CP EIR 01 - City of Redwood City
Transcription
CP EIR 01 - City of Redwood City
Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources 4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section describes existing biological resources in and around the plan area, as well as applicable regulations pertaining to this resource. Potential impacts to biological resources from implementing the New General Plan are identified and appropriate mitigation measures are provided where necessary. Information in this section is based on research and field reconnaissance conducted by Nomad Ecology. 4.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The plan area contains urban areas and open space, within which native habitats are present. The majority of the native habitat within the plan area exists north of U.S. 101, and consists primarily of open baylands including Bair Island, Bird Island, Greco Island, the Redwood Shores Lagoon, and the salt crystallization ponds on the Cargill Property. The bayland islands are preserved for their natural resources and are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge. The Emerald Hills and Farm Hill neighborhoods in the southern boundaries of the plan area are low density residential communities containing scattered areas of native vegetation on private property. The southern, hilly upland portions of the plan area also include the Edgewood County Park and Natural Preserve and Stulsaft Park. The underlying geology of these areas includes serpentine bedrock1 which accounts for the serpentine vegetation communities present in these parks (further discussed under the heading “Vegetation and Habitats”). Creeks and Tidal Waters The plan area includes portions of two watersheds: Cordilleras Creek and Redwood Creek. These systems include numerous small, unnamed tributaries that drain into these creeks, not all are mapped. Several creeks outside of the plan area, including Belmont Creek in Belmont, Pulgas Creek in San Carlos, and Marsh Creek in Menlo Park, drain into sloughs that are within the plan area. Bayland vegetation and habitat types including deep channel, tidal flats, etc. were defined using The Baylands Ecosystems Goals report (Goals Project 1999). Creeks, tidal waters, and other hydrologic features in the plan area are shown in Figure 4.4-1. 1 Brabb et. al. 1998 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-1 Source: Nomad Ecology, 2009 Legend NO RTH 1 inch equals 5,500 feet Redwood City General Plan EIR Creeks and Waterbodies 2,750 FIG 0 Feet 5,500 4-4.1 Geografika Consulting 04.06.10 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Cordilleras Creek Cordilleras Creek and its one main tributary originate in the hills above Edgewood County Park. Cordilleras Creek flows along the northwestern boundary of the plan area until it reaches the tidally influenced waters near Smith Slough and Steinberger Slough through a box culvert under U.S. 101. Cordilleras Creek is above ground for its entire length with the exception of culverted sections at road crossings. The channel varies in character along its length. At the upper reaches near Edgewood Park, the channel is meandering and vegetated with willows (Salix spp.), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), and other riparian vegetation. Farther downstream near El Camino Real, Cordilleras Creek is in a concrete channel with vertical sides and is vegetated with ornamental trees and shrubs. An unnamed tributary to Cordilleras Creek originates in the Emerald Hills neighborhood and flows westerly adjacent to Sylvan Way until it joins Cordilleras Creek near Edgewood Park. This unnamed tributary is above ground for most of its length and is characterized by coast live oak woodland. Redwood Creek Redwood Creek and its three tributaries flow through the plan area. Redwood Creek crosses into the plan area from the Menlo Country Club in the Town of Woodside. Emerald Branch, Jefferson Branch, and Stulsaft Branch originate in the hills to the west of Redwood Creek. Emerald Branch and Stulsaft Branch join Jefferson Branch near Red Morton Park. Jefferson Branch flows into Redwood Creek near Main Street in Downtown Redwood City (City). Redwood Creek flows through a culvert under U.S. 101 and enters the Bay between Bair and Greco Islands. Stulsaft Branch and Jefferson Branch are labeled „Arroyo Ojo‟ on the USGS 7.5 minute topographic map but are known in the City as Stulsaft and Jefferson branches. Redwood Creek is above ground for most of its length and flows in a concrete walled channel through urban areas of the plan area. Adjacent vegetation includes ornamental trees and shrubs that are rooted in private residential yards. Redwood Creek flows through a culvert at the corner of Maple Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, proceeds under City Hall, and emerges at the Bradford Pump Station on Bradford Street between Main Street and Jefferson Avenue. Downstream of this location, Redwood Creek is tidally influenced and is characterized by tidal salt marsh habitat, including pickleweed (Salicornia spp.) and saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) vegetation. Emerald Branch originates at Lower Emerald Lake. Lower Emerald Lake is a dammed recreational facility at the Emerald Lake Country Club. The lake contains floating docks and other recreational structures and supports freshwater marsh habitat, including cattails (Typha spp.) and other wetland vegetation, along the margins. Emerald Branch flows out of a culvert at the base of the dam into an eroded, vegetated channel. It flows above ground until it reaches Canyon Park, where it enters a culvert and flows both below ground and in a concrete channel through the residential neighborhood until it joins Jefferson Branch near Red Morton Park. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-3 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Stulsaft Branch originates in two drainages west of Farm Hill Boulevard near Edgecliff Way. Stulsaft Branch flows above ground in a steep vegetated canyon, passes underground under Farm Hill Boulevard and the residential neighborhood and emerges in the canyon in Stulsaft Park. In Stulsaft Park, the channel is meandering and bordered by coast live oak woodland. Stulsaft Branch goes below ground near Alameda de las Pulgas and remains primarily below ground until joining Jefferson Branch originates at Upper Emerald Lake and is surrounded entirely by residences. Jefferson Branch flows below ground until it enters a steep canyon east of Jefferson Avenue characterized by coast live oak woodland. The creek goes below ground again before it crosses Alameda de la Pulgas. Jefferson Branch flows primarily below ground from Red Morton Park to the confluence with Redwood Creek near the intersection of Broadway and Main Street in Downtown. Tidal Waters Due to its location on San Francisco Bay, the City has diverse and valuable estuarine resources. The City‟s boundary extends north approximately 3 miles into San Francisco Bay. Open water estuary habitat in the plan area borders Bird Island, Bair Island, and Greco Island. Tidal waters in the plan area include Belmont Slough, Steinberger Slough, Smith Slough, Redwood Creek, Westpoint Slough, and Corkscrew Slough. Belmont Slough is northwest of Redwood Shores. Steinberger Slough runs between Redwood Shores and Bair Island. Redwood Creek separates Bair Island from the Port of Redwood City. Corkscrew Slough runs east to west, separating the middle and outer Bair Island. Westpoint Slough runs between the Cargill Property salt crystallization ponds and Greco Island. The portion of Redwood Creek that is adjacent to the Port of Redwood City is characterized as deep channel. Deep channels are defined as channels that are deeper than 18 feet below Mean Low Lower Water. All of the other sloughs are characterized as shallow channels, which contain water levels between 18 feet below Mean Low Lower Water and Mean Low Lower Water in depth. Several of these sloughs have tidal flats along their margins, which occur from below Mean Low Lower Water to Mean Tide Level. Vegetation and Habitats Vegetation communities and wildlife habitats in the plan area include non-native grassland, native bunchgrass grassland, serpentine bunchgrass grassland, ruderal, coast live oak woodland, northern coastal scrub, chamise chaparral, Central Coast riparian scrub, and ornamental landscaped vegetation. Bayland vegetation communities and habitats occupying tidal waters include Bay channel, tidal flat/mudflat, tidal marsh/salt marsh, diked marsh, lagoon, and salt crystallization pond. Sensitive natural communities are characterized as plant assemblages that are unique in constituent components, restricted in distribution, supported by distinctive edaphic (soil) conditions, considered locally rare, potentially support special status plant or wildlife species and/or receive regulatory protection from municipal, county, state and/or federal entities. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-4 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources The regulatory framework that protects sensitive natural communities is derived from federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and is further discussed in Section 4.4.2. Sensitive natural communities are identified in Table 4.4-1. The locations of vegetation communities within the plan area are shown in Figure 4.4-2. Table 4.4-1 Vegetation Communities in Redwood City Vegetation Sensitive Natural Community Non-Native Grassland Approximate Acreage 174 Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland X 9 Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland/Non-Native Annual Grassland Mixed X 66 Ruderal NA** Coast Live Oak Woodland X 637 Northern Coastal Scrub 8 Chamise Chaparral 24 Central Coast Riparian Scrub X 6 Freshwater Marsh and Seep X NA* Streams X 89,030 linear feet Bay Channels X 757 Tidal Flat X 2,404 Tidal Marsh/Salt Marsh X 3,998 Diked Marsh X 257 Water Impoundment 15 Lagoon X 193 Salt crystallization pond X 1,466 Urban Landscape 128 Developed 7,781 * Note: Acreages are approximate because not all areas of the plan area were accessible during surveys. ** Note: Ruderal and Freshwater Marsh and Seep communities occurred in small, diffuse stands; these were not mapped. Source: Biological Setting Memo, March 2009; Table BE-1, New General Plan, 2009. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-5 Source: Nomad Ecology, 2009 Vegetation Communities City Boundary Non-Native Annual Grassland Central Coast Riparian Scrub Sphere of Influence Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland Bay Freeway/Highway Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland/ Non-Native Annual Grassland Mixed Bay Channel Salt Crystallizers Major Roads Tidal Flat Restoration Project Coast Live Oak Woodland Tidal Marsh Railroad Water Impoundment Northern Coastal Scrub Diked Marsh Urban Landscape Creeks Chamise Chaparral Redwood City General Plan EIR Lagoon Developed Vegetation Communities NO RTH 1 inch equals 5,500 feet 0 2,750 FIG Legend Feet 5,500 4-4.2 Geografika Consulting 04.29.10 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources These vegetation communities are described by referencing commonly used vegetation classification systems including California Vegetation2, Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California3, and A Manual of California Vegetation4. Bayland vegetation types were described using the Baylands Ecosystem Habitat Goals Project5. Upland Communities and Habitat Types Non-Native Grassland Within the plan area, non-native grassland is present along some of the Hetch Hetchy right-of-way; on slopes in Stulsaft Park, Easter Bowl, Canyon Park, and Edgewood Park; and is scattered on undeveloped parcels in the low density residential areas of the Farm Hill and Emerald Hill neighborhoods. Non-native grassland is dominated by a sparse to dense cover of non-native annual grasses and weedy annual and perennial forbs (flowering plants), primarily of Mediterranean origin, that have replaced native perennial grasslands as a result of human disturbance. However, where not completely overrun by weedy non-native plant species, scattered native wildflower species and native perennial grass species considered remnants of the original vegetation, may also be common. This community occurs on fine-textured, usually clay soils, which are moist or waterlogged during the winter rainy season and very dry during the summer and fall. Germination occurs with the onset of the late fall rains while growth, flowering, and seed-set occur from winter through spring. With a few exceptions, the plants are dead through the summer and fall dry season, persisting as seeds. Common non-native grass species found in this community include soft chess (Bromus hordeaceous), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), wild rye (Lolium multiflorum), wild oats (Avena fatua), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum ssp. gussonianum), hare barley (Hordeum murinum ssp. leporinum) and velvetgrass (Holcus lanatus). Non-native grasslands support a wide variety of insects, amphibians, reptiles, birds and small mammals. This habitat supports a wide variety of herbivore species which in turn support a variety of predatory hawks, owls, bats, and carnivores. Species commonly associated with non-native annual grasslands include California meadow vole (Microtus californica), Botha‟s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), black-tailed hare (Lepus californicus), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), barn owl (Tyto alba), great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus), bobcat (Lynx rufus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), coyote (Canis latrans), and mountain lion (Felis concolor), among others. Holland and. Keil 1995. Holland 1986. 