SECTION 7.0
COVERED ACTIVITIES/ALLOWABLE USES
7.1 COVERED ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE CRITERIA AREA AND PQP LANDS
Public and private Development, including construction of buildings, structures, infrastructure and all alterations of the land, that are carried out by Permittees, Participatory Special Entities, Third Parties Granted Take Authorization and others within the Plan Area, that are outside of the Criteria Area and PQP Lands are permitted under the Plan, subject to consistency with MSHCP policies that apply outside the Criteria Area (such as policies related to Riparian and Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools, Narrow Endemic Plant Species, Additional Survey Needs and Procedures, and Funding/Fee Issues).
7.2 COVERED ACTIVITIES WITHIN EXISTING PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC LANDS
The following is a discussion of Covered Activities within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands. Some of these activities may be proposed on federal lands, or may involve federal agency approvals (i.e., have a federal "nexus"). To the extent that these Covered Activities that involve a federal nexus are determined to affect federally listed species and as such require a Section 7 consultation with the USFWS under FESA, Incidental Take of listed species would occur through the Section 7 process, not through the MSHCP, however, the USFWS Obligations and Assurances provided for in Section 14.9 of the Implementing Agreement would apply.
7.2.1 Existing Roads Within Existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands
There are many existing roadways within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands, including interstates, freeways, State highways, city and county maintained roadways, as well as local roads, which are not city, or county maintained that provide property access. This latter category of other maintained roadways are generally maintained by the adjacent property owners, either individually or collectively. Table 7-1 provides an estimate summarizing the extent of these various types of existing roadways which are permitted to remain within Public/Quasi-Public Lands.
➤ Covered Road Maintenance Activities Within Public/Quasi-Public Lands
Privately Maintained Roads
Maintenance Activities on "Roadways Maintained by Others" are afforded limited coverage, subject to the submittal of an application for Certificate of Inclusion. The covered Maintenance Activities for these roadways is substantially limited in scope, including only such grading as necessary to restore a smooth driving surface, maintain existing graded shoulders within the existing rights-of-way, and essential weed abatement, excluding the application of any herbicides. Guidelines are provided in Appendix C which would minimize and avoid impacts to sensitive species and Habitats occurring adjacent to the existing roadway.
Publicly Maintained Roads
Some of the existing County maintained unpaved roads may be paved within the existing roadbed as future traffic, safety and/or environmental conditions warrant. In addition, safety improvements to other publicly maintained existing roadways within Public/Quasi-Public Lands are Covered Activities. Guidelines are provided in Appendix C which would minimize and avoid impacts to sensitive species and Habitats occurring adjacent to the existing roadway.
Necessary operation and Maintenance Activities conducted for safety purposes would be permitted within Public/Quasi-Public Lands. These activities include the following:
Maintenance and operation activities conducted for safety purposes, as described above, are subject to compliance with Best Management Practices (BMPs), as detailed in Appendix C of this document.
7.2.2 Planned Roads Within Existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands
Circulation Element Roads
New Circulation Element roads, or improvements to existing Circulation Element roads proposed within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands include Cajalco Road, Butterfield Stage Road, Anza Road, Bautista Canyon Road, Gilman Springs Road and Roads crossing the Santa Ana River, including a potential new crossing at Schleisman Avenue. Siting, design and construction of these facilities shall be subject to the guidelines provided in Sections 7.5.1, 7.5.2, and 7.5.3, and will also be subject to the Best Management Practices identified in Appendix C.
Impacts to Habitats within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands shall be compensated by purchase and dedication into the MSHCP Conservation Area of land that is in addition to the Additional Reserve Lands.
Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP Corridor
Two east-west CETAP alternatives for the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore transportation Corridor have been selected for further analysis: Alternatives 1 and 5. Alternative 1 includes two options, 1a and 1b, and Alternative 5 includes three options, 5a, 5c and 5e. In addition, there are two hybrid options that involve portions of alignment segments from various alternatives. Only one of these east-west CETAP alternatives will be chosen to be constructed. A complete description of the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore Corridor is provided later in this section. The purpose of this discussion is to identify the portions of the Corridor that are proposed to encroach upon existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands.
Portions of the proposed alignment for Alternatives 1a and 1b, and Hybrids 1 and 3 encroach into existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands. The impacted areas are currently part of existing reserves for Stephens' kangaroo rat. Table 7-2 provides an estimate of the total acreage of impact that these alignments will have.
