmented system. Nature 400:563-566.
Dahl. T.E. 1990. Wetiands losses in the United States 1780's to 1980's. U.S. Department of the
Interior, Fish and WildUfe Service, Washington, D.C. 13pp.
Dudek and Associates. 2000. Comprehensive species Ust hi: Understanding tiie plants and
animals of tiie westem Riverside County MSHCP.
[http://ecoregion.ucr.edu/mshcp/index.htmll.
Famolaro, P. And J. Newman. 1998. Occunence and management considerations of Califomia
gnatcatchers along San Diego County highways. Westem Birds 29:447^52.
Franzreb, K.E. 1989. Ecology and Conservation of tiie Endangered Least BeU"s Vireo.
Biological Report 89(1), U.S. Dept. of the Interior, USFWS, Sacramento, CA.
Gaines, D. 1977. Birds of tiie Yosemite Sierra. Califomia Syllabus, Oakland. 153 pp.
Galvin, J. P. 1998. Breeding and dispersal biology of the Califomia gnatcatcher in Centtal
Orange County. Westem Birds 29: 323-332.
GanettK. andJ. Dunn. 1981. Birds of southem CaUfomia: status.and distribiition. Los
Angeles Audubon Society; 408pp.
Goldwasser S 1978. Distiibution, reproductive success, and impact of nest parasitism by
Brown-headed Cowbirds on least Bell's vireos. State of Califomia, the Resources
Agency; Califomia Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Fed. Aid Wildl. Rest
W-54-R-10; Nongame Wildl. Prog. Job W 1.5.1; Final (unpublished) Report.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 37
,, D. Gaines, and S. Wilbur. 1980. The least Bell's vireo in Califomia: a de facto
endangered race. American Birds 34: 742-745.
*»
., and J. Greaves. 1984. The Riparian Forest as Habitat for the Least Bell's Vireo. Pp.
In R. Wamer and K. Hendrix, eds. Califomia Riparian Systems: Ecology, Conservation,
and Productive Management. University of CaUfomia Press, Davis CA.
Greaves, J. 1987. Least Bell's vireos at the Gibraltar Reservoir in Santa Barbara County,
CaUfomia in 1987. Unpublished report prepared for the Office of Endangered Species,
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S. Forest Service, and the Califomia Department of
Fish and Game.
Greaves. J. 1989. USDA Forest Service Technical Report PS W-l 10. Pp 293-298.
Greaves. J. and M.V, Gray. 1991. The least Bell's vireo population in the Gibraltar Reservoir
area during 1991. Prepared for the City of Santa Barbara, CA and Los Padres National
Forest, Goleta. CA.
Grinnell. J. and A. Miller. 1944. The distribution of the birds of Califomia. Pacific Coast
Avifauna Number 27: 1-608.
Grishaver, M. A. P. J. Mock, and K. L. Preston. 1998. Breeding behavior of the Califomia
gnatcatcher in southwestem San Diego County. Califomia. Westem Birds 29: 299-322.
Hamilton. T. 1962. Species relationships and adaptations for sympatry in the avian genus Vireo.
Condor 64:40-68.
Harrison, R. L. 1992. Toward a theory of inter-refuge corridor design. Conservation Biology
6:293-295.
Hensley, M. 1950. Notes on the breeding behavior of the Bell's vireo. Auk 67:243-244.
Kirkpatrick, J., and C. Hutchinson. 1977. The community composition of Califomia coastal
sage scrab. Vegetatio 35:21-33.
Kus, B. E. 1998. Use of restored riparian habitat by the endangered least Bell's vireo (Vireo
bellii pusillus). Restoration Ecology 6: 75-82.
Kus, B. E.. and K. Minor. 1987. Foraging behaviour of the least Bell's vireo: use of riparian and
non-riparian habitats. Unpublished report, San Diego State University.
Mock, P.J., B. L. Jones, and J. Konecny. 1990. Califomia Gnatcatcher Survey Guidelines. ERC
Environmental and Energy Services Co.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 38
Mock P J and D. Bolger. 1992. Ecology of the Califomia Gnatcatcher at Rancho San Diego.
' Technical appendix to the Rancho San Diego Habitat Conservatton Plan. Prepared by
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services for Home Capital Development Corporatton
(available from Wilson Omithological Society, Museum of Zoology, Univ. Mich., Ann
Arbor, Mich. 48109-1097).
Nolan, V. 1960. Breeding behavior of the Bell Vireo in southem Indiana. Condor 62:225-244.
Noss RF 1993 Connectivity as a component of conservation strategy for coastal sage scmb.
' /n P F Broussard, M. S. Gilpin, D. D. Murphy, R. F Noss, and J. F. O'leary (eds.).
Soutiiem Califomia Coastal Sage Scrab Natural Communities Conservatton Plan:
Scientific Review Panel Conservation Guidelines and Documentatton. California
Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento. Califomia.
Oberbauer T A 1990. Areas of vegetation communities in San Diego County. Unpubl. Rep.
County of San Diego, Department of Planning and Land Use, San Diego County,
Califomia.
O'Leary J 1990. Califomian coastal sage scrab: general characteristics and considerations for
biological conservation. Pages 24-41 in: Endangered Plant Communities of Southem
Califomia, A. Schoenhen (ed.). Soutiiem Califomia Botanists Special Publication
Number 3.
Patten, M. A. And K.FCampbeU. 1998. Has brood parasitism selected for earlier nesting in
' the Califomia gnatcatcher? Westem Birds 29:290-298.
Pike J and L Hays 1992. The status and management of tiie least Bell's vireo within the
' 'prado Basin, Califomia, 1986-1991. Unpublished report, Califomia State University,
Long Beach Foundation and U.S. Fish and WildUfe Service, Laguna Niguel, Cahfomia.
Pike J L Hays, and R. Zembal. 2001. The least BeU's vireos and southwestem willow
' "flycatchers in Prado Basin of the Santa Ana River watershed, Califomia. Orange County
Water District Fountain Valley, Califomia, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad,
Califomia. 21 pp.
Pitelka, F andE. Koestner. 1942. Breeding behavior of the BeU's Vireo in Illinois. Wilson
Bulletin 54:97-106.
Preston, K. L., P. J. Mock, M. A. Grishaver, E. A. Bailey, and D. F. King. 1998. Califomia
gnatcatcher tenitorial behavior. Westem Birds 29: 242-257.
