iv. environmental impact analysis c. biological … · environmental impact analysis c. biological...

Ponte Vista IV.C. Biological Resources Draft Environmental Impact Report Page IV.C-1

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

INTRODUCTION

This section of the Draft EIR provides a description of the biological resources on the Project site, information on regulations that serve to protect sensitive resources, an assessment of the potential impacts of the Project, and recommended measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts on sensitive resources. Various technical reports were prepared to analyze the potential biological resources impacts associated with the Project. These technical reports are summarized below and are included in Appendices IV.C-1 through IV.C-9 to this Draft EIR.

Background and Methods

Biological resources within the Project site were identified through the review of existing biological site information, pertinent scientific literature, and specific field reconnaissance surveys. The following biological resource surveys were conducted within the 61.5-acre Project site:

• Ponte Vista at San Pedro Tree Report (“Tree Report”) by Christopher A. Joseph & Associates (2006) (see Appendix IV.C-1)

• Presence/Absence Report for the California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) for the Ponte Vista Property (“CAGN Presence/Absence Report”) by TERACOR Resource Management (2005) (see Appendix IV.C-2)

• Riparian Bird Species Survey (“Riparian Bird Report”) by TERACOR Resource Management (2005) (see Appendix IV.C-3)

• Habitat Assessment for Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly (Gloucopsyche lygdamus palosverdescensis) (“Osborne PVB Habitat Assessment”) by Osborne Biological Consulting (2006) (see Appendix IV.C-4)

• Habitat Assessment, Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis) (“Mattoni PVB Habitat Assessment”) by Rudi Mattoni, PhD (2006) (see Appendix IV.C-5)

• Investigation of the Presence of Wetlands and Other Waters of the United States Associated with the Ponte Vista Project Site Community of San Pedro Los Angeles, California (“Jurisdictional Report”) by The Huffman-Broadway Group, Inc. (2005) (see Appendix IV.C-6)

• General Biological Assessment (“General Biology Report”) by TERACOR Resource Management (2005) (see Appendix IV.C-7)

• Focused Survey for Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis) on the approximately 60-acre Ponte Vista Project Site, San Pedro, California (“PVB Focused Survey Report”) by Osborne Biological Consulting (2006) (see Appendix IV.C-8)

City of Los Angeles November 2, 2006


• Memorandum – Ponte Vista Project: Updated vegetation mapping of coastal sage scrub habitat (“Updated Vegetation Mapping Memorandum”) by Glenn Lukos Associates (August 31, 2006) (see Appendix IV.C-9)

Vegetation

As shown in Figure III-2 in Section III (Environmental Setting) of this Draft EIR, the majority of the Project site is currently developed with abandoned duplex-style military housing. The northern property boundary, which borders the U.S. Navy’s Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP), is comprised primarily of non-native grassland (NNG) and invasive ornamentals with sparse, fragmented patches of coastal sage scrub (CSS). The southern portion of the Project site consists of a disturbed vacant field that is the site of a former fire fighting training facility. This area is separated from the currently developed portion of the site by a 940-foot-long, degraded, channelized drainage. The channel enters the property from the west and flows in a southeasterly direction. This channel is part of a storm drain drainage system and receives flows from the Los Angeles County Flood Control system PD180.

Field vegetation surveys were conducted in spring, summer, and fall of 2005 by S. Reed and T. Searl of TERACOR Resource Management (TERACOR). Vegetation and plant communities were mapped based on descriptions provided in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB),1 Holland,2 Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf,3 and Hickman.4 When plant community conditions on the ground were particularly mixed or small, TERACOR classified vegetation areas by combining community types on the vegetation mapping. Glenn Lukos Associates subsequently conducted more detailed mapping to precisely identify CSS habitat along the northern property boundary and map such habitat. Because they do not constitute sensitive plant communities, natural habitat, or landscaping protected by ordinance or regulation, the ornamental landscaping trees and shrubs planted within yards of the now abandoned duplex and retail structures were not inventoried by TERACOR (although ornamental trees within yards were inventoried in the Tree Report prepared separately for subdivision map purposes, discussed below under the “Tree Surveys” heading).

Special-Status Plant Species

Sensitive-species plant surveys, a review of existing scientific literature, and analysis of the California Native Plant Society (CNPS)5 and CNDDB were conducted during the spring and summer of 2005 by TERACOR in order to determine the occurrence of sensitive plant species within the Project site. Specifically, TERACOR based its predictive analysis on each species’ known

1 California Department of Fish and Game. 2003. Wildlife and Habitat Analysis Branch: The Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities Recognized by The California Natural Diversity Database. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/whdab/pdfs/natcomlist.pdf.

2 Holland, R. F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Non-Game Heritage Program. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

3 Sawyer, J.O., & T. Keeler-Wolf. 1995. A Manual of California Vegetation. California Native Plant Society. 4 Hickman, J.C., ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. U.C. Press. 5 California Native Plant Society. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California,

Special Publication No. 1, Sixth Edition



distribution or range including elevation, site disturbance levels, history of disturbance, and remnant site resources.

The CNPS is a private plant conservation organization dedicated to the monitoring and protection of sensitive species in California. The CNPS separates plants of interest into five categories. CNPS has compiled an inventory comprised of the information focusing on the geographic distribution and qualitative characterization of Rare, Threatened, or Endangered vascular plant species of California. The list serves as the candidate list for listing as Threatened and Endangered by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). In addition, the five categories within the CNPS are further classified by a “threat code” for each species. The CNPS five categories of rarity and the threat codes are summarized in Table IV.C-1.

Table IV.C-1 Summary of CNPS Lists 1, 2, 3, 4 and Threat Codes

CNPS List Comments List 1A – Presumed Extinct in California

Thought to be extinct in California based on a lack of observation or detection for many years.

List 1B – Rare or Endangered in California and Elsewhere

Species generally rare throughout their range that are also judged to be vulnerable to other threats such as declining habitat.

List 2 - Rare or Endangered in California, More Common Elsewhere

Species rare in California but more common outside of California.

List 3 – Need More Information

Species that are thought to be rare or in decline, but CNPS lacks the information needed to assign to the appropriate list. In most instances, the extent of surveys for these species is not sufficient to allow CNPS to accurately assess whether these species should be assigned to a specific list. In addition, many of the List 3 species have associated taxonomic problems such that the validity of their current taxonomy is unclear.

List 4 – Plants of Limited Distribution

Species that are currently thought to be limited in distribution or range whose vulnerability or susceptibility to threat is currently low. In some cases, as noted above for List 3 species above, CNPS lacks survey data to accurately determine status in California. Many species have been placed on List 4 in previous editions of the “Inventory” and have been removed as survey data has indicated that the species are more common than previously thought. CNPS recommends that species currently included on this list should be monitored to ensure that future substantial declines are minimized.

Threat Code Comments

.1 Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat)

.2 Fairly endangered in California (20 – 80% occurrences threatened)

.3 Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known)

Tree Survey

For subdivision map purposes, a comprehensive Tree Report was prepared for the Project site based on tree surveys conducted throughout the site on May 26 and 27; June 17 and 20; and June 21, 2005 by staff at Christopher A. Joseph & Associates (CAJA). As noted above, the Tree Report is included



as Appendix IV.C-1 to this Draft EIR. Trees were inventoried according to City of Los Angeles criteria as to their species, caliper size, health, and aesthetic appearance. Caliper measurements for single trunk trees were taken at approximately 4.5 feet above natural grade (Diameter at Breast Height, DBH). Trees with multiple trunks growing from one root system were measured with the largest trunk noted in the caliper section of the Tree Evaluation Matrix Sheets (Attachment C to the Tree Report) and secondary trunks noted in the comment area. Specifically, the City of Los Angeles trunk diameter criterion used was eight inches or more DBH in the undeveloped areas of the Project site (i.e., the southern drainage area and the northern slope), and 12 inches or more DBH in the developed areas (i.e., the former Navy housing lots). Inventoried trees were tagged with rectangular (3.25" x 3") metal tags inscribed with their corresponding Tree Evaluation Matrix number. Tree maps utilized as a base map for the surveys conducted by CAJA were obtained from a previous site survey completed on March 21, 2005 by Hunsacker (see Figures IV.C-3 and IV.C-4, below).

Wildlife

Wildlife species were surveyed during various field surveys conducted in spring, summer, and early fall of 2005 utilizing the following identifiers and methods: sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs. In addition to species actually observed, expected wildlife usage of the Project site was determined according to known habitat preferences of regional wildlife species and knowledge of their relative distributions in the area. Identification, scientific nomenclature, and common names referred to in this analysis followed Stebbins6 and The Center for North American Herpetology7 for amphibians and reptiles; Kays and Wilson8 for mammals; and Dunn,9 D.A Sibley,10 and the American Ornithologists’ Union (AOU) checklist11 for birds.

Special-Status Wildlife Species

Federal and State Protection and Classifications

The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) defines an endangered species as “any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” A threatened species is defined as “any species which is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future throughout all or significant portions of its range.” The Sacramento, California United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Field Office describes a Federal Species of Concern (FSC) as “a sensitive species that has not been listed, proposed for listing, or placed in candidate status.” The

6 Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Second Edition. Peterson Field Guide Series, Houghton Mifflin Company.

7 The Center for North American Herpetology. http://www.cnah.org/. 8 Kays, R. W. and D. E. Wilson. 2002. Mammals of North America. Princeton Field Guides. Princeton

University Press. 9 Dunn, Jon L. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America, National Geographic Society, Third

Edition. 10 Sibley, D. A. 2003. The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America. A. Knopf, Inc. 11 The American Ornithologists’ Union. 2005. The A.O.U. Check-list of North American Birds, Seventh

Edition. http://www.aou.org/checklist/index.



FSC receives no legal protection and use of the term does not necessarily mean the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a threatened or endangered species. The federal listing status is as follows:

• FE Federally listed as Endangered • FT Federally listed as Threatened • FPT Federally Proposed as Threatened • FPE Federally Proposed as Endangered • FPD Federally Proposed for delisting • FC Federal Candidate Species • FSC Federal Species of Concern

The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) defines an endangered species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.” The State defines a threatened species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts. Any animal determined by the [California Fish and Game] commission as rare on or before January 1, 1985 is a threatened species.” A candidate species is defined as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the Commission has formally noticed as being under review by the CDFG for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the Commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list.” Candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already listed as threatened or endangered at the discretion of the Commission. Unlike FESA, CESA does not include listing provisions for invertebrate species. The State listing status is as follows:

• SE State listed as Endangered • ST State listed as Threatened • SR State listed as Rare (plants only) • CSC California Species of Special Concern • SFP Fully Protected • SCE State Candidate for Endangered • SCT State Candidate for Threatened • Special Animal CNDDB Special Animal

“Special Animal” is a general term that refers to all of the taxa the CNDDB is interested in tracking, regardless of their legal protection status. The CDFG notes that these taxa generally fall into one or more of the following categories:

• Official listed or proposed for listing under State or Federal Endangered Species Acts;

• State or federal candidate for possible listing;



• Taxa which meet the criteria for listing, even if not currently included on any list, as described by Section 15380 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);

• Taxa considered by the CDFG to be Species of Special Concern;

• Taxa that are biologically rare or very restricted in distribution, declining throughout their range, or have a critical, vulnerable stage in their life cycle that warrants monitoring;

• Populations in California that may be on the periphery of the taxon’s range, but are threatened with extirpation in California;

• Taxa closely associated with habitats that are declining in California at an alarming rate; and/or

• Taxa designated as special status, sensitive, or declining species by other State or federal agencies, or non-government organizations.

