Environmental Assessment Determinations and Compliance Findings for HUD-Assisted Projects 24 CFR Part 58

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development 451 Seventh Street, SW Washington, DC 20410 www.hud.gov

espanol.hud.gov

Environmental Assessment Determinations and Compliance Findings for HUD-assisted Projects 24 CFR Part 58

Project Information

Project Name: Midway Village Redevelopment Project

Responsible Entity: County of San Mateo, Department of Housing, 264 Harbor Blvd. Bldg. A, Belmont CA 94002

Grant Recipient (if different than Responsible Entity): Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo, 264 Harbor Blvd. Bldg. A, Belmont CA 94002

State/Local Identifier: Midway Village, City of Daly City, California

Preparer: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. on behalf of County of San Mateo, Department of Housing

Certifying Officer Name and Title: Raymond Hodges, Director, County of San Mateo, Department of Housing

Consultant (if applicable): Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec)

Direct Comments to:

Raymond Hodges, Director, County of San Mateo, Department of Housing 264 Harbor Boulevard, Building A Belmont, CA 94002 Phone: 650-802-3300 Email: [email protected]

Barbara Deffenderfer 264 Harbor Boulevard, Building A Belmont, CA 94002 Phone: 650-802-3300 Email: [email protected]

Supporting documentation for this Environmental Assessment is found in the Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) prepared for this Project (City of Daly City 2020; available online at https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2) and supporting documents as cited in the SCEA or in the analysis below.

Project Location: The Project is located within the City of Daly City, California in San Mateo County and is approximately 15 acres in size (Figure 1). The Project site is bound by Schwerin Street to the west and Martin Street to the south, with Midway Drive running directly through the center of the Project site (Figure 1).

Description of the Proposed Project [24 CFR 50.12 & 58.32; 40 CFR 1508.25]: The proposed Project would include redevelopment of the Midway Village area to provide mixed-use development consisting of 555 residential units, 735 parking spaces, a child-care facility, a community center, office space for property management and other ancillary services, a revised street system, and recreation facilities. Other ancillary improvements would include landscaping, water and wastewater line improvements, and pedestrian walkways. One city park, Bayshore Park, would be relocated to a different location within Project limits (Figure 2), rough-graded, and returned to the City of Daly City. The existing park would be closed beginning at the start of Phase 1 of Project construction (anticipated in 2021) and would be relocated and reopened during Phase 4 of the Project (no later than 2027). The proposed 555 residential units would consist of 528 units for low-income families. The remaining 27 units would consist of 7 units for onsite property managers and the remaining 20 units would consist of townhomes to be sold at a below market rate. Building heights would vary between one and four stories, with a maximum height of 60 feet. The residential units would consist of 92 studio apartments, 116 one-bedroom apartments, 190 two-bedroom apartments, 133 three-bedroom apartments, and 24 four-bedroom apartments. The proposed Project would be constructed in four phases, and would include the demolition of existing structures, the relocation of current residents, and the relocation of the child-care facility onsite as each phase is underway. Table 1 provides a summary of activities for each phase of the Project.

Table 1 – Summary of Project Activities by Phase – Midway Village Redevelopment Project Phase Activity  Demolition of San Mateo County Housing Authority Demolition offices only  29 studio apartments  24 one-bedroom apartments Phase 1  56 two-bedroom apartments Construction  30 three-bedroom apartments  8 four-bedroom apartments  Garage A  Demolition of 60 residences Demolition  60 families relocated to Phase 1  27 studio apartments Phase 2  37 one-bedroom apartments  32 two-bedroom apartments Construction  28 three-bedroom apartments  4 four-bedroom apartments  Bayshore Child-Care Center  Demolition of existing child-care center Demolition  Demolition of 46 residences Phase 3  46 families relocated to Phase 2

Construction  18 studio apartments  27 one-bedroom apartments

 49 two-bedroom apartments  40 three-bedroom apartments  6 four-bedroom apartments  Community center  Garage D  Demolition of 44 residences Demolition  44 families relocated to Phase 3  18 studio apartments  28 one-bedroom apartments Phase 4  43 two-bedroom apartments Construction  25 three-bedroom apartments  6 four-bedroom apartments  Park rough-graded and returned to the City of Daly City  Park redeveloped by City of Daly City Total Residences 555

It is anticipated that the Project would be developed over a six-year period; however, based on market conditions, phasing could extend up to 15 years. For the purposes of this analysis, a conservative approach concentrating the construction into a six-year period was used. Each of the four phases of development would include demolition of a portion of the existing buildings onsite followed by new building construction. Existing tenants would only need to move once during redevelopment and would be relocated directly into their new units. Construction of the new child- care facility would occur early in the development process (Phase 2) to ensure that the students are relocated and settled as early as possible in the process. In addition to residences, the Midway Village area currently consists of 172,500 square feet (sf) of residential, office, and child-care space. The total square footage under the proposed Project would increase to 881,600 sf of mixed residential, office space, common space, a child-care facility, and a community center. The office space is included within the community center space.

Statement of Purpose and Need for the Proposal [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]:

The purpose of the Project is to increase the number of affordable low-income housing units within the existing Midway Village area; the Project is needed to address a local and regional shortage of low-income housing within San Mateo County. Currently, there are a total of 150 residential units located within the existing Midway Village area, which is well below the capacity allowed for High-Density Residential (R-HD), under which Midway Village is currently designated.

The City of Daly City has experienced significant growth in the decades immediately following World War II. The City’s population quadrupled between 1950 and 1970 with the construction of the Westlake and Serramonte subdivisions. By 1990 the population was approximately 90,000. The United States census reported the City’s population as 101,123 in 2010. Although population growth is anticipated to continue, it is anticipated to do so at a modest rate, reflecting the fact that the City is largely built out (City of Daly City 2013 and 2015 as cited in the City of Daly City 2020).

According to growth estimates in the Daly City General Plan, the City of Daly City can expect to add about 5,265 more residents between 2010 and 2030. Based on past development trends, regional growth forecasts, and assumptions about future growth, the City will accommodate approximately 106,388 residents at buildout, an increase of about 5.2 percent over the 2010

Census-determined population of 101,123. Over a 20-year period, this represents an annual growth rate of 0.3 percent (City of Daly City 2013, 2015 as cited in City of Daly City 2020).

The City’s housing stock composition largely mirrors that of San Mateo County, with single- family homes being the majority at 65 percent. Multi-family housing represents all but 2 percent of the remaining housing stock, which is comprised of mobile homes. The residential growth rate in the City has decreased significantly since the 1980s and 1990s, when 10-year growth rates were 8.5 percent and 7 percent, respectively. The growth rate between 2000 and 2010 was 1.5 percent. Comparatively, this is half the growth rate of San Mateo County as a whole, and the smallest growth rate in the Bay Area. The primary reason for the limited growth rate in the City is the relatively limited supply of developable land, given the lack of parcels that are large enough for substantial development projects (City of Daly City 2013 and 2015 as cited in City of Daly City 2020).

Existing Conditions and Trends [24 CFR 58.40(a)]:

Currently, Midway Village consists of 150 residential units, 223 parking spaces, a child-care facility (Bayshore Child-Care Center), open space, an existing street system, and office space for County of San Mateo, Department of Housing. Bayshore Park is currently located immediately northeast of the Midway Village area (Figure 1).

The existing Midway Village is located in an urban area and is currently developed with 3 one- story and 34 two-story structures. Most of these structures include residential dwelling units with additional structures for a child-care facility and a play area. There are currently 477 residents living on the Project site and 109 students enrolled at the Bayshore Child-Care Center, which is operated by Peninsula Family Services. The Bayshore Child-Care Center is a daytime-only facility that operates from 7 AM to 6 PM with 24 employees. There are also seven employees at the San Mateo County Housing Authority offices, which are located on the Project site at the end of Midway Drive.

Bayshore Park is currently 3.5 acres in size and includes an open grass area, play structures, and basketball courts. There are six existing roadway courts in the Midway Village area including Martin Court, Brandon Court, Jennifer Court, Mary Court, Midway Court, and Cypress Lane. These areas have clusters of existing multi-family units and marked parking spaces. Sporadic landscaping also occurs throughout the development with a mix of trees, shrubbery, and grasses. Walking pathways connect the residential units together and provide access throughout the development.

Funding Information

Grant Number HUD Program Funding Amount N/A Section 8 Project-Based Voucher Program $40,000,000

Estimated Total HUD Funded Amount: $40,000,000

Estimated Total Project Cost (HUD and non-HUD funds) [24 CFR 58.32(d)]: $400,000,000

Compliance with 24 CFR 50.4, 58.5, and 58.6 Laws and Authorities Record below the compliance or conformance determinations for each statute, executive order, or regulation. Provide credible, traceable, and supportive source documentation for each authority. Where applicable, complete the necessary reviews or consultations and obtain or note applicable permits of approvals. Clearly note citations, dates/names/titles of contacts, and page references. Attach additional documentation as appropriate.

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR 50.4 and 58.6 Airport Hazards Yes No The San Francisco International Airport is located approximately 5.4 miles south of the 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D Project area. No private airstrips are located within two miles of the Project site. Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Coastal Barrier Resources Yes No No Coastal Barrier Resources are identified within the state of California, which includes Coastal Barrier Resources Act, as the Project area. amended by the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act of 1990 [16 USC Source: 3501] https://www.hudexchange.info/environmenta l-review/coastal-barrier-resources/. Accessed May 2020. Flood Insurance Yes No Flood Insurance Rate Map. No. 06081C0035F indicates the Project is not

Flood Disaster Protection Act of within a 100-year or 500-year flood zone. 1973 and National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 [42 USC Source: 4001-4128 and 42 USC 5154a] https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?Address Query=Daly%20City%2C%20California#se archresultsanchor. Accessed July 31, 2019.

STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR 50.4 & 58.5 Clean Air Yes No The City of Daly City is in San Mateo County, which is within the boundaries of the

Clean Air Act, as amended, San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin particularly section 176(c) & (d); (SFBAAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, 93 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the California Air

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? Resources Board (CARB). The BAAQMD is in attainment for all national air quality standards except for ozone and PM2.5 (see Table 4.3-2 in City of Daly City 2020).

Air quality modeling was conducted for the Project (see Appendix D in City of Daly City 2020). All construction emissions of criteria pollutants will be below the BAAQMD 2017 significance thresholds (Section 4.3 in City of Daly City 2020). However, because construction of the Project will result in air emissions, mitigation measures AIR-1, AIR- 2, and AIR-3 will be implemented to further reduce effects related to air quality emissions during construction. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, effects to air quality are less than significant. Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Coastal Zone Management Yes No The Project is not located within a Coastal Zone Management Area. Coastal Zone Management Act, sections 307(c) & (d) Contamination and Toxic Yes No The Project site contains two identified Substances hazardous cleanup sites pursuant to California Government Code, Section 24 CFR Part 50.3(i) & 58.5(i)(2) 65962.5, and existing Land Use Covenants (LUC). The SCEA (City of Daly City 2020) prepared for the Project provides a detailed history of these sites and remediation activities within the Project area; the SCEA analysis was relied upon as part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis for this Environmental Assessment (EA). Various site investigations including testing of the soils and groundwater in and around the Midway Village area occurred in the early 1990s. In 1993, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) approved a

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? cleanup and Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for the Midway Village area, which included soil removal of the top 2 to 5 feet of soils in select areas followed by capping of these areas with 2 to 5 feet of clean soil, concrete patios, asphalt, or walkways. This work was completed by 1994. In 1998, the DTSC approved a similar plan for Bayshore Park (City of Daly City 2020). No further remedial action has been required since August 21, 2015, following certification by the DTSC (DTSC 2019b as cited in City of Daly City 2020). The 2002 LUC restricts residential development on the existing Bayshore Park; therefore, the 2002 LUC would need to be modified, amended, or rescinded to allow for construction of the Project. Coordination with DTSC regarding the LUC amendment is ongoing and the amendment is anticipated to be final in late 2020. The LUC modification will be based on a Human Health Risk Assessment and amendment to the Remedial Action Plan, both of which are expected to be complete in late 2020. Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Endangered Species Yes No The Project site does not provide suitable habitat for special-status plants and/or Endangered Species Act of 1973, wildlife species. Therefore, impacts to particularly section 7; 50 CFR Part 402 federally listed species and/or their habitat is not anticipated due to the existing development at the Project site and surrounding urban land use (Stantec 2020a; Appendix A). Explosive and Flammable Yes No Data obtained from the California Hazards Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal indicates 37 facilities 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C with Above Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs) and/or chemical storage within one mile of

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? the existing Midway Village. The closest facility is the Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Martin Service Center located approximately 1,230 feet from the existing Midway Village. No above ground storage tanks are indicated by CalEPA at this facility. Midway Village is an existing housing development, and it is not anticipated that the proposed Project would pose a new or increased risk to explosive and flammable hazards that currently exist within one mile of the existing facility. Source: http://siteportal.calepa.ca.gov/nsite/map/resu lts. Accessed July 27, 2020. Farmlands Protection Yes No The Project site is located in an urban area. No farmlands are present at the Project site; Farmland Protection Policy Act of therefore, none would be affected by the 1981, particularly sections 1504(b) and 1541; 7 CFR Part 658 Project. Floodplain Management Yes No Flood Insurance Rate Map. No. 06081C0035F indicates the Project is not

Executive Order 11988, within a 100-year or 500-year flood zone. particularly section 2(a); 24 CFR Part 55 https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?Address Query=Daly%20City%2C%20California#se archresultsanchor. Accessed July 31, 2019. Historic Preservation Yes No The Project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE) consists of Midway Village itself and National Historic Preservation Act adjacent areas that would be subject to either of 1966, particularly sections 106 and 110; 36 CFR Part 800 temporary or permanent direct or indirect effects from implementation of the Project. Identification efforts included a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) in Rohnert Park, California, Sacred Lands files maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and field surveys (archaeological and built resources studies).

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? The records search included a review of records for the entire APE and a surrounding radius of 0.25-mile. The records searches revealed seven previously recorded cultural resources located within 0.25-mile of the Project APE. However, no National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or listed resources are located within the APE. No archaeological material (no shell, lithics, midden soil, or historic debris) was identified, nor was native soil evident during the May 2020 archaeological investigation. As such, the likelihood of encountering previously unidentified archaeological resources as a result of the Project is low. On July 22, 2020, the Midway Village Redevelopment Project, Section 106 Inventory and Evaluation Report (Stantec 2020b) to the California Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO). The report defined an area of potential effects (APE) which included two built resources: PG&E’s Martin Station as well as the former Midway Village Elementary School. Since then, in coordination with the SHPO, Stantec confirmed there is no potential for the Project to affect PG&E’s Martin Station. Accordingly, the APE was been modified to reflect this change and the modified APE was submitted to the SHPO for concurrence on September 29, 2020. The revised APE now includes only the former Midway Village Elementary School, which is recommended ineligible for listing on the NRHP based on the current investigation. A finding of No Historic Properties Affected was made for the Project (Stantec 2020b). The SHPO provided concurrence with the findings on October 6, 2020 (Appendix B).

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? The NAHC, in their letter dated March 19, 2020 (Appendix B) identified five Native American tribes who may have knowledge of cultural resources in the Project area. Letters were sent to five Native American tribes on April 6, 2020 (Appendix B). To date, no responses have been received. Noise Abatement and Control Yes No HUD environmental noise regulations are set forth in 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart B which Noise Control Act of 1972, as specify the following noise standards for amended by the Quiet new housing construction: Communities Act of 1978; 24 CFR Part 51 Subpart B  65-day night average sound level (DNL) or less = Acceptable  Exceeding 65 DNL but not exceeding 75 DNL = Normally Acceptable  Exceeding 75 DNL = Unacceptable  The interior standard is 45 decibels Noise modeling was conducted for the Project (see Appendix H in City of Daly City 2020). With the implementation of mitigation measures NOI-1, NOI-2, NOI-3, NOI-4, and NOI-5 (see Section 4.13.3 in City of Daly City 2020), noise levels will remain within the “normally acceptable” range as identified in 24 CFR Part 51, Subpart B. Sources: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/env ironmental-review/noise-abatement-and- control/ City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Sole Source Aquifers Yes No There are no sole source aquifers in San Mateo County. Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, particularly section https://www.epa.gov/dwssa/map-sole- 1424(e); 40 CFR Part 149 source-aquifer-locations Wetlands Protection Yes No No wetlands or jurisdictional waterways are located within the Project limits and none

Are formal Compliance Factors: Statutes, compliance Executive Orders, and Compliance determinations steps or Regulations listed at 24 CFR mitigation §58.5 and §58.6 required? Executive Order 11990, would be affected by the Project (Stantec particularly sections 2 and 5 2020a; Appendix A). Wild and Scenic Rivers No Wild and Scenic Rivers are designated Yes No within the Project area, and none are located Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of in close proximity to the Project site. 1968, particularly section 7(b) and (c) https://www.rivers.gov/map.php ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Environmental Justice Yes No The existing Midway Village Development consists entirely of low-income residents. Executive Order 12898 However, based on a review of proposed Project plans, and existing demographic data (Barbara Deffenderfer, County of San Mateo, Department of Housing, personal communication), no minority or low-income populations would be disproportionately affected by the Project.