4 Sawyer Keeler-Wolf 1995. 5 Goals Project 1999. 2 3 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-7 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Serpentine Bunchgrass Grassland Serpentine bedrock underlies the southwestern portion of the plan area in Edgewood Park, Stulsaft Park, and the Emerald Hill and Farm Hill residential neighborhoods.6 In these areas, serpentine bunchgrass grassland is generally characterized by native grasses and forbs tolerant of this substrate chemical properties such as erect plantain (Plantago erecta) and the bunchgrass, purple needlegrass (Nasella pulchra). Serpentine bunchgrass was observed in Edgewood County Park and Stulsaft Park, and also occurs in scattered locations on private parcels in the Emerald Hill and Farm Hills neighborhoods. As described by Holland (1986), serpentine bunchgrass is open grassland dominated by perennial bunchgrasses. This community is restricted to serpentine sites where total cover is typically low, but is markedly dominated by native species. Serpentine rock, also known as ultramafic rock, weathers into soils rich in magnesium, iron, and silicates.7 8 This chemical composition is typically toxic and nutrient poor for most plant species to withstand, therefore creating a niche for plant species with physiological adaptations suitable for processing these minerals. Serpentine bunchgrass grassland provides habitat for a similar suite of wildlife species found within non-native annual grasslands. This habitat also supports specific rare endemic species adapted to serpentine habitats, such as the federally-threatened Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis), where suitable densities of the butterflies‟ host and nectar plants are present, such as at Edgewood County Park. Other endemic serpentine species include the Edgewood blind harvestman (Calicina minor), and Edgewood microblind harvestman (Microcina edgewoodensis), two species found under serpentine rocks within grassland and woodland areas. Ruderal Within the plan area, ruderal vegetation is present along the sides of roads, buildings, and near industrial areas. Ruderal vegetation is an assemblage of plants, often a mixture of both native and non-native weed species that thrive in waste areas, heavily grazed pastures, cultivated and fallow fields, roadsides, parking lots, footpaths, residences, and similar disturbed sites in towns and cities and along rural roadways. Some urban weeds are ornamentals, escaped from cultivation. Ruderal communities are difficult to characterize and are often temporary assemblages. In areas of frequent human disturbance, the majority of wild plants are often introduced weeds rather than natives. However, ruderal species may at times be integrated into various other communities.9 Common plant species found in ruderal areas include bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), red-stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), and non-native grass species including ripgut brome, wild oats, and hare barley. Brabb et. al. 1998. Kruckeberg 1984. 8 Kruckeberg 1984. 9 Holland and Keil 1995. 6 7 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-8 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Though ruderal vegetation is often the result of a high level of disturbance from grading, mowing, discing or other impacts, this habitat can provide seasonal foraging and cover for birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals. Typically these habitats are utilized by species that are adapted to disturbed habitats along urban boundaries such as raccoon, striped skunk, Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginana), and American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos). Native songbirds such as American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) and housefinch (Carpodacus mexicanus) forage within ruderal areas. There is also a wide variety of native butterflies that nectar on non-native thistles and mustards found within ruderal roadside areas. Coast Live Oak Woodland Within the plan area, coast live oak woodland is present in Edgewood County Park, Stulsaft Park, Easter Bowl, on the Cañada College campus, and is scattered throughout the Emerald Hills and Farm Hills residential neighborhoods. Coast live oak woodland is also present along creeks and streams in the plan area, including Stulsaft Branch, Jefferson Branch, Emerald Branch, and Sylvan Branch and is considered riparian vegetation in these locations. Coast live oak woodland is typically dominated by one tree species, coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), which is evergreen and reaches 33-83 feet. The shrub layer is poorly developed, but may include toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), gooseberry (Ribes spp.), and blue elderberry (Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea). This community integrates with coastal scrub and mixed chaparral communities on drier sites and with other oak and evergreen forests on moister sites. Due to the high amount of food resources and cover within oak woodland, this habitat provides foraging and nesting habitat for a wide variety of birds, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. Common bird species associated with coast live oak woodland include chestnut-backed chickadee (Poecile rufescens), oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica) and Cooper‟s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), among many others. Mammals include black-tailed deer, mountain lion, coyote, and San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens), among others. Reptiles and amphibians include gopher snake, western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), arboreal salamander (Aneides lugubris), and California slender salamander (Batrachoseps attenuatus), among others. Northern Coastal Scrub Within the plan area, northern coastal scrub was observed in Edgewood Park and near Stulsaft Branch north of Farm Hill Road. It may be present in scattered locations in the Emerald Hills and Farm Hills residential neighborhoods and in Stulsaft Park. As described by Holland (1986), Northern Coastal Scrub comprises low shrubs, usually 5.25 feet tall, typically dense but with scattered grassy openings. It occurs on windy, exposed sites with shallow, rocky soils and is patchily distributed from southern Oregon to May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-9 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Point Sur in Monterey County. Coastal scrub is dominated by California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), bush monkeyflower (Mimulus aurantiacus), and poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum). Due to the high amount of food resources and cover within northern coastal scrub, this habitat provides foraging and nesting habitat for a wide variety of birds, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. Common bird species associated with northern coastal scrub include Anna‟s hummingbird (Calypte anna), western scrub jay, spotted towhee (Pipilo maculatus) and white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), among others. Mammals include black-tailed deer, mountain lion, coyote, gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), brush rabbit (Sylvilagus nuttallii), San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, and deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus). Reptiles and amphibians include northern alligator lizard (Elgaria coerulea), western fence lizard, ring-necked snake (Diadophis punctatus), and California slender salamander, among others. Chamise Chaparral Within the plan area, chamise chaparral was observed in Edgewood County Park, in the canyon along Stulsaft Branch north of Farm Hill Road, and may also be present in Stulsaft Park. As described by Holland (1986), chamise chaparral is a 3 to 9 feet tall chaparral dominated by chamise. Other species in this community contribute little to overall cover. This community is adapted to repeated fires by stump sprouting. Mature stands of this vegetation type are dense with very little herbaceous understory or litter. It is present on dry rocky steep slopes with little soil. Due to the high amount of food resources and cover within chaparral, this habitat provides foraging and nesting habitat for a wide variety of birds, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. Common bird species associated with chaparral include wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum), spotted towhee, and Alan‟s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin), among others. Mammals include black-tailed deer, mountain lion, coyote, gray fox, black-tailed hare, San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat, and deer mouse. Reptiles and amphibians include northern alligator lizard, western fence lizard, ring-necked snake, and California slender salamander, among others. Urban Landscape Urban landscape observed in the plan area includes parks, golf courses, lawns, sports fields, and all areas that are planted and maintained as landscaped areas. Landscape plantings include turf grass and ornamental species of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees. Due to the intensive management of these areas (e.g., frequent mowing, rodent control), habitat values for wildlife are limited. Within larger open space areas such as golf courses, a higher variety of native wildlife can be supported. A variety of ducks, songbirds, raptors and bats may utilize golf courses, such as Emerald Hills Golf Course, due to the diversity of habitats present (i.e. wetlands, trees, brush and grass). Common species observed include Canada goose (Branta canadensis), mallard (Anas latyrhynchos), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), Pacific tree frog, red fox (Vulpes vulpes), coyote and black-tailed May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-10 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources deer. Small parks and sports fields such as Red Morton Community Park and Hawes Park typically support less wildlife, though woody vegetation along the borders of these fields can provide roosting, foraging, and nesting habitat for songbirds and raptors. Frequently predation is high within the urban landscape due to the higher densities of both opportunistic native predators such as raccoons, gulls, crows, and ravens (Corvus corax), and introduced predators, such as feral cats and red foxes. Wetland Communities and Habitat Types Central Coast Riparian Scrub Within the plan area, central coast riparian scrub was observed in only a few locations: along Cordilleras Creek in Edgewood County Park and downstream, along Sylvan Branch, and along Emerald Branch between Lower Emerald Lake and Canyon Park. Most of the streams in the plan area are characterized by coast live oak woodland vegetation although scattered willow thickets may also be present. As described by Holland (1986), Central Coast Riparian Scrub is a scrubby streamside thicket, varying from open to impenetrable, dominated by any of several willow species. This early seral community10 may succeed to any of several riparian woodland or forest types in the absence of severe flooding disturbance. This community occurs on relatively fine-grained sand and gravel bars that are close to river channels and, therefore, close to groundwater. It is distributed along and at the mouths of most perennial and many intermittent streams of the south Coast Ranges, from the Bay Area south to Point Conception. Central coast riparian scrub provides foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of songbirds, as well as resting/ foraging habitat for fall-migrant/ neotropical warblers such as yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), wilson‟s warbler (Wilsonia pusilla), and orangecrowned warbler (Vermivora celata). Raptors such as sharp-shined hawk (Accipiter striatus) and red-shouldered hawk forage within this habitat. Riparian scrub is also important in providing cover for amphibians and reptiles such as Pacific tree frog, California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii), San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia), western terrestrial garter snake (Thamnophis elegans), and southwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata pallida). Freshwater Marsh Within the plan area, freshwater marsh was present along the margins of Upper and Lower Emerald Lakes and in slow moving portions of streams. As described by Holland (1986), freshwater marsh is dominated by perennial, emergent monocots11 1 to 15 feet in height. It typically occurs on sites that lack a significant current A “seral community” means an ecological community currently occupying an area but part of a sequence of ecological communities that have or will occupy that area. An early seral community means that biologists expect the area to be succeeded by a different ecological community before the area reaches its ecological climax. 