HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix D - Biological Reosurces ReportsAPPENDIX D
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORTS
APPENDIX D1
HABITAT ASSESSMENT
2201 N. Grand Avenue #10098 | Santa Ana, CA 92711-0098 | (714) 716-5050
www.ELMTConsulting.com
October 20, 2021
KIMLEY-HORN
Contact: Kari Cano
3880 Lemon Street, Suite 420
Riverside, California 92501
SUBJECT: Habitat Assessment for Lennar’s Sobrato Project Located in the City of Fontana, San
Bernardino County, California
Introduction
This report contains the findings of ELMT Consulting’s (ELMT) habitat assessment for the Citrus West
Project Site (project site, site) located in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The habitat
assessment was conducted by biologist Jacob H. Lloyd Davies on August 17, 2021 to document baseline
conditions and assess the potential for special-status1 plant and wildlife species to occur within the project
boundaries that could pose a constraint to implementation of the proposed project. Special attention was
given to the suitability of the habitat to support burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), San Bernardino
kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus), California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), and
other special-status plant and wildlife species identified by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s
(CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and other electronic databases as potentially
occurring in the general vicinity of the project site.
Project Location
The project site is generally located north of State Route 210, south and east of Interstate 15, and south and
west of Interstate 215 in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The project site is depicted
on the Devore quadrangle of the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map
series within and Section 25 of Township 1 North, Range 6 West. Specifically, the project site is bounded
to the north by Sierra Lakes Parkway, to the west by Lytle Creek Road, and to the east by Maloof Avenue
and is located within Assessor Parcel Numbers1108-052-02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08, -09, -11, -12, -13,
-14, -15, -16, and -17. Refer to Exhibits 1 thru 3 in Attachment A.
Project Description
The project proposes the development of a gated community consisting of 137 units, 411 parking spaces, and
associated infrastructure and landscaping on approximately 10.3 acres. Refer to Attachment B, Site Plans.
1 As used in this report, “special-status” refers to plant and wildlife species that are federally and State listed, proposed, or candidates; plant species that have been designated with a California Native Plant Society Rare Plant Rank; wildlife species that are designated by the CDFW as fully protected, species of special concern, or watch list species; and specially protected natural vegetation communities as designated by the CDFW.
October 20, 2021 Page 2
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
Methodology
A literature review and records search were conducted to determine which special-status biological
resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the project site. In addition to the
literature review, a general habitat assessment or field investigation of the project site was conducted to
document existing conditions and assess the potential for special-status biological resources to occur within
the project site.
Literature Review
Prior to conducting the habitat assessment, a literature review and records search was conducted for special-
status biological resources potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the project site. Previously
recorded occurrences of special-status plant and wildlife species and their proximity to the project site were
determined through a query of the CDFW’s QuickView Tool in the Biogeographic Information and
Observation System (BIOS), CNDDB Rarefind 5, the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic
Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California, Calflora Database, compendia of special-
status species published by CDFW, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species
listings.
All available reports, survey results, and literature detailing the biological resources previously observed
on or within the vicinity of the project site were reviewed to understand existing site conditions and note
the extent of any disturbances that have occurred within the project site that would otherwise limit the
distribution of special-status biological resources. Standard field guides and texts were reviewed for specific
habitat requirements of special-status and non-special-status biological resources, as well as the following
resources:
• Google Earth Pro historic aerial imagery (1985-2021);
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS),
Soil Survey;
• USFWS Critical Habitat designations for Threatened and Endangered Species; and
• USFWS Endangered Species Profiles.
The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the biological resources potentially
occurring within the project site. The CNDDB database was used, in conjunction with ArcGIS software, to
locate the nearest recorded occurrences of special-status species and determine the distance from the project
site.
Habitat Assessment/Field Investigation
Following the literature review, biologist Jacob H. Lloyd Davies inventoried and evaluated the condition
of the habitat within the project site on August 17, 2021. Plant communities and land cover types identified
on aerial photographs during the literature review were verified by walking meandering transects
throughout the project site. In addition, aerial photography was reviewed prior to the site investigation to
locate potential natural corridors and linkages that may support the movement of wildlife through the area.
These areas identified on aerial photography were then walked during the field investigation.
October 20, 2021 Page 3
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
All plant and wildlife species observed, as well as dominant plant species within each plant community,
were recorded. Plant species observed during the field investigation were identified by visual characteristics
and morphology in the field. Unusual and less familiar plant species were photographed during the field
investigation and identified in the laboratory using taxonomical guides. Wildlife detections were made
through observation of scat, trails, tracks, burrows, nests, and/or visual and aural observation. In addition,
site characteristics such as soil condition, topography, hydrology, anthropogenic disturbances, indicator
species, condition of on-site plant communities and land cover types, and presence of potential
jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were noted.
Soil Series Assessment
On-site and adjoining soils were researched prior to the field investigation using the USDA NRCS Soil
Survey for San Bernardino County, Southwestern Part. In addition, a review of the local geological
conditions and historical aerial photographs was conducted to assess the ecological changes that the project
site have undergone.
Plant Communities
Plant communities were mapped using 7.5-minute USGS topographic base maps and aerial photography.
The plant communities were classified in accordance with Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf and Evens (2009),
delineated on an aerial photograph, and then digitized into GIS Arcview. The Arcview application was used
to compute the area of each plant community and/or land cover type in acres.
