HomeMy WebLinkAbout3466; OLIVEHAIN RD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT; FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLAN; 1995-11-012.2
!
2.5
3.:
3.1:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE
PROJECT INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION
Project Introduction
Project Description
Wetland Impacts And Mitigation
RIPARIAN MITIGATIONS DESIGN'
Design Overview
Weed Eradication -and'Exotics Control
Plant Palettes for Habitat iCreation
Other Areas of Disturbance Along the Road Widning/
Realignment Construction Corridor
Irrigation
CONSTRUCTION INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
Qualifications and Responsibilities of Persons Implementing
the Mitigation/Revegetation Program
Dedication
Acceptance
Installation Specifications
Contractor Education
Timing of Construction
Site Protection .
Site Grading and Site Preparation
Exotic Weed Species Removal
2-1
2-1
2-1
2-3
2-9
2-10
3-1
.3-1
3-2
3-2
3-3
3-3
3-4
''3-4
3-5
3-6
I 3.4'.6
General •Planting Specifications 3-6
4 5-YEAR POST-CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 47.1
41 Time Frame - 4-1
4 2
4.2'. 1
Responsibilities 4-1
City of Carlsbad 4-1
4 2 2 Revegetation Monitor 4-1
1 4 2 3 Maintenance Contractor 44
43 Contractor Education. ' 42 14.4 Contractor Guarantees'- 4-2
31505 1000
LI
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
I SEcTIoN TITLE PAGE
4 5 Irrigation System Maintenance 4-2
4.5.1 .: ,. System Repair 4-2
4 5 2 System D Cycle ocumentation 4-2
4.5:3. :System Removal 44
4.6 Weeding 4-3
4.7 ' Staking and Caging '
:4-4
1 4.8 Dead Plant Replacement ' 4-4
4.9- Trash and Debris Removal 4-4
.4.10 'Motorized Vehicle Access S 4-5
-
' 4.11 Pest Control 4-5.,
U 4.12: ' Fertilization ' 4-5
'1
I 5 5-YEAR MONITORING PROGRAM 5-1
' 5.1 ' Time Frame and Purpose 5-1
5.2 Horticultural Monitoring 5-1
1 5.3 Botamcal Monitoring.5-2
5.4
'
Monitoring Reports ' ' 1. 5-3
5.4.1'. ' During the Five Year'Monitoring Period 5-3
I 6 SUCCESS STANDARDS AND REMEDIAL MEASURES 6-1
6.1 , ' Purpose and Basis'for Standards ' . ' 6-1
'I 6.2
6.3
Scope ofRemedial'Measures ' •' 6-1
Project Success Standards and Recommended Remedial Measures 6-1
Modification of Monitoring Period 6-2
I
6.4
7 5
REFERENCES S ' S ' ' 7-1 1
1
-
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
I LIST OF FIGURES
I NUMBER TITLE PAGE
1 Project Location Map 1-2
2 Olivenhain Road Realignment Site Plan & Biological Impacts Map 1-3
3 Flood Control Dike Site Plan & Biological Impacts Map 1-4
4 Conceptual Wetland Mitigation Plan 2-2
I LIST OF TABLES
NUMBER TITLE PAGE
1 Impact Area Quantities and Mitigation Ratios 1-9
2 Olivenhain Road Widemng and Realignment Wetland I Mitigation/Revegetation Plant Palette Container Plantings 2-4
3 Olivenhain Road Widening and Realignment Wetland
MitigationIRevegetation Plant Palette Seed Mixes 2-7
1 LIST OF APPENDICES
I LETTER TITLE PAGE
• A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Letter of Approval A-i
1
B Biological Report, Prepared by Brian Mooney Associates, 1991 B-i
C PDC SeedMix for Roadway Slopes and Disturbed Areas C-i
Full Scale Landscape Plans for MitigationlRevegetation Areas D-1
ii.
I
1 - SECTION 1
PROJECT INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION
I
1.1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION
The following document is designed to summarize the requirements of a proposed wetland
mitigation program for the City of Carlsbad's Olivenhain Road Widening and Realignment
Project, including the construction of a flood control dike The project site occupies an area
extending from the intersection of El Camino Real and Olivenhain Road, eastward to
I Rancho Santa Fe Road (see Figures 1 and 2) Existing vegetation conditions are discussed
in detail in the Biological Survey and Report prepared by Mooney Associates in 1991,
I included in Appendix B
I This report is divided into six major sections Section 1 herein discusses overall project
elements, anticipated impacts, and mitigation strategies Section 2 covers the intended
I riparian mitigation design, with a discussion of the intended plant palettes and the area
proposed foi use as the riparian mitigation site Section 3 of this document will specify the
construction installation requirements which should be followed in implementing the
I . riparian.miiigation program. Section 4 specifies the requirements for the 5 year
post-construction maintenance program for the wetland mitigation and revegetation areas
I Section 5 delineates the requirements for the 5-year biological and horticultural monitoring
program to assure project success Finally, Section 6 describes the success standards
I against which the project will be evaluated and the potential remedial measures which may
be implemented should the project. fail to meet these standards.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The construction work involves the widening and realignment of Olivenhain Road,
including a new bridge extension and intersection modification at the intersection of
El Camino Real and Olivenhain Road. Also included is a flood control dike and basin
facility to be implemented southwest of the Olivenhain Road/Rancho Santa Fe Road
intersection (see Figure 3), to help control flood flows in the area.
This project is a portion of the total work described in the "Final Environmental Impact
Report-for Olivenhain Road Widening/Realignment and Flood CoñtrolProject,". City-of
Encinitas, January 1992. The roadway alignment being implemented was described in that
315051000 1-1
I -- -
I 'La OS; 35
- L
: 3, Loa
let
7 2S
WETLAND MITIGATION SITE AND
DIKE LOCATION
_ - - ,.,#, — k
I 'J
['20
Tl
PROJECTLocATIoN
I 1
i
51
1 1jfftt - , IL-VEN
1 51
Encindas BLVD arc
L
I
\
stiE 1k kSNA
r
\; ; 5"i• i i:;
- - k0 I I_
by-the-Sea ;
11 J
1\u
dy
12,32
I
24
WX
ENC
.
ip oio
%e. INCH S
p
,
26 25 _J3
I
I Reproduced — by THOMAS BROS. MAPi -
This map is ccpynghted by THOMAS BROS. MAPS. ft is Unlawful -' s - -, - I to COPY or reproduce oc any part thereof. wftethec for peis 11ICL(mr S L or resale, without SThISS1Ofl. -
- - - : /
10GUEN -Project Location Map
.IuIu••u
1-2
FIG U R E
L'l
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
y Rud E
.i
o 100' 2
Rud
100-Year Floodplain
(with Detention Basins A.B.C.D)
SOURCE: Brian Mooney, Biological Survey. 1991
Legend
Dist Disturbed
DWS Disturbed Wetland Scrub
FM Freshwater Mh '.
Rud RuderaI,
SWS - Southern Willow Scrub
E Wetiaid Ecbtone
CSM Coastal Salt Marsh
SMC SOuthern Mixed
Chaparral .
) Willow Flycatcher
j' DownyWooeckeri
construction Easement
UU Roadway Cut Slopes -
ikw
- Revegetation Area
(Temporary Impacts)
ASP Dist (See POC Plans)
sws
100-Year floodplain
(dth Detention BssinsAB.C)
Wf WM Rud-
FWM
) NOTE: Northernmost Limit of Proposed Construction Easement
. to be Determined by Umita of flOmecMal Gränig
----' *
elu
smc sws
yc
61-
BRIDGE:1. . '•
Home Depot OlInenhain MitigationArea
I
-•. (). iI - . _________
Coastal Zone le., . •, -- ______ I i . .... Planning Area (Eastern Boundary) ' SW Sr SWS ExistIng swc Alignment
M
DWS --_:;
SWS
-
OGDEN
. N N U•
Olivenhain Road Realignment Site Plan and Biological Impacts Map
F I G U R E
L..2i.
Legend
SH
01st 01s1uitd
DWS Dlshatsd Wsttand Swjb
E Ecotone
FY41 Frsshwat.r Marsh
Rud Rudwal
8W3 Southm Willow Scn
Band Aster
®eployFbish
LJO
Olivenhain Road
jet
Proposed Dike Construction Easement
- - / 'I>
/ 'i2 100-Year FIooIaIn ç
- 7 jp0r Count
. ".J
For New Proposed Mitigation
Area Boundaries (See Figure4) - —>---- OMWD Property Boundary
Prad flike. \
DIst
U - o iy 200'
LEGEND
1 VFLJ..
<
Southern Willow Scrub Revegetatlon Site
CSM Southern Coastal Salt Marsh
Dist Disturbed 1990 100-Year Floodplain .j DWS Disturbed Wetland Scrub (per Dr. Chang) FWM Freshwater Marsh
Rud Ruderal
Enlarged Plan Showing Original
Proposed Mitigation Sites
(Per Mooney 1991)
I
0 50' 100'
SOURCE: Brian Mooney, Biological Survey, 1991 —k. _— - - -
oc
C
Proposed Detention Basin/Dike
Biological Impacts Map
S
I
UUMN
. . . . .
Flood Control Dike Site Plan and Biological Impacts Map
F I G U R E
1-4
I
I document as Alignment 2 of Olivenhain Road This realignment work has been separated
11 out from the other related work along La Costa Ave., and has been phased as separate
I construction contracts As a result, the impacts to wetland vegetation addressed in this
report, and the subsequent mitigation requirements, have been modified to reflect the
1 Olivenhain Road portion of work only.
I To date the proposed Olivenhain Road project has been reviewed by the US Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) and has been given initial approval to proceed under the Nationwide
26 Clean Water Act guidelines (Corps letter of approval is included as Appendix A) The
I purpose of this detailed mitigation plan is to further refine the conceptual wetland
nñtigatioñ/revegetation plan which was outlined previously in the Biological Report
1 prepared by Brian Mooney Associates, 1991 (Mooney Report), (see Appendix B,
Attachment 1). This detailed plan discussed herein is intended to provide further
documentation to the Corps for the final mitigation program, and to meet the requirements
for a 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement, with the California Department of Fish and
- Game.
1.3 WETLAND IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Wetland vegetation impacts will occur in three areas due to the realignment and associated
1 grading of Olivenhain Road The three areas include wetland vegetation at the current
bridge crossing at the intersection of El Camino Real and .Olivenhain Road; at a side
I drainage to Encinitas Creek along Olivenhain Road, and at the proposed dike location
southwest of the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Olivenhain Road intersection. Thèsé areas are
discussed further in the Mooney Report.
2acfëofsouthern
i
tipor impat)T
The flood control dike construction area lies within a 2 acre site located on the south side of
I Olivenhain Road, approximately 1,200 feet west of Rancho Santa Fe Road (See
Figure 3). The exist.-~ng-wet-landrveget~t~ori-w-ithi Zt s- z7aFcm_-site-_tota _035 es,
315051000 1-5
In summary, the widening and realignment of Olivenhain Road, along with the
construction of the flood control dike, will result in impacts to 0.30 acres of freshwater
marsh, and 0 27 acres of southern willow scrub, totaling 0.57 acres of wetland impacts
(both permanent and temporary impacts) Of this total, permanent impacts amount to
0 16 acres of freshwater marsh (FWM), and 0.06 acres of southern willow scrub (SWS)
(per Ogden's re-verified impact analysis) In addition, temporary impacts amount to
0.14 acres. of freshwater marsh, and 0.21 acres of southern willow scrub. Permanent
impacts to. the freshwater marsh will be mitigated for at a. 1:1 ratio, and 'permanent impacts
to the southern willow scrub will be mitigated for at a-3:1 ratio Temporary impacts to
southern willow scrub will be mitigated for at a'1: 1 ratio as part of the new creation acreage
at the mitigation site, and through additional protective measures Temporary impacts to all
vegetation will be compensated for by following the protective measures ,criteria as outlined
in the Mooney Report, and as summarized, and additionally clarified herein.
Temporary Impacts Mitigation
Mitigation measures or temporary impacts (i.e., impacts due to the overall construction
easement) will include the following (Summarized from Mooney Report with additional
clarifications added by Ogden.)
'
A11 .'limits of the construction corridor shall be clearly staked and flagged prior to
construction, to indicate the limits of construction The revegetation monitor
shall, periodically assess that these limits are being maintained.
•• Wetlands bordering. the fioddcontrol dike site and the roadway construction
corridor will b& protected by temporary construction fencing.
2:
All existing wetlands shallbe protected from sedimentation during construction
byplacing siltation fencing and/or hay bales along their entire margins.
All marsh vegetation within the construction easement shall be protected from
permanent impact by placing temporary geotextile fabric over the vegetation and
adding a layer of soil over the fabric. The soil and fabric will be. removed
315051000 •. • 1.6
I
I immediately following the construction activities in that immediate area, and the
marsh vegetation soil elevations restored to the pre-construction condition
The areas of willow scrub vegetation within 'the construction easement, outside
I of the permanent disturbance area, shall be cut down to within six inches of the
ground and shall have the geotextile fabric installed over it All cut materials
shall be mulched and redistributed to appropriate areas per the revegetation
monitors direction.
All temporary impact areas shall be revegetated in place with appropriate native
vegetation to approximate their pre-existing plant compositions after
1 construction activities are complete This may include additional container
material if warranted by the revegetation momtor.
I All staging areas and construction access easements, which impact native
1
vegetatioh, shall be revegetated following completion of construction
I . Clearing of the southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh areas shall only
occurfrom late July through October to avoid impacts to sensitive nesting birds,
I
per guidelines outhned in the Mooney Report
All additional graded/disturbed-areas, left after construction shall be seeded per
I the revegetation plans prepared by P D C as part of the road improvement
plans (see Appendix Q. .
Permanent Impacts Mitigation
I . The project proponent, the City of Carlsbad (City), intends to mitigate for the loss of
1 wet-La~idsiat~~,a.:'mitigatioh;~',Parcel~~rior.theast-of
permanently and temporarily impacted wetlands through ae
-t
0 9 6acres:of:freshwater'marslrthabitat In
I
- j----- -------.--
addition, the City will provide
getationfor4ike revegtaoandas gafion
I
-, -- 31'5051000 -. : 1-7
- '.. - -
9
1 Table 1
1 - IMPACT AREA QUANTITIES AND MITIGATION RATIOS
IMPACT ANALYSIS COMPARISON
DIKE' LOCATION: '
Biological Report By Mooney As Re-Verified By'Ogden Habitat Type Assoc ' (1991) (1995)
I FWM.(perrnanent impact) 0.46'acres
. : 0.16 acres
I
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT .& WIDENING AREA:
Biological 'Report By. Mooney As Re-Verified By Ogden
Habitat Type Assoc.'(1991)' (1995)
I
SWS (permanent impact) " 004 acres 0.06 acres*
SWS (temporary impact) 0.21 acres 0.21 acres
FWM (temporary impact) ' 0.14 acres 0.14 acres
I TOTALS 0 55 acres 0.57 acres
* Ogden acreage differs due to sliver of SWS vegetation impacts not previously included in acreage summary. Ogden
I
analysis based upon re evaluation of project construction plans and Mooneys previous vegetation mapping No
additional field mapping was conducted by Ogden, except at the proposed dike mitigation site;
'SWS = Southern Willow Scrub Vegetation ' FWM =Freshwater Marsh Vegetation
MITIGA-T-1_ON_—RA_-T-IOS-AND— ACREAGE
'DIKE LOCATION AT 1:1 RATIO (PERMANENT. IMPACTS)
Required Mitigation 'Habitat Type Area Impacted
' At 1:1 Ratio
VM(permanent impact) . 0.1.6 acres '. 0.16 acres*
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT & WIDENING AT 3:1 RATIO
(PERMANENT IMPACTS):
Habitat Type . Area Impacted Required Mitigation
' At 3:1" Ratio
SWS(permanéñt impact) . 0.06 acres ' 0.18 acres*
TALs(PERMXNi'NT) 0.22 acres '. 0:34cres
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT & WIDENING AT 1:1 RATIO
(TEMPORARY 'IMPACTS'):
Habitat Type . Area Impacted Required Mitigation
At 1:1 'Ratio:
SW?temporary impact) 0.21 acres 0.21 acres* **
5. .5. FWM (temporary impact) • 0.14 acres ' ' 0.14 acres**
TOTALS—(TEMPORARY) 0.35 acres ' Q:_35—acres
IMPACTS1MITIGATION .SUMMARY: S
TOTAL *tTLA.ND' IMPACTS=0.57 ACRES (OGDEN'S RE-VERIFIED' ACREAGE)
SWS=0.27 ACRES
FWM=0.30 ACRES
THROUGH NEWLY CREATED HABiTAT =055 AC
"TEMPORARY WETLAND IMPACTS 'TO. BE MITIGATED FOR IN PLACE AND WITH ENHANCEMENT
=0.14 At. .
4 •
•
315051000
5 'S••• ' '
'T9
•
.5
-
SECTION 2
RIPARIAN MITIGATION DESIGN
1•. ... •.. ';. .:.. "S
21 DESIGN OVERVIEW
Four habitat types will be created or enhanced within the project area These include
southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, enhanced riparian scrub, and enhanced upland
: coastal sage scrub transition areas. The ripariãn scrub and upland coastal sage scrub
transition areas will be implemented on the berm and slopes of the dike, on the slopes
createdl by downgrading/excavating for the wetland, creation areas, and .on disturbed areas
within the construction easement boundaries of the dike and the roadway. Minor down
grading/excavation and surface weed removal will be necessary to create the southern
wi1low. scrub and freshwater. marsh,hábitats. .A combination of one gallon container
I
. plantings and seed mix applications will be utilized to establish new vegetation in each of
these habitat areas.
A conceptual:. plan showing the wetlãnd:mitigation design. intent for the mitigation site is
includedin Figure 4. The same ,mitigation area will be utilized as was originally proposed
in the Mooney Report, Revegetation Plan, however, slight adjustments have been made
due to the existing site conditions, as field-verified by Ogden in 1995. Detailed planting
plans are included in Appendix fl
2.2., 'WEED ERADICATION AND EXOTICS CONTROL
All weeds and exoticspeciesincluding, but not limited to, pampas grass (Cortaderia
'selloana), mustard (Brassica spp.) giant reed (Arundo donax), eucalyptus (Eucalyptus
spp.), and sweet clover (Melilotusspp.), will be removed from the wetland mitigation site
and enhancement ares, as a part of this revegetation effort.
The, details of the site preparation and weed eradication program are addressed further in
Section 3.4, Installation Specifications.. .
315051000
— - - —
f --.----,---
OUVENHAIN ROAD
77
_ 1
_ / SEEDI
) SOUTHERN SCRUB MITIGATION
ONE AREA (.39 ACRES)
,, BRACKISH MARSH/FRESHWATER MARSH PCARC86d SQ. FI./i.I4 ks MITIGATION AREA (.16 ACRES) —; i
LINE DESIGNATING AREA REQUIRED
FOR 2:1 SLOPE & 8' ACCESS ROAD RIPARIAN SCRUB &
j ZONE AREA (1.5 ACRES) TRANSITION
~:::::::NE e
R DISTRICT YARD I
I .,,. • : BRACKISH/FRESHWA MARSH j 7)
) RACKISH/FRESHWATER MARSH MITIGATION .8 AC. - — - H / , :..