California Natural Diversity Database

The State of California also maintains the CNDDB, which is a computerized inventory of information on the location of California’s rare, threatened, endangered, and otherwise sensitive plants, animals, and natural communities published by the CDFG. Updates to the CNDDB are issued twice annually. Valuable information regarding the species’ occurrences, population numbers, observers, occurrence dates, and potential threats to the organism(s) are included for each occurrence record.

Sensitive Wildlife Species Analysis and Surveys

Sensitive species wildlife analyses of the Project site were conducted by TERACOR in the spring, summer, and fall of 2005. This site analysis included a query of the CNDDB, review of applicable scientific literature,12 and sensitive wildlife surveys in order to determine the potential occurrence for sensitive wildlife species within the Project site. TERACOR’s predictive analysis on each species’ known distribution or range included elevation, site disturbance levels, history of disturbance, and remnant site resources. For the purposes of this analysis, TERACOR also employed “occurrence probability rating” designations for each species based on the above-described factors. Sensitive species occurrences within the Project site were categorized as either Confirmed Present; Not Present; or one of the following probability categories:

12 Schoenherr, Allan A. 1992. A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Ltd. Hall, E.R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. John Wiley and Sons, N.Y., N.Y. (2 volumes). Garrett, K. and J. Dunn. 1981. Birds of Southern California, Status and Distribution. Los Angeles Audubon

Society, publication. Small, A. 1994. California Birds: Their Status and Distribution. Ibis Publishing Company. Williams, D.F. 1986. Mammalian Species of Special Concern in California. California Department of Fish

and Game, Wildlife Management Division Administrative Report. Thelander, C.G., ed. 1994. Life on the Edge: A Guide to California’s Endangered Natural Resources.

Biosystems Books.



• Low - The Project site is within the known range or distribution of the species. Suitable habitat on-site is marginal to non-existent. Site factors, such as disturbance or other human factors, likely preclude species occurrence. Focused investigation for the species is not warranted.

• Moderately Low - The Project site is within the historic range of the species. Site factors may be somewhat suitable but other conditions may exist (adjacent urbanization, isolation, etc.) to suggest a fairly low probability of occurrence. The species has not recently been detected within the vicinity, or site conditions are such that sustained presence is unlikely.

• Moderate - The species has a reasonable possibility of occurrence on the Project site. Habitats are generally suitable and the species is known to occur in the area.

• Moderately High - Habitats on the Project site are structurally suitable for the species and occurrence is recently confirmed in the vicinity of the site.

• High - The Project site contains highly suitable habitat for the species and disturbances, if present, would not likely affect occurrence. The organism has recently been detected either on-site or in the vicinity, or ecological conditions are such that qualified personnel can reasonably anticipate presence.

Those species protected under the provisions of the FESA and CESA, with at least marginal probabilities of occurrence on the Project site, were the subject of focused on-site surveys conducted by federally authorized personnel.

Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey Methods

All surveys and analysis for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN, Polioptila californica californica) were conducted in compliance with the current guidelines set forth by the USFWS Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines13 re-issued by the USFWS, dated April 28, 2003; and pursuant to 10(a) Recovery Permit No. TE -839896-2 issued to TERACOR’s Principal Biologist, S. Reed, as an authorized surveyor (see Appendix IV.C-2 to this Draft EIR).

Habitat assessment and CAGN surveys were initiated by TERACOR to determine the presence/absence of the species on the Project site. The initial habitat assessment and plant community mapping was conducted on April 27, 2005. The habitat assessment determined there was marginally suitable CAGN habitat (consisting of approximately three acres of disturbed non-native grassland and ornamental vegetation with isolated patches of coastal sage scrub within the 61.5-acre site) on the cut slope that forms the northern boundary of the Project site (indicated as the “Survey Area” on Figure IV.C-5, below). Therefore, the CAGN surveys were concentrated within this area, which borders the adjacent DFSP property. The DFSP is a site known to support the CAGN.

13 United States Department of the Interior. 1997. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines.



The CAGN surveys were conducted on June 23 and 30; July 15 and 30; August 20; September 10 and 24; October 23; and November 6, 2005. All nine surveys were conducted at time periods between the hours of 6:15 AM and 12:15 PM, within the USFWS-designated breeding and non-breeding season survey window. The weather during all survey events was suitable for detection of CAGN and was recorded utilizing a Kestrel 4000 hand-held weather meter. In conducting the surveys, S. Reed walked the three-acre survey area during each of the nine survey intervals. Because the survey area only consisted of three acres, one transect was adequate during the survey. Each of the nine surveys lasted between 1.0 and 1.75 hours. Attempts to locate CAGN included the use of the “pishing” method and taped vocalizations of the CAGN. Ornithologists and birders utilize both of these methods as a means of attracting birds as well as stimulating them to vocalize, aiding in detection. Taped vocalizations of the CAGN were employed for periods of no longer than ten seconds at any one transect interval. Often, the CAGN is heard and not seen. “Heard-only-sightings” generally are considered valid sightings, as surveyors may determine that attempts to flush CAGN from brush are too disruptive during the nesting season.

Riparian Bird Species Survey Methods

Riparian bird surveys were conducted by TERACOR biologist’s S. Reed, T. Searl, F. Perez, and J. Reed on June 23 and 30, and July 15, 23, and 30, 2005 along the 940-foot (0.61-acre), highly degraded stormwater drainage channel located within the southern portion of the Project site (see Appendix IV.C-2 to this Draft EIR). These five surveys were conducted to determine if any sensitive riparian bird species were present within the channel and associated riparian vegetation. Riparian bird species survey methods consisted of the presence/absence technique, which utilized the standard “pishing” method and visual observations. The survey methodologies employed were consistent with established bird survey protocols. The entire length of the drainage channel located on-site was surveyed during each of the field visits. All surveys were conducted on the Project site from one to two hours per day between the hours of 5:30 AM and 10:00 AM. All species, including non-riparian species from adjacent habitat areas, were recorded.

A review of pertinent scientific literature, historical maps, and documentation, and a query of the CNDDB within the Torrance, California Quadrangle and surrounding quadrangles were also utilized during the analysis to determine the presence of sensitive riparian bird species within the Project site.

Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Survey Methods

The Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly (PVB, Gloucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis) flies once a year, generally February to April. Local populations of PVB only use the following host plants: milkvetch (Astragalus trichopodus var. lonchus) and deerweed (Lotus scoparius). Deerweed is the principal host plant used by PVB on the adjacent DFSP property to the north of the Project site. Deerweed is a short-lived perennial characteristic of early successional stages of CSS and chaparral, usually following disturbance such as fire or soil exposure by slope failures, erosion, and grading.

Two field investigations were conducted in order to assess the potential for habitat for the federally endangered PVB on the Project site. The first habitat assessment was conducted on February 11,



2006 by Osborne Biological Consulting, and the second on February 27, 2006 by Dr. Rudi Mattoni (see Appendices IV.C-4 and IV.C-5 to this Draft EIR, respectively). Of specific focus were a series of cut slope areas along the northern boundary and flat field areas on the undeveloped southwestern portion of the site. All undeveloped, cut slopes or open fields were carefully searched for PVB host plants. In general, PVB host plants found on the site were evaluated for size, approximate age or maturity, abundance, and proximity to known PVB habitat on the adjacent DFSP. Overall floral composition, degree of disturbance, and soil conditions were also noted where associated with PVB host plants. Locations of PVB host plants and their numbers were noted on an aerial photograph of the Project site.

Focused PVB surveys were conducted on the Project site between and inclusive of February 23 and May 11, 2006, by Ken Osborne and Rick Rogers (under Osborne’s USFWS 10(a) Permit No. TE-837760-6). Surveys were conducted twice a week during the flight season when weather conditions were suitable. These field investigations covered the entire 2006 PVB flight season. The observed PVB flight period of the DFSP, located just north of Project site, was monitored by Rogers, Osborne, and Pratt and lasted from February 23 through May 6, 2006. As noted above, the PVB Focused Survey Report is included as Appendix IV.C-8 to this Draft EIR.

Field surveys for adult PVB were conducted by slowly walking general transects through potential habitat areas previously identified by Osborne during the habitat assessment on February 11, 2006 (see Appendix IV.C-4 to this Draft EIR). Surveys were conducted during suitable weather conditions (in general not overcast or raining, minimal sustained winds < 15 mph, and temperatures > 65°F, or if overcast, temperatures > 70°F). During the surveys, general field notes were collected, specifically on weather conditions, butterfly and moth species observed, potential nectar sources, nectar source use by other butterflies, and general plant communities and their composition.

Wildlife Movement Corridors

Wildlife use of corridors may be fixed or flexible, depending upon the type of organism and the size and complexity of the corridor zone. Animals that move along corridors as part of an evolutionary-based pattern of migration or dispersal may be genetically programmed to follow predetermined, and sometimes ancient migration routes, and may have little or no individual ability to modify their behavior, even in the face of abrupt physical changes or barriers. When confronted with impassible barriers, these animals may lack an appropriate behavioral response that allows them to effectively avoid the barrier or implement alternative movement choices. In such cases, actions that physically obstruct corridors may result in population dislocation, inability to reach essential seasonal resource areas, loss of individual animals, and overall population declines.

Organisms are generally driven to disperse through mechanisms such as the scarcity of support resources (such as food, water, microhabitats, shelter, etc.), migratory genetic programming, and accidental dispersal, such as flooding events carrying individuals to downstream locations, fire-driven flight, or similar mechanisms. They sometimes do so along well-defined corridors (for example, the Pacific flyway for migratory birds or through connected stream systems in the case of amphibians dependent on moist environments). Terrestrial generalists (for example, black bear, deer,



rattlesnakes, coyote, bobcat, woodrats, pocket mice, etc.) usually do not migrate or move substantially unless seasonal behaviors or ecological factors necessitate movement in order to locate and exploit critical support resources.