Plants
Common plant species observed during the field investigation were identified by visual characteristics and
morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unusual and less familiar plants were
photographed in the field and identified in the office using taxonomic guides. Taxonomic nomenclature
used in this study follows the 2012 Jepson Manual (Hickman 2012). In this report, scientific names are
provided immediately following common names of plant species (first reference only).
Wildlife
Wildlife species detected during the field investigation by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other sign were
recorded during surveys in a field notebook. Field guides were used to assist with identification of wildlife
species during the survey included The Sibley Field Guide to the Birds of Western North America (Sibley
2003), A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003), and A Field Guide to Mammals
of North America (Reid 2006). Although common names of wildlife species are well standardized,
scientific names are provided immediately following common names in this report (first reference only).
Jurisdictional Drainages and Wetlands
Aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting a field investigation in order to locate and inspect
any potential natural drainage features, ponded areas, or water bodies that may fall under the jurisdiction
of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional
Board), or CDFW. In general, surface drainage features indicated as blue-line streams on USGS maps that
are observed or expected to exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and
October 20, 2021 Page 4
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
are also subject to state and federal regulatory jurisdiction. In addition, ELMT reviewed jurisdictional
waters information through examining historical aerial photographs to gain an understanding of the impact
of land-use on natural drainage patterns in the area. The USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Program “My Waters” data layers were also reviewed to
determine whether any hydrologic features and wetland areas have been documented on or within the
vicinity of the project site.
Existing Site Conditions
The project site occurs in an area that has undergone a conversion from natural habitats into agriculture and
residential land uses in the City of Fontana southeast of Interstate 15 and north of State Route 210. The site
is bordered to the north by Sierra Lakes Parkway with undeveloped, vacant land and residential
development to the north, to the west by Lytle Creek Road with residential development beyond; to the east
by Maloof Avenue with undeveloped, vacant land and residential development beyond; and to the south by
a San Bernardino County Flood Control channel with State Route 210 beyond.
Topography and Soils
The project site is relatively flat with no areas of significant topographic relief, and ranges in elevation from
1,487 to 1,513 feet above mean sea level. Generally, the project site slopes from northeast to southwest.
Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey2, the project site is underlain entirely by Tujunga gravelly
loamy sand (0 to 9 percent slopes). Refer to Exhibit 4, Soils in Attachment A. Soils on-site have been
mechanically disturbed and heavily compacted from historic land uses (i.e., grading and weed abatement
activities).
Vegetation
Due to historic and existing land uses, no native plant communities or natural communities of special
concern were observed on or adjacent to the project site. The project site consists of vacant, undeveloped
that has been subjected to a variety of anthropogenic disturbances including grading, routine weed
abatement activities, vehicular traffic, and on-site surrounding development. These disturbances have
eliminated and/or greatly disturbed the natural plant communities that historically occurred within the
immediate vicinity of the project site. Refer to Attachment C, Site Photographs, for representative site
photographs. No native plant communities will be impacted from implementation of the proposed project.
The site supports one (1) plant community: non-native grassland. In addition, two (2) land cover types are
present that would be classified as disturbed and developed. Refer to Exhibit 5, Vegetation in Attachment
A. The majority of the project site supports a non-native grassland plant community that is dominated by
non-native grass species such as bromes (Bromus sp.) and oats (Avena sp.) and it subjected to routine weed
abatement activities. Common species observed in the non-native grassland plant community include
Mediterranean mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), and puncturevine (Tribulus
terrestris).
2 A soil series is defined as a group of soils with similar profiles developed from similar parent materials under comparable climatic and vegetation conditions. These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics, which may promote favorable conditions for certain biological resources.
October 20, 2021 Page 5
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
The disturbed portions of the site occur along site boundaries and are vegetated with a limited variety of
weedy/early successional species. Common plant species observed in disturbed areas of the site include
non-native grasses, Mediterranean mustard, Russian thistle, puncture vine, horseweed (Erigeron sp.),
common sunflower (Helianthus annuus), western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), telegraph weed
(Heterotheca grandiflora), and Spanish lotus (Acmispon americanus).
Developed areas generally encompass all buildings/structures or any paved or otherwise impervious
surfaces. Developed portions of the site include a portion of the southeast corner within Maloof Avenue.
This area is unvegetated.
Wildlife
Plant communities provide foraging habitat, nesting/denning site, and shelter from adverse weather or
predation. This section provides a discussion of those wildlife species that were observed or are expected
to occur within the project site. The discussion is to be used a general reference and is limited by the season,
time of day, and weather conditions in which the field investigation was conducted. Wildlife detections
were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks, burrows, and direct observation. The project site provide limited
habitat for wildlife species except those adapted to a high degree of anthropogenic disturbances and
development.
Fish
No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would provide
suitable habitat for fish were observed on or within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no fish are
expected to occur and are presumed absent from the project site.
Amphibians
No amphibians or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., perennial creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) that would
provide suitable habitat for amphibian species were observed on or within the vicinity of the project site.
Therefore, no amphibians are expected to occur and are presumed absent from the project site.
Reptiles
The project site provides limited foraging and cover habitat for reptile species adapted to a high degree of
anthropogenic disturbance. The only reptile species observed during the field investigation was western
side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans). Common reptilian species adapted to a high degree of
anthropogenic disturbances that have the potential to occur on-site include Great Basin fence lizard
(Sceloporus occidentalis longipes) and alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata). Due to the high level of
anthropogenic disturbances on-site, and surrounding development, no special-status reptilian species are
expected to occur within project site.
