Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPAC_2003_11_1011111111 lill 11111111111111111111111111 lill 11 *NEW FILE* ic Qa�WP CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH u i GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE C'44/poFINP AGENDA November 10, 2003 7:00-9:00 p.m. Police Department Auditorium 870 Santa Barbara Drive 7:00 I. Call to Order 7:05 II. Approval of Minutes October 13, 2003 7:15 III. Hoag Hospital Presentation 8:15 IV. Biological Resources Addendum 8:50 V. Discussion of Future Agenda Items 8:55 VI. Public Comments DRAFT u CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of the General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting held on Monday, October 13, 2003, at the Police Department Auditorium. Members Present: Roger Alford Tom Hyans Larry Root Patrick Bartolic Mike Ishikawa John Saunders Phillip Bettencourt Mike Johnson James Schmiesing Carol Boice Bill Kelly Ed Siebel John Corrough Donald Krotee Jackie Sukiasian Grace Dove Phillip Lugar Jan Vandersloot Florence Felton Marie Marston Tom Webber Nancy Gardner Catherine O'Hara Ron Yeo Louise Greeley Carl Ossipoff Bob Hendrickson Charles Remley Members Absent: Karlene Bradley Ernest Hatchell Peter Oeth Gus Chabre Kim Jansma Laura Dietz Lucille Kuehn Staff Present: Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager Tamara Campbell, Senior Planner Woodie Tescher, EIP Consultant Debbie Lektorich, Executive Assistant Members of the Public Present: Everette Phillips Marice White I. Call to Order Nancy Gardner called the meeting to order. Ms. Gardner reminded everyone to park across the street for the meetings to allow room for the public to visit the Police Station. • II. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the September 8, 2003 meeting were approved as submitted. III. Presentation on Development Review Process for Bolsa Chica Sharon Wood introduced Huntington Beach Planning Director, Howard Zelefsky. Mr. Zelefsky shared experiences Huntington Beach has had over the years with the Bolsa Chica property. It is hoped that the information provided would assist Newport Beach when it is time to determine what will happen with Banning Ranch. During and after the presentation the following questions were raised. Ron Yeo asked about the City's relationship with the County Supervisors over this project. Mr. Zelefsky said both Supervisors were generally supportive of the plans over the years. John Saunders asked to compare the timeline between the Bolsa Chica project, which has gone on for so many years, and the Hyatt Hotel project, which was completed fairly quickly. Mr. Zelefsky pointed out the hotel project did take a long time, however the difference was that Huntington Beach had a certified LCP in place which called for a hotel on the property; this meant that the Coastal Commission had no say over the project. On the other hand, the Bolsa Chica property is uncertified so the Coastal • Commission has control. Bill Kelly asked if there was some way to take the County out of the process. Mr. Zelefsky said they had been in negotiations over the years with the owners regarding annexation into the City, however the owners did not want to become part of Huntington Beach. He also pointed out that Orange County is one of a few counties that does planning for "county islands". Nancy Gardner thought that because Banning Ranch is in our "sphere of influence" the City of Newport Beach would be doing the planning. Sharon Wood pointed out that because it is in our "planning area" our General Plan is supposed to include the property, however until the area is annexed the City does not have land use authority for permits or zoning. Mr. Kelly asked if we knew how the property owners felt about annexation. Phil Bettencourt thought it was fair to say that if the owners looked at the experiences with Huntington Beach, they would probably want to stay as far away as possible. Ms. Wood added that when the owners were working with Taylor Woodrow on a development, they did not want the City taking the lead on the review process; they preferred working with the County. Mr. Zelefsky pointed out it is generally easier to go though the County. Mr. Bettencourt added the general notion is that the County is better equipped to deal with the regional consequences of major planned community than the cities. Ms. Wood added that developers also prefer the County because they only have to convince one supervisor vs. a majority of city council. Jan Vandersloot felt that the developer made a mistake when they went against an • agreement they had with Huntington Beach and went to the County instead. He felt that if this action had not been taken, there may have been a completed project by 2 now. Mr. Zelefsky agreed and stated that Bolsa Chica is a case study on the wrong way • to proceed with a development plan. In 1992, the Council was willing to approve up to 1,500 units and now the project is down to 378 units. John Corrough asked about a plan to purchase the property and keep it open space. Mr. Zelefsky said the State bought approximately 900 acres and Prop. 50 money was supposed to buy the rest, however it hasn't been done yet. Ms. Gardner asked if there had been a consensus from the public about what should happen with Bolsa Chica. Mr. Zelefsky said no, there were always differing opinions regarding this property. Ms. Wood asked if there had been any discussion within the community regarding a bond issue for the public to acquire the property for open space. Mr. Zelefsky didn't think that a bond issue would be supported in Huntington Beach. Mr. Bettencourt asked both Ms. Wood and Mr. Zelefsky their opinion on how much time should be spent on local consensus building when the Coastal Commission staff has the power to change/stop the project. Mr. Zelefsky recommended working with both local and coastal staff at the same time, working with just one group won't do it. Ms. Wood agreed. • Charles Remley asked about the timeline for Banning Ranch and asked if nothing was going to be done in the next 25 years, why should we worry about it. Ms. Wood answered by stating the area is in our sphere of influence/planning area and the City should have some idea of what we would like to see there. The owner(s) may someday come in and ask for a General Plan amendment, or the Coastal Commission may have another idea, however it is still important that the community have a say in what happens there. Ms. Gardner added that things are happening with that property, the owners have talked to developers and there is a Sierra Club Task Force trying to get funding to buy the property for open space. Mr. Zelefsky agreed that it is very important for the community to be involved and have a say as to what happens with property within your City. Don Krotee asked Woodie Tescher to step back and give the group a plethora of options that could happen at Banning Ranch. Mr. Tescher advised that part of the work program will include looking at options for Banning Ranch and other sites to let the group assess consequences for each option before making any decisions. Mr. Vandersloot asked Mr. Zelefsky his opinion about leaving Banning Ranch as a "white hole" because we don't have a certified LCP. Mr. Zelefsky explained that "white hole" means there is no zoning assigned to the property; this has caused some litigation in Huntington Beach because property owners can't get an answer about what can be put on their property which is very frustrating for them. He didn't see any benefit for • "white holing" the property. Mr. Vandersloot said that the City is recommending "deferred certification" for Banning Ranch. Ms. Wood explained that Mr. Vandersloot is 3 talking about two different issues. The LCP schedule is ahead of the General Plan • because of State legislation and Coastal staff in their comments on the draft LCP Land Use Plan recommended that we "white hole" Banning Ranch because there is not time for the extensive study that should be done before a determination is made; we can address the area in the General Plan and go back to amend the LCP. Mr. Vandersloot asked if we would be stuck with some previous entitlement designation for the area. Ms. Wood responded by stating we are not stuck, however a large part of the property is within County jurisdiction and our rules don't apply. She added that when Taylor Woodrow was working with the owners, even though the County was the lead in the review process, they were always willing to meet and share information with the City. Catherine O'Hara suggested coming up with "performance standards" for the area and then see what projects fit those standards. Mr. Kelly asked if there was a way to work with the owners instead of developers on what we would like to see on the property. Ms. Wood indicated that the property owner has shown a willingness to work with the City. IV. Discussion of Future Agenda Items Mr. Tescher indicated that his firm has done some additional work on the Biological Report based on this committee's comments and it will be brought back to GPAC on November loth. Also, the traffic analysis has been refined to include specific evaluation • of summertime conditions and will be on future agenda. Ms. Wood indicated that representatives from Hoag Hospital have also been invited to give a presentation on their master plan. n Li Mr. Yeo asked if comments should be made on the Harbor Commission's letter that was included in the agenda packet. Ms. Wood indicated that it would be more appropriate at a future meeting when we start discussing alternatives. Louise Greeley asked that some information be provided regarding variances and modifications and tightening up the codes. Ms. Wood indicated that this issue is being heard by the Planning Commission and then will proceed to City Council; it is not an issue for this Committee. V. Public Comments Ms. Wood announced that Woodie Tescher had been recognized at the State American Planning Association annual conference where he was awarded the Planner's Emeritus Network Award from the California Planning Foundation. 2 n u CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting Schedule Revised 11/4/03 Police Department — Auditorium 870 Santa Barbara Drive 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. Monday, November 10ta November 24th **CANCELLED** • Monday, December 8th Monday, January 12th Monday, January 26tn Monday, February 9t" Monday, February 23rd Monday, March 8t" Monday, March 22°d Monday, April 12tn Monday, April 26tn City of Newport Beach Planning Department • 1VMemormdum To: GPAC From: Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager Date: November 5, 2003 Re: Addendum to General Plan and LCP Biological Reports As part of the LCP certification process and the General Plan Update effort, biological studies were prepared by the Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management. These studies were presented to GPAC in July 2003 and a significant number of comments were received. Since then, staff has worked with our General Plan Update Consultants, EIP Associates, to further refine and update those studies. An addendum to both reports has been prepared, providing additional information for areas likely to be of particular concern during the General Plan Update process. • The primary change made to the previous biological reports dealt with the replacement of the term "Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area" with the term "Environmental Study Area." Several GPAC members and Coastal Commission staff members commented that describing areas as ESHAs should be given careful consideration given the limitations on development within such areas. The Coastal Act requires protection of ESHAs from any significant disruption of habitat value and limits uses to only those that are dependent on those resources. When the City of Newport Beach originally drafted the first Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan in the 1980's, the term "environmentally sensitive habitat area" was used to identify all riparian areas, wetlands, intertidal areas, and other habitats that are considered to be environmentally sensitive. The term had been subsequently carried over into the LCP/General Plan Update studies. In'summary, EIP was contracted to supplement the findings presented in the previously presented studies. Information provided in the addendum includes descriptions of nine potential ESAs that may warrant additional detailed investigation to determine if parts or all of them qualify as ESHAs. In addition, refinements to maps based on the data provided in the n November 5, 2003 • addendum will assist the City, GPAC, potential developers and elected officials in the decision -making process surrounding development proposed in or near these areas. Due to duplicating costs, reproduction of the maps was not economically viable for all GPAC members, however, all maps are available for viewing on the City's General Plan Update web page. Please go to www.city.newport- beach.ca.us, click on "City Web Sites," "General Plan Update," "Reports." Copies of the maps may also be reviewed at the Planning Department. • Biological Resources Addendum City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Plan and General Plan Prepared for: u City of Newport Beach Prepared by: EIP Associates November 5, 2003 F 1 n u TABLE OF CONTENTS LJ • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • Section Page 1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................1-1 2. METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................2-1 3. BIOLOGICAL HABITATS...................................................................................3-1 4. LITERATURE CITED.........................................................................................4-1 APPENDIX A. Figures DIWINDOWWemporary Inlemet FileskOLK0056\toe eoc October 17 2003 1. INTRODUCTION • • SECTION 1.0 — INTRODUCTION In August of 2003, EIP conducted reconnaissance -level biological surveys to supplement and refine information presented in the City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan — Biological Appendix (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, December 2002) and the City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan — Newport Beach Biological Resources (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, January 2003). A detailed mapping and characterization of seven "Environmental Study Areas" (ESAs) — Banning Ranch, Buck Gully, Coastal Foredunes, MacArthur -San Miguel, Morning Canyon, Semeniuk Slough, and Spyglass Hill — was performed to provide further detail on the habitat composition and quality of each ESA, including the presence of potential waters/wetlands of the U.S., and the habitat's potential to support special -status species. From these data, a ranking system was developed, based on inherent habitat value, to evaluate the sensitivity of the ESAs to future development and guide the City with respect to biological resource permitting and ultimate development of the site(s). 1.1 PURPOSE OF STUDY EIP Associates was contracted by the City of Newport Beach to supplement the findings presented in the City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan — Biological Appendix (Chambers Group and • Coastal Resources Management, December 2002) and the City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan — Newport Beach Biological Resources (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, January 2003). A Local Coastal Plan (LCP) is required under provisions of the California Coastal Act and is a basic planning tool used by local governments to guide development in the coastal zone, in partnership with the Coastal Commission. The Biological Appendix prepared for the City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan in December 2002 included the delineation of 19 Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), which are defined by the California Coastal Act as areas in which "plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or are especially valuable because of their special role in an ecosystem that could easily be disturbed or degraded by human activities or development." The City of Newport Beach determined that the data used to delineate four of the ESHAs (Semeniuk Slough, Buck Gully, Morning Canyon, and Banning Ranch) was not detailed enough for the area to warrant designation as an ESHA. This document aims to provide the detail necessary to allow the Coastal Commission the ability to determine what areas, if any, within these four ESAs may be designated as ESHAs. An additional Non- ESHA Sensitive Habitat (p. 4-58 in City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan) — the Coastal Foredunes — was also re-evaluated for the same purpose. This refinement of the habitat mapping of these areas will facilitate the decision -making process associated with any proposed development in • these areas. CAWINDOWSWornpoary lnlemet ReMOLKBBSMSECTION 1 doe 1-1 November4, 2003 G 1. Introduction • The Biological Resources section of the General Plan is intended to serve as an update to the City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan by identifying ESHAs in Newport Beach that warrant protection. The Biological Resources Report for the General Plan includes the delineation of nine areas previously designated as ESHAs, two of which (MarArthur and San Miguel, and Spyglass Hill) the City concluded warranted additional analysis. As above, this document aims to provide the detail necessary to allow the City and Coastal Commission the ability to determine what areas, if any, within these two ESAs may be designated as ESHAs, according to criteria in the California Coastal Act. Refinements to maps based on this additional data will allow the City and potential developers to facilitate the decision -making process surrounding development proposed in these areas. CAWINOOWS\Tempom Z METHODOLOGY • • SECTION 2.0 — METHODOLOGY LJ 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW/INFORMATION SEARCH Information on occurrences of special -status species in the vicinity of the Study Area was gathered from the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG, 2003) and the California Native Plant Society's (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS, 2003) for the quadrangles containing the Study Area (i.e. Newport Beach, Tustin, and Laguna Beach 7.5 minute quadrangles). The CNDDB and CNPS Electronic Inventory are historical observation records and do not constitute an exhaustive inventory of every resource. Additional background on biological resources within the study area was derived from the Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California (Holland, 1986), the California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (Tibor, Ed., 2001), The Jepson Manual — Higher Plants of California (Hickman, J.C., Ed., 1993), and the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Newport Banning Ranch Local Coastal Program (PCR, 2000). Lastly, EIP biologists reviewed the City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan — Biological Appendix (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, December, 2002) and the City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan — Newport Beach Biological Resources (Chambers Group and • Coastal Resources Management, January, 2003) for relevant information on the specific ESAs covered in this report. 2.2 HABITAT VALUE RANKING Basis of the Ranking System For this report, EIP Associates has developed a system to rank specific areas within each of the respective ESAs based on a composite score of variables that collectively represent habitat quality. Habitats are attributed a low (3), moderate (2) or high (1) rank based on the number of positive or negative ecological attributes or functions (see below) in each area. In general, the more positive attributes or functions maintained by the habitat, the higher the rank, whereas areas with more negative attributes or functions are ranked lower. Moderate and highly ranked habitats are those more ecologically valuable and more likely to be adversely affected by development. The following attributes were evaluated in ranking the various habitats within each ESA: • Ability of the habitat to support special status species (recorded or potential) • Waters of the U.S. orjurisdictional wetlands • DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Community (e.g. sage scrub, dune, etc.) • • Degree of habitat integrity / connectivity C.IMNDOWSITemporary Intemet FIIes10LKB0561SECT10N 2 dw 2-1 November 4, 2003 R 2 — Methodology While most of the above habitat characteristics are easily documentable from a variety of sources, habitat • integrity/connectivity is a more subjective measure of biological value, which considers various attributes affecting a given habitats quality in a particular geographic area. Attributes contributing to (or detracting from) habitat integrity include: • Patch size and connectivity — Large "pieces" of habitat adjacent to or contiguous with similar or related habitats are particularly useful for more mobile species that rely on larger territories for food and cover. • Presence of invasive / non-native species — Invasive/non-native species often provide poorer habitat for wildlife than native vegetation. Proliferation of exotic plant species alters ecosystem processes and threatens certain native species with extirpation. • Disturbance — This includes disturbance due to human activities such as access (trails), dumping, vegetation removal, development, pollution, etc. Proximity to development — Habitat areas bordering development provide marginal habitat values to wildlife due to impacts from negative edge effects. This proximity presents the possibility of • secondary effects to the habitat due to spillover or human intrusion. Deterioration of habitat results from intrusion of lighting, non-native invasive plant species, domestic animals, and human activity. • Fragmentation — The converse of 'connectedness", habitat fragmentation is the result of development of large areas of undisturbed, contiguous habitat. The resulting breaking up of these areas into isolated, disjunct parcels can create barriers to migration, reduce wildlife food and water resources and generally compress territory size to reduce existing wildlife populations to nonviability. Fragmentation increases negative edge effects, whereby the interior area of habitat is affected by the different conditions of the disturbance on its edges. The smaller a particular habitat is, the greater the proportion of its area which experiences the edge effect, and this can lead to dramatic changes in plant and animal communities. In general, loss of habitat produces a decline in species total population size, and fragmentation of habitat can isolate small sub -populations from each other. This process leads to conditions whereby animals and plant species are endangered by local, then more widespread, extinction. C.11ONDOWSMempomrylnlemet Rlesl0LKBOMSEC77ON 2 da 2-2 November 4, 2003 2 — Methodology Use of the Ranking System • The habitat ranking system can be used to direct development away from higher -value habitats or, at a minimum, indicate which areas will likely receive a greater level of resource agency scrutiny in the permitting process. 'It may also be used to guide mitigation. Specific habitats within the respective ESAs are attributed a rank of 1 (high value) where proposed development would definitely require a resource permit, including, but not limited to: 1. U.S. Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - waters of the U.S. and associated wetlands; 2. U.S. Endangered Species Act Section 7 or 10 consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service — Listed threatened or endangered species or those proposed for listing; 3. California Fish & Game Code, Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game - Threatened or endangered species or those proposed for listing under the California Endangered Species Act; 4. California Fish & Game Code Section 1601-1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game —waters of the State. Habitats with a rank of 2 (moderate value) maintain significant characteristics to support the presence of special status plant and wildlife species. Proposed development in these areas will require additional field surveys to determine if resources are present, which would necessitate permitting activities. Habitats with a rank 3 (low) are generally predominated by non-native species or otherwise exhibit a history of disturbance that make resource permitting a very unlikely requirement in these areas. 2.3 FIELD SURVEYS Reconnaissance -level field surveys of were conducted on August 25, 26, and 27, 2003, by Ron Walker and Joshua Boldt of EIP Associates to examine each ESA in order to describe existing resources and to determine their distribution and relative abundance. Surveys focused on identification of areas exhibiting characteristics of natural or undisturbed habitats and areas that could potentially support special -status plant or wildlife species. Surveys of each ESA were conducted on foot and, in each, habitat types were identified and mapped and observed wildlife and plant species were recorded. Surveys were conducted following a period of elevated precipitation for the Newport Beach area. While precipitation totals for the 2001-2002 wet season were well below average (3.55 in., average is 11.52 in.), those for the 2002-2003 wet season were slightly above average (14.73 in.) C.IWINDOWSITempoory lnlemetAleslOLKBOMSECTION 2 doc 2-3 November 4, 2003 1t 2 — Methodology (http://www.oc.ca.gov/prfd/envres/Rainfall/rainfalidata.asp). Consequently, the composition of vegetation • communities — in particular annual species and the extent of wetland areas — was likely to be representative of what is typically found in years of average precipitation. 2.4 MAP PREPARATION Maps and data were created in GIS (Geographical Information Systems) format at a 1:2400 scale, or 1 inch = 200 feet, using ArcView 3.2a, using aerial photographs, coastal zone boundaries, ESA boundaries (Chambers, 2002, 2003) roads, parks, and parcels as base layers. Field observations and measurements were used to subdivide habitats within the existing ESA boundaries. Roads (either dirt or paved) that bisected a habitat were included within the boundaries of an ESA; whereas roads at the edge of an ESA were excluded. The subdivided ESAs were then ranked according to their relative value and resource permitting requirements. Maps of all the ESAs were printed out, using the aerial photos as a base 2.5 ESA DEFINITION When the City of Newport Beach drafted the first Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan in the 1980s, the term "environmentally sensitive habitat area" was used to identify riparian areas, wetlands, • intertidal areas, and other habitats that are considered to be environmentally sensitive. These environmentally sensitive habitat areas were described as being located on all or portions of twelve large areas. In 2002, a biological assessment study was conducted for use in updating the biological resource sections of the LCP Land Use Plan (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, December, 2002) and the General Plan (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, January, 2003). This biological assessment study carried over the term "environmentally sensitive habitat area" or "ESHA" to describe twenty-eight areas, including the twelve areas described in the existing LCP Land Use Plan. 0 The California Coastal Commission staff advised City staff that describing areas as ESHAs should be given careful consideration given the limitations on development within these areas as set forth in Section 30240(a) of the Coastal Act. Section 30240(a) requires the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas against any significant disruption of habitat values and limits uses to only those that are dependent on those resources. Consequently, subsequent drafts of the LCP Land Use Plan now identify these areas as "environmental study areas" (ESAs) to distinguish their geographic identification from the ESHAs that may be located within them. To avoid further confusion, this addendum to the 2002 biological assessment study has been prepared to more correctly identify the twenty-eight areas (nineteen in the coastal zone and nine outside of the coastal zone) as "environmental study areas." C.IWINDOWSITemporery Internet Filesl0LKS0561SECT10N 2 doc 2-4 November 4, 2003 2 — Methodology ESAs are typically undeveloped areas supporting natural habitats that may be capable of supporting • sensitive biological resources. ESA designation is based upon ecological importance, including rarity and function of the habitat. An ESA may support species and habitats that are sensitive (e.g. wetlands) and rare within the region or may function as a migration corridor for wildlife. ESAs may contain areas referred to as Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), as defined under Section 30107.5 of the California Coastal Act. These are areas in which "plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or are especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem that could easily be disturbed or degraded by human activities or development". 0 OWNDOWSMeI u 3. BIOLOGICAL HABITATS • k� SECTION 3.0 — BIOLOGICAL HABITATS • 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY AREAS A variety of diverse, valuable, and sensitive habitats occur within the City of Newport Beach. Environmental Study Areas (ESAs) are those portions of the City that contain natural habitat. An ESA may contain areas that are considered ESHAs. 3.1.1 Semeniuk Slough (Oxbow Loop) 3.1.1.1 Description Semeniuk Slough is a remnant channel of the Santa Ana River that historically drained into West Newport Bay and is still exposed to limited tidal influence through a tidal culvert connected between the Santa Ana River and the slough. The 103.0-acre site is bordered by the Newport Shores residential development to the south, the Santa Ana River to the west, and the Banning Ranch ESA to the north and east (Figures 2- 3). The ESA is located on the USGS Newport Beach 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. The Seminuik Slough ESA includes the main slough channel immediately north of Newport Shores and the coastal salt marsh habitat to the north, including a narrow sliver of salt marsh habitat in the far north of the ESA, flanked by the Santa Ana River on the west and the Banning Ranch ESA on the east. Several smaller • interconnected channels and inundated depressions are located throughout the salt marsh habitat. Semeniuk Slough is predominantly an open -water estuary, with southern coastal salt marsh as the predominant fringing vegetation and chenopod scrub and ornamental vegetation as a less significant component of the ESA. Southern coastal salt marsh vegetation on -site is dominated by pickleweed (Salicornia virginica), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), California cord grass (Spartina foliosa), California sea -lavender (Limonium californicum), and salt grass (Distichlis spicata), with shore grass (Monanthohloe littoralis), fleshy jaumea (✓aumea carnosa), and saltwort (Batis maritima) as associated species. Sea -fig (Carpobrotus chilensis) has invaded some of the upland portions of the salt marsh habitat in areas adjacent to disturbance. Other ornamental plant species found along the margin of the main slough channel, primarily in the eastern and southern section of the ESA near Newport Shores, include myoporum (Myoporum sp.), acacia (Acacia sp.), Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta), pine (Pinus sp.), and eucalyptus (Eucalyptus sp.). An island in the southwest part of the ESA has been graded or otherwise disturbed in the recent past and the resulting plant community is less established than the surrounding salt marsh. This area is dominated by a mixture of salt marsh species, such as saltgrass, heliotrope (Heliotropium curassavicum), and pickleweed, and upland ruderal species, such as burclover (Medicago sp.) and melilotus (Melilotus sp.) A small area of chenopod scrub occurs along the levee separating the Santa Ana River and the Semeniuk Slough ESA and is dominated by saltbush (Atriplex • sp.) CIW/NDOWSITempomry IntemetResl0LKB0561SECTION 3 dw 3-1 November 4, 2003 6 3. Biological Habitats • 3.1.1.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figures 2-3. DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: The following sensitive habitats occur within the Semeniuk Slough ESA: Southern Coastal Salt Marsh Special -Status Species (Potential) Habitats within the Semeniuk Slough ESA include southern coastal salt marsh, open estuary, and chenopod scrub. These habitats are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus (Salt marsh bird's beak): FE, SE, CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS I • Atriplex parishii (Parish's brittlescale): CNPS 1 B • Centromadia parryi ssp. australis (southern tarplant): CNPS 1 B • Helianthus nuttalld ssp. parishii (Los Angeles sunflower): FSC, CNPS 1A • Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri (Coulter's goldfields): CNPS 1 B Suaeda esteroa (Estuary seablite): CNPS I • Cicindela gabbii (tiger beetle): CSC • Tryonia imitator (California brackishwater snail): FSC • Eucycolgobius newberryi (tidewater goby): FE, CSC • Laterallus jamaicensis cotumiculus (California black rail): FSC, ST • Rallus longirostris levipes (light-footed clapper rail): FE, SE • Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (western snowy plover): FT, CSC • Sterna antillarum brown (California least tern): FE, SE • Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi (Belding's savannah sparrow): SE • Gavia immer(Common loon): FSC, CSC Pelecanus erythrorhynchos (American white pelican): CSC • Circus cyaneus (northern harrier): CSC • Elanus leucurus (white-tailed kite): FSC • Falco columbarius (merlin): CSC • • Numenius americans (long -billed curlew): FSC, CSC OMNDOWSITempomy InlemetResIOLKBOS6ISECT/ON 3 do 3-2 November 4, 2003 3. Biological Habitats • Rynchops niger (black skimmer): CSC • • Stems elegans (Elegant tern): FSC, CSC • Passerculus sandwichensis rostratus (large -billed savannah sparrow): CSC FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A= California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) The following special -status species have recorded CNDDB occurrences or other known occurrences within or adjacent to the Semeniuk Slough ESA: • • Centromadia parryi ssp. australis (southern tarplant) (CNPS 1 B) (CNDDB Occurrence #65): This occurrence of southern tarplant is from the "Newport Slough, south of the oil fields on the edge of the salt marsh and the access road." This is mapped at the western end of the access road north of the main slough channel in the Semeniuk Slough ESA. More than 100 plants were observed in 1998. This population is presumed to still be present. • Suaeda esteroa (Estuary seablite) (CNPS 1B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 13): This occurrence of estuary seablite is from the "Newport Slough, south of the oil fields on the edge of the salt marsh and the access road." This is mapped along the margin of the access road north of the main slough channel, east of the southern tarplant occurrence, in the Semeniuk Slough ESA. This population is presumed to still be present. • Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi (Belding's savannah sparrow) (CSC) (CNDDB Occurrence # 43): The location of this occurrence of Belding's savannah sparrow is the "Santa Ana River mouth, Newport Slough area." The CNDDB maps this occurrence on the entire southwest portion of the ESA. 17 pairs were observed in 1996, and 36 pairs