. .•.: : :• : :• Th.._. 1 (.. / DIKE
0 I
• :
. J i/ S) - FRESH WATER MARSH I
I DIKE CONSTRUCTION £ASEUENTJ'
- — — — — — o
'V
DIKE FlU. SLOPES
o
I
8
o
A5 BUILF
-
DATE - 4 RIiS9UB TRANT1O flONE SEEDING - - — - -
i '.-.--..... '..,
BENCHMARK; T CITY OF CARLSBAD Ii) •... — tOCMIt a CAIO eei. - _____________________________ -
- - ......j I DIIG aeir I ...,_ AIC OJ•4All ROAO RIPARIAN SCRUB TRANSITION ZONE SEEDING -.--- otsent ST*ICa IITY Nb - - — - — — — I .., MIDUME MIlT - - ______________________________________________________ - - ____
ftEYA11I 79715 FT U.S.G.S. - — — - - I •'bl,, iA,1. USL OAflM
MM
Willy or SAN DIM i •,u,s,II I I•IS,I,II•I II ••I I J so.o OM
P,a iii. . bees 1 __ -..-.., WIT QIlAflM.7 bATE mnoLl
- II ee
n.--- REOW OESOPTI 020 _ ,r ._
—
UUMN Conceptual Wetlands Mitigation Plan
FIGURE
U....
2-2
1
I
2.3 PLANT PALETTES FOR HABITAT CREATION
Southern Willow Scrub
This habitat type will be created primarily on the northern side of the existing wetland, east
of the dike site, at an elevation slightly higher than the existing freshwater marsh
vegetation, as shown in Figure 4. One to five feet of soil excavation will be necessary in
this area to bring the surface elevation close enough to the existing watertable to support the
intended vegetation and to provide an adequate elevational relationship to the floodplain.
The main species which will be utilized in this habitat area are shown in Table 2. These
species include arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepsis), sandbar willow (Salix hindsiana), and
mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia) planted in the overstory; with yerba mansa (Anemopsis
californica), giant wild rye (Leymus condensatus) and arrow weed, (Pluchea sericea)
planted as components of the understory. All container plantings will be provided from
one gallon stock, since experience has shown that better growth and root development have
resulted from smaller container sizes at time of planting. It should be noted that due to the
difficulty in timing of the construction, the previous idea, as discussed in the Mooney
Report, of utilizing willow cuttings from the areas of disturbance, as transplants into the
mitigation site, appears to be infeasible. Instead, container planted species will be used
instead of the cuttings.
Native seed mix, as shown in Table 3, will be utilized to provide additional understory
diversity and initial erosion control stabilization. The main species included in this mix are
western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), Douglas mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana),
Zorro annual fescue (Festuca megalura), and Hooker's primrose (Oenothera hookerii).
Brackish Marsh/Freshwater Marsh
Along the northern and southern edges of the existing wetland vegetation at the dike
mitigation site, between the existing freshwater marsh and the newly created southern
willow scrub, new brackish marsh/freshwater marsh habitat will be created. This area is
shown conceptually on Figure 4. This area will receive a slight amount of
downgrading/excavation to bring it into the floodplain influence and to match existing
elevations of current adjacent marsh areas. The main species to be utilized will include
California bulrush (Scirpus ca1fornica), with a secondary component of alkali rush
(Scirpus robustus); also alkali heath (Frankenia sauna), and spiny rush (Juncus acutus) will
315051000 2-3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Hi
- MON O=, _ - - NO
Table 2
OLIVENHAIN ROAD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLANT PALETTE
CONTAINER PLANTINGS
Scientific Common Container Spacing No. I grouping % Comp.
Name Name Size on Center
No./Acre
Southern Willow Scrub (SWS) Container Plant Palette:
(Goal: 75% mature cover from overstory species and 10 % mature cover from understory species)
Ovérstory Plantings:
Baccharis salicfolia mulefat 1 gal. 7ft. 5 per grouping 20% 170
(syn. Baccharis glutinosa)
Salix hindsiana sandbar willow 1 gal. 8ft. 5 per grouping 20% 130
Salix lasiolepsis arroyo willow 1 gal. lOft. 5 per grouping 40% 166
Sambucus mexicana elderberry 1 gal. 8ft. individual 10% 65
Understory Pantinas:
Anemopsis ca1fornica yerba mansa 1 gal. 3ft. 10 per grouping 40% 247
Artemisia douglasiana Douglas mugwort 1 gal. 3ft. 5 per grouping 30% 185
Leymus condensatus giant wild rye 1 gal. 4ft. 5 per grouping 30% 104
Pukhea sericea arrow weed 1 gal. 6ft. 5 per grouping 10% 116
(syn. Elvmus condensatus)
Total: 1183
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Table 2 (Continued)
OLIVENHAIN ROAD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLANT PALETTE
CONTAINER PLANTINGS
Scientific Common Container Spacing No. I grouping % Comp. No. I Acre
Name Name Size on Center
Riparian Scrub Container Plant Palette:
(Goal: 80 % mature cover by container plantings)
Baccharis salicfo1ia mulefat 1 gal. 7ft. 5 per grouping 80% 725
Levmus condensatus giant wild rye 1 gal. 4ft. 5 per grouping 20% 555
Total : 1280
Unland Transition Zone Container Plant Palette:
(Goal: 20 % mature cover by container species)
Artemisia calfornica California sagebrush! gal. 4ft. 3 per grouping 50% 347
Baccharis pu. ssp. consanguinea coyote bush 1 gal. 5 ft. 5 per grouping 20% 89
Heteromeles arbutjfolia toyon 1 gal. 8ft. individual 10% 17
Isomeris arborea bladderpod 1 gal. 4ft. individual 10% 69
Rhus integrjfolia lemonade berry deep 1 gal. 6ft. individual 10% 31
/ treepot
Total : 553
Table 2 (Continued)
Uj
OLIVENHAIN ROAD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLANT PALETTE
CONTAINER PLANTINGS
Scientific Common Container Spacing No. I grouping % Comp. No. I Acre
Name Name Size on Center
Brackish Marsh/Fresh Water Marsh Container Plant Palette:•
(Goal: 80 % mature cover by container species)
Frankenia sauna alkali heath 1 gal. 3ft. 10 per grouping 20% ' 986
Juncus acutus spiny rush 1 gal. 6ft. 5 per grouping 10% 123
Scirpus calfornicus bulrush 1 gal. 4ft. individual 30% 832
Scirpus robustus alkali rush 1 gal. 4ft. individual 30% 832
Total : 2773
Table 3
OLIVENHAIN ROAD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLANT PALETTE
SEED MIXES
Seed Mix A:
Southern Willow Scrub Seed Mix
Scientific Name Common Name Pounds per Acre
Ambrosia psilostachya western ragweed 2.0
Artemisia douglasiana Douglas mugwort 2.0
Artemisia drancunculus tarragon 2.0
Atriplexpatula ssp. hastata Halberd-leaf saitbush 2.0
Encelia ca4fornica California sunflower 2.0
Festuca megalura zorro annual fescue 2.0
Isocoma venetus coastal goldenbush 4.0
Leymus condensatus giant wild rye 4.0
Oenothera hookerii Hooker's primrose 1.0
TOTAL POUNDS PER ACRE 21.0
Hydroseed Slurry Mix:
Seedmix: Composition and poundage as indicated on table above.
Mulch: Virgin Wood Cellulose Fiber Mulch @ 2,000 lbs./ acre
Fertilizer: (0-45-0) triple super phosphate, and 19% soil sulfur, @ 250 lbs./ acre
Fertilizer: Urea Formaldehyde (38-0-0) @ 50 lbs./ acre
Am ANN W, ON - - - No -aw -) - - - c_ OW
Table 3 (Continued)
OLIVENHAIN ROAD WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT
WETLAND MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PLANT PALETTE
SEED MIXES
Seed Mix B:
Riparian Scrub & Upland Transition Zone Seed Mix
Scientific Name Common Name Pounds per Acre
Artemisia caljfornica California sagebrush 4.0
Encelia calfonzica California sunflower 4.0
Eschscholzia ca1fomica California poppy 2.0
Festuca megalura zorro fescue 2.0
00
Isocoma venetus coastal goldenbush 4.0
Leymus condensatus giant wild rye 4.0
Lupinus succulentus arroyo lupine 3.0
Phacelia tanacetifolia phacelia 2.0
TOTAL POUNDS PER ACRE 25.0
Hydroseed Slurry Mix:
Seedmix: Composition and poundage as indicated on table above.
Mulch: Virgin Wood Cellulose Fiber Mulch @ 2,000 lbs./ acre
Fertilizer: (0-45-0) triple super phosphate, and 19% soil sulfur, @ 250 lbs./ acre
Fertilizer: Urea Formaldehyde (38-0-0) @ 50 lbs./ acre
be utilized along the outer margins of these areas (see Table 2). It is assumed-that cattails,'
(Tyha 'spp.) will naturally colonize additional areas within the freshwater marsh site, based
I upon the existing abundant seed bank .in the adjacent marsh. No container plantings of this
particular species is-proposed.
Along the. slopes of the new, wetlands and dike, the dike berm, and in disturbed areas
within the dike construction easement and roadway, riparian scrub and upland transition
vegetation cover will be planted from seed and containers. The species to be utilized in this
area are shown in Table 2. The predominate upland species to be utilized will: include
coastal sage brush (Artemisia californica),coyote bush (Baccharis .pilularis ssp.
consan guinea), coastal sunflower (Encelia calforn°ica), bladderpod (Isomeris arborea),
toyon (Heteromeles arbutfolia), and lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia). The riparian scrub
species will include mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), giant wild rye (Leymus condensatüs),
and coastal goldenbush (Isocoma venetus). The riparian scrub species mulefat, giant wild.
rye, and coastal goldenbush will be utilized immediately adjacent to existing marsh and
riparian scrub areas and will then be bordered by the transitional species. It is intended that
this vegetation cover will be thick enough to discourage entry into the wetland areas and
will supplement the fence protection which already exists at the site along the northern
boundary.
2.4 OTHER AREAS OF DISTURBANCE . ALONG THE ROAD WIDENING/
REALIGNMENT CONSTRUCTION CORRIDOR
Other areas of revegetation along Olivenhain Road disturbed by construction, as well as
slopes and other areas. created. by the road widening work; will be planted With an erosion
control hydroseed mix which was designed by Project Design Consultants (P DC). This
mix is indicated on the project engineering improvement plans and specifications, and is
included herein as Appendix D., Ogden has provided suggested modifications to PDC's
seed mix, for use in:areas adjacent to wetlands and other native vegetation, to help assure
compatibility with existing native species and to avoid potential invasive problems by
exotic/ornamental species.
I
I . 315051000 . 2-9
H
I ,
2.5 IRRIGATION
The mitigationlrevegetation site area, associated with the flood control dike, will be
provided with an automatic overhead irrigation system, fed from an existing water source
in Olivenhain Road. A new water meter will be set to serve this area and below ground
irrigation systems installed to provide water to the intended container plantings and seeded
areas. It is envisioned that this system would only be considered temporary, and would be
used for the first three to four years to assist with initial plant establishment. Ultimately,
prior to final acceptance of the mitigation area at the end of the five-year
maintenance/monitoring period, this system would be shut down and abandoned. All
plantings would then survive on natural available water sources. Detailed irrigation plans
are included in Appendix D.
315051000 2-10
I
I - SECTION 3
CONSTRUCTION INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
I This section describes construction installation specifications and requirements for the
I proposed mitigation and revegetation plantings. These specifications and requirements
shall be considered part of the final landscape construction documents for the project. The
.I mitigation and revegetation areas include the landscape plans prepared by PDC for the
roadway revegetation, and the additional landscape plans for the wetland
mitigation/revegetation areas prepared by Ogden, included as attachments in the back sleeve I of this report.
Any additional plans not included in the above referenced documents shall be prepared by
an experienced riparian revegetation designer who will work with a landscape architect
registered in the State of California to develop any necessary additional landscape plans. In
addition, a civil engineer registered in the State of California shall also be consulted with to
develop any necessary grading plans for additional mitigation areas.
3.1 Q UALIFICATIONS AND R ESPONSIBILITIES OF P ERSONS I IMPLEMENTING THE MITIGATION/REVEGETATION PROGRAM
Revegetation Monitor
The revegetation monitor shall have the following minimum qualifications:
At least one year's training and/or local experience in growing native plant
species used in the mitigation/revegetation projects (either in a nursery setting or
in the field).
Knowledge of the vegetation associations proposed for the revegetation effort,
including species identity, general composition for both overstory and
understory, and species' ecological positions relative to the water table.
A minimum of 2 years of practical horticultural experience, i.e., maintenance
and/or growing and propagating of plants.
:1
315051000 3-1
Hi
4. A minimum of 2 years of college level study and 2 years of field experience in
landscape design and construction, including a knowledge of both irrigation
system design and planting plan development.
Overall monitoring of both the installation and initial .120-day maintenance will be the
responsibility of the revegetation monitor. The monitor will utilize a qualified landscape
architect for technical review of the irrigation installation. During the installation phase the
revegetation monitor will be directly under contract with the City to assure that proper
installation procedures are followed. At the completion of the installation, the revegetation
monitor will carry out the 5-year monitoring program, as described in Section 5, with
oversight by the City.
Responsibilities of the Installation Contractor
The installation contractor will have responsibility for the installation of all mitigation
landscape plans and the maintenance of all revegetation areas for 120 days after installation
or until final certification is received from the revegetation monitor certifying completion of
all required installation and maintenance contract tasks including, but not limited to, dead
plant replacement, proper staking, weed clearance, and irrigation system maintenance.
3.2 DEDICATION
The City of Carlsbad will assure that all revegetation and mitigation areas are placed in
permanent open space easements or parcels within the City of Carlsbad (City), and that
these easements or parcels restrict any and all future building/grading (except for flood
control purposes) within the revegetation and mitigation areas.
3.3 ACCEPTANCE
The project will be accepted by the City and the regulatory agencies based upon the
following milestones:
315051000 . . 3-2
.Tnsta1iationcornp1etion: '
1 The revegetation designer certifies in writing '.to. the City that the project has been
installed according to the intent of theplans.'
2. The City ins peas the gracing and landscape installations and determines them to
be acceptäble
Monitoring completion: .'
1. The revegetation monitor concludes in the fmal'year five monitoring report that
all success .ctiteriahave been met for the project and th't no additional remedial'
.measures remain to be completed. '
, 2. The City and all other regulatory agencies' having jurisdiction over the project
have approved successful completion of the mitigation efforts.
3.4 INSTALLATION. SPECIFICATIONS S
.5 '.•' S...
This section covers all activities relating to the installation of the riparian mitigation and
t revegetation areas (per the attached landscape plans), including contractor education,
construction timing, site protection, grading, irrigation installation and frequency, general
I planting specificatións; contract growing, substitutions, sources, and guarantees.
3.4.1 Contractor': Education
I Before the beginning of any grading or installation work, all contractors who will complete
some
I.
aspect of the construction will meet at the site with the revegetation monitor. The
revegetation monitor will review all requirements of the plan and associated wetland I permits which concern the contractor including site protection, inspections, landscape
procedures, and guarantees It shall be made clear to the contractor(s) that the revegetation
SI.. monitor willhave. final approval authority, along' withTCity of Carlsbad, over the final field
installations.'
1 • I
I
1 315051000 3-3
The installation of the project will be coordinated in such a way that grading for the
mitigation/revegetation areas takes place during the same year as the irrigation and planting
installations Landscape installations must immediately follow grading/clearing without
delay Clearing/grubbing of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh
vegetation shall be restricted to occur only between March 15 through
October 15th in order to avoid impacts to sensitive nesting birds per
CDFG. reauirements.
3.4.3 Site Protection
Protection During ,Construction
Existing wetlands and the limits of the proposed revegetation sites, will be protected during
the construction process by temporary construction fencing Construction fencing will
limit access into the revegetation areas only to workers and machines implementing the
project It will also assure that the existing nparian vegetation is not damaged during the
miti gationlrevegetation installation Additional fencing may also be required by the
revegetation monitor during grading of the revegetation areas to protect the existing riparian
vegetation on site if deemed necessary. The revegetation monitor will flag the location of
the fencing prior to grading or clearing A 646ot high temporary chain link fence will be
erected at these locations This fencing will remam in place until all facility grading and/or
excavation work is completed, at which time, upon approval of the revegetation monitor, it
may be removed if other construction activities will not harm existing riparian vegetation.
The project revegetation monitor will certify in writing thatthe limits of the work area have
been properly fenced before the contractor may proceed with work If at any time
workmen or machines damage vegetation otitside the limits of work, the contractor will
bear the full cost of having the revegetation designer complete a restoration plan for the
area, as well as the costs for monitoring the success of the revegetation according to the
same • standards as the original revegetation. The contractor will also be responsible for
repairing alldamage to protective fencing within One week of such damage.
I
1 315051000 3-4
I
C
The revegetation monitor will have final discretion over the location of all protective
fencing, and may at any time require additional fencing if if is deemed necessary to protect
existing native vegetation or the revegetation areas, and is agreed to by the City.
Only construction equipment necessary to accomplish the landscape installation will be
allowed in the revegetation area Workers' vehicles will be parked outside the revegetation
areas and mitigation area parcel, and all equipment will be removed from the site as soon as
its task is completed No vehicular fluids will be added or changed onsite If soils within
the revegetation areas are compacted during construction, they shall be uncompacted by the
responsible party, or at the cost of the responsible party, prior to any planting or
hydroseeding.
Post-construction Protection
After construction is completed and during the 5-year monitoring period, the revegetation
site will be permanently fenced using 5400t-high chain link fencing, or other fencing as
specified by the revegetation monitor, on all sides except those which directly abut existing
riparian vegetation The location of the proposed permanent fencing is shown on the
attached landscape plans The first post-construction monitoring report to the City will
certify that this fencing has-been completed to the satisfaction of the revegetation monitor.
The purpose of fencing will. be to keep all non-maintenance. individuals and vehicles out, of
the mitigation/revegetation areas at all times Any breaks in fencing will be repaired within
one week by the landscape contractor at no extra cost Additional fencing may be required
during the monitoring period if the revegetation monitoE determines that it is necessary to
eliminate human or vehicular entry into the project site This additional fencing would be a
change order to the project...
1 3 4 4 Site Grading and Site Preparation
I The revegetation monitor will observe the mitigation area grading to assure that final grades
adequately match the depths to water table required to support the habitat types indicated on
I the landscape plans Final approval of site grading will be made in writing by the
revegetation monitor to the City before irrigation.installatiOn and planting proceeds.
I
.1 .
.:
315051000 - 3-5
During grading operations, desirable topsoil, as specified by the revegetation monitor, will
be stockpiled and redisiributed to designated area'after g'rading is completed. Topsoil
stockpiling will be done only in areas approved by the.révegetaiion monitor.
Grading work will remain always within the limits of, work set in the field by the
revegetation monitor before the commencement Of 'grading. The contractor will be liable
for repair of-any damage beyond' these limits; as per 'the requirements of the original
revegetation plan.
'If fill soils are needed, they must be appr6ved' by' the revegetation monitor prior to
placement Generally, no fill soils are expected to be used in this project
All cut soils that are' not needed will be removed from the mitigation/revegétation:sites and
disposed dfoffsite in'a legally acceptable manner.
Grading equIpment will not remain onsite longer than necessary to complete the required
work No oil or other fluids from grading equipment will be dumped onsite
3.4.5 Exotic 'Weed Species Removal,
'
The contractor 'shall remove all weeds and exotic species from' the mitigatiôrilrevegetàtion
and enhancement areas. These weeds shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
wild tobacco (Nicotzana glauca), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), eucalyptus
'(Eucalypths spp.), giant reed (Arundo donax.), fennel '(Foéñipulum vulgare), mustard,
(Brassicaspp.), sweet clover (Melilotus spp.), castor bean (Ricinus cOmmunis), and any
other major invasive weed species as directed by the revegetation monitor.