In the areas where these impacts occur, the estimated width of right-of-way for the Corridor is approximately 500 feet. The facility will potentially include the following elements:
No interchanges are proposed within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands. Any interchanges that may be proposed in the future with Public/Quasi-Public Lands will not be covered and will require an amendment to the MSHCP. Maintenance Activities that are proposed for the portions of the CETAP Corridor that may be located within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands are the same as those listed in Section 7.2.1.
Guidelines for construction of wildlife crossings for the portions of the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP Corridor that encroach on existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands are addressed in Section 7.5.2. Construction guidelines are listed for this facility are included in Section 7.5.3. Siting and design guidelines contain in Section 7.5.1 apply only to the specific alignment and design of this facility, as the general alignment has been analyzed in the MSHCP. This facility is also subject to the Best Management Practices outlined in Appendix C. Impacts to Habitats within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands shall be compensated by purchase and dedication into the MSHCP Conservation Area of land that is in addition to the Additional Reserve Lands.
7.2.3 Cajalco Road Realignment and Widening
The transportation agencies are continuing their planning process for the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP Corridor. To ensure flexibility, the transportation agencies are proposing a process to include as a Covered Activity, an alternative to the alignment northerly of Lake Mathews currently under study, as described in Section 7.3.5. If it is not Feasible to build the CETAP Corridor in the alignment north of Lake Mathews, the proposed alternative involves the realignment and widening of Cajalco Road south of Lake Mathews to a four-lane arterial status, or other configuration that could be demonstrated to meet the criteria outlined in this section. The alternative would be proposed in place of the CETAP alternative between El Sobrante Road and the Temescal Wash.
The Cajalco Road alternative would involve the realignment of existing Cajalco Road and the construction of a new four-lane divided roadway, or other configuration that could be demonstrated to meet the criteria outlined in this section, to replace the existing two-lane roadway. The road improvements will follow the CETAP alternative alignment from I-215 westerly to a location approximately 9 miles east of I-15, at roughly the intersection of existing Cajalco Road and El Sobrante Road. At that location the proposed Cajalco Road Option alignment will continue in a south and westerly direction, while the CETAP alternative alignment travels northwesterly. The greatest distance between the two alignments is approximately three miles, at a location that is south of the western end of Lake Mathews. The Cajalco Road Option joins the CETAP Alternative alignment again approximately 1 mile east of I-15. The area within the gap between the two alignments is almost entirely within the existing Lake Mathews Reserve.
Should this option be selected, the CETAP Alternative north of Lake Mathewswould not be constructed as a CETAP Corridor.
The following outlines the proposed process to include the Cajalco Road realignment and widening alternative as a Covered Activity:
An equivalency analysis shall be provided by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) for review and concurrence by the Wildlife Agencies in narrative and graphic form comparing the effects/benefits of the proposed project with the northerly CETAP alternative. The analysis shall consider specific project design features, including consideration of the siting and design guidelines, and guidelines for construction of wildlife crossings contained in Section 7.5.2, as well as the Best Management Practices contained in Appendix C to this document. A primary issue for consideration in the analysis of equivalency is habitat fragmentation. Potential adverse impacts related to fragmentation of Habitats within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands and Additional Reserve Lands shall be thoroughly analyzed and discussed. The equivalency analysis will address the following categories:
- Effects on Habitats
- Effects on Covered Species
- Effects on Core Areas (as identified on the MSHCP Core and Linkage map)
- Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages (as identified on the MSHCP Core and Linkage map)
- Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area configuration and management (such as increases or decreases in edge)
- Effects on ecotones (defined as areas of adjoining Vegetation Communities, generally characterized by greater biological diversity) and other conditions affecting species diversity (such as invasion by exotics)
- Effects on and consistency with existing HCPs and/or NCCPs.
The equivalency analysis shall draw conclusions regarding the degree to which the Cajalco realignment and widening project is considered to be biologically equivalent or superior to the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP alternative. If the project is determined not to be biologically equivalent or superior by the Wildlife Agencies in the review and concurrence process, the project will be considered a Major Amendment, and required to follow the procedures described in Section 6.10 of this document.
RCTC shall meet and confer with the Wildlife Agencies to discuss road alignment and design issues and subsequently submit the equivalency analysis in writing to the Wildlife Agencies for their review. If the Wildlife Agencies do not concur with the analysis, the project shall be subject to a Major Amendment. If the Wildlife Agencies concur, or if they fail to respond within the 60-day period, the project would be permitted as a Covered Activity.
Specific design considerations that shall be incorporated into the project to facilitate the Biological Equivalency Determination include the following:
- Construction of Cajalco Road shall be designed in such a way as to facilitate the movements of avian species, including the California gnatcatcher and least Bells vireo by depressing the roadbed below the level of the adjacent natural grade, to the extent practical.
