4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

4.9.1 EXISTING SETTING

This section describes the existing biological resources including the special-status species and sensitive habitats known to occur or that potentially occur in the City of San Mateo General Plan Update Planning Area (herein referred to as Planning Area), the regulations and programs which provide for their protection, and an assessment of the potential impacts of implementing the City of San Mateo General Plan Update 2025 (General Plan Update). This section also includes a discussion of mitigation measures necessary to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, where feasible.

The biological resources within the Planning Area were determined from a review of previous environmental documentation for the Planning Area including the City of San Mateo General Plan (1990). Furthermore, a number of other resources were used for this assessment including an online list of federally listed species provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Office (USFWS 2009a), the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) (CDFG 2009), and the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory (CNPS 2009) for the San Mateo, California, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS 1993) 7.5-minute quadrangle and surrounding quadrangles (Appendix D). Methodology utilized in the analysis is described further under subsection 4.9.3 (Impacts and Mitigation Measures).

REGIONAL SETTING

The City of San Mateo is located on the San Francisco Peninsula, on the shores of San Francisco Bay in San Mateo County, California (Figure 3.0-1). San Mateo is located south of the City of San Francisco. The San Francisco Bay and Delta make up the Pacific Coast’s largest estuary, encompassing roughly 1,600 square miles of waterways and draining over 40 percent of California’s fresh water. The Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers flow from Northern California’s inland valleys into the Delta’s winding system of islands, sloughs, canals, and channels, before emptying into San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean.

The San Francisco Bay Area supports an extensive diversity of distinct vegetative communities. Broad habitat categories in the region generally include coastal scrubs, oak woodlands, grasslands, estuaries, coastal salt marsh, riparian habitats, eucalyptus groves, interior wetlands, and rivers and streams. Interior wetlands, estuaries, rivers and streams, and urban or highly disturbed habitats, although not vegetative communities, provide natural functions and values as wildlife habitat.

The San Francisco Bay is part of the Pacific Flyway, the route taken by migrating waterfowl twice each year. The marshes and mudflats of the San Francisco Bay provide important feeding and roosting habitat for these migrating birds. In the fall, migrating waterfowl and shorebirds by the hundreds of thousands arrive from the north to rest and feed before resuming their flights southward to Mexico and Central and South America. In the spring, waves of shorebirds are seen once again as they return.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

The Planning Area includes the incorporated City, the Planning Area, and the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) (Figure 3.0-2). The Planning Area encompasses 15.7 square miles (3.2 square miles of which are bay waters), including the City of San Mateo (13.5 square miles) and the unincorporated lands (2.2 square miles) as depicted on Figure 3.0-2. The City is bounded by the San Francisco Bay and Foster City to the east, by the City of Belmont to the south, by the Town of

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-1 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Hillsborough and the City of Burlingame to the north, and by unincorporated county lands to the west. Interstate 280 (I-280) is just to the west of the Planning Area, and U.S. Highway 101 travels through the eastern portion of the Planning Area in a north-south direction.

The Planning Area consists largely of residential and commercial development with some parks/open spaces, primarily along the east side of the Planning Area. Coyote Point Park, a rock outcropped peninsula that juts out into San Francisco Bay, is the largest park/open space within the Planning Area. The surrounding vicinity is composed of a similar mix of residential, commercial, and open space areas.

PHYSICAL SETTING

The Planning Area has a wide range of climate, topographical, watershed, and soils conditions. The climate is temperate and subhumid and is modified greatly by marine influence (USDA 1997). Summer fog is common in this area. Annual temperatures range from an average maximum of 66.8 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to an average minimum of 47.1°F (Western Regional Climate Center 2009). Average total mean annual precipitation for the San Mateo area is 20.16 inches (WRCC 2007) and the mean freeze-free period is about 250 to 300 days (USDA 1997).

The topography in the Planning Area and vicinity is varied, ranging from the San Francisco Bay marshes to the foothills to the west. Elevation within the Planning Area ranges from 0 feet (sea level) to approximately 675 feet (205.74 meters) above mean sea level (MSL) at the College of San Mateo. Dominant natural features within the Planning Area include San Mateo Creek, which flows from Crystal Springs Reservoir to the San Francisco Bay, Coyote Point County Park, the 225- acre Sugarloaf open space area, Marina Lagoon, and the 3-mile length of shoreline along the San Francisco Bay.

As described in more detail further below, the Planning Area contains various waterways and creeks including the Marina Lagoon (formally Seal Slough), San Mateo Creek, Polhemus Creek, Laurel Creek, Madera Creek, and others. San Mateo Creek forms the northern boundary of the City with the Town of Hillsborough, and Laurel Creek runs along the southern city boundary with the City of Belmont. To improve the quality of creek runoff, San Mateo joined the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP). Other notable creeks are Edgewood Creek, which parallels Edgewood Road as it crosses private property, and Beresford Creek, which flows from the canyons south of Campus Drive to the 19th Avenue Channel. Please refer to Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, for more details on hydrologic features within the Planning Area.

The Planning Area is located within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province of California that stretches from the Oregon border on the north nearly to Point Conception on the south. In the San Francisco Bay area, most of the Coast Ranges have developed on a basement of tectonically mixed Cretaceous- and Jurassic-age (70 to 200 million years old) rocks of the Franciscan Complex. Please refer to Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, for more details and references.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-2 San Francisco Bay

el nn Cha Mar ek e in a

Cr

k ave th ee 16

r

C

ood Foster City Lagoon Edgew nel o Chan ate M 19th ave L ago Creek o n Creek Borel San Unnamed Creek

rd Beresfo

rel Lau Creek P o lh em us Cree

k k Dam Cree

m

Da k aurel L ree C l aure L E. Legend

San Mateo City Limit Coastal Oak Woodland Planning Area Boundary Coastal Scrub Drainage Eucalyptus Lacustrine Calveg Habitats Saline Emergent Wetland Annual Grassland Urban Blue Oak Woodland Valley Foothill Riparian Chamise-Redshank Chaparral Valley Oak Woodland

Source: USDA Forest Service - Remote Sensing Lab, 2007; USDA FSA NAIP, 2005; City of San Mateo, 2009; PMC, 2009

2,000 0 2,000 Figure 4.9-1 Biological Communities within the Planning Area FEET 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

BIOLOGICAL SETTING

For planning and mapping purposes, twelve biological communities have been identified within the Planning Area and are depicted on Figure 4.9-1. Dominant biological communities within the Planning Area include annual grassland, blue oak woodland, chamise-redshank chaparral, coastal oak woodland, coastal scrub, eucalyptus, lacustrine, riverine, saline emergent wetland, urban, valley foothill riparian, and valley oak woodland. Each of the biological communities within the Planning Area, including common plant and wildlife species, is described further below.

Table 4.9-1 below outlines the acreages of each biological community found within the Planning Area according to the United States Forest Service (USFS) Classification and Assessment with Landsat of Visible Ecological Groupings (CALVEG) data (USFS 2005). This analysis is based on land cover mapping undertaken at a regional scale (2.5 acres for contrasting vegetation conditions based on cover type, vegetation type, tree cover from above classes, and overstory tree diameter classes) and therefore should be used within that context. The CALVEG classification is a provisional system that meets the floristically based level of the National Vegetation Classification Standard hierarchy. These vegetation alliances were originally developed by the Region’s Ecology Program in 1978. The descriptions and keys are being maintained and updated by the Pacific Southwest Region. The system currently consists of 178 distinct vegetation and land use types. At the state level, the CALVEG system crosswalks to types in the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) System (Meyer and Laudenslayer 1988) and its later versions. CWHR is an extensive compilation of community-level information describing existing vegetation types important to wildlife.

TABLE 4.9-1 ACREAGE OF BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA

Biological Communities Acres Annual Grassland 213.28 Blue Oak Woodland 77.51 Chamise-Redshank Chaparral 46.36 Coastal Oak Woodland 410.32 Coastal Scrub 35.32 Eucalyptus 41.19 Lacustrine 302.06 Riverine* Unknown Saline Emergent Wetland 43.42 Urban 7,784.50 Valley-Foothill Riparian 36.22 Valley Oak Woodland 48.97 TOTAL 9,039.15

Source: USFS 2005 *This biological community was not included in the CALVEG data provided by USFS although it is known to occur within the Planning Area.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-5 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The community descriptions below are derived from the CWHR System (2002) as described above. This information is available online (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/ cawildlife.aspx) and is provided in A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988). Additional references are provided where necessary.

Annual Grassland

Annual grassland generally occurs on flat plains to gently rolling foothills throughout the Central Valley, in the coastal mountain ranges to Mendocino County, and in scattered locations in the southern portion of the state (Kie 1988) including the San Mateo Planning Area. This community is characterized by annual grasses and forbs, which are predominantly non-native species. Annual grassland may include common species such as wild oat (Avena fatua), slender oat (Avena barbata), soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus), wild onion (Allium atrorubens var. cristatum), foxtail fescue (Vulpia myuros var. hirsuta), broadleaf filaree (Erodium botrys), turkey mullein (Eremocarpus setigerus), perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne), wild mustard (Brassica nigra), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola), and cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) (Kie 1988).