Biogeographic theory maintains that any habitat patch, or island, which experiences genetic isolation, will undergo eventual extinction if the habitat unit is too small to support genetic variability in any given species. In the Los Angeles area today, the most common type of “corridor” is actually a remnant habitat patch which serves to connect two or more otherwise isolated habitat areas. It is not the movement of the animal that is important; it is the movement of genetic material on a per species basis through an ecosystem over time that is important. The connection is vital not so that individual animals can move freely (although that can be true with predators like bobcats) but so that genetic exchange and corresponding genetic variability can be achieved incrementally throughout the habitat through reproductive processes.

Jurisdictional Waters Survey Methods

The Huffman-Broadway Group, Inc. (HBG) conducted an investigation of the geographic extent of wetlands and other waters of the United States potentially subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction at the Project site on August 19, 2005. Existing landforms, vegetation, hydrology, and soil conditions were evaluated within the existing and future Project development area in order to identify potential sites that may contain wetlands and other waters of the United States. These types of areas included landscape features such as drainages with identifiable bed and bank features and low-lying areas that potentially could pond, flood, or saturate based on their geographic position, soil permeability, and drainage characteristics in relationship to well-drained upland sites. Because the majority of the Project site is improved with an existing (abandoned) housing development, roadways, and associated infrastructure, the focus of this study was on the large open drainage located on the southern portion of the site. This drainage emerges from a subterranean culvert under Western Avenue, flows through the property, and then reenters a subterranean culvert at the southern end of the property.

The geographic extent of waters of the United States was delineated and analyzed according to the following criteria:14 the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Corps 33

14 33 CFR Part 328. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 33 CFR Part 329. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 40 CFR Part 230. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater

Habitats of the United States. Publication No. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services. Washington, DC.

Hurt, A.W., P.M. Whited, and R.F. Pringe. 1998. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States. Wetland Science Institute, Baton Rouge, LA.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992a. Regional Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. February 20, 1992, Memorandum.



Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 328 and Part 329; applicable Clean Water Act (CWA) guidelines; the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) set by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS); the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI); and the Corps’ 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual and applicable memoranda. As noted above, the Jurisdictional Report prepared for the Project site is included as Appendix IV.C-6 to this Draft EIR. The entire site was walked with representative observations noted on August 19, 2005. Locations where vegetation, soil, and hydrology indicator data were taken were memorialized as point features using a backpack-held, Trimble Pathfinder XRS global positioning system (GPS) unit with sub-meter accuracy. Drainage habitat was also evaluated for the presence of an Ordinary High Water Mark (OHW) and an identifiable bed and bank. These observations were also memorialized using a GPS unit, walking down the centerline of the channel noting channel width during the GPS data collection process.

Once field data collection was completed, GPS data were incorporated into a Geographic Information System (GIS), and overlaid onto geo-referenced topographic mapping of the Project site. Site data were also overlaid for review and analysis of preconstruction conditions onto an ortho-rectified digital May 2002 color aerial photograph obtained from AirPhotoUSA.

Regulatory Framework

Impacts to certain habitats and species associated with the Project area are regulated by federal and State agencies, including the Corps, USFWS, and CDFG. In addition, the City is required to review and consider the biological impacts associated with the Project pursuant to CEQA.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA, the Corps regulates the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the United States. The term “waters of the United States” is defined at 33 CFR Part 328 and includes (1) all navigable waters (including all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide), (2) all interstate waters and wetlands, (3) all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce, (4) all impoundments of waters mentioned above, (5) all tributaries to waters mentioned above, (6) the territorial seas, and (7) all wetlands adjacent to waters mentioned above. Wetlands are defined at 33 CFR Part 328.3(b) as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support…a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.” The Corps issues individual and

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992b. Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. March 8, 1992, Memorandum.

Reed, P.B. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: California (Region O). Biological Report 88(26.10) May 1988. National Ecology Research Center, National Wetlands Inventory, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. St. Petersburg, FL.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1995. Hydric Soils of the United States.



general (nationwide) 404 permits. The CWA authorizes nationwide permits for activities that will cause only minimal adverse effects when performed separately, and will have only a minimal cumulative adverse effect on the environment. Where endangered species could be adversely impacted by a Section 404 permit, the Corps must consult with USFWS prior to issuing a Section 404 permit.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Pursuant to Section 7 of the FESA, any federal agency undertaking a federal action (including issuance of Section 404 permits) that may affect a species listed or proposed as threatened or endangered under the FESA must consult with USFWS. In addition, any federal agency undertaking a federal action that may result in adverse modification of critical habitat for a federally listed species must consult with USFWS.

Various actions, including the “take” (e.g., harm, harass, pursue, injure, kill) of an animal species listed as threatened or endangered are regulated by the FESA. Destruction or adverse modification of habitat, either directly or indirectly, also constitutes a “take.” Section 7 and Section 10 of the FESA provide procedures for permitting takes that are incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of otherwise lawful activity (such as construction activity) in coordination with USFWS review. The USFWS may provide comments and recommendations outside their regulatory authority even if it is determined that a project will not adversely affect an endangered species.

The USFWS also regulates the “take” of migratory birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712), which provides that it is unlawful to “pursue, hunt, take, capture or kill; attempt to take, capture or kill; possess, offer to or sell, barter, purchase, deliver or cause to be shipped, exported, imported, transported, carried or received any migratory bird, part, nest, egg or product, manufactured or not.” The USFWS maintains a list of migratory birds that are protected under the Act.

California Department of Fish and Game

Pursuant to Division 3, Chapter 1.5, Sections 2050-2116 of the California Fish and Game Code, the CDFG prohibits take of State-listed species. If State-listed species were to be impacted by Project implementation, the CESA permit would be required. Likewise, the take of plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act (CNPPA) are subject to CDFG approval. Impacts to State-listed species must be fully mitigated in order to satisfy CESA and CNPPA requirements.

Pursuant to Division 2, Chapter 6, Sections 1600-1603 of the California Fish and Game Code, the CDFG regulates all diversions, obstructions, or changes to the natural flow or bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake that supports fish or wildlife. CDFG defines a “stream” (including creeks and rivers) as “a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation.”



Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3512 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of birds and active nests.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Project site is bounded by the DFSP to the north and east. Where fuel storage tanks have been located below ground at the DFSP, the surrounding surface areas are now comprised of disturbed open space. Green Hills Memorial Park is located to the northwest and urban areas are located to the south and west. As shown in Figure III-2 in Section III (Environmental Setting) of this Draft EIR, the majority of the Project site is currently developed with abandoned duplex-style military housing. The northern property boundary, which borders the DFSP, consists of a previously cut and graded slope that is primarily vegetated with NNG and invasive ornamentals with sparse, fragmented patches of CSS. The southern portion of the property consists of a disturbed field that was the former location of a fire fighting training facility, and is currently improved with a baseball diamond that is presently undergoing renovation. A 940-foot-long, degraded, channelized drainage separates this area from the area improved with duplexes. This channel receives flows from the Los Angeles County Flood Control stormwater drainage system designated as PD180. These flows originate from areas of higher elevation on the west side of Western Avenue. The channel enters the Project site from subterranean pipes and a culvert under Western Avenue on the west, runs southeasterly, and exits the property into an underground culvert and pipes along the southern property line in the vicinity of The Gardens condominium complex, located south of the Project site. For more detail on the storm drainage function of the channel, see Section IV.E (Hydrology and Water Quality) of this Draft EIR.

Historic information on the Project site documents a history of disturbance to the Project site over many decades. The Project site has been altered by development since at least 1947. Military housing, which exists on-site, has been present since at least 1965. Approximately 60 years of grading disturbances and construction in this area have degraded the ecological functionality of the Project site and converted the majority of the site to an urban environment. These factors, along with the property being surrounded by development, have resulted in an area dominated by non-native flora with low native plant species diversity.

Vegetation

Vegetation Mapping

Geographically, the Project site is located within the South Coast subregion of the California Floristic Provinces Southwestern California region. Plant assemblages found on-site during multiple surveys within spring, summer, and fall 2005 include annual NNG, CSS, and mixed ornamentals (see Figures IV.C-1 and IV.C-2). These communities and areas are described below utilizing the previously referenced methods. In addition, a list of all the plant species identified during the site field visits is provided in the General Biology Report included as Appendix IV.C-7 to this Draft EIR. As discussed earlier, TERACOR did not inventory the species of ornamental landscaping trees and shrubs planted within yards and setback areas of the abandoned residential units and retail structures at the Project site (although ornamental trees in yards were surveyed in the Tree Report, as discussed below).



Slip page for Figure IV.C-1, Vegetation Associations Onsite



Slip page for Figure IV.C-2, Vegetation Associations Onsite



Disturbed Non-Native Grassland

NNG mapped on the Project site contains various non-native, invasive grasses. Mapping distinctions between brome (CNDDB Code No. 42.000.00) or other grassland associations were not possible nor particularly relevant. Grasses recorded within open areas of the assessment area included wild oat (Avena barbata), ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), and barley (Hordeum murinum), mixed heavily with other exotic forbs such as filaree (Erodium botrys) and hairy vetch (Vicia villosa). Habitat values were generally low in NNG areas. Isolated patches of NNG provide little value to wildlife as compared to naturally occurring scrub and native grassland systems.

Disturbed Coastal Sage Scrub

CSS (CNDDB code 32.000.00) is considered a sensitive vegetation type throughout much of Southern California, particularly in regions known to support the federally-listed CAGN. CSS has an S3.1 ranking (defined as occupying between 10,000 and 50,000 extant acres and exhibiting a high level of threat) by the CDFG. The disturbed CSS observed on the Project site consists of 0.09-acre as small, isolated pockets along the cut-slope adjacent to the northern property line. This area has been previously graded and disturbed. Individual plant species appear stressed, and large populations of NNG and invasive ornamentals are displacing the CSS. Dominant species included deerweed (Lotus scoparius), brittlebrush (Encelia farinosa), and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica). Plant diversity within the CSS was observed to be very low.

Invasive Ornamental

As stated above, the northern portion is comprised of non-native species. Dominant species observed in these areas were iceplant (Carpobrotus edulis) and Acacia (Acacia sp.). Iceplant is listed as a high threat on the California Invasive Plant Council’s Invasive Plant Inventory. Species with a high threat listing have profound impacts on native ecosystems, plant and animal communities, and vegetative structure.

Ornamental

Ornamental species such as carob (Ceratonia siliqua), myoporum (Myoporum laetum), and Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia) are present within the northwestern portion of the Project site and other developed areas of the property.

Mixed Ornamental/Willow Scrub

This community is present in the channel located in the southern portion of the Project site. This riparian area is considered severely degraded ecologically, and is comprised primarily of willow and non-native ornamental species. Dominant ornamental species observed were Shamel ash (Fraxinus uhdei), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus terebinifolia), and Moreton Bay fig (Ficus macrophylla).



Disturbed/Developed

Areas throughout the Project site that appeared affected by human activity or have been previously developed were considered to be disturbed. This includes the introduction of NNG and ornamentals, and areas that appeared to have been maintained in the past (e.g., yards surrounding houses).