Environmental Assessment Factors [24 CFR 58.40; Ref. 40 CFR 1508.8 &1508.27] Recorded below is the qualitative and quantitative significance of the effects of the proposal on the character, features, and resources of the project area. Each factor has been evaluated and documented, as appropriate and in proportion to its relevance to the proposed action. Verifiable source documentation has been provided and described in support of each determination, as appropriate. Credible, traceable, and supportive source documentation for each authority has been provided. Where applicable, the necessary reviews or consultations have been completed and applicable permits of approvals have been obtained or noted. Citations, dates/names/titles of contacts, and page references are clear. Additional documentation is attached, as appropriate. All conditions, attenuation or mitigation measures have been clearly identified.

Impact Codes: Use an impact code from the following list to make the determination of impact for each factor. (1) Minor beneficial impact (2) No impact anticipated (3) Minor Adverse Impact – May require mitigation (4) Significant or potentially significant impact requiring avoidance or modification which may require an Environmental Impact Statement

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation LAND DEVELOPMENT Conformance with 2 The Project is in compliance with the Daly City General Plan Plans / Compatible and the Daly City Municipal Code. Land Use and Zoning / Scale and The Project site contains two identified hazardous cleanup Urban Design sites pursuant to California Government Code, Section 65962.5, and the existing Land Use Covenants (LUC). The 2002 LUC restricts residential development on the existing Bayshore Park; therefore, the 2002 LUC would need to be modified, amended, or rescinded to allow for construction of the Project. Coordination with DTSC regarding the LUC amendment is ongoing and the LUC amendment is anticipated to be final in late 2020. See discussion of Contamination and Toxic Substances above. Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Soil Suitability/ 3 The Project would result in ground disturbance of more than Slope/ Erosion/ one acre and be required to comply with the National Drainage/ Storm Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Water Runoff Construction Permit (GCP) and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would identify BMPs to control the discharge of sediment and other pollutants during construction and reduce erosion. All applicable state and local permits will be obtained prior to construction.

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Hazards and 2 The Project would not significantly increase noise levels to Nuisances sensitive receptors in and surrounding the Project area. There including Site are no known effects to site safety as a result of the Project. Safety and Noise Energy 1 The Project would incorporate a variety of operational Consumption sustainability features that would reduce its demand for resources, use non-toxic materials, and promote waste reduction, including, but not limited to: the use of renewable energy sources (i.e., solar thermal or photovoltaic panels); the proposed 555 residential units are within walking distance of public transit and neighborhood-oriented retail services, reducing the number of vehicle miles traveled; and improvements to energy efficiency.

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2).

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation SOCIOECONOMIC Employment and 1 There are currently 31 employees located onsite at the Income Patterns existing child-care and office facilities. It is estimated that approximately 15 to 20 additional employees would be needed onsite as a result of the Project; the number of staff would depend on the type of special needs populations ultimately served (e.g., formerly homeless, veterans, senior citizens, or transition-aged youth). These staff members would support the proposed child-care facility and Community Center and would provide property management services for the residential units in the development.

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Demographic 2 Existing tenants would be relocated as a result of the Project; Character Changes, however, tenants would only need to be moved once during Displacement redevelopment and would be relocated directly into their new units. No tenants would be displaced as a result of the Project.

The Project would accommodate up to 1,355 new residents, which represents 26% of the City of Daly City’s growth anticipated by 2030. This growth is accounted for in the General Plan and does not result in a significant increase to unplanned population growth.

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2).

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES Educational and 2 The Bayshore Elementary School currently has an existing Cultural Facilities enrollment of approximately 378 students and can serve up to 568 students (Per Comms. Audra Pittman 2018 as cited in City of Daly City 2020). Based on the estimated growth rate presented in the General Plan, which indicates a student growth rate of 0.8 percent between 2010 and 2030, the proposed Project may result in the addition of approximately 39 students.

The closest public library is the Daly City Public Library located at 460 Martin Street, approximately 0.18 mile west of the Project. The addition of 1,355 residents as a result of the Project would not affect the City’s ability to provide library space. Therefore, the Project would not result in the need to construct new or expand existing library branches. Therefore, Project impacts to public libraries would be less than significant.

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Commercial 2 No adverse impacts to commercial facilities are anticipated Facilities as a result of the Project.

Health Care and 2 No adverse impacts to health care are anticipated as a result Social Services of the Project. The new Bayshore Child Care center is proposed for construction as part of Phase 2 of the Project and will replace the existing facility proposed for demolition during Phase 3 of the Project. No interruption to childcare services will occur as a result of the Project. Solid Waste 2 No adverse effects to solid waste disposal and/or recycling Disposal / Recycling are anticipated as a result of the Project.

Waste Water / 2 Sufficient wastewater capacity exists to accommodate the Sanitary Sewers Project and no improvements to the sanitary sewer system will be needed as a result of the Project.

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2).

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation Water Supply 2 The water supply assessment conducted as part of the SCEA (Appendix A as provided in City of Daly City 2020) indicates the existing water supply is sufficient to accommodate the Project. Public Safety - 3 Police - By generating up to 1,355 new residents, the Project Police, Fire and may result in more service calls to the Daly City Police Emergency Medical Department (DCPD); although possibly not to the same extent as traditional single-family residential units. The Project would not represent a substantial increase in unplanned population growth and is consistent with local land use and zoning plans (see discussion in Land Development above).

Fire/Emergency Response - By generating up to 1,355 new residents, the Project may result in more service calls to the North County Fire Authority (NCFA); however, the number type of service calls are expected to be consistent with other residential developments in the City of Daly City. The Project would not represent a substantial increase in unplanned population growth and is consistent with local land use and zoning plans (see discussion in Land Development above). However, the high number of service calls typically associated with low income housing facilities could impact NCFA response times to other emergencies within its service area.

Generally, the risk of structural fires on the Project site would be low, as the buildings, structures, and facilities proposed would be constructed with newer, flame retardant building materials using modern construction methods. All structural improvements would comply with the standards contained in the current California Fire and Building Codes.

Source: City of Daly City 2020; https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2). Parks, Open Space 3 Project activities would include the closure and relocation of and Recreation Bayshore Park to a different location within the Project limits (Figure 2). This city park would be closed as part of Phase 1 of Project construction (anticipated in 2021) and would be relocated and reopened no later than 2027 during the final phase of construction (Phase 4). A new playground for Midway Village residents would be constructed during Phase 1 of the Project.

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation The 2002 LUC restricts residential development on the existing Bayshore Park; therefore, the 2002 LUC would need to be modified, amended, or rescinded to allow for construction of the Project. The LUC amendment is anticipated to be final in late 2020. Transportation and 2 Mitigation measures proposed in the SCEA to meet state and Accessibility local requirements will be implemented to offset potential transportation effects in the vicinity of Midway Village (City of Daly City 2020). Therefore, no adverse effects to transportation or site accessibility are anticipated as a result of the Project.

Environmental Impact Assessment Factor Code Impact Evaluation NATURAL FEATURES Unique Natural 2 The Project is located at the site of an existing housing Features, development. No impacts to unique natural features or water Water Resources resources are anticipated as a result of the Project. Vegetation, Wildlife 2 The Project is located at the site of an existing housing development in an urban setting. No long-term adverse impacts to vegetation or wildlife are anticipated.

Additional Studies Performed:

 Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) – Midway Village Redevelopment Project (City of Daly City 2020)  Reconnaissance-Level Biological Survey – Conducted by Stantec Consulting Services Inc (Stantec) on March 11, 2020 (Stantec 2020a; Appendix A).  Section 106 Inventory and Evaluation Report – Prepared by Stantec and submitted May 18, 2020 (Stantec 2020b).

Field Inspection (Date and completed by):

 Reconnaissance-Level Biological Survey – Conducted by Stantec on March 11, 2020.  Cultural Resources Field Studies - Archaeological field survey conducted by Stantec on May 16, 2020. A Built Environment (i.e., historic structures) survey was conducted by Stantec in April 2020.

List of Sources, Agencies and Persons Consulted [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]:

California EPA Regulated Site Portal. 2020. Website: http://siteportal.calepa.ca.gov/nsite/map/results. Accessed July 27, 2020.

City of Daly City. 2020. Midway Village Redevelopment Project Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment. Available online at https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020049013/2).

Deffenderfer, Barbera. County of San Mateo, Department of Housing. March, April, and May 2020. Personal communications. Subject: Midway Village demographic data and public outreach summary.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD Exchange. Available online at: https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/federal-related-laws- and-authorities/.

Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) 2020a. Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report.

Stantec 2020b. Midway Village Redevelopment Project, Section 106 Inventory and Evaluation Report.

List of Permits Obtained:

No development permits have been issued at this time. All applicable state and local permits will be obtained prior to construction.

Public Outreach [24 CFR 50.23 & 58.43]:

In late 2015 and early 2016, staff from County of San Mateo, Department of Housing met with the City of Daly City, the Bayshore School District, PG&E, and Peninsula Family Services to inform them about the redevelopment plans for Midway Village. In addition, coordination has been ongoing with the City of Daly City (2018 to present) to determine land use approvals needed, the size and shape of the new park, and the environmental review process.

The County of San Mateo, Department of Housing, working with MidPen, has been coordinating with Midway Village residents since the preliminary development stages of the Project. Four meetings were held (November 2015, and April, July, and August 2018) to present the Project to existing Midway Village residents. These meetings provided residents with the opportunity to hear presentations about the proposed redevelopment (in up to 6 languages) and ask questions and provide comments on the Project. In general, approximately 100 to 120 residents per meeting (ranging from 55 to 75 households) attended each meeting. Comments received and responses to those comments were summarized in meeting notes and kept as part of the Project record.

In addition to the informational meetings, MidPen interviewed residents from 76 of the 150 units. These residents had expressed an interest in participating in one-on-one interviews and were given the opportunity to provide comments and ask questions about the Project. Translation and/or language assistance was provided when needed. MidPen, in coordination with County of San Mateo, Department of Housing, initiated an on-site after-school program in June 2018 to provide answers on demand, and an on-site coordinator has been available to answer any questions from residents about the Project.

Public outreach is ongoing and has ranged from door-to-door communications, open houses, direct contact with local business and organizations including, but not limited to Peninsula Family

Services (the current on-site child care provider) the Bayshore School Board, the Bayshore Friendship Senior Club, and neighboring home owners associations.

A notice of availability of this EA and the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) will be published in the San Mateo County Times and will be available on the County of San Mateo, Department of Housing website at https://housing.smcgov.org/doh-public-notices.

Cumulative Impact Analysis [24 CFR 58.32]:

Construction of the Project will occur over a six-year period (anticipated to be 2021 through 2027); however, based on market conditions, phasing could extend up to 15 years. Therefore, the temporal boundary for cumulative effects is the maximum duration of construction activities (2021 through 2036). The spatial boundary for cumulative effects includes the existing Midway Village for most environmental constraints evaluated above; however, cumulative effects to community infrastructure (i.e., water, sewer, and electricity) and public services (i.e., police, fire, and emergency response) were evaluated for the City of Daly City.

Construction of the Project will accommodate up to 1,355 new residents within Midway Village, which represents 26% of the City of Daly City’s growth anticipated by 2030 (City of Daly City 2020). Over the course of Project construction, other community development projects may occur that have the potential to increase the local population. Any increases in population when combined with the current Project will result in a cumulative effect to existing infrastructure and community services within the City of Daly City, including a likely increase in calls to the DCPD and the NCFA. However, for the purposes of this analysis it is assumed that any such projects would require approval by the City of Daly City and would be consistent with local land use and zoning plans; therefore, these projects, when combined with the current Midway Village project, would likely not result in a significant increase to unplanned population growth. It is anticipated the Project will provide an overall beneficial community benefit by increasing the number of affordable, low-income housing units and addressing a local and regional shortage of low-income housing in San Mateo County.

Alternatives [24 CFR 58.40(e); 40 CFR 1508.9]

The Project was designed to be developed within the existing Midway Village area. Therefore, no off-site alternatives were considered. Multiple site plans were proposed and considered since 2015. The current site design was chosen based on a variety of factors including engineering and environmental constraints and through an extensive public outreach program with County of San Mateo, Department of Housing and Midway Village and community residents.

No Action Alternative [24 CFR 58.40(e)]:

Under the No Action Alternative, Midway Village would not be redeveloped, and Bayshore Park would remain its current location. No improvements to existing housing and facilities would occur. The No Action Alternative does not address the local and regional shortage of low-income housing within the San Mateo County, and, therefore, does not meet the purpose and need of the Project.

Summary of Findings and Conclusions:

The Project will not result in significant adverse effects to the natural or human environment. In addition, the Project is anticipated to provide overall beneficial effect to Midway Village and the surrounding community by increasing the number of affordable, low-income housing units and addressing a local and regional shortage of low-incoming housing in San Mateo County.

Mitigation Measures and Conditions [40 CFR 1505.2(c)] Summarize below all mitigation measures adopted by the Responsible Entity to reduce, avoid, or eliminate adverse environmental impacts and to avoid non-compliance or non-conformance with the above-listed authorities and factors. These measures/conditions must be incorporated into project contracts, development agreements, and other relevant documents. The staff responsible for implementing and monitoring mitigation measures should be clearly identified in the mitigation plan.

Law, Authority, or Factor Mitigation Measure (as cited in City of Daly City, 2020)

Clean Air Act AIR-1 – Mitigation Measure AIR-1 is a measure adopted from the Plan Bay Area (PBA) Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Plan Bay Area EIR (as cited in City of Daly City 2020) includes mitigation measures designed to help avoid or minimize significant environmental impacts and, as such, this project incorporates relevant mitigation measures previously identified by the Plan Bay Area EIR, where applicable. Those mitigation measures previously identified by the Plan Bay Area EIR are referred to as Plan Bay Area Environmental Impact Report Mitigation Measures (PBA EIR MM) in the SCEA. Details of PBA EIR MM 2.2-2) are found in the SCEA and include details of the Construction Best Practices for Exhaust and Dust. Clean Air Act AIR-2 - Tier 4 Interim Engine Requirements. Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permits (whichever occurs earliest), the project applicant and/or construction contractor shall prepare a construction operations plan that, during construction activities, requires all off-road equipment with engines greater than 50 horsepower to meet particulate matter emissions standards for Tier 4 Interim engines. The construction contractor shall maintain records documenting its efforts to comply with this requirement, including equipment lists. Off-road equipment descriptions and information shall include but are not limited to equipment type, equipment manufacturer, equipment identification number, engine model year, engine certification (Tier rating), horsepower, and engine serial number. The applicant and/or construction

contractor shall submit the construction operations plan and records of compliance to the City of Daly City.

Clean Air Act AIR-3 - Installation of MERV 13 Filters for Phase 1 and Phase 2. The applicant shall install high efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filters with a rating of 13 in the intake of the residential ventilation systems in all residential units that would be included in Phases 1 and Phase 2 of the Project. To ensure maintenance and replacement of the MERV filters in the individual units, the owner/property manager shall commit to maintaining and replacing the MERV 13 filters in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations lasting through the end of all construction associated with the Project. A signed commitment letter from the owner/property manager shall be submitted to the City of Daly City prior to the first occupancy of Phase 1 of the Project. Construction Noise NOI-1 – PBA EIR MM 2.6-5. To reduce exposure to new and existing sensitive receptors from non- transportation noise associated with projected development, implementing agencies and/or project sponsors shall implement measures, where feasible and necessary based on project- and site-specific considerations that include, but are not limited to:  Local agencies approving land use projects shall require that routine testing and preventive maintenance of emergency electrical generators be conducted during the less sensitive daytime hours (per the applicable local municipal code). Electrical generators or other mechanical equipment shall be equipped with noise control (e.g., muffler) devices in accordance with manufacturers’ specifications.  Local agencies approving land use projects shall require that external mechanical equipment, including HVAC units, associated with buildings incorporate features designed to reduce noise to below 70 dBA community noise equivalent level (CNEL) or the local applicable noise standard. These features may include, but are not limited to, locating equipment within equipment rooms or enclosures that incorporate noise reduction features, such as acoustical louvers, and exhaust and intake silencers. Equipment enclosures shall be oriented so that major openings (i.e., intake louvers, exhaust) are directed away from nearby noise-sensitive receptors.

Construction Noise NOI-2 - Project Fixed-Source Noise. The noise from all mechanical equipment associated with the proposed project shall comply with Section 1207.4 of the CBC at the neighboring residential receptors. Compliance with this Code would include incorporation of shielding and/or appropriate attenuators to reduce noise from mechanical equipment. Construction Noise NOI-3 - Construction Traffic. Develop a construction plan to route trucks into the sites avoiding City streets with dense residential populations as much as possible. Do not vary the construction traffic route to keep noise levels consistent throughout the construction process as much as possible. Avoiding residential streets keeps construction traffic removed from the sensitive residential receptors. Construction Noise NOI-4 - PBA EIR MM 2.6-1a. To reduce construction noise levels, implementing agencies and/or project sponsors shall:  Comply with local construction-related noise standards, including restricting construction activities to permitted hours as defined under local jurisdiction regulations;  Properly maintain construction equipment and outfit construction equipment with the best available noise suppression devices (e.g. mufflers, silencers, wraps);  Prohibit idling of construction equipment for extended periods of time in the vicinity of sensitive receptors;  Locate stationary equipment such as generators, compressors, rock crushers, and cement mixers a minimum of 50 feet from sensitive receptors, but further if possible;  Erect temporary construction-noise barriers around the construction site when adjacent occupied sensitive land uses are present within 75 feet;  Use noise control blankets on building structures as buildings are erected to reduce noise emission from the site; and  Use cushion blocks to dampen impact noise from pile driving. Construction Noise NOI-5 - Construction Activity. In addition to the Plan Bay Area EIR Mitigation Measure 2.6-(a) (part of NOI- 1), post a construction site notice that includes the following information: job site address, permit number, name and phone number of the contractor and owner or owner’s agent, hours of construction allowed by code or any discretionary approval for the Site, and City

telephone numbers where violations can be reported. The notice shall be posted and maintained at the construction site prior to the start of construction and displayed in a location that is readily visible to the public and approved by the City.