314.6 General Planting Specifications
Contract Growing and'-'Sources
Arrangement's will be by the contractor to contract grow, all container plant materials, and to
'reserve seed required for the revegetation work. Contract growing will be conducted by an
experienced native- plant nursery and seed company such as, but not limited to 'the
following:
315051000, 3-6
Container Plant Nurseries Tree of Life Nursery, San Juan Capistrano, CA, Mockingbird
Nursery, Riverside, CA; Bee Valley Nursery, San Diego; CA;
Seed Suppliers S & S Seeds, Carpinteria, CA, Pacific Coast Seed, Inc., Livermore, CA,
Carter Seeds, Vista.- CA.
A copy of the contract. grow agreement will be submitted to the revegetation designer by the
contractor as verification of the order.
Sources
It is preferred that the source, of all propagules. and seed used at the site be secured from
wild sources within San Diego county that are as close to the revegetation sites as possible.
The revegetation designer will work closely with the contractor and the suppliers to
approve all sources of plant materials. The.-,contractor will provide the revegetation
designer with information on the sources of all plant and seed materials grown/collected for
the project for final approval If necessary, the project revegetation designer will help the
grower locate local sources for plant material
Substitutions
The contractor is expected to secure all plant materials well in advance of the .expected
planting date No substitutions of any species specified will be allowed, and sizes shall not
be changed. If the contractor is unable to obtain the proper species specified at the time of
planting, commencement of the guarantee penod will be delayed until all plants specified
are planted. Substitution of plant materials at the time of planting depends solely upon the
discretion of the project revegetation designer. '
Plant Inspection
All plant materials will be inspected by the revegetatiOn?designer and approved as healthy,
disease free, and of proper size prior to planting In addition, the revegetation designer will
approve the final layout of all plant materials in the field prior to planting to, assure their
correct ecological positioning.
315051000 3-7
Irrigation System Inspection
Final layout of the irrigation system will be approved in the field by the revegetation
designer/landscape architect prior to planting installation Any major changes to the
irrigation system would be reviewed and approved by the project landscape architect
Container Planting Practices
Container, plantingsshalLbe installed within the mitigation site, preferably during the Fall
and early Winter prior to flooding; All irrigation systems should be operational prior to:
planting. Container plants will be planted usingstandardhorticu1tural'practice, utilizing a
hole twièe the diameter of the rootball-and leaving the plant crown 1 inch above grade after
planting Backfilled holes will be irrigated on several days prior to planting, to settle the
soil.
All plants will be thoroughly watered in their pots before planting Likewise, the soil in all
planting holes will be wetted before planting
A backfill mix containing only native soil mixed with 7 lbs per cubic yard of "Osmocote"
(18-642) slow release fertilizer or equivalent will beLused In addition, container plantings
will receive "Agriform" (20-10-5), 21 gram, slow release fertilizer tablets, at the rate of
one for each 1-gallon plant..These tablets will be placed no deeper than 8 inches from the
soil surface around the rootballs of the plants
No pruning of plant materials will. be.-allowed unless specified by the revegetation
designer/biologist
Staking of trees will only be implemented if considered necessary by the revegetation
designer at the time of planting All stalung will be with two 2-inch diameter by 8-foot
wooden posts on either side of the plant with tree ties holding the trunk to the post at the
lowest possible level of support Staking will be removed as soon as trees can support
themselves
I
I
ii.
I Container Plant Guarantees
* All plants determined to be dead or diseased by the revegetation designer will be replaced
120d'aysl after installation by the contractor and then as required by i the maintenance
I program Unless substitutions are approved by the revegetation designer, the replacement
plants shall be of the same size and species as ongmally planted
Hydroséeding Specifications
Hydroseeding will be done after the completion of all container plantings and before the
onset of winter rains The areas to be hydroseeded will be watered for two weeks prior to
seeding after container planting is completed All weeds growing at the end of two weeks
wilLbe sprayed with Rodeo herbicide or equivalent and then the weeds allowed to die over
the course of the next week. Any weeds left alive at the end of the third week will be hand
cleared by the contractor prior to hydroseeding. The ground w ill •be thoroughly wetted
prior tohydroseeding. Hydroseeding willpróceed only after- the revegetation designer
certifies that hydroseed Site preparation work has been completed.
In areas where different hydroseed mixes will béused, the final, limits of the areas to be
seeded will be approved by the revegetation designer.
Hydroseed quality will be the best obtainable in the year of application for both purity and
germination No seed shall be more than one year old when applied
Amount of seed purchased, germination, and purity of seed will be provided in writing to
the revegetation:designer by the contractor for all seed used.
During hydroseeding, all plant materials 1 gallon or smaller will be covered with 15-gallon
planting containers during the hydroseeding process to prevent seeding around their bases.
These cans will not remain in. place longer than I hour_ and will be removed as soon as
possible after seeding-takes place.
Once seed is in place, the contractor will be responsible for supplying sufficient irrigation
to adequately germinate and establish the seed applied The irrigation system will be
checked by the contractor for malfunctioning and/or damage to individual heads every other
day for the firt three weeks after seeding, and repairs will be made immediately.
31505000 3..9
1'
I
. : Hydroseed Guarantees
The contractor will guarantee a 70 percent coverage rate at 120 days or respray all areas
I where inadequate seed establishment has taken place at the direction of the revegetation
designer. The revegetation designer will determine the need for respraying
Reporting During Construction
1 Progress reports will be made to the City at major milestones during the construction
period, -beginning with a letter certifying that.,contractor education has been completed and
that pre-construction site protection has:taken place. If construction is delayed for any
reason, monitoringreportswi1l continue once construction is resumed.
I
I
:1
I
I
I
I
I
I
315051000 . 3-10
.. .. •,. ••• . . .• . "':7;
Once the revegetation monitor certifies that the mitigation and revegetation installations have
been completed, a 5-year maintenance and monitoring period will begin, to assure project
success; Monitoring will assess whether the project has met its performance standards.
This section outlines the requirements for the 5-year maintenance program Section 5 will
address the specifics of the 5year monitoring program.
4.2 RESPONSIBILITIES
4.2.1 City of Carlsbad
The City will beresonsible for hiring a landscape maintenance contractor-to implement the
5-year maintenance program, as outlined in this section The City shall coordinate with the
revegetation monitor to -carry out the requirements of the 5-year mitigation monitoring
program, as outlined in Section 5 The City may, with sole discretion, replace any of these
parties, but will be responsible for continuing the 5-year programs until, completion.
4.2.2 RevegEtation Monitor
The revegetation monitor will provide the maintenance contractor with a written checklist of
tasks to be performed after each of the monitoring visits to the site. If the revegetation
monitor's recornmendations.call for work beyond the scope of the contractor's contract, the
contractor will be paid additional fees for this work once authorized by the City.
4.2.3 Maintenance Coritractor
After the initial construction maintenance period is.:.completed (120 days), a separate
maintenance contract will be established by the City for the remainder of the 5-year
monitoring period The mamtenance contractor retained for this work will be responsible
for the maintenance program requirements once the installation contractor's work has been
cel4ified as complete. The maintenance contract will be let only on a yearly basis and.
315051000 . 4-1
renewed based upon successful completion of the yearly maintenance work, and based
upon the recommendations of the revegetatlon monitor. At the discretion of the
revegetation monitor and the City, the maintenance contractor may be changed if proper
maintenance is not performed At the completion of each yearly maintenance contract, the
contractor will be responsible for having completed all requests for work specified by the
revegetation monitor and the City before receiving final payment
.4.3 CONTRACTOR EDUCATION
The revegetation monitor will meet with all maintenance contractors prior to the beginning
of their contract to ensure that they understandthe maintenance provisions of the '5 year
maintenance program, as well as the recommendations for the current year's maintenance
procedures.
4.4 CONTRACTOR GUARANTEES
The maintenance contractor will be responsible for the, replacement of all plant materials
considered-dead or diseased, as-determined by The revegetation monitor, at the specified
replacement dates defined in the success standards (Section 6.0).
45 IRRIGATION SYSTEM MAINTENANCE
4.5.1 System Repair
The maintenance contractor will be responsible for the regular maintenance and repair of all
elements of the irrigation system The maintenance contractor will make general system
checks once every week for the first six months., after installation, to assure heads are
operating', properly and .'coverage of hydroseeded areas is adequate. .Thereafter, the
maintenance contractor will check system operation at least once a month except during
periods when the 'system is not inoperation due, to weather or the recommendation of the
revegetation monitor. .
4.5.2 System Cycle Documentation
The maintenance contractor will provide the revegetation monitor with the cycle start times
and the length of each cycle for all valves in the revegetation/mitigation areas These times
315051000 4-2
I may be changed as recommended by the revegetation monitor. When changes are made,
the contractor wiliprovide the revegetation monitor with written confirmation of, the date
I and time at-which the change was made.
4.5.3 System Removal
I The surface components of irrigation systems in the revegetation/mitigation areas are to be
removed once the plantings have become adequately established The revegetation monitor
will decide how and when irrigation will be phased out At the completion of the 5-year
:1 monitoring period, all irrigation components which are above grade will be removed by the
contractor from the revegetation/mitigation areas and all valves permanently disconnected.
11
•. 4.6 WEEDING
Weed removal will require constant diligence by the contractor The crucial period for
I
weed control will be the first two years of project establishment An 24-inch weed free
band will be maintained around all container plantings for the first two years after planting.
Throughout the rest of the project, weed species to be removed and the methods to be used
I will be specified by the revegetation momtor. In general, weed removal will be by hand or
hoe; herbicides will only be permitted based upon recommendations of a certified Pest
'1 'Control Advisor. Weed whipping. may be acceptable if so approved by',the revegetation
monitor. Because of the critical nature of weed control at the begitining of the project, the
contractor will be held liable for rehydroseeding if weeds are not removed on a timely
basis, thus preventing the establishment of hydroseeded species A timely basis will be
within one week of written recommendations by the revegetation momtor. Weed removal
will take place at least once a month during the first year, Once every four months 'for'
years 3 and.4, and twice a year. during year 5. More frequent weeding may be necessary
as recommended by the revegetation monitor to keep weeds at manageable levels.
Special attention will be given by the contractor to the removal of invasive exotic weed
species from the revegetation/mitigation sites. These species include, but are not limited to,
giant reed (Arundo donax), fennel (Foenzculum vulgare), pampas grass (Cortaderia
selloana), eucalyptus -(Eucalyptus spp.), mustard' (Brassica spp), sweet clover (Melilotus
I ' '
spp.), and wild tobacco (Nicotiana 'glauca). Repeat herbicide applications may be
necessary on large plants as determined by the Pest Control Advisor. All small plants are
to be removed with their roots 'if possible before rherbicide use is attempted.
315051000
4 3
1 .,,..
1
4.7 STAKING ANDCAGING
Staking of treeswill be avoided, and any stakes used will be removed as soon as the tree
I'. can support itself adequately. It is expected that some trees may require staking during the
first 2 years of the project Staking will only be done if recommended by the revegetation
I momtor. All stakes will be removed before the completion of the 5-year monitoring period
or earlier, as recommended .by the revegetation monitor. All stakes taken off trees will be
AM removed from the revegetation areas by the contractor and disposed of legally.
Caging of trees to protect them' from predator damage was not planned as part of the initial.
installation. If this need .becomes evident, the revegetation monitor will recommend that
such caging take place and the contractor will install the caging according to the
specifications provided'by. thélrevegetation monitor.. The costs of this caging will be borne
by the City as a change order to the contract.
4.8. DEAD PLANT REPLACEMENT
Dead and diseased plants will be flagged in the field by the revegetàtion' monitor and a list
provided to the maintenance. con tractor for replacement. Dead and diseased plants will be
replaced at 4, 8, -and 12 months during the first year after installation. If plants fail to meet
the success criteria at the end of any given year, plant. replacement may be one of the
.
remedial measures recommended by the revegetation. monitor. The cost of replacement
plants will ultimately be born by the City, although it may assign some or all of this
responsibility to. the maintenance contractor or other responsible party All plants will be
replaced "in kind", per the Original planting design, unless otherwise approved by the
revegetation monitor..
HI
4;9 TRASH AND DEBRIS REMOVAL
All human generated trash and :debris will be removed by the maintenance contractor from
I . the revegetation areas at least once every three months, throughout the 5-year maintenance
period. Care will be taken that these trash removal activities minimize or avoid impacts to
.I plantings in the révegetation/mitigation areas or existing wetlands. All dead limbs and tree
fall will be left in the revegetationln-utigation areas to naturally decompose Weed debris
will be removed from the Project area and disposed of at legally acceptable locations.
i
315051000 4-4
I ..
4-J.0 MOTORIZED VEHICLE ACCESS
No.'service vehicles will be allowed in the revegetationlimtigation areas at any time
Maintenance access to the revegetationlmitigation sites will be limited to the minimum
necessary for weed and trash removal All vehicles will be parked outside the
revegetation/mitigation areas on existing roads at all times No power tool fluids will be
changed or added while they are in the revegetation/mitigation areas
The contractor will immediately notify the revegetation monitor if any unauthorized
persons, vehicles, or animals impact the revegetation/mitigation areas
4.11 PEST CONTROL
Insects and diseases will be monitored for their impact on the revegetation/m.Itigation areas
Biological control and Integrated Pest Management will be used whenever possible Plants
that are severely diseased will be removed and replaced to prevent the spread of disease and
insects Pesticides will be largely avoided unless recommended for special problems by the
certified Pest Control Advisor. Rodent control, if necessary, will be restricted to trapping
or.,nti-coagulants with no secondary poisoning effect Any pest control measures which
require pesticide use will be recommended by the Pest Control Advisor with review and
approval by the revegetation momtor.
4A2 FERTILIZATION
For the first two years after planting, all trees will receive one application of the fertilizer
"Osmocote" (18-6-12) in February of each year Manufacturer recommended rates will be
applied The fertilizer will be dug at least 1 inch into the soil within the drip lines of the
container, plants. No fertilization will be7 used after the second year of project installation,
'unless recommendd by the revëgetation monitor;
4.5
'i
I - SECTION 5
5-YEAR MONITORING PROGRAM
I
5.I TIME FRAME. AND PURPOSE "
The first purpose of the monitoring program will be to ensure that proper installation,
I maintenance, and establishment procedures, as outlined in the previous section, are
followed The second purpose of the monitoring program will be to define success criteria
by which to evaluate project progress The third purpose of the monitoring program will
be to recommend remedial measures, if the project does not meet the success criteria, which
will bring it ba'ck into 'conformance. Horticultural monitoring will be the primary method
for evalu ingachievernent of establishment; a combination of horticultural and botanical
monitOriig will be usec to evaluate achievement of the success criteria. The revegetation
1' monitor will recommend remedial measures, as necessary to meet the required standards.
I The monitoring program will begin once construction is certified as complete Monitoring
,
will continue for 5 years or until the project 'is,. given final approval by the regulatory
I. agencies. . . .
5.2 HORTICULTURAL MONITORING
A' revegetation monitor with the qualifications outlined in Section 3.0 will direct the
project's horticultural monitoring program Plantings will be inspected by the revegetation
monitor at least once every 3 months (quarterly) during the first year after planting.
Thereafter, the revegetation monitor will visit the project'a minimum of three times a'year.
More frequent nionitoring visits maybe required' to ensure project progress and proper
maintënáncé practices are being followed.
A' written memorandum will be prepared after each monitoring site visit listing any
,problems and recommended remedial measures. These memoranda will be sent to the
maintenance contractor, and City for implementation. These memoranda will focus on any
and all problems. "concerning project horticulture including weeding, irrigation.scheduliñg,
ttash removal, pruning, pest control, etc. The revegetation monitor will be responsible for
all required dead and diseased plant counts and the approval of any plant' material
substitutions. The revegetation monitor will be responsible for recommending all remedial
measures to be implemented and will work with the maintenance contractor to determine
proper irrigation scheduling, and when to phase-out irrigation
5.3 BOTANICAL MONITORING
'A biologist/botanist having the following minimum qualifications will supervise, all:
botanical monitoring:
a broad background in vegetation sampling; -
at least 2 years of local experience in identifying/sampling native vegetation,
a good knowledge of the ecological relationships of the vegetative associations
oñsite; and
a minimum of a Bachelor's degree with afocus in botany/ecology.
Botanical monitoring will focus on quantitatively measuring the development of the
plantings and will be 'conducted concurrently with horticultural monitoring annually for
3 years beginning with the third year after project installation Monitoring will be
conducted during the active growing. season from April to September. Similar sampling
times should be consistent from year to year. Required reports will, be will become a part
of the annual reports for years 3-5.
Vegetative growth and establishment will be quantitatively assessed through the use of four
30 meter line transects beginning in the third year of the project Transects will be located
so as to effectively sample all reyegetation/mitigation areas Data collected from these line
transects will be used to evaluate project performance relative to the success standards
Data will be collected on vegetative composition, canopy cover and density. In addition,
for the planted nursery tree stock, annual data will be collected on species height as a means
of predicting or measuring achievement of the year 3 to 5 height goals A statistically
valid sample of at least" 5% of'planted trees will be used for this study. Volunteer
establishment of native wetland species will also be noted and measured. as appropriate.'
During year 2, a statistically valid sampling of tree and shrub species planted will be used
to derive standards for the bottom 20 percent of trees and shrubs in height growth Those
individuals among the 'bottom 20 percent"will be assessed for remedial needs.
I!
I 315051000 5-2
.1
1 54 MONITORING REPORTS
1 5 4 1 During the Five Year. Monitoring Period
I Monitoring reports will be filed with the City, at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months Reports
will detail project progress and remedial measures recommended and implemented during
I the monitoring period Reports will include a summary of the horticultural assessment, and
an analysis of the botanical monitoring data collected with an evaluation of project progress
relative to the success standards. •.
Copies of all yearly monitoring reports will be sent to all appropriate regulatory/permitting
1
• agencies by the City
• . •
:1..
0•' • •••.s
- SECTION 6
SUCCESS STANDARDS AND REMEDIAL MEASURES
6.1 PURPOSE AND BASIS FOR STANDARDS
This section defines a set of yearly success standards for evaluating project progress.
These standards will, be used to decide when to implement remedial measures, or to correct
problems which have:arisen.
6.2. SCOPE- OF REMEDIAL MEASURES
While remedial measures are partially defined herein, they are also left to the discretion of
the revegetatlon monitor/biologist since it is expected that one approach will not always be
the best or most cost effective Remedial measures will include some or all of the
following:'additional weeding, fertilization, pest control, replanting, additional irrigation,
changes to irrigation system, and possible species substitution
6.3 PROJECT SUCCESS STANDARDS AND RECOMMENDED REMEDIAL
MEASURES
Remedial Measure if
Standards Not Met Stañdàrd
Year 1 (Horticultural Monitoring only)
40% groundcover
2. Establishment of all species
1000/0 healthy container plantings
(trees' and shrubs)
Year 2 (Horticultural Monitoriñ only)
All trees of acceptable growth rate in height
2. All shrubs of acceptable growth. rate
. 100% survival of tree plantings2
80% survival, of shrub plantings2
50% total groundcover for all species
combined.
315051000 . . : 64
Reseed/Replant if not met:
Substitutions possible.
Reseed/Replant if not met.
Substitutions possible.
Replace with same species/size.
Smallest 20% of container trees
receive remedial measures.
Smallest 20% of shrubs receive
remedial measures.
Replant if not met.
Additional seed or container
plantings as recommended by
revegetation designer.
• ' Remedial Measure if
Standard ' .' • 'Standards NOtiMêt
Year 3-5 (Horticultural and Botanical Monitoring)
Height standards met for all trees Replant or receive remedial
measures, substitutions
possible.