- Beginning at Gavilan Road and proceeding westerly for roughly 3.4 miles, Cajalco Road shall be realigned to the southerly edge of the existing reserve in such a way as to minimize the existing reserve fragmentation. Once the road is relocated, the existing roadbed shall be removed and the area returned to a natural state including revegetation with native materials. Any remaining portions of existing Cajalco Road not needed to provide for local access will also be removed and restored.
- All stream crossing shall be designed to facilitate the movement of mammal species. Design considerations will include bridges and/or undercrossings, particularly in the western portions of the alignment that contain more significant topography. Wildlife crossings shall include design parameters that will ensure their success, including natural lighting/line of sight configurations, and fencing to direct wildlife movement to the crossings. Additional considerations for small mammals shall include provision of undercrossings in the flatter areas of the alignment, immediately south of the lake. Crossing opportunities shall be numerous through this area and will be focused on the most opportunistic movement features. Please refer to Section 7.5.2 for more details regarding guidelines for wildlife crossings.
- Impacts related to fragmentation and direct impacts to existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands shall be mitigated through the acquisition and Conservation of lands that are in addition to the 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands at an appropriate ratio to support the findings of biological equivalency.
The equivalency analysis shall demonstrate that the enhanced design features for Cajalco Road together with project-specific mitigation, which shall require Conservation of land in addition to the Additional Reserve Lands, shall result in equivalent conservation value when compared to the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP Alignment Alternatives, for the portion of the alignment that would be replaced by the Cajalco Road realignment and widening. In addition, for any portions of the alignment that would traverse the existing Lake Mathews Reserve, consistency with the Lake Mathews Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan shall be demonstrated.
7.2.4 Future Facilities Within Public/Quasi-Public Lands
Future facilities such as water, sewer, electrical, gas and solid waste facilities, that are described in more detail in Section 7.3.9 would also be permitted within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands subject to a finding of equivalent conservation provided through individual project mitigation. An equivalency analysis shall be provided by either the Permittee or the entity requesting a Certificate of Inclusion. The analysis shall be provided for review and concurrence by the Wildlife Agencies in narrative and graphic form comparing the effects/benefits of the proposed project including specific mitigation and compensation for lost conservation values, with the conditions prior to facility implementation. The analysis shall consider specific project design features, including consideration of the siting and design guidelines, contained in Section 7.5.1, as well as the Best Management Practices contained in Appendix C of this document. The equivalency analysis shall address the following categories:
- Effects on Habitats
- Effects on Covered Species
- Effects on Core Areas (as identified on the MSHCP Core and Linkage map)
- Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages (as identified on the MSHCP Core and Linkage map)
- Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area configuration and management (such as increases or decreases in edge)
- Effects on ecotones (defined as areas of adjoining Vegetation Communities, generally characterized by greater biological diversity) and other conditions affecting species diversity (such as invasion by exotics)
Impacts to Habitats within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands shall be compensated by purchase and dedication into the MSHCP Conservation Area of land at not less than a ratio of 1:1 that is in addition to the Additional Reserve Lands.
7.2.5 Maintenance of Other Existing Facilities Within Public/ Quasi-Public Lands by Permittees
Public facilities within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands may be maintained by Permittees within the existing disturbance area of each existing facility, and without any changes in the operating characteristics of the facility that would affect Covered Species.
7.2.6 Existing Agricultural Uses Within Local Public/Quasi-Public Lands
Existing Agricultural Operations within Local Public/Quasi-Public Lands are Covered Activities subject to the provisions of Section 6.2 of the Plan.
7.3 COVERED ACTIVITIES INSIDE CRITERIA AREA
7.3.1 Public and Private Development Consistent with MSHCP Criteria
As discussed in Section 3.0 of this document, public and private Development within the Criteria Area that is determined to be consistent with the Criteria is considered a Covered Activity.
7.3.2 Single-Family Homes on Existing Parcels Within the Criteria Area
Development of individual single-family homes on existing parcels, in accordance with existing land use regulations is a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area. As described in Section 6.1.1 of this document, there is currently a process for siting a home on an existing lot. The location of a single family home or mobile home on an existing lot is determined by factors such as access, topography/terrain, zoning development standards including setbacks, soil types, presence of earthquake fault lines, leach fields, presence of oak trees and location of lot within a high fire hazard area. Therefore, an expedited review process, through the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Process has been developed to assist in determining the appropriate location of a single family home or mobile home on an existing lot within the Criteria Area.
