Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08-14-14 EO&WR Committee Packet
OTAY WATER DISTRICT ENGINEERING, OPERATIONS & WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETING and SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA Board Room THURSDAY August 14, 2014 11:30 A.M. This is a District Committee meeting. This meeting is being posted as a special meeting in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2) in the event that a quorum of the Board is present. Items will be deliberated, however, no formal board actions will be taken at this meeting. The committee makes recommendations to the full board for its consideration and formal action. AGENDA 1. ROLL CALL 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD'S JU-RISDICTION BUT NOT AN ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA DISCUSSION ITEMS 3. AWARD TWO (2) PROFESSIONAL AS-NEEDED ENGINEERING DESIGN SER-VICES CONTRACTS TO ARCADIS AND PSOMAS, EACH IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $300,000 FOR FISCAL YEARS 2015 AND 2016. THE TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE AWARDED OVER THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT WILL NOT EX- CEED $300,000 WITHOUT ADDITIONAL BOARD AUTHORIZATION (BEPPLER) [5 minutes] 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AND RECORD GRANT DEEDS NEC- ESSARY TO PERFECT TITLE ON THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT (APN 597-041-50- 00) AND THE GORE (APN 597-041-51-00) PROPERTIES (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 5. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4240, FIXING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTIES OWNED BY THE OTAY LAND CO., LLC, APNs: 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17 AND 19-00 INTO THE OTAY WATER DIS- TRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NOS. 22 AND 27 (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 2 6. APPROVE THE ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 870-1 RESERVOIR ACCESS ROAD PAVING PROJECT (COBURN-BOYD) [5 minutes] 7. FISCAL YEAR 2014 FOURTH QUARTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM REPORT (MARTIN) [5 minutes] 8. SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY UPDATE (WATTON) [10 minutes] 9. ADJOURNMENT BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING: David Gonzalez, Chair Gary Croucher All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be delib- erated and may be subject to action by the Board. The Agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the Dis- trict’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the Agenda and all attachments are also available through the District Secretary by contacting her at (619) 670-2280. If you have any disability that would require accommodation in order to enable you to partici-pate in this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2280 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Certification of Posting I certify that on August 8, 2014 I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regu- lar meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section §54954.2). Executed at Spring Valley, California on August 8, 2014. /s/ Susan Cruz, District Secretary STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 3, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Beppler Senior Civil Engineer Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. All APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Award of Two (2) As-Needed Engineering Design Services Contracts for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016 GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) award two (2) professional As-Needed Engineering Design Services contracts to Arcadis and Psomas and authorize the General Manager to execute two agreements with Arcadis and Psomas, each in an amount not-to-exceed $300,000 for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016. The total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $300,000. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board authorization for the General Manager to enter into professional As-Needed Engineering Design Services contracts with Arcadis and Psomas, with each contract in an amount not-to-exceed $300,000 for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016. The total amount of the two contracts will not exceed $300,000. Historically, a single firm has been selected to provide as-needed consulting services. However, staff is looking for ways to increase production and value for the District. Selecting multiple engineering firms will allow the District to solicit task proposals from the two firms and evaluate the value to the District based on the design team strength, schedule to complete the task, and 2 ultimately the cost for the design effort. This is a pilot selection program and the effectiveness of selecting multiple consulting firms will be evaluated to determine if this should be done for other design disciplines in the future. ANALYSIS: The District will require the services of a professional engineering design consultant on an as-needed basis in support of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016. It is more efficient and cost effective to issue an as-needed contract for engineering design which will provide the District with the ability to obtain consulting services in a timely and efficient manner. This concept has also been used in the past for other disciplines such as construction management, geotechnical, electrical, and environmental services. The District staff will identify tasks and request cost proposals from the two consultants during the contract period. Each consultant will prepare a detailed scope of work, schedule, and fee for each task order, with the District evaluating the proposals based upon qualifications and cost. The District will enter into negotiations with the consultants, selecting the proposal that has the best value for the District. Upon written task order authorization from the District, the selected consultant shall then proceed with the project as described in the scope of work. The CIP projects that are estimated to require engineering design services for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016, at this time, are listed below: CIP DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST P2453 SR-11 Utility Relocations $50,000 P2551 Blossom Lane Interconnection $25,000 P2552 South Barcelona Interconnection $25,000 R2048 Otay Mesa Distribution Pipelines $15,000 R2116 14-inch Recycled Forcemain Assessment and Repair $35,000 R2117 RWCWRF Contact Basin Expansion PDR $75,000 S2033 Sewer System Rehabilitation $50,000 TOTAL: $275,000 The engineering design services scopes for the above projects are estimated from preliminary information and past projects. Staff believes that a $300,000 cap on each of the As-Needed Engineering Design Services contracts is adequate, while still providing a buffer. 3 Fees for professional services will be charged to the CIP projects or to the Fiscal Year Operations budget. The As-Needed Engineering Design Services contracts do not commit the District to any expenditure until a task order is approved to perform the work. The District does not guarantee work to the consultants, nor does the District guarantee to the consultants that it will expend all of the funds authorized by the contract on professional services. The District solicited engineering design services by placing an advertisement on the Otay Water District’s website on April 25, 2014 and with various other publications including the San Diego Daily Transcript. Thirteen (13) firms submitted a Letter of Interest and a Statement of Qualifications. The Request for Proposal (RFP) for Engineering Design Services was sent to all thirteen (13) firms resulting in six (6) proposals received on June 12, 2014. They are as follows: Arcadis (Carlsbad, CA) J.C. Heden / Dudek (San Diego, CA/Encinitas, CA) Lee & Ro (San Diego, CA) NV5 (Nolte Associates) (San Diego, CA) Psomas (San Diego, CA) Tran Consulting Engineers (San Diego, CA) Firms that submitted Letters of Interest, but did not propose, were Atkins, Landmark, Nasland, KEH, CivilSource and Rick Engineering. In accordance with the District’s Policy 21, Staff evaluated and scored all written proposals and interviewed the top six (6) firms on July 14, 2014. Arcadis and Psomas received the highest scores based on their experience, understanding of the scope of work, proposed method to accomplish the work, and their composite hourly rate. Arcadis and Psomas were the most qualified consultants with the best overall proposal. The District has not previously worked with Psomas on any project, but they are a highly rated company, provide similar services to other local agencies, and are readily available to provide the services required. A summary of the complete evaluation is shown in Attachment B. Arcadis and Psomas submitted the Company Background Questionnaire as required by the RFP and staff did not find any significant issues. In addition, staff checked their references and performed an internet search on the company. Staff found the references to be excellent and did not find any outstanding issues with the internet search. 4 FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The funds for this contract will be expended from a variety of projects, as previously noted above. The fees for professional services requested herein are available in the authorized CIP project budgets. This contract is for as-needed professional services based on the District's need and schedule, and expenditures will not be made until a task order is approved by the District for the consultant's services on a specific CIP project. Based on a review of the financial budget, the Project Manager anticipates that the budgets will be sufficient to support the professional as-needed consulting services required for the CIP projects noted above. The Finance Department has determined that the funds to cover this contract are available as budgeted for these projects. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the District’s Vision, “A District that is innovative in providing water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. SB/BK:jf P:\WORKING\As Needed Services\Engineering Design\FY 2015-2016\Staff Report\BD_09-03-14_Staff Report_Award of As-Needed Engineering Design Services (SB-BK).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Summary of Proposal Rankings ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Award of Two (2) As-Needed Engineering Design Services Contracts for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016 COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 14, 2014. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. Qualifications of Team Responsiveness and Project Understanding Technical and Management Approach INDIVIDUAL SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN AVERAGE SUBTOTAL - WRITTEN Proposed Rates* Consultant's Commitment to DBE TOTAL - WRITTEN Additional Creativity and Insight Strength of Project Manager Presentation and Communication Skills Responses to Questions INDIVIDUAL TOTAL - ORAL AVERAGE TOTAL ORAL TOTAL SCORE 30 25 30 85 85 15 Y/N 100 15 15 10 10 50 50 150 Poor/Good/ Excellent Howard Almgren 25 19 23 67 11 13 9 9 42 Kevin Cameron 28 23 27 78 13 14 9 8 44 Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 13 14 9 8 44 Dan Martin 27 23 27 77 14 14 10 9 47 Kent Payne 27 24 22 73 14 14 9 9 46 Howard Almgren 21 19 23 63 11 10 8 7 36 Kevin Cameron 20 17 19 56 10 9 7 6 32 Bob Kennedy 23 20 23 66 10 11 7 6 34 Dan Martin 22 20 22 64 11 10 7 7 35 Kent Payne 19 20 21 60 8 12 8 4 32 Howard Almgren 28 21 28 77 13 14 8 8 43 Kevin Cameron 28 24 28 80 13 14 10 9 46 Bob Kennedy 26 22 25 73 13 14 9 8 44 Dan Martin 27 23 28 78 14 14 9 9 46 Kent Payne 21 23 27 71 13 14 8 8 43 Howard Almgren 28 24 28 80 11 11 7 6 35 Kevin Cameron 27 24 27 78 13 12 7 5 37 Bob Kennedy 27 23 27 77 11 12 7 6 36 Dan Martin 27 23 27 77 11 12 7 7 37 Kent Payne 27 23 22 72 8 10 7 5 30 Howard Almgren 23 19 23 65 13 14 8 8 43 Kevin Cameron 25 23 25 73 13 13 9 8 43 Bob Kennedy 25 21 25 71 12 13 8 7 40 Dan Martin 25 20 25 70 14 13 9 9 45 Kent Payne 19 20 24 63 14 13 9 8 44 Howard Almgren 21 23 24 68 12 12 7 7 38 Kevin Cameron 22 20 23 65 12 13 6 5 36 Bob Kennedy 24 20 23 67 10 11 7 5 33 Dan Martin 23 21 24 68 12 12 6 6 36 Kent Payne 19 21 24 64 10 11 5 5 31 Consultant Rate Position Score Consultant Rate Position Score Arcadis $1,116 lowest 1 *The fees were evaluated by comparing rates for seven positions. The sum of these rates are noted on the table to the left. Lee & Ro $1,079 fifth 2 Note: Review Panel does not see or consider rates when scoring other categories. Rates are scored by the PM, who is not on Review Panel. Psomas $960 third 6 J.C. Heden / Dudek $985 fourth 5 NV5 $925 second 7 Tran Consulting $660 highest 15 MAXIMUM POINTS 1Arcadis Y5 82 Y 75 44 43 ATTACHMENT B SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL RANKINGS As-Needed Engineering Design - FY2015-16 WRITTEN ORAL 118NV5687 J.C. Heden / Dudek Psomas 76 6 82 126 77 117 120 35 75 Y Y Y 45 34 Excellent REFERENCES Excellent Lee & Ro 62 2 64 98 74 35 RATES SCORING CHART Tran Consulting 66 15 Y 81 116 Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2015\BD 09-03-14\As-Needed Engineering Design Services for FY 15-16 (Steve)\Summary of Proposal Rankings - written fee interview.xls STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 3, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: DIV. NO. 5 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Request Authorization for the General Manager to Execute and Record Grant Deeds Necessary to Perfect Title on the Otay Water District (APN 597-041-50-00) and the Gore (APN 597-041- 51-00) Properties GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) authorize the General Manager to execute and record grant deeds necessary to perfect Title on the District (APN 597-041-50-00) and Gore (APN 597-041-51-00) properties in substantially the same form as shown in Exhibits B1 through B4 attached. COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To exchange property and finalize the boundary adjustments established with Certificates of Compliance between the District and Gore recorded with the County of San Diego on October 14, 2004 through the execution and recordation of grant deeds. ANALYSIS: The District purchased a parcel of land located at the northeast corner of Highway 94 and Hillside Drive in Jamul (APN 597-041-50-00) in 1993 from Crossroads Development. In May of 2000, the District subdivided this land and sold a parcel to a Mr. and Mrs. Gore (Gore) 2 (APN 597-041-51-00). The location of these parcels is shown in Exhibits A1 and A2. In February 2004, District staff discovered and confirmed an administrative error in the grant deed to Gore that has resulted in Gore building residential improvements that encroached on the District’s property. The District approved staff to correct the administrative error and resolve the encroachment issue by processing a Boundary Adjustment Plat and Certificate of Compliance (B/C Plat No. 04-0192) with the San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use (Exhibit C). The Certificate of Compliance was recorded with the County on October 14, 2004. As part of the process to perfect the Title of the subject properties, the County of San Diego requires that parties exchange grant deeds after Certificates of Compliance are recorded to finalize the boundary adjustment process. As staff reviewed the District’s property (APN 597-041-50-00) in preparation to surplus the property, staff discovered that grant deeds were never exchanged between Gore and the District. As a result, the boundary adjustment process for these properties has not been finalized. Staff has prepared the grant deeds (Exhibits B1 through B4) necessary to finalize the boundary adjustment as included in the recorded Certificate of Compliance between the District and Gore. The boundary adjustment between the District and Gore will be an equal land trade of 0.24 acres. The grant deeds shown as Exhibits B1 and B2 complete the exchange of property between the District and Gore, respectively. The grant deeds shown as Exhibits B3 and B4 memorialize the Lot Line Adjustment as contained in the recorded Certificate of Compliance and will finalize the boundary adjustment. Staff contacted the County appraiser for the Gore property and inquired about any impacts that may result through the completion of this process. The County Appraiser informed staff that the Gore property would not be reassessed at the time the boundary adjustment with certificate of compliance is finalized. Staff has reached out to Mr. Gore and sent draft copies of the grant deeds. Mr. Gore is currently reviewing the information. Staff also contacted the County appraiser for the Gore property and inquired about any impacts that may result through the completion of this process. The County Appraiser informed staff that the Gore property would not be reassessed at the time the boundary adjustment with certificate of compliance is finalized. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact. 3 STRATEGIC GOAL: This item supports the District’s strategic goals to ensure financial health through formalized policies, prudent investing, and efficient operations. LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\Public-s\STAFF REPORTS\2014\BD 09-03-14\BD 09-03-14, Staff Report, Hillside Grant Deed Exchange Report, (DM-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Exhibits A1 and A2 - Location Maps Exhibit B1 – Grant Deed (District exchange to Gore) Exhibit B2 – Grant Deed (Gore exchange to District) Exhibit B3 – Grant Deed (District Lot Line Adjustment) Exhibit B4 – Grant Deed (Gore Lot Line Adjustment) Exhibit C – B/C Plat No. 04-0192 ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Request Authorization for the General Manager to Execute and Record Grant Deeds Necessary to Perfect Title on the Otay Water District (APN 597-041-50-00) and the Gore (APN 597-041-51-00) Properties COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 14, 2014. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. D H I L L SI D ECAMPO RD. ÃÅ94 113 115 Campo Rd 309308 §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ DIV. 5 DIV. 2 DIV. 1 DIV. 3 DIV. 4 5 8 8 805 805 11 9454 94 125 125 905 125 905 125 . 0 140 280 420 56070 Feet LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAPExhibit A1 Hillside Drive & Campo Road N/A N/A 597-041-50-00 7.82 Acres 0 Campo Rd, Jamul CA 91935 Otay Water District DIV. 5 ID 9 8/6/2014 DEVELOPER: PROJECT#: APN: AREA: OWNER: ADDRESS: DATE: DIR: WID: Property Line Adjustment. District PropertyAPN: 597-041-50-00 Private PropertyAPN: 597-041-51-00 ^_ "Cé 94 DE 94 RD. MELODY RD. R D. H W Y VIA DR. HWY. B U E N O CALLE L Y O N S CALLEALLEJANDRO JA CALLE MELODY MESQUITE H IL L S I DE JEFFERSON AL LEJANDRO SHORT CT. LAS PALMAS RD. CAMPO ROAD WA N D A W A Y CAMPO RD. MAXFIELD ROAD JEFFERSON ROAD CALLE BUENO GANAR PROCTOR VALLEY RD. VALLEY RD.ÃÅ94 Campo Rd Hillside Dr Maxfield Rd Melody Rd Sprint Way Sho rt CtWanda Way Las Palmas Rd Procto r Valley Rd Calle Mesquite 309308 205204 323322 . LOCATION MAP Exhibit A2 Hillside Drive & Campo Road District PropertyAPN: 597-041-50-00 . RECORDING REQUESTED BY: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, Ca 91978 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, Ca 91978 APN No. 597-041-50-00 (Space above this line reserved for Recorder’s use only) GRANT DEED FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PURPOSES The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s): Documentary transfer tax is $______ City Tax is $ EXEMPT ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or ( ) computed on full value less value of liens and encumbrances remaining at the time of sale. ( ) Unincorporated area: _________________ ( ) City of _____________________ (X) Realty not sold. FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Otay Water District (Grantor), hereby GRANTS to Otay Water District (Grantee), the following described real property in the County of San Diego, State of California: Parcel “A” of that certain Certificate of Compliance recorded October 14, 2004 as Document No. 04-0976196 in the Official Records of the San Diego County Recorder, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and made a part hereof. This grant deed is recorded pursuant to California Government Code Section 66412 (d) and is intended to memorialize that certain Lot Line Adjustment B/C 04-0192 approved by the San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use, recorded as Certificate of Compliance numbers 2004-0976196 and 2004-0976197, both recorded on October 14, 2004, and to effectuate the adjustment of lot lines for property held in common ownership. ___________________________________ Dated:_______________________ By: Mark Watton General Manager Otay Water District CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT GRANTOR’S SIGNATURE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California ) ) ss County of ) On ____________________ before me, ____________________________________________ DATE NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., "JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC" personally appeared __________________________________________________________________ NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. _________________________________ Signature of Notary Public (Notary Seal) RECORDING REQUESTED BY: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, Ca 91978 WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, Ca 91978 APN No. 597-041-51-00 (Space above this line reserved for Recorder’s use only) GRANT DEED FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT PURPOSES The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s): Documentary transfer tax is $______ City Tax is $ EXEMPT ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or ( ) computed on full value less value of liens and encumbrances remaining at the time of sale. ( ) Unincorporated area: _________________ ( ) City of _____________________ (X) Realty not sold. FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Judy Gore (Grantor), hereby GRANTS to Judy Gore (Grantee), the following described real property in the County of San Diego, State of California: Parcel “B” of that certain Certificate of Compliance recorded October 14,2004 as Document No. 2004-0976197 in the Official Records of the San Diego County Recorder, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and made a part hereof. This grant deed is recorded pursuant to California Government Code Section 66412 (d) and is intended to memorialize that certain Lot Line Adjustment B/C 04-0192 approved by the San Diego County Department of Planning and Land Use, recorded as Certificate of Compliance numbers 2004-0976196 and 2004-0976197, both recorded on October 14, 2004, and to effectuate the adjustment of lot lines for property held in common ownership. ____________________________ Dated:______________________ By: Judy Gore CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT GRANTOR’S SIGNATURE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of California ) ) ss County of ) On ____________________ before me, ____________________________________________ DATE NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., "JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC" personally appeared __________________________________________________________________ NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) , or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. _________________________________ Signature of Notary Public (Notary Seal) STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 3, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Otay Ranch Village 8 West Water Annexation Request into Improvement Districts (IDs) 22 and 27 (APNs 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17, & 19-00) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 4240, fixing terms and conditions for the annexation of certain real properties owned by the Otay Land Co., LLC, APNs: 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17, and 19-00 into the Otay Water District Improvement District Nos. 22 and 27 (see Exhibit C for location). COMMITTEE ACTION: See Attachment A. PURPOSE: The purpose of the proposed annexation is to provide water service to parcels owned by Otay Land Co., LLC. (APNs 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17, and 19-00.) ANALYSIS: A written request and Petition signed by Mr. Jeff O’Connor, Otay Land Co., LLC, has been received for the annexation of APNs (APNs: 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17, and 19-00) into Improvement District Nos. 22 and 27 for water service. The total acreage to be annexed is 2 299.37 acres. The properties are within the sphere of influence of Otay Water District and will be part of Improvement Districts 22 and 27 after the Board of Directors approve this request. The properties are located at Rock Mountain Road & Magdalena Avenue in the City of Chula Vista in the County of San Diego. The annexation of the Otay Ranch Village 8 West parcels will create two island parcels inside Improvement Districts 22 and 27 (see Exhibit C). Assessor Parcel Number 644-241-06-00 is owned by the United States Government and is currently being used by the Federal Aviation Administration. This parcel has an area of 51.65 acres. Assessor Parcel Number 644-070-13-00 is owned by the City of San Diego and contains an active 15 million gallon reservoir called Lower Otay Reservoir. Due to the complexity of securing ownership approvals to annex these parcels and in consideration of their current uses, the annexation of these parcels into Improvement Districts 22 and 27 has been deferred to a future date. FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph Beachem, Chief Financial Officer The property owners will pay the District's Annexation processing fee of $763.83, which is subject to annual adjustment in accordance with the District Code of Ordinances. At the time a water meter is purchased, the owners will pay the then current meter and capacity fees based on water meter size. The owner will continue to pay availability fees based on the current acres of 299.37 until such time that the property is subdivided at which time the fees will be based on $10 per parcel or $30 per acre. Because these parcels are already within the Otay Water District boundaries, no annexation fees will be charged for these parcels. STRATEGIC GOAL: Provide water service to meet increasing customer needs. LEGAL IMPACT: No legal impact. DM/RP:jf \\owd-fp1\engrplan\public-s\annexation requests\2014\village 8 west\draft staff report, otay ranch village 8 west water annexation 8-4-14.doc Attachments: Attachment A - Committee Action Attachment B - Resolution Exhibit A - Legal Description Exhibit B - Legal Map Exhibit C – GIS Map ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Otay Ranch Village 8 West Water Annexation Request into Improvement Districts (IDs) 22 and 27 (APNs 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17 & 19-00) COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 14, 2014. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 4240 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF OTAY WATER DISTRICT APPROVING THE ANNEXATION TO OTAY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NOS. 22/27 OF THOSE LANDS DESCRIBED AS "OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST WATER ANNEXATION REQUEST TO IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (IDs) 22 AND 27” (FILE NO. ENG70-10-142/DIV. 1) WHEREAS, a letter has been submitted by OTAY LAND COMPANY, LLC, C/O JEFF O’CONNOR, the owner and party that has an interest in the land described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto, for annexation of said land to Otay Water District Improvement District Nos. 22/27 pursuant to California Water Code Section 72670 et seq.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 72680.1 of said Water Code, the Board of Directors may proceed and act thereon without notice and hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT FINDS, RESOLVES, ORDERS AND DETERMINES as follows: 1. A depiction of the area proposed to be annexed, and the boundaries of IDs 22/27 following the annexation, is set forth on a map in Exhibit “B” filed with the Secretary of the District, which map shall govern for all details as to the area proposed to be annexed. 2. The purpose of the proposed annexation is to make water service available to the area to be annexed, which availability constitutes a benefit to said area. 3. The Board finds and determines that the area proposed to be annexed to IDs 22/27 will be benefited by such annexation and that the property currently within IDs 22/27 will also be Page 2 of 4 benefited and not injured by such annexation because after the annexation a larger tax base will be available to finance the water facilities and improvements of IDs 22/27. 4. The Board of Directors hereby declares that the annexa- tion of said property is subject to the owners complying with the following terms and conditions: (a) The petitioners for said annexation shall pay to Otay Water District the following: (1) The annexation processing fee at the time of application; (2) State Board of Equalization filing fees in the amount of $2,300; (3) The water annexation fee at the time of connection to the Otay Water District water system; (4) Yearly assessment fees will be collected through the County Tax Assessor’s office in the amount of $30 for APNs 644-070-12, 14 16, 17 and 19-00; (5) In the event that water service is to be provided, Petitioners shall pay all applicable water meter fees per Equipment Dwelling Unit (EDU) at the time the meter is purchased; and (6) Payment by the owners of APNs 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17 and 19-00 of all other applicable local or state agency fees or charges. Page 3 of 4 (b) The property to be annexed shall be subject to taxation after annexation thereof for the purposes of the improvement district, including the payment of principal and interest on bonds and other obligations of the improvement district, author- ized and outstanding at the time of annexation, the same as if the annexed property had always been a part of the improvement district. 5. The Board hereby declares the property described in Exhibit "A" shall be considered annexed to IDs 22/27 upon passage of this resolution. 6. The Board of Directors further finds and determines that there are no exchanges of property tax revenues to be made pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 95 et seq., as a result of such annexation. 7. The annexation of APNs 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17 and 19-00 to the District’s Improvement Districts 22/27 is hereby designated as the “OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST WATER ANNEXATION”. 8. Pursuant to Section 57202(a) of the Government Code, the effective date of the OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST WATER ANNEXATION shall be the date this Resolution is adopted by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District. 9. The General Manager of the District and the Secretary of the District, or their respective designees, are hereby ordered to take all actions required to complete this annexation. Page 4 of 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 3rd day of September, 2014. President ATTEST: __________________________________ District Secretary ÃÅ125 ÃÅ125 91913 91915 C A - 1 2 5 S CA-125 N W il e y R d La Media Rd C r a n b e r r y S t Reichert Way 068 069 052 083 067 053 084 051 082 Id 22-27 Id 22-27 §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ §¨¦ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ ÃÅ DIV. 5 DIV. 2 DIV. 1 DIV. 3 DIV. 4 5 8 8 805 805 11 9454 94 125 125 905 125 905 125 . 0 1,100 2,200 3,300 4,400550 Feet LOCATION MAP VICINITY MAPEXHIBIT C OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST ANNEXATION Otay Land Company, LLC D0790-090165 644-070-12, 14, 16, 17 & 19 299.37 Otay Land Company, LLC DIV 1 22/27 6/26/2014 DEVELOPER: PROJECT#: APN: AREA: OWNER: DATE: DIR: WID: Project Site APN: 644-070-12-00 APN: 644-070-14-00APN: 644-070-16-00 APN: 644-070-17-00APN: 644-070-19-00 Island Parcel APN: 644-241-06-00 ^_ L a M e dia R o a d Island ParcelAPN: 644-070-13-00 STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 3, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Bob Kennedy Engineering Manager PROJECT: P2515- 001101 DIV. NO. 2 APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief, Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) approves the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project (see Exhibit A for Project location). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To obtain Board approval for the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project. ANALYSIS: The Otay Water District (District) is proposing to pave an existing dirt access road that surrounds the 870-1 potable water reservoir facility. The paving of this road will provide year-round access to the Reservoir and reduce the maintenance requirements of the dirt road. The road is approximately 2,100 feet long and approximately 10 to 12 feet wide, covering a total area of approximately 21,000 square feet (0.48 acre). The road starts at the south access gate and encircles the reservoir, it is between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that surrounds the reservoir site. All planned construction activities would take place within previously developed areas (the existing dirt road). The road would be paved with asphalt concrete and require the use of construction equipment that includes a grader, dozer, roller, dump truck and backhoe. Staging of any construction equipment will occur in disturbed areas. The construction activity would occur within a two month time period and also occur outside of the migratory bird breeding season. District staff prepared the draft MND for the project with the aid of ICF Jones & Stokes, the As-needed Environmental Services consultant, who produced the technical studies that support the findings of the MND. Based on the findings of these documents, and with proper mitigation measures taken, as outlined in the draft MND, the Project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study and Draft MND were submitted for the 20-day review period on June 13, 2014. Two comment letters were received from the County of San Diego, and the San Diego County Archaeological Society. The two letters and the responses to their comments are presented in the Final MND (see Attachment B). The mitigation, monitoring, and reporting plan (MMRP) that will be in place for the Project is included with the Final MND. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer None. STRATEGIC GOAL: This Project supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. LC-B/BK:jf P:\WORKING\CIP P2515 -- 870-1 Reservoir Paving\Staff Reports\BD 09-03-14, Staff Report, 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project MND Attachments: Exhibit A – Project Location Map Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B – Budget Detail Attachment C – Final MND and MMRP ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2515-001101 Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a meeting held on August 14, 2014. The Committee supported Staff's recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. ATTACHMENT B – Budget Detail SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2515-001101 Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Level Title1 Committed Expenditures Outstanding Commitment Projected Final Cost Vendor Project Phase Consultant Contracts $19,889.83 $19,889.83 $0.00 $19,889.83 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES INC Planning Regulatory Agency Fees $50.00 $50.00 $0.00 $50.00 PETTY CASH CUSTODIAN Planning $125.40 $125.40 $0.00 $125.40 SAN DIEGO DAILY TRANSCRIPT Planning $115.31 $115.31 $0.00 $115.31 THE STAR-NEWS PUBLISHING CO Planning Standard Salaries $30,351.71 $30,351.71 $0.00 $30,351.71 Planning Total $50,532.25 $50,532.25 $0.00 $50,532.25 $7,615.00 $7,615.00 $0.00 $7,615.00 MTGL INC Design $2,716.00 $2,716.00 $0.00 $2,716.00 AIRX UTILITY SURVEYORS INC Design $1,425.00 $1,425.00 $0.00 $1,425.00 ALTA LAND SURVEYING INC Design $2,376.00 $0.00 $2,376.00 $2,376.00 MAYER REPROGRAPHICS INC Design $12.42 $12.42 $0.00 $12.42 FIRST AMERICAN DATA TREE LLC Design $1,300.00 $1,300.00 $0.00 $1,300.00 INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS INC Design Standard Salaries $101,322.82 $101,322.82 $0.00 $101,322.82 Design Total $116,767.24 $114,391.24 $2,376.00 $116,767.24 Construction Standard Salaries $2,523.35 $2,523.35 $0.00 $2,523.35 Construction Total $2,523.35 $2,523.35 $0.00 $2,523.35 Budget $550,000.00 Total $169,822.84 $167,446.84 $2,376.00 $169,822.84 Project Budget Detail P2515-870-1 Reservoir Paving 1/1/2004 - 7/30/2014 Planning Service Contracts Design Consultant Contracts Service Contracts ATTACHMENT C – Final MND and MMRP SUBJECT/PROJECT: P2515-001101 Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Final Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared By: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, CA 91978 Introduction A draft version of this Mitigated Negative Declaration (draft MND) was circulated for a 20-day public review between May 1, 2014 and May 31, 2014 and the Notice of Intent to Adopt the MND (NOI) was posted with the San Diego County Clerk. The Otay Water District (District) determined that a 20-day public review period was appropriate for the MND pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15073 because the project does not require the approval of any State agencies which would have required a 30-day review period. The draft MND was available for public review at the Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley, CA 91978, and on the District’s website, www.otaywater.gov. This chapter provides the persons, organizations, and public agencies that commented during this public review period. The District has evaluated the comments on environmental issues received from those agencies/parties and has prepared written responses to each pertinent comment relating to the adequacy of the environmental analysis contained within the draft MND. These responses are provided following each individual comment letter. The comments did not require any revisions to the draft MND. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is provided as Attachment B to this final MND. Agency and Organization Comments The District received two comment letters on the MND during the 20-day public review period. The letters received included: County of San Diego, Planning and Development Services (PDS), and San Diego County Archaeological Society (SDCAS), 1-1 1-2 Letter 1: County of San Diego, Planning and Development Services 2-1 The comment states that the project is considered a Priority Development Project (PDP) as described in the County’s current Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and requires the preparation of a storm water management plan (SWMP) with treatment control BMP’s. Comment is noted and acknowledged on page 41 of the draft MND that the construction plans will include BMP’s that comply with the County of San Diego Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management, and Discharge Control Ordinance. The District is not required to submit a SWMP to the County for approval or permitting but will prepare a stormwater management plan for the project. No changes to the draft MND are necessary in response to this comment. 2-2 The comment states that the discussion of the effects on water quality in the MND focuses only on construction BMP’s and that the discussion should include post- construction BMP’s as well. In response to this comment, a discussion about the post- construction BMP’s that are incorporated in the project design has been added to the draft MND. Changes are shown in strikeout/underline format in the draft MND (see Attachment A). (Please note, consistent with 15073.5(c)(4), new information added to the document for clarification does not constitute grounds for recirculation of the draft MND.) 2-2 2-1 Letter 2: San Diego County Archaeological Society 2-1 The San Diego County Archaeological Society had difficulty accessing the draft MND. The link to the document was corrected and contact was made to provide access to the document. 2-2 The San Diego County Archaeological Society concurs with the impact determinations contained with the draft MND that no impacts to cultural resources are expected and that no mitigation measures would be necessary. No changes to the draft MND are necessary in response to this comment. Attachment A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Draft Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared By: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, CA 91978 This page left intentionally blank. Table of Contents Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page Section 1 Project Background ........................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Project Purpose and Objectives ............................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Project Location .................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Project Description ................................................................................................................................ 1-1 1.4 Surrounding Land Use and Setting ........................................................................................................ 1-2 1.5 Authority to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration ....................................................................... 1-2 1.6 Preparer of the Mitigated Negative Declaration ................................................................................... 1-2 Section 2 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form ................................................................................... 2-3 2.1 Aesthetics .............................................................................................................................................. 2-6 2.2 Agricultural and Forest Resources ........................................................................................................ 2-7 2.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 2-9 2.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................................................................ 2-11 2.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 2-15 2.6 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 2-17 2.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................. 2-20 2.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................................... 