in 2001. This population is presumed to still be present. In addition, this species is known to breed in nearby areas including Upper • Newport Bay and salt marsh habitat in Huntington Beach (MEC 1991). C.IMNOOWSMempowyIntemetF,1e510LKB0561SECTlON3d= 3-3 November4, 2003 11 3. Biological Habitats • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma) (CNPS 1 B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 23): The information for this occurrence is from a 1932 herbarium collection from "Costa Mesa, along base of sea cliffs." It is mapped along the bluff separating Banning Ranch from Highway 1 and Semeniuk Slough. Although this population is presumed to still be present, it has not been observed since 1932. • The California least tern (Sterna antillarum) (FE, SE), which has a large nesting colony on the Huntington Beach side of the Santa Ana River mouth, forages occasionally in the slough channels (Atwood and Minsky 1983). • Small numbers of western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) (FT, CSC) breed in the Huntington Beach least tern colony in some years (Gallagher 1997). Western snowy plovers are observed occasionally in Semeniuk Slough (MEC 1991). • The California brackish water snail (Tryonia imitator) (FSC) has been collected in substantial numbers in the channels of Semeniuk Slough (MEC 1991). Waters/Wetlands of the U.S. . The entire Semeniuk Slough ESA site is salt marsh/open estuary, except for small area of chenopod scrub along western border. Inte.grity The Semeniuk Slough ESA is a relatively large, uninterrupted coastal salt marsh. It is hydrologically and tidally connected to the Santa Ana River, which empties into the Pacific Ocean, and is also contiguous with the large Banning Ranch ESA on its northern and eastern borders. This provides wildlife with a relatively large, diverse area for foraging, shelter, and movement. The proximity to the Newport Shores residential development has introduced numerous ornamental and non-native species to the eastern perimeter of the site, and also allows use of the sloughs for recreational use. A few oil -well related structures are located in the southern part of the ESA, immediately north of the main slough channel. The land surrounding these structures has been cleared. Two roads bisect the ESA - one leading from the Santa Ana River levee to the Banning Ranch area, and the other leading to the oil well structures. C•IWINDOWSITemponny Internet ReslOU(80661SECTION Ux 3-4 November 4, 2003 L� 3. Biological Habitats 3.1.2 Buck Gully • 3.1.2.1 Description The Buck Gully ESA is a steep, open canyon extending 2.5 miles from Little Corona Beach to Newport Coast Drive in the San Joaquin Hills (Figures 9-12). The canyon is divided by the Coast Highway. The lower section extends from Little Corona Beach to the Coast Highway and the larger, upper section stretches from the Coast Highway to Newport Coast Drive. The 263.E-acre ESA is bordered by the Pacific Ocean and Little Corona Beach to the west, and residential and commercial development to the east, north, and south of the site. The Buck Gully site is located on the Laguna Beach 7.5-minute USGS topographic quadrangle. The Buck Gully ESA is dominated by Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral, with southern willow scrub, annual grassland, and coastal freshwater marsh occurring as smaller components of the community. Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral encompass the majority of the gully - from the upper rims to the alluvial bottoms. A narrow ribbon of southern willow scrub riparian habitat is supported by an unnamed creek that flows along the canyon bottom the length of the gully. Patches of annual grassland occur throughout the chaparral and coastal sage scrub habitats and also in areas where native vegetation has been cleared for fire prevention. • The narrow, western reach of the canyon is largely encroached upon by the adjacent residential areas to the southeast and northwest. The upper slopes in this area of the canyon support a mix of disturbed southern mixed chaparral, a small patch of coastal sage scrub, and non-native ornamental vegetation originating from the surrounding homes. Typical chaparral species in this area include toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), and ceanothus (Ceanothus sp.) Non-native and ornamental species include giant reed (Arundo donax), acacia, eucalyptus, myoporum, Mexican fan palm, Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus terebinthifolius), Peruvian pepper tree (Schinus molle), castor bean (Ricinus communis), tree tobacco (Nicotiana glauca), pampas grass (Cortaderia sp.), and fennel (Foeniculum vulgare). The canyon bottom in this area is dominated by riparian vegetation including willows (Salix spp.), blackberry (Rubus sp.), cattail (Typha sp.), and bulrush (Scirpus sp.). A small freshwater marsh comprised almost exclusively of cattail is situated at the mouth of the gully adjoining Little Corona Beach. The central section of the canyon immediately northeast of the Coast Highway, while closely confined by residential development, contains fewer ornamental plant species than the coastal portion and supports southern mixed chaparral and southern willow scrub habitats with species compositions similar to the lower canyon. The chaparral in this area supports toyon, laurel sumac, ceanothus, chemise 9 CAMNDOWSITempomry lnfemelR1esIOLK90561SECTION 3,eec 3-5 November 4, 2003 6 3. Biological Habitats Wetlands/Waters of the U.S. • The unnamed creek channel flowing the length of Morning Canyon is likely a jurisdictional waters of the U.S. Integrity The lower, southwestern section of Morning Canyon is separated from the upper section of Morning Canyon by the Coast Highway. The entire canyon is very narrow and closely bordered by residential development on the northwest and southeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and the Pelican Hills Golf Course at the northeastern edge of the area. Ornamental species have completely displaced native vegetation in much of canyon and now dominate throughout the majority of this ESA. Pets from the adjacent residences likely use the area and further discourage wildlife use of the canyon. 3.1.4 MacArthur and San Minuel 3.1.4.1 Description The 4.1 acre MacArthur and San Miguel ESA (Figure 7), consists of a relatively small and isolated patch • of undeveloped land bordered by Avocado Avenue to the west, San Miguel Drive to the north, MacArthur Boulevard to the east, and an open lot to the south (north of the Central Library). The site is located on the USGS Newport Beach 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. This site is dominated by Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat. The upland areas of the site consist primarily of Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation dominated by California sagebrush, deerbrush (Lotus scopadus), and coyote brush, along with the non-native tocalote and scattered instances of prickly pear. Other common, non-native species include black mustard and various grasses. The perimeter of the site has been previously disturbed by adjacent road development and several ornamental plant species occur immediately outside the boundaries of the site, including eucalyptus, myoporum, and Peruvian pepper tree. Much of the adjacent undeveloped land, particularly the large lot between the site and the Central Library, supports ruderal vegetation. Two drainages intersect in the middle of the site. The east -west running drainage supports a limited amount of disturbed southern willow scrub habitat with dominant plant species including willow, cattails, bulrush and mule fat. The north -south running drainage supports a small seasonal wetland consisting of cattail and duckweed (Lemna sp.) 3.1.4.2 Habitat Value Ranking • The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figure 7. C1W/NDOWSITempamryintemetF,Ies10LK865615ECTION 3 d= 3-12 November 4, 2003 .3t 3. Biological Habitats DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: The following sensitive habitats occur within the MacArthur/San Miguel ESA: • Diegan coastal sage scrub • Southern willow scrub (disturbed) Special -Status Species (Potential) Habitats within the MacArthur/San Miguel ESA include Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern willow scrub. These habitats are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando spineflower): FC, SE, CNPS 1 B • Verbesina dissita (crownsbeard): FT, ST, CNPS 1B • Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand -verbena): CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex coulter! (Coulter's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii (Davidson's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • • Calochortus weedii ssp. intermedius (intermediate mariposa lily): CNPS 1 B • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya): CNPS 1B • Dudleya stolonifera (Laguna Beach dudleya): FT, ST, CNPS 1 B • Euphorbla misera (cliff spurge): CNPS 2 • Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula (mesa horkelia): CNPS 1B • lsocoma menziesli var. decumbens (decumbent goldenbush): CNPS 1 B • Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonli (Robinson's pepper -grass): CNPS 1 B • Navarretia prostrate (prostrate navarretia): CNPS 1 B • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak): CNPS 1 B • Sidlacea neomexicana (salt spring checkerbloom): CNPS 2 • Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei (San Diego horned lizard): FSC, CSC • Cnemidophorus hyperythrus (orange -throated whiptail): CSC • Polioptila californica californica (coastal California gnatcatcher): FT, CSC • Vireo bell!! pusillus (least Bell's vireo): FE, SE • Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus (coastal cactus wren): CSC FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened • SE = State Endangered C IMNOOWSITemporory lntemet Rlesl0LKBO561SECT1ON 3 dw 3-13 November 4, 2003 SA 3. Biological Habitats ST = State Threatened • FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant Although suitable habitat exists for these species within the MacArthur/San Miguel ESA, the small, fragmented nature of the area and its proximity to development, makes it unlikely that most of these species would utilize this area. Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) There are no recorded occurrences of special -status species in the CNDDB for the MacArthur/San Miguel ESA. Waters/Wetlands of the U.S. The two drainages traversing the ESA are potential waters of the U.S. The small seasonal wetland is a • potential wetland. • Integrity This ESA is relatively small in size (4.1 acres) and is completely isolated by urban development from any adjacent, associated habitats. The urban nature of the surrounding environment most likely precludes the use of this ESA by most wildlife species. This proximity to development has introduced numerous ornamental and non-native species to the perimeter of the site, further reducing the integrity of the ESA. 3.1.6 Spyglass Hill 3.1.5.1 Description The 16.5 acre Spyglass Hill ESA includes the uppermost reaches of Big Canyon (Figure 8). The site consists of a well-defined canyon with vegetated slopes bordered by residential development and a seasonal, southeast to northwest flowing drainage at the canyon bottom. This ESA is west of Spyglass Hill Road and northeast of Mission Bay Drive. The site is located on the USGS Newport Beach 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. C WNDOMITempamry tntemet ReSIOLKB0561SEC77ON 3 doe 3-14 November 4, 2003 2� 3. Biological Habitats This community is dominated by the Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral, with • several ornamental trees along the northeast -facing slope, just up from the vegetated canyon bottom. In addition, native vegetation immediately adjacent to the residential development has been cleared for fire prevention purposes. The upland areas on the north and east slopes of the main drainage support dense Diegamcoastal sage scrub habitat, dominated by California sagebrush, coyote brush, lemonadeberry, California buckwheat, deerweed, white sage, and laurel sumac. Slopes south and west of the drainage support southern mixed chaparral, dominated by toyon, ceanothus, coyote brush, bush mallow (Malacothamnus sp.), scrub oak, live oak (Quercus agrifolia), bush monkey flower, poison oak, blue elderberry, lemonadeberry, and chamise. The drainage itself is ephemeral and therefore is unable to support typical riparian habitat. It is characterized by species associated with the Diegan coastal sage scrub to the northeast and the southern mixed chaparral to the southwest. 