Public Services PUB-1 – PBA EIR 2.14-1. Prior to approval of new development projects, local agencies shall ensure that adequate public services, and related infrastructure and utilities, will be available to meet or satisfy levels identified in the applicable local general plan or service master plan, through compliance with existing local policies related to minimum levels of service for schools, police protection, fire protection, medical emergency services, and other government services (e.g., libraries, prisons, social services). Compliance may include requiring projects to either provide the additional services required to meet service levels or pay fees towards the project’s fair share portion of the required services pursuant to adopted fee programs and State law.

n o s n h o j e a k

: y B

0 1 - 4 0 - Cow Palace t 0

2 M S 0 a c 2

: o n n d a e a ld s i G l A v e l v e ne e R v A

a t

v e S d x t

m r .

5 e 0

8 b

0 l 9

1 a 0

2 T _ P _

1 O 1 t x til 8 ia _ S p t a M _ y t i n i

c t i V

_ S l a

c e o t

L d

\ r s S

D e

X a V i M _ c t C PG&E Martin Service Center \ o y s i i S a t p g r \ R c e e S a s t c t s a n n d L P A i

\ n a e r e r i r tri u dg r e g i e f A O w _ v y e t h i P c a c _ r y t l rid S a g d e \ St p y o t a k Bayshore s e w t D

\ d Park i C N O

S M N

H t

O y J r C E

A a t r K M \ C e i s M f d r i w e a s y n U Dr \

: n

C e Ma J rtin St

v M l

B ain S e t r

y B a ay B R id Toll Brothers Site ge D r L n in L J da V ac ista e que D n li r i ne l C e t u q c a J

Gua dal upe Ca nyo n P kwy

Figure No. Legend 1 Title Project Site Project Site Location

Client/Project City of Daly City Midway Village Redevelopment Project

Project Location 185704589 Daly City, CA

Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California III 0 300 600 FIPS 0403 Feet 2. Data Sources Include: bing - (c) 2010 Microsoft $ $ Corporation and its data suppliers Feet ¯ 1:6,000 (at original document size of 8.5x11) ( Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data. Y:\gis\templates\esri\stantec_ansi_a_L_HorizontalBar_TitleRight.mxd Revised: 2020-01-13 By: kaejohnson Date: September18, 2019 Source: DavidBaker Architects david baker davidarchitects baker

Martin Street Toll Brothers Development Ctyd. Res. Res. New Street B Street New Bldg. E Buildings Buildings Midway Village Redevelopment PLAN SITE OVERALL

F New Street A Utilities to Remain to Utilities Resident Courtyard (parking below) Midway Midway Drive Building D Bldg. Bldg. C

Midway Drive Resident Resident Park

Community Center Building Building SFPUC Easement SFPUC Garage A Garage A Stormwater to Remain Partridge Street Center Below Center Building B2 Building B Child Care Care Child Courtyard Resident Resident Loading Only Bayshore Park Building 3.3 ac A2 Schwerin Schwerin Street date: scale when printed 22 x 34: number: project P D C C T F M Project SitePlan i i r 2 a l t g i i o i l t e d l e u y y j n e r

C t e c o / t P

a i

N f t L

r y y D o o , o

j . C c e V a a c A l i t y l t l i a o

C n g i e t y

R e d e v e l o 09.18.2019 1" = 50'-0" = 1" p m 0' e 21803 n t

25' P r o j e 50' ct 100' A001 1 8 5 7 0 4 5 8 9 APPENDIX A – MIDWAY VILLAGE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

March 2020

Prepared for:

MidPen Housing Corporation 303 Vintage Park Dr., Suite 250 Foster City, CA 94404

Prepared by:

Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1340 Treat Boulevard, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94597

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 2

3.0 METHODS ...... 3 3.1 DEFINITIONS ...... 3 3.1.1 Special-Status Species and Sensitive Communities ...... 3 3.1.2 Potential to Occur ...... 3 3.2 LITERATURE AND DATABASE REVIEW ...... 4 3.3 FIELD SURVEYS CONDUCTED ...... 5

4.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT ...... 6 4.1 FEDERAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ...... 6 4.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act ...... 6 4.1.2 Clean Water Act ...... 6 4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act ...... 6 4.1.4 Executive Orders ...... 6 4.2 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ...... 7 4.2.1 California Endangered Species Act ...... 7 4.2.2 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act ...... 7 4.2.3 California Fish and Game Code ...... 7 4.3 LOCAL REGULATIONS ...... 8

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND RESULTS ...... 9 5.1 SITE CONDITIONS ...... 9 5.1.1 Physical Conditions ...... 9 5.2 BIOTIC HABITATS ...... 9 5.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Sensitive Natural Communities ...... 9 5.2.2 Habitat Connectivity ...... 10 5.2.3 Invasive Species ...... 10 5.2.4 Critical Habitat ...... 10 5.2.5 Special-Status Plant Species ...... 10 5.2.6 Special-Status Animal Species ...... 20 5.3 CONCLUSION ...... 28

6.0 REFERENCES ...... 29

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Survey Area ...... 12 Table 2. Special-Status Animal Species within Potential to Occur in the Survey Area ...... 21

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location ...... 6.2 Figure 2. Survey Area ...... 6.2 Figure 3. CNDDB Special-Status Plant Occurrences ...... 6.2 Figure 4. CNDDB Special-Status Wildlife Occurrences ...... 6.2

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A USFWS, CNDDB AND CNPS DATABASE RESULTS APPENDIX B REPRESENTATIVE SITE PHOTOS APPENDIX C OBSERVED PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES TABLES

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Biological Resources Technical Report (BRTR) has been prepared to evaluate the potential effects on sensitive biological resources that may occur near the proposed Midway Village Redevelopment Project (Project). The project would involve redevelopment of the Midway Village area and the Bayshore Park would include mixed-use development consisting of 555 residential units, 746 parking spaces, a child-care facility, a community center, office space for property management and other ancillary services, a revised street system, and recreation facilities. The proposed project is located within the City of Daly City, California (City) in San Mateo County. Specifically, the project site is bound by Schwerin Street to the west and Martin Street to the south, with Midway Drive running directly through the center of the project site (Figure 1). The project site is approximately 15 acres.

This BRTR is based on information gathered from a review of desktop resources including existing literature, data, and maps; and from a reconnaissance-level field survey of the survey area performed by Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (Stantec) biologists. The survey area for this BRTR encompasses approximately 15 acres of existing high-density residential development with smaller undeveloped areas adjacent to the project site. The survey area consists of all proposed project components and a 100-foot buffer (Figure 2).

The overall purpose of this BRTR is to:

• Characterize the habitats and vegetation communities present;

• Evaluate the potential for special-status plant and animal species to occur;

• Provide the locations and approximate boundaries of potential Waters of the United States (WOTUS) and waters of the State; and

• Determine potential impacts on biological resources resulting from localized construction activities, and temporary stockpiling of construction materials.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Midway Village Housing Complex (Midway Village area) is being proposed for redevelopment as part of the Midway Village Redevelopment Project (project). Currently, the Midway Village area is developed with 150 residential units, 223 parking spaces, a child-care facility (Bayshore Child-Care Center), open space, an existing street system, and office space for the Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo (HACSM). Additionally, an existing park, David R. Rowe/Bayshore Park (Bayshore Park), is currently located directly northeast of the Midway Village area and this area will be redeveloped as part of the proposed project.

The proposed project would involve redevelopment of the Midway Village area and the Bayshore Park would include mixed-use development consisting of 555 residential units, 746 parking spaces, a child-care facility, a community center, office space for property management and other ancillary services, a revised street system, and recreation facilities. The existing Bayshore Park would be relocated to a different location within the proposed project site and would be rough-graded before it is returned to the City and developed with various park amenities (development of the new park amenities is not part of the proposed project). HACSM currently administers the several affordable housing programs throughout San Mateo County, including the existing Midway Village area. These affordable homes are restricted for low- and very low-income households and would remain as such under the proposed project. Other ancillary improvements of the proposed project would include landscaping, water and wastewater line improvements, and pedestrian walkways.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

3.0 METHODS

The analysis presented in this BRTR includes a review of existing information about sensitive biological resources known to occur in the vicinity of the proposed project as well as the reconnaissance-level field survey conducted to determine whether the biological resources are absent, present, and/or are likely to be present. 3.1 DEFINITIONS

3.1.1 Special-Status Species and Sensitive Communities

For the purpose of this evaluation, “special-status” plant species include plants that are: 1) listed as threatened or endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and/or Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA); 2) proposed for federal listing as threatened or endangered; 3) State or federal candidate species; 4) designated as rare by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); or 5) California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) 1A, 1B, 2A or 2B species. Special-status animal species include species that are: 1) listed as threatened or endangered under the CESA and/or FESA; 2) proposed for federal listing as threatened or endangered; 3) State and/or federal candidate species; or 4) identified by the CDFW as species of special concern or fully protected species.

Sensitive natural communities are those communities that are of highly limited in distribution, and may or may not contain rare, threatened, or endangered species. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) ranks natural communities according to their rarity and endangerment in California. Habitats are considered “sensitive” if they are identified on the CDFW List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations as being highly imperiled or classified by CDFW in the CNDDB as natural communities of special concern – Ranks S1 to S3.

3.1.2 Potential to Occur

The potential for special-status species to occur within the survey area, was classified under one of five categories as described below. Only those special-status species with an occurrence potential of “Moderate” or greater are evaluated in detail.

• Present: The species is known to be present or has been recently observed in the survey area.

• High: The species has been observed and documented within five miles of the survey area within the last five years and suitable habitat for the species is present.

• Moderate: The proposed project is located within the range of the species, there are documented occurrences within five miles of the survey area, and/or suitable habitat for the species exists in the survey area.

• Low: The proposed project is located within the range of the species and low-quality (e.g., disturbed, agricultural) habitat is present.

• Absent: The proposed project site is located outside of the species range and/or potential habitat to support the species is not present in the survey area.

• Not Present: Potential habitat for the species is present in the survey area; however, the species has been determined to be absent from the survey area given the results of focused/protocol-level survey(s).

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

3.2 LITERATURE AND DATABASE REVIEW

Information about habitat types and special-status species that could occur in the survey area was obtained from the following sources:

• CDFW CNDDB plant and animal records (CDFW 2020a) (Appendix A);

• California Native Plant Society (CNPS) online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2020) (Appendix A);

• Calflora (2020);

• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of endangered and threatened species that may occur in the survey area (USFWS 2020a) (Appendix A); and

• USFWS Designated Critical Habitat within the survey area (USFWS 2020a)

The survey area is within the South San Francisco U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle. A CNDDB and CNPS database search for special-status species included the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles within a 5-mile radius of the project site. In this case, the San Francisco South, San Francisco North, Oakland West, and Hunter’s Point topographic quadrangles were queried. A 5-mile radius quadrangle search was conducted based on habitat types and migration distances for potential special-status species that could occur within the survey area. The USFWS database of endangered species was also utilized to query all federally endangered, threatened, candidate, and proposed animal and plant species, as well as designated critical habitat with known occurrences in this and adjacent quadrangles. Calfora and CNPS’ Online Inventory databases were used to obtain more information on the habitat requirements of rare plants.

Other information sources consulted to determine which special-status species could potentially occur in the survey area included:

• United States Geological Survey (USGS) California 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles for San Francisco South, San Francisco North, Oakland West, and Hunter’s Point;

• Aerial photographs of the survey area and surrounding vicinity (Google Earth 2020);

• USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS 2020b)

• Special Animals List (CDFW 2020b);

• State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFW 2020c)

• State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened and Rare Plants of California (CDFW 2020d);

• Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List (CDFW 2020e).

• California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (WHRS) (CDFW 2014); and

• Other pertinent databases and literature, including The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition (Baldwin et. al. 2012).

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Based on this background research, a list of special-status species that have the potential to occur or are known to occur in the survey area and vicinity was developed. The list was refined based on observations made during the reconnaissance-level biological field survey to determine the potential for those species to occur in the survey area and project site. 3.3 FIELD SURVEYS CONDUCTED

The project site was assessed through desktop analysis due to its existing development. A reconnaissance-level biological survey was conducted by Stantec Biologists Belinda Espino and Laura Butler on March 11, 2020 and focused on portions of the survey area that consisted of undeveloped areas. The reconnaissance-level survey was performed by walking the adjacent unnamed creek to characterize habitat, assess potential for special-status species to occur, and to record observed species. To better focus the field survey efforts on those plant and animal special- status species that may occur in the survey area, a target list of potentially occurring species was developed during the literature and database review process. Plant taxonomy for the botanical survey was determined using the Jepson Manual (Baldwin et al. 2012). Although a majority of the unnamed creek feature is located outside the survey area, the entire drainage feature was assessed to determine the potential for connectivity of special-status species to disperse into the project site.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

4.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT

4.1 FEDERAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

4.1.1 Federal Endangered Species Act

The FESA of 1973 was established to protect and recover endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. According to the FESA "endangered" indicates a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. In addition, the FESA defines a species as "threatened" if that species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The USFWS maintains a list of endangered and threatened species. The USFWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) administer FESA and are responsible for consulting with other federal agencies pursuant to FESA. Consultation with the USFWS would be necessary if a proposed project action has the potential to affect federally listed species, their habitat, as well as areas of Designated Critical Habitat (DCH). This consultation would proceed under Section 7 of the FESA if a federal action is required for the project or it would proceed through Section 10 of the FESA if no such federal nexus were available.

4.1.2 Clean Water Act

The objective of the Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977, as amended, is to maintain and restore the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. The discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the US (WOTUS), including jurisdictional wetlands, is regulated under Section 404 of the CWA by the USACE via a permitting process. Surface water quality is further regulated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA); in California this authority is delegated to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) or the RWQCB. Applicants for Section 404 permits are also required to comply with Section 401 of the CWA by obtaining Water Quality Certification (WQC) through the State.

4.1.3 Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 enacts the provisions of treaties between the United States, Great Britain, Mexico, Japan, and the Soviet Union and authorizes the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to protect and regulate the taking of migratory birds. This treaty prohibits “take,” which has been variously defined to include harming any migratory bird listed under the MBTA, including nests, eggs, and/or young.

4.1.4 Executive Orders

Federal agencies are required to demonstrate that their actions comply with Presidential Executive Orders established to protect the environment. Relevant Executive Orders include the following:

• Executive Order 11990 (Wetlands): For projects that could affect wetlands, federal agencies are required to demonstrate that no practicable alternative exists to avoid the wetland(s) and that all practicable avoidance, mitigation, and/or preservation measures have been incorporated into a project to minimize impacts to wetlands. Federal agencies are also required to provide opportunity for early public review of any plans or proposals for new construction in wetlands.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

• Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain Management): For projects that may be located in a floodplain, federal agencies are required to evaluate the effects of the action on the floodplain and identify practicable alternatives or measures to avoid long- and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of the floodplain and to avoid incompatible development in the floodplain.

• Executive Order 13112 (Invasive Species): Federal agencies are required to prevent the introduction of invasive species and not authorize actions that could cause or promote the introduction or spread of invasive species. Federal agencies need to identify feasible and prudent measures to minimize the risk of harm caused by invasive species.

• Executive Order 13186 (Migratory Birds): Federal agencies are required to evaluate the effects of their actions on migratory birds, with emphasis on species of concern, and to minimize the take of migratory birds through development of procedures for evaluating such take and conservation efforts in coordination with the USFWS. This Executive Order further implements the MBTA and requires coordination between the USFWS and federal agencies. 4.2 CALIFORNIA REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

4.2.1 California Endangered Species Act

The CESA prohibits “take” of plants or animals listed as endangered or threatened and protects native species of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals, invertebrates, and plants, and their habitats, that are threatened with extinction or experiencing a significant decline which, if not halted, would lead to a threatened or endangered designation. “Take” is defined in Section 86 of the California Fish and Game Code (FGC) as to “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” CESA authorizes the CDFW to issue incidental take permits for state-listed species, when specific criteria are met.

4.2.2 Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act

The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Porter-Cologne), Section 1601 to 1602 pf the California FGC, authorizes the SWRCB to oversee water rights and water quality policy, and as such has established nine RWQCBs to protect and enhance water quality at the regional and local levels. In addition to preparing WQCs to designate beneficial uses of water bodies in each region, the RWQCBs issue a permit, referred to as a Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR), for activities that result in pollutant or nuisance discharges that may affect surface or groundwater, including isolated wetlands not subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE.