Recon 2001 Revised Biological Technical Report for the Calavera Hills Master Plan, Phase E,
Bridge and Thoroughfare District, and Detention Basins, Carisbad, California. Recon
No. 3225B, San Diego, Califomia
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 39
Salata, L. R. 1983a. Status of the least Bell's vireo on Camp Pendleton, Califomia. Report on
research done in 1982. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Contract Report No. 11100-0145-
82, Laguna Niguel, Califomia. 73pp.
• J
. 1983b. Status of the least Bell's vireo on Camp Pendleton, Califomia. Report on
research done in 1983. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Contract Report No. 10181-
9373, Laguna Niguel, Califomia. 73pp.
SANDAG. 2001. Multiple Habitat Conservation Program. Public Review Draft
Scott, T. A 1993. Initial effects of housing constraction on woodland birds along the wildland
urban interface. In Interface between Ecology and Land Development in Califomia.
Edited by J. E. Keeley. Soutiiem Califomia Academy of Sciences, Los Angeles.
Small, A. 1994. Califomia Birds: Their Status and Disttibution. Ibis Publishing Company: Vista,
CA. 342 pp.
Small, M.F.. and M.L. Hunter. 1988. Forest fragmentation and avian nest predation in forested
landscapes. Oecologia 76:62-64.
Smith, F. 1977. A short review of the status of riparian forests in California. Pages 1-2 in A.
Sands, ed. Riparian forests in Califomia: their ecology and conservation. Inst. Ecol. Publ.
15.
Sockman, K.W. 1997. Variation in life-history traits and nest-site selection affects risk of nest
predation in the Califomia gnatcatcher. Auk 114: 324-332.
Sockman, K.W. 1998. Nest attendance by male Califomia gnatcatchers. J. Field Omitiiology
69:95-102.
Soule, M. E. 1991. Land use planning and wildlife maintenance: guidelines for conserving
wildlife in an urban landscape. Joumal of the American Planning Association 57:313-
323.
Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society Encyclopedia of North American Birds. Alfred A.
Knopf, New York, New York. 1109pp.
Unitt P. 1984. The birds of San Diego County. San Diego Society of Natural History: Memoir
13, San Diego, Califomia. 276pp
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants;
determination of endangered status for the least Bell's vireo. Final Rule. Federal Register
51: 16474-16482.
Colonel Richard G. Thompson (FWS-SDG-1597.5) 40
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Biological Opinion 1-6-93-FW-37R1 on the Effects of
Implementing the 4(d) Special Rule for the Coastal Califomia Gnatcatcher. October 18.
Carisbad Fish and Wildlife Field Office, Carisbad, Califomia.
. • • i
' I
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Draft Recovery Plan for the Least Bell's Vireo. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 139 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2000. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Final
determination of critical habitat for the coastal Califomia gnatcatcher; Final Rule.
Federal Register 65: 63680-63743.
Weaver, K. L. 1998. Coastal sage scrab variations of San Diego County and their influence on
the distribution oftiie Califomia gnatcatcher. Westem Birds 29: 392-405.
Westinan, W. 1981a. Diversity relations and succession in Califomia coastal sage scmb.
Ecology 62:170-184.
1981b. Factors influencing tiie distribution of species of Califomia coastal sage
scrab. Ecology 62:439-455.
Yahner, R.H., and C.A. Delong. 1992. Avian predation and parasitism on artificial nests and
eggs in two fragmented landscapes. Wilson Bulletin 104:162-168.
Zeiner, D. C, W., F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K. E. Mayer, M. White. Editors. 1990. Califomia's
Wildlife. Volume 2. Birds. State of Califomia, Departtnent of Fish and Game.
Sacramento, Califomia. 731 pp.
Zembal. R. 1984. Santa Margarita River Project San Diego County, CaUfomia. Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act Report, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Laguna
Niguel, Califomia. 91pp. plus appendices (267 pp.)
K. Kramer, and R. Bransfield. 1985. Survey of Vegetation and Vertebrate Fauna in
the'prado Basin and the Santa Ana River Canyon, Califomia. Unpublished report, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Laguna Niguel, Califomia.
Zink, R. M., and R. C. Blackwell. 1998. Molecular systematics and biogeography of arid land
gnatcatchers (Genus Polioptila) and evidence supporting species status of the Califomia
gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 26-32.
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF:
Office of ttie Chief
Regnlatory Branch
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
SAN DIEGO FIELD OFFICE
16885 WEST BERNARDO DRIVE, SUITE SOOA
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92127
May 15,2002
Calavera HiUs H, LLC and
Mr. Brian MilUdh
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, CA 91950
City of Carlsbad
Mr. David Hauser
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Messrs. Milich and Hauser:
Endosed you wiU find a signed copy of your Department of the Army Pennit (File # 2001-
00215-RLK). Please retain this copy for your files.
Thank you for participating in our regulatory program. If you have any questions, please
contact Mr. RusseU L. Kaiser at (213) 452-3293.
Sincerely,
Mark F. Sudol, D.Env.
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosures
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
Permittee: Calavera HiUs U, LLC and
Mr. Brian MilUch
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, CA 91950
200100215-RLK
Los Angeles District
CityofCarlsbad
Mr. David Hauser
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, C A 92008
Permit Number:
Issuing Office:
Note: The term "you" and its derivatives, as used in this permit, means the permittee or any
future b-ansferee. The term "this office" refers to tiie appropriate distiict or division office of the
Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction over tiie pennitted activity or fhe appropriate official
acting tmder the authority of the commanding officer.
You are authorized to perform work in accordance with the terms and conditions specified below.
Project Location: The proposed project is located in the northeast quadrant of the City of
Carlsbad in San Diego Coimty, Califomia.
Project Description: The project consists of tinree major components: (1) Constmction of up to
781 residential vmits as weU as associated infrastmcture, commvmity faciUties and natiural open
space within the Calavera HiUs Master Planned Commtmity; (2) Constinction of fhe extension
of CoUege Boulevard from its existing northem terminus within the Calavera Hills Community
to its existing southem terminus just northerly of El Camino Real, as weU as the extension of
Cannon Road from its existing westem tenninus at El Camino Real to its proposed intersection
with CoUege Boulevard; and (3) Constmction and operation of two flood control basins (Basins
BJB and BJ) with a storage capacity of 49 acre-feet and 48 acre-feet, respectively. The berms
necessary for tiie flood contirol basins are integrated into tiie culverted roadway crossings
(Figure 1).
Project Authorization: You are autiiorized to discharge fiU in 0.70 acre of waters of tiie United
States (U.S.), induding Calavera Creek, Aqua Hedionda Creek, Littie Encinas Creek, and otiier
cormected tmnamed tributary waters and/or wetiands to constinct tiie project described above.