Tree Height Standards1
WillOws (1 gal.) •. 2.0 ' 2.7 3.4
•,Muiefàt.(lgal.) ' 1;.2 ' 1.5 J.8
2 90% survival of tree plantings2 Replant if not met
80% survival of shrub plantings2
3 750/o groundcover by all species in year 3 Additional seieIT or container
85% groundcover by all species in year 4 plantings as recommended by
90% groundcover by all species in year 5 revegetation designer.
1 All heights given in meters
2 At the discretion of the revegetation monitor, dead container plants can be mitigated for by
naturally invading native seedlings if such seedlings are within 5 feet of the original plantings
and of similar species or habitat value
4. Irrigation will gradually. be withdrawn from the revegetation/mitigation areas during
years .3 and 4 For the project to be considered successful, all plantings must
survive through one full dry season without supplemental irrigation. Thus, no
matter when the monitoring period begins, final project evaluation will not be made
until the first March after irrigation has been discontinued.
6.4 MODIFICATION OF MONITORING PERIOD
The monitoring period is specified to be 5 years after completion and approval of
installation. The regulatory. agencies (under the project's 1603 and 404 permits) may
terminate monitoring earlier than 5 years if it is recommended by the revegetation monitor
based upon early achievement of the success standards Likewise, if, at the end of 5-years,
any of the revegetation/mitigation areas fails to meet the year 5 standards, the monitoring
and maintenance penod may be extended an additional year and a specific set of remedial
measures implemented Only areas which fail to meet the success standards will require
additional work-and rernediaFmeasures. This process will continue until the year 5
standards are met, or until the regulatory agencies determine that other mitigating measures
are appropriate.
315051000 ' 6-2
ii
:SECTION 7
REFERENCES
I
Brian F Mooney Associates 1991 Biological Survey and Report for the Ohvenhain
Road Widenin/Rea1ignment and Flood Control Project. City of Encinitas, California;
I Brian F Mooney Associates 1992 Final Environmental Impact Report for Olivenhain
Road WidemngfRealignment and Flood Control Project City of Encinitas, California
I Project Design Consultants (PDC) 1995 Draft Grading and Improvement Plans for
Olivenharn Road Widening and Realignment City of Carlsbad, California Engineering
I Department. Sheets 1thru 35.
I .
I
1
II
Ii
I I
I
I
315051000 7-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
SAN DIEGb.FIELD,IOFFICE
9808 SCRANTON ROAD, SUITE 430
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
May 23; 1995
RECEIVED.
REPLY TO
Office rI the Chief
Regulatory Branch MAY 2.61995
. EEER!NG:
.. DEPARTMENT City of. Carlsbad
Attn:, Mr. Pat Entezari
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 920091576
Gentlemen: . • .
I This is in reply to your letter (No 95-20096-BH) dated December 22, 1994, concerning
our permit authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1972(33 U.S.C. 1344) over
I your proposal to realign and widen Olivenhain Road from El Camino Real to a point
approximately 1,400 feet east, impacting approximately 025 acres of Encuutas Creek in the
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California.,The proposed project will include widening
1 . the existing two-lane bridge to six lanes with bicycle lanes and sidewalks on. both sides.
Regulations fo
r
. our perm t program, published in the Federal Register, include Part 330 I - Nation wiá'e Permits (see the enclosure) The Corps of Engineers has determined that your
proposed activity comphes with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit at 33 CFR
I Part 330, Appendix A(15)(26) for discharges of dredged or fill material into headwaters and
isolated waters of the United States, including wetlands, that are part of a single and
complete project which would cause the loss or substantial adverse modification of less than
I one acre of such waters For the purposes of this nationwide permit, the acreage of loss of
waters of the U.S. includes the filled area plus waters of the U.S. that are adversely affected
by flooding, excavation or drainage as a result of the project.
As long as you comply withl the nationwide permit conditions described in Part 330,
Appendix A(C) and the attached special condition, an individual permit is not required This
letter of verification is valid for .a period not- to exceed two years unless the nationwide
permit is modified, reissued orrevoked before that time. It is incumbent upon you to remain
I
informed of changes to the nationwide peimits.
A nationwide permit does not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. Also,
I it does not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others or authorize interference
with any existing or proposed Federal project Furthermore, it does not obviate the need to
obtain other Federal, state, or local authorizations required by law.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
I
APPENDIX B
BIOLOGICAL REPORT, PREPARED BY
I BRIAN MOONEY ASSOCIATES, 1991
I
:1
I
I
I. S
I
FT
I
I
I
I BIOLOGICAL SURVEY AND REPORT FOR T1i OLIVENHAIN ROAD wiDENING/REALIGNMENT AND
I
FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
Prepared for.
I City of Encim'a.i
Counity Developipent Department 1 527 Encinitas Boulevard
Encinnas, Califorina 92024
I
Prepared by:
I Brian F Mooney Associates
9903-B Busmesspark Avenue
San Diego, Califthma 92131
I
I
June 1991
I
I
TABLE OF -CONTENTS
••
4
I
Page
I
10
.10
1.9
19
20
22
22
23
27
31
31
34
LLcr OF FIGURES
Number Name Page
I i Regional Location Map 3 2 VicinatyMap 5 3 Biological Resources ?tap - Road Ahgiirrnts 7 Biologiciil Resources Map - Detention Basin 8 I 5 Biological Resources Map for La Cosa Avenue 9 6 Ohvenhin Rad Aligiamnt Biological Impacts Map 25 • 7 Detnron Basin Biologic1.al Impacts Map 26 1 8 La Cosa Avenue - Biological Impacts Map Alternative One 29 9 La Cosa Avenue - Biological Impacts Map Alternative Two 30
LIST OF TABLES
Number Name Page
1 1 Plant Species Observed on OhvenhMn Road ii 2 Bird Species Observed on Ohvenhain Road 15 Impact Snamry fcki101ivenhin Road and I Flood Control m=,Project,24 4 La Costa Avenue Flood Control Project- impact Smnmy 28
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
11
I
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Project Description and Location
The project is located within the cities of Carlsbad and 'Encinitas, in northern San
Diego County. The project consists of the widening and realignnint of the Olivenhin Road,
between Rancho Santa Fe Road and El Camino Real; a floodwater detention' basin (Detention
Basin D) south of Olivenhain Road, just west of Rancho Santa Fe Road; and a berm south
of LA Costa Avenue, west of El Camino Real. There- are four alternative alignments for
Olivenhain Road and two alternatives for the berm south' of La Costa Avenue. The detention
basin would be constructed in two phases. The first phase would be consmicted at the same
time as the road realignment. This part would consist of a dike at the western end of the
property, new an equestrian facility. The other phase of the detention basin would be filling
the northern and southern slopes of the current floodplain when development is proposed for
this property. The detention basin might result in ponding east of Rancho Santa Fe Road.
Existing Setting
Each project area (road, detention basin, berm) supports a complex wetland mosaic of
coastal freshwater marsh, coastal salt marsh, southern willow scrub, wetland ecotone, and
disturbed wetlaivi scrub, as well as southern mixed chaparral, and disturbed upland. The site
at La Costa Avenue also Contains baccharis scrub. The disturbed uplands are of little wildlife
value. The southern willow scrub has medium value south of Olivenhain Road and high value
south of La Costa. The traffic noise does detract from the willows scrub's value. The
wet1an4 ecotone has value as edge habitat. The disturbed wetland scrub is of medium value
but the baccharis scrub it of relatively high value. Thó salt marsh south of Olivenhain Road
has limited value because it is so dried up but the salt marsh south of La Costa seems to be
excellent habitat The fresh water marsh at all sites has a high habitat value.
The southern willow scrub, coastal freshwater and salt marsh, and the wetland ecotone
are considered sensitive habitats. One sensitive plant species, southwestern spiny rush, was
observed and identified on site, and another sensitive species was observed but its variety was
not determined. Southwestern spiny rush was detected in the freshwater marsh, coastal salt
marsh, and southern willow scrub. The survey also revealed a sand aster, in a ruderal area
west of the tack shop, but it could have been Del Mar mesa sand aster, San Diego sand aster
or the more common virgate cudweed aster.
Common tiparian and wetland fauna were observed on the sites with the exception of
two sensitive birds, downy woodpecker and willow flycatcher. Yellow-breasted chat and
yellow warbler might also occur in the southern willow scrub.
Impacts
The loss of southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, and coastal salt marsh from the
road widening, detention basin, and berm are considered significant cumulative impacts. The
impact to the sensitive species of these habitats, southwestern spiny rush, downy woodpecker,
and willow flycatcher are also regarded as cumulatively sigrificant The• willow flycatcher and
I
I
• other songbixds will also be significanoy, impacted by construction nose. The dike and the
construction .easement could potentially impact Del Mar Mesa or San Diego sand aster if ix
is determined to be present in a rnr
There ivill be slight increases -of oil and grimfrom the widening of the road which
would be considered a sigmant cumulative lm?act.
I
Mitigation
We recommend that Aligiinint 2 of Olivenhain Road and Alternate 1 of the La Costa
berm be chosen as the preferred alternatives because they impact less wetland vegetation and
nima1 species. This recomnndanon is based on the field surveys and habitat type and
quantity being impacted by each alternative alignment.
Significant impacts ftvii the construction of Aligmvmt2, the Detention Basin and
Alternate 1 berm can be mitigated by placing geotcatile over vegetation in the construction
easements and revegetanng the habitat types that will be permknntly impacted, southern
willow scrub and coastal salt marsh. In order to avoid any water pollution impacts from oil
and gas washing off the road, an oil cawhmnt basin should be constructed south of
Olivenhain road.
The construction period should be
impacts to sensitive nesting birds. There
I ruderal area to the west of the tack shop.
resuicted...to,lm July through October, to avoid
should be a summer survey for sand aster in the
The construction activities should be monitored by a qnalifiéd biologist to prevent any
unnecessary impacts to wethpnds The revegetanon should also be monitored for five years
to evaluate its initial success and direct maintenance activities The construction easements
shall also be surveyed the spring after the construction take plaóe to determine if the plant
communities are regenerating on their own.
INTRODUCTION
Project Description :
The project is located within the cities of CarLsbad and Pvvimtas, in northern San
Diego County (Egure 1) The project consists of the widening and-realignment of the
Olivenhain Road, between Rancho Santa Fe Road and El Camino Real;- a floodwater detention
basin (Detention'Buin I)) south of Olivenhain Road,* just west of Raiieho Santa Fe Road; and
a berm south of La Costa Avenue, west of El Cniino ReaL. There e four alternative
alignments for Olivenhain Road and two alternatives for the berm south of La Costa Avenue
The detention basin would be constructed in two phased. The first phase would be constructed
at the same time as the madIrealignnnt This part would consist of a dike at the western
I
end of. the property, near an equestrian facility. The other phase of the detention basin would
be filling the northern and southern slopes, of the current, floodplain when development is
proposed for this property. The detention basin might result in ponding east of Rancho Santa
i
Fe Road.
2
I
I
Ski
- j Aft
Mar
&s• •'/%I r'-
"'... sm -'
ci ••• '
J.
Fadio tO POP w
\;
-1_____•/ •
,.:
' •
L k
'p I •
, 'N -•p4do '• .• v-. I i ,.nk rvrj') \," '.. , '.•) '
jig kPAj&A
'1 l'f Olvsntin Rosd i ''I '•'. ••
C4SIW f•si
Lucadia\
Project Site
JI ...•A-'"
Emkfts
;Encinitas slat
10
I •.•
.'<' • . '-Jk; Cardiff.by4he
lCanftrn 'WI D\'
Solana Beach '
's
N Olivenhain Road Alignment
2 3 Regional Location Map
bria oonay.
-. 4
I Ow
Pography
The topography of the property south of Olivenhin Road is relatively 'flat, consisting
of slopes of less than ten-l.ercent, with a drainage along the southern bOnM2ry. (Figure 2).
The elevation ranges "from 100 feet above nan sea level (AMSL) in the drMnage to 140 'feet
SL in the more'isad areas The La Costa Avenue site. is also flat except far the fill ' slopes of the road. The elevation ranges from zero to twenty feet. AMSL at the berm site.
The project sim'is underlain by Eocene Marine wiinints'(Rogers 1965).', The soil at
Olivenhain Road consists of mainly Salinas clay loam withpatches -of Corralitas loamy .sand
j and Las Flares loamy fine sand (Bowman 1973). The soils south of La Costa Avenue include
Las Flares loamy fine sand, Carralitos loamy sand, Placentia sandy loam and terrace
iescarpments.
Land Use
J The land use in. the vicinity of 01ivenh2in Road consists of OMWD' Hadqiiiti,
undeveloped lafld, and single family dwellings to 'the north;. Rancho Santa Fe Road to the east;
El Caniino Real to the west; and a tack shop (H and 'H Tick-'and Feed), single. family
'residential , and undeveloped land south Of the road. The La Costa Avenue
to the north, El Camino Real to the east, and undeveloped land to the south and west
METHODS . . . .
The property was surveyed by W. Larry Sward and Anne Marie TiPton-Golly on
Februy 13, 1991 between the hours of 0900 and 1100' and May 29 froth 0820 to 1100.
- The weather was warm5°F) (70-7 and sunny in. February and overcast MW May. '' ClAude
Edwards did a focused, survey for sensitive riparian 'birds June 4, (ruin 1015 to 1245. The
weather (70M i. hazy. . .
The timing of the winter flld swvey' cesponded with a piod of re1aive1y low
biological activity. Most reptiles arc inactive and many important local breeding bud species
have migrated south. for the winter. Many' of' the herbaàeOus plants were senescent and
therefore not identible. at the tim of this suivey.
The entire property was surveyed directly and' with the' aid of 'binoculars. Color acial
photohs (dazed 1990) were 'used as aids in mapping the vegetation. The scale of these
I photographs are approximately one inch equal to 400 'feet This' report was prepared by A.M.
'Tipton-Golly and edited by W.L. Sward.
I
I
I
Proposed Detention Basin
Potential 100—Year Flood
Ponding Area
I \V
1•. ••I •i •('.
10
jl
i Cost COuniry :it
rJ
-r -1-1—j '--'k!. \
-
. I I I U ,'V'-. • • j.. -
C" of Wow—
I ........ t.• 1. /. I ••W IF Iw, p \• ' .')? (I.b.ç .
Y ' " Project $(t'( ', ,,
\-__.r's,It
Cn Site
I'
- i.e \ ,h.' • • -. ' • . /
I Ov
vp
IS
Olivenhain Road Alignment
Vicinity Map
LTI Jjpi,t.I
--------.1 Figure 2
I ULTS
I Botany
I Each project area (road, detention basin, berm) supports a complex wetland mosaic of
freshwater marsh, coastal salt marsh, southern willow sib, wet)nd ecotone, disturbed
d scrub, as well as- southern mixed chaparral and disnttbed. upland (Holland
(Pigs 3, 4, and 5). The site at La Costa Avenue alsocontains baccharis scrub. The
g vegetation patterns an probably the result, of the nann'al hydrology, numerou
s
achments into the Encimtas creek and Green Valley floodplains, and urban runoff. The
chments include fill for the tack shop, a subdivision west of the proposed dike, Rancho
J Fe and Olivenhin Roads, La Costa Avenue, atid B Camino Real. The most abundant
land habitat type is coastal fresh waxer marsh which covers 6.49 acres of the site. This
I
type is located in the drainage south of Olivenhin road and south of the culvert at La
Avenue. Soft flag (Typha latifolia) is the dominant species in this habitat type at
i7enhnin Road, it covers 95% of this marsh. Other speces in the freshwater marsh include
arsh fleabane (Pluchea odorata var. odoraxa, great marsh evening primrose (Oenothera
hirsunssirna, and southwestern spiny rush (Juncus acutus var. sphaerocaxpus). Tule
ttail Crypha domingensis) is the dominant species ax La Costa.
Coastal salt marsh occurs in the area of the detention basin . and berm and it
.mpasses 4.64 acres. This habitat is dominated by woody glasswort (Salicornia virginica.
livenhain Road, many of the plants are dried up and the arc a few dried salt bed
s
ted among the plants. Alkali-heath (Frankenia sauna), and sweet fennel (Foeniculum
) axe the other species included in this habitat type. The La Costa site also suppo
r
t
s
. susan (Jaurnea carnosa') and a. dense stand of southwestern spiny rush.
Southern willow scrub occurs in. scattered locations south of both roads, constituting
total 4.1
1-to
acres. There are not any mature tees in the eastern willow scrub near Rancho
Fe Road but the uees to the west and at La Costa are older and at least twice as tall
6 and 10 meters). Arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) Is the main arboreal element of the
w' scrub with shrubby arroyo willows, mule fax (Baecharis glunnosa), soft flag, and
jpwestern spiny rush as understory co ts. mponen
The wetland ecotone exists 'south of 011ve11h24n Road as a coastal salt marsh/disturbed
Ifscrub mixture. This habitat type covers 1.23 acres of the site. The marsh species
tof woody glasswort, ilk1i.heath, and salrrnarsh fleabane, while coastal goldenbush
veneta) and Russian thistle (Salsola australia) constitute the disturbed scrub element
ecotone is near the road in the eastern portion of the drainage and south of the road
o
n
western end.
( The are two types of wetland scrub, disturbed wettnd scrub and baccharis scru
b
.
species composition of disturbed wetland scrub vaties along the southern pan of the new
venhain Road alignments. On the eastern end of the site, near the proposed detention
it contains widely spaced coastal goldenbush and coyote bush (Bacchaxis 'pilularis ssp.
onsanguinea) with some non-native species such as castor-bean (Ricinus commiinis'),
scweed (Malva parviflora), and Australian saithush (Atriplex setibaccata). In the middle
\ Legend
i_---- Ii Dist Disturbed
DWS Disturbed Wetland Scrub
FWM Freshwater Marsh
I
Ii
SWS Southern Willow Scrub
SMC (l E Wetland Ecotone SWS ) 1 '—ioo- CSM Coastal Salt Marsh I !\.
SMC Southern Mixed I
- Chaparral \Ruci •' / Q) Willow Flycatcher () Downy Woodpecker
Rud
•.
11-000
FWM \' sws
- - flud - - - - _____ - - jinhaIfl flOB_
° -
Coastal Zone Rud PgArea : (Eastern I SWS SWS\
M DWS Dist
• - -- - - I loo-Year Floodplain v DWS
WS Detentioncc Basins ABC)
I Rud SWS WI I \• • - N
WS, - FWM El) 0 100 200 CSM - 011v1flh81n Road Alignment
-. • Rud E SWS Biological Resources Map brIanjoonc!v 100-Year floodplain
__• - • - (with Detention Basins A.B.C.D)
- Etoure 3
— - - —..--I—I-- --
SO(Ithim Coastal CSM Sall Mar sh
Tack & Fe Store Dws Disturbed-weiiam Scrub.
Offices
\ sws Southern Willow 3cnd OiIvnhaln Road satid \ ()
Spiny Rush
Rud
Dist
1982 floo~a.y
Thompso 7
Re&donce j...
.01 Sr
FWM
TrJ1J i FWM
N. '- P 2: -1èöoFIooIaIn :
(I) 6 ido' 200' Rud
Future Detention Basin D
%br I Man &0 on v Biological Resources Map
Figure 4
:1.
in,
Southweetecn,
- Spbiy Ruth Area
01ST Batlqultos Lagoon
La Costa Avenue
DIS1T
---iv; 'CSM
-
' -
00, rsws
let- 1) DIST I \,,,BS
SWS
(NJ
DCSS SWS
(( N
( 'DIST\
\ \'
Olivenhain Road Alinment
( [ LEGD La Costa Avenue L)16V 20V BS Baccharls Scrub
CSM Coastal Salt Marsh Biological Resources Map
DCSS Disturbed Coastal Sage. Scrub brian F rnooncp 01ST Disturbed
EUC Eucalyptus Woodland
d.slnOnnvental studs&SWS Southern Willow Scrub
Figrue 5
aa_-__• ilia .-
)
(S
ti the site, the scrub is domintri,id by coastal goldenbush with bare sound and red brorne
11 between the shrubs. Farther to the west, the community is dominated by coyote bush with
iarsh elements such as great marsh evening primrose, woody glasswort, and salt marsh
jleabane. The site contains 1.89 acres of this plant community. The bccharis scrub consists
"of a solid sand (0.06 acre) of coyote bush.