Many wildlife species use annual grasslands for foraging and/or breeding. Characteristic reptiles that breed in annual grasslands include the western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis), common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and western rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis). Common bird species observed or expected to occur in this community include western scrub jay (Aphelocoma californica), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura). This community also provides important foraging habitat for several raptor species such as white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni; state-threatened) and prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus). Mammals typically found in this community include the black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus), desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi), Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), California vole (Microtus californicus), and coyote (Canis latrans). (Kie 1988)

Blue Oak Woodland

Generally blue oak woodlands have an overstory composed of scattered trees, although the canopy can be nearly closed on better-quality sites. The canopy is dominated by broad-leaved trees, which are 5 to 15 meters in height and commonly form open savanna-like stands on dry ridges and gentle slopes. Blue oak woodlands include blue oak (Quercus douglasii) and interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii). Blue oaks may reach 25 meters in height. Blue oaks are the dominant species, comprising 85 to 100 percent of the trees present. Shrubs are often present but rarely extensive, often occurring on rock outcrops. Associated shrub species include western poison-oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), California coffeeberry (Frangula californica), sedgeleaf buckbrush (Ceanothus cuneatus var. fascicularis), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), and manzanita (Arctostaphylos spp.) species. Typical understory is composed of annual grassland vegetation. The ground cover comprises mainly annuals such as brome grass (Bromus orcuttianus), wild oats, foxtail (Alopecurus spp.), needlegrass (Achnatherum spp.), filaree (Erodium spp.), fiddleneck (Amsinckia spp.), and others. (Ritter 1988)

Oak habitats are important to wildlife in California. Twenty-nine species of amphibians and reptiles, 57 species of birds, and 10 species of mammals find mature stages of this type suitable or optimum for breeding, assuming that other special habitat requirements are met. Blue oak acorns buried by western scrub jays, yellow-billed magpies (Pica nuttali), western gray squirrels

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-6 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

(Sciurus griseus), and California ground squirrels are more likely to germinate because the seeds root well and are less likely to be eaten. Many wildlife species benefit from the use of oaks and even enhance oak germination. (Ritter 1988)

Chamise-Redshank Chaparral

Mature stands of chamise-redshank chaparral are generally single-layered and lacking well- developed herbaceous ground cover and overstory trees. Shrub canopies frequently overlap, which produces a nearly impenetrable canopy of interwoven branches. Chamise (Adenostoma spp.) dominated stands average 1 to 2 meters in height, but can reach up to 3 meters. Total shrub cover frequently exceeds 80 percent. In comparison, redshank (Adenostoma sparsifolium) stands are slightly taller, averaging 2 to 4 meters and occasionally reaching 6 meters. Mature redshank stands are frequently more open than chamise and can have sparse herbaceous cover between shrubs. A stand of brush is classified as chamise-redshank chaparral, as opposed to mixed chaparral, if any of the following criteria are fulfilled: (1) any stand with greater than 60 percent relative shrub cover by chamise and redshank; (2) young stands recovering from fire with greater than 20 percent absolute shrub cover by chamise and redshank, and greater than 75 percent relative shrub cover by these species and relatively short-lived subshrubs such as California yerba santa (Eriodictyon californicum); or (3) any stand with at least 50 percent relative shrub cover by chamise and redshank and greater than 75 percent relative shrub cover by these species and shrubs of intermediate life span such as ceanothus (Ceanothus spp). Common plant species include scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), chaparral oak (Quercus durata), and several species of ceanothus and manzanita. Additional common shrubs and plants include chamise, birchleaf mountain mahogany (Cercocarpus montanus var. glaber), silk-tassel (Garrya ssp.), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), California yerba santa, California buckeye, western poison-oak, California coffeeberry, and yarrow (Achillea millefolium californica). (England 1988)

Wildlife species found in this community are also found in mixed chaparral or sagebrush and in shrubs beneath several woodland and forest types. Chamise-redshank chaparral provides important cover, foraging, and breeding habitat for many wildlife species. Examples of wildlife species typically found in this community include spotted towhee (Pipilo maculates), California quail (Callipepla californica), western scrub-jay, western fence lizard, and western rattlesnake. (England 1988)

Coastal Oak Woodland

Coastal oak woodlands are extremely variable. The overstory consists of deciduous and evergreen hardwoods. From Sonoma County southwards, the coastal oak woodlands are usually dominated by coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). In many coastal regions, coast live oak is the only overstory species. In mesic sites, trees characteristic of mixed evergreen forests mix with coast live oak, such as California bay (Umbellularia californica), pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus), and canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis). Typical plants in dense coast live oak woodlands are shade-tolerant shrubs such as California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), creeping snowberry (Symphoricarpos mollis), toyon, and herbaceous plants such as bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum var. pubescens), California polupody (Polypodium californicum), fiesta flower (Pholistoma auritum), and miner’s lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata). Coastal oak woodlands provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species such as California quail, wild turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo), and black-tail deer (Odocoileus hemionus). (Holland 2005)

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-7 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Coastal Scrub

Coastal scrub habitat occurs along ridges and hillsides and includes shrub species such as coyote brush (Baccaris pilularis), bush monkey flower (Diplacus aurantiacus), and toyon. The scrub habitat is distributed in dense concentrations along ridges, hillsides, and other dry areas. This community is often colonized by non-native species such as french broom (Cytisus monspessulanus) and pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana). Other common overstory species are blue blossom ceanothus (Ceanothus thyrsiflorus), coffeeberry (Rhamnus californica), monkeyflower (Mimulus sp.), blackberry (Rubus sp.), poison-oak, and wooly sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum). Bracken fern and western sword fern (Polystichum munitum) are dominant in the understory; common cow parsnip (Heracleum maximum), indian paintbrush (Castilleja sp.), yerba buena (Satureja douglasii), and California oatgrass (Danthonia californica) are typically present. (Becker 1988)

Coastal scrub appears to support numbers of vertebrate species roughly equivalent to those in surrounding habitats (Stebbins 1978).

Eucalyptus

Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.) has been extensively planted and artificially established in California since approximately 1856. As such, this community can be found in association with a variety of areas. Typically, eucalyptus is found on relatively flat or gently rolling terrain. Trees tend to form a dense, monotypic stand with a closed canopy. However, stand structure varies considerably since most eucalyptus stands have been planted into either rows or dense groves for wind protection and hardwood production. On average, eucalyptus range from 87 to 133 feet in height and have a diameter at breast height of 8.6 to 15.1 inches. Trees in excess of 152 feet (maximum 264 feet) in height are not uncommon. The most common species is blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) followed by red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis). The understory varies upon whether the trees were artificially established in a uniform composition (i.e., single-species thickets with little or no understory) or have grown independently (i.e., scattered trees over a thick shrubby understory). (Pearson 1988)

For wildlife, the eucalyptus community provides roosts, perches, and nest sites for a number of avian species, such as barn owl (Tyto alba), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), raven (Corvus corax), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). Trees with stringy bark (or a tendency for rapid decomposition of litter) also create microhabitats for small vertebrates, including alligator lizard (Elgaria sp.), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), and woodrat (Neotoma sp.). (Pearson 1988)

Urban

Urban habitat is distinguished by the presence of both native and exotic species maintained in a relatively static composition within a downtown, residential, or suburbia setting. Species richness in these areas depends greatly upon community design (i.e., open space considerations) and proximity to the natural environment (McBride and Reid 1988). Vegetation in these areas consists primarily of introduced ornamental trees and shrubs and manicured lawns as well as invasive weeds in disturbed areas.

The CWHR (CDFG 2002) classifies urban habitat into five different vegetation types: tree grove, street strip, shade tree/lawn, lawn, and shrub cover. Tree groves refer to conditions typically found in city parks, green belts, and cemeteries. These areas vary in tree height, spacing, crown shape, and understory conditions; however, they have a continuous canopy. Street strip vegetation, located roadside, varies with species type, but typically includes a ground cover of

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-8 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES grass. Shade trees and lawns refer to characteristic residential landscape, which is reminiscent of natural savannas. Lawns are composed of a variety of grasses, maintained at a uniform height with continuous ground cover through irrigation and fertilization. Shrub cover refers to areas commonly landscaped and maintained with hedges, as typically found in commercial districts. All five types of urban habitat are generally found in combination creating considerable edge effect, which can be more valuable to wildlife than any one individual unit.

Vegetation in these areas consists primarily of introduced ornamental trees and shrubs and manicured lawns as well as invasive weeds in disturbed areas. Birds and mammals that occur in these areas typically include introduced species adapted to human habitation, including rock dove (Columba livia), starling (Sturnus vulgaris), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house mouse (Mus musculus), and Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus). Some native species persist in commercial development lands, including western toad (Bufo boreas), western fence lizard, Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), western scrub jay, yellow-billed magpie, and American crow. (McBride and Reid 1988)

Valley-Foothill Riparian

Valley-foothill riparian communities are found in valleys bordered by sloping alluvial fans, slightly dissected terraces, lower foothills, and coastal plains. They are generally associated with low velocity flows, floodplains, and gentle topography. Valley-foothill riparian habitat is generally found in the valley and foothill regions of California along low-gradient streams. Typically, this community consists of an overstory tree layer, subcanopy tree layer, understory shrub layer, and herbaceous layer. Canopy height is approximately 30 meters (98 feet) in a mature riparian forest with a canopy cover of 20 to 80 percent. Valley areas supply deep alluvial soils that are usually permanently moist and well aerated to provide for a variety of lush vegetation. Most trees are winter deciduous. Species dominating the overstory of valley foothill riparian habitat include Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), and valley oak (Quercus lobata). Typical subcanopy trees are white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), box elder (Acer negundo), and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia). Common understory shrubs include wild grape (Vitis californica), wild rose (Rosa californica), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), poison oak, button bush (Cephalanthus occidentalis), and willows (Salix spp.). The herbaceous layer consists of sedges (Cyperus spp.), rushes (Juncus spp.), miner’s lettuce, poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), hoary nettle (Urtica dioica holosericea), and various grasses. Valley-foothill riparian habitats provide food; water; migration and dispersal corridors; and escape, nesting, and thermal cover for an abundance of wildlife. At least 50 amphibians and reptiles occur in lowland riparian systems. Many are permanent residents; others are transient or temporal visitors. (Grenfell 1988)

Valley Oak Woodland

Valley oak woodland varies from savanna-like to forest-like stands with partially closed canopies, comprising mostly winter-deciduous, broad-leaved species. Denser stands typically grow in valley soils along natural drainages. Tree density decreases with the transition from lowlands to the less fertile soils of drier uplands. Exceptions to this pattern are known, especially in the central coastal counties. Similarly, the shrub layer is best developed along natural drainages, becoming insignificant in the uplands with more open stands of oaks. Valley oak stands with little or no grazing tend to develop a partial shrub layer of bird disseminated species, such as poison-oak, toyon, and California coffeeberry. Ground cover consists of a well-developed carpet of annual grasses and forbs. Mature valley oaks with well-developed crowns range in height from 15 to 35 meters. Canopies of these woodlands are dominated almost exclusively by valley oaks. Tree associates in the Central Valley include California sycamore, black walnut (Juglans nigra),

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-9 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES interior live oak, box-elder, and blue oak. The shrub understory consists of poison-oak, blue elderberry, California wild grape, toyon, California coffeeberry, California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), and California blackberry. Various sorts of grasses and forbs such as wild oats, bent grass (Agrostis pallens), soft brome, barley (Hordeum brachyantherum), ryegrass, and needlegrass dominate the ground cover. Additional common plant species include tarragon (Artemisia dracunculus), miner’s lettuce, elegant clarkia (Clarkia unguiculata), coyote mint (Monardella villosa), melic grass (Melica imperfecta), and snakeroot (Sanicula crassicaulis). (Ritter 1988)

These woodlands provide food and cover for many species of wildlife. Oaks have long been considered important to some birds and mammals as a food source. Many birds use valley oak woodland habitat for breeding, the most significant of which is the red-shouldered hawk, but also include European starling, California quail, oak titmouse (Baeolophus inornatus), scrub jay, rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), Bewick’s wren (Thryomanes bewickii), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), and acorn woodpecker (Melanerpes formicivorus). Mammals such as fox (Vulpes spp.), western gray squirrel, and black-tail deer regularly inhabit valley oak woodland. (Ritter 1988)

Wetlands and Other Waters of the U.S.

