Draft Initial Study Vegetation Management Plan Project

Auburn, California

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District

October 2018

DRAFT

Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Prepared for: Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District 471 Maidu Drive #200 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Kahl Muscott Tel: 530-537-2186

Prepared by:

853 Lincoln Way, Suite #208 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Markus Lang Tel: 530.863.4643

OCTOBER 2018

Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section

1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Project Overview ...... 1 1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ...... 1 1.3 Project Planning Setting ...... 1 1.4 Public Review Process ...... 1 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 4 2.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...... 4 2.2 Environmental Determination ...... 4 3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ...... 9 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 10 3.1 Aesthetics ...... 33 3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources...... 38 3.3 Air Quality ...... 40 3.4 Biological Resources ...... 45 3.5 Cultural Resources ...... 57 3.6 Geology and Soils ...... 61 3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 64 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 67 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 71 3.10 Land Use and Planning ...... 75 3.11 Mineral Resources ...... 76 3.12 Noise ...... 77 3.13 Population and Housing ...... 80 3.14 Public Services ...... 81 3.15 Recreation ...... 82 3.16 Transportation and Traffic ...... 84 3.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ...... 86 3.18 Utilities and Service Systems...... 88 3.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...... 91 4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS ...... 93 4.1 References Cited ...... 93 4.2 List of Preparers ...... 94

9798 i October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

FIGURES

Figure 1 Regional Map ...... 2 Figure 2 Vicinity Map ...... 3 Figure 3-1 Project Site Map – Ashford Park ...... 12 Figure 3-2 Project Site Map – Atwood Ranch Open Space ...... 13 Figure 3-3 Project Site Map – Meadow Vista Park ...... 14 Figure 3-4 Project Site Map – Placer Hills Park...... 15 Figure 3-5 Project Site Map – Regional Park ...... 16 Figure 4-1 Project Access – Ashford Park ...... 22 Figure 4-2 Project Access – Atwood Ranch Open Space...... 23 Figure 4-3 Project Access – Meadow Vista Park ...... 24 Figure 4-4 Project Access – Placer Hills Park ...... 25 Figure 4-5 Project Access – Regional Park ...... 26

TABLES

Table 3-1 Treatment Site Locations ...... 10 Table 3-2 Schedule of Treatments ...... 27 Table 3.3-1 Placer County APCD Thresholds ...... 42 Table 3.3-2 Air Pollutant Emissions During Operation...... 42

APPENDICES

A Vegetation Management Plan B Air Quality Modeling C Biological Resources Assessment

9798 ii October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 iii October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Overview The Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan (Proposed Project, Vegetation Management Plan) would set procedures for maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five public spaces (treatment sites) maintained by the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District (ARD).

1.2 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance This Initial Study has been prepared per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000, et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).

1.3 Project Planning Setting The Proposed Project is located on five ARD-owned or leased properties within the City of Auburn and within the communities of North Auburn and Meadow Vista in unincorporated Placer County, California. Refer to Figures 1 and 2.

1.4 Public Review Process The Initial Study and the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration will be circulated for public review for a period of 30 days, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073(a). ARD will provide public notice at the beginning of the public review period.

This draft Initial Study is being routed to State agencies through the Office of Planning and Research under a Notice of Completion. ARD has posted a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration on ARD’s website, posted it onsite, and published the Notice of Intent in the Auburn Journal, a newspaper of general circulation, and has provided the Notice of Intent to the County Clerk’s office and via direct mailings and emails to other stakeholders, local agencies, and other parties that have expressed interest in the proposed project.

After the document has been noticed and made publicly available for 30 days ARD will consider all comments received, revise the Initial Study as necessary, and schedule the project and this Initial Study for consideration by the ARD Board. The scheduled Board hearing will be publicly noticed prior to the public hearing. The Board will accept any written and oral comments at the hearing and make a decision on the project.

Written comments or questions may be addressed to Kahl Muscott, District Administrator, Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District, 471 Maidu Drive #200, Auburn, California 95603.

9798 1 October 2018 Sierra County

191 Durham 149 89

162

Oroville Yuba County Oroville Sierra County East South Thermalito Oroville Challenge- S Brownsville Ne 70 Palermo

Loma Nevada County utte County Rica Placer County utter County

Grass 20 Valley 99 174

Yuba Alta City Linda Beale Sierra AFB

Nevada County Placer County Meadow Foresthill El Dorado County Vista Project Location 80 65 North Auburn Lincoln Auburn 193 45

Loomis Rocklin 113 Sutter 49 Pollock Roseville County Placer County 50 Pines Sacramento County Placerville Citrus Cameron Rio Orangevale El Dorado Park Heights Shingle Woodland Linda North Folsom Hills Highlands El Dorado County Springs Fair Oaks Carmichael Arden- Rancho 5 80 Arcade Cordova El Dorado County West Davis Sacramento Mather Sacramento Rosemont AFB Amador County Parkway- Rancho South Sacramento Murieta 16

Florin Sacramento County

Amador County

88 Laguna Wilton Elk 124 84 160 Grove Ione 104 26

Sacramento Cou Yolo County Solano County Amador County Calaveras Sacramento County 4 County 015 0 Galt Arnold Miles San Joaquin County n C S nty SOURCE: ESRI FIGURE 1 Regional Map

Vegetation Management Plan Date: 2/1/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-1_Regional.mxd Path: - rstrobridge by: saved - Last 2/1/2017 Date: Placer Hills Park

Meadow Vista Park

49 Regional Park

80

Atwood Ranch Open Space

Ashford Park

0 2,000 4,000 Project Locations Feet

SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Maps - Auburn Quadrangle FIGURE 2 Vicinity Map

Vegetation Management Plan Date: 2/1/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-2_Vicinity.mxd Path: - rstrobridge by: saved - Last 2/1/2017 Date: Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 2.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected

This Initial Study analyzes the environmental impacts of the Proposed Project consistent with the format and analysis prompts provided in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The analysis determined that the project could have potentially significant impacts to the following resource categories: Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources. The analysis determined that all potentially significant impacts would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures to avoid or minimize the impacts identified. Detailed analyses of impacts are provided under each resource section evaluated by this Initial Study.

2.2 Environmental Determination

The lead agency finds that the Initial Study identifies potentially significant impacts, but that implementing the mitigation measures identified in Table 2-1 would avoid or minimize the impacts such that they would be less than significant. The Proposed Project would result in no impacts that would remain significant following implementation of mitigation measures. All mitigation measures are identified in Table 2-1, below.

Table 2-1 Mitigation Measures Number Mitigation Measure BIO.1 (Regional Park site) Prior to vegetation management activities conducted at the Regional Park site, a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) will evaluate the proposed work area to identify areas with dense vegetation that do not provide suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frog and delineate these areas on a large-scale map to be used by work crews. In areas that do not provide suitable habitat, no pre-construction surveys for foothill yellow-legged frog are required and crews can conduct vegetation removal down to the water’s edge. In the remaining stream reaches (not mapped as dense vegetation) that are identified as potentially suitable habitat for foothill yellow- legged frog (sparse margin vegetation and a relatively open canopy, and/or rocky substrates along the banks), pre-construction surveys shall be carried out by a qualified biologist immediately prior to vegetation management activities. Surveys shall be carried out by the Designated Biologist in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW and according to survey protocols reviewed and approved by CDFW. No disturbance activities shall occur until the biologist has determined that no foothill yellow-legged frog adults, juveniles, tadpoles, or egg- masses are within the proposed work area.

BIO.2 (Regional Park site) To avoid impacts to foothill yellow-legged frog juveniles and adults and potentially egg masses and tadpoles if present, work at the Regional Park site shall be conducted from outside of the wetted channel to the greatest extent possible and any vegetation maintenance work that must

9798 4 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

occur within the channel shall be conducted during the fall (September/October) after metamorphosis is complete and to reduce potential impacts to eggs or tadpoles.

BIO.3 (Regional Park site) To protect sensitive habitats and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW, herbicides shall not be used at the Regional Park site unless prior written authorization is obtained from CDFW.

BIO.4 For the protection of western pond turtle, if potentially suitable habitat for this species occurs within a treatment area a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) shall conduct a survey for turtles or potential turtle nests prior to vegetation management activities. If a potential pond turtle nest is identified, CDFW shall be notified and the nest shall be flagged for complete avoidance until the Designated Biologist determines that the eggs have hatched and the turtles have vacated the nest and no turtles are observed within the proposed work area. Potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle occurs within all proposed treatment areas except for the proposed treatment area within Ashford Park.

BIO.5 Prior to vegetation management activities that occur in areas where tree roosting bat species (e.g., Lasiurus cinereus, Lasiurus blossevillii) could occur, a roosting bat survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) to determine if any maternity colonies or overwintering roosts are present within or adjacent to the project area. Should an active maternity or overwintering roost be detected during surveys, the roost shall be avoided until bats have left the roost. Should project activities be necessary near an active roost site, consultation with CDFW shall be conducted to determine if there is an appropriate strategy to avoid impacts to roosting bats. Project activities near an active roost shall not occur unless CDFW provides written authorization.

BIO.6 To the extent possible and to ensure that active nests are not disturbed, vegetation management activities should be conducted between September 1 and January 31, which is outside of the bird nesting season.

For any project activities during the nesting season, which occurs from February 1 to August 31, a nesting bird survey shall be completed by a qualified biologist no more than three (3) days prior to starting work to determine if any native birds are nesting on or near the site (including a 300-foot buffer for raptors). If any active nests are observed during surveys, a suitable non-disturbance buffer from the nests shall be determined and flagged. The size of the non-disturbance buffer and any other restrictions shall be determined based upon the life history of the individual species, including their sensitivity to noise, vibration, ambient levels of human activity and general disturbance, the current site conditions (screening vegetation, terrain, etc.) and the various project-related activities necessary to implement the project. Any nest shall be avoided until it is no longer active. If a lapse in project- related work of 15 days or longer occurs, another survey shall be required before project work can be reinitiated. If, during the course of carrying out the project, an active nest is identified or becomes established that was not previously identified, a buffer or installation of appropriate barriers shall be established between the construction activities and the active nest so that nesting activities are not interrupted. The buffer shall be flagged by the qualified biologist and shall be in effect throughout vegetation management activities or until the young have fledged.

BIO.7 All work shall be carried out in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement entered into with CDFW for routine maintenance of the treatment areas. This may include

9798 5 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

some or all of the following avoidance and minimization measures summarized below:

 Worker education and awareness program to ensure that all personnel performing work on the project site employ protective measures for biological resources that may be encountered within work areas.

 Allow any wildlife encountered to leave the construction area unharmed.

 Project activities shall be conducted to prevent the spread of invasive species from one project to another by employing best management practices and guidelines and performing appropriate decontamination procedures for equipment.

 Prior to conducting any work the boundaries of the treatment area shall be clearly identified to ensure that no impacts or disturbance occurs outside of the approved treatment areas.

 Herbicides shall be applied by a qualified applicator in accordance with product labeling and shall not be used if labeling states that the product is toxic to fish or amphibians, or if the material datasheet states that the product LD50 is less than or equal to 1 mg/L or 1 ppm. Herbicides shall not be allowed to enter the watercourse within any treatment area.

 Cleared material shall be removed from the watercourse and placed in an area where it will not re-enter the watercourse during high flows. All temporary flagging, fencing or other materials used during construction shall be removed after treatment activities are completed.

 Vehicles may enter and exit the work area as necessary for project activities, but may not be parked overnight within ten (10) feet of the drip line of any trees within the work area. All equipment and vehicles shall be maintained to prevent leaks and shall not be stored or parked in areas where fluid leaks could enter waterways. Drip pans and spill containment shall be provided per the terms of the Streambed Alteration Agreement. Fueling and maintenance shall not be conducted within or near the creek.

 No trees over four inches in diameter at breast height shall be removed from the treatment areas without prior written approval from CDFW. A minimum of three trees of the same or similar species shall be planted for each native tree removed that is four inches in diameter or greater. Trees shall be planted in a location approved by CDFW and monitored for a minimum of five years. Replacement trees shall be planted and monitored for any planted tree that dies.

 Monitoring and reporting of permit compliance shall be carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW.

CUL.1 All vegetation removal activities within 100 feet of sites ARD-BB-S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1 shall be limited to above-ground only; no below ground removal, such as removal of stumps or roots, shall occur within this area. The limits of the restricted treatment area shall be determined by a qualified archaeologist.

9798 6 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

CUL.2 Should archaeological material, features, or soils affected by anthropogenic processes (i.e., dark midden-like soils or constituents) or paleontological material be encountered during construction, all earth-disturbing work shall be immediately halted in the area and a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist shall be retained for evaluation of the discovery. Should human remains be discovered, work shall be halted in that area and procedures set forth in the California Public Resources Code (Section 5097.98) and State Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) will be followed, beginning with notification of the City and County Coroner. If Native American remains are present, the County Coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission to designate a Most Likely Descendent, who will arrange for the dignified disposition and treatment of the remains.

9798 7 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 8 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

Project title:

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Lead agency name and address:

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District 471 Maidu Drive #200 Auburn, California 95603

Contact person and phone number:

Contact: Kahl Muscott, District Administrator, Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Phone: 530-537-2186

Project sponsor’s name and address:

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District 471 Maidu Drive #200 Auburn, California 95603

General plan designation and zoning:

Site Land Use Designation Zoning Ashford Park Open Space and OSC Conservation

Atwood Ranch Open Open Space O-AO Space Preserve

Regional Park Open Space O-AO

Meadow Vista Park Open Space O

Placer Hills Park Public Facility RS-AG-B-40

9798 9 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

INTRODUCTION

The Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan (Proposed Project, Vegetation Management Plan)(Appendix A) would set procedures for maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five public spaces operated and managed by ARD (Figures 1 and 2). The Proposed Project would be implemented in five defined treatment sites within riparian and upland areas within and immediately adjacent to improved and unimproved drainage channels and a pond in five ARD facilities: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park (Figures 3-1 through 3-5).

The Vegetation Management Plan describes the location, size, and biological and hydrological characteristics of each of the treatment sites, provides guidance to ARD staff for identifying priority areas for vegetation management within these treatment sites, and sets a standardized approach and procedures for conducting ongoing management activities. The Plan also outlines the anticipated schedule and timing for the proposed routine maintenance activities, the types of tools and methodology that would be used to implement management activities, and proposed access points for each of the treatment areas. Implementation of the Proposed Project would occur over a term of five years or more in accordance with the terms of a Streambed Alteration Agreement for routine maintenance between ARD and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). This period could be extended for an additional five years if authorized by CDFW prior to expiration of the initial 5-year term. An adaptive management approach would be used to evaluate and adjust management prescriptions within each of the five treatment sites.

PROJECT LOCATION

The location of each of the treatment sites that would be subject to the Vegetation Management Plan is provided in Table 3-1, below. Table 3-1 Treatment Site Locations

Other Location Information (Section, Township (T), Range Project Site General Location Geographic Coordinates* (R)) Ashford Park 1601 Auburn Ravine Road 38.919361, -121.063888 Section 3, T12 North, R8 East City of Auburn

9798 10 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Atwood Ranch Open Space Atwood Road 38.934093, -121.108282 Section 32, T13 North, R8 East Preserve North Auburn Area, unincorporated Placer County Meadow Vista Park 1101 Meadow Vista Drive 38.993388, -121.024576 Section 12, T13 North, R8 East Meadow Vista, unincorporated Placer County Placer Hills Park 1130 Meadow Lane, 38.998719, -121.024815 Section 1, T13 North, R8 East Meadow Vista, unincorporated Placer County Regional Park 3770 Richardson Drive, 38.952994, -121.105482 Section 29, T13 North, R8 East North Auburn Area, unincorporated Placer County Note: * Decimal degrees

DESCRIPTION OF SITES WITHIN THE PLAN AREA

The Plan area varies in elevation from approximately 1,380 feet at Atwood Open Space Preserve to 1,722 feet at Meadow Vista Park. The treatment sites generally drain toward the Bear River. A more detailed description of each site is given below.

Ashford Park

Ashford Park is located in the City of Auburn and is bounded by Auburn Ravine Road at its north and west ends (see Figure 3-1). A commercial/light industrial area abuts the park on the east and residential areas exist to the north and west. The south boundary of the park is approximately 200 feet northwest of Interstate 80 and approximately 100 feet northwest of the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The park includes manicured grass fields used as a dog park and for general recreation, a pond, restrooms, parking and various other recreation amenities. The portion of the park subject to the Vegetation Management Plan encompasses the stream channel that runs parallel to Auburn Ravine Road along the northwest boundary of the park, which contains a mature riparian corridor with a canopy dominated by valley oak (Quercus lobata) and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), as well as the outlet channel of the pond, which is tributary to the stream channel to the north (Figure 3-1). This area is bounded on the north by Auburn Ravine Road, which is classified as a scenic route in the City of Auburn General Plan for the aesthetic value of the riparian area adjacent to the roadway, and on the south by a grass field in the park. The subject riparian corridor is associated with a stream/ditch known as Boardman Canal and Auburn Ravine Creek. This proposed treatment area is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn

9798 11 October 2018 n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-1 Project Site Map - Ashford Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-2 Project Site Map - Atwood Ranch Open Space

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-3 Project Site Map - Meadow Vista Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-4 Project Site Map - Placer Hills Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 250 500 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-5 Project Site Map - Regional Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Ravine Subwatershed. Water continues southwest in Boardman Canal/Auburn Ravine Creek to eventually flow into Roseville Reservoir far to the south of the project site.

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve

The Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is within the North Auburn area of Placer County and is bounded by Atwood Road to the north, Vaquero Vista Drive to the east, Richardson Drive to the south, and a residential area along Caballo Circle to the west (see Figure 3-2). The park is surrounded by residential areas to the east, south, and west. The Placer County Auburn Main Jail, Placer County Sheriff’s Office, and Placer County Probation Juvenile Detention Facility are north of the park across Atwood Road. The park includes a large pond, a trail, and trees and shrubs intermixed with grass areas. The area that would be subject to the treatments identified by the proposed Vegetation Management Plan includes the pond and the wetland area along the outlet of the pond to the south. The pond is ringed by a dense growth of cattail (Typha latifolia). Trees planted along the margins of the pond just upslope of the cattail include Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), shining willow (Salix lasiandra), valley oak, and boxelder (Acer negundo). The freshwater emergent wetland at the outlet to the pond is dominated by cattail and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya). Water flows from the wetland area southwest along two vegetated swales with grassland vegetation. Scattered coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), Fremont cottonwood, valley oak, and shining willow occur along these swales. The treatment area is bounded on the north by Atwood Road, and on the east, south, and west by residential development. This treatment area is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed.

Meadow Vista Park

Meadow Vista Park is located in the community of Meadow Vista and is bounded by Meadow Vista Road to the north, Placer Hills Road to the east, the Sierra Hills Elementary School campus to the south, and Pumpkin Seed Lane to the west (Figure 3-3). Surrounding uses include the Meadow Vista Tree Farm west of the park, Sierra Hills Elementary School to the south, a trailer court across Placer Hills Road to the east, and residential and commercial areas to the north. The park consists of a large grass field surrounded by trees, a pond and walking paths, tennis courts, and a baseball field. The proposed Vegetation Management Plan would apply to the riparian corridor within Meadow Vista Park, which is associated with an unnamed stream that flows from south to north through the proposed treatment area and is tributary to Wooley Creek. Wooley Creek flows into Lake Combie northwest of the project site. The unnamed waterway within the treatment area supports a mature riparian corridor dominated by white alder, Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra var. lasiandra), valley oak, shining willow, narrowleaf willow (Salix exigua), Fremont cottonwood, and black oak (Quercus kelloggii). The understory is dominated by

9798 17 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Himalayan blackberry brambles. The treatment area is bounded on the east by restoration plantings and the walking path area and on the west by the pond. Rural residential uses are located to the south and commercial development is to the north. This treatment area is within the Magnolia Creek – Bear River Subwatershed.

Placer Hills Park

Placer Hills Park is located in the community of Meadow Vista. Residential and commercial areas exist to the north and east, Candlerock Lane abuts the park on the west, and Placer Hills Union School District buildings are located south of the park. The park includes lawn areas and the Placer Hills Pool complex. The area subject to the proposed Vegetation Management Plan includes a narrow riparian corridor associated with an unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek that runs along the western edge of the park area north of Meadow Lane as well as a secondary swale that runs along the northern and western edge of this area (see Figure 3-4). The tree canopy within the riparian corridor along Candlerock Lane is dominated by white alder and shining willow. The understory is comprised of dense Himalayan blackberry brambles. The small, vegetated secondary swale that runs along the north and east edges of the park appears to channel runoff from the adjacent hills into the stream channel associated with the unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek. The treatment area is bounded on the north, east and west by rural residential development and by a school and Meadow Lane to the south.

Regional Park

Regional Park is a large park located in the City of Auburn and is bordered by Richardson Drive/Quartz Drive to the west, Park Drive to the south, Dry Creek Road to the north, and a large residential area to the east. The park consists of several lawn areas, and includes various sports and recreational facilities (tennis, pickle ball, volleyball, and basketball courts, disc golf course, two baseball fields, and trails) and a large pond. The area subject to treatments prescribed by the proposed Vegetation Management Plan includes the Rock Creek riparian corridor, which runs south to north along the eastern park boundary. Habitat within this area includes mixed oak woodland and the riparian corridor along Rock Creek. The mixed oak woodland is dominated by blue oaks (Quercus douglasii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and valley oak. The understory in the mixed oak woodland habitat type is mowed by ARD staff as part of regular maintenance. This treatment site is bounded on the west by manicured grass fields and the pond in Regional Park, and by residential development to the north, east, and south. The subject riparian corridor is relatively open at the northern end of the project site, with shining willow and oak trees dominating the canopy. Rock Creek is within the Orr Creek Subwatershed. This stream appears to converge with Orr Creek north of the project site. Orr Creek is tributary to Bear River.

9798 18 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Proposed Project aims to reduce challenges to park visitor safety that have resulted from the densely vegetated riparian areas present on the project site being used for unauthorized camping and other unauthorized activities that result in litter and law enforcement issues. Along with increased visitor safety, the plan seeks to reduce accumulation of litter and other debris and address invasive exotic weed species, water quality, and access in these areas. The primary objectives of the Proposed Project include:

 Thin vegetation to reduce vegetative screening and improve security and access,  Deter the spread of invasive weedy plant species, and  Discourage unauthorized camping and other activities occurring within dense vegetation.

The proposed Vegetation Management Plan sets forth the following goals:

Goal Description

Goal 1. Identify Priority Treatment Areas for Riparian Prioritizing areas for vegetation management would Vegetation Management Activities and Target Invasive allow ARD to focus staff, funding, and equipment on Weed Species areas where safety, access, and invasive weed management issues are most significant. To this effect, the Plan provides guidelines for assessing and prioritizing areas for vegetation management by identifying the five public spaces that would be subject to the management plan: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. The Plan would identify target invasive weed species and serve as a guide for prioritizing treatments within those public spaces to achieve plan objectives.

Goal 2. Prescribe Methods, Adaptive Management This plan prescribes site-appropriate vegetation Strategies, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) for management methods and BMPs that would aid ARD Vegetation Management within Sensitive Habitat in obtaining appropriate approvals from resource agencies to conduct routine maintenance within sensitive areas. Sensitive areas include riparian zones, waterways, wetlands, and potential special-status species habitat. BMPs would help minimize potential

9798 19 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

effects to biological and wetland resources and ensure maintenance activities are conducted in a manner consistent with applicable regulatory requirements. Adaptive management strategies would allow ARD the ability to adjust the vegetation management program as needed to best meet existing conditions and changes in management areas over time.

Goal 3: Develop Routine Maintenance Practices and Continued maintenance of the riparian vegetation Timing for Ongoing Riparian Vegetation Management management areas is important for long-term visitor safety, improving access, and managing invasive weeds. Additionally, by formulating a plan for routine maintenance, financial burdens associated with vegetation management would likely be reduced over the long-term and can be included in annual budgeting.

TREE REMOVAL AND VEGETATION PROTECTION

A combination of physical removal and herbicide treatment would be used for riparian vegetation management and to control invasive exotic plant species within the treatment sites. Invasive species targeted for control within the treatment sites are generally aggressive, rapidly colonizing non-native plant species that compromise the quality and functions of natural habitats within the region. Vegetation management activities proposed within the treatment sites include trimming of woody vegetation and a weed control effort for removing invasive exotic weed species through both mechanical means and through treatment with herbicides. Properly timed, repeat herbicide applications are usually required for complete control of many well-established invasive exotic species.