4.2.3 California Fish and Game Code

The California FGC has several provisions for the protection of Waters of the State (WOTS), and special-status plant, fish, and wildlife resources, including their habitat. The applicable California FGCs are as follows:

• Sections 1600-1616 (Streambed Alteration): The CDFW is responsible for the protection and conservation of fish and wildlife resources in California. Under Section 1602, CDFW has the authority to issue Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreements (LSAA) for construction activities that substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated by the CDFW as providing resources for fish or wildlife.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

• Sections 1900-1913 (Native Plant Protection Act): The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) of 1977 prohibits the taking, possessing, or sale within the State of any plants that the CDFW has determined are rare, threatened, or endangered. The CDFW has the authority to enforce the provisions of this act and authorize measures to salvage native plants that may otherwise be affected by project activities, if deemed appropriate.

• Sections 3500-3516 (Game Birds and Birds of Prey): The CDFW protects game birds, birds of prey, migratory birds, and fully protected birds and their nests, eggs, and young from take or possession, except as otherwise provided by the code (e.g., incidental take under CESA).

• Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 (Fully Protected Species): California statutes accord a “fully protected” status to specific birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. These species cannot be “taken,” and no process exists for issuance of incidental take permits for fully protected species. 4.3 LOCAL REGULATIONS

The 37 parcels on the project site have a Daly City General Plan (General Plan) designation of High Density Residential (R-HD), while two parcels (005-330-330 and 005-330-390) in the northeast corner of the project site have a General Plan Designation of Public Park (PP) that encompass the existing Bayshore Park. All of the 39 parcels in the project site are zoned as a Multiple Family Residential District (R-3).

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND RESULTS

5.1 SITE CONDITIONS

5.1.1 Physical Conditions

The project site sits on a slightly sloping hillside with the highest elevation at the south side of the project site and the lowest elevation at the north side of the project site. Elevation of the site ranges from approximately 8 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the property line between the PG&E property and the Midway Village property (northern end) to approximately 100 feet msl at the southern end of the project site along Martin Street.

Regionally, the project site has a Mediterranean climate characterized by cool, dry summers and moderate winters, with average annual temperatures ranging from 65.2 to 49.3 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). Historical data used to describe the climate was collected at the San Francisco International Airport Station, approximately 5.5 miles south of the project site (Western Regional Climate Center 2020). Precipitation in the project site occurs as rain. Average annual rainfall is 19.94 inches and primarily occurs from October through May (Western Regional Climate Center 2020). 5.2 BIOTIC HABITATS

5.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Sensitive Natural Communities

Vegetation types in the survey area (or project site) were classified based on descriptions provided in A Guide to Wildlife Habitats of California (Mayer and Laudenslayer 1988), as well as the California Natural Community List (CDFW 2020f), which is adapted from the technical approach and vegetation alliance classification system described in A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009). The habitat community present in the project site includes Urban. Descriptions of the vegetation communities within the survey area are provided below. Representative photographs are provided in Appendix B, and a complete list of plant and wildlife species observed is provided in Appendix C.

Habitats are considered “sensitive” by CDFW if they are identified on the List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations as being highly imperiled or classified by CDFW in the CNDDB as natural communities of special concern – Ranks S1 to S3. The habitat community present in the project site includes Urban.

Upland Habitat Types

Urban/Developed

This land use type does not describe any specific vegetation type under Sawyer et al. (2009) but encompasses land that has been anthropogenically modified with structures and facilities, including roads and buildings. Ornamental plantings and ruderal vegetation may be present within and/or on the margins of developed areas. The project site consists of residential and commercial structures, parking areas, landscaped areas, and an existing park. The existing park includes an open grass area, play structures, and basketball courts. Landscaped areas throughout the project site include ornamental trees and shrubs planted adjacent to roadways and walkways. Additionally, there are trees planted adjacent to the northern and eastern boundary of the project site.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Aquatic Habitat Types

No aquatic habitats occur within the project site; however, a small unnamed creek flows underneath the project site through a box culvert system that outlets approximately 50 feet east of the project limits into an open earthen channel. The project would not impact the existing culvert that flows underneath the project. Based on the reconnaissance survey conducted on March 11, 2020, vegetation along the unnamed creek includes primarily non- native species consisting of cattail (Typha spp.), wattle (Acacia spp.) and willows (Salix spp.). Approximately 650 feet downstream of the project site, there is an existing marsh adjacent to the channel. The unnamed creek continues flowing through another box culvert until it reaches an open channel and into the San Francisco Bay. The creek appears to receive runoff from the surrounding developments and roadsides.

5.2.2 Habitat Connectivity

Habitat corridors are segments of land that provide linkages for wildlife movement between different habitats while also providing cover. Corridors also function as avenues along which plants can propagate, genetic interchange can occur, populations can move in response to environmental changes and natural disasters, and populations can be replenished from other areas. Habitat corridors often consist of riparian areas along streams, rivers, or other natural features. The survey area does not provide a potential corridor for species dispersal and/or migration due to its current development.

5.2.3 Invasive Species

Invasive plants (i.e., noxious weeds) are undesirable, non-native plants that commonly invade disturbed sites. Most species were introduced from Europe and Asia and many are known to negatively affect native wildlife habitat and plant communities. When disturbance results in the creation of habitat openings or in the loss of intact native vegetation, invasive plants may colonize the site and spread, often out-competing native species. Once established, they are very difficult to eradicate.

All pertinent non-native plant species were reviewed to determine their status as invasive plants according to the ratings in the California Invasive Plant Inventory produced by California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) (Cal-IPC 2006, 2020). Cal-IPC categorizes non-native invasive plants into three categories of overall negative ecological impact in California as “high”, “moderate”, and “limited”. Invasive species with a Cal-IPC rating of “high” that were observed in the survey area along the unnamed creek include: yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), Sweet fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), ice plant (Carpobrotus edulis), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), French broom (Genista monspessulana), and English ivy (Hedra helix).

5.2.4 Critical Habitat

The project site is not within USFWS designated critical habitat. There is critical habitat within the vicinity of the project site, including Franciscan manzanita (Arctostaphylos franciscana) critical habitat located 0.77 mile northwest (Figure 3) and Bay checkerspot butterfly critical habitat located 1.25 miles south (Figure 4) of the project site.

5.2.5 Special-Status Plant Species

Regionally occurring special-status plant species were identified based on a review of pertinent literature, the USFWS species list, CNDDB, and CNPS database records, and the reconnaissance-level biological field survey results. CNNDB special-status plant species occurrences within five miles of the survey area are illustrated in Figure 3. For

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

each species, habitat requirements were assessed and compared to the habitats in the survey area and immediate vicinity to determine if potential habitat occurs in the survey area. For the purposes of this review, all regionally occurring plant species listed under the FESA, CESA and CNPS are included in Table 1, regardless of whether the survey area provides potential habitat.

Based on database records, 65 special-status plants were evaluated for their potential to occur within the survey area. The project site consists of a multi-family residential housing development with a small ornamental grass field. The unnamed creek is culverted beneath the project site and outlets adjacent to the project site in an open earthen channel that is highly disturbed and inundated with non-native vegetation. Overall, the survey area, has marginal habitat for special-status species and there is no potential to support special-status plants within the project site. Full details of special-status plant species and evaluation of potential to occur can be found in Table 1 below

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Table 1. Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur in the Survey Area

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Clay, volcanic, often serpentinite soils Absent. The survey area is primarily Franciscan onion in cismontane woodland and valley developed and does not provide suitable Allium peninsulare var. -/-/1B.2 and foothill grassland. May-Jun habitat for this species. franciscanum Elev. 170-1000 ft.

Coastal bluff scrub, cismontane Absent. The survey area is primarily Bent-flowered fiddleneck woodland, and valley and foothill developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Mar-Jun Amsinckia lunaris grassland. habitat for this species. Elev. 10-1640 ft.

Franciscan manzanita Coastal scrub in serpentinite soils. Absent. The survey area is primarily FE/-/1B.1 Feb-Apr developed and does not provide suitable Arctostaphylos franciscana Elev. 195-985 ft. habitat for this species.

San Bruno Mountain Rocky soils in chaparral and coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily manzanita -/SE/1B.1 scrub. Feb-May developed and does not provide suitable Arctostaphylos imbricate Elev. 900-1215 ft. habitat for this species.

Presidio manzanita Serpentinite outcrops in chaparral, Absent. The survey area is primarily Arctostaphylos montana ssp. FE/SE/1B.1 coastal prairie, and coastal scrub. Feb-Mar developed and does not provide suitable Ravenii Elev. 150-705 ft. habitat for this species.

Montara manzanita Maritime chaparral and coastal scrub. Absent. The survey area is primarily -/-/1B.2 Jan-Mar developed and does not provide suitable Arctostaphylos montaraensis Elev. 260-1640 ft. habitat for this species.

Pacific manzanita Chaparral and coastal scrub. Absent. The survey area is primarily -/SE/1B.1 Feb-Apr developed and does not provide suitable Arctostaphylos pacifica Elev. 920-1050 ft. habitat for this species.

Openings with sandy soils in Absent. The survey area is primarily Marsh sandwort freshwater or brackish marshes and developed and does not provide suitable FE/SE/1B.1 May-Aug Arenaria paludicola swamps. habitat for this species. Elev. 10-560 ft.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Valley and foothill grassland in adobe Absent. The survey area is primarily Alkali milk-vetch clay soil; playas and vernal pools with developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Mar-Jun Astragalus tener var. tener alkaline soil. habitat for this species. Elev. 0-200 ft.

Coastal prairie, marshes and Absent. The survey area is primarily Bristly sedge swamps along lake margins, valley developed and does not provide suitable -/-/2B.1 May-Sep Carex comosa and foothill grassland. habitat for this species. Elev. 0-3,313 ft.

Northern meadow sedge Mesic meadows and seeps. Absent. The survey area is primarily -/-/2B.2 May-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Carex praticola Elev. 0-10500 ft. habitat for this species.

Often alkaline soils in chaparral, Absent. The survey area is primarily coastal prairie, meadows and seeps, developed and does not provide suitable Pappose tarplant coastal salt marshes and swamps, habitat for this species. Centromadia parryi ssp. -/-/1B.2 and vernally mesic valley and foothill May-Nov parryi grassland. Elev. 0-1375 ft.

Point Reyes bird's-beak Absent. The survey area is primarily Coastal salt marshes and swamps. Chloropyron maritimum ssp. -/-/1B.2 Jun-Oct developed and does not provide suitable Elev. 0-30 ft. Palustre habitat for this species.

San Francisco Bay Sandy soils in coastal bluff scrub, Absent. The survey area is primarily spineflower coastal dunes, coastal prairie, and developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jul Chorizanthe cuspidata var. coastal scrub. habitat for this species. cuspidate Elev. 10-705 ft.

Sandy or gravelly soils in maritime Absent. The survey area is primarily Robust spineflower chaparral, openings in cismontane developed and does not provide suitable Chorizanthe robusta var. FE/-/1B.1 woodland, coastal dunes, and coastal Apr-Sep habitat for this species. robusta scrub. Elev. 10-985 ft.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Broadleafed upland forest, coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily bluff scrub, coastal prairie, coastal developed and does not provide suitable Franciscan thistle -/-/1B.2 scrub, in mesic, sometimes Mar-Jul habitat for this species. Cirsium andrewsii serpentinite conditions. Elev. 0-495 ft.

Serpentinite seeps in broadleafed Absent. The survey area is primarily Mt. Tamalpais thistle upland forest, chaparral, and developed and does not provide suitable Cirsium hydrophilum var. -/-/1B.2 meadows and seeps. May-Aug habitat for this species. vaseyi Elev. 785-2035 ft.

Compact cobwebby thistle Chaparral, coastal dunes, coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily Cirsium occidentale var. -/-/1B.2 prairie, and coastal scrub. Apr-Jun developed and does not provide suitable compactum Elev. 15-490 ft. habitat for this species.

Coastal scrub and valley and foothill Absent. The survey area is primarily Presidio clarkia FE/SE/1B.1 grassland in serpentinite soils. May-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Clarkia franciscana Elev. 80-1100 ft. habitat for this species.

Round-headed Chinese- Absent. The survey area is primarily Coastal dunes. houses -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jun developed and does not provide suitable Elev. 0-65 ft. Collinsia corymbose habitat for this species.

Sometimes serpentinite soils in Absent. The survey area is primarily San Francisco collinsia closed-cone coniferous forest and developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Mar-May Collinsia multicolor coastal scrub. habitat for this species. Elev. 100-820 ft.

Chenopod scrub, meadows and Absent. The survey area is primarily San Joaquin spearscale seeps, playas, and valley and foothill developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Oct Extriplex joaquinana grassland in alkaline soil. habitat for this species. Elev. 0-2740 ft.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Cismontane woodland, coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily prairie, coastal scrub, valley and developed and does not provide suitable Fragrant fritillary -/-/1B.2 foothill grassland often in serpentinite Feb-Apr habitat for this species. Fritillaria liliacea soil. Elev. 10-1345 ft.

Blue coast gilia Absent. The survey area is primarily Coastal dune, coastal scrub. Gilia capitata ssp. -/-/1B.1 Apr-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Elev. 15-600 ft. chamissonis habitat for this species.

Dark-eyed gilia Coastal dunes. Absent. The survey area is primarily -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Gilia millefoliata Elev. 3-120 ft. habitat for this species.

Sandy or serpentine soils in coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily San Francisco gumplant bluff scrub, coastal scrub, and valley developed and does not provide suitable Grindelia hirsutula var. -/-/3.2 and foothill grasslands Jun-Sep habitat for this species. maritima Elev. 45-1,315 ft

Usually rocky, axonal soils, often in Absent. The survey area is primarily partial shade in broadleafed upland developed and does not provide suitable forest, chaparral, cismontane habitat for this species. Diablo helianthella -/-/1B.2 woodland, coastal scrub, riparian Mar-Jun Helianthella castanea woodland, and valley and foothill grassland. Elev. 195-4265 ft.

Congested-headed hayfield Grassy valleys and hills, often in Absent. The survey area is primarily tarplant fallow fields, sometimes along developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Nov Hemizonia congesta ssp. roadsides. habitat for this species. congesta Elev. 15-1,706 ft.

Sandy bluffs and flats in coastal bluff Absent. The survey area is primarily Short-leaved evax scrub, coastal dunes, and coastal developed and does not provide suitable Hesperevax sparsiflora var. -/-/1B.2 prairies. Mar-Jun habitat for this species. brevifolia Elev. 0-710 ft.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Chaparral, and valley and foothill Absent. The survey area is primarily Marin western flax FT/ST/1B.1 grasslands in serpentine soils Apr-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Hesperolinon congestum Elev. 100-1,200 ft. habitat for this species.

Alkaline, still or slow-moving water. Absent. The survey area is primarily Water star-grass Requires a pH of 7 or higher, usually developed and does not provide suitable -/-/2B.2 Jul-Aug Heteranthera dubia in slightly eutrophic waters. habitat for this species. Elev. 50-4,954 ft.

Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley Absent. The survey area is primarily Santa Cruz tarplant FT/SE/1B.1 and foothill grassland. Jun-Oct developed and does not provide suitable Holocarpha macradenia Elev. 30-725 ft. habitat for this species.

Openings in closed-cone coniferous Absent. The survey area is primarily forest, chaparral, coastal dunes, and developed and does not provide suitable Kellogg’s horkelia -/-/1B.1 in coastal scrub in sandy or gravelly Feb-Jul habitat for this species. Horkelia cuneate var. sericea soil. Elev. 30-670 ft.

Coastal dunes, coastal prairie, and Absent. The survey area is primarily Point Reyes horkelia -/-/1B.2 coastal scrub habitats in sandy soils. May-Sep developed and does not provide suitable Horkelia marinensis Elev. 15-2,500 ft. habitat for this species.

On bark and wood of hardwoods and Absent. The survey area is primarily Island tube lichen N/A -/-/1B.3 conifers. developed and does not provide suitable Hypogymnia schizidiata (lichen) Elev. 836-1,788 ft. habitat for this species.

Beach layia Coastal dunes, coastal scrub. Absent. The survey area is primarily FE/SE/1B.1 Mar-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Layia carnosa Elev. 9-100 ft. habitat for this species.

Rose leptosiphon Coastal bluff scrub habitat. Absent. The survey area is primarily -/-/1B.1 Apr-Jul developed and does not provide suitable Leptosiphon rosaceus Elev. 0-330 ft. habitat for this species.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

San Francisco lessingia Coastal scrub. Absent. The survey area is primarily FE/SE/1B.1 Jul-Nov developed and does not provide suitable Lessingia germanorum Elev. 9-500 ft. habitat for this species.

Chaparral, and cismontane Absent. The survey area is primarily Arcuate bush-mallow -/-/1B.2 woodlands. Apr-Sep developed and does not provide suitable Malacothamnus arcuatus Elev. 45-1,165 ft. habitat for this species.

Closed-cone coniferous forest, Absent. The survey area is primarily Marsh microseris cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jun Microseris paludosa and valley and foothill grassland. habitat for this species. Elev. 15-1,000 ft.

Northern curly-leaved Coastal dunes, coastal scrub, Absent. The survey area is primarily monardella chaparral, lower montane coniferous developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 May-Jul Monardella sinuate ssp. forest. habitat for this species. nigrescens Elev. 30-800 ft.