Saline Emergent Wetlands

The saline emergent wetlands within the Planning Area are tidal marsh. A large tidal marsh area is located in the southeast corner of the Planning Area adjacent to Foster City. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission has rated the San Mateo shoreline as “high” for value as waterfowl habitat (City of San Mateo 2009). Tidal marsh habitats are those areas inundated with twice-daily tidal flows. Vegetation in tidal areas includes pickleweed (Salicornia spp.) and cord grass (Spartina spp.). An important component of tidal marsh habitat includes adjacent uplands, which provide refuge for birds and mammals during high tide and storm events. Vegetation within the upland areas includes marsh gumplant (Grindelia spp.), sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and a number of non-native plants. (Springer 1988)

Saline emergent wetlands provide food, cover, and nesting and roosting habitat for a variety of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Several species of lizards and snakes frequent the edge of the high marsh, whereas the Pacific tree frog (Hyla regilla) and western toad occur in slightly brackish marsh after heavy rains. Endemic subspecies of birds include the endangered California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus), California black rail (Laterallis jamaicensis conturniculus), salt marsh yellow-throat (Geothlypis trichas sinuosa), and three subspecies of the song sparrow at the San Francisco Bay. Other bird species that feed or roost in these wetland are herons, egrets, ducks, hawks (including northern harrier [Circus cyaneus]), Virginia rail (Rallus limicola), American coot (Fulica americana), shorebirds, swallows, and marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris). Characteristic mammal species of shrews, bats, and mice including the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris) endemic to the San Francisco Bay, as well as the raccoon (Procyon lotor), mink (Mustela vison), river otter (Lontra canadensis), and harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). A number of species from adjacent uplands visit the wetlands to feed. (Springer 1988)

Lacustrine

Lacustrine habitats are inland depressions or dammed riverine channels containing standing water. Depth can vary from a few centimeters to hundreds of meters. Typical lacustrine habitats include permanently flooded lakes and reservoirs and intermittent lakes and ponds. Most permanent lacustrine systems support fish life. Suspended organisms such as plankton are found

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-10 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES in the open water of lacustrine habitats. Submerged plants such as algae and pondweeds serve as supports for smaller algae and as cover for swarms of minute aquatic animals. As sedimentation and accumulation of organic matter increases toward the shore, floating rooted aquatics such as water lilies (Nymphaea spp.) and smartweeds often appear. Floating plants offer food and support for numerous herbivorous animals that feed both on plankton and floating plants.

Riverine

The Planning Area contains various waterways and creeks including the Marina Lagoon (formally Seal Slough), San Mateo Creek, Polhemus Creek, Laurel Creek, Madera Creek, and others. Marina Lagoon is approximately 4.5 miles in length and serves primarily as flood control although it also has wildlife value. The lagoon contains a small (0.4 acre) island at the mouth which supports roosting, nesting, and feeding shorebirds and waterfowl (City of San Mateo 2009). San Mateo Creek is the largest channel crossing the City, and almost 75 percent of the creek’s length is above ground and vegetated (City of San Mateo 2009). The upper portion of the creek is dammed and, as such, the creek only carries seasonal flows.

Riverine habitats can occur in association with many terrestrial habitats. In general, riparian habitats are found adjacent to many rivers and streams. Riverine habitats can also be found contiguous to lacustrine and fresh emergent wetland habitats. Near-shore waters provide food for waterfowl, herons, shorebirds, belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), and American dipper (Cinclus mexicanus). In addition, many species of insectivorous birds (swallows, swifts, flycatchers) hawk their prey over water.

San Francisco Bay

The San Francisco Bay is a shallow, productive estuary through which water flowing in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers enters the Pacific Ocean. Despite its urban and industrial character, San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta remain perhaps California’s most important ecological habitats. California’s Dungeness crab, Pacific halibut, and Pacific salmon fisheries rely on the Bay as a nursery. The few remaining salt marshes now represent most of California’s remaining salt marsh, supporting a number of endangered species and providing key ecosystem services such as filtering pollutants and sediments from the rivers.

At present, the San Francisco Bay sustains nearly 500 species of fish, invertebrates, birds, mammals, insects, and amphibians. It is an essential resting place, feeding area, and wintering ground for millions of birds on the Pacific Flyway. Millions of waterfowl annually use the Bay shallows as a refuge. Two endangered species of birds are found here: the California least tern and the California clapper rail. Nearly half of the state’s waterfowl and shorebirds and two-thirds of the state’s salmon pass through the Bay during their migrations (BCDC 2006).

The deepwater habitat found within the Bay includes permanently flooded lands lying below the deepwater boundary of wetlands (greater than 6 feet underwater). Deepwater habitat includes environments where surface water is permanent and often deep, so that water, rather than air, is the principal medium within which the dominant organisms live, whether or not they are attached to the substrate (Cowardin et al. 1979).

SENSITIVE HABITATS, INCLUDING CRITICAL HABITAT

Sensitive habitats include (a) areas of special concern to resource agencies; (b) areas protected under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); (c) areas designated as

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-11 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES sensitive natural communities by CDFG; (d) areas outlined in Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code; (e) areas regulated under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA); (f) areas protected under Section 402 of the CWA; and (g) areas protected under local regulations and policies. Some of the biological communities found in the Planning Area are sensitive habitats protected by various agencies. The riverine, riparian, and wetland habitats within the Planning Area are sensitive habitats under the jurisdiction of CDFG and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Saline emergent wetlands and other wetland areas provide potential habitat for special-status species. Special-status species and their habitat are described in more detail further below.

USFWS defines critical habitat as a specific area that is essential for the conservation of a federally listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. No critical habitat is located within the Planning Area; however, there is designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) approximately 600 feet west of the Planning Area boundary near I-280 (USFWS 2009b).

WILDLIFE CORRIDORS

Wildlife corridors refer to established migration routes commonly used by resident and migratory species for passage from one geographic location to another. Corridors are present in a variety of habitats and link otherwise fragmented acres of undisturbed area. Maintaining the continuity of established wildlife corridors is important to sustain species with specific foraging requirements, preserve a species’ distribution potential, and retain diversity among many wildlife populations. Therefore, resource agencies consider wildlife corridors to be a sensitive resource.

Wildlife movement through the Planning Area is limited due to the urban nature of the City of San Mateo and surrounding environs. While the Planning Area is highly developed, some well- vegetated sections along creeks do exist although they are non-contiguous (City of San Mateo 2009). These creeks as well as other areas of open space within the Planning Area may provide enough cover to function as a migratory corridor for some species. Some riparian habitat is available within the Planning Area particularly along the upper reaches of Laurel Creek within the Sugarloaf Mountain area and along Polhemus Creek (see Figure 4.9-1).

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES

Special-status plant and animal species are those that are afforded special recognition by federal, state, or local resource agencies or organizations. Special-status species are of relatively limited distribution and generally require specialized habitat conditions. Special-status species are defined as:

• Listed, proposed, or candidate for listing under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts;

• Protected under other regulations (e.g., local policies, Migratory Bird Treaty Act);

• California Department of Fish Game’s Species of Special Concern and California Fully Protected Species;

• Listed as species of concern (List 1A , 1B, or 2 plants) by California Native Plant Society; or

• Species that receive consideration during environmental review under CEQA.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-12 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The potential for special-status species to occur within the Planning Area was evaluated by querying the CNDDB (CDFG 2009), the USFWS (2009a), and the CNPS (2009) for previously recorded occurrences of special-status species within the San Mateo, California, USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle (USGS 1993) and eight surrounding quadrangles (Woodside, Half Moon Bay, San Leandro, Redwood Point, Palo Alto, Hunters Point, San Francisco South, and Montara Mountain) (Appendix D).

CDFG maintains records for the distribution and known occurrences of sensitive species and habitats in the CNDDB. The CNDDB is organized into map areas based on 7.5-minute topographic maps produced by USGS. The CNDDB is based on actual recorded occurrences but does not constitute an exhaustive inventory of every resource. The absence of an occurrence in a particular location does not necessarily mean that special-status species are absent from that area, but that no data has been entered into the CNDDB inventory. Detailed field surveys are generally required to provide a conclusive determination on presence or absence of sensitive resources from a particular location where there is evidence of potential occurrence.

Table B-1 and Table B-2 in Appendix D identify the special-status species plant and animal species, respectively, which have potential to be affected by projects occurring within the project vicinity. The habitat preferences for each special-status species were carefully reviewed and considered in the context of each project site and surrounding areas. Species having no potential for occurrence are not expected to occur based on the known elevation or distribution range of the species or the lack of suitable habitat. Species that do have potential for occurrence are described in more detail further below. Tables B-1 and B-2 include the common name and scientific name for each species, regulatory status, habitat descriptions, and potential for occurrence within the Planning Area.

