The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFinal Habitat - Roripaugh RanchFINAL HABITAT MITIGATION AND MONITORING PLAN FOR IMPACTS TO AREAS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PURSUANT TO SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 6, SECTION 1603 OF THE CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME CODE FOR THE RORIPAUGH RANCH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CITY OF TEMECULA RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA August 15, 2001 Revised February 21, 20031 Prepared for: Ashby USA, LLC 470 E. Harrison Street Corona, California 92789 Contact: Richard Ashby Telephone: (909) 898-1692 Prepared by: Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. 29 Orchard Lake Forest, California 92630 Contacts: Darlene Shelley and Martin Rasnick Telephone: (949) 837-0404 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY......................................................................................................... I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Location of Project.................................................................................... B. Brief Summary of Overall Project............................................................ C. Responsible Parties................................................................................... D. Jurisdictional Areas to be Filled/Excavated by Habitat Type .................. E. Types, Functions, and Values of the Jurisdictional Areas to be Directly and Indirectly Impacted............................................................................. II. GOAL OF MITIGATION A. Types of Habitat to be Created ......................... B. Functions and Values of Habitat to be Created C. Time Lapse ........................................................ D. Estimated Cost .................................................. III. FINAL SUCCESS CRITERIA A. Target Functions and Values ......................... B. Target Hydrological Regime .......................... C. Target Jurisdictional Acreage to be Created.. IV. PROPOSED MITIGATION SITE A. Location and Size of Mitigation site..... B. Ownership Status .................................. Page 1 5 5 7 7 0 11 12 14 14 15 15 15 16 16 TABLE OF CONTENTS VII. MONITORING PLAN Page C. Existing Functions and Values of Mitigation site.......................................................... 16 D. Present and Proposed Uses of Mitigation site................................................................ 16 E. Present and Proposed Uses of All Adjacent Areas......................................................... 17 F. Zoning............................................................................................................................. 17 V. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN A. Rationale for Expecting Implementation Success.......................................................... 17 B. Responsible Parties......................................................................................................... 17 C. Implementation Schedule................................................................................................ 18 D. Site Preparation............................................................................................................... 18 E. Planting Plan................................................................................................................... 21 F. Irrigation Plan.................................................................................................................. 25 VI. MAINTENANCE DURING MONITORING PERIOD A. Maintenance Activities................................................................................................... 26 B. Responsible Parties......................................................................................................... 30 C. Maintenance Schedule.................................................................................................... 31 VII. MONITORING PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS VIII. COMPLETION OF MITIGATION A. Notification of Completion........................................................................................ B. Corps and CDFG Confirmation................................................................................. IX. CONTINGENCY MEASURES A. Initiating Procedures.................................................................................................. B. Alternative Locations for Contingency Mitigation ................................................... C. Funding Mechanism................................................................................................... D. Responsible Parties.................................................................................................... TABLES 1. Implementation Cost Estimate ................................ 2. Implementation Schedule ........................................ 3A. Southern Willow Scrub Plant Palette ..................... 3B. Freshwater Marsh Plant Palette .............................. 4. Maintenance Inspection Schedule Guidelines........ EXHIBITS 1. Regional Map 2. Vicinity Map 3. Project Grading Map 4 Delineation Map-Roripaugh Ranch Iff Page 37 37 37 37 38 38 14 18 24 25 31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 i i 1 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 5. Delineation Map -Off Site Project 6. Mitigation Site Location Map A. Samples of Monitoring Data Sheets iv Page SUMMARY This Final Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) describes the proposed mitigation for impacts to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) jurisdiction related to the Roripaugh Ranch Residential Development Project (Project) located in the City of Temecula (City), Riverside County, California [Exhibits 1 and 2]. Proiect Description The project consists of 2,058 units on 804.7 acres with a gross density of 2.56 units/acre and a net residential density of 4.97 units/acre. Residential uses include 1,233 single-family detached units on 332.7 acres, and 825 clustered homes on 81.2 acres. The project will have an estimated 110,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, 32 acres for two school sites, 24.9 acres for two onsite public park sites, 9.1 acres of private recreation facilities, a two -acre fire station ad 262.1 acres of open space. The open space acres include 201 acres of preserved habitat as required in the Assessment District 161 sub -Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (AD 161 SHCP) as required for the federal Endangered Species Act Section 10(a) permit issued by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on December 4, 2001. The proposed mitigation and mitigation site will be part of the 201 -acre Multiple Species Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (MSSHCP), as authorized by the AD 161 MSSHCP Implementing Agreement and USFWS Section 10(a) Permit Number TE - 030505 -0. Grading for the Project would result in permanent impacts to approximately 3.38 acres of Corps jurisdiction. In order to develop 2,058 units, the City will require the developer to build infrastructure at a cost of approximately $50 million in two phases. Phase one requires a $25.5 million dollar investment and phase two a $24.5 million dollar investment. The Project impacts, consisting of 3.38 acres of waters, including 0.50 acre of wetlands, are due to the construction of the culvert street crossings required over Long Valley Wash, and a boxed culvert connection for Santa Gertrudis Creek where it crosses below the proposed Butterfield Stage Road. These culverts also act as dissipaters to the stream flow, a base for the bridge crossings and related utilities. According to the applicant, any unit count below 2,058 renders the project economically unfeasible. Long Valley Wash, at the worst-case 100 -year flood, enters the project at 3,768 cubic feet per second (cfs) and exits the site at Butterfield Stage Road at 4,460 cfs. Development in Roripaugh Ranch would increase the flow through the project to 4,480 cfs at Butterfield Stage Road. The channel will have an average width of 230 feet, including 16 -foot wide shoulders. The wider channel design will provide a larger capacity, slower velocities, and lower water surface levels. The drainage design uses the same standards as FEMA watershed for establishment of 100 -year flood plain limits. The Culvert crossings will convey flow under Butterfield Stage C There are two proposed detention basins located at Nicolas Road and the section line and the northeast corner of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road adjacent to ' Santa Gertrudis Creek. These detention basins will reduce the post development off site flows at the MWD easement to or below historical flows. The basin at Nicolas Road and the section line will have a capacity of two acre-feet and a maximum ' height of seven feet. The basin at the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road will have a capacity of five acre-feet and a maximum height of 12 feet. ' Ashby USA, LLC is has processed an approved Specific Plan through the City for ' both parcels that will allow for the development mentioned above. The project site is located at the northeast comer of the City with 174 acres within the City and 636 acres formerly within the County that have been annexed into the City [Exhibits 1 ' and 2]. The adopted Specific Plan includes a comprehensive land use plan, master plans for circulation, phasing, grading, open space and recreation, landscape, walls and fences, master utility plans for drainage, water, and sewer, planning area and ' development standards, site planning design guidelines, and architectural design 1 2 Road to an existing drainage course. There are four channel crossings in the ' proposed project. In order to reduce off-site flows at Butterfield Stage Road from the estimated 4,480 cfs down to 4,460 cfs (existing flow) or lower, a detention basin is proposed east of South Loop Road. The basin will have a capacity of 17 acre-feet and a maximum height of 12 -feet. The basin will also accommodate the 100 -year post development runoff, with three feet of freeboard, adequate to prevent overtopping of adjacent ' facilities in a 100 -year rainfall event. Armorflex will be provided along both sides of Long Valley Wash, with the bottom of the existing low flow wash maintained in its ' natural condition, except at culvert crossings, splash aprons, the detention basin, approximately 600 feet East of Butterfield Stage Road, and 1000 feet east of South Loop Road. The Armorflex design was made in consideration of the preservation of ' biological resources at the channel bottom and the Corps concerns for wetland disturbance. The existing flow volume of Santa Gertrudis Creek enters the project at 2,797 cfs and outlets at the MWD easement at a flow rate of 3,479 cfs. A series of trapezoidal ' channels and concrete culverts will divert Santa Gertrudis Creek from its natural drainage course through the project site. There are two concrete culvert crossings that will convey flow under North Loop Road and Butterfield Stage Road. The bottom and side slopes of the proposed channel will be lined with Armorflex concrete block from the east side of Butterfield Stage Road to approximately 600 feet north of North Loop Road. The outlet channel west of Butterfield Stage Road will consist of Armorflex side slopes and a riprap channel bottom. The riprap will ' ensure that channel velocities at the MWD easement will be equal to or less than those of the existing creek. There are two proposed detention basins located at Nicolas Road and the section line and the northeast corner of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road adjacent to ' Santa Gertrudis Creek. These detention basins will reduce the post development off site flows at the MWD easement to or below historical flows. The basin at Nicolas Road and the section line will have a capacity of two acre-feet and a maximum ' height of seven feet. The basin at the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road will have a capacity of five acre-feet and a maximum height of 12 feet. ' Ashby USA, LLC is has processed an approved Specific Plan through the City for ' both parcels that will allow for the development mentioned above. The project site is located at the northeast comer of the City with 174 acres within the City and 636 acres formerly within the County that have been annexed into the City [Exhibits 1 ' and 2]. The adopted Specific Plan includes a comprehensive land use plan, master plans for circulation, phasing, grading, open space and recreation, landscape, walls and fences, master utility plans for drainage, water, and sewer, planning area and ' development standards, site planning design guidelines, and architectural design 1 2 I guidelines. The project will make improvements in water, sewer, flood, control, and roads, including Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road. Project History ' The Project is a component of the MSSHCP that has been developed by several regional property owners and permit applicants, including Ashby USA, LLC, in ' coordination with the USFWS and the CDFG. The purpose of the MSSHCP is to preserve sensitive plant and animal species within the region (Western Riverside County) by reconciling land development and habitat conservation within the plan area by conserving the most valuable habitat areas and providing a connection between MSSHCP preserved lands and local wildlife linkage corridors. The MSSHCP has been designed to be consistent with the County's General Plan, regional habitat conservation programs, the Federal Endangered Species Act, California Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the California Native Plant Protection Act, and the California Natural Communities Conservation Planning Act of 1992. The plan preparers expect that a coordinated conservation program will provide a more effective preserve system by conserving the most valuable habitat within each project area and providing a linkage with local wildlife corridors versus the isolated ' islands of land preserved by processing individual Section 404 Permits. The MSSHCP is expected to preserve large, key habitat areas and has been designed to form an essential preserve for many of the species listed in the MSSHCP. The