Cismontane woodlands, and valley Absent. The survey area is primarily White-rayed pentachaeta and foothill grasslands often in developed and does not provide suitable FE/SE/1B.1 Mar-May Pentachaeta bellidiflora serpentine soils. habitat for this species. Elev. 115-2,040 ft.

Chaparral, coastal prairie, and Absent. The survey area is primarily Choris’ popcornflower coastal scrub in mesic (perpetually developed and does not provide suitable Plagiobothrys chorisianus -/-/1B.2 wet) soil. Mar-Jun habitat for this species. var. chorisianus Elev. 45-525 ft.

Valley and foothill grassland, coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily San Francisco popcornflower -/SE/1B.1 prairie. Mar-Jun developed and does not provide suitable Plagiobothrys diffusus Elev. 147-1,181 ft. habitat for this species.

Alkaline meadows and seeps, and Absent. The survey area is primarily Hairless popcornflower -/-/1A coastal salt marshes and swamps. Mar-May developed and does not provide suitable Plagiobothrys glaber Elev. 50-600 ft. habitat for this species.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, lower Absent. The survey area is primarily Oregon polemonium -/-/2B.2 montane coniferous forest. Apr-Sep developed and does not provide suitable Polemonium carneum Elev. 50-5,000 ft. habitat for this species.

Coastal salt or brackish marshes and Absent. The survey area is primarily Marin knotweed -/-/3.1 swamps. June-Aug developed and does not provide suitable Polygonum marinense Elev. 0-35 ft. habitat for this species.

Meadows and seeps, valley and Absent. The survey area is primarily Adobe sanicle foothill grassland, chaparral, coastal developed and does not provide suitable /SR/1B.1 Feb-May Sanicula maritima prairie. habitat for this species. Elev. 50-705 ft.

Sometimes in alkaline soils in Absent. The survey area is primarily Chaparral ragwort chaparral, cismontane woodland, and developed and does not provide suitable -/-/2B.2 Jan-May Senecio aphanactis coastal scrub. habitat for this species. Elev. 45-2625 ft.

Coastal bluff scrub, coastal prairie, Absent. The survey area is primarily Scouler’s catchfly -/-/2B.2 valley and foothill grassland. Mar-Sept developed and does not provide suitable Silene scouleri ssp. scouleri Elev. 15- 1,033 ft. habitat for this species.

Coastal bluff scrub, chaparral, Absent. The survey area is primarily San Francisco campion coastal prairie, and valley and foothill developed and does not provide suitable Silene verecunda ssp. -/-/1B.2 grassland in sandy soil. Mar-Aug habitat for this species. verecunda Elev. 95-2,120 ft.

Broadleafed upland forest, closed- Absent. The survey area is primarily cone coniferous forest, chaparral, developed and does not provide suitable Santa Cruz microseris -/-/1B.2 coastal prairie, coastal scrub, valley Apr-May habitat for this species. Stebbinsoseris decipiens and foothill grassland. Elev. 295-2,460 ft.

California seablite Coastal salt marshes and swamps. Absent. The survey area is primarily FE/-/1B.1 Jul-Oct developed and does not provide suitable Suaeda californica Elev. 980-2,120 ft. habitat for this species.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Common Name Listing Status1 Known Habitat and Elevation Blooming Potential for Occurrence Scientific Name (Fed/State/CRPR) Range (Feet) Period

Coastal bluff scrub and sometimes in Absent. The survey area is primarily Two-fork clover serpentinite soils in valley and foothill developed and does not provide suitable FE/-/1B.1 Apr-Jun Trifolium amoenum grassland. habitat for this species. Elev. 15-1360 ft.

Marshes and swamps, valley and Absent. The survey area is primarily Saline clover foothill grassland in mesic areas with developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jun Trifolium hydrophilum alkaline soil, vernal pools. habitat for this species. Elev. 0-985 ft.

Usually serpentinite soils in coastal Absent. The survey area is primarily San Francisco owl’s-clover prairie, coastal scrub, and valley and developed and does not provide suitable -/-/1B.2 Apr-Jun Triphysaria floribunda foothill grassland. habitat for this species. Elev. 30-525 ft.

Absent. The survey area is primarily Coastal triquetrella Coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub N/A -/-/1B.2 developed and does not provide suitable Elev. 30-330 ft. (moss) Triquetrella californica habitat for this species.

Chaparral, cismontane woodland, Absent. The survey area is primarily Oval-leaved viburnum -/-/2B.3 and lower montane coniferous forest. May-Jun developed and does not provide suitable Viburnum ellipticum Elev. 705-4595 ft. habitat for this species.

1Federal and State Status Codes - = No status, or not applicable FE = Listed as endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) FT = Listed as threatened under FESA SE = Listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) SR = Listed as rare under CESA ST = Listed as threatened under CESA CE = Listed as candidate endangered CESA

CNPS Ranking 1A = Presumed extinct in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere. 1B = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere. 2A = Presumed extinct in California but common elsewhere. 2B = Rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere.

Threat Ranks 0.1 = Seriously threatened in California (more than 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat). 0.2 = Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat). 0.3 = Not very threatened in California (less than 20% of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat or no current threats known).

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

5.2.6 Special-Status Animal Species

Regionally occurring special-status animal species were identified based on a review of pertinent literature, the USFWS species list, CNDDB database records, a query of the California WHRS (CDFW 2014), and the reconnaissance-level biological field survey results. CNNDB special-status animal species occurrences within five miles of the survey area are illustrated in Figure 4. For each species, habitat requirements were assessed and compared to the habitats in the survey area and immediate vicinity to determine the species’ potential to occur in or near the survey area. For the purposes of this review, all regionally occurring wildlife species listed under the FESA or CESA are included in Table 2, regardless of whether the survey area provides potential habitat.

The literature and database review identified 58 special-status wildlife species with suitable habitat or known to occur in or near the survey area. The project site has no potential for special-status animal species. Furthermore, the unnamed creek where it outlets adjacent to the project site in an open earthen channel, is highly disturbed with marginal habitat for special-status wildlife at best. There is low potential to support the following special-status animals within the survey area:

• California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) – Federal Threatened (FT), Species of Special Concern (SSC) • San Francisco gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) – FE, SE, State Fully Protected (FP) • western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) – SSC • white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) – FP

Full details of special-status wildlife species and evaluation of potential to occur can be found in Table 2 below.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Table 2. Special-Status Animal Species within Potential to Occur in the Survey Area

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 INVERTEBRATES

Meadows and grasslands with abundant floral resources Western bumble bee throughout the mountains and northern coast of Absent. The survey area is primarily -/CE California. Nests in underground cavities including old developed and is outside the known current Bombus occidentalis rodent burrows in open west-southwest slopes bordered range of the species. by trees. San Bruno elfin butterfly FE Found in coastal, mountainous areas with grassy Absent. The survey area is primarily Callophrys mossii bayensis ground cover, mainly in the vicinity of San Bruno developed and does not provide suitable Mountain in San Mateo County. Colonies are located on habitat for this species. steep, north-facing slopes within the fog belt. The larval host plant is stonecrop (Sedum spathulifolium_. Bay checkerspot butterfly FT Restricted to native grasslands found on outcrops of Absent. The survey area is primarily Euphydryas editha bayensis serpentine soil in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. developed and does not provide suitable Primary host plant is Plantago erecta; Orthocarpus habitat for this species. densiflorus and/or O. purpurascens can be secondary host plants for this species. Mission blue butterfly FE Inhabits grasslands of the San Francisco Peninsula. Absent. The survey area is primarily Plebejus icarioides missionensis Three larval host plants include: Lupinus albifrons, L. developed and does not provide suitable variicolor, and L. formosus. L. albifrons is typically habitat for this species. favored as the host plant. Callippe silverspot butterfly FE Restricted to the northern coastal scrub of the San Absent. The survey area is primarily Speyeria callippe Francisco Peninsula. Host plant is Viola pedunculata. developed and does not provide suitable Most adults found on east facing slopes; males habitat for this species. congregate on hilltops in search of females. Myrtle's silverspot butterfly FE Restricted to the foggy, coastal dunes/hills of the Point Absent. The survey area is primarily Speyeria zerene myrtleae Reyes peninsula; extirpated from coastal San Mateo developed and does not provide suitable county. Larval food-plant thought to be Viola adunca. habitat for this species. FISH

Tidewater goby FE, SSC Found in brackish water habitats along the coast of Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Eucyclogobius newberryi California in shallow lagoons and lower stream reaches. coastal lagoons and estuary habitat. Requires fairly still but not stagnant water and high oxygen levels.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 Delta smelt FT/SE Found in the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta, seasonally Absent. Known range is restricted to the Hypomesus transpacificus in Suisun Bay, Carquinez Strait and San Pablo Bay. Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary Seldom found at salinities > 10 ppt. Most often occurs at salinities < 2ppt.

Hardhead SSC This species is widely distributed in streams at low to Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Mylopharodon conocephalus mid-elevations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin and freshwater streams. Only one documented Russian River drainages. Range extends from the Pit occurrence for this species within tributaries of River in Modoc County south to the Kern River in Kern the San Francisco Bay (within Alameda and County. Found in relatively undisturbed habitats of Coyote Creeks). larger freshwater streams with high water quality (i.e. clear and cool). Steelhead - central California coast FT This distinct population segment, or DPS, includes Absent. The survey area lacks suitable DPS naturally spawned anadromous steelhead originating aquatic habitat (i.e. cold-water streams with Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 8 below natural and manmade impassable barriers from deep water and overhead cover for the Pajaro River to (but not including) the Santa Maria protection). River. This DPS of steelhead complete their life history cycle in freshwater or spend 1 to 3 years in fresh water before migrating into the ocean for 2 to 4 years and returning to natal rivers to spawn. This DPS of steelhead may make intra-seasonal movements between lagoons and fresh water and within freshwater movements between reservoirs and tributaries. they need cool, flowing waters, a diversity of spawning, rearing, and feeding habitats, access to the ocean, and available prey. These requirements can be difficult for this DPS of steelhead to find, especially in dry years. Longfin smelt FC, ST, SSC Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Spirinchus thaleichthys bay/estuary aquatic habitat as well as the required freshwater rivers for spawning.

AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES

California tiger salamander FT, ST Vernal pools and/or seasonal water sources; requires Absent. The survey area is outside of the Ambystoma californiense underground refuges in adjacent upland areas, species known range. especially ground squirrel burrows. Green sea turtle FT Generally found in shallow waters, inside reefs, bays, Absent. The survey area lacks marine Chelonia mydas and inlets, and are attracted to areas with an abundance habitat. of marine grass and algae.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 California giant salamander SSC Endemic to California, found from southern Mendocino, Absent. The survey area lacks rocky Dicamptodon ensatus Lake and Glenn counties to southern Santa Cruz freshwater streams and damp forest habitat. County. Found in humid coastal forests especially in Douglas fir, redwood, red fir, and montane and valley- foothill riparian habitats. Lives in or near cool rocky streams, occasionally ponds and lakes. Western pond turtle SSC Occurs in both permanent and seasonal waters, Low. The survey area occurs within the range Emys marmorata including marshes, streams, rivers, ponds and lakes. of western pond turtle; however, only marginal Also found in irrigation canals and agricultural drains. aquatic habitat was observed within the They favor habitats with large amounts of emergent logs survey area and none have been observed or boulders, where they aggregate to bask. within 5-miles. The project has low potential for this species to occur and does not anticipate any impacts to this species or its habitat.

California red-legged frog FT, SSC Breeds in ponds and pools in slow-moving streams with Low. The project site does not provide Rana draytonii emergent vegetation; adjacent upland habitats are often suitable aquatic or upland habitat; however, used for temporary refuges or dispersal movements. the adjacent unnamed creek may provide suitable dispersal and summer aquatic habitat for CRLF. The nearest CNDDB occurrence record for this species is approximately 6- miles south of the survey area. The project has low potential for this species to occur and does not anticipate any impacts to this species or its habitat. San Francisco gartersnake FE, SE, FP Found in the vicinity of freshwater marshes, ponds and Low. The project site does not provide any Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia slow-moving streams in San Mateo County and extreme aquatic or upland habitat; however, the northern Santa Cruz County. Prefers dense cover and adjacent unnamed creek may provide suitable water depths of at least one foot. Upland areas near dispersal and summer aquatic habitat. There water are also very important. are CNDDB occurrence records for this species approximately 1-mile east of the survey area. The project has low potential for this species to occur and does not anticipate any impacts to this species or its habitat.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 BIRDS

Marbled murrelet FT, SE During the non-breeding season, this species is found in Absent. The survey area lacks suitable old- Brachyramphus marmoratus pelagic habitats. During the breeding season, this growth forested habitat needed for nesting as species is found along coastlines with stands of mature well as pelagic habitat for the non-breeding redwood and Douglas-fir. This species may be seen season. regularly 6-8 km (4-5 mi) inland in these coastal coniferous forests. Western snowy plover FT, SSC Found on sandy beaches, salt pond levees and shores Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus of large alkali lakes. Requires sandy, gravelly or friable nesting or foraging beach habitat. soils for nesting. Tends to be found in places where habitat matches the pale color of its back. Found in coastal salt and freshwater marsh. Nests and Northern harrier forages in grasslands, from salt grass in desert sink to Absent. No suitable nesting habitat and -/SSC mountain cienagas. Nests on ground in shrubby marginal foraging habitat is present in the Circus cyaneus vegetation, usually at marsh edge; nests built of a large survey area. mound of sticks in wet areas. Breeds in sedge marshes/meadows with moist soil or Yellow rail shallow standing water within the northeastern interior Absent. Survey area not within nesting range -/SSC California (Modoc County). Winter resident on the coast for this species and no suitable foraging Coturnicops noveboracensis and in the Suisun marsh region. Inhabits wet meadows habitat is present. and coastal tidal marshes during winter. Low. No suitable nesting habitat and marginal Rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks foraging habitat is present in the survey area. White-tailed kite & river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous Therefore, given the survey area is within the -/FP woodland. Open grasslands, meadows, or marshes for white-tailed kite’s current range and marginal Elanus leucurus foraging close to isolated, dense-topped trees for foraging habitat for the species is present in nesting and perching. the survey area, there is low potential for this species to occur within the survey area. American peregrine falcon FP Found near wetlands, lakes, rivers, or other water; on Absent. Action Area lacks suitable nesting Falco peregrinus anatum cliffs, banks, dunes, mounds; also, human-made habitat (i.e., cliffs/buildings). structures. Nest consists of a scrape or a depression or ledge in an open site. Saltmarsh common yellowthroat SSC Resident of the San Francisco bay region, in fresh and Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Geothlypis trichas sinuosa saltwater marshes. Requires thick, continuous cover foraging habitat is present in the survey area. down to water surface for foraging; tall grasses, tule patches, willows for nesting.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 California black rail ST, FP Found in freshwater marshes, wet meadows and Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus shallow margins of saltwater marshes bordering larger foraging habitat is present in the survey area. bays. Requires water depths of about 1 inch that does not fluctuate during the year & dense vegetation for nesting habitat. Alameda song sparrow SSC Resident of salt marshes bordering south arm of San Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Melospiza melodia pusillula Francisco Bay. Inhabits Salicornia marshes; nests low in foraging habitat is present in the survey area. Grindelia bushes (high enough to escape high tides) and in Salicornia. Resides in salt marshes along the north side of San San Pablo song sparrow Francisco and San Pablo bays. Inhabits tidal sloughs in Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal -/SSC Melospiza melodia samuelis Salicornia marshes; nests in Grindelia bordering slough foraging habitat is present in the survey area. channels. Short-tailed albatross FE, SSC This species nests on isolated, windswept islands, and Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Phoebastria albatrus forages in open marine habitat, with the most important foraging habitat is present in the survey area. prey being squids, crustaceans, and fish. California Ridgway's rail FE, SE, FP Salt-water & brackish marshes traversed by tidal Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Rallus obsoletus sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay foraging habitat is present in the survey area. Bank swallow ST Colonial nester. Nests primarily in riparian and other Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Riparia riparia lowland habitats west of the desert. Nest colonies are foraging habitat is present in the survey area. located in vertical banks of sand or dirt along riverbanks, lake shores, road cuts or similar sites. California least tern FE, SE, FP Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay south to Absent. No suitable nesting or marginal Sternula antillarum browni northern Baja California. Known to be a colonial foraging habitat is present in the survey area. breeder, prefers bare or sparsely vegetated, flat substrates: sand beaches, alkali flats, landfills, or paved areas for nesting. Mammals

Pallid bat SSC Open, dry habitats such as grasslands, shrublands, and Absent. The survey area does not contain Antrozous pallidus woodlands with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts in suitable day/night roosting habitat (i.e. anthropogenic structures (buildings and bridges), cliff shrublands and woodlands) for this species. crevices of rock faces, and hollow trees.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 Townsend's big-eared bat SSC Found throughout California in a wide variety of habitats; Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Corynorhinus townsendii most commonly associated with mesic sites. Generally day/night roosting habitat (i.e. caves, mines solitary or in small groups, but females form larger and abandoned structures). maternity colonies in the summer. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings of caves, mines or abandoned structures in or near woodlands and forests. Extremely sensitive to human disturbance. Southern sea otter FT, FP Found near shore marine environments from about Ano Absent. Survey area lacks suitable marine Enhydra lutris nereis Nuevo, San Mateo County to Point Sal, Santa Barbara habitat. County. Requires canopies of giant kelp and bull kelp for rafting & feeding. Prefers rocky substrates with abundant invertebrates. Western red bat SSC Typically roost solitarily in dense tree foliage, particularly Absent. The survey area lacks suitable Lasiurus blossevillii in willows, cottonwoods, and sycamores. Strongly day/night roosting habitat (i.e. dense tree associated with riparian habitats, particularly mature foliage). stands of cottonwood/sycamore. Forages in grassland, shrubland, open woodland, forest and agricultural habitats. Big free-tailed bat SSC Found in Low-lying arid areas in southern California. Absent. The survey area lacks suitable high Nyctinomops macrotis Requires high cliffs or rocky outcrops for roosting sites. cliff and rocky habitat for roosting habitat. Forages principally on large moths. Salt-marsh harvest mouse FE, SE, FP Only in the saline emergent wetlands of San Francisco Absent. The survey area lacks stands of Reithrodontomys raviventris bay and its tributaries. Pickleweed is primary habitat. pickleweed habitat for nesting and cover. Does not burrow instead; builds loosely organized nests and requires higher areas for flood escape. Alameda Island mole SSC Only known from Alameda Island. Found in a variety of Absent. Survey area is not within Alameda Scapanus latimanus parvus habitats, especially annual and perennial grassland. Island. American badger SSC Prefers dry open stages of most shrub, forest, and Absent. The survey area lacks dry open Taxidea taxus herbaceous habitats. Requires sufficient food (mostly on stage habitat. burrowing rodents), friable soils and open, uncultivated ground. Point Reyes jumping mouse SSC Primarily in bunch grass marshes on the uplands of Absent. Survey area outside Point Reyes and Zapus trinotatus orarius Point Reyes. Also present in coastal scrub, grassland, is primarily developed. and meadows.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

Species Status1 Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence2 Abbreviations: 1 Status designations: Federal FE Listed as Endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act FT Listed as Threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act FC Listed as Candidate under the federal Endangered Species Act BGEPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act – No Listed Status State of California SE California Fish and Game Code Endangered Species ST California Fish and Game Code Threatened Species SCE California Fish and Game Code Species listed as Candidate Endangered SCT California Fish and Game Code Species listed as Candidate Threatened SR California Fish and Game Code Rare Species FP California Fish and Game Code Fully Protected Species SSC CDFW Species of Special Concern – No Listed Status

2 The likelihood of occurrence (low, moderate, high) is based on habitat requirements (such as, substrate, hydrology, vegetation community, and disturbance factors) and range, applied by using the following general guidelines: Low: Habitat within the project site and vicinity and/or project vicinity satisfies very few of the species’ requirements and/or the range of the species overlaps with the vicinity of the project site and vicinity, but not with the project site and vicinity itself. The species’ presence within the project area and vicinity is unlikely. Moderate: Habitat within the project site and vicinity and/or project site and vicinity meets some of the species’ requirements and known locations for the species are found in the vicinity of the project site and vicinity. Presence of the species within the project site and vicinity is moderately likely. High: Habitat within the project site and vicinity and/or project site and vicinity meets most or all of the species’ requirements and known locations for the species are found within proximity to the project site and vicinity. Presence of the species within the project site and vicinity is highly likely. 1Federal and State Status Codes - = No status, or not applicable FE = Listed as endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) FT = Listed as threatened under FESA SE = Listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) ST = Listed as threatened under CESA SSC = Designated as a Species of Special Concern by CDFW under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) FP = Fully Protected under the California Fish and Game Code (F.G.C.) C = Candidate for listing as either endangered or threatened under FESA CE = Candidate for listing as endangered under CESA CT = Candidate for listing as threatened under CESA

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

5.3 CONCLUSION

Based on the results of the database research and reconnaissance survey, the project site does not provide suitable habitat for special-status plants and/or wildlife species. The project does not anticipate impacting special-status plants and wildlife species or their habitat due to the existing development within the project site and highly disturbed or urbanized areas within the survey area.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

6.0 REFERENCES

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

Behler, J.L. 1988. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 743 pp.

Bury, T.B., and D.J. Germano. 2008. Actinemys marmorata. (Baird and Girard 1852)- western pond turtle, pacific pond turtle. Chelonian Research Monographs 5:001.1-001.9.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2014. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR), Version 9.0 (personal computer program). California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Interagency Wildlife Task Group. < https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/data/cwhr>. Accessed February 2020

CDFW. 2019. Evaluation of the petition from the Xerces Society, Defender of Wildlife, and the Center for Food Safety to List Four Species of Bumble Bees as Endangered Under the California Endangered Species Act. State of California Natural Resources Agency Department of Fish and Wildlife. April 4, 2019.

CDFW. 2020a. Rarefind 5. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). California Natural Communities List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Department of Fish and Wildlife. < https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data> Accessed February 2020.

CDFW. 2020b. Special Animals List. CDFW, CNDDB. Periodic Publication. 66 pp. Updated August 2018. . Accessed February 2020.

CDFW. 2020c. State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California. CDFW, Biogeographic Data Branch, CNDDB. Updated August 2019. . Accessed February 2020.

CDFW. 2020d. State and Federally Listed Endangered, Threatened and Rare Plants of California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Biogeographic Data Branch, CNDDB. Updated October 2019. . Accessed February 2020.

CDFW 2020e. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. CDFW, CNDDB. Periodic Publication. 127 pp. Updated October 2019. . Accessed February 2020.

CDFW. 2020f. California Natural Communities List. Biogeographic Data Branch, California Department of Fish and Wildlife. < https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities> Accessed February 2020.

California Invasive Species Council (Cal-IPC). 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC Publication 2006-02. Cal-IPC: Berkeley, California. . Accessed February 2020.

Cal-IPC. 2020. California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC Inventory Online. Cal-IPC: Berkeley, CA. . Accessed February 2020.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2020. Inventory of Rare And Endangered Plants (Online Edition, V8-02). Sacramento, California. . Accessed February 2020.

Ernst, C.H., and J.E. Lovich. 2009. Turtles of the Unites States and Canada 2nd Edition. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore Maryland.

Fellers, G. 2005. Rana draytonii (Baird and Girard, 1852b) California red-legged frog. Pages 552-554 in M. Lannoo (editor). Amphibian declines the conservation status of United States species. University of California Press. Berkeley, California.

Google Earth. 2020. Map showing the Project site. Google Earth, 2020. . Accessed February 2020.

Holland, D.C. 1994. The western pond turtle: habitat and history. Final Report DOE/BP-62137 Bonneville Power Administration. U.S. Department of Energy and Wildlife Diversity Program, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. 302 p.

Janzen, F.J., J.G. Krenz, T.S. Haselkorn, E.D. Brodie Jr., E.D. Brodie III. 2002. Molecular phylogeography of common garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis) in western North America: implications for regional historical forces. Molecular Ecology (11):1739-1751.

Larsen, S.S. 1994. Life history aspects of the San Francisco garter snake at the Milbrae habitat site. Master’s Thesis, California State University, Hayward, California. 105 pp.

Mayer, K.E., and W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., eds. 1988. A Guide to Wildlife Habitats Of California. Sacramento: California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).

Pilliod, D.S., J.L. Welty, and R. Stafford. 2013. Terrestrial movement patterns of western pond turtles (Actinemys marmorata) in Central California. Herpetological Conservation and Biology. 8(1): 207-221.

Sawyer, J. O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. M. Evans. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd Edition. CNPS, Sacramento, California.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Recovery plan for the California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. viii + 173 pp.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. San Francisco gartersnake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia) 5-year review: summary and evaluation. Sacramento, California: USFWS. . Accessed February 2020.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013. Recovery Plan for tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California. Sacramento, California. Xviii + 605 pp.

United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2013. Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosytems of Northern and Central California. < https://www.fws.gov/sfbaydelta/documents/tidal_marsh_recovery_plan_v1.pdf>. Accessed February 2020.

Midway Village Redevelopment Project Biological Resources Technical Report

United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS). 2020a. Trust Resources Report. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). . Accessed February 2020.

USFWS. 2020b. USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). < https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/>. Accessed February 2020.

Western Regional Climate Center. 2020. Vallejo Marine World, California (ID 049219), 1998 to 2016. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coop Stations. . Accessed February 2020.

Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer, K.E. Mayer, and M. White, eds. 1990. California’s Wildlife. Volume II: Birds. California Statewide Wildlife Habitat Relationships System. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California.

Figures

g n i n e d n e l g p

: y B

8 1 - 3 0 - 0 2 0 2

: d e s i v e R

d x m . n o i t a c o L t c e j o r P _ 1 _ g i f \ s r e t a w _ d n a l t e w \ s D X M _ \ s i g \ d a c _ s i g \ a t a d _ 3 0 \ 9 8 5 4 0 7 5 8 1 \ e v i t c A \ 7 5 8 1 \ : V

Figure No. Project Site 1 Title

NV UT Project Location

Client/Project CA City of Daly City Midway Village Redevelopment Project AZ Project Location 185704589 Daly City, CA Prepared by PG on 2020-03-18 Technical Review by JE on 2020-03-18

Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V 0 0.25 0.5 FIPS 0405 Feet 2. Data Sources Include: bing - (c) 2010 Microsoft Miles $ $ Corporation and its data suppliers 1:36,000 (at original document size of 8.5x11) (¯ Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data. g n i n e d n e l g p

: y B

9 1 - 3 0 - 0 2 0 2

: d e s i v e R

d x m . a e r A y e v r u S _ 2 _ g i f \ s r e t a w _ d n a l t e w \ s D X M _ \ s i g \ d a c _ s i g \ a t a d _ 3 0 \ 9 8 5 4 0 7 5 8 1 \ e v i t c A \ 7 5 8 1 \ : V

Figure No. Project Site 2 Title Survey Area NV UT Survey Area National Wetlands Inventory Client/Project CA Riverine City of Daly City Midway Village Redevelopment Project AZ Project Location 185704589 Daly City, CA Prepared by PG on 2020-03-18 Technical Review by JE on 2020-03-18

Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane California III 0 200 400 FIPS 0403 Feet 2. Data Sources Include: bing - (c) 2010 Microsoft Feet $ $ Corporation and its data suppliers 1:3,600 (at original document size of 8.5x11) (¯ Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data. 9 24 9 $ $ 30 (¯ 10 5 31 13 15 33 Special-Status Plants 2 1 30 15 1. adobe sanicle 29 29 2. alkali milk-vetch 30 10 3. beach layia 5 10 33 10 7 4. bent-flowered fiddleneck 31 31 10 15 5. blue coast gilia 24 30 8 37 7 6. bristly sedge 5 16 30 7 7. California seablite 7 8. chaparral ragwort 18 7 9. Choris' popcornflower 3 12 26 6 33 29 14 10. coastal triquetrella 32 11. compact cobwebby thistle 29 19 30 27 12. congested-headed hayfield tarplant 21 33 5 13. dark-eyed gilia 29 35 31 25 33 14. Diablo helianthella 29 5 11 31 29 29 31 15. fragrant fritillary 29 34 16. Franciscan manzanita 29 17. Franciscan onion 18. Franciscan thistle 31 19. Kellogg's horkelia 19 32 34 20. Montara manzanita 29 31 33 13 21. northern curly-leaved monardella 29 34 34 34 22. Pacific manzanita 31 4 22 23. Point Reyes horkelia 28 2834 24. Presidio manzanita 30 10 20 30 25. robust spineflower 28 10 20 30 28 26. rose leptosiphon 9 34 27. round-headed Chinese-houses 34 14 19 36 23 25 28. San Bruno Mountain manzanita 28 30 38 14 14 14 29. San Francisco Bay spineflower 33 14 34 30. San Francisco campion 31 31. San Francisco collinsia 32. San Francisco lessingia 33. San Francisco owl's-clover 34. Scouler's catchfly 12 g

n 33 i 35. short-leaved evax n e d

n 36. two-fork clover e l g p

37. water star-grass : y 33 B

9 38. white-rayed pentachaeta 1 - 3 0 - 0 2 0 2

: d e s i v e R

d x m . s

t 17 n a l P _ s u t a t S l a i c e p S

_ Project Location 0 1 2 3 _ g i f \ s r Miles e 5-mile Project Radius t a

w 1:90,000 (At original document size of 11x17) _ d n

a Special-Status Plant Occurrences l t Project Location Prepared by PG on 2020-03-19 e w TR by JE on 2020-03-19 \ s South San Francisco, California D

X Critical Habitat M _ \ s i Franciscan manzanita g

\ Client/Project d a c Sources: California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, California _ s i

g Natural Diversity Database, November 2019.

\ Midway Village a U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Critical Habitat t a d _ 3 0 \

9 Figure No. 8 5 4 0 7

5 3 8 1

\ Title e v i t c

A Special-Status Plant Species \ 7 5 8 1 \ :

V Disclaimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient accepts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its officers, employees, consultants and agents, from any and all claims arising in any way from the content or provision of the data. 2 11 2 ($¯$ 17 3

18 5 9 18 12

Special-Status Wildlife Species 11 1. Alameda song sparrow 19 5 2. American badger 18 8 3. American peregrine falcon 15 4. bank swallow 4 5. Bay checkerspot butterfly 19 18 6. California black rail 16 7 6 13 7. California red-legged frog 15 3 10 8. California Ridgway's rail 12 12 9. callippe silverspot butterfly 9 10. hardhead 11. longfin smelt 8 12. Mission blue butterfly 13. saltmarsh common yellowthroat 12 9 14. San Bruno elfin butterfly 12 12 18 15 15. San Francisco gartersnake 9 15 15 16. tidewater goby 14 17. Townsend's big-eared bat 11 18. western bumble bee 9 19. western pond turtle 9 5 12 5

12 9

g 15 n i n e 8 d n e l g p

: 1 y B

1 18 - 3 0 - 0 2 0 2

d 12 e s i v 8 e R

d 1 x m . e f i l d l i W _ s u t a t S l a i c e p S

_ Project Location 0 1 2 4 _ g i f \ s r 5-mile Project Radius Miles e t a

w 1:90,000 (At original document size of 11x17) _ d Special-Status Wildlife Occurrences n a l t Project Location Prepared by PG on 2020-03-19 e w TR by JE on 2020-03-19 \ s Critical Habitat South San Francisco, California D X M _ Bay checkerspot butterfly \ s i g

\ Client/Project d a Steelhead c _ s i g

\ Sources: California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, California Midway Village a t

a Natural Diversity Database, November 2019. d

_ U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Critical Habitat 3 0 \

9 Figure No. 8 5 4 0 7

5 4 8 1

\ Title e v i t c

A Special-Status Wildlife Species \ 7 5 8 1 \ :

APPENDIX A USFWS, CNDDB and CNPS Database Results

10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

IPaC U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

IPaC resource list

This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location San Mateo County, California

Local oce

Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Oce

 (916) 414-6600  (916) 414-6713

Federal Building 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605 Sacramento, CA 95825-1846

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 1/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Endangered species

This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population, even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE. 2. Click DEFINE PROJECT. 3. Log in (if directed to do so). 4. Provide a name and description for your project. 5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species1 and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries2).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. 2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location:

Mammals NAME STATUS https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 2/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys raviventris Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/613

Southern Sea Otter Enhydra lutris nereis Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. Marine mammal https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8560

Birds NAME STATUS

California Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris obsoletus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4240

California Least Tern Sterna antillarum browni Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8104

Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4467

Short-tailed Albatross Phoebastria (=Diomedea) albatrus Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/433

Western Snowy Plover Charadrius nivosus nivosus Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8035

Reptiles NAME STATUS

Green Sea Turtle Chelonia mydas Threatened No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6199

San Francisco Garter Snake Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5956

Amphibians https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 3/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location NAME STATUS

California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891

Fishes NAME STATUS

Delta Smelt Hypomesus transpacicus Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/321

Tidewater Goby Eucyclogobius newberryi Endangered There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/57

Insects NAME STATUS

Bay Checkerspot Buttery Euphydryas editha bayensis Threatened There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2320

Callippe Silverspot Buttery Speyeria callippe callippe Endangered There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3779

Mission Blue Buttery Icaricia icarioides missionensis Endangered There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6928

Myrtle's Silverspot Buttery Speyeria zerene myrtleae Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6929

San Bruno Eln Buttery Callophrys mossii bayensis Endangered There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical habitat is not available. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3394

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 4/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location Flowering Plants NAME STATUS

Franciscan Manzanita Arctostaphylos franciscana Endangered There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5350

Presidio Manzanita Arctostaphylos hookeri var. ravenii Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7216

Robust Spineower Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta Endangered There is nal critical habitat for this species. Your location is outside the critical habitat. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9287

San Francisco Lessingia Lessingia germanorum (=L.g. var. Endangered germanorum) No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8174

Showy Indian Clover Trifolium amoenum Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6459

White-rayed Pentachaeta Pentachaeta bellidiora Endangered No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7782

Critical habitats

Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.

Migratory birds

Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act2.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 5/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described below.