Special-status Plants

Fifty-two special-status plant species identified in Appendix D, Table B-1 have the potential to occur within the Planning Area. The CNDDB (CDFG 2009) identified the occurrence of 21 sensitive plants within the Planning Area or within 1 mile of the Planning Area boundary (Appendix E). The Planning Area does not contain designated critical habitat for any listed plant species (USFWS 2009b).

Special-status Wildlife

Forty-seven special status wildlife species identified in Appendix D, Table B-2 have the potential to occur within 1 mile of the Planning Area. The CNDDB (CDFG 2009) identified the occurrence of 21 special-status wildlife species within the Planning Area or within 1 mile of the Planning Area boundary (Appendix D). The Planning Area does not contain designated critical habitat for any listed wildlife species (USFWS 2009b).

4.9.2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

This section lists specific environmental review and consultation requirements and identifies permits and approvals that must be obtained from local, state, and federal agencies during the review of individual development projects.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-13 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

FEDERAL

Endangered Species Act

Provisions of the federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), as amended (16 USC 1531), protect federally listed threatened and endangered species and their habitats from unlawful take. “Take” under the FESA includes activities such as “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” USFWS regulations define harm to include some types of “significant habitat modification or degradation.” In the case of Babbitt, Secretary of Interior, et al., Petitioners v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, et al. (No. 94-859) (U.S. Supreme Court 1995), the United States Supreme Court ruled on June 29, 1995, that “harm” may include habitat modification “...where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering.”

For projects with a federal nexus, Section 7 of the FESA requires that federal agencies, in consultation with USFWS or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), use their authorities to further the purpose of the FESA and to ensure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Section 10(a)(1)(B) allows nonfederal entities to obtain permits for incidental taking of threatened or endangered species through consultation with USFWS or NOAA Fisheries. In general, NOAA Fisheries is responsible for protection of federally listed marine species and anadromous fish while other listed species come under USFWS jurisdiction. Key provisions of the FESA are summarized below under the section that implements them.

Section 10

Section 10 of the FESA provides a means for nonfederal entities (states, local agencies, and private parties) that are not permitted or funded by a federal agency to receive authorization to disturb, displace, or kill (i.e., take) threatened and endangered species. It allows USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries to issue an incidental take permit authorizing take resulting from otherwise legal activities, as long as the take would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Section 10 requires the applicant to prepare a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) addressing project impacts and proposing mitigation measures to compensate for those impacts. The HCP is subject to USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries review and must be approved by the reviewing agency or agencies before the proposed project can be initiated. Because the issuance of the incidental take permit is a federal action, USFWS and/or NOAA Fisheries must also comply with the requirements of the FESA Section 7 and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Section 7

Section 7 of the FESA applies to the management of federal lands as well as other federal actions, such as federal approval of private activities through the issuance of federal permits, licenses, funding, or other actions that may affect listed species. Section 7 directs all federal agencies to use their existing authorities to conserve threatened and endangered species and, in consultation with USFWS, to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize listed species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Critical habitat is defined as specific areas that are essential to the conservation of federally listed species.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-14 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Clean Water Act, Section 404

The objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA 1977, as amended) is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Discharge of fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, is regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (33 USC 1251–1376). USACE regulations implementing Section 404 define waters of the U.S. to include intrastate waters, including lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and natural ponds, the use, degradation, or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as “areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3; 40 CFR 230.3). The jurisdictional boundaries for other waters of the U.S. are identified based on the presence of an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) as defined in 33 CFR 328.3(e). The placement of structures in “navigable waters of the U.S.” is also regulated by USACE under Section 10 of the federal Rivers and Harbors Act (33 USC 401 et seq.). Projects are permitted under either individual or general (e.g., nationwide) permits. Specific applicability of permit type is determined by USACE on a case-by- case basis.

In 1987, USACE published a manual that standardized the manner in which wetlands were to be delineated nationwide. To determine whether areas that appear to be wetlands are subject to USACE jurisdiction (i.e., are “jurisdictional” wetlands), a wetlands delineation must be performed. Under normal circumstances, positive indicators from three parameters, (1) wetland hydrology, (2) hydrophytic vegetation, and (3) hydric soils, must be present to classify a feature as a jurisdictional wetland. More recently, USACE developed the Arid West Regional Supplement (USACE 2006) for identifying wetlands and distinguishing them from aquatic habitats and other nonwetlands. The supplement presents wetland indicators, delineation guidance, and other information that is specific to the Arid West Region. For any wetland delineations submitted after June 5, 2007, USACE is requiring that the site be surveyed according to both the 1987 manual and the supplement guidelines. In addition to verifying wetlands for potential jurisdiction, USACE is responsible for the issuance of permits for projects that propose filling of wetlands. Any permanent loss of a jurisdictional wetland as a result of project construction activities is considered a significant impact.

Clean Water Act, Section 401

Section 401 of the CWA requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the United States to obtain a certification that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards. The appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board regulates Section 401 requirements (see under State).

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

Migratory birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treat Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703– 711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase, or barter any migratory bird listed in 50 CFR Part 10, including feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, or products, except as allowed by implementing regulations (50 CFR 21). The vast majority of birds found in the Planning Area are protected under the MBTA.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-15 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act

The bald eagle and golden eagle are federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668c). It is illegal to take, possess, sell, purchase, barter, offer to sell or purchase or barter, transport, export, or import at any time or in any manner a bald or golden eagle, alive or dead; or any part, nest or egg of these eagles unless authorized by the Secretary of the Interior. Violations are subject to fines and/or imprisonment for up to one year. Active nest sites are also protected from disturbance during the breeding season.

STATE

California Endangered Species Act

Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), CDFG has the responsibility for maintaining a list of endangered and threatened species (California Fish and Game Code 2070). CDFG maintains a list of “candidate species” which are species that CDFG formally notices as being under review for addition to the list of endangered or threatened species. CDFG also maintains lists of “species of special concern” which serve as species “watch lists.” Pursuant to the requirements of CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project site and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, CDFG encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species; however, this consultation is not required.

Project-related impacts to species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of CESA. “Take” of protected species incidental to otherwise lawful management activities may be authorized under California Fish and Game Code Section 206.591. Authorization from CDFG would be in the form of an Incidental Take Permit.

Coastal Zone Management Act (16 USC 1456 et seq.)

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) established national policy to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, restore or enhance the nation’s coastal zone. The coastal zone includes the territorial sea and inland bays. If a proposed project affects water use in the coastal zone, the activity must be consistent with the state’s coastal zone management program to the maximum extent possible. This applies to actions taken by a federal entity or to actions that require a federal permit. The reauthorization amendments of the CZMA, passed in 1990, indicate that any federal action regardless of its location, would be subject to the CZMA. Since the City of San Mateo is located adjacent to the San Francisco Bay, nearly any project action proposed in the City that requires a federal permit would be subject to the CZMA.

Marine Mammal Protection Act (P.L. 92-522; amended by P.L. 98-364, approved July 17, 1984)

The Marine Mammal Protection Act prohibits the taking or importing of marine mammals or marine mammal products except under special permit conditions. The term “take” is broadly defined to include harassing or attempting to harass marine mammals. The term “marine mammal” includes all seals, sea lions, and other mammals that primarily occur in marine environments.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-16 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act

Water quality in California is governed by the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. This law assigns overall responsibility for water rights and water quality protection to the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) and directs the nine statewide Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) to develop and enforce water quality standards within their boundaries.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board

Clean Water Act, Section 401 Water Quality Certification

Section 401 of the CWA (33 USC 1341) requires any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant into waters of the U.S. to obtain a certification that the discharge will comply with the applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards. The appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board (in California) regulates Section 401 requirements. The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB) is responsible for enforcing water quality criteria and protecting water resources within the Planning Area. SFBRWQCB is responsible for controlling discharges to surface waters of the state by issuing waste discharge requirements (WDR) or commonly by issuing conditional waivers to WDRs. SFBRWQCB requires that a project proponent obtain a CWA Section 401 water quality certification for Section 404 permits granted by USACE. A request for water quality certification (including WDRs) by SFBRWQCB and a Notice of Intent (NOI) application for a General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activities are prepared and submitted following completion of the CEQA environmental document and submittal of the wetland delineation to USACE.

Delegated Permit Authority

California has been delegated permit authority for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program including stormwater permits for all areas except Indian lands. Issuing CWA Section 404 dredge and fill permits remains the responsibility of USACE, but the State actively uses its CWA Section 401 certification authority to ensure 404 permits protect state water quality standards.

State Definition of Covered Waters

Under California state law, “waters of the state” means “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state.” Therefore, water quality laws apply to both surface and groundwater. After the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Army COE of Engineers (SWANCC v. USCOE), the Office of Chief Counsel of the SWRCB released a legal memorandum confirming the State’s jurisdiction over isolated wetlands. The memorandum stated that under the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, discharges to wetlands and other waters of the state are subject to State regulation, and this includes isolated wetlands. In general, the RWQCBs regulate discharges to isolated waters in much the same way as they do for federal-jurisdictional waters, using Porter- Cologne rather than CWA authority.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-17 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

California Department of Fish and Game

Streambed Alteration Agreement (Sections 1600–1607 of the California Fish and Game Code)

State and local public agencies are subject to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, which governs construction activities that will substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by CDFG. Under Section 1602, a discretionary Streambed Alteration Agreement permit must be issued by CDFG to the project developer prior to the initiation of construction activities within lands under CDFG jurisdiction. As a general rule, this requirement applies to any work undertaken within the 100-year floodplain of a stream or river containing fish or wildlife resources.

Native Plant Protection Act

The Native Plant Protection Act (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1900–1913) prohibits the taking, possessing, or sale within the state of any plants with a state designation of rare, threatened, or endangered (as defined by CDFG). An exception to this prohibition in the act allows landowners, under specified circumstances, to take listed plant species, provided that the owners first notify CDFG and give that state agency at least 10 days to come and retrieve (and presumably replant) the plants before they are plowed under or otherwise destroyed (Fish and Game Code Section 1913 exempts from “take” prohibition “the removal of endangered or rare native plants from a canal, lateral ditch, building site, or road, or other right of way”). Project impacts to these species are not considered significant unless the species are known to have a high potential to occur within the area of disturbance associated with construction of the proposed project.

Birds of Prey

Under Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.