Ruderal

Barren land with little to no vegetation was labeled as ruderal. Areas such as these were observed primarily off-site at the DFSP.

Special-Status Plant Species Surveys

A search of the CNDDB and CNPS for the Torrance Quadrangle and several site surveys conducted during spring, summer, and fall 2005 were utilized in order to determine if any sensitive plant species and their associated habitats are present within the Project site. Table IV.C-2 includes a summary of those sensitive plant species that were considered to occur within or in the vicinity of the Project site and which were the focus of site surveys. No sensitive plant species listed in Table IV.C-2 were found to occur within the Project site, most likely due to the lack of suitable support habitat on-site.

Table IV.C-2 Sensitive Plant Species Probability of Occurrence within the Project Site

Plant Species Sensitive Species Status Probability of Occurrence On-Site South Coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica)

CNPS List 1B.2 No formal governmental listing.

Not Present. An annual herb which occurs in coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub below 100 meters in elevation and blooms March through October. This species was not detected on the Project site during field surveys.

Parishs brittlescale (Atriplex parishii)


Not Present. Annual herb which blooms from June through October, it is only known from three occurrences in California. It occurs up to 1,900 meters in chenopod scrub, playas, and vernal pools. This species was not detected on the Project site during field surveys.

Davidsons saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii)


Not Present. Annual herb which blooms from April through October, it is believed extirpated from Los Angeles County. It occurs below 200 meters in alkaline conditions in coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub. This species was not detected on the Project site during field surveys.

southern tarplant (Centromadia parryi australis)


Not Present. This annual herb blooms from May through November. It occurs in marshes and swamps, vernally mesic grasslands, and vernal pools. This species was not detected on the Project site during field surveys, and is not likely to occur due to a lack of suitable habitat.

Salt marsh birds beak (Cordylanthus maritimus maritimus)

CNPS List 1B.2 FE, SE

Not Present. This species occurs on coastal dunes and salt marshes. Much of its habitat has been removed from the Los Angeles area. This species would not occur on-site due to lack of suitable support habitat.



Table IV.C-2 Sensitive Plant Species Probability of Occurrence within the Project Site

Plant Species Sensitive Species Status Probability of Occurrence On-Site Mexican flannelbush (Fremontodendron mexicanum)

CNPS List 1B.1 FE, SR

Not Present. This evergreen shrub occurs in closed-cone coniferous forests, chaparral, and cismontane woodlands. As of 1993, it is believed that fewer than 100 plants remain in California. This species was not detected on the Project site during field surveys.

prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata)


Not present. This species was found historically on alkali soils in vernal pools or grasslands. It is thought to be extirpated from the Los Angeles area. This species would not occur on-site due to lack of suitable habitat.

Lyons pentacheata (Pentacheata lyonii)

CNPS List 1B.1 FE, SE

Not Present. Lyons pentacheata is most often found on open, sandy or gravelly substrates in native grassland or around the margins of exposed granitic rocks, occurring in chaparral, grassland, and CSS. Habitat on-site is not considered suitable for this species, nor was it detected during field surveys. It has been detected along Malibu Creek in the vicinity of Tapia Park.

Estuary seablite (Suaeda esteroa)

CNPS List 1B.2 The species has no government listing status.

Not Present. This perennial herb is found in coastal salt marshes. This species would not occur on-site due to a lack of suitable habitat.

Source: TERACOR, 2005 (see Appendix IV.C-7 to this Draft EIR).

Tree Survey

As discussed earlier, for subdivision map purposes a comprehensive tree survey of the Project site was conducted in May and June 2005. The following includes a summary of the general field observations made during the visits to the Project site. A detailed Tree Report including individual data for each date of inspection is included in Appendix IV.C-1 to this Draft EIR. The vegetation typical of disturbed urban areas is present throughout the Project site, including ornamental-exotic trees and annual, non-native forbs and grasses. Fragmented areas of disturbed CSS occur on the previously cut and graded slope adjacent to the northern property line, including Brittlebush (Encelia californica) and Deerweed (Lotus scoparius). This area has previously been graded and has been colonized by noxious weeds including Yellow Star Thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), Black Mustard (Brassica nigra), and Sweet Fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). Common native and non-native (invasive) riparian vegetation species are located adjacent to the drainage feature in the southern portion of the Project site, including Arroyo Willow (Salix lasiolepis), Shamel Ash (Fraxinus uhdei), Castor Bean (Rincinus communis), Umbrella Plant (Cyperus alternifolius), and Nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus). No sensitive tree species are present in or adjacent to the drainage feature.

In total, 330 trees meeting the City of Los Angeles’ trunk diameter criterion (“criteria trees”) were recorded on the Project site (see Figures IV.C-3 and IV.C-4). Specifically, the City of Los Angeles trunk diameter criterion used was eight inches or more DBH in the undeveloped areas of the site (i.e., the southern drainage area and the northern slope), and 12 inches or more DBH in the developed areas (i.e., the housing lots). The following native trees were found on the Project site: Arroyo



Willow, Incense Cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), and Mexican Fan Palm (Washingtonia filifera). Table IV.C-3 lists the criteria tree species that were observed within the Project site.

Table IV.C-3 Tree Species Observed within the Project Site

Common Name

Scientific Name (Genus species)

Number Observed

% of Total Observed1

Bottle Tree Brachychiton populneus 1 0.3 Lemon Bottle Brush Callistemon citrinus 1 0.3 Incense Cedar Calocedrus decurrens 1 0.3 Carob Ceratonia siliqua 10 3.0 Italian Cypress Cupressus sempervirens 1 0.3 Kaffirboom Coral Tree Erythrina caffra 2 0.6 Sugar Gum Eucalyptus cladocalyx 1 0.3 Yate Eucalyptus cornuta 2 0.6 Red-Flowering Gum Eucalyptus ficifolia 5 1.5 Moreton Bay Fig Ficus macrophylla 1 0.3 Shamel Ash Fraxinus uhdei 34 10.3 Goldenrain Tree Koelreuteria paniculata 1 0.3 Glossy Privet Ligustrum lucidum 8 2.4 Tulip Tree Liriodendron tulipifera 1 0.3 Flaxleaf Paperbark Malaleuca linariifolia 2 0.6 New Zealand Christmas Tree Metrosideros excelsus 8 2.4 Myoporum Myoporum laetum 17 5.1 Olive Olea europaea 1 0.3 Avocado Persea Americana 1 0.3 Canary Island Date Palm Phoenix canariensis 9 2.7 Canary Island Pine Pinus canariensis 1 0.3 Aleppo Pine Pinus halepensis 7 2.1 Monterey Pine Pinus radiate 4 1.2 Chinese Pistache Pistacia chinensis 1 0.3 Victorian Box Pittosporum undulatum 6 1.8 Lombardy Poplar Populus nigra 1 0.3 Peach Prunus persica 1 0.3 Ornamental Pear Pyrus calleryana 5 1.5 African Sumac Rhus lancea 3 0.9 Arroyo Willow Salix lasiolepis 20 6.0 Brazilian Pepper Tree Schinus terebinthifolius 65 19.6 American Elm Ulmus Americana 1 0.3 Chinese Elm Ulmus parvifolia 43 13.0 Mexican Fan Palm Washingtonia filifera 57 17.2 Shiny Xylosma Xylosma congestum 8 2.4

Total 330 100.0 1. May not equal 100 percent due to rounding.

Source: CAJA, 2006 (see Appendix IV.C-1 to this Draft EIR).



Slip page for Figure IV.C-3, Tree Locations



Slip page for Figure IV.C-4, Tree Locations Southern Site Emphasis



Pursuant to Ordinance 177,404 (2006), the following are considered Protected Trees in the City of Los Angeles:

• Oak trees including Valley Oak (Quercus agrifolia), or any other tree of the oak genus indigenous to California but excluding the Scrub Oak (Quercus dumosa),

• Southern California Black Walnut (Juglans californica var. californica),

• Western Sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and

• California Bay (Umbellularia californica).

None of the above listed Protected Trees are present on the Project site.

Wildlife

Wildlife in the Vicinity of the Project Area

Two specific landscape types were identified surrounding the Project site during surveys: developed/urban and undeveloped/open space. The Project site itself has been graded, urbanized, and previously used for military and residential purposes. Urbanization surrounds the Project site after many decades of development in the South Bay area. Even within open space areas (e.g., the slope adjacent to the northern property line and the southern area of the site containing the drainage channel and the former site of a fire fighting training facility), there are few native plant communities remaining and those that remain have little value to wildlife due to lack of connectivity. This has resulted in the loss of habitat and population viability of many species groups. Urban areas are of little value to wildlife, other than to those that are adapted to urbanized areas (e.g., house finch, European starling, and rock pigeon). There are also open space areas located north of the Project site on the DFSP. Although the open space areas on the DFSP are comprised mainly of NNG, some relictual areas containing CSS alliances remain intact.

Wildlife within the Project Area

The previously cut and graded slope adjacent to the northern property line and the area south of the abandoned duplex housing (where the drainage channel and former site of the fire fighting training facility are located) were the two areas of the Project site that were initially considered the most likely to contain populations of resident species. The northern slope area is approximately three acres in size and is comprised of disturbed NNG, invasive ornamentals and small patches of disturbed CSS. Though the majority of the Project area is developed and is considered to have moderately low value to wildlife, a number of common species probably utilize the residential area for foraging. The Faunal Compendium of the General Biology Report, included in Appendix IV.C-7 to this Draft EIR, records those species which have the potential to occur on the Project site. Some species with high mobility, such as red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), barn owl (Tyto alba), and urban-tolerant songbirds probably utilize the Project area on a transitory and sometimes regular basis, depending on environmental factors present within their primary habitat.



The following bird species were observed within the Project site during several site surveys during spring, summer, and fall 2005:

• Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii),

• red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis),

• red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus),

• bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus),

• rock pigeon (Columba livia),

• mourning dove (Zenaida macroura),

• American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos),

• common raven (Corvus corax),

• western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica),

• California towhee (Pipilo crissalis),

• white-crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys),

• nutmeg manikin (Lonchura punctulata),

• American kestrel (Falco sparverius),

• American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis),

• house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus),

• barn swallow (Hirundo rustica),

• Brewers blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus),

• Bullocks oriole (Icterus bullockii),

• hooded oriole (Icterus cucullatus),

• brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater),

• northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos),

• yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata),

• common yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas),

• house sparrow (Passer domesiticus),

• downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens),

• Parrot (Aratinga sp.),

• phainopepla (Phainopepla nitens),

• European starling (Sturnus vulgaris),



• California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica),

• rufous hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus),

• Allens hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin),

• house wren (Troglodytes aedon),

• Bewicks wren (Thryomanes bewickii),

• American robin (Turdus migratorius),

• pacific-slope flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis),

• dusky-capped flycatcher (Myiarchus tuberculifer),

• black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans),

• western kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), and

• Cassin’s kingbird (Tyrannus vociferans).