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918. 2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/ birds-of-conservation-concern.php Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/ conservation-measures.php Nationwide conservation measures for birds http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf

The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED, WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE. "BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 6/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31 This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626

Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591

Black Skimmer Rynchops niger Breeds May 20 to Sep 15 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5234

Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Burrowing Owl Athene cunicularia Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9737

Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii Breeds Jan 1 to Dec 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa Breeds May 20 to Jul 31 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084

Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5511

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 7/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481

Nuttall's Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410

Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002

Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480

Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia Breeds Feb 20 to Sep 5 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA

Spotted Towhee Pipilo maculatus clementae Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 20 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4243

Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910

Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9483

Willet Tringa semipalmata Breeds elsewhere This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Wrentit Chamaea fasciata Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10 This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 8/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location Probability of Presence Summary

The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ “Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report” before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25. 2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2. 3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ( ) Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Eort ( ) Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ( ) A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 9/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

probability of presence breeding season survey eort no data

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Allen's Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Bald Eagle Non-BCC Vulnerable (This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.)

Black Oystercatcher BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Black Skimmer BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Black Turnstone BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Burrowing Owl BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA)

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 10/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Clark's Grebe BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Common Yellowthroat BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA)

Long-billed Curlew BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Marbled Godwit BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Nuttall's Woodpecker BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA)

Rufous Hummingbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Short-billed Dowitcher BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 11/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Song Sparrow BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA)

Spotted Towhee BCC - BCR (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA)

Tricolored Blackbird BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Whimbrel BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Willet BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Wrentit BCC Rangewide (CON) (This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.)

Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures and/or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 12/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development.

Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?

The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?

To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?

Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands); 2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and 3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects

For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 13/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?

If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report

The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ “What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location”. Please be aware this report provides the “probability of presence” of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the “no data” indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ “Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds” at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 14/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location

Marine mammals

Marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Some are also protected under the Endangered Species Act1 and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora2.

The responsibilities for the protection, conservation, and management of marine mammals are shared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [responsible for otters, walruses, polar bears, manatees, and dugongs] and NOAA Fisheries3 [responsible for seals, sea lions, whales, dolphins, and porpoises]. Marine mammals under the responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list; for additional information on those species please visit the Marine Mammals page of the NOAA Fisheries website.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act prohibits the take (to harass, hunt, capture, kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture or kill) of marine mammals and further coordination may be necessary for project evaluation. Please contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Field Oce shown.

1. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. 2. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a treaty to ensure that international trade in plants and animals does not threaten their survival in the wild. 3. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following marine mammals under the responsibility of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are potentially aected by activities in this location:

NAME

Southern Sea Otter Enhydra lutris nereis https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8560

Facilities

National Wildlife Refuge lands

Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 15/16 10/28/2019 IPaC: Explore Location Fish hatcheries

THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.

Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory

Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

THERE ARE NO KNOWN WETLANDS AT THIS LOCATION.

Data limitations

The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions

Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions

Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities.

https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/DWTN45LYCNCA3J4DPF4SR2DIII/resources 16/16 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database

Query Criteria: Quad IS (San Francisco South (3712264) OR San Francisco North (3712274) OR Oakland West (3712273) OR Hunters Point (3712263))
AND Taxonomic Group IS (Ferns OR Gymnosperms OR Monocots OR Dicots OR Lichens OR Bryophytes)

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum PMLIL021R1 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 Franciscan onion Amsinckia lunaris PDBOR01070 None None G3 S3 1B.2 bent-flowered fiddleneck Arctostaphylos franciscana PDERI040J3 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 Franciscan manzanita Arctostaphylos imbricata PDERI040L0 None Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 San Bruno Mountain manzanita Arctostaphylos montana ssp. ravenii PDERI040J2 Endangered Endangered G3T1 S1 1B.1 Presidio manzanita Arctostaphylos montaraensis PDERI042W0 None None G1 S1 1B.2 Montara manzanita Arctostaphylos pacifica PDERI040Z0 None Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Pacific manzanita Arenaria paludicola PDCAR040L0 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 marsh sandwort Astragalus tener var. tener PDFAB0F8R1 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 alkali milk-vetch Carex comosa PMCYP032Y0 None None G5 S2 2B.1 bristly sedge Carex praticola PMCYP03B20 None None G5 S2 2B.2 northern meadow sedge Centromadia parryi ssp. parryi PDAST4R0P2 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 pappose tarplant Chloropyron maritimum ssp. palustre PDSCR0J0C3 None None G4?T2 S2 1B.2 Point Reyes salty bird's-beak Chorizanthe cuspidata var. cuspidata PDPGN04081 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 San Francisco Bay spineflower Chorizanthe robusta var. robusta PDPGN040Q2 Endangered None G2T1 S1 1B.1 robust spineflower Cirsium andrewsii PDAST2E050 None None G3 S3 1B.2 Franciscan thistle Cirsium hydrophilum var. vaseyi PDAST2E1G2 None None G2T1 S1 1B.2 Mt. Tamalpais thistle Cirsium occidentale var. compactum PDAST2E1Z1 None None G3G4T2 S2 1B.2 compact cobwebby thistle

Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2019 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 3 Report Printed on Monday, October 28, 2019 Information Expires 3/29/2020 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Clarkia franciscana PDONA050H0 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Presidio clarkia Collinsia corymbosa PDSCR0H060 None None G1 S1 1B.2 round-headed Chinese-houses Collinsia multicolor PDSCR0H0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 San Francisco collinsia Extriplex joaquinana PDCHE041F3 None None G2 S2 1B.2 San Joaquin spearscale Fritillaria liliacea PMLIL0V0C0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 fragrant fritillary Gilia capitata ssp. chamissonis PDPLM040B3 None None G5T2 S2 1B.1 blue coast gilia Gilia millefoliata PDPLM04130 None None G2 S2 1B.2 dark-eyed gilia Grindelia hirsutula var. maritima PDAST470D3 None None G5T1Q S1 3.2 San Francisco gumplant Helianthella castanea PDAST4M020 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Diablo helianthella Hemizonia congesta ssp. congesta PDAST4R065 None None G5T2 S2 1B.2 congested-headed hayfield tarplant Hesperevax sparsiflora var. brevifolia PDASTE5011 None None G4T3 S2 1B.2 short-leaved evax Hesperolinon congestum PDLIN01060 Threatened Threatened G1 S1 1B.1 Marin western flax Heteranthera dubia PMPON03010 None None G5 S2 2B.2 water star-grass Holocarpha macradenia PDAST4X020 Threatened Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 Santa Cruz tarplant Horkelia cuneata var. sericea PDROS0W043 None None G4T1? S1? 1B.1 Kellogg's horkelia Horkelia marinensis PDROS0W0B0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Point Reyes horkelia Hypogymnia schizidiata NLT0032640 None None G2 S1 1B.3 island tube lichen Layia carnosa PDAST5N010 Endangered Endangered G2 S2 1B.1 beach layia Leptosiphon rosaceus PDPLM09180 None None G1 S1 1B.1 rose leptosiphon Lessingia germanorum PDAST5S010 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 San Francisco lessingia Malacothamnus arcuatus PDMAL0Q0E0 None None G2Q S2 1B.2 arcuate bush-mallow

Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2019 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 3 Report Printed on Monday, October 28, 2019 Information Expires 3/29/2020 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Microseris paludosa PDAST6E0D0 None None G2 S2 1B.2 marsh microseris Monardella sinuata ssp. nigrescens PDLAM18162 None None G3T2 S2 1B.2 northern curly-leaved monardella Pentachaeta bellidiflora PDAST6X030 Endangered Endangered G1 S1 1B.1 white-rayed pentachaeta Plagiobothrys chorisianus var. chorisianus PDBOR0V061 None None G3T1Q S1 1B.2 Choris' popcornflower Plagiobothrys diffusus PDBOR0V080 None Endangered G1Q S1 1B.1 San Francisco popcornflower Plagiobothrys glaber PDBOR0V0B0 None None GH SH 1A hairless popcornflower Polemonium carneum PDPLM0E050 None None G3G4 S2 2B.2 Oregon polemonium Polygonum marinense PDPGN0L1C0 None None G2Q S2 3.1 Marin knotweed Sanicula maritima PDAPI1Z0D0 None Rare G2 S2 1B.1 adobe sanicle Senecio aphanactis PDAST8H060 None None G3 S2 2B.2 chaparral ragwort Silene scouleri ssp. scouleri PDCAR0U1MC None None G5T4T5 S2S3 2B.2 Scouler's catchfly Silene verecunda ssp. verecunda PDCAR0U213 None None G5T1 S1 1B.2 San Francisco campion Stebbinsoseris decipiens PDAST6E050 None None G2 S2 1B.2 Santa Cruz microseris Suaeda californica PDCHE0P020 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 California seablite Trifolium amoenum PDFAB40040 Endangered None G1 S1 1B.1 two-fork clover Trifolium hydrophilum PDFAB400R5 None None G2 S2 1B.2 saline clover Triphysaria floribunda PDSCR2T010 None None G2? S2? 1B.2 San Francisco owl's-clover Triquetrella californica NBMUS7S010 None None G2 S2 1B.2 coastal triquetrella Viburnum ellipticum PDCPR07080 None None G4G5 S3? 2B.3 oval-leaved viburnum Record Count: 58

Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2019 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 3 Report Printed on Monday, October 28, 2019 Information Expires 3/29/2020 Selected Elements by Scientific Name California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database

Query Criteria: Quad IS (San Francisco South (3712264) OR San Francisco North (3712274) OR Oakland West (3712273) OR Hunters Point (3712263))
AND Taxonomic Group IS (Fish OR Amphibians OR Reptiles OR Birds OR Mammals OR Mollusks OR Arachnids OR Crustaceans OR Insects)

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Accipiter cooperii ABNKC12040 None None G5 S4 WL Cooper's hawk Adela oplerella IILEE0G040 None None G2 S2 Opler's longhorn moth Ambystoma californiense AAAAA01180 Threatened Threatened G2G3 S2S3 WL California tiger salamander Antrozous pallidus AMACC10010 None None G5 S3 SSC pallid bat Banksula incredula ILARA14100 None None G1 S1 incredible harvestman Bombus caliginosus IIHYM24380 None None G4? S1S2 obscure bumble bee Bombus occidentalis IIHYM24250 None Candidate G2G3 S1 Endangered western bumble bee Caecidotea tomalensis ICMAL01220 None None G2 S2S3 Tomales isopod Callophrys mossii bayensis IILEPE2202 Endangered None G4T1 S1 San Bruno elfin butterfly Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus ABNNB03031 Threatened None G3T3 S2S3 SSC western snowy plover Cicindela hirticollis gravida IICOL02101 None None G5T2 S2 sandy beach tiger beetle Circus hudsonius ABNKC11011 None None G5 S3 SSC northern harrier Corynorhinus townsendii AMACC08010 None None G3G4 S2 SSC Townsend's big-eared bat Coturnicops noveboracensis ABNME01010 None None G4 S1S2 SSC yellow rail Danaus plexippus pop. 1 IILEPP2012 None None G4T2T3 S2S3 monarch - California overwintering population Dicamptodon ensatus AAAAH01020 None None G3 S2S3 SSC California giant salamander Dufourea stagei IIHYM22010 None None G1G2 S1 Stage's dufourine bee Elanus leucurus ABNKC06010 None None G5 S3S4 FP white-tailed kite

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Emys marmorata ARAAD02030 None None G3G4 S3 SSC western pond turtle Enhydra lutris nereis AMAJF09012 Threatened None G4T2 S2 FP southern sea otter Erethizon dorsatum AMAFJ01010 None None G5 S3 North American porcupine Eucyclogobius newberryi AFCQN04010 Endangered None G3 S3 SSC tidewater goby Euphydryas editha bayensis IILEPK4055 Threatened None G5T1 S1 Bay checkerspot butterfly Falco peregrinus anatum ABNKD06071 Delisted Delisted G4T4 S3S4 FP American peregrine falcon Geothlypis trichas sinuosa ABPBX1201A None None G5T3 S3 SSC saltmarsh common yellowthroat Hydroporus leechi IICOL55040 None None G1? S1? Leech's skyline diving beetle Ischnura gemina IIODO72010 None None G2 S2 San Francisco forktail damselfly Lasiurus blossevillii AMACC05060 None None G5 S3 SSC western red bat Lasiurus cinereus AMACC05030 None None G5 S4 hoary bat Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus ABNME03041 None Threatened G3G4T1 S1 FP California black rail Lichnanthe ursina IICOL67020 None None G2 S2 bumblebee scarab beetle Melospiza melodia pusillula ABPBXA301S None None G5T2? S2S3 SSC Alameda song sparrow Melospiza melodia samuelis ABPBXA301W None None G5T2 S2 SSC San Pablo song sparrow Mylopharodon conocephalus AFCJB25010 None None G3 S3 SSC hardhead Nyctinomops macrotis AMACD04020 None None G5 S3 SSC big free-tailed bat Phalacrocorax auritus ABNFD01020 None None G5 S4 WL double-crested cormorant Plebejus icarioides missionensis IILEPG801A Endangered None G5T1 S1 Mission blue butterfly Rallus obsoletus obsoletus ABNME05011 Endangered Endangered G5T1 S1 FP California Ridgway's rail Rana draytonii AAABH01022 Threatened None G2G3 S2S3 SSC California red-legged frog

Rare Plant Rank/CDFW Species Element Code Federal Status State Status Global Rank State Rank SSC or FP Reithrodontomys raviventris AMAFF02040 Endangered Endangered G1G2 S1S2 FP salt-marsh harvest mouse Riparia riparia ABPAU08010 None Threatened G5 S2 bank swallow Scapanus latimanus insularis AMABB02032 None None G5THQ SH Angel Island mole Scapanus latimanus parvus AMABB02031 None None G5THQ SH SSC Alameda Island mole Speyeria callippe callippe IILEPJ6091 Endangered None G5T1 S1 callippe silverspot butterfly Spirinchus thaleichthys AFCHB03010 Candidate Threatened G5 S1 longfin smelt Sternula antillarum browni ABNNM08103 Endangered Endangered G4T2T3Q S2 FP California least tern Taxidea taxus AMAJF04010 None None G5 S3 SSC American badger Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia ARADB3613B Endangered Endangered G5T2Q S2 FP San Francisco gartersnake Trachusa gummifera IIHYM80010 None None G1 S1 San Francisco Bay Area leaf-cutter bee Tryonia imitator IMGASJ7040 None None G2 S2 mimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail) Vespericola marinensis IMGASA4140 None None G2 S2 Marin hesperian Zapus trinotatus orarius AMAFH01031 None None G5T1T3Q S1S3 SSC Point Reyes jumping mouse Record Count: 52

Commercial Version -- Dated September, 29 2019 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 3 Report Printed on Monday, October 28, 2019 Information Expires 3/29/2020 10/28/2019 CNPS Inventory Results

*The database usedInve tont oprovidery of R aupdatesre and Eton dthean gOnlineered P Inventorylants is under construction. View updates and changes made since May 2019 here.

Plant List

65 matches found. Click on scientific name for details

Search Criteria

Found in Quads 3712274, 3712264 3712273 and 3712263;

Modify Search Criteria Export to Excel Modify Columns Modify Sort Display Photos

Blooming CA Rare State Global Scientific Name Common Name Family Lifeform Period Plant RankRank Rank bent-flowered Boraginaceae annual herb Mar-Jun 1B.2 S3 G3 Amsinckia lunaris fiddleneck Arabis blepharophylla coast rockcress Brassicaceae perennial herb Feb-May 4.3 S4 G4 Arctostaphylos Franciscan perennial evergreen Ericaceae Feb-Apr 1B.1 S1 G1 franciscana manzanita shrub San Bruno Mountain perennial evergreen Ericaceae Feb-May 1B.1 S1 G1 Arctostaphylos imbricata manzanita shrub Arctostaphylos montana perennial evergreen Presidio manzanita Ericaceae Feb-Mar 1B.1 S1 G3T1 ssp. ravenii shrub Arctostaphylos perennial evergreen Montara manzanita Ericaceae Jan-Mar 1B.2 S1 G1 montaraensis shrub Arctostaphylos pacifica Pacific manzanita Ericaceae evergreen shrub Feb-Apr 1B.1 S1 G1 perennial marsh sandwort Caryophyllaceae May-Aug 1B.1 S1 G1 Arenaria paludicola stoloniferous herb Carlotta Hall's lace perennial Pteridaceae Jan-Dec 4.2 S3 G3 Aspidotis carlotta-halliae fern rhizomatous herb Astragalus nuttallii var. ocean bluff milk- Fabaceae perennial herb Jan-Nov 4.2 S4 G4T4 nuttallii vetch Astragalus tener var. alkali milk-vetch Fabaceae annual herb Mar-Jun 1B.2 S1 G2T1 tener perennial bristly sedge Cyperaceae May-Sep 2B.1 S2 G5 Carex comosa rhizomatous herb northern meadow Cyperaceae perennial herb May-Jul 2B.2 S2 G5 Carex praticola sedge Castilleja ambigua var. annual herb johnny-nip Orobanchaceae Mar-Aug 4.2 S3S4 G4T4 ambigua (hemiparasitic) Centromadia parryi ssp. pappose tarplant Asteraceae annual herb May-Nov 1B.2 S2 G3T2 parryi Chloropyron maritimum Point Reyes bird's- Orobanchaceae annual herb Jun-Oct 1B.2 S2 G4?T2 ssp. palustre beak (hemiparasitic) www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3712274:3712264:3712273:3712263 1/4 10/28/2019 CNPS Inventory Results