Southern mixed CIP1 occurs north of OlivenhRin Road aLd a ruderal area. The
edge of this habitat type extends 0.54 acre into the project site. The vegetation is dense and
I ew
U. •'
W kI.'-
The disturbed area consists of the tack and feed shop area, Eucalyptus woodlands, and
'areas of ruderal vegetation with non-native species such as Russian thistle, Australian saitbush,
IF=ard (Brassica sp.), soft chess Mm=mollis), and red brn (Brornus rubens). The fill
south of La Costa and the disturbed area at the intersection of El Camino Real and La
Costa 'also contain species such as Indian sweet clover (Melilotus indicus), white stem filarec
'Erodium moscharum), and gnnia (Gazania longiscapa). The tack shop and the intersection
of La Costa and El Camino Real have sands of eucalyptus (Thicalyptus sp.) The area south
of the proposed detention basin has been recently cultivated.. This cultivation included some
,areas which previously supported coastal salt marsh. There are 6.3 acres of disnbed land and
75 acres of ruderal vegetation.
I
Flora. There were 73 plant species observed on site, 34 (46 percent) of which are
ion-natives (Table 1). The high percentage of non-native species reflects the disturbed nnture
1 most of the Olivenhmn Road project area. Some of the summer herbaceous species would
not be in evidence this time of year, therefore, this is: not a complete list of species.
Zoology
One reptile species, side-blotched lizard (lIv stansbmiana), was observed in the ruderal
area (Jennings 1983). An amphibian species, bullfrog (Rana catesheian), was observed in
'a
pond in the freshwater marsh. Thirty-five bird species were observed on site (Table 2).
All may breed on site except for the migrants, yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coonata)
and white-crowned sparrow (Zononichi leucophiys), and red-tailed hawk, red-shouldered
rk_
(Butco lineatus), California towhee (Pipilo crissalia), and peat blue heron (Ardea
herodius) whose nesting habitats are not on site.. Evidence of five rnvnm*1 species were
observed in the ruderal or disturbed wetland scrub habitat, they include coyote (Cania latran),
rabbit (Sylvilagus sp.), woodrat (Nto sp.), skunk (Mephitis sp.), mule dew (Odocoileus
_
and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyiJones et al. 1982).
Sensitive Spedes
Plant and anirnal species are considered sensitive if they have been listed as such by
I
federal or state agencies, or one or more special interest groups. The California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG) publishes a comprehensive list through the Natural Diversity Data
Base (NDDB 1990a and b). This list includes the following categories: California Listed
Endangered and Threatened Species,, Fully Protected Species, and Species of Special Concern.
10
TABLE 1
PLANT SPECIES. OBSERVED, ON OLIVENHAIN ROAD'
Speci&
DICOTYLEDONEAE'
ADOXAAE
Sambucus mexicana/desert elderbe*ry
AIZOACEAE - Carpet-weed Family
*Caxpobrotus edulis. Hottentot-fig
APIACEAE - CarrOt Firnily
Apinin graveolena common celery
*Foeniculum vulgare. sweet fennel
ASTERACEAE - Sunflower Family.
Ambrosia psilostaehva var. californica.., western ragweed
Ambrsia pnmila.. San Diigo ragweed '
Aztmisia californica. California sagebrush
Baccharis glutinosa. mule-fat
Baccharis pilulans sap consanguinea. coyotebush
Centaurea mehtensu. tocalote
Corethrogyne filagimfoha var.?
*Cynra cardunciilus artichoke
*1r1r.q7%niS1 long scipa :gn22nia
Hetemtheca gandiflora. telegraph weed
Hawmiliafascilita.tuwwd
veneta. goldenbush
UUM cams salty sum
*pjcrjs echioide&'.bristly'0x40ngue
Phichea odoratavar. odoiam salmaaxsh fleabane
Senecio vulgaria. con groundsel
Sonchus a= spiny-leaf sow-thistle
Stephania virgata ssp virgata. virgata wreath-plant
*Xnthium strmmirium var. anadflse;ean cocklebn
BRASSICACEAE . Mustard Family
*Brassica sp, mustard
Lepidiuth lasiocarpum. peppergrass
Lobuiaria maritma. sweet aiyssum
CAR"IOPHYLLACEAE - Pink Family
*Spergularia marina. salunarsh sand-spurry
,C,DU,W I.
i,C,P .
C,DU
c,w
B,CID,F
C
D
C
DU
CDU
.DU
CAE
S .
C
..
D.
W
C,
CD,DU
D'.
DUF
S
I'
I'
TABLE 1 (ContiflUed)
I PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED ON OLIVENHAIN ROAD
I peaes' Habitat2
cHENOPODtAcEAE - Goosefoot Family &riplex lenuformes saithusli C *Acriplex sen,ibaccata. Australian saltbush CD Chenopodium sp C I *Chen film album. 1ainb's quarters F Salsola australis Russian this S ahcorma virgimca, woody glasswort C,E,S
CtJCURB1TACEAE - Gourd Family
- Cucurbita foetdissama. calaiThi D
CYPERACEAE - Sedge Family. niger var capitatus brown umbrella sedge F I Cyprus
Eleocharis sp, spike-sedge F,W Scirpus americanus Olney's bulrush F
I Scirpui cahfornica. California bulrush F
ERICACIAE - Heath Family Xylococcus.bicolor. mission mn'ini?2 M
EUPHORBIACEAE -'Spurge Family
I
*Ricinu5 comniunis castor-bean
Eremocarpus sengerus doveweed C
D
FABACEAE - Pea Family
Lonis scoparius deciweed C,DIDU Medicago polymorphL bur-clover
. C *Melilotus indiàus. Indian sweetcIover
.
.
FAGACEAE - Oak Family
. Ouercus dumoa. 'scrub oak '.
FRANMAEAE
M
Fran.kenia. salin& 1k14-heath . E,P,S
GERANIACEAE - Geranium Family • *Esp,fila C $ Erodt botrys long-beak filazee D Erodiui moschatum. white-stem filazee DU
I,
12
H
TABLE 1 (Continued)
PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED ON OLJVENHMN ROAD
Sped Habltat3 I
LAMIACEAE - Mint Family .. -
*Malva parviilora. cheeseweed C
MALVAcEAE
Malaeothamnus fasciculatus ssp fasciculatus mesa bushm11ow DU
Malvella leprosa, it1ki1i mallow F -
MYRTACEAE - Myrtle Family I
*Eucalyptus sp., eucalyptus D,W
ONAGRACEAE - Evening Primrose Family __ I
Oenothera d=asp hirsunsaima. p _ eat marsh evening nuhwse C,D,F
POLYGONACEAE - Buckwheat Family I
Eriogonum fasciculatum asp fascicularum flat-top buckwheat C,D
*Rumex crispus. cocklebur P,W
ROSACEAE - Rose Family .:.
Adenostoma fasciculatum. chamise M
Heicromeles arbutifolia. toyon .M 1
SALICACEAE - Willow Family . . :
Salix lasiolepis. arroyo willow F,W
SAURURAcEAE S
Anemopsis cahfornica yerba rnna F
SOLANACEAB 'I *j ptj !lni-& tree tobacco . w
MONOCOTYLDONEAE I
JUNCAcEAE- Rush Family . . . S.
Juncns acutus var sphaerocarpus southwestern spiny rush F,W
. . . W Juncus mexicanus. Mexican: rush
1
13
I
.
TABLE 1 (Contizued) . . . .
I PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED ON OL1VENHAIN ROAD.
pçcig . iabjtat2 .
:j
POACEAE - Gras Family : .
..
*Bmmü3 mollis. soft chess
Bmmus. fllbCflL red bTOC . ' C,D,U
jubata.. paas
CF
.
Cnodon dactylon. common bwmudaass .. . .. c ..
picata ssp, spicata. coastal -salt-grass •, :. ;' CFY ,.MUjCha
Elymus condensatus. giant id rye . . . •... ., . w.
Hordeum vulgare.. cultivated barley . . . . .. DU
'Lolium sp., ryegrass " . .
DU.
I* _
African fount in grass . . . .
Pbiagmitei aUsnalise commnn reed . .
*ppl.c,pogon monspeliensLs. rabbitfoot beardgrass F
. : TYPHAE - Cat-tail .Faly, . '.. ' ....
Tha dthningensis. Tule car-tail . . ., F •:.
1.1y9ha lanfoha. soft flag P,W
1 Nomenclature from Munz (1974) and Beauchamp (1986)
Habitat:.-
B = Baccharis Scrub . .
C = Disturbed WàtI2nd Scrub . .. . . . .
.5
1 D= Disturbed ' .'
.5.
I. DU. = Disturbed Upland :•
E = Wet1ndEcotàne .. .. .
F = Coastal . Fresh,: Water Marsh . . . .•
M =Southern Mixed Oparral
P = Salt-grass..Pasne . . . .:
. .J S = Coastal Salt Marsh . .
. W . = Southern Willow Srub . .,
I I
.14
.
Habitat'
1.
TABLE
BIRD' SPECIES OBSERVED ON OL1VENHAIN ROAD
Spea
nutcy ii ub. (T1i'4p:TIii1
red-shouldered hawk, (Buteo linestul
red-tafted •: -. I.great_I rri JI . •. s-•
k. vociferas
's ' :_Tsk
Anna's ': (CaIXM :': J. , •.• • • - __9 (picloides _ 51I21
downy .... •s,s!i obakens
• .! •_nmidnnax. tmiM
Pacific-s ,i .. •i
black phoebe,
ash,-!&mamd flycatcher, I____ L' 1 5 kingbird, (7I=us vocifleransI
Northern • :5 s : -•
cliff swallow, it ,.•,. MMdI
,scrub jay, . • , :4ss
common ravM (.•'gs
. •Tsaltripartis. rMidmnz
4 US A5;S.d.
house wren,ffrogjQfts:1'_...s
i ts • s thrush, (CathimisL$T1Tfl
.,
i s thrasher,!
S •i 5 :ls swim& III
jyellow- 1 I ':s • - si.j.ii1
whim-crowned • r'it rpr.j,jT'
red-winged 'Ii •. ,
- III I IJL -, • • s • I i. •T:i'_ii ci-=a=hajus
brown-headed
ii.. 5 - S oriole, •(Icterus galbulp,
house-finch, (CmModmus s5t_.4(41,1b!I
15
I H
TABLE 2
1 BIRD SPECIES OBSERVED ON OL1VENHAIN ROAD
Speaes - Habitat'
-11"lesser goldfinch, (Caxdueh3 psa1ia) W American goldfinch, (Carduelis mstis) W
'ft
1 Nomenclature from Binford (1986) and DeBendicus (1989) 12 Habitaz D = Disturbed
1 F Freshwater Marsh
O=Overhead
I W = Southern Willow Scrub
I
I
I
V V,••
:
:.
I
I
' ''
V
,
' V
,
•,, :'., V
I
V 16 '
V
V
---
This list also includes Federally Listed End
angered and Threatened Species, species proposed for Listing as Endangered or Threatened and Candidate Species. Candidate Species are considered either Category I or 2. Category 1 species are those taxa for which the United States Fish and Wildlife Service has sufficient biological information to support a proposal to list as Endangered or Threatened.. Category 2 species are those taxa for which existing information may warrant listing, but substantial biological information to support a proposed rule is lacking. These categories can be applied to both plants and aninials.
The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) also provides a comprehensive listing of plant species. Their sensitivity evaluation of a species is based on its rarity,, endangerment, and distribution (Smith and Berg 1988). Number values are assigned to these categories which, when considered together, are the basis for placement on one of four lists: List 1B: "Plants Raze, Threatened, or Pntingered in California and Elsewhere;" List 2: "Plants Rare
,
Threatened, or Endangered in California, But More Common Elsewhere;" List 3: "Plants About Which. We Need More Information—A Review List" and List 4: "Plants of Limited Distribution—A Watch List." For the purposes of this report, species on stare or federal lists or CNPS Lists lB and 2 have been of prime consideration.
The Audubon Society has provided sensitive bird listings on the national and local level. The Blue List crate 1986) is a national listing of sensitive birds which is an "early warning system for sensitive birds." In addition to reporting on Federal action for the listed species, the list separates the species into those of national concern (The Blue List) and those of local concern.
-
The local Audubon Society published a list of sensitive bird species for San Diego County (Everett 1979). This listing categorizes species as Threatened, Declining, or Sensitive. Threatened "status is accorded to those species or subspecies which have undergone dramatic, non-cyclical, long-term population declines, to the point where the situation has reached the critical level throughout their range." Declining "status is given to species whose local breeding populations have been steadily reduced, or in some cases extirpated." Sensitive species "are those for which declines have not been documented, but are regarded as such because of: (a) extremely localized or limited distribution, (b) sensitivity to disturbance, (c) actual or impending destruction of essential habitat, or (d) lack of sufficient data on current or past status which significantly increased the potential for serious reduction of a local population.
Analysis of sensitive reptiles, beyond the stare and federal lists, is provided by the San Diego Herpetological Society (SDHS). This group has published a listing of endangered and threatened species of San Diego County (1980). In this li
s
t
i
n
g
"
a
n
e
n
d
a
n
g
e
r
e
d
s
p
e
c
i
e
s
is defined to be one whose population and habitat distribution have been reduced to such a widespread extent that the species is unable to reproduce at a normal rate and is imminently near extinction throughout the majority of its remaining distribution. A threatened species is defined to be one which has had significant population depletion and/or habitat destruction and is potentially endangered but (is) presently reproducing at or near normal where it still occurs."
i
I
I
1
I
I
17
Plants. One sensitive plant species was observed and identified on site, and another
sensitive species was observed but its variety was not determined. Southwestern spiny rush
was detected in the freshwater marsh, coastal salt marsh, and southern willow sub. It is
on CNPS List 4. The survey also revealed a sand aster, in a ruderal area west of the tack
shop, but it could have been Del Mar mesa sand as (Corethmgvne fliaginifolia var.
jjfoliA San Diego sand as (Corethrogyne filaginifolia var. incana), or the common virgate-
cudweed aster (Cotethrogyne fib ginifolia var. virgaxa), because it is difficult to identify them
until they flower during the summer (June to September). Del Mar Mesa sand aster is on
CNPS List lB and it is a Candidate for federal listing and San Diego sand aster is on CNPS
List 4 (some local botanists Wink it is more sensitive than its listing suggests).
Animals. Two sensitive bird species were observed on site and three sensitive bird
species may also occur. The two birds species observed are downy woodpecker (Picoides.
pibescens) and willow flycatcher (Empidonax iiii). A variety of migratory riparian
songbirds may forage in the southern willow sub but there probably is not enough space for
nesting territories. These birds include least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus, yellow warbler
(Dendroica petechia), and yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens).
A pair of downy woodpeckers and two fledglings were observed west of El Camino
Real at the intersection with Olivenhin Road. It is typically found in this type of extensive
mature riparian habitat. This species is considered as declining by Evereu (1979).
Willow flycatchers nest in willow thickets. This species was seen in the southern
willow sub but no breeding activity was observed. They were observed south of Olivenhain
Road by the intersection, and west ofEl.CminoReal. kisa state candid2xe for listing as
Endangered, a Federal sensitive species, a Blue List species, and Everett determined it to be
Declining.
The least Bell's vireo is a state and federally listed endangered species. This vireo
species was last seen, in the project vicinity, at the Green Valley riparian corridor in 1982
(across El Camino Real). It has not been sighted since then, despite numerous directed
surveys. It is an obligate riparian habitat, migratory songbird. This means that it requires
woodland vegetation in which to carry out its life cycle. Vireos arrive in San Diego County
in laze March to early April and leave for their Mesican wintering grounds in September. All
reproductive activities, ftom pair formation to fledgling of young, occur in well-defined
territories; usually willow-dominated riparian vegetation with a dense understory. The species
appears to be highly size tenacious with males often returning to the same general area used
the previous year (Salata 1983). Since the average vireo nest is constructed three to four feet
above the ground, young successional riparian habitat, or older habitat with a dense understory
component, is required as nesting habitat. Riparian plant succession is an important element
in rnaintining veo habitat. Nests are also often placed along internal or external edges of
riparian thickets (USFWS 1986). This vireo sub-species is considered to be a generalist with
respect to the specific vegetation it selects to nest in, because it chooses a variety of plant
species to nest in, including forbs, shrubs, and trees (Gray and Greaves 1981).
18
[]
Yellow warbler is a Species of Special Concern (NDDB 1990a), is c
Society's Blue List (Tate 1986), and is also considered a Declining species It is a fairly common spring migrant, uncommon and localized summer
common to common fall migrant, and rare winter visitor. Migrants disperse
County, but are not numerous in the mountain zone. This species breeds
riparian woodlands and suffers from brown-headed cowbird parasitism. It ma
southern willow scrub or in the disturbed wetland scrub.
n the Audubon
(Everett 1979).
resident, fairly
throughout the
exclusively in
y forage within V
Yellow-breasted chat is a Species of Special Concern (CDFG 1990), is considered
Declining (Everett 1979), and is rarely seen as a migrant in either spring or fall. This
migratory species breeds uncommonly in San Diego County, primarily in riparian forest in the coastal lowland of the County The same is true for this species as for the yellow warbler;
both may forage in the project area.
Sensitive Habitats
Sensitive habitats are those which are considered rare within the region, are rapidly declining, or support sensitive plants or animals The Southern willow scrub, coastal
freshwater and salt marsh, and the wet1nd ecotone are considered sensitive habitats.
The willow scrub and other wetlands are regarded as sensitive and valuable resources
due to their ability to support a diversity of wildlife species. Proximity to waxer, interface
between a variety of habitat types, and vertical mxification of foliage axe factors which
conthbute to the richness and productivity of wetlRnds. While a few wildlife species are restricted entirely to wer12n1k for all their life requirements, many more are dependent on these habitats for necessities such as food, cover or breeding. Numerous other species also Tn2kC
extensive use of these habitats even though they are not dependent upon them.
In southern California riparian areas by their nature are limited. In San Diego County
they are extremely limited; somewhere between 0.2% (5,000 acres) or 0.5% (13,000 acres) of
the county's total land area of 2.7 million acres contains riparian habitat (Wheeler and Fancher
1984). They are also one of the fastest disappearing habitats in the county.
Each of the remaining wetland area (freshwater marsh, coastal salt marsh, and wetland
ecotone) are considered sensitive habitats in San Diego County. This is due to their limited
area, rliminihing acreages, and the sensitive flora and fauna that depend on these habitats.
Coastal freshwater marsh and coastal salt marsh are also sensitive because they support a
sensitive species, southwestern spiny rush.
Habitat Evaluation
The habitat values present on the property vary due to the levels of disturbance.
Urbanization and disturbances from grading reduced on site habitat values. Often, however,
disturbed areas an of significant value to certain animal species such as large man,ml and
birds of prey, because they provide foraging opportunities. In this case, however, the lack of
evidence of significant small mnnim1 and reptile populations observed during the survey
indicates a probable low habitat value for the disturbed uplands in the study area. Because
there is very little cover, the disturbed uplandsare of little wildlife value, including forage
I itat for birds of prey.