MSSHCP also preserves a key linkage between the Lake Mathews Core Reserve and the Southwestern Riverside County Multi -Species Preserve. ' The Final MSSHCP, issued in January 2001, is a two -volume document consisting of the documents titled Assessment District 161: Final Multiple Species Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan, Volume 1, and Assessment District 161: Final Multiple Species Subarea Conservation Plan, Volume 11, Implementation Agreement, that identifies endangered species and impacts for several development projects within the MSSHCP area, outlines conservation and mitigation measures designed to minimize impacts to ' endangered species, and provides short- and long-term habitat management. These measures are expected to maintain the viability of sensitive biological resources in this region, including the coastal California gnatcatcher and Quino checkerspot, through ' conservation of riparian habitat and Riversidean sage scrub habitat within a regional preserve system connected by habitat linkages. The conservation of natural lands ' within the Roripaugh Ranch project has been designed to be consistent with the habitat linkages and preserve system contemplated by the MSSHCP. ' As part of the proposed Project, the applicant will dedicate 201 acres of land for endangered species habitat preservation by deed restriction to the County Parks and Open Space Department. This dedication is scheduled to occur prior to ground ' disturbance and will also consist of the applicant's financial contribution to assist the 1 3 I County with acquisition of up to 674 acres of the Johnson Ranch Property and the ' 180 -acre University of California, Riverside (UCR) Property. The applicant's financial contribution is part of the Final Assessment District (AD) 161 MSSHCP prepared for the USFWS. The 201 -acre dedication, combined with the contribution for the acquisition of Johnson Ranch and the UCR Parcels, provides the mitigation required for the endangered species impacts imposed by the project. In addition, the MSSHCP included an application for a Section 10(a) Permit under Section 10(a)1(B) of the Endangered Species Act that allows incidental take associated with various threatened/endangered species, such as the quino checkerspot ' butterfly and the coastal California gnatcatcher. The Section 10(a) Permit was issued to the applicant by the USFWS on December 4, 2001 as permit number TE030505-0. The MSSHCP covers a number of private and public projects within, and in the ' vicinity of, AD 161 in the City, including Roripaugh Ranch. Project implementation will permanently impact habitat for the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) and the Stephen's Kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi), as well as impact 9 pairs of the 24 pairs of coastal California gnatcatchers ' (Polioptila californica californica) located within the project site. All of these species are listed covered by the Federal Endangered Species Act; therefore, the USFWS' Section 10(a) Permit No.TE030505-0 covered these impacts. Only one of ' these species, the Stephens Kangaroo Rat, is listed under the State Endangered Species Act. Incidental take of the Stephens Kangaroo Rat is covered under the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan encompassing 517,900 acres in ' western Riverside County. Since incidental take is covered by this habitat conservation plan, no CDFG 2081 Memorandum of Agreement is required for this state -listed species. ' Mitikation Prorram ' The Project mitigation program provides for on site creation of approximately 8.20 acres of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat for permanent impacts to 3.38 acres of Corps jurisdiction, of which 0.50 acre consist of Corps jurisdictional ' wetlands, and 3.38 acres of CDFG jurisdiction, of which 0.83 acre consists of vegetated riparian habitat. A graphic depicting Corps and CDFG jurisdiction is enclosed as Exhibits 4 and 5. ' The 8.20 -acre mitigation site within Santa Gertrudis Creek is being created within the ' 201 -acre preservation parcel, as mandated by the AD 161 MSSHC; Implementing Agreement and USFWS Section 10(a) Permit Number TE030505-0. The Roripaugh Family currently owns the mitigation site. Ashby USA, LLC anthe Roripaugh Family have agreed that the mitigation site shall be purchased using a deed restriction following transfer of I d to the County Parks and Open Space Department and before project impacts occur A graphic depicting the location of the mitigation site is enclosed as Exhibit 6. 4 I L 1 1 1 1 The mitigation site currently supports upland and riparian vegetation or unvegetated sandy wash. The site will be excavated to within one foot of the groundwater table and qualify as Corps and CDFG jurisdiction. The mitigation plan also provides for the removal of exotic species within the mitigation site. The mitigation site will be seeded and planted with a variety of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh species indigenous to the project area and collected from plant propagules located on site. All appropriate species of container stock will be inoculated with mycorrhizal fungi prior to delivery to the site. An experienced habitat restoration specialist will supervise all aspects of the mitigation plan, including installation and maintenance, and will conduct the mitigation monitoring. The primary goal of the mitigation program is the creation of sufficient habitat on site such that there is no net loss of riparian functions and values. The plan proposes creation of high quality on site southern willow scrub habitat, thus ameliorating the effects of permanent Project impacts. Once the Corps has accepted this mitigation site as successful, the site will then become part of the 201 -acre parcel maintenance program administered by the City per the guidelines established by the AD 16 MSSHCP Implementing Agreement. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Location of Project Roripaugh Ranch in the City of Temecula, Riverside County, California [Exhibit 1], is comprised of approximately 805 acres of active agricultural land and contains five blue -line drainages (as depicted on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic map Bachelor Mountain, California [dated 1953 and photorevised in 1973]) [Exhibit 2]. The Project area is bounded by the proposed alignment of Murrieta Hot Springs Road to the north, the proposed alignment of Butterfield Stage Road to the south, Leon Road to the west, and the Johnson Ranch to the east. B. Brief Summary of Overall Project The adopted specific plan consists of 2,058 units on 804.7 acres with a gross density of 2.56 units/acre and a net residential density of 4.97 units/acre. Residential uses include 1,233 single-family detached units on 332.7 acres, and 825 clustered homes on 81.2 acres. The project will have an estimated 110,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, 32 acres for two school sites, 24.9 acres for two onsite public park sites, 9.1 acres of private recreation facilities, a two -acre fire station ad 262.1 acres of open space. The open space acres include 201 acres of preserved habitat as required in the Assessment District 161 sub - Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (AD f61 SHCP) as required for the federal Endangered Species Act Section 10(a) permit issued by the USFWS on December 4, 2001. The proposed 5 I 1 1 L 1 1 1 U 1 r [1 1 mitigation and mitigation site will be part of the 201 -acre MSSHCP, as authorized by the AD 161 MSSHCP Implementing Agreement and USFWS Section 10(a) Permit Number TE - 030505 -0. Grading for the Project would result in permanent impacts to approximately 3.38 acres of Corps jurisdiction. In order to develop 2,058 units, the City will require the developer to build infrastructure at a cost of approximately $50 million in two phases. Phase one requires a $25.5 million dollar investment and phase two a $24.5 million dollar investment. The Project impacts, consisting of 3.38 acres of waters, including 0.50 acre of wetlands, are due to the construction of the culvert street crossings required over Long Valley Wash, and a boxed culvert connection for Santa Gertrudis Creek where it crosses below the proposed Butterfield Stage Road. These culverts also act as dissipaters to the stream flow, a base for the bridge crossings and related utilities. According to the applicant, any unit count below 2,058 renders the project economically unfeasible. Long Valley Wash, at the worst-case 100 -year flood, enters the project at 3,768 cubic feet per second (cfs) and exits the site at Butterfield Stage Road at 4,460 cfs. Development in Roripaugh Ranch would increase the flow through the project to 4,480 cfs at Butterfield Stage Road. The channel will have an average width of 230 feet, including 16 -foot wide shoulders. The wider channel design will provide a larger capacity, slower velocities, and lower water surface levels. The drainage design uses the same standards as FEMA watershed for establishment of 100 -year flood plain limits. The Culvert crossings will convey flow under Butterfield Stage Road to an existing drainage course. There are four channel crossings in the proposed project. In order to reduce off-site flows at Butterfield Stage Road from the estimated 4,480 cfs down to 4,460 cfs (existing flow) or lower, a detention basin is proposed east of South Loop Road. The basin will have a capacity of 17 acre-feet and a maximum height of 12 -feet. The basin will also accommodate the 100 -year post development runoff, with three feet of freeboard, adequate to prevent overtopping of adjacent facilities in a 100 -year rainfall event. Armorflex will be provided along both sides of Long Valley Wash, with the bottom of the existing low flow wash maintained in its natural condition, except at culvert crossings, splash aprons, the detention basin, approximately 600 feet East of Butterfield Stage Road, and 1000 feet east of South Loop Road. The Armorflex design was made in consideration of the preservation of biological resources at the channel bottom and the Corps concerns for wetland disturbance. The existing flow volume of Santa Gertrudis Creek enters the project at 2,797 cfs and outlets at the MWD easement at a flow rate of 3,479 cfs. A series of trapezoidal channels and concrete culverts will divert Santa Gertrudis Creek from its natural drainage course through the project site. There are two concrete culvert crossings that will convey flow under North Loop Road and Butterfield Stage Road. The bottom and side slopes of the proposed channel will be lined with Armorflex concrete block from the east side of Butterfield Stage Road to approximately 600 feet north of North Loop Road. The outlet channel west of Butterfield Stage Road will consist of Armorflex side slopes and a riprap channel bottom. The riprap will ensure that channel velocities at the MWD easement will be equal to or less than those of the existing creek. I 1 1 I I I 1 1 There are two proposed detention basins located at Nicolas Road and the section line and the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road adjacent to Santa Gertrudis Creek. These detention basins will reduce the post development off site flows at the MWD easement to or below historical flows. The basin at Nicolas Road and the section line will have a capacity of two acre-feet and a maximum height of seven feet. The basin at the northeast comer of Butterfield Stage Road and North Loop Road will have a capacity of five acre-feet and a maximum height of 12 feet. Ashby USA, LLC has processed an approved Specific Plan through the City for both parcels that allow for the development mentioned above. The project site is located at the northeast corner of the City with 174 acres within the City and 636 acres currently within the County [Exhibits 1 and 2]. The adopted Specific Plan includes a comprehensive land use plan, master plans for circulation, phasing, grading, open space and recreation, landscape, walls and fences, master utility plans for drainage, water, and sewer, planning area and development standards, site planning design guidelines, and architectural design guidelines. The project will make improvements in water, sewer, flood, control, and roads, including Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Butterfield Stage Road. Exhibit 3 depicts the proposed Project development. C. Responsible Parties Applicant: Ashby USA, LLC 470 E. Harrison Street Corona, California 92879-1314 Telephone: (909) 898-1692 Contact: Richard Ashby Preparers of Mitigation Plan: Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. 29 Orchard Lake Forest, California 92630 (949) 837-0404 Contacts: Darlene Shelley and Martin Rasnick D. Jurisdictional Areas to be Filled/Excavated by Habitat Type Fill and excavation associated with the Project will permanently impact 3.38 acres of Corps jurisdictional waters, of which 0.50 acre consists of jurisdictional wetlands, and 3.38 acres of CDFG jurisdiction, of which 0.83 acre consists of vegetated riparian habitat. The boundaries of the jurisdictional areas are depicted on Exhibits 4 and 5. Compensation for permanent impacts to Corps and CDFG jurisdiction will be accomplished through the creation of 8.20 acres of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat on 7 site whose functions and values will equal or exceed those of the jurisdictional areas impacted by the project. A graphic depicting the proposed mitigation site is enclosed as Exhibit 6. E. Types, Functions, and Values of the Jurisdictional Areas to be Directly and Indirectly Impacted Unvegetated sandy wash, southern willow scrub habitat, Riversidean sage scrub, and upland invasive species within existing riparian intermittent and unvegetated ephemeral drainage courses will be impacted by Project construction. Incised banks, sandy bottom, native riparian and upland plant species, and invasive plant species characterize the wash. The ephemeral drainages exhibit very low functional capacity and the riparian drainages ' exhibit low to moderate functional capacity for the wetland functions addressed in the Corps' Guidebook for Evaluation of Wetland Functions Associated with Riverine Systems or other documents that address wetland functions according to the Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) ' approach. The Project is located within an existing rural residential area that continues to urbanize as well as existing open space within the MSSHCP. The following analysis of the wetland functions provided by the jurisdictional areas to be affected uses elements of the HGM approach for wetland functional assessment developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).