3.1'.5.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figure 8. DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: • The following sensitive habitats occur within the Spyglass Hill ESA: • Diegan coastal sage scrub • Southern mixed chaparral Special -Status Species (Potential) The Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral habitats within the Spyglass Hill ESA are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando spineflower): FC, SE, CNPS 1 B • Verbesina dissita (crownsbeard): FT, ST, CNPS 1B • Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand -verbena): CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex coulteri (Coulter's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii (Davidson's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Calochortus weediissp. intermedius (intermediate mariposa lily): CNPS 1B • • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya): CNPS 1 B C.IWMOOWSITempomrytmemetROSIOLK80561SECTJON 3 dx 3-15 November 4, 2003 5N 3. Biological Habitats • Dudleya stolonifera (Laguna Beach dudleya): FT, ST, CNPS 1B • Euphorbia misers (cliff spurge): CNPS 2 • Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula (mesa horkelia): CNPS I • Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens (decumbent goldenbush): CNPS 1 B • Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii (Robinson's pepper -grass): CNPS 1 B • Navarretia prostrata (prostrate navarretia): CNPS 1 B • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak): CNPS 1 B • Sidlacea neomexicana (salt spring checkerbloom): CNPS 2 • Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei (San Diego horned lizard): FSC, CSC • Cnemidophorus hyperythrus (orange -throated whiptail): CSC • Crotauliusruberruber(northern red -diamond rattlesnake): CSC • Polioptila californica californica (coastal California gnatcatcher): FT, CSC • Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus (coastal cactus wren): CSC • Perognathus longimembris pacificus (Pacific pocket mouse): FE, CSC FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered • ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) The following special -status species have recorded CNDDB occurrences within the Spyglass Hill ESA: • Perognathus longimembris pacificus (Pacific pocket mouse) (FE, CSC) (CNDDB Occurrence # 4): This is a historic collection from 1971 centered around "Spyglass Hill". The occurrence is believed to be no longer present. WatersANetlands of the U.S. The unnamed creek channel flowing the length of through this ESA is a potential waters of the U.S. • C.IWINDOWSITempowyIntemetResIMB0561SECTION 3 dx 3-16 November 4, 2003 np 3. Biological Habitats Integrity • The Spyglass Hill ESA is a relatively undisturbed area of high -quality Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral. Except for the area immediately adjacent to the residential development to the west and southwest, the habitats in the Spyglass Hill ESA are almost entirely composed of native species. However, this ESA is completely isolated from any adjacent, associated habitats by residential development, and overall the area is relatively small (16.5 acres). This is an ideal example of fragmented habitat. While supporting undisturbed native vegetation communities, the isolated nature of the area possibly precludes its use by many wildlife species. 3.1.6 Coastal Foredunes 3.1.6.1 Description Foredune habitats are identified by stands of dense to sparse annual and perennial herbs, grasses, or shrubs occurring on sand dunes along the coast. In Newport Beach, southern coastal foredune habitat extends southwest, from 10th Street to the tip of the Balboa peninsula along the ocean side of Balboa, immediately adjacent to the bike lane (Figures 4-6). The vegetation in this community is generally sparse with overall cover ranging from 20 to 70 percent in some areas, while other areas are completely devoid • of vegetation. Areas of open sand fragment this southern coastal foredune habitat. Dominant plants include non-native species such as sea -fig, hottentot fig, sea rocket (Cakile maritima), and native purple sand -verbena (Abronia umbellata), beach evening primrose (Camissonia cheiranthifolia), beach morning glory (Calystegia soldanella), and beach bur (Ambrosia chamissonis). Many areas are almost completely covered by sea -fig and hottentot fig, which seem to have been introduced from the residences fronting the beach area. Although many areas within the Coastal Foredunes ESA have extensive non-native cover, these species are considered to be a component of southern coastal foredune habitat and were therefore not mapped differently from those areas supporting a predominance of native species. • 3.1.6.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figures 4-6. DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: The following sensitive habitats occur within the Coastal Foredunes ESA: • Southern coastal foredune C IWINDOWSITempomry Internet Fllesl0LK80561SECT1ON 3 d= 3-17 November4, 2003 3k 3. Biological Habitats Special -Status Species (Potential) • Habitats within the Coastal Foredunes ESA include southern coastal foredune and open beach, which could support a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus (salt marsh bird's -beak): FE, SE, CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex coulteri (Coulter's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana (Orcutt's pincushion): CNPS 1 B • Hordeum intercedents (vernal barley): CNPS 3 • Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata (coast woolly -heads): CNPS 1 B • Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (western snowy plover): FT, CSC • Sterna antillarum brown (California least tern): FE, SE • Phalacrocorax auritus (double -crested cormorant): CSC • Passerculus sandwichensis tostratus (large -billed savannah sparrow): CSC FE = Federally Endangered • FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) The following special -status species have recorded CNDDB occurrences within the Coastal Foredunes ESA: • Nemacaulis denudata var denudata (coast woolly -heads) (CNPS 1 B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 17): This occurrence consists of three collections on Newport Peninsula from the harbor entrance north to about 9th St. Collections include ".....from 61h St. to harbor entrance", ".... 8`h and 91h St. sand dunes", and "Newport Beach". This occurrence is presumed to still be present. • C:1W/NDOWSITempcmrylntemetFilesIOLKS0561SECTlON3dw 3-18 November 4, 2003 151, 3. Biological Habitats Waters/Wetlands of the U.S. • No potential wetlands/waters of the U.S. were observed during biological surveys within the Coastal Foredunes ESA. IntegritV Ornamental and non-native species, likely introduced from the adjacent residences, dominate much of the southern coastal foredune habitat in this ESA. Numerous residences use the beach area as an extension of their backyards and residents have planted and irrigated the ornamental species that have replaced native species in these areas. Increased human activity and public access also adversely impact these dune habitats, as evidenced by the numerous trails bisecting the dunes. 3.1.7 Banning Ranch 3.1.7.1 Description The 377.2 acre Banning Ranch ESA is located near the mouth of the Santa Ana River (Figures 13-14). This ESA is bordered to the northeast and east by residential and commercial development, to the north . by Talbert Regional Park, to the south by West Coast Highway, and to the south and west by the Newport Shores residential community and the Semeniuk Slough ESA. The Banning Ranch site is located on the • Newport Beach 7.5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle. The Banning Ranch ESA encompasses four distinct topographic features that influence the type and character of biological resources on the site. The western edge of Newport Mesa, which comprises much of the eastern portion of the site, represents a coastal plane that slopes gently from east to west. Historic oil -extraction related infrastructure is found throughout the mesa, including the location of wells, pipelines, buildings, improved and unimproved roads, and open storage pipes and machinery. Bluffs form the western edge of the mesa, which are very steep along the southern and southwestern edges of the mesa, but become less severe in the north. These bluffs provide a transition between mesa uplands to the east and the lowlands to the west. The bluffs and mesa are incised at various points along their/its length by a number of drainages. Two of these drainage features - one in the southern portion of the site and one in the northern portion - are markedly larger than the others and referred to as "arroyos". C.IWINDOWSITempormylnfemetFdeslOLKBOS61SECTION 3 doe 3-19 November 4, 2003 35 3. Biological Habitats The majority of the lowlands in the western portion of the project site were historically tidal marsh • associated with Semeniuk Slough. The construction of a levee between the Banning Ranch lowlands and Semeniuk Slough removed the former from tidal influence, very likely to facilitate oil extraction activities. Subsequent channelization of the Santa Ana River and oil extraction activities at Banning Ranch, dating back at least 75 years, have altered these lowlands area to where they are now characterized by narrow channels and low pockets of periodically -standing water in some areas. Tidal influence is presently limited to only 4.8 acres at the southwest corner of the lowlands. The entire area supports a network of roads, pipelines, oil derricks, and a few buildings. Plant communities on the Banning Ranch property range from relatively undisturbed native to highly disturbed exotic populations. Upland (mesa) areas generally support southern coastal bluff scrub and non-native grassland, while the lowlands support riparian and wetland vegetation. Current plant communities include: (1) southern coastal bluff scrub; (2) sage scrub -grassland ecotone/sere; (3) annual grassland; (4) ruderal (uplands); (5) ruderal wetlands; (6) vernal pool; (7) alkali meadow; (8) southern coastal salt marsh; (9) coastal brackish marsh; (10) mulefat scrub; (11) southern black willow forest; (12) developed areas; (13) disturbed areas; and (14) ornamental vegetation (Figures 13-14). Scattered portions of both upland and lowland areas of Banning Ranch contain ruderal vegetation dominated by non-native grasses and forbs. Plant species associated with this community include black • mustard, wild radish (Raphanus sativus), pampas grass, fennel, and filaree (Eroidum sp.). The lowland portions of this ESA consist of ruderal wetlands, alkali meadows, southern coastal salt marsh, and coastal brackish marsh. Ornamental vegetation occurs throughout the site, though primarily in the upland areas, and include hottentot-fig, myoporum, and eucalyptus. • 3.1.7.