Of tiie total impacts on waters of tiie U.S., 0.64 acre would be permanent and 0.06 acre would be
temporary. Of tiie permanent impacts, 0.28 acre would occur on wetiand waters and 0.36
would occvur on non-wetiand waters of tiie U.S. AU temporary unpacts would occur on non-
wetiand waters of ttie U.S. The foUowing table sets fortii tiie specific activities and impacts
associated witii the proposed activity and Figure 4 identiuEies tiie waters of the U.S. and the
impact areas.
T 'RniF.rT TMPACTS ON WATFRS OF THF. U.S.
Project
Comoonent
Ripa
Wood
rian
land
Freshwater Marsh Cismor
AlkaUlV
Ltane
larsh
TOT
Wetland Waters
TOTAL
Non-Wetland Wateis
Perm Temp Perm Temp Perm Temp Perm Temp Perm Temp
Calavera Hills
Phase n
0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0
Cannon Rd. 0.08 0.08 0.0 0.0
Pnllpcrp Rearh A 0.04 0.05 0.09 0.0.3 0.06
Pnllpvp Reach R 0.0 0.0
TnUpcrp Reach C. 0.0 0.0
College / Cannon
Intersect.
0.01 0.01 0.13 0.0
Detention
Basinn
0.0 0.0
TOTAL 0.05 0.0 0.05 0.0 0.18 0.0 0.28 0 0.36 0.06
Permit Conditions.
General Conditions:
1. The time limit for completing the authorized activity ends on July 1,2004. If you find that
you need more time to complete tiie authorized activity, submit your request for a time extension
to this office for consideration at least one month before the above date is reached.
2. You must maintain the activity authorized by this permit in good condition and in
conformance with the terms and conditions of this permit You are not reUeved of this
requirement if you abandon tiie permitted activity, although you may make a good faitii tiransfer
to a third party in compHance with General Condition 4 below. Should you wish to cease to
maintain the authorized activity or shoiild you desire to abandon it without a good faith tiransfer,
you must obtain a modification from this permit from this office, which may require restoration of
the area.
3. If you discover any previously unknovm historic or archeological remains while
accompUshing the activity authorized by tiiis permit, you must immediately notify tiiis office of
what you have found. We wiU initiate the Federal and state coordination required to detennine if
tiie remains wanant a recovery effort or if tiie site is eUgible for listing in tiie National Register of
Historic Places.
4. If you seU the property associated with tiiis permit, you must obtain the signature of the
new owner in the space provided and forward a copy of the pennit to this office to vaUdate the
transfer of this authorization.
5. If a conditioned water quaUty certification has been issued for your project, you must
comply with the conditions specified in the certification as spedal conditions to this permit
6. You must aUow representatives from tiiis office to inspect tiie authorized activity at any
time deemed necessary to ensure that it is being or has been accompUshed with fhe terms and
conditions of your permit.
Special Conditions:
1.1 Thirty days prior to the discharge of fiU in waters of tiie U.S., including wetiands, tiie
Permittee shaU submit for Corps approval a Pre-Construction Operations (CO) Plan. The Pre-CO
plan shaU include:
1.1.1 Proposed constmctibn timeUne and sequencing.
1.1.2 Pre-constinction sturveys defining project boundaries witii respect to avoidance of
Section 404 Resources (e.g., waters of tiie U.S., biological and cultural).
1.1.3 Site plan delineating boimdaries for staging, fueUng and storage areas. Storage areas
shaU include sites for spoU and bonow materials. Staging, fueUng and storage areas
shaU not be located witiiin 100 feet of waters of tiie U.S.
1.1.4 Measures to be taken to prevent an unpermitted discharge(s) of fiU into Waters of tiie
U.S. may include use of sUt nets, hay bales and otiier Best Management Practices
(outside of Waters of tiie U.S.), including use of emergency spUl kits.
1.1.5 Photographs documenting site conditions, induding work Umits and resource exclusion
areas. Photographs shaU show demarcated (staked/roped) constinction areas, and
exclusion areas, including waters of tiie U.S., cultiiral resources, and open space areas.
In addition, the Pennittee shaU:
1.1.5.1 Retain a Corps approved biologist to monitor and inspect aU on-site activities. The CO
Plan shaU identiify the biologist's name, address, phone number, email address and
experience/credentials. The biologist shaU review, oversee, monitor, and/or inspect:
1.1.5.1.1 Grading and site plans;
1.1.5.1.2 InstaUation of rope to demarcate constmction work and open space areas;
1.1.5.1.3 AU grading, excavation and ground (and non-ground) disturbance activities in (or
near) Waters of the U.S., and
1.1.5.1.4 CompUance of avoidance measures for open space areas.
1.1.5.1.5 Furthermore, the Corps approved biologist shaU:
1.1.5.1.5.1 Be empowered to halt constinction and contact Corps, Regulatory Project Manager
if he/she beUeves the terms and conditions of the autiiorization are being violated,
with non-compUance reported to tiie Corps witiiin one hour of detection; and
1.1.5.1.5.2 Implement and morutor the mitigation program.
115 2 Retain a Corps approved cultural resoiu-ce speciaUst to monitor and inspect aU on-site
activities, near CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDl-15069, CA-SDI-
5434, SA-SDI-5436, and Temp 5. The CO Plan shaU identify tiie cultiural resource
speciaUst's name, address, phone number, emaU address and experience/credentials.
The cultiural resource specialist shaU review, oversee, moiutor, and/or inspect:
115 21 AU activities, investigations, and reporting requirements for Section 106 CompUance
witii CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDI-15069, CA-SDI-5434,
SA-SDI-5436, and Temp 5 sites. No work shaU be performed witiiin a 100-foot
radius of CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDI-15069, CA-SDl-
5434, SA-SDI-5436, and Temp 5 except as aUowed in Section 2.4. hi addition, tiie
monitor shaU be onsite during aU ground disturbance activities.
1.1.5.2.2 Furthermore, tiie Corps approved cultural resovurce specialist shaU:
1.1.5.2.2.1 Be empowered to halt constinction and contact Corps, Regulatory Project Manager
if he/she beUeves the terms and conditions of tiie authorization are being violated,
witti non-compliance reported to ttie Corps within one hour of detection; and
1.1.5.2.2.2 Implement and monitor the mitigation program, if wananted.
1.2 The Corps may conduct onsite field investigations prior to and during constinction
activities to inspect for compUance with aU conditions listed herein.