Birds
The project site provides limited foraging and nesting habitat for bird species adapted to a high degree of
anthropogenic disturbance. Bird species detected during the field investigation included mourning rock
pigeon (Columba liva), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), and house finch (Haemorhous
October 20, 2021 Page 6
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
mexicanus).
Mammals
The project site provides limited foraging and cover habitat for mammalian species adapted to a high degree
of anthropogenic disturbance. The only mammalian species observed during the field investigation were
pocket gopher (Thomomys sp.) and kangaroo rat (Dipodomys sp.). Common mammalian species adapted to
a high degree of anthropogenic disturbance that could be expected to occur include coyote (Canis latrans),
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), and raccoon (Procyon lotor).
Nesting Birds
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which was
conducted at the end of the bird nesting season. Although subjected to routine disturbance, the ornamental
trees found on-site has the potential to provide suitable nesting habitat for year-round and seasonal avian
residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area that area adapted to urban
environments. Additionally, the open, disturbed habitat on-site also provides nesting opportunities for
ground-nesting species such as killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). No raptors are expected to nest on-site due
to lack of suitable nesting opportunities.
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and
Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds,
their nests or eggs). If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction
clearance survey for nesting birds should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation
removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.
Migratory Corridors and Linkages
Habitat linkages provide connections between larger habitat areas that are separated by development.
Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for animals to disperse or
migrate between areas. A corridor can be defined as a linear landscape feature of sufficient width to allow
animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed habitat fragments. Adequate cover is essential
for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement area. It is possible for a habitat corridor to be adequate for
one species yet still inadequate for others. Wildlife corridors are features that allow for the dispersal,
seasonal migration, breeding, and foraging of a variety of wildlife species. Additionally, open space can
provide a buffer against both anthropogenic disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources.
According to the San Bernardino County General Plan, the project site has not been identified as occurring
within a Wildlife Corridor or Linkage. As designated by the San Bernardino County General Plan Open
Space Element, major open space areas documented in the vicinity of the project site include the Lytle
Creek Wash, located approximately 3.2 miles to the northeast, which is separated from the project by
existing developments.
The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are isolated
from regional wildlife corridors and linkages. In addition, there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful
patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the site to a recognized wildlife
October 20, 2021 Page 7
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is not expected to impact wildlife
movement opportunities. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.
Jurisdictional Areas
There are three key agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in
California. The Corps Regulatory Branch regulates discharge of dredge or fill materials into “waters of the
United States” pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Section 10 of the Rivers and
Harbors Act. Of the State agencies, the CDFW regulates alterations to streambed and bank under Fish and
Wildlife Code Sections 1600 et seq., and the Regional Board regulates discharges into surface waters
pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
The project site does not support any discernible drainage courses, inundated areas, wetland features, or
hydric soils that would be considered jurisdictional by the Corps, Regional Board, or CDFW. uery of the
NWI database found on potential blueline streams, riverine, or other aquatic resources within or adjacent
to the project site. Therefore, project activities will not result in impacts to Corps, Regional Board, or
CDFW jurisdictional areas and regulatory approvals will not be required.
It should be noted that that a flood control channel is located along the southern boundary of the project
site. If any impacts occur to the flood control channel from implementation of the proposed project, further review will likely be needed to map the jurisdictional extent of the channel. Additionally, the Applicant will likely need to obtain the following regulatory approvals prior to impacts occurring within the identified jurisdictional areas, Corps CWA Section 404 Permit, Regional Board CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification, and/or CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA).
Special-Status Biological Resources
The CNDDB Rarefind 5 and the CNPS Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of
California were queried for reported locations of special-status plant and wildlife species as well as special-
status natural plant communities in the Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. The habitat assessment
evaluated the conditions of the habitat(s) within the boundaries of the project site to determine if the existing
plant communities, at the time of the survey, have the potential to provide suitable habitat(s) for special-
status plant and wildlife species. Only one quadrangle was searched since the project site is located near
the middle of the quadrangle and is surrounding be existing development.
The literature search identified twenty (20) special-status plant species, forty-two (42) special-status, and
three (3) special-status plant communities as having potential to occur within the Devore USGS 7.5-minute
quadrangle. Special-status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the
project site based on habitat requirements, availability and quality of suitable habitat, and known
distributions. Species determined to have the potential to occur within the general vicinity of the project
site is presented in Table D-1: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources, provided in
Attachment D.
Special-Status Plants
October 20, 2021 Page 8
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
According to the CNDDB and CNPS, twenty (20) special-status plant species have been recorded in the
Devore quadrangle (refer to Attachment D). No special-status plant species were observed on-site during
the field investigation. The project site consists developed land and undeveloped, vacant land that has been
subject to a variety of anthropogenic disturbances from on-site historic agricultural activities and residential
development, grading, and routine weed abatement activities, and is largely surrounded by existing
development. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that once occurred on-site
which has removed ability of the habitat on the project site to provide suitable habitat for special-status
plant species known to occur in the general vicinity. Based on habitat requirements for specific special-
status plant species and the availability and quality of habitats needed by each species, it was determined
that the project site do not provide suitable habitat for any of the special-status plant species known to occur
in the area and all are presumed to be absent. No focused surveys are recommended.