2-22 2.9 Hydrology and Water Quality.............................................................................................................. 2-25 2.10 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................................................ 2-29 2.11 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................................... 2-31 2.12 Noise ................................................................................................................................................... 2-32 2.13 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................................... 2-34 2.14 Public Services ..................................................................................................................................... 2-35 2.15 Recreation ........................................................................................................................................... 2-37 2.16 Transportation and Traffic .................................................................................................................. 2-38 2.17 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................................... 2-40 2.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................................... 2-42 2.19 Earlier Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 2-44 Appendices Appendix A: Air Quality & Greenhouse Gases Letter Report for the 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project, ICF International, June 2014. Appendix B: Biological Resources Letter Report for the 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project, ICF International, October, 2013. Appendix C: Cultural Resources Letter Report for the 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project, ICF International, October 2013. Appendix D: Subsurface Investigation, CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving, MTGL, June 2013. Appendix E: Noise Analysis Letter Report for the 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project, ICF International, June 2013. Figures Figure 1: Vicinity Map ...................................................................................................................... after1-1 Figure 2: Location Map ................................................................................................................................ after1-1 OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 1 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Section 1 Project Description 1.1 Project Purpose and Objectives The Otay Water District (District) is proposing to pave an existing dirt access road that surrounds their 870-1 potable water reservoir facility. The paving of this road will provide year-round access to the Reservoir and reduce the maintenance requirements of the dirt road. The current unpaved road is approximately 2,100 feet long and approximately 10 to 12 feet wide. The road starts at the south access gate to the reservoir site and encircles the reservoir. 1.2 Project Location The District’s 870-1 Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa George F. Bailey Detention Facility in the unincorporated community of Otay, San Diego County, California (Figure 1). The facilities consist of the reservoir, a dirt access road, and support facilities, including a small building containing instrumentation and disinfection equipments, concrete vaults and drain pipes, and stacks of construction materials. The project site is located on the Otay Mesa U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute series Otay Mesa Quadrangle. 1.3 Project Description The District is proposing the paving of an existing dirt and gravel access road that encircles the 870-1 Reservoir facilities in order to provide year-round access and reduce on-going road maintenance activities (Figure 2). The currently unpaved road is approximately 2,100 feet long and approximately 10 to 12 feet wide, covering a total area of approximately 21,000 square feet (0.48 acre). The road starts at the south access gate and encircles the reservoir, it is between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that surrounds the reservoir site. All planned construction activities would take place within previously developed areas (the existing dirt road). The road would be paved with asphalt concrete and require the use construction equipment that includes a grader, dozer, roller, dump truck and backhoe. Staging of any construction equipment will occur in disturbed areas. BMP’s will be used during construction to ensure that all materials generated during construction are contained and/or disposed of properly. There will be no impact to vegetation at the site which generally occurs between the inner edge of the access road and the outer edge of the reservoir. Temporary construction fencing will be installed around patches of vegetation that could be potentially impacted by construction activities so that the Contractor is aware of the limits of construction. It has been determined that the construction activity would occur within a two month time period and will occur outside of the migratory bird breeding season. The project consists solely of the paving of the existing access road. There are no other structures included in the project and no new lighting. The operations aspect of the project will not change after project completion. Currently, District Operations staff visits the site once per day with the potential of one other maintenance staff visit per week. The operations component of the project will remain the same after paving is completed. National Geographic, Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA,ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp. P: \ \ W O R K I N G \ C I P P 2 5 1 5 \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ 6 - 1 1 - F i g . 1 Figure 1870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving ProjectCIP P2515 Project Site F 0 5 102.5 Miles 055 P: \ \ W O R K I N G \ C I P P 2 5 1 5 \ G r a p h i c s \ E x h i b i t s - F i g u r e s \ E n v i r o n m e n t a l Figure 2F PROJECT SITE ALTA R D . EAST MESADETENTIONFACILITY 870-1 RES 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving ProjectCIP P2515 OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 2 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 1.4 Surrounding Land Use and Setting The project vicinity is largely undeveloped. The project site is bounded to the northwest, northeast, and southeast by the Otay County Open Space Preserve. The closest developed land use to the Project is the East Mesa Detention Complex, which is located to the southwest. This is a complex of four county- and privately-operated detention facilities. The project site is more than two miles from the closest major highway or airport. The project site is wholly contained within Otay Water District property that contains a below ground Reservoir and is surrounded by a chain-link fence. 1.5 Authority to Prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration As provided in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15070 (Title 14 – California Code of Regulations), an MND may be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when an Initial Study has identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but when revisions to the project have been made so that no significant effect on the environment would result from project implementation. The District is the lead agency and is responsible for planning, constructing, and operating the training facility. Based on the findings of the Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form prepared for this project, the District has determined that preparation of the MND is the appropriate method to present environmental review of the proposed project in compliance with CEQA. Section 2 of this MND provides the Initial Study/ Environmental Checklist Form. 1.6 Preparer of the Mitigated Negative Declaration This MND was prepared by Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Environmental Compliance Specialist, Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd., Spring Valley, California, 91978. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 3 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Section 2 Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978-2004 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Environmental Compliance Specialist (619) 670-2219 4. Project Location: The Access road would extend from the Otay Water District’s Regulatory Site at 11880 Campo Road, Spring Valley, CA 91978, to the County of San Diego Sheriff Station that is under construction and to a secondary access road that connects to SR-94. The access road would extend through parcel 506-140-13-00. The site’s regional location is shown in Figure 1. 5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, CA 91978-2004 6. General Plan Designation: Rural Lands 40 and Public/Semi-Public 7. Zoning: S90 Holding Area 8. Description of Project: The District is proposing the paving of an existing dirt and gravel access road that encircles the 870-1 Reservoir facilities in order to provide year-round access and reduce on-going road maintenance activities (Figure 2). The currently unpaved road is approximately 2,100 feet long and approximately 10 to 12 feet wide, covering a total area of approximately 21,000 square feet (0.48 acre). The road starts at the south access gate and encircles the reservoir, it is between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that surrounds the reservoir site. All planned construction activities would take place within previously developed areas (the existing dirt road). The road would be paved with asphalt concrete and require the use construction equipment that includes a grader, dozer, roller, dump truck and backhoe. Staging of any construction equipment will occur in disturbed areas. BMP’s will be used during construction to ensure that all materials generated during construction are contained and/or disposed of properly. There will be no impact to vegetation at the site which generally occurs between the inner edge of the access road and the outer edge of the reservoir. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 4 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 9. . The project consists solely of the paving of the existing access road. There are no other structures included in the project and no new lighting. The operations aspect of the project will not change after project completion. Currently, District Operations staff visits the site once per day with the potential of one other maintenance staff visit per week. The operations component of the project will remain the same after paving is completed. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project vicinity is largely undeveloped. The project site is bounded to the northwest, northeast, and southeast by the Otay County Open Space Preserve. The closest developed land use to the Project is the East Mesa Detention Complex, which is located to the southwest. This is a complex of four county- and privately-operated detention facilities. The project site is more than two miles from the closest major highway or airport. The project site is wholly contained within Otay Water District property that contains a below ground Reservoir and is surrounded by a chain-link fence. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 6 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Environmental Checklist Aesthetics Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than- Significant Impact No Impact 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Discussion a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The paving of the access road would not have an adverse effect on scenic vistas because there are no designated scenic vistas in the area. The work will occur within the same area as the existing dirt access road and will not affect any vistas. No impact will occur as a result of the project. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway? No Impact. There are no scenic highways in the area of the project. No impact will occur as a result of the project. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? No Impact. The paving of the access road around the reservoir will occur in the same footprint as the existing dirt access road that surrounds a public water supply reservoir, and is not accessible to the general public. There will not be any impact to the vegetation or alteration of the terrain adjacent to the road. Therefore, there will be no impact as a result of the project. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. The paving of the access road design does not include any lighting facilities. No impact will occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 7 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Agricultural and Forest Services Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation. Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)) or timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code section 4526)? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest to non-forest use? Discussion a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. According to the maps prepared by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Dept. of Conservation, Land Resources Division, the project site does not contain any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance and, therefore will not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. No impact will occur as a result of the project. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 8 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 The project does not contain an agricultural zoning designation and is not associated with a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, there will be no impact as a result of the project. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)) or timberland (as defined in Public Resources Code section 4526)? No Impact. The project site does not contain any forest lands or timberland. Therefore, the project will not cause any rezoning of these lands and no impact will occur as a result of the project. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The project site does not contain any forest lands, therefore there is not any possibility for the loss of forest lands or for conversion of forest lands to a non-forest use. No impact will occur as a result of the project. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest to non-forest use? No Impact. There are no farmland on or adjacent to the access road paving project site so that the construction would not cause any conversion of farmland to non-agricultural or non-forest uses. Therefore, there will be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 9 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Air Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. When available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Discussion a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. The project site is in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) which is contiguous with San Diego County. Within San Diego County, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) has the primary responsibility for the development and implementation of rules and regulations designed to attain national and state ambient air quality standards, as well as the permitting of new or modified sources, development of air quality management plans, and adoption and enforcement of air pollution regulations. The SDAPCD is the local agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of air quality regulations in San Diego County. The San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining state standards, while the State Implementation Plan (SIP) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining federal standards. The SDAPCD develops a set of emissions control measures that reduce emissions within the basin, in an effort to attain NAAQS and CAAQS. These emission controls are adopted as local air quality rules and regulations. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 10 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 ICF International completed an air quality analysis (Appendix A) which estimated the air quality emissions for the project. Based on the results of this analysis, it is expected that there would be less than significant short term construction impacts and no long-term operational impacts on air quality due to the proposed project. Additionally, the RAQS also relies on information from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) regarding projected growth in the county, which is based in part on local general plans. The proposed Project would not result in a change of land uses and is therefore consistent with the County of San Diego General Plan. Therefore, because the project would be consistent with the County of San Diego General Plan, which was used in the formulation of the RAQS and SIP, the project is considered consistent with the RAQS and SIP and would not conflict or obstruct with their implementation. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would pave an existing dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. Construction of the project would result in emissions as a result of ground disturbance, off-road construction vehicle exhaust, emissions from employee and asphalt delivery travel, and off-gassing from paving activities. Emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and, for fugitive dust, prevailing weather conditions. The ICF international air quality analysis (Appendix A) estimated the project’s construction emissions which were compared to SDAPCD air quality impact analysis (AQIA) trigger levels, (SDAPCD Rule 20.2 and 20.3) Based on this analysis it was determined that the levels would be far below AQIA trigger levels. Therefore there would be a less than significant impact as a result of the project. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less than Significant Impact. See 3. b) above. The construction activity and project operation would not have any impacts on air quality so there would be a less than significant impact as a result of the project. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the access road would create emissions and fugitive dust which has the potential to impact any nearby sensitive receptors. BMPs will be used to limit fugitive dust emissions from construction activities and adherence to SDAPCD Rules 50, 51, and 55 would limit emissions that may be capable of impacting any nearby receptors. Therefore, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and the project will have a less than significant impact for this issue. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. Project-related odor emissions would be limited to the construction period and may include odors from the construction equipment and the asphalt paving. These odors would not affect a substantial number of people because there are no residential areas near the project site. There would be no permanent impacts since any odor generation would terminate upon completion of the construction phase of the project. Therefore, there will be a less than significant impact with regards to odors from the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 11 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Biological Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Discussion a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 12 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 ICF International staff performed biological surveys and prepared a Biological Letter Resources Report (Biological Letter) in the spring and summer of 2013 to analyze potential effects of the proposed project on sensitive biological resources. The report is provided as Appendix B. The biological surveys included a general biological survey, focused surveys for Quino checkerspot butterfly and dry season sampling for listed fairy shrimp. Vegetation Communities The access road is currently unpaved and maintained free of vegetation. Within the 300 foot survey buffer surrounding the project alignment, there are seven different vegetation communities. Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, Non-native Grassland, Disturbed Southern Willow Scrub, Disturbed Mule Fat Scrub, Disturbed Habitat, and Developed. Sensitive Plant and Wildlife Species Field surveys and a search of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and California Native Plant Species (CNPS) identified 30 special-status plant species that occur or have the potential to occur in the project vicinity (refer to Attachment B of the Biological Letter). Field surveys and a search of the CNDDB also identified 22 special-status wildlife species that occur or have the potential to occur in the project vicinity (refer to Attachment C of the Biological Letter). Focused surveys were conducted for Quino checkerspot butterfly. No adult or larval Quino were detected during the survey. One western spadefoot tadpole was found occupying a ponded road-rut. The basin containing this and other road ruts was sampled for San Diego and Riverside Fairy Shrimp during the dry season. The results of this sampling were negative, the full report is attached in Appendix B. Impacts The project does not include any removal of vegetation from the site so there will be no impact to native vegetation habitats. Temporary construction fencing will be installed around the vegetation close to the project site to ensure that no impacts occur. Prior to the start of construction, it is possible that direct impacts would result from vehicle traffic on the access road when ponded water is present. In order to avoid direct impacts to western spadefoot, Mitigation Measure Bio-1 will be implemented. This measure consists of pre-construction surveys by a qualified biologist when suitable conditions are present to determine if the species is present. If present, the species will be removed from the impact area. Increased noise levels during construction could result in indirect impacts on the coastal California gnatcatcher (or other special-status birds/raptor species or species protected by the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act [MBTA]), if construction would occur during the breeding season. Because project construction activities could result in impacts on the coastal California gnatcatcher or other special-status birds/raptor species or species protected by the MBTA, this would be a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would reduce the project’s potential direct and indirect adverse impacts from short-term construction noise on coastal California gnatcatcher, special-status birds/raptor species, or species protected by the MBTA to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Pre-Construction Biological Survey for Western Spadefoot. Due to the observed presence of one western spadefoot tadpole, a qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction surveys to determine if this species is present. If present, the species will be removed from the project site. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 13 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Construction Not to Occur during Coastal California Gnatcatcher Breeding Season. Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. No clearing, grubbing, grading of vegetation will occur between February 15 and August 31, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher. However, if construction is proposed during the breeding season for the gnatcatcher, the following requirements will have to be met to the satisfaction of the County: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol surveys will be required in order to determine species’ presence or absence. If no gnatcatchers are detected within 300 feet of the proposed grading/construction, then no restriction on grading will be necessary. If gnatcatchers are present, measures to minimize noise impacts will be required and should include temporary noise walls and/or berms. If the survey is not performed and construction is proposed during the species’ breeding season, presence will be assumed and a temporary wall/berm will be required. Noise levels from grading/construction activities during the breeding season should not exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ at the edge of the occupied habitat, or the ambient noise level if noise levels already exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in the Biological Resources Letter Report (Appendix B), the project will not impact any vegetation. Due to the location of potentially sensitive riparian habitats adjacent to the road, standard BMP’s will be used to contain any runoff from construction activity reducing the potential impact to less than significant. Therefore, the impact of the project for this issue will be less than significant. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Less than Significant Impact. See response 4. b) above. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel access road on District property that is entirely contained within a barbed-wire topped, chain-link fence enclosure. As such, the presence of a paved OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 14 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 road would not alter the permeability to wildlife of this site. The proposed road will support limited vehicular traffic and will not include structures or physical barriers that would impede or discourage wildlife movement across the road. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. The project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel access road surrounding a reservoir. As a result, the proposed project would not be in conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The project is not located within an area with an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, there will be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 15 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Cultural Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Discussion a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? No Impact. A project site reconnaissance and record search was conducted by ICF International archaeologists and the results are documented in a letter report to the District, dated April 18, 2013 (Appendix C). Based on the results of the cultural resources survey, no historical resources as defined in Section 15064.5 were identified within the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause an adverse change to a historical resource and there would be no impact as a result of the project. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? No Impact. The cultural resources survey conducted for the project site (ICF Intl., April, 2013) found no archaeological resources located on the project site. There would be no impact as a result of the project. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. A geotechnical report of the site was conducted by MTGL in June, 2013 (Appendix C). The subsurface exploration done for the study indicated that the access road site consists of 4.5 foot to 5.5 foot of undocumented fill, deposited when the reservoir was constructed. The project will remove approximately 9 inches of this fill for the paving of the road. Native soils will not be disturbed by the paving of the road. Therefore, there is no possibility for the destruction of a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. There would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 16 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact. The cultural resources survey for the site found no evidence of human remains or cultural resources in the project site. However, there is a possibility that human remains could be found at the site. In the event that human remains are discovered during Project activities, the procedures outlined in Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Human Safety Code would be followed. Therefore, impacts on human remains would be less than significant. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 17 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Geology and Soils Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 2. Strong seismic groundshaking? 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 4. Landslides? b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Discussion a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Less than Significant Impact. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 18 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 An investigation of the geologic conditions of the site was prepared for the District by MTGL Inc. in June, 2013 (Appendix D). The site is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Per the findings in the geotechnical analysis, the site is not within an earthquake fault zone. Therefore, potential impacts from surface rupture of an active fault would be less than significant. 2) Strong seismic groundshaking? Less than Significant Impact. As with most southern California regions, the project site would be subject to strong ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake. Although the site is not within an earthquake fault zone, the nearest known active fault likely to generate the highest ground accelerations at the site is the Rose Canyon Fault, located about 15 miles northwest of the site. Therefore, the project site could experience ground motion during its design life as a result of regional seismic activity. Potential for ground shaking during earthquakes and engineering design measures would be a part of the proposed access road. With incorporation of standard measures, potential impacts on the proposed access road from seismic groundshaking would be less than significant. 3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. The geotechnical report prepared by MTGL Inc. in June, 2013 found that the site has relatively dense subsurface soils and that there is no groundwater table present. Under these conditions, the potential for liquefaction at the site is negligible. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. 4) Landslides? Less than Significant Impact. The geotechnical report found that the potential for the site to be impacted by landslides and debris flows is considered to be very low due to the shallow depth to formation materials and the relative density of the materials. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. The project site has been relatively disturbed by the development of the existing reservoir and the existing dirt and gravel access road. The grading that will be done to prepare the road for paving could disturb soil that would potentially be exposed to wind and water erosion for a short period of time. During the grading activities the project will be required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the short-term erosion impacts associated with the construction activities. With the implementation of the BMPs, potential impacts associated with soil erosion would be less than significant. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an onsite or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Less than Significant Impact. Based on the information contained in the above-referenced geotechnical report, the potential impact to the proposed project from unstable geologic units would be less than significant. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 19 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. Based on the information contained in the above-referenced geotechnical report, the access road paving would not be impacted by expansive soils. Additionally, according to County sources the proposed project is not within an area of potential expansive soils (County of San Diego, 2011). Based on this information, the potential impact to the proposed project from expansive soils would be less than significant. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The project is the paving of a dirt access road around a potable water reservoir. It does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 20 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project would result in GHG emissions as a result of off-road construction equipment exhaust and from employee and asphalt delivery travel. Total GHG emissions would vary depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and the amount of time each equipment or vehicle is in use. ICF International completed an air quality and greenhouse gas analysis for the project (Appendix A) and estimated the GHG emissions for the project based on an earlier analysis done for a similar, but larger District road paving project, the Regulatory Site Access Road Project. The GHG analysis for the Regulatory Site Access Road included an estimation of construction GHG emissions using CalEEMod. Emissions were summed over the entire construction period, added to annual operational emissions, and compared to the CAPCOA screening threshold. Emissions were found to be far below the CAPCOA screening threshold and were considered to be less than significant. Activity associated Regulatory Site Access Road construction is expected to be greater than expected for this proposed project. Therefore, because this proposed project would result in less activity over a shorter duration, total GHG emissions from construction are anticipated to be of similar or less quantity than for the Regulatory Site Access Road. Therefore, GHG emissions from this proposed project are considered to be less than significant. b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than Significant Impact. The District has yet to adopt a qualified plan, policy, or regulation to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the most applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions is Assembly Bill 32, which codified the state’s GHG emissions reduction targets for the future. The County of San Diego has recently adopted a Climate Action Plan and thresholds of significance for various types of projects. As discussed in the response to 7a, the combined construction and operations GHG emissions would not exceed the County’s 2,500 MTCO2e bright line threshold. Long-term operations would not change from before the implementation of the project and would be minimal, one motor vehicle trip per day. Therefore, because the OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 21 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 project would result in construction emissions below relevant threshold and since the project would not result in additional trip generation during long term operation, the proposed project would not hinder implementation of statewide or regional plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The impact of the project for this issue would be less than significant. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 22 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 8. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e. Be located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f. Be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Discussion a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 23 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Less than Significant Impact. The project is the construction of a paved access road around a potable water reservoir. During the project construction phase, construction equipment would use diesel fuel and other petroleum-based products. The use of diesel fuel and petroleum-based products would be temporary, and standard BMPs (see discussion section 9. b) for a list of BMPs) would be applied to ensure that all hazards potentially occurring during this phase of the project would not create a significant hazard to the public. Therefore, impacts during construction would be less than significant. During the operations phase of the project, a portion of the paved road will be used on infrequent occasions to deliver sodium hypochlorite to a disinfection facility located on the south end of the reservoir site. Deliveries of this chemical occur once or twice per year for emergency disinfection of the reservoir. Transport of this material is regulated by the California Health and Safety Code and any transport would comply with all mandatory regulations to ensure prevention of hazardous conditions. The District has set forth standard and mandatory safety procedures for the delivery, storage, and use of hypochlorite in HMS 101.21, “Sodium and Calcium Hypochlorite Safety Procedure,” which lays out safe work practices to protect employees and container, delivery, and disposal procedures to protect the environment and other people who may be in proximity to these chemicals. The infrequent use and adherence to mandatory safety procedures ensure that the project’s impacts due to any project-related presence of hazardous materials would be less than significant. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact. See response to 8. a) above. Therefore, impacts of the project for this issue would be less than significant. c) Emit hazardous emissions or involve handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the project site. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Envirostor Database, DTSC). Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. e) Be located within an airport land use plan area or, where such a plan has not been adopted, be within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within two miles of a public airport. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 24 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 f) Be located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The project is the paving of an access road around a potable water reservoir and would not impact traffic on any nearby roadway. There would be no interference with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing access road around a potable water reservoir in a rural setting. Therefore, the project will not expose people or structures to the potential risk of wildland fires and there would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 25 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Hydrology and Water Quality Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding onsite or offsite? e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect floodflows? i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 26 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact j. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Discussion Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel road wholly contained within District property. Project construction is small-scale and not located adjacent to any natural water bodies. The District’s construction contract documents will include a list of BMPs that would be required during project construction in order to eliminate any opportunity of sediment and/or pollutants being discharged from the construction impact area. The BMPs are: Sediment Control with Fiber rolls. Sediment Control with Gravel Bags Berm Stabilized Construction Exit to Prevent Offsite Tracking of Sediment Street Sweeping to Prevent Offsite Tracking of Sediment Runoff Velocity Control with Energy Dissipator Site Management with Sanitary Waste Management Site Management with Vehicle and Equipment Fueling Site Management with Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance. Post Construction Impacts With implementation of the project, an area characterized by a dirt road would be converted to paved roadway. As a result, runoff would flow from the paved road at greater velocities than associated with the existing conditions. The District proposes to incorporate permanent BMPs listed below into the access road design to ensure that stormwater runoff from the paved road does not result in increased erosion or impacts on water quality. The work area would be clearly delineated for the construction of the road and all areas outside of these limits of work would remain undisturbed. Minimize erosion from slopes. Disturb existing slopes only when necessary. Direct flows leaving the road by the use of berms and direct these flows into a berm outlet with energy dissipator. Implementation of standard BMPs identified in the SWPPP would minimize potential impacts from construction activities. By the use of construction BMPs and the incorporation of permanent BMPs in the project design, the project would be consistent with the County of San Diego’s Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management, and Discharge Control Ordinance._Therefore, the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts from the project for this issue would be less than significant. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 27 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, resulting in a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. Paving of the existing access road would not require the consumption of groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Potable water would be supplied to the construction area. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the project. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation onsite or offsite? No Impact. Paving of the access road would follow the alignment of the existing dirt road around the reservoir and would not involve any substantial changes to the topography of the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off the site. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding onsite or offsite? Less than Significant Impact. See responses to 9a and 9c. Although the proposed access road would increase the extent of impervious surfaces from that associated with the existing dirt road, the design of the road would allow the water to drain from the road so that any increase in stormwater runoff would be absorbed within the surrounding area and would not result in flooding on or off the site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. See responses to 9a and 9c. Impacts would be less than significant. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact. See responses to 9. a) and 9. c). Impacts would be less than significant. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps for San Diego County, the entire area of the access road is mapped as being outside the 100-year floodplain, meaning that OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 28 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 there is a very low chance that damaging floods would occur on the site (FEMA 1999). In addition, the proposed project does not include the construction of any housing units. Therefore, the project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, and no impact would occur as a result of the project. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect floodflows? No Impact. See response to 9g. The entire area proposed for the access road is mapped as being outside the 100-year floodplain (FEMA 1999). Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. As discussed above, the access road is not in an area that is prone to flooding events. The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, because there are no levees or dams in the project vicinity. No impact would occur as a result of the project. Contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. The project site is greater than 13 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. The closest body of water is the Otay Reservoir, approximately 1.4 miles north of the project site. No impacts associated with inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 29 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Land Use and Planning Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Discussion Physically divide an established community? No impact. The proposed access road would generally follow the alignment of an existing dirt access road. The project does not propose the introduction of new infrastructure such as major roadways, water supply systems, or utilities to the area. The access road is in an unincorporated area in East Otay Mesa, adjacent to the County of San Diego’s George F. Bailey Detention Facility. The proposed access road is wholly contained within District property and would not divide any established community. Therefore, construction of the access road on the site would not divide an established community and there would be no impact as a result of the project. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No impact. The Project site is wholly contained within District property. As a Special District, local land use plans or policies are not applicable to the District. In addition, as discussed in other sections of this initial study, there will be no direct impacts on biological resources associated with the project. No other significant impacts on the environment have been identified. As a result, there would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 30 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No impact. The proposed project would be located on the District’s property surrounding their 870-1 potable water reservoir and is limited to the paving of an existing access road. As a result, the project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plans or natural community conservation plans and no impact would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 31 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Mineral Resources Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Discussion Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The project site is located within a relatively disturbed area surrounding a potable water reservoir. The project site is not identified as containing significant mineral resources. Based on the geotechnical report prepared by MTGL (Appendix D), the project site is not utilized for mineral resources mining or processing activity, nor is the site located in close proximity to such uses. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. See response to 11. a). The access road project is wholly contained within Otay Water District property. There are no locally important mineral resource recovery sites delineated on any local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan within the vicinity of the project. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 32 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Noise Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 12. NOISE. Would the project: a. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. Be located within an airport land use plan area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Discussion Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in a local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact. ICF International completed a noise analysis for the project. (Appendix E) Noise from the project is not expected to exceed County of San Diego Noise Ordinance Limits. The project is a short-term construction project that will not introduce any new noise-sensitive land uses and will not create new operations that could generate ongoing noise levels at existing noise sensitive land uses. The noise analysis found that the main source of noise associated with the project is construction activity and that construction noise levels would not exceed the applicable County noise standard of 75 dBA. Construction activity would not occur between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m, or at any time on a Sunday or holiday. Therefore, with these time and day restrictions, the project would have a less than significant impact for this issue. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 33 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project is not expected to create excessive groundborne vibrations or groundborne noise levels. During construction, there could be a potential for the creation of short-term vibrations related to the use of construction equipment in the project area. However, because high-impact type methods would not be used (i.e., no pile-driving or blasting), the potential for excessive groundborne vibrations and noise levels would be significantly reduced. The contractor for the project would comply with all construction activity time limits required by the County Noise Ordinance. In addition, the closest noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses are approximately 450 feet from the project site. Vibrations dissipate relatively quickly through typical soils. As a result, vibration from construction activities would be well below thresholds of perceptibility at the nearest noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses. Therefore, the impact from construction groundborne vibration and groundborne noise would be less than significant. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No impact. The paving of the access road will not produce a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels since the sole noise generating component of the project is the construction of the paved access road. The use of the road remains the same as before the project would be implemented. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to 12. a). Be located within an airport land use plan area, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is not within an airport land use plan area or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. Be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. There are no private airstrips in the project vicinity, so no one residing or working in the project area would be exposed to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 34 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Population and Housing Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c. Displace a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel road to improve access to an existing potable water reservoir. The project would not induce population growth directly or indirectly. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. b) Displace a substantial number of existing housing units, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. There are no existing housing units on the proposed project site. The project would not displace existing housing, and there would be no impact as a result of the project. c) Displace a substantial number of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project would not displace a substantial number of people because there are no residential uses on the project site. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 35 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Public Services Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities? Discussion Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or a need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: Fire protection? No Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel road to provide improved access to an existing potable water reservoir. The project does not include any extraordinary uses or operations that would create additional demand for public services. Therefore, there would be no impact to public services as a result of the project. Police protection? No Impact. The proposed project is the paving of an existing dirt and gravel road to provide improved access to an existing potable water reservoir. The project does not include any extraordinary uses or operations that would create additional demand for public services. Therefore, there would be no impact to public services as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 36 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Schools? No Impact. The access road would not generate a demand for public school services. There would be no impact as a result of the project. Parks? No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not generate a demand for parks or park services. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the project. Other public facilities? No Impact. No other public facilities would be affected. No impact would occur would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 37 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Recreation Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The proposed access road would not provide access to existing neighborhood parks, regional parks, or other recreational facilities. Therefore, substantial physical deterioration of these facilities would not occur or be accelerated. No impact would occur as a result of the project. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The proposed project does not include the construction of new recreational facilities or the expansion of existing recreational facilities. The construction or expansion of recreational facilities would not be required. No impact would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 38 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Transportation and Traffic Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a. Exceed the capacity of the existing circulation system, based on an applicable measure of effectiveness (as designated in a general plan policy, ordinance, etc.), taking into account all relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency access? f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Discussion Exceed the capacity of the existing circulation system, based on an applicable measure of effectiveness (as designated in a general plan policy, ordinance, etc.), taking into account all relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? Less than Significant Impact. The project would not generate a considerable amount of traffic during the temporary construction period or during ongoing operation. The main route for construction traffic would be from I-905 to Alta Road or the SR- 125 to Alta Road. Because of the small scale of the project, construction would require a very limited amount of materials and workers and would not exceed the capacity of the existing circulation system. A recent traffic OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 39 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 study for the District’s Otay Mesa Conveyance and Disinfection Project (VRPA Technologies, June 2014) analyzed the existing traffic impacts on roads from the I-905 and SR-125 to Alta Road and following Alta Road to the vicinity of this project. The addition of the construction and worker vehicles needed for the proposed project would not exceed the capacity of the existing circulation system. Additionally, the operation of the project would not change from before the implementation of the project. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact for this issue. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less than Significant Impact. See 15. a) above. The project would not generate traffic of a great enough volume to conflict with any applicable congestion management programs for designated roads or highways. The level of service on the roads and highways that lead to the project site will not be impacted by the addition of the construction traffic. Operation traffic at the site will remain the same as before the proposed project. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact for this issue. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed access road would not create any change in air traffic patterns. No impact would occur. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed paving of the access road is being built to allow for better access to the reservoir. In addition the access road would replace an existing dirt road with a paved roadway. Therefore, construction of the access road would not create new hazards associated with any design features. There would be ni impact as a result of the project. Result in inadequate emergency access? No Impact. Impacts of the project on emergency access would be beneficial. The proposed paving of the access road would allow for easier access by Fire Protection vehicles than the dirt road that is currently in place. Therefore there would be no impact as a result of the project. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. Use of the proposed access road would not change or impede any established policies, plans, or programs that support alternative forms of transportation. Therefore, there would be no impact as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 40 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Utilities and Service Systems Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less than Significant Impact No Impact 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Discussion Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. No utilities would be extended within the proposed access road. Therefore, no impact related to wastewater treatment requirements would occur as a result of the project. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 41 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less-than-Significant Impact. No utilities would be extended within the proposed access road. Therefore, no impact related to the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities would occur as a result of the project. c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed paving of an existing access road would not include new storm water drainage facilities or an expansion of any existing facilities. The construction plans for the project would include BMPs that comply with requirements of the County of San Diego Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management, and Discharge Control Ordinance. Therefore, construction of the access road would not result in significant environmental impacts. d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed? No Impact. No utilities would be extended within the proposed access road. Therefore, no impact related to water supplies would occur as a result of the project. e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? No Impact. No utilities would be extended within the proposed access road. Therefore, no impact related to wastewater treatment requirements would occur as a result of the project. f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? Less-than-Significant Impact. Solid waste would be generated during construction of the access road that would be disposed of in accordance with the appropriate regulations. No long-term waste disposal would be associated with operation of the proposed access road. Therefore, no impact related to landfill capacity would occur as a result of the project. g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less-than-Significant Impact. See response to 17. f). OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 42 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 Mandatory Findings of Significance Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated Less-than- Significant Impact No Impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on evaluations, technical studies, and discussions in this Initial Study, the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. In order to reduce potential impacts on biological resources to less than significant levels, the project would implement mitigation measures to protect sensitive vegetation communities and wildlife (see Section 4, “Biological Resources”). Therefore, with mitigation incorporated, the proposed project would not significantly affect the quality of the environment. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 43 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project could result in cumulative impacts on biological resources; however, mitigation measures presented below are proposed to reduce all impacts to below a level of significance. With implementation of the proposed mitigation, impacts from the project would be less than significant. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Pre-Construction Biological Survey for Western Spadefoot. Due to the observed presence of one western spadefoot tadpole, a qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction surveys to determine if this species is present. If present, the species will be removed from the project site. Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Construction Not to Occur during Migratory Bird Breeding Season. Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. No clearing, grubbing, or grading of vegetation will occur between February 15 and August 31, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher. However, if construction is proposed during the breeding season for the gnatcatcher, the following requirements will have to be met to the satisfaction of the County: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol surveys will be required in order to determine species’ presence or absence. If no gnatcatchers are detected within 300 feet of the proposed grading/construction, then no restriction on grading will be necessary. If gnatcatchers are present, measures to minimize noise impacts will be required and should include temporary noise walls and/or berms. If the survey is not performed and construction is proposed during the species’ breeding season, presence will be assumed and a temporary wall/berm will be required. Noise levels from grading/construction activities during the breeding season should not exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ at the edge of the occupied habitat, or the ambient noise level if noise levels already exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction and operation of the proposed project would be wholly contained within the District-owned property designated for such uses. As discussed further in this Initial Study, the proposed project would not have environmental effects that would cause direct or indirect adverse effects on humans. As discussed above, in the response to 18. b), the proposed project could result in cumulative impacts on biological resources; however, mitigation measures are proposed to reduce all impacts to below a level of significance. With implementation of the proposed mitigation, impacts from the project would be less than significant. OWD 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Page | 44 Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration – June 2014 19. EARLIER ANALYSIS. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impact adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “potentially significant unless mitigated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Otay Water District, Regulatory Site Access Road Improvements (SCH#2012121948) 2012. This document is available for review at the Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, California 91978. Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the San Miguel Regional Training Facility (SCH#2010081058). 2010. This document is available for review at the Otay Water District, 2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard, Spring Valley, California 91978. b) Impact adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not Applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “potentially significant unless mitigated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. Not Applicable. Appendix A Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Letter Report June 3, 2014 Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Road Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 Subject: Otay Water District East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases Dear Ms. Coburn-Boyd: Please be advised that ICF International (ICF) has completed an air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) analysis for the Otay Water District (OWD) East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (Project). A summary of the analysis is presented below. Project Overview The OWD East Mesa Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility in the unincorporated community of Otay, San Diego County, California, approximately 10 kilometers east-southeast of Chula Vista, California (Figure 1). Specifically, the Project is located within the NE ¼ of Section 19 of Township 18 South, Range 1 East of the San Bernardino Base Meridian, as depicted on the United States Geological Survey Mesa, California 7.5- minute series quadrangle (1955 [photorevised 1971, photoinspected 1975]) (Figure 2). OWD plans to pave a dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. The road is located between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that encompasses the facility. The Project area consists of the road and the area within 7.5 meters of each side of the road (Figure 3). Existing Conditions The Project vicinity is largely undeveloped. The Project site is bounded to the northwest, northeast, and southeast by the Otay County Open Space Preserve. The closest developed land use to the Project is the East Mesa Detention Complex, which is located to the southwest. This a complex of four county- and privately-operated detention facilities. The Project site is more than two miles from the closest major highway or airport and background noise levels are generally quite low except for operational noise from the Detention Complex which includes prisoners in the exercise yards and officers training at an outdoor firing range located at the northwest edge of the complex (approximately 2,500 feet from the Project site). Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 3, 2014 Page 2 of 6 The Project site is in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), which is contiguous with San Diego County. Within San Diego County, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) has the primary responsibility for the development and implementation of rules and regulations designed to attain national and state ambient air quality standards, as well as the permitting of new or modified sources, development of air quality management plans, and adoption and enforcement of air pollution regulations. The SDAPCD is the local agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of air quality regulations in San Diego County. The San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining state standards, while the State Implementation Plan (SIP) is the region’s plan for improving regional air quality while attaining federal standards. The SDAPCD develops a set of emissions control measures that reduce emissions within the basin, in an effort to attain NAAQS and CAAQS. These emission controls are adopted as local air quality rules and regulations. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Thresholds Air quality standards for the County are based on the SDAPCD’s Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA) trigger levels for new or modified stationary sources (APCD Rules 20.2 and 20.3). These trigger levels are used as a screening criterion for potential significance of air quality impacts and have been adopted to ensure reduced air quality violations. Any project would be considered to have a potentially significant air quality impact if the project’s emission levels were to exceed any of the criteria presented in Table1 below. Table 1. SDAPCD Air Quality Impact Analysis Trigger Levels Air Contaminant Emission Rate (pounds/hour) (pounds/day) (tons/year) PM10 -- 100 15 PM2.51 -- 55 10 NOX 25 250 40 SOX2 25 250 40 CO 100 550 100 Pb3 -- 3.2 0.6 VOC4 -- 75 13.7 Source: County of San Diego 2007. 1 Rule 20.2 and 20.3 do not include a PM2.5 threshold level. PM2.5 threshold level also used by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2 Oxides of sulfur. 3 Lead and lead compounds. 4 The County of San Diego’s CEQA Significance Determination Threshold for VOC threshold is based on South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) levels and the Monterey Bay Air Pollution Control District (APCD), which has similar Federal and State attainment status as San Diego. In addition, the following County of San Diego criteria are used to determine whether the project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 3, 2014 Page 3 of 6 Would the project place sensitive receptors near CO “hotspots” or create CO “hotspots” near sensitive receptors? Would the project result in exposure to TACs resulting in a maximum incremental cancer risk greater than 1 in 1 million without application of Toxics Best Available Control Technology, or a health hazard index greater than 1, and thus be deemed as having a potentially significant impact? Would project either generate objectionable odors or place sensitive receptors next to existing objectionable odors, which would affect a considerable number of persons or the public? With regards to GHGs and climate change, the County of San Diego formally adopted guidelines in 2013 for evaluating the significance of GHG and climate change impacts. The guidelines identify a tiered approach to determining significance of project-related GHG emissions. Two bright-light numeric thresholds were adopted for annual emissions: 10,000 metric ton carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) for stationary source projects and 2,500 MTCO2e for other development projects (County of San Diego 2013). These County’s guidelines were formally adopted after the Regulatory Site Access Road MND (ICF 2011) was completed. The analysis in the Regulatory Site Access Road MND utilized the 900 metric ton MTCO2e screening threshold within the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) report CEQA & Climate Change (CAPCOA 2008). Impact Analysis Generation of Criteria Pollutant Emissions Construction of the proposed project would result in criteria pollutant emissions as a result of ground disturbance, off-road construction vehicle exhaust, emissions from employee and asphalt delivery travel, and as a result of off-gassing from paving activities. Emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and, for fugitive dust, prevailing weather conditions. The air quality analysis for the Regulatory Site Access Road included an estimation of construction emissions using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) emissions estimation software. Emissions were summed daily and compared to SDAPCD and were determined to be far below AQIA trigger levels. Activity associated Regulatory Site Access Road construction is expected to be greater than expected for the Proposed Project. For example, construction of the Regulatory Site Access Road was estimated to include approximately 43,200 square feet (ft2) of grading and paving (roadway dimensions of 1,800 feet long by 24 feet wide) over a 12-month period. By comparison, construction of the Proposed Project is expected to include approximately 21,000 ft2 of grading and paving (roadway dimensions of 2,100 feet long by 10 feet wide) over a 2-month period. Based on information from the District, the anticipated equipment fleet for the grading and paving phases would be similar to that anticipated for the Regulatory Site Access Road. However, because the project encompasses less area, there would be less ground disturbance and fewer asphalt delivery truck trips. Therefore, because there would be less activity, less are a disturbed and paved, and fewer truck deliveries, it is anticipated Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 3, 2014 Page 4 of 6 that construction activity would be similar or in less quantities than for the Regulatory Site Access Road. Thus, similar to construction of the Regulatory Site Access Road, the Proposed Project is not expected to result in an impact on air quality. Generation of Toxic Air Contaminants Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM), which is classified as a carcinogenic toxic air contaminant by CARB, is the primary pollutant of concern with regards to health risks to sensitive receptors. Diesel-powered construction equipment and heavy duty on-road vehicles operating on- and off-site during construction will emit diesel exhaust, which can be inhaled by nearby sensitive receptors. The only sensitive land uses near the project area is the detention facility, located approximately 450 feet to the southwest of the nearest portion of the project area. Construction activities would occur over an approximately 2-month period, which is much shorter than the assumed 70-year exposure period used to estimate lifetime cancer risks. Onsite heavy duty truck idling would be minimal, limited to a maximum of 5 minutes per truck, consistent with the CARB’s Heavy Duty Idling Reduction Program. The Proposed Project may create a nuisance for nearby residents of the detention facility during hours of construction, as diesel trucks could create occasional exposure to exhaust, but this would be minimal. Additionally, adherence to SDAPCD Rules 50, 51, 55, and 67.7 would limit dust and VOC emissions that could impact nearby receptors. Therefore, the potential human health impact is considered to be minimal. In addition, the project would not create congestion at nearby roadways or intersection, as the project is not expected to generate additional trips. Thus, the exposure to elevated CO concentrations is considered minimal. This impact is less than significant. Consistency with Air Quality Plan The Proposed Project would pave an existing dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. The Proposed Project would not result in a change of land uses and is therefore consistent with the County of San Diego General Plan. As discussed above, short-term construction emissions are expected to be minimal. In addition, the proposed project is not expected to generate additional motor vehicle trips to the project area. Thus, because the project would be consistent with the County of San Diego General Plan, which was used in the formulation of the RAQS and SIP, the project is therefore considered consistent with the RAQS and SIP. In addition, the primary construction-related pollutant in terms of the SDAB is PM10 and PM2.5 as well as precursors to ozone (VOC and NOX). Grading and paving activities would be subject to SDAPCD rules and regulations, including Rule 50 (Visible Emissions), Rule 51 (Nuisance), and Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control) (SDAPCD 2014). The principal sources of PM emissions would be fugitive dust from earthmoving activities and vehicle travel on unpaved and paved surfaces. The requirements of Rules 50, 51, and 55 can be met by the implementation of standard construction best management practices (BMPs) for dust control. In addition, the project would be subject to the requirements of SDAPCD Rule 67.7, which sets provisions on the application and sale of emulsified asphalt materials. The standard construction measures utilized by the Water District during recent construction projects that will be included as part of the Project include the following: Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 3, 2014 Page 5 of 6 • Dust prevention to eliminate amounts of dust that could damage property, cultivated vegetation, or domestic animals, or cause a nuisance to persons living in or occupying buildings in the vicinity of the site • Measures to enclose, cover, water (as needed), or apply nontoxic soil binders according to manufacturer’s specifications on material piles (i.e., gravel, sand, dirt) with a silt content of 5% or greater • Application of water or non-toxic soil stabilizers to maintain adequate dust control for active or inactive construction areas Project paving and grading activities would also be required to adhere to these dust control measures, and would thereby adhere to applicable SDAPCD rules and regulations. Impacts on sensitive receptors are considered to be less than significant. Generation of GHG Emissions Construction of the proposed project would result in GHG emissions as a result of off-road construction equipment exhaust and from employee and asphalt delivery travel. Total GHG emissions would vary depending on the level of activity, the specific type of construction activity occurring, and the amount of time each equipment or vehicle is in use. Similar to the criteria pollutant analysis discussed above, the GHG analysis for the Regulatory Site Access Road included an estimation of construction GHG emissions using CalEEMod. Emissions were summed over the entire construction period, added to annual operational emissions, and compared to the CAPCOA screening threshold. Emissions were found to be far below the CAPCOA screening threshold and were considered to be less than significant. As discussed above, activity associated Regulatory Site Access Road construction is expected to be greater than expected for the Proposed Project. Therefore, because the Proposed Project would result in less activity over a shorter duration, total GHG emissions from construction are anticipated to be of similar or less quantity than for the Regulatory Site Access Road. Therefore, GHG emissions from Proposed Project are considered to be less than significant. Further, because the project would result in construction emissions below relevant threshold and since the project would not result in additional trip generation during long term operation, the Proposed Project would not hinder implementation of statewide or regional plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Conclusions Project construction is not anticipated to result in impacts related to air quality and GHG emissions. Construction emissions would be minimal, sporadic, and reduced due to adherence with applicable SDAPCD rules and regulations. There would be no long-term operational emissions, as there would be no increase in motor vehicle trip generation. Therefore, all impacts related to air quality and GHG emissions are considered less than significant. Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 3, 2014 Page 6 of 6 References California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2008. CEQA & and Climate Change. January. County of San Diego. 2007. Guidelines for Determining Significance – Air Quality. March. County of San Diego. 2013. Guidelines for Determining Significance – Climate Change. November. ICF. 2011. Regulatory Site Access Road Mitigated Negative Declaration. San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDACPD). 2014. Current Rules & Regulations. Available: <http://www.sdapcd.org/rules/current_rules.html>. Figure 1 - Project Regional LocationOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: National Geographic (2013) 0 10,000 20,000 Feet± Project Location Figure 2 - Project VicinityOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 2 _ P r o j V i c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: USGS 7.5' Quad - Otay Mesa, California (1955, pr 1971, pi 1975) 0 1,000 2,000 Feet± Legend Project Area Figure 3 - Project AreaOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 3 _ P r o j A r e a . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: ESRI Imagery (2013) 0 75 150 Feet± Legend Project Area Appendix B Biological Resources Letter Report October 15, 2013 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Road Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 Subject: Otay Water District – 870-1 Reservoir Paving Task Dear Ms. Coburn-Boyd: ICF International/Jones & Stokes (ICF) was retained to conduct biological surveys and prepare a Biological Resources Letter Report for the Otay Water District (OWD) 870-1 (East Mesa) Reservoir Paving Project. This letter report analyzes the potential effects on sensitive biological resources associated with paving an existing access road at the 870-1 Reservoir. 1.0 Project Description, Location, and Setting 1.1 Project Location The OWD 870-1 Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility in the unincorporated community of Otay, San Diego County, California (Attachment A). The facilities consist of the reservoir, a dirt access road, and support facilities, including small buildings, concrete vaults and drain pipes, and stacks of construction materials. The project site is located on the Otay Mesa U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute series Otay Mesa Quadrangle. 1.2 Project Description OWD is proposing to pave an existing dirt access road that encircles the 870-1 Reservoir facilities in order to provide year-round access and limit on-going maintenance activities. The currently unpaved road is approximately 2,100 feet long and approximately 10 feet wide, covering a total area of approximately 21,000 square feet (0.48 acre). The road starts at the south access gate and encircles the reservoir. 1.3 Existing Conditions The access road is currently unpaved and maintained free of vegetation. The access road is approximately 2,100 feet long and 10 feet wide and consists of compacted soil, gravel, or concrete Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 2 of 27 depending on the location. The road is mostly without signs of erosion, although there is road rut in the southeastern section of the property where water ponds. A chain-link fence encloses the road, and vegetation is maintained by mowing within the fenced area and outside of the fence to a distance of 40 to 80 feet depending on the location around the reservoir. Although there are some patches of habitat in the vicinity of the road, all planned paving activities would take place within previously developed areas and no additional habitat would be directly impacted. 1.4 Environmental Setting The survey area, which includes the project site and a 300-foot buffer, ranges in elevation from 840 feet above mean sea level (MSL) near the entrance to 875 feet above MSL north of the reservoir. Soils in the vicinity of the road consist of Huerhuero loam, 2 to 9 percent slopes to the south and west of the reservoir, and Huerhuero loam, 2 to 15 percent slopes to the north and east (Bowman 1973). Soils in the Huerhuero Series are a moderately drained loam that have clay subsoil. Steeper sloped soils of this series have a moderate erosion hazard. The project area is adjacent to a portion of a San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) preserve, with a portion of the reservoir road crossing the MSCP hardline preserve boundaries (Attachment B). The site is located on the foothills of Otay Mountain, and the surrounding lands support expansive areas of native habitat, as well as developed areas. Developed areas in the vicinity of the project area include the East Mesa Detention Center to the southwest and another OWD reservoir facility to the west. 2.0 Regulatory Setting No specific OWD documents are currently available for guidance related to infrastructure maintenance and environmental management of the 870-1 Reservoir facilities. For general environmental guidance on the federal environmental requirements, the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), the Clean Water Act (CWA), and Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) were consulted. For State guidance, The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and California Endangered Species Act (CESA) were reviewed for relevant guidance on potential environmental impacts. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act was reviewed for potential impacts to waters and wetlands that might occur within the vicinity of the road. The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) was reviewed for potential impacts to special status plants that may be present within the project area. The South County Segment of the San Diego MSCP Subarea Plan was reviewed for consistency with the MSCP. The Biological Opinion (BO; 1-6-98-FW-03), issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), was also reviewed. 2.1 Federal Environmental Requirements FESA and its subsequent amendments provide guidance for the conservation of endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Section 9 of the Act lists all activities that are prohibited by ESA. The “take” of any listed species is prohibited by the Act. Take is defined as harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 3 of 27 engage in any such conduct. Section 7 of the Act requires federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat for these species. For non-marine environments, USFWS is responsible for administering the Act. Regulations governing interagency cooperation under Section 7 are found in 50 CFR Part 402. The opinion issued at the conclusion of consultation will include a statement authorizing take that may occur incidental to an otherwise legal activity. The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) provides guidance for the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. Section 404 of the CWA establishes a permit program administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) regulating the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States (U.S.), including wetlands. Implementation regulations by Corps are found at 33 CFR Parts 320-330. Guidelines for implementation are referred to as Section 404 (b)(1) Guidelines and were developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in conjunction with Corps (40 CFR Parts 230). The Guidelines allow the discharge of dredged or fill material into the aquatic system only if there is no practicable alternative that would have less adverse impacts. MBTA is a treaty with Canada, Mexico, Russia, and Japan that makes it unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, or kill migratory birds. The law applies to the removal of nests occupied by migratory birds during the breeding season. Migratory birds as defined the MBTA include most native birds in North America except galliformes (a group of birds containing turkeys, grouse, chickens, quails, and pheasants) and a few others (e.g., wrentit). Permitted activities are allowed under USFWS regulations for hunting and for actions to prevent or minimize risks to human safety. 