Chorizanthe cuspidata San Francisco Bay Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Jul(Aug) 1B.2 S1 G2T1 var. cuspidata spineflower Chorizanthe robusta var. robust spineflower Polygonaceae annual herb Apr-Sep 1B.1 S1 G2T1 robusta Cirsium andrewsii Franciscan thistle Asteraceae perennial herb Mar-Jul 1B.2 S3 G3 Cirsium hydrophilum var. Mt. Tamalpais thistle Asteraceae perennial herb May-Aug 1B.2 S1 G2T1 vaseyi Cirsium occidentale var. compact cobwebby Asteraceae perennial herb Apr-Jun 1B.2 S2 G3G4T2 compactum thistle Clarkia franciscana Presidio clarkia Onagraceae annual herb May-Jul 1B.1 S1 G1 round-headed Plantaginaceae annual herb Apr-Jun 1B.2 S1 G1 Collinsia corymbosa Chinese-houses San Francisco (Feb)Mar- Plantaginaceae annual herb 1B.2 S2 G2 Collinsia multicolor collinsia May perennial marsh horsetail Equisetaceae unk 3 S1S3 G5 Equisetum palustre rhizomatous herb perennial Eriophorum gracile slender cottongrass Cyperaceae rhizomatous herb May-Sep 4.3 S4 G5 (emergent) San Francisco Brassicaceae perennial herb Mar-Jun 4.2 S3 G3 Erysimum franciscanum wallflower San Joaquin Chenopodiaceae annual herb Apr-Oct 1B.2 S2 G2 Extriplex joaquinana spearscale perennial bulbiferous fragrant fritillary Liliaceae Feb-Apr 1B.2 S2 G2 Fritillaria liliacea herb Gilia capitata ssp. blue coast gilia Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jul 1B.1 S2 G5T2 chamissonis Gilia millefoliata dark-eyed gilia Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jul 1B.2 S2 G2 Grindelia hirsutula var. San Francisco Asteraceae perennial herb Jun-Sep 3.2 S1 G5T1Q maritima gumplant Helianthella castanea Diablo helianthella Asteraceae perennial herb Mar-Jun 1B.2 S2 G2 Hemizonia congesta congested-headed Asteraceae annual herb Apr-Nov 1B.2 S2 G5T2 ssp. congesta hayfield tarplant Hesperevax sparsiflora short-leaved evax Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jun 1B.2 S2 G4T3 var. brevifolia Hesperolinon congestum Marin western flax Linaceae annual herb Apr-Jul 1B.1 S1 G1 perennial herb water star-grass Pontederiaceae Jul-Oct 2B.2 S2 G5 Heteranthera dubia (aquatic) Holocarpha macradenia Santa Cruz tarplant Asteraceae annual herb Jun-Oct 1B.1 S1 G1 Horkelia cuneata var. Kellogg's horkelia Rosaceae perennial herb Apr-Sep 1B.1 S1? G4T1? sericea Horkelia marinensis Point Reyes horkelia Rosaceae perennial herb May-Sep 1B.2 S2 G2 Hypogymnia schizidiata island rock lichen Parmeliaceae foliose lichen (null) 1B.3 S1 G2 perennial coast iris Iridaceae Mar-May 4.2 S3 G3 Iris longipetala rhizomatous herb Layia carnosa beach layia Asteraceae annual herb Mar-Jul 1B.1 S2 G2 Leptosiphon rosaceus rose leptosiphon Polemoniaceae annual herb Apr-Jul 1B.1 S1 G1 San Francisco Asteraceae annual herb (Jun)Jul-Nov 1B.1 S1 G1 Lessingia germanorum lessingia www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3712274:3712264:3712273:3712263 2/4 10/28/2019 CNPS Inventory Results Malacothamnus arcuate bush-mallow Malvaceae perennial evergreen Apr-Sep 1B.2 S2 G2Q arcuatus shrub Mt. Diablo Asteraceae annual herb Mar-May 3.2 S3S4 G3G4 Micropus amphibolus cottonweed Microseris paludosa marsh microseris Asteraceae perennial herb Apr-Jun(Jul) 1B.2 S2 G2 (Apr)May- Monardella sinuata ssp. northern curly-leaved Lamiaceae annual herb Jul(Aug- 1B.2 S2 G3T2 monardella nigrescens Sep) white-rayed Asteraceae annual herb Mar-May 1B.1 S1 G1 Pentachaeta bellidiflora pentachaeta Plagiobothrys Choris' Boraginaceae annual herb Mar-Jun 1B.2 S1 G3T1Q chorisianus var. popcornflower chorisianus San Francisco Boraginaceae annual herb Mar-Jun 1B.1 S1 G1Q Plagiobothrys diffusus popcornflower Polemonium carneum Oregon polemonium Polemoniaceae perennial herb Apr-Sep 2B.2 S2 G3G4 Sanicula maritima adobe sanicle Apiaceae perennial herb Feb-May 1B.1 S2 G2 Jan- chaparral ragwort Asteraceae annual herb 2B.2 S2 G3 Senecio aphanactis Apr(May)

Silene scouleri ssp. (Mar- Scouler's catchfly Caryophyllaceae perennial herb May)Jun- 2B.2 S2S3 G5T4T5 scouleri Aug(Sep) Silene verecunda ssp. San Francisco (Feb)Mar- Caryophyllaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S1 G5T1 verecunda campion Jun(Aug) Spergularia macrotheca long-styled sand- Feb- Caryophyllaceae perennial herb 1B.2 S2 G5T2 var. longistyla spurrey May(Jun) Santa Cruz Asteraceae annual herb Apr-May 1B.2 S2 G2 Stebbinsoseris decipiens microseris perennial evergreen California seablite Chenopodiaceae Jul-Oct 1B.1 S1 G1 Suaeda californica shrub Trifolium amoenum two-fork clover Fabaceae annual herb Apr-Jun 1B.1 S1 G1 Trifolium hydrophilum saline clover Fabaceae annual herb Apr-Jun 1B.2 S2 G2 San Francisco owl's- Orobanchaceae annual herb Apr-Jun 1B.2 S2? G2? Triphysaria floribunda clover Triquetrella californica coastal triquetrella Pottiaceae moss 1B.2 S2 G2 oval-leaved perennial deciduous Adoxaceae May-Jun 2B.3 S3? G4G5 Viburnum ellipticum viburnum shrub

Suggested Citation

California Native Plant Society, Rare Plant Program. 2019. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed 28 October 2019].

Search the Inventory Information Contributors Simple Search About the Inventory The Calflora Database Advanced Search About the Rare Plant Program The California Lichen Society Glossary CNPS Home Page California Natural Diversity Database About CNPS The Jepson Flora Project Join CNPS The Consortium of California Herbaria CalPhotos www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3712274:3712264:3712273:3712263 3/4 10/28/2019 CNPS Inventory Results

Questions and Comments [email protected]

www.rareplants.cnps.org/result.html?adv=t&quad=3712274:3712264:3712273:3712263 4/4

APPENDIX B Representative Site Photos

Photo 1. Industrial facility adjacent (northeast) to the project site.

Photo 2. Industrial facility adjacent (east) to the project site.

Photo 3. Unnamed creek culvert outlet adjacent (east) to the project site.

Photo 4. Overview of unnamed creek adjacent to the project site.

Photo 5. Overview of freshwater emergent wetland adjacent (east) to the survey area.

Photo 6. Unnamed creek culvert inlet adjacent (east) of the survey area.

APPENDIX C Observed Plant and Wildlife Species Tables

Table C1. Plant Species Observed on March 11, 2020

Scientific Name Common Name Native/Non-native Cal-IPC Acacia longifolia Sydney golden wattle non-native Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood acacia non-native limited Avena fatua wild oats non-native moderate Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush native Brassica spp. Mustard spp. non-native Bromus spp. brome spp. unknown Centaurea solstitialis yellow star thistle non-native high Carpobrotus edulis ice plant Non-native high Cortaderia selloana Pampas grass Non-native high Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat native Foeniculum vulgare Sweet fennel non-native high Genista monspessulana French broom Non-native high Geranium dissectum cut leaved geranium non-native limited Hedra helix English ivy Non-native high Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox-tongue non-native limited Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry non-native high Rumex crispus curly dock non-native limited Salix lasiolepis arroyo willow native Silybum marianum Milk thistle non-native limited Stellaria media chickweed non-native Stipa cernua nodding needle grass native Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison oak native Trifolium sp. clover spp. unknown Typha sp. cattails native Umbellularia californica California Bay native Vicia sativa spring vetch non-native

Table C2. Wildlife Observed on March 11, 2020

Scientific Name Common Name Insect Papilionidae sp. Swallowtail butterfly Reptiles Uta stansburiana Common Side-blotched lizard Birds Agelaius phoeniceus Red-winged blackbird Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk Calypte anna Anna’s hummingbird Sayornis nigricans Black phoebe Melospiza melodia Song sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow Fish Unknown sp. Unknown sp.

APPENDIX B – SECTION 106 CORRESPONDENCE State of California • Natural Resources Agency Gavin Newsom, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Armando Quintero, Director OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION Julianne Polanco, State Historic Preservation Officer 1725 23rd Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95816-7100 Telephone: (916) 445-7000 FAX: (916) 445-7053 [email protected] www.ohp.parks.ca.gov

October 6, 2020 [VIA EMAIL] Refer to HUD_2020_0917_001

Ms. Barbara Deffenderfer, HCD Specialist Department of Housing County of San Mateo 264 Harbor Boulevard, Building A Belmont, CA 94002-4017

Re: Midway Village Multifamily Affordable Housing Redevelopment Project at Bayshore Heights, Daly City, San Mateo County, CA

Dear Ms. Deffenderfer:

The California State Historic Preservation Officer received the consultation submittal for the above referenced undertaking for our review and comment pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations found at 36 CFR Part 800. The regulations and advisory materials are located at www.achp.gov.

Pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800.4(c)(2) the California SHPO concurs with the County’s determination that the Midway Village Elementary School is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. As no historic properties have been identified within the APE, pursuant to 36 CFR §800.4(d) we do not object to the County of San Mateo’s finding that no historic properties will be affected by the proposed Midway Village multifamily affordable housing redevelopment project located in the Bay Shore neighborhood in Daly City, CA.

In the event that historic properties are discovered during implementation of the undertaking, your agency is required to consult further pursuant to §800.13(b).

We appreciate the County of San Mateo’s consideration of historic properties in the project planning process. If you have questions please contact Shannon Lauchner Pries, Historian II, with the Local Government & Environmental Compliance Unit at (916)445-7013 or by email at [email protected]

Note that we are only sending this letter in electronic format. Please confirm receipt of this letter. If you would like a hard copy mailed to you, respond to this email to request a hard copy be mailed.

Sincerely,

Julianne Polanco [Type here]

State Historic Preservation Officer

STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

March 19, 2020

Georganne McMaster, Archaeologist Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. CHAIRPERSON Laura Miranda Luiseño Via Email to: [email protected]

VICE CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Re: City of Daly City, Midway Village Redevelopment Project, San Mateo County Chumash

SECRETARY Dear Ms. McMaster: Merri Lopez-Keifer Luiseño A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information you have submitted for the above referenced project. The PARLIAMENTARIAN results were negative. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not Russell Attebery indicate the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural Karuk resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.

COMMISSIONER Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources Marshall McKay in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential Wintun adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated;

if they cannot supply information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. By COMMISSIONER contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to William Mungary consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of Paiute/White Mountain Apache notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received.

COMMISSIONER If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify Joseph Myers Pomo me. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email COMMISSIONER Julie Tumamait- address: [email protected]. Stenslie Chumash Sincerely, COMMISSIONER [Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Christina Snider Sarah Fonseca Pomo Cultural Resources Analyst

Attachment NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, California 95691 (916) 373-3710 [email protected] NAHC.ca.gov

Page 1 of 1

Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List San Mateo County 3/19/2020

Amah MutsunTribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Irenne Zwierlein, Chairperson 789 Canada Road Costanoan Woodside, CA, 94062 Phone: (650) 851 - 7489 Fax: (650) 332-1526 [email protected]

Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe Tony Cerda, Chairperson 244 E. 1st Street Costanoan Pomona, CA, 91766 Phone: (909) 629 - 6081 Fax: (909) 524-8041 [email protected]

Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson P.O. Box 28 Costanoan Hollister, CA, 95024 Phone: (831) 637 - 4238 [email protected]

Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area Monica Arellano, 20885 Redwood Road, Suite 232 Costanoan Castro Valley, CA, 94546 Phone: (408) 205 - 9714 [email protected]

The Ohlone Indian Tribe Andrew Galvan, P.O. Box 3388 Bay Miwok Fremont, CA, 94539 Ohlone Phone: (510) 882 - 0527 Patwin Fax: (510) 687-9393 Plains Miwok [email protected]

This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed City of Daly City, Midway Village Redevelopment Project, San Mateo County.

PROJ-2020- 03/19/2020 11:18 AM 1 of 1 001579

April 2, 2020

Andrew Galvan The Ohlone Indian Tribe PO Box 3152 Fremont, CA 94539

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for Midway Village, Daly City Calisofnia

Dear Mr. Galvan,

The Midway Village Project is situated at 45 and 47 Midway Drive in Daly City California. Specifically, the project site is bound by Schwerin Street to the west and Martin Street to the south, with Midway Drive running directly through the center of the project area. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is conducting oversight on this federally funded project that the County of San Mateo County Department of Housing plans to construct. The project area is approximately 15 acres of developed land and currently consists of multi-family residential units. The proposed project will remove the existing structures and replace them with 36 low income residential structures containing a total of 150 units, ranging in size from one to four bedrooms. A single-story free-standing structure occupied by a childcare facility also exists on-site. Also existing on site are asphalt driveways and parking areas, landscaped areas, walkways, trash enclosures, and three additional structures. A records search performed at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) identified no prehistoric cultural resources within the APE. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) performed an updated Sacred Lands File (SLF) search for the project site, and the results of this search were negative. Your name appears on the NAHC list of individuals who may know more about the cultural resources of the area. Stantec respectfully requests any specific information you can provide on the location and nature of resources that may be within or immediately adjacent to the APE, especially prehistoric archaeological sites and features, historic-era resources, and any sacred lands or locations of importance or continuing use to the Native American community. Any information you have would greatly assist in our efforts to identify all areas of concern. We recognize that the nature and location of these resources is sensitive information, and it will be treated accordingly. Please send written comment to me at 100 California Street, Suite 1000, or by email to [email protected]. I can also be reached by phone at 650-678-3239.

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Cultural Resources

Enclosed: Project Site Map

April 2, 2020

Monica Arellano Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area 20885 Redwood Road, Suite 232 Castro Valley, CA 94546

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for Midway Village, Daly City Calisofnia

Dear Ms. Arellano:

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Cultural Resources

Enclosed: Project Site Map

April 2, 2020

Katherine Perez, Chairperson North Valley Yokuts Tribe PO Box 717 Linden, CA 95236

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for the Midway Village Housing Project, Daly City California

Dear Ms. Perez:

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Principal Cultural Resources

Enclosed: Project Site Map

April 2, 2020

Ann Marie Sayers, Chairperson Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan P.O. Box 28 Hollister, CA 95024

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for Midway Village, Daly City Calisofnia

Dear Ms. Sayers:

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Cultural Resources

Enclosed: Project Site Map

April 6, 2020

Valentin Lopez, Chairperson Amah Mutsun Tribal Band P.O. Box 5272 Galt, CA 95632

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for Midway Village, Daly City Calisofnia

Dear Mr. Lopez,

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Cultural Resources

Figure 2

April 6, 2020

Irene Zwierlein, Chairperson Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista 789 Canada Road Woodside, CA 94062

Subject: Invitation to Begin Informal Section 106 Consultation for Midway Village, Daly City Calisofnia

Dear Ms. Zwierlein:

Thank you,

Alisa Reynolds Cultural Resources

Enclosed: Project Site Map

n o s n h o j e a k

: y B

3 1 -

1 t

0 Cow Palace -

0 S

0 n 2

: a M

d l l ac e d s i o A n v al e Ge d

R A

n v e e t v a

A S v d e

x t r m . e 5

0 b

8 l 0 a 9

1 T 0 2 _ P _ 1

1 O x tt 8 ili _ a S p t a M _ y t i n i c i t V _ l S a

c a

o i

L c t \ t s a S

D S c X e C c t PG&E Martin Service Center M e y _ d A n p \ r s r i e e i g e L s r s \ t n V s a t P O S s a a o e

d r i tr n r \ id i s p t i R g e r g A y C e \ v e C a t P w

a a rt h d ri

_ d g c 3 e 0 St S \ 9 8

5 t 4

0 C

7 Bayshore

8 y 1 a

\ Park e w v i t d c i a

\ M 7 5

8 t y 1

\ r C

: a t V r C M e M f id i wa n y D n r e J Ma Bra rtin ndo St n t Ct

a M a M i Indu n B strial S t a Wa y y

h B o a r y Toll Brothers Site e R id B g l e v D d r n Li L nda V e Jac is n qu ta i eli Dr l ne e Ct u q c a J

Gu ada lup e C anyo n Pkwy

Figure No. Legend 2.1-2 Title Project Site Project Site Location

Client/Project City of Daly City Midway Village Redevelopment Project

Project Location 185704589 Daly City, CA