11 Monocots are flowering plants, including grasses containing a single embryonic seed leaf. 10 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-11 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources and are permanently flooded by freshwater along the edges of water bodies, dune swales, slough terrace edges, banks, channels, and mouth margins of rivers, bottomlands, ditch margins, lagoons, ponds, reservoir margins, and along geologic faults. Common plant species include rush (Juncus spp.), cattails (Typha spp.), knotweed (Polygonum spp.), and small fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus). Freshwater marsh provides habitat for a variety of wildlife species such as Pacific tree frog (Hyla regilla), marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), and pied-billed grebe (Podilymbus podiceps). Special status species that utilize freshwater marshes include California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) and southwestern pond turtle. Non-native species that are often present within these habitats include introduced Centrarchid fishes (i.e., bass, sunfish, and crappie), red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta), and bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana). Typically, the presence of one or more of these introduced species greatly reduces the potential for California tiger salamander, California red-legged frog and/or southwestern pond turtle. Streams As described previously, major streams in the plan area include Cordilleras Creek and Redwood Creek and its tributaries. Streams in the plan area vary from vegetated natural channels to unvegetated concrete channels. Vegetation types that are supported by streams in the plan area include coast live oak woodland, central coast riparian scrub, freshwater marsh, and seep. Due to the extensive urbanization within the watersheds of Cordilleras and Redwood Creeks, and the concrete channelization of the creeks for most of their length through the plan area, stream habitat for native aquatic species is limited primarily to the foothill portions of the creek systems. Redwood Creek is above ground in the northeastern portion of downtown and is characterized as a tidally influenced channel with tidal flat vegetation on the banks. The wildlife habitat value of this portion of Redwood Creek is addressed in the discussion of Creeks and Tidal Waters. Within the concrete channels, vegetation consists of algae and some aquatic plants that grow within shallow pools. Wildlife within the channels is limited to a few species such as Pacific tree frog, crayfish, striped skunk, and raccoon. In the foothills, the creeks are more natural, with earthen beds and banks, and in some places, there are adjacent riparian floodplains consisting of willow riparian or coast live oak woodland. These portions of the creeks provide habitat for wildlife to forage, breed, and disperse. Within natural streams, a diversity of aquatic insects is present, and these form the base of the aquatic food chain. Common species present include native fishes such as threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and California roach (Hesperoleucus symmetricus) and amphibians such as Pacific tree frog, western toad (Bufo boreas), and rough-skinned newt (Taricha granulosa). May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-12 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Bay Channels/Open Water Within the plan area, bay channels include Westpoint Slough, Corkscrew Slough, Smith Slough, Steinberger Slough, and Redwood Creek between Bair Island and the Cargill Property salt crystallization ponds. Bay channels include deep channels (deeper than 18 feet below Mean Low Lower Water), and shallow channels (between 18 feet below Mean Low Lower Water and actual Mean Low Lower Water). The sediments in deep channels vary from coarse sand to very fine clay and salts. The sediments of shallow channels are primarily mud and are generally unvegetated. The San Francisco Bay estuary provides important open water habitat for special status and common wildlife species. The nutrient rich waters and bay mud support abundant invertebrate organisms that form the base of the food chain within the estuary. These in turn provide important foraging, movement corridors, and nursery habitat for bay fishes, foraging and rafting habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl; and important foraging habitat for Pacific harbor seals. Bay channels provide deep and shallow water habitat for invertebrates, bay fishes, and a variety of birds. The channels provide habitat for invertebrates and fishes such as rock crab (Cancer antennarius), opossum shrimp (Neomysis mercedis (relicta)), leopard shark (Triakis semifasciata), bat ray (Myliobatus californica), brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus), and California halibut (Paralichthys californicus). The channels provide habitat to birds including: canvasback (Aythya valisineria), surf scoter (Melanitta perspicilata), ruddy duck (Oxyura jamaicensis), Forster‟s tern (Sterna forsteri), blackcrowned night heron (Nycticorax nycticorax), western/Clark‟s grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis), among others. The channels also provide corridors for anadromous12 fishes such as Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). In addition, harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) utilize marsh areas adjacent to bay channels and smaller sloughs as resting or haul-out sites during high tides.13 Tidal Flat Within the plan area, tidal flats are adjacent to Greco Island and Bair Island, particularly to the north in shallow areas. Tidal flat is also present in Steinberger Slough, Westpoint Slough, and Corkscrew Slough along the margins. Tidal flat includes unvegetated mudflats, sandflats, and shellflats. This habitat occurs from below Mean Low Lower Water to Mean Tide Level and supports less than 10 percent cover of vascular vegetation, with the exception of eel grass. Mudflats comprise the largest area of tidal flat habitat. These expanses of fine-grained silts and clays support an extensive community of diatoms, worms, and shellfish, as well as algal flora. More than 12 Anadromous fish live in the ocean for most of the life cycle, but breed in fresh water. 13 Goals Project 1999. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-13 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources one-half of the San Francisco Bay‟s tidal flat habitat is in the southern half of the San Francisco Bay. Tidal flats are biologically rich with invertebrate organisms, and provide important foraging habitat for a variety of migratory shorebirds such as long-billed curlew (Numenius americanus), western sandpiper (Calidris mauri), American avocet (Recurvirostra americana), black-necked stilt (Himantopus mexicanus), marbled godwit (Limosa fidoa), and long-billed dowitcher (Limnodromus scolopaceus) among others. This habitat also provides important foraging and/or breeding habitat for bay fishes such as Pacific staghorn sculpin (Leptocottus armatus armatus), Pacific herring (Clupea pallasi) and starry flounder (Platichthys stellatus) among others. Tidal Marsh/Salt Marsh (Including Muted Tidal Marsh) Within the plan area, tidal marsh/salt marsh occurs on Greco Island, Bird Island, and Bair Island. One muted tidal marsh is present on the northeastern portion of Bair Island. Tidal marsh is vegetated wetland that is subject to tidal action. Tidal marsh includes salt marsh and tidal brackish marsh. Salt marsh occurs in saline areas, while tidal brackish marsh occurs in areas where there is significant freshwater influence. A muted tidal marsh is a tidal marsh that receives less than full tidal flow because of an impediment, either natural (such as a sandspit) or man-made (such as a culvert or tide gate). Tidal marsh occurs throughout much of the Bay from the lowest extent of vegetation to the top of the intertidal zone. Tidal marsh includes three general zones of vegetation: low tidal marsh (between the lowest margin of the marsh and Mean High Water), middle tidal marsh (between Mean High Water and Mean Higher High Water), and high tidal marsh (between Mean Higher High Water and the highest margin of the marsh). Pacific cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) and common pickleweed (Salicornia virginica) are the dominant plant species in salt marsh. In high tidal salt marsh, pickleweed also grows with saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), spearscale (Atriplex triangularis), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), and jaumea (Jaumea carnosa). Species that utilize tidal marsh for breeding and/or foraging include a large number of invertebrates and fish such as chinook salmon, three-spine stickleback, longjaw mudsucker (Gillichthys mirabilis), rock crab, opossum shrimp, and California bay shrimp (Crangon franciscorum). Two federally listed mammals, salt marsh wandering shrew (Sorex vagrans haliocoetes) and salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris), only occur within this habitat type. There are also a wide variety of shorebirds and waterfowl such as ruddy duck, northern pintail (Anas acuta), red knot (Calidris canutus), western sandpiper, American avocet, black-necked stilt, long-billed dowitcher, and marbled godwit, as well as the State and federally listed California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus) and California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus). Songbirds that forage and nest in the tidal marshes include song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phaeniceus), and salt marsh common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), among others. Raptors that forage and breed include Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and northern harrier (Circus cyaneus). May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-14 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Diked Marsh Diked marsh occurs on Bair Island. Diked marshes are currently being restored to tidal influence on Bair Island and in a portion of Redwood Shores along Belmont Slough. Diked marshes are areas that were once tidal but are now isolated from the tides. Diked marsh usually occurs in low areas adjacent to levees or dikes that have no or poor drainage. Diked marshes are seasonal wetlands and they can pond continuously for weeks or months or may remain nearly dry. Diked marshes may provide important habitat for a variety of wildlife, especially waterfowl, shorebirds, and small mammals. Where they are located near or adjacent to tidal marshes, they can be especially valuable as high tide refugia for small mammals and as roosting habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl such as canvasback, northern pintail, ruddy duck, and marbled godwit, among others. Diked marshes often are good foraging and roosting habitat for shorebirds.14 Songbirds that forage and nest include marsh wren, red-winged blackbird, and salt marsh common yellowthroat, among others. Raptors that forage and breed include Peregrine falcon and northern harrier. Lagoon A lagoon is an impoundment of water that is subject to at least occasional or sporadic connection to full or muted tidal action. The impoundment can be natural or artificial. Within the plan area, a lagoon is present in the Redwood Shores area. Lagoons support many of the same species of aquatic invertebrates and fishes that occur in nearby shallow bays and channels. They also provide feeding or resting habitat for a variety of water birds such as brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis), canvasback, greater and lesser scaup (Aythya affinis/ A. marila), bufflehead (Bucephala albeola), and ruddy duck15. Salt Crystallization Pond Salt crystallization ponds are large, persistent hypersaline ponds that are intermittently flooded with bay water. The process of making salt in artificial ponds involves moving bay water through a series of ponds, known as concentrators or evaporators, over a period of several years. During this time, solar evaporation increases the waters salinity. Salt crystallization ponds support a distinctive and highly specialized salt-tolerant biota consisting of microalgae, bacteria, and invertebrates and are mostly unvegetated. Cargill Inc. owns the salt crystallization ponds north of U.S. 101, known as the Cargill Property. Bair Island contains former salt crystallization ponds that became diked marshes when they were no longer used for salt production. These areas are part of a Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge restoration project. 14 15 Goals Project 1999. Goals Project 1999. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-15 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Due to the high densities of brine flies, brine shrimp and other invertebrates, salt crystallization ponds provide foraging habitat for a variety of birds such as Wilson‟s phalarope (Phalaropus tricolor), American white pelican (Pelecanus erythrorhynchus), American avocet, black-necked stilt, western sandpiper, and long-billed dowitcher. Dry salt crystallization ponds and levees also provide important nesting habitat for Forster‟s tern, Caspian tern (Sterna caspia) and burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia). Inactive salt crystallization ponds, salt crystallization pond beaches, and levees currently provide important nesting habitat for the federally-threatened western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus). Numerous waterbirds use the salt ponds and their associated islands and levees primarily for roosting, either at night or during high tide when their preferred foraging tidal marsh habitats are submerged. Large mixed species flocks of shorebirds, gulls, terns, cormorants, pelicans, herons, and other birds are often seen roosting or loafing on levees, in shallow water, or on exposed mud in the ponds. Some of these species nest on islands or levees within the ponds or on barren salt flats on the bottoms of dried ponds.16 Migration, Travel Corridors, and Habitat Fragmentation The plan area is bordered by urban development to the west and east. Open space areas are located on opposite sides of the plan area, within the foothills (Edgewood County Park, Stulsaft Park) in the southwest and along the Bayshore (Bair Island, Bird Island, Greco Island) in the northeast. These habitats primarily support various wildlife species adapted to the different habitat types present. The foothills provide woodlands, brushlands, and other upland community types whereas the Baylands provide tidal marsh and aquatic habitats and limited upland habitats. Overlap of usage occurs for common, broad ranging and/or opportunistic species whose habitat requirements are met in the foothills and the Baylands (western fence lizard, raccoon, coyote, raven and northern harrier, among others). Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation resulting from land use changes or habitat conversion can alter the use and viability of wildlife movement corridors (i.e. linear habitats that naturally connect and provide passage between two or more otherwise disjunct larger habitats or habitat fragments). In general, studies suggest that habitat corridors provide connectivity for, and are used by wildlife and as such, are an important conservation tool.17 According to Beier and Loe (1992), wildlife habitat corridors fulfill several functions. They maintain connectivity for daily movement, travel, mate-seeking, and migration; plant propagation; genetic interchange; population movement in response to environmental change or natural disaster; and recolonization of habitats subject to local extirpation or removal. The suitability of a habitat as a wildlife movement corridor is related to, among other factors, the habitat corridor‟s dimensions (length and width), topography, vegetation, exposure to human influence, and the species in question. 16 17 EDAW et al. 2007. Beier and Noss 1998. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-16 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Species utilize movement corridors in several ways. “Passage species” are those species that use corridors as thru-ways between outlying habitats. The habitat requirements for passage species are generally less than those for corridor dwellers. Passage species use corridors for brief durations, such as for seasonal migrations or movement within a home range. As such, movement corridors do not necessarily have to meet any of the habitat requirements necessary for a passage species‟ everyday survival. Large herbivores, such as deer and elk, and medium-to-large carnivores, such as coyotes, bobcats and mountain lions, are typically passage species. “Corridor dwellers” are those species that have limited dispersal capabilities – a category that includes most plants, insects, reptiles, amphibians, small mammals, and birds – and use corridors for a greater length of time. As such, wildlife movement corridors must fulfill key habitat components specific to a species‟ life history requirements in order for them to survive.18 In general, however, the suitability and/or utility of the landscape – specifically, of the landscape as corridor habitat – is best evaluated on a species-level.19 Movement corridors for wildlife through the plan area are severely limited due to the density of urbanization (industrial, commercial, and suburban sectors). Wildlife movement between the Bayshore to the north and foothills to the south would need to move through approximately 3 miles of urbanized area. Wildlife movement through the plan area is primarily limited to the creek and riparian corridors that connect the foothills to the Bayshore area. Cordilleras Creek and Redwood Creek and their associated tributaries have been channelized into either narrow earthen or concrete channels as they flow through the central portion of the plan area. These channels provide corridors for wildlife during low flow conditions, while during high flows they present movement barriers, even for fish (e.g. velocity barriers for in-migrating salmonids). The urbanized sections of these creeks are not suitable for most wildlife species and are primarily used as thru-ways by species adapted to urban habitats such as raccoon, striped skunk, and Virginia opossum. Though movement for land mammals and other species is severely limited through the plan area, resident and migratory birds and bats can utilize the urban forest for foraging, roosting and breeding. For birds and bats connectivity of habitats may not be as important as forest patch size and vegetation structure.20 Maintaining or reestablishing vegetative corridors, as well as increasing patch size and vegetation structure within urban areas can benefit land mammals, birds, bats and potentially other groups of species. Special Status Species Special status plant and wildlife species are defined as those species listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Proposed for listing, or are designated as Fully Protected species under one or more of the following regulatory statues: Federal Endangered Species Act, as amended Beier and Loe 1992. Beier and Noss 1998. 20 Andren 1994. 18 19 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-17 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 50, Section 17), Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (2001), California Endangered Species Act (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 670.5), California Fish and Game Code (Sections 1901, 2062, 2067, 3511, 4700, 5050 and 5515) and Native Plant Protection Act of 1977. Special status species also include locally rare species defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines 15125(c) and 15380, which may include species that are designated as sensitive, declining, rare, locally endemic or as having limited or restricted distribution by various federal, state and local agencies, organizations and watchlists. Their status is based on their rarity and endangerment throughout all or portions of their range. The regulatory framework that protects special status species is further discussed in Section 4.4.2. In evaluating on-site habitat suitability for special status plant and wildlife species within the study area, relevant literature, knowledge of regional biota, and observations made during the field investigations were applied as analysis criteria. Criteria determinations for occurrence potential of special status species are divided into the five categories described below. These determination categories appear in Appendix E, which provides a summary of the status, habitat affinities, flowering phenology, habitat suitability and local distribution, and potential for occurrence for each of the target special status species. Appendix E contains all special-status plant and wildlife species known to occur in the plan area vicinity which is defined as the four USGS 7-½ minute Quadrangles that contain the Plan Area (San Mateo, Redwood Point, Woodside, and Palo Alto) and the twelve adjacent USGS 7-½ minute Quads (Cupertino, Half Moon Bay, Hayward, Hunters Point, La Honda, Mindego Hill, Montara Mountain, Mountain View, Newark, San Francisco South, San Gregorio, and San Leandro). It should be noted that local distribution references refer to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Element Occurrence Index (EONDX) number.21 The EONDX is an integer primary key (unique for each record) used within the CNDDB for GIS relational databases. Although the EONDX is assigned sequentially, gaps may appear as records are merged or updated. Factors influencing which determination criteria are applied to target species is detailed below. 21 None denotes a complete lack of habitat suitability, local range restrictions, and/or regional extirpations. Not Expected denotes situations where suitable habitat or key habitat elements may be present but may be of poor quality or isolated from the nearest extant occurrences. Incompatible habitat suitability refers to elevation, geology, soil chemistry and type, vegetation communities, microhabitats, and degraded/significantly altered habitats. These factors create unsuitable ecological conditions for the consideration of even a low occurrence potential within the study area. CDFG 2009e May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-18 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Absent indicates specified taxa (group) not observed during field investigations and were consequently ruled out. This category also refers to diagnostic vegetative material of shrubby perennial species not observed on site. This category refers only to plant species. Possible indicates the presence of suitable habitat or key habitat elements that potentially support a specific species or taxa. Present indicates the target species was either observed directly or its presence was confirmed by diagnostic sign (i.e. tracks, scat, burrows, carcasses, castings, prey remains, etc.) during field investigations. Special Status Plants Based on the site reconnaissance, a review of available databases and literature,22 and familiarity with the regional flora, a total of 79 special status plant species are known from the region and were considered as part of this assessment. Of these species, 48 were ruled out based on the lack of suitable habitat or range restrictions. Eight species are known to occur within the plan area, primarily in Edgewood and Stulsaft parks, and may occur in other areas of the plan area. Twenty-three species were determined to have at least some potential to occur within the plan area based on the presence of suitable habitat (i.e. serpentine grassland, grassland, chamise chaparral, oak woodland, northern coastal scrub, and salt marsh). Special status plant species with the potential to occur within the plan area are included in Appendix E. Special Status Wildlife Based on the field investigation, review of available databases and literature, familiarity with local fauna, and on-site habitat suitability, a total of 100 special status fish and wildlife species were considered as part of this assessment.23 Fifty-four of these were determined to have at least some potential to occur within the plan area or adjacent habitats based on the presence of suitable habitat. Special status wildlife species with the potential to occur within the plan area are included in Appendix E. 4.4.2 REGULATORY SETTING Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (FESA), was created to “conserve the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend.” The USFWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration‟s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) have authority over projects that may result in a “take” of a species listed as threatened or endangered under the FESA. Under the FESA, plant and wildlife species, including all lower taxa including subspecies and varieties, are listed 22 23 USFWS 1999, 2008, 2009a,b; CDFG 2009b,c,e; CNPS 2001, 2009; CCH 2009, Hickman 1993 USFWS 1999, 2008, 2009a,b; CDFG 2009a,d,e; NMFS 2004, SAS 2006 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-19 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources threatened or endangered based on (A) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of their habitat or range, (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes, (C) disease or predation, (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms, or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting their continued existence. FESA listing categories include endangered, threatened, and candidates for listing. FESA provides protection for species listed as endangered, and prohibits the “take” of such species in areas under federal jurisdiction or in violation of state law. A “take” is defined as any action to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. Species listed as threatened do not warrant listing as endangered and are not provided the same protection under Section 9 of the FESA; however, USFWS often applies the same protection as authorized by Section 4(d) of the FESA. Section 4(d) also allows for exceptions to the take rule under special circumstances. If a project would result in a take of a federally listed species, either an incidental take permit, under Section 10(a) of the FESA, or a federal interagency consultation under Section 7 of FESA, is required prior to the take. Current inventories published for species listed under the FESA include the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants,24 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That are Candidates or Proposed for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions; Proposed Rule,25 Endangered and Threatened Species; Establishment of Species of Concern List, Addition of Species to Species of Concern List, Description of Factors for Identifying Species of Concern, and Revision of Candidate Species List Under the Endangered Species Act.26 Clean Water Act of 1977: Section 401 and Section 404 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have jurisdiction over “Waters of the United States,” which include navigable waters of the United States, interstate waters, all other waters where the use or degradation or destruction of the waters could affect interstate or foreign commerce, tributaries to any of these waters, and wetlands that meet any of these criteria or that are adjacent to any of these waters or their tributaries. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes the USACOE to regulate any activity that fills wetlands or “waters of the United States.” Under Section 401 of the CWA, projects that require a permit from the USACOE under Section 404 must also obtain water quality certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). USFWS, 1999. USFWS, 2005a. 26 NMFS, 2004. 24 25 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-20 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Waters of the United States include marine waters, tidal areas, and stream channels. Under federal regulations, wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.”27 Presently, to be considered a wetland, a site must exhibit three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology existing under the “normal circumstances” for the site. Wetlands that are non-navigable, isolated, and intrastate only may not be subject to USACOE jurisdiction under Section 404 of the CWA, pursuant to the “SWANCC” decision.28 Although isolated wetlands may not be subject to USACOE jurisdiction under Section 404, they are considered “waters of the State” under California‟s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Cal. Water Code Sections 13020, et seq.) and, as such, are subject to regulation by RWQCBs. Policies regulating the loss of wetlands generally stress the need to compensate for wetland acreage losses by creating wetlands from non-wetland habitat on at least an acrefor-acre basis. That is, mitigation requiring a no-net-loss of wetland functions and values is typically required. Projects that cause the discharge of dredged or fill materials in Waters of the United States require permitting by the USACOE. Actions affecting small areas of jurisdictional waters may qualify for a Nationwide Permit, provided conditions of the permit are met (such as avoiding impacts to threatened or endangered species or to important cultural sites). Development projects that do not meet the Nationwide Permit conditions, or projects that disturb a larger area, require an Individual Permit. The process for obtaining an Individual Permit requires a detailed alternatives analysis and development of a comprehensive mitigation/monitoring plan. Waters of the United States “Waters of the United States,” which include “wetlands” and “other waters,” are defined by 33 CFR Section 328.3 as follows: All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands. 33 C.F.R. Section 328.3(b). Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County vs. United Stated Army Corps of Engineers (2001) 531 U.S. 159. 27 28 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-21 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources All “other waters” such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: o which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or o from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or o which are used or could be used for industrial purpose by industries in interstate commerce. All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition. Tributaries of waters identified above. The territorial seas. Wetlands adjacent to waters (other than wetlands) identified above. The USACOE generally does not consider the following waters to be “waters of the United States.” However, the USACOE reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine that a particular water body within these categories of waters is a water of the United States. The EPA also has the right to determine on a case-by-case basis if any of these waters are “waters of the United States.” Non-tidal drainage and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land. Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating and/or diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons. Water filled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of waters of the United States [see 33 CFR 328.3(a)]. Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to upland if the irrigation ceased. Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and retain water, and which are used exclusively for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing. Ordinary High Water Mark USACOE jurisdiction over “other waters” extends to the limit of the Ordinary High Water Mark or the upward extent of any adjacent wetland. The Ordinary High Water Mark, as defined by 33 CFR Section 328.3(e), is the visible line on the shore/bank established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as: A clear, natural line impressed on the bank. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-22 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Shelving. Changes in the character of soil. Destruction of terrestrial vegetation. The presence of litter and debris. Other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas. Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires authorization from the Secretary of the Army, acting through the USACOE, to construct any structure in or over any “navigable water of the United States.” Structures or work outside the limits defined as navigable waters require a Section 10 permit if the structures or work affect the course, location, or condition of the water body. The law applies to dredging or disposal of dredged materials, excavation, filling, rechannelization, or any other modification of a navigable water of the United States. It includes without limitation, any wharf, dolphin, weir, boom breakwater, jetty, groin, bank protection (e.g. riprap, revetment, bulkhead), mooring structures such as pilings, aerial or subaqueous power transmission lines, intake or outfall pipes, permanently moored floating vessel, tunnel, artificial canal, boat ramp, aids to navigation, and any other permanent, or semi-permanent obstacle or obstruction. Navigable waters are generally defined as waters of the United States that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, shoreward to the mean high water mark, and/or are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign commerce, as defined in 32 CFR Section 322.2(a). Marine Mammal Protection Act The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) was enacted on October 21, 1972. All marine mammals are protected under the MMPA. The MMPA prohibits, with certain exceptions, the "take" of marine mammals in U.S. waters and by U.S. citizens on the high seas, and the importation of marine mammals and marine mammal products into the U.S.29 Congress passed the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 based on the following findings and policies: some marine mammal species or stocks may be in danger of extinction or depletion as a result of human activities; these species or stocks must not be permitted to fall below their optimum sustainable population level ("depleted"); measures should be taken to replenish these species or stocks; there is inadequate knowledge of the ecology and population dynamics; and marine mammals have proven to be resources of great international significance. The MMPA was amended substantially in 1994 to provide for: certain exceptions to the take prohibitions, such as for Alaska Native subsistence and permits and authorizations 29 NMFS. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-23 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources for scientific research; a program to authorize and control the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing operations; preparation of stock assessments for all marine mammal stocks in waters under U.S. jurisdiction; and studies of pinniped30fishery interactions. Migratory Bird Treaty Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712; MBTA), administered by the USFWS, implements four treaties between the United States and Canada, Mexico, Japan and Russia, respectively, to manage and conserve migratory birds that cross national borders. The MBTA makes it unlawful in any manner, unless expressly authorized by permit pursuant to federal regulations, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to barter, barter, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, export, import, cause to be shipped, exported, or imported, deliver for transportation, transport or cause to be transported, carry or cause to be carried, or receive for shipment, transportation, carriage, or export at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird. The definition of “take” is defined as any act to “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect, or attempt to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect.” This includes most actions, direct and indirect, that could result in “take” or possession, whether it is temporary or permanent, of any protected species.31 Although harassment and habitat modification do not constitute a take in themselves under the MBTA or Fish and Game Code, such actions that result in direct loss of birds, nests or eggs, including nest abandonment or failure, are considered a take under such regulations. A list of migratory birds protected under the MBTA, available in Section 10.13 of Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulation, excludes non-native species that have been introduced into the U.S. or its territories, and species that belong to the families not listed in any of the four treaties underlying the MBTA, such as wrentit (Chamaea fasciata), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), California quail (Callipepla californica), Ring-necked Pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) and Chukar (Alectoris chukar), among other species less common in California. On December 8, 2004 the U.S. Congress passed the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act (Division E, Title I, Section 143 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, PL 108– 447; MBTRA), which excludes all non-native migratory birds or birds that have been introduced to the U.S. or its territories. It defines a native migratory bird as a species present within the U.S. and its territories as a result of natural biological or ecological processes. The USFWS published a list of the bird species excluded from the MBTA on March 15, 2005 (70 FR 12710), which included two species commonly observed in the U.S., the rock pigeon (Columba livia) and domestic goose (Anser anser „domesticus’). 30 31 A pinniped is a class of marine mammals including seals, sea lions, and walruses. USFWS, 2005b. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-24 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d; June 8, 1940) as amended, provides protection for the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) by prohibiting the taking, possession and commerce of such birds, their nests, eggs or feathers unless expressly authorized by permit pursuant to federal regulations. The Act also provides criminal and civil penalties for violations of the Act and defines take as any action to pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, molest or disturb. California Endangered Species Act The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) of 1984, administered by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), recognizes that certain species of fish, wildlife, and plants are in danger of, or threatened with, extinction because their habitats are threatened with destruction, adverse modification, or severe curtailment, or because of overexploitation, disease, predation, or other factors. The Legislature recognized that these species of fish, wildlife, and plants are of ecological, educational, historical, recreational, aesthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the state, and the conservation, protection and enhancement of these species and their habitat is of statewide concern. The CESA built on the California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) (discussed below) and increased regulatory protection for plant species. Listing categories under the CESA include endangered, threatened, rare or candidate for listing.32 CESA requires state agencies to consult with the CDFG when preparing CEQA documents to ensure that the state lead agency actions do not jeopardize the existence of listed species. It directs agencies to consult with CDFG on projects or actions that could affect listed species, directs CDFG to determine whether jeopardy would occur, and allows CDFG to identify “reasonable and prudent alternatives” to the project consistent with conserving the species. CESA prohibits the taking