2 MifigriHnn Hpquirpmpnt!;:
2.1 The Pennittee shaU comply witii tiie Biological Opinion (FWS-SDG-1597.4, dated March
14,2002; aU terms and conditions are non-discretionary, pp. 31-33).
2.2 The Permittee shaU post a Performance Bond (or bonds) for 120% of tiie anticipated
costs of the mitigation and morutoring assodated with tiie project.
2.2.1 The bonding company must appear on tiie Departinent of Treasury Cfrcular 570,
Companies Holding Certificates of Autiiority as Acceptable Sureties on Federal Bonds
and Acceptable Reinsuring Companies. For a current Ust of Treasury-authorized
companies, write or caU tiie Surety Bond Branch, Finandal Management Services,
Deparbnent of ttie Treasury, Washington D.C. 20227; (202) 874-6850.
2.2.2 The performance bond(s) shaU be conditioned such ttiat if tiie Permittee defaults on tiie
mitigation reqmrements stated in tiie special conditions herein, ttie bonding company
shaU assume aU responsibiUty for ttie mitigation requfrements of tiiis penrut.
2.2.3 Hie perfonnance bond(s) shaU be released only upon a detennination by tiie Corps tiiat
successful mitigation has been completed.
2.2.4 The Pennittee shaU submit a draft bond with an itemized costs Ust for the mitigation
components relating to the initial phase of work (Calavera HUls Phase II, CoUege
Reaches B and C, detention basin BJB and Cannon Reach 3) to the Corps for approval at
least five days prior to initiating waters/wetlands impact authorized by this permit. A
second bond with an itemized costs list for the mitigation components relating to the
second phase of work (CoUege Reach A and detention basin BJ) shaU be submitted at
least 60 days prior to commencing work on College Reach A or detention basin BJ.
2.2.5 The Permittee shaU submit tiie final bond for the amount approved by the Corps for the
initial phase of work within 30 days of iiutiating waters/wetiands impact authorized by
this permit. In the event mitigation costs exceed or otherwise deviate from the amount
of the perfonnance bond (120% of anticipated cost of mitigation and monitoring)
originaUy posted, the Permittee shaU revise the performance bond to reflect trae cost
(based on the final Corps-approved mitigation and morutoring plan). The Permittee
shaU submit the final bond for the amoimt approved by the Corps for the second phase
of work at least 15 days prior to commencing work on CoUege Reach A or detention
basin BJ.
2.3 The Permittee shaU abide by the terms and conditions of the Mitigation Guidelines &
Monitoring Requfrements outlined in the Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan for the City
of Carlsbad Bridge & Thoroughfare District No. 4, the Calavera Hills Project, and the Detention
Basins Project in Carlsbad, Califomia, dated April 3, 2002, as approved and revised by tiie
Corps, and hereafter refened to as the "Plan" as foUows:
2.3.1 The Permittee shaU finalize the Plan within 90 days of issuance of this permit The Final
Plan shaU incorporate Corps comments on the draft as weU as the final plans and
specifications for each of the different mitigation sites.
2.3.2 The Permittee shaU establish and maintain the open space conservation areas for project
riparian mitigation areas associated with each of ttie two phases of impacts. The
Permittee shaU record conservation easements, which shaU run with the land, obUgating
the Permittee or thefr successor or assigns to maintain aU mitigation (creation,
enhancement and preservation) area as natural open space in perpetuity. The Permittee
shaU receive written approval from the Corps for the easement language prior to it
being recorded. The Corps-approved conservation easement for the area underlying the
irutial phase of mitigation shaU be submitted to Corps-approved recipient of the
easement no later than 90 days from the date of issuance of the permit. The form of
conservation easement for the area underlying the second phase of mitigation shaU be
approved by the Corps at least 30 days prior to the commencement of work on CoUege
Boulevard Reach A and detention basin BJ. The Corps-approved conservation easement
for the area underlying the second phase of mitigation shaU be submitted to the Corps-
approved recipient of the easement prior to commencing work on CoUege Reach A or
detention basin BJ.
2.3.3 The Pennittee shaU create 10.7 acres of vegetated riparian habitat, as presented in the
Plan. Of this total, 8.1 acres wiU consist of riparian woodland, 1.7 acre wiU consist of
riparian scmb, 0.7 acre of cismontane alkaU marsh, and 0.2 acre of non-wetland waters,
as described in tiie Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan for the City of
Carlsbad Bridge «Sc Thoroughfare District No. 4, the Calavera Hills Project, and
the Detention Basins Project in Carlsbad, Califorrua, dated April 3,2002.
2.4 The Permittee shaU temporarily avoid work in areas near potentiaUy eUgible sites for listing
under ttie National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), including CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-
9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDI-15069, CA-SDI-5434, SA-SDI-5436, and Temp 5, untU tiie
Corps, in coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office, has completed the Section
106 process and a determination of findings is made. Until tiie process is complete, the
Permittee shaU:
2.4.1 Place Exclusionary Fencing, five days prior to initiation of constraction, around CA-
SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDI-15069, CA-SDI-5434, SA-SDI-5436,
and Temp 5. No work shaU be performed within a 100-foot radius of CA-SDI-9092, CA-
SDI-9093/9094, CA-SDI-9615, CA-SDI-15069, CA-SDI-5434, SA-SDI-5436, and Temp 5.
2.4.2 Perform aU further investigations, studies and mitigation, as dfrected by the Corps, to
determine if site(s) is\(are) eUgible for listing under the NRHP. The Permittee shaU
fund aU investigations requfred by the Corps. For reporting purposes, the Pennittee
shaU prepare a Draft Mitigation Plan, which shaU be submitted for Corps review and
approval. FoUowing completion of the investigations, a Final Report shaU be prepared
by the Permittee and submitted for Corps approval.
2.4.3 Request Corps release of the site(s), upon completion of the cultural resource
investigations. Again, no constmction work shaU be conducted within the exclusion
area until the Corps provides a letter indicating site compUance has been completed.
Once the findings of the evaluation have been determined, work efforts may be
permitted witii modifications and if only aU appropriate mitigation measures are
undertaken, per 36 CFR 800.11.
2.4.4 Not perform any activities which may affect historic properties listed, or eUgible for
listing, in the NRHP is authorized, until the District Engineer (DE) has complied with
the provisions of 33 CFR Part 325, Appendbc C. The Pennittee must notify the DE if the
authorized activity may affect any historic properties listed, determined to be eUgible
for listing, or which the Pennittee has reason to beUeve may be eUgible for listing on the
NRHP, and shaU not begin the activity imtU notified by the DE that the requfrements of
the National Historic Preservation Act have been satisfied and that the activity is
autiiorized.