“Fully Protected” Species

California statutes also accord “fully protected” status to a number of specifically identified birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. These species cannot be “taken,” even with an incidental take permit. Section 3505 of the California Fish and Game Code makes it unlawful to take “any aigrette or egret, osprey, bird of paradise, goura, numidi, or any part of such a bird.” Section 3511 protects from take the following fully protected birds: (a) American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum); (b) brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis); (c) California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus); (d) California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus); (e) California condor (Gymnogyps californianus); (f) California least tern (Sterna albifrons browni); (g) golden eagle; (h) greater sandhill crane (Grus canadensis tabida); (i) light- footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes); (j) southern bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus); (k) trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator); (l) white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus); and (m) Yuma clapper rail (Rallus longirostris yumanensis).

California Fish and Game Code Section 4700 identifies the following fully protected mammals that cannot be taken: (a) Morro Bay kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni morroensis); (b) bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), except Nelson bighorn sheep (subspecies Ovis canadensis nelsoni); (d) Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi); (e) ring-tailed cat (genus

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-18 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Bassariscus); (f) Pacific right whale (Eubalaena sieboldi); (g) salt-marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris); (h) southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis); and (i) wolverine (Gulo gulo).

Fish and Game Code Section 5050 protects from take the following fully protected reptiles and amphibians: (a) blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Crotaphytus wislizenii silus); (b) San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia); (c) Santa Cruz long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum); (d) limestone salamander (Hydromantes brunus); and (e) black toad (Bufo boreas exsul).

Fish and Game Code Section 5515 also identifies certain fully protected fish that cannot lawfully be taken even with an incidental take permit. The following species are protected in this fashion: (a) Colorado River squawfish (Ptychocheilus lucius); (b) thicktail chub (Gila crassicauda); (c) Mohave chub (Gila mohavensis); (d) Lost River sucker (Catostomus luxatus); (e) Modoc sucker (Catostomus microps); (f) shortnose sucker (Chasmistes brevirostris); (g) humpback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus); (h) Owens River pupfish (Cyprinoden radiosus); (i) unarmored threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni); and (j) rough sculpin (Cottus asperrimus).

California Native Plant Society

CNPS is a non-governmental agency that classifies native plant species according to current population distribution and threat-level, in regard to extinction. The following description of the CNPS classification system is relevant to identifying potential impacts to biological resources due to implementation of the project.

The CNPS maintains a list of plant species native to California that has low numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2009). Potential impacts to populations of CNPS-listed plants receive consideration under CEQA review.

The following identifies the definitions of the CNPS listings:

• List 1A: Plants believed to be extinct

• List 1B: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere

• List 2: Plants that are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but are more numerous elsewhere

All of the plant species on List 1 and List 2 meet the requirements of Section 1901, Chapter 10 (Native Plant Protection Act) or Sections 2062 and 2067 (CESA) of the California Fish and Game Code and are eligible for state listing. Plants appearing on List 1 or List 2 are considered to meet the criteria of CEQA Section 15380 and effects on these species are considered “significant” in this Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Classifications for plants listed under List 3: Plants about which we need more information (a review list) and/or List 4: Plants of limited distribution (a watch list), as defined by CNPS, are not currently protected under state or federal law. Therefore, no detailed descriptions or impact analysis was performed for qualifying species under these classifications.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-19 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

LOCAL

Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil Species of the San Francisco Bay Area

Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil Species of the San Francisco Bay Area features 28 species of plants and animals that occur exclusively or primarily on serpentine soils and serpentine grasslands in the San Francisco Bay Area of California (USFWS 1998). The Endangered Species Act mandates the preparation of recovery plans for listed species unless such a plan would not contribute to their conservation. Recovery plans detail the actions necessary to achieve self- sustaining, wild populations of listed species so they will no longer require protection under the federal Endangered Species Act. The ultimate goal of this recovery plan is to de-list 6 of the 14 endangered and threatened species, improve the security of 7 of the 14 listed species, and ensure the long-term conservation of the 14 species of concern. An interim goal is to down-list the endangered species to threatened status.

Bay Delta Conservation Plan

California Department of Fish and Game, Resources Agency, Department of Water Resources, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, USFWS, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Delta water contractors have started work on a Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). The BDCP will be crafted to address water operations and facilities in the legal delta. The BDCP will focus primarily on aquatic ecosystems and natural communities, but may also cover adjacent riparian and floodplain natural communities. The Planning Agreement was signed in late 2006. Species that are intended to be the initial focus of the BDCP include aquatic species such as Central Valley steelhead, Central Valley Chinook salmon (spring run and fall/late-fall runs), Sacramento River Chinook salmon (winter run), Delta smelt, green sturgeon, white sturgeon, splittail, and longfin smelt. Other species that will be considered for inclusion in the BDCP include Swainson’s hawk, bank swallow, giant garter snake, and valley elderberry longhorn beetle.

McAteer-Petris Act

The McAteer-Petris Act established the Bay Conservation Development Commission (BCDC) as the agency responsible for maintaining and carrying out the provisions of the act and the San Francisco Bay Plan. The Bay Plan is the primary plan governing development in San Francisco Bay; it is a comprehensive and enforceable plan for conservation of water of the Bay and the development of its shoreline (BCDC 2006). The act directs BCDC to exercise its authority to issue or deny permit applications for placing of bay fill. The agency has jurisdiction over all tidal areas of the San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River, including projects within 100 feet of the shoreline.

The Bay Plan is the guiding policy document for BCDC. The Bay Plan provides the findings and policies to guide future uses of the Bay and shoreline, certain waterways, salt ponds, and managed wetlands, and the maps that apply these policies to BCDC’s jurisdiction.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-20 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission

The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission’s primary mission is to analyze, plan, and regulate the San Francisco Bay as an ecological unit. BCDC has permit jurisdiction over San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay, and the Suisun Marsh—including levees, waterways, marshes, and grasslands—below the 10-foot contour line (as measured off a USGS quadrangle map from mean high water). Any person or public agency other than a federal agency that proposes certain activities in or around these areas must obtain a development permit from BCDC.

The area over which BCDC has jurisdiction in San Mateo County for the purpose of carrying out the controls described above is defined in the McAteer-Petris Act and includes:

• The open water, marshes and mudflats of greater San Francisco Bay, including Suisun, San Pablo, Honker, Richardson, San Rafael, San Leandro, and Grizzly bays and the Carquinez Strait.

• The first 100 feet inland from the shoreline around San Francisco Bay.

• The portion of the Suisun Marsh—including levees, waterways, marshes and grasslands— below the 10-foot contour line.

• Portions of most creeks, rivers, sloughs, and other tributaries that flow into San Francisco Bay.

• Salt ponds, duck hunting preserves, game refuges, and other managed wetlands that have been diked off from San Francisco Bay.

Where necessary, particular portions of BCDC’s jurisdiction may be further clarified by BCDCs regulations.

City of San Mateo General Plan

The 2009 City of San Mateo General Plan includes a Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element that contains goals, objectives, policies, actions, and strategies applicable to biological resources. The City’s General Plan Update goals and policies related to biological resources within the Planning Area are provided below.

Bay Shoreline and Marina Lagoon

C/OS 1.1: Lagoon Habitat. Enhance the wildlife habitat value of Marina Lagoon, whenever possible, in conjunction with recreational use and flood control management activities.

C/OS 1.2: Bird Island. Maintain “Bird Island” as a bird nesting and breeding site.

C/OS 1.5: Conversion of Incompatible Uses. Encourage the conversion of existing land uses which are not compatible with adjacent lagoon or wetlands to permitted compatible uses.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-21 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Creeks and Channels

C/OS 2.1: Aesthetic and Habitat Values -- Public Creeks. Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and habitat values of San Mateo, Laurel and Beresford creeks and other City-owned channels in all activities affecting these creeks.

C/OS 2.2: Aesthetic and Habitat Values – Private Creeks. Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and habitat values of privately owned sections of all other creeks and channels, shown in Figure C/OS-2, whenever cost effective or whenever these values outweigh economic considerations.

C/OS 2.3: Hydrologic Impacts. Ensure that improvement to creeks and other waterways do not cause adverse hydrologic impacts on upstream or downstream portions of the subject creek; comply with Safety Element Policy S-2.1 regarding flood control.

C/OS 2.4: New Creekside Development Requirements. Require that new creekside development includes the following:

a. Adequate setback from the creek bank for flood control as directed by the Safety Element Policy S-2.2.

b. Protection or enhancement of riparian vegetation and water (including stormwater) quality.

c. Dedication of maintenance/bank stabilization easement in exchange for City assumption of maintenance responsibility.

d. Dedication of public access easement where possible and desirable.

C/OS 2.5: Creekside Development Density. Require that new development on creekside lots be of a bulk and density appropriate to the buildable portion of the subject lot in conformance with the City’s creek and slope standards.

Hillsides

C/OS 3.1: Hillside Development Principles. Minimize the impact of hillside development through conformance with the City’s Zoning and Site Development Codes, and by utilizing the following principles:

a. Limit the development of steep slopes through conformance with City regulations which consider slope in the determination of appropriate minimum lot area for subdivisions and parcel maps, permitted floor area ratio (FAR), and density of multi-family development.

b. Cluster development to preserve steep slopes as private or common open spaces.

c. Preserve the form of the existing topography by limiting cuts and fills, and the height and visibility of new development.

d. Comply with Safety Element Policies S 1.1, S 1.2, and S 1.3 regarding site stability.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-22 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

C/OS 3.2: Low-Impact Development. Regulate the location, density, and design of development throughout the City in order to preserve topographic forms and to minimize adverse impacts on vegetation, water, and wildlife resources.

Threatened and Endangered Species

C/OS 5.1: Interjurisdictional Coordination. Promote coordination with adjacent jurisdictions to protect critical wildlife habitat.

C/OS 5.2: Site Evaluations. Require independent professional evaluation of sites during the environmental review process for any public or private development located within known or potential habitat of species designated by state and federal agencies as rare, threatened, or endangered, as shown in Appendix L, and as amended if new species are so designated.

Heritage Trees

C/OS 6.1: Tree Preservation. Preserve heritage trees in accordance with the City Heritage Tree Ordinance.