[ The HGM methodology requires that jurisdictional areas, subject to evaluation, be compared with reference wetlands in the same region, which have already been evaluated, and indexed/rated. Currently, reference wetlands for the Riverine system or for depressional wetlands have not been designated for Southern California, which would allow for a quantitative assessment of the jurisdictional areas to be affected within the Specific Plan Project area. Therefore, the following analysis seeks in a qualitative manner, to compare the existing wetland functions with the functions to be provided by the riparian vegetation proposed for creation in this mitigation program. The italicized headings and subheadings that follow in this section correspond to the functional categories and specific functions provided in the below referenced HGM documents. Functions Related to Hydrologic Processes Short -Term Storage of Surface Water1 The ephemeral drainages consist primarily of incised channels supporting Riversidean sage scrub and/or unvegetated streambeds. The ephemeral drainages range in width from one foot Smith, R.D., Atmnann, A., Bartoldus, C., and Brinson, M.M. 1995. "An approach for assessing wetland ' functions using hydrogeomorphic classification, reference wetlands, and functional indices," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, October 1995. ' 'According to the Guidebook for application of HGM assessments to Riverine wetlands, short-term storage is generally considered as storage for less than seven days and long-term storage is for greater than seven days. 1 8 I ' wide to 14 feet wide and do not contain areas for overbank flooding or areas that otherwise ' provide for short-term floodwater retention. Due to the general narrowness of the drainages, the ephemeral drainages have a very limited potential for flood attenuation and do not contribute significantly to control of floodwaters. ' The riparian/wetland drainages consist primarily of incised channels supporting southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat and unvegetated streambeds. These drainages ' range in width from four feet wide to 57 feet wide and contain areas for overbank flooding or areas that otherwise provide for a low to moderate potential for short-term floodwater retention. Because of the presence of riparian/wetland vegetation within the riparian drainages, a low to moderate potential for floodwater control occurs. Long -Term Storage of Surface Water The ephemeral drainages are consistently dry most of the year and have a very limited potential to support areas of long-term storage of surface water. Water is present in these drainages only ' during severe storm events. The riparian/wetiand drainages support wetlands and therefore contain areas of long-term storage for surface water. Water flowing within these drainages is the result of intermittent stream flow and severe storm flows. Moderation of Groundwater Flow or Discharge ' The ephemeral drainages have no potential to moderate groundwater flow or discharge since the drainages are consistently dry and contain water only during severe storm events. ' The riparian/wetland drainages are intermittent drainages. The soils within the project area exhibit sandy soil characteristics and are saturated during rainfall events. Since sandy soils produce limited groundwater storage or movement, it is expected that low quality groundwater ' flow moderation or discharge to Santa Gertrudis Creek will be produced. Dissipation of Energy The ephemeral drainages are dry, unvegetated, or sparsely vegetated, and provide for very limited energy dissipation capability. The main source of hydrology for these drainages is ' from direct precipitation and flow is very limited even during significant rainfall events. The riparian/wetland drainages provide low to moderate energy dissipation capability. The ' main source of hydrology for these drainages is from direct precipitation, limited groundwater, and urban runoff Portions of the project area contain jurisdictional wetlands from intermittent streambeds. Significant rainfall events may cause moderate to high-energy dissipation as flood flows traverse the drainages. 1 9 I Functions Related to Biogeochemical Processes ' Cycling of Nutrients ' The ephemeral drainages are consistently dry most of the year and support either no vegetation or sparse upland vegetation and provide a very limited potential for nutrient cycling. ' The riparian/wetland drainages support moderate vegetative cover consisting of southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, and Riversidean sage scrub habitat containing moderate ' detrital turnover from leaf litter and other organic material. The drainages provide moderate nutrient cycling due to the presence of surface water within freshwater marsh habitat and intermittent stream flow within southern willow scrub habitat. Removal of Imported Elements and Compounds ' The ephemeral drainages are unnamed tributaries of Santa Gertrudis Creek. Since the ephemeral drainages are dry most of the year, they exhibit a very limited potential for removing imported elements or compounds from the watershed. The riparian/wetland drainages are tributaries to Santa Gertrudis Creek. Since these drainages have the potential to contain intermittent flow that may remove imported elements, the riparian drainages support moderate potential for removing imported elements and compounds from the watershed. ' Retention of Particulates The ephemeral drainages do not provide for the retention of a significant amount of particulates since the ephemeral drainages support water only during severe storm events. A majority of the flow within the riparian/wetland drainages exists as a result of limited groundwater availability and storm flows caused by direct precipitation. These drainages provide for a moderate potential for retention of particulates. Export of Organic Carbon The ephemeral drainages support sparse vegetation, limiting the export of organic carbon, consistent with similar ephemeral streams supporting sparse vegetation. The riparian/wetland drainages provide a low to moderate potential for export of organic carbon due to the presence of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat, consistent with similar riparian/wetland drainages. I I10 I Functions Related to Habitat 'Habitatfor Invertebrates The ephemeral drainages have very limited potential to support aquatic invertebrates since they contain water only during severe storm events. ' The riparian/wetland drainages have low to moderate potential to support aquatic invertebrates since these drainages contain intermittent stream flow and freshwater marsh habitat. ' Habitatfor Vertebrates The ephemeral drainages have the potential to support very limited foraging habitat for bobcats, coyotes, and other upland animal species within the project area. ' The riparian/wetland drainages have a moderate potential to support wildlife foraging habitat within southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, and Riversidean sage scrub habitats. ' Habitatfor Vascular Plants The ephemeral drainages support either no vegetation or sparse upland vegetation. The ephemeral drainages are dry most of the year. Therefore, these drainages exhibit very limited potential for supporting vascular plants. ' The riparian/wetland drainages currently support cattails (Typha spp., OBL), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia, FACW), mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana, FACW), arroyo willow ' (Salix lasiolepis, FACW), black willow (Salix gooddingii, OBL), sycamore (Platanus racemosa, FACW), cottonwood (Populus fremontii, FACW), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), white sage (Salvia apiana), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica, UPL), ' laurel sumac (Malosma laurina, UPL), and buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). Therefore, these drainages exhibit moderate to high potential for supporting vascular plants. ' II. GOAL OF MITIGATION ' A. Types of Habitat to be Created/Preserved ' The goal of mitigation is to ensure that functions and values lost during the construction grading of the Project will be regained within the 8.20 -acre mitigation site to be created within Santa Gertrudis Creek. The mitigation site will be located within the AD 161 ' MSSHCP and is expected to support southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat for amphibians, migrating birds, passerines, and waterfowl. Other animal species, such as coyotes and bobcats, will also utilize these sites. The creation of the 8.20 acres of southern 1 1 willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat mitigation site will ensure that no net loss occurs to riparian functions resulting from impacts to Corps and CDFG jurisdiction. Southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat will be created in appropriate areas and with appropriate plant species within the mitigation site. The mitigation site will be graded in accordance with engineering drawings to be prepared at a later date. Following grading, non-native plant species will be removed. A qualified habitat restoration specialist or other individual knowledgeable in native plant revegetation, the Project Monitor; will assist with adjustments to project implementation that may be required in the field as conditions dictate. Existing southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat will be preserved within the mitigation site. If required, a qualified habitat restoration specialist or other individual knowledgeable in native plant revegetation will assist with adjustments to project implementation that may be required in the field as conditions dictate. B. Functions and Values of Habitat to be Created/Preserved Functions Related to Hydrologic Processes Surface Water Storage The mitigation site will provide for moderate to high storage of surface water produced by runoff from on site drainages. The mitigation site will also store surface water following winter and spring rains. Long -Term Storage of Surface Water The mitigation site will have a moderate to high potential for supporting areas of long-term storage of surface water due to the presence of low-lying ponded marsh areas and wetlands supporting riparian vegetation. Moderation of Groundwater Flow or Discharge The mitigation site will support soils conducive to saturation due to intermittent stream flow, riparian habitat, and storm flows. Therefore, these areas will have a moderate to high potential for supporting groundwater flow moderation or discharge. Dissipation of Energy The mitigation site will provide moderate to high-energy dissipation capability. The main source of hydrology for these areas will be from intermittent stream flow, storm flow, and ponded water. 12 ' Functions Related to Biochemical Processes ' Nutrient Cycling Nutrients within the mitigation site will benefit from existing and/or enhanced hydrology. The enhanced hydrology will increase the total net primary productivity within the mitigation site that will result in a higher level of nutrient cycling. ' Removal of Imported Elements and Compounds The mitigation site has the potential to support intermittent stream flow and urban runoff. Therefore, the mitigation site has a moderate potential for removing imported elements and compounds from the site. Retention of Particulates A majority of the flow within the mitigation site is expected to result from intermittent stream flow and urban runoff caused by direct precipitation. Therefore, based upon these conditions, the mitigation site has a moderate potential for retention of particulates. Export of Organic Carbon The mitigation site will provide a moderate potential for export of organic carbon due to the creation and enhancement of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat, consistent with similar riparian/wetland drainages supporting southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat. Functions Related to Habitat Habitat for Invertebrates The mitigation site will have moderate to high potential for supporting aquatic, invertebrates due to the expectation of ponded water within the freshwater marsh and wetland habitat within these sites. ' Habitat for Vertebrates The mitigation site will provide potential habitat for a variety of vertebrates typically found in local riparian and upland areas, consistent with other riparian mitigation projects exhibiting similar characteristics. These sites will provide potential nesting and foraging ' habitat for birds such as the coastal California gnatcatcher, common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis), and black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans). 