An application for the issuance of a grading permit for an individual single family home on an existing lot or a site preparation permit for a mobile home on an existing lot within the Criteria Area will be subject to review against the MSHCP Conservation Criteria solely in order to determine the location of a building foot print area and any necessary access road(s) on the least sensitive portion of the lot. A habitat assessment may be required in order to assist in determining the most appropriate location for the area of disturbance and any necessary access road(s). A habitat assessment for purposes of this provision shall include mapping of the vegetation at sufficient detail to identify sensitive areas. Upon completion of the review, the Permittee will determine the location of the area of disturbance, and the location of any necessary road(s). Any necessary firebreaks will be included within the area of disturbance.
If during the review period it is determined that all or part of the property may benefit assembly of the MSHCP Conservation Area, the Permittee may negotiate with the property owner to acquire the entire lot or portion thereof or determine which incentives may apply in order to acquire a conservation easement over that portion of the property not necessary for access road(s) and outside of the building footprint area. If the Permittee is unable to reach agreement with the property owner concerning the acquisition of the entire lot or a conservation easement over a portion of the lot upon completion of the review period, the property owner may proceed with the processing of the grading or site preparation permit application. However, compliance with the location of the building footprint area as well as the location of any necessary road(s) will be required.
Trend data collected from 1995 to mid 2002 suggests that, on average, there is development of approximately 75 single-family homes on lots averaging approximately 9 acres in size within the Criteria Area on an annual basis. Therefore, the Single-Family Home Expedite Process will have the potential to affect approximately 675 acres of land within the Criteria Area annually. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that approximately 50% of that area, or 338 acres potentially impacted by such Development will be within areas of sensitive Habitat that are considered desirable for inclusion in the MSHCP Conservation Area. This is based on the overall ratio of Additional Reserve Lands to Criteria Area, which is roughly one half. Based on the trend data and average parcel size, that 338 acres represents approximately 38 parcels. It is estimated that the Permittees will be able to successfully negotiate with 75%, or 29 of the 38 property owners through the Property Owner Initiated Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Process. Therefore, it is assumed that Conservation that conforms to the Criteria will be achieved on approximately 253 of the 338 acres of land per year that is potentially impacted through this process. It is assumed that the remaining approximately 85 acres will be developed in accordance with the Criteria and will become unavailable for Conservation on an annual basis, as a result of the Single-Family Home Expedite Process.
The inability to incorporate into the MSHCP Conservation Area approximately 85 acres of land that is desirable for Conservation throughout the Plan Area on an annual basis will not reduce the overall acreage required for Additional Reserve Lands. So while Conservation may be precluded on an estimated average of 85 acre per year, it is not expected that this will adversely affect the ability to assemble a viable MSHCP Conservation Area, since there is adequate additional land within the Criteria Area that could be acquired in lieu of the areas subject to Development under the Single-Family Home Expedite Process.
In addition, annual reporting will determine whether the activity of single-family home Development occurs in a manner that is consistent with the assumptions used for the MSHCP analysis. The number of grading or site preparation permits for the construction or location of a single family home or a mobile home on an existing lot located within the Criteria Area will be monitored and reported on at least an annual basis in order to insure that appropriate assembly of the MSHCP Conservation Area is occurring. Corrective action will be taken if necessary, to direct Reserve Assembly activities in a manner that adjusts for single-family home construction activities to avoid the adverse foreclosure of Reserve Assembly options.
7.3.3 Agricultural Lands Within the Criteria Area
Existing agricultural uses and conversion of natural lands to agricultural use, as defined and outlined in Section 6.2 of this document, will be allowed as a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area. New conversions to agricultural use within the Criteria Area are covered up to an established threshold of 10,000 acres over the life of the Plan. Agricultural Operations, as defined in Section 6.2, include the production of all plants (horticulture), fish farms, animals and related production activities, including the planting, cultivation and tillage of the soil, dairying, and apiculture; and the production, plowing, seeding, cultivation, growing, harvesting, pasturing and fallowing for the purpose of crop rotation of any agricultural commodity, including viticulture, apiculture, horticulture, and the breeding, feeding and raising of livestock, horses, fur-bearing animals, fish, or poultry and all uses conducted as a normal part of such operations; provided such actions are in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.
The guidelines for coverage of Agricultural Operations and mechanisms for implementing the New Agricultural Lands Cap are discussed in detail in Section 6.2. The purpose of this discussion is to establish a process for monitoring New Agricultural Lands and for ensuring that Reserve Assembly activities are adjusted to account for New Agricultural Lands in the Criteria Area.
