COUNTY OF MENDOCINO IGNACIO GONZALEZ, INTERIM DIRECTOR TELEPHONE: 707-234-6650 EPARTMENT OF LANNING AND UILDING ERVICES FAX: 707-463-5709 D P B S FB PHONE: 707-964-5379 860 NORTH BUSH STREET ž UKIAH ž CALIFORNIA ž 95482 FB FAX: 707-961-2427 120 WEST FIR STREET ž FT. BRAGG ž CALIFORNIA ž 95437 [email protected] www.mendocinocounty.org/pbs

August 7, 2018

Planning –Ukiah US Fish & Wildlife Service Cloverdale Rancheria Department of Transportation State Clearinghouse Redwood Valley Rancheria Environmental Health - Fort Bragg Department of Forestry/ CalFire Irish Beach Water District Building Inspection - Fort Bragg Department of Fish and Wildlife Redwood Coast Fire District Assessor Coastal Commission CoastLife Support Comm. Svcs. Sonoma State University Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians

CASE#: CDP_2017-0003 DATE FILED: 2/3/2017 OWNER/APPLICANT: PABLO ALEJANDRO ROMANO REQUEST: A Standard Coastal Development Permit request to construct a 1,167 sq. ft. single-family residence, 530 sq. ft. attached garage, 603 sq. ft. deck and associated development. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Categorically Exempt LOCATION: In the Coastal Zone, within the community of Irish Beach, the site is located on the north side of Forest View Road (CR 551A) approximately 0.25 mile west of its intersection with Pomo Lake Drive (CR 551), located at 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester (APN: 132-130-08). STAFF PLANNER: Juliana Cherry RESPONSE DUE DATE: August 17, 2018

PROJECT INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT: https://www.mendocinocounty.org/government/planning-building-services/public-agency-referrals

Mendocino County Planning & Building Services is soliciting your input, which will be used in staff analysis and forwarded to the appropriate public hearing. You are invited to comment on any aspect of the proposed project(s). Please convey any requirements or conditions your agency requires for project compliance to the project coordinator at the above address, or submit your comments by email to [email protected]. Please note the case number and name of the project coordinator with all correspondence to this department.

We have reviewed the above application and recommend the following (please check one):

No comment at this time.

Recommend conditional approval (attached).

Applicant to submit additional information (attach items needed, or contact the applicant directly, copying Planning and Building Services in any correspondence you may have with the applicant)

Recommend denial (Attach reasons for recommending denial).

Recommend preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (attach reasons why an EIR should be required).

Other comments (attach as necessary).

REVIEWED BY:

Signature Department Date REPORT FOR: Standard Coastal Development Permit CASE #: CDP_2017-0003

OWNER: ROMANO PABLO ALEJANDRO

APPLICANT: ROMANO PABLO ALEJANDRO

REQUEST: A Standard Coastal Development Permit request to construct a 1,167 SF single-family residence, 530 SF attached garage, 603 SF deck and associated development.

LOCATION: In the Coastal Zone, within the community of Irish Beach, the site is located on the north side of Forest View Road (CR 551A) approximately 1/4 mile west of its intersection with Pomo Lake Drive (CR 551) at 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester (APN: 132-130-08).

ACREAGE: 0.59 Acres

GENERAL PLAN: Rural Residential 5 acre minimum-Planned Development with Suburban Residential – Planned Development combining district (RR5-PD[SR-PD]).

ZONING: Rural Residential 5 acre minimum (RR:5) / Planned Development (PD).

COASTAL ZONE: Yes

EXISTING USES: Vacant Residential SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT: 5

TOWNSHIP: 13 N. RANGE: 17 W. SECTION: 6 USGS QUAD#: 56

RELATED CASES ON SITE: B_2017-0054 scheduled for Coastal Permit Administrator hearing April 2018 to combine two lots. RELATED CASES IN VICINITY: - CDP_2002-0100: Approved a single-family residence and associated improvements within 100-foot ESHA buffer. Lot is approximately 225 northeast from subject parcel. - LCP_1990-0077: Approved a single-family residence and associated improvements within 100-foot ESHA buffer. Lot is adjacent to the northwest.

ADJACENT ADJACENT ADJACENT ADJACENT GENERAL PLAN ZONING LOT SIZES USES NORTH: RR10 RR10 2.9± acres Water District EAST: RR5-PD[SR-PD] RR5-PD[SR-PD] 13,755.5± sqft Vacant Residential SOUTH: RR5-PD[SR-PD] RR5-PD[SR-PD] 14,219.3± sqft Vacant Residential WEST: RR5-PD[SR-PD] RR5-PD[SR-PD] 19,749.4± sqft Residential

REFERRAL AGENCIES: Planning (Ukiah) Trails Advisory Council CHP Department of Transportation Native Plant Society MTA Environmental Health (FB) State Clearinghouse County Addresser Building Inspection (FB) Caltrans LAFCO Emergency Services CalFire Gualala MAC Assessor Department of Fish & Wildlife Laytonville MAC Farm Advisor Coastal Commission Westport MAC Agriculture Commissioner RWQCB Sierra Club Forestry Advisor Division of Mines & Geology School District Air Quality Management District Department of Health Services Sewer District ALUC Department of Parks & Recreation Irish Beach Water District County Water Agency Department of Conservation Redwood Coast Fire District Archaeological Commission Soil Conservation Service Sonoma State University Army Corps of Engineers City Planning US Fish & Wildlife Service Cloverdale Rancheria Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians Redwood Valley Rancheria Coast Life Support Comm Svcs

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: ** August 6, 2018 referral packet is corrected because the June 8, 2018 packet included incorrect maps/exhibits.**

See Biological Scoping Survey, Botanical Report, and Point Arena Mountain Beaver Protocol Level Survey prepared by Wynn Coastal Planning, November 22, 2017. Survey results begin on report page 11 or Report Section 4. Proposed development site is 50-feet or more from a riverine/wetland vegetation.

Project coordinator can be contacted via [email protected] or 707-234-2888

ASSESSOR’S PARCEL #: 132-130-08

PROJECT COORDINATOR: JULIANA CHERRY PREPARED BY: J CHERRY DATE: 8/6/2018 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (To be completed by Planner)

COUNTY WIDE Yes No Yes 1. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone – Geotechnical Report #GS______Site is approximately ¾ mile from the San Andreas Fault Zone. No 2. Floodplain/Floodway Map –Flood Hazard Development Permit #FP______

No 3. Within/Adjacent to Agriculture Preserve / Timberland Production Urban & Built-Up Land. See exhibit Important Farmland No 4. Within/Near Hazardous Waste Site

No 5. Natural Diversity Data Base

No 6. Airport CLUP Planning Area – ALUC#______

7. Adjacent to State Forest/Park/Recreation Area. See exhibit Adjacent Parcels 8. Adjacent to Equestrian/Hiking Trail.

9. Hazard/Landslides Map

10. Require Water Efficient Landscape Plan.

11. Biological Resources/Natural Area Map.

12. Fire Hazard Severity Classification: LRA SRA-CDF# Moderate Fire Hazard. See exhibit Fire Hazard Zones & Responsibility Areas 13. Soil Type(s)/Pygmy Soils. Biaggi loam. See Botanical Survey dated 11-22-2017 14. Wild and Scenic River.

15. Specific Plan Area.

16. State Permitting Required/State Clearinghouse Review Coastal Commission. CalFire. DFW. 17. Oak Woodland Area

COASTAL ZONE Yes No No 16. Exclusion Map. See exhibit CDP Exclusion Zones Marginal 17. Coastal Groundwater Study Zone. Marginal Water Resource Area. See exhibit Water Districts; Ground Water Resource No 18. Highly Scenic Area/Special Communities. See exhibit LCP Map 22: Mallo Pass Creek 19. Land Capabilities/Natural Hazards Map. Non-Prime Agricultural Land. See exhibit LCP Land Capabilities & Natural Hazards 20. Habitats/ESHA/Resources Map. See exhibits: LCP Habitats & Resources; CLassified Wetlands 21. Appealable Area/Original Jurisdiction Map. Appealable Area - ESHA. See exhibit Appealable Areas 22. Blayney -Dyett Map. See exhibit LCP Map 22: Mallo Pass Creek 23. Ocean Front Parcel (Blufftop Geology).

24. Adjacent to beach/tidelands/submerged land/Public Trust Land.

25. Noyo Harbor/Albion Harbor.

CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 1 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 2 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 3 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 4 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 5 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 8 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 9 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 10 CDP_2017-0003 Revised Application APN 132-130-08, -09

PBS Received 5-1-2018 Page 11 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00

BIOLOGICAL SCOPING SURVEY, BOTANICAL REPORT & POINT ARENA MOUNTAIN BEAVER PROTOCOL LEVEL SURVEY For 15761 & 15781 Forest View Road Manchester, CA 95456 APNs 132-130-08-00 & 132-130-09-00 Mendocino County

Property Owners: Pablo Romano & Marisa Guardado 3680 17th Street, Apt. 4 San Francisco, CA 94114-2632

Report Prepared By: Karen Youngblood, Biologist

November 22nd, 2017

Wynn Coastal Planning 703 North Main Street, Fort Bragg CA 95437 ph: 707-964-2537 fx: 707-964-2622 www.WCPlan.com

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section Title 1.0 Project Summary 1 2.0 Study Area Description 4 3.0 Survey Methodology 6 4.0 Survey Results 11 5.0 Mitigation and Avoidance Measures 16 6.0 Discussion 19 7.0 References 22 8.0 Investigator Biographies 23

Figures Title Page Figure 1 Map of Study Area Location 2 Figure 2 Map of Potential ESHAs 3 Figure 3 Map of Plant Communities 5 Figure 4 Photo: Romano Field Site 6 Figure 5 Map of Rare Flora reported to CNDDB 7 Figure 6 Map of Rare Fauna reported to CNDDB 8 Figure 7 Photo: Point Arena Mountain Beaver (PAMB) 9 Figure 8 Map of Point Arena Mountain Beaver Geographic Range 10 Figure 9a Photo: Coyote brush with grasses 11 Figure 9b Photo: Coyote brush patches 11 Figure 10 Photo: Non-native grassland 12 Figure 11 Photo: Riparian vegetation 13 Figure 12a Photo: CA red-legged frog 14 Figure 12b Photo: Foothill yellow-legged frog 14 Figure 12c Photo: Western pond turtle 14 Figure 12d Photo: Red bellied newt 14 Figure 13 Map of Staging Area Plan 20 Figure 14 Straw wattle installation guide 21

Appendices Title Appendix A Scoping Lists: Ranking Definitions Table 1. Rare Plant Scoping List Table 2. Rare Plant Alliances and Communities Scoping List Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List Appendix B Plants observed in the Study Area Appendix C USDA NRCS – Custom Soil Resource Report Appendix D USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Map Appendix E Reduced Buffer Analysis Appendix F ESHA definitions

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

1 PROJECT SUMMARY

A biological scoping survey, floristic survey and protocol level Point Arena Mountain Beaver (PAMB) survey were conducted by Wynn Coastal Planning biologists at 15761 and 15781 Forest View Road, Manchester, APN 132-130- 08-08 and APN 132-130-09 to locate Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) - special status plants and communities, wetlands and riparian areas, and special status animals and/or their habitats and to determine if they would be directly or indirectly impacted by the proposed development. The proposed development consists of:

a) A boundary line adjustment; b) Construction of a single-family residence; and c) Construction of associated infrastructure including: driveway, connection to utilities and septic, and a primary and secondary leach field.

The Subject Parcels are roughly four miles north of Manchester in the small residential community of Irish Beach (Figure 1). The area surveyed encompassed the two adjacent parcels and an additional 100 ft of the surrounding area, hereinafter referred to as the Study Area. The Study Area is neighbored by developed and undeveloped small parcels. (A pending property line adjustment application is on file at the county to merge the subject two parcels into one.)

Wynn Coastal Planning’s staff biologists Karen Youngblood and Asa Spade conducted floristic and ESHA surveys on April 27, June 10, August 4, October 18, Dec 14, 2016 (Asa Spade, as Spade Natural Resources Consulting), and March 20, May 19 and September 5, 2017, for a total of 10 field hours. Point Arena Mountain Beaver Surveys (PAMB) were conducted by a certified surveyor, Asa Spade, on August 28, 2016, and March 20 and September 5, 2017 for a total of 3 hours.

Three potential ESHAs were identified within the Study Area according to the definitions by the California Coastal Act (CCA) and Mendocino County LCP (Figure 2). No PAMB signs or occurrences were identified.

• Constructed Spillway/Stream ESHA – A constructed spillway of Pomo Lake runs through the Study Area just north of the property boundary.

• Riparian ESHA – A riparian area surrounds the constructed spillway/small stream north of the property boundary.

• Sonoma Tree Vole Nest- A Sonoma tree vole nest was identified in a grand fir in the riparian area approximately 30 feet north of the northern property boundary.

This analysis has been performed by Wynn Coastal Planning, and is the culmination of our professional opinion, research, and data collection. The County of Mendocino (County), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) should also be consulted regarding this project to obtain all necessary permits and obtain their concurrence with our findings and recommendations, and to make recommendations of their own, including concurrence of the boundaries of the sensitive areas and appropriate avoidance and protective measures.

The proposed development includes a boundary line adjustment to merge two parcels, the construction of a single- family residence, garage and associated infrastructure which includes a driveway, septic, primary and secondary leach field and connection to utilities at 15761 & 15781 Forest View Road Manchester, CA in Mendocino County California.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 1 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Study Area

^

°

0 1.5 3 Miles Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, Map updated 11/9/2017 KLY MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

OWNER: Romano APN: 132-130-08, 132-130-09 GP/ZONE: RR5PD(S) General Location Map ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Rd, Manchester, CA

Figure 1. Location of Romano Parcels.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 2 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

.! Sonoma Tree Vole Nest Constructed Spillway 50 ft ESHA buffer 100ft ESHA buffer Riparian ESHA StudyArea Subject Parcels Proposed Development House; Garage Leach line Septic Driveway

.!

House Garage

Forest View Road

°

0 50 100 Feet

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus Map updated 11/3/2017 KLY DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

OWNER: Romano APN: 132-130-08, 132-130-09 GP/ZONE: RR5PD(S) Potential ESHA Map ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Rd, Manchester, CA

Figure 2 . Potential Environmental Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) and proposed development in the Study Area.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 3 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

2 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION

2.1 General Site Description The Subject Parcels are a total of 0.6 acres located in the small subdivision of Irish Beach, approximately five miles north of Manchester, and 2,500 ft east of the coastline. The parcels can be accessed by taking Pomo Lake Drive east of Highway One 0.6 miles to Forest View Road. Just outside the northern boundary of the two adjacent parcels is a constructed spillway of Pomo Lake. To the east and west are similar small parcels and the southern boundary borders Forest View Road.

2.2 Land-Use History The parcels are within a major subdivision of similar sized parcels, some of which are undeveloped. They are on the first marine terrace in a forested riparian area adjacent to open brush scrub. Pomo Lake is within 200 ft of the Subject Parcel, and provides habitat for aquatic species. The lake was created to provide additional recreation and scenic value to the Irish Beach subdivision. When Pomo Lake was created, the natural drainage was impounded with an earthen dam and the spillway was created on the south side of the lake to convey stream flow during regular and high flows (Fabula, 2010). This spillway runs just outside the northern property boundary and is within the Study Area. In the 1980s, Pomo Lake was dewatered so that heavy equipment could remove silt from the lake bottom. In 2010, during the creation of a Pomo Lake Management plan, biologist Tina Fabula identified fish in the lake as possibly bluegill, sunfish and mosquito-fish. Fabula also noted that at one time the lake was stocked with trout from the Fort Bragg Trout Farm.

2.3 Topography and Soils The elevation of the Study Area is about three-hundred feet above sea level and gently slopes from east to west.

A custom soil report was generated through the USDA NRCS website, which identified the soil on the parcel as Biaggi, loam 0-5 percent slopes and Dystropepts, 30-75 percent slopes (Appendix C).

2.4 Climate and Hydrology The Mendocino Coast has a Mediterranean climate with average annual precipitation of 40.24 inches (WRCC, Station Fort Bragg 5N, average for years 1895-2016), with the majority of rain occurring in winter months (November through March).