Equipment utilized for trimming or removal of woody vegetation includes brushhog, tractor, cables, hand-held chainsaws, loppers, and/or chippers. To minimize disturbance only hand tools would be used within the stream channel and no heavy equipment or vehicles would be used in potentially jurisdictional waters, as determined by a qualified biologist. Herbaceous vegetation may be managed through hand-pulling, cutting the above-ground portion of plants using loppers, weedeaters, brushcutters, scythes, or by digging out the entire plant with a hula hoe, rake, or shovel. For herbicide application, backpack sprayers may be used in upland areas where a high density of herbaceous weedy species are present. Large trees or plants that are removed during vegetation management work would be removed from the project site.

9798 20 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

TREATMENT SITE ACCESS

Access to treatment areas would be accomplished through established access routes that are currently used for maintenance activities (see Figures 4-1 through 4-5 and Appendix A – Vegetation Management Plan). These access routes would be used during the dry season and allow vehicles to access riparian areas overland through upland areas. As vegetation is cleared in areas with dense underbrush, further access would be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on conditions revealed by the vegetation clearing. Areas with standing or flowing water would only be accessed on foot with hand tools.

Ashford Park. Access to the riparian area associated with Auburn Ravine for vegetation management work would be gained from two points. The upstream or north end of the treatment site would be accessed from the paved parking area on the south side of Auburn Ravine Road just outside and west of the park entrance gate. The downstream or south end of the treatment site would be accessed from the surfaced walking path that extends around the south side of the pond to the equipment shop. Vehicles would be parked and equipment would be staged within either the paved parking area or previously disturbed turf areas at the end of the walking path.

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. Access to the treatment site would be from the existing walking path that is accessed from Richardson Drive and runs just west of Vaquero Vista Drive. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would occur in existing disturbed or surfaced areas at the north end of the walking path near the pond.

Meadow Vista Park. Access to the treatment site would be from two locations. The north end of the treatment site would be accessed from a gate and paved path on the east side of the existing parking lot. The paved path would provide access along the entire west side of the treatment site. The east side of the treatment site would be accessed from graveled pathways in the arboretum. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be within existing disturbed areas at or near these access points.

Placer Hills Park. Access to the Placer Hills Park treatment site would be from the gate on the north side of Meadow Lane on the west end of the park or from the north side of Meadow Lane on the east side of the park. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be in existing previously disturbed turf areas within the park and adjacent to the work area.

Regional Park. Access to the treatment site would be from three locations. A potential fourth location is possible if permission can be obtained from the property owner. Access to the northern or upstream end of the treatment site would be from the parking lot just off of Dry Creek Road. This access point would provide for vehicles and equipment to access the treatment

9798 21 October 2018

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-1 Project Access - Ashford Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-2 Project Access - Atwood Ranch Open Space

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-3 Project Access - Meadow Vista Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-4 Project Access - Placer Hills Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 250 500 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-5 Project Access - Regional Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan site from the existing walking path that runs along the west side of the treatment site. The walking path could also be accessed from the soccer field at the south or downstream side of the treatment site at the east end of the soccer field. The Dry Creek parking lot would also provide access to the riparian area on the east side of the drainage. Access may also be gained from the mobile home park on the east side of the treatment site if permission is obtained. Access to the south end of the treatment site is available from State Route 49 at the southeast end of the treatment site. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be in existing disturbed areas along the walking path or at each of the access points.

PROJECT SCHEDULE AND CONSTRUCTION HOURS

Physical vegetation management is anticipated to start in the autumn and run through the winter, approximately September 1 – March 30. Treatments that require entering the channel would be conducted during periods of low or no water flow and to the extent possible would be done outside of the bird breeding season, which extends from February 1 through September 1. Adaptive management would allow for adjustments to return interval / frequency of treatments, but it is expected that management activities would be carried out as frequently as every year within each site, as determined necessary by ARD to meet plan objectives. Repeat herbicide applications at the appropriate growing period are typically required for complete control of many well-established invasive exotic species.

Table 3-2 Schedule of Treatments

Treatment Site Treatment Schedule/Frequency* Notes Ashford Park Mechanical After September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations season/after cleared by pre-work and as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Atwood Ranch Open Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Space Preserve Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations season/after cleared by pre-work and as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Meadow Vista Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations season/after cleared by pre-work and as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations

9798 27 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Table 3-2 Schedule of Treatments

Treatment Site Treatment Schedule/Frequency* Notes Placer Hills Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations season/after cleared by pre-work and as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Regional Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations season/after cleared by pre-work and as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Note: * Monitoring and adaptive management would be used to assess results of treatments and modify or maintain scheduled treatment intervals to achieve plan goals and objectives.

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Best Management Practices (BMP’s) are incorporated into the Vegetation Management Plan to reduce potential impacts to wetlands and sensitive species. No vehicles or heavy equipment would enter into the waterways. All work within jurisdictional wetland areas would be completed using hand-held equipment.

Herbicide application adjacent and/or within the stream channels would be accomplished by cut and paint method. The vegetation would be cut down without disturbing the ground and an herbicide approved for use within wetlands and waterways would be painted on the exposed end of the stalk using a paintbrush. Care would be taken to ensure that no herbicide enters the water.

Work is not expected to include removal of trees, but there is potential for some trees to be removed to reduce hazards or for large limbs to be cut from trees to improve access and visibility in treatment areas. All tree trimming and removal for work areas in the County would be carried out in compliance with Placer County Code, Article 12.16 (Placer County Tree Ordinance), which may require a tree permit for certain maintenance activities and regulates native trees according to size and species and includes specific restrictions on tree removal within riparian areas. Placer County Planning would be consulted prior to maintenance activities to determine appropriate measures to comply with County Code. Tree trimming and removal for work areas in the City of Auburn would be carried out in compliance with Chapter 161: Tree Preservation of the City of Auburn Municipal Code. A certified arborist or registered professional forester would be consulted to identify regulated or non-regulated trees as necessary and prior to cutting or removal. Large trees or plants that are removed during vegetation management work would be

9798 28 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan disposed of as green waste outside of the treatment sites. Seedlings and small plants that are pulled, cut, or sprayed may be left to decompose on site provided they are in an area where they would quickly desiccate and not in an area where they may take root and recover or wash into waterways. Regrowth that is subsequently treated with herbicide may be left in place to decompose so long as the plants are not allowed to recover to mature size before being treated again.

Measures to Avoid and Minimize Effects to Protected Species

Nesting birds: Implementation of vegetation management activities each year would begin after the bird breeding season ends on September 1. This would ensure that breeding birds are not harmed by the weed control program should they be nesting in any trees or shrubs to be removed.

Nesting bird surveys would be performed prior to control during the bird breeding season, as needed. None of the legally registered herbicides that may be used to treat weeds in the project area pose a threat to avian species, and they may be used without restrictions, with the exceptions of the use limitations imposed for threatened and endangered species, if identified by regulatory/resource agencies.

Western pond turtle: For the protection of western pond turtle, if potentially suitable habitat for this species occurs within a treatment area, a qualified biologist would conduct a survey for potential turtle nests prior to vegetation management activities. Potential turtle nests would be flagged for complete avoidance until such a time as it has been determined that the eggs have hatched and the turtles have vacated the nest.

Bats: For the protection of bat species that may utilize the treatment sites for foraging, vegetation management activities would be confined to daylight hours.

Prior to vegetation management activities that occur in areas where tree roosting bat species (e.g., Lasiurus cinereus, Lasiurus blossevillii) could occur, a roosting bat survey would be performed by a qualified biologist to determine if any maternity colonies or overwintering roosts are present within or adjacent to the project area. Trees with peeling bark or suitable cavities would be surveyed for urine stains, guano piles or visible bats. Should an active maternity or overwintering roost be detected during surveys, the roost would be avoided until early spring when bats leave their winter roost site, or in late summer after young have left the maternity roost site. Should project activities be necessary near an active roost site, consultation with CDFW would be sought to determine a proper strategy to avoid impacts to roosting bats.

9798 29 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Foothill yellow-legged frog: Only the Regional Park treatment site has some potential to support foothill yellow-legged frog. Rock Creek, within the Regional Park treatment site, provides limited suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frog since most of the stream corridor has dense margin and overhanging vegetation (blackberry shrubs). Stream reaches that contain dense blackberries and other vegetation along the banks do not provide suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frog. Prior to vegetation management activities, areas with dense vegetation that do not provide suitable habitat would be identified in the field and delineated on a large-scale map for work crews. In these reaches, crews can conduct vegetation removal down to the water’s edge without pre-construction surveys for foothill yellow-legged frog. In all of the remaining stream reaches (not mapped as dense vegetation) that contain sparse margin vegetation and a relatively open canopy, or where rocky substrates (bedrock, boulder, and cobble) are present along the banks, pre-construction surveys would be carried out by a qualified biologist immediately prior to vegetation removal.

To further protect foothill yellow-legged frog juveniles and adults and potentially egg masses and tadpoles if present, all work would be conducted outside of the wetted channel. However, if it is necessary to work in the channel to remove vegetation and foothill yellow-legged frog were not observed during the pre-construction survey, in-channel work would be restricted to the fall (September/October) after metamorphosis to minimize potential impacts to foothill yellow- legged frog.

Required Approvals: The Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District is the Lead Agency under CEQA for the Proposed Project. The following approvals and permits are expected to be required for the Proposed Project:

 California Department of Fish and Wildlife - Streambed Alteration Agreement for routine maintenance  Placer County – Tree permit (as necessary for tree removal within the County)

 City of Auburn – Tree permit (as necessary for tree removal within the City of Auburn)

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

9798 30 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Agriculture and Aesthetics Air Quality Forestry Resources

Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils

Greenhouse Gas Hazards and Hydrology and Water

Emissions Hazardous Materials Quality

Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise

Population and Housing Public Services Recreation

Tribal Cultural Utilities and Service Transportation and Traffic Resources Systems Mandatory Findings of

Significance

9798 31 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Proposed Project, nothing further is required.

11/1/2018 Signature Date

9798 32 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS – Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character

or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

3.1 Aesthetics Setting

The Proposed Project would include vegetation management activities in five public spaces in the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District (ARD). These include Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. Ashford Park is within the City of Auburn while the rest of the treatment sites are within Placer County. Policies contained in the City of Auburn General Plan and Placer County General Plan and applicable Community Plans generally identify riparian areas and open space as areas having high aesthetic or scenic values that should be protected. The individual treatment sites are described in detail below.

Ashford Park

Ashford Park is located within the City of Auburn and is bounded by Auburn Ravine Road at its north and west ends. A commercial area with six rectangular grey warehouse buildings surrounded by a large paved area exists to the east of the park. This commercial area is used primarily for auto service and repair shops. Residential areas with one to two-story single family houses surround the park to the north and west. These houses are generally neutral in color and have grass lawns in their front yards, and large, mature trees in their front and back yards. The park is located approximately 200 feet west of Interstate 80, and includes manicured grass fields, the Ashford Park Pond, the Ashley Off Leash Dog Park, and a stream channel. The park is bordered with mature trees at its north, west, and east ends, and partially bordered by trees and

9798 33 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan shrubs at its south end. The stream channel at Ashford Park contains a mature riparian corridor with a canopy dominated by large trees. The treatment site consists of the riparian corridor associated with the stream channel along the north park boundary between Auburn Ravine Road and grass fields within the park, as well as the outlet channel from the park’s pond, which is tributary to the stream channel along the park’s north boundary (Figure 3-1). Auburn Ravine Road is classified as a scenic route in the City of Auburn General Plan, which indicates that the scenic value of the road is attributable to the riparian areas along the ravine (City of Auburn, 1993).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve

The Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is within the North Auburn area of Placer County and is bounded by Atwood Road to the north, Vaquero Vista Drive to the east, Richardson Drive to the south, and a residential area along Caballo Circle to the west (see Figure 3-2). The park is surrounded by residential areas to the east, south, and west with one to two-story single family homes. These homes typically have grass lawns and scattered trees and shrubs. The Placer County Auburn Main Jail and other County buildings exist to the north of the park. These buildings have tan and gray exteriors and are surrounded by paved areas and landscape plantings and lawns. South of the Superior Court Department 12 and Placer County Probation Juvenile Detention Facility is a large parking lot fitted with solar panels. The Preserve includes a large pond at its northeastern corner a trail through the eastern edge of the treatment site, and trees and shrubs intermixed with grass areas. A landscaped area with manicured grass, trees, and shrubs surrounds the park. The area that would be subject to the treatments identified by the proposed Vegetation Management Plan includes the pond and the wetland area along the outlet of the pond to the south (Figure 3-2). A small playground is within the treatment site along the trail to the east of the pond. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is ringed by a dense growth of cattail. Upland of the cattail, large trees and shrubs surround the pond. Various trees and shrubs are scattered throughout the park. Views of the pond on the treatment site are available from Vaquero Vista Drive and Atwood Road. The project site is bounded on the north by Atwood Road, and on the east, south, and west by residential development.

Meadow Vista Park

Meadow Vista Park is located in the community of Meadow Vista and is bounded by Meadow Vista Road to the north, Placer Hills Road to the east, the Sierra Hills Elementary School campus to the south, and Pumpkin Seed Lane to the west (Figure 3-3). Surrounding uses include the Meadow Vista Tree Farm to the west of the park, which includes large lots used to grow evergreen trees, Sierra Hills Elementary School to the south, a trailer court to the east, and rural residential and commercial areas to the north. Sierra Hills Elementary School consists of ten

9798 34 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan campus buildings, surrounded by a large paved area that includes surface parking, handball and basketball courts and other school recreational facilities. The school campus also includes two playgrounds. The park consists of a large grass field surrounded by trees, a pond and walking paths, tennis courts, and a baseball field. The treatment site includes the riparian corridor, east of the pond and west of the walking paths in the open area west of Placer Hills Road (Figure 3-3). The riparian corridor is visible from within the park and from surrounding roads and developed areas and is visually characterized by a dense canopy of trees and dense shrubs. The treatment site is immediately bounded on the east by walking paths within a restoration area that includes nest boxes and wire cages around trees and shrubs. The project site is bounded on the west by the trail, manicured grass fields and the pond within the park, and to the north and south by rural residential and commercial development.

Placer Hills Park

Placer Hills Park is located in the community of Meadow Vista and is surrounded by Meadow Lane to the south, Candlerock Lane to the west, and residential and commercial areas to the north and east. The park includes lawn areas and the Placer Hills Pool complex. The area subject to the proposed Vegetation Management Plan includes a narrow riparian corridor associated with an unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek that runs in a north-south alignment along the western edge of the park area north of Meadow Lane and a secondary swale that runs along the northern and western edge of this treatment site (see Figure 3-4). Dense vegetation is the dominant visual feature associated with the riparian corridor along the west edge of the park, while the tributary channel is sparsely vegetated (Figure 3-4). Closer views of the riparian corridor reveal an understory of dense Himalayan blackberry brambles. Views of the treatment site are available from Meadow Lane and from within the portion of the park north of Meadow Lane, as well as from surrounding rural residential areas and Candlerock Lane west of the treatment site.

Regional Park

Regional Park is located in the City of Auburn and is bordered by Richardson Drive/Quartz Drive to the west, Park Drive to the south, Dry Creek Road to the north, and a large residential area to the east. The park consists of several lawn areas, and includes tennis, volleyball, and basketball courts, baseball fields, a large pond, and trails. The treatment site includes the Rock Creek riparian corridor, which runs south to north within the park along the eastern park boundary and densely vegetated upland areas adjacent to the riparian corridor (Figure 3-5). This vegetated area is visually characterized by many large, mature trees in a mixed oak woodland setting and dense trees and shrubs in the riparian corridor associated with Rock Creek. The understory within the mixed oak woodland is mowed by ARD staff as part of regular park maintenance. This treatment site is visible from walking paths and public areas within the park ,

9798 35 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan and from developed residential areas to the north, south and east. Portions of the treatment site are viewable from Dry Creek Road, Richardson Drive, and Park Drive.

Discussion a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

A scenic vista is generally defined as an expansive view of highly valued landscape observable from a publicly accessible vantage point. In the vicinity of the treatment sites, publicly accessible vantage points are public roads and adjacent park areas.

The Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation along drainages within five existing public spaces operated by ARD. The proposed treatment sites are within riparian corridors and open space areas, which are generally considered as areas of high aesthetic value by the Placer County General Plan and applicable Community Plans. Auburn Ravine Road, adjacent to the proposed treatment site in Ashford Park, is identified as a scenic route in the City of Auburn General Plan for the scenic quality of the riparian area along the road, which includes the riparian area proposed for treatment.

The proposed activities would include physical removal and herbicide treatment of invasive exotic plant species and would therefore result in a lower density of vegetation within treated areas, but no substantial adverse change in any scenic vista or the overall character of the treated riparian and upland areas. The treatment sites are not within the viewshed of any recognized or designated scenic vista. As the dense vegetation that currently exists on the treatment sites provides cover for unauthorized camping activities, it facilitates an accumulation of litter and other debris around the drainages. Management of this vegetation according to the Proposed Project would therefore serve to reduce litter, debris, and dense invasive plant species cover on the treatment sites, and could potentially improve overall visual quality of the treatment sites. As the Proposed Project would not substantially alter views of the treatment sites and would result in no substantial adverse impact associated with any change in a scenic vista, impacts would be less than significant, b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

None of the proposed treatment sites is within the viewshed of any state-designated scenic highway. SR 49 is designated by Caltrans as eligible for listing as a state scenic highway. The treatment site at Ashford Park is approximately 1 mile from SR 49, but is

9798 36 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

not visible from the highway. Portions of the treatment site in Regional Park are less than a quarter mile form SR49 and may be visible intermittently from the highway in places. However the treatment site is not considered a scenic resource that would contribute to the highway being eligible for designation as a state scenic highway and SR49 is not formally designated as a scenic highway. No impacts to scenic resources within a state scenic highway would occur as a result of the Proposed Project. c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

As discussed in Impact 3.1-a, the Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation along drainages within five existing public spaces in the ARD. Removal of dense invasive vegetation along these drainages would result in lower vegetation density within the treatment sites, as viewed from surrounding public and private property, and would reduce visible litter and other debris. This would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the treatment sites and their surroundings, and may be considered to improve the overall aesthetic and visual character of the treatment sites. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

The Proposed Project includes no addition of lighting and would create no new sources of glare. The project would result in no impacts associated with the addition of light or glare. No impact would occur.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

9798 37 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or

a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by

Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of

forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result

in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Setting

The Proposed Project would include vegetation management within five treatment sites located within public parks or open space preserve areas. Treatment sites are associated with riparian areas along waterways or around lakes and do not support agricultural or timber operations and none of the treatment sites carry Farmland designations or are zoned for timberland uses.

Discussion a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

All treatment sites are located on land designated by the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) as “Urban and Built-up Land” and do not include any prime farmland, unique farmland or Farmland of

9798 38 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Statewide Importance (CDC 2014). The project would result in no impact to designated Farmland. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

Based on a review of the California Department of Conservation’s 2013-2014 Williamson Act Map for Placer County, none of the treatment sites include land subject to a Williamson Act contract (CDC 2013). The treatment sites are located within an existing urban area, which does not include agricultural land use or zoning designations. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to conflicts with existing zoning or Williamson Act contracts. c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

The treatment sites are within an existing urban area, which does not include forest or timberland land use or zoning designations. The Proposed Project would not conflict with zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production land. The project would result in no impact to forest land or timberland. d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use?

The Proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. The Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation along drainages within five existing public spaces maintained by ARD. No impact related to the loss or conversion of forest land would occur with implementation of the Proposed Project. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

The Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation along drainages within five existing public spaces. Due to the nature and locations of the treatment sites, no Farmland would be converted to a non-agricultural use and no forest land would be converted to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.

9798 39 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the

applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state

ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant

concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial

number of people?

3.3 Air Quality Setting

The federal and state Clean Air Acts define allowable concentrations of several air pollutants. When monitoring indicates that a region regularly experiences air pollutant concentrations that exceed those limits, the region is designated as non-attainment and is required to develop an air quality plan that describes air pollution control strategies to be implemented to reduce air pollutant emissions and concentrations.

The Proposed Project is located within the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, which is designated non-attainment for the federal and state 8-hour ozone standards, the federal particulate matter (PM2.5) standard, and the state particulate matter (PM10) standard within Placer County. The area is in attainment or unclassified for all other state and federal standards (CARB 2017).

To address the region’s non-attainment status, the Air Quality Management Districts and Air Pollution Control Districts with jurisdiction over the air basin have prepared the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan, or the State Implementation Plan. Ozone is created as a result of a chemical reaction between reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in sunlight. The Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan identifies land use and

9798 40 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan transportation control measures to be applied to development projects in order to reduce emissions of the pollutants that react to form ozone.

Discussion a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

The Proposed Project would not violate air quality standards or exceed emissions thresholds as discussed in item (b) below. The projections for attainment of air quality standards under the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan are based on assumed development patterns that reflect buildout of adopted General Plans. The Proposed Project would result in no operational emissions associated with development and would result in only intermittent emissions associated with maintenance activities to manage vegetation within existing parks and open space areas. The proposed maintenance treatments are a continuation of maintenance activities that have occurred for many years under a previous Streambed Alteration Agreement and would result in minimal emissions. The Regional Ozone Attainment Plan anticipates maintenance of existing uses such as parks and open space areas. Ozone is a byproduct of pollutants from vehicle emissions and the vegetation management activities associated with the Proposed Project would result in several daily vehicle trips intermittently over the duration of the active plan period. The Proposed Project would therefore result in no conflict with the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan. No impact would result from any conflict with applicable air quality plans. b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation?

The SVAB is designated as non-attainment for the federal and state ozone standards (ROG and NOx), nonattainment for the federal particulate matter standard (PM2.5), and non-attainment for the state particulate matter standard (PM10). The Placer County Air Pollution Control District (APCD) recommends applying the APCD’s New Source Review emissions standards to estimates of emissions during construction and during project operation. The New Source Review Rule pollutant emissions limits are listed in Table 3.3-1. In addition, the New Source Review Rule requires application of Best Available Control Technology for emissions sources that exceed these limits. Project emissions (as calculated by the CalEEMod program) that exceed threshold values could have a significant effect on regional air quality and the

9798 41 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

attainment of federal and state standards. The thresholds apply to both construction and operational air pollutant emissions. Table 3.3-1 Placer County APCD Thresholds (pounds per day) Air Contaminant Operational Thresholds Reactive organic gases (ROG) 55

Nitrogen oxides (NOX) 55 Particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter 82 (PM10)

As recommended by Placer County APCD, Dudek used the CalEEMod modeling program to prepare emissions estimates for implementation of the proposed Vegetation Management Plan. The applicable standards and the emissions estimated for this project are shown in Tables 3.3-1 and 3.3-2. As shown, air pollutant emissions during project operation would remain below the New Source Review Rule thresholds. The CalEEMod modeling inputs and results are provided in Appendix B. Modeling assumed that treatments would occur annually within the five proposed treatment sites and that treating all five sites would require up to 14 workdays requiring an average of 10 vehicle trips per day. It is anticipated that all 14 workdays could be required to accomplish treatment during the first year and that subsequent treatments would require fewer than 14 workdays to complete. As shown in Table 3.3-2, the proposed action would not exceed Placer County APCD thresholds of significance, which are set at values to ensure consistency with the EPA- approved State Implementation Plan. Emissions shown in Table 3.3-2 would occur daily for a maximum of 14 days per year and would not be emitted on a daily basis throughout the year. Air pollutant emissions would be minimal. Table 3.3-2 Air Pollutant Emissions During Operation (maximum pounds per day – 14 days annually)

Emission Air Contaminant

Source ROG NOX PM10 PM2.5 Area 0.0022 0 0 0 Energy Use 0 0 0 0 Mobile 0.0603 0.2688 0.1055 0.0296 Total 0.0625 0.2688 0.1055 0.0296

9798 42 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

According to CalEEMod analysis, the Proposed Project would result in an increase in regional and local emissions from vehicle and maintenance equipment operation during management activities. Modeling indicates that operational emissions of the Proposed Project would remain far below Placer County APCD’s thresholds of significance of 55 pounds per day of ROG or NOx and 82 pounds per day of PM10. The Proposed Project’s operational air pollutant emissions would result from vegetation management activities including operation of gas and diesel-powered equipment, trucks hauling waste materials, use of consumer products, and worker vehicle exhaust. Significance thresholds would not be exceeded by project emissions and no mitigation is necessary to reduce emissions. Emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) from idling vehicles can create pockets of high CO concentrations, called “hot spots.” These pockets can exceed the state standards for CO. High CO concentrations can cause headaches, dizziness, and nausea and can contribute to chronic health conditions. At very high concentrations and/or with prolonged contact, CO exposure can be fatal. Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service, where many thousands of cars are idling, and/or with extremely high traffic volumes. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in a large number of vehicles idling or unacceptable levels of service, as discussed in Section XVI, Transportation/Traffic, and the Proposed Project would not result in significant CO concentrations. The Proposed Project includes no new stationary emission sources. No impact to air quality is anticipated from stationary source emissions. The Proposed Project would not violate any air quality standard and impacts associated with the project’s contribution to regional emissions would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?