of state-listed endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species. CDFG exercises authority over mitigation projects involving state-listed species, including those resulting from CEQA mitigation requirements. CDFG may authorize a taking through an incidental take permit, if the impacts of the take are minimized and fully mitigated. Mitigation often takes the form of an approved habitat management plan or management agreement that avoids or compensates for possible jeopardy. CDFG requires preparation of mitigation plans in accordance with published guidelines. California Fish and Game Code The California Fish and Game Code provides protection for California’s plant and wildlife species and precludes taking of species listed as fully protected by the CDFG. Section 86 defines take as any action to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill. Unless expressly authorized under Chapter 1.5, Article 3, 32 CDFG Code Sections 2062, 2067 and 2068 May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-25 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Section 2081 (which outlines exceptions for taking of endangered and threatened species) endangered, threatened, and fully protected species shall not be taken for any purpose. Section 3503 prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird; Section 3503.5 prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of any nests, eggs or birds in the orders Falconiformes (new world vultures, hawks, eagles, ospreys and falcons, among others)or Strigiformes (owls); Section 3511 prohibits the take or possession of fully protected birds; and Section 3513 prohibits the take or possession of any migratory nongame bird or part thereof as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Section 4700 provides protection for fully protected mammals unless expressly authorized under Section 2081.7. Fully protected mammals include Morrow Bay kangaroo rat, bighorn sheep, except Nelson bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis nelsoni), northern elephant seal, Guadalupe fur seal, ring-tailed cat, Pacific right whale, salt-marsh harvest mouse, southern sea otter, and wolverine. Section 4150 provides protection for all nongame mammals occurring naturally in California, which are not fully protected or furbearing mammals. Section 5050 provides protection for fully protected amphibians and reptiles unless expressly authorized under Section 2081.7. Fully protected amphibians and reptiles include blunt-nosed leopard lizard, San Francisco garter snake, Santa Cruz long-toed salamander, limestone salamander, and black toad. Section 5515 provides protection for fully protected fish unless expressly authorized under Section 2081.7. Fully protected fish include Colorado River squawfish, thicktail chub, Mohave chub, Lost River sucker, Modoc sucker, shortnose sucker, humpback sucker, Owens River pupfish, unarmored threespine stickleback, and rough sculpin. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and Section 401 of the Clean Water Act The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) administers both the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and Section 401 of the CWA through the nine state RWQCBs. The RWQCB with jurisdiction in the Bay Area is the San Francisco RWQCB. The PorterCologne Water Quality Control Act requires “any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the ‘waters of the State’ to file a report of discharge” with the RWQCB (Cal. Water Code Section 13260). Waters of the State are “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state” [Cal. Water Code Section 13050(e)]. Pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA, the RWQCBs consider waters of the State to include (without limitation) rivers, streams, lakes, bays, marshes, mudflats, unvegetated seasonally ponded areas, drainage swales, sloughs, wet meadows, natural ponds, vernal pools, diked bay lands, seasonal wetlands, and riparian woodlands. The RWQCBs have also claimed jurisdiction and exercised discretionary authority over “isolated waters,” as discussed above. Native Plant Protection Act The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) of 1977, which is implemented by the CDFG, was created to “preserve, protect, and enhance rare and endangered plants in this State.” The NPPA gave the CDFG the authority to designate native plants as endangered or rare and to May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-26 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources regulate, through permits, activities such as collecting, transporting, or selling plants protected by the NPPA. The NPPA also provides the definitions of native, threatened, and endangered plants in Section 1901 of the California Fish and Game Code. Among its goals, CEQA was intended “to preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities” (Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 21001c). Through this process, impacts and mitigation to state and federally listed plant species are discussed. California Native Plant Society The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed and maintains a list of rare, threatened, and endangered plants of California. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. The CNPS list is endorsed by the CDFG and effectively serves as its list of “candidate” plant species. The following identifies the definitions of the CNPS listings: List 1A: Plants presumed to be extinct in California; List 2: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but are more numerous elsewhere; List 3: Plants about which more information is needed (a review list): and List 1B: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; List 4: Plants of limited distribution (a watch list). CNPS List 1B and List 2 species are considered eligible for state listing as endangered or threatened pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code. As part of the CEQA process, such species should be fully considered, as they meet the definition of threatened or endangered under the NPPA and Sections 2062 and 2067 of the California Fish and Game Code. CNPS List 3 and List 4 species are considered to be either plants about which more information is needed or are uncommon enough that their status should be regularly monitored. Such plants may be eligible or may become eligible for state listing, and CNPS and CDFG recommend that these species be evaluated for consideration during the preparation of CEQA documents,33 as some of these species may meet NPPA and CESA criteria as threatened or endangered. San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) is a California state agency that has regulatory jurisdiction over the Bay and its shoreline. BCDC's jurisdiction generally extends to all areas of the Bay that are subject to tidal action, including sloughs and marshlands, to a 100-foot shoreline band surrounding the Bay, to salt crystallization ponds and managed wetlands as defined in the Act, and certain designated waterways. Specifically, BCDC has jurisdiction over marshlands lying between 33 CNPS 2001. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-27 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources mean high tide and five feet above mean sea level; tidelands (lying between mean high tide and mean low tide); and submerged lands (lands lying below mean low tide). Redwood City Tree Preservation Ordinance Chapter 35 of the Redwood City Municipal Code (“Tree Preservation Ordinance”) uses the following definition for the word “tree”: Any woody plant characterized by having a single trunk of a circumference of thirty-eight inches (38″) or more, measured at any point between six inches (6″) and thirty-six inches (36″) above ground level; or Any woody plant characterized by having a single trunk which has been found by the Park and Recreation Commission to have special significance to the community, which plant shall be designated a "heritage tree." (Ord. No. 1536, Section 1, 6-26-72) The ordinance protects trees as defined above from being cut, removed, or caused to be cut, moved, or removed without a permit from the City’s Parks and Recreation Director (Director). If trees are damaged or removed without this approval the tree must be restored to its former condition under the direction of Director, if restoration is not possible the tree must be replaced with a tree as approved by the Director. The ordinance states that any tree, regardless of size, may be declared a heritage tree, as long as it is healthy and adapted well to the climatic condition of the area, is visible from a public right-of-way, and meets one the following conditions: That said tree has historical significance, That said tree is indigenous to the area, That said tree is one of a group of trees and that each is dependent on the other tree for survival. (Ord. No. 1536, Section 1, 6-26-72). Policy Consistency Analysis All proposed development allowed by the New General Plan will be subject to environmental review and will be reviewed for consistency with applicable policies and implementation programs of the New General Plan. Policies NR-5.7 and NR-8.1 through NR-8.5 within the New General Plan are focused on preserving, enhancing and restoring habitats for native plants and wildlife through a variety of mechanisms such as protection of sensitive habitats, as well as working to enhance and restore native habitats. Program NR-27 specifically calls for the enforcement and compliance with all of the previously described federal, state, and local regulations. Program NR-22, as modified by mitigation below, would require that proponents of new development in any area where sensitive biological resources exist (i.e. hillside and Bayfront areas) to identify all such sensitive biological resources on project site(s) in accordance with the methods and protocols of the USFWS, CDFG, and CNPS. Program NR-23 would require proponents of any development in the plan area to mitigate any potential adverse impacts to biological resources in accordance with the CEQA and other applicable environmental regulations. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-28 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources The New General Plan also includes Policies NR-5.2, NR-5.3, NR-5.5, and NR-6.5, which reduce potential pollution from construction activities by restricting development near creeks and other waterways, and taking steps to reduce urban runoff. These policies would promote compliance with Sections 401 and 404 of the CWA. Policies NR-99.1 through NR-9.94 and Programs NR-34, NR-39, NR-40 would preserve, maintain, and expand the number of trees within the plan area that would be protected under the current Redwood City Tree Preservation Ordinance. 4.4.3 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. A significant impact could occur if development allowed by the New General Plan would: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. 4.4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES This impact analysis is based on a review of background information, including a query of the CNDDB,34 review of existing environmental documents, knowledge of regional biota, and a site reconnaissance of the plan area conducted by Nomad Ecology botanists and 34 CDFG 2009e. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-29 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources wildlife biologists on February 18 and 25, 2009. One additional field reconnaissance was conducted by a wildlife biologist on March 9, 2009. Issues Not Discussed Further Conflict with the Provisions of an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Conservation Plan There is no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), nor other similar approved conservation plan within or in close proximity to the plan area. The closest HCP to the plan area is the San Bruno Mountain HCP, located approximately 12 miles north of the plan area. The closest NCCP to the plan area is the Santa Clara Valley NCCP, approximately 30 miles to the south in the Coyote Valley. Owing to the distances between the closest HCP and NCCP to the plan area, adoption of the New General Plan would result in no conflict to the provisions of these pertinent HCPs and NCCPs and thus no impact would result. Project Impacts Impact 4.4-1: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss of habitat, mortality, or indirect impacts to special status species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Development allowed by the New General Plan would primarily be infill and redevelopment of areas already urbanized. However, up to 9,103 new housing units and 7.3 million square feet of non-residential development are anticipated, in addition to identified transportation and infrastructure improvements. The New General Plan emphasizes infill and redevelopment in urbanized areas of the City. Some development allowed by the New General Plan could occur on parcels that are undeveloped or vacant or on land adjacent to sensitive resources, which may result in impacts to biological resources. Future development activities and/or public improvement projects throughout the plan area along streams, in grasslands that contain seasonal wetlands, in Bayfront areas, and other wetland habitats could result in the loss of wetlands and riparian habitat. The New General Plan