13 Habitat for Vascular Plants The mitigation site will provide suitable habitat for a variety of vascular plants. Plants included in the mitigation site will be mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), sandbar willow (Salix exigua), arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis), black willow (Salix gooddingii), sycamore (Platanus racemosa), cottonwood (Populus fremontii), coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), cattails (Typha .spp.), and a variety of rush species (Juncus spp. and Scirpus spp.). Many of these plant species currently exist within the creation/preservation areas. C. Time Lapse The implementation of the mitigation plan will occur concurrently with construction grading, currently scheduled for Winter 2003. Container stock will be installed during the rainy season in November 2003. Once plant installation is complete, lost habitat values are expected to quickly reestablish within the mitigation site. Within one year of the completion of the mitigation site, it is expected that immature riparian vegetative structure will exist such that insects and birds will utilize the mitigation site for foraging. With the anticipated hydrology, the mitigation site is expected to provide a greater degree of forage and shelter within two years, although woody trees and shrubs will take approximately three to five years to become established. The southern willow scrub habitat will take approximately five to ten years to reach the mature structure necessary to provide nesting sites for nesting birds. D. Estimated Cost Table I below indicates the estimated cost for implementation, maintenance, and monitoring of the mitigation site for five years or until completion of the applicant's responsibilities. TABLE 1 IMPLEMENTATION COST ESTIMATE TASK COST Site Preparation (does not include exotic plant removal) $12,000 Irrigation $131,000 Installation (includes plants and seeds) $68,671 Project Maintenance $90,953 Project Monitoring $200,450 Total $502,743 14 III. FINAL SUCCESS CRITERIA A. Target Functions and Values Creation of 8.20 -acre of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat within Santa Gertrudis Creek will result in the establishment of moderate to high quality riparian southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat. This habitat is expected to result in increased functions for the Project area associated with both habitat types. Performance criteria for the planted species within the mitigation site shall be a minimum of 25 percent cover the first year and 90 percent cover by the end of the fifth year. Since the mitigation site is part of the 201 -acre MSSHCP preservation area required by AD ' 161, it will be incorporated into the City of Temecula's monitoring and maintenance program for this area once the Corps and the CDFG have deemed the site successful. B. Target Hydrological Regime Creation of the mitigation site will consist of grading and sediment removal. Hydrologic input is expected to consist of stream flow from Santa Gertrudis Creek, storm water flow from direct precipitation, and runoff from adjacent residential areas. The enhanced hydrology within the project area is expected to provide for dynamic storage of surface water, long-term and short-term storage of surface water, dissipation of energy, moderation of groundwater flow, nutrient cycling, removal of imported elements and compounds, retention of particulates, and export of organic carbon. Additionally, the increased flows will result in the establishment of a higher diversity of understory hydrophytes within the mitigation site, thereby enhancing the riparian habitat present there. C. Target Jurisdictional Acreage to be Created Implementation of the mitigation plan will result in the creation of 8.20 -acre of southern ' willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat within the mitigation site located within Santa Gertrudis Creek. �I 1 15 II IV. PROPOSED MITIGATION SITE A. Location and Size of Mitigation site The 8.20 -acre mitigation site will be located within Santa Gertrudis Creek (see Exhibit 6) within the 201 -acre AD 161 MSSHCP. The mitigation site has been selected as mandated by the AD 161 MSSHCP Implementing Agreement and will be located within the 201 -acre ' MSSHCP within the Project area. The habitat within the mitigation site is adjacent to preserved land exhibiting similar habitat on the Johnson Ranch and on preserved land owned by UCR. Once graded, the mitigation site will exhibit favorable hydrology. 1 B. Ownership Status 1 The Roripaugh Family currently owns the mitigation site. Ashby USA, LLC and the Roripaugh Family have agreed that the mitigation site, which is part of the 201 -acre MSSHCP 1 preserve land, shall be purchased using a deed restriction as described in the MSSHCP Implementation Agreement following transfer of land to the City of Temecula before project impacts occur. During the construction phase Richard Ashby is the point of contact for rpermission to gain access to the site. The Corps and CDFG may access the mitigation site at their will and are requested to notify Ashby USA, LLC before entering. Once the mitigation r site has been deemed successful by the Corps and the CDFG, it will be transferred to the City, per AD 161, and maintained and monitored, as required, by the MSSHCP. IC. Existing Functions and Values of Mitigation site r The mitigation site is located within Santa Gertrudis Creek. Very limited riparian functions and values are currently present within the mitigation site as a majority of the existing mitigation site area supports unvegetated sandy wash. r D. Present and Proposed Uses of Mitigation Site The mitigation site supports riparian vegetation and unvegetated sandy wash and is an existing streambed used by local wildlife, such as birds, coyotes, and bobcats. Before project impacts occur, the mitigation site will be dedicated to the City of Temecula as part of the 201 -acre MSSHCP within the Project area. Ashby USA, LLC's Project Monitor will conduct interim habitat management, and the City will conduct long -tern habitat management. The mitigation site is expected to provide greater aesthetic value to residents surrounding the development and function as enhanced wildlife habitat following completion of the mitigation plan. In E. Present and Proposed Uses of All Adjacent Areas Single-family residential developments exist to the west and south of the Project area, open space exists to the east, and existing streambed exists in the northern and southern portions of the Project area. Future uses of the adjacent areas consist of residential housing, arterial roadways, commercial uses and an existing streambed within the vicinity of the Project area. F. Zoning No zoning conflicts exist which would prevent implementation of any aspects of the proposed mitigation program. V. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN A. Rationale for Expecting Implementation Success The mitigation site is a good candidate for habitat creation and restoration for several reasons. First, areas within the vicinity of the mitigation site presently contain stands of southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat and will more than likely benefit from windblown seed and emigrating wildlife. Second, direct precipitation, storm flows and riparian vegetation within Santa Gertrudis Creek provide site hydrology. Third, the Project Monitor will supervise the implementation of the mitigation plan, therefore adjustments to project implementation can be made in the field as conditions dictate. Finally, the plant palette consists of species that either occur on site or are known to perform well in habitat restoration programs. The tenacious quality of these plants, which allows their continued survival under less than favorable conditions, also helps to ensure their establishment as part of the proposed mitigation. Natural reproduction is expected within the revegetation areas. B. Responsible Parties Ashby USA, LLC will be responsible for implementing the mitigation project and performing interim habitat management until the mitigation site is transferred to the City of Temecula, as required by AD 161. Ashby USA, LLC may assign this responsibility to an appropriate contractor, but will retain ultimate responsibility for success. Overall supervision of the installation and maintenance contractor(s) will be the responsibility of the Project Monitor. Once the site is transferred to the City, the City will maintain and monitor the area pursuant to AD 161. The installation contractor is responsible for completion of soil preparation, pre -planting weed control, irrigation system installation, plant installation, and seeding. Once the Project Monitor 17 L 1 1 L� l_l 1 L I has verified the completion of the landscape installation, a 120 -day maintenance period will begin. At the end of this period the Project Monitor will certify completion. Ashby USA, LLC will hire a maintenance contractor for the duration of the five-year monitoring period and may change contractors at its discretion. The maintenance contractor will service the mitigation site, as necessary, to ensure compliance with success criteria. The maintenance contractor will perform all checklist items in a timely manner. C. Implementation Schedule Installation of the mitigation site will be concurrent with grading of the project area. The following Implementation Schedule [Table 2] indicates timing of intended impacts to Corps and CDFG jurisdiction, mitigation site grading, site preparation, and planting. TABLE 2 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE January 2003 June 2003 August 2003 November 2003 Impacts to Jurisdiction Mitigation Site Gradin Exotic Plant Eradication Site Preparation Irrigation Installation Plant & Seed Installation Site grading, site preparation, irrigation installation, and plantings shall begin as soon as practicable during or after completion of construction activities. D. Site Preparation Contractor Education Prior to the commencement of grading or any construction work, the applicant will provide all contractors who will complete some aspect of this plan with a copy of this document. The applicant will review all aspects of the plan, which concern the contractors including site protection, maintenance inspections, landscape procedures and monitoring. Access Control Unauthorized motorized vehicles shall not enter the conservation area or the mitigation site. The Project Monitor will delineate existing service access routes and the contractors will be expected to stay within their confines. No new service routes will be constructed. The 18 I 1 contractor will notify the Project Monitor immediately if any unauthorized persons or vehicles enter the conservation area or mitigation site. Nesting Birds The applicant may remove vegetation within the upland and riparian impact areas from February 15th to July 15th if a qualified biologist conducts a survey for nesting birds within three days prior to the vegetation removal and ensures no nesting birds shall be impacted by the project. These surveys shall include the areas within 500 feet of the edge of the proposed impacts. If active nests are found, a minimum 250 -foot (300 feet for raptors) fence barrier shall be erected around the nest site. No habitat removal or any other work shall occur within the fenced nest zone: if the nest continues to be active beyond August 15, until the young have fledged, until the young birds are no longer being fed by the parents and have left the nest, and until the birds will no longer be impacted by the project. The applicant shall submit the mapped survey results to CDFG for review and approval prior to vegetation removal to ensure full avoidance measures are in place. The applicant will adhere to all applicable requirements of the federal and state codes. In addition, no homes will be built within 100 linear feet of any conserved riparian habitat along Santa Gertrudis Creek. Other Species Burrowing Owl ' Surveys to determine the presence of the burrowing owl will be conducted within appropriate habitat by a USFWS and CDFG-approved biologist during the winter season (December 1 to January 31) or the nesting season (April 15 to July 15) prior to clearing ' activities. If a burrowing owl is found within the Project impact area, appropriate mitigation measures will occur. Occupied burrows should be left undisturbed during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31) unless it is verified that either a) the birds have begun egg -laying and incubation, or b) juveniles from occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. ' Western Soadefoot Toad Surveys to determine the presence/absence of western spadefoot toads shall be conducted by ' an USFWS and CDFG-approved biological monitor. The biological monitor will conduct toad surveys at the end of March, June, September, and December during the Project ' construction phase. No homes shall be constructed within 100 feet of any conserved riparian canopy along Santa Gertrudis Creek, thus allowing the preservation of toad habitat. Mitigation Site Excavation and Grading Excavation of the mitigation site will occur concurrently with Project grading. The ' mitigation site will be excavated down to within one foot of the groundwater table, and shall 1 19 I 1 C 1 I] 1 u LJ I I be left in a rough grade state with macro- and micro -topographic relief (including channels), which mimics natural wetland topography. The Project Monitor shall supervise grading activities. Restrictions Work in flowing water shall be minimized. Water diversion will be limited. No debris, soil, silt, sand, rubbish, cement or concrete or washings thereof, oil or petroleum products or washings thereof, shall be allowed to enter into or be placed in a manner where it may be washed via rainfall or run-off into local creeks. When each part of the project is completed, any excess materials or debris shall be removed from the work area. Staging, storage and fueling areas for equipment and materials shall be located on upland sites, out of Corps and CDFG jurisdiction. No staging or storage areas shall be located within 50 feet of conserved habitat. The Contractor shall have equipment capable of extinguishing small brush fires on site at all times. In addition, personnel trained to use this equipment shall also be on site. The Contractor shall water active construction areas to minimize impacts to the conservation areas and the mitigation site. If the Project Monitor observes significant amounts of dust impacting conserved habitat, corrective measures will be implemented to control this issue, such as shutting down operations for the day. No night lighting shall be used during construction activities unless specifically required. Lights may be shielded to minimize lighting the surrounded habitat. The applicant shall make all Contractors aware of the Section 404 Permit and the CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement. Copies of each permit shall be kept on site at all times. Preparation of Planting Areas Preparation of planting areas shall consist of removing trash and debris, clearing and controlling exotic plants, trenching, preparing planting holes, installation of underground irrigation components, and doing any other work necessary to make ready the area for planting. Exotic Vegetation Control The predominance of non-native, invasive weed species throughout California has presented a challenge to most native mitigation projects. Weedy species are opportunistic, rapidly colonizing disturbed sites such as the mitigation site. This can lead to the displacement of native species if the weeds are not properly treated. 