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings: DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: The following sensitive habitats occur within the Banning Ranch ESA: • Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub • Vernal Pool • Alkali Meadow • Southern Coastal Salt Marsh • Coastal Brackish Marsh • Southern Black Willow Forest C.IWINDOWSITempomry lnfemetReSIOLKS0561SECTION 3 eoc 3-20 November 4, 2003 3. Biological Habitats Special -Status Species (Potential) • The southern coastal bluff scrub, annual grasslands, ruderal wetlands, vernal pool, alkali meadow, southern coastal salt marsh, coastal brackish marsh, mulefat scrub, and southern black willow forest in the Banning Ranch ESA are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando spineflower): FC, SE, CNPS 1 B • Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus (salt marsh bird's -beak): FE, SE, CNPS 1 B • Verbesina dissita (crownsbeard): FT, ST, CNPS 1B • Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand -verbena): CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex coulteri (Coulter's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex parishii (Parish's brittlescale): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii (Davidson's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Calochortus weedii ssp. intermedius (intermediate mariposa lily): CNPS 1 B • Centromadia parryi ssp. australis (southern tarplant): CNPS 1 B • Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana (Orcutt's pincushion): CNPS 1 B • • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya): CNPS 1 B • Dudleya stolonifera (Laguna Beach dudleya): FT, ST, CNPS 1 B • Euphorbia misera (cliff spurge): CNPS 2 • Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii (Los Angeles sunflower): FSC, CNPS 1A • Hordeum intercedents (vernal barley): CNPS 3 • Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula (mesa horkelia): CNPS 1B • Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens (decumbent goldenbush): CNPS 1 B • Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri (Coulter's goldfields): CNPS 1 B • Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii (Robinson's pepper -grass): CNPS 1 B • Nama stenocarpum (mud nama): CNPS 2 • Navarretia prostrata (prostrate navarretia): CNPS 1 B • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak): CNPS 1 B • Sagittaria sanfordii (Sanford's arrowhead): CNPS 1 B • Sidlacea neomexicana (salt spring checkerbloom): CNPS 2 • Branchinecta sandiegoensis (San Diego fairy shrimp): FE • Cicindela gabbii (tiger beetle): CSC • Tryoniaimitator (California brackishwatersnail):FSC • • Eucycolgobius newberryi (tidewater goby): FE, CSC CIW/NOOWSITemporary lntemetAlesIOGCBOSSISECTION 3 doc 3-21 November 4, 2003 35 3. Biological Habitats Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei (San Diego horned lizard): FSC, CSC • Cnemidophorus hyperythrus (orange -throated whiptail): CSC • Crotaulius ruberruber(northern red -diamond rattlesnake): CSC • Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus (California black rail): FSC, ST • Rallus longirostris levipes (light-footed clapper rail): FE, SE Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (western snowy plover): FT, CSC • Sterna antillarum brown (California least tern): FE, SE • Empidonax traillii extimus (southwestern willow flycatcher): FE • Polioptila californica californica (coastal California gnatcatcher): FT, CSC Vireo bellii pusillus (least Bell's vireo): FE, SE • Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi (Belding's savannah sparrow): SE Phalacrocorax auritus (double -crested cormorant): CSC • Accipiter cooperii (Cooper's hawk): CSC • Circus cyaneus (northern harrier): CSC Elanus leucurus (white-tailed kite): FSC Falco columbarius (merlin): CSC Numenius americanus (long -billed curlew): FSC, CSC • Rynchops niger (black skimmer): CSC • • Athene cunicularia (burrowing owl): CSC Eremophila alpestris (horned lark): CSC • Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus (coastal cactus wren): CSC • Lanius ludovicianus (loggerhead shrike): CSC • Dendroica petechia brewsteri (yellow warbler): CSC • Icteria virens (yellow -breasted chat): CSC Passerculus sandwichensis rostratus (large -billed savannah sparrow): CSC • Perognathus longimembris pacificus (Pacific pocket mouse): FE, CSC • FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant C IWINDOWSI7empomry InfemetAIes1OLK8O561SEC71ON 3 dw 3-22 November 4, 2003 3� 3. Biological Habitats • Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) The following special -status species have recorded CNDDB occurrences or other known occurrences within or adjacent to the Banning Ranch ESA: • Centromadia parryissp. australis (southern tarplant) (CNPS 1B) (CNDDB Occurrence#64): This occurrence of southern tarplant is from the "south end of the Newport oil fields in disturbed areas adjacent to oil pipelines" and is mapped near the southwestern border of the Banning Ranch ESA near its boundary with the Semeniuk Slough ESA. More than 1000 plants were observed in 1998. It was also observed on Banning Ranch by PCR during surveys conducted in 2000 for the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Newport Banning Ranch Local Coastal Program (PCR, 2000). This population is presumed to still be present. • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma) (CNPS 1 B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 23): The information for this occurrence is from a 1932 herbarium collection from "Costa Mesa, along base of sea cliffs" and was mapped along the bluff separating Banning Ranch from Highway 1 and Semeniuk Slough. Although this population is presumed to still be present, it has not been observed since 1932. • San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegoensis) (FE) was documented by PCR during surveys conducted in February and March 2000 for the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Newport Banning Ranch Local Coastal Program (PCR, 2000) from the vernal pool and a small depression immediately to the south. • • Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) (FT, CSC) has been observed primarily within coastal bluff scrub onsite during focused surveys from 1992 to 1998. 19 pairs were observed in 1992 and between 1993 and 1996, the number of observed pairs ranged from 16 to 29. 17 pairs were observed in 1997, and 19 pairs were observed in 1998 (PCR, 2000). • Coastal cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus) (CSC) Ten pairs were observed in 1997 and seven pairs were observed in 1998 (PCR, 2000). • The following special -status species were observed either on -site or flying over the area during surveys conducted by PCR for the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Newport Banning Ranch Local Coastal Program (PCR, 2000): California least tern, yellow warbler, Belding's savannah sparrow, southwestern willow flycatcher, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, golden C.IW/NOOWSITempom,yintemet FdestOLKBO5615ECTION 3 dx 3-23 November 4, 2003 3. Biological Habitats eagle, sharp -shinned hawk, white-tailed kite, and osprey. No further details about these • observations were given. Waters/Wetlands of the U.S. A 1998 wetland delineation performed by PCR determined there were 57.5 acres of jurisdictional waters on Banning Ranch, including 57.15 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 0.35 acre of unvegetated channels. The majority of these wetlands are in the lowland portion in the northwest part of the ESA, with other jurisdictional areas associated with four drainages originating at various locations on the upper portions of the site. In addition, one vernal pool was identified near the central portion of the site (PCR, 2000). Integrity The Banning Ranch ESA is a large, relatively undeveloped, but historically disturbed assemblage of diverse habitats that, together with the contiguous Semeniuk Slough ESA, provides wildlife with a significantly large, diverse area for foraging, shelter, and movement. Infrastructure related to oil exploration and extraction is scattered throughout the area, especially in the northern portion of the mesa, degrading the native habitats where they occur. Much of the land surrounding developed areas (i.e. oil • infrastructure) is disturbed and does not support any vegetation. Improved and unimproved roads bisect the entire ESA, fragmenting habitat and creating increased areas of "edge effect'. Areas supporting annual grassland and ruderal vegetation communities are dominated by non-native species, typically annual grasses and forbs. Ornamental species are found throughout the site, primarily in upland areas. The entire Banning Ranch ESA is closed to public access, though pets from nearby residences and feral domestic animals are common transients through these habitats. LJ While disturbance associated with the oil infrastructure does diminish the quality of habitat in the Banning Ranch ESA to some extent, the overall area should be regarded as relatively high -quality wildlife habitat due to its large size, habitat diversity, and continuity with the adjacent Semeniuk Slough ESA. 3.2 SUMMARY The information in this report is presented as a supplement to the City of Newport Beach, California, Local Coastal Plan — Biological Appendix (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, December 2002) and the City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan — Newport Beach Biological Resources (Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management, January 2003). Together with the ESA maps provided in Figures 2-14, this information can facilitate the decision -making process C.IWINDOWSITemporary/nternetResIOLKS0561SECTION 3 dw 3-24 November 4, 2003 3b 3. Biological Habitats associated with any proposed development in these areas. This will guide the City in focusing • development in areas with the fewest impacts to biological resources and attempting preservation and protection in areas with the highest biological value. The habitat value ranking system presented in this report will also guide resource permitting efforts of prospective developers by indicating which sub -areas of the studied ESAs either definitely will require some level of permitting or for which additional studies need to be performed to determine whether such permitting is required. • 0 C9WMCOWSITemporaryL 4. LITERATURE CITED 0 • IV 3. Biological Habitats (Adenostoma fasciculatum), lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia), scrub oak (Quercus berberidifolia), • southern honeysuckle (Lonicera subspicata), redberry (Rhamnus crocea), bush monkey flower (Mimulus aurantiacus), and sugar bush (Rhus ovata). Approximately adjacent to the intersection of 5th Avenue and Poppy Avenue, the gully veers east and opens into a broader canyon. The southern slopes of the canyon in this area support dense stands of southern mixed chaparral, while the northern slopes support disturbed annual grassland, possibly established as chaparral and coastal sage scrub, but subsequently cleared for fire prevention by homeowners. At present, the annual grassland contains black mustard (Brassica nigra), tocalote (Centaurea melitensis), artichoke thistle (Cynara cardunculus), wild oats (Avena fatua), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), barley (Noredum sp.), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), and fennel. Diegan coastal sage scrub becomes more dominant as the canyon slopes on the upper portions of the canyon veer eastward. This community is composed of California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), white sage (Salvia apiana), prickly pear (Optunia sp.), coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), laurel sumac, lemonadeberry, and California bush sunflower (Encelia califomica). The canyon floor of Buck Gully supports a southern willow scrub community, dominated by willows and mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), with occasional western sycamore (Platanus racemosa) and cottonwood • (Populus fremontit). Associated plant species include cattail, blue elderberry, poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), rush (Juncus spp.), and nutsedge (Cyperus sp.). • The upper canyon is broader than the lower canyon and is therefore less impacted by adjacent development. Vegetation in this area is primarily Diegan coastal sage scrub and southern mixed chaparral, interrupted by occasional patches of annual grassland, and southern willow scrub associated with the creek at the canyon bottom. 