2.4.5 Immediately suspend aU work in an area(s) where potential cultural resources are
discovered prior to or during constmction and cannot be avoided. Work wiU not
resume imtU the Corps re-authorizes project constmction, per 36 CFR 800.11.
3 pncf rnntinjrHnn:
3.1 The Permittee shaU submit a "Post-Constmction Operations Report" to the Corps
within 30 days from the date constmction is completed. The Post CO Report shaU include:
3.1.1 A summary of project compUance with tiie measures identified above (including
noncompUance and corrective actions taken to achieve compUance); and
3.1.2 As-buUt plans of tiie Calavera Hills, Phase H, project development witii a discussion of
any variances from the autiiorized Plan.
3.2 The Penrattee shaU be responsible for nutigating any additional impacts to waters of the
U.S. outside the auttiorized constmction footprints. Additional mitigation shaU be conducted
at a minimum ratio of 5:1. In the event tiiat additional mitigation is requfred, tiie type of
mitigation shaU be determined by the Corps and may indude enhancement restoration,
creation, or preservation.
3.3 The Permittee shall submit morutoring reports, per the Mitigation Guidelines and
Morutoring Requirements for the Plan (Condition No. 2.3 above) for mitigation efforts
to the Corps for a ininimum of five years and until such a time as the mitigation is
deemed successful by the Corps.
Further Information:
1. Congressional Authorities. You have been authorized to undertake the activity described
above pursuant to:
( ) Section 10 of ttie River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403).
(X) Section 404 of tiie Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
( ) Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33
U.S.C. 1413).
2. Limits of this authorization.
2.1 This permit does not obviate the need to obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations
requfred by law.
2.2 This permit does not grant any property rights or exdusive privUeges.
2.3 This permit does not autiiorize any injury to the property or rights of otiiers.
2.4 This permit does not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project.
3. Limits of Federal LiabUity. In issuuig this permit tiie Federal Govemment does not assume
any UabiUty for the foUowing:
3.1 Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of other permitted or
unpermitted activities or from natural causes.
3.2 Damages to the permitted project or uses thereof as a result of current or future activities
undertaken by or on behalf of tiie United States in the pubUc interest
3.3 Damages to persons, property, or to other permitted or impermitted activities or stmctures
caused by the activity autiiorized by this permit
3.4 Design or constmction deficiendes associated with the permitted work.
3.5 Damage daims associated with any future modification, suspension, or revocation of this
permit.
4. ReUance on AppUcant's Data. The detennination of this office that issuance of this permit is
not confrary to the pubUc interest was made in reUance on the information you provided.
5. Reevaluation of Permit Decision. This office may reevaluate its decision on this pennit at any
time the cfrcumstances warrant Cfrcumstances that could requfre a reevaluation include, but are
not limited to, the foUowing:
5.1 You fail to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit.
5.2 The information provided by you in support of your permit appUcation proves to have been
false, incomplete, or inaccurate (See 4 above).
5.3 Significant new information surfaces which this office did not consider in reaching the
original pubUc interest decision.
Such a reevaluation may result fri a determination that it is appropriate to use the suspension,
modification, and revocation procedures contained in 33 CFR 325.7 or enforcement procedures
such as those contained in 33 CFR 326.4 and 326.5. The referenced enforcement procedures
provide for the issuance of an adminisfrative order requiring you to comply with the terms and
conditions of your permit and for the initiation of legal action where appropriate. You wiH be
requfred to pay for any corrective measure ordered by this office, and if you faU to comply with
such dfrective, this office may in certain situations (such as ttiose specified in 33 CFR 209.170)
accomplish the conective measures by contrad or otherwise and bUl you for the cost
6. Extensions. General condition 1 estabUshes a time limit for the completion of the activity
authorized by this permit. Unless there are cfrcumstances requiring either a prompt completion
of the authorized activity or a reevaluation of the pubUc interest decision, the Corps wUl normaUy
give you favorable consideration to a request for an extension of this time Umit
Your signature below, as permittee, indicates that you accept and agree to comply with the terms
and conditions of this permit
PERMHTEE T-l^fC^W S(//f DATE
—<
PERMriTEE pji^tO Mv^^ DATE
This permit becomes effective when the Federal official, designated to act for the Secretary of tiie
Army, has signed below.
Mark F. Sudol, D.liAv.
Chief, Regulatory Branch
DATE
When fhe stractures or work authorized by this pemnit are stiU in existoice at the time tiie
property is fransferred, the terms and conditions of this pennit wUl continue to be binding on the
new owner(s) of the property. To vaUdate the transfer of tins permit and the associated liabiUties
assodated witii compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date
below.
mANSFEREE DATE
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
Permit Numben 2001-00215-RLK
Name of Permittee: Claavera HiUs n, LLC
Date of Issuance:
Upon completion of fhe activity authorized by ttiis permit sign fhis certification and retum
it to the foUowing address:
Regulatory Branch - Los Angeles Distrid Office
ATTN: CESPL-CO-R-2001-00215-RLK
P.O. Box 532711
Los Angeles, CaUfomia 90053-2325
Please note that your permitted activity is subjed to a compUance inspection by an Army
Corps of Engineers representative. If you faU to comply with this pennit you may be subject to
permit suspension, modification, or revocation.
I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above referenced permit has been
completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of said permit.
Signature of Permittee Date
Signature of Penxuttee Date
10
! fllAMS
PROPOSED PROJECT
STATE OF CAI IFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY GRAY DAVIS. Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
South Coast Region
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, California 92123
(858) 467-4201
FAX (858) 467-4235
June 03, 2002
Flex
POWER
Calavera Hills II, LLC
Attn: Brian Milich
2727 Hoover Avenue
National City, CA 91950
Dear Mr. Milich:
Enclosed is Streambed vMteration Agreement R5-2001-0007 that authorizes work on the
Calavera Hills II projed impacting Calavera and Agua Hedionda Creeks in San Diego County.
This action is authorized under Section 1600 of the Fish and Game Code and has been approved
by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game. Pursuant to the requirements of the CaUfomia
Environmental Quality^ Act/CEQA), the Department filed a Notice of Detennination (NOD) on
the project on /O^/PZ Under CEQA regulations, the project has a 30-day
statute of limitations on court challenges of the Department's approval under CEQA.