C/OS 6.2: Replacement Planting. Require significant replacement planting when the removal of heritage trees is permitted.

C/OS 6.3: New Development Requirements. Require the protection of heritage trees during construction activity; require that landscaping, buildings, and other improvements located adjacent to heritage trees be designed and maintained to be consistent with the continued health of the tree.

C/OS 6.4: Tree and Stand Retention. Retain the maximum feasible number of trees and preserve the character of stands or grove trees in the design of new or modified projects.

C/OS 6.6: New Development Street Trees. Require street tree planting as a condition of all new developments in accordance with the adopted Street Tree Master Plan.

C/OS 6.7: Street Tree Planting. Encourage the planting of new street trees throughout the City and especially in gateway areas such as Third Avenue, Fourth Avenue, El Camino Real (SR 82), Hillside Boulevard, and 42nd Avenue; encourage neighborhood participation in tree planting programs; explore non-City funded tree planting programs.

C/OS 6.8: Street Tree Preservation. Preserve existing street trees; ensure adequate siting, selection, and regular maintenance of City trees, including neighborhood participation, for the purpose of keeping the trees in a safe and aesthetic condition.

City of San Mateo Heritage Tree Ordinance

The City of San Mateo Heritage Tree Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 13.52) provides for the protection of heritage trees which are defined as any bay (Umbellularia californica), buckeye (Aesculus spp.), oak (Quercus spp.), cedar (Cedrus spp.), or redwood (Sequoia spp.) tree that has a diameter of 10 inches or more measured at 48 inches above natural grade; or any tree with a trunk diameter of 16 inches or more, measured at 48 inches above natural grade. A permit is required for (1) removing a heritage tree; (2) pruning more than one quarter of the

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-23 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES crown of existing foliage; or (3) removing more than one third of the root system. A Heritage Tree Application is required for the permit and includes, among other things, the number and location of trees to be removed or pruned by types and the reason for removal or pruning of each.

Any application for discretionary development approval is to be accompanied by plans describing the location of each tree, its species, trunk size, and drip line area. In addition, the location of any tree within 30 feet of the area proposed for construction that is within public right-of-way is to be shown on the plans and identified by species. For any construction work within a radius measured from the trunk center equal to ten times the diameter of the tree trunk measured at 4 feet above grade, or other radius as determined by the City during the development review process, a Tree Protection Plan is to be prepared by a certified arborist prior to the issuance of any permit for a development project. Section 13.52.025 of the tree ordinance describes the requirements for the plan. Trees removed under jurisdiction of a planning approval pursuant to Chapter 27.71 must conform with the replacement conditions specified in the planning approval. For tree removal on property without a planning application, a 24-inch box size tree is required to be planted for each tree removed. The location and species of the replacement tree is to be determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation. Alternatively, payment equal to the value of the cost of the purchase and installation of a replacement tree, as stated on the permit, can be made to the City’s Tree Planting Fund.

4.9.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE

To determine the level of significance of an identified impact, the criteria outlined in the CEQA Guidelines were used. CEQA (Section 15065) directs lead agencies to find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

CEQA (Section 15206) further specifies that a project shall be deemed to be of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance if it would substantially affect sensitive wildlife habitats including, but not limited to, riparian lands, wetlands, bays, estuaries, marshes, and habitats for rare and endangered species.

CEQA (Section 15380) further provides that a plant or animal species, even if not on one of the official lists, may be treated as “rare or endangered” if, for example, it is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.

Additional criteria to assess significant impacts to biological resources due to the proposed project are specified in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15382 (Significant Effect on the Environment) “…a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance.”

Based on the Environmental Checklist in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project could be considered to have significant biological resource impacts if it would have:

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-24 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. A substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any special-status species.

2. A substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by CDFG or USFWS.

3. A substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

4. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

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

METHODOLOGY

This impact assessment is based on the project description (Section 3.0), information described in the existing setting subsection, and the standards of significance described above. Furthermore, this impact analysis is based upon a comparison between vacant land inventory data, the planned uses of those areas based on the General Plan Update Land Use Map (Figure 3.0-4), and the CALVEG data for those areas. Conflicts between planned land uses and mapped biological communities were then identified for the proposed project.

Habitat Assessment: Biological communities within the Planning Area were defined based upon CALVEG data (USFS 2005). CALVEG is a hierarchical classification system of actual vegetation designed to assess vegetation-related resources throughout California. The system was devised in the late 1970s by the Pacific Southwest Region of the U.S. Forest Service to describe and map natural vegetation in the state. CALVEG mapping was conducted between 1979 and 1981 by U.S. Forest Service personnel by photo-interpretation of 1:250,000-scale color infrared prints of Landsat Multispectral Scanner (MSS) imagery. CALVEG organizes all vegetation by “cover type,” which can include shrubs, grass, water, etc. Using the CALVEG-CHWR crosswalk, the CALVEG classifications were then correlated with the applicable CWHR types as defined by Mayer and Laudenslayer (1988). A biological communities figure was created using ArcView by layering the CALVEG data on an aerial photograph (Figure 4.9-1). This data has not been verified with field surveys and may therefore be inaccurate due to the methods in which the CALVEG data was obtained and the intended scale at which the data was meant to be used.

Special-status Species Assessment: In addition to identifying biological communities within the Planning Area (Figure 4.9-1), aerial photography was reviewed for determining potential habitat for special-status species identified from the literature and database searches (Appendix D). A species was determined to have potential to occur in the Planning Area if its documented geographic range from the literature and database search includes the project vicinity and if suitable habitat for the species was identified within or near the Planning Area. The CNDDB was queried for a list of special-status wildlife, plant, and fisheries resources that are known to occur within the Planning Area or vicinity (CDFG 2009). A database search was performed for special-

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-25 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES status species within the San Mateo, California, USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle (USGS 1993) and eight surrounding quadrangles (Woodside, Half Moon Bay, San Leandro, Redwood Point, Palo Alto, Hunters Point, San Francisco South, and Montara Mountain).

The CNPS electronic online inventory was also searched for rare or endangered plants that may occur within the Planning Area (CNPS 2009). This query was performed for CNPS List 1A, List 1B, List 2, and List 3 special-status plants occurring in the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles listed above. List 1A species are presumed extinct in California. List 1B species are considered rare or endangered in California and elsewhere. List 2 species are considered rare or endangered in California, but are more common elsewhere. List 3 species require further review and consideration. However, as described further above (Regulatory Framework), CNPS List 3 plants are not included in this analysis.

In addition, the online USFWS list for the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles listed above was queried and reviewed for federally listed or candidate plant and animal species that could potentially be affected by the proposed project (USFWS 2009a).

Appendix D presents the results of the CNDDB, CNPS, and USFWS queries for special-status species that have the potential to occur within the Planning Area and surrounding vicinities.

This impact analysis is organized by the significance criteria noted above: special-status plant and wildlife species; sensitive vegetation communities including wetlands; wildlife movement; and compliance with existing Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) or other plans and policies. Each impact category includes a description of the specific potential impacts, as well as avoidance and mitigation measures that can potentially reduce and mitigate potentially significant impacts.

ASSUMPTIONS

As described in Section 3.0, Project Description, the proposed General Plan Update identifies the Planning Area, which is the equivalent to the existing City’s Sphere of Influence and includes all lands within the incorporated city limits, an area within San Francisco Bay, and unincorporated lands just beyond the western city limit (adjacent to the City’s Western Hills Plan Area) (Figure 3.0-2).

Although it is likely that some level of natural resources would be retained (if available) within each vacant land parcel, the exact extent of these resources could not be determined. As such, it is assumed that all natural resources within a vacant land parcel, where a conflicting land use is planned, would be impacted. This approach was taken to ensure that impacts would not be underestimated. For the purpose of this analysis, vacant lands are defined as lands where no development has occurred, but does not include open space areas surrounding existing buildings/homes.

There are several areas within the Planning Area that cannot be developed with the buildout of the proposed General Plan Update. These areas include waters of the San Francisco Bay, including all tidelands, wetlands, and marshlands, and dedicated Sugarloaf open space lands along the southwestern hills boundary. Inclusive of, or in addition to, these protected areas, other areas excluded from this analysis were those designated as “Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation” under the proposed General Plan Update. Open Space lands include “any parcel or area of land or water which is essentially unimproved and devoted to an open space use and which is designated on a local, regional, or state open-space plan as one or more of four types of use” (City of San Mateo 2009). The General Plan Update defines open

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-26 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES space for (1) preservation of natural resources; (2) managed production of resources; (3) outdoor recreation; and (4) public safety. There are no areas managed for the production of resources within the Planning Area. Natural resource areas include locations required for plant and animal habitat or for ecological and scientific study. In the Planning Area, these locations include the San Francisco Bay marshes, San Mateo Creek, and Sugarloaf Mountain. Outdoor recreation locations include parks and areas of scenic and cultural value, stream banks, trails, and other links between open spaces. In the Planning Area, these open spaces include Marina Lagoon, designated private land reserves, and a variety of park sites. Public safety areas include locations which require special management because of hazardous conditions such as unstable soils, fire risk, fault zones, or flood. In the Planning Area, these areas include portions of the shoreline, Sugarloaf, and San Mateo Creek. It is assumed in this analysis that no or very little disturbance would occur within these protected areas. It is also assumed that park sites contain primarily ornamental plant species which are maintained on a regular basis.

PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

With regard to all impacts identified below, given the disturbed and developed nature of the Planning Area and surrounding vicinity, impacts to biological resources are expected to be minimal as there is a low likelihood of special-status plant or wildlife species occurrence within developable portions of the Planning Area. The mitigation measures identified below are intended to provide an assurance that potential impacts would be mitigated appropriately for any future proposed development within the Planning Area.

Special-Status Species

Impact 4.9.1 Land uses and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update could result in the loss of populations or essential habitat for special- status plant and animal species. This would be considered a significant impact.