20 i L1 L,' Exotic plant species control is proposed for the mitigation site. If grading precedes planting by more than a few months, it will be necessary to eradicate all undesirable exotic plants that have become established prior to planting and seeding of the mitigation site. Exotic vegetation control may include the use of herbicides. Eradication of weeds shall be performed by hand, by the use of pesticides, or by other methods approved by the project monitor. Weed control will be maintained throughout the monitoring period. The type, quantity, and method of herbicide application will be determined by a California licensed Pest Control Advisor (PCA) who will inspect the site, write project recommendations and submit it to the contractor for approval. Pesticide recommendations shall include, but are not limited to, the pesticides to be used, rates of application, methods of application, and areas to which pesticides are to be applied. Weed species identified as invasive, particularly tenacious, or those with wind-borne seed will be subject to the earliest control efforts. Exotic species currently occurring on the project site include, but are not limited to: castor bean (Ricinus communis), giant reed (Arundo donax), cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), as well as a variety of non-native grasses. Exotic Removal Procedures A licensed Pest Control Operator (PCO) may work under the supervision of the Pest Control Advisor (PCA) who will employ best management practices regarding the timing, quantity, and type of herbicide for each species. The PCA will determine both immediate and follow- up herbicide application for each species. Fuel Management Zones Fuel management zones, if required, will be designed and managed to minimize impacts to native vegetation. No additional take of conserved habitat is required for fuel management ' purposes. The applicant in conjunction with the County Fire Department and the wildlife agencies will develop a fire management plan within 60 days of project implementation. The Homeowners Association and/or the individual landowner will be responsible for ' clearing the fuel modification zones as outlined in this plan. The fuel management zone is located inside the habitat area. E. Planting Plan IA total of 6.7 acres of southern willow scrub habitat and 1.5 acres of freshwater marsh habitat will be created as part of this mitigation plan. The plant community was selected following field surveys conducted during the jurisdictional delineation and general knowledge of the local plant communities. Woody plant species have been selected to create a mature tree canopy. Planting shall consist of installing aboveground irrigation, ' 21 preparing planting holes, planting container stock, applying fertilizer and mulch, and ' hydroseeding. No planting shall be done in any area until the area concerned has been prepared in accordance with the plans and presents a neat and uniform appearance satisfactory to the Project Monitor. Plant Palette The proposed mitigation -planting palette for the southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat is designated below in Tables 3A and 3B. The plant palette defines species, spacing, and total quantity of plants or seed required. For the seeded species, pounds of seed per acre and total seed quantity are also specified. Sources Container stock will be obtained from a regional local native plant nursery and seed will be obtained from a local seed supplier who will contract grow the plants and seed from locally obtained propagules. Container Plants One -gallon container stock shall be utilized. All plant materials will be inspected by the contractor and approved as healthy, disease free, and of proper size prior to planting. Overgrown, root -bound container stock will be rejected. Mycorrhizal Fungi Mycorrhizae are specialized fungi found on plant roots. A symbiotic relationship exists between plant roots and mycorrhizae wherein the plants benefit from the increased ability to take up nutrients and withstand drought when mycorrhizae are present. This relationship is essential to the growth rate, well being, and longevity of native plant communities. Plant utilization of mycorrhizal fungi markedly increases the success of mitigation on disturbed or degraded lands. All appropriate container -grown plants, other than those known to be non - host species, shall be inoculated with mycorrhizal fungi before delivery to the project site. IFlagging of Plant Locations Container stock will be laid out in a natural configuration within planting areas. Prior to container stock installation, individual planting locations will be flagged in the field by the project monitor with 21 -inch flag stakes. The flags will be color coded as to species. A list of species with their appropriate color code will be provided to the installation personnel prior to plant installation. 1 22 ' All container plants will be planted in a hole at least twice the diameter of the container and twice the depth. Container stock will be thoroughly watered the day before planting. The container will be upended into the palm of the hand to avoid damage to the root structure and placed in the planting hole. The top of the root ball will be set one inch above finish grade. The planting hole will be backfilled with native soil. Individual plants will be fertilized at time of installation. A mulched, weed -free watering basin will then be constructed around each container plant. A three-inch high, hand -compacted earth berm will extend approximately 15 inches from the ' base of the plant. Mulch will be from 3 to 4 inches thick and must not come in contact with 1 23 Replacement Planting The installation contractor will replace all container stock plants terminally diseased or dead within 120 days of installation. Thereafter, the maintenance contractor on an annual basis as required will replace plants. The replacement plants will be of the same species, spacing and size as specified for plants being replaced. The reason for failure will be determined, if possible, and appropriate measures taken to remedy the cause. Contingency measures, rather than plant replacement, may be implemented if determined appropriate by the project monitor. The Corps and/or the iCDFG must approve any changes in the Planting Plan in writing. Seeding Method The southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh habitat will be hydroseeded immediately after installation of the container stock. The ground will be thoroughly wetted prior to 1 hydroseeding. Hydroseeding will proceed after the Project Monitor has certified that site preparation work has been completed. Hydroseeding will be performed only during low wind conditions. Hydroseeding will consist of a hydraulic application of a homogenous slurry mixture consisting of water, seed, mycorrhizal inoculum, compost, paper or wood fiber, and stabilizing emulsion on the revegetation area. ISeeding Guarantee Once hydroseeding has occurred, the contractor will be responsible for supplying sufficient irrigation to adequately germinate and establish the applied seed. Areas where inadequate ' seed establishment has taken place will be re -sprayed or re -seeded within 30 days as determined by the Project Monitor. Planting Method for Container Stock ' All container plants will be planted in a hole at least twice the diameter of the container and twice the depth. Container stock will be thoroughly watered the day before planting. The container will be upended into the palm of the hand to avoid damage to the root structure and placed in the planting hole. The top of the root ball will be set one inch above finish grade. The planting hole will be backfilled with native soil. Individual plants will be fertilized at time of installation. A mulched, weed -free watering basin will then be constructed around each container plant. A three-inch high, hand -compacted earth berm will extend approximately 15 inches from the ' base of the plant. Mulch will be from 3 to 4 inches thick and must not come in contact with 1 23 the stem of the plant. The watering basin will be maintained until the plants are no longer irrigated. Container stock will be watered immediately after installation. Pruning and Staking There will be no pruning of plant materials or staking of trees. TABLE 3A SOUTHERN WILLOW SCRUB PLANT PALETTE 6.70 ACRES Botanic Name Common Name Stock Type Plant Spacing No. per Acre Total Plant/Seed Quantity Overstory Platanus racemosa Western sycamore 1 gal 20' o.c. 55 369 Populus fremontii Fremont cottonwood 1 gal 20' o.c. 25 168 Salix exigua Sandbar willow 1 gal 8' o.c 75 503 Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow 1 gal 10' o.c. 150 1005 Salix'gooddingn Black willow 1 gal 10' o.c. 150 1005 Sambucus mexicana Mexican elderberry 1 gal 10" o.c. 60 402 Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 1 gal 20' o.c. 40. 268 Subtotal 555 3720 Understory Bacchans pilulans Coyote bush 1 gal 8' o.c. 55 369 Bacchans salicifolia Mulefat 1 gal 8' o.c. 200 1340 Bacchans emoryii Emory baccharis 1 gal 8' o.c. 200 1340 Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort 1 gal 8' o.c. 200 1340 Rosa califomica California wild rose 1 gal 5' o.c. 200 1340 Rubus ursinus California blackberry 1 gal 5' o.c. 200 1340 Subtotal 1055 7069 Total Container Stock 10,789 Seed Lbs/Acre Total Lbs. ` Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort Seed 5 33.5 Rosa califomica California rose Seed 5 33.5 Bacchans pilularis Coyote bush Seed 2 13.4 Total Seed 1 12 80.4 24 I I I TABLE 3B FRESHWATER MARSH PLANT PALETTE 1.50 ACRES 4Botanic Name Common Name Stock Type Plant Spacing No. per Acre Total Plant/Seed Quantity Understory Typha domingensis Southern cattail 1 gal S o.c. 300 450 Scirpus califomicus California bulrush 1 gal S o.c. 300 450 Scirpus acutus Hard -stem bulrush 1 gal T o.c. 300 450 Juncus mexicanus Mexican rush 1 gal S o.c. 300 450 Subtotal 900 1800 Total Container Stock 1800 Seed Lbs/Acre Total Lbs. Eleocharis macrostachya Creeping spikerush Seed 3 4.50 Anemopsis califomica Yerba mansa 3 4.50 Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort Seed 4 8.20 Total Seed 13 15.00 F. Irrigation Plan ' Irrigation is to be used solely for the purpose of establishing the plants at the mitigation site and is of a temporary nature. The goal of the irrigation program is to obtain germination and growth with the least amount of irrigation. Frequent irrigation encourages weed invasion and leaches nutrients from the ' soil. ' The critical period for irrigation is during the first winter and early spring following planting. During this time, roots are not well established and an unseasonable drought can cause high mortality. During dry periods between plant installation and mid-April, the ' contractor will regularly inspect soil moisture. Watering during the summer dry season will occur when required. The mitigation site will initially be supported by a temporary automatic irrigation system. The container stock will be irrigated as long as necessary to establish the root systems in the native soils. The main line will be installed belowground. All slope portions of the system will be installed aboveground for ease of removal and inspection. After the initial plant establishment period, water will be applied infrequently and only as required to prevent the mortality of plants and seedlings. The irrigation methods employed will attempt to mimic wet rainfall years by incorporating evenly spaced, infrequent, deep applications of water. 25 I 1 I 1 Once the plant material is established and does not require supplemental irrigation, the aboveground portions of the system will be removed. The Project Monitor will determine when the irrigation system will be removed. VI. MAINTENANCE DURING MONITORING PERIOD A. Maintenance Activities The purpose of this program is to ensure the success of the mitigation planting. Maintenance will occur over the five-year life of the project. The Project Monitor will monitor all aspects of the mitigation in an effort to detect any problems at an early state. Potential problems could arise from irrigation failure, erosion, vandalism, competition from weeds, and unacceptable levels of disease and predation. These maintenance guidelines are specifically tailored for native plant establishment. The maintenance personnel will be fully informed regarding the habitat creation/preservation program so they understand the goals of the effort and the maintenance requirements. A professional with experience and knowledge in native plant habitat creation/preservation maintenance will supervise all maintenance personnel. For a period of 120 days following completion of the planting installation, the landscape contractor will be responsible for the care of the plantings. The purpose of the establishment period is to ensure continuity between the installation of the plant material and its short-term ' maintenance. The contractor's presence during this period is proven to increase project success. The contractor will be able to control the spread of weed species and identify any efforts necessary to ensure the health and survival of the plantings. ' Following the 120 -day establishment period the project will be evaluated for health of plant material, and if judged satisfactory by the owner, the establishment period will be considered ' concluded, and the long-term habitat maintenance program will begin. A different contractor may implement this period of maintenance; the Project Monitor, however, will continue to review the project's success. ' Damage to plants, irrigation systems, and other facilities occurring as a result of unusual weather or vandalism will be repaired. The applicant recognizes that failure to meet success criteria shall result in the requirement to replace that portion of failed mitigation. The applicant, however, shall not be held responsible for any replacement of planted vegetation ' damaged or destroyed by any natural disaster or by any storm/flood event, which has damaged or destroyed naturally occurring vegetation of comparable size within the mitigation project area or the on and off site preservation areas. 