2.2 State Environmental Requirements CESA establishes the policy of the state to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. It prohibits the “take” of any species that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) determines to be a threatened or endangered species and mandates that state agencies should not approve projects that would jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available. There is no state agency consultation under CESA, however for projects that affect a state and federal listed species, compliance with the federal ESA will satisfy CESA if the CDFW determines that the federal incidental take authorization is “consistent” under Fish and Game Code(FGC) Section 2080.1. Fish and Game Code Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515 designate “fully protected” species that provide protection to wildlife that were rare or faced possible extinction, and prohibit any state agency from issuing incidental take permits except for necessary scientific research. Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3505, 3800, and 3801.6 protects all native birds, birds of prey, and all nongame birds including eggs and nests, that are not already listed as fully protected and which occur naturally within the state. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 4 of 27 Fish and Game Code Section 1600-1616 mandates protection of wetlands and waterways that include ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial watercourses, and further extends into habitats adjacent to watercourses. Water features such as vernal pools and other seasonal swales, where the defined bed and bank are absent and the feature is not contiguous or closely adjacent to other jurisdictional features, are generally not asserted to fall within state jurisdiction. The CDFW also has authority to regulate work that will deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake. Under Section 401 of the CWA, an applicant for a Section 404 permit must obtain a certificate from the appropriate state agency stating that the intended dredging or filling activity is consistent with the state’s water quality standards and criteria. In California, the authority to grant water quality certification is delegated by the State Water Resources Control Board to the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). Each of the RWQCBs must prepare and periodically update a basin plan for water quality control in accordance with the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Each basin plan establishes water quality standards for surface water and groundwater and specifies actions to control nonpoint and point sources of pollution. These actions are intended to achieve and maintain the basin plan’s water quality standards. Basin plans represent an opportunity to protect wetlands by establishing water quality objectives. Under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, wetlands and drainages that are considered waters of the United States by USACE are also classified as waters of the state. More recently, the appropriate RWQCB has also generally taken jurisdiction over “waters of the state” that are not subject to USACE jurisdiction under the federal CWA, in cases where USACE has determined that certain features do not fall under its jurisdiction. Mitigation typically must require no net loss of wetlands functions and values of waters of the state pursuant to Executive Order W-59-93, “State Wetland Conservation Policy.” Portions of the road area also fall within the boundaries of the South County Segment of the County of San Diego MSCP South County Subarea Plan. Land use within the preserve is generally limited; however, exemptions to prohibited activities include existing uses, including any annual clearing, maintenance and replacement of existing facilities, roads and structures (§§ 1.9.1.B). For new and existing roads within the South County Segments (§§ 1.9.3.2), the MSCP South County Subarea Plan states: Take of covered species from the construction of new or modification of existing circulation element road corridors (within all segments of the Subarea Plan) which are identified on the County’s circulation element road map dated September 17, 1997 (GPA 97-CE) is based on the County making the following findings for the project: The project is consistent with adopted community or subregional plans, and the MSCP and Subarea Plans. All feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project and there are no feasible, less environmentally damaging locations, alignments or non-structural alternatives that would meet project objectives; Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 5 of 27 When the project encroaches into a wetland or floodplain, mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that result in a net gain in wetland and/or riparian habitat; Where the project encroaches into steep slopes, native vegetation will be used to revegetate and landscape cut and fill areas; No mature riparian woodland will be destroyed or reduced in size due to otherwise allowed encroachments; All Critical Populations of Sensitive Plant Species within the County’s Subarea (Attachment C of Biological Mitigation Ordinance (BMO)), Rare Narrow Endemic Animal Species within the County’s Subarea (Attachment D of BMO), Narrow endemic Plan Species within the County’s Subarea (Attachment E of BMO), and San Diego County Sensitive Plant Species (as defined by BMO), will be avoided as required and consistent with the Subarea Plan and BMO. 3.0 Methods This section provides information regarding the methods used during surveys conducted for this project, including the general biological survey, focused surveys for Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino; Quino), and dry sampling for listed fairy shrimp. The survey area was defined as the project alignment and a 300-foot buffer, except for the Quino surveys, which included a 500-foot buffer. Prior to conducting any fieldwork, searches of available literature and databases were conducted to determine sensitive species previously observed, detected, or with potential to occur within the survey area as well as the physical characteristics of the site and surrounding areas. Available data that were reviewed included: the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) database (CDFW 2013; Otay Mesa quadrangle); California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Online Plant Inventory (CNPS 2013); the USDA soil survey of the area (Bowman 1973); and USGS topographic maps to identify potential stream courses and other notable topographic features. Survey dates and weather conditions for all surveys conducted are summarized in Table 1. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 6 of 27 Table 1. Survey Dates and Times Date Survey Type Time Weather Conditions Surveyor 5-Mar-13 General Survey 0900-1130 58/59°F, 1-4 mph, cloudy to partially cloudy skies G. Kinoshita, E. Eidson 15-Mar-13 Quino #1 1040-1200 72/75°F, 0-4 mph, clear skies w/haze C. Dunn, D. Allen, K. Davis, I. Cain 22-Mar-13 Quino #2 1245-1415 70/72°F, 1-6 mph, clear skies C. Dunn, J. Hickman 29-Mar-13 Quino #3 1400-1530 73/72°F, 1-5 mph, clear skies w/ haze C. Dunn, J. Hickman 3-Apr-13 Quino #4 1200-1340 77/79°F, 0-1 mph, few scattered clouds E. Eidson, J. Hickman 9-Apr-13 Quino #5 1200-1330 67/69°F, 1-8 mph (gusts of 10 mph), few scattered clouds E. Eidson 11-Jun-13 Fairy Shrimp Soil Collection 0900-1030 D. Allen 5-Aug-13 Fairy Shrimp Soil Collection 1000-1130 D. Ritenour 3.1 General Biological Survey The OWD 870-1 Reservoir site was surveyed on March 5, 2013 by ICF biologists Glen Kinoshita and Erika Eidson from 9:00 a.m. through 11:30 a.m. Temperatures at the time of the survey were between 58°F and 59°F, winds were approximately 1 to 4 mph under cloudy to partially-cloudy skies. The purpose of the visit was to assess the current condition of the road and inventory biological resources in the surrounding habitat. The road and surrounding habitat were surveyed on foot out to a distance of 300 feet and scanned with binoculars if areas were inaccessible. Photographs were taken of representative habitat and global positioning system (GPS) points were taken where sensitive resources were located. The survey area was traversed by walking meandering transects in an effort to accurately categorize vegetation communities and to identify the locations of any sensitive species readily detectable. Vegetation communities occurring in the survey area were mapped according to Holland categories (Holland 1986); with subsequent modifications by Oberbauer et al. (2008), as described in the County of San Diego’s Guidelines for Determining Significance (County of San Diego 2010b). Vegetation communities were mapped on a “one-inch equals 250 feet” aerial photograph of the project area in the field and later digitized into a geographic information system (GIS) coverage using ArcGIS software. All plants and wildlife species detected were recorded. Plants that could not be identified in the field were identified later using taxonomic keys including Beauchamp (1986) and Baldwin et al. (2012). Wildlife species were detected visually, aurally, and through sign (e.g., scat and tracks). Potentially suitable bat roosting habitat such as structures and other built facilities around the survey area were checked for bats or bat sign (guano and/or culled insect parts, urine stains, vocalizations, and/or odor). Complete lists of the plant and wildlife species observed within Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 7 of 27 the survey area are listed on Attachments C and D. Representative photos of the site are included on Attachment E. Survey limitations include the timing of the surveys. Nocturnal wildlife species would not have been readily detected as only daytime surveys were conducted. Special-status annual plant species may not have been detected as the survey was conducted during a time of year when annual plants were developing and were not identifiable at this time. 3.2 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly ICF biologists Erika Eidson (TE-051236), Cindy Dunn (TE-29658A-0), and Doug Allen (TE-837448-4) and supervised surveyors Kimberly Davis, Ian Cain, and James Hickman conducted surveys for adult Quino on March 15, 22, and 29, and April 3 and 9, 2013. These surveys were conducted on a weekly basis under acceptable weather conditions as defined in the USFWS protocol (Table 1) (USFWS 2002a). Each survey involved slowly walking transects throughout all non-excluded portions of the survey area and stopping periodically to scan for butterfly activity. All host plants detected were recorded and mapped. All flowering plants that provide potential nectar sources for Quino were recorded. The surveys were conducted at an average rate of no more than 9 acres per hour. The surveyor stopped periodically to scan adjacent areas for moving butterflies. The 2013 focused survey report is provided as Attachment F. 3.3 Dry Season Fairy Shrimp Sampling On June 11, 2013, ICF vernal pool biologist Doug Allen conducted the field portion of the dry-season protocol in accordance with the Guidelines (USFWS 1996). Mr. Allen collected 10 soil samples when the road ponding feature (road rut) was dry. A hand trowel was used to collect approximately one liter volume sample of soil from the top 1-3 centimeters of sediment within the road rut. Whenever possible, soil samples were collected in chunks and the trowel was used to pry up intact chunks of sediment. The soil was not loosened by raking or shoveling or any other method that could damage fairy shrimp cysts. The ten soil samples were labeled, stored, and analyzed individually. Each label included information necessary to identify the specific sample location within the road rut. The stored samples were kept out of direct sunlight in order to avoid excessive heating. Soil samples were processed by Dale Ritenour (TE-58888A-0) in accordance with the Guidelines (USFWS 1996). The ten soil samples were measured into individual plastic containers. These samples were hydrated in tap water then washed through a set of sieves. Material passing through a Number 45 (0.0139”) USA Standard Testing Sieve, A.S.T.M.E.-11 specification and caught on a Number 70 (0.0083”) Sieve was rinsed into a container with approximately 100 milliliters of a saturated brine solution to float organic material, including fairy shrimp cysts. The material floating on the brine was decanted onto a paper filter on a wire strainer, and water was removed through the filter paper by gravity into a collection basin. The material left on the paper was examined under a Cambridge Instruments Stereo Zoom 5 Microscope. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 8 of 27 Due to discrepancies in interpretations of Mr. Ritenour’s permit authorizations, ICF contracted USFWS-approved listed branchiopod cyst identifier, Dr. Chuck Black of Ecological Restoration Service (TE-835549-8), to process additional soil samples from the basin for presence or absence of fairy shrimp cysts. On August 5, 2013, Mr. Ritenour recollected one liter of soil from the basin, following methods above, for processing by Dr. Black. No distinctive Branchinecta cysts, no Streptocephalus cysts, and no cladoceran ephippia were found in any of the samples processed and analyzed by Mr. Ritenour or Dr. Black. The 2013 focused survey report is provided as Attachment J. 4.0 Results 4.1 Habitat and Vegetation Communities A total of seven vegetation communities were mapped within the survey area, including Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub, non-native grassland, disturbed southern willow scrub, disturbed mule fat scrub, disturbed habitat, and developed areas (Table 2, Attachment G). Table 2: Habitat types within the 870-1 Reservoir Road Survey Area Habitat Type Area (Acres) Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub 12.27 Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub 1.96 Non-native Grassland 1.57 Disturbed Southern Willow Scrub 0.14 Disturbed Mule Fat Scrub 0.33 Disturbed Habitat 6.23 Developed 5.69 Total 28.18 4.1.1 Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Two forms of coastal sage scrub were mapped in the survey area; Diegan coastal sage scrub and disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub. All forms of coastal sage scrub are considered sensitive by local, state, and federal agencies and these habitats are known to support the federally-listed coastal California gnatcatcher. Diegan coastal sage scrub is a vegetation community typically characterized by low, woody subshrubs that grow up to 3 ft in height (Oberbauer et al. 2008). Dominant species within the survey area included California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), and San Diego County viguiera (Bahiopsis laciniata). This type of habitat can be found on the slopes surrounding the reservoir, as well as less disturbed Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 9 of 27 areas to the north and east. The Diegan coastal sage scrub in the survey area is predominated by native species and provides suitable habitat for several wildlife species, including coastal California gnatcatcher. Furthermore, habitat present in the survey area is contiguous with a larger area of Diegan coastal sage scrub. Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub is distinguished from undisturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub by the abundance of non-native species and the sparse distribution of typically dominant shrub species (Oberbauer et al. 2008). Patches of disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub can be found to the south and west of the reservoir. Native plant species detected include California buckwheat, California sagebrush, and laurel sumac. Non-native species detected included black mustard (Brassica nigra), shortpod mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), and non-native grasses (Bromus and Avena spp.). Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub in the survey area supports an abundance of non-native plant species but is contiguous to the more expansive areas of undisturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub. 4.1.2 Non-native Grassland Non-native grassland is a dense to sparse cover of grasses with flowering culms 6” to 18” high; often associated with numerous species of showy-flowered, native annual forbs (“wildflowers”) (Oberbauer et al. 2008). In some areas, depending on past disturbance and annual rainfall, annual forbs may be the dominant species; however, it is presumed that grasses will soon dominate. Germination occurs within the onset of the late fall rains; growth, flowering, and seed-set occur from winter through spring. With few exceptions, the plants are dead through the summer-fall dry season, persisting as seeds. Remnant native species are variable. Areas of non-native grassland can be found to the east of the reservoir and adjacent to the access road close to the fence line. Native species detected include coastal goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii) and San Diego popcornflower (Plagiobothrys collinus var. gracilis). Non-native species detected include wild oat (Avena fatua), compact brome (Bromus madritensis), and redstem filaree (Erodium cicutarium). Non-native grassland in the survey area provides habitat for small mammals and foraging habitat for raptor species. 4.1.3 Disturbed Southern Willow Scrub Disturbed southern willow scrub is a dense, broadleaved, winter-deciduous riparian thicket dominated by Salix species (Oberbauer et al. 2008). This is distinguished from undisturbed southern willow scrub by the abundance of non-native species. This habitat type consists of a small patch of habitat occurring in the northwest portion of the survey area. Native plant species detected include red willow (Salix laevigata) and mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia). Non-native species include salt cedar (Tamarix ramosissima) and fennel. This habitat type is supported by water that is released from an outlet northwest of the water tank. 4.1.4 Disturbed Mule Fat Scrub Disturbed mule fat scrub is a depauperate, tall, herbaceous riparian scrub strongly dominated by mule fat and is maintained by frequent flooding (Oberbauer et al. 2008). This is distinguished from Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 10 of 27 undisturbed mule fat scrub by the abundance of non-native species. This habitat can be found in the northwest portion of the survey area near the disturbed southern willow scrub. The primary native plant species detected was mule fat. Non-native species include fennel and salt cedar. This habitat type is supported by water that is released from an outlet northwest of the water tank. 4.1.5 Disturbed Habitat Disturbed habitat refers to areas that are subject to high levels of physical disturbance and are no longer recognized as a native or naturalized vegetation association (Oberbauer et al. 2008). Within the survey area, disturbed habitat is dominated by areas that appear to receive periodic mowing and have a groundcover dominated by short non-native and native annual herbs (Erodium cicutarium, Urtica urens, Crassula connata, Centaurea melitensis), and these areas appear to be mowed and maintained regularly. This type of habitat is the primary habitat within the fence line of the reservoir and alongside the road. Vegetation is kept low through regular maintenance. Disturbed habitat also describes areas of bare ground including unvegetated areas that are not developed, but appear to have been cleared for restoration or landscaping because of its proximity to other vegetated areas and lack of other evidence of further development. A strip of this type of habitat can be found along the paved section of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility. Disturbed habitat in the survey provides potential habitat for small mammals and foraging habitat for raptors. 4.1.6 Developed Developed areas are areas that have been physically altered to an extent that native vegetation is not longer supported or areas with buildings or paved areas (Oberbauer et al. 2008). Developed land is characterized by permanent or semi-permanent structures, pavement, or hardscape, and landscaped areas that often require irrigation. Within the survey area, the road surrounding the reservoir is considered developed, along with the reservoir and accompanying infrastructure. 4.2 Special-Status Species The following section discusses special-status species detected within the survey area. A special -status plant species is one that is listed by federal or state agencies as threatened, endangered, or rare, or is listed by CDFW on the California Rare Plant Ranking (CRPR) (1, 2, 3, and 4). A special-status wildlife species is one that is listed by federal or state agencies as threatened, endangered or species of special concern. Special-status plant species detected within the 300-foot survey area include San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens), ashy spike-moss (Selaginella cinerascens), and San Diego County viguiera (Bahiopsis laciniata). Special-status wildlife species detected include western spadefoot (Spea hammondii), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica). Locations of these species are presented on Attachment G. There were no sign of bats using any of the structures found on site. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 11 of 27 4.2.1 Special-Status Plant Species The CNDDB search, CNPS search, and field survey identified 30 sensitive plant species that have the potential to occur in the project vicinity (Attachments B and H). During the general biological survey, three special-status plant species were detected in the survey area: San Diego barrel cactus, ashy spike-moss, and San Diego County viguiera. Discussions of the plant species incorporate information from Reiser 1994 and CNPS 2013. 4.2.1.1 Special-Status Species Observed San Diego Barrel Cactus (Ferocactus viridescens) CRPR 2B.1 The optimal habitat for San Diego barrel cactus optimal is Diegan sage scrub hillsides; often at the crest of slopes and growing in cobbles. It is occasionally found on the periphery of vernal pools and mima mound topography at Otay Mesa, sometimes in considerable numbers (Reiser 1994). The blooming period for this species is from May through June. Three clusters of 3-6 individuals were mapped within 300-feet of the access road (Attachment G); none were found within the impact area. Ashy Spike-Moss (Selaginella cinerascens) CRPR 4.1 Ashy spike-moss is a spike-moss found in undisturbed chaparral and Diegan coastal sage scrub as a prostrate perennial groundcover (Reiser 1994). It is a good indicator of if a site is disturbed as it rarely inhabits disturbed soils. Because this species is a fern, it has no blooming period. This plant species could be found in areas of less disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub to the east and north of the road within the 300-foot buffer survey area, usually under larger shrubs and near rock piles, and was too widespread in these areas to justify mapping. No individuals were found within the impact area. San Diego County Viguiera (Bahiopsis laciniata) CRPR 4.2 San Diego County viguiera is typically found in arid Diegan coastal sage scrub, and is often a co-dominant of the shrub community where it occurs (Reiser 1994). The blooming period for this species is from February to June. This species could be found primarily on the slopes surrounding the reservoir (Attachment G), with scattered individuals outside the fence line within the 300-foot survey area, and was generally too widespread to mapping. No individuals were found within the impact area. 4.2.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species The CNDDB search and field survey identified 22 special-status wildlife species that have potential to occur in the survey area (Attachments B and I). Focused surveys were conducted for Quino checkerspot butterfly and dry season surveys were conducted to determine the presence or Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 12 of 27 absence of listed fairy shrimp. Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), and coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) were detected on-site. Five additional special-status wildlife species have been determined to have a high potential to occur on site based on field observations and habitat requirements. These include: four reptiles: orangethroat whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra), San Diego horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii), coast patch-nosed snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea), and two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii); and one mammal: San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii). 4.2.2.1 Special-Status Species Observed Western Spadefoot (Spea hammondii) State Species of Special Concern Western spadefoot is distinguished from other toads by their cat-like eyes (vertically elliptical pupils), the single black sharp-edged “spade” on each hind foot, teeth in their upper jaw, and rather smooth skin (Stebbins 2003 ). The eggs are found in irregular cylindrical clusters of 10 to 42 eggs attached to plant stems or other submerged objects in temporary pools (Stebbins 2003). Spadefoot larvae can reach 2.8 inches in length (Storer 1925) and their eyes are set close together and situated well inside the outline of the head when viewed from above, with the body broadest just behind the eyes (Storer 1925). Historically this species has ranged throughout the Central Valley, the Coast Ranges, and Coastal lowlands from San Francisco Bay to Mexico in California (Jennings and Hayes 1994). The species currently occurs mostly below 3,000 feet in elevation. The specific food habits of western spadefoot larvae are unknown; however, they have been reported to prey on fairy shrimp (e.g., Branchinecta spp.) . Adult spadefoots will forage on a variety of insects, worms, and other invertebrates . Western spadefoot breeds from January to May in temporary pools and drainages that form following winter or spring rains. Water temperatures in these pools must be between 48°F and 86°F for spadefoots to reproduce . Oviposition does not occur until water temperatures are at a minimum of 48°F (Jennings and Hayes 1994). Depending on temperature regime and annual rainfall, oviposition may occur between late February and late May (Storer 1925, Stebbins 2003). Eggs hatch in 1 to 6 days depending on temperature and larval development can be completed in 3 to 11 weeks depending on food sources and temperature, but must be completed before pools dry. Recently metamorphosed juveniles emerge from water and seek refuge in the immediate vicinity of natal ponds, and spend several hours to several days near these ponds before dispersing (Weintraub 1980). A single western spadefoot tadpole was observed in a water-filled road rut located in the southeastern section of the access road (Attachments E and G). The feature was approximately 6 feet long by 2 feet wide and approximately 2 inches in depth. No other wildlife or native or non-native plant species were co-occurring in the road rut at the time of observation. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus) State Species of Special Concern Northern harriers prefer open meadows, pastures, prairies, grasslands, and riparian woodlands and occurs year round within California. They forage in a variety of open habitats and nest on the Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 13 of 27 ground, mostly within patches of dense vegetation in undisturbed areas (MacWhirter and Bildstein 1996). The breeding season is from March through August (Loughman and McLandress 1994). One adult northern harrier was observed soaring over the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat to the north of the survey area, outside the 300-foot buffer. The open, treeless landscape of surrounding the road is suitable foraging habitat for this species. No breeding habitat is present on site. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Federally Threatened, State Species of Special Concern Coastal California gnatcatcher is a small resident insectivorous bird species that is strongly associated with sage scrub habitats found throughout southern California into northern Baja California, Mexico. The USFWS listed this species as threatened in 1993. Although California gnatcatchers have a close association with sage scrub, this species has also been documented using open coastal sage-chaparral scrub, chamise chaparral, and other habitat types (Campbell et al. 1998, Bontrager 1991). The breeding season extends from mid-February through mid-August. One coastal California gnatcatcher was detected aurally during the March 5, 2013 general survey in Diegan coastal sage scrub approximately 100 feet north of the survey area. Diegan coastal sage scrub in the survey area contains scattered California sagebrush, which is the primary shrub selected by this species for nest building. The Diegan coastal sage scrub is contiguous to large areas of open space. The survey area provides suitable nesting habitat for this species. 4.2.2.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species with High Potential to Occur San Diego Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis) Federally Endangered San Diego fairy shrimp are small freshwater crustaceans that are found in shallow vernal pools and other ephemeral basins (USFWS 2002b). San Diego fairy shrimp is found in southwestern coastal California and extreme northwestern Baja California, Mexico, with all known localities below 700 m (2,300 ft) and within 65 kilometers (km) (40 miles [mi]) of the Pacific Ocean, from Santa Barbara County south to northwestern Baja California (USFWS 1997, 2002b). These species can also occur in road ruts and ditches that provide suitable conditions for the species. Water temperature is an important factor for this fairy shrimp. The water must not get too hot (above 86°F [30°C]) or too cold (below 41°F [4°C]) for this species to occur (USFWS 2002b). One water-filled road rut was observed in the southeastern section of the access road (Attachments E and G). San Diego fairy shrimp were historically prevalent in vernal pool complexes across Otay Mesa (USFWS 2008). A CNDDB search for this species documented occurrence of this species within one mile of the project site. The presence of potentially suitable habitat, along with a co-occurring species (Western spadefoot toad), and the close proximity of a historical location of this species indicate that this species had high potential to occur within the impact area. Therefore, ICF conducted dry season surveys in accordance with USFWS survey guidelines (USFWS 1996) as described previously. No fairy shrimp cysts were found in the two sets of soil samples collected from the road rut in 2013. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 14 of 27 After analysis of the soil samples, ICF had several discussions with USFWS regarding the results of the dry season survey, the site conditions, and geographic isolation of the rut. In summary, while the road rut occurs on a soil series (Hueroheuro) that is known to support vernal pools (Bauder 1996), the topography is gently to greatly sloping (2 to 9, to 9 to 30 percent), which would preclude the occurrence of pool complexes. The site is entirely fenced and gated, reducing the vehicular access to the site and the resultant chance of vectoring of shrimp cysts in mud on truck tires into the road rut onsite. While the site is approximately 0.8 mile from an extant, occupied vernal pool complex, the site is isolated by development (East Mesa Detention Center) and is not on a landform position suitable for the formation of vernal pools. ICF is confident the feature was adequately sampled during dry-season surveys and the resulting soil analysis was accurate, rendered no fairy shrimp cysts. Without cysts, it is highly unlikely the feature supports fairy shrimp let alone a viable population. ICF received confirmation that it was acceptable for ICF vernal pool biologists to forego wet-season surveys during the winter of 2013 due to the lack of vernal pool habitat on-site and adjacent to the site and two negative dry samples (Susan Wynn, email communication September 19, 2013). Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydrayas editha quino) Federally Endangered Quino checkerspot butterfly (Quino) is a subspecies of Edith’s checkerspot (E. editha) and is a member of the Nymphalidae family, and the Melitaeinae subfamily, checkerspots and fritillaries. Primary host plants for the Quino are dot-seed plantain (Plantago erecta), thred-leaved bird’s beak (Cordylanthus rigidus), and white snapdragon (Antirrhinum coulterianum). Larval Quino may also use other species of plantain (Plantago spp.) and annuals owl’s clover (Castilleja exerta) as primary or secondary host plants and will diapauses in or near the base of native shrubs, such as California buckwheat (E. fasiculatum). Quino are generally found in open areas and ecotone situations which may occur in a number of plant communities, and optimal habitat appears to contain little or no invasive exotic vegetation, and densely vegetated areas are not known to support Quino (Mattoni et al. 1997). Habitat patch suitability is determined primarily by larval host plant density, topographic diversity, nectar resource availability, and climatic conditions (Service 2003). The life cycle of Quino begins with adult quino during flight season between late February and May, when adult butterflies move about to search for nectar sources and mates. Eggs hatch in about 10 days and larvae begin to feed immediately and migrate in search of additional plants to consume (USFWS 2003). When plants dry out, and the larvae are in their third or fourth instar of development, they enter an obligatory diapause. Diapause is a low-metabolic resting state that may last a year or more depending on conditions, and enables larvae to survive seasonal climatic extremes and times of extended adverse conditions, such as drought. The time between diapause termination and pupation can range from two weeks to three months. Sufficient rainfall is required to break diapause, which normally occurs during November or December. After diapause, larvae become active and feed until they enter their pupae stage. Within two to six weeks they transform into adults and emerge as butterflies. Adults live for approximately 10 to 14 days. No Quino were observed at the time of the general biological survey; however, its preferred host plant, dot-seed plantain, was observed in the survey area (Attachment G), and Quino was sighted Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 15 of 27 during the 2013 flight season less than one mile west of the survey area (Lisa Coburn-Boyd, pers. comm.). Focused surveys were conducted in March 2013 to determine presence/absence of this species in the habitat surrounding the road. The results of the 2013 focused surveys were negative for Quino. The impact area does not support the primary constituent elements of Quino habitat and provides limited to no existing potential to support this species (i.e., it lacks larval host plants and nectar sources and consists of an unvegetated compacted soil and gravel road that is well-maintained and frequently used). Orangethroat Whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperthrya) State Species of Special Concern The orangethroat whiptail is an uncommon to fairly common species in Orange, Riverside, and San Diego counties (Bostic 1965), occurring at elevations ranging from sea level to 3,310 ft (1040 m) (Jennings and Hayes 1994). It inhabits coastal scrub, chamise chaparral, and mixed chaparral habitats. They forage actively for a variety of small arthropods (Stebbins 2003), and are active from early spring to late-summer, with breeding activities beginning in April and egg laying until mid-July. Hatchlings emerge August-September from clutches of 2-3 eggs. Orangethroat whiptail has high potential to occur within the impact area due to the close proximity of suitable habitat, primarily the rocky Diegan coastal sage scrub found to the east and north of the survey area. San Diego Horned Lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) State Species of Special Concern The San Diego horned lizard is endemic to southern California and northern Baja California, Mexico, distributed predominately throughout the Peninsular Ranges in San Diego County (Reeve 1952). They are a usually solitary animal, relying on camouflage in open areas and is known to bury itself in fine, loose soil (Stebbins 2003). They are found in a variety of habitats including coastal sage scrub, chaparral, grassland, conifer forest, oak woodlands, riparian habitats, and the margins of deserts (Jennings and Hayes 1994). They are insectivorous, primarily feeding on native harvester ants (Pogonmyrmex sp.), but will also feed on other insects including termites, beetles, flies, wasps, and grasshoppers (Reeve 1952; Stebbins 2003; Jennings and Hayes 1994). Clutches of 6-17 eggs are laid between May and early July (Stebbins 1985; Jennings and Hayes 1994), and hatch after approximately two months, with young appearing in July to early August (Jennings and Hayes 1994). San Diego horned lizard has high potential to occur within the impact area due to the close proximity of suitable habitat, primarily the Diegan coastal sage scrub found to the east and north of the survey area. Coast Patch-nosed Snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea) State Species of Special Concern Coast patch-nosed snake occurs in California from the northern Carrizo Plains in San Luis Obispo County, south through the coastal zones of central and southern California, west of the deserts, and into coastal northern Baja California, Mexico (Stebbins 2003). They can be found in semi-arid chaparral in canyons, rocky hillsides, and plains. This species is active in the daytime and can Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 16 of 27 burrow in loose soil. They eat lizards, small mammals, and possibly other small snakes, nestling birds, and amphibians (Stebbins 2003). Mating takes place from April through June and eggs are laid from May to August in clutches of 5-6 eggs (Fitch 1970). Coast patch-nosed snake has high potential to occur within the impact area due to the close proximity of suitable habitat, primarily the Diegan coastal sage scrub found to the east and north of the survey area. Two-striped Garter Snake (Thamnophis hammondii) State Species of Special Concern Two-striped garter snake can be found Monterey County to southern California where it ranges east through the Transverse and Peninsular Ranges into northern Baja California, Mexico (Jennings and Hayes 1994). It is associated with densely vegetated riparian pools and creeks with permanent to semi-permanent waters, often in rocky areas, and associated with oak woodlands, chaparral, and coniferous forests (Rathburn et al. 1993). They feed on fishes and their eggs, amphibians and their larvae, and other invertebrates and small mammals (Rathburn et al. 1993). Mating occurs in the spring, with young born alive in late summer (Rossman et al. 1996). Two-striped garter snake has a high probability of occurring in the vicinity of the disturbed southern willow scrub and disturbed mule fat scrub in the northwestern portion of the survey area, as there was flowing water from a culvert that empties on the northwestern side of the road within suitable vegetation. San Diego Black-tailed Jackrabbit (Lepus californicus intermedia) State Species of Special Concern San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit is a subspecies of black-tailed jackrabbit that occurs only on the coastal side of the southern California mountains (Stephenson and Calcarone 1999). It is a generalist species, occurring in open to semi-open habitat, typically grasslands, agricultural fields, or sparse coastal scrub (Bond 1977). Breeding for this species can occur year round, with gestation lasting approximately 40 days (Best 1996). The number of young per litter varies from year to year depending on environmental conditions (Best 1996). It has been reported that a one-year-old female can produce 14 or more young per year (Ingles 1965). Potentially suitable habitat for San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit occurs in the open areas within the Diegan coastal sage scrub surrounding the road, but is not expected to occur within the disturbed habitat within the fence line. 4.3 Jurisdictional Wetlands and other Features Sensitive wetland and potentially jurisdictional communities occurring within the vicinity of the road include disturbed southern willow scrub and disturbed mule fat scrub, which occur in the northwest portion of the road (Attachment G). Waters of the U.S., including wetlands, and waters of the State are regulated by the CDFW pursuant to Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code, by the USACE pursuant to Section 404 of the CWA, and by the RWQCB pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and pursuant to the State Porter Cologne Act. The water-filled road rut observed along the access road was approximately 6 feet long by 2 feet wide and approximately 2 inches in depth. The feature appears to have been formed by a combination of local micro-topography and compaction by vehicles when the soil surface in this Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 17 of 27 section of road was damp or saturated (Attachment E). A single spadefoot toad tadpole was observed in the ponded water. No other wildlife (ostracods, fairy shrimp, etc.) was observed and no plants (vernal pool, riparian, or upland) were associated with the feature. This man-made feature would not be regulated waters of the U.S. or state because it was constructed in the uplands and is isolated from any potentially jurisdictional features such as a stream or larger vernal pool complex.5.0 Project Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Potential impacts to vegetation communities, special-status plants, special-status wildlife, and other sensitive resources are discussed in this section as well as an analysis of the significance of the impact, and anticipated mitigation requirements. The proposed project has been designed to minimize impacts to biological resources by placing the proposed road alignment along existing roads. When evaluating potential impacts to biological resources related to road paving activities at this location, Appendix G the State CEQA Guidelines (CCR §§15000-15387) were used as a guide. According to these guidelines, a significant impact to biological resources would occur if the project would: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, or any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or USFWS. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direction removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree preservation policies or ordinances. Conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state HCP. 5.1 Impact Definitions Biological resource impacts can be considered direct, indirect, or cumulative and either permanent or temporary in nature. Direct: Occur when biological resources are altered, disturbed, or destroyed during project implementation. Examples include clearing vegetation, encroaching into wetland buffers, diverting surface water flows, and the loss of individual species or their habitats. Indirect: Occur when project-related activities affect biological resources in a manner that is not direct. Examples include elevated noise and dust levels, increased human activity, decreased water quality, and the introduction of invasive wildlife (i.e., domestic cats and dogs) and plants. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 18 of 27 Cumulative: Occur when multiple direct and indirect impacts to a biological resource affect the resource additively over time. Individual direct and indirect impacts may not be individually significant, but the additive effect when viewed in connection with the impacts of past, present and future projects may cause the significant loss or degradation of a resource. Temporary: Temporary impacts can be direct or indirect and are considered reversible. Examples include the removal of vegetation from areas that will be revegetated, elevated noise levels, and increased levels of dust. Permanent: Permanent impacts can be direct or indirect and are not considered reversible. Examples include the removal of vegetation from areas that will have permanent structures or pavement placed on them or landscaping an area with non-native plant species. 5.2 Analysis of Project Effects Direct and permanent impacts would result from the paving the proposed access road (Attachment G). The project would result in direct and permanent impacts to a total of 0.48 acre of developed areas. There will be no temporary impacts as all work will occur within the permanent impact area. 5.2.1 Sensitive Vegetation Communities The proposed project has been designed such that paving and other construction activities will take place only along the existing dirt access road. As all project activities will take place within previously developed areas and will not directly or indirectly impact any sensitive vegetation communities. 5.2.2 Special-Status Plants All project activities will take place within previously developed areas and no direct or indirect impacts to any special-status plant species will occur. 5.2.3 Special-Status Wildlife The project will not result in direct impacts to any native vegetation habitat, and as such, no direct impacts to sensitive wildlife species occupying these habitats should occur. The proposed impact area does not support the primary constituent elements of Quino habitat and provides limited to no existing potential to support this species (i.e., it lacks larval host plants and nectar sources and consists of an unvegetated compacted soil and gravel road that is well-maintained and regularly used). The focused surveys were negative and there will be no direct or indirect impacts from the project. A single western spadefoot tadpole was observed in ponded water on the road. Spadefoot toads are opportunistic breeders that will lay their eggs in temporary rain pools that they encounter. Direct impacts to this species are not expected to occur as outside of the rainy season adult toads would move out of the impact footprint and within the rainy season, adults would need to find this basin and lay eggs again for the species to be present in following years. This road is already developed and is highly disturbed. In addition, this species is still fairly common in San Diego County and the Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 19 of 27 individual detected does not represent a regionally significant population. Impacts will be less than significant. Coastal California gnatcatcher was detected in the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat north of the project area within the 300-foot buffer. As no vegetation will be removed for this project, no direct impacts to this species are anticipated to occur. Indirect impacts from noise may occur during the breeding season (February 15-August 31) if a nest is located within 300 feet of the impact area and hourly noise levels meet or exceed the 60dBA hourly LEQ threshold. San Diego fairy shrimp was determined to have a high-potential to occur within the road rut within the project footprint. A protocol dry-season survey was conducted and determined that the basin was not occupied by fairy shrimp. The USFWS concurred that one dry-season survey was sufficient to determine absence of fairy shrimp from this road rut. As the species is not present in the road rut, the project would not impact this species. Other wildlife that were not observed, but have a high potential to occur in the vicinity of the project area due to the vicinity of suitable habitat including orangethroat whiptail, San Diego horned lizard, coast patch-nosed snake, two-striped garter snake, burrowing owl, and San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit. All of these species are motile and if present on the site, would avoid construction activities. As no vegetation will be removed for this project, no impacts to any of these species are anticipated. The proposed project is entirely within a barbed-wire topped, chain-link fence enclosure. As such, the presence of a paved road would not alter the permeability to wildlife of this site. The proposed road will support limited vehicular traffic and will not include structures or physical barriers that would impede or discourage wildlife movement across the road. 5.2.4 Jurisdictional Waters, Wetlands and Other Aquatic Features As stated before, no streams or wetlands will be impacted by planned road paving activities. No permits will be required for this project provided that construction only takes place within the previously developed area of the existing access road. The road rut that is present within the impact area would not be jurisdictional. 5.2.5 Other Project Impacts A portion of the road is also within the San Diego MSCP South County Segment preserve area (Attachment B). Approximately 500 square feet of the road in the preserve area would be impacted by paving activities. As the road will remain in a developed state and serve an identical function when paved, no preserve area within the MSCP will be impacted by construction activities. Impacts to MSCP preserve habitat are expected to be less-than-significant. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 20 of 27 5.3 Mitigation Measures and Design Considerations 5.3.1 Sensitive Vegetation Communities The proposed project has been designed such that paving and other construction activities will take place only along the existing dirt access road. No vegetation clearing is anticipated; therefore, no direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would . 5.3.2 Special-Status Plants The proposed project would not result in impacts to regionally significant populations of San Diego barrel cactus, ashy spike-moss, or San Diego County viguiera, and no sensitive plants were determined to have a high-potential to occur within the project area; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. 5.3.3 Special-Status Wildlife The proposed project would not result in direct or indirect impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp, Quino Checkerspot butterfly, northern harrier, orangethroat whiptail, San Diego horned lizard, coast patch-nosed snake, two-striped garter snake, or San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Western Spadefoot One western spadefoot tadpole was found occupying a ponded road-rut, direct impacts to this species are not anticipated to occur from project implementation. Scheduling construction activities while the ponded area is dry would eliminate the potential for direct impacts to western spadefoot. However, if construction takes place during the breeding season (January-May) and ponded water exists within the impact area, a qualified biologist should conduct a pre-construction survey to check the impact area, including suitable ponded road-ruts for this species. If any tadpoles, or other sensitive amphibians are found, the biologist could then move them to other suitable habitat, reducing their direct impact to less-than-significant. Other direct impacts to western spadefoot or other amphibians occurring on the road could be reduced by controlling vehicle speed and conducting environmental training for any workers at the site to increase awareness and avoidance of this and other sensitive species that may be present. These species are mobile and would normally move away from the road when disturbed; however, they may not always move aside and they may need to be removed from the impact area. A qualified biologist should conduct the training and be available if the need arises to remove this or other species from the impact area. No impacts to western spadefoot are anticipated, thus, no mitigation is required for this species. Coastal California Gnatcatcher No impacts to vegetation suitable for coastal California gnatcatcher are anticipated, and as such, no direct impacts to this species are expected. Indirect impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher could result from increased noise levels from construction during the breeding season for this species (February 15-August 31). Indirect impacts to this species shall be minimized by conducting all Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 21 of 27 construction activities outside the breeding season. If construction activities are proposed during the breeding season for the gnatcatcher, measures to minimize indirect noise impacts would be required and could include temporary noise walls/berms. Noise levels from construction activities during the breeding season should not exceed 60dBA hourly LEQ at the edge of the occupied habitat, or ambient noise level if noise levels already exceed 60dBA LEQ. 5.3.4 Nesting Birds Impacts to nesting birds protected by the MBTA and similar provisions of the FGC can occur if work is conducted during the breeding season (February 15 – August 31). There is potential for raptors and other early nesting species such as hummingbirds to initiate nests as early as January. However, in general, the peak nesting season is February through August. All vegetation, native or non-native, provides habitat that may be used for nesting. No direct impacts to nesting birds from vegetation removal are anticipated as no vegetation removal activities are planned for this project. However, due to the close proximity of suitable habitat to the access road and the presence of coastal California gnatcatcher, a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted if construction activities are planned during the combined breeding season for birds (February 15-August 31) to determine if nesting birds occur in the vicinity of the impact area. The pre-construction nesting bird survey would be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 5 days prior to commencing project activities. If a nest is found, a qualified biologist would identify and flag an appropriate buffer around the nest, and no construction activities would occur within the buffer until the young have fledged or the nest is no longer active. The specific buffer width would be determined by a qualified biologist at the time of discovery and would vary according to the avian species, site conditions, and the type of work activities to be conducted. 5.3.5 Jurisdictional Waters, Wetlands and Other Aquatic Resources No direct impacts to jurisdictional waters, including wetlands are anticipated, as all construction activities will take place on previously developed areas. Sensitive aquatic resource habitats occur adjacent to the road including disturbed southern willow scrub and disturbed mule fat scrub. Indirect impacts due to construction runoff will be contained through the use of standard best management practices (BMPs) which will reduce these impacts to less-than-significant. 5.4 Cumulative Impacts A cumulative impact analysis is an assessment of how the proposed project, whose impact may not be individually significant, could contribute significantly to the total impacts to sensitive resources occurring in the project vicinity. The proposed project has been designed to minimize impacts to biological resources by placing the proposed road alignment entirely within existing unpaved roads. No native vegetation will be impacted as a result of this project. Therefore, the proposed access road would not contribute to any potentially significant cumulative impact to biological resources in the project vicinity. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 22 of 27 6.0 Conclusions The planned project will pave 0.48 acre of unpaved, unvegetated access road. No impacts to native vegetation habitats are anticipated by this project, as all planned impacts will take place in previously developed areas currently devoid of habitat. The project will not result in impacts to any regionally significant populations of special-status plants. No direct impacts to Quino checkerspot butterfly are anticipated due to the negative survey results for the 2013 flight season. No direct impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp are anticipated due to the negative survey results for the dry season sampling. No direct or indirect impacts to orangethroat whiptail, San Diego horned lizard, coast patch-nosed snake, two-striped garter snake, burrowing owl, and San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit are anticipated as no suitable habitat will be impacted by construction activities. Direct impacts to western spadefoot would result from vehicle traffic on the road when ponded water with western spadefoot tadpoles is present. To avoid direct impacts, a pre-construction survey by a qualified biologist when suitable conditions are present will determine if this species is present, and will remove this species from the impact area. No direct impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher are anticipated to occur as no vegetation will be removed. Indirect impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher could result from increased noise levels during construction. Indirect impacts to this species shall be minimized by conducting all project related activities outside of the breeding season (February 15 – August 31). If construction activities are proposed during the breeding season for the gnatcatcher, measures to minimize noise impacts would be required and could include temporary noise walls/berms. Noise levels from construction activities during the breeding season should not exceed 50dBA hourly LEQ at the edge of the occupied habitat, or the ambient noise level if noise levels already exceed 60dBA hourly LEQ. In order to avoid impacts to other nesting birds, a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted to locate any nests in the vicinity of the project if construction takes place during nesting season (February 15-August 31). If a nest is found, methods need to be implemented to avoid impacts. This would consist of a no-work buffer zone placed around the nest until the adults are no longer using it or the young have fledged. The specific buffer width would be determined by a qualified biologist at the time of discovery. These would vary based on site conditions and type of work to be conducted. No direct impacts to sensitive riparian habitats are planned for this project and no permits will be required. However, due to the location of potentially sensitive riparian habitats adjacent to the access road, containment of construction runoff using standard BMPs would reduce these impacts to less-than-significant. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 23 of 27 If you have any questions regarding the contents of this letter report, please contact me at (858) 444-3958. Sincerely, Senior Biologist Attachments: Attachment A – Regional Location Map Attachment B – Site Map with CNDDB Species Attachment C – Plant Species Detected Table Attachment D – Wildlife Species Detected Table Attachment E – Photos of OWD 870-1 Reservoir Project Attachment F – Quino Checkerspot Focused Survey Report Attachment G – Vegetation Map Attachment H – Sensitive Plant Potential to Occur Table Attachment I – Sensitive Wildlife Potential to Occur Table Attachment J - Focused Dry Season Fairy Shrimp Report Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 24 of 27 References American Ornithologists’ Union. 1998 and supplements. Checklist of North American Birds, 7th edition. American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. Baldwin, B.G., D.H. Goldman, D.J Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti. 2012. The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California. Second Edition. University of California Press, CA. Baker, R. J., L. C. Bradley, R. D. Bradley, J. W. Dragoo, M. D. Engstrom, R. S. Hoffmann, C. A. Jones, F. Reid, D. W. Rice, and C. Jones. 2003. Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 2003. Lubbock, TX: Occasional Papers, Museum of Texas Tech University, Number 229. Beauchamp, R.M. 1986. A Flora of San Diego County, California. Sweetwater River Press. Best T.L. 1996. Lepus californicus. Mammalian Species No. 530. American Society of Mammalogists. Bond S.I. 1977. An annotated list of the mammals of San Diego County, California. In: Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History. 18(14): 229-248. Bontrager, D.R. 1991. Habitat requirements, home range requirements, and breeding biology of the California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) in south Orange County, California. Prepared for Santa Margarita Company, Ranch Santa Margarita, CA. April. Bostic, D. L. 1965. Home range of the teiid lizard, cnemidophorus hyperyhtrus beldingi. Southwest Naturalist. 10:178-281. Bowman, R.H. 1973. Soil Survey of the San Diego Area, California. United States Agriculture Department. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2005. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System (CWHR), version 8.1 personal computer program. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. CDFG. 2011. Special Animals List. Natural Diversity Data Base. 60 pp. January. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2013. Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens List. Natural Diversity Data Base. Quarterly publication. 72 pp. July. CDFW. 2013b. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) RareFind 4 Report. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2013. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Sacramento. Campbell, K.F., R.A. Erickson, W.E. Haas, and M.A. Patten. 1998. California Gnatcatcher use of habitats other than coastal sage scrub: conservation and management implications. Western Birds 29: 421-433. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 25 of 27 Collins, J. T., and T. W. Taggart. 2002. Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles and Crocodilians. Center for North American Herpetology, Lawrence, Kansas. pp. 45. Collins, J. T., and T. W. Taggart. 2009. Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles and Crocodilians. Sixth Edition. Publication of The Center for North American Herpetology, Lawrence. Iv + 44 pp. Hickman, J.C. (ed.). 1993. The Jepson Manual; Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. State of California Department of Fish and Game, Non-game Heritage Program, Sacramento.Ingles L. 1965. Mammals of the Pacific states. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Jennings, M.R. and M.P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division, Rancho Cordova, CA. iii+255 pp. Loughman, D. L., and McLandress, M. R. 1994. Reproductive success and nesting habitats of Northern Harriers in California. California Waterfowl Assoc., 4630 Northgate Blvd., Ste. 150, Sacramento, CA 95834. MacWhirter, R. B., and Bildstein, K. L. 1996. Northern Harrier (Circus cyaneus), in The Birds of North America (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.), no. 210. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia. McAuley, M. 1996. Wildflowers of the Santa Monica Mountains. Canyon Publishing Company. Mattoni, R G. F. Pratt, T. R. Longcore, J. F. Emmel and J. N. George. 1997. The endangered Quino checkerspot, Euphydryas editha quino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). J. Res. Leip. 34: 99-118. Munz, P.A. 1974. A Flora of Southern California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. Oberbauer, T., M. Kelly, and J. Buegge. 2008. Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County. Based on “Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California”, Robert F. Holland, Ph.D., October 1986. Rathburn G.B., Jennings M.R., Murphey T. G., and Siepel N.R. 1993. Status and ecology of sensitive aquatic vertebrates in lower San Simeon and Pico Creeks, San Luis Obispo County, California. Unpublished report, National Ecology Research Center, Piedras Blancas Research Station, San Simeon, California, under Cooperative Agreement (14-16-0009-91-1909). Reeve, W.L. 1952. Taxonomy and distribution of the horned lizard genus Phrynosoma. The University of Kansas Science Bulletin. 34(14):817-960. Reiser, C. H. 1994. Rare Plants of San Diego County. Aquafir Press. May. 175 pp. Roberts, N.C.1989. Baja California Plant Field Guide. Natural History Publ. Co. U.S.A. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 26 of 27 Rossman D.A., Ford N.B., Siegel R.A. 1996. The garter snakes: evolution and ecology. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. 332 pp. Shuford, W. D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. . Stebbins, R.C. 2003. A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. Stephenson J.R. and Calcarone G.M. 1999. Southern California mountains and foothills assessment: Habitat and species conservation issues. General Technical Report GTR-PSW-175. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Storer, T.L. 1925. A synopsis of the amphibia of California. University of California Publications in Zoology 27:1-342. Unitt. P. 2004. San Diego County Bird Atlas, Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History 39: i-vii, 1-639. USFWS. 1996. Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods. April 19. USFWS. 1997. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the San Diego Fairy Shrimp. Federal Register 62 (22): 4925-4939. USFWS. 2002a. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Year 2002 Survey Protocol. USFWS. 2002b. Species Profile for San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis). http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/life_histories/K049.html. USFWS. 2008. San Diego Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Carlsbad Office, Carlsbad, California. September. Weintraub, J.D. 1980. Selection of daytime retreats by recently metamorphosed Scaphiopus multiplicatus. Journal of Herpetology 14:83-84. Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (eds.). 1993. Mammal Species of the World. 2nd ed. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution. Personal Communications Coburn-Boyd, Lisa. 11 March 2013. Personal Communication with Otay Water District Environmental Compliance Specialist. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd October 15, 2013 Page 27 of 27 Wynn, Susan. 17 September 2013. Personal Communication with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biologist. Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project October 2013 ICF 00122.13 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, EsriJapan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, 2013 Attachment ARegional LocationOWD 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ A t t a c h m e n t A _ R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n . m x d 9 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ± Source: ESRI World Map (2012) 0 2 41 Miles San Bernardino Riverside San Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern InyoTulareKings Ventura SantaBarbara San LuisObispo C a l i f o r n i a Project Site ^_ A L T A R D Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Attachment BMSCP Preserve and CNDDB ResultsOWD 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ A t t a c h m e n t B _ C N D B B . m x d 9 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ! !! !East Mesa Reservoir Road Location 300-ft Buffer of Reservoir Road SD MSCP Hardline Preserve CNDDB Coastal California Gnatcatcher Lakeside ceanothus, Munz's Sage Laguna Mountains Jewel-Flower,Parry's Tetracoccus, Thorne's HairstreakSource: CNDDB (2013); Imagery-ESRI (2010). 0 200 400100 Feet ± Attachment C. Plant Species Detected Table Scientific Name Common Name Special Status LYCOPHYTES Selaginellaceae ‐ Spike‐moss family Selaginella cinerascens Ashy spike‐moss CRPR 4.1 EUDICOTS Anacardiaceae ‐ Sumac Or Cashew family Malosma laurina Laurel sumac Rhus integrifolia Lemonade berry Schinus molle Pepper tree * Apiaceae ‐ Carrot family Foeniculum vulgare Fennel * Sanicula arguta Sharptooth blacksnakeroot Asteraceae ‐ Sunflower family Artemisia californica California sagebrush Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush Baccharis salicifolia ssp. salicifolia Mule fat Baccharis sarothroides Broom baccharis Bahiopsis laciniata San Diego County viguiera CRPR 4.2 Centaurea melitensis Tocalote * Corethrogyne filaginifolia Common sand aster Glebionis coronaria Garland or crown daisy * Gutierrezia sarothrae Matchweed Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox‐tongue * Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed Isocoma menziesii Coastal goldenbush Lasthenia gracilis Common goldfields Pseudognaphalium luteoalbum Jersey cudweed * Silybum marianum Blessed milkthistle * Boraginaceae ‐ Borage family Pectocarya linearis ssp. ferocula Narrow‐toothed pectocarya Plagiobothrys collinus var. gracilis San Diego popcornflower Brassicaceae ‐ Mustard family Brassica nigra Black mustard * Brassica sp.Mustard Hirschfeldia incana Shortpod mustard * Lepidium nitidum Shining pepperweed Cactaceae ‐ Cactus family Scientific Name Common Name Special Status Ferocactus viridescens San Diego barrel cactus CRPR 2.1 Opuntia oricola Chaparral prickly‐pear Chenopodiaceae ‐ Goosefoot family Atriplex semibaccata Australian saltbush * Convolvulaceae ‐ Morning‐glory family Calystegia macrostegia Island false bindweed Crassulaceae ‐ Stonecrop family Crassula connata Pygmy‐weed Cucurbitaceae ‐ Gourd family Marah macrocarpa Chilicothe Euphorbiaceae ‐ Spurge family Ricinus communis Castorbean * Fabaceae ‐ Legume family Acmispon glaber Deerweed, California broom Melilotus officinalis Yellow sweetclover * Geraniaceae ‐ Geranium family Erodium cicutarium Redstem filaree * Lamiaceae ‐ Mint family Marrubium vulgare Horehound * Salvia apiana White sage Malvaceae ‐ Mallow family Malacothamnus fasciculatus var. fasciculatus Chaparral mallow Sidalcea malviflora Checkerbloom, checkermallow Myrsinaceae ‐ Myrsine family Anagallis arvensis Scarlet pimpernel * Nyctaginaceae ‐ Four O'clock family Mirabilis laevis Desert wishbone‐bush Onagraceae ‐ Evening Primrose family Epilobium canum ssp. canum Hummingbird trumpet Plantaginaceae ‐ Plantain family Plantago erecta Dotseed plantain Polygonaceae ‐ Buckwheat family Eriogonum fasciculatum var. fasciculatum Coastal California buckwheat Primulaceae ‐ Primrose family Dodecatheon sp.Shooting star Rhamnaceae ‐ Buckthorn family Rhamnus crocea Spiny redberry Rubiaceae ‐ Madder family Galium aparine Goose grass Scientific Name Common Name Special Status Salicaceae ‐ Willow family Salix laevigata Red willow Solanaceae ‐ Nightshade family Solanum douglasii Greenspot nightshade Tamaricaceae ‐ Tamarisk family Tamarix ramosissima Saltcedar * Urticaceae ‐ Nettle family Urtica urens Dwarf nettle * Violaceae ‐ Violet family Viola pedunculata Johnny‐jump‐up MONOCOTS Agavaceae ‐ Century Plant family Chlorogalum parviflorum Smallflower soap plant Poaceae ‐ Grass family Avena fatua Wild oat * Bromus madritensis Compact brome * Bromus sp.Brome Cortaderia selloana Pampas grass * Lamarckia aurea Goldentop grass * Schismus barbatus Common mediterranean grass * Themidaceae ‐ Brodiaea family Dichelostemma capitatum Blue dicks Legend Special Status: CRPR – California Rare Plant Rank 1A. Presumed extinct in California 1B. Rare or Endangered in California and elsewhere 2. Rare or Endangered in California, more common elsewhere 3. Plants for which we need more information ‐ Review list 4. Plants of limited distribution ‐ Watch list Threat Ranks .1 ‐ Seriously endangered in California .2 – Fairly endangered in California *= Non‐native or invasive species Wildlife Species Detected TableAttachment D. Scientific Name Common Name Special Status INVERTEBRATES Moths, Skippers and Butterflies Pontia protodice Checkered White *Pieris rapae Cabbage White Anthocharis sara Pacific Orangetip Callophrys affinis Western Green Hairstreak Brephidium exile Western Pygmy‐Blue Glaucopsyche lygdamus Silvery Blue Apodemia virgulti Behr’s Metalmark Speyeria callippe Callippe Fritillary Chlosyne gabbii Gabb’s Checkerspot Vanessa cardui Painted Lady Vanessa annabella West Coast Lady Coenonympha tullia Common Ringlet Erynnis funeralis Funereal Duskywing VERTEBRATES Amphibians Spea hammondii Western Spadefoot CSC Birds Circus cyaneus Northern Harrier CSC Buteo jamaicensis Red‐tailed Hawk Charadrius vociferus Killdeer *Columba livia Rock Pigeon Zenaida macroura Mourning Dove Geococcyx californianus Greater Roadrunner Calypte anna Anna's Hummingbird Tyrannus vociferans Cassin's Kingbird Corvus corax Common Raven Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit Salpinctes obsoletus Rock Wren Polioptila californica californica Coastal California Gnatcatcher FT, CSC Mimus polyglottos Northern Mockingbird Dendroica coronata Yellow‐rumped Warbler Scientific Name Common Name Special Status Melozone crissalis California Towhee Zonotrichia leucophrys White‐crowned Sparrow Sturnella neglecta Western Meadowlark Carpodacus mexicanus House Finch Carduelis psaltria Lesser Goldfinch Mammals Sylvilagus audubonii Desert Cottontail Spermophilus beecheyi California Ground Squirrel Legend Special Status: Federal: FE = Endangered FT = Threatened State: SE = Endangered ST =Threatened CSC = California Species of Special Concern *= Non‐native or invasive species Attachment E OWD 870-1 Reservoir Project Photos taken March 2013 Photo 1: view of typical disturbed habitat within the vicinity of the reservoir road. Note most this area is mowed. Photo facing north. Photo 2: view of the south access entrance to the reservoir road with a typical concrete vault structure in the ground. Photo facing south. Photo 3: view of slope around the reservoir vegetated with Diegan coastal sage scrub species. Photo facing northeast. Photo 4: view of non-native grassland habitat outside the fence on the east side. Photo facing north. Photo 5: view of a cluster of San Diego barrel cactus in Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat to the north of the reservoir road. Photo facing south. Photo 6: view of water filled road rut found along east side of reservoir road. Photo facing north. Attachment E Photo 7: close up view of western spadefoot toad tadpole found in water filled road rut. Photo facing northeast. Photo 8: view of ground squirrel burrows near the south entrance of the reservoir. Photo facing south. Photo 9: view of drainage rip-rap and disturbed southern willow scrub habitat on the other side of the fence in the northwestern portion of the reservoir road. Photo facing northwest. Photo 10: view of disturbed southern willow scrub found on the outside of the fence line in the northwestern portion of the road. Photo facing east. Photo 11: view of disturbed mule fat scrub found on the outside of the fence line in the northwestern portion of the road. Photo facing northeast. Photo 12: view of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat vegetated slopes outside the fence line in the southern portion of the reservoir road. Photo facing west. Attachment F: Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Focused Survey Report RESULTS OF QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY SURVEYS FOR THE EAST MESA RESERVOIR ROAD PAVING PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P REPARED FOR: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 P REPARED BY: ICF International 9775 Businesspark Avenue San Diego, CA 92131 Contact: Cindy Dunn (858) 578-8964 May 2013 ICF International. 2013. Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project. May. (ICF 00122.13.) San Diego, CA. Prepared for Otay Water District, San Diego, California. Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project i May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Contents Page Summary ................................................................................................................ S-1 Chapter 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1-1 Physical Characteristics ................................................................................................ 1-1 Chapter 2 Methods ................................................................................................................. 2-1 Chapter 3 Results .................................................................................................................... 3-1 Chapter 4 Certification ............................................................................................................ 4-1 Chapter 5 References .............................................................................................................. 5-1 Attachment 1 Field Notes Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project ii May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Tables and Figures Table On Page 1 Survey Conditions................................................................................................................................................ 2-2 2 Butterfly Observed Within the Survey Area ............................................................................................. 3-1 Figure Follows Page 1 Regional Vicinity .................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 2 Project Location.................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 3 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Area ................................................................................................ 1-1 Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project S-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Summary ICF International (ICF) was retained by the Otay Water District (OWD) to conduct protocol surveys for the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino; Quino) for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (project). The project site is located in the unincorporated community of Otay, in San Diego County, California (Figure 1). The OWD East Mesa Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility. A dirt and gravel service road encircles the reservoir within a chain-link fence that encompasses the East Mesa Reservoir facility. OWD plans to pave this road to facilitate and improve access around the reservoir (Figure 2). The project footprint comprises the approximately 815-foot long service road occurring within the fenced facility. The project footprint consists of developed areas mostly containing an unpaved road. The survey area includes the project footprint and a 150-foot buffer around the unpaved road (Figure 3). Areas of Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed southern willow scrub, disturbed mule-fat scrub, non-native grassland, disturbed habitat, bare ground, and developed areas occur within 150 feet of the project footprint. A total of five weekly surveys were conducted between March 15 and April 9, 2013. Surveys for adult Quino were conducted by ICF biologists C. Dunn (TE-29658A-0), E. Eidson (TE-051236-1), and D. Allen (TE-837448-4). All surveys were conducted according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Year 2002 Protocol (USFWS 2002). Suitable Quino nectaring and larval habitat was present within the survey area. Several patches of dot-seed plantain (Plantago erecta), a Quino primary host plant, were detected in the eastern and northeastern portion of the survey area. Nectar sources were most abundant outside of the fenced area in the eastern and northern portions of the survey area. Overall the survey area provides habitat ranging from low to high suitability for Quino. The highest suitability occurred in the northeastern corner of the survey area, outside of the project footprint, with suitability increasing as distance from the project footprint increased. Quino were not observed during the 2013 protocol surveys for this project. Based on the conditions on the project site, the information provided for the reference populations, and ICF’s findings at the site northwest of the East Mesa Detention Facility, the 2013 surveys were timed correctly and Quino would have been detected during the focused surveys if it occurred in the survey area. These surveys were conducted according to the survey protocol by qualified, permitted biologists during favorable climatic conditions, and this survey report documents absence of the species during the 2013 flight season. Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 1-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Chapter 1 Introduction ICF International (ICF) conducted protocol surveys to determine the presence/absence of the Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) (Quino) for Otay Water District’s (OWD’s) East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (project). The project site is located in the unincorporated community of Otay, in San Diego County, California (Figure 1). The OWD East Mesa Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility. A dirt and gravel service road encircles the reservoir within a chain-link fence that encompasses the East Mesa Reservoir facility. OWD plans to pave this road to facilitate and improve access around the reservoir (Figure 2). In its entirety, the project includes an approximately 815-foot long service road. For the purposes of this report, the term “project footprint” refers to the service road occurring within the fenced facility. The project footprint comprises developed areas primarily consisting of the unpaved road. The survey area includes the project footprint and a 150-foot buffer around the unpaved road (Figure 3). The survey area covers approximately 15.9 acres. Areas of Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed southern willow scrub, disturbed mule-fat scrub, non-native grassland, disturbed habitat, bare ground, and developed areas occur within 150 feet of the project footprint. This report documents the results of the 2013 focused surveys within the survey area for this project. Physical Characteristics The survey area is surrounded by undeveloped areas supporting native and nonnative vegetation (Figure 3). The survey area ranges in elevation from 815 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) at the southwestern portion of the survey area to 890 feet AMSL in the northeastern portion. Soils in the survey area consist of Huerhuero loam (2 to 9 percent slopes, 9 to 15 percent slopes, and 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded), San Miguel-Exchequer rocky silt loams (9 to 70 percent slopes), and Stockpen gravelly clay loam (2 to 5 percent slopes) (NRCS 2013). Soils in the Huerhuero series consist of moderately well drained loams that have a clay subsoil. These soils developed in sandy marine sediment. The San Miguel-Exchequer complex is about 50% San Miguel silt loam and 40% Exchequer silt loam with 10% rock outcrops. Soils in the San Miguel series consist of well-drained, shallow to moderately deep silt loams that have a clay subsoil. Soils in the Exchequer series consist of shallow and very shallow, well-drained silt loams that formed in material weathered from hard metabasic rock. Soils in the Stockpen series consist of moderately well drained, moderately deep, gravelly clay loams (Bowman 1973). Service Layer Figure 1Regional LocationEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n . m x d 5 / 8 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: ESRI World Map (2012). 0 4 82 Miles San Bernardino Riverside San Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern InyoTulareKings Ventura SantaBarbara San LuisObispo N e v a d a C a l i f o r n i a Project Site ^_ Figure 2Project VicinityEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 2 _ P r o j e c t V i c i n i t y . m x d 4 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale quadrangles: Otay Mesa 0 2,0001,000 Feet Survey Area kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kjkj kjkjkjkj kjkj kj ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! Copyright:© 2013 Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Figure 3Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey AreaEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 3 _ Q C B S u r v e y A r e a . m x d 7 / 3 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ! ! !Project Footprint Survey Area Excluded Area kj Dot-Seed Plantain Vegetation Communties Developed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Disturbed Habitat Disturbed Southern Willow Scrub Non-Native Grassland Source: Imagery-ESRI (2010). 0 100 20050 Feet ± Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 2-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Chapter 2 Methods On March 5, 2013, a habitat assessment was conducted by E. Eidson. At that time dot-seed plantain (Plantago erecta) was the only host plant detected in the survey area. Dot-seed plantain appeared healthy, with approximately 50% of all individuals in bloom. The habitat assessment determined that 12.81 acres of non-excluded areas, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2002), occurred within the survey area (Figure 3). Excluded areas, not recommended for Quino surveys, are defined as follows: • Orchards, developed areas, or in-fill parcels largely dominated by nonnative vegetation. • Active/in-use agricultural fields without natural or remnant inclusions of native vegetation. • Closed-canopy forest or riparian areas, dense chaparral, and small openings completely enclosed within a closed-canopy or dense chaparral area. Excluded areas within the survey area included developed areas and areas of dense riparian scrub. A total of five weekly surveys were conducted between March 15 and April 9, 2013. Surveys for adult Quino were conducted by ICF biologists C. Dunn (TE-29658A-0), E. Eidson (TE-051236-1), and D. Allen (TE-837448-4). These surveys were conducted under acceptable weather conditions as defined in the USFWS protocol (Table 1) (USFWS 2002). Each survey involved slowly walking meandering transects throughout all non-excluded portions of the survey area (Figure 3). The surveys were conducted at an average rate of no more than 10 acres per hour. The surveyor stopped periodically to scan adjacent areas for moving butterflies. All butterfly species observed were identified and recorded (Table 2). All host plants detected within the survey area were mapped (Figure 3), and all potential nectar sources were noted. Copies of daily field notes are provided as an attachment to this report (Attachment 1). In accordance with the USFWS protocol, Quino surveys, at a minimum, must occur over a 5-week period during the flight season for the given year. The timing of the flight season for Quino typically varies from year to year and by region. In order to determine the beginning and end of the flight season at each site, the conditions of host plants and/or nectar sources within the survey area for the project are assessed prior to the start of focused surveys. Prior to the start of the survey period for this project, host plants on site were healthy and in bloom and nectar sources were available within and adjacent to the survey area. Surveyors also assess information provided by other biologists monitoring Quino reference populations. For the 2013 flight season, Quino reference information was obtained from populations in the Otay Mountain and Otay Mesa areas and by visiting a known Quino population on OWD property. Information from the Otay Mountain and Otay Mesa reference sites, as reported by the monitoring biologists, was used to confirm that Quino were actively flying during the survey dates for this project. According to the monitoring information, Quino were detected flying in Otay Mountain and the Otay Mesa area on March 6, 2013. Quino were no longer detected during a survey conducted on April 4 in these areas. Otay Water District Chapter 2. Methods Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 2-2 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 On March 15, 2013, ICF biologists conducted a visit to a known population of Quino located on OWD property northwest of the East Mesa Detention Facility. Permission to visit this site was granted by OWD. More than 30 Quino adults were observed at this site copulating and foraging on nectar sources similar to those available within the survey area. Table 1. Survey Conditions Date (2013) Survey Number Start—End Time Temperature (Start/Stop) Wind Speed Cloud Cover Surveyor (Supervised Individuals) March 15 1 1040–1200 72/75°F 0–4 mph 0% (high haze) C. Dunn, D. Allen (K. Davis, I. Cain) March 22 2 1245–1415 70/72°F 1–6 mph 0% C. Dunn (J. Hickman) March 29 3 1400–1530 73/72°F 1–5 mph 0% (high haze) C. Dunn (J. Hickman) April 3 4 1200–1340 77/79°F 0–1 mph 0–10% E. Eidson (J. Hickman) April 9 5 1200–1330 67/69°F 1–8 mph (gusts of 10) 0–10% E. Eidson °F = degrees Fahrenheit; mph = miles per hour Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 3-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Chapter 3 Results No Quino were detected during the five 2013 protocol surveys for the project in the survey area. However, 13 other butterfly species were observed (Table 2). Several patches of dot-seed plantain, a Quino primary host plant, were detected in the eastern and northeastern portion of the survey area (Figure 3). At the beginning of the survey period dot-seed plantain was approximately 1 inch in height, in good health, and mostly in flower. At the end of the survey period dot-seed plantain was 1.5–2 inches in height and senescing. Table 2. Butterflies Observed Within the Survey Area Scientific Name Common Name Scientific Name Common Name Pontia protodice Checkered white Speyeria callippe Callippe fritillary Pieris rapae Cabbage white Vanessa annabella Gabb’s checkerspot Anthocharis sara Pacific orangetip Vanessa cardui Painted lady Callophrys affinis Western green hairstreak Vanessa annabella West coast lady Brephidium exile Western pygmy-blue Coenonympha tullia Common ringlet Glaucopsyche lygdamus Silvery blue Erynnis funeralis Funeral duskywing Apodemia virgulti Behr’s metalmark Potential nectar sources present and in bloom during the surveys included San Diego sunflower (Bahiopsis laciniata), black mustard (Brassica nigra), blue dicks (Dichelostemma capitatum), common goldfields (Lasthenia gracilis), Crete weed (Hedypnois cretica), deerweed (Acmispon glaber), San Diego popcornflower (Plagiobothrys collinus var. gracilis), narrow‐toothed pectocarya (Pectocarya linearis ssp. ferocula), and a few individuals of California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum). Nectar sources were most abundant outside of the fenced area in the eastern and northern portions of the survey area. Most areas inside the fencing and west and south of the project alignment supported highly disturbed habitats that were predominated by non-native, weedy plant species. Overall the survey area provides habitat ranging from low to high suitability for Quino. The highest suitability occurred in the northeastern corner of the survey area, outside of the project footprint, with suitability increasing as distance from the project footprint increased. Quino were not observed during the 2013 protocol surveys for this project. Based on the conditions on the project site, the information provided for the reference populations, and our findings at the site northwest of the East Mesa Detention Facility, the 2013 surveys were timed correctly and Quino would have been detected during the focused surveys if it occurred in the survey area. These surveys were conducted according to the survey protocol by qualified, permitted biologists during favorable climatic conditions, and show the absence of the species during the 2013 flight season. Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 4-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Chapter 4 Certification I certify that the information in this survey report and attached exhibits fully and accurately represent my work. ___________________ May 14, 2013 Erika Eidson (Permit No. TE-051236-1) Date Biologist Author and Field Surveys ___________________ May 14, 2013 Cindy Dunn (Permit No. TE-29658A-0) Date Biologist Field Surveys ___________________ May 14, 2013 Doug Allen (Permit No. TE-837448-4) Date Biologist Field Surveys Results of Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Surveys for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project 5-1 May 2013 ICF 00122.13 Chapter 5 References Bowman R. 1973. Soil Survey of the San Diego Area. U.S. Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the USDI, UC Agricultural Experiment Station, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), United States Department of Agriculture. 2013. Web Soil Survey. Available: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/. Accessed: April 24, 2013. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Year 2002 Survey Protocol. Attachment 1 Field Notes ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! kj kjkj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj kj Copyright:© 2013 Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping,Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community Attachment GVegetation Map and Potentially Sensitive ResourcesOWD 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ A t t a c h m e n t G _ V e g M a p . m x d 9 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ! ! !East Mesa Reservoir Road Location 300-ft Buffer of Reservoir Road kj Californian Plantain kj San Diego Barrel Cactus kj Coastal California Gnatcatcher kj Ground Squirrel Burrows kj Road Rut Vegetation Communties Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Developed Disturbed Habitat Disturbed Mule Fat Scrub Non-Native Grassland Disturbed Southern Willow Scrub Source: Imagery-ESRI (2010). 0 100 20050 Feet ± Attachment H: Sensitive Plant Species and Their Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the East Mesa Reservoir Road Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code Habitat Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale San Diego thornmint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia) FT SE CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Grassy openings in chaparral and coastal sage scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Prefers friable or broken clay soils. 33 to 3150 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-Jun No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Spineshrub (Adolphia californica) CRPR 2B.1 Deciduous shrub Chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; 45-740 m (147-2428 ft). Blooming period: December - May No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. This distinctive shrub should have been observed if present. San Diego bur-sage (Ambrosia chenopodiifolia) CRPR 2B.1 Deciduous shrub Coastal scrub 55-155 m Blooming period: April - June No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. This distinctive shrub should have been observed if present. San Diego County Viguiera (Bahiopsis laciniata) CRPR 4.2 Deciduous shrub Diegan coastal sage scrub. 197-2461 ft. Blooming Period: Feb-Jun Yes Observed Observed along the margins of the slopes of the water reservoir within the survey area. Golden cereus (Bergerocactus emoryi) CRPR 2B.2 Perennial stem succulent Chaparral and coastal scrub; 3-395 m; Blooming period: May - June No Moderate Appropriate habitat present on-site. This large distinctive cactus should have been observed if present. San Diego goldenstar (Bloomeria clevelandii) CRPR 1B.1 Bulbiferous herb Chaparral, coastal sage scrub, valley grasslands, particularly near mima mound topography or the vicinity of vernal pools; 50 - 465 m (164-1526 ft). Blooming period : April - May No Moderate Suitable habitat and soils present within on site. Occurs in the vicinity at the same altitude. Annual species which would not have been observed during early spring surveys. Orcutt’s brodiaea (Brodiaea orcuttii) CRPR 1B.1 Bulbiferous herb Moist grasslands, near streams and the periphery of vernal pools; 0-1600 m (0-5249 ft). Blooming period: May - July No Low No vernal pools present within the survey area. Road rut does not support vegetation. Round-leaved filaree (California macrophylla) CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Grasslands and cismontane woodland; 15-1200 m; Blooming period: March - May No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Dunn's mariposa lily (Calochortus dunnii) SR CRPR 1B.2 Growth Form: perennial bulbiferous herb Blooming Period: Apr-Jun Rocky openings in chaparral or grassland/chaparral ecotone. Seems to be restricted to metavolcanic and gabbroic soils. 1247 to 6004 ft. No None Suitable habitat does not occur in the survey area; this species typically occurs at a higher elevation than that of the survey area. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code Habitat Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale Lakeside ceanothus (Ceanothus cyaneus) CRPR 1B.2 Evergreen shrub Closed-cone coniferous forest, dense chaparral. 771 to 2477 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-Jun No None Suitable habitat does not occur in the survey area; The range of this species is highly restricted to the north of the study area. Summer holly (Comarostaphylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia) CRPR 1B.2 Annual herb Sandy soils in coastal bluff scrub, coastal scrub, and grassland; 5-300 m (16-984 ft). Blooming period: Feb - Aug No Moderate Appropriate habitat present on-site. This large shrub should have been observed if present. Long-spined spineflower (Chorizanthe polygonoides var. longispina) CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Clay lenses, largely devoid of shrubs. Occasionally seen on the periphery of vernal pool habitat and the periphery of montane meadows near vernal seeps; below 1400 m (4593 ft). Blooming period: April - June No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Snake cholla (Cylindropuntia californica var. californica) CRPR 1B.1 Perennial stem succulent Chaparral and coastal scrub 30-150 m; Blooming period: April - May No Moderate Appropriate habitat present on-site. This distinctive cactus should have been observed if present. Otay tarplant (Deinandra conjugens) FT SE CRPR 1B.1 Aannual herb Fractured clay soils or lightly vegetated coastal sage scrub. 82 to 984 ft. Blooming Period: May-Jun No Moderate Suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. The frequent mowing within the impact area may prevent the establishment of this species. Orcutt’s bird’s beak (Dicranostegia orcuttiana) CRPR 2B.1 Annual herb (Hemiparisitic) Coastal scrub; 10-350 m; Blooming period March - Sept No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Variegated dudleya (Dudleya variegata) CRPR 1B.2 Perennial herb Clay soils in chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools; 3- 580 m (9-1903 ft). Blooming period: April - June No Moderate Suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Unlikely to occur with within the highly disturbed project impact area. Cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera) CRPR 2B.2 Shrub Coastal scrub, coastal bluff scrub and Mojavean desert scrub; 10-500 m. Blooming period: Dec - Oct No Low Suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. This distinctive shrub should have been observed if present. San Diego button-celery (Eryngium aristaulatum var. parishii) FE SE CRPR 1B.1 Perennial herb Vernal pools within coastal scrub or grasslands. 65 to 2034 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-Jun No Low No vernal pools present within the survey area. Road rut does not support vegetation. San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens) CRPR 2B.1 Perennial stem succulent Sandy to rocky areas in coastal sage scrub or grasslands. 10 to 1,476 ft. Blooming Period: May-Jun Yes Observed Several individuals of this species were observed in northeastern area of the survey area. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code Habitat Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale Mexican flannelbush (Fremontodendron mexicanum) FE SR CRPR 1B.1 Evergreen shrub Closed cone coniferous forest and southern mixed chaparral. A limited population of mature shrubs grows along Cedar Creek on Otay Mountain; entire known population is now restricted to Otay Mountain; 33 to 2349 ft. Blooming Period: Mar-Jun No None Suitable habitat for this species does not occur in the survey area. Palmer’s grapplinghook (Harpagonella palmeri) CRPR 4.2 Annual herb Chaparral, grasslands, clay vertisols with open grassy slopes or Diegan coastal sage scrub between 20-955 m (65 to 3132 ft). Blooming period: March - May No Moderate Potentially suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. San Diego marsh elder (Iva hayesiana) CRPR 2B.2 Perennial herb Marshes and swamps, and playas; 10-500 m (32-1640 ft). Blooming period: April - Oct No Low Streambed habitat within the survey area is marginally suitable for this species. Gander’s pitcher sage (Lepechinia ganderi) CRPR Subshrub Coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland; 300-1370m Blooming period: Apr-Jul No Low Suitable habitat is marginally suitable. Spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis) FT CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Vernal pools. 98 to 4265 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-Jun No Low No vernal pools present within the survey area. Road rut does not support vegetation. California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica) FE SE CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Vernal pools. 49 to 2165 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-Aug No Low No vernal pools present within the survey area. Road rut does not support vegetation. Otay mesa mint (Pogogyne nudiuscula) FE SE CRPR 1B.1 Annual herb Vernal pools. 295 to 820 ft. Blooming Period: May-Jul No Low No vernal pools present within the survey area. Road rut does not support vegetation. Munz’ sage (Salvia munzii) CRPR 2B.2 Evergreen shrub Chaparral and Diegan coastal sage scrub. Typically found on metavolcanic soils in the southern portion of San Diego County. 394 to 3494 ft. Blooming Period: Feb-Apr No Moderate Suitable habitat occurs within the survey area. Ashy spike-moss (Selaginella cinerascens) CRPR 4.1 Perennial rhizomatous herb Chaparral and coastal scrub, dry habitat, often in clay soils both in open areas and in the shade of larger plants. 65 to 2100 ft. Blooming Period: none Yes Observed This species was observed in the Diegan coastal sage scrub within the survey area. Laguna Mountains jewel-flower (Streptanthus bernardinus) CRPR 4.3 Perennial herb Chaparral, Lower montane coniferous forest. 2,198 to 8,202 ft. Blooming Period: May-Aug No None Suitable habitat does not occur in the survey area; this species typically occurs at a higher elevation than that of the survey area. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code Habitat Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale Parry's tetracoccus (Tetracoccus dioicus) CRPR 1B.2 Deciduous shrub Typically in low-growing chamise chaparral, with moderately dense canopy cover. Below 3280 ft. Blooming Period: Apr-May No None Suitable chaparral habitat for this species does not occur within the survey area. Legend: Status: Federal FE - listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. FT - listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. State SE - listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. ST – listed as threatened under California Endangered Species Act. SR – listed as rare under the Native Plant Protection Act. California Rare Plant Ranks – formerly California Native Plant Society Lists 1B – Rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere 2B – Rare, threatened or endangered in California but more common elsewhere 3 – May be rare but more research needed to determine true status 4 – Limited distribution and are uncommon but not presently rare or endangered Threat Ranks .1 – Seriously endangered in California .2 – Fairly endangered in California .3 – Not very endangered in California References Special Status information from CDFW 2013. Nomenclature and plant descriptions from Baldwin et al. 2012, Beauchamp 1986, CNPS 2013, Hickman 1993, McAuley 1996, Munz 1974, Reiser 1994, Roberts 1989. Attachment I: Sensitive Wildlife Species and their Potential to Occur in the Vicinity of the 870-1 Reservoir Project Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code & Status Habitat |Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale INVERTEBRATES San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis) FE Vernal pools. All known localities are below 701m (2,300 ft) and are within 64km (40 miles) of the Pacific Ocean. No High – After dry season sampling None Focused protocol dry season survey determined that this species did not occupy suitable habitat. Thorne’s hairstreak (Callophrys thornei) BLM - Sensitive Associated with host plant Tecate cypress (Cupressus forbesii), with nectar sources from shrubs found coastal sage scrub and chaparral. No Low No suitable host plants occur within the survey area, however, suitable nectar sources occur within Diegan coastal sage scrub found within the survey area. Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) FE Inhabits openings on clay soils within or in the vicinity of shrublands, grasslands, meadows, vernal pools, and lake margins. Closely tied to its larval host plant, dwarf plantain (Plantago erecta) or owl’s clover (Castilleja exserta). No High – after focused surveys None Suitable habitat occurs on site and populations occur less than one mile from the survey area. Focused protocol dry season survey determined that this species did not occupy suitable habitat. Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) FE Vernal pools. It occurs from Los Angeles County to Baja California. In San Diego County, all populations are within 15 kilometers of the coast. Maturation of cysts may require as much as two months, depending on water temperature. Because of this relatively long development period, S. woottoni tends to be found only in deeper, more dependable pools. No Low – After dry season sampling None Road rut observed onsite too shallow to be inundated naturally for long enough to support this species. Focused protocol dry season survey determined that this species did not occupy suitable habitat. AMPHIBIANS Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) CSC Temporary rain pools with water temperatures between 9oC and < 30oC that last at least 3 weeks. Yes Observed One tadpole was observed in a road rut within the impact area. REPTILES Silvery legless lizard (Anniella pulchra pulchra) CSC Prefers litter or loose soils under chaparral or sage scrub habitat. No Low Suitable habitat is present within the survey area. Soils are marginally suitable. Orangethroat whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra) CSC The habitat characteristics are poorly understood, however historically it was found in floodplains or terraces along streams. Closely tied to coastal sage scrub plants and some chaparral plants. No High Suitable habitat is present within the survey area. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code & Status Habitat |Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale San Diego horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) CSC Grasslands, brushlands, woodlands, and open coniferous forest with sandy or loose soil; requires abundant ant colonies for foraging. No High Suitable habitat is present within the survey area. Coast patch-nosed snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea) CSC Inhabits semi-arid brushy areas and chaparral in canyons, rocky hillsides, and plains. No High Suitable habitat is present within the survey area. Two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii) CSC Inhabits perennial and intermittent streams with rocky beds and bordered by willow thickets or other dense vegetation. No High Suitable habitat exists in the disturbed southern willow scrub and disturbed mulefat scrub in the drainage in the northwestern portion of the survey area. BIRDS Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) CSC Prairies, grasslands, lowland scrub, agricultural lands, coastal dunes, desert floors, and some artificial, open areas. They require large open expanses of sparsely vegetated areas on gently rolling or level terrain with an abundance of active small mammal burrows. They use rodent or other burrows for roosting and nesting cover and also known to use pipes, culverts, and nest boxes where burrows are scarce. No Breeding – Moderate Migration/ Wintering - Moderate Suitable habitat can be found within infrastructure in disturbed habitat and ground squirrel burrows are present within the survey area. There is no sign of current use by burrowing owl in these features. San Diego cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus sandiegensis) CSC Cactus thickets No None There are no suitable cactus thickets within in or adjacent to the survey area. Northern harrier (Circus cyaneus) CSC (nesting) Grasslands and marshes. Nests are on the ground and typically concealed within a marsh or other dense vegetation. Yes Breeding – None Foraging – Observed Suitable nesting habitat does not occur within the survey area. Suitable foraging habitat occurs throughout the survey area. Yellow-breasted chat (Ictera virens) CSC Dense riparian woodland. No Low There is marginal habitat in the disturbed riparian habitat northwest of the reservoir. Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) FT CSC Prefer open scrubby habitats such as coastal sage scrub and some forms of chaparral. Yes Observed One individual was detected vocalizing in the Diegan coastal sage scrub within the northern portion of the survey area. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code & Status Habitat |Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) FE SE Riparian thickets either near water or in dry portions of river bottoms; nests along margins of bushes and forages low to the ground; may also be found using mesquite and arrow weed in desert canyons. No Moderate Very marginal habitat occurs within the survey area; however, the species has been observed in other nearby riparian habitat outside the survey area. MAMMALS Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) CSC Primarily a cliff-dwelling species for breeding. Found foraging in a variety of habitats, from dry desert washes, flood plains, chaparral, oak woodland, open ponderosa pine forest, grassland, montane meadows, and agricultural areas. No Roosting – None Foraging - Low Low quality foraging habitat present on site, no suitable cliffs or other potential breeding habitat. Pocketed free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus) CSC Lives in deserts and sage scrub, roosts in rocky crevices. No Roosting – None Foraging - Moderate Suitable foraging habitat present on site, no suitable cliffs or other potential breeding habitat. Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) CSC Usually among dense foliage, in forests and wooded areas, making long migrations from the northern latitudes to warmer climes for winter, sometimes hibernates in tree hollows or woodpecker holes. No Roosting – None Foraging - Low Preferred roosting habitat not present within the survey, marginal foraging habitat present. Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax) CSC Coastal sage scrub, sage scrub/grassland ecotones, and chaparral communities. No Moderate Suitable habitat present on site. San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii) CSC Mostly found on the coastal side of our local mountains in open habitats, usually avoiding dense stands of chaparral or woodlands. No High Suitable habitat present on site. San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia) CSC Variety of shrub and desert habitats, primarily associated with rock outcroppings, boulders, cacti, or areas of dense undergrowth. No Low No middens observed within the survey area. American badger (Taxidea taxus) CSC Inhabit a diversity of habitats with principal requirements of sufficient food, friable soils, and relatively open, uncultivated ground. Grasslands, savannas, and mountain meadows near timberline are preferred. No None No suitable habitat within the survey area. Proximity of the survey area to developed areas would likely deter this species from occurring on site. Common Name (Scientific Name) Sensitivity Code & Status Habitat |Preference/Requirements Verified On-site (Yes/No) Potential to Occur Rationale LEGEND: STATUS: Federal FE - listed as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act. FT - listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. State SE - listed as endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. FPS – fully protected species in California. CSC - species of special concern in California. References Special Status information from CDFG 2011. Nomenclature and invertebrate descriptions from USFWS 1997a, 2002a, 2002b. Nomenclature and vertebrate descriptions from AOU 1998 and supplements (AOU 1998), CDFG 2005, Collins and Taggart 2009, Shuford and Gardali 2008, Stephenson and Calcarone 1999, Baker et al. 2003, Wilson and Reeder 2005 and Unitt 2004. DRY SEASON PROTOCOL SURVEY FOR LISTED FAIRY SHRIMP FOR THE 870-1 RESERVOIR PAVING PROJECT, SAN DIEGO COUNTY P REPARED FOR: Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd. Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 P REPARED BY: ICF International 9775 Businesspark Avenue San Diego, CA 92131 Contact: Dale Ritenour (858) 578-8964 August 2013 ICF International. 2013. Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp for the 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project. August. Prepared for Otay Water District. Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp, 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project i August 2013 Contents Page 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Area ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Vicinity ........................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 Methods ........................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Dry Season Fairy Shrimp Sampling............................................................................................. 2 3.0 Results .............................................................................................................................................. 3 4.0 References ........................................................................................................................................ 3 5.0 Certification ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Appendix A USFWS Notification Appendix B Soil Analysis Letter Figure Follows Page 1. Regional Vicinity ........................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Survey Area Vicinity .................................................................................................................................. 1 3. Basin Location ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp, 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project 1 August 2013 1.0 Introduction Otay Water District (OWD) proposes to pave the existing road surrounding the 870-1 Reservoir (project). This site was referred to as the “East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project” in the 15-day notification. The project site is located in the unincorporated community of Otay, in San Diego County, California (Figures 1 and 2). The OWD 870-1 Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility. A dirt and gravel service road encircles the reservoir within a chain-link fence that encompasses the 870-1 Reservoir facility (Figure 3). In its entirety, the project includes an approximately 815-foot long service road. For the purposes of this report, the term “project footprint” refers to the service road occurring within the fenced facility. ICF International/Jones & Stokes (ICF), assisted by Ecological Restoration Services, conducted protocol surveys to determine the presence or absence of federally-listed endangered San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis) and Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) within a road rut immediately southeast of the 870-1 Reservoir (Figure 3). 1.1 Project Area The project footprint comprises developed areas primarily consisting of the unpaved road. The study area includes the project footprint and a 150-foot buffer around the unpaved road (Figure 3). The study area covers approximately 15.9 acres. Areas of Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed southern willow scrub, disturbed mule-fat scrub, non-native grassland, disturbed habitat, bare ground, and developed areas occur within 150 feet of the project footprint. Only one potential basin was observed within the study area. The basin was observed below the southeastern corner of the existing reservoir, in the dirt road at the base of the slope. The basin consists of a series of road ruts that spans part of the road. The basin is unvegetated; no vernal pool indicator plant species were observed. The study area is surrounded by undeveloped areas supporting native and nonnative vegetation. The study area is at the foot of Otay Hills/Otay Mountain, and slopes down from the northeast to the southwest. Elevation within the survey area ranges from 890 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in the northeastern portion of the survey area to 815 feet AMSL. Soils in the study area consist of Huerhuero loam (2 to 9 percent slopes, 9 to 15 percent slopes, and 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded), San Miguel-Exchequer rocky silt loams (9 to 70 percent slopes), and Stockpen gravelly clay loam (2 to 5 percent slopes) (NRCS 2013). Soils in the Huerhuero series consist of moderately well drained loams with clay subsoil. These soils developed in sandy marine sediment. The San Miguel-Exchequer complex is about 50% San Miguel silt loam and 40% Exchequer silt loam with 10% rock outcrops. Soils in the San Miguel series consist of well-drained, shallow to moderately deep silt loams with clay subsoil. Soils in the Exchequer series consist of shallow and very shallow, well-drained silt loams that formed in material weathered from hard metabasic rock. Soils in the Stockpen series consist of moderately well drained, moderately deep, gravelly clay loams (Bowman 1973). Service Layer Figure 1Regional Location870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ D r y _ F S \ F i g 0 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n . m x d 9 / 5 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ± Source: ESRI World Map (2012). 0 4 82 Miles San Bernardino Riverside San Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern InyoTulareKings Ventura SantaBarbara San LuisObispo N e v a d a C a l i f o r n i a Project Site ^_ Figure 2Project Vicinity870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ D r y _ F S \ F i g 0 2 _ P r o j e c t V i c i n i t y . m x d 9 / 5 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ± Source: USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale quadrangles: Otay Mesa 0 2,0001,000 Feet Survey Area Figure 2Project Vicinity870-1 Reservoir Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ D r y _ F S \ F i g 0 2 _ P r o j e c t V i c i n i t y . m x d 9 / 5 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 2 6 8 ± Source: USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale quadrangles: Otay Mesa 0 2,0001,000 Feet Survey Area Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp, 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project 2 August 2013 1.2 Project Vicinity San Diego fairy shrimp are known from vernal pools in natural mima mound topography 0.8 mile from the study area, on the northeast side of the George Bailey Detention Facility. These pools are primarily on lands previously held by The Environmental Trust. Riverside fairy shrimp are known from detention basins 2.3 miles to the south and 3.3 miles to the west of the study area. The study area is on the shoulder of Otay Hills/Otay Mountain, and there is no flat, undeveloped land in the immediate area. 2.0 Methods ICF biologist Dale Ritenour (TE Permit# 58888A-0) conducted a protocol dry season survey to determine the presence or absence of San Diego fairy shrimp and Riverside fairy shrimp within the basin. Survey methodology follows the Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods (Guidelines) (USFWS 1996). Prior to initiating the surveys, a 15-day pre-notification letter was sent to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Carlsbad Field Office informing intent to conduct a protocol dry season survey for the presence or absence of listed fairy shrimp (Appendix A). Due to discrepancies in interpretations of Mr. Ritenour’s permit authorizations, ICF contracted USFWS-approved listed branchiopod cyst identifier, Dr. Chuck Black of Ecological Restoration Service (TE-835549-8), to process additional soil samples from the basin for presence or absence of fairy shrimp cysts. 2.1 Dry Season Fairy Shrimp Sampling 2.1.1 Soil Collection On June 11, 2012, ICF vernal pool biologist Doug Allen collected soil samples for the dry season survey. Soil samples were collected when the areas with potential to support fairy shrimp (i.e., vernal pools and road ruts) were dry. A hand trowel was used to collect soil samples from the top 1-3 centimeters of pool sediment in accordance with the USFWS-approved recovery permit protocol. Whenever possible, soil samples were collected in chunks and the trowel was used to pry up intact chunks of sediment. Loosening the soil by raking or shoveling was avoided as such methods can damage cysts. Ten 100-mililiter soil samples were collected at the basin, with no more than one liter of soil taken from the basin. The stored samples were kept out of direct sunlight in order to avoid excessive heating. On August 5, 2013, ICF vernal pool biologist Dale Ritenour recollected one liter of soil from the basin, following methods above, for processing by Dr. Black. 2.1.2 Soil Processing for Cyst Presence Soil samples were processed by Dale Ritenour in accordance with the Guidelines (USFWS 1996). The ten soil samples were measured into individual plastic containers. These samples were hydrated in tap water then washed through a set of sieves. Material passing through a Number 45 (0.0139”) USA Standard Testing Sieve, A.S.T.M.E.-11 specification and caught on a Number 70 (0.0083”) Sieve was Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp, 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project 3 August 2013 rinsed into a container with approximately 100 milliliters of a saturated brine solution to float organic material, including fairy shrimp cysts. The material floating on the brine was decanted onto a paper filter on a wire-mesh strainer. The organic material collected on the paper was examined under a Cambridge Instruments Stereo Zoom 5 Microscope. No fairy shrimp cysts were identified. 3.0 Results Cysts of the Streptocephalus genus can be discerned from Branchinecta cysts based on cyst surface characteristics. Only one member of the Streptocephalus genus, Riverside fairy shrimp, is found within San Diego County, so any observed Streptocephalus cysts would be accepted as Riverside fairy shrimp. Two species of Branchinecta have been found on Otay Mesa: San Diego fairy shrimp and Lindahl’s/versatile fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lindahli). Cysts of the Branchinecta genus present in southern California are very similar and cannot be reliably identified through microscope examination. No fairy shrimp cysts were recovered in soil samples processed and analyzed by ICF. No distinctive Branchinecta cysts, no Streptocephalus cysts, and no cladoceran ephippia were found in any of the samples processed and analyzed by Dale Ritenour or Dr. Black. A single sample had one ostracod shell present. Ostracods are freshwater invertebrates common to ephemeral waters and the presence of an ostracod shell indicates that this basin may hold water for some duration during the rainy season. The methods and results from Dr. Black are included as Appendix B. 4.0 References Bowman R. 1973. Soil Survey of the San Diego Area. U.S. Department of Agriculture in cooperation with the USDI, UC Agricultural Experiment Station, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of the Navy, and the U.S. Marine Corps. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods. April 19. Dry Season Protocol Survey for Listed Fairy Shrimp, 870-1 Reservoir Paving Project 4 August 2013 5.0 Certification I certify that the information in this survey report and attached exhibits fully and accurately represent my work. August 16, 2013 Dale Ritenour (Permit No. TE-58888A-0) Date Vernal Pool Biologist Author and Surveys _ August 16, 2013 Doug Allen (Permit No. TE-837448-5) Date Vernal Pool Biologist Field Surveys Appendix A USFWS Notification June 10, 2013 Ms. Susie Tharratt Recovery Permit Coordinator Department of Interior Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92011 RE: 15-Day Notice for Protocol Surveys for Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods Dear Ms. Tharratt: The Otay Water District (OWD) has requested that ICF International (ICF) conduct a protocol dry season survey for listed vernal pool branchiopods for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (Project) on Otay Mesa, San Diego County, CA (Figures 1 and 2). The goal of this Project is to pave the existing dirt road around the OWD East Mesa reservoir. The purpose of the survey is to determine the presence/absence of listed branchiopods within the single rut/basin onsite. I will be conducting the dry season survey under the guidelines stated in the 1996 Interim Survey Guidelines issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Fairy shrimp biologist Douglas Allen (TE-837448-5) may assist me with this survey. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Dale Ritenour TE-58888A-0 (858) 444-3958 Dale.Ritenour@icfi.com Service Layer Figure 1Regional LocationEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n . m x d 5 / 8 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: ESRI World Map (2012). 0 4 82 Miles San Bernardino Riverside San Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern InyoTulareKings Ventura SantaBarbara San LuisObispo N e v a d a C a l i f o r n i a Project Site ^_ Figure 2Project VicinityEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 2 _ P r o j e c t V i c i n i t y . m x d 4 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale quadrangles: Otay Mesa 0 2,0001,000 Feet Survey Area July 26, 2013 Ms. Susie Tharratt Recovery Permit Coordinator Department of Interior Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92011 RE: 15-Day Notice for Protocol Surveys for Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods Dear Ms. Tharratt: The Otay Water District (OWD) has requested that ICF International (ICF) conduct a protocol dry season survey for listed vernal pool branchiopods for the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (Project) on Otay Mesa, San Diego County, CA (Figures 1 and 2). The goal of this Project is to pave the existing dirt road around the OWD East Mesa reservoir. The purpose of the survey is to determine the presence/absence of listed branchiopods within the single rut/basin onsite. ICF will recollect soil from this basin and provide it to Listed Branchiopod Cyst Identifier Chuck Black (TE-835549-8) for processing and analysis. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Dale Ritenour TE-58888A-0 (858) 444-3958 Dale.Ritenour@icfi.com Service Layer Figure 1Regional LocationEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c a t i o n . m x d 5 / 8 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: ESRI World Map (2012). 0 4 82 Miles San Bernardino Riverside San Diego Orange Los Angeles Kern InyoTulareKings Ventura SantaBarbara San LuisObispo N e v a d a C a l i f o r n i a Project Site ^_ Figure 2Project VicinityEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K:\ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ o t a y _ w a t e r _ d i s t r i c t \ 0 0 1 2 2 _ 1 3 _ E a s t _ M e s a _ R d _ P a v i n g \ m a p d o c \ Q u i n o \ F i g 0 2 _ P r o j e c t V i c i n i t y . m x d 4 / 2 3 / 2 0 1 3 1 9 5 4 2 ± Source: USGS 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale quadrangles: Otay Mesa 0 2,0001,000 Feet Survey Area Appendix B Soil Analysis Letter Examination of Soil Samples from an Otay Mesa, CA Site for Fairy Shrimp Cysts Chuck Black 10(a)(1)(A) permit Ecological Restoration Service TE835549-8 San Diego, CA 92103 Effective to 3/9/2015 (619) 944-1964 7 August, 2013 Introduction Ecological Restoration Service was contracted by ICF International, San Diego, CA in August 2013 to process soil samples collected from a seasonally ponding basin at the Otay Water District East Mesa Reservoir site, San Diego County, CA, for determination of the presence of fairy shrimp cysts. Methods Soil Processing for Cyst Presence A composite, approximately 1 liter dry soil sample, collected by Dale Ritenour [10(a)(1)(A) permit number TE-58888A-0] from a road puddle at the Otay Water District site was delivered to Ecological Restoration Service in August 2013. The sample was divided into ten approximately 100 ml samples which were processed per the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service April 19, 1996 Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(l)(A) of the Endangered Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods, modified by Ecological Restoration Service as described below. Charles Black of Ecological Restoration Service is authorized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to process dry samples for the presence of fairy shrimp cysts and to culture cysts to identify to species level as special conditions of his 10(a)(1)(A) permit. The samples were hydrated for approximately 1 hour in tap water, then washed through a set of sieves. Material passing through a Number 45 (.0139”) USA Standard Testing Sieve, A.S.T.M.E.