Land use and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update could result in adverse impacts on special-status species or essential habitat for special-status species in the Planning Area. As indicated in Appendix D, Tables B-1 and B-2, numerous occurrences are known to occur within or near the Planning Area. Any development within areas that are currently undeveloped, especially larger tracts of land connected to waterways or open space areas, or are designated as Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation on the Land Use Map (Figure 3.0-4), could result in impacts to habitat resources that may support special-status species. Construction of future projects could result in direct take of habitat and loss of individuals of these species. Where there are direct impacts to special-status species, indirect impacts would occur as well. Indirect impacts include increased human/wildlife interactions, habitat fragmentation, encroachment by exotic weeds, and area-wide changes in surface water flows due to development of previously undeveloped areas. These impacts would be considered potentially significant.

Table 4.9-2 below conservatively quantifies the biological communities that may be impacted by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update. These biological communities provide potential habitat for, or are know to support, special-status species. Please refer to Appendix D, Tables B-1 and B-2, for special-status species associated with each biological community. The actual acreage ultimately impacted may be less than the estimates shown in Table 4.9-2 as future development design proposals will be subject to the application of General Plan policies that address protection of biological resources, as well as possible further review on a project-

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-27 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES by-project basis. These policies and possible further review are expected to reduce the impacts estimated in Table 4.9-2, which ensure that the worst-case impacts are considered in this DEIR.

As discussed previously, further environmental review may be necessary, depending on whether the potential environmental impacts of future proposed projects within the Planning Area have the potential to cause one or more direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment that have not already been adequately considered in this DEIR. This DEIR is a programmatic analysis of the broad environmental effects of the overall proposed General Plan Update. Goals, policies, and action items contained within the proposed General Plan Update would apply to all future improvement plans within the Planning Area. Future proposed projects that have the potential to cause a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment will undergo additional, project-specific CEQA-review, as required by statute. Those future projects will also be subject to the FESA and CESA, as appropriate.

TABLE 4.9-2 POTENTIAL IMPACT ACREAGE OF BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA

Biological Communities Total Acres within Planning Area Impacted Acres within Planning Area Annual Grassland 177.7663 2.7093 Blue Oak Woodland 77.5107 3.4794 Chamise-Redshank Chaparral 46.3645 -- Coastal Oak Woodland 408.5056 1.6648 Coastal Scrub 27.1623 -- Eucalyptus 33.2679 -- Lacustrine 302.0593 -- Riverine* Unknown -- Saline Emergent Wetland 43.4234 -- Urban 7,637.4179 149.9446 Valley-Foothill Riparian 36.2160 -- Valley Oak Woodland 48.9723 -- TOTAL 8,838.6662 157.7981

Source: USFS 2005 *This biological community was not included in the CALVEG data provided by USFS although it is known to occur within the Planning Area.

Proposed General Plan Update Policies that Provide Mitigation

The following applicable City of San Mateo General Plan Update policies proposed in the Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element would assist in reducing any potential biological impacts to special-status species:

C/OS 1.1: Lagoon Habitat. Enhance the wildlife habitat value of Marina Lagoon, whenever possible, in conjunction with recreational use and flood control management activities.

C/OS 1.2: Bird Island. Maintain “Bird Island” as a bird nesting and breeding site.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-28 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

C/OS 1.5: Conversion of Incompatible Uses. Encourage the conversion of existing land uses which are not compatible with adjacent lagoon or wetlands to permitted compatible uses.

C/OS 2.1: Aesthetic and Habitat Values – Selected Creeks. Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and habitat values of San Mateo, Laurel, and Beresford creeks and other City-owned channels in all activities affecting these creeks.

C/OS 2.2: Aesthetic and Habitat Values – General. Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and habitat values of privately owned sections of all other creeks and channels, shown in Figure C/OS-2, wherever cost effective or whenever these values outweigh economic considerations.

C/OS 2.4: New Creekside Development Requirements: Require that new creekside development include the following:

a. Adequate setback from the creek bank for flood control as directed by the Safety Element Policy S-2.2.

b. Protection or enhancement of riparian vegetation and water (including stormwater) quality.

c. Dedication of maintenance/bank stabilization easement in exchange for City assumption of maintenance responsibility.

d. Dedication of public access easement where possible and desirable.

C/OS 3.2: Low-Impact Development. Regulate the location, density, and design of development throughout the City in order to preserve topographic forms and to minimize adverse impacts on vegetation, water, and wildlife resources.

C/OS 5.1: Interjurisdictional Coordination. Promote coordination with adjacent jurisdictions to protect critical wildlife habitat.

C/OS 5.2: Site Evaluations. Require independent professional evaluation of sites during the environmental review process for any public or private development located within known or potential habitat of species designated by state and federal agencies as rare, threatened, or endangered, as shown on Figure C/OS-3 and as amended as new species are so designated.

C/OS 6.1: Tree Preservation. Preserve heritage trees in accordance with the City Heritage Tree Ordinance.

C/OS 6.2: Replacement Planting. Require significant replacement planting when the removal of heritage trees is permitted.

C/OS 6.3: New Development Requirements. Require the protection of heritage trees during construction activity; require that landscaping, buildings, and other improvements located adjacent to heritage trees be designed and maintained to be consistent with the continued health of the tree.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-29 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

C/OS 6.4: Tree and Stand Retention. Retain the maximum feasible number of trees and preserve the character of stands or grove trees in the design of new or modified projects.

C/OS 6.8: Street Tree Preservation. Preserve existing street trees; ensure adequate siting, selection, and regular maintenance of City trees, including neighborhood participation, for the purpose of keeping the trees in a safe and aesthetic condition.

Mitigation Measures

In addition to the policies contained in the Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element of the General Plan Update, the following mitigation measures are identified:

MM 4.9.1a Add a new policy to state the following: The City shall seek to preserve wetlands, habitat corridors, sensitive natural communities, and other essential habitat areas that may be adversely affected by public or private development projects where special-status plant and animal species are known to be present or potentially occurring based on City biological resource mapping or other technical material.

Implementation Measure: The City shall protect sensitive biological resources and habitat corridors through environmental review of development applications in compliance with CEQA provisions, participation in comprehensive habitat management programs with other local and resource agencies, and continued management of open space lands that provide for protection of important natural habitats. Protect wetlands and waters of the United States in accordance with the regulations of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other appropriate agencies.

MM 4.9.1b Amend Policy C/OS 5.2 to state the following: The site evaluation required shall determine the presence/absence of these special-status plant and animal species on the site. The surveys associated with the evaluation shall be conducted for proper identification of the species. The evaluation will consider the potential for significant impacts on special-status plant and animal species and will identify feasible mitigation measures to mitigate such impacts to the satisfaction of the City and appropriate governmental agencies (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game). Require adequate mitigation measures for ensuring the protection of sensitive resources and achieving “no net loss” of sensitive habitat acreage, values and functions. In lieu of the site evaluation, presence of special-status plant and animal species may be assumed and mitigation requiring “no net loss” of sensitive habitat acreage may be applied.

While implementation of these mitigation measures and the above policies would only partially reduce and/or avoid direct and indirect impacts to special-status species within the Planning Area, environmental review as described further above will ensure that adequate mitigation measures will be identified for future projects that will help to further reduce/minimize impacts to special-status species and loss of sensitive habitats supporting these species. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would reduce impacts to special-status species to a less than significant level.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-30 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Sensitive Natural Communities, Including Waters of the U.S.

Impact 4.9.2 Land uses and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update could result in the loss of riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

Implementation of the General Plan Update could result in disturbance, degradation, and removal of annual grassland, blue oak woodland, and coastal oak woodland communities. Remnant riparian habitats (if present), drainages, and wetlands within these communities may be impacted by the future development. Riparian habitat and waters of the U.S., including wetlands, are considered to be sensitive natural communities by CDFG. Therefore, disturbance and loss of these features would be considered potentially significant.

Riparian habitat supports a high diversity of wildlife species and provides shade for streams and wetlands, maintaining stream temperatures and reducing stream evaporation. Riparian obligates (those species dependent on riparian habitat) often benefit from setbacks where development is prohibited. The benefits of riparian corridor buffers increase if they are adjacent to larger tracts of conserved land.

Jurisdictional waters of the U.S. provide for a variety of functions for plants and wildlife within the proposed Planning Area. Jurisdictional waters provide habitat, foraging, cover, migration and movement corridors, and water sources for both special-status and other species. In addition to habitat functions, jurisdictional waters provide physical conveyance of surface water flows as well as channels for the handling of large stormwater events. Large storms can produce extreme flows that cause bank cutting and sedimentation of ephemeral drainage and water bodies such as open water and streams in the proposed Planning Area. Jurisdictional waters found within the proposed Planning Area can slow these flows and lessen the effects of these large storm events, protecting habitat and other resources.

Proposed General Plan Update Policies that Provide Mitigation

In addition to implementation of policies described under Impact 4.9.1, the following applicable General Plan Update policies and implementation programs proposed in the Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element would assist in reducing any potential biological impacts to sensitive natural communities:

C/OS 2.3: Hydrologic Impacts. Ensure that improvement to creeks and other waterways do not cause adverse hydrologic impacts on upstream or downstream portions of the subject creek; comply with Safety Element Policy S-2.1 regarding flood control.

C/OS 2.5: Creekside Development Density. Require that new development on creekside lots be of a bulk and density appropriate to the buildable portion of the subject lot in conformance with the City’s creek and slope standards.

I.5 San Mateo Creek. Protect and utilize the open space and natural qualities of San Mateo Creek for private and public benefit to: assure access for police, fire, and floodway maintenance; increase flood protection; and preserve opportunities for future public use, access, and enjoyment.

I.6 San Mateo Creek. Protect and utilize the open space and natural qualities of San Mateo Creek for private and public benefit to: assure access for police, fire and floodway maintenance; increase flood protection; and preserve opportunities for future public use and access.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-31 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

I.7 San Mateo Creek Flood Protection. Protect new development adjacent to San Mateo Creek by requiring adequate building setbacks from creek banks, provision of access easements for creek maintenance purposes, and creek improvements such as bank stabilization.

S 2.1: Creek Alteration. Prohibit any reduction of creek channel capacity, impoundment or diversion of creek channel flows which would adversely affect adjacent properties or the degree of flooding. Prevent erosion of creek banks.

S 2.2: Development Adjacent to Creeks. Protect new development adjacent to creeks by requiring adequate building setbacks from creek banks and provision of access easements for creek maintenance purposes.