Mammal, reptile, and amphibian sightings within the Project site included the following species:

• Bottas pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) and

• western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis).

Habitat values at the Project site have decreased substantially since the site and areas adjacent to the property were developed. The habitat conversion to an urban neighborhood involved the removal of natural substrate and soil, removal of organisms that inhabited the area, removal of scrub and grassland, and introduction of exotic species. Wildlife usage of the site is largely restricted to the most common mammals, reptiles, and avian species, with the exception of the small habitat wedge adjacent to the DFSP, which has a higher diversity of bird species than the balance of the Project site.

Special-Status Wildlife Species Surveys

As stated previously, various sensitive species wildlife surveys were conducted in spring, summer, and fall 2005 in order to determine the presence of sensitive species that are known to occur within the vicinity of the Project site. In combination with these field surveys, queries of the FESA, CESA, CNDDB, applicable scientific literature, and application of TERACOR’s Occurrence Probability Rating, the presence/absence of sensitive wildlife species within the Project site was determined. The full range of sensitive species known to occur in the South Coast Region of California has not been analyzed herein due to the site having been developed with military housing for over 40 years, removal of intact native vegetation communities, modification of soils and substrates, and the invasion of exotic plant species. Although the Project site supports only degraded/naturalized vegetation communities, CAGN was observed in portions of the north cut slope.

Potential host plants for the PVB were documented on the Project site, although the habitat quality was considered to be too low to likely support the species. To confirm the presence or absence of the



species, focused surveys were conducted during the 2006 adult flight season. These surveys have confirmed that the species is not present on the Project site, and are further discussed below.

An analysis of sensitive riparian bird species was also conducted due to the presence of a degraded riparian system (i.e., the southern drainage channel) on the Project site. The probability that other sensitive organisms could utilize the site is considered low. Table IV.C-4 includes a summary of those sensitive wildlife species that are known within or in the vicinity of the Project site and which were the focus of site surveys.

Table IV.C-4 Sensitive Wildlife Species Probability of Occurrence within the Project Site

Wildlife Species Sensitive Species

Status Probability of Occurrence On-Site Invertebrates Sandy beach tiger beetle (Cicindela hirticollis gravida)

FORMERLY FSC

Not Present. Tiger beetles are among the most voracious of all insects. Both the adult beetle and larvae are predators. This species is always found near water on sandy beaches. This species would not occur on-site due to a lack of suitable habitat.

Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus)

The monarch is considered a Special Animal in the CNDDB while present at winter roost sites, otherwise, it has no formal state or federal listing status.

Low. The monarch butterfly’s winter roost sites extend along the coast from northern Mendocino County to Baja California, Mexico. Typically, all roost sites are in tall dense groves of trees (such as oaks, pines, cypress, or Eucalyptus), in wind-sheltered sites near the coast. The CNDDB lists several localities for winter roosts for this butterfly locally, but specific locational information on winter roost sites is suppressed. Extensive surveys along the coastal zone have been undertaken by W. Sakai, but available information indicates the Project site has not been identified as a roosting site for the species.

Palos Verdes blue butterfly (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis)

FE Not Present. This species is a habitat specialist and requires either deerweed (Lotus scoparius) or Santa Barbara milkvetch (Astragalus trichoides) as larval food plants. Deerweed is present along the cut-slope along the northern property line, therefore, it was considered that this portion of the site might provide habitat occupied by the PVB. Thought to be extinct from 1987 to 1994, the Palos Verdes blue butterfly was rediscovered on the DFSP located just north of the Project site by Dr. Rudi Mattoni. Due to the presence of deerweed and the Project site’s juxtaposition to the DFSP, surveys were conducted during the 2006 flight season; however, no PVB were observed during protocol-level surveys conducted throughout the 2006 flight season. Therefore, it was concluded that the PVB is not present on-site and the on-site deerweed does not provide habitat for the PVB.

Reptiles horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum ssp.)

FORMERLY FSC, CSC

Low. Favorable habitat for this lizard includes open, flat, sandy areas in which several colonies of harvester ants (Pogonomermex sp.) are established, as ants are the horned lizard’s preferred food item. Plant communities associated with habitation of the horned lizard include CSS. Marginal habitat is present.

Birds Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii)

CSC Confirmed Present. This species is a widespread predator that specializes on other birds as prey species. It was observed flying over the Project site. Although drainage channel trees and other trees furnish nesting opportunities, no nests were found.



Table IV.C-4 Sensitive Wildlife Species Probability of Occurrence within the Project Site

Wildlife Species Sensitive Species

Status Probability of Occurrence On-Site tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)

CSC Low. This species requires emergent wetland vegetation for breeding habitat. Often found near fresh water, this colonial nester preys upon insects. It is feasible that the species may utilize the Project site as a stopover during migration, but it is not expected to inhabit the site.

western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)

SE Not Present. Habitat within the degraded channel is not considered suitable for the western yellow-billed cuckoo, which inhabits dense riverine woodlands. Further, TERACOR did not detect this species over the course of five focused riparian bird surveys on the Project site.

willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailli all subspecies)

FE, SE Not Present. This species breeds in the dense understory of riparian thickets. It is highly unlikely this species occurs within the degraded channel, nor was it detected during five focused riparian bird surveys.

coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica)

FT, CSC Observed. The CAGN is a habitat specialist in that it requires CSS. Disturbed CSS is present in small, isolated pockets along the cut-slope adjacent to northern property line. Individual plant species appear stressed, and large population of NNG and invasive ornamentals are displacing the CSS. However, CAGN were observed during focused surveys in this portion of the Project site.

California least tern (Sterna antillarum browni)

FE, SE Not Present. This species was listed as endangered in 1970. It breeds from April to August on sandy beaches. Habitat loss and recreation on beaches have drastically reduced the population size of the California least tern, though since 1998 populations seem to be increasing. This species would not occur on-site due to a lack of suitable habitat.

least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)

FE, SE

Not Present. This riparian-obligate species generally requires less-disturbed areas of dense willow-associated riparian habitat and prefers areas with standing water. This species was not detected during five focused riparian bird surveys conducted along the on-site riparian system, nor is it expected to occur due to the degraded and isolated nature of the riparian area.

Mammals pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus)

FE, CSC Low. Pocket mice are the smallest members of the family Heteromyidae. Pacific pocket mouse is generally believed to be a coastal-dweller. Populations have been negatively affected by urbanization and the introduction of feral cats. Vegetative density of NNG on-site, extent of invasion by exotic plant species, modification of substrates, and lack of burrows indicates that the Project site is unsuitable for the species.

Fish Mojave tui chub (Gila bicolor mohavensis)

FE, SE Not Present. This species has been extirpated from its historical, natural habitat of the Mojave River. Experimental fish plantings have been successful in saving the species from extinction, but they are restricted to refuges. 147 chub were transplanted into a man-made stream in 1970 at the South Coast Botanic Garden Refugium in Palos Verdes, but were extinct by 1976. No fish bearing water-bodies are located on the Project site.


Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey

Although the Project site is located in an urbanized area and considered highly degraded ecologically, it borders the DFSP, which is an area that the CAGN inhabits. Nine focused surveys for the CAGN



were conducted on the Project site. The communities present on-site considered suitable for use by CAGN include the disturbed CSS and disturbed NNG located on the cut slope adjacent to the Project site’s northern property line. While the NNG-associated plants provide little value to CAGN as compared to naturally occurring scrub and native grassland systems, CAGN will often forage within NNG, particularly if it occurs in association with CSS. The first five of the surveys were negative for CAGN, and two of the last three were positive. On September 10, 2005, two individuals were observed, and on September 24, 2005, two individuals were observed. In addition, during a survey of the site on October 23, 2005, an individual was observed at the DFSP, which is not a part of the Project site. All of the CAGN sightings occurred after the breeding season (February 15 through August 30), which indicates that the observed individuals may have used the site for dispersal habitat and not necessarily for nesting (supported by the small amount of fragmented CSS habitat on-site), as CAGN home ranges tend to be much larger outside of the breeding season.

Table IV.C-5 presents the CAGN data recorded by the survey team with regard to survey dates, times, survey results, acres surveyed, meteorological conditions, and CAGN observations. Figure IV.C-5 depicts the CAGN survey area, and Figure IV.C-6 depicts the sighting locations in which CAGN detections occurred. Figure IV.C-6 includes the area within the habitat where CAGN were observed throughout the course of the surveys, but is not intended to necessarily reflect full ranges or territories.

Table IV.C-5 California Gnatcatcher Survey Conditions and Observations within the Project Site

Survey No. Date

Start Time

Temp °F

Weather Conditions

CAGN Observations

End Time

Temp°F

Total Acres

Surveyed

Total Hours

Surveyed

1 6/23/05 8:00 AM 67 partly cloudy, wind 1-3mph none 9:30 AM 73 3 1.5

2 6/30/05 6:30 AM 61 overcast, wind 1 -4mph none 7:30 AM 67 3 1.0

3 7/15/05 6:20 AM 67 overcast, wind calm none 7:30 AM 73 3 1.0

4 7/30/05 6:30 AM 65 mostly clear, wind - 6-7mph none 7:30 AM 67 3 1.0

5 8/20/05 9:00 AM 63 overcast, wind calm none 9:45 AM 70 3 0.75

6 9/10/05 8:00 AM 61 overcast, wind calm

yes - 1 female confirmed, 1

female or juvenile 9:00 AM 62 3 1.0

7 9/24/05 11:00 AM 70

mostly overcast, wind 1 – 4 mph yes – 2 12:15 PM 72 3 1.25

8 10/23/05 8:00 AM 60 cloudy, lt. fog, wind calm

yes - 1 off-site @ DFSP 9:15 AM 64 3 1.25

9 11/06/05 7:00 AM 57 mostly clear, wind calm no 8:30 AM 60 3 1.5




Slip page for Figure IV.C-5, Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey Area



Slip page for Figure IV.C-6, Coastal California Gnatcatcher Sighting Map



Riparian Bird Species Survey

As previously discussed, a 940-foot-long, degraded, channelized drainage is located in the southern portion of the Project site. Currently the drainage channel functions primarily as a storm drain and is highly disturbed due to human alterations. Although once a natural drainage, it was transformed through fill, the addition of asphalt, and channelization to serve as a storm drain. Due to lack of maintenance, it has since come to be revegetated. Non-native ornamental species comprise the majority of the biomass within and on the banks of the channel. In addition, non-native Shamel ash and Mexican fan palm now dominate the drainage, while Arroyo willow generally comprises the balance of the tree profile. Areas directly adjacent to the storm drain are developed or highly disturbed. Abandoned military housing is situated north of the channel. Disturbed NNG is present south of the drainage channel, at the location of the former fire fighting training facility and abandoned baseball field. Areas of this drainage course both upstream and downstream of the Project site have been relocated underground by urbanization.