-11 specification and caught on a Number 70 (.0083”) Sieve was rinsed into a container with approximately 50 ml of a saturated brine solution to float organic material, including fairy shrimp cysts. The material floating on the brine was decanted onto a paper filter on a filter funnel, and water was removed through the filter paper by vacuum suction. The material left on the paper was examined under a 6.3-570x power Olympus SZX9 Zoom Stereo Microscope. Distinctive fairy shrimp cysts, if present, were individually counted. The presences of ostracod shells and cladoceran ephippia were also noted in samples. Results Cyst Presence No distinctive Branchinecta cysts, no Streptocephalus cysts, and no cladoceran ephippia were found in any of the samples. A single sample had one ostracod shell present. Appendix C Cultural Resources Letter Report April 18, 2013 Ms. Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Road Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 Subject: Otay Water District East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project – Cultural Resources Survey Dear Ms. Coburn-Boyd: Please be advised that ICF International (ICF) has completed a Phase I cultural resources survey and inventory for the Otay Water District (OWD) East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (Project). A summary of the investigations is presented below. Project Overview The OWD East Mesa Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility in the unincorporated community of Otay, San Diego County, California, approximately 10 kilometers east-southeast of Chula Vista, California (Figure 1). Specifically, the Project is located within the NE ¼ of Section 19 of Township 18 South, Range 1 East of the San Bernardino Base Meridian, as depicted on the United States Geological Survey Mesa, California 7.5-minute series quadrangle (1955 [photorevised 1971, photoinspected 1975]) (Figure 2). OWD plans to pave a dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. The road is located between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that encompasses the facility. The Project Area consists of the road and the area within 7.5 meters of each side of the road (Figure 3). This study was conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (California Public Resources Code [PRC] § 21000 et seq.), pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Code of Regulations, Title 14 § 15000 et seq.), and in accordance with industry standards for similar projects in San Diego County. The study included: 1) a cultural resources records search at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC), the applicable California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) repository for the Project, and (2) a cultural resources intensive pedestrian survey. The purpose of the study was to identify and record any “historical resources” as defined by CEQA (PRC § 5020.1[j]) present in the Project Area. Methodology The study included both a cultural resources records search at the SCIC and a cultural resources intensive pedestrian survey. The methodology used during the study is presented below. East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project Cultural Resources Survey Page | 2 Cultural Resources Study April 18, 2013 Cultural Resources Records Search ICF submitted a records search request to the SCIC for the Project Area and all areas within ¼ mile of the Project Area on March 11, 2013, and ICF received the results of the request from the SCIC on March 21, 2013. The records search consists of data obtained from the following sources: • Mapped locations of previously-recorded archaeological resources; • Mapped locations of previously-recorded non-archaeological resources; • Mapped locations of previous cultural resources studies; • Copies of resource records for previously-recorded archaeological resources; • Copies of resource records for previously-recorded non-archaeological resources; • Copies of reports from previous studies; • Ethnographic information; and, • Historical maps. The records search revealed that two previously-recorded cultural resources (CA-SDI-10668/H and CA-SDI-16450/H) are present within ¼ mile of the Project Area, and that 16 cultural resources studies have been previously conducted within ¼ mile of the Project Area, of which three have included some portion of the Project Area. Resource CA-SDI-10668/H is a large prehistoric quarry with several lithic scatters and flaking station, and also includes an historic-period rock cistern and historic-period refuse – only the prehistoric component of the resource was recorded within the Project Area. The site boundary for CA-SDI-10668/H includes the southern two-thirds of the Project Area. Resource CA-SDI-16450/H consists of two prehistoric bedrock milling features and flaked stone tools and debitage, and also an historic-period water tank – only the prehistoric component of the resource was recorded within the Project Area. The site boundary for CA-SDI-16450/H covers the northeast corner of the Project Area. Both resources were previously tested for significance and determined not-eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). Previously-Recorded Cultural Resource Studies Within the Project Area Trinomial Description CRHR-Eligibility CA-SDI-10668/H Large prehistoric quarry with an historic-period feature and refuse Previously determined not-eligible CA-SDI-16450/H Prehistoric bedrock milling features and flaked stone, and an historic-period feature Previously determined not-eligible Previous Cultural Resource Studies Covering Some Portion of the Project Area NADB # Year Author(s) Report Title 1124651 1987 WESTEC East Mesa County Detention Facility Draft Environmental Impact Report 1120850 1988 Kyle, Carolyn, Dennis Gallegos, and Roxana Phillips Cultural Resource Survey and Testing Program for the East Mesa Detention Facility, San Diego, California. 1122945 1994 Kyle, Carolyn E., and Dennis R. Gallegos Cultural Resource Survey and Test of Five Sites for the Otay Water District Central Area and Otay Mesa Interconnection Pipeline Alignments. East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project Cultural Resources Survey Page | 3 Cultural Resources Study April 18, 2013 Field Methods ICF archaeologist Robin Hoffman, MA, RPA, conducted a cultural resources intensive pedestrian survey for the Project Area on April 18, 2013. The survey methods consisted of walking the Project Area and inspecting the ground surface for cultural materials. A Trimble Geo XH sub-meter accuracy Global Positioning System (GPS) unit was used to track survey coverage and record any identified cultural resources. Digital photographs were taken to document ground conditions and any identified cultural resources. Notes on resource details were collected to meet or exceed site recordation guidelines based on the California Office of Historic Preservation’s California Archaeological Inventory Handbook for Completing an Archaeological Site Record and those recommended by the SCIC. Weather conditions during the survey were mild temperature, sunny, with a slight breeze. Ground visibility averaged 95%, with the existing dirt road presenting 100% visibility and areas adjacent to the road with 85% visibility. Areas adjacent to the road were covered in low medium-density grasses, and the road consisted of bare dirt. Results No previously-unrecorded cultural resources were identified during the study. Ten pieces of lithic debitage, all Santiago Peak (dark green fine-grained) metavolcanics, were observed within the existing site boundary for CA-SDI-16450/H. The site record describes these artifacts, accurately, and the existing site boundary appears to be accurate. Heavy ground disturbance from construction of the OWD reservoir and associated dirt road has impacted the portions of the site within the Project Area. No cultural material was observed in portions of the Project Area within the existing site boundary for CA-SDI-10668/H. Heavy ground disturbance from construction of the OWD reservoir and associated dirt road has occurred in the portion of CA-SDI-10668/H within the Project Area, and appears to have destroyed this portion of the site. Conclusions and Management Recommendations No previously-unrecorded cultural resources were identified during the survey. Two cultural resources (CA-SDI-10668/H and CA-SDI-16450/H) were previously-recorded within portions of the Project Area. However, both resources were previously tested and determined not-eligible for the CRHR. During the survey, no cultural material was identified within the existing site boundary for CA-SDI-10668/H. Cultural materials were identified in the portion of CA-SDI-16450/H within the Project Area. The materials, however, are the same as those (accurately) described in the site record. The likelihood of finding additional cultural resources resources is low due to the excellent (averaging 95%) ground visibility during the survey. Both of the previously-recorded sites were previously determined not-eligible for the CRHR, and therefore require no further consideration under CEQA. The cultural material identified within CA-SDI-16450/H is the same as that previously-recorded and does not suggest the need to reconsider the CRHR-eligibility of the site. In summary, ICF does not foresee that the Project will have any substantial adverse change to the significance of an historical resource or unique archaeological resource. Therefore, ICF does not foresee that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with respect to cultural resources. ICF does not recommend further study or mitigation for cultural resources. If any human remains are discovered during Project activities, the procedures outlined in Section 7050.5 of the East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project Cultural Resources Survey Page | 4 Cultural Resources Study April 18, 2013 California Health and Human Safety Code should be followed. If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to contact me at robin.hoffman@icfi.com or 858-444-3959. Sincerely, Robin Hoffman, MA, RPA ICF International, San Diego Enclosed: Figure 1 – Regional Location Figure 2 – Project Vicinity Figure 3 – Project Area Figure 1 - Project Regional LocationOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: National Geographic (2013) 0 10,000 20,000 Feet± Project Location Figure 2 - Project VicinityOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 2 _ P r o j V i c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: USGS 7.5' Quad - Otay Mesa, California (1955, pr 1971, pi 1975) 0 1,000 2,000 Feet± Legend Project Area Figure 3 - Project AreaOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 3 _ P r o j A r e a . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: ESRI Imagery (2013) 0 75 150 Feet± Legend Project Area Appendix D Subsurface Investigation, CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving Geotechnical Engineering Construction Inspection Materials Testing Environmental OFFICE LOCATIONS ORANGE COUNTY CORPORATE BRANCH 2992 E. La Palma Avenue Suite A Anaheim, CA 92806 Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax: 714.632.2974 SAN DIEGO IMPERIAL COUNTY 6295 Ferris Square Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax: 858.537.3990 INLAND EMPIRE 14467 Meridian Parkway Building 2A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel: 951.653.4999 Fax: 951.653.4666 INDIO 44917 Golf Center Pkwy Suite 1 Indio, CA 92201 Tel: 760.342.4677 Fax: 760.342.4525 OC/LA/INLAND EMPIRE DISPATCH 800.491.2990 SAN DIEGO DISPATCH 888.844.5060 www.mtglinc.com SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION (REVISED) CIP P2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving North of Alta Road Otay Mesa Area of San Diego, California Prepared For: Otay Water District 2544 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard Spring Valley, California 91978 Prepared By: MTGL, Inc. 6295 Ferris Square, Suite C San Diego, California 92121 June 28, 2013 (Revised July 3, 2013) MTGL Project No. 2069A17 MTGL Log No. 13-547R CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 FIELD INVESTIGATION ..................................................................................................................... 2 1.5 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................... 2 2.0 FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................ 3 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 3 2.2 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 3 2.3 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ................................................................................. 4 2.4 CONTAMINATED SOILS ................................................................................................................... 4 2.5 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY............................................................................................................. 4 2.6 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ............................................................................................................. 5 2.7 LANDSLIDES .................................................................................................................................... 5 2.8 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE HAZARD ...................................................................................................... 5 3.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 6 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................... 7 4.1 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE ............................................................................... 7 4.2 SITE CLEARING RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................. 7 4.3 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 8 4.4 COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 8 4.5 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND SHORING .................................................................................... 8 4.6 FILL MATERIALS ........................................................................................................................... 10 4.7 THRUST BLOCKS ........................................................................................................................... 11 4.8 CORROSIVITY ................................................................................................................................ 11 4.9 PAVEMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 12 4.10 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .......................................................................................... 12 4.11 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS/TESTING OF EARHTWORK OPERATIONS ................................ 13 5.0 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 14 CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ATTACHMENTS: Figure 1 – Site Location Map Figure 2 – Site Plan Figure 3 – Regional Geologic Map Figure 4 – Regional Fault Map Appendix A – References Appendix B – Field Exploration Program Appendix C – Laboratory Test Procedures CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authorization, MTGL, Inc. has completed a Subsurface Investigation for the subject site. The following report presents a summary of our findings, conclusions and recommendations based on our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis. 1.1 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION It is our understanding that the Otay Water District is in the design phase for a new asphalt concrete access road that runs along the south and east side of the existing 870-1 Reservoir. The 870-1 Reservoir is located in the Otay Mesa area of the City of San Diego, California, see Site Location Map, Figure 1. The new access road is for regular maintenance of the reservoir. 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK The purpose of our investigation is to provide geotechnical design recommendations to be used for the design and construction of the access road. The scope of our geotechnical services included the following: Review of geologic, ground water, aerial photos, and other geotechnical literature. Reconnaissance of the site. Logging, sampling and backfilling of two exploratory borings drilled with an 8-inch hollow stem auger drill rig to a maximum depth of 7 feet below existing grades. Laboratory testing of representative samples. Geotechnical engineering review of data and engineering recommendations. Preparation of this report summarizing our findings and presenting our conclusions and recommendations for the proposed construction. 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION The 870-1 Reservoir is a below ground structure. The site was graded so that fill was added to the northwest, southwest and southeast sides of the reservoir to create a level surface. There is a dirt access road that runs from the entrance to the site, off of Alta Road, along the eastern side of the reservoir to the northeastern side of the reservoir. The existing dirt road is where the new asphalt CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 2 concrete access road is planned. Topographically, the site descends toward the south and west. Elevations along the access road ranged from 875 feet msl on the northeast to 837 feet msl on the southwest side, near the entrance to the site. The Site Plan, Figure 2, shows the topographical layout of the site. 1.4 FIELD INVESTIGATION Prior to the field investigation, a site reconnaissance was performed by an engineer from our office to mark the boring locations, as shown on the Site Plan (Figure 2), and to evaluate the boring location with respect to obvious subsurface structures and access for the drilling rig. Underground Service Alert was then notified of the marked location for utility clearance. Our subsurface investigation consisted of drilling test borings utilizing a truck mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger. See Appendix B for further discussion of the field exploration including logs of test borings. Borings were logged and sampled using Modified California Ring (Ring) sampler at selected depth intervals. Samplers were driven into the bottom of the boring with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. Blows required to drive the Ring sampler 12 inches are shown on the boring logs in the “blows/foot” column (Appendix B). Representative bulk soil samples were also obtained from our borings. Each soil sample collected was inspected and described in general conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The soil descriptions were entered on the boring logs. All samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory. 1.5 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples to verify the field classification of the recovered samples and to determine the geotechnical properties of the subsurface materials. All laboratory tests were performed in general conformance with ASTM or State of California Standard Methods. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix C of this report. CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 3 2.0 FINDINGS 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The site is located in the coastal portion of the Peninsular Range Province of California. This area of the Peninsular Range Province has undergone several episodes of marine inundation and subsequent marine regression throughout the last 54 million years, which has resulted in the deposition of a thick sequence of marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks on the basement rock of the Southern California Batholith. Gradual emergence of the region from the sea occurred in Pleistocene time, and numerous wave-cut platforms, most of which were covered by relatively thin marine and nonmarine terrace deposits, formed as the sea receded from the land. Accelerated fluvial erosion during periods of heavy rainfall, coupled with the lowering of the base sea level during Quaternary times, resulted in the rolling hills, mesas, and deeply incised canyons which characterize the landforms in the general site vicinity today. 2.2 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS Based on local geology maps, the site is mapped as having Tertiary-age Otay Formation (To) exposed at the surface, underlain by Tertiary-age Fanglomerate (Tf). Cretaceous-age Santiago Peak Volcanics (Ksp) is expected to underlie the Fanglomerate. In general, the Otay Formation is characterized as having massive sandstone and claystone layers, the Fanglomerate is a bolder fanglomerate that typically has a medium to coarse sandstone matrix, and the Santiago Peak Volcanics is typically unmetamorphosed to slightly metamorphosed. As observed in our borings, the site is underlain by undocumented fill/residual soils over the Otay Formation. In our borings the fill/residual soils extended to 4½ to 5½ feet below existing grade. The fill/residual soils encountered consisted of light brown, yellowish brown, and reddish brown clayey sand (SC) and dark brown fat clay (CH). The clayey sand is fine to coarse grained, moist and medium dense to dense. The fat clay is high plasticity, moist and hard. Gravel and cobbles were encountered throughout the borings and are exposed on the surface at the site. The Otay Formation was encountered in the borings below the undocumented fill/residual soils at a depth of 4½ to 5½ feet below existing grade. The Otay Formation consisted of brown clayey sandstone ‘SC’ and yellowish brown silty sandstone ‘SM’. The sandstones are fine to coarse CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 4 grained, moist and moderately to well cemented. Refusal in the Otay Formation occurred at both borings at a depth of 7 feet below existing grade. Logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings are provided in Appendix B. 2.3 SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS No seepage or groundwater was observed in our investigation. However, it should be recognized that leaking from the reservoir could produce seepage or locally perched groundwater conditions within the soil underlying the site. Based on the subsurface conditions at the site, any perched groundwater would typically lie at the bottom of the fill/residual materials at the contact of the denser formational soils. 2.4 CONTAMINATED SOILS We did not expose any signs of contaminated soil within the borings drilled as a part of this investigation. It should be noted that although no obvious signs of contamination were encountered within the borings there is still a potential for contaminated soils to exist between boring locations. 2.5 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY Faults are one of the most widespread geologic hazards to development in California. Faults of most concern are those designated as active, which have shown surface displacement within the last approximately 11,000 years and potentially active, which have shown surface displacement within the last approximately 1.6 million years. The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. The site is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and therefore surface rupture of an active fault is not considered to be a significant geologic hazard at the site. Potential seismic hazards at the site are anticipated to be the result of ground shaking from distant active faults. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault zone, which is located about 15.0 miles (24.1 km) northwest of the site. Other active faults include the Coronado Bank fault zone, which is located 21.4 miles (34.4 km) west of the site, and the Elsinore-Julian fault zone, which is located 39.8 miles (64.1 km) northeast of the site. The Regional Fault Map, Figure 4, shows the site plotted in relation to active faults in the area. A number of other significant faults also occur in the San Diego metropolitan area suggesting that the regional faulting pattern is very CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 5 complex. Faults such as those offshore are known to be active and any could cause a damaging earthquake. The San Diego metropolitan area has experienced some major earthquakes in the past, and will likely experience future major earthquakes. 2.6 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL Liquefaction is a phenomenon where earthquake induced ground vibrations increase the pore pressure in saturated, granular soils until it is equal to the confining, overburden pressure. When this occurs, the soil can completely loose its shear strength and enter a liquefied state. The possibility of liquefaction is dependent upon grain size, relative density, confining pressure, saturation of the soils, and strength of the ground motion and duration of ground shaking. In order for liquefaction to occur three criteria must be met: underlying loose, coarse-grained (sandy) soils, a groundwater depth of less than about 50 feet and a nearby large magnitude earthquake. Given the relatively dense nature of the subsurface soils, and the absence of a groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction at the site is considered to be negligible. 2.7 LANDSLIDES Given the shallow depth to formation materials, and the relative density of those materials, the potential for landslides and debris flows to impact the site is considered to be very low. 2.8 Tsunami and Seiche Hazard The site is not located within an area mapped by the California Geological Survey as subject to inundation by tsunami. Given the inland location of the elevation of the site, the inundation hazard posed by tsunami is considered to be low. There is a potential for flooding to impact the site if the adjacent 870-1 reservoir fails. CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 6 3.0 CONCLUSIONS Given the findings of the investigation, it appears that the site geology is suitable for the proposed construction. Based on the investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed development is safe provided the recommendations presented in our report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. There appears to be no significant geologic constraint onsite that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and sound construction practices. Specific conclusions pertaining to geologic conditions are summarized below: Undocumented fill/residual soils, up to 4½ to 5½ feet below existing grade, were encountered within our two subsurface exploration borings. These materials in their current condition are not suitable for support of the proposed access road. Recommendations are presented in the following sections for remedial grading of these materials. Seepage or groundwater was not observed in the exploratory borings drilled for this site. There is a potential for leaking of the reservoir to produce seepage or locally perched groundwater conditions within the soils underlying the site. CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 7 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Our recommendations are considered minimum and may be superseded by more conservative requirements of the civil engineer, building code, or governing agencies. The geotechnical recommendations are based on the boring logs and laboratory testing of the onsite soils. Waterline installations that are performed by Otay Water District typically follow Water Agency Standards (WAS) Standard Specifications. If recommendations presented in our report differ from the WAS Standard Specifications, then the WAS Standard Specifications should govern. 4.1 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE Our exploratory borings were advanced with little difficulty within the undocumented fill/residual soils encountered in our subsurface investigation; however, we encountered practical refusal in the Otay Formation in both borings at a depth of 7 feet below existing grade. Any excavation within the Otay Formation may require the use of extra-large grading equipment. Grading activities are expected to generate oversized cobble materials that are not considered suitable for use within the fill materials. Shrinkage is the decrease in volume of soil upon removal and recompaction expressed as a percentage of the original in-place volume, which will account for changes in earth volumes that will occur during grading. Our estimate for shrinkage of the onsite surficial soils are expected to range from 5 to 10 percent. 4.2 SITE CLEARING RECOMMENDATIONS All surface vegetation, trash, debris, asphalt concrete, portland cement concrete and underground pipes should be cleared and removed from the proposed construction site. Underground facilities such as utilities may exist at the site. Depressions resulting from the removal of buried obstructions and/or tree roots should be backfilled with properly compacted material. All organics, debris, trash and topsoil should be removed from the grading area and hauled offsite. CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 8 4.3 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the upper 12 inches of existing grade or planned finish grade, whichever is lower, be scarified, moisture conditioned to a moisture content that is slightly above optimum moisture, and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Any remaining fills that are placed within the roadway to bring it to finished grade elevations should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density. 4.4 COMPACTION RECOMMENDATIONS All trench backfill materials should be compacted as outlined in WAS Standard Specifications but at a minimum should be at least 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557, except as modified below. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts, no greater than 8 inches prior to applying compactive effort. All engineered fill materials should be moisture- conditioned and processed as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is near optimum moisture content and within moisture limits required to achieve adequate bonding between lifts. The upper 12 inches of finished subgrade materials, the zone immediately below the pavement section, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Fills placed below the upper 12 inches of finish subgrade materials in the trench zone should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. 4.5 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND SHORING Short term temporary excavations in existing soils may be safely made at an inclination of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. If vertical sidewalls are required in excavations greater than 3 feet in depth, the use of cantilevered or braced shoring is recommended. Excavations less than 3 feet in depth may be constructed with vertical sidewalls without shoring or shielding. Our recommendations for lateral earth pressures to be used in the design of cantilevered and/or braced shoring are presented below. These values incorporate a uniform lateral pressure of 72 psf to provide for the normal construction loads imposed by vehicles, equipment, materials, and workmen on the surface adjacent to the trench excavation. However, if vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. are CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 9 kept a minimum distance equal to the height of the excavation away from the edge of the excavation, this surcharge load need not be applied. Design of the shield struts should be based on a value of 0.65 times the indicated pressure, Pa, for the approximate trench depth. The wales and sheeting can be designed for a value of 2/3 the design strut value. Placement of the shield may be made after the excavation is completed or driven down as the material is excavated from inside of the shield. If placed after the excavation, some over-excavation STRUTS(typ.) SHIELD(typ.) UNDISTURBED SOIL BEDDING 1'min. H1 Hsh Dt P = 30 Hsh psfa HEIGHT OF SHIELD, Hsh = DEPTH OF TRENCH, Dt , MINUS DEPTH OF SLOPE, H1 TYPICAL SHORING DETAIL 1:1 (H : V ) 1:1 (H:V) SHORING DESIGN: LATERAL SHORING PRESSURES BRACED SHEETING H CANTILEVERED SHEETING 72 psf Pa Total = 72 psf + 30 H psf Pa = 30 H psf 0.6H 0.2H 0.2H Pa Total = 72 psf + 25 H psf Pa = 25 H psf 72 psf CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 10 may be required to allow for the shield width and advancement of the shield. The shield may be placed at either the top or the bottom of the pipe zone. Due to the anticipated thinness of the shield walls, removal of the shield after construction should have negligible effects on the load factor of pipes. Shields may be successively placed with conventional trenching equipment. Vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. should be set back away from the edge of temporary excavations a minimum distance of 15 feet from the top edge of the excavation. Surface waters should be diverted away from temporary excavations and prevented from draining over the top of the excavation and down the slope face. During periods of heavy rain, the slope face should be protected with sandbags to prevent drainage over the edge of the slope, and a visqueen liner placed on the slope face to prevent erosion of the slope face. Periodic observations of the excavations should be made by the geotechnical consultant to verify that the soil conditions have not varied from those anticipated and to monitor the overall condition of the temporary excavations over time. If at any time during construction conditions are encountered which differ from those anticipated, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted and allowed to analyze the field conditions prior to commencing work within the excavation. All Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work. 4.6 FILL MATERIALS The on-site materials are suitable for use as fill materials within the roadway grading provide that they are free from vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Rocks greater than 4 inches in size shall not be used within the fill materials. The ‘pipe zone’ is the area within the trench width that extends from the bottom of the trench to 12 inches above the top of pipe. The pipe zone materials should conform to the requirements for pipe zone as outlined in WAS Standard Specifications. For pressurized pipelines, the pipe zone materials should be decomposed granite that has a sand equivalent of at least 30, have a coefficient of uniformity of 3 or greater, and conform to the following gradation: CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 11 US Standard Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight 1-inch 100 ¾-inch 90 – 100 No. 4 50 – 95 No. 30 25 – 45 No. 200 3 – 15 The ‘trench zone’ is the area within the trench that extends from the top of the pipe zone to the bottom of the pavement section. The WAS Standard Specifications recommends that backfill material within the trench zone be composed of a decomposed granitic rock with a minimum sand equivalent of 30, have a coefficient of uniformity of 3 or greater, and conform to the following gradation: US Standard Sieve Size Percent Passing by Weight 1-inch 100 ¾-inch 90 – 100 No. 4 50 – 95 No. 30 25 – 45 No. 200 3 – 15 The on-site materials are not considered suitable for use as pipe zone and trench zone materials. 4.7 THRUST BLOCKS Lateral resistance for thrust blocks may be determined by a passive pressure value of 275 pounds per square foot for every foot of embedment, assuming a triangular pressure distribution. This value is for both the fill and formational materials that are present at the site. 4.8 CORROSIVITY Corrosion series tests consisting of pH, soluble sulfates, soluble chlorides, and minimum resistivity were performed on a selected sample of the on-site soils. Soluble sulfate levels for the on-site soils indicate a negligible sulfate exposure for concrete structure. As such, no special considerations are required for concrete placed in contact with the on-site soils. However, it is recommended that Type II cement to be used for all concrete. Based on the soluble chloride levels the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to metals that is corrosive. Based on the pH and Resistivity, the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to ferrous CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 12 metals that is corrosive to very corrosive. The actual corrosive potential is determined by many factors in addition to those presented herein. MTGL, Inc. does not practice corrosion engineering. Underground metal conduits in contact with the soil need to be protected. We recommend that a corrosion engineer be consulted. 4.9 PAVEMENTS Asphalt concrete pavement design for the new access road was conducted in general accordance with Caltrans Design Method (Topic 608.4). A Traffic Index of 3.5 was assumed for the site to handle vehicle maintenance trucks. Laboratory R-Value tests on the site soils indicate that an R- Value of 5 may be used for pavement design. Based on an R-Value of 5 and using a Traffic Index of 3.5 we recommend that the access road pavement consist of 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches aggregate base. Immediately prior to constructing pavement sections, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified, brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Aggregate base should also be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Aggregate base should conform to Caltrans Class II or Standard Specifications for Public Works Constructions (SSPWC), Section 200 for crushed aggregate base. Asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Hveem unit weight. Asphalt concrete should conform to SSPWC Section 400-4. Concrete pavement design was conducted in accordance with the simplified design procedures of the Portland Cement Association. This methodology is based on a 20 year design life. For design it was assumed that aggregate interlock would be used for load transfer across control joints. Laboratory R-Value tests indicate that the subgrade materials will provide a ‘low’ subgrade support. Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section consist of 6 inches of portland cement concrete (PCC) over native subgrade. Crack control joints should be constructed for all PCC pavements on a maximum of 10 foot centers, each way. 4.10 CBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS The computer program Earthquake Ground Motion Parameters Version 5.0.8 (USGS, 2007) was used to calculate the CBC site specific design parameters as required by the 2010 California CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 13 Building Code. Based upon the shallow depth to formational soils at the site, the site can be classified as Site Class C. The spectral acceleration values for 0.2 second and 1 second periods obtained from the computer program and in accordance with the 2010 California Building Code are tabulated below. Ground Motion Parameter Value 2010 CBC Reference SS 0.919g Section 1613.5.1 S1 0.331g Section 1613.5.1 Site Class C Section 1613.5.2 Fa 1.033 Table 1613.5.3(1) Fv 1.469 Table 1613.5.3(2) SMS 0.949g Section 1613.5.3 SM1 0.487g Section 1613.5.3 SDS 0.633g Section 1613.5.4 SD1 0.324g Section 1613.5.4 4.11 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information and subsurface conditions as interpreted from the investigation. Our preliminary conclusion and recommendations should be reviewed and verified during construction, and revised accordingly if exposed geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page 14 5.0 LIMITATIONS The findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on the site conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation, and further assume that the subsurface conditions encountered during our investigation are representative of conditions throughout the site. Should subsurface conditions be encountered during construction that are different from those described in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that our recommendations may be re-evaluated. This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for evaluating the design of the project as it relates to geotechnical aspects. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only, and not as a warranty of subsurface conditions included in this report. Our investigation was performed using the standard of care and level of skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable soil engineers and geologists currently practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the Contractor's operations, and we are not responsible for their actions. The contractor will be solely and completely responsible for working conditions on the job site, including the safety of all persons and property during performance of the work. This responsibility will apply continuously and will not be limited to our normal hours of operation. The findings of this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural events or to human activities on this or adjacent sites. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate codes and standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, this report may become invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. FIGURES APPENDIX A REFERENCES CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page A1 APPENDIX A REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (2012). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I); Volume 04.09 Soil and Rock (II); Geosynthetics, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA. Blake, Thomas F. (2000). “EQSEARCH”, Computer Program for Categorizing Historical Significant Earthquakes. California Division of Mines and Geology (1997). Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Special Publication 42. California Geological Survey (2004). Preliminary Geologic Map of El Cajon 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Southern California, compiled by Todd, Victoria R. California Geological Survey (2008). Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117. MTGL (2012). Proposal for Subsurface Investigation – 870-1 Reservoir – Access Road Paving, North of Alta Road – Otay Mesa, San Diego California, MTGL Proposal No. P-13-271, May 7. Water Agencies’ Standards (2011). Standard Specification, Section 02223, November 23. U.S. Geological Survey, Earthquakes Hazard Program/Quaternary Fault and Fold Database, http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov/qfault/viewer.htm. APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page B1 APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM The subsurface conditions for this Subsurface Investigation were explored by excavating exploratory borings with an 8-inch hollow-stem-auger to a maximum depth of 7 feet below existing grade. All drive samples were obtained by California Tube Sampler. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Site Plan (Figure 2). The field exploration was performed under the supervision of our engineer who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. Subsurface conditions are summarized on the accompanying Logs of Borings. The logs contain factual information and interpretation of subsurface conditions between samples. The stratum indicated on these logs represents the approximate boundary between earth units and the transition may be gradual. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and times. Identification of the soils encountered during the subsurface exploration was made using the field identification procedure of the Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2488). A legend indicating the symbols and definitions used in this classification system and a legend defining the terms used in describing the relative compaction, consistency or firmness of the soil are attached in this appendix. Bag samples of the major earth units were obtained for laboratory inspection and testing, and the in-place density of the various strata encountered in the exploration was determined The exploratory borings were located in the field by using cultural features depicted on a preliminary site plan provided by the client. Each location should be considered accurate only to the scale and detail of the plan utilized. The exploratory borings were backfilled in accordance with State of California regulations which incorporated compacting soil cuttings and bentonite chips. Logged by:SEV Date Drilled: 5/29/2013 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 875' msl BL O W S P E R F T DR I V E S A M P L E BU L K S A M P L E DE N S I T Y ( P C F ) MO I S T U R E ( % ) LAB TESTS FILL / RESIDUAL SOILS: Clayey sand (SC), reddish brown, fine to coarse,moist, dense, some gravels and cobbles to 6 inches in size.Sieve Analysis, (LL=43, PL=18, PI=25)Atterberg Limits, Yellowish brown. Expansion Index,R-Value, pH, Resistivity, Sulfate,Chloride 77 36.266-11"CAL OTAY FORMATION (To): Silty sandstone 'SM', yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented, 'very dense', gravels and cobbles. Total depth: 7 feetGroundwater not encounteredBackfilled in accordance with State and County requirements on 5/29/13 PROJECT NO. 2069A17 FIGURE B-1 24 25 26 20 21 22 23 BORING NO. B-1 30 LOG OF BORING DE P T H ( F T ) DESCRIPTION 27 28 29 17 18 19 13 14 15 16 9 10 11 12 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 Logged by:SEV Date Drilled: 5/29/2013 Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 851' msl BL O W S P E R F T DR I V E S A M P L E BU L K S A M P L E DE N S I T Y ( P C F ) MO I S T U R E ( % ) LAB TESTS 1 to 2 inches gravel and sitly sand (SM) roadway surface.Max Density &FILL / RESIDUAL SOILS: Clayey sand (SC), light brown, fine to medium, moist,Optimum Moisture, dense.R-Value 28 CAL 95 23.4 Fat clay (CH), dark brown, high plasticity, moist, hard, some gravel. 102 8.578CAL OTAY FORMATION (To): Clayey sandstone 'SC', brown, fine to coarsegrained, moist, moderately cemented, 'very dense', gravel and cobbles. Total depth: 7 feetGroundwater not encounteredBackfilled in accordance with State and County requirements on 5/29/13 PROJECT NO. 2069A17 FIGURE B-2 BORING NO. B-2 DE P T H ( F T ) DESCRIPTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 28 29 30 LOG OF BORING 22 23 24 25 26 27 CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page B2 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM No . 2 0 0 U . S . S t a n d a r d S i e v e i s th e s m a l l e s t p a r t i c l e v i s i b l e Co a r s e - g r a i n e d s o i l s >1 / 2 o f m a t e r i a l s i s la r g e r t h a n # 2 0 0 s i e v e GRAVELS are more than half of coarse fraction larger than #4 sieve Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) GW Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Gravels with fines GP Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines SANDS are more than half of coarse fraction larger than #4 sieve Clean Sands (less than 5% fines) GM Silty Gravels, poorly-graded gravel- sand-silt mixtures Sands with fines GC Clayey Gravels, poorly-graded gravel- sand-clay mixtures Fi n e - g r a i n e d S o i l s > 1 / 2 o f m a t e r i a l s is s m a l l e r t h a n # 2 0 0 s i e v e SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Less than 50 SW Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines SP Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines SM Silty Sands, poorly-graded sands- gravel-clay mixtures SC Clayey Sands, poorly-graded sand- gravel-silt mixtures ML Inorganic clays of low to med plasticity, gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Greater than 50 CL Inorganic clays of low to med plasticity, gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays OL Organic silts and clays of low plasticity MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sands or silts CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic silts and clays of medium to high plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, humus swamp soils with high organic content GRAIN SIZE SIZE PROPORTION Description Sieve Size Grain Size Approximate Size Trace – Less than 5% Boulders >12” >12” Larger than basketball-sized Few – 5% to 10% Cobbles 3”- 12” 3”- 12” Fist-sized to basketball-sized Little – 15% to 20% Gravel Coarse ¾”- 3” ¾”- 3” Thumb-sized Some – 30% to 45% Fine #4 - ¾” 0.19” - 0.75” Peat-sized to thumb-sized Mostly – 50% to 100% Sand Coarse #10 - #4 0.079” - 0.19” Rock salt-sized to pea-sized MOISTURE CONTENT Medium #40 - #10 0.017” - 0.079” Sugar-sized to rock salt-sized Dry – Absence of moisture Fine #200 - #40 0.0029” - 0.017” Flour-sized to sugar-sized Moist – Damp but not visible Fines Passing #200 <0.0029” Flour-sized or smaller Wet – Visible free water CONSISTENCY FINE GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY COARSE GRAINED SOILS Apparent Density SPT (Blows/Foot) Mod CA Sampler (Blows/Foot) Apparent Density SPT (Blows/Foot) Mod CA Sampler (Blows/Foot) Very Soft <2 <3 Very Loose <4 <5 Soft 2-4 3-6 Loose 4-10 5-12 Firm 5-8 7-12 Medium Dense 11-30 13-35 Stiff 9-15 13-25 Dense 31-50 36-60 Very Stiff 16-30 26-50 Very Dense <50 <60 Hard >30 >50 CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page B3 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page C1 APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES 1. Classification Soils were classified visually, generally according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Classification tests were also completed on representative samples in accordance with ASTM D422 for Grain Size. The test results are attached to this appendix. 2. Particle Size Analysis Particle size analysis was performed on a selected soil sample in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM test method D 422. The grain size distributions were used to estimate presumptive soil strength parameters and foundation design criteria. The results are summarized in Figure C-1. 3. Maximum Density Maximum density test was performed on representative bag samples of the near surface soils in accordance with ASTM D1557. The results are presented below: Sample Location Soil Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) B-2 at 0 to 3’ Light brown clayey sand (SC) 113.9 15.4 4. Expansion Index Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with the standard test method ASTM D4829. Test results are presented below: Sample Location Soil Description Expansion Index Expansion Potential B-1 at 0 to 2’ Reddish brown clayey sand (SC) 48 Low CIP 2515 870-1 Reservoir Paving MTGL Project No. 2069A17 Otay Mesa, California MTGL Log No. 13-547R Page C2 5. Corrosion Chemical testing was performed on a representative sample to determine the corrosion potential of the onsite soils. Testing consisted of pH, chlorides (CTM 422), soluble sulfates (CTM 417), and resistivity (CTM 643). Test results are as follows: Sample Location pH Resistivity (ohm-cm) Soluble Sulfate (ppm) Soluble Chloride (ppm) B-1 at 0 to 2’ 7.6 740 325 408 6. R-Value R-value test was performed on a sample of the upper soils in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 2844. Test results are presented below: Sample Location Soil Description R-Value B-1 at 0 to 2’ Reddish brown clayey sand (SC) <5 B-2 at 0 to 3’ Light brown clayey sand (SC) <5 Appendix E Noise Analysis Letter Report June 2, 2014 Lisa Coburn-Boyd Environmental Compliance Specialist Otay Water District 2554 Sweetwater Springs Road Spring Valley, California 91978-2096 Subject: Otay Water District East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project – Noise Dear Ms. Coburn-Boyd: Please be advised that ICF International (ICF) has completed a noise analysis for the Otay Water District (OWD) East Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project (Project). A summary of the analysis is presented below. Project Overview The OWD East Mesa Reservoir is located at the northern terminus of Alta Road, northeast of the East Mesa Detention Facility in the unincorporated community of Otay, San Diego County, California, approximately 10 kilometers east-southeast of Chula Vista, California (Figure 1). Specifically, the Project is located within the NE ¼ of Section 19 of Township 18 South, Range 1 East of the San Bernardino Base Meridian, as depicted on the United States Geological Survey Mesa, California 7.5- minute series quadrangle (1955 [photorevised 1971, photoinspected 1975]) (Figure 2). OWD plans to pave a dirt and gravel service road that encircles a small reservoir in order to facilitate improved access around the reservoir. The road is located between the reservoir and a chain-link fence that encompasses the facility. The Project Area consists of the road and the area within 7.5 meters of each side of the road (Figure 3). Existing Conditions The Project vicinity is largely undeveloped. The Project site is bounded to the northwest, northeast, and southeast by the Otay County Open Space Preserve. The closest developed land use to the Project is the East Mesa Detention Complex, which is located to the southwest. This a complex of four county- and privately-operated detention facilities. The Project site is more than two miles from the closest major highway or airport and background noise levels are generally quite low except for operational noise from the Detention Complex which includes prisoners in the exercise yards and officers training at an outdoor firing range located at the northwest edge of the complex (approximately 2,500 feet from the Project site). Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 2, 2014 Page 2 of 4 Noise Standards Noise standards for the County of San Diego are provided in the County’s Noise Element of the General Plan and in Section 36.4 (i.e., Title 3, Division 6, Chapter 4) of the County’s Code of Regulatory Ordinances. The standards contained in the Noise Element are intended to address ongoing and long-term noise/land use compatibility and therefore, are not applicable to the Project for the following reasons: (1) it is a short-term construction project; (2) the Project will not introduce new noise-sensitive land uses; and, (3) the Project will not create new operations that could generate ongoing noise levels at existing noise-sensitive land uses. The County’s noise ordinance seeks to control construction noise by placing limits both on the hours during which construction activity may occur and on the average noise levels that may be generated during those hours, as follows: • Construction equipment may not be operated between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7 a.m., or at any time on a Sunday or holiday. • During the permitted hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., noise from construction equipment may not exceed an eight-hour average noise level (i.e., 8-hour Leq) of 75 dBA. Noise Analysis Based on information provided by Otay Water District staff (Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Environmental Compliance Specialist), the Project will be constructed in two phases, utilizing the following equipment: Phase 1 – Grading • 4 pickup trucks • 1 grader • 1 excavating dozer • 1 dump truck • 1 loader Phase 2 – Paving • 4 pickup trucks • 1 heavy truck (for asphalt delivery) • 1 roller • 1 paver • 1 loader The closest area to the proposed construction activity that might be considered noise-sensitive is an exercise yard at the neighboring detention facility to the southwest. This yard is located approximately 450 feet from the nearest portion of the Project site and 1,250 feet from the most distant portion of the Project site. The acoustical average distance from the Project site to Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 2, 2014 Page 3 of 4 the receiver is approximately 750 feet1. Using this distance, along with typical construction equipment noise levels and calculation techniques provided by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an average noise level of 64 dBA is estimated for the grading phase of construction and 65 dBA for the paving phase of construction. A summary of the noise analysis is provided in Tables 1 and 2. Construction activities that might cause unusually high levels of vibration, such as pile driving or blasting, will not take place at the Project site. Heavy construction equipment such as graders and dozers will generate groundborne vibration that will dissipate with distance from the Project site. Over the distances that exist between the Project site and the closest sensitive receiver (450 to 1,200 feet) vibration will be reduced to extremely low (probably imperceptible) levels. As noted previously, the Project is not anticipated to lead to any long-term increases in operational activity at the Project site and, therefore, would not increase long-term noise levels. It is also not anticipated that the Project would create any significant increase in traffic to and from the reservoir, so perceptible increases in traffic noise levels are not expected. Table 1 – Summary of Construction Noise Analysis, Phase 1 - Grading Equipment Item Maximum Noise Level at 50 feeta Number of Unitsb Usage Factora,c Distance to Receiverd Average Noise Level at Receiver Pickup truck 75 dBA 4 0.4 750 feet 54 dBA Grader 85 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 57 dBA Dozer 85 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 57 dBA Dump Truck 84 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 56 dBA Loader 85 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 57 dBA Total for All Equipment 64 dBA a. Obtained or estimated from: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA, (FTA-VA-90-1003-06), May 2006 and/or FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Version 1.0, February 2, 2006 b. Noise level increase = 10×log(number of units) c. Usage Factor is the percentage of time equipment is operating in noisiest mode while in use. Noise level decrease = 10×log(usage factor) d. Noise level decreases at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from source to receiver. 1 When noise sources are distributed or mobile across an area, the average noise level can be estimated by assuming all the noise occurs at an acoustical average distance from the receiver. This average is calculated as the square route of the product of shortest and farthest distance between the noise source and the receiver. In this case √(450×1250)=750. Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District June 2, 2014 Page 4 of 4 Table 2 – Summary of Construction Noise Analysis, Phase 2 - Paving Equipment Item Maximum Noise Level at 50 feeta Number of Unitsb Usage Factora,c Distance to Receiverd Average Noise Level at Receiver Pickup truck 75 dBA 4 0.4 750 feet 54 dBA Dump Truck 84 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 56 dBA Roller 74 dBA 1 0.2 750 feet 43 dBA Paver 89 dBA 1 0.5 750 feet 62 dBA Loader 85 dBA 1 0.4 750 feet 57 dBA Total for All Equipment 65 dBA a. Obtained or estimated from: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, FTA, (FTA-VA-90-1003-06), May 2006 and/or FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Version 1.0, February 2, 2006 b. Noise level increase = 10×log(number of units) c. Usage Factor is the percentage of time equipment is operating in noisiest mode while in use. Noise level decrease = 10×log(usage factor) d. Noise level decreases at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from source to receiver. Conclusions The main source of noise associated with the Project is construction activity. Analysis shows that construction noise levels will not exceed the applicable County noise standard of 75 dBA (8-hour Leq). However, it is noted that construction activity must not occur between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7 a.m., or at any time on a Sunday or holiday. The Project is not expected to generate long-term operational noise. In summary, ICF does not anticipate that the Project will generate any substantial adverse noise impacts. Therefore, ICF does not foresee that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment with respect to noise, and does not recommend further study or mitigation for noise (beyond compliance with the County-mandated hours of construction described above). If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to contact me at jonathan.higginson@icfi.com or 949.333.6619. Sincerely, Jonathan Higginson, INCE Senior Noise Analyst Enclosed: Figure 1 – Regional Location Figure 2 – Project Vicinity Figure 3 – Project Area Figure 1 - Project Regional LocationOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 1 _ R e g i o n a l L o c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: National Geographic (2013) 0 10,000 20,000 Feet± Project Location Figure 2 - Project VicinityOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 2 _ P r o j V i c . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: USGS 7.5' Quad - Otay Mesa, California (1955, pr 1971, pi 1975) 0 1,000 2,000 Feet± Legend Project Area Figure 3 - Project AreaOtay Water DistrictEast Mesa Reservoir Road Paving Project K: \ S a n D i e g o \ p r o j e c t s \ D P W \ 0 0 1 9 0 . 1 3 _ P a m a _ R o a d _ B r i d g e _ R e p l a c e m e n t \ m a p d o c \ R e p o r t \ F i g 3 _ P r o j A r e a . m x d 4 / 1 8 / 2 0 1 3 2 6 6 1 1 Source: ESRI Imagery (2013) 0 75 150 Feet± Legend Project Area Attachment B Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program Attachment B Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Otay Water District 870-1 Reservoir Access Road Paving Project Mitigation Measures Timing & Methods Responsible Parties BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1: Due to the observed presence of one western spadefoot tadpole, a qualified biologist will conduct pre-construction surveys to determine if this species is present. If present, the species will be removed from the project site. Timing: Prior to any disturbance of the road surface. Methods: Retain a qualified biologist to perform pre- construction surveys and, if species is present, remove from the site. Implementation: Otay Water District Monitoring & Reporting: Otay Water District Verification: Otay Water District BIO-2: Prior to any construction activity, all contractual agreements with the District will ensure that the following project requirements regarding sensitive wildlife species are completed. No clearing, grubbing, or grading of vegetation will occur between February 15 and August 31, the breeding season of the coastal California gnatcatcher. However, if construction is proposed during the breeding season for the gnatcatcher, the following requirements will have to be met: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service protocol surveys will be required in order to determine species’ presence or absence. If no gnatcatchers are detected within 300 feet of the proposed grading/construction, then no restriction on grading will be necessary. If gnatcatchers are present, measures to minimize noise impacts will be required and should include temporary noise walls and/or berms. If the survey is not performed and construction is proposed during the species’ breeding season, presence will be assumed and a temporary wall/berm will be required. Noise levels from grading/construction activities during the breeding season should not exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ at the edge of the occupied habitat, or the ambient noise level if noise levels already exceed 60 dBA hourly LEQ. Timing: Prior to any construction activity. Methods: Ensure sensitive wildlife species impacts are avoided or mitigated by preconstruction nesting bird surveys and buffering. Implementation: Otay Water District Monitoring & Reporting: Otay Water District Verification: Otay Water District STAFF REPORT TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: September 3, 2014 SUBMITTED BY: Dan Martin Engineering Manager PROJECT: Various DIV. NO. ALL APPROVED BY: Rod Posada, Chief of Engineering German Alvarez, Assistant General Manager Mark Watton, General Manager SUBJECT: Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2014 Capital Improvement Program Report GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION: That the Otay Water District (District) Board of Directors (Board) accept the Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2014 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Report for review and receives a summary via PowerPoint presentation (see Attachment C). COMMITTEE ACTION: Please see Attachment A. PURPOSE: To update the Board about the status of all CIP project expenditures and to highlight significant issues, progress, and milestones on major projects. ANALYSIS: To keep up with growth and to meet our ratepayers' expectations to adequately deliver safe, reliable, cost-effective, and quality water, each year the District staff prepares a Six-Year CIP Plan that identifies the District’s infrastructure needs. The CIP is comprised of four categories consisting of backbone capital facilities, replacement/renewal projects, capital purchases, and developer's reimbursement projects. 2 The Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2014 update is intended to provide a detailed analysis of progress in completing these projects within the allotted time and budget of $13.9 million. Expenditures through the Fourth Quarter totaled approximately $8.5 million. Approximately 61% of the Fiscal Year 2014 expenditure budget was spent (see Attachment B). The expenditures versus forecast for Fiscal Year 2014 were influenced in part by the changes in the economy, external agency driven projects, as well as budgeting flexibility for “Just in time” delivery for District projects as noted below. 1. A majority of the projects contained in the annual CIP budget are multi-year projects that required the project manager to forecast how expenditures would occur over several future fiscal years. Development of the Fiscal Year 2014 budget occurred approximately sixteen months in advance of the fiscal year’s completion. 2. The FY 2014 CIP budget contained Developer reimbursement projects and District transmission projects that were programmed into the budget based on the Developer timelines for project delivery. Changes in the economy influenced Developer decisions on when to implement these projects. Staff worked with the Developers to incorporate the best project delivery information into the budgeting process, however, as the economic climate changed during this fiscal year, Developers revised their project delivery schedules. 3. Fifteen (15) percent of the FY 2014 CIP budget consisted of projects that were driven by external agencies including the County of San Diego, the City of Chula Vista, Caltrans, and the San Diego Association of Governments. 4. The CIP also contained a number of projects that experienced reprioritization during the course of this fiscal year. The Otay Mesa Desalination Conveyance and Disinfection System project is an example of this concept, as the District worked with Mexico, California State agencies, and United States Federal agencies on moving the project forward. FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer No fiscal impact as this is an informational item only. 3 STRATEGIC GOAL: The Capital Improvement Program supports the District’s Mission statement, “To provide high value water and wastewater services to the customers of the Otay Water District, in a professional, effective, and efficient manner” and the General Manager’s Vision, “A District that is at the forefront in innovations to provide water services at affordable rates, with a reputation for outstanding customer service.” LEGAL IMPACT: None. DM/RP:jf P:\Forms\D-Construction\CIP Quarterly Reports\CIP Qtr Reports\FY 2014\Q4\Staff Report\BD 09-03-14, Staff Report, Fourth Quarter FY 2014 CIP Report, (DM-RP).docx Attachments: Attachment A – Committee Action Attachment B - Fiscal Year 2014 Fourth Quarter CIP Expenditure Report Attachment C – Presentation ATTACHMENT A SUBJECT/PROJECT: Various Informational Item – Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2014 Capital Improvement Program Report COMMITTEE ACTION: The Engineering, Operations, and Water Resources Committee (Committee) reviewed this item at a Committee Meeting held on August 14, 2014. The Committee supported Staff’s recommendation. NOTE: The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the Board as a Committee approved item, or modified to reflect any discussion or changes as directed from the Committee prior to presentation to the full Board. FISCAL YEAR 2014 4thQUARTER REPORT (Expendituresthrough6/30/2014) ($000) CIPNo. p2083 P2190 P2267 P2403 P2434 P2451 P2466 P2486 P2511 P2514 P2528 P2537 P2539 P2541 P2542 P2543 P2544 R2028 Description CAPITAL FACILITYPROJECTS PS -870-2PumpStationReplacement(28,000GPM) PL-10-Inch,1485Zone,JamulHighlands 36-InchMainPumpoutsandAir/VacuumVentilationInstallations PL-12-Inch,624Zone,HeritaqeRoad-Olympic/OtayValley RanchoDelReyGroundwaterWellDevelopment OtayMesaDesalinationConveyanceandDisinfectionSystem RegionalTrainingFacility AssetManagementPlanConditionAssessmentandDataAcquisition OtayInterconnectPipeline PL -30-Inch,980Zone,HunteParkway-ProctorValley/UseArea 30-InchPotableWaterPipelineManifoldat624Reservoirs OperationsYardPropertyAcquisitionImprovements SouthBay BusRapidTransit(BRT)UtilityRelocations 624 PressureZonePRSs 850-3ReservoirInteriorCoating 850-1 ReservoirInterior/ExteriorCoating 850-2ReservoirInterior/ExteriorReservoirCoating RecPL -8-Inch,680Zone,HeritageRoad-SantaVictoria/OtayValley R2042 IRecPL-8-Inch.927Zone,RockMountainRoad-SR-125/EastLake R2047 R2048 R2058 R2077 R2087 R2091 R2107 R2108 R2110 S2039 S2043 P2366 P2382 P2440 RecPL -12-Inch,680Zone,LaMediaRoad -Birch/RockMountain RecPL -OtayMesa DistributionPipelinesandConversions RecPL-16-Inch,860Zone,AirwayRoad -OtayMesa/Alta RecPL -24-Inch,860Zone.AltaRoad-AltaGate/Airway RecPL -24-Inch.927Zone.WuesteRoad -Olympic/OtayWTP RecPS-927-1Pump StationUpgrade(10,000GPM)andSystem Enhancements RWCWRF ScreeningCompactorandChlorineInjectorsEnclosure Res-927-1 ReservoirCoverReplacement RecPS-927-1Optimizationand PressureZonemodifications HiddenMountainLiftStationEnclosure RWCWRF SludgeHandlingSystem TotalCapitalFacilityProjects REPLACEMENT/RENEWALPROJECTS APCD EngineReplacementsandRetrofits SafetyandSecurityImprovements I-905UtilityRelocations Project Manager Marchioro Martin Vasquez Martin Marchioro Kennedy Coburn-Boyd Zhao Marchioro Martin Marchioro Almgren Cameron Marchioro Cameron Cameron Cameron Martin Martin Martin Martin Martin Beppler Cameron Martin Stalker Martin Marchioro Stalker Beppler Total: Rahders Ramirez Marchioro FISCALYEAR-TO-DATE,06/30/14 FY 2014 Budget $540 5 100 1,500 14 75 600 130 50 80 300 10 - - - 100 100 135 5 250 60 100 150 8 50 4,362 5 500 10 Expenses $316 - - 9 932 4 24 306 71 16 29 207 - - - - 5 1 61 1 173 29 1,064 63 7 37 3,355 31 116 4 Balance $224 - 5 91 568 10 51 294 59 - 34 51 93 10 - _ - - - 95 99 74 4 77 31 (964) 87 1 13 1,007 (26) 384 6 Expenseto Budget% 59% 0% 0% 0% 9% 62% 29% 32% 51% 55% 0% LIFE-TO-DATE,06/30/14 Budget $12,581 228 435 925 8,700 30,000 300 1,090 37,300 1,815 7,000 32%I 300 36% 69% 0% 320 600 440 0%475 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 1% 45% 20% 69% 48% 1064% 1075 600 140 450 2,200 3,500 4,500 7,000 2,130 130 1,400 42%!150 88% 74% ■Hum 620% 23% 40% 37 1,500 127,321 3,488 3,397 1600 Expenses $928 3 234 3,607 2,561 285 818 1,980 1.740 18 37 29 207 _ - _ - - _ 475 1.340 2.804 1,032 2,068 101 1,064 63 37 37 21,468 2,513 2,019 1.584 Expenseto Balance Budget% $11,653 225 201 925 5093 27,439 15 272 35,320 75 6,982 263 291 393 440 475 1,075 600 140 450 1,725 2,160 1,696 5,968 62 29 336 87 1,463 105,853 975 1,378 16 7% Comments Projectscheduleadjustedtoadda3D modelto theconsultant'sscopeofwork.Value engineeringworkshop isscheduledforAugust 2014. 1%|NobudqetforFY2014. 54%IProjectmovedtoFY2015. 0%INobudqetforFY2014. 41% 9% 95% 75% 5% 96% Desiqnisonhold. TheProjectschedulehasbeenadjustedtomatch proqresswiththeRosarttoBeachDesalProiect Proiectisonhold. Theassetmanagementdecision-makingsoftware willbepurchasedinFY2015. EnvironmentalsubconsultantwillamendEIRto ncludenewalignment.Desiqnisonhold. Constructioncompleted.Claimsresolutionwork scompleted. 0%No budqetforFY2014. 12%'Projectisproqressinqto30%desiqn 9%!SANDAGdrivenoroiect.Designisat90%. 35% ConstructionbidswererejectedattheJuly3, 2014Boardmeeting.Projecttobere-bidata futuredate. 0%iProjectmovedtoFY2016. 0%NobudqetforFY2014. 0%INobudqetforFY2014. 0%'NobudqetforFY2014 0%NobudqetforFY2014. 0%NobudqetforFY2014. 22%Developerdrivenproject. 38%Developerdrivenproject Projectisonholdas aresultofthetemporary 62%recycledwatermoratorium. Projectisonholdas aresultofthetemporary 15%recycledwatermoratorium. 97% 78% 76% 42% Constructioncompleted.Claimsresolutionwork iscompleted. TheremaininqbalancewillbeusedinFY2015. Projectwasaccelerated.Construction completed. Distributionsystem improvementscompleted; however,pump station controlstrategy improvementspostponeduntilFY2015. 100%'Proiectcompleted. 2% iiilKIM 72% 59% Projectisonholdpendinginternalreviewand outcomeofMetrocostanaysisofthe PointLoma PermitRenewalUpqrades. Duetodelaysinmanufacturing,$16,500willbe movedtoFY2015budqet. $83Kinsystemupgradeswerecompletedbythe endofFY2014.Theremaining balancewillbe expensed inphaseprojectsduringFY2015and forward. StaffanticipatesthatCaltranswillissuean additional$33,493credittotheDistrict;however, the$33kcreditonholdispendingCaltrans' receiptoffinalaccountingnumbersfromtheCity 99%ofSanDiego'ssewercontractor Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2015\BD09-03-14\FY2014FourthQuarterCIPReport(Dan)\COMMENTS-FY144thqtrexpjdma FISCALYEAR 2014 4th QUARTER REPORT (Expendituresthrough 6/30/2014) ($000) CIPNo. _p2453 P2477 P2485 P2493 P2494 P2495 P2496 P2504 P2507 P2508 P2513 P2515 P2518 p2519 P2520 P2521 P2529 P2530 P2531 P2532 P2533 P2534 P2535 P2538 R2109 R2111 Description SR-11 UtilityRelocations Res-624-1ReservoirCoverReplacement SCADA CommunicationSystemandSoftwareReplacement 624-2ReservoirInterior/ExteriorCoatinq MultipleSpeciesConservationPlan SanMiquelHabitatManaqement/MitiqationArea OtayLakesRoad UtilityRelocations RequlatorvSiteAccessRoadandPipelineRelocation EastPalomarStreetUtilityRelocation PipelineCathodicProtectionReplacementProqram EastOrangeAvenue BridgeCrossing 870-1ReservoirPaving 803-3ReservoirInterior/ExteriorCoatinq 832-2Reservoirinterior/ExteriorCoating MotorolaMobileRadioUpgrade LarqeMeterVaultUpqradeProqram 711-2 ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoating 711-1 ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoatinq 944-1 ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoatinq 944-2ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoatinq 1200-1 ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoating 978-1 ReservoirInterior&ExteriorCoatinq 458-2ReservoirInteriorCoating Administrationand OperationsBuildingFireSprinklerReplacement Proqram SweetwaterRiverWoodenTrestleImprovementfortheRecycledWater Forcemain RWCWRF -RAS Pump Replacement Project Manager Marchioro Martin Stalker Cameron Coburn-Boyd Coburn-Boyd Martin Cameron Cameron Marchioro Cameron Almqren Cameron Cameron Martinez Mendez- Schomer Cameron Cameron Cameron Cameron Cameron Cameron Cameron Cameron Beppler Beppler FISCALYEAR-TO-DATE,06/30/14 FY2014 Budget 125 50 540 1,550 60 140 70 325 230 60 300 490 125 335 30 105 - - 5 5 - 345 100 100 100 Expenses 74 31 400 1,451 12 138 24 13 337 46 142 96 116 376 12 23 7 8 - - 7 22 32 57 Balance 51 19 140 99 48 2 46 312 (107) 14 158 394 9 (41) 18 82 - (2) (3) 338 78 68 43 Expense to Budget % 59% 62% 74% 94% 20% LIFE-TO-DATE,06/30/14 Budget Expenses 2,250 1,000 1,846 1,950 887 99%2,040 34%325 4% 147% 77% 47% 20% 93% 112% 40% 22% 0% 0% 140% 160% 0% 0% 2% 22% 32% 57% 900 300 1,350 550 750 775 100 600 600 725 175 725 325 225 425 400 350 100 233 927 1,168 1,467 811 1,032 300 327 620 49 1.307 153 626 645 77 219 _ _ 7 8 - - 14 22 32 57 Balance 2.017 73 678 483 76 1.008 25 573 280 251 43 397 124 130 23 381 600 725 168 717 325 225 411 378 318 43 Expenseto Budget%Comments 10% 93% 63% 75% 91% 51% 92% 36% 69% 16% 97% 28% 83% 83% 77% 37% 0% ConstructioncontractawardedJanuary2014; however,constructionscheduleistiedtolarge Caltrans'freewayproject.Majorityofwater relocationconstructionanticipatedinFY2015. ProjectacceptedbytheDistrictonJuly1,2013. Thetwo-yearcontractwarrantywillexpireonJuly 1,2015. Spendingwasdelayedduetodelaysinthe SCADA ReplacementandSouthDistrictRadio Installationprojects. Constructionis95%complete.Project acceptanceanticipatedfortheendofJuly2014. ProjectonholdFY2014,butworkwillbegin aqaininFY2015. Thisisacontinuingproject.FiscalYearbudget spentasexpected Constructionissubstantiallycompleted.Project acceptancebytheDistictispendingtheCityof ChulaVista'sacceptanceofthework. Projectison hold. Caltransdrivenproject.Utilityagreementsarein placeforreimbursement.Anticipatedcompletion inJuly2015. PDR completedJune30,2014.Finaldesignof 14-inchforcemaincathodicprotectionrehabwill becompletedto90%levelbyAuqust2014. Projectcompleted. Designcompleted.Constructiontobeginin November2014. Constructioniscomplete.Projectisinwarranty period. Constructioniscomplete.Projectisinwarranty period. $35KwasaddedtoFY2015foranewproject totalof$135K.Theadditionalfundsareto providehandhelddeviceswithincreasedrange durinqanemqerencyresponse Retrofitofthevaultsitesfinishedunderbudget. Afterinspectionsandreviews, theamountofwork neededwaslessthanexpected.Anyadditional workwillbemovedtoaworkorderandthisCIP willbeclosedthisFiscalYear NobudqetforFY2014 0%NobudqetforFY2014. Design90%completed.Constructiontobeginin 4%November2014. Design90%completed.Constructiontobeginin 1%November2014 0%NobudqetforFY2014. 0%NobudqetforFY2014 Design90%completed.Constructiontobeginin 3%November2014. Theproject'sscopewasmodifiedfrom afull replacementtorepairandtreatment.Thiswill significantlyreducethecost.Repairsare complete.Treatmentsystemtobeinstalledin 6%July2014. Preliminarydesignreportisunderwaywithdraft dueAugust2014.Remainingbalancemovedto 9%FY2015. 57% 30%designcompletedinJune2014.Final designanticipatedinSeptember2014 RemaininqbalancemovedtoFY2015 Y:\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2015\BD09-03-14\FY2014FourthQuarterCIPReport(Dan)\COMMENTS-FY144thqtrexp_dma.xlsx Page2of3 FISCAL YEAR 2014 4thQUARTER REPORT (Expendituresthrough6/30/2014) ($000) CIPNo. S2012 S2024 S2027 S2033 P2282 P2285 P2286 P2469 P2470 P2540 S2042 P2104 P2107 R2082 R2083 R2084 R2085 R2094 Description SanDiegoCountySanitationDistrictOutfallandRSD Outfall Replacement Campo RoadSewerMainReplacement Rancho SanDieqoPump Station Rehabilitation SewerSystem Rehabilitation TotalReplacement/RenewalProjects CAPITALPURCHASE PROJECTS VehicleCapitalPurchases OfficeEquipment andFurniture CapitalPurchases FieldEquipmentCapitalPurchases InformationTechnoloqyNetworkandHardware FinancialSystemEnhancements WorkOrderManaqementSystem Replacement SewerVehicleCapitalPurchases TotalCapitalPurchaseProjects DEVELOPER REIMBURSEMENT PROJECTS PL-12-Inch,711Zone,LaMedia Road -Birch/RockMountain PL-12-Inch.711Zone,RockMountainRoad-LaMedia/SR125 RecPL-24-Inch,680Zone,OlympicParkway-Villaqe2/Heritaqe RecPL-20-Inch 680Zone,HeritaqeRoad-Villaqe2/Olympic RecPL-20-Inch,680Zone.Villaqe2-Heritaqe/LaMedia RecPL-20-Inch.680Zone,LaMedia-State/Olympic PotableIrriqationMeterstoRecycledWaterConversions TotalDeveloperReimbursementProjects GRAND TOTAL Project Manager Kennedy Beppler Beppler Beppler Total: Rahders Payne Rahders Sequra Stevens Stevens Rahders Total: Martin Martin Martin Martin Martin Martin Martin Total: FISCAL YEAR-TO-DATE,06/30/14 FY2014 Budget 450 275 500 800 '"77736" 266 55 149 350 130 300 367 1,617 _ - 1 1 1 1 150 154 $13,863 Expenses 17 136 18 375 4,121 25 20 128 290 52 118 367 1,000 - - 38 38 $8,514 Balance 433 139 482 425 3,609 241 35 21 60 78 182 - 617 - - 1 1 1 1 112 116 $5,349 Expense to Budget% 4% 49% 4% 47% 9% LIFE-TO-DATE,06/30/14 Budget 3,550 5,500 2,900 6,000 47,008 5,021 36%589 86%I 1,758 83% 40% 39% 100% 62% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25% ■EC 25% 2,509 2,322 700 367 13,266 833 722 1,747 400 971 600 1,700 6,973 61%.$- Expenses Balance 834 181 57 607 17,896 2,900 524 1,291 1,675 1,671 118 367 8,546 1 1,603 1,604 $49,514 2.716 5,319 2 843 5,393 29,112 Expenseto Budget% 23% Comments ExpensesonprojectstheCountyplans,designs, andbuilds.Remainingbudgetwillbemoved to FY2015. Preliminarydesignreportisunderwaywithdraft 3%|dueinSeptember2014. 2% 10% 38% 70%designsubmittalreviewedinJuly2014. RemaininqbalancemovedtoFY2015. Designcompleted.Awaitingpermitsfromthe CountyofSanDiego.Constructiontobeginin November2014.Remainingbalancedmovedto FY2015 2,121 65 467 834 651 582 - Duetodelaysinmanufacturing,$175,877willbe 58%|movedtoFY2015budqet. 89%Expendituresunderbudget. 73% 67% 72% CIPcompleted. Toaccommodateabetterandmorethorough biddingprocessforthepurchaseoftheStorage AreaNetworkEquipment,$60K willbemovedto FY2015. Staffingchangesdelayedcontractorspending. 17%MoneywillbespentdurinqFY2015. 100%CIPcompleted. 4,720 833 722 1,747 400 970 600 97 5,369 $145,054 64% 0% 0% 0% 0% NobudgetforFY2014. NobudqetforFY2014. Developerdrivenproject.Nomajoractivity anticpatedforFY2014. Developerdrivenproject.Nomajoractivity anticpatedforFY2014. Developerdrivenproject.Nomajoractivity 0%ianticpatedforFY2014. Developerdrivenproject.Nomajoractivity 0%anticpatedforFY2014. 94%Projectcomplete. ■EL 23% 25% Y\Board\CurBdPkg\ENGRPLAN\2015\BD09-03-14VFY2014FourthQuartetCIPReport(Dan)\COMMENTS-FY144thqtrexp_dma.xlsx Page3of3 Otay Water District Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2014 Fourth Quarter (through June 30, 2014) Attachment C 624-2 Reservoir Exterior Coating 06/06/14 Background The approved CIP Budget for Fiscal Year 2014 consists of 63 projects that total $13.9 million. These projects are broken down into four categories. 1.Capital Facilities $ 4.4 million 2.Replacement/Renewal $ 7.7 million 3.Capital Purchases $ 1.6 million 4.Developer Reimbursement $ 0.2 million Overall expenditures through the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal Year 2014 totaled $8.5 million, which is approximately 61% of the Fiscal Year budget. 2 Fiscal Year 2014 Fourth Quarter Update ($1,000) CIP CAT Description FY 2014 Budget FY 2014 Expenditures % FY 2014 Budget Spent Total Life-to- Date Budget Total Life-to-Date Expenditures % Life-to- Date Budget Spent 1 Capital Facilities $4,362 $3,355 77%$127,321 $21,468 17% 2 Replacement/ Renewal $7,730 $4,121 53%$47,008 $17,896 38% 3 Capital Purchases $1,617 $1,000 62%$13,266 $8,546 64% 4 Developer Reimbursement $154 $38 25%$6,973 $1,604 23% Total: $13,863 $8,514 61%$194,568 $49,514 25% 3 Fiscal Year 2014 Fourth Quarter CIP Budget Forecast vs. Expenditures 4 Annual CIP Expenditures vs. Budget 5 District Map of Major CIP Projects 6 CIP Projects in Construction 624-2 Reservoir Interior/Exterior Coating & Upgrades (P2493) Remove and Replace Deteriorating Reservoir Coating Structural Modifications Including Level Indicator Replacement and Anode Replacement $1.95M Budget Start: January 2014 Estimated Completion: July 2014 7 624-2 Reservoir Completed Exterior Coating 06/30/14 CIP Projects in Construction 927-1 Recycled Water Reservoir Cover and Liner Replacement (R2108) Removal and Replacement of the reservoir liner and cover $1.40M Budget Start: November 2013 Completion: June 30, 2014 927-1 Reservoir Completed Project 8 06/30/14 CIP Projects in Construction SR-11 Utility Relocations Sequence I (P2453) Relocate Existing Water Facilities to support SR-11 Construction $2.25M Budget Start: February 2014 Estimated Completion: July 2016 Aerial View of Project Location Future SR-11/Sanyo Avenue 9 Construction Contract Status 12 PROJECT TOTAL % R2091 944-1R Recycled Pump Station Upgrade & System Enhancements Sepulveda $1,099,423 $1,162,423 $90,505 8.2%$1,252,928 $1,252,928 7.8%100.0% Complete February 2014 R2108 927-1 Recycled Water Reservoir Cover and Liner Replacement Layfield $833,400 $873,400 $5,558 0.7%$878,958 $878,958 0.6%100.0%Complete June 2014 P2453 SR-11 Potable Water Utility Relocations - Sequence 1 Coffman Specialties, Inc.$947,380 $992,380 $0 0.0%$947,380 $0 -4.5%0.0%July 2016 P2493 624-2 Reservoir Coating Advanced Industrial Services $1,169,000 $1,199,000 $0 0.0%$1,180,770 $1,180,770 -1.5%100.0%July 2014 P2514 Hunte Parkway 30" Potable Water Installation Sepulveda $1,172,257 $1,212,257 $126,233 10.8%$1,312,508 $1,312,508 8.3%100.0%Complete June 2013 P2513 Orange Avenue/ I-805 12" Potable Water Installation Basile $767,000 $872,000 $19,290 2.5%$891,290 $891,290 2.2%100.0% Complete August 2013 P2518/ P2519 803-3 & 832-2 Reservoir Coating Advanced Industrial Services $876,900 $946,900 ($3,339)-0.4%$873,561 $873,561 -7.7%100.0% Complete December 2013 TOTALS:$6,865,360 $7,258,360 $238,247 3.5%$7,337,395 $6,390,014 1.1% CURRENT CONTRACT AMOUNT TOTAL EARNED TO DATE **THIS CHANGE ORDER RATE INCLUDES THE CREDIT FOR UNUSED ALLOWANCES *NET CHANGE ORDERS DO NOT INCLUDE ALLOWANCE ITEM CREDITS. IT'S A TRUE CHANGE ORDER PERCENTAGE FOR THE PROJECT CIP NO.PROJECT TITLE CONTRACTOR BASE BID AMOUNT CONTRACT AMOUNT W/ ALLOWANCES % CHANGE ORDERS W/ ALLOWANCE CREDIT** % COMPLETE EST. COMP. DATE NET CHANGE ORDERS LTD* Consultant Contract Status 11 Consultant Contract Status 12 Consultant Contract Status 13 QUESTIONS? 14