As i.mphed by its nan, disturbed wetland scrub is relatively sparse and it contains
I non-native species. These are characteristics .which aact fewer native 2nimls. In cOntr ast
to the P=ViOU.Rlyr mentioned disturbances, the natural resilience of rparan systems positively
- affects the habitat value of the disturbed wetland scrub. The wetland ecotone. has value as
I edge habitat.
The southern willow. scrub south of Olivenhain Road is of =&um, value and
I Importance to wildlife because it,is sparse and relatively maW It is used as foraging habitat
by various birds and animal g but it probably is not suitable for nesting habitat for sensitive..
migratory songbird& The southern willow scrub at La Costa, however, is dense and mature
- and it is of relatively high. value to wildlife (except for the small stand adjacent.,to the mad).
The only problem with the woodland is that it is effected by noise from La Costa Avenue'
which lbwers its value. It may also be too MatUrC to support nesting least Bell's vreo.
The habitat value of the southern mixed chaparral is
next to a disturbed area, and much of the surrounding area
La Costa development. On the other hand, the habitat is
J which increases its value.
limited because it is on the edge
will be impacted by the Arroyo
dense, and relatively undisturbed
The coastal salt and freshwater marsh habitats are of relatively high value. In
February, the coastal salt marsh plants were drying out, at Olivenbain Road,. due to thà.
drought conditions, but they, may have recovered from the March rains. The àoasal salt marsh
at La Costa seems to be more healthy, possibly due to some degree of tidal flushing from
Batiuitos Lagoon. . .
Applicable Legislation,
..
.
1 Coosmiction in wetlands or other sensitive habitats may require state, or fedCral permits
or approvals in addition to those required by local jurisdictions. This additional regulatory
framework consists mainly of:
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
The Federal Pndangered Species Act
The' California Endangered Species Act
. Setions 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code
Native Plant Protection Act
Issues pertinent to one or more of the approvals required under'-d= Im9ulationi. are
I
often addressed as part of the environmental review process. If agency coordination is
initiated early inthe planning process, the project conditions or mitigation measures required
by a state or. federal agency as a condition of their approval can be,intete4 into the
imitigation measures outlined in the environmental document. . In such instances the time 'delays
associated'with agency review and re-evaluation f existing studiS can be avoided. A brief
I
summary of each of the environmental regulations listed above is provided below:
20
I
I
Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act empowers the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) to regulate the placement of fill in "territorial waters of the United States",
a definition that includes virtually all wetland areas. Fill or effects of fill impacting one acre or less can be allowed, after a pre-discharge notification in instances when a Federal Endangered Species could not be impacted. At the discretion of the COE and the
Environmental Protection Agency, fill of between one and ten. acres =X be allowed under a Nationwide Permit. Aggregate impacts exceeding ten acres automatically subject to an individual Section 404 permit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (PWS) as well as the State wildlife conservation agency are offered the opportunity to comment on the action. The Federal noticing process is followed.
Federal Endangered Species Act. Section 9 of the Federal Ewlangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits the "take" of an endangered species. "Take" refers to any action that would harm, harass or kill the species. There axe exceptions to the prohibition arinct take. These are allowed by Sections 7 and 10 of the ESA. For public or private projects that require some level of approval by a federal agency, such as a 404 permit, take of an endangered
species can be allowed if it can be shown that the take involved will not jeopardize the
survival of the species. Take is also allowed under Section 10(a) of the ESA if it occurs in association with an otherwise lawful act and an FWS-approved Habitat Conservation Plan is
in place.
California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act contains the same universal prohibition against take contained in the Federal Act, but does not have the associated criminal penalties. In practice, it applies mainly to State projects. It establishes a mechanism for project review and alternatives analysis.
California Fish and Game Code Streamcourse Alteration Agreement Under Section 1600 of the State Fish and Game Code, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) has authority to reach an agreement with the project advocate, proposing to affect intermittent or permanent streams and other wetlanda. If contracted early enough, the Department generally evaluates the information gathered during preparation of the ED/EIS and attempts
to satisfy its permit concerns via mitigation measures in the environmental document The
CDFG often accepts mitigation for sueamcourse impacts as a product of the Agreement
Regardless of whether federal action is. involved at any one of the stream crossings, the City must apply directly to the CDFG for a 1601 Sueanibed Alteration Agreement for any proposed wetland impacts despite the acreage amount affected. The CDFG requires no net loss of wetland habitat and typically sets forth construction restrictions and mitigation conditions for the granting of the Agreement
Native Plant Protection Act. The California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) gives the Fish and Game Commission the power to designate native plants as endangered or rare,
and to require permits for collecting, transporting, or selling such plants The legal protection afforded listed plants involves conditions that prohibit the taking of plants from the wild and a salvage requirement for land owners. Under this Act, a landowner notified of the presence of listed species on his property must inform the CDFG at least ten days prior to any proposed land change that would effect the sensitive species.
21
IMPACT ANALYSIS
Assessment and Assumption Guidelines
Impacts to the flora and fauna observed or expected at the -site w determined to be I significant or msigrncant based upon sensitivity of the resource and the extent of the im
p
a
c
t
.
Resources are generally considered sigiiieant
if they are limited in distribution and their ecological role is critical within a regional and local context. Habit
a
t
s
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
s
p
e
c
i
e
s
I listed as rare, endangered, or threatened by the agencies that enforce the California or Federal Endangered Species Act art also regarded as sio~ficant resources In addition, habitats ncnng the following criteria were also determined to be significant' I e Natural areas, communities, and habitats of plant and anam2l species that are restricted in distribution.
Habitat that is critical to species or a group of
s
p
e
c
i
e
s
for feeding, breeding, resting, and mianng
Biological resources that are of scientific or educational interest because they exhibit unusual physiological, social, or ecolo
g
i
c
a
l
characteristics
• Buffer zones to protect signif5cañt resources.
• CorEidors .or areas that link significant wildlife h
a
b
i
t
a
t
s
.
I
i
A significant impact to a sensitive resource may be direct, indirect,
o
r
c
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
A
n
impact is regarded as direct whenthC primary effects, ofthe project result in loss-of habitat that would cause a reduction in the density or diversity of biological resources within the region. The magnitude of an indirect impact is the sane as .a direct impact, however, the impact occurs from a secóndar ect of the project An impact. is regarded as cumulative when the project impact is not significant but the c
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
i
n
c
r
e
m
i
a
l
i
m
p
a
c
t
o
f
it and other projects in the region is signiant
The extent of the impact to the sensitive ;~n,'qurce must also be considered in determining the significance of an impact For certain highly sensitive resources (e.g. an endangered species) any impact would be perucive
d
a
s
s
1
g
T
u
a
n
t
.
C
o
n
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
,
b
i
b
e
r
r
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
which have a low sensitivity I(e.g. species with a large, locally stable population but may be declining elsewhere) could sustain a relatively large area of impact or population losS, a
n
d
not result in a signiant impact.
S. •
Biological,#pacts are considered insignifitant' if the resource i
n
q
u
e
s
t
i
o
n
d
o
e
s
not meet the above criteria for sensitivity or the extent of impact is not considered significant.
Biological impacts from this project may occur, from the road
,
d
e
t
e
n
t
i
o
n
basin, a berm, or fixture traffic generated noise. These impacts a
r
e
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
e
d
below asr either direct, for the construction impacts, or indirect, for the noise impacts.
22.
I
'I
I
ij
Direct Impacts
Oliveihin Road Expansion. The proponent's preferred alignment, out of four possible I alternatives, is Alignment 2. The road would impact 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.33 acre of southern mixed chaparral, 4.7 acres of ruderal vegetation, and 0.40 acre of disturbed land (Table 3XFlgwe 6). The impact to the southern willow scrub is considered cumulatively
signifrant due to this habitat's limited range. Each alignment is anticipated to have a fifty-
foot construction easement along the southern edge of the road. Alignment 1 has two of such easements, to the north and south. Alignments 2, 3, and 4 have 15 feet Construction easements along the northern edges of the cuts. The construction easement for Alignment 2
would temporarily impact an additional 0.21 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.14 acre of coastal freshwater marsh, 0.04 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 0.21 acre of mixed chaparral, 0.69 acre of ruderal vegetation, and 0.16 acre of disnbed 12n1L The impacts to southern willow scrub and freshwatermarsh are considered significant cumulative impacts. The impact to disturbed wetln4 scrub is not significant The significalnce of the impact to the disturbed wetland scrub is due to its low wildlife value from the high percentage of non-native species.
Alignment 1 road would impact approximately 1.38 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.26 acre of coastal freshwater marsh, 0.27 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 1.46 acres of ruderal vegetation and 1.0 acre of disturbed area. The impacts to the southern willow scrub and coastal freshwater marsh are considered significant cumulative impacts. The impact to the disturbed werind scrub is not signiflant for the above mentioned reasons. The construction easement would result in temporary impacts to 0.82 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.28 acre of coastal freshwater marsh, 0.41 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 1.28 acre of ruderal vegetation, and 0.08 acre of disturbed land. The impacts from the construction easement to southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh are cumulatively significant.
The construction of Alignment 3 road would impact approximately 0.25 acre of southern willow scrub, 4.41 acres of ruderal land, and 0.29 acre of disturbed land. The impact to southern willow scrub is regarded as cumulatively significant. Approximately 0.35 acre of willow scrub, 0.08 acre of coastal freshwater marsh. 0.19 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 0.75 of ruderal vegetation, and 0.04 acre of mixed chaparral would be impacted by the
construction easement The temporary impacts to willow scrub and freshwater marsh are
considered cumulatively signifant The impacts to disturbed wetland scrub and chaparral are not significant.
The last aligrnnint. Alignment 4 road, would impact approximately 0.35 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.04 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 0.11 acre of mixed chaparral, 3.8 acres of ruderal vegetation, and 0.81 acre of disturbed land. The impact to southern willow scrub is Considered ngz'ifcant The impact to disturbed wetland scrub is not significant The construction easement would impact 0.35 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.19 acre of freshwater marsh, 0.30 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, 1 acre of ruderal vegetation, and 0.04 acre of mixed chaparral. The impact to willow scrub and the loss of freshwater marsh would be regarded as cumulatively significant
I Detention Basin. The dike would impact approximately 0.16 acre of freshwater marsh, 0.19 acre of disturbed wetland scrub, and 0.89 acres of ruderal vegetation (Table 3)Figuró 7). The impacts to freshwater marsh would be regarded as a significant cumulative impact.
The loss of disturbed wetland scrub would not be considered significant due to its disturbed
23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE
IMPACT SUMMARY FOR OLIVENHAIN ROAD
AND FLOOD CONTROL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Alignment 11 AlIgnment 12 Alfgumern 13 *Ugnment A. Detention Basin
Construction Construction Construction Construction Construction
Road Easémefli Road Eagemeil Rand Easement Road Easemtfit Dike Easement
Habitat Type
South nwillowcrub
1.
1.38 0.82 0.04 0.21 0.25 035 0.35 0.35 -
oastalsallmazsh - - - - -
Coastal frcshwaicr marsh 016 0.28 -- 0.14 - 0.08 - 0.19 0.16 -
Southern nuxed chapairal - - 033 0.21 - 004 011 004 -
Disiwbcdwcdandscnib 0.27 0.41 - 004 - 019 004 030 019 011
Wcdandecolonc - - - - - - -- - - -
Rudctal 146 1.28 47 069 441 075 38 1 089 214
Dssiwbcd 1.0 008 040 016 0.29 - - - - -
Subtotal 437 2.87 547 145 4.95 141 4.3 1.89 124 231
Total 7.24 6.92 6.36 618 3.55
- - ... 24
Legend
Dist Disturbed
DW$ Disturbed Wetland Scrub
sit E FWM Freshwater Marsh
Rud Ruderal
SWS. Southern Willow Scrub' 1I __ I___ , S E Welland Ecotone SWS J I
) CSM Coastal Salt Marsh
j Roadway Cuf SMC Southern Mixed ) Slope,'j__ Chaparral
Willow Flycatcher
Downy Woodpecker
Construction Easement
14 5,5
j I Lc(4I)
I - - I I Rud -
Coastal Zone ________ 0IIv.nR0!!L — —[ I Planning Area
'•[-
(Eastern Boundary) SWS SWS Existing Alignmen sws IF .
- M c.
-- -
DWS z t
'S_ OWS
_________ . 100-Year FI0odpiak .- v DWS •5..
N
SWS Rud E
WS,
F
tronBssnQ
FWM
ióo' 200 I
CSM Oil venhain Road Alignment
Aa.
100-Year Floodplain
Rud V E
-.
SWs BIological Impacts Map ; aflO
____.
_ (with Detention Basins A.B.C.D)
- Figure 6
-0— - - - — — — -- moll— — — .--
CSM Southern Coastal
-. Salt Marsh
i \ \Dist Disturbed
\\ OWS DisturbedWelland Scrub
E Ecotone
D FWM Freshwater Marsh
Id 'CO J~kL"c -tcL GI SWS Southern Willow Scrub
€) 8*nIM*Sr
Dist N
ION Floodway
0 -C,
V101
E 2
f
E..• St
N v. COWS '••PI4, ..
DI FWM
I FWM E
lI1*rL5a '1 c - ...-..... Proposed DlkiFlllBank's Sr
••• -
. Ws
S. - ., \ • .... • .2FM — CSM..
1990 Floolaki
Rud kp
I RUd 011veflhn Road Allgnment
bdan f mo Proposed Detention Basin 0 Dike
Biological impacts Map
Figure 7
-i
nature. The impact to the ruderal vegetation may include losses of the sensitive sand aster. I The 50 to 60 foot wide construction easement would result in an additional impact of 0.17 acre of disturbed wetland scrub and 2.14 acre of ruderal vegetation. The impact to diturbed
wetland scrub is not significant but the impact to ruderal vegetation can not be ascertained until the variety of sand aster on site is determined.
La Costa Avenue Flood Control Iu.iywvements. The. impacts from either of the two 1 alternatives designs for the berm south of La Costa Avenue would result from the actual berm. and the fifteen foot consuuction easement surrounding the berm (Table 4). The berm for alternative 1 would impact 0.08. acre of southern willow scrub, 0.04 acre of coastal salt marsh, and 0.31 acre of ruderal vegetation (Figure 8). The impacts to willow scrub and. coastal salt marsh are considered significant cumulative impacts. The construction easement would impact 0.08 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.04 acre of coastal salt marsh, 0.03 acre: of baccharis scrub, 0.03 acre of eucalyptus woodland, and 0.20 acre of ruderal vegetation. The impacts to willow scrub and salt marsh from the construction easement are regarded as significant
cumulative impacts.
The second alternative is more impactive (Figure 9). The berm for this alternative
would displace 0.19 acre of southern willow scrub, 1.19 acre of coastal salt marsh, 0.01 acre of eucalyptus woodland, and 0.59 acre of ruderal vegetation. The impacts to southern willow
scrub is cumulatively significant and the impact to coastal salt marsh is significant The construction easement would impact 0.09 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.33 acre of coastal salt marsh, 0.03 acre of eucalyptus wood] and, and 0.26 acre of ruderal vegetation. The impacts
to both wetland habitats, willow scrub and salt marsh, axe considered significant
Sensitive Plants. The dike and the construction easement could potentially impact Del Mar sand aster if it is determined to be present in a summer survey. San Diego marsh elder
may be present in the freshwater marsh. Many southwestern spiny rushes (1.19 acres of its habitat) would be impacted for the Alternative 2 berm for La Costa Avenue. This would be considered a significant impact.
Sensitive Animals. The loss of southern willow scrub, which is habitat for both the
willow flycatcher and the downy woodpecker, is regarded as a significant cumulative impact
This significance is due the precipitous decline of this habitat type in the region.
Indirect Impacts
The project dasign'includm a silt fence along the southern side of the road and a
siltation basin at the northern side of the road near existing culverts to prevent any
sedinrntation. Tim upstream detention basins (A and B) would detain most of the sediment
that would have flowed into Detention Basin D (Nolte 1991). The berm at La Costa Avenue and the fill slopes at the Detention Basin may erode into the adjacent wetlnixL5. This impact
would be considered insignificant. There will also be slight increases of oil and grease from
the widening of the road which would be considered a significant cumulative impact The widening of Olivenhain road will also slightly increase the runoff due to an additional eight-
acres of impermeable surface area, which would result in an increase of the 100 year peak
discharge from 361 cfs (cubic feet per second) to 368 cfs (Nolte 1991). This increase in runoff
would not be regarded as significant I
27
TABLE
LÀ COSTA AVENUE FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT I PACT SUMMARY
Alternative $1 Alternative 12
Hablid Type. Berm Coiistrucdo. Easement Berm Construction Easement
Souihern willow scrub 008 0.08. 019 009
Cnasaal mu. maish 004 004 119 0.33
Bchansscnib - 003 - -
Eucalypluswoodland - O. 001 003
Ruderal (LII (12Q (L2
Total 043 0.35 1.98 011
47
28
-I
Southwestern
/ 8P'Y Rush Area Fresh
Water
DIST BatiqUltos Lagoon Marsh \
I DIST __-\-----t
\ La Costa Avenue
I -
t
\ DIST
DIST
GSM"N (SWS BS CS
sws "
sws
DIST
SVY
DCSS
'
sws
"._ ••%. BS
. r'.. •. .. - "oisi\ \
LEGEND ol!venhaln'Road Alignment
(J) S BS Baccharls Scrub La Costa Avenue
6 CSM Coastal Salt Marsh
DCSS Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub
DIST Disturbed Biological impacts Map for
brian F moonup ELJC Eucaltus Woodland Alternative I Flood Control Berm
SWS Southern Willow Scrub S
PiV. dSsln & Srnonn,.ntiI tud.s Li Alternative $1 Berm Design
Nei -
riiiij Construction Easement Figure 8
- — - — — — — — — — — — — — — —
'S
Alternative 12 Berm _Design
SWS
31
\DIST\
J
011venhain Road Alignment I
La. Costs Avenue I
Biological Impacts Map for Alternative 2
Flood Control Berm
: Figure C
.- Southweetern Spiny FIUAJb AIOa Fresh
DIST Batiqultos Lagoon Marsh
DIST
\ .5'.
. La Costa Avenue
-
DIST
CSMN SWS CSIf CSM
SwS
Ile SwS
DIST -
LEGD
BS. Baccharls Scrub
.CSM Coastal Salt Marsh 0 100' 200' DCSS Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub.
DIST Disturbed
b i EU M C. Eucalyptus Woond OflCr9 SWS Southern Willow Scrub
plbriwk. demon a Iu1liK Cónstruät Ion Easement
Noise generated by traffic along the improved Olivenhin Road may disrupt foraging
and mating activities of sensitive song birds within the southern willow scrub, if they are present. The cwicflt 61 dB(A) noise contour already COVerS most of the riparian area. The
project would result in moving the 61 CNEL noise contour 110-120 feet to the south. Most of the noise increase cos from increased traffic along El Camino Real.which shifts the
contour 90 feet to the east. That means 1.64 more acres of southern willow scrub would be
impacted by traffic noise. From existing information on the sensitivity of these species to
traffic noise (i.e. the proximity of territories to major. roads or highways), acceptable noise
disturbance levels have been found to be within the 50-60 decibel (dB(A)) range (SANDAG,
1988; Mock, 1989). ['The USFWS uses 61 dB(A) L. as its standard noise threshold for least
Bell's vireo]. Any impact to sensitive songbirds from noise is not regarded as significant
because the anticipated increase in noise impacts ate small compared to the amount of habitat
currently affected by uffic. There will be, however, noise impacts from the construction of
Olivenhin Road and La Costa Avenue berm. The average decibels generated by construction are over 75 dB(A), as far as 200 feet from a point source. This would be considered a
significant impact to the sensitive songbird, willow flycatcher. S
Off-Site Impacts .