The Study Area is situated between Irish Creek which is about 750 ft to the south, and a tributary to Irish Creek that flows in and out of Pomo Lake to the north. Pomo Lake is approximately 150 ft northeast of the northern property boundary. A constructed spillway directs water from Pomo Lake, passing just outside the Study Area’s northern property boundary (Figure 2).

The USFWS National Wetlands Inventory was consulted and shows a small freshwater pond (Pomo Lake) and its spillway (Appendix D). No additional wetlands were mapped in the vicinity of the Study Area.

2.5 Vegetation and Natural Communities Wynn Coastal Planning biologists identified three general plant communities within the Study Area: a non- native grassland (common velvet grass – sweet vernal grass meadow), planted Monterey pines (Monterey pine stand), and coyote brush scrub (Figure 3). Plant communities are described in detail in Section 5.2.

2.6 Existing Development There’s no existing development on this property.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 4 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Forest View Road

Constructed Spillway *****Pomo Lake ***** *****(((( Coyote brush scrub ° *****(((( (((( Monterey pines Nonnative grassland Parcel boundary

0 50 100 Feet

Map updated 11/3/2017 KLY Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus Created by Asa Spade DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community OWNER: Romano APN: 132-130-08, 132-130-09 GP/ZONE: RR5PD(S) Plant Communities Map ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Rd, Manchester, CA

Figure 3 Romano Plant Communities Map.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 5 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

3 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

3.1 Scoping Tables Scoping tables were created for the special-status plant species and wildlife with the potential to occur in the Study Area by reviewing the most up-to-date species lists for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS).

For purposes of this evaluation, animal and plant species, and plant communities are considered special- status if they, 1) are designated as rare, threatened, or endangered by the state or federal governments; or 2) are proposed for rare, threatened, or endangered status; and/or 3) are state or federal candidate species, and/or 4) are considered species of concern by the USFWS; and/or 4) have a State rank of S3 or lower; and/or 5) are included on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 1A, 1B, & 2.

The California Natural Diversity Database CNDDB was reviewed for records within approximately 5 miles of the Study Area (Figures 5 & 6). The CNDDB is a database consisting of historical observations of special- status flora and fauna in California. Because the CNDDB is limited to reported sightings, it is not a comprehensive list of species that may occur in a particular area. However, it is useful in refining the list of special-status species that have the potential to occur on a particular site.

A plant database search was performed using the CNPS Electronic Inventory, which allows users to query the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California using a set of search criteria (e.g., quad name, habitat type). A target list of special-status plant species with the potential to occur on the site was developed through interpretation of the CNDDB and CNPS query results. The biological scoping tables with special status resources and potential occurrences in the Study Area are presented in Appendix A, Tables 1, 2, and 3, (a key to the ranking status of all rare plants, plant communities and wildlife is also presented in Appendix A).

Additional database review of the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soils and the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) was conducted to assess the potential for wetlands to occur in the area prior to field work. Aerial photography was assessed for features with “wet” characteristics and the Inventory of National Wetlands database was viewed with the subject parcel boundaries to see if any predetermined wetlands occur in the Study Area.

Figure 3 Romano field site.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 6 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Castilleja mendocinensis Subject Parcel: 132-130-08, 132-130-09

Castilleja mendocinensis

Lasthenia californica ssp. macrantha

Sidalcea malachroides Lasthenia californica ssp. bakeri Castilleja mendocinensis Sidalcea malachroides

Agrostis blasdalei ° Map Updated 11/3/17 Wyatt Dooley

0 0.5 1 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, Miles CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

RomanoRomano CNDDBCNDDB FloraFlora MapMap

Figure 4 Rare flora reported to CDFW in the proximity of the Study Area and recorded in the CNDDB database.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 7 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Arborimus pomo Sonoma tree vole

Aplodontia rufa nigra Point Arena mountain beaver

Subject Parcels: 132-130-08, 132-130-09

Aplodontia rufa nigra Point Arena mountain beaver Arborimus pomo Sonoma tree vole

Aplodontia rufa nigra Point Arena mountain beaver

° Map Updated 11/3/17 Wyatt Dooley 0 0.5 1 Miles Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

RomanoRomano CNDDBCNDDB FaunaFauna MapMap

Figure 5 Rare fauna reported to CDFW in the proximity of the study area and recorded in the CNDDB database.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 8 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

3.2 Mapping Aerial photographs and contour maps were used in the field to help determine plant community boundaries and feature location. Garmin GPS units were also used in the field to collect point data for rare plant populations, boundaries of wetlands and plant communities, and other significant features. The combination of annotated field maps and GPS data points assisted the final map creation identifying Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas and plant communities. AutoCAD data was imported into ArcMap to rectify property boundaries and proposed development locations.

3.3 Biological Surveys The botanical survey of the Study Area was conducted primarily adhering to the protocol described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife in Guidelines for Assessing the Effects of Proposed Projects on Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and Natural Communities.

Wynn Coastal Planning’s staff biologists conducted field surveys on April 27, June 10, August 4, October 18, Dec 14, 2016 and March 20, May 19 September 5, 2017 to compile a full floristic list of plants occurring in the Study area and to identify any rare resources having the potential to meet the LCP ESHA definitions. To ensure potential ESHA plants were evident and identifiable, offsite reference plant populations were visited prior to the field surveys. Verified offsite reference site plants included: Point Reyes blennosperma (Blennosperma nanum var. robustum), Blasdale’s bent grass (Agrostis blasdalei), sea-watch (Angelica lucida, swamp harebell (Campanula californica), Mendocino coast paintbrush (Castilleja mendocinensis), supple daisy (Erigeron supplex), headland wallflower (Erysimum concinnum), short-leaved evax (Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia), Point Reyes horkelia (Horkelia marinensis), thin-lobed horkelia (Horkelia tenuiloba), harlequin lotus (Hosackia gracilis), Baker’s goldfields (Lasthenia californica ssp. bakeri), perennial goldfields (Lasthenia californica ssp. macrantha), coast lily (Lilium maritimum), coastal bluff morning glory (Calystegia purpurata ssp. saxicola), deceiving sedge (Carex saliniformus), great burnet (Sanguisorba officinalis), and early blue violet (Viola adunca).

All identifiable plant species located during the surveys were identified to the lowest taxonomic level necessary to determine the presence of special status plant species and are listed in Appendix B. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California (Baldwin 2012) was used to determine the taxonomic nomenclature. A Manual of California Vegetation Second Edition (Sawyer 2009) and the List of California Terrestrial Natural Communities (CDFW 2010) recognized by the California Natural Diversity Database, based on the Sawyer & Keeler Wolf classification system was used to classify and describe representative plant communities present.

During floristic field surveys, potential wildlife and habitat was also surveyed for, including host plants for endangered butterflies, bird nests, Sonoma tree vole nests and piles of resin ducts, animal burrows, and other potential wildlife indicators. If field indicators or habitat was found for special status wildlife with the potential to occur in the Study Area, additional protocol level surveys were recommended/conducted by a qualified biologist.

3.4 Point Arena Mountain Beaver (PAMB) Surveys Currently, the potential range of the PAMB is considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to be an area surrounding Point Arena from approximately 8 miles north of Point Arena to approximately 4 miles south of Point Arena and inland to approximately 5 miles east of Point Arena. (FWS 2002). Figure 8 shows the updated geographic range of PAMB as of August 2016.

Figure 6. Point Arena Mountain Beaver. (Photo: Kim Fitts) WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 9 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Point Arena Mountain Beaver occupy a wide range of habitat types, which can overlap and integrate with one another. The USFWS recommends surveying for PAMB in all areas that contain brushy and herbaceous plant cover within the potential range of PAMB. The Study Area is in the northern portion of the PAMB’s range, approximately 6 miles north of Point Arena. The three closest recorded PAMB occurrences (according to the CNDDB database) occur approximately 0.5 mi to the west, 0.5 mi to the south and approximately 0.75 miles to the north of the Study Area.

Asa Spade, Senior Biologist for Wynn Coastal Planning and a USFWS-approved PAMB surveyor, conducted habitat assessments for PAMB during the floristic surveys in spring and summer 2016. Once potential habitat areas were determined, protocol level presence/absence surveys for PAMB were conducted in the Study Area on August 28th 2016 and March 20 and September 5, 2017 for a total of 3 hours.

PAMB presence/absence surveys were conducted using a wandering transect technique in all potential habitat areas on the Subject Parcel and on all adjacent properties within 100 ft. of the Subject Parcel where legally and safely accessible. The spacing between transect lines was influenced by terrain and vegetation types. Using this technique, the ground surface, soil type and vegetation was examined for PAMB indicators, primarily burrows and runways.

Study Area

^

PAMB Range (2017 data) °

0 1.5 3 Miles Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, Map updated 11/9/2017 KLY MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

OWNER: Romano APN: 132-130-08, 132-130-09 GP/ZONE: RR5PD(S) PAMB Habitat Area ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Rd, Manchester, CA

Figure 8. PAMB geographicWYNN COASTAL range. PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 10 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

4 SURVEY RESULTS

Biological Field Surveys were performed that identified plants, plant communities, streams, riparian habitat, and potential wildlife in the Study Area. Point Arena Mountain Beaver protocol level surveys were conducted on the Subject Parcels and all areas within 100 feet where legally and safely accessible.

4.1 Plants – No ESHA found The CDFW’s California Native Diversity Database (CNDDB) BIOS, Version 5 (2016), was used to focus the search of special status flora previously reported in the vicinity of the Study Area along with undocumented special-status plants suitable for habitats present in the Study Area (Figure 5). All plants identified in the Study Area are listed in (Appendix B). No special status plant species were found during any of the three floristic surveys.

4.2 Plant Communities- No ESHA found

4.2.1 Coyote Brush Scrub (Baccharis pilularis Shrubland Alliance G5 S5) The Baccharis pilularis shrubland alliance occurs throughout the eastern parcel and on the neighboring parcels to the east and across Forest View Road. This community includes patches of thick coyote brush and areas where the coyote brush is more open, intermixing with CA blackberry (Rubus ursinus) and grasses.

The dominant shrub is coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) growing with patches of tan oak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus), California coffeeberry (Frangula californica), and blue blossom (Ceanothus thyrsiflorus). Dominant nonnative grasses occur in patches within the coyote brush scrub plant community and include dominants velvet grass (Holcus lanatus) and sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum) with forbs including rough cat ear (Hypochaeris radicata), Douglas iris (Iris douglasiana), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), common cowparsnip (Heracleum maximum), pearly everlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea), spreading rush (Juncus patens), and tall cyperus (Cyperus eragrostis). Throughout this community, California blackberry (Rubus ursinus) is also common.

All areas of coyote brush scrub in the Study Area were identified as potential PAMB habitat and were surveyed for presence/absence of PAMB. No indicators for PAMB presence, such as burrows or tunnels through vegetation, were found.

Figure 9 and 9a. Grass, Blackberry, and coyote brush with other shrubs (left) and coyote brush patch (right).

4.2.2 Monterey Pine Stand (Pinus radiata Semi Natural Stand) A semi natural stand of young Monterey pines (Pinus radiata) occurs along the northern and western property boundary and extends into the neighboring properties. This community includes the area along the constructed spillway for the Pomo Lake outlet where riparian vegetation is present as an understory

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 11 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

of the Monterey pines. The understory trees are tanoak (Notholithocarpus densiflorus), red alder (Alnus rubra), and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var menziesii). The shrub layer consists of wax myrtle (Morella californica), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) and twinberry (Lonicera involucrata var. ledebourii). Forbs include California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), hairy honeysuckle (Lonicera hispidula), Polypogon sp., and sword fern (Polystichum californicum).

Portions of the riparian zone were identified as suitable habitat for PAMB, including sword ferns, willows and other small diameter shrub vegetation, pliable soil and a north facing stream bank. Presence/absence surveys for PAMB were conducted in the riparian area. No indicators of PAMB presence were found.

4.2.3 Common Velvet Grass – Sweet Vernal Grass Meadows (Holcus lanatus – Anthoxanthum odoratum Herbaceous Semi- Natural Alliance) The nonnative grassland is the largest community on the western parcel. Nonnative and native grasses include sweet vernal grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), slender oat (Avena barbata), California brome grass (Bromus carinatus), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), rattail grass (Festuca myuros) and soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus). Forbs include bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), California mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), yerba buena (Clinopodium douglasii), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), common cow parsnip (Heracleum maximum), Douglas iris (Iris douglasiana), and varied lupine (Lupinus variicolor).

Figure 10. Grassland dominated by non-native grasses on the western portion of the Subject Parcel.

4.3 Stream – potential ESHA found A small stream runs along the northern property boundary. The stream is a small constructed spillway (channel), partially cemented used to accommodate the outflow of constructed Pomo Lake. The natural stream channel, before Pomo Lake existed, was located farther to the north. Forbs growing within the current stream channel are water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa) and watercress (Nasturtium officinale). The low flows and cemented and silted stream bottom is not suitable for anadromous fish, however the stream provides suitable habitat for herpetofauna.

4.4 Riparian Habitat – potential ESHA found The riparian habitat observed along the constructed spillway also occurs just north of the property boundary. The natural channel historically occurred even farther to the north, so the vegetation along the constructed spillway has not fully developed into a mature riparian community. The over story consists of Monterey pine

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 12 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

(Pinus radiata), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var menziesii), and young red alder (Alnus rubra). The shrub layer consists of twinberry (Lonicera involucrata var. ledebourii), Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis), and wax myrtle (Morella californica). Forbs include bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), sword fern (Polystichum californicum), Polypogon sp. and tall cyperus (Cyperus eragrostis).

Figure 11. Riparian vegetation found north of the parcel boundary, within the constructed spillway.

4.5 Wildlife - Potential Occurrences The CDFW’s California Native Diversity Database (CNDDB) BIOS, Version 5 (2016), was used to focus the search on fauna previously reported in the vicinity of the project area (Figure 6). No special-status wildlife species were identified during the field biological surveys; however, suitable habitat for special status wildlife species was identified. Descriptions below are for wildlife species with moderate to high potential to occur, and for State or Federally Endangered or Threatened Species with potential to occur. A complete list of special status wildlife with the potential to occur at the project site can be found in Table 3 (Appendix A).

4.5.1 Invertebrates a) Lotis Blue butterfly (Lycaeides argyrognomon lotis) (FE; G5TH SH). The Lotis Blue butterfly (LBB) has not been seen since 1983. It is primarily from Mendocino County but historically from northern Sonoma and possibly Marin Counties. The LBB inhabits wet meadows and potentially poorly-drained sphagnum-willow bogs where soils are waterlogged and acidic. The presumed host plant for the LBB is Harlequin lotus (Hosackia gracilis), which was not found in the Study Area. No further surveys are warranted.

b) Behren's silverspot butterfly (Speyeria zerene behrensii) (FE; G5T1 S1). The Behren’s silverspot butterfly (BSSB) is historically from the Town of Mendocino, Mendocino County, south to the area of Salt Point State Park, Sonoma County. Now, the BSSB is presumed to be from Manchester south to Salt Point. They inhabit coastal terrace prairie with caterpillar host plant western dog violet (Viola adunca). Adult nectar sources include many plants in the sunflower family including thistles, goldenrod, tansy ragwort, California aster, seaside daisy and pearly everlasting. Because the host plant was not found in the Study Area, no further surveys for BSSB are warranted.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 13 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

4.5.2 Fish Many of the larger coastal Mendocino streams support migrating Coho and steelhead populations. Sometimes chinook salmon are seen in these waters but are not regular visitors on the Mendocino coast. Ideal habitat for the anadromous fish includes stream reaches with loose, silt-free gravel, cool water from a shaded canopy, pools for resting or escape, and sufficient dissolved oxygen occurring in higher flowing riffles or runs. The constructed spillway just north of the property boundary does not meet any of these requirements and therefore was determined not suitable for anadromous fish.

4.5.3 Amphibians and Reptiles a) California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) (FT; G4T2T3 S2S3) California red-legged frogs are found in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation. They require 11-20 weeks of permanent water for larval development and can wander overland sometimes far from water to cool damp places.

b) Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) (State Candidate for Threatened; G3 S2S3) Foothill yellow-legged frogs are generally found in partly-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats including coastal scrub and wet meadows. They need at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying; egg clusters are attached to rocks in moving water. Tadpole development requires water for three to four months usually hatching in March to April. Foothill yellow-legged frogs are generally found near water but can be found in moist environments with some protection away from the water’s edge.

c) Red-bellied newt (Taricha rivularis) (G4 S2) Red-bellied newts are found in redwood forests and lay their eggs in fast flowing streams or rivers. They are often found under rocks, logs, rodent burrows, and other forest debris.

d) Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata marmorata) (G3G4 S3) Western pond turtles are associated with permanent or nearly permanent water in a wide variety of habitats. They require basking sites and nest sites may be found up to 0.5 km (1640 ft) from water. Due to the dewatering of Pomo Lake in the 80s, results of Pomo Lake Study in 2010 (Fabula), and the closest CNDDB siting of the western pond turtle is 30 miles east along the Russian River corridor, it is unlikely western pond turtle resides in or near Pomo Lake today.

Figure 12b. Foothill yellow-legged frog. (Photo Gary Nafis) Figure 12a. CA red-legged frog. (Photo Gary Nafis)

Figure 12c Western pond turtle. (Photo Gary Nafis) Figure 12d Red bellied newt. (Photo Will Flaxington)

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 14 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Presence of special-status amphibians and reptiles in the Study Area is possible due to the proximity of Pomo Lake (approximately 150 ft to the north of the Study Area), its location between Irish Creek (approximately 800 ft south of the Study Area), and tributary to Irish Creek (constructed spillway in the Study Area). The constructed spillway has low suitability for breeding habitat due to silty and artificially cemented substrate and low to intermittent water levels; however, all species mentioned above have the potential to occur within the Study Area. Mitigation and Avoidance measures in Section 6 further address how to minimize impacts to all potentially occurring amphibians and reptiles.

4.5.4 Birds Potentially present nesting birds may be migratory or year-round residents, and nesting requirements are highly variable. Some birds nest in burrows, others on the ground, in vegetation, brush, trees, rocky outcrops, or on man-made structures. The bird nesting season typically extends from February to August. Although no special-status birds or nests were observed during any of the field surveys, the nearby forest land and riparian corridor provide potential nesting habitats for special-status bird species and also common migratory bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction is to occur during the breeding season for birds (February to August), a pre-construction survey is recommended to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during development. No surveys are recommended if activity occurs in the non-breeding season. (See Appendix A, Table 3 for potential special-status bird species in the Study Area). Mitigation and Avoidance measures in Section 6 further address how to minimize impacts to all potentially occurring nesting birds in the vicinity of proposed development.

4.5.5 Bats Although no bats or roosts were documented during any of the field surveys, bat roost sites can change from year to year, so pre-construction surveys are usually necessary to determine the presence or absence of bat roost sites in a given area. Pre-construction bat surveys do not need to be performed if work is conducted between September 1 and October 31, after young have matured and prior to the bat hibernation period. However, if it is necessary to disturb potential bat roost sites between November 1 and August 31, pre-construction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist within 14 days prior to the onset if development activities. (See Appendix A, Table 3 for potential special-status bat species in the Study Area). Mitigation and Avoidance measures in Section 6 further address how to minimize impacts to all potentially occurring bats in the vicinity of proposed development.

4.5.6 Other Mammals Sonoma tree vole (Arborimus pomo G3 S3). The Sonoma tree vole inhabits the north coast fog belt forests and primarily feeds on Douglas-fir needles and occasionally needles of pine or grand fir.

In recent years, Sonoma tree vole nests have been observed near the Study Area in larger conifers on the northern side of Pomo lake (approximately 350 feet north of the Study Area). One seemingly abandoned Sonoma tree vole nest was found in the Study Area approximately 30 ft north of the northern property boundary in a relatively small grand fir in the riparian zone of the constructed spillway. During the last site visit on September 5th, 2017 the Sonoma tree vole nest in the Study Area appeared to be inhabited by a squirrel. Generally, the trees in the Study Area are sparse, young and with discontinuous canopy, and not highly suitable habitat for Sonoma tree voles.

Point Arena Mountain Beaver (PAMB) (Aplodontia rufa nigra FE; G5T1 S1) The Point Arena Mountain Beaver is a subspecies of mountain beaver only found within a 24-square mile area in western Mendocino County, which nests among small diameter plants such as coastal scrub, riparian plant communities, and the edges of conifer forests.

The Coyote brush scrub and riparian habitat in the Study Area was identified as potential PAMB habitat. Potential PAMB habitat areas were surveyed over three different periods: August 18, 2016, March 20, 2017 with the most recent survey having been conducted on September 5, 2017. No burrows, tunnels or signs of PAMB were detected in any of the areas surveyed.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 15 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

4.6 Field Survey Results – Potential ESHAs Found Field survey results identified the following potential ESHAs within the Study Area: Stream (constructed spillway), Riparian, and Sonoma Tree Vole nest. Mitigation and Avoidance measures described in Section 6 are recommended to ensure that any proposed project avoids or minimizes impacts to all ESHAs and potentially occurring special-status wildlife. Compliance with these avoidance measures is recommended to reduce potential negative impacts to sensitive resources to a less-than-significant level.

5 MITIGATION AND AVOIDANCE MEASURES

The proposed project has been analyzed relative to its proximity to natural resources to determine its potential disturbance to sensitive species, utilizing the methods and results gathered above and the Reduced Buffer Analysis of the Mendocino County’s Local Coastal Program (Appendix E). As a result of those analyses, we believe that potential impacts to ESHA habitats (riparian, stream [constructed spillway], and Sonoma Tree Vole Nest) can be minimized or avoided if the project utilizes the Mitigation and Avoidance Measures we recommend below. Additionally, a Best Management Practices and Staging Area Plan is provided (Figure 12) to demonstrate where construction materials, fencing and other items addressed in the Mitigation Measures are to be placed during construction activities to minimize impacts to the ESHAs.

5.1 Potential Impact 1: Potential Impact to Sonoma tree vole (STV) A Sonoma tree vole nest was found within 100 feet of the proposed project. At the time the nest was found, it appeared to be abandoned. However, due to the known presence of Sonoma tree voles in the vicinity and the nest location in the riparian area within 100 ft of the project area, a visual STV survey prior to construction is recommended.

5.1.1 Measure 1a: Pre-construction survey for Sonoma tree voles A visual survey for Sonoma tree vole presence in the project area prior to construction is recommended.

5.2 Potential Impact 2: Potential Impact to Birds Construction in the Study Area has the potential to disturb special status and other protected birds during the nesting season. Construction activity near trees and vegetated areas has the potential to disturb bird species.

5.2.1 Measure 2a: Seasonal Avoidance No surveys are recommended if activity occurs in the non-breeding season (September to January). If development is to occur during the breeding season (February to August), a pre- construction survey is recommended within 14 days of the onset of construction to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during development.

5.2.2 Measure 2b: Nest Avoidance If active special-status bird nests are observed, no ground disturbance activities shall occur within a minimum 100-foot exclusion zone of the nest. These exclusion zones may vary depending on species, habitat and level of disturbance. The exclusion zone shall remain in place around the active nest until all young are no longer dependent upon the nest. A biologist should monitor the nest site weekly during the breeding season to ensure the buffer is sufficient to protect the nest site from potential disturbance.

5.2.3 Measure 2c: Construction activities during daylight hours Construction should occur during daylight hours to limit disturbing construction noise and minimize artificial lights.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 16 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

5.3 Potential Impact 3: Potential Impact to Bats Construction in the Study Area has the potential to impact special status bat species. No trees are proposed for removal, which will minimize the potential negative impacts to bats.

5.3.1 Measure 3a: Pre-construction surveys for bats Construction will ideally occur between September 1st and October 31 after the young have matured and prior to the bat hibernation period. If it is necessary to disturb potential bat roost sites between November 1 and August 31, pre-construction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist 14 days prior to the onset of development activities. If active bat roosts are observed, no ground disturbance activities shall occur within a minimum 100-foot exclusion zone. These exclusion zones may vary depending on species, habitat and level of disturbance. The exclusion zone shall remain in place around the active roost until all young are no longer dependent upon the roost.

Pre-construction bat surveys involve surveying trees for evidence of bat use (guano accumulation) and searching for bats visually or by sound. If evidence of bat presence is found, then biologists shall conduct acoustic surveys under appropriate conditions using an acoustic detector, to determine whether a site is occupied. If bats are found, a minimum 50-foot buffer should be implemented around the roost tree.

5.3.2 Measure 3b: Construction activities during daylight hours Construction should occur during daylight hours to limit disturbing construction noise and minimize artificial lights.

5.4 Potential Impact 4: Potential impact to amphibians and reptiles - light and noise disturbance, erosion of sediment and debris, ground disturbance Due to the potential presence of CA red-legged frog, foothill yellow legged frog and/or the Western pond turtle, the following measures should be followed to minimize impacts to the sensitive resource. Additional avoidance measures (Measures 6a-c) should be followed to ensure no special status amphibians and reptiles with the potential to occur are detrimentally impacted within the construction site.

5.4.1 Measure 4a: Erosion control Straw wattles should be placed along the 50 foot ESHA boundary of the stream and riparian area during ground disturbance activities. In the northwestern corner of the parcel, the slope increases slightly towards the riparian area. The straw wattles should be placed along the level contour of the break in slope. The straw wattles will serve as a visual reminder as well as a physical barrier to prevent sediment, debris and activity from entering the stream and riparian ESHA buffer area (Figures 13 & 14).

5.4.2 Measure 4b: Construction activities during daylight hours Construction should occur during daylight hours to minimize disturbing construction noise and artificial lights.

5.4.3 Measure 4c: Limit ground disturbing construction to dry season Ground disturbing construction within 50 and 100 feet of the stream should occur during the dry season, which is generally April 1 to October 31 of any year.

5.5 Potential Impact 5: Potential Impact to Soil and Vegetation - ground compaction and vegetation disturbance from materials and vehicles

5.5.1 Mitigation 5a: Staging Area Plan Stage all building materials and construction vehicles in upland areas greater than 50 feet from all ESHAs (Figure 13). Clearly mark the staging area site with stakes and flagging or construction cones.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 17 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

5.6 Potential Impact 6: Potential Impact to Special Status Amphibians – Disturbance in upland areas during staging and ground disturbance Construction activities may disturb special status amphibians and reptiles that may be hiding in or under piles of staged material. To minimize impacts, the following avoidance measures should be followed.

5.6.1 Measure 6a: Contractor education Within two weeks prior to construction activities, project contractors shall be trained by a qualified biologist in the identification of the California red-legged frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, red-bellied newt and western pond turtle (see photos in Section 5.5.3).

5.6.2 Measure 6b: Pre-construction search During ground disturbing activities, construction crews shall begin each day with a visual search around the staging and impact area to detect the presence of amphibians and reptiles.

5.6.3 Measure 6c: No construction during rain event If a rain event occurs during the ground disturbance period, all ground disturbing activities shall cease for a period of 48 hours, starting after the rain stops.

Prior to resuming construction activities, trained construction crew member(s) will examine the site for the presence of special status amphibians.

a) If no special status amphibians are found during inspections, ground-disturbing activities may resume.

b) If a special status amphibian or reptile is detected, construction crews will stop all ground disturbing work and will contact the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or a qualified biologist. Clearance from the CDFW will then be needed prior to reinitiating work. The CDFW will need to be consulted and will need to be in agreement with protective measures needed for any potential special status amphibians and reptiles.

5.7 Potential Impact 7: Vegetation planting

5.7.1 Measure 7a: Landscaping No invasive species should be planted on the subject parcel.

5.8 Potential Impact 8: Artificial night time lighting

5.8.1 Measure 8a: Exterior lighting Exterior lighting shall be downcast and shielded such that light does not shine beyond the boundaries of the property.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 18 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

6 DISCUSSION

It is the professional opinion of the biologists at Wynn Coastal Planning that the project, as proposed, is the least damaging and most feasible option.

Three potential ESHAs were identified on the property located at 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester, in the Irish Beach Subdivision:

• Constructed Spillway/Stream ESHA – The Pomo Lake constructed spillway runs north of the property boundary. • Riparian ESHA – Intermittent riparian vegetation occurs along the constructed spillway. • Sonoma Tree Vole Nest – A Sonoma tree vole nest was identified in a grand fir in the riparian area, approximately 30 feet north of the northern property boundary.

A Reduced-Buffer Analysis (Appendix E), Mitigation and Avoidance Measures (Section 6), and a BMPs and Staging Plan (Figure 12) are included in this Report. Adhering to the Mitigation and Avoidance Measures should minimize impacts to the riparian and stream habitat, and any potential rare fauna.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 19 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Straw Wattles .! Sonoma Tree Vole Nest 50 ft ESHA buffer Riparian ESHA StudyArea Subject Parcels Proposed Development House; Garage Leach line Septic Driveway Staging Area

Place straw wattles .! along the 50 ft ESHA buffer

er uff 50 ft ESHA b

House Garage Stage materials here during Forest View Road construction.

° 0 50 100 Feet Map updated 11/3/2017 KLY Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

OWNER: Romano APN: 132-130-08, 132-130-09 GP/ZONE: RR5PD(S) BMP & Staging Area Map ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Rd, Manchester, CA

Figure 13. Best management practices and staging area plan.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 20 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

Figure 14. Straw Wattle Installation Guide.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 21 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

7 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, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

California Coastal Commission. (1985). Mendocino County General Plan Coastal Element, Adopted by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors November 5, 1985.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat Conservation Division. (2014). Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). Rare Find Version 5

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. “Guidelines for Assessing the Effects of Proposed Projects on Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and Natural Communities. The Resource Agency (2000). Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations. Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. (September 2010).

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). (2014). Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (on line addition). California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. accessed at http://www.cnps.org.

Fabula, Tina (2010). Pomo Lake Study. Prepared for the Irish Beach Improvement Club.

Holland, R.F. (1986). Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game.

Klein A, Keeler-Wolf T, Evens J. Classification of the Vegetation Alliances and Associations of Sonoma County, CA, V. 2 – Vegetation Descriptions; 2015.

Sawyer, J.O. & Keeler-Wolf, T. (2009). A Manual of California Vegetation. Sacramento, CA. California Native Plant Society. www.CaliforniaHerps.com - photographs (Gary Nafis) of special status herp species.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 22 of 23 CDP_2017-0003 Romano APN 132-130-08-00 Romano Biological Scoping, Botanical Report & Point Arena Mountain Beaver Survey November 22nd, 2017

8 INVESTIGATOR BIOGRAPHIES

Contributing Biologists

Asa B Spade graduated from Humboldt State University with a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Science, with a concentration in Landscape Ecosystems as well as a minor in Botany. Since that time, he has been working in the natural resources field, first with Mendocino County Environmental Health and later with California State Parks and the Department of Fish and Game. He has been trained in Army Corps wetland delineation by the Coastal Training Program at Elkhorn Slough. He is on the Fish and Wildlife Service approved list for Point Arena mountain beaver surveys and has done surveys for Behren’s silverspot butterfly, Northern spotted owl, and the California red-legged frog. He has contributed to more than 100 coastal development projects in Mendocino County.

Karen Youngblood holds a Master of Science in Natural Resources and a GIS Certificate from Humboldt State University and a Bachelor’s of Arts in Environmental Studies, with an emphasis in Policy and Planning, from the University of California in Santa Cruz. Her diverse experience includes over 20 years of botanical, wildlife, fisheries and forestry field work throughout Northern California and Southeastern Oregon, with the last 10 years being focused in Coastal Mendocino County. She has received additional training in Army Corps wetland delineation by Richard Chinn Environmental Training in Sacramento, CA, Rare Plant Species of Special Concern with Teresa Sholars at the College of the Redwoods in Fort Bragg, CA (Spring, 2009), and Carex keying and identification training with Gordon Leppig in Arcata, CA (March, 2017).

Staff Biologists

Teresa R Spade, AICP, graduated from Humboldt State University with a Bachelor’s Degree in Natural Resources Planning and Interpretation. She has 10 years of experience working in land use planning and natural resources, and is a certified planner per the American Institute of Certified Planners. She has contributed to over 100 coastal development projects in Mendocino County. She has been trained in Army Corps wetland delineation by Richard Chinn Environmental Training in Sacramento, CA. She is on the Fish and Wildlife Service approved list for Point Arena mountain beaver surveys and has surveyed for the Federally Endangered Behren’s silverspot butterfly.

Wyatt Dooley graduated from the University of California Santa Barbara with a Bachelor of Science in Environmental Studies and a minor in Geology. After graduating, he worked for Fish and Wildlife as a technician researching salmon. Traveling abroad, he worked in New Zealand as a conservation ranger helping to understand invasive pests and species.

WYNN COASTAL PLANNING

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Page 23 of 23 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Species Rarity Ranking System and Definitions

FED: federal status includes federally rare (FR), threatened (FT), or endangered (FE)

STATE: California state status includes rare (CR), threatened (CT), or endangered (CE)

CNPS: California Native Plant Society ranked inventory of native California plants thought to be at risk

CNPS Ranking

List 1A (1A) Presumed extinct in California.

List 1B (1B) Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere.

List 2 (2) Rare, threatened or endangered in California but more common elsewhere.

List 3 (3) More information needed, a review list.

List 4 (4) Species of limited distribution, a watch list.

Threat Code extensions and their meanings:

.1 - Seriously endangered in California

.2 – Fairly endangered in California .3 – Not very endangered in California

G-RANK: Global Ranking - The global rank (G-rank) is a reflection of the overall condition of an element throughout its global range.

SPECIES OR NATURAL COMMUNITY LEVEL

G1 = Less than 6 viable element occurrences (Eos) OR less than 1,000 individuals OR less than 2,000 acres.

G2 = 6-20 Eos OR 1,000-3,000 individuals OR 2,000-10,000 acres.

G3 = 21-80 Eos OR 3,000-10,000 individuals OR 10,000-50,000 acres.

G4 = Apparently secure; this rank is clearly lower than G3 but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e., there is some threat, or somewhat narrow habitat.

G5 = Population or stand demonstrably secure to ineradicable due to being commonly found in the world.

GH - All sites are historical so possibly extinct; the element has not been seen for at least 20 years, but suitable habitat still exists (SH = All California sites are historical and possibly extinct).

GX - All sites are extirpated; this element is extinct in the wild (SX = All California sites are extirpated).

GXC - Extinct in the wild; exists in cultivation.

G1Q - The element is very rare, but there are taxonomic questions associated with it. T - Rank applies to a subspecies or variety.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 1 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Species Rarity Ranking System and Definitions

S-RANK: STATE RANKING - The state rank (S-rank) is assigned much the same way as the global rank, except state ranks in California often also contain a threat designation attached to the S-rank.

S1 = Less than 6 viable Eos OR less than 1,000 individuals OR less than 2,000 acres

S1.1 = very threatened

S1.2 = threatened

S1.3 = not very threatened OR no current threats known

S2 = 6-20 Eos OR 1,000-3,000 individuals OR 2,000-10,000 acres

S2.1 = very threatened

S2.2 = threatened

S2.3 = not very threatened OR no current threats known

S3 = 21-80 Eos or 3,000-10,000 individuals OR 10,000-50,000 acres

S3.1 = very threatened

S3.2 = threatened

S3.3 = not very threatened OR no current threats known

S4 = Apparently secure within California; this rank is clearly lower than S3 but factors exist to cause some concern; i.e. there is some threat, or somewhat narrow habitat.

S5 = Demonstrably secure to ineradicable in California. NO THREAT RANK.

Notes: 1. Other considerations used when ranking a species or natural community include the pattern of distribution of the element on the landscape, fragmentation of the population/stands, and historical extent as compared to its modern range. It is important to take a bird’s eye or aerial view when ranking sensitive elements rather than simply counting Eos. 2. Uncertainty about the rank of an element is expressed in two major ways: By expressing the rank as a range of values: e.g., S2S3 means the rank is somewhere between S2 and S3. By adding a ? to the rank: e.g., S2? This represents more certainty than S2S3, but less than S2. 3. Other symbols

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 2 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A . Table 1. Rare plant scoping list. Potential Scientific Name Blooming Fed. State State Global habtat in (Synonyms) Habitat found CRPR Found? Period Listing Listing Rank Rank Study Common Name Area?

Abronia umbellata var.breviflora Coastal dunes Jun-Oct 1B.1 N N S1 G4G5T No No Pink sand-verbena

Agrostis blasdalei Coastal dunes, coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie. May- Jul 1B.2 N N S2 G2 No No Blasdale's bent grass

Arctostaphylos nummularia ssp. Mendocinoensis Closed-cone coniferous forest. Acidic sandy-clay Jan 1B.2 N N SH G3?THQ No No Pygmy manzanita soils in dwarfed coniferous forest.

Astragalus agnicidus Openings, disturbed areas, roadsides,broadleafed Apr-Sep 1B.1 N CE S3 G3 No No Humboldt milk- vetch upland forest, North coast coniferous forest

Astragalus pycnostachyus var. pyncnostachyus Coastal dunes (mesic), coastal scrub, coastal salt Apr-Oct 1B.2 N N S2 G2T2 No No Coastal marsh milk-vetch marshes and swamps, and streamsides

Blennosperma nanum var.robustum Coastal prairie, coastal scrub Feb-Apr 1B.2 N CR S2 G4T2 No No Point Reyes blennosperma

Calamagrostis crassiglumis Coastal scrub (mesic), freshwater marshes and May-Aug 2B.1 N N S2 G3Q No No Thurber's reed grass swamps.

Calystegia purpurata ssp. saxicola Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub, Mar-Sep 1B.2 N N S2S3 G4T2T3 Yes No Coastal bluff morning-glory North Coast coniferous forest.

Bogs and fens, closed-cone coniferous forest, Campanula californica coastal prairie, meadows and seeps, freshwater Jun-Oct 1B.2 N N S3 G3 No No Swamp harebell marshes and swamps, and North Coast coniferous forests.

Bogs and fens, closed-cone coniferous forest, Carex californica coastal prairie, meadows and seeps, marshes and May-Aug 2B.3 N N S2 G5 No No California sedge swamps (often on margins or drier areas).

Shores, beaches, often gravelly, bogs and fens, Carex lenticularis var.limnophila marshes and swamps, North Coast coniferous Jun-Aug 2B.2 N N S1 G5T5 No No Lagoon sedge forest.

Carex livida Bogs and Fens Jun 2A N N SH G5 No No Livid sedge

Carex lyngbyei Brackish or freshwater marshes and swamps Apr-Aug 2B.2 N N S3 G5 No No Lyngbye's sedge

Mesic sites of coastal prairie, coastal scrub, and Carex saliniformis meadows, seeps, marshes and swamps (coastal Jun-Jul 1B.2 N N S2 G2 No No Deceiving sedge salt)

Carex viridula ssp. Viridula Bogs and fens, marshes and swamps (freshwater), Jun-Nov 2B.3 N N S1.3 G5T5 No No Green yellow sedge north coast coniferous forest (mesic).

Castilleja affinis ssp.litoralis Sandy sites in coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub; Jun 2B.2 N N S3 G4G5T4 No No Oregon coast paintbrush coastal dunes.

Castilleja ambigua var. humboldtiensis Coastal salt marshes and swamps. Apr-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G4T2 No No Humboldt Bay owl's-clover

Castilleja mendocinensis Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub, closed-cone (Castilleja latifolia ssp. Mendocinensis) Apr-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G2 Yes No coniferous forest, coastal dunes, coastal prairie. Mendocino Coast paintbrush

Chorizanthe howellii Sandy, often disturbed, areas of coastal prairie and May - Jul 1B.2 FE CT S1 G1 No No Howell's spineflower coastal scrub, and coastal dunes

Clarkia amoena ssp. whitneyi Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub. Jun-Aug 1B.1 N N S1 G5T1 No No Whitney's farewell-to- spring

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 3 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A . Table 1. Rare plant scoping list. Potential Scientific Name Blooming Fed. State State Global habtat in (Synonyms) Habitat found CRPR Found? Period Listing Listing Rank Rank Study Common Name Area?

Collinsia corymbosa Coastal dunes, coastal prairie. Apr-June 1B.2 N N S1 G1 No No Round-headed Chinese-houses

Cornus canadensis Bogs and fens, meadows and seeps, North Coast May-Jul 2B.2 N N S2 G5 Yes No Bunchberry coniferous forest.

Cuscuta pacifica var. papillata Coastal dunes (interdune depressions). Jul-Oct 1B.2 N N S1 G5T1 No No Mendocino dodder

Erigeron supplex Coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie. May-Jul 1B.2 N N S2 G2 Yes No Supple daisy

Erysimum concinnum Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal prairie. Feb-Jul 1B.2 N N S3 G3 No No Headland wallflower

Erysimum menziesii (Erysimum menziesii ssp. eurekense, Erysimum menziesii ssp. menziesii, Localized on coastal dunes and coastal strand. Mar-Sep 1B.1 FE CE S1 G1 No No Erysimum menziesii ssp. yadonii) Menzies' wallflower

Erythronium revolutum Mesic, streambanks. Bogs and fens; broadleafed Mar-Aug 2B.2 N N S3 G4 Yes No Coast\Mahogany fawn lily upland forests; North Coast coniferous forest.

Fritillaria roderickii Coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie, valley and (Fritallaria biflora var. biflora) Mar-May 1B.1 N CE S1.1 G1Q No No foothill grassland. Roderick's fritillary

Gilia capitata ssp.chamissonis Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Apr-Jul 1B.1 N N S2 G5T2 No No Blue coast gilia

Gilia capitata ssp. pacifica Coastal bluff scrub, openings in chaparral, coastal Apr-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G5T3T4 Yes No Pacific gilia prairie, valley and foothill grassland.

Gilia capitata ssp.tomentosa Serpentinite, rocky, outcrops of coastal bluff scrub May-Jul 1B.1 N N S2 G5T2 No No Woolly-headed gilia and calley and foothill grassland.

Gilia millefoliata Coastal dunes Apr-Jul 1B.2 N N S2 G2 No No Dark-eyed gilia

Glyceria grandis Bogs and fens, wet meadows and seeps, marshes, Jun-Aug 2B.3 N N S3 G5 Yes No American manna grass swamps,streambanks, and lake margins

Hemizonia congesta ssp. Congesta Sometimes roadsides.Valley and foothill grassland Apr-Nov 1B.2 N N S1S2 G5T1T2 Yes No Seaside tarplant

Sandy coastal bluffs; coastal dunes, coastal dune Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia mat, and sandy openings in wet dune meadows. Mar-Jun 1B.2 N N S2 G4T3 No No Short-leaved evax Coastal bluff scrub. Rocky, grassy slopes. In areas of sparse vegetation cover in sandy substrate.

Hesperocyparis pygmaea (Cupressus pygmaea, Cupressus goveniana ssp. pigmaea, Closed-cone coniferous forests, usually podzol-like NA 1B.2 N N S1 G1 No No Callitropsis pygmaea) Pygmy cypress

Horkelia marinensis Sandy, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, coastal prairire May-Sep 1B.2 N N S2 G2 Yes No Point Reyes horkelia

Mesic openings or sandy sites in broadleafed Horkelia tenuiloba upland forests, chaparral, and valley and foothill May-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G2 No No Thin-lobed horkelia grassland.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 4 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A . Table 1. Rare plant scoping list. Potential Scientific Name Blooming Fed. State State Global habtat in (Synonyms) Habitat found CRPR Found? Period Listing Listing Rank Rank Study Common Name Area?

Wetlands, roadsides, Broadleafed upland forest, Coastal bluff scrub, Closed-cone coniferous forest, Hosackia gracilis Cismontane woodland, Coastal prairie, Coastal (Lotus formosissimus) Mar-Jul 4.2 N N S3 G4 Yes No scrub, Meadows and seeps, Marshes and swamps, Harlequin lotus North Coast coniferous forest, Valley and foothill grassland

Juncus supiniformis Bogs and fens; freshwater marshes and swamps Apr-Jul 2B.2 N N S1 G5 No No Hair-leaved rush near the coast.

Kopsiopsis hookeri (Boschniakia hookeri) North Coast conferous forest Apr-Aug 2B.3 N N S1S2 G4G5 Yes No Small groundcone

Lasthenia californica ssp.bakeri Openings in closed-cone coniferous forest; coastal Apr-Oct 1B.2 N N SH G3TH Yes No Baker's goldfields scrub; meadows and seeps; marshes and swamps.

Lasthenia californica ssp. macrantha Coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, and coastal Jan-Nov 1B.2 N N S2 G3T2 No No Perennial goldfields scrub.

Lasthenia conjugens Mesic sites in cismontane woodlands, alkaline Mar-Jun 1B.1 FE N S1.1 G1 No No Contra Costa goldfields playas, valley and foothill grasslands, vernal pools

Bogs and fens; mesic sites of coastal prairies, Lathyrus palustris coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forests, Mar- Aug 2B.2 N N S2 G5 Yes No Marsh Pea and North Coast coniferous forests. Broadleafed upland forests, closed-cone coniferous Lilium maritimum forests, coastal prairies, coastal scrub, freshwater May-Aug 1B.1 N N S2 G2 Yes No Coast lily marshes and swamps. Roadsides and roadside ditches. Closed-cone coniferous forests, cismontane woodlands, coastal scrub, valley and foothill Microseris paludosa grasslands. (A 1968 collection from Point Arena (3.2 Apr-Jul 1B.2 N N S2 G2 Yes No Marsh microseris/silverpuffs km to N, between Hwy. 1 and beach) is the northernmost occurrence and is disjunct from southern populations. Sandy, usually mesic sites in coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal prairie, and lower montane Oenothera wolfii coniferous forests. (Along roads on vertical May-Oct 1B.1 N N S1 G2 Yes No Wolf's evening- primrose cutbanks and in grassy median. On disturbed sterile soil; upper stabilized dunes; rocky slopes protected above strand; vertical cliffs above the ocean.)

Packera bolanderi var.bolanderi Sometimes roadsides, Coastal Scrub, North coast (Senecio bolanderi var. bolanderi) Jan-Aug 2B.2 N N S2S3 G4T4 Yes No coniferous forest Seacoast ragwort Sandy, sometimes rocky, sites in coastal bluff scrub; Phacelia insularis var.continentis coastal dunes. (Rocky, thin soil with native and non- Mar-May 1B.2 N N S2 G2T2 No No North Coast phacelia native grasses and forbs. Sandy pastureland and grazed coastal prairie.)

Closed-cone coniferous forests with podzol-like Pinus contorta ssp.bolanderi soils. Associated with Mendocino cypress and Jul-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G5T2 No No Bolander's beach pine bishop pine, and Mendocino pygmy cypress forests. Sometimes serpentinite, Broadleafed upland forest, Piperia candida Lower montane coniferous forest, North Coast Mar-Sep 1B.2 N N S3 G3 Yes No White-flowered rein orchid coniferous forest

Pleuropogon hooverianus open areas, mesic, broadleafed upland forest, Apr-Jun 1B.1 N CT S2 G2 Yes No North Coast semaphore grass meadows and seeps, North coast coniferous forest.

Potamogeton epihydrus Marshes and swamps (assorted shallow freshwater) Jun-Sep 2B.2 N N S2.2? G5 No No Ribbonleaf pondweed

Puccinellia pumila Coastal salt marshes and swamps; meadows and Jul 2B.2 N N SH G4? No No Dwarf alkali grass seeps, mineral spring meadows.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 5 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A . Table 1. Rare plant scoping list. Potential Scientific Name Blooming Fed. State State Global habtat in (Synonyms) Habitat found CRPR Found? Period Listing Listing Rank Rank Study Common Name Area?

Bogs and fens (sometimes in Mendocino pygmy Rhynchospora alba forests); meadows and seeps; marshes and swamps Jul-Aug 2B.2 N N S2 G5 No No White beaked-rush (freshwater). Bogs and fens,broadleafed upland forests, meadows and seeps, marshes and swamps, North Sanguisorba officinalis Coast coniferous forests, riparian forests, Jul-Oct 2B.2 N N S2 G5? Yes No Great burnet Serpentine seepage areas and along stream borders.

Sidalcea calycosa ssp.rhizomata Freshwater marshes and swamps near the coast. Apr-Sep 1B.2 N N S2 G5T2 No No Point Reyes checkerbloom

Sidalcea malviflora ssp.patula Often roadcuts, coastal bluff scrub; coastal prairie; May-Aug 1B.2 N N S2 G5T2 Yes No Siskiyou checkerbloom North coast coniferous forest

Sidalcea malviflora ssp. purpurea Broadleafed upland forest, coastal prairie May-Jun 1B.2 N N S1 G5T1 Yes No Purple-stemmed checkerbloom

Gravelly margins of broadleafed upland forests, cismontane woodlands, coastal prairie. (Common Trifolium buckwestiorum associates include Juncus bufonius, Soliva sessilis, Apr-Oct 1B.1 N N S2 G2 No No Santa Cruz clover Danthonia californica, and Bromus hordeaceus. In Mendocino Co., most collections from ~5 miles up Garcia River.)

Trifolium trichocalyx Closed-cone coniferous forest (sandy, openings, Apr-Jun 1B.1 FE CE S1 G1 Yes No Monterey clover burned areas).

Triquetrella californica Soil of Coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub, NA 1B.2 N N S2 G2 Yes No Coastal triquetrella

Yellow pine forest, red fir forest, lodgepole forest, Viola adunca redwood forest, mixed evergreen forest, subalpine not Apr-Aug N N ? ? Yes No Western dog violet forest, alpine fell-fields, wetland riparian. Common ranked and widespread on open sea bluffs to red fir forest.

Viola palustris Coastal Bogs and Fens; Coastal Scrub (mesic) Mar-Aug 2B.2 N N S1S2 G5 No No Alpine marsh violet

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 6 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A. Table 2. Rare plant alliances and communities. Global & State Scientific Name Common Name Found? Rank Woodland and Forest Alliances and Stands Abies grandis Alliance Grand fir forest G4 S2 No Acer macrophyllum Alliance Bigleaf maple forest G4 S3 No Arbutus menziesii Alliance Madrone forest G4 S3 No Callitropsis pigmaea Alliance Mendocino pygmy cypress woodland G2 S2 No Chrysolepis chrysophylla Alliance Golden chinquapin thickets G2 S2 No Lithocarpus densiflorus Alliance Tanoak forest G4 S3 No Picea sitchensis Alliance Sitka spruce forest G5 S2 No Pinus contorta ssp. contorta Alliance Beach pine forest G5 S3 No Pinus muricata Alliance Bishop pine forest G3 S3 No Sequoia sempervirens Alliance Redwood forest G3 S3 No Tsuga heterophylla Alliance Western hemlock forest G5 S2 No Umbellularia californica Alliance California bay forest G4 S3 No Shrubland Alliances and Stands Arctostaphylos (nummularia, sensitiva) Alliance Glossy leaf manzanita chaparral G2 S2 No Corylus cornuta var. californica Alliance Hazelnut scrub G3 S2? No Garrya elliptica Provisional Alliance Coastal silk tassel scrub G3? S3? No Diplacas aurantiacus Alliance Bush monkeyflower scrub G3 S3? No Holodiscus discolor Alliance Ocean spray brush G4 S3 No Morella californica Alliance Wax myrtle scrub G3 S3 No Rhododendron neoglandulosum Alliance Western Labrador-tea thickets G4 S2? No Rhododendron occidentale Provisional Alliance Western azalea patches G3 S2? No Rosa californica Alliance California rose briar patches G3 S3 No Rubus (parviflorus, spectabilis, ursinus) Alliance Coastal brambles G4 S3 No Salix hookeriana Alliance Coastal dune willow thickets G4 S3 No Sphagnum Bog Sphagnum bog G3 S1.2 No Salix sitchensis Provisional Alliance Sitka willow thickets G4 S3? No Herbaceous Alliances and Stands Abronia latifolia–Ambrosia chamissonis Alliance Dune mat G3 S3 No Argentina egedii Alliance Pacific silverweed marshes G4 S2 No Bulboschoenus maritimus Alliance Salt marsh bulrush marshes G4 S3 No Calamagrostis nutkaensis Alliance Pacific reed grass meadows G4 S2 No Camassia quamash Alliance Small camas meadows G4? S3? No Carex obnupta Alliance Slough sedge swards G4 S3 No Carex pansa Alliance Sand dune sedge swaths G4? S3? No Danthonia californica Alliance California oat grass prairie G4 S3 No Elymus glaucus Alliance Blue wild rye meadows G3? S3? No Festuca rubra Alliance Red fescue grassland G4 S3? No Festuca idahoensis Alliance Idaho fescue grassland G4 S3? No Glyceria occidentalis Northwest manna grass marshes G3? S3? No Grindelia (stricta) Provisional Alliance Gum plant patches G3? S3? No Hordeum brachyantherum Alliance Meadow barley patches G4 S3? No PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 7 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Appendix A. Table 2. Rare plant alliances and communities. Global & State Scientific Name Common Name Found? Rank Juncus (oxymeris, xiphioides) Provisional Alliance Iris-leaf rush seeps G2? S2? No Juncus lescurii Alliance Salt rush swales G3 S2? No Leymus mollis Alliance Sea lyme grass patches G4 S2 No Leymus triticoides Alliance Creeping rye grass turfs G4 S3 No Mimulus (guttatus) Alliance Common monkey flower seeps G4? S3? No Poa secunda Alliance Curley bluegrass grassland G4 S3? No Scirpus microcarpus Alliance Small-fruited bulrush marsh G4 S2 No Woodwardia fimbriata Woodwardia thicket G3 S3.2 No North Coast Bluff Scrub G2 S2.1 No Northern Coastal Terrace Prairie G2 S2.1 No Aquatic Vegetation Hydrocotyle (ranunculoides , umbellata ) Alliance Mats of floating pennywort G4 S3? No Nuphar lutea Provisional Alliance Yellow pond-lily mats G5 S3? No Oenanthe sarmentosa Alliance Water-parsley marsh G4 S2? No Sarcocornia pacifica (Salicornia depressa ) Alliance Pickleweed mats G4 S3 No Sparganium (angustifolium ) Alliance Mats of bur-reed leaves G4 S3? No Typha (angustifolia, domingensis, latifolia ) Alliance Cattail marshes G5 S5 No

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 8 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

INVERTEBRATES

Snails, Slugs, and Abalone (GASTROPODA )

Helminthoglypta arrosa pomoensis Found near the coast in heavily-timbered redwood canyons of Mendocino County, from Big River None None G2G3T1 S1 IUCN:DD and Russian Gulch watersheds. Found under redwoods. Generally, in somewhat moist duff. Found in Pomo bronze shoulderband scrub in forest opening under a power line in Russian

Noyo interessa Known from a few locations in Mendocino County with limited habitat information. None None G2 S2 None Ten Mile shoulderband Known from Ten Mile Dunes.

Beetles (INSECTA, Coleoptera)

Coelus globosus Subterranean beetle that tunnels through sand under dune vegetation. Since coastal dune habitat in None None G1 S1 IUCN:VU Globose dune beetle California is diminishing, the beetle is a special-status species.

Butterflies & Moths (INSECTA, Hymenoptera)

Lycaeides argyrognomon lotis Not seen since 1983, it is primarily from Mendocino County but historically from northern Sonoma and possibly Marin Counties. Inhabits wet meadows, damp coastal prairie, and potentially bogs or Endangered None G5TH SH XERCES:CI poorly-drained sphagnum-willow bogs where soils are waterlogged and acidic. Presumed host plant lotis blue butterfly is Hosackia gracilis.

Speyeria zerene behrensii Historically from near the City of Mendocino, Mendocino County, south to the area of SaltPoint StatePark,SonomaCounty. Nowpresumedto befromManchestersouthto SaltPoint area.Inhabits Endangered None G5T1 S1 XERCES:CI Behren's silverspot butterfly coastal terrace prairie with caterpillar host plants: violet (Viola adunca) andadult nectarsources: thistles, asters, etc.

Ants, Bees, & Wasps (INSECTA, Hymenoptera)

Bombus occidentalis Populations in central California have declined since the 1990’s. It visits flowers in a variety of Western bumble bee None None GU S1 XERCES:IM habitats. Identified by a white patch on its abdomen hind tip. None recorded

FISH

Trout & Salmon (SALMONIDAE )

Oncorhynchus kisutch Coho salmon - southern Require beds of loose, silt-free, coarse gravel for spawning. Also need cover, cool water and Threatened Threatened G4T2Q S2? AFS:TH DFG:SSC Oregon / sufficient dissolved oxygen. northern California ESU

Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus steelhead-northern Threatened None G5T2Q S2 AFS:TH DFG:SSC Cool, swift, shallow water and clean loose gravel for spawning. California DPS

Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Adults depend on pool depth and volume, amount of cover, and proximity to gravel. Water temps Threatened None G5 S2 AFS:TH chinook salmon – California >27° C lethal to adults. coastal ESU

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 9 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Minnows & Carp (INVERTEBRATES CYPRINIDAE)

Lavinia symmetricus navarroensis Habitat generalists. Found in warm intermittent streams as well as cold, well-aerated streams. Found None None G5T1T2 S1S2 DFG:SSC in the lower, warmer reaches of streams in the Russian and Navarro River drainages. Navarro roach

Lavinia symmetricus parvipinnis None None G5T1T2 S1S2 DFG:SSC Habitat generalists. Found in warm intermittent streams as well as cold, well-aerated streams. Gualala roach

Gobies (GOBIIDAE)

Eucyclogobius newberryi AFS:EN DFG:SSC Brackish water habitats along the California coast from Agua Hedionda lagoon, San Diego Co. to the Endangered None G3 S2S3 mouth of the Smith River. Found in shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches, they need fairly still tidewater goby IUCN:VU but not stagnant water and high oxygen levels.

AMPHIBIANS & REPTILES

Salamanders (SALAMANDRIDAE)

Taricha rivularis CDFW: SSC Red-bellied newts are found in redwood forests and lay their eggs in fast flowing streams or rivers. Red-bellied newt None None G4 S2 IUCN:LC They are often found under rocks, logs, rodent burrows, and other forest debris.

Olympic salamanders (RHYACOTRITONIDAE)

Rhyacotriton variegatus southern torrent (=seep) Found in Coastal redwood, Douglas fir, mixed conifer, montane riparian, and montane hardwood- salamander conifer forests from northern California south to Point Arena. Aquatic habitat includes permanent DFG:SSC IUCN:LC None None G3G4 S2S3 cold creeks, streams and seepages with low water flow; associated with moss-covered rocks within USFS:S trickling water and the splash zone of waterfalls; old-growth coniferous forests with closed canopy; <50% cobble in creeks, remainder mixture of pebble, gravel and sand.

Tailed frogs (ASCAPHIDAE)

Ascaphus truei Occurs in montane hardwood-conifer, redwood, Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine habitats. Coastal from Anchor Bay, Mendocino Co. to Oregon border. Cold, clear, rocky streams in wet forests. They None None G4 S2S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC do not inhabit ponds or lakes. A rocky streambed is necessary for cover for adults, eggs, and larvae. Pacific tailed frog After heavy rains, adults may be found in the woods away from the stream.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 10 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Frogs (RANIDAE)INVERTEBRATES

Rana aurora aurora Found in humid forests, woodlands, grasslands, and streamsides in northwestern California. Generally near permanent water, but can be found far from water, in damp woods and meadows, northern red-legged frog None None G4T4 S2? DFG:SSC USFS:S during non-breeding season. Integration zone between northern and California species is between Manchester and Elk.

Rana aurora draytonii Lowlands and foothills in or near permanent sources of deep water with dense, shrubby or emergent California red-legged frog Threatened None G4T2T3 S2S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:VU riparian vegetation. Requires 11-20 weeks of permanent water for larval development. Must have access to estivation habitat.

Rana boylii BLM:S Candidate for Partly-shaded, shallow streams and riffles with a rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Need at None G3 S2S3 foothill yellow-legged frog Threatened DFG:SSC IUCN:NT least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying.

USFS:S

Box & Water Turtles (EMYDIDAE) Emys marmorata BLM:S marmorata Former scientific name: Clemmys marmorata marmorata . Associated with permanent or nearly None None G3G4 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:VU permanent water in a wide variety of habitats. Requires basking sites. Nests sites may be found up to western pond turtle 0.5 km from water. USFS:S

BIRDS

Pelicans (PELECANIDAE) Pelecanus occidentalis californicus Nest colonies are on offshore islands free of mammalian predators and human disturbance, are of California brown pelican sufficient elevation to prevent flooding of nests, and are associated with an adequate and consistent (nesting colony & Delisted Delisted G4T3 S1S2 DFG:FP food supply. Brown pelicans roost communally, generally in areas that are near adequate food communal roosts) supplies, have some type of physical barrier to predation and disturbance, and provide some protection from environmental stresses such as wind and high surf.

Cormorants (PHALACROCORACIDAE)

Phalacrocorax auritus Rookery site: colonial nester on coastal cliffs, offshore islands, and along lake margins in the interior double-crested cormorant None None G5 S3 DFG:WL IUCN:LC of the state. Nests along coast on sequestered islets, usually on ground with sloping surface, or in tall trees along lake margins. (nesting colony)

Hawks, Kites, Harriers, & Eagles (ACCIPITRIDAE)

Accipiter cooperii Nesting: woodland, chiefly of open, interrupted or marginal type. Nest sites mainly in riparian None None G5 S3 DFG:WL IUCN:LC Cooper's hawk (nesting) growths of deciduous trees, as in canyon bottoms on river flood-plains; also, live oaks.

Accipiter gentilis BLM:S CDF:S Nesting: within and in vicinity of coniferous forest. Uses old nests, and maintains alternate sites. Usually nests on north slopes, near water. Red fir, lodge pole pine, Jeffrey pine, and aspens are None None G5 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC northern goshawk (nesting) typical nest trees. Northern goshawks typically nest in conifer forests containing large trees and an USFS:S open understory on the west slope of the Sierra. There is historic nesting in Big River and Pudding Accipiter striatus Nesting: ponderosa pine, black oak, riparian deciduous, mixed conifer and Jeffrey pine habitats. Prefers riparian areas. North-facing slopes, with plucking perches are critical requirements. Nests sharp-shinned hawk None None G5 S3 DFG:WL usually within 275 ft. of water. Nests in dense, even-aged, single- layered forest canopy, usually nests (nesting) in dense, pole and small-tree stands of conifers, which are cool, moist, well shaded, with little ground- cover, near water. Foraging: Uses dense stands in close proximity to open areas.

Aquila chrysaetos CDF:S DFG:FP Nesting and wintering: rolling foothills mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of range; also, large trees in open areas. Nests on cliffs golden eagle (nesting & None None G5 S3 DFG:WL IUCN:LC of all heights and in large trees in open areas. Alternative nest sites are maintained, and old nests are wintering) reused. Builds large platform nest, often 10 ft. across and 3 ft. high, of sticks, twigs, and greenery. Rugged, open habitats with canyons and escarpments used most frequently for nesting. USFWS:BCC

Usually east of the coastal belt, uncommon migrant in coastal Mendocino County seen in open areas Buteo regalis DFG:WL IUCN:LC None None G4 S3S4 such as Bald Hill and Manchester. Feeding habitat in open, treeless areas. Does not breed in California. ferruginous hawk (wintering) USFWS:BCC

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 11 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Circus cyaneusINVERTEBRATES

Northern harriers prefer sloughs, wet meadows, marshlands, swamps, prairies, plains, grasslands, and shrublands and perch on structures such as fence posts. Nesting habitat: nest on the ground, usually near water, or in tall grass, open fields, clearings, or on the water on a stick foundation, None None G5 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC Northern harrier (nesting) willow clump, or sedge tussock. Most nests built within patches of dense, often tall, vegetation (e.g., cattails) in undisturbed areas. They usually nest near hunting grounds. Foraging: They need open, low woody or herbaceous vegetation for nesting and hunting.

Elanus leucurus

Nesting: rolling foothills/valley margins with scattered oaks and river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodland, open grasslands, meadows, or marshes for foraging close to isolated, dense- None None G5 S3 DFG:FP IUCN:LC topped trees for nesting and perching. Winter congregation of at least 20 birds seen at Manchester white-tailed kite (nesting) State Park in early 2000’s. One nest known from a THP in Albion ~2006; nest was at the edge of conifer forest with no pasture immediately adjacent.

Haliaeetus leucocephalus CDF:S DFG:FP Nesting and wintering: ocean shore, lake margins, and rivers for both nesting and wintering. Most nests within 1 mile of water. Nests in large, old-growth, or dominant live tree with open branches, bald eagle (nesting & Delisted Endangered G5 S2 IUCN:LC USFS:S especially ponderosa pine. Roosts communally in winter. Known from winter in Lake Cleone, wintering) MacKerricher State Park and Little River.

USFWS:BCC

Pandion haliaetus CDF:S Nesting: ocean shore, bays, fresh-water lakes, and larger streams. Large nests built in tree-tops within 6-7 to 15 miles of goodfish-producing bodyof water.Flattened portionsof partiallybroken None None G5 S3 offsnags,trees,rocks,dirt pinnacles,cacti,andnumerous man-madestructures such as utilitypoles Osprey (nesting) DFG:WL IUCN:LC and duck blinds are used for nests. Furthest nest inland may be McGuire’s Pond.

Falcons (FALCONIDAE)

General wintering habitat: Uncommon winter migrants on the coast. Habitat apparently similar to breeding habitat, (open forest and grasslands). Regularly hunts prey (e.g., shorebirds) concentrated Falco columbarius on tidal flats. Often winters in cities throughout its range, where frequently perches on buildings, None None G5 S3 DFG:WL IUCN:LC power poles, and tall trees. Also winters in open woodland, grasslands, open cultivated fields, marshes, estuaries, and seacoasts. Frequents open habitats at low elevation near water and tree stands.

Merlin (wintering)

Falco peregrinus anatum CDF:S DFG:FP Nesting: near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water; on cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds; also, human- Delisted Delisted G4T3 S2 American peregrine falcon USFWS:BCC made structures. Nest consists of a scrape on a depression or ledge in an open site. (nesting) Plovers & Relatives (CHARADRIIDAE) Charadrius alexandrinus ABC:WLBCC nivosus DFG:SSC USFWS:BCC Nesting:federallistingappliesonlyto thepacificcoastal population.Sandy beaches,salt pondlevees and shores of largealkali lakes.Needs sandy,gravelly orfriable soilsfor nesting.Sand spits,dune- Threatened None G4T3 S2 backed beaches, unvegetated beach strands, open areas around estuaries, and beaches at river western snowy plover mouths are the preferred coastal habitats for nesting. Less common nesting habitat includes salt (nesting) pans, coastal dredged spoil sites, dry ponds, and salt pond levees and islands.

Oystercatchers (HAEMATOPODIDAE)

Haematopus bachmani IUCN:LC From the Aleutian Islands to Baja California, the forage on intertidal macroinvertebrates along gravel None None G5 S2 or rocky shores and in the southern part of their range nest primarily on rocky headlands and Black oystercatcher (nesting) USFWS:BCC offshore rocks.

Gulls & Terns (LARIDAE)

Larus californicus DFG:WL None None G5 S2 Colony nesters and usually occurring on an island or vegetated offshore rock. California gull (nesting) IUCN:LC

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 12 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Auklets, Puffins, & Relatives (ALCIDAE)INVERTEBRATES

Brachyramphus ABC:WLBCC CDF:S marmoratus

Nesting: feeds near-shore; nests inland along coast, from Eureka to Oregon border and from Half Moon Bay to Santa Cruz. Nests in old-growth redwood-dominated forests, up to six miles inland, often in Douglas-fir. Presence of platforms (flat surface at least four inches in diameter) appears to Threatened Endangered G3G4 S1 marbled murrelet (nesting) IUCN:EN be the most important stand characteristic for predicting murrelet presence. Stands can be: 1) mature (with or without an old- growth component); 2) old-growth; 3) young coniferous forests with platforms; and 4) include large residual trees in low densities sometimes less than one tree per acre.

Fratercula cirrhata Nesting colony: open-ocean bird; nests along the coast on islands, islets, or (rarely) mainland cliffs free of human disturbance and mammalian predators. Nests in burrows or rock crevices when sod or tufted puffin (nesting colony) None None G5 S2 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC earth in unavailable for burrowing. Occurs year-road offshore near breeding colonies in northern California, but more common in winter. Breeding records from Goat Rock, Mendocino Headlands tufted puffin (nesting colony) State Park.

Owls (STRIGIDAE)

Athene cunicularia BLM:S

burrowing owl (burrow Burrow sites: open, dry annual or perennial grasslands, deserts and scrublands, and dunes sites and some winter None None G4 S2 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC characterized by low-growing vegetation. Subterranean nester, dependent upon burrowing sites) mammals, most notably, the California ground squirrel. USFWS:BCC

Strix occidentalis caurina ABC:WLBCC CDF:S Old-growth forests or mixed stands of old-growth and mature trees. Occasionally in younger forests northern spotted owl Threatened None G3T3 S2S3 DFG:SSC w/patches of big trees. High, multistory canopy dominated by big trees, many trees w/cavities or broken tops, woody debris, and space under canopy. IUCN:NT

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 13 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Swifts (INVERTEBRATESAPODIDAE)

Nesting: redwood, Douglas fir, grand fir, and other coniferous forests. Nests in large hollow trees and snags. Often nests in flocks. Forages over most terrains and habitats but shows a preference for Chaetura vauxi foraging over rivers and lakes. Also nests in artificial structures such as chimneys. The most None None G5 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC important habitat requirement appears to be an appropriate nest site in a large, hollow tree. Forages over most terrains and habitats, often high in the air. Shows an apparent preference for foraging over rivers and lakes.

Hummingbirds (TROCHILIDAE )

Selasphorus rufus IUCN:LC Breeds in open or shrubby areas, forest openings, yards and parks, and sometimes in forests, rufous hummingbird None None G5 S1S2 thickets, and meadows. Late winter and spring migrant on the California coast. Breeding range from USFWS:BCC (nesting) southeast Alaska and as far south as northwestern California.

ABC:WLBCC Breeds only along a narrow strip of coastal California and southern Oregon. Nests in densely Selasphorus sasin IUCN:LC vegetated areas and forests. An early migrant compared with most North American birds, arriving in None None summer breeding grounds as early as January. Breeds in moist coastal areas, scrub, chaparral, and forests. Winters in forest edge and scrub clearings with flowers. Allen's hummingbird USFWS:BCC (nesting) Swallows (HIRUNDINIDAE )

Nesting: inhabits woodlands, low elevation coniferous forest of Douglas fir, Ponderosa pine, and Progne subis Monterey pine. Nests in old woodpecker cavities mostly, also in human- made structures such as None None G5 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC weep holes in bridges. Nest often located in tall, isolated trees and snags. Nesting on the Mendocino Coast known, in part, from Juan Creek, Ten Mile, Noyo, and Big River, and snags from Ten Mile River to Pudding Creek. Need open foraging habitats. (Coast redwood forest and at Gualala River bridge) purple martin

Wood-warblers (PARULIDAE)

Breeding range is relatively limited to the Pacific Coast and the Cascade and Sierra Nevada mountain Dendroica occidentalis ranges of Washington, Oregon, and California. Some winter along the coastal central and southern California, but most winter primarily in the mountains of western Mexico and Central America. Nesting habitats in Pacific northwest are coniferous forests with a high canopy volume, generally ABC:WLBCC None None G4G5 S3? preferring mature stands of pine and Douglas fir. Avoids areas with a high deciduous volume; absent hermit warbler (nesting) IUCN:LC from riparian areas and clearcuts. Birds of coniferous forests; they prefer cool, wet fir forests at elevation, and moist forests of Douglas-fir, hemlock, and western red cedar closer to sea level. Major threat to this species appears to be the degradation of breeding habitat. Not known as frequently nesting on the coast, perhaps more common inland.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 14 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Sparrows, Buntings, Warblers, & Relatives (INVERTEBRATES EMBERIZIDAE ) Nesting: dense grasslands on rolling hills, lowland plains, in valleys and on hillsides on lower Ammodramus savannarum mountain slopes. Favors native grasslands with a mix of grasses, forbs and scattered shrubs. Loosely None None G5 S2 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC grasshopper sparrow colonial when nesting. Summer (breeding) resident in Mendocino County known from north of Ten (nesting) Mile River. California endemic from near Humboldt Bay, Humboldt Co. to Morro Bay, San Luis Obispo Co. Breeds in low tidally influenced habitats in higher parts of pickleweed/saltgrass marshes, adjacent ruderal Passerculus areas, moist grasslands within and just above the fog belt, bottomlands and dairy pastures in the sandwichensis alaudinus None None G5T2T3 S2S3 DFG:SSC taller grasses and rushes along roads and fences, and infrequently, drier grasslands. In moist upland grasslands, it occurs where herbaceous vegetation is relatively short, with no or little woody plant cover. Open areas, whether provided by tidal mudflats or upland interstitial areas between clumps of Bryant’s savannah vegetation, appears to be an important component of occupied habitat. sparrow (nesting) Blackbirds (ICTERIDAE)

ABC:WLBCC Agelaius tricolor BLM:S Nesting colony: highly colonial species, most numerous in central valley and vicinity. Largely endemic tricolored blackbird None None G2G3 S2 DFG:SSC IUCN:EN to California. Requires open water, protected nesting substrate, such as cattails and foraging area (nesting colony) with insect prey within a few km of the colony. Known inland from McGuire’s Pond. USFWS:BCC

Mammals

Evening Bats (VESPERTILIONIDAE )

Antrozous pallidus BLM:S A wide variety of habitats deserts, grasslands, shrublands, woodlands and forests from sea level up DFG:SSC IUCN:LC pallid bat through mixed conifer forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. A None None G5 S3 USFS:S yearlong resident in most of the range. Day roosts are in caves, crevices, mines, and occasionally in hollow trees and buildings where there is protection from high temperatures. WBWG:H

Corynorhinus townsendi BLM:S

Generally found in the dry uplands throughout the West, but also occur in mesic coniferous and deciduous forest habitats along the Pacific coast. Unequivocally associated with areas containing caves and cave-analogs for roosting habitat. Requires spacious cavern-like structures for roosting None None G4 S2S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC Townsend's big-eared bat during all stages of its life cycle. Typically, they use caves and mines, but have been noted roosting in USFS:S WBWG:H large hollows of redwood trees, attics and abandoned buildings, lava tubes, and under bridges. Extremely sensitive to disturbance.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 15 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

INVERTEBRATES

Ranges throughout California in coastal and montane forests. May be found anywhere in California during spring and fall migrations. Primarily a forest (tree-roosting) bat associated with north Lasionycteris noctivagans temperate zone conifer and mixed conifer/hardwood forests. Prefers forested (frequently IUCN:LC coniferous) areas adjacent to lakes, ponds, and streams. During migration, sometimes occurs in xeric None None G5 S3S4 WBWG:M areas. Roosts in dead or dying trees with exfoliating bark, extensive vertical cracks, or cavities, rock crevices, and occasionally under wood piles, in leaf litter, under foundations, and in buildings, mines and caves. The primary threat is likely loss of roosting habitat due to logging practices that fail to accommodate the roosting needs of this species (e.g., clusters of large snags). silver-haired bat

Lasiurus blossevillii western red bat Locally common in some areas of California from Shasta County south to the Mexican border. California Central Valley is the species’ primary breeding region. Species appears to be strongly associated with riparian habitats for roosting and foraging, particularly mature stands/large diameter None None G5 S3? DFG:SSC IUCN:LC of cottonwood/sycamore. Roosts in woodland borders, rivers, agricultural areas, and urban areas with mature trees in the foliage of large shrubs and trees, usually sheltering on the underside of overhanging leaves. It often hangs from one foot on the leaf petiole and may resemble a fruit or a dead leaf. Rarely observed roosting in mines.

Mountain Beavers (PLODONTIDAE)

Aplodontia rufa nigra Generally known from 2 miles north of Bridgeport Landing to 5 miles south of the town of Point Arena. Coastal areas often near springs or seepages; mesic coastal scrub, northern dune scrub, edges Endangered None G5T1 S1 DFG:SSC IUCN:LC of conifer forests, and riparian plant communities. North facing slopes of ridges and gullies with Point Arena mountain beaver friable soils and thickets of undergrowth.

Mice, Rats, & Voles (MURIDAE )

Arborimus pomo Species split into red tree vole and Sonoma tree vole; approximate boundary between two species is Klamath River. Inhabits north coast fog belt from Oregon border to Sonoma Co. in old-growth and None None G3 S3 DFG:SSC IUCN:NT other forests, mainly Douglas-fir, redwood, and montane hardwood-conifer habitats. Feeds almost exclusively on Douglas-fir needles. Will occasionally take needles of grand fir, hemlock or spruce. Sonoma tree vole

Weasels & Relatives (MUSTELIDAE)

Martes americana Endemic to the coastal forests of northwestern California with a historical range described as “the humboldtensis narrow northwest humid coast strip, chiefly within the redwood belt” from the Oregon border to northern Sonoma county. However, the one known remnant Humboldt marten population occurs in None None G5T2T3 S2S3 DFG:SSC USFS:S the north-central portion of the described range in an area dominated by Douglas-fir and tanoak. Typically associated with closed-canopy, late-successional, mesic coniferous forests with complex physical structure near the ground. Very rare on the Mendocino coast. Humboldt marten

Martes pennanti (pacifica) BLM:S DPS Intermediate to large-tree stages of coniferous forests and deciduous-riparian areas with high Candidate None G5 S2S3 percent canopyclosure.Usecavities,snags, logsand rockyareas forcover anddenning. Needlarge Pacific fisher DFG:SSC USFS:S areas of mature, dense forest. Very rare on the Mendocino coast.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 16 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix A. Table 3. Rare Fauna Scoping List. Scientific name Federal State G S Organization: Habitat Common name Status Status Rank Rank Code

Sea Lions & Fur Seals (INVERTEBRATES OTARIIDAE)

Solitary, non-social “eared” seals breed in the tropical waters off southern California/Mexico region Arctocephalus townsendi Threatened Threatened G1 S1 DFG:FP but have been seen on rare occasion off Mendocino.

Callorhinus ursinus Mostly pelagic seal ranging throughout the Pacific Rim, from Japan to the Channel Islands. Pacific None None G3 S1 IUCN:VU rookeries in the Channel and Farallon Islands. Infrequent visitor to the Mendocino Coast. One was northern fur-seal stranded on Albion flat in 2013 and rescued by the Marine Mammal Center.

Eumetopias jubatus Range throughout the North Pacific Rim from Japan to central California. Unlike California sea lions, IUCN:EN Threatened None G3 S2 Stellers tend to remain off shore or haul out in unpopulated areas. Breeding rookery on Año Nuevo MMC:SSC Steller (=northern) sea-lion Island.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix A Scoping Lists Page 17 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix B. Plants observed in the Study Area

Scientific Name by Family Common Name Native? GYMNOSPERMS Pinaceae Abies grandis grand fir; lowland fir Y Pinus radiata Monterey pine Y Pseudotsuga menziesii var. menziesii Douglas fir Y

Dennstaedtiaceae Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens bracken; western bracken; hairy bracken fern Y Dryopteridaceae Polystichum munitum western sword fern Y

Apiaceae Conium maculatum poison hemlock N Heracleum maximum common cow parsnip Y Oenanthe sarmentosa Pacific oenanthe, water parsely Y Aristolochiaceae Aristolochia californica Dutchman's pipe, California pipe vine, pipevine Y Asteraceae Achillea millefolium yarrow Y Anaphalis margaritacea pearly everlasting Y Anisocarpus madioides woodland madia Y Artemisia douglasiana mugwort, wormwood, Douglas' sagewort Y Baccharis pilularis coyote brush Y Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle N Hypochaeris radicata rough cat's ear, hairy cat's ear N Alnus rubra red alder, Oregon alder Y Brassicaceae Nasturtium officinale water cress Y Caprifoliaceae Lonicera hispidula hairy honeysuckle Y Lonicera involucrata var. ledebourii coast twinberry, Twinberry honeysuckle Y Cistaceae Cistus sp. Convolvulaceae Calystegia purpurata ssp. purpurata Pacific false bindweed Fabaceae Lupinus variicolor varied lupine, varied-color lupine Y Fagaceae Notholithocarpus densiflorus var. densiflorus tanoak Y Lamiaceae Clinopodium douglasii yerba buena Y Myricaceae Morella californica wax-myrtle Y Rhamnaceae Ceanothus thyrsiflorus blueblossom Y Frangula californica California coffeeberry Y

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix B Page 1 of 2 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Appendix B. Plants observed in the Study Area

Scientific Name by Family Common Name Native? Rosaceae Rubus armeniacus Himalaya-berry, Himalayan blackberry N Rubus ursinus California blackberry Y Salicaceae Salix sitchensis Sitka willow Y

Cyperaceae Cyperus eragrostis tall flatsedge, tall sedge Y Iridaceae Iris douglasiana Douglas' iris Y Juncaceae Juncus patens common rush, spreading rush Y Poaceae Anthoxanthum odoratum sweet vernal grass N Avena barbata slender wild oat N Bromus carinatus California brome Y Bromus diandrus ripgut brome; ripgut N Bromus hordeaceus soft chess N Holcus lanatus common velvetgrass N Polypogon monspeliensis annual beard grass, rabbits foot grass N Festuca myuros rattail fescue N

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix B Page 2 of 2 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State Mendocino County, Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment Western Part, Conservation Stations, and local Service participants California

Appendix C Page 1 of 17 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 August 31, 2017 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Preface

Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require

2 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 2 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

3 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 3 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Contents

Preface...... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made...... 5 Soil Map...... 8 Soil Map...... 9 Legend...... 10 Map Unit Legend...... 11 Map Unit Descriptions...... 11 Mendocino County, Western Part, California...... 13 105—Biaggi loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes...... 13 139—Dystropepts, 30 to 75 percent slopes...... 14 References...... 16

4 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 4 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

How Soil Surveys Are Made

Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil

5 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 5 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and

6 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 6 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

7 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 7 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Soil Map

The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.

8 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 8 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey Custom Soil Resource Report APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Soil Map 123° 40' 57'' W 57'' 40' 123° W 52'' 40' 123°

440900 440910 440920 440930 440940 440950 440960 440970 440980 440990 441000 441010 441020 39° 1' 23'' N 39° 1' 23'' N 4319560 4319560 4319550 4319550 4319540 4319540 4319530 4319530 4319520 4319520 4319510 4319510 4319500 4319500

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 4319490 4319490

39° 1' 20'' N 39° 1' 20'' N 440900 440910 440920 440930 440940 440950 440960 440970 440980 440990 441000 441010 441020

Map Scale: 1:585 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Meters N 0 5 10 20 30 123° 40' 57'' W 57'' 40' 123° W 52'' 40' 123° Feet 0 25 50 100 150 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 9 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 9 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at Area of Interest (AOI) 1:24,000. Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot Soil Map Unit Polygons Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Wet Spot Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause Other Soil Map Unit Points misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil Special Line Features line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed Blowout Water Features scale. Streams and Canals Borrow Pit Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Clay Spot Rails measurements. Closed Depression Interstate Highways Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Gravel Pit US Routes Web Soil Survey URL: Gravelly Spot Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Major Roads Landfill Local Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Lava Flow projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts Background distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

Miscellaneous Water This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as Perennial Water of the version date(s) listed below.

Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Mendocino County, Western Part, California Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 22, 2016

Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger.

Sinkhole Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Dec 31, 2009—Jan Slide or Slip 26, 2017

Sodic Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

10 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 10 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

Map Unit Legend

Mendocino County, Western Part, California (CA694)

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 105 Biaggi loam, 0 to 5 percent 1.1 72.6% slopes 139 Dystropepts, 30 to 75 percent 0.4 27.4% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 1.5 100.0%

Map Unit Descriptions

The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the

11 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 11 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

12 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 12 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

Mendocino County, Western Part, California

105—Biaggi loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: hmk1 Elevation: 100 to 400 feet Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 45 inches Mean annual air temperature: 45 to 57 degrees F Frost-free period: 250 to 330 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance

Map Unit Composition Biaggi and similar soils: 80 percent Minor components: 20 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Biaggi Setting Landform: Marine terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Residuum weathered from sandstone and shale Typical profile H1 - 0 to 23 inches: loam H2 - 23 to 27 inches: unweathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 5 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Loamy Terrace (Perennial Grass) (R004XB059CA) Hydric soil rating: No

Minor Components Crispin Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No

13 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 13 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

Windyhollow Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Heeser Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Flumeville Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Marine terraces Hydric soil rating: Yes Cabrillo Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Mallopass Percent of map unit: 3 percent Hydric soil rating: No Unnamed, gentler or steeper slopes Percent of map unit: 2 percent Hydric soil rating: No

139—Dystropepts, 30 to 75 percent slopes

Map Unit Composition Dystropepts and similar soils: 75 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dystropepts Setting Landform: Marine terraces Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Riser Down-slope shape: Concave Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Residuum weathered from sandstone and shale Properties and qualities Slope: 30 to 75 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Runoff class: High Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None

14 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 14 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

Minor Components Abalobadiah Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Unnamed, gentler or steeper slopes Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Unnamed, talus Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Vizcaino Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hydric soil rating: No

15 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 15 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

References

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084

16 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 16 of 17 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017 Custom Soil Resource Report

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf

17 PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix C Page 17 of 17 Romano Biological ScopingCDP_2017-0003 Survey, Botanical ReportRomano & PAMB Survey Romano NWI WetlandsAPN Map 132-130-08-00November 22nd, 2017

1:2,375 0 0.02 0.04 0.08 mi U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team, [email protected] 0 0.03 0.06 0.12 km

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife August 31, 2017 Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should Wetlands Freshwater Emergent Wetland Lake be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Other Estuarine and Marine Wetland PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Freshwater Pond Riverine Appendix D Page 1 of 1 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This page was produced by the NWI mapper Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO (A) Buffer Areas. A buffer area shall be established adjacent to all environmentally sensitive habitat areas. The purpose of this buffer area shall be to provide for a sufficient area to protect the environmentally sensitive habitat from degradation resulting from future developments and shall be compatible with the continuance of such habitat areas.

The Study Area is a small parcel (0.6 acres) in the Irish Beach subdivision.

The proposed development consists of a boundary line adjustment, building a single-family residence and the associated infrastructure including driveway, connection to utilities and septic, and a primary and secondary leach field.

Three types of potential Environomental Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) were identified in the Study Area:

• Constructed Spillway/Stream ESHA –constructed spillway to Pomo Lake flows approximately 30 feet north of the northern property boundary • Riparian ESHA – riparian vegetation along the constructed spillway • Sonoma Tree Vole Nest ESHA - Sonoma tree vole nest (potentially abandoned) in a grand fir approximately 20 feet north of the northern property boundary

Mitigation and Avoidance measures (Section 6.0) address the potential impacts from proposed development and how it can be minimized to have the least impact possible.

(1) Width. The width of the buffer area shall be a minimum of one hundred (100) feet, unless an applicant can demonstrate, after consultation and agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game, and County Planning staff, that one hundred (100) feet is not necessary to protect the resources of that particular habitat area from possible significant disruption caused by the proposed development. The buffer area shall be measured from the outside edge of the Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas and shall not be less than fifty (50) feet in width. New land division shall not be allowed which will create new parcels entirely within a buffer area. Developments permitted within a buffer area shall generally be the same as those uses permitted in the adjacent Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area.

Based on the analysis below, Wynn Coastal Planning recommends:

• Constructed Spillway/Stream ESHA – 50 foot Buffer • Riparian ESHA – 50 foot Buffer • Sonoma tree vole nest ESHA – 50 foot Buffer

The minimum buffer is appropriate due to the low suitability of both the constructed spillway habitat and the sparse riparian habitat for sensitive species.

The 50 ft buffer was mapped from the outside edge of the riparian habitat where it existed; if riparian vegetation was absent, a 10 foot buffer on either side of the stream was created.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 1 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO 1 (a) Biological Significance of Adjacent Lands. Lands adjacent to a wetland, stream, or riparian habitat area vary in the degree to which they are functionally related to these habitat areas. Functional relationships may exist if species associated with such areas spend a significant portion of their life cycle on adjacent lands. The degree of significance depends upon the habitat requirements of the species in the habitat area (e.g., nesting, feeding, breeding, or resting).

Where a significant functional relationship exists, the land supporting this relationship shall also be considered to be part of the ESHA, and the buffer zone shall be measured from the edge of these lands and be sufficiently wide to protect these functional relationships. Where no significant functional relationships exist, the buffer shall be measured from the edge of the wetland, stream, or riparian habitat that is adjacent to the proposed development.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 2 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO

The stream and riparian areas just north of the property are biologically significant and should be protected.

The California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), foothill yellow legged frog (Rana boylii) and red-bellied newt (Taricha rivularis) are primarily stream dwelling and depend on permanent water for larval development, though both species have been found in terrestrial environments away from water. The western pond turtle (Emys marmorata marmorata) may also travel overground in search of food or to nest greater than 100 feet from water.

Avoidance Measures in Section 6 address how construction workers and construction activity can avoid impact to amphibians and reptiles that may migrate from the stream and riparian area into the construction site. Avoidance measures include: teaching construction workers how to identify different sensitive species, daily searches for sensitive species prior to construction activity, termination of construction activity during wet weather, and termination of construction activity if sensitive species are found.

Potentially present nesting birds may be migratory or year round residents, and nesting requirements are highly variable. The bird nesting season typically extends from February to August. Although no special-status birds or nests were observed during any of the field surveys, the riparian corridor, adjacent coyote brush scrub and Monterey pines provide potential nesting habitat for special-status bird species and would be protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. If construction is to occur during the breeding season (February to August), a pre-construction survey is recommended to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during development. No surveys are recommended if development occurs in the non-breeding season. (See Appendix A, Table 3 for potential special-status bird species in the Study Area).

Although no bats or roosts were documented during any of the field surveys, bat roost sites can change from year to year, so pre- construction surveys are usually necessary to determine the presence or absence of bat roost sites in a given area. Pre-construction bat surveys do not need to be performed if work is conducted between September 1 and October 31, after young have matured and prior to the bat hibernation period. However, if it is necessary to disturb potential bat roost sites between November 1 and August 31, pre- construction surveys should be performed by a qualified biologist within 14 days prior to the onset of development activities. (See Appendix A, Table 3 for potential special-status bat species in the Study Area).

Mitigation and Avoidance measures in Section 6 address how to minimize impacts to all potentially occurring birds and bats in the vicinity of proposed development.

A Sonoma tree vole nest was found within 100 feet of the proposed project in a large grand fir in the riparian area. The Sonoma tree vole inhabits the north coast fog belt in old growth and other forests and primarily feeds on Douglas-fir needles and occasionally needles of pine or grand fir. The proposed area for development is predominantly dominated by forbs and shrubs. Only a few Monterey pines are present on the western property boundary and are relatively small. Habitat in the development area is not highly suitable for Sonoma tree vole, however Mitigation Measures in Section 6 recommend a preconstruction survey for Sonoma tree voles in the project area.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 3 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO 1(b) Sensitivity of Species to Disturbance. The width of the buffer zone shall be based, in part, on the distance necessary to ensure that the most sensitive species of plants and animals will not be disturbed significantly by the permitted development. Such a determination shall be based on the following after consultation with the Department of Fish and Game or others with similar expertise: (1b-i) Nesting, feeding, breeding, resting, or other habitat requirements of both resident and migratory fish and wildlife species; (1b-ii) An assessment of the short-term and long-term adaptability of various species to human disturbance; (1b-iii) An assessment of the impact and activity levels of the proposed development on the resource.

No rare plants were found in the Study Area.

A Sonoma tree vole nest was found within 100 feet of the proposed project in a large grand fir in the riparian area. Only a few Monterey pines are present on the western property boundary and are relatively small, consequently, habitat in the project area is not suitable for Sonoma tree vole, however Mitigation Measures in Section 6 recommend a visual survey for Sonoma tree voles prior to construction.

There is a potential that special status birds and bats (which are sensitive to disturbance during their breeding seasons) may use the trees observed in and near the riparian area. Amphibians and reptiles might be found throughout the Study Area.

The proposed development is in a subdivision where human traffic and activity currently exist on nearby adjacent parcels. Common species in the Study Area are likely adapted to human disturbance. The protection of the stream and riparian corridor and buffer area will protect and preserve habitat for the most sensitive species with the potential to occur in the Study Area.

To minimize construction impacts, a staging plan was developed (Figure 13) and the recommended Mitigation Measures (Section 6) include:

• Construction should occur during the non-breeding season of birds and bats and noise should be limited to daylight hours. If construction occurs during the breeding season of birds and bats, both bird and bat surveys should be performed prior to construction. • To minimize erosion, construction should occur in the dry season. Straw wattles can be used to prevent debris and human activity from entering the ESHA buffers. • Construction workers shall be trained to recognize special status amphibians and reptiles. Staged material shall be moved carefully to avoid crushing potentially occurring special-status species. If any special-status species are observed, a qualified biologist will be contacted before construction activities resume.

1(c) Susceptibility of Parcel to Erosion. The width of the buffer zone shall be based, in part, on an assessment of the slope, soils, impervious surface coverage, runoff characteristics, and vegetative cover of the parcel and to what degree the development will change the potential for erosion. A sufficient buffer to allow for the interception of any additional material eroded as a result of the proposed development should be provided.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 4 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO

The soil type mapped for the Study Area by NRCS is predominantly Biaggi loam with 0 – 5% slope. The proposed development will occur on this mostly flat, well-drained soil type. The north western corner of the property is underlain by Dystopepts soils with 30 – 75% slope. The greatest slope in the northwestern corner is approximately 30%. The permeable area in the Study Area will be reduced due to the construction of the house and driveway, which will occupy approximately 3,100 sq ft of ground, or 12 % of the total parcel area. Proposed development is positioned farthest from the stream and riparian zone and in the flattest portion of the parcel, adjacent to Forest View Road. To avoid erosion on the steeper areas into the riparian and stream zone, it is recommended that straw wattles are placed on the flat ground at the break in slope as well as along the 50 ft ESHA buffer boundary. Straw wattles will prevent sediment caused from ground disturbance activities from entering the riparian and stream ESHAs. Straw wattles along the 50 ft ESHA buffer will also provide a visual barrier between the construction site and the protected sensitive habitat areas. Upland habitat in the 50 ft buffer, adjacent to the riparian and stream habitat has >90% vegetation cover, mostly composed of grasses and shrubs, which will provide additional protection for the riparian area. Ground disturbance and exposed soil will be limited to the flat ground in areas of the property, which are all greater than 50 feet from the riparian and stream habitat and vegetated buffer area.

1(d) Use of Natural Topographic Features to Locate Development. Hills and bluffs adjacent to ESHAs shall be used, where feasible, to buffer habitat areas. Where otherwise permitted, development should be located on the sides of hills away from ESHAs. Similarly, bluff faces should not be developed, but shall be included in the buffer zone.

Proposed development occurs on the flat slope away from the riparian and stream habitat. The northwestern corner slopes more steeply toward the riparian and stream in the 50 ft buffer area. Straw wattles shall be placed along the uphill side of the break in slope to prevent sediment and construction activity from occurring on the steeper slopes.

The Staging Area Plan (Figure 14) indicates where staged materials and straw wattles shall be placed to protect all potential ESHAs.

1(e) Use of Existing Cultural Features to Locate Buffer Zones. Cultural features (e.g., roads and dikes) shall be used, where feasible, to buffer habitat areas. Where feasible, development shall be located on the side of roads, dikes, irrigation canals, flood control channels, etc., away from the ESHA.