would allow for the conversion of a portion of a parcel within the Bayfront area along Steinberger Slough designated as Open Space in the existing General Plan to Mixed Use – Waterfront Neighborhood. This map change would allow urban development in an open space area that may harbor sensitive biological resources. Development of empty parcels and redevelopment of currently developed parcels could result in the removal of oak woodland and serpentine habitat/and or serpentine grassland. Restoration or public access projects in Stulsaft and Edgewood parks could also result in impacts to serpentine habitat/and or serpentine grassland. With regard to the salt crystallization ponds on the Cargill Property, the New General Plan would maintain the existing “Urban Reserve” designation for the western portion of the site and provide an “Open Space- Preservation” designation for the eastern portion (Refer May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-30 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources to Section 4.2, Agriculture, and Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, for further discussion pertaining to the Cargill Property). The retention of “Urban Reserve” on the western portion would continue the City’s designation of that portion of the site for unspecified future conversion to urban use. The designation of the eastern portion as Open Space – Preservation would allow for the continuation of the same allowable uses as under the site’s current general plan designation, including salt harvesting activities. Thus, the New General Plan would not introduce any physical change to the Cargill Property and therefore would not result in any related significant environmental impact related to biological resources on the property. As the City received a development application for the property in May 2009, the potential development of the property is considered in this EIR as part of the cumulative impact analysis. Please see Chapter 6.0, Cumulative Impacts. The Natural Resources and Built Environment Chapters of the New General Plan contain policies and programs, which address the health protection, conservation, and management of biological resources known to or expected to occur within the plan area. The New General Plan includes several policies and implementation programs related to the protection of biological resources in the plan area. Policy NR-8.1 requires that efforts to protect sensitive biological resources are pursued. Policies NR-5.1, NR-5.3 through NR5.7, detailed in Appendix A, address the protection and enhancement of creeks, streams, and sloughs including the preservation and protection of riparian plants, requiring setbacks from and buffer zones around creeks, limiting construction activities within creeks. Policies NR-6.1, NR-6.2, and NR-6.3 address the protection, restoration, and maintenance of Baylands including tidal flats, tidal marshes, and salt marshes. Policies NR-8.2 through NR-8.5 would require the restoration and protection of sensitive biological resources, native habitat, and vegetation communities that support sensitive wildlife species and would preserve and create contiguous wildlife habitat and movement corridors. In regards to tree protection, Policies NR-9.1 and NR-9.3 would preserve and expand the number of trees within the plan area, focusing on native and landmark treetypes. Furthermore, Policy BE-23.9 would preserve open space and habitat resources and provide species protection. Program NR-24 requires that whenever new development or redevelopment occurs adjacent to an existing creek, the City will work with the developer to improve and enhance the portion of the creek on or adjacent to the property, including daylighting and creek restoration, wherever feasible. Program NR-25 requires protection of reasonable setback areas along existing creeks from encroachment by buildings, pavement and other impactful uses. Programs NR-26 through NR-31, NR-34, NR-37, NR-38, NR-40, NR-43, and NR-46 require compliance with water quality standards and state and federal regulations pertaining to habitat and wildlife preservation, enhancing fisheries restoration, maintaining upland-bayland transition zones for wildlife refuge, consultation with BCDC to restore and preserve Bayfront lands while maintaining public access, and tree preservation. Adherence to these related policies of the New General Plan would result in the restoration and enhancement of creeks, marshlands, riparian areas, and wildlife habitat, and would allow for appropriate public access to Bayfront open space and May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-31 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources creeks. Refer to Appendix A for a detailed description of the referenced implementation programs. The New General Plan implementation programs include similar protective and restorative measures for sensitive biological resources. Programs NR-22, NR-23, and NR27 address the identification of sensitive biological resources, mitigation of adverse impacts, and compliance with State and federal regulations pertaining to habitat preservation. While Program NR-22 requires new development proposals to obtain qualified biologists to identify and map all sensitive biological resources on the project site, this implementation program only specifies new development proposals in the hillside and baylands areas, and not all projects, including public access/trails projects or restoration projects. Furthermore, Program NR-23 requires the implementation of measures to mitigate potential adverse impacts of development and/or public improvements on fish, plant, and wildlife habitat in accordance with CEQA and other applicable environmental regulations, but does not specifically address sensitive vegetation communities including wetlands, riparian habitats, oak woodlands, or serpentine grassland. The wetlands, riparian habitats, oak woodlands, and serpentine grassland communities within the plan area are important plant and wildlife habitats and are considered sensitive biological resources. The loss of any part of these communities is considered a significant impact and requires mitigation, identified below. Mitigation Measure 4.4-1a: Modify Implementation Program NR-22 to read as follows: Program NR-22: Sensitive Species Biological Resources Identification. For development applications proposed for sensitive hillside or Bayfront biological resource areas, require qualified biologists to identify and map all sensitive biological resources on the project site, including local, State and federally sensitive, rare, threatened and endangered plant, fish and wildlife species and their habitats; using methods and protocols in accordance with the USFWS, CDFG, and California Native Plant Society; and make recommendations for avoiding sensitive biological resources to the maximum extent feasible and pursuant to program BE-2 in Urban Form and Land Use Chapter of the Built Environment Element. These requirements shall be satisfied prior to approval of any development proposal for the site. Mitigation Measure 4.4-1b: Modify Implementation Program NR-23 to read as follows: Program NR-23: Mitigate Adverse Impacts of Development. Implement measures to mitigate potential adverse impacts of development and/or public improvements on fish, plant and wildlife habitat in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and other applicable environmental regulations. For new development proposals in the City in which unavoidable harm or removal of sensitive biological resources could occur, require the development of a compensation May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-32 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources plan prior to City approval of any development proposal for the site. Compensation could include purchase of mitigation credits for the affected habitat types at an established mitigation bank, or preservation and enhancement of in-kind habitat types (preferably onsite). Required compensation ratios will be developed on a case-bycase basis in coordination with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Mitigation Measure 4.4-1c: Obtain Permits and Implement Conditions of State and Federal Permits for Impacts on Riparian Habitat, Wetlands, and Other Waters of the United States. Potential impacts to wetlands are regulated by the USACOE under Section 404 the CWA; CDFG under Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code, and San Francisco Bay RWCQB. Prior to any ground disturbing activities, and prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits within the plan area, the City shall require the project proponent to obtain all necessary permits pertaining to affected riparian habitat or Waters of the United States, including wetlands, stream channel, and open-water habitat regulated by the USACOE, CDFG, and San Francisco Bay RWQCB. Discharge of fill into Waters of the United States will require a CWA Section 404 permit from the USACOE and CWA Section 401 certification from the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The permitting process will also require compensation for impacts to wetlands. Significance After Mitigation: With the changes identified in Mitigation Measures 4.4-1a through 4.4-1c, program level impacts to sensitive biological resources would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-2: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss of habitat, mortality or indirect impacts to special status plant species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The New General Plan could allow future development or public improvement efforts that lead to the loss of special status plants or indirect impacts that could degrade the habitat of special status plants. Special status plants are known to occur in the plan area including in Edgewood Park, Stulsaft Park, and Belmont Slough. Potential habitat for special status plant species occurs in serpentine grassland, grassland, chamise chaparral, oak woodland, northern coastal scrub, and salt marsh throughout the plan area. New General Plan Programs NR-22, NR-23, and NR-27 address the identification of sensitive biological resources, mitigation of adverse impacts, and compliance with state and federal regulations pertaining to habitat preservation, which includes special status plant species. Additionally, Policy NE-8.1 would protect threatened and endangered plant species and Policy NR-8.4 would require consultation with regulatory agencies and other organizations to conserve, acquire, and restore open lands that include plant species. Refer to Appendix A for policy and implementation program details. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-33 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources However, there are no specific New General Plan components that call for avoidance of and/or compensation for impacts to special status plant species. Future development activities and/or public improvement projects throughout the plan area, including potential future bayfront development, and restoration activities in Stulsaft and Edgewood parks could result in the loss or indirect impacts to special status plant species. This impact is considered significant and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure 4.4-2a: Avoid Impacts to Special Status Plants. The loss of special status plants should be avoided or reduced to the extent feasible for each project site associated with a sensitive biological resource area. Prior to consideration of any development or public improvement proposal for the site, the project proponent shall retain a qualified botanist approved by the City to conduct a special-status plant survey, according to protocols established by the CNPS, CDFG, or the USFWS, to identify and map special status plants and make recommendations for avoiding or mitigating impacts to all special status plants on the project site. The botanist will coordinate placement of protective temporary fencing outside of special status plant populations to be preserved. Timing of field surveys and fencing should correspond with the blooming period when target species are most conspicuous and easily recognizable. Mitigation Measure 4.4-2b: Compensate for Loss of Special Status Plants. For each project that removes special status plants, the City shall require the development of a compensation plan, including compensation for impacts to special status plant species through preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration of habitat to assist in the recovery of the species. The City shall require that any such compensation plans are incorporated in project plans and conditions of project approval. Prior to construction, individual special status plant species within the work areas that may be impacted shall be enumerated, photographed, and conspicuously flagged to maximize avoidance, as well as to determine the total number of individuals affected. Seed collection from individuals with mature seed that are likely to be impacted should be collected and properly stored for post-construction propagation and reestablishment. The first six inches of topsoil within occupied habitat should be stored separately on site and protected from exotic weeds seed dispersal for the purpose of returning this soil horizon to its appropriate place in