Olivenhain Road may be connected to Leucadia Boulevard in the future. If that takes
place, southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh from the Green Valley riparian area, west
of El Camino Real, would be impacted. The preliminary design of the road indicates that 0.05
acre of freshwater marsh would be impacted by the road and the construction easement would
impact 0.12 acre of freshwater marsh and 0.05 of southern willow sub.
As a result of the detention basin, during a 100-year flood, the salt-grass pasture, east
Of Rancho Santa Fe, would be inundated with waxer. The water would flood approximately
4 acres. This would not be considered a significant impact because the habitat is already a
disturbed wetifind.
The location of staging ,'as for the construction of the road and detention basin are
not imown. at this time, therefore the impacts can not be assessed.
There will not be any impacts to vegetation 'from detour roads for this project because
the existing road and the proposed road will be used for traffic citculation during project
construction.
MiTIGATION
We recommend that Alignment ,2 of Olivenhin Road and Alternate 1 of the La Costa
berm be chosen as the prefed alternatives because they impact less wetland vegetation and
animal species. This recommendation is based on the field surveys, habitat type and quantity
being impacted by each alternative alignment.
Significant impacts from the construction of Alignment 2, the Detention Basin and
Alternate 1 berm can be mitigated by incorporating the following measures into the project
I These recommendations are grouped according to habitats and/or species which may be
affected.
31
. 'I
Wetlands
A Section 404 Per or a 1600 Stieamcourse Alteration Agreement would probably be necessary before any construction takes place. Included in the permit or ag
r
e
e
m
e
n
t
w
o
u
l
d
be the revegetation of the sensitive wetlands.
The mitigation of wetlands depends upon the nature of the impact If the impact is permanent then mitigation will be in the form of revegetanon (see below) If the impact is temporary, as it.is for the copstruction casement,. then the following must take place as a mitigation measure. The marshes in all construction easements shall be protected
b
y
l
a
y
i
n
g
geotextile and adding a layer of soil over the cloth. The soil should come from the adjacent areas to be disturbed.. The willow scrub in the construction easement shall be. cut down to just above soil height The cut materials shall be mulched pled acco
r
d
i
n
g
to the revegetation plan. Geotextile shall then be placed over the wethnd Prior to construction and placement of geotextile, the outer limits of the construction easement shall be. fla
g
g
e
d
w
i
t
h
fluorescent tape to avoid additional wetland impacts. Can must be taken to k
e
e
p
t
h
e
s
o
i
l
within the construction easement to avoid sedimentation. Soil samples shall be taken prior to and after construction to determine if compaction has occurred. If soil is impacted, then it should be uncompacted.
The permanently impacted areas should be replaced as per the revegetation plan..
(
s
e
e
Attachment) and shall include the following ratios:, The southern willow scrub wo
u
l
d
h
a
v
e
to be replaced at a 3:1 ratio and the marshes at a '1:1 ratio. That translates to 0.36 ,acres of southern willow scrub and 0.04 acre of coastal salt marsh to be revegetated.
Given' the complex hydrology and salinity which resulted in the mosaic of wetland types, creation of these various habitat types may be difficult Prior to construction of the berm, the costal salt marsh and soil shall be lvaged according to the revegetaxion plan specifications.
The revegetation should also be monitored for five years to evaluate its initial success I and direct maintenance activities. The construction easements shall also be surveyed the spring after the construction take place to determine if the plant communities are regenerating on their own. In order to avoid any waxer pollution impacts from oil and gas washing off the road, I an oil catchment basin should be constructed south of Olivenhain mad.
I
Even though the extra erosion from the berm and detention basin fill slopes are not considered significant impacts the slopes should be seeded with a native hydroseeded mix. The species included in the mix are coastal sage species. The hydroseed mix is as follows:
Coastal Sage Scrub/Riparian Scrub Species
Minimum %
Put Germ LBS/Acre Species
5 20 1 I 15 60 2
20 50 1
2 50 1
I 5
40 2
.90 30 1
I
I
Ambrosia psiostachya (western ragweed)
Artemisia californica (California sagebrush)
Artemisia pálmeri (San Diego sagewort)
Baccharis glutinosa (mulefat)
Baccharis I pilulaxis ssp. consanguinea (chaparral broom)
Croton califormcus (California crown)
32
0.0
0 l
75 .55 1 Eremocarpus setigerus (doveweed)
10 65 10 -top. Eriogonum fasciculatum (flat-top buckwheat)
15 5.0 . 3. Hapiopappus venetus .j(coast
75 80 2 Lasthenia californica (goldfields)
40 60 8 Lotus scoparius (deerweed)
95 70 2 Lupinus hirsutissimus 1 (stinging lupine)
95 75 25 Plantago msularis (not common nan)
40 30 2 Stipa pulchra (purple needle grass)
61: Total:.pourds per àcz . .
* This non-nanve, non-invasive species is included to provide fast cover for erosion control.
Hydroseeding & Slurry Additives Hydoseeding shall consist of hydrauhc application
Of a homogeneous slurry Imixture of waxer, seed, organic soil stabilizer, and mulch (no
fertilizer is included since the sites are non-irrgated)
Apply the following additives in a one.step hydroseed ap1icatiôn:
Coastal Sage Scrub/Riparian Scrub
2,000. LBS/ACRE Cellulose Wood Fiber .
160 LBS/ACRE Organic Soil Stabilizer . .
Seedmix as specified
Waxer as reqwred
Sensitive Birds .
The construction period should be resthcted to late July through October, to avoid
impacts to sensitive nesting birds. The impact Ito sensitive birds would also be mitigated by
the revegetarion.
Sensitive 'Plants .
There should be a snmnr survey for said aster in the ruderal area to the west of the
tack. shpp. 0
Off-site
All staging areas should be located outside of sensitive wetland habitats.
:10
I
33
001
I .RNc!E .
Bailey. LA .1925. Manual of Cultivated Plants. MacMi11i' Publhhing CO., Inc. New 'York. ll6pp
'1 Beauchamp, R. Mitchel ' 1986. A Flora of San Diego County, California Sweet Water
Press, National City, California. 241 pgs
Binford, Laurence C. 1986. Checklist of California Bids., 1986. Westan.Birds17:1.16.
Bowman, Roy, E:. 173., Soil Survey of the San Diego' Area, alifornia.U.S.DA.
I California Department of Fish and Game 1990a. Natural Diversity Data Base, Special nii . .. .
.1 California Department of Fish and Game. 1990b. ".
Natural Diversity Data B ase, Sensitive
Plants. November 1990.
I DeBendictis, Paul A. 1989 Comments on the thirty-seven supplement to the Check-list of
- North American Bhs. Arican Bfrds 43(3):416418.. , ..
Everett, William 1, 1979. Threatened, Declining,..and'Sensitive Bird Species in San Diego
County. Sketches 29(10): 2-3.
Gray, MN. and J.M. Greaves. 1981. The riparan forest as habitat for the least Bell's vireo
(Vireo belhifpusiThis'. Presetited atL the. California Riparian Systems Conference, Univ. of Calif., Davis, September 17-19.
Holland, R.F. .1986. P±climinrny Descriptions of the Terrestrial Nana1' Communities of
I California. Nongame-Heritage Pro= California.-Department. of Fish and Game.
Jennings, Mark .R 1983. An Annotated Check' List of the Amphibians and Reptiles of California. Calif&nia:.Fls and Game. '69(3):151-171.
Jones, J.K., D.C." Carter, HA' GenOways, R.S. Hoffman, and D.W. Rice. .1982. Revised Checklist of North Aican Mammal North of Mexico. Occasional Papers 'of the Museum Texas Tech University. 80:1-22. '
Munz, Philip A. '1974. A. Flora of Southern California. Ufliv. of California Press, Berkeley,
Los Angeles. 1086 pp.
Rogers, Thomas H. 1965. GeOlogic Map of California, Santa Ana,Shàet. State of California,
H Department of Conservation (Resources Agency).
SalatL LR. ... .1983. Status of least Bell's vireo on Camp Pendleton, California: Report on research, done. in 1983, UnpubL Report, U.S. Fish and Witiilife Service, Laguna Niguel, California.
34 1. . . .
'.
I
------ -'-.----"
-I
San Diego Herpetological Society. 1980 Survey and Status of End2ngered and Threatened Species Of Reptiles.Nañvely Occurring in San Diego County. San Diego. Deparent of Agriculture.
I. Smith, James P, Jr, and Ken Berg 1988 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Berkeley, California. Spec Pub No 1, Vol. 4: 174 pp.
Tate, James, Jr 1980.--"The Blue List for 1986 American Birds, 40(2) 227-236 1 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986 Pndngered and threatened wildlife and plants, least Bell's vno, Determination of endangered status, and reopening of cownt period in the proposed critical habitat designnon. Federal Register 51(85) 16475-16483.
Wheeler, Gary P. and Jack. Fancher. 1981. San Diego county Riparian Systems: Cur
r
e
n
t
Threats and Statutory Protection Efforts in. California Riparian, Systems, Editors Richard E Warner and Kathleen M. Hendrix.
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
35 I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
1 ATTACHMENT 1
I CONCEPTUAL REVEGETATION PLAN
I
I
I
1 :
I
I
I
S
I:
I
I
REVEGE'IATION.PLAN .
FOR THE QLIVENHAIN ROAD w . . WIDENING/REALIGNMENT AND
.: FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT
I
Prepared for:
City of Encinitas . . Community Development Department ...
. .
. . 527 Encinitas Boulevard
' 5 Encinitas, California 92024 5 5 1 • 5
I 5
Prepared by:
:. Brian F. Mooney Associates S •
9903-B Businessparlc Avenue S •., 5
. San Diego, California 92131
S
S I•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
irRoDuCrIoN 1
TING CONDiTIONS 1
1
: :INcEPTTJAL REVEGETATION PLAN
rG°
GUIDELINES .. 2
Site Preparation . . 2
Planting Specifications '
Plant I Material Standaids
5
6
Timing of Installation 6
: Irrigation . . .7
I Protective Fencing 7
Maintenance . 7
-.
![N1TORING 8
Success Criteria
I Maintenance
8
10
,.. .
10
. r4ICAL.ASSESSMENT . South llow Scrub
Coastal Salt Marsh 1'l
FERENES
I
LIST OF
tmber
FIGURES
Name . . _
Proposed Revegetation Sites
-2 Second' Alte native Site for Coastal Salt .Máh..Revegetation . 4
I I
1 1
I
INTRODUCTION
This revegetation project is mitigation for the biological impacts associated with the
realignmntof Olivenhain Road, between Rancho Santa Fe Road and El Camino Real; a
floodwater -detention basin (Detention Basin I)) south' of Olivenh2in Road, and a berm south
of La Costa Avenue. The creation of southeft willow scrub habitat' would be replaced. at a
3:1 ratio and the marshes at a 1:1 ratio. This translates. to 0.36. acres of southern willow scrub'
and 0.04 acre of coastal salt marsh to be revegetated. The project. site is located within the
cities of Carlsbad and Encinitas, in northern San Diego County.
EXISTING CONDiTIONS
The topography of the Olivenhin Road site is relatively flat consisting of slopes of less
than ten-percent, with a drainage along the southern boundary. The elevation ranges from 100
feet above mean sea level, (AMSL) in the drainage. The La Costa Avenue 'site is also flat
except where the site slopes up to the road. The elevation ranges from zero to twenty feet
AMSL at the berm site.
The southern willow scrub revegetation would be located in an area of disturbed
wetland scrub. This disturbed habitat contains widely spaced coastal goldenbush (Isocoma
veneta) and coyote bush (Baccharts pilularts ssp. coManguinea) with some non-native species,
such as castor-bean (Rici,uis commwus), cheeseweed (Malva parvflora), and Australian
saitbush (Arriplex se,nibaccaa). The coastal salt marsh would displace disturbed upland or
disturbed wetland scrub.
The project site is underlain by Eocene Marine sediments' (Rogers 1965). The soils
south of La Costa Avenue include Las Flores loamy fine sand, Corrailtos loamy sand,
Placentia sandy loam and terrace escarpments.
Land Use
The land use in. the vicinity of Olivenhmn Road' consists of OMWD Headquarters,
undeveloped land, and single family dwellings to the north,- Rancho Santa Fe Road to the east;
El Camino Real to the west; and a tickle shop (H and H Tack and Feed), single family
residential, and undeveloped land south of the mid. 'The proposed berm has La Costa Avenue
to the north, El Cniino Real to 'the east, and undeveloped land to the south and west.
SITE SUFABflJY
In order -to determine the suitability' of the project site as potential habitat for -southern
willow scrub and coastal salt marsh the following issues were evaluated: 1) whether the site
could support these habitat types over the' long term, and 2) whether the site is situated in a
location which 'can be a part of defensible open Space system.
With respect to these issues the a field survey was conducted on by W. Larry Sward
and Anne Marie Tipton-Golly on February 13, 1991 between the hours of 0900 and 1100 and
May 29 from 0820 to 1100. The weather was warm (70-75°F) and sunny in February and
1
I
____ overcast in May. (12nde Edwards did a focused survey for sensitive riparian birds June '4,
I
I
from 1015 to 1245. The weather was warm (70°F) and hazy. It was otw'.deIeimntion that
the site could support the southern willow scrub at the location chosen. However, it was also
our determination that the coastal salt marsh habitat needed several alternative site locations
in which to optimally re1cate this type of habitat. The siting of this habitat shall ultimte1y
depend upon the soil type, salinity, and tidal regime since this habitat is difficult o establish.
The sites chosen for ,the revegetation are located within proposed detention sins or the
I Bauquitos Lagoon which would' be part of an overall open space corridor. This open space
corridor would provide 'a defensible open space network controlled for the propose flood
control; therefore, the chosen revegetation areas appear suited for long term support of 'these
- habitats once they become established.
I
CONCEFFUAL REVEGETATION PLAN .
I
As 'indicated on' the conceptual revegótation plan 0.36 acres of southern willow scrub
and 0.04 acre of coastal salt marsh within the larger detention basin have been designated
(Figure A- 1). -Figure A-2 shows the location of one of the alternative locations for the
placementof the coastal salt marsh (see Batiquixos Lagoon EIR for potential mitigation site).
REVEGETATION GUIDELINES
Site Preparation
i
The soil surface shall be prepared prior to 'installation of any irrigation system and
weed eradication. No further preparation or disturbance shall occur in order to avoid bringing
additional weed seeds to the surface.
.1 Invasive species such as castor bean, giant reed and tamarisk should be mechanically
I
removed and, if necessary, mated with herbicide. The herbicide RODEO or an equivalent that
is compatible with the riparian community should be. applied by hand to the individual exposed
stumps. In addition to the non-native species the native species in the'disuubed wetland scrub
shall also be removed.
The proposed revegetarion site shall be surveyed to determine the depth of the water
table, and any 'soil contiumnnts or pollutants. Site shaU be rough graded to approximately
the same elevation as the fresh waxer marsh. The soil (one foot deep) and leafiitter should
bereovrum thn T.& Costa bin site and spread over the revegetationtixe. Depending
on the depth of the waxer table the si graded to within 12' to 18 inches of the
elevation of the fresh waxer marsh habitat adjacent to the south. All contminti soil shall
be removed. Willow cuttings that are being removed from the construction
tilled into the soil toa depthofl2 inches at the revegetation site as per plan,
below. oontaliy scarify the soil surface v to incorporate the use of low, berms
or "biochannels" to create soil microenvironments.
2
1
I
Proposed Dike construction Easement
1982 100-Year Floodplain -. -1•
-- C er County) U, '.• - -' k
DIst ud j-'((( fJ J
I Ki
S.
A,
.•
,• Coastal Salt ,•' Marsh Revegetation
/ Alternative 1 Sit FWM
L(i
t•1.
-- U DWS
71 i1.
L VJ L R 1 '1T
LEGEN '. I
E Southern WIllow Scrub
Hevegetation Site
CSM Southern Coastal Salt Marsh
Dist Disturbed
DWS Disturbed Wetland Scrub 1990 100-Year floodplain -? '
FWM Freshwater Marsh (per Dr. Chang)
Rud Ruderal
N
5C
rbrl4
onap an
&
Olivenhain Road Alignment
Proposed Revegetation Sites
Within Future Detention Basin '0"
I
I
F - - ---- - - - - - - - - - 3
Southwestern
" Sj)kf Rush Area
" \ / Fresh
Water X. 01ST Batiquitos Lagoon:
OA
Marsh
01ST 0
0
.. . •0
:.
N\N La Costal AvenUe, .
0
oisi; 0.
0
•0
DIST
WS N. f CSM BS
SWS SWS /
N - N
0 •. . Coastal Sell
\\
-, Marsh Revegetalion
N Ile (
01ST
WS Syl
DCS
0 \
0
0
-
0
•0000
0
-
0
i 0 iOO 200 BS Baccharls Scrub..
CSM Coastal Salt Marsh
DCSS Dturbed Coastal Sage Scrub
kw 0 EUC Euôalyptus Woodland
0 SWS Southern Willow Scrub.
0
DIST\ :--
\•0
000'.. •\ 0 •
0 Olivenhaln Road Alignment
La oata Avenue
0
Alternative Coastal Salt
0 0 Marsh RevOgetàt!on Site
0 Figure A2.
I:
The salt marsh revegetazion site shall be prepared by grading three feet below the elevanon of the adjacent salt marsh. The soil and plant material from the berm area to be
impacted shall be salvaged and placed in the salt marsh revegetanon site Soil to be removed for the installation of the plants shall be taken off-site to a legalAantifill,site or used for the be
Planting Specifications
The trees and shrubs shall be salvaged from the berm area,' and transplanted to the revegetanon site after the site has been rough graded to the final elevation but prior to the rotouul*ng of the willow cuttings from the constriction easement and dicking for biochannels Container plants shall supplement the uansplants The willow scrub would consist of arroyo willow (Salzx lasiolepis) and mule fat (Baccharss glunnosa) The conriner, plantings shall be planted approximately one year after the' nañsplanted, materiaL The individual plants shall be clumped in groups of five to ten with an average spacing of approximately 10 feet on center, however, final spacing shall be determined after meas rementsarC.rnaie of the willow s'rub to be impacted (see monitoring)
Size Species. (Ga&E)
Arroyo Willow 1 (Salix lasiolepis)
15
Mule-fat 1 (Baccharis glurinosa) 5
Herbaceous: Seed Mix for Willow Scrub. An herbaceous mix should 'comprise five percent of the revegetanon area. This seed mix should be hind broadcast The reason for not hydroseeding is to avoid any impacts to the revegetanon area from hydroseeding (e.g., trampling and overspraying). The amount of seed mix applied (Le. pounds per, acre), will be determined at the time the find planting plan construction drawings are prepared. This will
be determined by the landscape architect, biologist, and resource agency personnel during the maintenance and monitoring phase 'following planting implementation. This mix shall consist of:
Yerba Mansa (AnemopsLs cahfornzca)
Western Ragweed (Ambrosia psllostachya 'var. californica).
Great MErsh Evening Primrose (Oenothern elm ssp. hirizaissima)"
Salt-marsh 'Fleabane (Plzschea odoraa var. odorcia)
I
CCI c
(U4r CO A
j
The coastal salt zuah shall be moved whole, like sod, from the area to be impacted
to the revegeration site (like Cabrillo Bay, Long Beach). The earth shall be cut three feet below ground level to include all the roots and the pieces of salt marsh' should be moved using a moving palette and a forklift. The plants can be watered with ocean water if there
is not enough water at the site. If the sod does not dowell then container plants of woody
glasswort (Salicornia virginica), alkali-heath (Frankenia sclina), and southwestern spiny rush (Jwzcz&s acunis var. sphaerocarpu1c) should be planted in the revegetaton area.
