HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix B1 - Biological Assessment Page i
Biological Assessment Report
for
Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot
Redevelopment Project
City of Fontana
Prepared For:
First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc.; First Industrial LP and
First Industrial Acquisitions II, LLC.
C/O Weis Environmental LLC
1938 Kellogg Avenue, Suite 116
Carlsbad, CA 92008
June 13, 2022
Prepared By:
Michael K. Jefferson
Senior Biologist
BLUE Consulting Group
Page ii
Table of Contents
1. Summary of Findings .............................................................................................................................. 1
2. Regional Context ..................................................................................................................................... 1
3. Survey Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 1
4. Regulatory Background ........................................................................................................................... 2
5. Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................................. 2
5.1 Surrounding Land Use .................................................................................................................... 5
5.2 Topography and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 5
5.3 Botany ............................................................................................................................................ 5
5.3.1 Urban/Developed ................................................................................................................ 5
5.4 Zoology ........................................................................................................................................... 6
5.4.1 Birds .................................................................................................................................... 7
5.4.2 Mammals ............................................................................................................................ 7
5.4.3 Reptiles ............................................................................................................................... 7
5.4.4 Amphibians ......................................................................................................................... 7
5.4.5 Invertebrates ....................................................................................................................... 7
5.5 Sensitive Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 8
5.5.1 Sensitivity Criteria ............................................................................................................... 8
5.5.2 Sensitive Plant Communities and Habitats .......................................................................... 8
5.5.3 Sensitive Plant Species ........................................................................................................ 8
5.5.4 Sensitive Wildlife Species .................................................................................................... 8
5.5.5 Wildlife Movement Corridors ............................................................................................. 8
5.5.6 City Tree Protection Ordinance ........................................................................................... 8
5.5.7 Consistency With Adopted NCCPs/HCPs ............................................................................. 8
6. Impacts and Mitigation…..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10
7. Certification/Qualification ...................................................................................................................... 13
8. References Cited..................................................................................................................................... 14
Page iii
FIGURES
1: Property Location Map attached
2: Property Aerial attached
3: Vegetation Map attached
TABLES
1: Vegetation Communities 5
PHOTOGRAPHS
1: Adjacent to the SE. Property Line Looking West over Disturbed Area. attached
2: Adjacent to the NE. Property Line Looking West over Developed Area. attached
ATTACHMENTS
Appendix A Figures 1- 3
Appendix B Photographs 1-2
Appendix C Special-status species status
Appendix D 2022 Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana,
California (LSA Project No. FRT2202). April 22
Page 1
1. Summary of Findings
This report documents the findings of the completed biological assessment of the two (2) parcels
(Property) located on the west portion of the block south of the intersection of Slover Avenue and
Tamarind Avenue, in the City of Fontana. The surveys were completed by qualified BLUE senior biologist
Mike Jefferson on September 10th, 2021.
The Property, totaling approximately 4.29-acres, is comprised of two developed lots (APN’s 256-011-03
and 256-011-04) located within the City of Fontana (Figure 1). The Property is not within the draft City of
Fontana North Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Subarea Plan area.
No sensitive, rare, or endangered species or habitats were observed onsite. The Property is not within a
designated Critical Habitat area. Due to the lack of appropriate soils and habitat, no protected, sensitive,
rare or endangered species are expected to occur.
2. Regional Context
This project is located within the City of Fontana and the outside the draft MSHCP.
General biological survey, sensitive species, rare plant and animal presence/absence and/or potential
surveys were conducted to map the vegetation communities and to assess the presence or potential for
presence of sensitive floral and faunal species. This report provides biological data and background
information required for environmental analysis by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the City of Fontana.
3. Survey Methods
The Property, as well as a surrounding buffer area of approximately 100 feet off-site was surveyed.
Vegetation communities were assessed and mapped on a color aerial (Google earth, 2019 and 2021). No
wetlands/aquatic resources are reported onsite. Animal species observed directly or detected from calls,
tracks, scat, nests, or other sign were noted. All plant species observed on-site were also noted, and
plants that could not be identified in the field were identified later using taxonomic keys.
Limitations to the compilation of a comprehensive faunal and floral checklist were few within the survey
area, all of which had been previously, legally, graded and paved.
While the field visit was conducted in the summer, and was likely too late/early for the potential
detection of several rare plant and wildlife species (if present). Due to the historic development of the
area, as well as the ongoing use and maintenance, it was determined that the existing developed and
disturbed/maintained conditions precluded the recommendation of additional surveys being
recommended as a comprehensive checklist was prepared.
Below is a summary of the survey types, date, times, temperature conditions, sky conditions, and wind
speeds during the completed surveys for the Project.
Page 2
SURVEY DETAILS
Date/Survey Type Time
Conditions
Temp (ºF), Wind (mph) begin and
end, Cloud Cover (CC)
Biologist
9/10/21 - General, Rare,
Sensitive 0945-1040 77ºF, 0-3 mph, 5%cc
83ºF, 0 mph, 5%cc MJ*
*Mike Jefferson
Prior to conducting the biological survey, a thorough review of relevant maps, databases, and literature
pertaining to biological resources was performed. Recent aerial imagery (Google Earth), topographic
maps (USGS 2014), soils maps (USDA 2021), and other maps of the project site and immediate vicinity
were acquired and reviewed to obtain updated information on the natural environmental setting. In
addition, a review of regional species lists produced by the USFWS (USFWS 2012a) and CDFW (CDFW
2011, 2012a, CDFW 2012b, and 2012c).