3.1.2.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figures 9-12. DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: The following sensitive habitats occur within the Buck Gully ESA: • Diegan coastal sage scrub • Southern mixed chaparral • Southern willow scrub CSW/NDOWSITempmarylnternatRes10LKSOMSECT/ON 3.dw 3-6 November 4, 2003 yo 3. Biological Habitats • Coastal freshwater marsh • Special -Status Species (Potentia ) The Diegan coastal sage scrub, southern mixed chaparral, southern willow scrub, annual grassland, and coastal freshwater marsh in the Buck Gully ESA are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina (San Fernando spineflower): FC, SE, CNPS 1 B • Verbesina dissita (crownsbeard): FT, ST, CNPS 1 B • Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand -verbena): CNPS 1 B • Aphanisma blitoides (aphanisma): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex coulteri (Coulter's saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex pacifica (South Coast saltbush): CNPS 1 B • Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii (Davidson's saltbush): CNPS 1 B Calochortus weedii ssp. intermedis (intermediate mariposa lily): CNPS 1 B • Centromadia parryi ssp. australis (southern tarplant): CNPS 1 B • Chaenactis glabrfuscula var. orcuttiana (Orcutt's pincushion): CNPS 1 B • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya): CNPS 1B • • Dudleya stolonifera (Laguna Beach dudleya): FT, ST, CNPS 1B • Euphorbia misera (cliff spurge): CNPS 2 • Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishY (Los Angeles sunflower): FSC, CNPS 1A • Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula (mesa horkelia): CNPS 1B • Isocoma menziesil var. decumbens (decumbent goldenbush): CNPS 1 B • Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri (Coulter's goldfields): CNPS 1 B • Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii (Robinson's pepper -grass): CNPS 1 B Name stenocarpum (mud name): CNPS 2 • Navanetia prostrate (prostrate navarretia): CNPS 1 B • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak): CNPS 1 B • Sagittaria sanfordii (Sanford's arrowhead): CNPS 1 B • Sidlacea neomexicana (salt spring checkerbloom): CNPS 2 • Eucycolgobius newberryi (tidewater goby): FE, CSC • Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei (San Diego horned lizard): FSC, CSC • Cnemidophorus hyperythrus (orange -throated whiptail): CSC • Crotaulius ruber ruber (northern red -diamond rattlesnake): CSC • Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus (western snowy plover): FT, CSC • Sterna antillarum brown (California least tern): FE, SE • C IWMDOWSITempomrylnlemetFlasiOLKBOSGISECTION 3 eoc 3-7 November4, 2003 2t 3. Biological Habitats • Empidonax traillii extimus (southwestern willow flycatcher): FE • • Polioptila californica californica (coastal California gnatcatcher): FT, CSC Vireo bellii puslllus (least Bell's vireo): FE, BE • Phalacrocorax auritus (double -crested cormorant): CSC • Accipiter cooperif (Cooper's hawk): CSC • Elanus leucurus (white-tailed kite): FSC • Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus (coastal cactus wren): CSC • Dendroica petechia brewsteri (yellow warbler): CSC • Icteria vixens (yellow -breasted chat): CSC • Perognathus longimembris pacificus (Pacific pocket mouse): FE, CSC FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened BE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant • CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant • Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) The following special -status species have recorded CNDDB occurrences within the Buck Gully ESA: • Euphorbia misera (cliff spurge) (CNPS 2) (CNDDB Occurrence # 21): The location for this occurrence is listed as "Corona del Mar State Beach" and consists of a total of three colonies at the following locations: "Inspiration Point south of Orchid Ave. at Ocean Blvd.; adjacent to Glen Dr./Beach Dr.; and south of Glen Dr." This first location is just north of the mouth of Buck Gully. A "Glen Dr." does not exist in Newport Beach, but the colonies associated with these locations are assumed to be in the general vicinity of the first colony. 60 plants were observed in 1989. This population is presumed to still be present. • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya) (CNPS 16) (CNDDB Occurrence # 94): The source for this occurrence is a 1908 herbarium collection from "Corona del Mar bluffs." This population has not been relocated and is believed to be no longer present. O.IWIND0WSITempo2ry lntemet FlleslOLKBOWSECTION 3 dw 3-8 November 4, 2003 3. Biological Habitats • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak) (CNPS 1B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 3): This occurrence is • reported to be due east of the corner of 5'h Ave. and Poppy Ave. in Buck Gully in an area of chaparral and coastal sage scrub. Four to seven plants were observed in 1991, and this occurrence is presumed to still be present. • Lasthenia glabrata (Coulter's goldfields) (CNPS 1B) (CNDDB Occurrence # 58): Location information for this occurrence is "Buck Gully, about one mile upstream from Highway 1:' Two plants were observed in 1998 in a clay depression near willow woodland in the valley bottom. This occurrence is presumed to still be present. Waters/Wetlands of the U.S. The unnamed creek channel flowing the length of Buck Gully is a likely water of the U.S. Sections of the riparian corridor and the coastal freshwater marsh at the mouth of the canyon near Little Corona Beach may also be considered "associated wetlands." Integrity The lower (western) portion of Buck Gully is isolated from the upper Buck Gully by the Coast Highway. • This area is closely confined by residential development on the south and north. The proximity to development, accessibility by local residents and their pets, and abundance of non-native ornamental plant species detract from the quality of habitat for wildlife species in this area. The upper (eastern) portion of Buck Gully is a broad, open, relatively undisturbed canyon. Coastal sage scrub and mixed chaparral dominate much of the area, except for the riparian corridor along the canyon bottom and the tops of the canyon, which are influenced by the adjacent residential development. Much of the native vegetation near the rim of the canyon has been removed to reduce wildfire hazard. Ornamental and non-native plant species from the adjacent residential development have encroached into Buck Gully, especially in the lower, narrow portions. Annual grasslands in Buck Gully consist of non- native annual grasses and forbs. Some non-native inclusions were also observed in the Diegan coastal sage scrub, southern mixed chaparral, and southern willow scrub habitats. 3.1.3 Morning Canyon 3.1.3.1 Description Morning Canyon, an 11.2 acre ESA perpendicular to the coastline, is located between Corona Highlands • and Cameo Highlands above the Coast Highway, and between Shore Cliff and Cameo Shores on the CAMNDOMMempomry mtemef Ales10LK805MEMON 3.dw 3-9 November 4, 2003 J 3. Biological Habitats ocean side of Coast Highway (Figure 9). Morning Canyon is bordered by the Pacific Ocean to the west, . Pelican Hills Golf Course to the east, and residential development to the north and south. This ESA is located on the Laguna Beach 7.5 minute USGS topographic quadrangle. n U 0 Morning Canyon is characterized by disturbed, remnant, southern mixed chaparral vegetation on the canyon floor and along the upland slopes. This area, however, contains few remaining native species and is dominated by non-native and ornamental species that have invaded the canyon from adjacent residential areas located immediately to the northwest and southeast. Native plant species in the remnant southern mixed chaparral community include coyote brush, toyon, mountain mahogany (Cercopcarpus betuloides), lemonadeberry, and blue elderberry. Non-native species include fennel, pampas grass, acacia, date palm (Phoenix sp.), fig (Ficus sp.), hottentot fig (Carpobrotus edulis), Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), tree tobacco, pittosporum (Pittosporum sp.), and castor bean. The canyon bottom once supported a southern willow scrub and willows, mule fat, and mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana) can still be observed growing among the dominant non-native vegetation, though these species are no longer common enough to consider this habitat to be southern willow scrub. Non- native plant species now dominate the bottom and lower slopes of the canyon and include giant reed, acacia, hottentot fig, eucalyptus, myoporum, Mexican fan palm, Brazilian pepper tree, Peruvian pepper tree, pampas grass, ivy (Hedera sp.), and fennel. Although most of the native riparian -associated species have been displaced by non-native and ornamental species, the area is still used by riparian wildlife, such as American crow (Corvus brachyrhyncus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), cedar waxwing (Bombycilla garrulous), English sparrow (Passer domesticus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), and opossum (Didelphis virginiana). The presence of a perennial watercourse along with a structurally diverse woody vegetation community provides the necessary habitat attributes that are essential to riparian -associated species. 3.1.3.2 Habitat Value Ranking The following resources contribute to the habitat value rankings illustrated in Figure 9. DFG/CNDDB Sensitive Habitats: Southern mixed chaparral (disturbed, remnant) C IWINDOWSITempowy lnternetResIOLKS0561SECTION 3 dX 3-10 November 4, 2003 3. Biological Habitats Special -Status Species (Potential) • Habitats within the Morning Canyon ESA include disturbed, remnant southern mixed chaparral and the creek channel. These habitats are capable of supporting a variety of special -status plants and animals, including: • Verbesina dissita (crownsbeard): FT, ST, CNPS 1 B • Abronia villosa var. aurita (chaparral sand -verbena): CNPS 1 B • Calochortus weedii ssp. intermedius (intermediate mariposa lily): CNPS 1 B • Dudleya multicaulis (many -stemmed dudleya): CNPS 1 B • Dudleya stolonifera (Laguna Beach dudleya): FT, ST, CNPS 1 B • Horkelia cuneata ssp. puberula (mesa horkelia): CNPS I • Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens (decumbent goldenbush): CNPS 1 B • Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii (Robinson's pepper -grass): CNPS 1 B • Quercus dumosa (Nuttall's scrub oak): CNPS 1 B • Sidlacea neomexicana (salt spring checkerbloom): CNPS 2 • Vireo bellii pusillus (least Bell's vireo): FE, SE • Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei (San Diego horned lizard): FSC, CSC • Crotauliusruberruber(northern red -diamond rattlesnake): CSC • Elanus leucurus (white-tailed kite): FSC • Empidonax traillii extimus (southwestern willow flycatcher): FE • Dendroica petechia brewsteri (yellow warbler): CSC • Icteria vixens (yellow -breasted chat): CSC FE = Federally Endangered FT = Federally Threatened SE = State Endangered ST = State Threatened FSC = Federal Species of Concern CSC = State Species of Special Concern CNPS 1A = California Native Plant Society List 1A Plant CNPS 1 B = California Native Plant Society List 1 B Plant CNPS 2 = California Native Plant Society List 2 Plant Special -Status Species (Known Occurrences) There are no recorded occurrences of special -status species in the CNDDB for the Morning Canyon ESA. • C:IWINDOWSITempomry lntemetRe51OLKBO561SECTION 3 dw 3-11 November 4, 2003 SECTION 4.0 — LITERATURE CITED • Atwood, J.L., and D.E. Minsky. 1983. Least Tern Foraging Ecology at Three Major California Breeding Colinies. Western Birds 14:57-71. California Department of Fish and Game. 2003. California Natural Diversity Database. California Native Plant Society. 