Riparian bird species surveys and a query of the CNDDB were conducted to determine if any sensitive riparian bird species were present within the channel and associated riparian vegetation. The CNDDB query of the Torrance, California Quadrangle resulted in no records of any sensitive riparian bird species in the area. During the course of the five surveys, no State or federally threatened or endangered species were detected within the mixed ornamental willow scrub. Further, no sensitive species (federal or State species of concern) were detected within or near the mixed ornamental/willow scrub. TERACOR field personnel detected 18 relatively common species of birds in the riparian and adjacent NNG areas. A list of the species detected within or near the riparian area (i.e., drainage channel) is included in Appendix IV.C-7 to this Draft EIR. The majority of the bird species observed utilizing the riparian area are species adapted to urban environments (e.g., European starling, house finch, American crow).

Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly Survey

As previously stated, two PVB habitat field investigations were conducted in February 2006. The cut slope on the northern portion of the Project site along the boundary with the DFSP was found to have developed early successional CSS (where not dominated by exotic grasses or exotic landscape species). Dominant elements of this CSS are California brittlebush (Encilia californica) and deerweed (Lotus scoparius). California sage bush (Artemisia californica) is also present in this community. Numerous shrubs of L. scoparius were found of various ages and sizes. During the field investigations, it was observed that a few (less than ten percent) of the L. scoparius were in full bloom and were attracting the marina blue butterfly (Leptotes marina). Soils on the cut slope are composed of marine terrace sands. The slope is a long narrow strip about 100 feet wide and 1,800 feet long. The strip extends in an irregular path from Western Avenue on the west in a trending southeastern direction to the point where the easternmost former Navy duplexes end and the property line veers south.



A very small portion of this northern slope area supports three foodplant clusters of an estimated 50 mature L. scoparius individuals. In addition, another 50 or so are scattered across the easternmost portion of the slope.

In their respective habitat assessments, Dr. Osborne and Dr. Mattoni concurred that the plant community now present is incapable of supporting a colony of the butterfly. Most plants appear stressed, with poor leaf development and a sparse open structure that is not as robust and full as the dozen healthy individuals present. The few that can be described as robust were observed to be small, less than three feet in circumference and height. On the adjacent DFSP, robust L. scoparius exhibit twice to three times the biomass and are at least four feet by four feet. By comparison, across the DFSP there were at least several hundred such robust individuals during 2004 and 2005. The CSS habitat on-site consists of small, scattered patches distributed along the slope with disturbed NNG and ornamental vegetation. Much of the slope is clearly not natural, but the result of earlier grading, an evaluation supported by the several asphalt drainage swales.

The southerly slope vegetation cover below the swale of the manufactured slope, about 700 feet long, is mostly iceplant with a few California sage and bush sunflower volunteers. A few L. scoparius seedlings are scattered on the slope. On the slope trending northwest and ending at Western Avenue, the lower portion is covered with an impenetrable cover of scrub acacia. The one area that even suggests quality vegetation, and includes the densest L. scoparius cluster, is on the top of the slope indicated as the “Survey Area” on Figure IV.C-5. The plant community includes stands of bush sunflower, corethrogyne, milkweed, California sage, and Palmer’s goldenbush with some iceplant. The other clusters are weak collections of mostly stressed L. scoparius.

In his report, Dr. Mattoni speculated that only under the most optimistic circumstance might an occasional wandering male stray into the Project site, and that it was even less likely that a gravid female would stray in and lay eggs. Dr. Mattoni observed that from the extensive work concerning the behavior and natural history of PVB at the DFSP, it has been well established that the butterflies are restricted to a few patches of dense foodplant in more protected sites. They rarely wander far. Females especially remain close to a “home” area, making very short flights to deposit eggs on favorable large plants. Males can sense barriers (fences, plant community borders) and hostile territory from which they shy away and return to the suitable site from which they wander. Males fly orders of magnitude times farther than females. Much of the DFSP has some L. scoparius cover. Yet the PVB has been found as established breeding colonies only on a few limited sites over the past dozen years of intense survey. Further, these colonies do not correlate with L. scoparius occurrence. There are dense stands of L. scoparius where the butterfly has never been seen, although, conversely, colonies only occur where dense foodplant stands are found. Dense robust foodplant clusters are a requirement for colony establishment, but L. scoparius density itself is not sufficient.

The closest known colony of PVB is at the “Barranca” site, located about 1,000 feet east of the Project site on the DFSP site. This Barranca colony was established by release of captive bred PVB in 2001. A dense foodplant stand, varying between 50 to 100 very robust L. scoparius, has persisted here since surveys started, with a stray male or two seen each year prior to the introduction of over 100 PVB. After the initial apparent success, the population has trended to decline.



In addition, on the open grassy fields on the southern portion of the Project site (the location of the former fire fighting training facility and abandoned baseball field), approximately 70 individual plants of L. scoparius, all small and apparently young (less than two years in age) were located. All of these plants appear to be less than 30 cm in height and all are found within an area of less than 500 square meters. From appearances, the site is regularly mowed for fire suppression. Dr. Mattoni concluded that this portion of the site, in its present state, cannot support the PVB even though the foodplant is present, and that the area could not be considered habitat by any known metric concerning PVB requirements. The area is completely isolated from PVB occupied habitat by a minimum distance of 0.5 mile. The intervening land is hostile to adult PVB and unlikely to support movement of the butterfly from its nearest known colony. The nearest known colony (Barranca on DFSP, discussed above) is itself extremely low and likely to extirpate at any time.

Astragalus trichopodus, the other PVB hostplant, was not observed at any location on the Project site. The remainder of the Project site is developed with the abandoned former Navy housing complex. This housing tract and the associated streets have been left unused for several years and have become overgrown with exotic weeds and landscape plants. No PVB hostplants appear in the context of this abandoned neighborhood.

To verify the absence or presence of PVB, the cut slope on the northern portion of the Project site and the open grassy fields on the southern portion of the site were surveyed during the 2006 flight season. However, no PVB individuals were observed on the Project site during the focused surveys. These results confirm the previous habitat assessments which concluded that the on-site habitat was not suitable to support the species. By contrast, significant numbers of PVB were observed on the adjacent DFSP site indicating that this was a prolific year for the species. The long duration of the flight season due to late rains also increased the opportunity to observe the species on the Project site. Thus, the negative flight survey confirms that notwithstanding the presence of host plant species, the PVB does not occur on the Project site.

Detailed reports on the PVB habitat assessments and survey are included in Appendices IV.C-4, IV.C-5, and IV.C-8 to this Draft EIR.

Wildlife Movement Corridors

The Project site is comprised primarily of developed areas and ornamental species and is surrounded by existing development, heavily traveled roadways, and highly disturbed areas. Though small, isolated areas in the northern portion of the Project site are comprised of NNG and CSS, the site is relatively isolated and does not appear to function as a corridor or connective habitat. The Project site is shown in relation to surrounding areas on Figure IV.C-7. Patches of discontinuous open space on the Project site were noted in various conditions, including natural ravines, graded open areas, and suburban parkland.



Avian Migratory Stopover

The Project site lacks high quality native habitat(s) that might normally function as suitable stopover or foraging habitat for migratory bird species. This condition notwithstanding, relictual habitat in the South Bay and Los Angeles basin generally can be considered as marginally suitable stopover habitat for birds migrating through coastal regions of the Pacific Flyway.

Jurisdictional Waters

Historical aerial photographs from the Spence Air Photo Collection, UCLA, and Whittier College were obtained and reviewed as part of the analysis of the drainage channel, located within the southern portion of the Project site. Review of these photographs indicates that the site has undergone development on both sides of the drainage, which runs through the property, since at least 1947. Figure IV.C-8 presents a 1947 aerial photograph of the Project site that shows the drainage in a relatively natural condition. Examination of a 1965 aerial photograph, shown in Figure IV.C-9, shows the presence of the Naval housing complex constructed on the Project site in the early 1960s. This photograph also provides evidence that the drainage was channelized, possibly in conjunction with construction of the Naval housing, by 1965.

Soil Conditions

Surface soils within the Project site have been graded and filled through past development. Research into the history of the site indicated that the grading activity was the result of the construction of the Navy housing facility and former fire fighting training facility. Only one land feature, the drainage crossing the southern portion of the Project site, was found to have the potential to support hydric soil conditions. Indicators of hydric soil conditions included aquatic moisture regimes (inundated >7 days and/or saturated >15 days) and low chroma soils with redoximorphic features found in low-lying areas along the drainage (see Appendix IV.C-6 to this Draft EIR for more detail). The remainder of the Project site has been graded and engineered for positive drainage in order to avoid ponded or flooded conditions. Examination of side cuts within the drainage revealed that the soils within the area were well drained clay loams to sandy loams. Surrounding areas to the north consist of the abandoned residential yards and to the south, a graded building pad that slopes west to east. This area was graded in order to construct the former fire fighting training facility, shown in the historic photograph presented in Figure IV.C-9. No hydric soil indicators were found on the Project site either north or south of the drainage.



Slip page for Figure IV.C-7, Biogeographic Aerial



Slip page for Figure IV.C-8, Historic Aerial of the Project Site Drainage (1947)



Slip page for Figure IV.C-9, Historic Aerial of the Project Site Drainage (1965)



Hydrology Conditions

Wetland hydrology conditions on the Project site are limited to the drainage located in the southern portion of the site. The drainage is a constructed storm drain channel approximately 940 feet in length and 0.61 acre in extent. It receives flows from the Los Angeles County Flood Control stormwater drainage system designated as PD180. The channel emerges from a subterranean culvert under Western Avenue, flows through the Project site, and then reenters a subterranean culvert at the southern end of the property. The drainage has several banks. The highest appears to be the constructed top bank. No evidence of historic flows was found at this point. Descending approximately halfway from the top, an intermediate bank was found. Here evidence of past flows was noticeable due to erosion scars on the side of the bank and scoured places around the bases of trees and large shrubs. Below this was a channel bank or shelf that had obviously been scoured by flooding events in the recent past. These indicators included leaves with sediment on them, sediment on the bases of tree trunks, and cans and other debris with encrusted sediment. The top of this bank or shelf was determined to be the OHW. The average width of the OHW was five feet for the drainage channel. Below this point was a low flow channel that had flowing water in it. This channel, with the flowing water, averaged two to three feet wide along the length of the drainage (see Appendix IV.C-6 to this Draft EIR for more detail). No evidence of wetland hydrology conditions was found on the site other than within the drainage.