1 26 I 1 H [I I 1 General Maintenance The contractor will perform the following tasks as general maintenance duties: • Plant Inspection • Irrigation Water Volume and Frequency • General Irrigation System Inspection • Trash and Debris Removal • Weed Control • Pest Control • Plant Replacement Plant Inspection After initial planting, the Project Monitor will check the mitigation site monthly through the 18th month. Thereafter, the plants shall be inspected on a quarterly basis. The Project Monitor shall prepare a written memorandum to the client after each monitoring site visit listing problems and recommended remedial measures. A copy of this memorandum shall be sent to the contractor for implementation. These memorandums shall focus on any and all problems concerning project horticulture, including weeding, irrigation scheduling, debris removal, pest control, etc. The project monitor shall be responsible for recommending all remedial measures to be implemented. Irrigation The contractor shall be responsible for applying sufficient water to adequately establish new plant materials, and germinate and establish the applied seed. Irrigation water will be applied in such a way as to encourage deep root growth (periodic deep irrigation versus frequent light irrigation). ' When the plantings are sufficiently established to phase out irrigation, the Project Monitor shall notify the contractor to remove all irrigation components. All valves shall be ' permanently disconnected, and the contractor shall remove all system components from the mitigation site. Irrigation System Inspection The contractor will be responsible for the regular maintenance and repair of all aspects of ' the irrigation system. Poorly functioning or non-functioning parts shall be replaced immediately so as to not endanger the plantings. General system checks shall be conducted a minimum of weekly for the first month after installation to assure system is functioning correctly and hydroseed coverage is adequate. Thereafter, the system shall be checked monthly, except during periods when the irrigation ' system is not in operation as recommended by the Project Monitor. 27 Any erosion caused by the contractor's inadequate maintenance or the contractor at his/her expense, as determined by the Project Monitor, will repair operation of irrigation facilities. Trash and Debris Removal The mitigation site will be kept free of trash and debris during the monitoring period. Care will be taken so that trash removal activities minimize or avoid impacts to plantings in the mitigation site. Inorganic debris that is generated on the site will be removed during routine maintenance visits. All dead limbs and tree fall shall be left in place in the mitigation site. Weed debris shall be removed from the project area and disposed of as permitted by law. Weed Control Weed eradication will be conducted as necessary to minimize competition that could prevent the establishment of native species. The crucial period for weed control is the first two years of project establishment. As weeds become evident, they should be immediately removed by hand or controlled with an appropriate herbicide as determined by a licensed Pest Control Advisor (PCA). ' Weed control shall occur monthly for the first six months and not less than monthly through the first two years. The project monitor may contact the contractor for any required weed ' work. All maintenance personnel will be trained to distinguish weed species from native vegetation. ' Examples of weeds to be controlled include, but are not limited to: • Arundo/giant reed (Arundo donax); ' Artichoke thistle/cardoon (Cynara cardunctdus); • Australian saltbush (A triplex semibaccata); • Bermuda grass (Cynodon dacrylon); Biennial mustard (Hirschfeldia incana); Black mustard (Brassica nigra); • Broom species (Cystisus spp.); ' • Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare); Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis); Castor bean (Ricinis communis); ' Cootamundra wattle (Acacia baileyana); • Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.); ' • Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare); Filaree/Storksbill (Erodium spp.); • Foxtail chess (Bromus madritensis); Hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis); ' • Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum); • Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus); ' • Ivy (Hedera spp.); 28 I ' • Japanese honeysuckle(Lonicerajaponica); Kikuyu grass (Pennisetum clandestimon); ' Pampas grass (Cortaderia jubata,- C. selloana); • Periwinkle (Vinca major); Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle); Rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis); • Red valerian (Centranthus rubor); ' Ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus); • Russian thistle (Salsola tragus); • Slender oats (Avena barbata); Soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus); Tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima, T. parvii lora); • Tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca); • Umbrella sedge (Cyperus involucratus); • Water bent grass (Agrostis viridis); and • Wild oat (Avena fatua). Other Pest Control Young trees and shrubs will be monitored for signs of disease and/or insect damage and treated as necessary. Infestations will not be treated unless more than 10 -percent of the trees in a planting area show significant damage from insects, vertebrate pests, and/or diseases. A licensed Pest Control Advisor (PCA) as required by law will make specific recommendations. The Project Monitor will be consulted on any pest control measures to be ' implemented. Plant Replacement ' Any replanting to replace dead or dying container stock will be conducted following the same procedures described in the original contractor specifications. The Project Monitor will determine the proper container stock, site preparation, and timing. ' The installation contractor will be responsible for replacing any dead or terminally diseased container stock plants at least one month prior to turning the project over to the maintenance contractor. The maintenance contractor will be responsible for replacement of all plants ' determined by the Project Monitor to be dead or terminally diseased. Reseeding If there are any areas where inadequate seed establishment has taken place, these areas will be reseeded on an annual basis, which shall be done between November I st and March 30th to take advantage of the winter rainy season. 29 ' Fertilization ' If nutrient deficiencies are observed during maintenance and monitoring, the Project Monitor to speed initial growth or as a remedial measure may specify applications of slow- release pellet fertilizer. These applications shall occur at the onset of the rainy season following the manufacturer's recommendations. Fertilizer will not be applied other than under the direction of the project monitor. Pruning ' No post -installation pruning is necessary unless otherwise specified by the Project Monitor. Dead wood shall be left on trees or where it has fallen as it plays an important role in habitat creation and soil formation. Staking of Trees Staking of trees is to be avoided unless determined necessary by the Project Monitor. All stakes shall be removed before the completion of the five-year monitoring period, or earlier as determined by the Project Monitor and removed from the mitigation site by the contractor and disposed of legally. B. Responsible Parties Ashby USA, LLC will be responsible for implementing the mitigation project and performing interim habitat management until the mitigation site is transferred to the City of Temecula, as required by AD 161. Ashby USA, LLC may assign this responsibility to an appropriate contractor, but will retain ultimate responsibility for success. Overall supervision of the installation and maintenance contractor(s) will be the responsibility of the Project Monitor. Once the site is transferred to the City, the City will maintain and monitor the area pursuant to AD 161. Ashby USA, LLC, together with the Project Monitor, will be responsible for the overall supervision of the maintenance contractor. The installation contractor shall have the responsibility for the maintenance of all mitigation site and on and off site preservation area activities for 120 days after installation, or until he receives final certification from the Project Monitor. The maintenance contractor shall be responsible for the five-year maintenance program requirements once the installation contractor's work has been certified as complete. 30 I 1 1 1 I C. Maintenance Schedule The restoration maintenance and monitoring program will begin with the construction process and continue for five years following the completion of plant installation. Table 4 below details the maintenance schedule guidelines. Table 4 MAINTENANCE INSPECTION SCHEDULE GUIDELINES VIL MONITORING PLAN A. Performance Criteria The success of mitigation is defined as the restoration of a functional ecosystem. Success is usually measured by percent coverage by target species. While a fully successful mitigation plan might be viewed as one that results in 100 -percent coverage, such coverage is unlikely. Natural habitats rarely exhibit 100 -percent coverage, but rather include a considerable proportion of open spaces. While this monitoring program uses percent coverage criteria, it is noted that determination of successful coverage is expected to be relative to other similar native habitats typical of the region. The means of determining successful mitigation is by a series of measurements for natural recruitment, exotic species cover, and cover by native species. All of these, except weed cover, should increase over time. Weed cover should be the opposite; it should decrease with time. After the initial planting effort has been completed, the mitigation site will be monitored by the Project Monitor on a monthly basis for the first 18 months and quarterly for the remainder of 31 Year Maintenance Task 1 2 3 4 5 Plant Inspection Monthly Monthly through Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly' 18th month; quarterly thereafter Irtigation System Inspection Monthly for 1st Quarterly As Required N/A N/A month; quarterly thereafter, or as required Trash and Debris Removal Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Weed Control Monthly Monthly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Pest Control Monthly Bi -monthly Quarterly Quarterly Quarterly Plant Replacement Annually Annually Annually Annually Annually Fertilization (if necessary) Annually Annually N/A N/A N/A VIL MONITORING PLAN A. Performance Criteria The success of mitigation is defined as the restoration of a functional ecosystem. Success is usually measured by percent coverage by target species. While a fully successful mitigation plan might be viewed as one that results in 100 -percent coverage, such coverage is unlikely. Natural habitats rarely exhibit 100 -percent coverage, but rather include a considerable proportion of open spaces. While this monitoring program uses percent coverage criteria, it is noted that determination of successful coverage is expected to be relative to other similar native habitats typical of the region. The means of determining successful mitigation is by a series of measurements for natural recruitment, exotic species cover, and cover by native species. All of these, except weed cover, should increase over time. Weed cover should be the opposite; it should decrease with time. After the initial planting effort has been completed, the mitigation site will be monitored by the Project Monitor on a monthly basis for the first 18 months and quarterly for the remainder of 31 1 d 1 1 1 the monitoring period. Qualitative surveys, consisting of a general site walkover and habitat characterization, will be completed during each monitoring visit. General observations, such as fitness and health of the planted species, pest problems, weed establishment, mortality, and drought stress, will be noted in each site walkover. The Project Monitor will determine remedial measures necessary to facilitate compliance with performance standards. Quantitative data will be collected annually using accepted vegetative sampling methods in order to evaluate survivorship, species coverage, and species composition. In the event that plantings should fail to meet the specified requirements, compliance will be ensured by the performance of either or both of the following remedial procedures by the contractor on an as -needed basis as directed by the Project Monitor: (1) replacing unsuccessful plantings with appropriate -sized stock or seed mixes to meet stated cover or survival requirements, and /or (2) performing maintenance procedures to ensure the site conditions are appropriate (e.g., non-native species removal). Remedial actions in planting areas shall be based on detailed investigations (such as soil tests and excavations of failed plantings to examine root development) to determine causes of failure. If substantial non-compliance with the performance occurs, Ashby USA, LLC will consult the Corps and CDFG to determine whether corrective measures and an extension of the five-year monitoring period will be necessary. The initial monitoring will be conducted in September following the first growing season after installation. Annual monitoring events will also be conducted in September. Monitoring of Natural Regeneration Natural recruitment of native plant species will be documented during the monitoring surveys. Natural recruitment is expected to be low during the first few years of plant establishment, with the possible exception of exotic species that may colonize from adjacent seed sources. Some natural recruitment of woody species is expected to occur during the five-year monitoring period. The occurrence of these volunteer woody species will be recorded during the monitoring to the extent possible. Standard vegetation monitoring procedures will be as follows: First -Year Monitoring. During the first year, monitoring will occur every month. One quantitative survey will be performed to determine planted species' growth performance. The following performance standards will be achieved at the end of the first year: • 80 -percent survival of container plants; • 25 -percent coverage of native species (5 -percent deviation allowed); • percent cover of non-native species not exceeding 5 -percent. 