Special-Status Wildlife
According to the CNDDB, forty-two (42) special-status wildlife species have been reported in the Devore
quadrangle (refer to Attachment D). No special-status wildlife species were observed on-site during the
habitat assessment. The project site consists developed land and vacant, undeveloped land that has been
subject to a variety of anthropogenic disturbances from historic grading and stockpiling activities, on-site
and surrounding development, and routine weed abatement activities, and is largely surrounded by existing
development. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that once occurred on-site
which has greatly reduced potential foraging opportunities for wildlife species.
Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was
determined that the proposed project site has a high potential to provide suitable habitat for Cooper’s hawk
(Accipiter cooperii), California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia); and a low potential to support
burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and Costa’s hummingbird (Calypte costae). It was further determined
that the project site does not have the potential to support any of the other special-status wildlife species
known to occur in the area since the site has been heavily impacted by on-site disturbances and surrounding
development.
None of the aforementioned species are federally or state listed as endangered or threatened. In order to
ensure impacts to the aforementioned species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a
pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. With
implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the aforementioned
species will be less than significant and no mitigation will be required.
Based on regional significance, the potential occurrence of California gnatcatcher, burrowing owl, and San
Bernardino kangaroo rat within the project site are described in further detail below:
California Gnatcatcher
California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species with restricted habitat requirements, being an
obligate resident of sage scrub habitats that are dominated by California sagebrush. This species generally
occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet inland. According to J. Atwood
and J. Bolsinger (1992), 99% of all California gnatcatcher observations are in areas with elevations below
950 feet. There are reported occurrences of California gnatcatcher at 1,600 feet elevation (500 meters).
October 20, 2021 Page 9
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
California gnatcatcher ranges from Ventura County south to San Diego County and northern Baja
California and is less common in sage scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs. It prefers habitat with
more low-growing vegetation. California gnatcatchers breed between mid-February and the end of August,
with peak activity from mid-March to mid-May. Population estimates indicate that there are approximately
1,600 to 2,290 pairs of coastal California gnatcatcher remaining. Declines are attributed to loss of sage
scrub habitat due to development, as well as cowbird nest parasitism.
California gnatcatcher are ground and shrub-foraging insectivores. They feed on small insects and other
arthropods. A California gnatcatcher’s territory is highly variable in size and seems to be correlated with
distance from the coast, ranging from less than 1 ha to over 9 ha. In a 1998 study, biologist Patrick Mock
concluded that California gnatcatcher in the inland region require a larger territory than those on the coast
in order to meet the nutritional requirements needed for survival and breeding.
The Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs)3 essential to support the biological needs of foraging,
reproducing, rearing of young, intra-specific communication, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering for
California gnatcatcher that were surveyed for include:
1. Dynamic and Successional sage scrub Habitats and Associated Vegetation (Diegan Coastal Sage
Scrub, Coastal Sage-Chaparral Scrub, etc.) that provide space for individual and population growth,
normal behavior, breeding, reproduction, nesting, dispersal and foraging; and
2. Non-sage scrub habitats such as chaparral, grassland, and riparian areas, in proximity to sage scrub
habitats have the potential to provide linkages to help with dispersal, foraging and nesting.
The project site ranges in elevation from 1,487 to 1,513 feet above mean sea level, which coincides with
the maximal known elevational range of California gnatcatcher. The preferred habitat for California
gnatcatcher is coastal sage scrub dominated by California sage brush. The project site does not support
coastal sage scrub habitat, nor does it support any vegetation alliances capable of providing suitable habitat
for California gnatcatcher. In addition, the site is isolated from California gnatcatcher occupied coastal sage
scrub habitats and linkage areas in the region by surrounding development. Given the highly degraded
condition of the site, plus the lack of any observation of California gnatcatcher in north Fontana and
isolation of the site due to the recent development of surrounding properties, it is highly unlikely that the
site supports this species. The site is presumed to be unoccupied and focused surveys are not recommended.
Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl is currently listed as a California Species of Special Concern. It is a grassland specialist
distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare
ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and
semi-arid environments with well-drained, level to gently-sloping areas characterized by sparse vegetation
and bare ground (Haug and Didiuk 1993; Dechant et al. 1999). Burrowing owls are dependent upon the
presence of burrowing mammals (such as ground squirrels) whose burrows are used for roosting and nesting 3 Specific elements of physical and biological features that provide for a species’ life-history process and are essential to the conservation of the species.
October 20, 2021 Page 10
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
(Haug and Didiuk 1993). The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that
limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have
been found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes, and
dry culverts. Burrowing mammals may burrow beneath rocks and debris or large, heavy objects such as
abandoned cars, concrete blocks, or concrete pads. They also require open vegetation allowing line-of-sight
observation of the surrounding habitat to forage as well as watch for predators.
No burrowing owls or recent sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or white wash) was observed during the
field investigation. The project site is unvegetated and/or vegetated with a variety of low-growing plant
species that allow for line-of-sight observation favored by burrowing owls and does not support any suitable
burrows (>4 inches in diameter) capable of providing roosting and nesting opportunities. In addition, the
site is surrounded by buildings, trees, and utility poles which decrease the likelihood that burrowing owls
would occur on the project site as these features provide perching opportunities for larger raptor species
(i.e., red-tailed hawk [Buteo jamaicensis]) that prey on burrowing owls. Further, the project site is entirely
surrounded by existing development and is thoroughly isolated from nearby suitable habitats.
