Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIP 97-07; Newton Business Center; Planned Industrial Permit (PIP) (27)RBRiggan and Associates 26 January 1998 Ms. Sheryl L. Barrett Assistant Field Supervisor Fish and Wildlife Service 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad CA 92008 Hand Delivered Reference: City of Carlsbad - Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Newton Business Center Project (PIP97-07/HDP 97-18) - FWS Letter Dated Jan 21 1998 - Response (RBR Job Number 1652.36A) Dear Ms Barrett: RBRiggan and Associates has provided biological and environmental consultation services for the Newton Business Center Project. By way of background: RBR conducted a protocol Gnatcatcher survey and detailed biological studies of the site in March, February, April, and May of 1997. Recognizing the sensitivity of the site and the lack of progress on the MHCP, we brought the project to the Service’s field biologist assigned to the region. We provided our draft report and other material to Ellen Berryman of your staff. Ellen reviewed our work and requested certain additional studies (most notably a Perognathus longimembris paczjicus survey), all of which were performed. It was our specific understanding that we had performed the studies required by the Service and that the Service concurred with both the analysis and recommended mitigation program. A copy of our final memorandum to Ellen is attached. We also reviewed our draft report and related material with Dr. David Lawhead. It was also our understanding that CDF&G concurred with our analysis and recommended mitigation program. Our entire effort was closely coordinated with Mr. Don Rideout at the City of Carlsbad. Based specifically on the understanding that all of the biological issues associated with the project had been coordinated with the wildlife agencies and resolved, Industrial Developments International (IDI) purchased the property in August 1997 and immediately filed development applications with the City of Carlsbad. 11228 Zapata Avenue, San Diego, CA 921 26 Riverside Oftice: (909)3514809 San Diego Office: (61912335454 professional environmental services Ms. Sheryl L. Barrett 26 January 1998 page two Again, based on our understanding with the Service and the CDF&G, ID1 has purchased mitigation credits for the “disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub” found within the project site. That purchase is final and we should be able to provide the appropriate documentation later today. Due to our previous efforts with the Service and CDF&G we were, needless to say, stunned to receive the Service’s letter of 21 January 1998. That letter raises four points. In response to these four issues we provide the following information: Coastal California Gnatcatcher. FU3Riggan and Associates performed a federal protocol survey for this species on the ID1 property in March and April of 1997 (as is indicated in our report). The results of the survey were negative. This result is not surprising given the isolated nature and small size of the habitat fragment that occupies the ID1 property, and the fact that the distribution of Coastal Sage Scrub is limited to less than an acre. To the best of my knowledge we are not requesting a “de minimus” 4(d) finding. We had originally explored such a mechanism, but the City (through Don Rideout) indicated that such a mechanism is not available. The loss of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat has been mitigated in accordance with the direction we received from Ms. Berryman and Dr. Lawhead. Chorizanthe orcuttiana. We certainly recognize the sensitivity of this species and feel that (due to its rarity) its occurrence on a development project would be “fatal” for the project. For this reason we conducted a comprehensive survey for the species on the ID1 property during our April and May effort. The species was not found, a fact that we have previously communicated to Ms. Berryman. Brodiaeafilifolia. Due to a quirk of ownership, ID1 acquired the 1984 Brodiaeafilifolia preserve (originally set aside in that year by the adjacent residential developer) when they purchased the balance of the property. As is pointed out in your letter, ID1 is not disturbing this preserve and is not disturbing the adjacent native grasslands. Lacking a nexus of impact (direct or indirect), it would seem that the principal outlined in Dolan v. Tigard (1 14 S.Ct.2309) would prohibit any mitigation requirement. ID1 would be happy, however, to deed the preserve to any appropriate agency or entity. It would seem that future management of the site would fall under the City’s MHCP responsibility. Last spring, we surveyed the preserve periphery several times with the specific intent of locating any B. filifolia that might have volunteered outside the fenced boundary. None were located, although we did note a large number of Dichelostemma capitatum growing in the adjacent grasslands. Southern Maritime Chaparral. The sensitivity of this association is also a point with which we are extremely familiar. For this reason we went to great lengths to assure ourselves that the definition we utilized on-site (in this case the Holland definition; as cited in the MSCP documentation) was acceptable to the Service. This is a point we discussed at length with Ms. Berryman and which is Ms. Sheryl L. Barrett 26 January 1998 page three discussed in the attached memorandum. We have attached a copy of our final memorandum to Ms. Berryman. We also have other background information on the biological resources of the property and would be happy to make all of our files available to the Service. Timing is a critical issue to Industrial Developments International and we would hope to resolve this matter in the next two to three days. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly if we can provide any additional information. Sincerely, Royce B. Riggan, Jr., AICP Consulting Biologist (PRT-780195) lU3R:ct attachment cc Mr. Alan J. Sharp, Vice President, Industrial Development International J. R. Wetzel, Vice President, Industrial Development International Dr. David Lawhead, California Department of Fish and Game Mr. Don Rideout, Senior Management Analyst, City of Carlsbad Ms. Anne Hysong, Planning Department, City of Carlsbad [:\1652-let.002] RBRiggan and Associates Date: 13 May 1997 Context: Telephone Conversation Job Number: 1635.36A Prepared By: Royce Regarding: Carlsbad CRC 14 Property Present: Ms. Ellen Berryman - Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Field Office Royce Riggan, Jr. - RBRiggan and Associates Copies To: Ms. Ellen Berryman Dr. David Lawhead - Department of Fish and Game Mr. Don Rideout - City of Carlsbad Mr. Gary Nogle - Nogle Onufer Associates File A packet of information for the Carlsbad CRC 14 property had been previously delivered to Ellen. She was contacted to review the project and to determine FWS’s position on the limited resources present. The following summarizes the points discussed and summarizes Ellen’s conclusions, the latter based on the data before her at the time of the conversation. 1. 2. 3. 4. The subject property is located west of El Camino Real, north of Palomar Airport and College Avenue, and represents part of a habitat fragment isolated by existing roads, residential and industrial developments. The site includes approximately 16.1 acres. Development will disturb the 0.78 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub and on the order of four acres of Southern Mixed Chaparral. With the exception of a small area of disturbed native grassland on clay soils (which will be preserved) the balance of the development area is ruderal. Individuals of neither the Del Mar Manzanita nor the Wart-leafed Ceanothus were found on site, ergo the classification of the property as “Southern Mixed.” A California Gnatcatcher survey has been completed and no individuals of that species were encountered. After review of the aerial photo, Ellen concurred that the Coastal Sage Scrub occurrence is de minimus. This conclusion is based on the absence of the Gnatcatcher, the overall size and isolation of the larger habitat fragment, and the occurrence of less than one acre of Coastal Sage Scrub. Ellen concurred that waiver of the 4(d)-permit process was permissible with the assurance that the Coastal Sage Scrub will be mitigated on a 1 : 1 basis. Absent the target Arctostaphylos and Ceanothus species, Ellen concurred with the classifica- tion of the chaparral. 8883 Shaula Way, San Diego, CA 921 26 Riverside Office: (909)351-0809 San &!go Office: (61912335454 professional environmental services w BerrymadRiggan 13 May 1997 page two 5. Ellen inquired as to whether we had identified any Chorizunthe on the property. Individuals of that genus were something that we were certainly aware of and looking for during the field work but none (of any species) were noted. 6. Ellen was also concerned as to the potential for the occurrence of the Pacific Pocket Mouse (Perognuthus Zongimembrispucijcu). Due to the slightly inland location of the site, the lack of the soft “buttery” sandstones that we normally associate that species with, and due to the degree of disturbance of both the project site and the surrounding area, that is a species we had not considered. However, Ellen was concerned as to a possible occurrence and indicated that a specific field examination would be appropriate. Dr. Phil Behrends has recently done work withpucijcus and Ellen suggested him as a contact. Ellen indicated that she would be satisfied if Phil just looked at the property and determined it to be unsuitable habitat. If, of course, their is a potential then trapping would be necessary. 7. The BrodiueuJiIifoZiu preserve will be retained undisturbed and there will be a 1 00-foot plus buffer between the edge of development and the existing preserve fence. The proposed development will have no direct or indirect effect on the Brodiueu preserve (for example, drainage from the developed area will not be allowed to flow into the preserve, rather it will be captured in a storm drain system). 8. Assuming that the pucijcus examination turns up negative, then no additional concerns are apparent.