As discussed above, the Placer County APCD New Source Review emissions standards are used to evaluate the potential for the project to contribute to cumulative air quality impacts. The New Source Review Rule pollutant emissions limits are listed in Table 3.3- 1. As discussed above, operational emissions from the Proposed Project would not exceed APCD significance thresholds. The Proposed Project would also not conflict with the applicable air quality plans, which address cumulative emissions in the Sacramento Valley Air Basin. Accordingly, the Proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions of any criteria pollutant for which the project region has nonattainment status. Impacts would be less than significant.

9798 43 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

The greatest potential for exposing sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations would occur from operating equipment and trucks during vegetation maintenance operations. Sensitive receptors in close proximity to the proposed treatment sites include residential areas and parks. Implementation of the Vegetation Management Plan would result in intermittent and temporary pollutant emissions during annual treatments at the five sites. Vehicle emissions would be typical of maintenance activities carried out within park facilities and would not generate substantial concentrations of emissions or diesel particulates in offsite areas. No industrial source emissions would be emitted by the Proposed Project. Impacts to sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Proposed Project would be less than significant. e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Odors are a form of air pollution that is most obvious to the public. Odors can present significant problems for both the source and surrounding community. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be annoying and cause concern.

Potential sources that may emit odors during vegetation management activities prescribed by the proposed plan include diesel equipment and gasoline-powered engines. Odors from these sources would be temporary, localized and generally confined to the immediate treatment area during maintenance activities carried out annually. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not be expected to cause an odor nuisance and impacts would be less than significant.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project: 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?

9798 44 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,

marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community

Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

3.4 Biological Resources Setting

A biological resources assessment was prepared by Dudek to describe the existing conditions within the five treatment sites subject to the proposed Vegetation Management Plan (Dudek 2016). These five treatment sites include park and open space areas in Placer County and the City of Auburn: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park (Figures 1 and 2). The biological resources assessment included a field survey of each of the treatment areas conducted on August 16, 2016, as well as database and literature searches using the following sources to determine special-status species with potential to occur within the project region: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) IPaC Trust Resource Report; California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB); and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants.

The treatment sites are characterized generally as riparian corridors along streams or surrounding ponds adjacent to maintained public park spaces. The riparian corridors are generally undeveloped and unmaintained and are dominated by non-native Himalayan blackberry brambles

9798 45 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

(Rubus armeniacus). A more detailed discussion of vegetation communities and habitat within each of the five treatment areas follows.

Ashford Park. Boardman Canal flows from northeast to southwest through the project site. This stream contains a defined bed and bank with silty to cobble-lined substrates. Water was actively and vigorously flowing in the stream channel at the time of the site survey. Exposed roots and undercut banks along this stream are evidence of sustained, relatively high velocity flows in this stream. The stream channel contains a mature riparian corridor with a canopy dominated by valley oak (Quercus lobata) and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). The understory of the riparian habitat is dominated by non-native species such as Himalayan blackberry, Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum), canary ivy (Hedera canariensis), and English ivy (Hedera helix).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve contained water at the time of the site survey, although it was below full capacity as evidenced by mudflats around the perimeter of the pond where cattails were absent. A spillway at the southwest end of the pond allows water to leave the pond to a freshwater emergent wetland just south and west of the pond. Water leaves the wetland via several small, incised channels in the grassland and travels south where it exits the project site through several culverts. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is ringed by a dense growth of cattail (Typha latifolia). Trees planted along the margins of the pond just upslope of the cattail include Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), shining willow (Salix lasiandra), valley oak, and boxelder (Acer negundo). The freshwater emergent wetland southwest of the pond is dominated by cattail and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya). Water flows southwest from the wetland along two vegetated swales that contain vegetation similar to annual grasslands, including wild oats (Avena fatua), bromes (Bromus hordeaceous and B. diandrus), and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis). Scattered coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), Fremont cottonwood, valley oak, and shining willow also occur along these drainages.

Meadow Vista Park. The unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek that occurs in Meadow Vista Park supports a mature riparian corridor dominated by white alder, pacific willow, valley oak, shining willow, narrowleaf willow (Salix exigua), Fremont cottonwood, and black oak (Quercus kelloggii). The understory is dominated by Himalayan blackberry brambles. The stream in Meadow Vista Park contains a defined bed and bank with a gravel and cobble substrate. Water was actively flowing from south to north through the project site at the time of the site survey. The water enters the treatment site from a large culvert under Placer Hills Road at the southeast and exits the area under the Meadow Vista Road Bridge to the north. A pond occurs just outside and to the west of the treatment site and is separated from it by a paved walking path. A spillway at the northern end of this pond drains water into a small vegetated swale that meets with the

9798 46 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan larger stream channel in the treatment site just before it travels under Meadow Vista Road. Mosquito fish and crayfish were observed in this stream channel during the site visit.

Placer Hills Park. The riparian corridor associated with the unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek narrows as it passes through Placer Hills Park. The tree canopy is dominated by white alder and shining willow. The understory is comprised of impassible Himalayan blackberry brambles. The same unnamed stream that passes through Meadow Vista Park passes along the west edge of Placer Hills Park. The channel of this stream is deeply incised and overgrown with Himalayan blackberry. A small, vegetated swale appears to channel stormwater runoff from the east side of the park, along the park’s northern perimeter to the stream. At the time of the survey the vegetated swale was and the stream channel contained actively flowing water.

Regional Park. Habitat within the proposed treatment site in Regional Park includes mixed oak woodland and the riparian corridor along Rock Creek, which flows south to north through the proposed treatment area and contained flowing water at the time of the site survey. The mixed oak woodland is dominated by blue oaks (Quercus douglasii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and valley oak. The understory in this habitat type is mowed by ARD staff for maintenance purposes. The riparian corridor is relatively open at the northern end of the project site, with shining willow and oak trees dominating the canopy. Himalayan blackberry brambles are not as prevalent at the northern end of the treatment site. In the central and southern end of the treatment site, however, the riparian understory is dominated by thickets of Himalayan blackberry. The stream widens into several ponded areas at the northern end of the project site. Small (2 inches to 5 inches long) fish were noted within pools in the stream during the site survey. A pond occurs in the park just outside and to the west of the treatment site. Water from this pond appears to leak from overflow from a spillway and enter Rock Creek through a smaller side channel. Several freshwater emergent wetlands occur along the creek channel in the vicinity of this pond and are likely formed from seepage from the pond.

Special-Status Wildlife: A total of 56 species of vascular plants were recorded during the site survey; 29 of these are native to California and 27 are nonnative species. Twelve common wildlife species or their sign were observed during the field survey: gray squirrel (Sciurus griseus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), California towhee (Melozone crissalis), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), American robin (Turdus migratorius), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California quail (Callipepla californica), mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), and raccoon (Procyon lotor) scat. Numerous small fish ranging in size from approximately 2 inches to 5 inches in length were noted within streams at Meadow Vista Park and Regional Park.

9798 47 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Results of the CNDDB and USFWS searches revealed 15 listed or special-status wildlife species, or species proposed for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered by either the CDFW or the USFWS with potential to occur within the region. Of these, eight were removed from consideration due to lack of suitable habitat within or adjacent to the project site, or the project site was outside of the species known range. Species removed from further consideration included California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), central California Distinct Population Segment (DPS) steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), west coast DPS fisher (Pekania pennanti), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi).

Seven wildlife species were not eliminated from consideration; each of these has a low to moderate potential to occur within the treatment sites. These include foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii, State Species of Special Concern), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata, no listing status), purple martin (Progne subis, State Species of Special Concern), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii, State Species of Special Concern, State Candidate), western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii, State Species of Special Concern, State Candidate), California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus, Federal Bird of Conservation Concern, State Threatened, State Fully Protected), and tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor, Federal Bird of Conservation Concern, State Endangered, State Species of Special Concern).

Foothill yellow-legged frogs prefer rocky streams and rivers with open banks in a variety of forested or scrubby habitats. The nearest documented CNDDB occurrence for this species is located approximately 4.5 miles northeast of the nearest treatment site along the Bear River. The northern section of Rock Creek, where it passes through Regional Park, contains moderately suitable habitat with rocky substrates and banks relatively free of overhanging vegetation in many areas (Dudek, 2017). The streams in the other treatment sites have dense blackberry brambles and do not provide high quality habitat for this species, therefore, there is low potential for foothill yellow-legged frog to occur in these sites. The pond and seasonal wetland at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve do not provide suitable habitat for this species.

Potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle occurs at all of the treatment sites except for Ashford Park, where high velocity flows likely preclude the presence of this species in the waterway. Although no turtles were noted at the treatment sites during the site surveys, there is moderate potential for this species to utilize the aquatic habitats, as well as the upland habitat surrounding the waterways for foraging and nesting. CNDDB documents an occurrence of this species within 5 miles of the treatment sites (CDFW, 2016).

9798 48 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Purple martins are cavity nesters and are known to nest and forage in riparian woodlands. While there is suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species within all five treatment sites, there are no documented occurrences of purple martin within 5 miles of the treatment sites and the potential for this species to occur within any of the treatment sites is low.

Townsend’s big-eared bat generally roosts in limestone caves and lava tubes, but has been known to roost in man-made structures such as abandoned buildings, bridges, and tunnels. This species prefers to forage in mesic habitat such as the riparian corridors that occur within the treatment sites. The biological assessment found that there are two documented occurrences of this species within 5 miles of the treatment sites, both south and east of Auburn (CDFW, 2016); therefore, there is moderate potential for this species to utilize foraging habitat within each of the five treatment sites.

Western red bat is a tree roosting species that occurs in forests and woodlands from sea level up through mixed conifer forests. It forages in edge habitats within grasslands, woodlands, shrublands, forests, and agricultural areas. While there is suitable roosting and foraging habitat within each of the treatment sites, potential for occurrence of this species is considered low because of the developed nature of the treatment sites and surrounding lands.

California black rail prefers densely vegetated marsh habitat for nesting. The wetland at Atwood Open Space Preserve provides potentially suitable habitat for this species; however, the developed nature of the surrounding land and high level of disturbance likely precludes this species from occurring and it is considered to have a low potential to occur within the treatment sites at the Atwood Open Space Preserve.

Similarly, the cattails surrounding the pond at Atwood Open Space Preserve provide suitable nesting habitat for tricolored blackbird, but there is a low potential for this species to occur due to the absence of suitable adjacent foraging habitat and the developed nature of the surrounding land.

Nesting Birds - The study found that trees within or adjacent to the treatment sites could provide habitat for nesting birds. All native birds in California are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, which specifically protects raptors. All of the treatment sites have suitable nesting habitat for several common raptor and passerine species of birds.

Wildlife Movement Corridors - Drainages with riparian cover such as those within the treatment sites serve as local movement corridors that connect foraging, breeding and cover habitat for resident wildlife species. Additionally, because these riparian areas generally occur in developed

9798 49 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan areas, they may also provide essential habitat linkages between fragmented segments of natural habitat. Because the treatment sites are situated among highly fragmented habitat within an urban setting, the riparian corridors provide functional wildlife corridors and habitat linkages.

Special-Status Plants: Results of the CNDDB and CNPS searches revealed 15 special-status plant species that have potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site. All 15 species were removed from consideration due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of appropriate soils or soil substrates, low quality or quantity of habitat, or because the proposed treatment sites are outside the species known geographic or elevation range.

Discussion a) Would the project 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?

Riparian areas within the treatment sites do not provide suitable habitat for any special- status plant species. Adjacent upland areas that would be used to provide access to the treatment sites are substantially disturbed or maintained and used as recreational parks and open space and would not be expected to support special-status plant species. The Proposed Project is expected to result in no impacts to special-status plants.

As discussed in Setting above, the biological assessment determined that seven wildlife species have a low to moderate potential to occur within the treatment sites. These include foothill yellow-legged frog, western pond turtle, purple martin, Townsend’s big- eared bat, western red bat, California black rail, and tricolored blackbird. The biological assessment concluded that purple martin has a low likelihood for occurrence and recommended no mitigation measures for this species.

Foothill yellow-legged frog has a low potential to occur in all treatment sites except for the northern portion of the Regional Park treatment site that is associated with Rock Creek which contains moderately suitable habitat for this species. These areas of suitable habitat include portions of the stream that contain sparse margin vegetation and a relatively open canopy, or where rocky substrates (bedrock, boulder, and cobble) are present along the banks. Vegetation management activities prescribed by the proposed Vegetation Management Plan for these areas of suitable habitat, particularly activities in and immediately adjacent to the wetted channel, could result in direct impacts to this species if frogs are present when equipment or maintenance personnel enter areas of suitable habitat

9798 50 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

within the treatment site in Regional Park. Mitigation Measure BIO.1 is incorporated into the proposed Vegetation Management Plan and requires that a qualified biologist map areas of suitable habitat and conduct pre-treatment surveys to ensure that this species is absent from the work area prior to beginning maintenance work and further requires that work within suitable habitat be restricted to the fall after metamorphosis has occurred to avoid potential impacts to tadpoles or egg masses. Mitigation Measure BIO.2 requires that work at the Regional Park site be conducted from outside the channel to the extent possible and that all work that requires entry into the channel be conducted during the fall to avoid potential impacts to eggs or tadpoles. Additionally, Mitigation Measure BIO.3, consistent with the terms of the draft Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW, prohibits use of herbicides during vegetation management activities unless prior approval is obtained from CDFW. This measure would provide additional protection of aquatic habitat that could support foothill yellow-legged frogs from impacts associated with herbicide application.

As described in the Setting section above, potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle occurs within all of the treatment sites except for Ashford Park. Vegetation management work carried out in accordance with the proposed Vegetation Management Plan could result in direct impacts to individual turtles or nests of this species. Mitigation Measure BIO.4 is incorporated into the proposed Vegetation Management Plan and would ensure that impacts to this species are avoided by requiring a survey of any suitable habitat be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to disturbance to ensure the work area is free of turtles or active nests.

The biological assessment determined that bats could use the treatment sites for foraging and roosting. Project activities could disturb roosting bats within the treatment sites and could result in disturbance of active roosts or take of tree-roosting bat species as a result of vegetation removal. Project activities would occur during daylight hours and would not affect bats foraging during nighttime hours or species that do not utilize trees for roost sites, such as Townsed’s big-eared bat. Mitigation Measure BIO.5 is incorporated into the proposed Vegetation Management Plan and requires that a roosting bat survey be conducted prior to vegetation management activities within areas where tree-roosting bat species could occur and that disturbance to any active maternity or overwintering roost be avoided until bats have vacated the roost site or as approved in consultation with CDFW.

Suitable nesting habitat for a variety of protected birds occurs within the proposed treatment areas. Vegetation management activities prescribed by the proposed plan could result in nest disturbance and take of individuals. Mitigation Measure BIO.6 is incorporated into the Vegetation Management Plan and would require that project activities occur outside of the breeding season and that nesting bird surveys be performed

9798 51 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

prior to any project activities carried out during the breeding season and that any active nests be avoided until they are no longer occupied. Herbicides for weed control would be applied in accordance with any use limitations imposed by regulatory / resource agencies for threatened and endangered species and as allowed by the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement for Routine Maintenance approved by CDFW, and would result in no adverse impacts to nesting birds.

Additionally, the terms of the draft Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW include other measures that would be implemented as part of the Proposed Project to ensure impacts to biological resources are avoided or minimized. Mitigation Measure BIO.7 summarizes these measures which include a worker education program, wildlife protection, invasive species best management practices, work area definition, herbicide use restrictions, materials and vehicle and equipment storage requirements, restrictions on tree removal and requirements for replacement of any trees removed, and monitoring and reporting requirements.

With implemnentation of Mitigation Measures BIO.1 through BIO.7, impacts to special- status species of plants and wildlife as a result of implementing the Proposed Project would be less than significant. b) Would the project 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?

The Proposed Project would remove non-native and dead shrubs and trees and trim other vegetation within riparian areas in each of the five treatment sites identified by the Vegetation Management Plan. Work within the riparian area would require ARD to enter into a Streambed Alteration Agreement for routine maintenance with CDFW. All work in the riparian area would be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement, which includes measures to mitigate adverse effects within the riparian areas subject to project activities. Terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement are summarized in Mitigation Measures BIO.1-BIO.7 and have been determined appropriate by CDFW to ensure no net loss of riparian habitat. With implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Streambed Alteration Agreement, impacts to riparian habitat would be less than significant.

9798 52 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan c) Would the project 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?

The Proposed Project would result in no placement of dredged or fill material or hydrological interruption that would be subject to permitting by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No impact would occur associated with an adverse effect on federally protected wetlands. d) Would the project 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?

As discussed in Setting above, drainages and riparian areas within the treatment sites serve as local movement corridors for resident wildlife species and may also provide essential habitat linkages between fragmented segments of natural habitat. The Proposed Project would remove non-native shrubs and trees and trim other vegetation within riparian areas in each of the five treatment sites identified by the Vegetation Management Plan. The proposed maintenance activities would occur periodically and, while activities may disrupt wildlife movement over a short period while treatment activities are being conducted, project activities would result in no substantial long-term interference with local or seasonal movements of wildlife through the treatment sites. The Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with interference with animal movement or use of nursery sites. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

Vegetation management within the treatment sites in Placer County would be carried out in compliance with Placer County Code, Article 12.16 (Placer County Tree Ordinance), which requires a tree permit for certain maintenance activities and regulates native trees according to size and species and includes specific restrictions on tree removal within riparian areas. In accordance with the proposed Vegetation Management Plan, Placer County Planning would be consulted prior to maintenance activities to determine appropriate measures to comply with County Code for tree and vegetation removal within riparian areas. Vegetation management within the treatment sites in the City of Auburn would be carried out in compliance with Chapter 161: Tree Preservation of the City of Auburn Municipal Code. A certified arborist or registered professional forester would be

9798 53 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

consulted to identify regulated or non-regulated trees as necessary and prior to cutting or removal. Note that Mitigation Measure BIO.7 summarizes mitigation measures required as terms of the draft Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW and includes a requirement that three replacement trees be planted for each native tree 4 inches or greater in diameter removed by project activities. No impacts would result from non- compliance with applicable local policies or ordinances for the protection of biological resources. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

There is no adopted habitat conservation plan that is applicable to the treatment sites. No impact would occur from any conflict with an adopted conservation plan.

MITIGATION MEASURES

Mitigaiton Measure BIO.1: (Regional Park treatment site) Prior to vegetation management activities conducted at the Regional Park site, a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) will evaluate the proposed work area to identify areas with dense vegetation that do not provide suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frog and delineate these areas on a large-scale map to be used by work crews. In areas that do not provide suitable habitat, no pre-construction surveys for foothill yellow-legged frog are required and crews can conduct vegetation removal down to the water’s edge. In the remaining stream reaches (not mapped as dense vegetation) that are identified as potentially suitable habitat for foothill yellow- legged frog (sparse margin vegetation and a relatively open canopy, and/or rocky substrates along the banks), pre-construction surveys shall be carried out by a qualified biologist immediately prior to vegetation management activities. Surveys shall be carried out by the Designated Biologist in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW and according to survey protocols reviewed and approved by CDFW. No disturbance activities shall occur until the biologist has determined that no foothill yellow- legged frog adults, juveniles, tadpoles, or egg-masses are within the proposed work area.

Mitigation Measure BIO.2: (Regional Park treatment site) To avoid impacts to foothill yellow- legged frog juveniles and adults and potentially egg masses and tadpoles if present, work at the Regional Park site shall be conducted from outside of the wetted channel to the greatest extent possible and any vegetation maintenance work that must occur within the channel shall be conducted during the fall (September/October) after metamorphosis is complete and to reduce potential impacts to eggs or tadpoles.

9798 54 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Mitigation Measure BIO.3: (Regional Park treatment site) To protect sensitive habitats and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW, herbicides shall not be used at the Regional Park site unless prior written authorization is obtained from CDFW.

Mitigation Measure BIO.4: For the protection of western pond turtle, if potentially suitable habitat for this species occurs within a treatment area a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) shall conduct a survey for turtles or potential turtle nests prior to vegetation management activities. If a potential pond turtle nests is identified, CDFW shall be notified and the nest shall be flagged for complete avoidance until the Designated Biologist determines that the eggs have hatched and the turtles have vacated the nest and no turtles are observed within the proposed work area. Potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle occurs within all proposed treatment areas except for the proposed treatment area within Ashford Park.

Mitigation Measure BIO.5: Prior to vegetation management activities that occur in areas where tree roosting bat species (e.g., Lasiurus cinereus, Lasiurus blossevillii) could occur, a roosting bat survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist approved by CDFW (Designated Biologist) to determine if any maternity colonies or overwintering roosts are present within or adjacent to the project area. Should an active maternity or overwintering roost be detected during surveys, the roost shall be avoided until bats have left the roost. Should project activities be necessary near an active roost site, consultation with CDFW shall be conducted to determine if there is an appropriate strategy to avoid impacts to roosting bats. Project activities near an active roost shall not occur unless CDFW provides written authorization.

Mitigation Measure BIO.6: To the extent possible and to ensure that active nests are not disturbed, vegetation management activities should be conducted between September 1 and January 31, which is outside of the bird nesting season.

For any project activities during the nesting season, which occurs from February 1 to August 31, a nesting bird survey shall be completed by a qualified biologist no more than three (3) days prior to starting work to determine if any native birds are nesting on or near the site (including a 300-foot buffer for raptors). If any active nests are observed during surveys, a suitable non- disturbance buffer from the nests shall be determined and flagged. The size of the non- disturbance buffer and any other restrictions shall be determined based upon the life history of the individual species, including their sensitivity to noise, vibration, ambient levels of human activity and general disturbance, the current site conditions (screening vegetation, terrain, etc.) and the various project-related activities necessary to implement the project. Any nest shall be avoided until it is no longer active. If a lapse in project-related work of 15 days or longer occurs,

9798 55 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan another survey shall be required before project work can be reinitiated. If, during the course of carrying out the project, an active nest is identified or becomes established that was not previously identified, a buffer or installation of appropriate barriers shall be established between the construction activities and the active nest so that nesting activities are not interrupted. The buffer shall be flagged by the qualified biologist and shall be in effect throughout vegetation management activities or until the young have fledged.

Mitigation Measure BIO.7: All work shall be carried out in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement entered into with CDFW for routine maintenance of the treatment areas. This may include some or all of the following avoidance and minimization measures summarized below:

 Worker education and awareness program to ensure that all personnel performing work on the project site employ protective measures for biological resources that may be encountered within work areas.

 Allow any wildlife encountered to leave the construction area unharmed.

 Project activities shall be conducted to prevent the spread of invasive species from one project to another by employing best management practices and guidelines and performing appropriate decontamination procedures for equipment.

 Prior to conducting any work the boundaries of the treatment area shall be clearly identified to ensure that no impacts or disturbance occurs outside of the approved treatment areas.

 Herbicides shall be applied by a qualified applicator in accordance with product labeling and shall not be used if labeling states that the product is toxic to fish or amphibians, or if the material datasheet states that the product LD50 is less than or equal to 1 mg/L or 1 ppm. Herbicides shall not be allowed to enter the watercourse within any treatment area.

 Cleared material shall be removed from the watercourse and placed in an area where it will not re-enter the watercourse during high flows. All temporary flagging, fencing or other materials used during construction shall be removed after treatment activities are completed.

 Vehicles may enter and exit the work area as necessary for project activities, but may not be parked overnight within ten (10) feet of the drip line of any trees within the work area. All equipment and vehicles shall be maintained to prevent leaks and shall not be stored or parked in areas where fluid leaks could enter waterways. Drip pans and spill containment

9798 56 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

shall be provided per the terms of the Streambed Alteration Agreement. Fueling and maintenance shall not be conducted within or near the creek.

 No trees over four inches in diameter at breast height shall be removed from the treatment areas without prior written approval from CDFW. A minimum of three trees of the same or similar species shall be planted for each native tree removed that is four inches in diameter or greater. Trees shall be planted in a location approved by CDFW and monitored for a minimum of five years. Replacement trees shall be planted and monitored for any planted tree that dies.

 Monitoring and reporting of permit compliance shall be carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those

interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

3.5 Cultural Resources Setting

The project area is comprised of five treatment sites that total approximately 47.83 acres. These treatment sites are characterized by riparian vegetation bounded by park facilities, landscaping, paved roads, and private land. The area of potential effect (APE) for the project consists of the entire 47.83-acre area. The vertical APE is represented by the maximum depth of disturbance, which would be less than one foot below the surface as a result of surface disturbance associated with vegetation treatment activities.