Based on the results of the field investigation, it was determined that the project site has a low potential to
provide suitable habitat for burrowing owls and focused surveys are not recommended.
San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat
The San Bernardino kangaroo rat, federally listed as endangered, is one of several kangaroo rat species in
its range. The Dulzura (Dipodomys simulans), the Pacific kangaroo rat (Dipodomys agilis) and the Stephens
kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi) occur in areas occupied by the San Bernardino kangaroo rat, but these
other species have a wider habitat range. San Bernardino kangaroo rat historically ranged from the San
Bernardino Valley in San Bernardino County to southwest Perris, Bautista Canyon, and Murrieta Hot
Springs in Riverside County, with at least 25 separate localities identified. Currently, populations of the
San Bernardino kangaroo rat are limited to seven widely separated locations in San Bernardino and
Riverside Counties, four of which (City Creek, Etiwanda, Reche Canyon, and South Bloomington) support
only small, remnant populations. The Santa Ana River, Lytle and Cajon washes, and the San Jacinto River
support the largest extant concentrations of San Bernardino kangaroo rat and the largest areas of habitat for
this species (approximately 3,200 acres total). The total area of occupied habitat occurs across a mosaic of
approximately 13,697 acres of potential habitat; however, all but the 3,215 occupied areas are currently
more mature than the open, early successional habitat types preferred by the San Bernardino kangaroo rat
(USFWS 2009).
San Bernardino kangaroo rat is found primarily on sandy and loamy sand substrates, where they can readily
excavate simple, shallow burrows. This is typically associated with Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub
(RAFSS) habitat, a relatively uncommon desert-influenced plant community in southern California that
develops on alluvial fans and floodplains subjected to scouring and deposition (USFWS 2009). Adjacent
upland habitat provide refuge for San Bernardino kangaroo rat during flood events. Animals occupying this
refugia habitat are able to repopulate core habitat areas within the floodplain following major flood events.
Most of the drainages have been historically altered as a result of flood control efforts and the resulting
increased use of river resources, including mining, off-road vehicle use, and road and housing development.
This increased use of river resources has resulted in a reduction in both the amount and quality of habitat
October 20, 2021 Page 11
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
available for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. The past habitat losses and potential future losses prompted
the emergency listing of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat as an endangered species (USFWS, 1998a).
The project site has not supported a natural plant community since at least 1994, and the existing plant
community and land cover types do not exhibit the species diversity or distribution of RAFFS habitat. In
addition, the project site and surrounding area are no longer exposed to fluvial processes needed to maintain
the intermediate RAFSS habitat that would be required for long-term San Bernardino kangaroo rat
conservation since the site has been isolated from the influences of nearby waterways and alluvial fans
extending out of the San Gabriel Mountains since the mid-1980s to early-2000s. Due to the history of
regular disruption and manipulation of the native soils, the loss of fluvial scouring due to flood control
activities, and isolation from known occupied habitat, it was determined that the project site does not
provide suitable habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat. No further studies are recommended.
Special-Status Plant Communities
According to the CNDDB, three (3) special-status plant communities have been reported in the Devore
USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle: Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, southern riparian forest, and Southern
Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland. Based on the results of the field investigation, no special-status plant
communities were observed onsite. Therefore, no special-status plant communities will be impacted by
project implementation.
Critical Habitat
Under the federal Endangered Species Act, “Critical Habitat” is designated at the time of listing of a species
or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the geographical range of a
species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological features that are essential to the survival
and eventual recovery of that species. Maintenance of these physical and biological features requires special
management considerations or protection, regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or
not. All federal agencies are required to consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which may affect a federally listed species or its
designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the consultation is to ensure that projects will not jeopardize
the continued existence of the listed species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat.
The designation of Critical Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing
is on federal lands, uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the
Federal Highways Administration or a CWA Permit from the Corps). If a there is a federal nexus, then the
federal agency that is responsible for providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS.
The project site is not located within federally designated Critical Habitat. The nearest Critical Habitat
designation is located approximately 0.25 miles north of the site for San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Exhibit
6, Critical Habitat). Therefore, no impacts to federally designated Critical Habitat will occur from
implementation of the proposed project.
North Fontana Conservation Program
The North Fontana Conservation Program (previously referred to as the North Fontana Interim Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan) was prepared to address lands in north Fontana and the listed and
October 20, 2021 Page 12
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
special-status species that have the potential to occur on these lands. To adequately mitigate for the loss of
sensitive habitats, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a tiered development
mitigation fee was created for new development in north Fontana. The mitigation fee is based on the quality
of the habitat on the development site and a site’s potential to support SBKR, coastal California gnatcatcher,
or other special-status species occurring in the vicinity. The mitigation fee is charged for each acre of land
proposed for development based on the habitat quality rating.
The North Fontana Conservation Program mitigation fee areas (habitat quality ratings) were overlain over
the project site boundaries in ArcGIS in order to calculate the acreage of impacts to the various habitat
qualities occurring on the project site. From this, the mitigation fee for the proposed projects were
calculated.
The project site is not located within the North Fontana Conservation Program boundaries. Therefore, the
project implementation is not subject to the mitigation fee.