The Department believes that the project fliUy meets the requirements of the Fish and
Game Code and CEQA. However, if court challenges on the NOD are received during the 30-
day period, then an additional review or even modification of the project may be requfred. If no
comments are received during the 30-day period, then any subsequent comments need not be
responded to. This information is provided to you so that if you choose to undertake the project
prior to the close of the 30-day period, you do so with the knowledge that additional actions may
be required based on the resuUs of any court challenges that are filed during that period.
Please contact Tamara Spear at (858) 467-4223 if you have any questions regarding the
Sfreambed Alteration Agreement.
Sincerely,
CF. Riysbrook
Regional Manager
Enclosure
cc: Tamara Spear
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, Califomia 92123
Notification R5-2001-0007
AGREEMENT REGARDING PROPOSED STREAM OR LAKE ALTERATION
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into between the State of Califomia, Department of Fish and
Game, hereinafter called the Department, and Mr. David Hauser. representing Citv of Carisbad.
1635 Faradav Avenue, Carlsbad. CA 92008-7314 and Mr. Brian Milich. representing Calavera
Hills II. LLC. 2727 Hoover Avenue. National Citv. CA 91950 State of Califomia. hereinafter
called the Operators, is as follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1601 of Califomia Fish and Game Code, the Operator, on the
5"" dav of January. 2001. notified the Department that they intend to divert or obstnjct the
natural flow of, or change the bed, channel, or bank of, or use material from the streambed(s) of,
the following water(s): unnamed tributaries to Calavera and Agua Hedionda Creel<. Little
Encinas Creek. Calavera Creek and Aqua Hedionda Creek, tributaries to Agua Hedionda
Lagoon. San Diego County, Califomia, Section^ _Tovvnship_ Range_.
WHEREAS, the Department (represented by Tamara Spear through a site visit on the
15"" day of Febraary. 2001) has detennined that such operations may substantially adversely
affed those existing fish and wildlife resources within the streambed of unnamed tributaries to
Calavera and Agua Hedionda Creek. Little Encinas Creek Calavera Creek and Agua
Hedionda Creek, tributaries to Agua Hedionda Lagoon, specifically identified as follows:.
Birds; Califomia gnatcatcher IPolioptila califomica califomica). least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii
pusillus). southwestem willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus). Cooper's hawk (Accipiter
coopen). white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). northem harier (Circus cyaneus). sharp-shinned
hawk (Acc/p/ters/na^us). red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). loggerhead shrike (Lanius
ludovicianus). Califomia quail (Ca///pep/a califomica). mouming dove (Zenaida macroura).
Califomia homed lark (Eremophila alpestris actia). coastal cactus wren (Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus couesi). Nuttall's woodpecker (Picoides nuttaltii), black phoebe (Savomis
nigricans), scmb iav (Aphelocoma coerulescens). American crow (Corpus brachyrhynchos).
common raven (Corvus corax). Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna). Bewick's wren
(Thn/omanes bewickii). northem mockingbird (Mimus oolvalottos). vellow-mmped warbler
(Dendroica coronata). spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus). Califomia towhee (P/p//o crissalis).
yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens). Bell's saoe sparrow (Amohisoiza be///belli), blue grosbeak
(Guiraca caemlea). tri-colored blackbird (Aaelaius tricolor): Amphibians: Pacific tree frog (Hyta
reailta): Reptiles: San Diego homed lizard (Phrynosoma carinatum blainvillei). westem fence
lizard (Sceloporous occidentalis). Belding's orangethroat whiptail (Cnemidophorus hyperythrus
beldingi). coast patch-nosed snake (Salvadora hexalepis vimultea). red diamond rattlesnake
(Crotalus exsul): Mammals: San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia), coyote
(Canis latrans). desert cottontail (Svivilagus audubonii). San Diego black-tailed lack rabbit
(Lepus catifomicus bennettii): Plants: thread-leaved brodiaea (Srod/aea filifolia). Nuttall's scmb
oak (Quercus dumosa). Palmer's orapplinghook (Hamaoonella palmeri var. oalmeri).
southwestem spiny msh (Juncus acutus). ashy spike-moss (Selaginella cinerascens). Califomia
adolphia (Adolphia califomica), westem dichondra (Dichondra occidentalis): including the
riparian woodland/scmb. riparian forest freshwater marsh, dsmontane alkali marsh, seasonal
cismontane alkali marsh and surrounding native grassland, coastal sage scmb. chamise
chaparral, southem mixed chaparral, eucalyptus woodland and non-native grassland which
provide habitat for such species in the area.
THEREFORE, the Department hereby proposes measures to protect fish and wildlife
resources during the Operator's wori<. The Operator hereby agrees to accept the following
measures/conditions as part of the proposed work.
_ Page 1 of 6
STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT #R5-2001-0007
If the Operator's work changes from that stated in the notification specified above, this
Agreement is no longer valid and a new notification shall be submitted to the Department of Fish
and Game. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement and with other pertinent
code sections, including but not limited to Fish and Game Code Sections 5650, 5652, 5937, and
5948, may result in prosecution.
Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the Operator to trespass on any land or property,
nor does it relieve the Operator of responsibility for compliance with applicable federal, state, or
local laws or ordinances. A consummated Agreement does not constitute Department of Fish
and Game endorsement of the proposed operation, or assure the Department's concurrence
with pemnits required from other agencies.
This Agreement becomes effective the date of Department's signature and terminates Mav 15.
2007 for projed constraction onlv. This Agreement shall remain in effect for that time necessarv
to satisfy the terms/conditions of this Agreement
1. The following provisions constitute the limit of activities agreed to and resolved by tfiis
Agreement The signing of this Agreement does not imply that the Operator is preduded from
doing other adivities at the site. However, activities not specifically agreed to and resolved by
this Agreement shall be subjed to separate notification pursuant to Fish and Game Code
Sections 1600 et seq.
2. The Operator proposes to alter the streambed of unnamed tributaries to Calavera and
Agua Hedionda Creek. Little Encinas Creek. Calavera Creek and Agua Hedionda Creek,
tributaries to Agua Hedionda Lagoon, to accommodate the constmdion of the Calavera Hills,
II Development Projed and the constmdion of College Boulevard Reaches A, B and C, Cannon
Road Reach 3, and Detention Basins BJ and BJB. The project is bounded by the existing
northeriy villages of Calavera Hills on the north, and the El Camino Real/College Boulevard
intersedion on the south, within the city of Carisbad, San Diego County. The projed impacts
2.87 acres of streambed.