9798 57 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

A cultural resources inventory report was prepared by Dudek for the project area to satisfy the requirements of CEQA and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The inventory included a records search of previous studies of the APE and a surrounding half-mile radius conducted by staff of the North Central Information Center (NCIC). The records search identified 72 previous studies which have been performed within the records search area; of these, two have covered a least a portion of the APE, within the Atwood Ranch Open Space and Regional Park. The records search identified no cultural resources within the project APE. The search identified 33 cultural resources within a half-mile of the project APE. A search of the NAHC’s Sacred Lands File returned negative results for resources within the project APE.

The pedestrian survey of the APE conducted as part of the cultural resources inventory recorded two cultural resources within the project APE, ARD-BB-S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1. Both of these sites are prehistoric bedrock milling sites. Since these sites have not been formally evaluated to determine if they meet eligibility criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or National register of Historic Places (NRHP) they are assumed to be eligible for the purposes of impact analysis and treatment under CEQA and the NHPA. The cultural resources inventory recommended that no subsurface disturbance occur within 30 meters of ARD-BB-S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1 to avoid disturbance to any subsurface deposits that may occur in the area.

As part of the cultural resources inventory available historic aerial photographs of the project area were reviewed for the years 1952, 1993, 1998, 2005, 2009, 2010, and 2012. Based on the 1952 aerial, the five treatment sites within the APE consisted of undeveloped fields and riparian vegetation. By 1993, the APE appears largely as it does today. The APE is surrounded by rural and urban development including parks, roads, and residential buildings.

Discussion a, b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical or archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5?

According to CEQA (Pub. Res. Code SS5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852), a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect (adverse effect) on the environment and the cultural resource itself. A substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource would be constituted by physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.

9798 58 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

ARD-BB-S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1 are assumed eligible for listing on the CRHR and NRHP since they have not been evaluated for listing eligibility. Therefore, any adverse effect to these resources would constitute a significant impact. Consistent with recommendation of the cultural resources inventory, Mitigation Measure CUL.1 requires that vegetation removal within 100 feet of these sites be limited to above-ground treatments only to avoid subsurface disturbance in the vicinity of these sites and further requires that no modification to the resources themselves occur. With implementation of CUL.1, the project’s impact to historical resources would be less than significant.

The cultural resources inventory determined it is unlikely for archaeological resources to be inadvertently discovered during project activities. However, some potential exists for inadvertent discovery of resources during project activities. Mitigation Measure CUL.2 would ensure that impacts resulting from inadvertent discovery of cultural resources during vegetation management activities would remain less than significant by requiring that treatment activities be halted and that any resources discovered be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and that treatment measures be implemented as determined appropriate by the archaeologist. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL.2, impacts associated with an adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource would remain less than significant. c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

There are no known unique paleontological or geologic features within the project boundaries and the site has been substantially graded and modified from a natural condition. Mitigation Measure CUL.2 would ensure that impacts to unidentified paleontological or geologic features that could be inadvertently discovered during vegetation treatment activities would be less than significant. d) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

Given that the project area has been substantially graded and disturbed as a result of past development, it is considered unlikely that subsurface remains occur onsite. However, there is some potential for human remains to be discovered during project activities as the ground surface would be more visible and some minor surface disturbance would occur with vegetation treatment. Mitigation Measure CUL.2 would ensure that measures are taken for the appropriate treatment of any human remains in the unlikely event that such remains are discovered while conducting project activities. Implementation of Mitigation

9798 59 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Measure CUL.2 would ensure potential impacts to human remains that could be inadvertently discovered as a result of the Proposed Project would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measure CUL.1: All vegetation removal activities within 100 feet of sites ARD-BB- S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1 shall be limited to above-ground only; no below ground removal, such as removal of stumps or roots, shall occur within this area. The limits of the restricted treatment area shall be determined by a qualified archaeologist.

Mitigation Measure CUL.2: Should archaeological material, features, or soils affected by anthropogenic processes (i.e., dark midden-like soils or constituents) or paleontological material be encountered during vegetation treatment activities, all earth-disturbing work shall be immediately halted in the area and a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist shall be retained for evaluation of the discovery. Should human remains be discovered, work shall be halted in that area and procedures set forth in the California Public Resources Code (Section 5097.98) and State Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) shall be followed, beginning with notification of the City and County Coroner. If Native American remains are present, the County Coroner will contact the Native American Heritage Commission to designate a Most Likely Descendent, who will arrange for the dignified disposition and treatment of the remains.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including

liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss

of topsoil?

9798 60 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water

disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

3.6 Geology and Soils Setting

The treatment sites are located within five public spaces in the communities of Auburn and Meadow Vista. The closest portion of an Alquist Priolo active fault is the Cleveland Hills Fault, which is located approximately 36 miles northwest of the City of Auburn (CTE 2015). According to the California Department of Conservation map showing earthquake shaking potential for California, the treatment sites are located in a region that has the lowest level of earthquake hazard. The lowest level of earthquake hazard classification describes areas that are distant from known, active faults and will experience lower levels of shaking less frequently (CDC 2003). The treatment sites and surrounding area are considered to have low seismic risk in terms of fault hazard, seismic ground shaking, and liquefaction based on review of the California Department of Conservation Geological Survey mapping of California 2010 Fault Activity and Earthquake Fault Zones (CDC 2010 and CDC 2015). According to the California Department of Conservation records, the treatment sites are located within an area of low landslide susceptibility (CDC 2011).

Discussion a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

9798 61 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

As the Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation within five existing public spaces in the ARD; no structures or facilities would be constructed as part of the Proposed Project. The treatment sites do not currently support any buildings or structures. As the Proposed Project would not be in close proximity to an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and would not support structures or result in any change in risk to people from rupture of a known earthquake fault, no impact would occur. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

The Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation within five existing public spaces in the ARD. No structures or facilities would be constructed as part of the Proposed Project, and the treatment sites do not currently support any buildings or structures. As the treatment sites are located in an area of low earthquake hazard, and would not support people or structures, the Proposed Project would result in no impact associated with any increase in potential adverse effects from strong seismic ground shaking. iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

No structures or facilities would be constructed as part of the Proposed Project, and the treatment sites do not currently support any buildings or structures. As the treatment sites are located in an area of low liquefaction hazard, and would not support people or structures, no impact would occur. iv) Landslides?

No buildings or structures would be constructed on the treatment sites as a result of the Proposed Project. As the treatment sites are located in an area of low landslide susceptibility, and would result in no increased exposure of people or structures to hazards associated with landslides, the Proposed Project is expected to result in no impact associated with increased risk of landslides. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

9798 62 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

The project would remove non-native vegetation and trim trees but no substantial soil disturbance would occur that would result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

The project would remove non-native vegetation and trim trees and includes no grading or substantial soil disturbance that would result in geologic or soil instability. No impact would occur associated with geologic or soil instability. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

The Proposed Project includes no structures or other elements that would pose a risk to life or property from being located on expansive soils. No impacts associated with risks to life or property would occur as a result of implementing the vegetation treatment project. e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

The Proposed Project would involve maintenance and management of riparian vegetation within five public areas in the ARD. As the Proposed Project would not increase demand for wastewater disposal systems on the treatment sites, no septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be necessary and no impact associated with wastewater disposal would occur.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

9798 63 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Setting

Global climate change is a cumulative impact; a project participates in the potential impact through its incremental contribution combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of greenhouse gas (GHGs). Thus, GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective (CAPCOA, 2008).

Neither the State of California nor Placer County has adopted CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions. While no formal thresholds are adopted, the Placer County APCD recommends use of a threshold of significance for GHG emissions of 1,100 metric tons CO2e per year to determine the significance of GHG emissions for projects within the District. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) advises, “Even in the absence of clearly defined thresholds for GHG emissions, the law requires that such emissions from CEQA projects must be disclosed and mitigated to the extent feasible whenever the lead agency determines that the project contributes to a significant, cumulative climate change impact” (OPR, 2008). Furthermore, the OPR advisory indicates, “In the absence of regulatory standards for GHG emissions or other scientific data to clearly define what constitutes a ‘significant impact,’ individual lead agencies may undertake a project-by-project analysis, consistent with available guidance and current CEQA practice” (OPR, 2008). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4, state that a lead agency has discretion in determining the most appropriate method for assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions. Therefore, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the above determinations.

The CEQA Guidelines with respect to GHG emissions state in Section 15064.4(a) that lead agencies should “make a good faith effort, to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate” GHG emissions. Section 15064.4(a) further notes that an agency may identify emissions by either selecting a “model or methodology” to quantify the emissions or by relying on “qualitative analysis or other performance based standards.” Section 15064.4(b) provides that the lead agency should consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions on the environment:

. The extent a project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the environmental setting

9798 64 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project

. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.

Thus, in accordance with the first criterion, if the Proposed Project would result in a net decrease in GHG emission during operation compared to the environmental setting (i.e., existing conditions), it would not result in a significant impact related to global climate change. GHG emissions from the Proposed Project in the analysis below are not applied to a specific significance threshold; however, for disclosure purposes this analysis quantifies the maximum annual and total GHG emissions estimated to result from implementation of the Proposed Project.

Discussion a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Operational GHG Emissions

Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in GHG emissions associated with the use of maintenance equipment such as trucks, a tractor, and other small gas and diesel-powered tools. The CalEEmod analysis, attached as Appendix B, indicates that implementing the Proposed Project would generate approximately 11.63 metric tons CO2 equivalent (MT CO2e) annually. For any quantity and type of greenhouse gas, CO2e signifies the amount of CO2 which would have the equivalent climate impact and provides a means to express various greenhouse gas emissions as a common unit. According to the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalency Calculator, 11.63 MT CO2e is equivalent to the average annual greenhouse gas emissions of 1.3 homes. Estimated GHG emissions would be far below the threshold recommended by the Placer County APCD of 1,100 MT CO2e annually. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact related to long-term GHG emissions. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

The Climate Change Scoping Plan, approved by CARB on December 12, 2008, provides an outline for actions to reduce California’s GHG emissions. The Scoping Plan provides

9798 65 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

a framework for actions to reduce California’s GHG emissions and requires CARB and other state agencies to adopt regulations and other initiatives to reduce GHGs. As such, the Scoping Plan is not directly applicable to specific projects. Moreover, the Final Statement of Reasons for the amendments to the CEQA Guidelines reiterates the statement in the Initial Statement of Reasons that “[t]he Scoping Plan may not be appropriate for use in determining the significance of individual projects … because it is conceptual at this stage and relies on the future development of regulations to implement the strategies identified in the Scoping Plan” (CNRA, 2009).

There are several federal and state regulatory measures aimed at the identification and reduction of GHG emissions; most of these measures focus on area source emissions (e.g., energy usage) and changes to the vehicle fleet (increased use of hybrid, electric, and more fuel-efficient vehicles). While federal and state legislation would ultimately reduce GHG emissions associated with the project, no specific plan, policy, or regulation would be directly applicable to the Proposed Project. In order to ensure that an individual project would not interfere with attainment of the statewide goals established under AB 32, the Placer County APCD has recommended that projects be evaluated against a threshold of 1,100 MT CO2e. As discussed in item (a) above, the project would generate approximately 11.63 MT CO2e annually. This demonstrates that the Proposed Project would not conflict with the Climate Change Scoping Plan. To date, the City of Auburn and Placer County have not adopted a Climate Action Plan or GHG reduction plan. No local mandatory GHG regulations, plans, or policies would apply to implementation of the Proposed Project, and no conflict would occur. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in no impact from a potential conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset

and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste

within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

9798 66 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Setting

Hazardous materials stored and used in the area surrounding the Proposed Project area would likely be associated with common materials used in commercial and recreational activities, such as paints, cleaning solvents, bonding agents, and small quantity petroleum fuels and lubricants, as well as herbicides and pesticides used for common weed and pest control applications. A search of the State Geotracker and Envirostor databases determined that no active hazardous materials cleanup sites are located in proximity to three of the five treatment sites (Regional Park, Meadow Vista Park, and Placer Hills Park). Tom’s Sierra and Ken’s Service Station are cleanup sites associated with former gas stations and are located within 0.25 miles of the Ashford Park site but across Interstate 80 to the west of Ashford Park. Dewitt Bakery (military cleanup), Dewitt Heating Plant (military cleanup), Jail Kitchen Annex (site cleanup) are within 0.25 miles of Atwood Ranch Open Space project site (Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2017; State Water Resources Control Board, 2017). No school exists within 0.25 mile of three of the treatment sites (Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, and Placer Hills Park); however, Auburn Elementary is 0.26 miles southwest of the Atwood Ranch Open Space

9798 67 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Preserve. There is one school (Sierra Hills School) within 0.25 miles of Meadow Vista Park; and one school (Chana High School) directly adjacent to Regional Park. None of the treatment sites is located near any private airstrip or within the boundaries of an airport land use plan. The Auburn Fire Department, Placer Hills Fire Department, and Placer County Fire Department provide emergency response to the treatment sites.

Discussion a-c) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

The project would include mechanical and herbicide treatments to control vegetation within the five treatment sites. Common hazardous materials such as petroleum products, for vehicle and equipment fuel and lubricant, and herbicides, to control vegetation within the treatment areas, would be used during treatment activities. Removal and treatment of non-native vegetation and vegetation thinning would include applying small-quantities of herbicides to eliminate non-native and invasive plants within the treatment areas. Herbicides would be applied consistent with product labeling, Safety Data Sheets (SDS), and terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW. All herbicide treatments would be applied by a qualified applicator and no herbicide would be used that is toxic to fish or amphibians. No herbicide would be allowed to enter the watercourse. The project would not result in routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; the above-noted hazardous materials would only be used periodically during vegetation management activities and no long-term storage of hazardous materials would occur as a result of the Proposed Project. Compliance with storage and use requirements and terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement, the project would ensure that no hazards would result to the public including schools that exist within 0.25 miles of Meadow Vista Park and Regional Park. Impacts from transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.

9798 68 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan d) Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

The treatment sites are not included on any list of hazardous materials sites (DTSC, 2017; SWRCB, 2017). Therefore, no impact would result from disturbance within a listed hazardous materials site. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

Regional Park is located within two miles of the Auburn Municipal Airport. The project would result in no changes in the existing conditions with relation to the airport and its operations. The project would result in no impact associated with any change in hazards associated with airport operations. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

The site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would result in no impact related to proximity to a public or private airport. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

The Proposed Project would set procedures for maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species across the five treatment sites. The implementation of the Proposed Project would not affect an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; therefore, the project would have no impact. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

The Proposed Project would set procedures for maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species across the five treatment sites. The implementation of the Proposed Project would reduce the risk of wildfires to people and structures; therefore, the project would have no impact.

9798 69 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste

discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table

level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned

stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or

Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures

which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

9798 70 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Setting

The treatment sites are characterized generally as riparian corridors adjacent to maintained public park spaces. The riparian corridors are generally undeveloped and subject to maintenance activities and are dominated by non-native Himalayan blackberry brambles. The treatment sites vary in elevation from approximately 1,380 feet above mean sea level at Atwood Open Space Preserve to 1,722 feet above mean sea level at Meadow Vista Park. The sites generally drain toward the Bear River. Local hydrology for each site is described below.

Ashford Park. The riparian corridor within Ashford Park is associated with a stream/ditch known as Boardman Canal. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). Water appears to continue southwest in Boardman Canal to eventually end at Roseville Reservoir far to the south of the project site. This channel is classified by the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as semi-permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom riverine habitat (USFWS 2016a).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The riparian vegetation within Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve consists of a vegetated strip surrounding a pond. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). The pond within the project site is described in the NWI as impounded, permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom palustrine habitat. Water appears to drain from the pond to the southwest, into a seasonally flooded channel that is characterized as seasonally flooded, emergent palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

Meadow Vista Park. The riparian corridor within Meadow Vista Park is associated with an unnamed stream that flows from south to north through the project site and is tributary to Wooley Creek, which flows into Lake Combie northwest of the project site. This project site is within the Magnolia Creek – Bear River Subwatershed (HUC 180201260301). This stream channel is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded forested palustrine habitat.

Placer Hills Park. The same stream channel that passes through Meadow Vista Park also passes through Placer Hills Park. A small, vegetated secondary swale is also located on the north and east edges of the park and appear to channel runoff from the adjacent hills into the stream channel.

Regional Park. The riparian corridor within Regional Park surrounds Rock Creek, which flows northwest through the project site. Rock Creek is within the Orr Creek Subwatershed (HUC 180201610201). This stream appears to converge with Orr Creek north of the project site. Orr

9798 71 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Creek is tributary to Bear River. This stream is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded, forested, palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

Discussion a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?

Maintenance activities carried out under the proposed Vegetation Management Plan would include clearing dense vegetation and pruning trees, as necessary, within the riparian corridor and would not result in substantial ground disturbance or grading and would not result in erosion or sedimentation. Herbicide application would comply with all applicable laws, regulations, safety precautions, and label directions in addition to the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement entered into with CDFW. State laws and regulations regarding pest control and herbicides are contained in the Food and Agriculture Code and the California Code of Regulations. To apply herbicides for hire, state law requires that the contractor performing pest control have a valid Qualified Applicator Certificate or Qualified Applicator License from the State of California, as appropriate to the contractor’s situation.

The following conditions of the draft Streambed Alteration Agreement between CDFW and ARD would apply to herbicide application under the proposed Vegetation Management Plan (see also Mitigation Measures BIO.3 and BIO.7):

- Herbicides shall be applied only as directed by the product label by a qualified applicator.

- An herbicide shall not be used if the product label states that it is toxic to fish or amphibians, or if the material safety datasheet states that the product LD50 is less than or equal to 1 mg/L or 1 ppm.

- Herbicides shall not be applied within or allowed to wash into or otherwise enter the watercourse.

- No herbicides shall be used at the Auburn Regional Park site unless authorized in writing by the Department and all herbicides must be applied by a Qualified Applicator.

A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required if any pesticides are applied to or come in contact with waters of the United States. If herbicides are applied to or come in contact with water, enrollment under Water Quality Order No. 2013-0002-DWQ, General Permit No. CAG990005, Statewide General NPDES Permit

9798 72 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

for the Residual Aquatic Pesticide Discharges to Waters of the United States from Algae and Aquatic Weed Control Applications, or any subsequent permit, will be required prior to applying pesticides to the water. It is anticipated that no aquatic herbicides will be used under the Vegetation Management Plan.

Herbicides may be legally applied to any portion of the project area without an NPDES permit, so long as herbicides are not applied to or do not come into contact with open water, all other legal requirements are met, and the implementation of the Proposed Project remains in compliance with the terms of the Streambed Alteration Agreement.

Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would ensure that no impact would result from any violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

The Vegetation Management Plan includes vegetation clearing and removal of non-native and noxious or invasive plant species and would have no impact to groundwater supplies. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

The Vegetation Management Plan includes vegetation clearing and removal of non-native and noxious or invasive plant species and would result in minor disturbance to the ground as a result of hand crews entering areas to perform clearing and control work. This would result in no change to drainage patterns within any of the treatment areas and would not result in substantial erosion or siltation. Impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?

The Vegetation Management Plan includes vegetation clearing and removal of non-native and noxious or invasive plant species and would not alter the existing drainage pattern within the treatment areas and would not result in flooding. No impact.

9798 73 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?

The Vegetation Management Plan includes vegetation clearing and removal of non-native and noxious or invasive plant species and would not change stormwater runoff such that it would exceed the capacity of existing systems. Impacts would be less than significant.

f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?

The Proposed Project includes no components that would substantially degrade water quality. Please see item (a) above. Impacts would be less than significant. g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?

The project would not construct housing. No impact. h) Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows?

The project would result in no new structures. No impact. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

The project would result in clearing of non-native, invasive, and noxious plant species from within riparian corridors and could result in some increased capacity of the waterway channel and would result in no impact associated with flooding. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?

The project area is not subject to these potential issues and the project would result in no change in risk of these occurring. No impact.

9798 74 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact X. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general

plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation

plan or natural community conservation plan?

3.10 Land Use and Planning Setting

The treatment sites are associated with riparian areas within existing public parks and open space areas within the City of Auburn and the North Auburn and Meadow Vista communities of Placer County.

Discussion a) Would the project physically divide an established community?

The Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five public spaces in the ARD. These public spaces are the Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. None of these treatment sites contains existing housing and the Proposed Project would not construct any buildings or structures or result in any other division of an established community. No impact would occur. b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

9798 75 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

The Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five public spaces managed by ARD. No component of the Proposed Project would conflict with the City of Auburn General Plan or Placer County General Plan, or any other applicable land use policies or regulations. Therefore, no impact would occur. c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

No adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan applies to any of the proposed treatment areas. Therefore, no impacts would result from any conflict an applicable conservation plan.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XI. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site

delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

3.11 Mineral Resources Setting

The five treatment sites are associated with riparian areas along waterways or around lakes located within public parks or open space preserve areas. Treatment sites do not support any mining activities and are not zoned for mineral extraction or preservation.

Discussion a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?

9798 76 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

The Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five treatment sites and would result in no change in the availability of mineral resources or sites designated for recovery of important mineral resources. No mining activities occur within any of the proposed treatment areas. No impact would result from any change in resource availability.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XII. NOISE – Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the

local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use

airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing

or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

3.12 Noise

Setting

All five treatment sites are within semi-urbanized areas within Placer County and the City of Auburn. The treatment sites are within areas of existing rural or urban development and near noise generating land uses including public parks, commercial and residential development, and roads and noise levels in the vicinity of the treatment sites is consistent with these uses. The riparian corridors that make up the five treatment sites support no uses that generate elevated

9798 77 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan noise levels. Noise generated by construction or maintenance activities is exempt from applicable Placer County noise standards if generated between 6:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday and holidays. Within the City of Auburn noise generated by construction and maintenance activities is exempted by Section 93.09.J of the City of Auburn Municipal Code, which allows for noise-generating construction activities to occur from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and on Sundays and holidays from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The Auburn Municpal Airport is located approximately 0.75 mile from the proposed Regional Park treatment site.

Discussion a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

The Proposed Project would generate noise associated with vegetation removal, including operation of gas-powered equipment such as chain saws, string trimmers, and trucks and other equipment that would elevate noise levels in the vicinity of the work area temporarily during treatment activities. Vegetation removal activities would occur for several days a year at each site and would be exempt from applicable noise standards since all vegetation maintenance work would be carried out during normal daylight hours when noise generation from maintenance activities would be exempt from applicable noise standards identified by Placer County Code 9.36.030 and Section 93.09.J of the City of Auburn Municipal Code. The project would result in no permanent increase in noise levels over the existing condition. Temporarily elevated noise levels as a result of vegetation management activities that would occur fewer than five days a year at each site during noise-exempt days and hours would be less than significant. b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

The project involves vegetation clearing and would not be expected to generate excessive ground-borne vibration or noise levels to on or offsite areas. Minor vibration and noise could be detectable to people very close to the work area as a result of equipment and vehicle operation but any detectable vibration or noise would be intermittent and temporary and would not affect sensitive receptors such as residential areas or schools. Impacts associated with temporary ground-borne vibration related to the proposed vegetation treatments would be less than significant.

9798 78 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

The Proposed Project does not include any components that would generate a permanent change in noise levels in the project vicinity. The project would result in no impact from a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Proposed Project. d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Vegetation management activities associated with the Proposed Project would result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity while vegetation management activities are carried out (up to five days annually at each site). Project activities would be carried out during daytime hours when elevated noise levels would be less annoying to surrounding uses and are exempt from noise standards in accordance with Placer County Code and the City of Auburn Municipal Code. Temporary increases in noise levels as a result of proposed vegetation management activities and in compliance with applicable County and City codes would be less than significant. e-f) Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Would the project be within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

The Proposed Project would result in no change with respect to noise levels experienced by the population in the area as a result of airport operations at the Auburn Municipal Airport. No impact.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new

homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

9798 79 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

3.13 Population and Housing

Setting

The five treatment sites are undeveloped areas characterized by dense riparian vegetation.

Discussion a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

See discussion under item ‘c’ below. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

See discussion under item ‘c’ below. c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

The Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five treatment sites managed by ARD. None of these treatment sites contains existing housing. As the Proposed Project would result in vegetation management and maintenance within existing park and open space areas and includes no components, such as increased capacity or extension of infrastructure, that would indirectly generate increased population, the Proposed Project would not induce population growth. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in no impact associated with inducing substantial population growth or construction of replacement housing due to displacement of people or existing housing

9798 80 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Other public facilities?

3.14 Public Services

Setting

Fire protection and emergency services to the treatment sites are provided by the Auburn City Fire Department and Placer County Fire, which contracts with CAL Fire for fire protection services. Law enforcement response is provided by the City of Auburn Police Department and the Placer County Sheriff’s Office.

Discussion a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?

Police protection?

Schools?

Other public facilities?

The Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species within five treatment sites managed by ARD. As the Proposed Project would guide maintenance and management of existing parks, it would

9798 81 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

not induce population growth and no additional demand for fire protection, police protection, schools, or other public services. The Proposed Project would not require construction of new public services facilities to maintain existing service levels and performance objectives for services. As the Proposed Project is intended to increase park visitor safety and reduce unauthorized camping and other illegal activity within the proposed treatment sites, demand for law enforcement services within the treatment sites and associated parks could decrease with implementation of the Proposed Project. The project would also decrease fire risk in the area by clearing brush and other fuels and reducing the potential for fire ignition as a result of unauthorized camping. Therefore, no impacts would result from construction of new facilities to meet an increased demand for services as a result of the Proposed Project.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of

recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

3.15 Recreation

Setting

All five treatment sites are within public parks or open space operated by the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District.

Discussion a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

See discussion under ‘b’ below.

9798 82 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

The project includes no residential or recreational development, and project implementation would result in no increase in population in the area that would require additional recreation facilities or generate increased demand for recreational facilities. Aesthetics and safety improvements as a result of implementing the Proposed Project could result in some increase in the use of park facilities; however, increased use would not be expected to result in substantial physical deterioration of any park facilities and is a desirable result of the project. The project would therefore have a less than significant impact associated with deterioration of recreation facilities and no impact associated with construction of new recreation facilities.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC – Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand

measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous

intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access?

9798 83 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian

facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

3.16 Transportation and Traffic

Setting

The treatment areas would be accessed from public roads in Placer County and the City of Auburn including Auburn Ravine Road (Ashford Park site), Richardson Drive (Atwood Ranch Open Space Preseve site), Meadow Vista Road and Placer Hills Road (Meadow Vista Park site), Meadow Lane (Placer Hills Park site), and Dry Creek Road, Park Drive, State Route 49, and Grant Avenue (Regional Park site).

Discussion a) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?

Vegetation management activities would occur annually within the five treatment sites. It is estimated that an average of 14 workdays would be required for treatments annually and that an average of 10 vehicle trips would be generated per day while treatment activities are conducted. It is anticipated that all 14 workdays could be required to accomplish treatments during the first year and that vegetation management treatments during subsequent years would require fewer than 14 workdays to complete. Up to 140 total vehicle trips would be generated over the duration of vegetation management activities annually. An additional 10 vehicle trips per day for a period of 14 days annually and distributed to roadways around five different sites would result in a minimal change in traffic volumes on the public roads serving the treatment sites and would result in no substantial change in the function of the circulation system or conflict with plans, regulations, or policies establishing measures of

9798 84 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system in the vicinity of the treatment areas. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

The project would generate 10 vehicle trips per day intermittently for up to 14 days annually and distributed to roadways around five different sites. This minimal and temporary increase in vehicle trips is expected to result in no change in level of service standards on roadways serving the treatment sites. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

The project would have no effect on air traffic patterns in the project vicinity. No impact. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

The proposed vegetation management activities would result in no new roads or changes in the design of existing roads. No impact. e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

Emergency access would be maintained on all public roads at all times during project activities. No impact. f) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?

The project includes vegetation management activities in existing open space areas and would result in no change in the performance or safety of public transit. No impact.

9798 85 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local

register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?

3.17 Tribal Cultural Resources Setting

Regulatory Framework

Passed in 2014, AB 52 requires consultation regarding projects that may affect a tribal cultural resource. The law provides for the inclusion of California tribes’ expertise regarding cultural resources and a process for governing bodies to incorporate tribal knowledge into their CEQA review processes.

Tribal Correspondence

The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was contacted by Dudek on August 25, 2016 to request a search of the Sacred Lands File. The NAHC responded on September 7, 2016 indicating that the search failed to identify any Native American resources in the vicinity of the project and provided a list of individuals and organizations to contact that may have additional information. Letters were sent to each of the contacts to request information on resources in the area on November 3, 2016. To date, only Mr. Cruz from the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California responded directly to Dudek. He deferred consultation to the United Auburn Indian Community. Follow-up phone calls were made on November 18, 2016 to the NAHC-listed

9798 86 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Tribal representatives. No responses have been received, nor direct contact made, by phone. Following a response to AB 52 notification, ARD staff and a Dudek biologist visited site ARD- RV-S-1 with UAIC representatives, including Ms. Marcella Ernest, on 9/28/2016. ARD reported that the UAIC noted this resource to be interesting, and that it was a good example to be used in future tribal trainings. UAIC further expressed interest in plants of traditional value in the area, notably black oak which is ethnographically documented to produce one of the preferred acorns for use in traditional foods.

Discussion

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?

See discussion under ‘b’ below. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?

The records search identified 72 previous studies which have been performed with the records search area; of these, two have covered a least a portion of the APE, within Atwood Ranch and Regional Park. The records search did not identify any cultural resources within the APE, however 33 cultural resources have been identified within a half-mile of the APE. Additionally, ARD-BB-S-1 and ARD-RV-S-1 have not been evaluated for eligibility to be listed on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or National register of Historic Places (NRHP). In compliance with CEQA and the NHPA, these resources are assumed eligible for listing. Mitigation Measure CUL.1 requires that, should vegetation removal occur within 30 meters of these sites, it will be above-ground only, and no modification to the resources themselves shall occur. Furthermore, should revisions to the project design include disturbance to these sites or subsurface soils in the surrounding 30 meter area, significance testing must first be completed to assess CRHR and NRHP

9798 87 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

eligibility and possible affects under CEQA and NHPA appropriately addressed. With the implementation of CUL.1, the project’s impact to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the

applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of

existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing

facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and

regulations related to solid waste?

3.18 Utilities and Service Systems a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

See discussion under ‘e’ below. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

See discussion under ‘e’ below.

9798 88 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

See discussion under ‘e’ below. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?

See discussion under ‘e’ below. e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

The Proposed Project would involve the maintenance and management of riparian vegetation within five treatment sites associated with ponds and drainages within existing parks and open space areas managed by ARD. These activities would include a combination of physical removal and herbicide treatment of riparian vegetation and invasive exotic plant species on the treatment sites. No structures or facilities would be constructed as a result of the Proposed Project and it would not increase demand for water supply or water or wastewater treatment services. The Proposed Project would not substantially alter drainage patterns or increase runoff on the treatment sites, and therefore no new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing storm water facilities would be necessary. Therefore, no impact would occur. f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?

See discussion under ‘g’ below. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

The Proposed Project would involve the maintenance and management of riparian vegetation within the drainage channels within five treatment sites managed by ARD. Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, and Regional Park are located within the North Auburn area of Placer County, Meadow Vista Park and Placer Hills Park are located within the community of Meadow Vista, and Ashford Park is within the City of Auburn.

9798 89 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Solid waste within the North Auburn area, Meadow Vista area, and City of Auburn is collected by Recology Auburn Placer and transported to the Western Placer Waste Management Authority (WPWMA) Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) located at 3033 Fiddyment Road in the City of Roseville. Solid waste is sorted at the MRF and recyclable materials, including wood and green waste, are recovered from the waste and recycled. Wood and green waste are processed for composting at the MRF. Remaining solid waste that cannot be recycled is disposed of at the Western Regional Sanitary Landfill (WRSL) in the City of Lincoln.

The WRSL is permitted to accept 1,900 tons per day and 624 vehicles per day; in 2013, the WRSL received an average of 638 tons per weekday and 86 vehicles per day (Placer County Facility Services Department 2015). The landfill has a permitted design capacity of 36,350,000 cubic yards and, as of July 2014, had a remaining capacity of 25,386,466 cubic yards (70% remaining capacity), with a permitted lifespan extending to 2058 (Placer County Facility Services Department 2015).

The MRF has a permitted processing capacity of 1,750 tons per day and 1,014 vehicles per day; in 2014, the MRF received an average of 1,116 tons per weekday and 588 vehicles. The MRF has a permitted processing capacity of 2,200 tons per day for municipal solid waste and construction and demolition debris; the compost portion of the MRF has a permitted processing capacity of 75,000 cubic yards (37,500 tons) and a design capacity of approximately 164,000 cubic yards (82,000 tons) (Placer County Facility Services Department 2015). The MRF achieved an overall diversion rate of over 42% in 2014 (Placer County Facility Services Department 2015).

The Proposed Project would involve the removal and disposal of woody and herbaceous riparian vegetation and invasive exotic species on the treatment sites. As solid waste generated by the Proposed Project would be green waste, the majority of the waste would be processed and diverted at the MRF. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s contribution to the WRSL would be minimal, and a less than significant impact would occur.

9798 90 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

3.19 Mandatory Findings of Significance a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

The treatment sites include riparian habitat and provide suitable habitat for nesting birds and other wildlife, as discussed in Section 3.4 of this Initial Study. With implementation of mitigation measures identified in Section 3.4 and as conditions of permit issuance by CDFW, the Proposed Project would not reduce habitat for fish or wildlife species, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or adversely affect rare or endangered species. The project would remove non-native and invasive species from waterways adjacent to public parks operated by the Auburn Recreation District. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO.1 through BIO.7 would ensure that project impacts to biological resources would be less than significant.

9798 91 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

As discussed in Section 3.5, two prehistoric cultural resources sites have been identified within the project APE. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL.1 would ensure that appropriate measures are implemented to ensure that impacts to these sites remain less than significant. Mitigation Measure CUL.2 would ensure that impacts to cultural resources that could be inadvertently discovered during project activities would remain less than significant. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?

The project would remove non-native vegetation and thin vegetation in riparian areas and would implement treatments over several years with the goal of a long-term conversion to a community more dominated by native species. The incremental effects of the project are expected to result in a riparian community with fewer non-native species, Himalayan blackberry in particular, which could be viewed as a benefit to the environment. Cumulative impacts of the project and other similar projects would result in less than significant effects with implementation of the mitigation measures identified throughout this Initial Study. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

The project effects are primarily short-term during intermittent vegetation treatment activities. The Proposed Project would be carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW and consistent with applicable local ordinances and policies related to land use, noise, and protection of natural resources and the environment, as disclosed by this Initial Study. Project emissions of ROG and NOX would remain below Placer County APCD’s thresholds of significance for cumulative impacts. The Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with any cumulatively considerable impacts within any resource areas analyzed.

9798 92 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS 4.1 References Cited

CARB 2017. California Air Resources Board. “Air Quality Standards and Area Designations.” https://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/desig.htm. Accessed November 11, 2017.

14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A through L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.

California Public Resources Code, Section 21000–21177. California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.

CDC. 2003. California Department of Conservation. California Geologic Survey. “Earthquake Shaking Potential for California, Spring 2003.” http://www.conserve.ca.gov/cgs/rghm/psha/Documents/shaking_18x23.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2017.

CDC 2010. California Department of Conservation. California Geologic Survey. “2010 Fault Activity Map of California.” http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/FAM/faultactivitymap.html. Accessed July 10, 2017.

CDC. 2013. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. Land Conservation Act. “Placer County Williamson Act FY 2013/2014.” ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/Placer_w_13_14_WA.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2017.

CDC. 2014. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. “Placer County Important Farmland 2012.” ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2012/pla12.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2017.

CDC 2015. California Department of Conservation. California Geologic Survey. “Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone Map.” http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/ WH/regulatorymaps.htm. Accessed July 10, 2017.

CDFW 2016. “Special Animals (900 taxa).” California Natural Diversity Database. CDFW, Biogeographic Data Branch. .http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants_and_animals.asp.

CTE. 2015. CTE CAL, Inc. Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Epperle Corners Duplex Development. June 3, 2015.

9798 93 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Dudek 2016. Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California. December 14, 2016.

Dudek, 2017. Memo from Craig Seltenrich addressing foothill yellow-legged frog habitat. April 4, 2017.

Placer County Facility Services Department. Letter to Jim Bermudez. April 29, 2015.

4.2 List of Preparers

Dudek prepared this Initial Study on behalf of the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District.

853 Lincoln Way, Suite 208 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Markus Lang 530.887.8500

9798 94 October 2018 Draft Initial Study for the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 95 October 2018

APPENDIX A Vegetation Management Plan

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Prepared for:

Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District 471 Maidu Drive #200 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Kahl Muscott Tel: 530-537-2186

Prepared by:

853 Lincoln Way, Suite #208 Auburn, California 95603 Contact: Markus Lang Tel: 530.863.4643

MAY 2017

Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material. Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No.

1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Purpose and Need of the Plan ...... 1 1.2 Plan Goals ...... 2 2 PLAN AREA EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 19 2.1 Vegetation and Land Cover Types ...... 19 2.2 Hydrology ...... 20 3 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM APPROACH ...... 23 3.1 Vegetation Management Overview ...... 23 3.1.1 Target Species for Weed Control ...... 23 3.2 Equipment ...... 24 3.3 Methods...... 25 3.3.1 Mechanical Vegetation Removal ...... 25 3.3.2 Herbicide Applications ...... 25 3.4 Schedule ...... 26 3.5 Access ...... 27 4 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND MEASURES TO AVOID PROTECTED SPECIES ...... 39 4.1 Best Management Practices ...... 39 4.2 Measures to Avoid and Minimize Effects to Protected Species ...... 39 5 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT ...... 42 6 REFERENCES ...... 44 FIGURES

1 Regional Map ...... 3 2 Vicinity Map ...... 5 3-1 Project Site Map – Ashford Park ...... 7 3-2 Project Site Map – Atwood Ranch Open Space ...... 9 3-3 Project Site Map - Meadow Vista Park...... 11 3-4 Project Site Map – Placer Hills Park...... 13 3-5 Project Site Map – Regional Park ...... 15 4-1 Project Access – Ashford Park ...... 29 4-2 Project Access – Atwood Ranch Open Space...... 31

9798 i May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Section Page No.

4-3 Project Access - Meadow Vista Park ...... 33 4-4 Project Access – Placer Hills Park ...... 35 4-5 Project Access – Regional Park ...... 37 TABLES

1 Project Site Location Information ...... 1 2 Target Invasive Exotic Plant Species ...... 23 3 Schedule of Treatment ...... 26 4 Management Priority ...... 42

9798 ii May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

1 INTRODUCTION

This Riparian Vegetation Management plan (Plan) discusses maintenance and management of riparian vegetation and control of invasive plant species from the wetlands and upland areas within improved and unimproved drainage channels under the purview of the Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District (ARD). The Plan area includes five distinct public spaces in western Placer County in the communities of Auburn and Meadow Vista, California: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park (Figures 1 and 2). The location data for each site is provided in Table 1 and shown in Figures 2 and 3.

Table 1 Project Site Location Information

Other Location Information Project Site Geographic Coordinates* (Section, Township (T), Range (R)) Ashford Park 38.919361, -121.063888 Section 3, T12North, R8East Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve 38.934093, -121.108282 Section 32, T13North, R8East Meadow Vista Park 38.993388, -121.024576 Section 12, T13North, R8East Placer Hills Park 38.998719, -121.024815 Section 1, T13North, R8East Regional Park 38.952994, -121.105482 Section 29, T13North, R8East Note: * Decimal degrees

This Plan guides management of riparian vegetation along drainages within the five public spaces over a term of five years or more in accordance with the terms and conditions of an anticipated Streambed Alteration Agreement for routine maintenance from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and other permits applicable to the maintenance program. The terms and conditions of any applicable permits must be consulted and any work carried out under this plan must be in accordance with all permit conditions. Goals of the project include control of invasive plant species, trash management, and improving public safety. 1.1 Purpose and Need of the Plan

Over time, varying levels of funding and changing planning and management priorities and expiration of a previous maintenance agreement with CDFW have presented challenges to maintaining vegetation along natural and man-made waterways and riparian areas within the five public spaces that are the subject of this plan. These densely vegetated riparian areas present challenges for law enforcement and park maintenance as they are being used for unauthorized camping that has led to increased criminal activity, an accumulation of litter and other debris, and water quality concerns. As a result, public safety, access, water quality, and invasive exotic

9798 1 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

weed species have become areas of concern for ARD. In park facilities such as these, issues such as resource conservation, recreational use, maintenance, and visitor safety intertwine. This Plan provides ARD with guidelines for implementing future riparian vegetation management actions that will be efficient and effective in resolving current maintenance and public safety concerns.

This Plan sets forth an approach for routine and ongoing riparian vegetation maintenance by ARD at riparian corridors within Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. The primary objectives of the proposed maintenance program are as follows:

• Thin vegetation to reduce vegetative screening and improve security and access, • Deter the spread of invasive weedy plant species, and • Discourage unauthorized camping and illegal activity.

Maintenance activities would include clearing dense vegetation and pruning trees, as necessary, within the riparian corridor. It is anticipated that the proposed maintenance activities would be carried out for a period of at least five years according to the terms of a Streambed Alteration Agreement for routine maintenance entered into between ARD and CDFW. If authorized by CDFW, the agreement could be extended for an additional five years.

In accordance with direction received from CDFW during preliminary consultation, this plan provides the location, size and a description of the areas proposed for treatment, an anticipated schedule and timing for the proposed routine maintenance activities, the types of tools and methodology that would be used to implement management activities, and proposed access points for each of the treatment areas. Additionally, this plan identifies standard best management practices that would be implemented for protection of sensitive resources. Additional measures may be required as conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW. 1.2 Plan Goals

This plan defines the treatment sites, provides guidance to ARD staff for identifying priority areas for vegetation management within those sites, and provides a standardized approach and procedures for conducting ongoing management activities to improve public safety and discourage unauthorized uses by thinning vegetation, facilitating improved access, and reducing the prevalence and spread of invasive exotic weeds. The following goals are presented to focus the desired outcomes of the Plan.

9798 2 May 2017 Sierra County

191 Durham 149 89

162

Oroville Yuba County Oroville Sierra County East South Thermalito Oroville Challenge- S Brownsville Ne 70 Palermo

Loma Nevada County utte County Rica Placer County utter County

Grass 20 Valley 99 174

Yuba Alta City Linda Beale Sierra AFB

Nevada County Placer County Meadow Foresthill El Dorado County Vista Project Location 80 65 North Auburn Lincoln Auburn 193 45

Loomis Rocklin 113 Sutter 49 Pollock Roseville County Placer County 50 Pines Sacramento County Placerville Citrus Cameron Rio Orangevale El Dorado Park Heights Shingle Woodland Linda North Folsom Hills Highlands El Dorado County Springs Fair Oaks Carmichael Arden- Rancho 5 80 Arcade Cordova El Dorado County West Davis Sacramento Mather Sacramento Rosemont AFB Amador County Parkway- Rancho South Sacramento Murieta 16

Florin Sacramento County

Amador County

88 Laguna Wilton Elk 124 84 160 Grove Ione 104 26

Sacramento Cou Yolo County Solano County Amador County Calaveras Sacramento County 4 County 015 0 Galt Arnold Miles San Joaquin County n C S nty SOURCE: ESRI FIGURE 1 Regional Map

Vegetation Management Plan Date: 2/1/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-1_Regional.mxd Path: - rstrobridge by: saved - Last 2/1/2017 Date: Placer Hills Park

Meadow Vista Park

49 Regional Park

80

Atwood Ranch Open Space

Ashford Park

0 2,000 4,000 Project Locations Feet

SOURCE: USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Maps - Auburn Quadrangle FIGURE 2 Vicinity Map

Vegetation Management Plan Date: 2/1/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-2_Vicinity.mxd Path: - rstrobridge by: saved - Last 2/1/2017 Date: n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-1 Project Site Map - Ashford Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-2 Project Site Map - Atwood Ranch Open Space

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-3 Project Site Map - Meadow Vista Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 100 200 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-4 Project Site Map - Placer Hills Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd n 0 250 500 Project Site Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 3-5 Project Site Map - Regional Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure3-3_ProjectSite.mxd Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Goal 1: Identify Priority Treatment Areas for Riparian Vegetation Management Activities and Target Invasive Weed Species

Prioritizing areas for vegetation management will allow ARD to focus staff, funding, and equipment on areas where safety, access, and invasive weed management issues are most significant. To this effect, the Plan provides guidelines for assessing and prioritizing areas for vegetation management by identifying the five public spaces that would be subject to the management plan: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park (Figures 1 and 2). The Plan will identify target invasive weed species and serve as a guide for prioritizing treatments within those public spaces to achieve plan objectives.

Goal 2: Prescribe Methods, Adaptive Management Strategies, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Vegetation Management within Sensitive Habitat

This plan prescribes site-appropriate vegetation management methods and BMPs that will aid ARD in obtaining appropriate approvals from resource agencies to conduct routine maintenance within sensitive areas. Sensitive areas include riparian zones, waterways, wetlands, and potential special-status species habitat. BMPs will help minimize potential effects to biological and wetland resources and ensure maintenance activities are conducted in a manner consistent with applicable regulatory requirements. Adaptive management strategies will allow ARD the ability to adjust the vegetation management program as needed to best meet existing conditions and changes in management areas over time.

Goal 3: Develop Routine Maintenance Practices and Timing for Ongoing Riparian Vegetation Management

Continued maintenance of the riparian vegetation management areas is important for long- term visitor safety, improving access, and managing invasive weeds. Additionally, by formulating a plan for routine maintenance, financial burdens associated with vegetation management will likely be reduced over the long-term and can be included in annual budgeting.

9798 17 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 18 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

2 PLAN AREA EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 Vegetation and Land Cover Types

The majority of the Plan area sites contain defined riparian corridors along streams or surrounding ponds which are typically adjacent to or surrounded by developed, manicured public park areas such as areas of grass turf, a disc golf course, walking trails, and other developed recreational amenities. Land cover types within each of the five Plan area sites are described in greater detail below. Plant nomenclature generally follows the Jepson Manual, Second Edition (Baldwin et al. 2012).

Ashford Park. The stream channel at Ashford Park contains a mature riparian corridor with a canopy dominated by valley oak (Quercus lobata) and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). The understory of the riparian habitat is dominated by non-native species such as Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum), canary ivy (Hedera canariensis), and English ivy (Hedera helix). The project site is bounded on the north by Auburn Ravine Road and on the south by manicured grass fields within the park (Figure 3-1).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is ringed by a dense growth of cattail (Typha latifolia). Trees planted along the margins of the pond just upslope of the cattail include Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii), shining willow (Salix lasiandra), valley oak, and boxelder (Acer negundo). Southwest of the pond, an outlet drains water into a freshwater emergent wetland dominated by cattail and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya). The water then appears to travel southwest from this wetland along two vegetated swales that contain vegetation similar to annual grasslands, including wild oats (Avena fatua), bromes (Bromus hordeaceous and B. diandrus), and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis). Scattered coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), Fremont’s cottonwood, valley oak, and shining willow also occur along these drainages. The project site is bounded on the north by Atwood Road, and on the east, south, and west by residential development (Figure 3-2).

Meadow Vista Park. The unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek that occurs in Meadow Vista Park supports a mature riparian corridor dominated by white alder, Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra var. lasiandra), valley oak, shining willow, narrowleaf willow (Salix exigua), Fremont’s cottonwood, and black oak (Quercus kelloggii). The understory is dominated by Himalayan blackberry brambles. The project site is bounded on the east by what appear to be restoration plantings including nest boxes and wire cages around trees and shrubs. The project site is bounded on the west by manicured grass fields and a pond within the park, and to the north and south by rural residential and commercial development (Figure 3-3).

9798 19 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Placer Hills Park. The riparian corridor associated with the unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek narrows as it passes through Placer Hills Park. The tree canopy is dominated by white alder and shining willow. The understory is comprised of impassible Himalayan blackberry brambles. The project site is bounded on the north, east and west by rural residential development and by a school and Meadow Lane to the south (Figure 3-4).

Regional Park. Habitat within Regional Park includes mixed oak woodland in addition to the riparian corridor along Rock Creek. The mixed oak woodland is dominated by blue oaks (Quercus douglasii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and valley oak. The understory in the mixed oak woodland habitat type is mowed by ARD staff as part of regular maintenance. This project site is bounded on the west by manicured grass fields and a pond in Regional Park, and by residential development to the north, east, and south (Figure 3-5). The subject riparian corridor is relatively open at the northern end of the project site, with shining willow and oak trees dominating the canopy. Himalayan blackberry brambles are not as prevalent at the northern end of the project site. In the central and southern end of the project site, however, the riparian understory is dominated by thickets of Himalayan blackberry. Rock Creek provides limited suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frogs due to the presence of dense margin and overhanging vegetation (mostly blackberry) along much of the stream corridor. FYLF generally avoid stream margins with dense streamside vegetation as it reduces sun exposure and the number of basking sites and increases cover for predators, such as gartersnakes. 2.2 Hydrology

The Plan area varies in elevation from approximately 1,380 feet above mean sea level at Atwood Open Space Preserve to 1,722 feet above mean sea level at Meadow Vista Park. The sites generally drain toward the Bear River. Local hydrology for each site is described further below.