Conclusion
Based literature review and field survey, and existing site conditions discussed in this report,
implementation of the project will have no significant impacts on federally or State listed species known to
occur in the general vicinity of the project site. Additionally, the project will have no effect on designated
Critical Habitat, since there is no federal nexus, or regional wildlife corridors/linkage because none exists
within the area. No jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were observed on the project site during
the field investigation. No further surveys are recommended. With completion of the recommendations
provided below, no impacts to year-round, seasonal, or special-status avian residents or special-status
species will occur from implementation of the proposed project.
Recommendations
Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Fish and Game Code
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish and
Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds,
their nests or eggs). In order to protect migratory bird species, a nesting bird clearance survey should be
conducted prior to any ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities that may disrupt the birds during
the nesting season.
If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting
birds should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing
activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction. The biologist conducting the
clearance survey should document a negative survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to
active avian nests will occur. If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction clearance
survey, construction activities should stay outside of a no-disturbance buffer. The size of the no-disturbance
buffer will be determined by the wildlife biologist and will depend on the level of noise and/or surrounding
anthropogenic disturbances, line of sight between the nest and the construction activity, type and duration
of construction activity, ambient noise, species habituation, and topographical barriers. These factors will
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis when developing buffer distances. Limits of construction to avoid an
October 20, 2021 Page 13
Lennar’s Sobrato Project Habitat Assessment
active nest will be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers; and
construction personnel will be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. A biological monitor should be
present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting
behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Once the young have fledged and left the
nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, construction activities within the
buffer area can occur.
As part of the nesting bird clearance, it is recommended that a burrowing owl pre-construction clearance
survey be conducted prior to any ground disturbance or vegetation removal activities to ensure that
burrowing owls remain absent from the project site.
Please do not hesitate to contact Tom McGill at (951) 285-6014 or tmcgill@elmtconsulting.com or Travis
McGill at (909) 816-1646 or travismcgill@elmtconsulting.com should you have any questions regarding
this proposal.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. McGill, Ph.D. Travis J. McGill
Managing Director Director
Attachments:
A. Project Exhibits
B. Project Site Plans
C. Ste Photographs
D. Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources
E. Regulations
APPENDIX D2
CULTURAL AND BIOLOGICAL DUE DILIGENCE LETTER
May 27, 2021
Randall Schroeder
Lennar Homes of CA, Inc.
Inland Empire Division
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 302
Corona, California 92879
Subject: Results of a Cultural and Biological Resources Due Diligence Study for the Sobrato
Project, APNs 1108-052-01 through -17, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California
Dear Mr. Schroeder:
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. (BFSA) conducted a due diligence cultural and
biological resources review of the proposed Sobrato Project which includes Assessor’s Parcel
Numbers (APNs) 1108-052-01 through -17. This project consists of a proposed residential
subdivision of 12.5 acres and associated off-site improvements. The subject property is located
southwest of the intersection of Lytle Creek Road and Sierra Lakes Parkway, within the city of
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California and can be found within Section 25, Township 1
North, Ranch 6 West as shown on the United States Geological Survey Devore, California 7.5-
minute topographic quadrangle map. This due diligence study focused upon the potential of the
property to contain significant archaeological, historical, paleontological, and/or biological
resources that could represent a constraint to its development. The scope of work for this
assessment included:
1) A review of previous cultural resources studies for the project;
2) A review of existing records regarding recorded archaeological sites and fossil
localities within and adjacent to the property;
3) A Sacred Lands File (SLF) review conducted by the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC);
4) An intuitive survey of the property to search for any significant cultural resources;
5) A paleontological records review and assessment of the potential for fossils within and
adjacent to the property;
6) A biological assessment for this project; and
7) Preparation of this letter report to summarize the results of the study and present an
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 2
opinion regarding the potential constraints associated with cultural and biological
resources during the development of the project.
Cultural Resources
The assessment of the potential constraints associated with archaeological or
paleontological resources within the Sobrato Project are presented in four categories: research of
existing records, assessment of property conditions, review of current conditions, and
recommendations. Fortunately for this study, a sufficient quantity of data is available to permit a
strong assessment of the property’s potential to contain significant archaeological or
paleontological resources.
Review of Available Archaeological Records Data
BFSA requested an archaeological records search from the South Central Coastal
Information Center (SCCIC) at the California State University at Fullerton. However, due to the
limitations imposed by the evolving circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic, records
search access has become limited, and as of the date of this report, the records search has not yet
been completed by the SCCIC. However, given the high frequency of development in the area, it
is likely that much of the area surrounding the project has been studied.
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search
BFSA requested a SLF search to be conducted by the NAHC for the project to determine
if any recorded Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance
are present within or near the project. However, as of the date of this study, no response has been
received.
Results of the Archaeological Field Survey
On May 21, 2021, BFSA archaeologist Bud Hoff conducted an intuitive survey to
determine if any locations of historic or prehistoric resources or potential use areas were present.
The parcel can be characterized as flat terrain that is covered in recently cut weeds and grasses.
Ground surface visibility was moderate due to the coverage of the weeds and grasses. Historic
aerial photographs indicate that the property remained vacant through 1938. Between 1938 and
1959 the parcel was sub-divided and three single family residences were constructed. Also, by
1959, portions of three additional single-family properties were present along the south border of
the property. Another single-family residence was constructed in the project area by 1966.