Vegetation Conditions

Plants associated with the yard areas within the abandoned Navy housing area north of the drainage consist of ornamental shrubs and trees and non-native grasses. Dominant ornamental shrub and tree species are also present on the banks of the drainage. These include Brazilian pepper tree, Mexican fan palm, Moreton Bay fig and Shamel ash. Patches of Arroyo willow are also present in this area, the only native shrub found within the drainage. Arroyo willow is listed by the NWI as a FACW species. The banks below OHW were relatively devoid of herbaceous vegetation (see Appendix IV.C-6 to this Draft EIR for more detail).

Areas Potentially Regulated by the Corps

Aquatic resources on the Project site were examined with respect to all applicable discretionary and non-discretionary exemptions from CWA regulations. No areas within the Project site that meet the criteria for the discretionary and/or non-discretionary exemptions were identified. On the basis of the methods and criteria for delineating wetlands and other waters of the United States, as defined in the Corps’ 1987 Manual, and Corps guidance documents and regulations, it was determined that habitat meeting these criteria occurs on the Project site; specifically along the drainage receiving stormwater runoff from the upstream Los Angeles County Flood Control drainage system designated as PD180 on the west side of Western Avenue. Using the NWI classification system, the habitat would be classified as Excavated Riverine Forested Habitat. No wetlands are located on the Project site. Figure IV.C-10 shows the location of the identified habitat on the Project site (see Appendix IV.C-6 to this Draft EIR for more detail).



Slip page for Figure IV.C-10, Delineation Map



ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Thresholds of Significance

In accordance with Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines, the Project would have a significant impact on biological resources if it would:

(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;

(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;

(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or

(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Project Details and Permitting Requirements

The Project would redevelop 100 percent, or 61.5 acres, of the site. Aspects of the Project have the potential to adversely affect resources protected and regulated by State and federal agencies. Site preparation for the Project would generally involve conventional cut and fill grading techniques. Site grading would be required to prepare the proposed building pads for construction. Grading would also be required in order to construct the proposed roads, parking areas, and drainage improvements, and to install utilities. The combined grading operations would affect the entire site and would involve a total earthwork quantity of approximately 1,470,000 cubic yards (cy). No fill material would be imported to or exported from the Project site. However, the removal of debris resulting from the demolition of existing structures on the Project site would be required. As described previously, the portion of the Project site that has been developed with the former Navy housing and retail structures does not contain any biological resources of import. Thus, redevelopment of this central section of the Project site would not result in any significant adverse impacts to biological resources.



The existing slope along the northeastern boundary of the Project site has been previously cut and graded, but does not meet City of Los Angeles grading standards. Therefore, it is expected that the slope would be required to be modified in order to comply with those standards. Although this would involve the clearance of existing vegetation on the slope, the applicant proposes to fully vegetate the re-engineered slope with a variety of native plant and tree species including CSS community species (see Mitigation Measure C-2, below). Dominant species would include California sagebrush, deerweed, California Buckwheat, milkvetch, and coast goldenbush (a more detailed plant palette would be included in the CSS restoration plan discussed in Mitigation Measure C-2). When revegetation of this slope area is completed, it is expected that the available habitat for such sensitive species as CAGN would be substantially improved and increased over existing marginally suitable conditions. However, as the entire area would be re-graded during site preparation work and existing vegetation removed, the potential exists for temporary adverse impacts to existing CAGN habitat to occur.

In addition, as part of Project construction, it is proposed that the existing drainage channel be covered to provide area for the proposed community park and potential little league baseball field portion of the Project.

Vegetation within the anticipated limits of grading would be removed as part of recontouring of the Project site to accommodate the proposed approach to development. However, the majority of the site consists of developed/disturbed or ruderal habitat. A smaller portion of the site consists of low- to marginal-quality disturbed NNG, small patches of disturbed CSS, and various ornamentals. Due to the historical use of the Project site, these vegetation communities are highly disturbed from the repetitive human alterations that have occurred over time. Isolated pockets of disturbed CSS and disturbed NNG (where CAGN were observed) could also be affected by proposed development. Approximately 0.61 acres of jurisdictional waters that occur within the storm drain channel could also be affected by proposed development. Common, urban-adapted terrestrial species known to be present or believed to be present on the Project site, such as western fence lizard, side blotch lizard, deermouse or other white-footed mice, skunk, coyote, western toad, or Pacific chorus frog would likely be eliminated from the Project site with Project implementation.

The Project applicant will obtain all required permits and authorizations for Project activities from a variety of State and federal resource agencies under the CWA, FESA/CESA, and other laws. This Draft EIR identifies feasible mitigation measures to mitigate potential adverse impacts on biological resources, and is also intended to fulfill potential environmental review functions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in connection with any federal resource permits that may be necessary for the Project. This Draft EIR will be forwarded to resource agencies with potential jurisdiction, such as the CDFG (with respect to covering the drainage channel and the CAGN), USFWS (with respect to covering the drainage channel and the CAGN), the Corps (with respect to covering the drainage channel), and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB, with respect to covering the drainage channel) for their review and comment. Most of the State and federal permitting processes with respect to the Project will not likely be completed until after the Final EIR is prepared and certified.



On April 4, 2006, the Project applicant submitted a notification of proposed streambed alteration and supporting materials to the CDFG pertaining to the applicant’s proposal to underground the on-site drainage channel in the proposed park area. On August 3, 2006, CDFG issued a determination that undergrounding the drainage channel would potentially impact 1.45 acres of CDFG jurisdictional area. CDFG further determined that the potential impacts of covering the riparian habitat associated with the drainage channel and streambed area would be mitigated by funding the off-site restoration of 3.48 acres of habitat restoration within the Portuguese Bend Nature Preserve, including two acres of riparian habitat restoration at the Klondike Canyon stream and 1.48 acres of CSS habitat restoration adjacent to Klondike Canyon. Pursuant to the CDFG’s determination, the Project applicant and CDFG will enter into a streambed alteration agreement to require the implementation of the foregoing mitigation required by CDFG (see Mitigation Measure C-4, below). In addition, as highlighted below in Mitigation Measure C-5, the Project applicant will be required to submit evidence of securing any necessary State or federal agency permits prior to issuance of any grading or building permits, and will be required to comply with those permits.

Project Impacts

The impacts of the Project on biological resources are grouped below into major categories of impacts. The actual impact and its anticipated location on the Project site (e.g., northern cut slope, developed area, southern field area) is described in detail within each major category below.

Special-Status Species

No known populations of special-status plant species have been reported at the Project site or were encountered in systematic surveys conducted in the spring, summer, and fall of 2005, and no populations are suspected to occur on the Project site. This is due to the disturbed and developed nature of the site, which has resulted in unsuitable support habitat for the previously noted sensitive plant species. The surveys were conducted in accordance with the survey guidelines of the CDFG and CNPS, and no additional field surveys are considered necessary. Therefore, impacts to sensitive plant species resulting from implementation of the Project would be less than significant.

During protocol surveys conducted in 2005, two CAGN were observed on September 10 and two CAGN were observed on September 24. On both occasions, the CAGN were sighted in the disturbed NNG/Ornamental/CSS habitat on the cut-slope adjacent to the northerly property line. Re-engineering of this slope would remove the existing disturbed CSS vegetation. Though CAGN have been sighted in this area, the disturbed CSS does not represent high value for the CAGN, due to the species composition, and the large component of NNG and invasive ornamentals displacing the small patches of CSS. Although site preparation work would involve the temporary removal of existing vegetation on the slope, the Project applicant proposes to revegetate the re-engineered slope with CSS appropriate to the site, including PVB hostplants deerweed and milkvetch, and species favored by the CAGN including California sagebrush. Upon successful revegetation of this slope, the existing vegetation, which is marginally suitable for CAGN and is not occupied by PVB, would be replaced with more extensive and higher functioning CSS habitat for both CAGN and PVB, at an approximately 28 to 1 ratio of restored CSS habitat (2.5 acres) to impacted CSS habitat (0.09-acre).



Additionally, in accordance with Mitigation Measures C-1 and C-2 below, consultation with the USFWS would be initiated.

As part of the development of the Project, the drainage channel would be covered. However, no State or federally threatened or endangered species were found to be present within the drainage channel area. Further, no sensitive species (federal or State species of concern) were detected. This lack of sensitive bird species and the general lack of species diversity and richness is attributed to the general conditions of the riparian habitat on-site and the location of the Project site. The degraded ecological value of the riparian area is primarily attributed to the high population of non-native species within the drainage. No further riparian bird surveys are considered to be necessary through 2006. As discussed above, CDFG has determined the mitigation to be required for the Project’s proposal to underground the drainage channel (which is subject to CDFG jurisdiction as a streambed), and a streambed alteration agreement requiring the implementation of such mitigation will be required. Therefore, impacts to sensitive riparian bird species resulting from implementation of the Project would be less than significant.

Although host plants for the PVB were documented on the Project site, the habitat quality was analyzed to be too low to support the species. Focused surveys conducted during the 2006 adult flight season confirmed that the species is not present on the Project site. Therefore, no direct impacts would occur to PVB from Project implementation.

Although no sensitive raptor or bird species were identified during field site visits, due to the proposed tree removal and construction in the vicinity of other trees, there remains a remote potential for construction to adversely affect active bird nests, including raptors and/or other migratory birds. Raptor or migratory bird nests in active use (generally between February 15 and August 31) are protected by both the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code. Removal of trees or vegetation with non-active nests is permitted outside the nesting season (generally between September 1 and February 14). However, if vegetation removal must occur during the nesting season, pre-construction surveys should be performed to confirm the presence or absence of any nests prior to the initiation of construction, which could be affected by grading and other construction activities, together with appropriate construction-related restrictions if new nests are encountered. With implementation of these timing restrictions or required surveys and resulting mitigation measures (included as Mitigation Measure C-3, below), impacts to raptors, other migratory birds, and other nesting birds resulting from implementation of the Project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Sensitive Natural Communities

The majority of the Project site is occupied by abandoned homes, and does not support riparian habitat. As discussed earlier, in the southern portion of the Project site, a drainage ditch enters the site from a subterranean culvert under Western Avenue and flows southeasterly until it exits the site through a subterranean culvert near the southern boundary of the site. The drainage ditch is lined on its northern side with concrete, and on its southern side with deteriorated asphalt. The drainage ditch is the remnant of a historical stream that was substantially modified between 1956 and 1965, during



which time it was concretized, widened, and realigned. The drainage ditch is currently in a neglected and dilapidated state. Due to this neglect, a tree canopy has developed, which is believed to be less than 30 years old. Trees that line the drainage ditch include the Mexican Fan Palm, a native of the desert areas of Southern California; Shamel Ash, a non-native, invasive species; and Arroyo Willow, a native riparian species. The Arroyo Willow population is not considered indicative of a sensitive riparian habitat because the man-made drainage ditch has been substantially invaded by Shamel Ash and remains in a disturbed, fragmented condition. With implementation of the Project, the entire 61.5-acre site would be developed, including covering the existing drainage channel. Because the channel does not contain any sensitive riparian plant communities, potential impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. In addition, CDFG has determined the mitigation to be required for the Project’s proposal to underground the drainage channel (which is subject to CDFG jurisdiction as a streambed), and a streambed alteration agreement requiring the implementation of such mitigation will be required.