Ashford Park. The riparian corridor within Ashford Park is associated with a stream/ditch known as Boardman Canal. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). Water appears to continue southwest in Boardman Canal to eventually end at Roseville Reservoir far to the south of the project site. This channel is classified by the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as semi-permanently flooded, unconsolidated bottom riverine habitat (USFWS 2016 a).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The riparian vegetation within Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve consists of a vegetated strip surrounding a pond. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). The pond within the project site is described in the NWI as impounded, permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom palustrine habitat. Water appears to drain from the pond to the southwest, into a seasonally flooded channel that is characterized as seasonally flooded, emergent palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

9798 20 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Meadow Vista Park. The riparian corridor within Meadow Vista Park is associated with an unnamed stream that flows from south to north through the project site and is tributary to Wooley Creek, which flows into Lake Combie northwest of the project site. This project site is within the Magnolia Creek – Bear River Subwatershed (HUC 180201260301). This stream channel is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded forested palustrine habitat.

Placer Hills Park. The same stream channel that passes through Meadow Vista Park also passes through Placer Hills Park. A small, vegetated secondary swale is located on the north and east edges of the park and appears to channel runoff from the adjacent hills into the stream channel.

Regional Park. The riparian corridor within Regional Park surrounds Rock Creek, which flows northwest through the project site. Rock Creek is within the Orr Creek Subwatershed (HUC 180201610201). This stream appears to converge with Orr Creek north of the project site. Orr Creek is tributary to Bear River. This stream is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded, forested, palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

9798 21 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 22 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

3 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM APPROACH

A combination of physical removal and herbicide treatment will be used for riparian vegetation management and to control invasive exotic plant species in the Plan area. Monitoring and an adaptive management strategy will be employed to ensure that vegetation management activities are adjusted to meet the needs of changing conditions and biological response within the treatment areas over time. 3.1 Vegetation Management Overview

Invasive species targeted for control within the Plan area are generally aggressive, rapidly colonizing non-native plant species, such as Himalayan blackberry, that compromise the quality and functions of natural habitats within the region. In some instances, invasive species can also compromise public safety by exacerbating flood and fire hazards. Vegetation management activities proposed within the Plan area include trimming of woody vegetation and a weed control effort for removing invasive exotic weed species through both mechanical means (see Section 3.3.1 Mechanical Vegetation Removal), and through treatment with herbicides (see Section 3.3.2 Herbicide Applications). The need for follow-up weed control measures will depend on the species targeted for control, the success of the initial efforts, and whether new invasive exotic weed propagules are becoming established in the project area. Properly timed, repeat herbicide applications are usually required for complete control of many well-established invasive exotic species.

3.1.1 Target Species for Weed Control

Annual and perennial invasive exotic plant species observed growing in the five sites that are expected to be subject to control under this plan include the species listed in Table 2. Additional species may be added to this list if observed within the treatment areas.

Table 2 Target Invasive Exotic Plant Species

Location Atwood Ashford Ranch Meadow Placer Regional Species Cal-IPC Rating* Park OSP Vista Park Hills Park Park Woody Perennial Species Himalayan blackberry High      Rubus armeniacus Japanese privet Limited; however, can be   Ligustrum japonicum locally problematic

9798 23 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Table 2 Target Invasive Exotic Plant Species

Location Atwood Ashford Ranch Meadow Placer Regional Species Cal-IPC Rating* Park OSP Vista Park Hills Park Park Woody Perennial Species Canary ivy High   Hedera canariensis English ivy High   Hedera helix Annual Species Yellow star thistle High   Centaurea solstitialis Pennyroyal Moderate    Mentha pulegium Black mustard Moderate    Brassica nigra Note: * California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) Ratings: High = Severe ecological impacts, moderate to high rates of dispersal and establishment, most are widely distributed ecologically; Moderate = substantial and apparent, but not severe, ecological impacts, moderate to high rates of dispersal, though establishment is generally dependent upon ecological disturbance, distribution may range from limited to widespread; Limited = invasive but ecological impacts are minor on a statewide level, low to moderate rates of invasiveness, ecological distribution generally limited but may be locally persistent and problematic.

Because of their limited lifespan, along with the limited period of time that maintenance occurs, the control of annual weeds may not be required at all sites, or may consist only of occasional control by mechanical methods such as mowing or weed-whacking with string trimmers. 3.2 Equipment

Equipment utilized for trimming or removal of woody vegetation includes brushhog, tractor, cables, hand-held chainsaws, loppers, and/or chippers. To minimize disturbance only hand tools will be used within the stream channel and no heavy equipment or vehicles will be used in potentially jurisdictional waters, as determined by a qualified biologist. Herbaceous vegetation may be managed through hand-pulling, cutting the above-ground portion of plants using loppers, weedeaters, brushcutters, scythes, or by digging out the entire plant with a hula hoe, rake, or shovel. For herbicide application, backpack sprayers may be used in upland areas where a high density of herbaceous weedy species are present.

9798 24 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

3.3 Methods

All work shall be carried out in compliance with terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement, any other applicable permit conditions or regulations, and mitigation measures contained in the CEQA document. Large trees or plants that are removed during vegetation management work should be removed from the project site. Seedlings and small plants that are pulled, cut, or sprayed may be left to decompose on site provided they are in an area where they will quickly desiccate and not in an area where they may take root and recover. Regrowth that is subsequently treated with herbicide may be left in place to decompose so long as the plants are not allowed to recover to mature size before being treated again.

3.3.1 Mechanical Vegetation Removal

Trimming or removal of woody vegetation will be accomplished using one or a combination of the following equipment: brushhog, tractor, cables, hand-held chainsaws, loppers, and/or chippers. Herbaceous vegetation may be managed through hand-pulling, cutting the above- ground portion of plants using loppers, weedeaters/string trimmers, brushcutters, scythes, or by digging out the entire plant with a hula hoe, rake, or shovel. To minimize disturbance within the stream channels, no heavy equipment or vehicles will be used in potentially jurisdictional waters, as determined by a qualified biologist.

3.3.2 Herbicide Applications

Herbicide label directions change with some frequency, and occasionally new products are introduced or old ones are withdrawn. Currently registered herbicides that may be used for weed control in the project area include, but are not limited to, glyphosate (trade names Aquamaster, Roundup Pro, Roundup Pro Dry, Roundup Pro Concentrate, etc.), triclopyr (trade names Garlon 3A, Garlon 4, Pathfinder II), diquat (trade name Reward), fluazifop-p (trade name Fusilade II), sethoxydim (trade name Poast), and pelargonic acid (trade name Scythe). All, some, or none of these materials may be used to control weeds in the project area, depending on circumstances at the time control is accomplished. Follow-up herbicide treatment should be done at the biologically appropriate time when the recovering plants are still relatively small and before they have time to regain strength and vigor.

When performing weed control, all applicable laws, regulations, safety precautions, and label directions must be followed. State laws and regulations regarding pest control and herbicides are contained in the Food and Agriculture Code and the California Code of Regulations. To apply herbicides for hire, state law requires that the contractor performing pest control have a valid Qualified Applicator Certificate or Qualified Applicator License from the State of California, as appropriate to the contractor’s situation. If a contractor is performing the work, the contractor must also have a valid Pest Control Business License. If the contractor performing the pest control work

9798 25 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

needs specific pest control recommendations for any particular pest-control effort, the contractor should consult a licensed Pest Control Adviser for a written recommendation.

Due to a 2001 decision by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Headwaters Inc. vs. Talent Irrigation District case, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required if any pesticides are applied to or come in contact with waters of the United States. If herbicides are applied to or come in contact with water, enrollment under Water Quality Order No. 2013-0002-DWQ, General Permit No. CAG990005, Statewide General NPDES Permit for the Residual Aquatic Pesticide Discharges to Waters of the United States from Algae and Aquatic Weed Control Applications, or any subsequent permit, will be required prior to applying pesticides to the water.

Herbicides may be legally applied to any portion of the project area without an NPDES permit, so long as herbicides are not applied to or do not come into contact with open water, and all other legal requirements are met. Aquatic herbicides are not legally required for use in wetland areas unless the herbicide will actually come into contact with open water, or unless label directions prohibit their use (some pesticides have restrictions in tidal zones or where saturated soil is present). 3.4 Schedule

Physical vegetation management is anticipated to start in the autumn and run through the winter, approximately September 1 – March 30. Treatments that require entering the channel would be conducted during periods of low or no water flow and to the extent possible would be done outside of the bird breeding season, which extends from February 1 through September 1. Nesting bird surveys would be required prior to operations conducted during the nesting season. Adaptive management would allow for adjustments to return interval / frequency of treatments, but it is expected that management activities would be carried out as frequently as every year within each site, as determined necessary by ARD to meet plan objectives. Repeat herbicide applications at the appropriate growing period are typically required for complete control of many well-established invasive exotic species.

Table 3 Schedule of Treatment

Site Treatment Schedule/Frequency* Notes Ashford Park Mechanical After September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations and season/after cleared by pre-work as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Atwood Ranch Open Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting

9798 26 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Table 3 Schedule of Treatment

Site Treatment Schedule/Frequency* Notes Space Preserve Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations and season/after cleared by pre-work as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Meadow Vista Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations and season/after cleared by pre-work as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Placer Hills Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations and season/after cleared by pre-work as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Regional Park Mechanical September 1/Annually Low water, outside of bird nesting Chemical Per manufacturer’s recommendations and season/after cleared by pre-work as needed for appropriate control nesting survey; herbicide application per manufacturer’s recommendations Note: * Monitoring and adaptive management would be used to assess results of treatments and modify or maintain scheduled treatment intervals to achieve plan goals and objectives. 3.5 Access

Access to the treatment areas will be accomplished through established access routes that are currently used for maintenance activities (see Figures 4-1 through 4-5). These access routes would be used during the dry season and allow vehicles to access riparian areas overland through upland areas. As vegetation is cleared in areas with dense underbrush, further access will be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on conditions revealed by the vegetation clearing. Areas with standing or flowing water will only be accessed on foot with hand tools.

Ashford Park. Access to the riparian area associated with Auburn Ravine for vegetation management work would be gained from two points (Figure 4-1). The upstream or north end of the treatment area would be accessed from the paved parking area on the south side of Auburn Ravine Road just outside and west of the park entrance gate. The downstream or south end of the treatment area would be accessed from the surfaced walking path that extends around the south side of the pond to the equipment shop. Vehicles would be parked and equipment would be staged within either the paved parking area or previously disturbed turf areas at the end of the walking path.

9798 27 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. Access to the treatment area would be from the existing walking path that is accessed from Richardson Drive and runs just west of Vaquero Vista Drive (Figure 4-2). Vehicle parking and equipment staging would occur in existing disturbed or surfaced areas at the north end of the walking path near the pond.

Meadow Vista Park. Access to the treatment area would be from two locations, as depicted in Figure 4-3. The north end of the treatment area would be accessed from a gate and paved path on the east side of the existing parking lot. The paved path would provide access along the entire west side of the treatment area. The east side of the treatment area would be accessed from graveled pathways in the arboretum. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be within existing disturbed areas at or near these access points.

Placer Hills Park. Access to the Placer Hills Park treatment area would be from the gate on the north side of Meadow Lane on the west end of the park or from the north side of Meadow Lane on the east side of the park (Figure 4-4). Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be in existing previously disturbed turf areas within the park and adjacent to the work area.

Regional Park. Access to the treatment area would be from three locations. A potential fourth location is possible if permission can be obtained from the property owner. See Figure 4-5 which shows all potential access points. Access to the northern or upstream end of the treatment area would be from the parking lot just off of Dry Creek Road. This access point would provide for vehicles and equipment to access the treatment area from the existing walking path that runs along the west side of the treatment area. The walking path could also be accessed from the soccer field at the south or downstream side of the treatment area at the east end of the soccer field. The Dry Creek parking lot would also provide access to the riparian area on the east side of the drainage. Access may also be gained from the mobile home park on the east side of the treatment area if permission is obtained. Access to the southern end of the project site is available from State Route 49 at the southeast end of the treatment area. Vehicle parking and equipment staging would be in existing disturbed areas along the walking path or at each of the access points.

9798 28 May 2017

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-1 Project Access - Ashford Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-2 Project Access - Atwood Ranch Open Space

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-3 Project Access - Meadow Vista Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 100 200 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-4 Project Access - Placer Hills Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd

Project Site 4

4 n 0 250 500 4 Work Access Path Feet

SOURCE: Auburn Recreation District (2016); Bing (2016) FIGURE 4-5 Project Access - Regional Park

Vegetation Management Plan Date:5/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path:Z:\Projects\j979800\MAPDOC\VMP\Figure4_WorkAreaAccess.mxd Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

4 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AND MEASURES TO AVOID PROTECTED SPECIES 4.1 Best Management Practices

All work shall be carried out in compliance with terms and conditions of the Streambed Alteration Agreement, any other applicable permit conditions or regulations, and mitigation measures contained in the CEQA document. No vehicles or heavy equipment may enter into the waterways. Vehicles and heavy equipment may work from the adjacent upland areas, access roads, or other approved staging areas. All work within potentially jurisdictional wetland areas must use hand-held equipment.

Herbicide application adjacent and/or within the stream channels will be accomplished by cut and paint method. The vegetation will be cut down without disturbing the ground and an herbicide approved for use within wetlands and waterways will be painted on the exposed end of the stalk using a paintbrush. Care will be taken to ensure that no herbicide enters the water.

All large tree removal will be carried out in compliance with Placer County Code, Article 12.16 (Placer County Tree Ordinance), which may require a tree permit for certain maintenance activities and regulates native trees according to size and species and includes specific restrictions on tree removal within riparian areas. Placer County Planning will be consulted prior to maintenance activities to determine appropriate measures to comply with County Code. A certified arborist or registered professional forester will be consulted to identify regulated or non- regulated trees as necessary and prior to cutting or removal. Large trees or plants that are removed during vegetation management work should be disposed of as green waste outside of the Plan area. Seedlings and small plants that are pulled, cut, or sprayed may be left to decompose on site provided they are in an area where they will quickly desiccate and not in an area where they may take root and recover. Regrowth that is subsequently treated with herbicide may be left in place to decompose so long as the plants are not allowed to recover to mature size before being treated again. 4.2 Measures to Avoid and Minimize Effects to Protected Species

Nesting birds: Implementation of vegetation management activities each year should begin after the bird breeding season ends on September 1. This will ensure that breeding birds are not harmed by the weed control program should they be nesting in any trees or shrubs to be removed. Any large exotic trees growing in the stream channel will be cut down and treated with herbicide, if necessary, after the bird breeding season is over.

9798 39 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

Some invasive weed species require 2 to 3 years of properly timed treatment to kill the plants (Bossard et al. 2000; Di Tomaso and Healy 2003; and Tu et al. 2001). Thus, a site may require treatment during the bird breeding season. Nesting bird surveys will be performed prior to control during the bird breeding season, as needed. None of the legally registered herbicides that may be used to treat weeds in the project area pose a threat to avian species, and they may be used without restrictions, with the exceptions of the use limitations imposed for threatened and endangered species, if identified by regulatory/resource agencies.

Western pond turtle: For the protection of western pond turtle, if potentially suitable habitat for this species occurs within a treatment area, Dudek recommends a qualified biologist conduct a survey for turtles or potential turtle nests prior to vegetation management activities. Potential turtle nests will be flagged for complete avoidance until such a time as it has been determined that the eggs have hatched and the turtles have vacated the nest. The biological resources assessment prepared for the project (Dudek, 2016) identified potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle within all Plan area sites with the exception of Ashford Park.

Bats: For the protection of bat species that may utilize the project sites for foraging, Dudek recommends that vegetation management activities be confined to daylight hours.

Prior to vegetation management activities that occur in areas where tree roosting bat species (e.g., Lasiurus cinereus, Lasiurus blossevillii) could occur, a roosting bat survey will be performed by a qualified biologist to determine if any maternity colonies or overwintering roosts are present within or adjacent to the project area. Trees with peeling bark or suitable cavities will be surveyed for urine stains, guano piles or visible bats. Should an active maternity or overwintering roost be detected during surveys, the roost will be avoided until early spring when bats leave their winter roost site, or in late summer after young have left the maternity roost site. Should project activities be necessary near an active roost site, consultation with CDFW will be sought to determine a proper strategy to avoid impacts to roosting bats.

Foothill yellow-legged frog: There is a low potential for foothill yellow-legged frog to occur within all sites except Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. These sites provide limited suitable habitat for foothill yellow-legged frog since most of the stream corridor has dense margins and overhanging vegetation (Himalayan blackberry). Foothill yellow-legged frog generally avoids stream margins with dense streamside vegetation as it reduces sun exposure and available basking sites and increases cover for predators, such as gartersnakes. Stream reaches that contain dense blackberries and other vegetation along the banks do not provide suitable habitat for FYLF. Prior to vegetation management activities, areas with dense vegetation that do not provide suitable habitat will be identified in the field and delineated on a large-scale map for work crews. In these reaches, crews can conduct vegetation removal down to the water’s edge without pre-

9798 40 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

construction surveys for foothill yellow-legged frog. In all of the remaining stream reaches (not mapped as dense vegetation) that contain sparse margin vegetation and a relatively open canopy, or where rocky substrates (bedrock, boulder, and cobble) are present along the banks, pre- construction surveys will be carried out by a qualified biologist immediately prior to vegetation removal.

To further protect FYLF juveniles and adults and potentially egg masses and tadpoles if present, all work will be conducted outside of the wetted channel. However, if it is necessary to work in the channel to remove vegetation and foothill yellow-legged frog were not observed during the pre-construction survey, in-channel work will be restricted to the fall (September/October) after metamorphosis to minimize potential impacts to FYLF. To minimize impacts of any in-stream work, care will be taken to minimize disturbance to banks, aquatic vegetation, or the stream substrate.

9798 41 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

5 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

An adaptive management approach will be used to evaluate and adjust management prescriptions within each of the project sites. Adaptive management allows for the management approach to be modified through a process of evaluating the results of implementing the Plan and proposing changes to the approach to adapt it to better suit existing site conditions resulting from earlier management decisions and implementation.

Maintenance and remedial actions will be adaptive and based on annual monitoring conducted by ARD staff or an approved contractor. The monitoring visits will assess whether or not the Plan goals and objectives are being met and will specifically identify 1) the efficacy of the treatment methods, 2) new management issues since the last treatment or monitoring period, and 3) recommendations for further vegetation management. Based on observations of changing conditions or responses to treatment methods, recommendations following monitoring may include adjusting vegetation management methods. In general, management measures would be adjusted by adopting a modified or different approach that would be more effective. These modifications or changes in approach would be selected based on the management priorities as indicated by maintenance issues ratings given by filling out the simple prompts in Table 4. Higher scores would indicate a greater need for maintenance treatments targeted to address a specific issue and a higher priority for maintenance and management for that issue. A higher score overall would indicate a greater urgency to apply treatments to that project site and could indicate a need for adjustments to treatment schedules among the different sites.

Table 4 Management Priority

Years since Maintenance Issue Score (1-3)* last Invasive Public Site Treatment Weeds Safety Access Litter/Trash Total Ashford Park Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve Meadow Vista Park Placer Hills Park Regional Park Note: * Management Issue Score – 1 = Management issue is not prevalent in the site and does not require immediate attention; 2 = Management issue is moderately noticeable and will require attention within the next year; 3 = the management issue is prevalent and requires immediate attention.

9798 42 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 43 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

6 REFERENCES

Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. 2nd Edition. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Bossard, Carla C., John M. Randall, and Marc C. Hoshovsky. 2000. Invasive Plants of California’s Wildlands. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Cal-IPC (California Invasive Plant Council). 2017. California Invasive Plant Inventory Database. Cal-IPC Publication 2017. Berkeley, California: California Invasive Plant Council. Accessed March 2017. http://cal-ipc.org/paf/.

Di Tomaso, Joseph M., and Evelyn A. Healy. 2003. Aquatic and Riparian Weeds of the West. Oakland, California: University of California, Agriculture and Natural Resources Publication 3421.

Tu, M., Hurd, C., & J.M. Randall. 2001. Weed Control Methods Handbook: Tools & Techniques for Use in Natural Areas. The Nature Conservancy. April 2001.

9798 44 May 2017 Auburn Area Recreation and Parks District Riparian Vegetation Management Plan

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

9798 45 May 2017

APPENDIX B Air Quality Modeling

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 12/6/2017 1:20 PM

ARD Vegetation Management Plan Sacramento Valley Air Basin, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage

Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population

City Park 1.00 Acre 1.00 43,560.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics

Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 3.5 Precipitation Freq (Days) 65

Climate Zone 2 Operational Year 2019

Utility Company Pacific Gas & Electric Company

CO2 Intensity 641.35 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

Project Characteristics - Land Use - modeling for construction activiites associated with vegeation management. No new land use development proposed Construction Phase - project involves annual vegetation maintenance. Would require approximately 14 days of activity annually. Off-road Equipment - small tracktor and/or loader, hand-held trimming equipment Trips and VMT - assume 10 worker trips daily

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value

tblConstructionPhase NumDays 1.00 14.00

tblConstructionPhase NumDaysWeek 5.00 7.00

tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 12/5/2017 5/20/2018

tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 12/6/2017 5/7/2018

tblGrading AcresOfGrading 7.00 0.50 tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes

tblOffRoadEquipment OffRoadEquipmentType Forklifts

tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2018 2019

tblTripsAndVMT WorkerTripNumber 8.00 10.00

2.0 Emissions Summary

2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Year tons/yr MT/yr

2018 0.0130 0.1455 0.0592 1.3000e- 0.0377 6.6700e- 0.0444 0.0205 6.1400e- 0.0266 0.0000 11.5458 11.5458 3.4500e- 0.0000 11.6321 004 003 003 003

Total 0.0130 0.1455 0.0592 1.3000e- 0.0377 6.6700e- 0.0444 0.0205 6.1400e- 0.0266 0.0000 11.5458 11.5458 3.4500e- 0.0000 11.6321 004 003 003 003

Mitigated Construction

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Year tons/yr MT/yr

2018 0.0130 0.1455 0.0592 1.3000e- 0.0377 6.6700e- 0.0444 0.0205 6.1400e- 0.0266 0.0000 11.5458 11.5458 3.4500e- 0.0000 11.6321 004 003 003 003

Total 0.0130 0.1455 0.0592 1.3000e- 0.0377 6.6700e- 0.0444 0.0205 6.1400e- 0.0266 0.0000 11.5458 11.5458 3.4500e- 0.0000 11.6321 004 003 003 003 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction

2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Area 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Mobile 2.7000e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 7.3634 7.3634 4.3000e- 0.0000 7.3742 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 004

Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0183 0.0000 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.2132 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

Total 3.1100e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0183 8.5766 8.5948 1.5600e- 1.0000e- 8.6374 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 005

Mitigated Operational

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Area 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

Energy 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Mobile 2.7000e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 7.3634 7.3634 4.3000e- 0.0000 7.3742 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 004 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0183 0.0000 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.2132 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

Total 3.1100e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0183 8.5766 8.5948 1.5600e- 1.0000e- 8.6374 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 003 005

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction

3.0 Construction Detail

Construction Phase

Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week

1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 5/7/2018 5/20/2018 7 14 vegetation maintenance

Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5

Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0

Acres of Paving: 0

Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0

OffRoad Equipment

Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor

Architectural Coating Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37

Architectural Coating Forklifts 1 6.00 89 0.20

Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41

Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37

Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7.00 247 0.40

Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class

Site Preparation 3 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.0372 0.0000 0.0372 0.0203 0.0000 0.0203 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0126 0.1452 0.0566 1.2000e- 6.6700e- 6.6700e- 6.1300e- 6.1300e- 0.0000 11.0201 11.0201 3.4300e- 0.0000 11.1058 004 003 003 003 003 003

Total 0.0126 0.1452 0.0566 1.2000e- 0.0372 6.6700e- 0.0438 0.0203 6.1300e- 0.0264 0.0000 11.0201 11.0201 3.4300e- 0.0000 11.1058 004 003 003 003

Unmitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 3.4000e- 2.6000e- 2.6200e- 1.0000e- 5.5000e- 0.0000 5.6000e- 1.5000e- 0.0000 1.5000e- 0.0000 0.5258 0.5258 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.5262 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005

Total 3.4000e- 2.6000e- 2.6200e- 1.0000e- 5.5000e- 0.0000 5.6000e- 1.5000e- 0.0000 1.5000e- 0.0000 0.5258 0.5258 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.5262 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005 Mitigated Construction On-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Fugitive Dust 0.0372 0.0000 0.0372 0.0203 0.0000 0.0203 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Off-Road 0.0126 0.1452 0.0566 1.2000e- 6.6700e- 6.6700e- 6.1300e- 6.1300e- 0.0000 11.0201 11.0201 3.4300e- 0.0000 11.1058 004 003 003 003 003 003

Total 0.0126 0.1452 0.0566 1.2000e- 0.0372 6.6700e- 0.0438 0.0203 6.1300e- 0.0264 0.0000 11.0201 11.0201 3.4300e- 0.0000 11.1058 004 003 003 003

Mitigated Construction Off-Site

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Worker 3.4000e- 2.6000e- 2.6200e- 1.0000e- 5.5000e- 0.0000 5.6000e- 1.5000e- 0.0000 1.5000e- 0.0000 0.5258 0.5258 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.5262 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005

Total 3.4000e- 2.6000e- 2.6200e- 1.0000e- 5.5000e- 0.0000 5.6000e- 1.5000e- 0.0000 1.5000e- 0.0000 0.5258 0.5258 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.5262 004 004 003 005 004 004 004 004 005

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 2.7000e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 7.3634 7.3634 4.3000e- 0.0000 7.3742 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 004

Unmitigated 2.7000e- 0.0155 0.0284 8.0000e- 5.5700e- 1.1000e- 5.6800e- 1.5000e- 1.0000e- 1.6000e- 0.0000 7.3634 7.3634 4.3000e- 0.0000 7.3742 003 005 003 004 003 003 004 003 004

4.2 Trip Summary Information

Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT

City Park 1.89 22.75 16.74 14,926 14,926 Total 1.89 22.75 16.74 14,926 14,926

4.3 Trip Type Information

Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %

Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by W City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6

LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.524493 0.039926 0.196214 0.128426 0.028654 0.006473 0.020520 0.043471 0.001703 0.002000 0.006125 0.000803 0.001191

5.0 Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Electricity 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated

NaturalGas 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mitigated

NaturalGas 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated

NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr

City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Mitigated

NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated

Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use

Land Use kWh/yr t MT/yr o n City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Mitigated

Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use

Land Use kWh/yr t MT/yr o n City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

Category tons/yr MT/yr

Mitigated 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

Unmitigated 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total

SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr

Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

Consumer 4.1000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products 004

Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 005 005 005

Total 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

Mitigated

ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr

Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating

Consumer 4.1000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products 004

Landscaping 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 005 005 005 005

Total 4.1000e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 2.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 2.0000e- 004 005 005 005 005

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

Category t MT/yr o n Mitigated 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

Unmitigated 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated

Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e door Use

Land Use Mgal t MT/yr o n City Park 0 / 1.19148 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

Total 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005 Mitigated

Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e door Use

Land Use Mgal t MT/yr o n City Park 0 / 1.19148 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

Total 1.2132 5.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.2179 005 005

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste

Category/Year

Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e

t MT/yr o n Mitigated 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Unmitigated 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed

Land Use tons t MT/yr o n City Park 0.09 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Total 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Mitigated

Waste Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed

Land Use tons t MT/yr o n City Park 0.09 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

Total 0.0183 1.0800e- 0.0000 0.0453 003

9.0 Operational Offroad

Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type

10.0 Vegetation

APPENDIX C Biological Resources Assessment

December 14, 2016 9798

Mr. Kahl Muscott Auburn Area Recreation & Parks District 471 Maidu Drive #200 Auburn, California 95603

Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Dear Mr. Muscott:

This biological resources assessment describes the existing conditions for the proposed Auburn Area Recreation & Park District’s (ARD’s) Riparian Vegetation Management Plan Project (project) area that includes five distinct public spaces in Auburn and Meadow Vista, California: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park (Figures 1 and 2).