Plant Material Standards
Commercial 1; five and fifteen gallon stock Will, be used for all tree and shrub. species listed above..The commercial stock shall be derived from seed, salvaged material taken from
areas to be impacted by this project or from local nivay sources. Note: there is an inherent time lag in this process between the time the plant material is salvaged, and the time
it has grown to a one-gallon container plant. If there is insufficient seed or salvaged plant material to develop the container stock, then material will be taken from within the Encinitas. Creek drainage. The container stock will be healthy, vigorous, of normal growth, free from disease, insects, and insect eggs. No container plants will have cracked or broken balls of earth when taken from the containers. They will also not, be root or pot bound. All plants are to be well rooted in container with a maximum height of 12 inches. The stock will conform to quality and sire with the American Standard for Nursery Stock or equivalent. Any plant material not meeting the above criteria shall be rejected and replaced with approved container stock of equal type and size.
Soil testing will be done to determine if any clay or hard pan soil horizons exist betwecn the surface and water table. If there is none, a hole should be prepared 1.5 times the container's width and a depth such that once planted the mot bail I is one inch above the finish surface. If a clay or hard pan exists, each hole should be prepared by auguring with an eight-inch di2niter auger to the water table and refilling with. indigenous soil.' The container stock should be planted at the same depth—one inch-auth above finish grade.
Timing of Installation
Ap1'IJ The plants 'should be installed during a 45-day period following the on-set of the winter rains, pre(czably between,. November and early January to increase survivorship and reduce dependencies on ,uppinta1 irrigation. However, with the establishment of the irrigation system plant installation could óccür throughout the year.
The herbaceous seed mix will be installed just prior 'to the onset of the rainy season and after the container stock has become established.' This will be determined by the
consulting biologist and resource agency 'personnel and is expected to be fall of the third year.
I 1.1
I
I
This delay in seeding will allow for ecient weed eradication and maintenance of container
plant material.
imgadm
All container stock in the willow scrub will be irrigated immediately after planting. I
This irrigation regime will be determined by the landscape contractor and approved by the
biological consultant and resource agencieS. S
Irrigation by a drip irrigation system should start after planting and should continue
nj n4,j plant material has been established and is sustainable without an irrigation
system. The watering regime should encourage deep root growth. However, before any-
irrigatim system
is nded representative test plots shall be established to monitor the
effects of a non irrigated condition. The test plot locations shall be determined by the
consulting biologist This evaluation should be accomplished during drought conditions to
ensure a "worst case" scenario Any sign of waxer stress within the test plots will require the
continuance of regular irrigation. The scheduling and length of irrigation applications shall
be coordinated with the consulting biologist to encourage deep rooting and prevention of soil
and. plant iases.
Protective Fencing I
The revegetation Site should be fenced to discourage foot and vehicular afflc. This
could be accomplished with a temporary five-foot high chivinlinir
Maintenance
In order for the revegetation to be effective, representatives of the City, the landscape
architect, biologist consultant, ad the band ccape conuacxor must be. involved for a Period of
five years. Regular and consistent maintenance and monitoring of the revegetated area will
be required with quarterly reporting. The City isentative will inspect and approve all
aspects of the revegetation project
Plants lost or stunted as a result .of imptopa maintenance, disease, overwazering, irriga-
tion failure, vandalism, within five years of the daze of planting, would be replaced mkind
and in place between November and Janury of the year they die. This replanting
should occur at the end of the first, second, third, and fourth growing season. Plains will not
be replaced if the replacennt would interfere with a seedling of a native species from the
surrounding area. The landscape contractor will be responsible for the actual replacement of
the individual plants as determined bythe consulting biologist
Fertilization and Pruning
No post-icisralltion fertilization or pruning is necessary, unless otherwise directed by
mutual agreement of the consulting biologist and City representative.
7
'Atun44ois TwnarL sp., Nicodana glauca,Corraderiajubaa, and Ricinus convnunis
will be removed (manually) for the first two (2) years of the project life. Weeding will be
conducted monthly and the consulting biologist will monitor this for the thst three (3) months
of the project. During the quarterly assessments, the City will 'den the need for further
weeding and will contact the landscape contractor for any required work.
The entire willow scrub site will be covered with two 'nhes of mnlch for the entire
monitoring period, inorder--to, inii the invasion by weeds. This mulch should be
removed from thC area to be 'seeded in the third year.
'•I
I
The irrigation system will be maintained in good working order and repaired as
necessary until irrigation is 'discontinued as outlined'. above.
MONiTORING
Success Criteria
I
Prior to any construction, measurements of the southern willow scrub and coastal salt
marsh should be nwfr to serve as a basis for companson. In the southern willow scrub,
crown cover, tree density (and spacing) and species composition, diameter-at-breast-height
(DBH), foliage volume density, and height shall be measured (see Technical Assessment)
Cover, survivorship, and productivity 'shall' be measured in the coastal salt marsh.
Southern Willow Scrub n flrM)
The co plants for the willow scrub are not intended to be planted until one
Yew after th plant material is placed in the revegetanon sites. However, naturally reoccumng
plant material will need to be evaluated for its replacement value. The worst-case scenario
would be that no vegetation would be deemed acceptable. Ile.best case would be that the
tilled willow cutungs sprout and reduce the need for introduced plant material con?2lner stock.
Once cofltainer stock material is planted the following mnnitoring program should be
First-Year Momtoring. After the initial planting, the areas should be checked quarterly.
There should be a "tine zex0 report detailing exactly what was done and when and whem.
Records will be kept of mortality and other problems, such as iflvasion of the revegetaxion area
by exotic vegetation. .
One year after planting, areport wilibe submitted to the Corps, Service, Environmental
Protection Agency, and Fish & Game The report will describe and delineate with large scale
maps, all areas used in the revegetanon effort The report will also record the number of each
species planted, shrub and ground cover densities, tree and shrub heights and percent canopy
cover, percent shrub cover and percent ground cover. Cover will be det&wined through line-
intercept surveys. Mortality greater than 15 percent for any species used in the revegetatión
8
I
I
I
effort will be offset by in-kind (size and species) replac
e
m
e
n
t
by the applicant The report
will recomiei4 steps required to ensure that on the artier of 50 percent coverage will be
achieved by the end of the following year' The agen
c
i
e
s
l
i
s
t
e
d
a
b
o
v
e
w
i
l
l
h
a
v
e
4
5
d
a
y
s
to
review and comment on the report and to makerecommendations concerning remedial
measures that may be needed at the mitigation site.
Second-Year Monitoring. At two years .5ft: planting,
a
s
e
c
o
n
d
5imil report will be I
submitted to the agencies listed above for their review and comment. Co
v
e
r
a
g
e
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
50
percent or mortality of any species used in & revegetation effort greater than 15 patent shall
be corrected by the applicant.
Third-Year Mon mg. At three years after planting, a third, çimilr report will be
submitted to the agencies listed above for their review
a
n
d
c
o
m
m
ent. Coverage less than 60
percent or mortality of any species used in the revegetax
i
o
n
e
f
f
o
r
t
g
r
e
a
t
e
r
t
h
a
n
1
5
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
s
h
a
l
l
be corrected by the applicant S
Fourth-Year Monitoring. At four years after planting, a fourth, simibr report will be
submitted to the agencies listed above for their review
a
n
d
,
c
o
m
m
ent; however, this fourth
report will list steps required to ensure that on the order of 70 percent coverage will be
achieved by the end of the fifth year.
Fifth-Year Monitoring. At the end of the fifth year, a 54n'tilnr report will be submitted 1
to the agencies. At this time, if 80-percent coverage is not achieved, the City will consult
with the Carps, Service, Environmental Protection Ag
e
n
c
y
a
n
d
F
i
s
h
&
G
a
m
e
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
corrective measures At this time, the combined c
a
n
o
p
y
c
o
v
e
r
o
f
t
t
e
e
s
s
h
all be 40 to 60
percent; shrub canopy cover shall be 30 to; 50 percent; herbaceous covet h11 be two to nine
percent; and open ground shall be three to nine percent.
Failure of any significant portion of the mitigation, plan (relative to percent coverage
by the desired species) may result in a requirement to replace that portion of failed mitigation.
At the end of the five years the willow scrub should be progressing at a rate such that
it will eventually achieve the 'status of the impacted site.
Coastal Salt Marsh
The vegetation in the coastal salt marsh should be thriving a
n
d
g
r
o
w
i
n
g
w
i
t
h
recruitment It should support various salt marsh
s
p
e
c
i
e
s
Q
u
a
r
t
e
r
l
y
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
be
submitted for the firit two years
"
Maintenance
The revegetation project should also, be overseen dur
i
n
g
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
a
i
n
tenance I
to ensine the proper implementation of this plan. This should begun with a pre-construction
meeting with the lm{ccape contractor and biologist to walk over the site to identify the limits
of construction, off-site sensitive areas, staging areas, and borrow and spoil
s
u
e
s
During
construction, the biologist Should monitor' compliance with the construction limits and fill in
unforeseen details.
I
I
"te .1 scape
conactcr to enswe the proper execunon of the weed conwol, lmgabon, replacement planungs,
etc. During this phase, the biologist will make weekly visits for the first three months, twice
monthly fo the next nine móñths, and quarte±iy through the rmtinder of the five year
I .. monitoring, period. . . .
.
..
I TECHNICAL ASSESS ENT .
Southern WillOw Scrub. '
Qjilitative assessments of the revegetarion -effort will be made monthly by. the
consulting bjologit to. determine, the success of the revegetation effort' for. the &st year after
1 installanon. Quanuzanve assessments 41 shall be made in July during the five years of
monitoring program. The quantitative assessments shall consist of six me wide belt transects
with line transects down the n,idd1 which should be randomly established and permanently
located within the willow scrub The quadrats should cover at least ten percent of the site
They should cross the site in a north-south direction. Within the quadrants the following data
- will be collected.-
1. Survivoihip: assessed by absolute counts.
I .Coveri a calculation based on perpendiculr , crown . diameter
measwemeñts. A meter tape is laid out on. the :ground :grpund Imm one, side of the
crown perimeter to the other through the center of the tree.
I Another diameter measurement is Made approximately perpendicular to the first
Crown cover is then obtained from a simple formnlk (Muell-Dombois and
El]enberg, 1974). . . .
1 3. Tree density and species composition: number of. trees (by, speces) per 10-
meter by. 10-meter quadrant. . .. .
I 4. Diameter at breast height this is taken ax. 4.5 feet (137 cm)
I
the ground with calipers or a diameter tape
5. Foliage volume density should be assessed using the methods., described in Karen
Miner's masters thesis (iner 1989). .
I . Along. the line transects the following data for species will be collected: 'a) height b)
density; C) cover, and . d) bare ground cover in order to establish the relative importance
I (ranking) within the revegetation area
All raw data ill be recorded on a standard form to be developed aad..copies of 'these
will be submitted as an appendix to each required report. Permanent photOdgcUmentxion
stations will, also be established within each quadrant and around the perimeter' to visually
document vegetational 'changes and community. development. Representative photographs 'will
be taken during each assessment
Aviffinn"I wansects will be conducted using the sa quadrats to rerd bir3
ecies present on the site Any br
e
e
d
i
n
g
a
c
t
v
n
e
s
t
a
k
i
n
g
p
l
a
c
e
o
n
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
3
i
a
l
s
o
L
corded. These surveys will tin u
p
z
t
1
'
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
of the irmuzai6n. PreSence oc
icroinvertebraxes aid iti,jm 3hClC :3G I.-.assessed.
The flydxt)logy of the 5i above nd below ground, sbuac also 1 c L'ionitured. The
sh of the ground water and extent of
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
a
t
e
r
should be measured quarterly
Coastal Salt Marsh
One square meter quadrats should
be used for sampling the herc'eous species, and
o--by-three met quadraza for shrubby species They should be permanently established
salt marsh. Height, percent
cover, above ground':biomass, and'
.species composition
4 be measured. The shrub strata sh
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
c
o
r
d
e
d
in the thrr.t-metcr quadrazs The
ass should be measured to obtai3m net primary productivity, (Erwiti 1990). 1
The salt marsh should be monitored quarterly at "time o," 3,,6," 9, 12,15, 18, and
1 oiAx
The hydrology of the salt marsh area should also be assessed includ
i
n
g
t
h
e
t
i
d
a
l
r
e
g
i
m
e
.
1
ENCES
.LL 1990. Wetland Evaluation for Restoration and Creation. 'In LA. Kuslcr and. ME.
KentWok Eds., Wetland Crenoa and Restoration The S
t
a
t
u
s
o
f
the Science Island
Pr.ss, Covelo, California.
'1•'
K. 1989. :Fàraging.Eclogy of the Last Bell's Vireo, Virec
I1j R UIZIUM. Master's
thesis San Diego State University San Diego, Califam I
Dombois, D. and IL Ellen_berg, 1974 Aims and Meth6d_z of Vegetation Ecology
ohn Wiley & Sons.
I
I
Ij
2340349 PDC 5 PO-4 HLI :-
I
212-1.2.4 Orpnic Soil Amendxiient. Add following:
'1 Organic Soil Amendment shall, be derived from wood with the following properties:, It shal1.b
a wood residual product derived from the bark. of pine, white fir/and red fir, cedar shavings or
I
redwood shavings Amendment upon analysis shall contain at least 0 5% nitrogen (on a dry
weight basis) with an ash content not to exceed 10%. A commercial grade product shall be
used. Contractor shall supply the Engineer a sample of the.proposed:amen'dméntaccompanied
by laboratory analytical analysis from an approved laboratory 'illustrating degree of compliance.
Guarantee - Wt./Cu.Yd. - 560# - 820#. Nitrogen (organic or ammonac 0.5%) pH (less than
6.5. Salinity (EC8 x 103 at 25 degrees C.) - 2.5, iron. -(FE) expressed as metallic 0.01%.
I Density - approximately 25 Ibs. /cu ft organic matter -'85 % A non-ionic wetting agent should
be used. Properties: Screen analysis: % retained on stacked screens - I mesh - 0.2%, 5 mesh
- 36.6%; 8,rnesh - 25.7%; 12 mesh - 30.7%; 32 mesh 5.9%; -remainder 0.9%. (Shall be
I similar or equal to: Wil-Gro Life, Loamex, or Forest Humus.)
212-1.2.6 Herbicides and Pesticides: '
U Shall be used in their appropriate applications with strict adherence to manufacturer's
specifications and instructions. Post emergent herbicide for all 'areas shall be Roundup, Diquat,
I Montar, or-approved equal. Pre-emergent herbiéide for .shrubs.and ground cover areas (planted
from flats), shall be Treflan, Surfian, Eptan, or approved 'equal.
I 212-1.3 Seed. Add the following;
I
All brand name, patented seed must be received by contractor in original manufacturer's bag.
Seed shall be received by contractor in separate containers specifying kind, quantity, purity and
germination. Contractor shall provide Engineering with copies of the labels and invoices for
I
approval prior to installation. .mix shall be as follows. See Section 308-4.9.1 for additional
information.
Species Lbs/Acre .EL
Encelia californica 5 40/60
I - Lotus copiu 7 ' .90/60
Eriogonum fasciculatum' 8 10/65
Eirophyllüm cOnfertiflorum 4 30/60
Mitnulus puniceus 3 2/55
Eschscholzia californica 2 , 98/78
Layia platylossa 1.5 80/75
Lupinus succulentus 4 98/80
- Tafolium gracilicuturn 3 90/70
I
. Vulpa microstachys. .'6 90/60
Nasselia pulchra . 4 90/60
Melicacálifornica . . 3 90/60
1 ' tzc. t-ro 'ocL, 4- TO
I FØi
m 1L MW RaOMM OW ~ (I) 24 OW.) 9AYt .MGRL6 C 7(4 a-a'cre (it) S GAL (1W.)
cUttR IU10 WIN f MUIIZLD NOW 0' £&IO(
.I!It
I It
oil i!
P Project Design Consultants
CI sa SUI-ns-sm FA Zs1-lsiP
I3 &7 L.A UIE 1savJ,m Dr Dr Dr
.6 CT1IT
p •1
I MINN
M 110,01
IMA
I I
30
R wo
gla
MEN,
Be
\04/
APPENDIX C
22 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1
ENGINEERING DCPARUA(NT I L
- - MADSrAT UIAls FOD Of NW0IOWT Or
OLIfrEM—/AIN ROAD - -
---
- - - - -
- I APPROVED: LLOYD B. ItIS CKPRM 12-31-17
w -
D40HEER OF ION
-
REVISION DEsaP110N ii I - iiiii. - , . D BY:
OIICOBY: I RVDO BY 3466
PROJECT N I OA*ING NO
opp,ovo - on' oppgovo
/
/• ,
.1
---.- -
-< y---.,Tc --__:_ I .
- -- -.- 9,
- -- -
Underground Service Atari
Call: TOLL FREE
(5 GALLON)
SHRUB PLANTING
IN PUNTPG XTSL N.
SHRUB PLANTING
P Pro ject Design Con-slAltan-ts
70 Th. JlLN X4 Sn.. 2M5* CI flP-W-W? Zr
ai ALA 9m DIW osIvl A. OA I s oi/A, or Sr so
£ COAT
0 0;
- IGCR IKR 7f (2) W1AP M(R1
ARCVJC (/7 r srA?ir MCVRE 70
-. - - STA?r KR U4MFACI1I7CS RC1& PLACE
- -
iow ll5 a? IRCE
LI PIIC MOT
..- r iau 1 AXb( F)I4
7 O7ACL AX X MIRJV
7 'S x4 nD? ___ WWW DICE
Li
•
"—L0Sl)¼ 26a?AX OR
— - RiPAC1W GRADE Iu
L_
u I 2!
r Or NWM4LL
(2480x)
TREE pLANnNG/ffrAKtQ
WMLAH FLAMM DETAIL N.1
I
1
- :'
I UU11 il •
2T Ia? a? RXIUAU 2' A80f
WT1L? ow FWW MAX AX 3' MIRC1J2!D plo,:) '° -
F"9( QUM A'
—r
SUBMADC OR
6Ok #flAW _—,Jji' lU9D OVA Ifi FI°L 2 KR Mil
J4• OVM a?AWS 2 KR IKR 2! LIAMEW
4'&4. ALW mit a? R00IR4LL (NiL 4' DLTP KR SOLS
(24° Box)
() THEE PLANTING/DEEP WATERING lSN PLANTINO DETAL
APPENDIX C
L-2_FLANT1NGPLAN. NOTES AND DEAJL8
CITY OF CARLSBAD 23 __LNIIN((RUIGD(PARTMENT __X
LA.'c4Pr KA/4 FU? 171 IA]T 0'
OLIkENHAIN ROAD
APPROW UOV a IS.S I2-3I-•
UIT_UI _SAIL
INITIAL jjjj jj Dill OR PROCT NO. DRAA7NG NO.
OF 11= REVISION D€SCRIP1ON CHKD 3466 __336-6j
1M 907 St.JRMflTAI.
27 lU' a? RCI)liail 7' Aaow FZWIS4 a?4t.V - ADO J* MIRCUM
Dow aSP wI/WI 70 LNThir RANIER AMA.
WAlER 8A9/4 70 W Rrwomo 0'ILi PlANT LI (STA&191701
Li'O PO!R nRr,UZER TA2IIS APPIJCA Ia? PA ITS KR VfCS
&4O(FILL 1ST KR VfCS
(NSPNC 9183?ACI 0? RCCOIPACI(D G?AO( KR 9tS iwaNm
APPENDIX D
FULL SCALE LANDSCAPE PLANS
FOR MITIGATION/REVEGETATION AREAS