3. The agreed wori< includes adivities associated with No. 2 above. The projed area is located
within the streambed of unnamed tributaries to Calavera and Agua Hedionda Creek. Little
Encinas Creek. Calavera Creek and Agua Hedionda Creek, tributaries to Agua Hedionda
Lagoon. San Diego County. Specific wori< areas and mitigation measures are described on/in
the plans and documents submitted by the Operator, including a "Biological Technical Report for
the Calavera Hill Master Pian Phase II. Bridge and Thoroughfare District and Detention Basin".
prepared bv RECON. Environmental Consultants, dated Mav 10. 2000: "Final Habitat
Restoration and Monitoring Plan for the City of Carisbad Bridge & Thoroughfare District No. 4.
the Calavera Hills Projed. and the Detention Basins Proied in Carisbad. CA". prepared bv
RECON Environmental Consultants, dated April 3. 2002: a "Final EIR forthe Calavera Hills
Master Plan Phase II. Bridge and Thoroughfare Distrid No. 4. & Detention Basins", prepared by
RECON Environmental Consultants, dated November 2001: a "Biological Assessment for the
Calavera Hills Master Plan Phase II & Bridge and Thoroughfare Distrid no. 4 & Detention Basin
Proied. City of Carisbad. CA". prepared by RECON Environmental Consultants, dated August
21. 2000: and shall be implemented as proposed unless direded differently by this agreement
4. The Operator shall not impact more than 2.87 acres of jurisdidional streambed comprised of
2.42 acres riparian woodland/scrub, 0.18 acre dsmontane alkali marsh, 0.05 freshwater marsh,
and 0.24 acre unvegetated streambed. Impacts to riparian woodland/ scmb shall be mitigated
at a 4:1 ratio, cismontane alkali marsh and freshwater marsh shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio and
unvegetated waters at 1:1 for a total mitigation acreage requirement of 10.61 acres (9.68 riparian
woodland/scrub, 0.54 dsmontane alkali marsh, 0.15 freshwater marsh and 0.24 unvegetated
streambed). All mitigation shall be in-kind with the exception of unvegetated streambed. All
mitigation shall occur on-site at two locations. One mitigation area is upstream along Calavera
Creek and the other is within detention basin "BJ" along Little Endnas Creek. The Operator has
assured the Department that detention basin "BJ" will not require maintenance adivities. Note: A
_ Page 2 of 6
STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT #R5-2001-0007
20-foot distance out from the basin inlet will require maintenance to keep obstradions away from
the culvert, but this area is not counted as mitigation. Any impads generated beyond those
described within this agreement shall be mitigated in-kind at a 5:1 ratio.
5. The Operator shall submit a Final Revegetation, Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for tiie 10.61
acres of wetland habitat restoration, creation and enhancement areas on-site. The plan shall
include a description of the proposed numbers, container sizes and planting location by species,
monitoring adivities (locations, techniques, scheduling, etc.), maintenance operations with
emphasis on watering methods and schedules; the removal of invasive plant spedes, area
treated, techniques to be used, and schedule and success criteria for controlling invasive plants;
and any/all other references to revegetation and restoration activities specified by this agreemerit.
The Operator shall receive Department approval of the plan prior to project
initiation/impacts.
All revegetation (7.7 acres) of mitigation for Phase 1 impads (Calavera Hills development, college
Blvd. Reaches B and C, Cannon Road Reach 3, Detention Basin BJB) shall be installed no later
than November 15. 2004. All revegetation (3.0 acres) of mitigation for Phase 2 impacts (College
Boulevard Reach A, Detention Basin BJ) shall be installed no later than Mav 15. 2007.
6. The Operator shall not remove vegetation within the stream from March 15 to September 1 to avoid impacts to nesting birds.
7. The Operator shall have a qualified biologist onsite daily during any impacts to vegetation for
the purpose of monitoring and enforcing conditions of this agreement.
8. No equipment shall be operated in ponded or flowing areas except for activities autiiorized by this agreement .
9. Disturiaance or removal of vegetation shall not exceed the limits approved by the Department.
The disturtsed portions of any stream channel shall be restored. Restoration shall include the
revegetation of stripped or exposed areas with vegetation native to the area.
10. Installation of bridges, culverts, or other stmdures shall be such that water flow is not
impaired, except for activity authorized by this agreement Bottoms of temporary culverts shall be
placed at stream channel grade; bottoms of pennanent culverts shall be placed at or below
stream channel grade.
11. Preparation shall be made so that mnoff from steep, erodible suri'aces will be diverted into
stable areas with little erosion potential. Frequent water checks shall be placed on dirt roads, cat
tracks, or other work trails to control erosion.
12. Water containing mud. silt or other pollutants from aggregate washing or other activities shall
not be allowed to enter a lake or flowing stream or placed in locations that may be subjeded to
high storm flows.
13. Stmctures and associated materials not designed to withstand high seasonal flows shall be
removed to areas above the high water mark before such flows occur.
14. The perimeter of the work site shall be adequately flagged to prevent damage to adjacent
riparian habitat.
15. Staging/storage areas for equipment and materials shall be located outside of the stream.
16. The Operator shall comply with all litter and pollution laws. All contradors, subcontradors
and employees shall also obey these laws and it shall be the responsibility of the operator to
ensure compliance.
17. If a stream's low flow channel, bed or banks have been altered, these shall be retumed as
- Page 3 of 6
STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT #R5-2001-0007
neariy as possible to their original configuration and width, without creating future erosion
problems, excepting the2.87 acre of streambed impacts associated with condition No. 2 above.
18. Access to the work site shall be via existing roads and access ramps.
19. All mitigation planting shall have a minimum of 100% survival the first year and 80% survival
thereafter and/or shall attain 75% cover after 3 years and 90% cover after 5 years for the life of
the project If the survival and cover requirements have not been met, the Operator is
responsible for replacement planting to achieve these requirements. Replacement plants shall be
monitored with the same survival and growth requirements.
20. All mitigation planting shall be done between Odober 1 and April 30 to take advantage of the
winter rainy season.
21. An annual report shall be submitted to the Department by January 1 (following the first
growing season) of each year for 5 years after planting. This report shall include the survival,
percent cover, and height of both tree and shmb species. The number by species of plants
replaced, an overview of the revegetation effort, and the method used to assess these
parameters shall also be included. Photos from designated photo stations shall be included.