2003. Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management. 2002. City of Newport Beach, California, Local Master Plan — Biological Appendix. Chambers Group and Coastal Resources Management. 2003. City of Newport Beach, California, General Plan — Newport Beach Biological Resources. Gallagher, S.R. 1997. Atlas of Breeding Birds Orange County, California. Sea and Sage Audubon Press. Hickman, J.C., Ed. 1993. The Jepson Manual —Higher Plants of California. Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. MEC Analytical Systems, Inc. 1991. Ecological Descriptions and Evaluations of Proposed Enhancement/Restoration for Eight Southern California Wetlands Prepared in Response to California Coastal Commission for Southern California Edison Company. • PCR. 2000. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Newport Banning Ranch Local Coastal Program. • Tibor, D.P., Ed. 2001. California Native Plant Society's Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. C.IW/NDOWSITempomry Intemet Filesl0LKS0561SECT10 APPENDIX P • ,Nti APPENDIX A Due to the size of this information it is not being printed It is available through the General Plan Update Website www.nbvision2025.com - then click on Reports • t� LJ GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Monday, November 10, 2003 Roger Alford Patrick Bartolic Phillip Bettencourt Carol Boice Karlene Bradley Gus Chabre John Corrough Laura Dietz Grace Dove Florence Felton Nancy Gardner Louise Greeley Ernie Hatchell— Bob Hendrickson Tom Hyans Mike Ishikawa Kim Jansma Mike Johnson Bill Kelly Donald Krotee Lucille Kuehn Philip Lugar Marie Marston Peter Oeth Catherine O'Hara — Carl Ossipoff 10tW-►T 1 J•. Charles Remley • Larry Root John Saunders James Schmiesing Ed Siebel — f NAME GENERAL PLAN AASORY COMMITTEE Monday, November 10, 2003 PUBLIC SIGN -IN ADDRESS/PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS j GENERAL PLAN AASORY COMMITTEE Monday, November 10, 2003 PUBLIC SIGN -IN NAME ADDRESS/PHONE • E-MAIL ADDRESS GENERAL PLAN AASORY COMMITTEE Monday, November 10, 2003 PUBLIC SIGN -IN NAME ADDRESS/PHONE E-MAIL ADDRESS n r-I U CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of the General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting held on Monday, 'November 10, 2003, at the Police Department Auditorium. Members Present: Roger Alford Florence Felton Phillip Lugar Patrick Bartolic Nancy Gardner Charles Remley Phillip Bettencourt Bob Hendrickson Larry Root Carol Boice Tom Hyans John Saunders Karlene Bradley Mike Ishikawa James Schmiesing Gus Chabre Kim Jansma Jan Vandersloot John Corrough Mike Johnson Tom Webber Laura Dietz Bill Kelly Ron Yeo Grace Dove Donald Krotee Members Absent: Louise Greeley Marie Marston Carl Ossipoff Ernest Hatchell Peter Oeth Ed Siebel Lucille Kuehn Catherine O'Hara Jackie Sukiasian Staff Present: Sharon Wood, Assistant City Manager Tamara Campbell, Senior Planner Patrick Alford, Senior Planner Woodie Tescher, EIP Consultant Debbie Lektorich, Executive Assistant Members of the Public Present: Carol Hoffman I. Call to Order Phillip Lugar called the meeting to order. II. Approval of Minutes • The minutes of the October 13, 2003 meeting were approved as submitted. Phillip Bettencourt asked if Lucy Dunn would be asked to address the group at a future meeting. Sharon Wood stated she was waiting for contact information and then Ms. Dunn would be invited. III. Hoag Hospital Presentation Sharon Wood introduced Peter Foulke and Debra Legan from Hoag Hospital. Mr. Foulke reviewed the hospital's long range development plans (presentation attached). During and after the presentation the following questions were raised. Ms. Wood asked if it was important to have medical office space near the hospital or if it could be located anywhere in the region. Mr. Foulke indicated the prime real estate for medical offices is right next to the hospital; however there is also a lot of office space at Newport Center and the doctors there also use Hoag. Charles Remley asked how many more jobs would be created with the new development. Mr. Foulke stated that there would be some new jobs (3-5%) but not many due to the fact that the current development is largely replacement of • older/smaller facilities. John Saunders asked if Hoag would be sharing any parking with the medical offices. Mr. Foulke stated the parking at the hospital is for patients, visitors and staff, the medical offices are required to have their own parking available. Bob Hendrickson asked what out -patient services are provided for the 280,000 patients annually. Mr. Foulke indicated imaging services (MRI, CT, x-ray, etc.), lab work, GI procedures, chemotherapy, mammography, ultrasound, physical and respiratory therapy, etc. Mike Johnson asked about the traffic impact on surrounding streets with the expansion. Mr. Foulke stated they had done traffic studies and traffic impact is relatively minimal. Don Krotee stated he received a public notice regarding carcinogenic material being released due to the construction and asked if it was due to the co-gen plant building. Mr. Foulke stated he was not aware of this notice and pointed out that they have gone through all the AQMD procedures to insure a clean operation. i7 Carol Boice asked if the hospitals in neighboring areas were expanding at the • same rate. Mr. Foulke stated that Saddleback is expanding, Irvine Medical Center is filling up and a Kaiser Hospital is being built next to it. Patrick Bartolic asked about the current square footage and what it will be adding the current development. Mr. Foulke responded that the facility is currently a little over 600,000 sq. ft. and they are adding another 300,000 sq. ft. Mr. Bartolic asked if any consideration was given to the new building blocking the view from Newport Heights neighborhood. Mr. Foulke stated the building is within height limits and the new building does not block out the entire view of the ocean. Kim Jansma asked if the hospital has anything to do with the loss of radio reception in the area. Mr. Foulke said no. Jan Vandersloot asked if the hospital intended to address additional traffic cutting through the Newport Heights neighborhood. Mr. Foulke did not think the hospital would cause traffic to use that route; Coast Highway is a much easier way to get to the hospital. Mr. Vandersloot also asked about the `old master plan" for the hospital and the configuration of the campus. Mr. Foulke indicated that the "master plan" does not locate buildings; it sets height limits, set backs, total square feet, etc. Laura Dietz asked about the delivery system for gas to the co-gen building. Mr. Foulke indicated it would be the same commercial system they are using now. Karlene Bradley indicated that Louise Greeley asked her to raise the question of putting a medical office building on Westminster Street. Mr. Foulke stated the hospital did not need any additional property at this time. Ms. Bradley also asked about fumes she sees when she walks Sunset Ridge which she believes to be pollution. Mr. Foulke indicated that area has a lot of methane gas in the ground, Hoag vacuums the gas and scrubs it clean which meets AQMD standards. He added that if the gas was not processed, it would leak up through the ground and have a foul odor. Bill Kelley asked if the methane could be burned in the co-gen plant. Mr. Foulke said yes they use it now. Ms. Wood asked if the hospital has any impact on the hotel business in the City by attracting patients from distances where they would need somewhere local to stay. Mr. Foulke indicated that the hospital is not of the nature like the Mayo Clinic, most patients are from the local area. However, the hospital does get patients from the hotel business when visitors are in need of care while on vacation here. 3 Tom Webber asked how the co-gen -plant would operate after a major • earthquake if gas service was knocked out. Mr. Foulke indicated they have diesel fuel stored to work the generators which are tested on a weekly basis. Ron Yeo asked if the hospital would expand beyond the current allotted square footage looking out 20-25 years. Mr. Foulke said currently they look out 10-12 years and it appears the allotment will be adequate to that point, but anything could happen looking out 20-25 years. IV. Biological Resources Addendum Sharon Wood introduced Dr. Bruce Barnett with EIP Associates who was asked to look at several sites in the City in response to GPAC's concerns with the Biological Resources Report presented at the July 7th meeting. Dr. Bruce Barnett did the work and produced the Addendum and presented the information. Nancy Gardner asked about the designation of the sites studied as areas that might be developed and the fact that Buck Gully and Morning Canyon cannot be developed. Ms. Wood indicted that in those areas the thought was development in terms of improvements or additions to the homes that already exist. Dr. Barnett also pointed out the information could be useful if any restoration activities occur. . Tom Webber asked why the report used data from occurrences in 1932 when determining the ranking for sites. Dr. Barnett explained that if there is a known/documented occurrence of species in an area, it must be reflected. The ranking system that was developed for the addendum does not rely on the old data and rank the area as a'T', the ranking was based on the old data and the fact that habitat exists that could support the species; however further survey work is necessary. Jan Vandersloot asked about the MacArthur/San Miguel site, he submitted information to Sharon Wood about the area (copies will be provided with the agenda packet for 12/8). After discussion, it appears the site studied (Newport Village) was not the area intended by staff. Phillip Bettencourt asked if this documentation would be satisfactory for the Coastal Commission staff for LCP purposes. Patrick Alford indicated comments had not yet been received on the Coastal Resources chapter; however based on other comments he is not sure that this will necessarily satisfy them. Gus Chabre asked what was happening with the eelgrass issue since it was not addressed in the addendum. Mr. Alford responded by saying that the direction he has received from the Mayor and LCP Certification Committee is that staff is rd to develop policy(s) with the strategy of establishing a baseline and try to avoid conflicts between the Army Corps of Engineers and the Coastal Commission. Ron Yeo asked about the timing of the LCP certification. Mr. Alford could not give a definitive answer yet, staff has revised Chapters, 1, 2 and 3 and Chapter 4 is underway. After revisions, the next step is to go to local hearings which may occur in the first part of next year. Tom Webber pointed out that the small orientation maps in the lower left corner of the Addendum attachments do not match the maps. Dr. Barnett indicated he would have that looked into. Mr. Chabre asked about the impacts of the properties adjacent to the ranked sites. Mr. Alford responded that in most of those cases, a Coastal Development Permit will need to be issued., Mr. Bartolic asked Ms. Wood about the parameters used in the selection of the sites included in the study and if economics had any impact. Ms. Wood stated that economics had no impact; the areas were selected based on the staffs knowledge of the City, past discussions about different areas, agreements like CIOSA and open space areas. Charles Remley asked about the mapping of coastal dunes which change regularly. Dr. Barnett agreed that the dunes change regularly and stated that the mapping is used to reduce areas of concern, rather than rank the whole area as coastal dune. V. Discussion of Future Agenda Items Sharon Wood advised that additional work has been done on the Traffic Study and will be brought back at the next meeting on December 8t'. Woodie Tescher also thought a tentative schedule for the group would be presented at the next meeting. VI. Public Comments No comments offered. W,