32 Replanting will be performed as necessary, during the appropriate plantin ith the appropriate -sized stock or by seeding to ensure that these perform cc standards e achieved. If substantial non-compliance with the performance occurs .e. Ashby USA, LLC) will consult with the Corps and the CDFG to determine whether correc and an extension of the five-year monitoring period will be necessary. At the end of the first year, a report summarizing the performance of the restored habitat will be submitted to the Responsible Parties for distribution to the Corps and the CDFG. ' Second -Year Monitoring. During the second year, monitoring will occur on a quarterly basis. One quantitative survey will be performed to determine planted species' growth performance. The following performance standards will be achieved at the end of the second year: ' • 80 -percent survival of container plants; • 40 -percent coverage of native species (<5 -percent deviation allowed); ' • percent cover of non-native species not exceeding 5 -percent. ' Replanting will be performed as necessary, during the appropriate planting with the appropriate -sized stock to ensure that these performance standards are et. If subs al ' non-compliance with the performance standards listed above occurs (i.e. shby USA, LL will consult with the Corps and the CDFG to determine whether corrective an extension of the five-year monitoring period will be necessary. At the end o and year, a report summarizing the performance of the restored habitat will be submitted to the Responsible Parties for distribution Corps CDFG. to the and the Third -Year Monitoring. During the third year, monitoring will occur quarterly. One quantitative survey will be performed to determine planted species growth performance. The following performance standards will be achieved at the end of the year: ' • 80 -percent survival of container plants; ' • 60 -percent coverage of native species (<5 -percent deviation allowed); • percent cover of non-native species not exceeding 5 -percent. ' Replanting will be performed as necessary wi o nate-sized stock to ensure that these performance standards are achie If substantia on -compliance with the performance standards listed above occu (i.e. Ashby USA, LL )will consult with the Cotes and the CDFG to determine whether e d an extension of the five- year monitoring period will be necessary. At the en a third year, a report summarizing the performance of the restored habitat will be submitted to the Responsible Parties for distribution to the Corps and the CDFG. 1 1 33 Fourth Year Monitoring. During the fourth year, monitoring will occur quarterly. One quantitative survey will be performed to determine planted species' growth performance. The following performance standards will be achieved at the end of the third year: • 80 -percent survival of container plants; • 75 -percent coverage of native species (<5 -percent deviation allowed); • percent cover of non-native species not exceeding 5 -percent. Replanting will be performed as necessary, during the planting period, with the appropriate - sized stock to ensure that these performance standards are ach' e . tial non- compliance with the performance standards listed above occurs ( e. Ashby USA, C) will consult with Corps and the CDFG to determine whether coir measures and an extension of the five-year monitoring period will be necessary. At the end of the fourth year, a report summarizing the performance of the restored habitat will be submitted to the Responsible Parties for distribution to the Corps and the CDFG. ' Fifth Year Monitoring. During the fifth year, monitoring will occur quarterly. One quantitative survey will be performed to determine planted species' growth performance. The following performance standards will be achieved at the end of the year: ' • 80 -percent survival of container plants; 1 1 [1 1 1 11 11 • 90 -percent coverage of native species (<5 -percent deviation allowed); • percent cover of non-native species not exceeding 5 -percent. Replanting will be performed as necessary, during the appropriate planh peno , . the appropriate -sized stock to ensure that these performance standards a achieved. substantial non-compliance with the performance standards listed above o i.e. As USA, LLC) will consult with the Corps and the CDFG to determine whether co ctive measures and an extension of the five-year monitoring period will be necessary. At the end of the fifth year, a report summarizing the performance of the restored habitat will be submitted to the Responsible Parties for distribution to the Corps and the CDFG. B. Monitoring Methods Monitoring will assess the attainment of annual and final success criteria and identify the need to implement contingency measures in the event of failure. Monitoring methods include field - sampling techniques that are based upon the California Native Plant Society field sampling 34 1 1 protocol .3 Please refer to A Manual of California Vegetation for further details on this sampling method. Monitoring Monitoring shall be conducted during the active growing season in September of every year. A qualified habitat restoration specialist, biologist, or horticulturist with appropriate credentials and experience in native habitat restoration shall perform monitoring. Continuity within the personnel and methodology of monitoring shall be maintained insofar as possible to ensure comparable assessments. Records will be kept of mortality and other problems, such as insect damage. The Project Monitor will also identify other potential site problems, such as weed infestation and soil loss. Remedial measures undertaken will be referenced in the annual report to the Corps and CDFG. Sampling Techniques Sampling will be conducted using the point -intercept sampling method. This sampling method is based on a 50 -meter long point -transect centered in a 50 -meter by 2 -meter belt plot. At each 0.5 -meter interval along the transect (beginning at the 50 -cm mark and ending at 50 - meter) a point is projected vertically into the vegetation. Each species intercepted by the point is recorded, providing a tally of hits for each species in the herbaceous, shrub, and tree canopies. Percent cover for each species, according to vegetation layer (herb, shrub, and tree) can be calculated from these data. A list of all additional species within the 250 square meter belt is subsequently made. Four 2 -meter by 50 -meter long transects per acre will be used to monitor the development of the mitigation. The various transects will be randomly located for the first sampling event and permanently marked to facilitate their use in subsequent years. Samples of proposed transect data sheets are provided in Appendix A. Photo -Documentation Several permanent stations for photo -documentation will be established. Photos shall be taken each monitoring period from the same vantage point and in the same direction each year, and shall reflect material discussed in the annual monitoring report. Final Success Criteria Resolution If the project meets all success criteria at the end of the five-year monitoring period, the mitigation will be considered a success. If not, the maintenance and monitoring program will be extended one full year at a time and a specific set of remedial measures, approved by ' 'Sawyer, John O. and Todd Keeler -Wolf. 1995. A. Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. 1 35 l.J ' the Corps and/or CDFG, will be implemented until the standards are met. Only those areas, which fail to meet the success criteria, will require additional work. This process will ' continue until all year -five standards are met or until the Corps and the CDFG determine that other mitigation measures are appropriate. Final success criteria will not be considered to have been met until a minimum of two years after all human support, including irrigation, has ceased. Should the mitigation effort meet I all goals prior to the end of the five-year monitoring period, the Corps and/or the CDFG, at their discretio ,may terminate the monitoring effort and release the applicant from this requirement. 6nce the Corps and the CDFG have indicated that the site has met its five-year ' success criten the s to will be transferred to the City and the City will maintain and monitor it pursuant to AD 161 ' The applicant recognizes that failure to meet success criteria may result in the requirement to replace that portion of failed mitigation, unless the failure was the result of an "Act of God" (e.g., fire, flood, etc.) that would likely have destroyed the original vegetation for which mitigation is being performed. C. Annual Reports ' At the end of each of the five monitoring period growing seasons, an annual report will be prepared for submittal to the Corps and CDFG by January 1st of each year for the duration of the monitoring period. These reports will assess both attainment of yearly target criteria and ' progress toward final success criteria. These reports shall include the survival of tree and shrub container stock and percent cover of herbaceous species. The number of species of plants replaced, an overview of the mitigation effort, the method used to assess these parameters, and photos from designed photo stations shall also be included. These reports will include the following: ' • a list of names, titles, and companies of all persons who prepared the content of the annual report and participated in monitoring activities for that year ' • a copy of the Corps permit number 1999-15459-RRS and any attachments including Special Conditions and subsequent Letters of Modification ' • a copy of the CDFG Streambed Alteration Agreement and any subsequent Amendments • an analysis of all qualitative monitoring data ' • copies of all monitoring photographs • maps identifying monitoring areas, transects, planting zones, etc. as 1 appropriate. 36 I ID. Schedule ' Grading of the 8.20 -acre southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh mitigation site will occur in Winter 2003 and mitigation site planting will occur in November 2003. All mitigation site vegetation will be installed at the same time and will be on a common monitoring cycle. VIII. COMPLETION OF MITIGATION A. Notification of Completion When the initial monitoring period is complete, and if the applicant believes final success criteria have been met, the applicant will notify the Corps and CDFG when submitting the ' annual report that documents this completion. ' B. Alternative Locations for Contingency Mitigation Sufficient area for creation of the 8.20 -acre southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh ' habitat exists on site, therefore no alternative site will be required at this time. Although this plan is expected to be successful, alternative locations may be used in the event that mitigation cannot be achieved. I 37 Corps and CDFG Confirmation Following receipt of the report, the applicant will, at the request of the Corps and/or CDFG, provide access and guidance through the project site to confirm the adequate completion of the mitigation effort. Once the completed mitigation effort has been verified by the Corps and the CDFG, the City will obtain control of the mitigation site as part of the overall requirements of the MSSHCP and AD 161. The City will maintain these areas as authorized by AD 161 and the MSSHCP. IX. CONTINGENCY MEASURES A. Initiating Procedures If an annual performance criterion is not met for any portion of the mitigation project in any ' year, or if the final success criteria are not met, the applicant will prepare an analysis of the cause(s) of failure and, if determined necessary by the Corps and/or CDFG, propose remedial ' action for approval. ' B. Alternative Locations for Contingency Mitigation Sufficient area for creation of the 8.20 -acre southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh ' habitat exists on site, therefore no alternative site will be required at this time. Although this plan is expected to be successful, alternative locations may be used in the event that mitigation cannot be achieved. I 37 m x C. Funding Mechanism Ashby USA, LLC will fund planning, implementation, and monitoring of any contingency procedures that may be required to achieve mitigation goals within the mitigation site, the on site preservation area, and the off site preservation area. D. Responsible Parties Ashby USA, LLC will be responsible for implementing and monitoring any contingency procedures. The applicant may assign these responsibilities to an appropriate contractor, but will retain ultimate responsibility for implementing and monitoring any contingency procedures for the mitigation site. S: 0163-40c.mil 38 m X N m m= m= m= m== m m m m= m m r m D a d L fD CL O 3 c rn CIO d J D J d O to a m N / x )SJ I .,� )LAIN � A t ,... \\ i Laketon age`-��/ 1 �9\ El51N4PEAK t3s9 �Vdlle Ellw A A AZA Com' �f oAeo-H {3 �r .., $kylafkt'. I )I I �i ownlamlu�%t cnesler Di rc o o 7k 1 wit A OUN w , go^' 7 1 ,J9< ♦ N — _r'v 26r/y mmuni+r Rask R tt A°e i r o me gal a ti'• vn'� a• I, .1996 %r'�L l Wi ° ILAI .. -' 14A;4_ "SA n11(5 yulye -'lpilkh rwad '-Vail �Vljnal hl I - Se V �:dn 11 \ /r' '�T n 172 XM EAM LJT \\\ , y E 11 ti REP ANY' \�rar \ t _� \ n/G oW� an[ 'III __a PROJECT SITE I ICA �a M i// 1593 {,� f wmdmil I. /V A .°f� $ag { 0�r p • Mur eta HO SMI ,� w� in I + J1 � �. 12]JO 6. I —� I\ _ p\ �' wal• r. 7/ �'7�+\ \p� � IIkB,`111 �,;/ / C- _ rh 1souNW 1 "_- - — ��\7(. / ra -_ two,�. J OeY / i 'f omal or. l L'w IVa,I� IMQUNYAN . 1 9 i�Ranr/\'T �.... 1 ��/'?' Cd•i ; -1 Ral¢b °`'�'F S OAKSM� ne r �.`�,� o �ndm 11 1/2V r 4353 MILL RI EDO ( MEEP DE}�,%I%� JCPLOR(If(5 _ ,y ,�°n9 r :ice%_/ y cel N F�[aA DA )- L -i fC r �. 0� 2971--(( ' /�-'f 'T Y' Cil ( \ metol C wit., l T- / \ INY� r c. :�y09yg.,,, ) ✓'^' GOAT ME .y 1669 • � i \'I\. ( �i-� �/-y,. \�PNrle tindlan banal*om i'1\ J.. ✓�Aaall I ,. J '• / I � > !- 'r "" I x l/. h Y1 / I�< � � � \ a (L�n�f// \ f� _ _ 'Renin. •� 5 a aOLYyyy -. ,aJrey - R(,an{'IwiaRlPEA K r aandn. / S f~^\ \/ ,/ 7��) �d"J" 1. ; / HANGA` 1°A r, ;}�j. p� .,� -} Lx ^Li'„a .'^"y 'y Zr Carp 1. a ,avr (PEC 6AJbW AIN I('4 �. , 1N4tAry �d"Il. 'a9[D O SE �AK _. \ 1 an\n \. i, Jyf +• T ch z --L+� 1 g \RVA'MWI._ 4�I "1 -- o I rN ! Y— I” �T�r W R } sihb RED r Da an v ey_ ,*PUa slew T r 1, \ r,, N__}�_ to° .R.^r N r a UU 111 {/ {1. r Au( Eo WILDKmnA `� O: _CLFV L �D NAT)Vine FORES 1 i Fc 1 �R'( •'t^' ..- BR K I S� {.. 