the profile in an attempt to salvage any viable seeds in the seed bank. Significance After Mitigation: With the changes identified in Mitigation Measures 4.4-2a, and 4.4-2b, program level impacts to special status plant species would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-3: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss of habitat, mortality or indirect impacts to special status animal species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in mortality or injury to individual special status animals including the California red-legged frog, San Francisco May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-34 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources garter snake, California tiger salamander, southwestern pond turtle, Bay checkerspot butterfly, Pacific harbor seals, and burrowing owl. Impacts to an undetermined acreage of potential special status animal habitat could lead to indirect impacts to the species due to future development activities and/or public improvement projects. Indirect impacts include increased lighting from artificial light sources, increased human activity, and increased harassment or predation of protected species by pets (i.e. cats and/or dogs). New General Plan policies relevant to impacts to wetlands and riparian habitat that could support special status species are listed under Impact 4.4-1. New General Plan Programs NR-22, NR-23, and NR-27 address the identification of sensitive biological resources, mitigation of adverse impacts, and compliance with state and federal regulations pertaining to habitat preservation, but do not specifically address the protection of specific special status animal species including the California red-legged frog, San Francisco garter snake, California tiger salamander, southwestern pond turtle, Bay checkerspot butterfly, Pacific harbor seals, and burrowing owl. The loss of habitat and/or mortality of special status species would be considered a take as defined under the federal ESA. This impact is considered significant and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure 4.4-3a: Consult with USFWS if Federally-Protected Species or Habitats are Identified. If habitats that potentially support special status species are found within or adjacent to a project area, the project proponent must consult with the USFWS under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act (or Section 10 if the project involves a federal action) and obtain all required federal permits and approvals and comply with all applicable federal requirements. Mitigation Measure 4.4-3b: Consult with CDFG if Habitats Potentially Supporting Southwestern Pond Turtle are Identified. If aquatic habitats, riparian habitats, ponds, canals, creeks, or other drainages or water bodies with adjacent upland habitats that potentially support southwestern pond turtle are found in a project area, the City shall require that the project proponent avoid these habitat areas to the extent practicable, and implement mitigation required by the CDFG. Mitigation Measure 4.4-3c: Avoid Impacts on Active Burrowing Owl Nesting and Wintering Burrows. If active burrowing owl nesting or wintering burrows are found on or in the vicinity of a project area, the project proponent will implement mitigation strategies to avoid, reduce or mitigate impacts to burrowing owls, as required by the CDFG. Mitigation Measure 4.4-3d: Compensate for Impacts to Habitat for Special status species. The City shall require compensation for impacts to special status species habitat through preservation, enhancement, and/or restoration of habitat or assist in the recovery of the species. Project plans and conditions of approval shall incorporate all mitigation measures required by the USFWS and/or the CDFG. Significance After Mitigation: With the changes identified in Mitigation Measures 4.4-3a through 4.4-3d, program level impacts to special status animal species would be less than significant. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-35 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources Impact 4.4-4: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss of habitat, mortality, or indirect impacts to special status avian species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss of habitat, mortality or indirect impacts to five federal and/or state listed birds occurring in Baylands habitats (i.e. tidal saltmarsh, tidal flat, lagoon, diked marsh, bay channels and salt crystallization ponds), within tree groves, and along riparian corridors throughout the plan area due to future development activities and/or public improvement projects. These species are California black rail, California clapper rail, California least tern, western snowy plover, great egret, snowy egret, great blue heron, and black-crowned night heron. Indirect impacts to these species may include increased lighting from artificial light sources, increased human activity and increased harassment or predation by pets (i.e. cats and/or dogs). California black rails are listed as threatened under the CESA. Western snowy plovers are listed as threatened under the federal ESA, and California clapper rails, California least tern and the salt marsh harvest mouse are listed as endangered under the federal ESA and CESA. Other special status wildlife species occurring in Baylands habitats are federal species of concern and/or California species of special concern. In addition, all nesting birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and nesting raptors are protected under the CDFG, Section 3503.5. Relevant New General Plan policies include Program NR-22, NR-23, and NR-27 which address the identification of sensitive biological resources, mitigation of adverse impacts, and compliance with state and federal regulations pertaining to habitat preservation, but do not specifically address the protection of federal and/or state listed avian species. However, future development activities and/or public improvement projects could result in the loss of habitat and mortality of listed avian species in the plan area. This impact is considered significant and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure 4.4-4a: Avoid Impacts on Active Nest for Special Status Avian Species. If nests for special status avian species are found on or in the vicinity of a project area, or if there are potential effects related to the loss of foraging habitat on nesting raptors, the project proponent will consult with the CDFG to develop appropriate site-specific mitigation strategies to avoid impacts on active nests and rookeries. Mitigation measures may include establishing protective nondisturbance buffer zones, timing restrictions, or compensation through acquisition of replacement nesting habitat. Mitigation Measure 4.4-4b: Avoid Impacts to Active Migratory Bird Nests. If active migratory bird nests are found on or in the vicinity of a project area, the project proponent shall consult with the USFWS Migratory Bird Permit Office and the CDFG to develop appropriate site-specific mitigation strategies to avoid impacts on active nests. Mitigation measures may include establishing protective nondisturbance buffer zones, timing restrictions, and monitoring restrictions. The City May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-36 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources shall require that project plans and conditions of approval incorporate mitigation acceptable to the USFWS and/or the CDFG. Significance After Mitigation: With changes identified in Mitigation Measures 4.44a, and 4.4-4b, program level impacts to migratory birds would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-5: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the loss or disturbance to active bat roosts and habitat of special status bat species. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the disturbance or loss of an undetermined number of active bat roosts and habitat of special status bat species due to future development activities and/or public improvement projects. Special status bats with potential to roost in the Redwood City area include pallid bat and western red bat. Other non-special status bat species such as long-legged myotis, fringed myotis, hoary bat, Yuma myotis, and California myotis also may roost and forage within the plan area. Bat roost sites may be limited in availability and often have very specific habitat and/or microclimate conditions. When a roost site is lost, individuals may not be able to find an alternate roost in sufficient time for protection from the elements before expiring. Bat roosts can occur within both man-made structures and natural areas such as wetlands, riparian habitat and oak woodland. Potential roosts occur within the foothills, along stream corridors, within manmade structures including bridges and within the Baylands. Bats also forage over wetlands, and within grasslands, oak woodlands, riparian habitat, and vegetated habitats within suburban areas depending upon the species. New General Plan policies relevant to this impact to wetlands, riparian habitat, oak woodlands and grassland are listed under Impact 4.4-1. Program NR-22, NR-23 and NR27 address the identification of sensitive biological resources, mitigation of adverse impacts, and compliance with state and federal regulations pertaining to habitat preservation, but do not specifically address impacts to special status bat species. While no specific bat roosts are known, such bat roosts could occur throughout the plan area. Future development activities and/or public improvement projects could result in the loss or disturbance to active bat roosts and/or habitat of special status bat species. This impact is considered significant and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure 4.4-5a: Avoid Impacts to Active Bat Roosts. If active bat roosts are found on or in the vicinity of a project area, the project proponent will consult with the CDFG to develop and implement site-specific mitigation strategies to avoid impacts on active roosts, if feasible. Active bat roosts are protected under the California Fish and Game Code, Section 4150 (nongame mammals) and under CEQA. Mitigation measures may include establishing protective non-disturbance buffer zones, timing restrictions, and exclusion devices implemented prior to or after the maternity season. Mitigation Measure 4.4-5b: Compensate for Impacts to Active Bat Roosts and Habitat of Special Status Bat Species. When impacts to active bat roosts cannot be feasibly avoided, the City shall require compensation for impacts to bat roosts and habitat of special status bat species through preservation, enhancement, May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-37 Redwood City New General Plan 4.4 Biological Resources and/or restoration of habitat or assist in the recovery of the species. The City shall require that project plans and conditions of approval incorporate mitigation acceptable to the CDFG. Significance After Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4-5a or Mitigation Measure 4.4-5b would reduce impacts to active bat roosts and the habitat of special status bat species to a less than significant level. Impact 4.4-6: Development allowed by the New General Plan could result in the potential spread of invasive weeds in the hillsides, creekside and waterfront areas. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Construction activities for projects allowed by the New General Plan could result in the introduction or spread of non-native invasive plant species. Spread of non-native invasive plant species can displace native plant species and degrade habitat for wildlife. Invasive non-native plant species are rated by the California Invasive Plant Council and the California Department of Food and Agriculture. Policy NR-88.3 of the New General Plan requires the replacement and control of invasive non-native vegetation and animals to the extent feasible in parks and open space areas, and encourages restoration of native vegetation, but does require invasive species monitoring/control plans and conditions of approval prior to project construction. Future development activities and/or public improvement projects could result in the spread of invasive weeds. This impact is considered significant and mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure 4.4-6a: Identify Invasive Weeds in Proposed Project Area. Prior to consideration of any development proposal where the City finds evidence of the presence of invasive weeds, the City will require a botanist to identify and map the invasive weed populations on the proposed development site prior to construction activities. Invasive weeds are defined as those species rated as ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘C’ by California Department of Food and Agriculture or rated High Threat by the California Invasive Plant Council. Mitigation Measure 4.4-6b: Monitor and Control Invasive Weeds in Proposed Project Area. After construction, sites will be monitored to detect the spread or establishment of new populations of invasive non-native weed populations. Significance After Mitigation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4-6a and Mitigation Measure 4.4-6b would reduce impacts of invasive weeds to a less than significant level. May 2010 Draft EIR 4.4-38