The pre-survey investigation also included a verification of whether or not the project site falls within
areas designated as final or proposed USFWS Critical Habitat for federally threatened or endangered
species (USFWS 2012b).
Delineated boundaries of all features identified within the study area were recorded using a 1” =100’
aerial photograph.
4. Regulatory Background
(1) Federal Regulations
In a case where a property owner seeks permission from a Federal agency for an action which could
affect a Federally-listed plant and animal species, the property owner and agency are required to consult
with USFWS to obtain appropriate permits. Section 9(a)(2)(b) of the FESA addresses the protections
afforded to listed plants.
(a) Federal Clean Water Act, Section 404
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) regulates the discharge of dredged material, placement of fill
material, or excavation within “waters of the U.S.” and authorizes the Secretary of the Army, through the
Chief of Engineers, to issue permits for such actions. “Waters of the U.S.” are defined by the CWA as
“rivers, creeks, streams, and lakes extending to their headwaters and any associated wetlands.” Wetlands
are defined by the CWA as “areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions.” The permit review process entails an assessment of potentially adverse
impacts to USACE jurisdictional “waters of the U.S.” and wetlands. In response to the permit application,
the USACE will also require conditions amounting to mitigation measures. Where a Federally-listed
species may be affected, they will also require an Endangered Species Act Section 7 consultation with the
USFWS. Through this process, potentially significant adverse impacts within the Federal jurisdictional
limits could be mitigated to a level that is less than significant.
(b) Federal Clean Water Act, Section 401
The mission of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is to develop and enforce
water quality objectives and implement plans that will best protect the beneficial uses of the State’s
waters, recognizing local differences in climate, topography, geology, and hydrology. The California
RWQCB is responsible for implementing compliance not only with State codes such as the California
Water Code, but also Federal acts such as Section 401 of the CWA which requires that: Any applicant for a
Page 3
Federal permit for activities that involve a discharge to waters of the State shall provide the Federal
permitting agency a certification from the State in which the discharge is proposed that states that the
discharge will comply with the applicable provisions under the Federal Clean Water Act. On April 6, 2022
United States Supreme Court decision that stayed a Northern District of California Court decision that
both remanded and vacated EPA Trump-era rules regarding water quality certification of projects under
Clean Water Act Section 401. The California District Court in 2021 in Clean Water Act Rulemaking, 2021
WL 4924844 (2021), vacated the Trump-era Clean Water Act 401 Certification Rule.
Before the USACE will issue a CWA Section 404 permit, applicants must apply for and receive a Section
401 water quality certification from the RWQCB. A complete application for 401 Certification will include
a detailed Water Quality Management Plan that addresses the key water quality features of the project to
ensure the integrity of water quality in the area during and post-construction.
Under separate authorities granted by State law (i.e., the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act), a
RWQCB may choose to regulate discharges of dredge or fill materials by issuing or waiving (with or
without conditions) Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs), a type of State discharge permit, instead of
taking a water quality certification action. Processing of a WDR is similar to that of a Section 401
certification; however, the RWQCB has slightly more discretion to add conditions to a project under
Porter-Cologne than under the Federal CWA.
(c) Migratory Bird Treaty Act
As previously discussed, under provisions of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which prohibits the take
(including killing, capturing, selling, trading, and transport) of protected migratory bird species without
prior authorization by the Department of Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Section 9(a)(1)(B) of
the FESA, unless properly permitted, it is unlawful to “take” any listed species.
(2) State of California Regulations
As previously discussed, Article 3, Sections 2080 through 2085, of the CESA addresses the taking of
threatened or endangered species. Exceptions authorized by the State to allow “take” require permits or
memoranda of understanding and can be authorized for “endangered species, threatened species, or
candidate species for scientific, educational, or management purposes.” Sections 1901 and 1913 of the
California Fish and Game Code provide that notification is required by an initiator prior to disturbance.
(a) State of California Fish and Game Code 1602
Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code requires any entity (e.g., person, state or local
government agency, or public utility) who proposes a project that will substantially divert or obstruct the
natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river,
stream, or lake to notify the CDFW of the proposed project. In the course of this notification process, the
CDFW will review the proposed project as it affects streambed habitats within the project area. The
CDFW may then place conditions in the Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate any potentially significant adverse impacts within CDFW jurisdictional limits.
(b) State of California Fish and Game Code 3503
Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code as they pertain to nesting birds.
Section 3503: “It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as
otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.” Section 3503.5: “It is unlawful
to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to
take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or
any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Section 3513: “It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory
nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird
Page 4
except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of
the Migratory Treaty Act.”
(3) California Native Plant Society
As previously discussed, the CNPS has compiled an inventory comprised of the information focusing on
geographic distribution and qualitative characterization of rare, threatened, or endangered vascular plant
species of California which classifies plant species into categories of rarity. Informally listed species are
not protected per se, but warrant consideration in the preparation of biological assessments.
(4) Local Regulations
(a) City of Fontana Tree Preservation Ordinance
The City Tree Preservation Ordinance.