NNG is not designated as a special-status community in the CNDDB. In the context of the Project site, which is largely surrounded by developed and disturbed areas, the NNG does not contribute substantially to habitat functions, and as such, the loss of the NNG would not be significant.

The Project proposes that all 330 criteria trees on the Project site (see Figures IV.C-3 and IV.C-4) be removed during site preparation work. All trees in the portion of the property that is presently developed with former Navy Housing would be removed as part of the Project or during on-going maintenance of the property.15 Trees along the northern cut slope area of the Project site would be removed during grading and site preparation in order to re-engineer the slope to meet applicable City standards. Trees along the existing storm drainage channel would be removed during the process of covering and re-engineering the channel. As part of the Project, a comprehensive landscaping program would be implemented. The comprehensive landscaping plan would increase the number of trees located at the Project site from the number that exists today. While mature trees would be removed as part of the Project, no oak trees (Quercus sp.), Southern California Black Walnut (Juglans californica var. californica), Western Sycamore (Platanus racemosa), or California Bay (Umbellularia californica) trees are present on the Project site (Protected Trees pursuant to City of Los Angeles Ordinance 177,404). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. See Appendix IV.C-1 to this Draft EIR for more detail.

Jurisdictional Waters

As discussed earlier, up to 0.61 acres of the existing storm drainage channel constitutes non-tidal other waters of the United States. Using the NWI classification system, this storm drain channel (which receives stormwater from the upstream Los Angeles County Flood Control stormwater drainage facility PD180 and from the existing development on the Project site) is also classified as an Excavated Riverine Forested Habitat. No wetlands were found at the Project site. A larger area of

15 The property was closed and vacated by the U.S. Navy in the late 1990’s, and the current owner is currently engaged in fire safety maintenance and excessive brush clearance.



the storm drain channel constitutes a streambed as classified by the CDFG. The riparian area is highly constrained in both floral and faunal diversity and has been subject to a high degree of human activity over many decades. Functional values of this system are considered low. No sensitive bird, animal, or plant species have been identified in this area. Covering these areas would result in the drainage channel being underground, but would not result in a significant adverse impact to sensitive bird, animal, or plant communities. As such, impacts would be less than significant. Notwithstanding the lack of potentially significant impacts to sensitive species, the Project applicant will be required to obtain permits for the activity from all responsible State and/or federal agencies (see Mitigation Measure C-5, below). Resource agencies with potential jurisdiction include the CDFG, RWQCB, USFWS, and the Corps. As discussed above, CDFG has reviewed the proposed undergrounding of the drainage channel and determined the mitigation to be required for the Project’s proposal to underground the drainage channel (which is subject to CDFG jurisdiction as a streambed), and a streambed alteration agreement requiring the implementation of such mitigation will be required (see Mitigation Measure C-4).

Wildlife Movement and Habitat Connectivity

The Project site is located in an urbanized area and is completely surrounded by industrial and residential development. As such, it is highly unlikely that the Project site is part of a movement corridor or habitat linkage system. Proposed development would alter existing wildlife habitat values of the Project site and opportunities for wildlife movement in the vicinity. Smaller resident mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and insects would be eliminated from the approximately 61.5-acre Project site by grading, and birds and larger mammals would be at least temporarily displaced as development plans are implemented. Species that are highly sensitive to human activity and disturbance, particularly predatory mammals and birds, would avoid the developed portion of the Project site even after construction.

The previously disturbed Project site contains no on-site waterways capable of supporting migratory fish. The closest native wildlife nursery to the Project site is located in the DFSP to the north, where CSS habitat has been restored for the PVB and CAGN. The Project would not impede the use of this site. Therefore, no substantial impediment to wildlife movement or gene flow could occur as a result of Project implementation. For all of these reasons, development of the Project would not interfere substantially with the movement of a native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species.

Conformance with City Policies and Ordinances Pertaining to Biological Resources

Proposed development on the Project site would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policies or ordinances. As described above, tree preservation ordinances in the City of Los Angeles are limited to the Protected Tree Ordinance (Ord. 177,404). There are no Protected Trees on the Project site. Thus, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.



Conformance with Adopted Habitat Conservation Plans

The previously disturbed Project site is zoned for residential use and is not located within an area covered by an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impact would occur to adopted conservation plans.

MITIGATION MEASURES

All of the following mitigation measures are required to reduce potential impacts on special-status species to a less-than-significant level. Subsequent permitting processes with resource agencies could result in additional mitigation beyond that required by the City in the CEQA process. Any additional mitigation required by these agencies would be incorporated as a condition of their permit authorization:

(C-1) Evidence that the applicant has secured any required authorization from the USFWS and CDFG, as required by federal and State law, to avoid, minimize, or offset impacts to any species listed under either the State or Federal Endangered Species Acts (CESA/FESA) or protected under any other State or federal law (the species of concern with respect to the Project is CAGN) shall be submitted to the City of Los Angeles prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project.

(C-2) To mitigate potential impacts to CAGN and small isolated pockets of CSS habitat on the north slope of the Project site (approximately 0.09 acres), the following measures are proposed:

• All vegetation clearing and grading activities within potential habitat for CAGN shall be monitored by a USFWS-approved biologist.

• All construction personnel scheduled to work within potential habitat for CAGN shall be trained in CAGN identification, habitat description, legal protective status, construction restrictions, and procedures to avoid incidental take of this species.

• Clearing of CSS habitat vegetation shall not be initiated in any given year until after September 15, and shall be completed before February 1, to avoid potential impacts to nesting CAGN. Vegetation clearing may be initiated prior to September 15 if a qualified biologist permitted to conduct surveys for CAGN has determined that CAGN are not nesting or that juveniles have fledged (left the nest) in the CSS habitat to be removed or in adjacent areas. Vegetation removal activities will not be initiated until a report is submitted to and approved by USFWS and CDFG documenting such survey results.

• Following completion of grading, the proposed open space lot (Lot 5) in the northern cut slope section of the Project site shall be revegetated with CSS



habitat appropriated to the site, using species collected from the vicinity of the site (e.g., San Pedro, Palos Verdes, etc.) to provide approximately 2.5 acres of CSS habitat. This increased and enhanced CSS habitat would include native shrubs such as California sagebrush, deerweed, California buckwheat, and coast goldenbush. Native bunch grasses would include purple needlegrass and coast range melic.

• A final mitigation plan implementing the foregoing measures shall be prepared by a qualified wildlife biologist and shall be submitted to the USFWS and CDFG for review and approval in accordance with USFWS and CDFG procedures.

(C-3) Potential impacts to nesting birds, migratory birds, and raptors shall be avoided either by scheduling grading, vegetation removal and demolition during the non-nesting period (August 30 through February 14), or if this is not feasible, by conducting a pre-construction survey for raptor nests. Provisions of the pre-construction survey and nest avoidance, if necessary, shall include the following:

• If grading or vegetation removal is scheduled during the active nesting period (February 15 through August 31), a qualified wildlife biologist shall conduct a pre-construction raptor and nesting bird survey no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading to provide confirmation on presence or absence of active nests in the vicinity.

• If active nests are encountered, species-specific measures shall be prepared by a qualified biologist in consultation with the CDFG and implemented to prevent abandonment of the active nest. At a minimum, grading in the vicinity of the nest shall be deferred until the young birds have fledged. A nest-setback zone of at least 300 feet for all raptors and 100 feet for loggerhead shrike and other non-raptors shall be established within which all construction-related disturbances shall be prohibited. The perimeter of the nest-setback zone shall be fenced or adequately demarcated with staked flagging at 20-foot intervals, and construction personnel restricted from the area.

• If permanent avoidance of the nest is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by prohibiting disturbance within the nest-setback zone until a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from the nest are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date.

• A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying that the young have fledged shall be submitted to the City of Los Angeles prior to initiation of grading in the nest-setback zone.



The following mitigation measure is required and would ensure that potential impacts to jurisdictional waters (drainage channel) located on the Project site are less than significant:

(C-4) Enter into a streambed alteration agreement (or other documentation satisfactory to the CDFG) to fund the restoration of 3.48 acres of habitat at Klondike Canyon at Portuguese Bend Preserve as provided in the CDFG’s determination of August 3, 2006 and supporting mitigation project description prepared by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (see Appendix IV.C-10 to this Draft EIR).

(C-5) Evidence that the applicant has secured any additional required authorization from the USFWS, RWQCB, and Army Corps of Engineers (if any), as required by federal and State law, relating to the proposed covering of the drainage channel shall be submitted to the City of Los Angeles prior to issuance of any grading or building permits for the Project.

The following mitigation measure is not necessary to mitigate any significant biological impact but is recommended as a condition of the Project:

(C-6) A master landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the Project in compliance with Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) Sections 12.40 through 12.43 shall be implemented. At a minimum, the landscape plan shall incorporate 330 24-inch box replacement trees (or 15-inch where appropriate as to tree root structure of the replacement tree) as a 1:1 replacement of the 330 trees to be removed.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

The characteristics of both the Project site and surrounding vicinity are dominated by disturbed vegetation and existing development. The Project site itself has been developed with urban uses and is also located in an urbanized area completely surrounded by military, residential and nearby commercial and industrial development. As such, it is highly unlikely that development of the Project site in conjunction with development of the related projects would have a negative cumulative effect on biological resources within the surrounding Project area. Isolated pockets of CSS and NNG, where two CAGN were observed on one survey date and two CAGN were observed on a separate survey date, would be impacted by the Project. The applicant proposes to fully revegetate the re-engineered slope with a variety of native plant and tree species including CSS community species, increasing the amount of CSS habitat on the north slope of the Project site by nearly 28 times, to approximately 2.5 acres. Dominant species would include California sagebrush, deerweed, California Buckwheat, milkvetch, and coast goldenbush (a more detailed plant palette would be included in the CSS restoration plan discussed in Mitigation Measure C-2). When revegetation of this slope area is completed, it is expected that the available habitat for CAGN and potential habitat for PVB would be substantially improved over existing conditions. The existing marginal habitat occurs in disturbed, isolated patches and does not form a healthy contiguous population with other adjacent communities. The closest native wildlife nursery to the Project site is located in the DFSP to the north, where CSS habitat has been restored for the PVB and CAGN. Although the 0.61-acre



storm drain that runs through the southern portion of the site would be covered, these waters do not form a linkage for any surrounding migratory fish or other wildlife. Therefore, implementation of the Project in conjunction with the related projects would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts on biological resources.

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION

With implementation of the mitigation measures described above, Project-specific impacts to biological resources would be less than significant.

iv. environmental impact analysis c. biological … · environmental impact analysis c. biological...

Documents