Between 1980 and 1994, one of the residences was removed from the parcel, and by 2005, the
project area was vacant. The survey conducted by BFSA did not reveal the presence of any
archaeological sites, artifacts, or other potential cultural resources.
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 3
Results of the Paleontological Assessment
The Sobrato Project is underlain by late Quaternary (Holocene) young alluvial fan deposits
consisting of unconsolidated to moderately consolidated, coarse-grained sand to bouldery alluvial-
fan deposits having slightly to moderately dissected surfaces. Alluvial fan deposits typically have
high coarse-to-fine clast ratios. Younger surficial units have upper surfaces that are capped by
slight to moderately developed pedogenic-soil profiles (Morton and Matti 2001).
Young alluvial fan deposits typically do not contain significant vertebrate fossils, at least
in the uppermost layers, but they may contain pockets of finer-grained sediments, particularly at
depth, that may contain significant vertebrate fossil remains. The fossilized remains that might be
expected would be the bones of late Pleistocene-age mammals such as horses, camels, or
mammoths, or small vertebrates such as reptiles and rodents.
While shallow excavations in the young alluvial fan deposits are unlikely to encounter
significant vertebrate fossils, deeper excavations within the project area that extend down into
older, finer-grained Quaternary deposits may encounter significant remains of fossil vertebrates.
Therefore, any substantial excavations in the proposed project area should be monitored to recover
any fossil remains. A mitigation monitoring and reporting plan (MMRP) is warranted to reduce
impacts to potential paleontological resources to a level below significant.
Biological Resources
Review of Available Biological Resources Records Data
Existing biological resource conditions within and adjacent to the Sobrato Project were
initially investigated through review of pertinent scientific literature. Federal register listings,
protocols, and species data provided by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
were reviewed in conjunction with federally listed species potentially occurring in the area of the
subject property. The California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), a California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Natural Heritage Division species account database, was also
reviewed for all pertinent information regarding the locations of known occurrences of sensitive
species in the vicinity of the property (CDFW 2021a). In addition, numerous regional floral and
faunal field guides were utilized in the identification of species and suitable habitats. Combined,
the sources reviewed provided an excellent baseline from which to assess the biological resources
potentially occurring in the area. Other sources of information included the review of unpublished
biological resource letter reports, jurisdictional delineations, permit applications, and assessments.
Other CDFW reports and publications consulted include the following:
• Special Animals (CDFW 2021b)
• State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFW
2021c)
• Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Plants of California (CDFW 2021d)
• Special Vascular Plants and Bryophytes List (CDFW 2021e)
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 4
A reconnaissance survey of the project was conducted by Ruben Ramirez, from Cadre
Environmental, on May 18, 2021 (USFWS Permit 780566-14, CDFW Permit 02243) in order to
characterize and identify potential wildlife habitats, and to establish the accuracy of the data
identified in the literature search and previous surveys. Geologic and soil maps were examined to
identify local soil types that may support sensitive taxa. Aerial photographs, topographic maps,
and vegetation and rare plant maps prepared by previous studies in the region were used to
determine community types and other physical features that may support sensitive plants, wildlife,
uncommon taxa, or rare communities that occur within the project.
Based upon the initial review of the USFWS and CNDDB databases, habitat assessments
were conducted for the following species:
• Sensitive plants
• Delhi sand flower-loving fly – Federally Endangered
• Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) – California State Species of Special Concern
• San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) – Federally Endangered /
California State Species of Special Concern
• Protected (“Heritage”) trees (as defined in City of Fontana Municipal Code Ordinance
No. 1126 § 1, 8-16-94)
Results of the Field Survey
The project is bordered by high-density and rural existing residential development, high
traffic roads, and the County of San Bernardino County Flood Control channel/State Route 210 to
the south. Based upon a review of historic aerial photographs, the project parcel has been mowed
annually.
Habitat on the project is characterized primarily as non-native grassland/ruderal vegetation
and is dominated by wild oat (Avena fatua), ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus), puncture vine
(Tribulus terrestris), cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), red-
stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), tumbling pigweed (Amaranthus albus), black mustard
(Brassica nigra), Russian thistle (Kali tragus), horseweed (Conyza canadensis), and common
fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii).
The entire project is characterized as having Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent
slopes (TvC) (U.S. Department of Agriculture 2021).
Results of the Biological Assessment
The Sobrato Project is not located within or adjacent to the North Fontana Conservation
Program area (Michael Baker International 2016). Therefore, implementation of the project would
not result in a conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, no impacts
would occur, and no mitigation is required.
1. Sensitive Habitats: No sensitive or undisturbed habitats were documented within or
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 5
adjacent to the project. No proposed actions are needed.
2. Sensitive Plants: No suitable habitat for sensitive floral species, including those listed
as federal or state threatened/endangered, was documented within or adjacent to the
project. No proposed actions are needed.
3. Sensitive Wildlife: No suitable habitat for wildlife species listed as federal or state
threatened/endangered was documented within or adjacent to the project.
The project is located within the County of San Bernardino Biotic Resources Overlay
Map (2012) for the burrowing owl and suitable foraging habitat was documented on
site. No potential burrows or characteristic sign including white-wash, feathers, tracks,
or pellets was detected onsite.