The Fontana Ordinance No. 1126, § 1, adopted Aug. 16, 1994 (City of Fontana Urban Tree Protection
Requirements), controls the removal and preservation of Heritage, Significant, Specimen and Windrow trees
within the city. Windrow is defied by the City as a series of trees (minimum of four), usually a variety of
eucalyptus, planted in a closely spaced line no more than ten feet apart to provide a windbreak for the
protection of property and/or agricultural crops. Protected trees are defined as:
1. Is of historical value because of its association with a place, building, natural feature or event
of local, regional or national historical significance as identified by city council resolution; or
2. Is representative of a significant period of the city's growth or development (windrow tree,
European Olive tree); or
3. Is a protected or endangered species as specified by federal or state statute; or
4. Is deemed historically or culturally significant by the city manager or his or her designee
because of size, condition, location or aesthetic qualities.
Protected trees may not be removed, destroyed, or disfigured without a permit. However, the term
"significant trees" and “specimen trees” shall not include any tree located on a private parcel of property of
less than one acre zoned for residential use.
Where existing eucalyptus windrows are to be removed along the existing or ultimate public
right-of-way (R.O.W.), as shown within the circulation element of the city's general plan, they shall
be replaced with appropriate street trees to be determined by the staff of not less than a 15-gallon
size in a ratio of one tree from the city's approved tree list for every one removed.
(b) City of Fontana General Plan Goals and Policies
General Plan Update 2015 – 2035. On November 13, 2018, the City of Fontana adopted its most recent
General Plan, which can be thought of as the City’s constitution or long-range blueprint for its physical
development. The State of California mandates that every city and county adopt a general plan. The
General Plan details the community’s vision by identifying goals and objectives over the next 20 years.
Specific plans take the place of zoning for a designated geographic area and include detailed
development and infrastructure requirements. At the time of the last General Plan in 2003, a significant
amount of land remained to be entitled and developed, north of the 210 Freeway. More than a decade
later, much of the land in Fontana has been built out or entitled. Over the next 20 years, Fontana’s
growth will focus increasingly on redevelopment.
Page 5
5. Existing Conditions
The property is developed, and consists of multiple structures, maintained undeveloped backyards,
compacted gravel storage yard and paved area. There are currently two single family residences and a
commercial trucking storage yard operating on the Property.
5.1 Surrounding Land Use
The Property is surrounded by a dirt lot to the north, existing roads and developed area. Uses include a
dirt pad, industrial, residential and commercial activities.
5.2 Topography and Soils
The site is graded, level, maintained undeveloped backyards, compacted Degraded Granite (DG) parking
lot/truck storage yard and paved area. The underlying soils (USDA, WSS 2021) is dominated by Delhi fine
sand, 0 to 5 percent. slopes. The USGS soil maps show the site is mapped as both Delhi fine sand and
Tujunga loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes.
5.3 Botany
The Property, totaling approximately 4.29 acres, is considered Developed/Urban Disturbed and supports
no sensitive native or wetland/waters habitat. The observed landscaping vegetation is ornamental and
associated with the residences/office and truck storage yards onsite.
TABLE 1
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ON SITE
Habitat Type Total (acres)
Urban Disturbed 1.06
Developed (Holland Code 12000) 3.23
TOTAL 4.29
5.3.1 Urban/Developed
In addition to paved and compacted gravel (DG) areas, developed areas contain numerous and varied
horticultural plantings located within landscaping associated with the residential yards and businesses.
Characteristic weedy species include prickly sow thistle (Sonchus asper), common sow thistle (Sonchus
oleraceus), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), giant reed (Arundo donax),
hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), wild lettuce (Lactuca serriola), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), castor-
bean (Ricinus communis), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), smooth cat’s-ear (Hypochoeris glabra), red-
stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), short-beak filaree (Erodium brachycarpum) and white-stem filaree
(Erodium moschatum). These urban lands do not typically contain native vegetation or provide essential
habitat connectivity; and therefore, tend to have reduced biological value.
Observed:
A total of approximately 3.23 acres of Urban/Developed habitat was observed. Generally, the Property is
dominated by development which is comprised of existing residential and business structures/footprints
and a large area of paved and DG parking as well as the ornamental landscaping associated with the uses.
Weedy non-native species observed in the irrigated, maintained dirt backyards is dominated by: turf
grass, Russian thistle, castor-bean and erodium ssp.
Page 6
The mature maintained trees in the residential backyard include the following ornamental species:
Northern catalpa (Catalpa speciosa)
Chinaberry tree (Melia azedarach)
Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle)
Indian laurel (Ficus nitida)
Chinese elm (Ulmus parvifolia)
Common fig (Ficus carica)
Common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana)
White mulberry (Morus alba)
Cootamundra wattle (Acacia baileyana)
Lemon (Citrus sp.)
Ash (Fraxinus sp.)
Grapefruit (Citrus x paradisi)
Common guava (Psidium guajava)
Loquat (Eriobotrya japonica)
Around the trees, the backyard generally has an understory of bare dirt and a few locations of non-native
weedy species dominated by short-beak filaree and mustard.
Adjacent to the western property line, outside the property fence, is a line of ten (10) ornamental non-
native Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus) trees.
5.3.2 Disturbed
Disturbed areas are typically located adjacent to urbanization and contain a mix of primarily weedy
species, including non-native forbs, annuals, and grasses, usually found pioneering on recently disturbed
soils.
Characteristic weedy species include prickly sow thistle (Sonchus asper), common sow thistle (Sonchus
oleraceus), bristly ox-tongue (Picris echioides), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), giant reed (Arundo donax),
hottentot-fig (Carpobrotus edulis), wild lettuce (Lactuca serriola), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), castor-
bean (Ricinus communis), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), smooth cat’s-ear (Hypochoeris glabra), red-
stem filaree (Erodium cicutarium), short-beak filaree (Erodium brachycarpum) and white-stem filaree
(Erodium moschatum). These urban lands do not typically contain native vegetation or provide essential
habitat connectivity; and therefore, tend to have reduced biological value.
Observed:
A total of approximately 1.06 acres of Disturbed habitat was observed in the southern portion of the
Property, behind the single-family residence. Generally, the area is comprised of a lot that has been
previously graded and utilized as parking/storage for trucks and is routinely maintained and disked (bare
dirt). As a result, the disturbed areas support no native species. As a result, this maintained area is
dominated by bare dirt with little to no vegetation. The observed on-native/exotic ornamental vegetation
includes: mustard ssp., erodium ssp., Russian thistle and tree tobacco sparsely growing in spots along the
perimeter.
5.4 Zoology
Overall, the property is in a maintained, irrigated and high use condition which provides a very low value
habitat for wildlife species. No active bird nests or burrows were observed.
Page 7
5.4.1 Birds
Native and non-native vegetation communities provide habitat for numerous species of resident and
migratory birds. A number of common avian species breed within sage scrub and chaparral habitats, and
forage among the leaf litter in the vegetative understory. Rocky outcrops, particularly on undisturbed
slopes or peaks can provide significant perching or roosting sites for raptors; and grasslands and
agricultural lands located adjacent to woodland areas provide significant foraging habitat for resident,
wintering and migrant raptors. Avian diversity and abundance is substantial within riparian and oak
woodland habitats. These habitats are comprised of several horizontal niches including canopy, shrub,
herb, and ground, which provide a network of valuable roosting, foraging and breeding areas for birds.
Quality avian habitat within the City is concentrated where the vegetation is less disturbed and provides
habitat connectivity; however, the various creeks and tributaries within the City also provide some
measure of habitat connectivity, and potential avian breeding and foraging areas.
No bird species were observed.
5.4.2 Mammals
Without trapping, the presence of mammal species must be discerned through habitat suitability, species
range and biological records. Many mammals are nocturnal and secretive, and indirect signs for several
species, particularly rodents, can be similar. Small mammal species typically occur in sage scrub,
chaparral, grasslands and agricultural/disturbed areas, and several of these species will intermittently use
riparian and woodland habitats for foraging and cover. Various species of bats will also forage in
grasslands and woodland habitats. Larger mammals often require greater blocks of connected habitat for
hunting and travel within their range. Quality habitat for small mammal species is not present.
Despite the extensive urban development within the City core, several regionally common mammals still
reside within City open space and other now often isolated pockets of remaining native vegetation. A
squirrel burrow was observed in the south-western portion of the site. No indications of active use,
feathers or droppings were observed around the burrow.
5.4.3 Reptiles
Quality reptilian habitat, primarily consisting of sage scrub, rocky outcrops, chaparral and oak woodland,
is not present onsite or within the area.
A single reptile, typical in urban areas was observed: Western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis).
5.4.4 Amphibians
Amphibians typically occur in riparian habitats with peripheral upland vegetation. Riparian ecosystems
often provide temporary ponding water used as breeding habitat by various amphibious species, as well
as abundant vegetation for cover and foraging. Amphibians will also create burrows in adjacent upland
habitats, such as sage scrub and non-native grasslands, where they will aestivate (or spend time in a
dormant state, similar to hibernation).
No amphibians were observed and due to a lack of habitat, are not expected to occur.
5.4.5 Invertebrates
Limited cohesive information is available to provide a thorough description of the many invertebrate
fauna found within the City and region. Butterfly species occur in a wide range of habitats; including sage
scrub and chaparral, open areas devoid of substantial shrub cover such as non-native grasslands and
agricultural/disturbed land, as well as more densely vegetated areas such as riparian habitat and oak
woodlands. These habitats provide various host-specific plants suitable for larval development, adult
Page 8
nectar resources; as well as topographical features, such as hilltops or open ground that aid in courtship
and mating. In contrast, vernal pool branchiopods are strongly restricted to vernal pool habitat, and
consequently, many of these species are sensitive.
No vernal pools or invertebrate specific habitat (e.g. fairy shrimp/quino checkerspot butterfly) was
observed onsite and as a result, no sensitive or rare species of invertebrates are expected to occur onsite.
5.5 Sensitive Biological Resources
5.5.1 Sensitivity Criteria
The subject property is located within the City of Fontana. The proposed project must be designed to
meet or exceed those regulations.
State and federal agencies regulate sensitive species and require an assessment of their presence or
potential presence to be conducted on-site prior to the approval of any proposed development on a
property. For purposes of this report, observed species will be considered sensitive if they are: (1) listed
or proposed for listing (a ‘candidate species’) by state or federal agencies as threatened or endangered;
(2) on List 1B (considered endangered throughout its range) or List 2 (considered endangered in California
but more common elsewhere) of the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and
Endangered Vascular Plants of California (Skinner and Pavlik 1994); or (3) considered fully protected,
sensitive, rare, endangered, or threatened by the State of California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB),
or other local conservation organizations or specialists. California fully protected is a designation adopted
by the State of California prior to the creation of the State Endangered Species Act and is intended as
protection from harm or harassment.
Noteworthy plant species are those which are on List 3 (more information about the plant’s distribution
and rarity needed) and List 4 (plants of limited distribution) of the CNPS Inventory. Sensitive habitat types
are those identified by the CNDDB, Holland (1986) and/or those considered sensitive by other resource
agencies.
A determination of the potential occurrence for listed, sensitive, or noteworthy species are based upon
known ranges and habitat preferences for the species (Zeiner et al.; Skinner and Pavlik; Reiser); species
occurrence records from the CNDDB (State of California); and species occurrence records from other sites
near the project site.
5.5.2 Jurisdictional Waters, Sensitive Plant Communities/Habitats
No potentially occurring federal/state/local jurisdictional waters, wetlands or sensitive plant
community/habitat was observed. No protocol preliminary jurisdictional wetland delineation was
required or conducted.
5.5.3 Sensitive Plant Species
No plant listed as sensitive (rare, endangered, etc.) was observed onsite or within the 100-foot offsite
buffer area. Due to the developed/highly disturbed condition of the site and offsite, none are expected to
occur. The assessment of the Property to potential support each potentially occurring special-status plant
species is attached.
5.5.4 Sensitive Wildlife
Sensitive wildlife includes those species listed as Endangered or Threatened under the FESA or CESA,
candidates for listing by the USFWS or CDFW, and species of special concern to the CDFW. Several
sensitive wildlife species were reported in the vicinity based on CNDDB and the Final EIR (City of Fontana,
1996). However, no species are identified as having a potential to occur within the study area based on
Page 9
the literature review and habitat within the study area. The assessment of the Property to potential
support each potentially occurring special-status wildlife (animal) species is attached.
Special-status bats and mammals. No special-status species were observed and none are expected to
occur. As required by the Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a habitat
assessment and evaluation for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea), San Diego pocket mouse
(Chaetodipus fallax), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis), western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) and
San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia) was conducted onsite. Due to the existing
developed, utilized and maintained nature of the property and subsequent lack of appropriate habitat,
hydrology, nesting, roosting and foraging potential, none of these species were observed and are not
expected to occur.
Delhi Sands Flower‐Loving Fly
The Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) is found primarily on fine,
sandy soils, often with wholly or partially consolidated dunes. These soil types are generally classified as
the "Delhi" series (primarily Delhi fine sand). The habitat for this species is restricted to western Riverside
and San Bernardino Counties, along the former floodplains of Lytle Creek and the Santa Ana River. This
species is present year-round, but is only visible above ground when it emerges as an adult for foraging
and mating in August and September. The remainder of the year is spent as an egg, pupae and
subsequent molt stages until adulthood. The habitat for this species has historically been limited, and
agriculture practices and ongoing development of the San Bernardino Valley area has resulted in Delhi
sands being further reduced. The species is listed as endangered by the USFWS. The CDFW has not
formally designated this species.
The project site is within the northern portion of the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Jurupa Recovery Unit.
The location of the ‘Jurupa Hills’ population (2008) is, as a bird flies, 3.12 miles south west of the property
in the undeveloped hills (USFWS; Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) 5-
Year Review: Summary and Evaluation)
While Delhi sand series soils underlay a small portion of the western most portion of the project site, they
are in a graded condition and overlayed by compacted DG/pavement and/or in a maintained condition.
The onsite soils are not disturbed, they are compacted and covered in gravel. No dune formations are
located onsite, adjacent to the properties or in the area. The surrounding area is urban developed and
does not support dune formations. Based on the existing commercial and residential use, absence of
exposed native soils (unmaintained and ungraded) and absence of dune formations, Delhi Sands flower-
loving fly is considered as having no potential to occur onsite or be impacted.
Raptors
Due to the developed/maintained condition of the Property, the site has no potential to support foraging
habitat for raptors. Due to the lack of large, mature and unmaintained trees (or the equivalent), no raptor
nests were observed and there is no potential to support nesting raptors.
No wildlife listed as sensitive (rare, endangered, etc.) was observed onsite or within the 100-foot offsite
buffer area. Due to the developed/highly disturbed condition of the site and offsite, none are expected to
occur.
Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl is a resident species in lowland areas of southern California (Garrett & Dunn 1980). It
prefers open areas for foraging and burrowing, and is found widely scattered in open desert scrub. This
species is scarce in coastal areas, being found mainly in agricultural and grassland habitats. The largest
Page 10
remaining numbers are in the Imperial Valley, where it is common in suitable habitat adjacent to the
agricultural fields.
The burrowing owl prefers large flat open areas for nesting and hunting (Garrett & Dunn 1981). This
species lives in burrows constructed by other ground-dwelling species in grassy or sparse shrubby habitat.
Burrowing owls also take over other types of burrows, including manmade objects such as pipes. This
species forages low over the ground surface for insect prey, and seldom flies very high in the air.
As a result of coastal development, the burrowing owl is declining in coastal habitats. The CDFW has
designated the burrowing owl as a California Species of Special Concern (SSC). These species are so
designated because “declining population levels, limited ranges and/or continuing threats have made
them vulnerable to extinction.” (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012a). Burrowing owls need
sparse shrubby habitat (such as grasslands and desert scrub) to provide food for their insect and other
small prey items.
No sign of active burrowing owl use was observed (burrows, feathers, whitewash, etc.), but suitable
nesting habitat exists (squirrel burrow). A pre-construction survey no less than 14 days prior to initiating
construction on the project area to determine if burrowing owl are nesting on site (California Department
of Fish and Game 2012a) is recommended.
5.5.5 Wildlife Movement Corridors
Wildlife movement corridors are defined as areas that connect suitable wildlife habitat areas in a region
otherwise fragmented by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. Natural features
such as canyon drainages, ridgelines, or areas with vegetation cover provide corridors for wildlife travel.
Wildlife movement corridors are important because they provide access to mates, food, and water; allow
the dispersal of individuals away from high population density areas; and facilitate the exchange of
genetic traits between populations (Beier and Loe 1992). Wildlife movement corridors are considered
sensitive by resource and conservation agencies.
The developed Property is within a fully developed area and not adjacent to natural habitat. The Property
is not within a recognized USFWS, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or City wildlife
corridor and does not support habitat which would be required. No impacts to a wildlife corridor are
possible.
5.5.6 The City Tree Preservation Ordinance
As defined by the City tree preservation ordinance, no tree deemed to be a City Specimen, Significant or
Heritage individual was observed onsite. Although there are no trees on the site that qualify as heritage,
significant, or specimen tree, the City’s ordinance requires replacement for all trees. LSA has conducted
an arborist study pursuant to Chapter 28, Article III, Section 28-67(c) of the Fontana Tree Preservation
ordinance to document the sizes and conditions of the trees so replacement requirements can be
determined (Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana, California (LSA
Project No. FRT2202).
5.5.7 Compliance with adopted NCCPs/HCPs
The Project Area is not located within the boundary of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) or
Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). The Property is not within the draft City of Fontana North
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Subarea Plan area. The Property is not within a
designated US Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) Critical Habitat area. The development of the property and
Project will not conflict with the stated goals and objectives of any adopted NCCP/HCP.
Page 11
6. Impacts and Mitigation
Assuming the entire 4.29-acre property were to be impacted for its’ re-development, no potentially
significant biological impacts to sensitive/protected habitats and/or species are proposed. No
compensatory habitat/species specific mitigation is required at this time.
Due to the presence of ornamental vegetation onsite, there is a potential for nesting birds to occur.
Mitigation to ensure the avoidance of impacts to nesting birds is required; see below.
Impacts
No sensitive upland vegetation, special aquatic resource areas or jurisdictional waters/wetlands were
observed onsite. No sensitive upland vegetation, special aquatic resource areas or jurisdictional
waters/wetlands are proposed to be impacted by the onsite re-development of the Property. No
mitigation is required.
The literature review and field assessment data confirm that no special-status plant/animal species
(including candidate species) currently or potentially utilize the property. The property lacks suitable
habitat that would typically support special-status plant/animal species or receive state or federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections. Consequently, there is no reasonable presumption of adverse
impact to any special status species or their habitats as a result of a potential Project implementation. No
impact to special-status plant/animal species (including candidate species) is proposed. No mitigation is
required.
No sensitive plant/animal species were observed on site during the habitat assessment. Given the site’s
developed nature and exposure to recurring surface disturbances associated with vegetation
management, these species are not expected to occur on site. No impact to sensitive plant/animal
species is proposed. No mitigation is required.
The property supports no riparian/riverine/vernal pool habitats or species associated with these habitat
types. No impact no riparian/riverine/vernal pool habitats or species is proposed. No mitigation is
required.
The Property is not within the draft City of Fontana North Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP) Subarea Plan area or any adopted NCCPs/HCPs. The re-development of the property will not
conflict with the goals of any local subarea plan area or any adopted NCCPs/HCPs. No biological
habitat/species compensatory mitigation is required.
The re-development of the Property will not conflict with City biological policies and/or measures (e.g.,
City’s General Plan, Ordinances, SWIP, etc.). Tree replacement, as required by city ordinance, will be
completed.
The Property supports no Heritage, Significant, Specimen and Windrow trees covered by the City tree
protection ordinance. No impacts to City protected trees is proposed. No mitigation is required.
No recognized wildlife corridor is present onsite or adjacent to the Property. No impacts to a wildlife
corridor are proposed. No mitigation is required.
Page 12
Potentially Significant Impacts
Burrowing Owl:
Due to the presence of ornamental vegetation and observed squirrel burrow, there is a potential for
nesting birds and/or burrowing owl to occur. As described above, in Section 4, burrowing owl and nesting
birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and relevant sections of California Fish and Game
Code (e.g., Sections 3503, 3503.4, 3544, 3505, et seq.).
As a result, vegetation clearing should take place outside of the typical avian nesting season (February 1st
- August 31st), to the maximum extent practical. If not possible, mitigation would be required.
Tree Preservation Ordinance:
As stated in the City of Fontana’s (City) Tree Preservation Ordinance, adopted August 16, 1994 (City of
Fontana Urban Tree Protection Requirement), which controls the removal and preservation of heritage,
significant, or specimen tree, Sec. 28-67 (c) which states:
All other trees which are not heritage, significant, or specimen tree shall be replaced.
The size of the replacement tree(s) shall be based on a scale of ten percent to 100
percent. Staff may require that the ratings be performed by a certified arborist. The
arborist report will be approved by staff. All living trees must be replaced.
There are no trees on the site that qualify as Heritage, Significant, or Specimen Trees. The loss of the
identified living trees is considered a significant impact and mitigation (replacement) is required.
Mitigation Measures
Burrowing Owl:
Any future land disturbance for site-specific developments within the project site shall be conducted
outside of the State-identified bird nesting season. If construction during the nesting season must occur,
the site shall be evaluated by a City-approved biologist prior to ground disturbance to determine if
nesting birds exist onsite. The following measures shall be implemented to address potential impacts.
• If start of construction occurs between February 1 and August 31, then a qualified biologist shall
conduct a breeding bird survey no more than three days prior to the start of construction to
determine if nesting is occurring. This survey can be conducted as part of the burrowing owl surveys.
• “Construction” includes selection of staging areas, demolition, tree, trash and debris removal,
placement of equipment and machinery on to the site preparatory to grading, and any other
project-related activity that increases noise and human activity on the project site beyond existing
levels. Emergency measures are exempt from this definition.
• If occupied nests are found, they shall not be disturbed unless the qualified biologist verifies through
non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg-laying and incubation; or (b)
the juveniles from the occupied nests are capable of independent survival.
• If the biologist is not able to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur
within a distance specified by the qualified biologist for each nest or nesting site. The qualified
biologist will determine the appropriate distance in consultation with the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Tree Preservation Ordinance:
Any future removal of the trees identified require replacement. The replacement trees size and quantity
are listed in Table A: Trees on the Project Site (Attached; LSA, April 2022)
Page 13
7. Certification/Qualification
The following individual completed the field surveys and preparation of this report:
Michael Jefferson; University of California at San Diego, B.A., Biological Anthropology and
Sociobiology, 1996
USACE Protocol Wetland Assessment Specialist
CHRIS Registered Archaeologist
Qualified County of San Diego Biologist
Qualified County of Riverside Biologist and CEQA Specialist
Page 14
8. References Cited
American Ornithologists’ Union
1998 Check-list of North American Birds. 7th ed. Washington, D.C.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
2012a. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. Report prepared by the State of California Natural
Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Wildlife, March 7, 2012
California Department of Fish and Wildlife,
2012b. Special Animals. The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Sacramento, California.
Fontana, City
1994 City of Fontana ARTICLE III. PRESERVATION OF HERITAGE, SIGNIFICANT AND SPECIMEN TREES;
Ordinance No. 1126, § 1, and Chapter 28, Article III, Section 28-67(c) adopted Aug. 16.
Holland, R. F.
1986 Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California.
Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and Game. October.
LSA
2022 Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana, California (LSA Project
No. FRT2202). April 22
Reiser, C. H.
1994 Rare Plants of San Diego County. Aquafir Press, Imperial Beach, California.
Skinner, M., and B. Pavlik
1994 Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. California Native Plant Society Special
Publication No. 1, 5th ed. Sacramento.
U. S. Department of Agriculture
2022 Web Soil Survey. January.
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service).
1997. Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) Recovery Plan.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
2008. Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and
Evaluation. March.
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service).
2022. Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. Endangered
and Threatened Species List. In: U.S. Department of the Interior, editor. Carlsbad, CA: USFWS.
Attachment A
Attachment B
Attachment C
Attachment D
CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
April 22, 2022
Paul Loubet
First Industrial, L.P.
898 North Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 175
El Segundo, CA 90245
Subject: Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana, California
(LSA Project No. FRT2202)
Dear Mr. Loubet:
LSA conducted a tree inventory for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project (project). The
approximately 4-acre project site (Assessor’s Parcel Number 0256-011-03 and -04) is southwest of
the intersection of Tamarind Avenue and Tamarind Court in the City of Fontana (City), San
Bernardino County, California (Figure 1, attached). The tree inventory was conducted in accordance
with the City’s tree protection ordinance.1 No trees meeting the ordinance’s definition of a
Significant, Heritage, or Specimen Tree were found on the site.
METHODS
Trees on the site were inventoried on April 1 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. by LSA arborist Stan
Spencer (International Society of Arboriculture [ISA] Certified Arborist WE-9358A), assisted by LSA
biologist Heather Monteleone. All ornamental, fruit, nut, and native trees with trunk diameters of at
least 0.75 inch were inventoried, as well as stump regrowth and dead trees, if any.
The inventory did not include palms under 8 feet tall or weed species, such as tree tobacco
(Nicotiana glauca) and tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Inventoried trees were identified,
assigned a number, mapped, and evaluated by measuring trunk diameter and height and assessing
general condition. The trunk diameter for multi-stem trees was calculated by taking the square root
of the sum of the squared diameters of the individual stems. The inventory and assessment were
conducted in accordance with Section 28-67 of Article III (preservation of Heritage, Significant, and
Specimen Trees) of the Fontana Municipal Code. Trunk diameter was measured at 6 inches above
ground level for trees with trunk diameters of 0.75 to 4 inches, at 12 inches above ground level for
trees with trunk diameters of 5 to 8 inches, and at 54 inches above ground level for trees with trunk
diameters of 9 inches or greater. The height of measurement was lowered if necessary to avoid
branch points. A tree health rating was applied on a scale of 10 to 100 to each tree, taking into
account the species, trunk diameter, height, canopy, and structure.
1 City of Fontana. 1994. Fontana Municipal Code. Chapter 28, Article III (Preservation of Heritage,
Significant, and Specimen Trees). https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_
ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH28VE_ARTIIIPRHESISPTR (accessed February 10, 2022).
4/20/22 «https://lsaassoc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/jennette_bosseler_lsa_net/Documents/Desktop/ArboristRpt_Fontana First Tamarind_2022April.docx» 2
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 1 shows locations of trees and stump regrowth on the proposed project site. Table A provides
tree measurements, ratings, and replacement requirements according to criteria specified in the
City’s ordinance. There are no trees on the site that qualify as Heritage, Significant, or Specimen
Trees. Trees on the site are in generally average to poor condition due to age, drought, and soil
conditions. Replacement is required for all living trees and cut trees with stump regrowth, as
specified in Table A. There are stands of tree tobacco and tree of heaven within in the south-central
portion of the site. These are invasive species, not ornamental trees, and should be eradicated from
the site.