The currently proposed project would entail management of riparian vegetation along drainages within the five public spaces over a term of five years or more. Goals of the project include control of invasive plant species, trash management, and improvements to public safety.

This report describes the project sites, biological reconnaissance survey methodology, special- status biological resources present or potentially present on the sites, a preliminary assessment of potential constraints to implementation of vegetation management activities that may be posed by biological resources on the sites, and regulatory requirements associated with those resources.

1 SITE LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTION

The project consists of five sites: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. Meadow Vista Park and Placer Hills Park are located in Meadow Vista, California. Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, and Regional Park are located in Auburn, California (Figure 2). The location data for each site is provided in Table 1 and shown in Figures 2 and 3.

Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Table 1 Project Site Location Information

Other Location Information Project Site Geographic Coordinates (Section, Township (T), Range (R)) Ashford Park 38.952849, -121.105850 Section 29, T13North, R8East Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve 38.934093, -121.108282 Section 32, T13North, R8East Meadow Vista Park 38.993388, -121.024576 Section 12, T13North, R8East Placer Hills Park 38.998719, -121.024815 Section 1, T13North, R8East Regional Park 38.952994, -121.105482 Section 29, T13North, R8East

The project sites are characterized generally as riparian corridors adjacent to maintained public park spaces. The riparian corridors are generally undeveloped and unmaintained and are dominated by non-native Himalayan blackberry brambles (Rubus armeniacus).

1.1 Geography and Soils

All five sites are generally located within the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Terrain is variable within each site and ranges from hilly to flat. Specific soil data is described for each project site in Table 2 and Figure 4, and the soil types are described in more detail below.

Table 2 Soil Data

Project Site USDA Soils Types Ashford Park Auburn silt loam 2 to 15 % slopes, Auburn-Rock outcrop complex 2 to 30 % slopes Atwood Ranch Open Space Auburn silt loam 2 to 15 % slopes Preserve Meadow Vista Park Sites loam 9 to 15 % slopes, Sites loam 15 to 30 % slopes, Xerofluvents frequently flooded Placer Hills Park Mariposa-Josephine complex 5 to 30 % slopes, Xerofluvents frequently flooded Regional Park Auburn silt loam 2 to 15 % slopes, Auburn-Argonaut-Rock outcrop complex 2 to 15 % slopes, Auburn-Rock outcrop complex 2 to 30 % slopes, Auburn-Sobrante-Rock outcrop complex 2 to 30 % slopes, Xerorthents cut and fill areas, Xerorthents placer areas Source: USDA 2007.

Auburn Series Soils. Auburn series soils consist of shallow to moderately deep, well drained soils formed in material weathered from metabasic or metasedimentary rock (USDA 2007). These soils are common in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and often contain rock outcrops.

2 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Sites Series Soils. Sites series soils consist of deep or very deep, well drained soils formed in material weathered from metabasic and metasedimentary rocks. These soils are usually found at elevations ranging from 600 to 5,000 feet above mean sea level (USDA 2007).

Mariposa-Josephine Complex. Mariposa series soils consist of moderately deep well drained soils formed in material weathered from tilted slates and schists. These soils are generally found on undulating to steep slopes on ridges and sides of mountains (USDA 2007).

Xerofluvents. Xerofluvent frequently flooded soils are generally found adjacent to stream channels and generally contain somewhat poorly drained alluvium. These soils may be subject to frequent flooding from the stream.

Xerorthents. Xerorthents soils consist of cut and fill areas where the soils have been mechanically moved or altogether removed. Soils may have been removed for use as fill for development. This soil type is generally well drained and is often subject to rapid surface water runoff.

1.2 Hydrology

The project sites vary in elevation from approximately 1,380 feet above mean sea level at Atwood Open Space Preserve to 1,722 feet above mean sea level at Meadow Vista Park. The sites generally drain toward the Bear River. Local hydrology for each site is described further below.

Ashford Park. The riparian corridor within Ashford Park is associated with a stream/ditch known as Boardman Canal. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). Water appears to continue southwest in Boardman Canal to eventually end at Roseville Reservoir far to the south of the project site. This channel is classified by the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) as semi-permanently flooded, unconsolidated bottom riverine habitat (USFWS 2016a).

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The riparian vegetation within Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve consists of a vegetated strip surrounding a pond. This project site is within the Dutch Ravine – Auburn Ravine Subwatershed (Hydrologic Unit Code 180201610102). The pond within the project site is described in the NWI as impounded, permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom palustrine habitat. Water appears to drain from the pond to the southwest, into a seasonally flooded channel that is characterized as seasonally flooded, emergent palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

Meadow Vista Park. The riparian corridor within Meadow Vista Park is associated with an unnamed stream that flows from south to north through the project site and is tributary to

3 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Wooley Creek, which flows into Lake Combie northwest of the project site. This project site is within the Magnolia Creek – Bear River Subwatershed (HUC 180201260301). This stream channel is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded forested palustrine habitat.

Placer Hills Park. The same stream channel that passes through Meadow Vista Park also passes through Placer Hills Park. A small, vegetated secondary swale is also located on the north and east edges of the park and appear to channel runoff from the adjacent hills into the stream channel.

Regional Park. The riparian corridor within Regional Park surrounds Rock Creek, which flows northwest through the project site. Rock Creek is within the Orr Creek Subwatershed (HUC 180201610201). This stream appears to converge with Orr Creek north of the project site. Orr Creek is tributary to Bear River. This stream is classified by the NWI as temporarily flooded, forested, palustrine habitat (USFWS 2016).

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The proposed project would include routine and ongoing maintenance by ARD along riparian corridors within the five public facilities: Ashford Park, Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, Meadow Vista Park, Placer Hills Park, and Regional Park. The primary objective of this maintenance is to improve security and access, combat the spread of invasive weedy plant species, and to discourage unauthorized camping and illegal activity. Maintenance activities would include clearing of dense vegetation and pruning trees, as necessary, within the riparian corridor. It is anticipated that the proposed maintenance activities would be carried out for a period of at least five years according to the terms of a routine maintenance agreement entered into between ARD and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).

3 PRELIMINARY SITE EVALUATION

The survey was conducted on foot to visually cover each of the five project sites. Aerial photography with an overlay of the project boundaries was utilized to map the vegetation communities and record any special-status or sensitive biological resources while in the field. Data regarding biological and jurisdictional resources present within the project sites was obtained through a review of pertinent literature and field reconnaissance. The results of the preliminary site evaluation are described in detail below.

3.1 Special-Status Species

Special-status biological resources present or potentially present on the sites were identified through a literature search using the following sources: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

4 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

IPaC Trust Resource Report (USFWS 2016b); California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB); and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants. Historical aerial photography was used to determine areas of the site that could potentially contain jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State.

A CNDDB records search was conducted for the Auburn, California USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle and the surrounding eight quadrangles. Only California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1, 2, and 3 plant species were included in this search.

Following review of these resources, Dudek determined the potential for each species to occur within the site based on a review of vegetation communities and available land cover types, soils, and elevation preferences, as well as the known geographic range of each species (Appendix A). For example, if the site is within the elevation range of a particular plant species, but a specific soil type for the species is not present, the species is considered to have low potential to occur on the site. Also, species were not expected to occur when the site was clearly outside of the known geographic range of the species.

4 FIELD RECONNAISSANCE AND METHODS

A biological reconnaissance survey was conducted by Dudek biologist Laura Burris on August 16, 2016. The survey included walking the project sites where access was possible through the thick blackberry brambles. Objectives during the survey included mapping vegetation communities, land cover types encountered, and potentially jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the U.S., and assessing the potential for special-status species to occur within the project sites.

4.1 Vegetation Community and Land Cover Mapping

The survey was conducted on foot to visually cover each of the five project sites. Aerial photography with an overlay of the project boundaries was utilized to map the vegetation communities and record any special-status or sensitive biological resources while in the field.

4.2 Flora

Plant species encountered during the field survey that were able to be identified were recorded directly into a field notebook. Common and scientific names for plant species with a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR, formerly CNPS List) follow the CNPS On-Line Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California (CNPS 2016). Unknown plant species were either

5 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California photographed or collected when the population could sustain collection, and identified at the lab. A list of plant species observed on the site is presented in Appendix C.

4.3 Fauna

Wildlife species detected during the field survey by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs were recorded directly into a field notebook. The site was scanned with and without binoculars to aid in the identification of wildlife. In addition to species actually detected during the surveys, expected wildlife use of the site was determined by known habitat preferences of local species and knowledge of their relative distributions in the area.

4.4 Jurisdictional Wetlands

Dudek conducted a constraints-level analysis for potentially jurisdictional waters and wetlands based on criteria provided by the following agencies:

 Waters of the U.S., including wetlands, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act.  Wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the Porter-Cologne Act.  Wetlands under the jurisdiction of CDFW, pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code.

Pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), ACOE- and RWQCB-jurisdictional areas include those supporting all three wetlands criteria described in the ACOE manual: hydric soils, hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Areas regulated by the RWQCB are generally coincident with the ACOE, but may also include isolated features that have evidence of surface water inundation pursuant to the state Porter Cologne Act. These areas generally support at least one of the three ACOE wetlands indicators but are considered isolated through the lack of surface water hydrology/connectivity downstream. The extent of CDFW-regulated areas typically include areas supporting a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., 50% cover or greater) where associated with a stream channel.

Specifically, Dudek performed a constraints-level wetland assessment within the project sites, reviewed current and historical aerial photography, and then identified potentially jurisdictional features based on aerial signatures and field observations.

6 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

5 RESULTS

The quantification of biological resources described below pertains to habitats and species present within the project sites only. No off-site areas are included in this analysis since these areas were not evaluated as part of the assessment. Representative photographs of the proposed project sites are depicted in Appendix A.

5.1 Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types

The majority of the sites contain defined riparian corridors along streams or surrounding ponds. Additionally, they contain developed, manicured park ground surrounding the riparian corridors. These land cover types are described for each project site in detail below.

Ashford Park. The stream channel at Ashford Park contained a mature riparian corridor with a canopy dominated by valley oak (Quercus lobata) and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). The understory of the riparian habitat was dominated by non-native species such as Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum), canary ivy (Hedera canariensis), and English ivy (Hedera helix). The project site is bounded on the north by Auburn Ravine Road and on the south by the manicured lawns of Ashford Park.

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is ringed by a dense growth of cattail (Typha latifolia). Trees planted along the margins of the pond just upslope of the cattail include Fremont’s cottonwood (Populus fremontii), shining willow (Salix lasiandra), valley oak, and boxelder (Acer negundo). Southwest of the pond, an outlet drains water into a freshwater emergent wetland dominated by cattail and creeping spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya). The water then appears to travel southwest from this wetland along two vegetated swales that contain vegetation similar to annual grasslands, including wild oats (Avena fatua), bromes (Bromus hordeaceous and B. diandrus), and Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis). Scattered coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), Fremont’s cottonwood, valley oak, and shining willow also occur along these drainages. The project site is bounded on the north by Atwood Road, and on the east, south, and west by residential development.

Meadow Vista Park. The unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek that occurs in Meadow Vista Park supports a mature riparian corridor dominated by white alder, pacific willow, valley oak, shining willow, narrowleaf willow (Salix exigua), Fremont’s cottonwood, and black oak (Quercus kelloggii). The understory is dominated by Himalayan blackberry brambles. The project site is bounded on the east by what appears to be restoration plantings including nest boxes and wire cages around trees and shrubs. The project site is bounded on the west by the

7 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California manicured Meadow Vista Park and a pond, and to the north and south by rural residential and commercial development.

Placer Hills Park. The riparian corridor associated with the unnamed tributary to Wooley Creek narrows as it passes through Placer Hills Park. The tree canopy is dominated by white alder and shining willow. The understory is comprised of impassible Himalayan blackberry brambles. The project site is bounded on the north, east and west by rural residential development and by a school to the south.

Regional Park. Habitat within Regional Park includes mixed oak woodland and the riparian corridor along Rock Creek. The mixed oak woodland is dominated by blue oaks (Quercus douglasii), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), and valley oak. The understory in this habitat type is mowed by ARD staff for maintenance purposes. The riparian corridor is relatively open at the northern end of the project site, with shining willow and oak trees dominating the canopy. Himalayan blackberry brambles are not as prevalent at the northern end of the project site. In the central and southern end of the project site, however, the riparian understory is dominated by thickets of Himalayan blackberry plants. This project site is bounded on the west by the manicured Regional Park and a pond, and by residential development to the north, east, and south.

5.2 Aquatic Habitats and Jurisdictional Wetlands and Waters

Aquatic habitats within the project sites include ephemeral streams, perennial streams, vegetated swale, ponds, and seasonal wetlands. A wetland delineation has not been completed for these sites. Aquatic features within the project sites are described in more detail below.

Ashford Park. Boardman Canal flows from northeast to southwest through the project site. This stream contains a defined bed and bank with silty to cobble-lined substrates. Water was actively and vigorously flowing in the stream channel at the time of the site survey. Exposed roots and undercut banks along this stream are evidence of sustained, relatively high velocity flows in this stream.

Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve. The pond at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve contained water at the time of the site survey, although it was below full capacity as evidenced by mudflats around the perimeter of the pond where cattails were absent. A spillway at the southwest end of the pond allows water to leave the pond to a freshwater emergent wetland just south and west of the pond. This freshwater emergent wetland is dominated by cattail and creeping spikerush. Water leaves the wetland via several small, incised channels in the grassland and travels south where it exits the project site through several culverts.

8 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Meadow Vista Park. The stream in Meadow Vista Park contains a defined bed and bank with a gravel and cobble substrate. Water was actively flowing from south to north through the project site at the time of the site survey. The water appears to enter the site from a large culvert under Placer Hills Road at the southeastern end of the project site and leaves the project site under the Meadow Vista Road Bridge to the north. A pond occurs just outside and to the west of the project site and is separated from the project site by a paved walking path. A spillway at the northern end of this pond drains water into a small vegetated swale that meets with the larger stream channel in the project site just before it travels under Meadow Vista Road. Mosquito fish and crayfish were observed within this stream channel during the site visit.

Placer Hills Park. The same unnamed stream that passes through Meadow Vista Park passes along the west edge of Placer Hills Park. The channel of this stream is deeply incised at this point and contains a very thick growth of Himalayan blackberry in the understory along the banks. Due to the overgrowth of vegetation, the channel was barely visible and conditions of the substrate of the channel could not be ascertained. A small vegetated swale appears to channel rain water runoff from the east side of the park, along the park’s northern perimeter to the stream. Although the vegetated swale was dry at the time of the site survey, the stream channel contained actively flowing water.

Regional Park. Rock Creek flows through Regional Park from south to north. This stream channel contained water at the time of the site survey and is characterized by gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates. The stream widens into several ponded areas at the northern end of the project site where fish are abundant. Numerous small (2 inches to 5 inches long) fish were noted within pools in the stream during the site survey. A pond occurs just outside and to the west of the project site at the southern end of the project site. Water from this pond appears to leak from overflow from a spillway and enter Rock Creek through a smaller side channel. Several freshwater emergent wetlands are located along the creek channel in the vicinity of this pond and are most likely formed from seepage from the pond.

5.3 Plants and Wildlife

A total of 56 species of vascular plants were recorded during the site survey (Appendix B); of the 56 species observed, 29 were native to California and 27 were nonnative.

Twelve wildlife species or their sign were observed during the field survey: gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), California towhee (Melozone crissalis), western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), American robin (Turdus migratorius), acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes

9 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California formicivorus), black-headed phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), California quail (Callipepla californica), mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), and raccoon (Procyon lotor) scat. Additionally, numerous small fish ranging in size from approximately 2 inches to 5 inches in length were noted within streams at Meadow Vista Park and Regional Park. The sites are a combination of relatively undisturbed riparian habitat and developed, managed park lands. It is likely that small mammals, birds, and reptiles use the areas frequently for foraging and cover.

5.4 Special-Status Wildlife

Results of the CNDDB and USFWS searches revealed 22 listed or special-status wildlife species, or species proposed for listing as rare, threatened, or endangered by either the CDFW or the USFWS with potential to occur within the region (Appendix C). Of these, 16 were removed from consideration due to lack of suitable or high quality habitat within or adjacent to the project site, or the project site was outside of the known species range. Species removed from further consideration included California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), Blainville’s horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), southern California Distinct Population Segment (DPS), central California coast DPS, northern California DPS, south/central California Coast DPS Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), summer-run steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), west coast DPS fisher (Pekania pennanti), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus), bank swallow (Riparia riparia), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), osprey (Pandion haliaetus), Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), valley elderberry longhorn beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus), and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi).

No suitable habitat for anadromous fish occurs within the streams at the project sites due to barriers to anadromy located downstream along the Bear River. No elderberry shrubs (Sambucus nigra) were noted within any of the five project sites; thus, there is no suitable habitat for valley elderberry longhorn beetle. Although there is emergent vegetation along the margins of wetland features within some of the project sites that are potentially suitable to support black rail, the sites are within developed areas frequented by humans and it is unlikely this species would utilize the habitat within the project sites. The banks of the streams were either not steep enough or were overgrown with blackberry brambles and therefore do not provide suitable nesting habitat for bank swallow. Furthermore, the site lacks large stands of mature forest habitat that would be suitable for fisher. These species are not expected to be present or utilize habitat within the site.

10 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Aquatic features at all the project sites except for Ashford Park provide potentially suitable aquatic breeding habitat for California red-legged frog. The project sites are within the historic range of this species; however, no documented occurrences are present within five miles of any of the project sites. Further, surveys conducted at suitable habitat within 2 kilometers of the historic occurrence documented in Auburn did not identify any remaining populations or new populations (Barry and Fellers 2013). The nearest extant population to the project sites is the population located at Big Gun Diggings, which is located more than 10 miles east of the Meadow Vista sites and is separated from the sites by very deep mountain gorges and high peaks not traversable by this species. Thus, it is highly unlikely that California red-legged frog would be found in potentially suitable habitat in any of the project sites.

All of the six remaining species have moderate to high potential to occur on the project site. These are foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii), western pond turtle (Emys marmorata), American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum), purple martin (Progne subis), Central Valley DPS of steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus), Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii).

Suitable nesting and foraging habitat exists for many species of birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In addition, suitable habitat occurs within all project sites for American peregrine falcon, a California fully protected raptor and purple martin, a California bird species of special concern. American peregrine falcon nest on cliffs, buildings, and bridges and the project sites do not provide suitable nesting habitat for this species; however, there is suitable foraging habitat for this species within all project sites. There is one documented occurrence of American peregrine falcon within 5 miles of the project sites, just north of Ashford Park (CNDDB 2016). Purple martins are cavity nesters and have been known to nest and forage in riparian woodlands. Several snags with nesting cavities were noted within the project sites at Placer Hills Park, Meadow Vista Park, and Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve, and all project sites provide suitable riparian vegetation; thus, there is suitable nesting and foraging habitat for this species within all five project sites. There are no documented occurrences of purple martin within 5 miles of the project sites and the potential for these to occur is reduced to moderate.

Foothill yellow-legged frogs prefer rocky streams and rivers with open banks in a variety of forested or scrubby habitats. The nearest documented CNDDB occurrence for this species is located approximately 4.5 miles northeast of the project site along the Bear River (Figure 5; CNDDB 2016). The northern section of Rock Creek where it passes through the Regional Park contains moderately suitable habitat with rocky substrates and banks relatively free of overhanging vegetation in many areas. The streams in the other project sites are choked with blackberry

11 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California brambles and do not provide high quality habitat for this species. The pond and seasonal wetland at Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve do not provide suitable habitat for this species.

The Central Valley DPS of steelhead occurs in cool streams with rocky and gravelly substrates for spawning. Critical habitat for this species was designated for this species by the USFWS in 2005 (50 CFR Part 226). Critical habitat for this species occurs in stream reaches in Lower Coon Creek watershed downstream from Rock Creek where it flows through Regional Park. Numerous unidentifiable fish were observed within pools within Rock Creek at Regional Park. However, the upper Coon Creek watershed, which includes Rock Creek, does not contain protected anadromous fish. Thus, impacts to this species are not anticipated as a result of this project.

Potentially suitable habitat for western pond turtle occurs at all of the project sites except for Ashford Park, where high velocity flows likely preclude the presence of this species in the waterway. Although no turtles were noted at the project sites during the site surveys, there is potential for this species to utilize the aquatic habitats, as well as the upland habitat surrounding the waterways for foraging and nesting. This species has been previously documented within 5 miles of the project sites (CNDDB 2016).

Townsends big-eared bat generally roosts in limestone caves and lava tubes, but has been known to roost in man-made structures such as abandoned buildings, bridges, and tunnels if conditions are right. This species prefers to forage in mesic habitat such as the riparian corridors within the project sites. There are two documented occurrences of this species within 5 miles of the project sites, both south and east of Auburn (CNDDB 2016). There is potential for this species to utilize all five project sites for foraging.

5.5 Special-Status Plants

Results of the CNDDB and CNPS searches revealed 15 special-status plant species that have potential to occur in the vicinity of the project site (Appendix C). All 15 species were removed from consideration due to lack of suitable habitat, lack of appropriate soils or soil substrates, low quality or quantity of habitat, or the site was out of the species known geographic or elevation range.

5.6 Sensitive Resources and/or Habitats

The riparian corridors, streams, and wetlands within the five project sites are all potentially sensitive resources and habitats. These features are described above in Section 5.2. Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve is open space land set aside as part of the Atwood Ranch LLC planned residential development (Placer County 2010).

12 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

5.7 Wildlife Corridors and Habitat Linkages

Wildlife corridors are linear features that connect large patches of natural open space and provide avenues for the migration of animals. Habitat linkages are small patches that join larger blocks of habitat and help reduce the adverse effects of habitat fragmentation; they may be continuous habitat or discrete habitat islands that function as stepping stones for wildlife dispersal.