22. A security in the fomri of an irrevocable letter of credit for the amount of 120% of the
complete on-site restoration shall be submitted to the Department prior to initiation of constmdion
activities. This amount shall be based on a cost estimate which shall be submitted to the
Department for approval within 30 days of signing this Agreement The security shall be
approved by the Department's legal advisors prior to its execution, and shall allow the
Department at its sole discretion to recover funds immediately if the Department determines there
has been a default The legal advisors can be contacted at (916)654-3821.
In lieu of the security described above, the Operator may provide written evidence to the
Department's satisfaction that security in the form of a perfomiance bond has been provided to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the same restoration mitigation plan, within 30 day of
signing this agreement
23. A biological conservation easement shall be recorded on the riparian mitigation areas of the
project to proted fish and wildlife resources in perpetuity. The easement shall be in favor of the
Center for Lands Management, the Department or the Department's designated agent and shall
be recorded within one year of signing this agreement, or as extended by the Department The
fomn and content of the easement shall be approved by the Department's legal advisors prior to
its execution.
24. All terms and conditions under the federal Biological Opinion No. 1-6-01-F-1597 and Army
Corps permit No.200100215-SKB shall be enforceable by the Department underthis agreement
24. Spoil sites shall not be located within a stream, where spoil could be washed back into a
stream/lake, or cover aquatic or riparian vegetation.
25. Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil or
other petroleum produds, or any other substances which could be hazardous to aquatic life,
resulting from project related activities, shall be prevented from contaminating the soil and/or
entering the waters of the state. These materials, placed within or where they may enter a
stream/lake, by Operator or any party worthing under contract, or with the permission of the
Operator, shall be removed immediately.
26. No debris, soil, silt, sand, bari<, slash, sawdust, mbbish, cement or concrete or washings
thereof, oil or petroleum products or other organic or earthen material from any constmction, or
assodated activity of whatever nature shall be allowed to enter into or placed where it may be
washed by rainfall or mnoff into, waters of the State. When operations are completed, any
excess materials or debris shall be removed from the wori^ area. No mbbish shall be deposited
within 150 feet of the high water mark of any stream or lake.
_ Page 4 of 6
STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT #R5-2001-0007
27. No equipment maintenance shall be done within or near any stream channel where
petroleum produds or other pollutants from the equipment may enter these areas under any
flow.
28. The Operator shall provide a copy of this Agreement to all contractors, subcontractors,
and the Operator's project supervisors. Copies of the Agreement shall be readily available
at work sites at ali times during periods of active work and must be presented to any
Department personnel, or personnel from another agency upon demand.
29. The Department reserves the right to enter the projed site at any time to ensure compliance
with terms/conditions of this Agreement.
30. The Operator shall notify the Department, in writing, at least five (5) days prior to initiation
of construction (project) activities and at least five (5) days prior to completion of
construction (project) activities. Notification shall be sent to the Department at 4949 Viewridge
Avenue, San Diego, CA 92123 Attn: Tamara A. Spear
31. It is understood the Department has entered into this Streambed Alteration Agreement for
purposes of establishing protedive features for fish and wildlife. The decision to proceed with the
project is the sole responsibility of the Operator, and is not required by this agreement It is
further agreed ail liabiiity and/or incurred cost related to or arising out ofthe Operator's
project and the fish and wildlife protective conditions of this agreement, remain the sole
responsibility of the Operator. The Operator agrees to hold harmless the State of Califomia
and the Department of Fish and Game against any related claim made by apy party or parties for
personal injury or any other damages.
32. The Operator shall request an extension of this agreement prior to its temiination. Extensions
may be granted for up to 12 months from the date of termination of the agreement and are
subject to Departmental approval. The extension request and fees shall be submitted to the
Department's Region 5 office at the above address. If the Operator fails to request the extension
prior to the agreement's termination, then the Operator shalt submit a new notification witii fees
and required information to the Department Any adivities conduded under an expired
agreement are a violation of Fish and Game Code Section 1600 et seq.
33. The Department reserves the right to suspend or cancel this Agreement for other reasons,
including but not limited to the following:
a. The Department determines that the infonmation provided by the Operator in support of the
Notification/Agreement is incomplete or inaccurate;
b. The Department obtains new infonnation that was not known to it in preparing the tenms and
conditions of the Agreement;
c. The projed or projed activities as described in the Notification/Agreement have changed;
d. The conditions affeding fish and wildlife resources change or the Department determines that
projed adivities will result in a substantial adverse effed on the environment
34. Before any suspension or cancellation of the Agreement, the Department will notify the
Operator in writing of the circumstances which the Department believes warrant suspension or
cancellation. The Operator will have seven (7) worthing days from the date of receipt of tills
notification to respond in writing to the circumstances described in the Department's notification.
During the seven (7) day response period, the Operator shall immediately cease any project
activities which the Department specified in its notification. The Operator shall not continue the
specified activities until that time when the Department notifies the Operator in writing that
adequate methods and/or measures have been identified and agreed upon to mitigate or
eliminate the significant adverse effect
Page 5 of 6
CONCURRENCE
(City of Carisbad)
(signature) /(dat^)
Mr. David Hauser
(title)
fCalavera Hills II^LC),
(signature)
Mr. Brian Milich
(title)
STREAMBED ALTERATION AGREEMENT #R5-2001-0007
Califomia Dept of Fish and Game
^^^^ ^y/r^dU
(signature) (d^te)^
CF. Ravsbrook. Regional Manager
(title)
Page 6 of 6
City of Carlsbad
1635 FARADAY AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-7314
(760) 620-2720
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
TO:
Jeanie Domingues
Concordia Homes
760.722.3966
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
DATE
07/24/2002
JOB NO.
3882
ATTENTION
Jeanie Domingues
Calavera Hills/College Blvd. & Cannon Rd.
WE ARE SENDING YOU
• Shop Drawings
• Copy of letter
Dated
^ Attached • Under separate cover via
• Prints • Plans • Samples • Specifications
• Change Order |^ Pick-up at Engineering Counter
the following items:
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
1 Calavera Hills II Resource Agency Permits
1 College Blvd. & Cannon Rd. 30% plans sheets 1-9 and 14-19
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
n Forapproval
^ For your use
As requested
• For review and comment
• For your action
• For checking
• Approved as submitted
• Approved as noted
, copies for approval • Resubmit
• Design only, not for construction
• Retum corrected prints
• Returned for corrections •
REIVIARKS
Per your request at a meeting with David Hauser. Please call me at 760-602-2746 if you have questions
or need more information.
COPY TO: File
SIGNED: / T
0AU Carrie Loya-Smalley
Senior Civil Engineer
\f enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once.