If you have any questions or comments about this arborist report, please do not hesitate to contact
me at (951) 781-9310 or stan.spencer@lsa.net.
Sincerely,
LSA Associates, Inc.
Stan Spencer, Ph.D.
Associate/Senior Biologist and Arborist
Attachments: Table A
Figure 1
ARBORIST REPORT APRIL 2022 FONTANA 50 PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
https://lsaassoc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/jennette_bosseler_lsa_net/Documents/Desktop/ArboristRpt_Fontana First Tamarind_2022April.docx «04/20/22»
Table A: Trees on the Project Site
Tree No. Species Rating Trunk Caliper (inches) Height (feet)
Heritage, Significant, or Specimen Tree?
Replacement Tree Requirement (based on rating and trunk caliper)
1 Northern catalpa
(Catalpa speciosa)
40 7 15 No 1 x 15 gallon1
2 Chinaberry tree
(Melia azedarach)
45 17 30 No 1 x 15 gallon1
3 Peruvian pepper tree
(Schinus molle)
55 2 6 No 1 x 15 gallon2
4 Indian laurel (Ficus nitida) 70 11 30 No 4 x 36" box1
5 Chinese elm
(Ulmus parvifolia)
60 9 (multi-stem) 20 No 4 x 24" box1
6 Common fig (Ficus carica) 65 11 (multi-stem) 20 No 4 x 24" box1
7 Common fig
(Ficus carica)
65 10 (multi-stem) 20 No 4 x 24" box1
8 Common persimmon (Diospyros virginiana) 50 4 12 No 1 x 15 gallon2
9 White mulberry
(Morus alba)
60 9 20 No 4 x 24" box1
10 Cootamundra wattle (Acacia baileyana) 55 8 6 No 1 x 15 gallon1
11 Lemon
(Citrus sp.)
55 6 10 No 1 x 15 gallon2
12 Lemon
(Citrus sp.)
55 8 (multi-stem) 10 No 1 x 15 gallon1
13 Chinese elm
(Ulmus parvifolia)
65 9 30 No 4 x 24" box1
14 Ash
(Fraxinus sp.)
65 11 11 No 4 x 24" box1
15 Grapefruit
(Citrus x paradisi)
55 4 15 No 1 x 15 gallon2
16 Common guava
(Psidium guajava)
55 7 (multi-stem) 15 No 1 x 15 gallon1
17 Loquat
(Eriobotrya japonica)
55 6 (multi-stem) 12 No 1 x 15 gallon2
18 Chinaberry tree
(Melia azedarach)
65 20 (multi-stem) 35 No 4 x 24" box1
19 Lemon
(Citrus sp.)
45 4 (multi-stem) 8 No 1 x 15 gallon2
20 Chinaberry tree
(Melia azedarach)
65 30 30 No 4 x 24" box1
21 Lemon (Citrus sp.)
stump regrowth N/A N/A No 1 x 15 gallon; species to be determined by City staff3
22 Chinaberry tree
(Melia azedarach)
65 17 (multi-stem) 35 No 4 x 24" box1
23 Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus) 65 10 25 No 4 x 24" box1
24 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
65 10 20 No 4 x 24" box1
ARBORIST REPORT APRIL 2022 FONTANA 50 PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
https://lsaassoc-my.sharepoint.com/personal/jennette_bosseler_lsa_net/Documents/Desktop/ArboristRpt_Fontana First Tamarind_2022April.docx «04/20/22»
Table A: Trees on the Project Site
Tree No. Species Rating Trunk Caliper (inches) Height (feet)
Heritage, Significant, or Specimen Tree?
Replacement Tree Requirement (based on rating and trunk caliper)
25 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
65 12 25 No 4 x 24" box1
26 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
Dead N/A N/A No None4
27 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
30 10 25 No 1 x 15 gallon1
28 Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus) 30 11 25 No 1 x 15 gallon1
29 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
Dead N/A N/A No None4
30 Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus) 65 9 25 No 4 x 24" box1
31 Brisbane box
(Lophostemon confertus)
40 5 15 No 1 x 15 gallon2
32 Brisbane box (Lophostemon confertus) 40 6 15 No 1 x 15 gallon2
Source: Compiled by LSA.
1. Replacement requirement indicated in Table No. IV (for Other Trees 7 inches or greater in diameter) in Fontana Municipal Code, Section 28-67. 2. Replacement requirement indicated in Table No. III (for Other Trees under 7 inches in diameter) in Fontana Municipal Code, Section
28-67.
3. Replacement requirement indicated in Fontana Municipal Code Section 28-67(f) for tree determined by a certified arborist to be
stump regrowth. 4. No replacement is required for trees determined to be diseased or dead by a certified arborist and approved by City staff (Fontana
Municipal Code, Section 28-65(4)).
!
!
(
(
!
!!!
!
!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
(
(((
(
(((((((((
(((((
((
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
!(1
2 3 4 5
67
8
9 1011
12
1314
15
16
17 18
19
20
21
222324
25
26
27
28
29
30 31
32
Tamarind AveTamarind Ct
SOURCE: Nearmap (1/26/2022); San Bernardino County (2021)
I:\FRT2202\GIS\MXD\Bio\TreeSurveyResults.mxd (4/18/2022)
FIGURE 1
First Tamarind II Logistics
Tree Survey Results
LEGEND
Project Site Tree Survey Results
!(Stump Regrowth
!(Tree
!(Dead Tree050100
FEET