1 j Y / d �)� MORGAN nrtl _ ., - 1. - r ti � '_ I. PADMA �, tarp N AL �u Fal lerI (�l tt l a r.l .p�l1�i I >_-C NDIANz'j mu RAMi°�l lu (7 WO VA GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT 1 m X 03 w a m V a O c G) m CD v n l0 O g 0 m O CL a) n N 2 01 18 Y 7 \� J 5 PROJECT SITE i Hollow his c> 1)f.l illa�'C Dr}inage 2ILI ger}7''a ,jam j Urnnage 3 - ��''✓� � �� 1S 20 � � f -' .. Drainage 4 o ROPE D(a,na9e 5 i LP' M1`�O 9uttertfetd Stage Road Alignment �I I GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT 2 m x A J a Eu a 0 LLJ U 0 J a Q w O 7 i 2 a Or LD Ir IY z W J LL 1, LL z O U h - CD J a � 1 PURPOSESTENTATIVE RMAP NO* 29353EASEMENT FOR ELECTRICAL POLE LINES & MAINTANCE IN FAVOR OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON RECORDED APRIL 9.1968. A$ INST. N0.32463 OF O.R. I I j I I ,� i w . �. �.� .. i • . �� . i . • n A . II— r w 1 . � .. w R/W . ,. s,. .•, :. � _ 1250 __ , , , r X711 `_ 95Z-170'-025 2. 1 957 170 024 F R/W R/W 1 2• 957 170 Oi , ' r,. „r `�i - M 38 C/L 38. I — — 100 YR. WATER SURFACE — — � ..,:• -' � - — LO FG @ACCESS ROAD RT ELEVATION (WSEI w , , I I FG @ACCESS ROAD LT _ � ---,us---- '' , •. :.,.� , PM ND. l� 57_.., M 15 23 23 15' PRIVATE STREETS 3243 PER PLAN rTYPJ ---�-- — — ' PER PLAN (TYP) � ,:-•, _ -.,.. TRACT BOUNDARY PROP ( ) PROPOSED, 30 WIDE EASEMENT 2: {4'ILL 'At (/IRE RlGflGQF FY,4Y - .... , PROPOSED 30 WIDE EA°SE NT N 4' S' 6' S' 12' 1�' 12' S' 6' 5' 4' PM J 7/57 58 FOR EQUESTRIAN TRAIL AND PMJ3 9 /.7.1. 72 PRIVATE STREETS WITHIN SINGLE FAMILY PLANNING AREAS ? FOR:_EG?TIES-TRIAN TRAIL AN K• ._ FUEL MODIFICATION 28- 27 ti I 1 PHILL IP G. CAC IA p 0 SIDEWALKI OVERBANK GRADING FUEL OD'IFIGATION. �;, PM 14.tcga 95' JOHN M. &NANCY E. 'MIZE` ,- sloEwaLK P1 Not To Scale I I o : .. JOHN M. &NANCY E. - MIZE n -- _ _ - _ _ _ I 993 020 012 9 �: c� _ 943-050-Q08 IL 1 P,9: A4 GUTTER :1 R/W C/L —_ —� „ I n , v FM NO# 2;J 446 - y 943 050 007 I 2 R/W I -�� i'^ 5FR - 1 I c x., _ L r 41 I (,� I w PM `J sa/aa-a9 �, ; I o. f7—A 5 R A-5 zx". _ 2i I I M1 L ANv o o XIST, 4.5 55 3 ' S.5' 4.5' �j f 117-A-5 DRAKE J. HASKINS = I JAMES J. & GRACE Y. LEE STEVEN D. LASSLEY w I I ROBERT J. GORHAM JEAN 943-020-011 �' o rr� 943-030-009 943-050-018 >' GpNO PUE o PUE EXISTING GROUND 957-170-029 WAGNER" A-1-10 O "� m R—A 5 RA 20 2% Id Q JOHN M. & FLOWLINE EXIST.CHANNEL R.4': J� m N O n _ q} f 2y, 2y r ARMORFLEX TYPICAL 9S% ti v SECTION „E„ „E„ - �--► I BOTHSIDES I ~1 X0028 I -� NANCY E. MIZE �Q i W W943-050-009 Q a TYPICAL SECTION "CC" -"CC" 17—A-67 f>? A5 JOHN M. &NANCY E. MIZE R -A 5 �o� 9 MODIFIED PRINCIPAL COLLECTOR ROAD (76') i LONG VALLEY CHANNEL .....,NORTH & SOUTH LOOP ROAD _ _ PRIVATE STREETS (30%41') —— PRtviTE STREETS WITHIN CLUSTER PLANNING AREAS BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD A TO LOOP ROAD "C" Not To Scale Not To Scale T OWNER/DEVELOPER EXISTING ZONING: A-1-10 /HR /L T PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan z Y W PROPOSED WATER LINE LOCATION 470 E. HARRISON STREET 0 o rn CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-1314 SS PROPOSED SEWER LINE LOCATION 3 U J r STS PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE LOCATION RORIPAUGH RANCH INC. a C P.O. BOX 2 m o m T OWNER/DEVELOPER EXISTING ZONING: A-1-10 /HR /L PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan ASHBY USA, LLC Y W PROPOSED WATER LINE LOCATION 470 E. HARRISON STREET 0 CORONA, CALIFORNIA 92879-1314 SS PROPOSED SEWER LINE LOCATION 6 Dbl Lettered Lots (O.S.) U J STS PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE LOCATION RORIPAUGH RANCH INC. a C P.O. BOX 2 m Co OPEN SPACE AREA TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92390 o N GO LEO E. RORIPAUGH/JUNE TULL U o RESTRICTED ACCESS (AS SHOWN) GENERAL NOTES: 39800 WINCHESTER ROAD w 0 Q TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 923900 Z L ¢ z � • THIS PROJECT INCLUDES ALL CONTINGUOUSLY CIVIL ENGINEER w M U OWNED PROPERTY. 0 N w S. SLOPES 10 TO 309 THIS IS A SCHEDULE "D" TRAC`� MAP. °' m -00 0 w rr • THE PROPERTY IS NOT IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL LIQUEFACTION OR DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. < ~ GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS, OR WITHIN THE SPECIAL STUDY ZONE. 800 NORTH AVENUE SUITE 300 Q Cr � rye f >.' SLOPES > 30 • ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA 91764 ::D O LL q (909)481-5750 SANTA GERTRUDIS AND LONG VVALLEY CREEKS, DEVELOPMENT WILL a m - W INCLUDE MITIGATION MEASURES OF POTENTIAL FLOOD HAZARDS. a SOILS ENGINEER 2 Lztl q w L1J THE DEVELOPER SHALL OBTAIN CLEARENCES & PERMITS FROM THE I— 0- N FOLLOWING AGENCIES: U.S FISH AND WILDLIFE, CALIFORNIA FISH LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES AND GAME AND THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. N 41715 ENTERPRISE CIRCLE NORTH SUITE 103 � • THIS PROJECT IS A SUBAREA OF AD 161 SUB -REGIONAL HABITAT � UT m TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 ID z z CONSERVATION PLAN WITH APPROVED 10A PERMIT. (909)296-0530 U_ vi • ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: ° ILLUSTRATESTHE GRADING CONCEPT FOR THE PROJECT. THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WILL BE DEVELOPED WITH FUTURE OVERLAID SUBDIVISION MAPS. 957-130-001 & 002 vEyA 957-340-001, 003, 007, 008 • FINAL GRADING WILL BE DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO TRACT OVER LAID 958-260-001, 002 g 4 •THE UTILITY PURVEYORS: i 'a w _ �� MULTIPLE PHASES FOR THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. W ¢ w ¢W GAS Southern California Gas Company 0 100 200 400 600 800 VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS ARE RESTRICTED ALONG MURRIETA SEWER Eastern Municipal Water District CD w HOT SPRINGS ROAD, BUTTERFIEL.D STAGE ROAD, NICOLAS ROAD, WATER Eastern Municipal Water District C STREET NORTH AND C STREET SOUTH EXCEPT AT THE STREET ELECTRIC Southern California Edison o m TELEPHONE Verizon INTERSECTIONS AND APPROVED, DRIVEWAYS. AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. L` a CABLE C.T.I. (909) 699-0020 Z w GRADING: SCHOOL DISTRICT TEMECULA VALLEY U.S.D. 0 Z 10 m IN CUT: 9,313,000 J tL o LAND USE & ZONING: m FILL: 8,308,000 = Roripaugh Ranch SP O w z In o GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SP Overlay Zone Z EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant/Agri g J FT.: 275,700 w O N Z y " O O C W 6 PROPOSED LAND USE: ResidentiaWixed Use it ¢ ACRES: 6.32 Zm UWa"ZLL� LEGEND. EXISTING ZONING: A-1-10 /HR /L PROPOSED ZONING: Specific Plan W PROPOSED WATER LINE LOCATION TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS: 30 Numbered Lots (Buildable) 7 Lettered Lots (Streets) SS PROPOSED SEWER LINE LOCATION 6 Dbl Lettered Lots (O.S.) On STS PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE LOCATION TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN SECTION 21:.635±Acres TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN SECTION 20:_ 160+Acres m a OPEN SPACE AREA TOTAL 804+ACRES U o RESTRICTED ACCESS (AS SHOWN) GENERAL NOTES: 0 SLOPES < 10 L • THIS PROJECT INCLUDES ALL CONTINGUOUSLY M OWNED PROPERTY. N w S. SLOPES 10 TO 309 THIS IS A SCHEDULE "D" TRAC`� MAP. °' m -00 0 w • THE PROPERTY IS NOT IDENTIFIED AS POTENTIAL LIQUEFACTION OR 3 GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS, OR WITHIN THE SPECIAL STUDY ZONE. o rye f >.' SLOPES > 30 • PORTIONS OF THE SITE ARE SI BJECT TO FLOOD HAZARDS. ALONG q SANTA GERTRUDIS AND LONG VVALLEY CREEKS, DEVELOPMENT WILL a m INCLUDE MITIGATION MEASURES OF POTENTIAL FLOOD HAZARDS. a N • PRIOR TO GRADING OR ANY WORK WITHIN THE CREEK CHANNELS, q w THE DEVELOPER SHALL OBTAIN CLEARENCES & PERMITS FROM THE m 0- N FOLLOWING AGENCIES: U.S FISH AND WILDLIFE, CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME AND THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. N ¢ • THIS PROJECT IS A SUBAREA OF AD 161 SUB -REGIONAL HABITAT � UT m 0 Or 0 w z z CONSERVATION PLAN WITH APPROVED 10A PERMIT. U_ vi • PRELIMINARY GRADING SHOWN ON THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP ° ILLUSTRATESTHE GRADING CONCEPT FOR THE PROJECT. THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WILL BE DEVELOPED WITH FUTURE OVERLAID SUBDIVISION MAPS. vEyA • FINAL GRADING WILL BE DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO TRACT OVER LAID ON TRACT MAP. g 4 •THE SUBDIVIDER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO RECORD MAPS IN 'a w _ �� MULTIPLE PHASES FOR THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. a 0 100 200 400 600 800 VEHICULAR ACCESS RIGHTS ARE RESTRICTED ALONG MURRIETA w HOT SPRINGS ROAD, BUTTERFIEL.D STAGE ROAD, NICOLAS ROAD, C STREET NORTH AND C STREET SOUTH EXCEPT AT THE STREET INTERSECTIONS AND APPROVED, DRIVEWAYS. AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. / CONTOUR INTERVAL=5' • GRADING: a 0 m 10 m IN CUT: 9,313,000 V) o n, FILL: 8,308,000 = BASIS OF BEARING: • TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT a ' 4,1SQ. LANDSCAPE AND MAINTENANCE AREAS: FT.: 275,700 O N Z y " O O C W 6 • THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE ACRES: 6.32 Zm UWa"ZLL� NORTH LINE OF SECTION 21, T 7 S, R 2 W, SBBM, PARKS: 23.60 ACRES BEING S88029'37"W AS SHOWN ON RECORD OF SURVEY,�� TOTAL: 29.90 ACRES BOOK 100, PGS. 52-57, INCLUSIVE RECORDS OF U S.QQW ! RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA w LLdffiapQp�� O¢JLip�N NOTE:��zxwa 00 FOR IDENTIFYING ONSITE AND OFFSITE ------- r-----�—�-----�--- I L IMPROVEMENTS REFER TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT... SEC 18 I SEC 17 I SEC 16 I SEC 15 i ally Ir mrmu, I I I W IETA NOT 5 ROA AWRRIETA HOT SRI SEC 22 a; i SEC 19 I SEC 20 PROJECT i I : SITE — I TEMFCULA w I I I CIO o I SEC 30 I SEC 2 w SEC 28 I SEC 28 I j I m I I -- —� --------Ld L----� VICINITY MAP Thomas Guide Coordinates N. T. S. PLANNING APPLICATION # PA01-0230 SOURCE OF TOPOGRAPHY • TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASE ON AERIAL SURVEY FLOWN AUGUST 1998, BY ARROWHEAD MAPPING COMPANY. DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIA°CES, 800 NORTH HAVEN ,AVENUE, SUITE 300 ONTARIO, CA. 91764-4315 (909) 481-5750 0 Er 0 U w Er z 0 U ZD .n Er U 0 4 m U C U ci f 93- m X .. GLENN LU KOS ASSOCIATES PERMIT EXHIBIT 1B u SCALE: 1 = 200' 0 50100 200 400 600 .800 DATED: OCTOBER 1999 AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ... NORTH HAVEN AVENUE, SUITE .. *NTARIO, CA. 91764-4915 (909) 481-5750 a PAU eklbDment IIII U VA 11 Z7` t''Allll 111 II �A �-2 Y !a , L�e Y O LEGEND Areas Within Corps Jurisdiction (A.single number indicates the width of the OHWM) WETLAND ", Wetlands Within or Adjacent to OHWM (This symbol represents the portion of the drainage supporting jurisdictional wetlands) Areas Within Corps and CDFG Jurisdiction (The first number indicates the width of the OHWM, while the larger number indicates the width of CDFG Riparian Vegetation mc nLz, NK, �i:-R CDFG Riparian Habitat Non -Jurisdiction Erosional Feature (No OHWM) v, 14 Photo Location Wetlands Within 0HWMl J- . Data Point .,...GLENN LUKOS ASSOCIATES 0 200 400 600 N� 2' T � —116 Y v AIL 'N N 17�7 PAUGH RANCH ration Map KEITH INTERNATIONAL, INC. a Planning a Civil Engineering & Environmental Services Ar gr Land Surveying a Public Works ar Water, Resources v Inland Empire Division 22690 Cactus Ave... Ste. 300 Moreno Valley, CA 92553 (9091653-0234 Sheet'. - I I J.N.: JrrR Date: 0-.26-76 Revisiom -4ev—lslow Revision,, - Revision: Revision: iRevi;qn----. D m z 0 A..mLM n8 .nous Gri USE CODE ACRES DENSITY UNITS = LOW DE NSITY RESIDENTIAL L 1129 12 135 F—) LOW MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LM 1890 48 909 p MED DENSITY RES IS1anUare) MI 309 61 185 O MED DENSITY RES (Clustered CuunyarrIl M2 112 101 828 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL NC ISa ® NEIGHBORHOOD PARK NP S, SPORTS PARK SP 198 E PRIVATE MINI PARK MP 3 �r O* PRIVATE RECREATION CENTER RC as 1111111110 EDUCATIONAL 15cMOU SI.S2 320 ® PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL (Fre Sui PI 20 HABITAT OSI 2021 FLOOD CONTROL OS? .182 _CIO CL O LANDSCAPE SLOPE OS3 212 i an PUBLIC STREETS 354 PRIVATE STREETS 98 TD V GRAND TOTAL " 1 256 2058 e :ENn ee Cil, r County Boundary Padeslnan End, ®� =me�.. s 'is"' aws aet NAP ii Na. 1 goo eeo r '338 sent+ Aa -33A Ac — d n AS 9 y = = = = m m 14 1 15 w w MIK � K 1r.1K1 Ilr W9 ons 8.20- I:A Mitigation Site ,^\133 V Mitigation Site 16 la iws 24 iaaK mGA '21'm n '20 L y1eK nous Notes ' A 15water mull) -use trail is le[eled in Planning Areas 19. 20 and 21 adjacent 10166 Property Boundary Planning Neal 19. 20, 21, 33A and 33B Ate Have 1 ane mimnKrm lots adlaunl In the a0pen, Wunder, and 112 Mie ir.r m Iola alllaranl In IIM 1 ape bis c m c� Sa GerlreMh reek 7:� LL Q\ �r LO CDN C _CIO CL 17 i an TD V iw J vs K aA V cn n:K Qa O L 25 '20 L y1eK nous Notes ' A 15water mull) -use trail is le[eled in Planning Areas 19. 20 and 21 adjacent 10166 Property Boundary Planning Neal 19. 20, 21, 33A and 33B Ate Have 1 ane mimnKrm lots adlaunl In the a0pen, Wunder, and 112 Mie ir.r m Iola alllaranl In IIM 1 ape bis I 1 r 1 I 1 1 Appendix A Samples of Monitoring Data Sheets 39 TRANSECT/PERCENT COVER ESTIMATION Project Name: Sheet of Date: Transect Number: Transect Length: Readings/Transect: Distance Between Readings: Photostation Number: Comments: Bare/Vacant: "Herb" Layer 0-3' Species Tally Additional Species: (within 1.0 m of transect) "Shrub" Layer >3' - g„ Species Tally El Recorder: "Tree" Layer >g„ Species Tally I I 1 I 1 Cl 1 MITIGATION SITE MONITORING SHEET - QUALITATIVE EVALUATION Recorder: Plant Health - General Are there visible signs of nutrient/water deficiencies? If yes, then describe: Are there signs of regeneration/reseeding? Is vandalism harming plant health or project success? Are there any signs of herbivory?: Other: Container Stock Provide visual estimation percent survival of container stock: Are watering basins intact?: Is mulch from original installation still present? Is there litter development?: Seeded Species Are all intended native species present? If not, then what is missing?: Are there any occurrences of volunteer native species?: Are there any unvegetated areas? Should these be remediated?: Weeds Is excessive competition from weeds affecting desired species?: Is there adequate maintenance/weed clearing?: Other: Soils Are there any signs of soil development?: Other: Irrigation System Are irrigation heads functioning properly?: Are there any signs of rodent damage to irrigation system?: Are there any signs of vandalism to the irrigation system/controller box?: Are there any signs of excessive runoff?: Does irrigation frequency and volume require adjustment? Other: Is there any indication that wildlife is using the site?: Recommendations for Remediation: Project Name: Date: