DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan Pasadena, Los Angeles County, California Prepared for City of Pasadena Department of Water and Power 100 North Garfield Avenue, Room N306 Pasadena, California 91109 Contact: Elisa Ventura, P.E. T: (626) 744-4465 Prepared by Psomas 225 South Lake Avenue, Suite 1000 Pasadena, California 91101 Contact: Marc Blain, Senior Project Manager/Biologist T: (626) 351-2000 F: (626) 351-2030 August 2019 Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location ..................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Relevant Plans, Policies, and Regulations ................................................................... 3 2.1 Hahamongna Watershed Park Master Plan .......................................................... 3 2.2 Arroyo Seco Watershed Management and Restoration Plan ................................ 3 2.3 Angeles National Forest Land Management Plan ................................................. 3 2.4 USDA-FS Weed Management Strategy ................................................................ 4 2.5 Integrated Regional Water Management Plan ...................................................... 4 2.6 One Arroyo Report ................................................................................................ 5 2.7 Arroyos & Foothills Conservancy .......................................................................... 5 2.8 Regulatory Framework .......................................................................................... 6 2.8.1 Federal ...................................................................................................... 6 2.8.2 State .......................................................................................................... 7 2.8.3 Local .......................................................................................................... 9 3.0 Physical Site Conditions .............................................................................................. 11 3.1 Topography ......................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Climate ................................................................................................................ 11 4.0 Survey Methods ............................................................................................................ 12 4.1 Invasive Vegetation Survey and Mapping ........................................................... 12 5.0 Biological Resources .................................................................................................... 13 5.1 Vegetation ........................................................................................................... 13 5.2 Wildlife ................................................................................................................. 14 6.0 Environmental Resource Protection ........................................................................... 16 6.1 Special Status Resources ................................................................................... 16 6.2 Special Status Vegetation Types......................................................................... 18 6.3 Special Status PlantS .......................................................................................... 18 6.4 Special Status Wildlife ......................................................................................... 22 6.4.1 Nesting Birds ........................................................................................... 25 6.5 Jurisdictional Resources ..................................................................................... 25 6.6 Protected Trees ................................................................................................... 25 R:\Projects\2PAS010102\Habitat Enhancement Plan\Habitat Enhancement Plan-081519.docx i Table of Contents Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan 7.0 Invasive/Non-Native Vegetation Removal ................................................................... 27 7.1 Non-Native Trees ................................................................................................ 28 7.1.1 Cut-and-Paint Stump Treatment .............................................................. 28 7.1.2 Allelopathic Litter ..................................................................................... 28 7.1.3 Retention of Coarse Woody Debris or Snags .......................................... 28 7.2 Non-Native Shrubs .............................................................................................. 28 7.3 Non-Native Annual and Perennial Herbs ............................................................ 29 7.3.1 Broadleaf weeds ...................................................................................... 29 7.3.2 Non-Native Grasses ................................................................................ 29 7.4 Ornamental Plant Species ................................................................................... 30 8.0 Native Plant and Seed Installation ............................................................................... 31 8.1 Area 1 (‘Spreading Grounds’) .............................................................................. 31 8.1.1 Container Planting ................................................................................... 31 8.1.2 Seed Mix Application ............................................................................... 32 8.1.3 Arroyo Seco Canyon Project ................................................................... 32 8.1.4 Basin Restoration .................................................................................... 32 8.2 Habitat Enhancement Demonstration Area ......................................................... 33 8.2.1 8.2.1 Restoration Goals ........................................................................... 33 8.2.2 Preliminary Ecological Assessment ......................................................... 33 8.2.3 Implementation ........................................................................................ 34 8.2.4 Native Plants and Seeds ......................................................................... 34 8.2.5 Training .................................................................................................... 34 8.2.6 Site Preparation ....................................................................................... 34 8.2.7 Site Installation ........................................................................................ 35 8.2.8 Long Term Maintenenace ........................................................................ 36 8.2.9 Long-Term Monitoring ............................................................................. 36 8.3 Area 2 (‘Riparian Corridor’) and Area 3 (‘East of Substation’) ............................. 36 8.4 Area 4 (‘Northern Mountain Slopes’) ................................................................... 36 9.0 Fencing and Interpretive Signage ............................................................................... 37 10.0 Wildlife Enhancements ................................................................................................. 37 11.0 Stakeholder Coordination ............................................................................................ 38 12.0 Implementation Approach ............................................................................................ 38 13.0 References ..................................................................................................................... 39 14.0 Glossary ......................................................................................................................... 41 R:\Projects\2PAS010102\Habitat Enhancement Plan\Habitat Enhancement Plan-081519.docx ii Table of Contents Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan TABLES Table Page 1 Slope Analysis Summary ................................................................................................ 11 2 Special Status Plant Species Known to Occur Within the Project Region ...................... 19 3 Special Status Wildlife Species Known to Occur Within the Project Region ................... 22 EXHIBITS Exhibit Follows Page 1 Habitat Enhancement Areas ............................................................................................. 1 2 Slope Analysis ................................................................................................................. 11 3 Non-Native Removals ..................................................................................................... 28 4 Sycamore Planting Area ................................................................................................. 32 5 Habitat Enhancement Areas – Upper Area 1 .................................................................. 32 APPENDICES Appendix A Specifications B Proposed Element Activity Phasing Schedule R:\Projects\2PAS010102\Habitat Enhancement Plan\Habitat Enhancement Plan-081519.docx iii Table of Contents Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Upper Arroyo Seco Habitat Enhancement Plan (HEP) has been prepared to support the City of Pasadena’s goal of improving habitat functions and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Botany Biological Evaluation
    APPENDIX I Botany Biological Evaluation Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi Page 1 of 35 for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project November 2009 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE – FOREST SERVICE LAKE TAHOE BASIN MANAGEMENT UNIT Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project El Dorado County, CA Biological Evaluation for Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Plants and Fungi PREPARED BY: ENTRIX, Inc. DATE: November 2009 APPROVED BY: DATE: _____________ Name, Forest Botanist, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit SUMMARY OF EFFECTS DETERMINATION AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS AND/OR REQUIREMENTS One population of a special-status bryophyte, three-ranked hump-moss (Meesia triquetra), was observed in the survey area during surveys on June 30, 2008 and August 28, 2008. The proposed action will not affect the moss because the population is located outside the project area where no action is planned. The following species of invasive or noxious weeds were identified during surveys of the Project area: cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum); bullthistle (Cirsium vulgare); Klamathweed (Hypericum perforatum); oxe-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare); and common mullein (Verbascum Thapsus). The threat posed by these weed populations would not increase if the proposed action is implemented. An inventory and assessment of invasive and noxious weeds in the survey area is presented in the Noxious Weed Risk Assessment for the Upper Truckee River Sunset Stables Restoration Project (ENTRIX 2009). Based on the description of the proposed action and the evaluation contained herein, we have determined the following: There would be no significant effect to plant species listed as threatened, endangered, proposed for listing, or candidates under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), administered by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.3.1 Existing Conditions Methodology
    4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES 4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES This section identifies biological resources present on the project site and assesses the project’s impacts upon those resources. It is based on previous biological resource assessments for the site (conducted for the applicant) and a review of those assessments and supplemental field surveys and research conducted by the City’s EIR consultant. Since the Notice of Preparation was published March 9, 2010, the applicant has undertaken minimal amount of site disturbance activity for environmental research and maintenance. These activities involved conducting cultural resources investigations in March 2011, fuel maintenance as required by the County Fire Department in May 2011, and geotechnical exploration of the project site to assess possible construction design (i.e. foundation designs) on June 13-15, 2011. Each of these activities was planned and monitored to avoid any significant biological resources. Fuel modification is conducted on an ongoing basis once every three months. 4.3.1 Existing Conditions This section discusses the regional setting, project site conditions, and the existing and potentially occurring biological resources at the project site. Biological resources within the surrounding area are also discussed, when relevant. Methodology The description of existing conditions provided below is based on a literature review and site surveys. Literature Review The literature review included previous site-specific and non site-specific studies and California Department of Fish and
    [Show full text]
  • (Lonicera L.) Genties Atstovų Genetinės Įvairovės Ir Filogenetiniai Tyrimai Dnr Ţymenų Metodais
    VILNIAUS UNIVERSITETAS Donatas Naugţemys SAUSMEDŢIO (LONICERA L.) GENTIES ATSTOVŲ GENETINĖS ĮVAIROVĖS IR FILOGENETINIAI TYRIMAI DNR ŢYMENŲ METODAIS Daktaro disertacija Biomedicinos mokslai, biologija (01 B) Vilnius, 2011 Disertacija rengta 2006 – 2010 metais Vilniaus universitete. Mokslinis vadovas: prof. dr. Donatas Ţvingila (Vilniaus universitetas, biomedicinos mokslai, biologija – 01 B) Konsultantas: dr. Silva Ţilinskaitė (Vilniaus universitetas, biomedicinos mokslai, biologija – 01 B) 2 TURINYS SANTRUMPOS ..................................................................................................... 5 ĮVADAS ................................................................................................................. 7 I. LITERATŪROS APŢVALGA ......................................................................... 13 1. Sausmedţio genties apţvalga ....................................................................... 13 1.1. Lonicera L. genties sistematikos istorija ir problemos .......................... 15 1.2. Lonicera L. genties kilmė ...................................................................... 21 2. Molekuliniai ţymenys ir augalų filogenetiniai tyrimai ................................ 24 2.1. RAPD metodo taikymas augalų sistematikoje ...................................... 26 2.2. Chloroplastų DNR nekoduojančių specifinių regionų tyrimas sekoskaitos metodu .............................................................................................. 31 2.3. Lonicera L. genties filogenetikos molekuliniai tyrimai
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Collections
    A. andersonii A. Gray SANTA CRUZ MANZANITA San Mateo Along Skyline Blvd. between Gulch Road and la Honda Rd. (A. regismontana?) Santa Cruz Along Empire Grade, about 2 miles north of its intersection with Alba Grade. Lat. N. 37° 07', Long. 122° 10' W. Altitude about 2550 feet. Santa Cruz Aong grade (summit) 0.8 mi nw Alba Road junction (2600 ft elev. above and nw of Ben Lomond (town)) - Empire Grade Santa Cruz Near Summit of Opal Creek Rd., Big Basin Redwood State Park. Santa Cruz Near intersection of Empire Grade and Alba Grade. ben Lomond Mountain. Santa Cruz Along China Grade, 0.2 miles NW of its intersection with the Big Basin-Saratoga Summit Rd. Santa Cruz Nisene Marks State Park, Aptos Creek watershed; under PG&E high-voltage transmission line on eastern rim of the creek canyon Santa Cruz Along Redwood Drive 1.5 miles up (north of) from Monte Toyon Santa Cruz Miller's Ranch, summit between Gilroy and Watsonville. Santa Cruz At junction of Alba Road and Empire Road Ben Lomond Ridge summit Santa Cruz Sandy ridges near Bonny Doon - Santa Cruz Mountains Santa Cruz 3 miles NW of Santa Cruz, on upper UC Santa Cruz campus, Marshall Fields Santa Cruz Mt. Madonna Road along summit of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Between Lands End and Manzanitas School. Lat. N. 37° 02', Long. 121° 45' W; elev. 2000 feet Monterey Moro Road, Prunedale (A. pajaroensis?) A. auriculata Eastw. MT. DIABLO MANZANITA Contra Costa Between two major cuts of Cowell Cement Company (w face of ridge) - Mount Diablo, Lime Ridge Contra Costa Immediately south of Nortonville; 37°57'N, 121°53'W Contra Costa Top Pine Canyon Ridge (s-facing slope between the two forks) - Mount Diablo, Emmons Canyon (off Stone Valley) Contra Costa Near fire trail which runs s from large spur (on meridian) heading into Sycamore Canyon - Mount Diablo, Inner Black Hills Contra Costa Off Summit Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Sheet Summary
    Factual Report Camp 16 Incident Burnover And Fatal Vehicle Accident August 30, 2009 CA-LAC-09196997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Review of Team Process………………………………….……… 1 Team Roster……………………………………………….……… 3 Overview of Accident …………………………………………… 4 Sequence of Events………………………………………………. 6 Findings…………………………………………………………... 18 Witness List………………………………………………………. 24 Causal and Contributing Factors…………………………………. 27 Attachments Blue Sheet………………………………………………………… 31 Green Sheet……………………………………………………….. 35 Fire Behavior …………………………………………………….. 40 Topographic Fire Behavior Map…………………………………. 70 Orthostatic Fire Behavior Map…………………………………… 71 California Highway Patrol Multidisciplinary Accident Investigation Team Report………….. 73 Training Review Summary………………………………………. 77 LACoFD Personnel………………………………………. 78 CDCR Inmate Fire Fighters……………………………… 82 Safety Review Summary…………………………………………. 88 Scene Maps Topographic Map………………………………………… 93 Aerial with Road Map……………………………………. 94 Google Earth Elevated View Map……………………….. 95 Google Earth Depressed View Map……………………… 96 Times Burned Map……………………………………….. 97 Fire History Map…………………………………………. 98 Aerial Facility Map……………………………………….. 99 Aerial Vehicle Placement Map…………………………… 100 Report Photos……………………………………………………... 103 Large Scale Site Survey Diagram………………………………… 123 Small Scale Site Survey Diagram………………………………… 124 Glossary and Acronyms………………………………………….. 125 Foreword Fire Captain Ted Hall, Superintendent 16, and Fire Fighter Specialist Arnie Quinones, Foreman Crew 16-3, are two brother firefighters we shall never forget.
    [Show full text]
  • Petrologic Comparison of Cataclastic Rocks from Shallow and Deeper Crustal Levels Within the San Andreas Fault System of Southern California
    Petrologic Comparison of Cataclastic Rocks From Shallow and Deeper Crustal Levels Within the San Andreas Fault System of Southern California J. Lawford Anderson Robert H. Osborne Department of Geological Sciences University of Southern California USGS CONTRACT NO. 14-08-0001-17732 Supported by the EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM OPEN-FILE NO. 80-987 U.S. Geological Survey OPEN FILE REPORT This report was prepared under contract to the U.S. Geological Survey and has not been reviewed for conformity with USGS editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Opinions and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the USGS. Any use of trade names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the USGS. I. INTRODUCTION Studies leading to earthquake prediction and control require not only a knowledge of the causes and mechanics of earthquakes, but also an understanding of the physical, compositional, and me­ chanical properties of the geologic system in which they occur. Presently, little has been written about the nature of cataclastic rocks within fault zones except that it is generally markedly dif­ ferent from rocks on either side of the fault; that it may be fault gouge, fault breccia, cataclasite, or mylonite; 1 and that it ori­ ginates from mechanical crushing of rocks and from varying degrees of secondary chemical and mineralogical alterations by fluids mov­ ing through the fault zone (Higgins, 1971). The authors have recently completed a study of cataclastic rocks along the present trace of the San Andreas (Anderson, et al, in press) and the findings are summarized below in the section "Cataclastic Rocks within the San Andreas Fault Zone of Southern California." Our present effort has been directed at the San Gabriel Fault (Figure 1 and Plate 1) which as a deeply eroded precursor to the present San Andreas may provide intrafault mate­ rial representative of deeper crustal levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Franklin Canyon Trail, Carpinteria/Santa Ynez Mountains
    New Franklin Trail, Carpinteria January 2015 By Andrea Adams-Morden This preliminary checklist covers the new (lower) stretch of the Franklin Canyon Trail, including only the short riparian zone after the bridge and the trail after the fence stops to the 2015 gate on the Southern California Edison easement access road. * = non-native plants Lycophites Selaginellaceae – Spike-moss Family Selaginella bigelovii Bigelow’s Spike Moss Ferns Polypodiaceae – Polypody Fern Family Pellaea andromedifolia Coffee Fern Pentagramma triangularis Goldback Fern Polypodium californicum California Polypody Polystichum munitum Western Sword Fern Eudicots Adoxaceae - Muskroot Family Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea [S. mexicana] Blue Elderberry Anacardiaceae - Sumac Family Malosma laurina Laurel Sumac Toxicodendron diversilobum Western Poison Oak Apiaceae - Parsley Family Foeniculum vulgare Sweet Fennel* Sanicula crassicaulis Cut-leafed Sanicle Apocynaceae - Dogbane Family Araujia seicifera Bladder Pod Vine* Vinca major Periwinkle* Araliaceae - Aralia Family Hedra sp. Ivy* Asteraceae - Sunflower Family Artemisia californica California Sagebrush Baccharis pilularis ssp. consanguinea Coyote Brush Bidens pilosa Beggar's Ticks* Brickellia californica California Brickell Bush Centaurea melitensis Tocalote * Corethrogyne [Lessingia] filaginifolia California Cudweed-aster Delaria oderata Cape Ivy* Encelia californica Coastal Bush Sunflower Erigeron foliosus var. foliosus Leafy Fleabane Y:\Floras\Calif-FP\SW\TR\WTR\SantaYnezMts\New Franklin Trail Carpinteria.doc.odt 3/27/2015
    [Show full text]
  • Final Redacted Station Botany Assessment
    BOTANY TECHNICAL SPECIALIST’S REPORT BURNED AREA EMERGENCY REHABILITATION for STATION FIRE Resource: Botany Fire Name: Station Fire – National Forest System Lands Month/Year: 09/2009 Author Name: Janet Nickerman, Joanna Clines, Jan Beyers with assistance from Kerry Myers, Tommy Stoughton and Krissy Day. Author Duty Station: Angeles, Sierra National Forest, PSW Research Station and the San Bernardino National Forest. Thickleaf yerba santa resprouting after a fire. (photo by Stoughton) I. SUMMARY The Station Fire started on August 26, 2009 and burned 161,188 acres. It is the largest fire in the recorded history of Los Angeles County. Until now, the largest fire was 75,000 acres. There are approximately 37 cities that surround the fire perimeter. The fire area is extremely steep, inaccessible and it supports some important and unique habitats. There is occupied and potential habitat for one federal endangered plant species and eleven Forest Service Sensitive plant species. Thirty seven plant communities were burned or impacted by suppression activities. Some of these habitats and species are at risk to further losses. For example, disturbances/degradation from post­fire impacts of sediment and ash delivery will result in loss of water quality, scouring of riparian systems and loss of wildlife habitat at natural springs and spring developments due to sediment delivery and erosion. In addition, vegetation community Page 1 of 24 recovery is at risk for delayed recovery due to invasive species and illegal Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) activity. Summary of Initial Concerns o Invasive species spread (see Specialist Report for Noxious Weeds and Non­native invasive plant species).
    [Show full text]
  • Public Release Station Fire 2500-8
    Station Fire BAER September 23, 2009 USDA-FOREST SERVICE FS-2500-8 Date of Report: September 23, 2009 BURNED-AREA REPORT (Reference FSH 2509.13) PART I - TYPE OF REQUEST A. Type of Report [X] 1. Funding request for estimated emergency stabilization funds [ ] 2. Accomplishment Report [ ] 3. No Treatment Recommendation B. Type of Action [X] 1. Initial Request (Best estimate of funds needed to complete eligible stabilization measures) [ ] 2. Interim Report [ ] Updating the initial funding request based on more accurate site data or design analysis [ ] Status of accomplishments to date [ ] 3. Final Report (Following completion of work) PART II - BURNED-AREA DESCRIPTION A. Fire Name: Station Fire B. Fire Number: CA-ANF-3622 C. State: CA D. County: Los Angeles E. Region: 5 F. Forest: Angeles G. District: Los Angeles River, San Gabriel River, Santa Clara/Mojave Rivers H. Fire Incident Job Code: P5E5VL I. Date Fire Started: August 26, 2009 J. Date Fire Contained: TBD (pending winter rains) K. Suppression Cost: $86,967,661 as of 09/23/09 L. Fire Suppression Damages Repaired with Suppression Funds 1. Fireline waterbarred (miles): 110 total miles of dozer line (46 on FS land) 2. Fireline seeded (miles): None to date 3. Other (identify): None M. Watershed Number: M. Watershed Number: HUC 6: 180701050201 (Pacoima Wash), 180701050103 (Lower Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050102 (Middle Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050101 (Upper Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701050202 (Verdugo Wash), 1807010503992 (Arroyo Seco), 180701050402 (Eaton Wash), 180701050102 (Middle Big Tujunga Canyon), 180701060101 (Upper West Fork San Gabriel River), 180701060102 (Middle West Fork San Gabriel River), 180701020101 (Aliso Canyon), 180902060406 (Little Rock Reservoir), 180902060402 (Little Rock Creek), 180701020102 (Soledad Canyon-Arrastre Canyon), 180701020103 (Lower Soledad Canyon) N.
    [Show full text]
  • Lonicera Subspicata Hooker & Arnott Var. Denudata Rehder
    Lonicera subspicata Hooker & Arnott var. denudata Rehder, CHAPARRAL HONEYSUCKLE, SOUTHERN HONEYSUCKLE. Shrub, evergreen, typically not twining but with terminal shoots long-arching or vinelike sprawling over neighboring shrubs (scandent), 100–250 cm tall; shoots with thin, ± leathery leaves and long internodes, sometimes 2-dimensional (plagiotropic) via petiolar twisting, puberulent and with capitate glandular hairs, the glandular hairs erect with orangish to translucent reddish purple heads on colorless stalk but head commonly lost in age leaving only stalk. Stems: cylindric, often purplish red, puberulent and capitate-glandular, older stems with red-brown periderm. Leaves: opposite decussate (rarely with a whorl of 3 leaves at an isolated node), simple, petiolate with pair or whorl connected by low ledges across node, without stipules; petiole hemi- cylindric, 1−8 mm long, conspicuously short-hairy; blade oblong to widely elliptic or ovate to broadly ovate, 10–50 × 5–32 mm, rounded and commonly slightly oblique at base, entire and ± short-ciliate with ascending hairs on margins, often rolling under when water- stressed or only margins inrolled (revolute), rounded to obtuse with minute point at tip, pinnately veined with midrib sometimes raised but other principal veins sunken on upper surface and all principal veins raised on lower surface, surfaces with conspicuous netted venation, upper surface glossy dark green and not glaucous, low-cobblestonelike (10×), glabrous or short-hairy glabrescent along veins and initially with scattered
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Alliances of the San Dieguito River Park Region, San Diego County, California
    Vegetation alliances of the San Dieguito River Park region, San Diego County, California By Julie Evens and Sau San California Native Plant Society 2707 K Street, Suite 1 Sacramento CA, 95816 In cooperation with the California Natural Heritage Program of the California Department of Fish and Game And San Diego Chapter of the California Native Plant Society Final Report August 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Study area ................................................................................................................................... 2 Existing Literature Review........................................................................................................... 2 Sampling ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1. Study area including the San Dieguito River Park boundary within the ecological subsections color map and within the County inset map............................................................ 3 Figure 2. Locations of the field surveys....................................................................................... 5 Cluster analyses for vegetation classification ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX B Biological Resources Reports
    APPENDIX B Biological Resources Reports July 10, 2020 JN 178669 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR Attn: Mr. Ryan Wright 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 SUBJECT: Results of a Biological Resources Assessment of the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project– City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California Dear Mr. Wright: Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) is pleased to submit this report to the City of Diamond Bar documenting the results of a biological resources assessment of the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project (project) located in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California. Michael Baker conducted a literature review and a field survey to characterize existing site conditions and assess the potential for special-status1 plant and wildlife species to occur on or within the immediate vicinity of the project site that could pose a constraint to future development. Specifically, this report provides a detailed assessment of the suitability of the on-site habitat to support special-status plant and wildlife species that were identified by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) RareFind 5 (CDFW 2020a), the CNDDB Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS; CDFW 2020b), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (Online Inventory; CNPS 2020), and other databases as potentially occurring in the vicinity of the project site. Project Location The survey area include the project site plus a 500-foot buffer, and is generally located south of State Route 60, east of State Route 57, north of Grand Avenue, and west of Chino Hills Parkway in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California (refer to Figure 1, Regional Vicinity, in Attachment A).
    [Show full text]