Proposed actions include:
a. Prior to initial grading or clearing of areas of suitable habitat (e.g., a vacant site
with a landscape of grassland or low-growing, arid scrub vegetation or
agricultural use or vegetation), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-
construction survey, in accordance with the 2012 California Department of Fish
and Game (now CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, to
determine the presence or absence of burrowing owls within the proposed area
of impact. Specifically, two pre-construction clearance surveys should be
conducted 14 to 30 days and 24 hours, respectively, prior to any vegetation
removal or ground disturbing activities. Documentation of findings shall be
submitted to the City of Fontana for review and approval. If no burrowing owls
or occupied burrows are detected, construction may begin. If an occupied
burrow is found within the development footprint during pre-construction
clearance surveys, a burrowing owl exclusion and mitigation plan would need
to be prepared and submitted to the CDFW for approval prior to initiating
project activities.
4. USFWS Critical Habitat: The project is not located within or adjacent to a designated
plant or wildlife critical habitat boundary. No proposed actions are needed.
5. California Department of Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513:
The non-native grassland/ruderal habitat documented within the Project Site represents
potentially nesting habitat for ground nesting birds protected by California Department
of Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513. The loss of an active nest
would be considered a potentially significant impact. Standard required compliance
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 6
with the CDFW Codes will ensure potential impacts to nesting birds are reduced to a
level below significant.
Proposed actions include:
a. To avoid impacts to nesting birds and to comply with the California Department
of Fish and Game Code Codes 3503 & 3513 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act,
clearing should occur between non-nesting (or non-breeding) season for birds
(generally, September 1 to January 31). If this avoidance schedule is not
feasible, the alternative is to carry out such activities under the supervision of a
qualified biologist. This shall entail the following:
1. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nesting bird
survey no more than 14 days prior to initiating ground disturbance
activities. The survey will consist of full coverage of the proposed
disturbance limits and up to a 500-foot buffer area, determined by the
biologist and taking into account the species nesting in the area and the
habitat present.
If no active nests are found, no additional measures are required.
2. If “occupied” nests are found, their locations shall be mapped, species
documented, and, to the degree feasible, the status of the nest (e.g.,
incubation of eggs, feeding of young, near fledging) recorded. The
biologist shall establish a no-disturbance buffer around each active nest.
The buffer area will be determined by the biologist based on the species
present, surrounding habitat, and type of construction activities
proposed in the area. No construction or ground disturbance activities
shall be conducted within the buffer until the biologist has determined
the nest is no longer active and has informed the construction supervisor
that activities may resume.
6. Jurisdictional Wetland & Regulated Resources: No wetlands or jurisdictional
resources regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, CDFW, or Regional
Water Quality Control Board were documented within or immediately adjacent to the
project. No proposed actions are needed.
Conclusion
The review of current property conditions and historic aerial imagery has provided
sufficient information to form an opinion regarding the cultural and paleontological constraints, as
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 7
well as the likely biological and regulatory constraints to the development of the property. The
following points are salient to the evaluation of potential constraints:
• Historic aerial photographs indicated that the project area was developed as early as
1959 and the parcel was completely disturbed by 2005.
• The archaeological survey of the property did not identify any historic or prehistoric
sites, features, or artifacts.
• The paleontological assessment indicates that the property is unlikely to contain fossils
at shallow depths, although the potential increases with depth of soil.
• Specific biological constraints and recommendations include conducting
preconstruction burrowing owl and nesting bird surveys.
Because the archaeological records search results have not yet been received from the
SCCIC, it is unclear if previously recorded cultural resources are present in the project area that
were not identified by BFSA during the recent survey. It is possible, given the moderate ground
surface visibility of the parcel, that unidentified cultural resources are present within the project.
Native American issues are anticipated to be relatively minor for this project, given the likely
absence of any archaeological sites on the parcel. Local tribes will likely request Native American
monitoring to protect any sensitive tribal resources that may be present. This situation is very
common in this area, and the only constraint to the development of the property associated with
Native American tribes would be the cost of Native American monitoring during grading.
A MMRP that addresses both archaeological and paleontological resources will likely be
required during all grading activities by the City of Fontana. Generally, this requires the presence
of a full-time archaeological and/or paleontological monitor during all grading activities. If
cultural or paleontological resources are identified during grading, work would stop in the vicinity
of the find until the material can be assessed and recorded by the archaeologist or paleontologist.
If the find is prehistoric in nature, a Native American representative would also be called to assess
the find. It is also possible that the City of Fontana will require the presence of a Native American
monitor(s) during all grading activities. Following the completion of grading, a reporting program
would be completed to address the presence or absence of cultural materials within the Sobrato
Project. The requirement for a mitigation monitoring program by the City as part of a grading
permit is not considered a significant constraint to development plans. Costs associated with
mitigation monitoring are anticipated to be typical for such projects.
Biological constraints could be a minor financial consideration but also do not appear to
be a major constraint to development. The project requires standard preconstruction surveys for
burrowing owls and nesting birds. Furthermore, no critical habitat or sensitive plant or wildlife
species were identified within the project.
It would appear that the only constraint to development is associated with the costs for the
biological preconstruction surveys, cultural resources monitoring, and Native American tribal
monitoring. In the unlikely event that burrowing owls are identified on the property prior to
Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. — Page 8
grading, additional costs could be added to the project to protect or relocate the owls.
If you have any questions or wish further information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Brian F. Smith
BFS:jc