Mitigation Measures

In addition to the policies contained in the Conservation, Open Space, Parks, and Recreation Element, and Safety Element of the General Plan Update, and the policies contained in the Downtown Plan, the following mitigation measures are identified:

MM 4.9.2a Add a new policy to state the following: Restrict or modify proposed development in areas that contain wetlands or waters of the U.S., as defined by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers delineations, as necessary to ensure the continued health and survival of special-status species and sensitive habitat areas. Development projects shall preferably be designed to avoid impacts on sensitive resources, or to adequately mitigate impacts by providing on-site replacement or (as a lowest priority) off-site replacement at a higher ratio. Modification in project design shall include adequate avoidance measures to ensure that no net loss of wetland acreage, function, water quality protection, and habitat value occurs. This may include the use of setbacks, buffers, and water quality, drainage control features, or other measures to maintain existing habitat and hydrologic functions of retained wetlands and waters of the U.S.

MM 4.9.2b Add a new policy to state the following: Design public access to avoid or minimize disturbance to sensitive resources, including necessary setback/buffer areas, while facilitating public use, enjoyment, and appreciation of wetlands.

MM 4.9.2c Add a new policy to state the following: Avoid wetlands development where feasible (as defined under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15364). Where complete avoidance of jurisdictional wetlands is not feasible (as defined under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15364), require provision of replacement habitat on-site through restoration and/or habitat creation that would ensure no net loss of wetland acreage, function, water quality protection, and habitat value. Allow restoration of wetlands off-site only when an applicant has demonstrated that no net loss of wetlands would occur and that on-site restoration is not feasible. Off-site wetland mitigation preferably will consist of the same habitat type as the wetland area that would be lost.

While implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.9.2a, MM 4.9.2b, and MM 4.9.2c, MM 4.9.1b, and the above policies would partially reduce and/or avoid direct and indirect impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, environmental review as described

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-32 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES above would ensure that adequate mitigation measures will be identified for future projects that will help to further reduce/minimize impacts to sensitive habitat acreage, values, and function. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would reduce impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, including waters of the U.S., to a less than significant level.

Wildlife Corridors

Impact 4.9.3 Land uses and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update could restrict aquatic or terrestrial wildlife movement through travel corridors. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

Migratory birds may however use the rivers, creeks, and other natural habitats within the Planning Area during migration. Furthermore, open space provides an opportunity for dispersal and migration of wildlife species. The primary travel corridors available in the Planning Area include the riparian and riverine habitats which provide adequate cover and vegetation to be used as a migratory corridor for common and special-status fish and wildlife species. Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update may result in disturbance, degradation, and removal of important corridors for the movement of common and special-status wildlife species. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

General Plan Update policies and implementation measures identified under Impact 4.9.1 and Impact 4.9.2 would mitigate impacts to wildlife movement corridors and would therefore reduce potential impacts to wildlife travel corridors to a less than significant level. No additional mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measures

None required.

Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances

Impact 4.9.4 Proposed policies in the General Plan Update that affect biological resources may differ from local policies and ordinances currently in effect. However, potential conflicts would be addressed by the revisions of the implementing ordinances to ensure that they conform to the proposed policies. This would be considered a less than significant impact.

The proposed General Plan Update would update policies and implementation measures identified under Impact 4.9.1 and Impact 4.9.2 regarding biological resources, particularly those related to riparian corridors, wetlands, special-status species, sensitive natural communities, and wildlife movement corridors. Upon adoption of the new policies and implementation measures contained within the General Plan Update, applicable City ordinances would be updated to conform to the policies so that these conflicts would no longer exist. As a result, this impact would be considered less than significant.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-33 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Mitigation Measures

None required.

Conflict with Adopted Habitat or Natural Community Conservation Plans

Impact 4.9.5 Land uses and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plans. This would be a less than significant impact.

Land uses and development consistent with the proposed General Plan Update would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved conservation plan. The Planning Area is located within the recovery plan area for the Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil Species of the San Francisco Bay Area (USFWS 1998). However, implementation measures identified under Impact 4.9.1 and Impact 4.9.2 regarding biological resources, particularly those related to riparian corridors, wetlands, special-status species, sensitive natural communities, and wildlife movement corridors, would ensure that any covered species under the recovery plan would not be adversely impacted. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures

None required.

4.9.4 CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES

CUMULATIVE SETTING

The City of San Mateo and the surrounding area of San Mateo County as a whole must be considered for the purpose of evaluating land use conversion issues associated with biological resources on a cumulative level. In particular, this cumulative setting condition includes the approved, planned, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable projects as identified in Section 4.0, Introduction to the Environmental Analysis and Assumptions Used, existing land use conditions and planned development under the proposed General Plan Update, and planned and proposed land uses and development patterns in communities near the City. These land uses and developments have the potential to adversely affect the biological resources in the region and could contribute to the loss of potential habitat within the region. Future developments would require on- and off-site improvements to provide water, wastewater, storm drainage, solid waste disposal, and other such services at the City’s required level of service. Anticipated development, public projects, and related improvements could contribute to the loss of potential habitat within the region.

On a cumulative level, the land uses may contribute to a loss of potential habitat for special- status species that currently inhabit the area or could inhabit the area in the future. In addition to potential direct impacts on biological resources from project implementation, the increased human presence would be anticipated to cause potential indirect impacts. These could disturb breeding and foraging behavior of wildlife, and if so may result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact. Another indirect impact would be stormwater runoff. Each project is required to participate in the NPDES permit program for stormwater runoff, which effectively reduces water quality impacts to below a level of significance. Planned urbanization of the Planning Area would create new sources of light and glare. While project specific measures

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-34 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES would be undertaken to orient or shield lights to minimize illumination of adjacent lands, the combined effect of all new developments approved or planned in the area may create a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact associated with increased human presence.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

Cumulative Impacts on Biological Resources

Impact 4.9.6 The proposed project, in combination with other reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in direct mortality and loss of habitat for special-status species and waters of the U.S., including wetlands. This would be a potentially cumulatively considerable impact.

Many biological communities within the Planning Area and region are critically important for the protection of several sensitive species. Implementation of the proposed project may result in degradation of wildlife habitat through a variety of actions which, when combined with other habitat impacts occurring from development within surrounding areas, may result in significant cumulative impacts. Future development within the City of San Mateo and the surrounding vicinity would have an unknown and unquantifiable impact on special-status species, biologically sensitive habitats, and potentially jurisdictional features (wetlands and waters of the U.S.). The loss of wetlands and other waters within the Planning Area would result in a decline in water quality condition, which may result in adverse effects to downstream aquatic resources and riparian habitat. Furthermore, increased development and disturbance created by human activities (e.g., fires, increased nighttime lighting) would result in direct mortality, habitat loss, and deterioration of habitat suitability. These impacts are considered cumulatively considerable.

Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update policies and implementation measures under Impacts 4.9.1 and 4.9.2 described earlier in this section will reduce the proposed project’s impacts to these resources to a less than significant level through either resource avoidance or replacement measures. Therefore, the project’s cumulative contribution to impacts on these resources would be reduced to a less than cumulatively considerable level.

Mitigation Measures

None required.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-35 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

REFERENCES

Becker, S. 1988. Coastal Scrub. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2002. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) program version 8. Sacramento, CA.

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2009. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch, California Dept. Fish and Game, Sacramento, CA.

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2009. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, Convening editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Accessed online at: http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi.

City of San Mateo. 1990. General Plan.

City of San Mateo. 2009. Draft General Plan 2025.

Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

England, A. S. 1988. Chamise-Redshank Chaparral. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Grenfell, W. E. Jr. 1988. Valley Foothill Riparian. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Holland, V. L. 1988. Coastal Oak Woodland. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Kie, J. G. 1988. Annual Grassland. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Mayer, Kenneth E. and William F. Laudenslayer, Jr., eds. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California. State of California, Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game Sacramento, CA. 166 pp. Updated April 2005. Accessed online at: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/wildlife_habitats.asp.

McBride J. R. and C. Reid. 1988. Urban. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Nelson, J. R. 1994. Guidelines for Assessing Effects of Proposed Developments on Rare Plants and Plant Communities. In M. Skinner and B. M. Pavlik, eds., Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Special Publication No. 1 (5th ed.), California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA.

Pearson, D. C. 1988. Eucalyptus. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Ritter, L. V. 1988. Blue Oak Woodland. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Ritter, L. V. 1988. Valley Oak Woodland. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

General Plan Update City of San Mateo Draft Environmental Impact Report July 2009 4.9-36 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). 2006. San Francisco Bay Plan. San Francisco, CA. Accessed online at: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/pdf/ planning/plans/bayplan/bayplan.pdf.

Springer, P. F. Saline Emergent Wetland. In Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988.

Stebbins, R. 1978. Appendix I: Use of Habitats in the East Bay Regional Parks by Free Living Vertebrate Animals. In J. Nicole, ed. Vegetation Management Principles and Policies for the East Bay Regional Park District East Bay Reg. Park Dist. Oakland, CA.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1997. Ecological Subregions of California. Prepared by U.S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. Available online at: http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/projects/ecoregions/261ai.htm.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1998. Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil Species of the San Francisco Bay Area. Portland, OR.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. National Wetlands Inventory. Available at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009a. Federal Endangered and Threatened Species that Occur in or may be Affected by Projects in the Counties and/or USGS 7½ Minute Quads you Requested. Document number 090310033519. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Sacramento, CA. Accessed online at: http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/es/spp_lists/ auto_list_form.cfm.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009b. Critical Habitat Data Portal. Electronic online mapping program accessed online at http://crithab.fws.gov/.

U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2005. CALVEG data. USFS, Pacific Southwest Region, Remote Sensing Lab.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1993. San Mateo, California, 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle. U.S. Department of the Interior. TopoScout.

U.S. Supreme Court. 1995. Babbitt, Secretary of Interior, et al., Petitioners v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, et al. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 94–859. Argued April 17, 1995—Decided June 29, 1995.

Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC). 2009. Current and historical climate data for the City of San Mateo area. Accessed online at: http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi- bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca1206.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update July 2009 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.9-37