BIOLOGICAL TECHNICAL REPORT FOR PHASE I PERRIS VALLEY STORM DRAIN CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT LOCATED IN THE CITY OF PERRIS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis, LLP 1900 Main Street 5th Floor Irvine, California 92614-7321 Contact: John Condas Phone: (949) 851-5551 Prepared By: Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. 1940 E. Deere Avenue, Suite 250 Santa Ana, California 92705 Phone: (949) 340-3851 Report Preparer: Martin Rasnick/Lesley Lokovic September 10, 2020 i INFORMATION SUMMARY A. Report Date: September 10, 2020 B. Report Title: Biological Technical Report for the Phase I Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel Improvement Project Located in the City of Perris, Riverside County, California. C. Project Site Location: USGS 7.5’ series Perris Quadrangle, City of Perris, Riverside County, Township 4 South, Range 3 West, Section 8, 850 feet north of the Ramona Expressway, 1,600 feet south of East Rider Street, east of Redlands Avenue. D. Owner/Applicant: Steve Hollis IDIL Rider 2, LLC and IDIL Rider 4, LLC 840 Apollo Street Suite 343 El Segundo, California 90245 Phone: (213) 334-4804 Email: [email protected] E. Principal Investigator: Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) 1940 E. Deere Avenue, Suite 250 Santa Ana, California 92705 Phone: (949) 340-3851 Report Preparer: Martin Rasnick/Lesley Lokovic F. Report Summary: A biological study was performed for the proposed Phase I Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel Improvement Project (Phase I/Project) Study Area located in the City of Perris, Riverside County, California. The Project would make improvements to an approximate 3,491 linear-foot segment of the Perris Valley Storm Drain (PVSD) and adjacent uplands located east of Redlands Avenue from an area approximately 100 feet north of East Morgan Street to an area approximately 120 feet south of East Rider Street. Phase I improvements will be constructed in connection with the development of the Rider 2 and 4 Warehouse Project (Rider 2 and 4), which is located adjacent to the site. The biological resources and impacts associated with Rider 2 and 4 have been addressed separately as part of a separate standalone report1. This document provides the results of field studies performed to evaluate the potential occurrence of biological resources and the requirements triggered by environmental laws and regulations. The site is within the 1 Biological Technical Report for the Rider 2 and Rider 4 Warehouse Project, located in the City of Perris, Riverside County, California. Prepared by Glenn Lukos Associates (November 2019). ii Mead Valley Area Plan of the Western Riverside County Multiple-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), but outside of Criteria Cells and survey areas for mammals and amphibians, as well as outside of core and linkage areas. The Phase I Project Study Area occurs in the Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Area, Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area, and Burrowing Owl Survey Area for the MSHCP. The PVSD is classified as Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) Conserved Lands by the MSHCP. Habitat assessments were performed for special-status plants and animals, and evaluations were performed to determine the presence/absence of federal and/or state jurisdictional waters and wetlands, including MSHCP Riparian/Riverine areas and vernal pools. The Project Study Area does not support potential habitat for riparian birds or fairy shrimp. The Project Study Area supports both state and federal jurisdictional waters and MSHCP Riparian/Riverine areas. No vernal pools are present. The Project is expected to increase the overall limits of Corps/Regional Board, CDFW, and MSHCP Riparian/Riverine habitats and PQP Conserved Lands by at least 20 acres. A focused habitat assessment for rare plants was performed and suitable habitat was determined to be absent from the site. A focused survey for burrowing owl was performed and the species was determined to be absent from the site. There is no proposed or designated Critical Habitat present. G. Individuals Conducting Fieldwork: Lesley Lokovic Gamber, GLA Trina Ming, GLA April Nakagawa, GLA Martin Rasnick, GLA David Smith, GLA Jillian Stephens, GLA iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background and Scope of Work .......................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Location ................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Project Description ............................................................................................... 2 1.4 Relationship of the Project Site to the MSHCP ................................................... 3 1.4.1 MSHCP Background .................................................................................... 3 1.4.2 Relationship of the Project Site to the MSHCP ............................................ 4 2.0 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Summary of Surveys ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 Botanical Resources ............................................................................................. 6 2.2.1 Literature Search ........................................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Vegetation Mapping ...................................................................................... 7 2.2.3 Special-Status Plant Species and Habitats Evaluated for the Project Study Area ....................................................................................................................... 7 2.2.4 Botanical Surveys ......................................................................................... 8 2.3 Wildlife Resources ............................................................................................... 8 2.3.1 General Surveys ............................................................................................ 8 2.3.2 Special-Status Animal Species Evaluated for the Project Study Area ......... 9 2.3.3 Habitat Assessment for Special-Status Animal Species ............................... 9 2.3.4 Focused Surveys for Special-Status Animals Species .................................. 9 2.4 Jurisdictional Delineation ................................................................................... 10 2.5 MSHCP Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools .......................................... 11 3.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................... 11 3.1 Endangered Species Acts ................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 California Endangered Species Act ............................................................ 12 3.1.2 Federal Endangered Species Act ................................................................ 12 3.1.3 State and Federal Take Authorizations ....................................................... 13 3.1.4 Take Authorizations Pursuant to the MSHCP ............................................ 13 3.2 California Environmental Quality Act ............................................................... 14 3.2.1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15380 ............................................................... 14 3.2.2 Special-Status Plants, Wildlife and Vegetation Communities Evaluated Under CEQA ............................................................................................................. 14 iv 3.3 Jurisdictional Waters .......................................................................................... 16 3.3.1 Army Corps of Engineers ........................................................................... 16 3.3.2 Regional Water Quality Control Board ...................................................... 18 3.3.3 California Department of Fish and Wildlife ............................................... 19 4.0 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 20 4.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................... 20 4.2 Vegetation Mapping ........................................................................................... 20 4.2.1 Developed ................................................................................................... 21 4.2.2 Ruderal (Upland) ........................................................................................ 21 4.2.3 Ruderal (Channel) ....................................................................................... 21 4.2.4 Disturbed Southern Riparian Scrub ............................................................ 21 4.3 Special-Status Vegetation Communities ............................................................ 21 4.4 Special-Status Plants .......................................................................................... 22 4.4.1 Special-Status Plants Detected at the Project Study Area .......................... 30 4.5 Special-Status Animals ...................................................................................... 30 4.5.1 Special-Status Wildlife Species Observed within the Project Study Area . 36 4.5.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species Not Observed but with a Potential to Occur at the Project Study Area .........................................................................................