No cultural features exist between the proposed development area and the ESHAs (riparian, constructed spillway/stream and STV nest) 1(f) Lot Configuration and Location of Existing Development. Where an existing subdivision or other development is largely built-out and the buildings are a uniform distance from a habitat area, at least that same distance shall be required as a buffer zone for any new development permitted. However, if that distance is less than one hundred (100) feet, additional mitigation measures (e.g., planting of native vegetation) shall be provided to ensure additional protection. Where development is proposed in an area that is largely undeveloped, the widest and most protective buffer zone feasible shall be required.

Proposed development is located approximately 50 feet from the existing potential ESHAs, a distance which is consistant with neighboring parcels in the subdivision. Proposed development is in the farthest feasible location from the potential ESHAs.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 5 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Mendocino County Coastal Zoning Code, Table 4. Section 20.496.020 ESHA – Development Criteria - ROMANO 1(g) Type and Scale of Development Proposed. The type and scale of the proposed development will, to a large degree, determine the size of the buffer zone necessary to protect the ESHA. Such evaluations shall be made on a case-by-case basis depending upon the resources involved, the degree to which adjacent lands are already developed, and the type of development already existing in the area.

The proposed development consists of construction of a single-family residence and the associated infrastructure including driveway, connection to utilities and septic, and a primary and secondary leach field. The proposed development is consistent with the type and scale of nearby residences in the Irish Beach subdivision.

(2) Configuration. The buffer area shall be measured from the nearest outside edge of the ESHA (e.g., for a wetland from the landward edge of the wetland; for a stream from the landward edge of riparian vegetation or the top of the bluff).

• LiDAR with one foot contours was used to refine the location of the constructed spillway. • The edge of the riparian area was first identified in the field by examining vegetation patterns, topography, and landforms. The riparian overstory is predominantly Monterey pine, so the alder canopy is obscured in aerial images. It was necessary to use field captured coordinates and field verified vegetation boundaries to map the riparian zone as the drip line of the alder vegetation where it existed. In cases where riparian vegetation was absent, a 10 ft buffer from the stream line was created. • GPS captured coordinates for the STV nest tree were uploaded into ArcGIS and added to the ESHA map. (3) Land Division. New subdivisions or boundary line adjustments shall not be allowed which will create or provide for new parcels entirely within a buffer area.

Application for a property line adjustment is on file with the county for this property owner to combine the two adjacent parcels into one. Currently, proposed development for house, garage and driveway occur on the eastern parcel, APN 132-130-08 The septic and leach fields are designed for development on the western parcel APN 132-130-09. All proposed development will occur outside the riparian and stream ESHA and 50 ft buffer area.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix E Page 6 of 6 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS DEFINED

Definition of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area

The Mendocino County Local Coastal Plan (LCP) and the California Coastal Act (CCA) define an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) as:

“any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments”. [emphasis given]

The Mendocino County LCP and California Coastal Commission (CCC) have identified specific types of ESHAs including: wetlands, sand dunes, estuaries, streams, rivers, lakes, open coastal waters, coastal waters, riparian habitats, other resource areas, special status species, and the habitat of special status species. For the purpose of this report, the following definitions were used to assess potential ESHAS present in the study area.

Wetland ESHAs

The Mendocino County Local Coastal Plan (LCP) and the California Coastal Act (CCA) define wetlands as:

“Lands within the Coastal Zone which may be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes, open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens."

California Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations (Section 13577 (b)) provide the following detailed definition:

"Wetlands are lands where the water table is at, near, or above the land surface long enough to promote the formation of hydric soils or to support the growth of hydrophytes, and shall also include those types of wetlands where vegetation is lacking and soil is poorly developed or absent as a result of frequent or drastic fluctuations of surface water levels, wave action, water flow, turbidity or high concentrations of salt or other substance in the substrate. Such wetlands can be recognized by the presence of surface water or saturated substrate at some time during each year and their location within, or adjacent to, vegetated wetlands or deep-water habitats." In summary, a wetland in the coastal zone falls under CCA jurisdiction if any of the following conditions are present: wetland hydrology, dominance of wetland vegetation (hydrophytes), and/or presence of hydric soils.”

The Statewide Interpretive Guidelines for Identifying and Mapping Wetlands and Other Wet Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (CCC 1981) use the CCA definition to establish technical criteria to delineate wetlands. These guidelines consider wetland hydrology as the most important parameter to identify a wetland within the coastal zone: "the single feature that most wetlands share is soil or substrate that is at least periodically saturated with or covered by water, and this is the feature used to describe wetlands in the Coastal Act. The water creates severe physiological problems for all plants and animals except those that are adapted for life in water or in saturated soil, and therefore only plants adapted to these wet conditions (hydrophytes) could thrive in these wet (hydric) soils. Thus, the presence or absence of hydrophytes and hydric soils make excellent physical parameters upon which to judge the existence of wetland habitat areas for the purposes of the Coastal Act, but they are not the sole criteria." The saturation of soil in a wetland must be at or near the surface (approximately one foot or less) for a period of time (usually more than two weeks) in order to facilitate anaerobic

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix F Page 1 of 3 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

soil reduction processes that produce wetland conditions.

Identifying the presence of either wetland classified plants or hydric soils is referred to as the “one parameter approach.” This approach can be useful because wetland plants, wetland hydrology, and/or hydric soils often co-occur, especially in natural undisturbed areas. However, situations do exist where wetland classified plants are found in the absence of other wetland conditions. These areas are not wetlands and a delineation study must carefully scrutinize whether the wetland classified plants that are growing as hydrophytes in anaerobic soil conditions caused by wetland hydrology or not.

Examples of hydrophytic plants growing in non-wetland conditions include:

1) Deep-rooted trees (e.g., willows), capable of persisting in the presence of surface water or in dry conditions by tapping into deep groundwater sources; and,

2) Wetland-classified plants that are also salt-tolerant (e.g., alkali heath) can grow in the presence of either wetland conditions or saline soil conditions, but not necessarily both.

Similarly, hydric soils can be found in the absence of wetland hydrology or wetland classified plants. For example, hydric soils have been observed in upland areas where historic disturbances exposed substratum and in densely vegetated grasslands (Mollisols). A wetland delineation must determine if the hydric soil indicators are a result of frequent anaerobic conditions in the presence of hydrology or due to another cause.

In the Coastal Zone, the California Coastal Commission presumes an area is a wetland if any one of the following three-wetland indicators is present: wetland hydrology, wetland plants, or hydric soils. Exceptions to this exist if there is strong positive evidence of upland conditions, which should be obtained during the wet season. Evidence of upland conditions could include the following observations: a given area saturates only ephemerally following a substantial rainfall, soil is very permeable with no confining layer, or the land is steep and drains rapidly.

Hydrology: Depressions, seeps, and topographic low areas in the Study Area are surveyed for primary and secondary hydrological indicators. Primary indicators of wetland hydrology that offer direct evidence include: visible inundation or saturation, surface sediment deposits, oxidized root channels, and drift lines. Secondary indicators that offer indirect evidence include algal mats, shallow restrictive layers in the soil, or vegetation meeting the FAC-neutral test.

Soils: The Study Area is examined for hydric soil indicators according to Natural Resources Conservation Service guidelines (USDA 2006) where horizon depths, color, redoximorphic features, and texture characterize soil profiles. Soils formed under anaerobic wetland conditions generally have a low chroma matrix color, designated 0, 1, or 2, and contain mottles or other redoximorphic features. Soil color and chroma was determined using a Munsell soil color chart (Gretag Macbeth 2000) to identify soils as hydric.

Plants: The US Army Corps of Engineers developed a classification system for plant species known to occur in wetlands. The plant species are categorized based on the frequency that they have been observed in wetlands. Species classified as obligate (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), and Facultative (FAC) are considered hydrophytic. If more than 50 percent of the plant species in a given area are hydrophytic, the area meets the wetland vegetation criterion and is presumed to be a jurisdictional wetland under the CCA.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix F Page 2 of 3 Romano Biological Scoping Survey, BotanicalCDP_2017-0003 Report & PAMB Romano Survey APNNovember 132-130-08-00 22nd, 2017

Areas identified as potential wetlands by the presence of wetland plants are also examined for indicators of wetland hydrology. Positive indicators of wetland hydrology can include direct evidence (primary indicators) such as surface water, saturation, sediment deposits, and surface soil cracks, or indirect evidence (secondary indicators) such as drainage patterns and water- stained leaves.

Riparian ESHAs

The Mendocino County LCP recognizes drainages with associated riparian vegetation to be ESHAs. The Technical Criteria (CCC 1981) defines riparian vegetation as:

“that association of plant species which grows adjacent to freshwater watercourses, including perennial and intermittent streams, lakes, and other freshwater bodies. Riparian plant species and wetland plant species either require or tolerate a higher level of soil moisture than dryer upland vegetation, and are therefore generally considered hydrophytic.”

Special Status Species ESHAs

Special status species and their habitats are defined as ESHAs by the CCA and Mendocino County LCP. Special-status species include those species that have been formally listed, are proposed as endangered or threatened, or are candidates for such listing by the USFWS or CDFW. In addition, CDFW Species of Special Concern are given special consideration under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Species of Concern may only be protected as ESHAs if they are ranked by CDFW as imperiled in California (S3 or less). Plant species on California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Lists 1 or 2 are also considered special status species and are protected as ESHAs.

PBS Recieved 11-28-2017 Appendix F Page 3 of 3 RR10 RR5-PD [SR-PD]

RR5-PD [SR-PD]

RL FL

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 100 200 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.015 0.03 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:2,400 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Zoning Districts ZONING DISPLAY MAP THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES M e d iu m D e n s it y I n t e r m ix

Lo w D e n s i t y I n t e r m i x

M e d iu m D e n s it y I n t e r f a c e

Lo w D e n s i t y I n t e r m i x

e a c r f t e I n t y s i e n D w Lo Ve ry L o w D e n s i t y, Ve g e t a t e d

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,800 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE ZONES THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES Freshwater Emergent Wetland

Freshwater Pond

Riverine

NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

Freshwater Pond Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Lake Riverine

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,800 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester WETLANDS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES IRISH BEACH WATER DISTRICT

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester County Water Districts WATER DISTRICTS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester COWNTOAUTRE INRT EDRVAISL TIS R40I CFEETTS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES 105

139

225

182

105

106

174

139

1

4 1

226 115 105

199

5 2 2

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano Shinglemill-Gibney Complex 1:4,800 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Western Study Soil Types LOCAL SOILS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa NO SC A LE APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,844 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester REVISED SITE PLAN THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 185 370 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa NO SC A LE APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.03 0.06 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,416 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester REVISED FLOOR PLAN THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 185 370 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa NO SC A LE APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.03 0.06 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,416 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester REVISED ELEVATIONS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 185 370 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa NO SC A LE APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.03 0.06 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:4,416 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester REVISED ELEVATIONS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES SUBJECT PARCEL/S

1

H Manchester !!!S

ROAD MOUNTAIN VIE W

a r c E G i a R Legget t i v E e E Covel o r E E West port E E Layt onvi ll e

E E For t Br agg E Wil li t s E E Mendocino Pot ter Val l ey E E Compt che E E E Cal pell a Al bion E E Navarr o E Uki ah E E E El k Phi lo E Boonvi ll e E E E Hopl and E E Poi nt Ar ena Yor kvi ll e

E Gual al a

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 2,550 5,100 Feet ! OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa !! Major Towns & Places Major Roads APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.5 1 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano Major Rivers 1:63,360 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Highways LOCATION MAP THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester LCP MAP 22: MALLO PASS CREEK THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester LAND CAPABILITIES & NATURAL HAZARDS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester HABITATS & RESOURCES THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES RR 10

RR 10

RR 5-PD [SR-PD]

RL 160 FL 160

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 100 200 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.015 0.03 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:2,400 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester General Plan Classes GENERAL PLAN CLASSIFICATIONS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES REDWOOD COAST FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa County Fire Districts Moderate Fire Hazard APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano Very High Fire Hazard 1:4,800 AGENT: Andy Hill FIRE HAZARD ZONES & RESPONSIBILITY AREAS High Fire Hazard ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester STATGE RRESOPOUNSNIBDILIT YW ARAEATER RESOURCES THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES S O U T H E R N T O R R E N T S A L A M A N D E R R h y a c o t r i t o n v a r i e g a t u s PAMB Habitat Zone 2000-06-15

S O N O M A T R E E V O L E P O I N T A R E N A M O U N TA I N B E A V E R A r b o r i m u s p o m o A p l o d o n t i a r u f a n i g r a

CNDDB version 1/2018. Please note: The occurrences shown on this map represent the known locations of of the species listed here as of the date of this version. There may be additional occurrences or additional species within this area which have not yet been surveyed and/or mapped. Lack of information in the CNDDB about a species or an area can never be used as proof that no special status species occur in an area.

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 100 200 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa )!" Spotted Owl Locations Jan 2018 APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.015 0.03 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano CNDDB Jan 2018 1:2,400 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Mountain Beaver Suitable Habitat NATURAL DIVERSITY DATABASE THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 200 400 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.035 0.07 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano Marginal Water Resources 1:4,800 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Critical Water Resources Bedrock GROUND WATER RESOURCES THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 250 500 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0425 0.085 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:6,000 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester APPEALABLE AREAS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES 1 55 IVE DR AKE O L POM

F O R E S T V IE W C O U R T

5 5 1 C

AD 55 W RO 1A VIE ST RE FO

Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community

CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 50 100 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0075 0.015 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:1,200 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester Public Roads AERIAL IMAGERY THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES 132-100-11 ZACHARY HYMANSON 132-100-35 RR 5 0.34 A± COAST MENDOCINO OS 0 37.3 A±

132-141-10 BEACH IRISH RR 10 0 A±

132-130-04 PATRICK ROBARDS RR 5 0 A± 132-130-12 BEACH IRISH 132-130-03 RR 10 0 A± ROD SCHAEFFER RR 5 0 A± 132-141-02 132-130-02 132-141-11 RICHARD MORTON ROD SCHEAFFER RICHARD MORTON RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A±

132-130-10 132-130-07 IRENE HUCKS CURTIS JOHNSON RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± 132-130-06 JIMMY MCPEAK RR 5 0 A± 132-130-08 132-130-09 132-161-14 PABLO ROMANO EDWIN BUTCHER PABLO ROMANO RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± 132-130-05 ROBERT KELLER RR 5 0 A± 132-161-13 EMMANUEL FEUCHT RR 5 0 A±

132-150-24 132-161-11 132-150-27 132-150-23 132-150-25 SCOTT PULLEN RONALD WHITNEY NICOLAS EPANCHIN COAST MENDOCINO CHRISTI HENSON RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± 132-161-12 RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± JAMES ONEILL RR 5 0 A±

132-150-19 132-150-20 JOHN MCGEHEE 132-150-22 STEVEN RYNECKI RR 5 0 A± 132-161-10 132-150-21 RR 5 0 A± MICHAEL SMITH JOSEPH ELLISON SONJA KEASBERRY RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A±

132-161-09 GABRIELLA RAPPAPORT RR 5 0 A±

132-150-02 132-150-01 132-150-03 MARK HAMMOND JOHN BUCKE 132-162-14 132-150-09 132-150-04 ROGER BEAN RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± RUSSELL PASQUALETTI THOMAS REIDENBACK 132-150-08 LISA DIENAR RR 5 0 A± 132-162-13 RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± CAROL HOFER RR 5 0 A± STEELYN INOUE 132-162-12 RR 5 0 A± RR 5 0 A± FRED BISHOP RR 5 0 A± CASE: CDP 2017-0003 0 50 100 Feet OWNER: ROMANO, Pablo & Marisa APN: 132-130-08, 09 0 0.0075 0.015 Miles µ APLCT: Pablo Romano 1:1,200 AGENT: Andy Hill ADDRESS: 15761 Forest View Road, Manchester ADJACENT PARCELS THIS MAP AND DATA ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND. DO NOT USE THIS MAP TO DETERMINE LEGAL PROPERTY BOUNDARIES