Drainages with riparian cover such as those within the project sites serve as local movement corridors by resident wildlife. Additionally, because these riparian areas generally occur in developed areas, the may also provide essential habitat linkages between fragmented segments of natural habitat.

Because the project sites are situated among fragmented habitat, the riparian corridors provide quality wildlife corridor and habitat linkage. However, the proposed maintenance activities would not impede local or seasonal movement of animals among the surrounding habitat.

6 POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section identifies potential constraints to proceeding with the proposed project that would result from special-status biological resources that occur on the project sites. Recommendations for addressing these potential constraints are also provided.

6.1 Vegetation

The purpose of the proposed project is to maintain the riparian corridors within park spaces managed by the ARD. This will entail trimming and removal of vegetation, primarily non- native Himalayan blackberry and other non-native vegetation such as English ivy and Japanese privet. Native trees such as white alder, valley oak, live oak, and willows may also be trimmed to promote safety and to provide access for management activities. Management of vegetation within the riparian corridors would require a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement with CDFW through Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. Any tree removal required should be carried out in compliance with the Placer County tree preservation ordinance, which may require a permit for tree removal.

6.2 Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.

The proposed project sites include drainages, ponds, and wetlands that could potentially be under the joint regulation of the ACOE, RWQCB, and CDFW. Any impacts that result in dredging or discharge of fill material in these wetlands and waters will require authorization from the resource agencies listed above in the form of wetland permits (e.g., 404 Nationwide Permit, 401 Water

13 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

Quality Certification, and 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement respectively). However, clearing of vegetation by crews using hand tools will not include ground disturbance and will not result in fill or discharge to potentially jurisdictional features. To further reduce potential for impacts to wetlands and waters, all application of herbicide within bed or bank of waterways will be applied by hand to prevent discharge into potentially jurisdictional features.

6.3 Special-Status Plants

No special-status plants have potential to occur within the project sites and none were observed during the field survey.

If vegetation management is to extend into upland areas surrounding the riparian corridors for any reason, Dudek recommends a rare plant survey be performed by a qualified botanist during the appropriate blooming season to determine if any special-status plant species occur within the area that would be disturbed by the proposed vegetation management. Should any special-status plant species be detected during the survey, Dudek recommends adjusting vegetation management activities to avoid impacts to these species. Other mitigation options could include relocation or seed collection and reestablishment in an alternate location.

6.4 Special-Status Animals

No special-status animals were detected during this survey. However, all native birds in California are protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, which specifically protects raptors. The site has suitable nesting habitat for several common raptor species found in California, such as Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), and also common passerine species such as acorn woodpecker. Potentially suitable habitat occurs in the project sites for American peregrine falcon and purple martin; however both are secretive species and tend to avoid areas with increased levels of human disturbance. Because the project sites are public open space areas and are frequented by people, it is unlikely these species would nest in close proximity to the project sites.

Although several raptor and passerine species have the potential to nest and forage on and adjacent to the sites, the relatively large amount of undisturbed habitat surrounding the project area makes it unlikely that project activities would discourage avian species from continuing to exist within the area. Additionally, preconstruction surveys for nesting birds, as described below, will ensure that no impact to these species will occur as a result of vegetation management activities.

To ensure that no impacts to nesting birds would occur as a result of the proposed project activities, if vegetation management is to occur during the nesting season for most birds

14 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

(February 1 through September 1), Dudek recommends a nesting bird survey be completed by a qualified biologist two weeks prior to project implementation to determine if any native birds are nesting on or near the site (including a 150 foot buffer for raptors). If any active nests are observed during surveys, a suitable avoidance buffer from the nests will be determined and flagged by the qualified biologist based on species, location and planned construction activity. These nests would be avoided until the chicks have fledged and the nests are no longer active.

For the protection of potential western pond turtle, Dudek recommends a qualified biologist conduct a survey for potential turtle nests prior to vegetation management activities. Potential turtle nests will be flagged for complete avoidance until such a time as it has been determined that the eggs have hatched and the turtles have vacated the nest.

For the protection of bat species that may utilize the project sites for foraging, Dudek recommends that vegetation management activities be confined to daylight hours.

To avoid impacts to potentially occurring foothill yellow-legged frog, no work within the wetted part of the channel at Regional Park is recommended.

6.5 Sensitive Resources and/or Habitats

Sensitive resources and habitats including riparian habitat and potentially jurisdictional features are regulated by CDFW, USFWS and ACOE as discussed in 6.2 above. All wetland and waterways within the project sites are likely under jurisdiction of ACOE, RWQCB, or CDFW. If discharge of fill material into these wetland features is anticipated, permits from the appropriate agencies must be obtained.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact me via telephone at 916.835.9671 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,

______Laura Burris Biologist

Att.: Appendix A, Representative photographs of the Project Sites Appendix B1, Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area Appendix B2, Special-Status Wildlife Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area Appendix C, List of Vascular Plant Species Recorded Within the Sites

15 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

REFERENCES CITED

16 U.S.C. 703–712. Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended.

Barry, Sean J. and G. M. Fellers. 2013. History and Status of the California Red-Legged Frog (Rana Draytonii) in the Sierra Nevada, California USA. In Herpetological Conservation and Biology 8(2): 456-502. September 15, 2013.

CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2016. “Special Animals (900 taxa).” California Natural Diversity Database. CDFG, Biogeographic Data Branch. .http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants_and_animals.asp.

CDFW. 2016. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Rarefind, Version 5 (Commercial Subscription). Sacramento, California: CDFW, http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ biogeodata/cnddb/mapsanddata.asp.

CDFW. 2015. “State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California.” California Natural Diversity Database. CDFW, Biogeographic Data Branch. August 2016, http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/TEPlants.pdf.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2016. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-02). California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org (accessed August 2016).

County of Placer (Placer County). 2010. County of Placer Planning Commission Public Meeting Agenda and Notes. January 28, 2010.

Google Earth V 7.1.5.1557. (May 20, 2015). Auburn, California. 39°17’28.65”N, 120°22’59.73” W, Eye alt 31,646 feet. Digital Globe 2016. http://www.earth.google.com [August 2, 2016].

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. 1300 pp.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87- 1.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2007. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey. Accessed August 2016. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/ app/HomePage.htm.

16 December 2016 Mr. Kahl Muscott Subject: Biological Resources Assessment for the Auburn Area Recreation and Park District’s Riparian Vegetation Management Project in Auburn, Placer County, California

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWSa). 2016. National Wetlands Inventory website. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.

USFWSb. 2016. IPaC Trust Resources Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. IPaC v3.0.8. Generated August 22, 2016. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/.

17 December 2016 APPENDIX A Representative Photos

APPENDIX A Representative Photos

Photo 1: View of riparian corridor at Placer Hills Park, facing north.

Photo 2: View of vegetated swale at Placer Hills Park, facing northwest.

A-1 December 2016 APPENDIX A (Continued)

Photo 3: View of riparian corridor at Meadow Vista Park, facing southwest.

Photo 4: View of pond outfall at Meadow Vista Park, facing west.

A-2 December 2016 APPENDIX A (Continued)

Photo 5: View of typical pool in Rock Creek at the northern end of Regional Park, facing northeast.

Photo 6: View of the pond at Atwood Open Space Preserve, facing north.

A-3 December 2016 APPENDIX A (Continued)

Photo 7: View of freshwater emergent marsh at Atwood Open Space Preserve, facing southwest.

Photo 8: View of riparian corridor at Ashford Park, facing west.

A-4 December 2016 APPENDIX B1 Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area

APPENDIX B1 Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area

Status Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Form/ Blooming Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State/CRPR) Period/ Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur by Site Allium jepsonii Jepson's onion None/ None/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. coniferous forest/ Serpentinite or volcanic/ perennial The project sites do not contain suitable bulbiferous herb/ Apr-Aug/ 984-4,331 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Balsamorhiza big-scale None/ None/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Valley and foothill Not expected to occur at all project sites. macrolepis balsamroot grassland/sometimes serpentinite/ perennial herb/ Mar- The project sites do not contain suitable Jun/ 295-5,102 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Calystegia Stebbins' morning- FE/ CE/ 1B.1 Chaparral (openings), Cismontane woodland/gabbroic or Not expected to occur at all project sites. stebbinsii glory serpentinite/ perennial rhizomatous herb/ Apr-Jul/ 607- The project sites do not contain suitable 3,576 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Ceanothus Pine Hill ceanothus FE/ CR/ 1B.1 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland/ Serpentinite or Not expected to occur at all project sites. roderickii gabbroic (nutrient-deficient forms of gabbro-derived soils The project sites do not contain suitable characterized by low concentration)/ perennial evergreen habitat or soil substrates for this species. shrub/ Apr-Jun/ 804-2,067 Chlorogalum Red Hills soaproot None/ None/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. grandiflorum coniferous forest/ serpentinite, gabbroic and other soils/ The project sites do not contain suitable perennial bulbiferous herb/ May-Jun/ 804-4,068 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Crocanthemum Bisbee Peak rush- None/ None/ 3.2 Chaparral/ often gabbroic or lone soil; often burned or Not expected to occur at all project sites. suffrutescens rose disturbed areas/ perennial evergreen shrub/ Apr-Aug/ The project sites do not contain suitable 246-2,198 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Fritillaria Butte County None/ None/ 3.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. eastwoodiae fritillary coniferous forest (openings)/ sometimes serpentinite/ The project sites do not contain suitable perennial bulbiferous herb/ Mar-Jun/ 164-4,921 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Galium El Dorado FE/ CR/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. californicum ssp. bedstraw coniferous forest/ gabbroic/ perennial herb/ May-Jun/ 328- The project sites do not contain suitable sierrae 1,919 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Gratiola Boggs Lake None/ CE/ 1B.2 Marshes and swamps (lake margins), Vernal pools/clay/ Not expected to occur at all project sites. heterosepala hedge-hyssop annual herb/ Apr-Aug/ 33-7,792 The project sites do not provide suitable vernal pool habitat with clay soil underlayment. Horkelia parryi Parry's horkelia None/ None/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland/Ione formation and Not expected to occur at all project sites. other soils/ perennial herb/ Apr-Sep/ 262-3,510 The project sites do not contain suitable habitat or soil substrates for this species.

B2-1 December 2016 APPENDIX B1 (Continued)

Status Primary Habitat Associations/ Life Form/ Blooming Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/State/CRPR) Period/ Elevation Range (feet) Potential to Occur by Site Lathyrus dubious pea None/ None/ 3 Cismontane woodland, Lower montane coniferous forest, Not expected to occur at all project sites. sulphureus var. Upper montane coniferous forest/ perennial herb/ Apr- The project sites do not contain suitable argillaceus May/ 492-3,051 habitat for this species. Packera layneae Layne's ragwort FT/ CR/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland/ serpentinite or Not expected to occur at all project sites. gabbroic, rocky/ perennial herb/ Apr-Aug/ 656-3,560 The project sites do not contain suitable habitat or soil substrates for this species. Poa sierrae Sierra blue grass None/ None/ 1B.3 Lower montane coniferous forest/ Openings/ perennial Not expected to occur at all project sites. rhizomatous herb/ Apr-Jun/ 1,198-4,921 The project sites do not contain suitable habitat for this species. Viburnum oval-leaved None/ None/ 2B.3 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. ellipticum viburnum coniferous forest/ perennial deciduous shrub/ May-Jun/ The project sites do not contain suitable 705-4,593 habitat or soil substrates for this species. Wyethia reticulata El Dorado County None/ None/ 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Lower montane Not expected to occur at all project sites. mule ears coniferous forest/clay or gabbroic/ perennial herb/ Apr- The project sites do not contain suitable Aug/ 607-2,067 habitat or soil substrates for this species.

B1-2 December 2016 APPENDIX B2 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Area

APPENDIX B2 Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Proposed Project Sites

Status Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/ State) Habitat Potential to Occur by Site Amphibians Rana boylii foothill yellow- None/ SSC Rocky streams and rivers with open banks in forest, High potential to occur at all sites except Atwood Ranch legged frog chaparral and woodland Open Space Preserve. All sites except for Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve support potentially suitable rocky stream habitat for this species. Atwood Ranch Open Space Preserve does not contain suitable habitat for this species. The closest known population is approximately 4.75 miles east of Placer Hills Park and Meadow Vista Park. Rana draytonii California red- FT/ SSC Lowland streams, wetlands, riparian woodlands, Low potential to occur at all sites. Suitable habitat for this legged frog livestock ponds; dense, shrubby or emergent species occurs within the ponds and streams within the vegetation associated with deep, still or slow- project sites; however, there are no documented moving water; uses adjacent uplands occurrences of this species within 5 miles of the project sites. Reptiles Phrynosoma Blainville's horned None/ SSC Open areas of sandy soil in valleys, foothills and Not expected to occur at all sites. These sites do not blainvillii lizard semi-arid mountains including coastal scrub, suitable habitat for this species such as dry, loose, sandy chaparral, valley-foothill hardwood, conifer, riparian, soil. Additionally, the riparian vegetation at all sites is very pine-cypress, juniper and annual grassland dense and without openings. There are no documented occurrences of this species within 5 miles of the project sites. Emys marmorata western pond turtle None/None Slow-moving permanent or intermittent streams, High potential to occur at all sites except Ashford Park. ponds, small lakes, reservoirs with emergent All sites except for Ashford Park offer potentially suitable basking sites; adjacent uplands used for nesting foraging and basking habitat for these species in the form of and during winter ponds or slow moving streams. The stream at Ashford park was swift-moving and steep-sided; therefore, it does not provide suitable aquatic or basking habitat for this species. This species was historically documented in the Auburn area.

B2-1 December 2016 APPENDIX B2 (Continued)

Status Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/ State) Habitat Potential to Occur by Site Birds Laterallus California black rail BCC/ ST, FP Tidal marshes, shallow freshwater margins, wet Low potential to occur at Regional Park and Atwood jamaicensis meadows and flooded grassy vegetation; suitable Open Space Preserve. No potential to occur at the other coturniculus habitats are often supplied by canal leakage in sites. This species generally occurs within wet, marsh Sierra foothill populations habitat, and requires dense vegetation for cover from predators. Suitable habitat for this species is present within the cattail surrounding the pond at Atwood Regional Open space Preserve and the vegetation along Rock Creek at Regional Park; however, this species has not been identified within 5 miles of the project sites. Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird BCC/ SE, SSC Nests near fresh water, emergent wetland with Low potential to occur at all project sites. Suitable (nesting colony) cattails or tules, but also in Himalayan blackberrry; habitat for this species is present within the blackberry forages in grasslands, woodland, and agriculture brambles or cattail at the project sites; however, there is limited foraging habitat and there are no known occurrences of this species within 5 miles of the project sites. Falco peregrinus American FDL/ SDL, FP Nests on cliffs, buildings, and bridges; forages in Moderate potential to forage at all project sites, no anatum (nesting) peregrine falcon wetlands, riparian, meadows, croplands, especially potential to nest. The sites offer suitable foraging habitat where waterfowl are present for this species and there are known occurrences of this species within the project vicinity; however, none of the five sites provide suitable nesting habitat for this species. Haliaeetus bald eagle FDL, BCC/ SE, Nests in forested areas adjacent to large bodies of Low potential to nest adjacent to Placer Hills Park, no leucocephalus FP water, including seacoasts, rivers, swamps, large potential to occur at all other sites. Coniferous forest (nesting and lakes; winters near large bodies of water in directly west of Placer Hills Park may provide potentially wintering) lowlands and mountains suitable nesting habitat for this species; however, foraging habitat is less than optimal at all of five sites and there are no known occurrences within 5 miles. Riparia riparia bank swallow None/ ST Nests in riparian, lacustrine and coastal areas with Not expected to occur at all project sites. There are no (nesting) vertical banks, bluffs and cliffs with sandy soils; suitable vertical banks within any of the five sites; thus, open country and water during migration there is no suitable nesting habitat for this species.

B2-2 December 2016 APPENDIX B2 (Continued)

Status Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/ State) Habitat Potential to Occur by Site Elanus leucurus white-tailed kite None/ FP Nests in woodland, riparian, and individual trees Low potential to occur at all project sites. The sites offer (nesting) near open lands; forages opportunistically in suitable nesting habitat for this species in the more sparsely grassland, meadows, scrubs, agriculture, emergent vegetated areas, however, this species prefers to forage in wetland, savanna, and disturbed lands open woodlands, cleared lands, and cultivated fields, which do not occur within the project sites. No occurrences of this species have been documented with 5 miles of the sites. Pandion osprey None/ WL Large waters (lakes, reservoirs, rivers) supporting Not expected to occur at all project sites. This species haliaetus fish; usually near forest habitats, but widely nests in tall trees generally adjacent to large bodies of (nesting) observed along the coast water, including large rivers and lakes; the project sites do not provide suitable foraging and nesting habitat for this species. No occurrences of this species have been documented within 5 miles of the sites. Progne subis purple martin None/ SSC Nest and forages in woodland habitats including Moderate potential to occur in all project sites. (nesting) riparian, coniferous, and valley foothill and montane Potentially suitable nesting and foraging habitat is present woodlands; in the Sacramento region often nests in within the five sites for this species; however, there are no weep holes under elevated freeways documented occurrences within 5 miles of the project sites. Fishes Oncorhynchus southern steelhead FE/ SSC Clean, clear, cool well-oxygenated streams. Needs Not expected to occur at all project sites. The sites are mykiss irideus - southern relatively deep pools in migration and gravelly outside of the species’ known geographic range. California DPS substrate to spawn. Oncorhynchus steelhead - central FT/ None Coastal basins from Redwood Creek south to the Not expected to occur at all project sites. The sites are mykiss irideus California coast Gualala River, inclusive. Does not include summer- outside of the species’ known geographic range. DPS run steelhead. Oncorhynchus steelhead - Central FT/ None Coastal basins from Redwood Creek south to the Moderate potential to occur at Regional Park, no mykiss irideus Valley DPS Gualala River, inclusive. Does not include summer- potential to occur at all other project sites. Suitable run steelhead. habitat for this species includes cool streams with rocky and gravelly substrate such as those found in Rock Creek where it flows through Regional Park. Oncorhynchus steelhead - FT/ SSC Coastal basins from Redwood Creek south to the Not expected to occur at all project sites. The site is mykiss irideus northern California Gualala River, inclusive. Does not include summer- outside of the species’ known geographic range. DPS run steelhead.

B2-3 December 2016 APPENDIX B2 (Continued)

Status Scientific Name Common Name (Federal/ State) Habitat Potential to Occur by Site Oncorhynchus steelhead - FT/ SSC Coastal basins from Redwood Creek south to the Not expected to occur at all project sites. The site is mykiss irideus south/central Gualala River, inclusive. Does not include summer- outside of the species’ known geographic range. California coast run steelhead. DPS Oncorhynchus summer-run None/ SSC Coastal basins from Redwood Creek south to the Not expected to occur at all project sites. The site is mykiss irideus steelhead trout Gualala River, inclusive. Does not include summer- outside of the species’ known geographic range. run steelhead. Mammals Corynorhinus Townsend's big- None/ SC, SSC Mesic habitats characterized by coniferous and Moderate potential to forage at all project sites. The site townsendii eared bat deciduous forests and riparian habitat, but also provides suitable foraging habitat for this species and is xeric areas; roosts in limestone caves and lava adjacent to suitable roosting habitat for this species. There tubes, also man-made structures and tunnels. are two documented occurrences of this species within five miles of the sites. Pekania fisher - West Coast PFT/ SC, SSC Range widely in forested regions; uses heavy Not expected to occur at all project sites. The sites are pennanti West DPS stands of mixed species of mature trees. outside of the species’ known geographic range and do not Coast DPS provide suitable habitat.. Invertebrates Desmocerus valley elderberry FT/ None Occurs only in the Central Valley of California, in No potential to occur at all project sites. No elderberry californicus longhorn beetle association with blue elderberry (Sambucus shrubs were observed during the site visit. Because this dimorphus mexicana). species is entirely dependent on the host plant, there is no potential for this species to occur in any of the five sites. Branchinecta vernal pool fairy FT/ None Vernal pools, seasonally ponded areas within No potential to occur at all project sites. No vernal pools lynchi shrimp vernal swales, and ephemeral freshwater habitats. or otherwise suitable mesic habitat for this species was observed at any of the five sites. Status Abbreviations FE: Federally Endangered SE: State Endangered FT: Federally Threatened ST: State Threatened PFE: Proposed Federally Endangered SC: State Candidate PFT: Proposed Federally Threatened SDL: State Delisted FC: Federal Candidate SS: List Special Animals List, but no other status FDL: Federally Delisted BCC: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bird of Conservation Concern SSC: California Species of Special Concern FP: California Fully Protected Species WL: California Watch List Species

B2-4 December 2016

APPENDIX C List of Vascular Plant Species Recorded Within the Sites

APPENDIX C Vascular Plant Species Observed at the Project Sites

GYMNOSPERMS AND GNETOPHYTES

CUPRESSACEAE—CYPRESS FAMILY Calocedrus decurrens—incense cedar

PINACEAE—PINE FAMILY Pinus ponderosa—ponderosa pine Pinus sabiniana—California foothill pine

MONOCOTS

CYPERACEAE—SEDGE FAMILY Cyperus eragrostis—tall flatsedge

POACEAE—GRASS FAMILY * Avena barbata—slender oat * Avena fatua—wild oat * Bromus diandrus—ripgut brome * Bromus hordeaceus—soft brome * Cortaderia jubata—purple pampas grass * Cynodon dactylon—Bermudagrass * Paspalum dilatatum—dallisgrass

TYPHACEAE—CATTAIL FAMILY Typha latifolia—broadleaf cattail

EUDICOTS

ARALIACEAE—GINSENG FAMILY * Hedera canariensis—Algerian ivy * Hedera helix—English ivy

ASTERACEAE—SUNFLOWER FAMILY Artemisia douglasiana—Douglas’ sagewort Baccharis pilularis—coyotebrush Bidens frondosa—devil’s beggartick * Carduus pycnocephalus—Italian plumeless thistle * Centaurea solstitialis—yellow star-thistle * Cichorium intybus—chicory * Lactuca serriola—prickly lettuce

C-1 December 2016 APPENDIX C (Continued)

BETULACEAE—BIRCH FAMILY Alnus rhombifolia—white alder

BRASSICACEAE—MUSTARD FAMILY * Brassica nigra—black mustard

CAPRIFOLIACEAE—HONEYSUCKLE FAMILY * Lonicera japonica—Japanese honeysuckle

DIPSACACEAE—TEASEL FAMILY * Dipsacus fullonum—Fuller’s teasel

ERICACEAE—HEATH FAMILY Arbutus menziesii—Pacific madrone

EUPHORBIACEAE—SPURGE FAMILY Croton setiger—dove weed

FABACEAE—LEGUME FAMILY Acmispon americanus var. americanus—American bird’s-foot trefoil Lupinus bicolor—miniature lupine * Albizia julibrissin—silktree * Genista monosperma—bridal broom * Lathyrus odoratus—sweetpea

FAGACEAE—OAK FAMILY Quercus douglasii—blue oak Quercus kelloggii—California black oak Quercus lobata—valley oak Quercus wislizeni var. wislizeni—interior live oak

HYPERICACEAE—ST. JOHN’S WORT FAMILY * Hypericum perforatum—common St. Johnswort

LAMIACEAE—MINT FAMILY * Mentha pulegium—pennyroyal

MYRSINACEAE—MYRSINE FAMILY * Lysimachia arvensis—scarlet pimpernel

OLEACEAE—OLIVE FAMILY * Ligustrum japonicum—Japanese privet

C-2 December 2016 APPENDIX C (Continued)

ONAGRACEAE—EVENING PRIMROSE FAMILY Epilobium ciliatum—fringed willowherb

PAPAVERACEAE—POPPY FAMILY Eschscholzia californica—California poppy

PHRYMACEAE—LOPSEED FAMILY Mimulus guttatus—seep monkeyflower

PLANTAGINACEAE—PLANTAIN FAMILY * Plantago major—common plantain

POLYGONACEAE—BUCKWHEAT FAMILY * Rumex crispus—curly dock * Rumex pulcher—fiddle dock

ROSACEAE—ROSE FAMILY Heteromeles arbutifolia—toyon * Rubus armeniacus—Himalayan blackberry

SALICACEAE—WILLOW FAMILY Salix exigua—narrowleaf willow Salix laevigata—red willow Salix lasiolepis—arroyo willow Populus fremontii—Fremont cottonwood

SAPINDACEAE—SOAPBERRY FAMILY Acer negundo—boxelder

SCROPHULARIACEAE—FIGWORT FAMILY * Verbascum thapsus—common mullein

URTICACEAE—NETTLE FAMILY Urtica dioica—stinging nettle

VITACEAE—GRAPE FAMILY Vitis californica—California wild grape

* Non-native species

C-3 December 2016 APPENDIX C (Continued)

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

C-4 December 2016