In order to verify the location of the Existing Agricultural Operations, the County will establish a database identifying Existing Agricultural Operations ("Existing Agricultural Operations Database") on or before the Effective Date of the Implementing Agreement or the issuance of the Section 10(a) Permit and the NCCP Authorization. The New Agricultural Lands Cap of 10,000 acres within the Criteria Area will be applied to Agricultural Operations that are in addition to the activities recorded in the Existing Agricultural Operations Database. The 10,000 acre New Agricultural Lands Cap represents approximately 3 percent of the total acreage contained within the Criteria Area.
If New Agricultural Lands conversions result in the need to acquire Additional Reserve Lands that were not contemplated in the Criteria, it will be demonstrated that the Additional Reserve Lands meet not only the total acreage requirements of the Plan, but also the conservation functions and values (including reserve design and configuration considerations) specified in the Plan. It is anticipated that there will be adequate and appropriate land available for Conservation within the Criteria Area that could compensate for areas potentially considered for Conservation that will be made unavailable through the agricultural conversion allowance. Annual review of MSHCP implementation and Reserve Assembly will provide a mechanism for addressing potential issues associated with Reserve Assembly that may be brought about by agricultural conversions within the Criteria Area. Corrective action will then be taken to direct Reserve Assembly activities in a manner that adjusts for agricultural activities and avoids the adverse foreclosure of Reserve Assembly options.
Because there are agricultural activities that do not require discretionary actions by the County, such activities may be difficult to monitor through review of permitting. Aerial photographs of the Criteria Area will be reviewed every three years to determine the level of activity occurring within that period. Through the annual reporting process, the trend of agricultural activity will be examined to determine if Reserve Assembly options are being precluded.
To estimate the potential effects of New Agricultural Lands in relation to the MSHCP, it is assumed that approximately 50% of the agricultural conversions that take place within the Criteria Area will be consistent with the Criteria. Therefore, it is assumed that approximately 5,000 acres of New Agricultural Lands will occur within areas considered desirable for Conservation under the Criteria. This represents approximately 1.5% of the total Additional Reserve Lands proposed to be acquired within the Criteria Area. Tracking of MSHCP implementation, and adjustments to Reserve Assembly strategies as outlined in this section, will provide a mechanism to ensure that adequate acreage of Additional Reserve Lands is being acquired, and that appropriate reserve design and configuration are being achieved.
7.3.4 Existing Roads Within the Criteria Area
Maintenance of existing roads within the Criteria Area is considered a Covered Activity for Permittees, Participating Special Entities, and Third Parties Granted Take Authorization. Existing roads within the Criteria Area are not anticipated to be included in the total acreage of Additional Reserve Lands and will not be included in the MSHCP Conservation Area. However, maintenance and minor modifications to existing roads may result in impacts to listed species. Specified road maintenance activities as outlined in this section, are Covered Activities under the Plan. Existing roadways within the Criteria Area include interstates, freeways, State highways, City and County maintained roadways, as well as local roads, which are not City, or County maintained that provide property access. This latter category of other maintained roadways are generally maintained by the adjacent property owners, either individually or collectively. Table 7-3 provides an estimate summarizing the extent of these various types of existing roadways which are permitted to remain within the Criteria Area.
➤ Covered Road Maintenance Activities Within the Criteria Area
Privately Maintained Roads
Maintenance Activities on "Roadways Maintained by Others" will be afforded limited coverage, subject to the submittal of an application for Certificate of Inclusion. The covered Maintenance Activities for these roadways will be substantially limited in scope, including only such grading as necessary to restore a smooth driving surface, maintain existing graded shoulders within the existing rights-of-way, and essential weed abatement, excluding the application of any herbicides. The construction guidelines provided in Section 7.5.3, as well as Best Management Practices outlined in Appendix C, will minimize and avoid impacts to sensitive species and Habitats occurring adjacent to the existing roadway.
Publicly Maintained Roads
Some of the existing County maintained unpaved roads may be paved within the existing roadbed as future traffic, safety and/or environmental conditions warrant. In addition, safety improvements to other publicly maintained existing roadways within the Criteria Area are Covered Activities. The construction guidelines provided in Section 7.5.3, as well as Best Management Practices outlined in Appendix C, will minimize and avoid impacts to sensitive species and Habitats occurring adjacent to the existing roadway.
Necessary operation and Maintenance Activities conducted for safety purposes will be Covered Activities within the Criteria Area. These activities include, but are not limited to, the following:
Maintenance and operation activities conducted for safety purposes, as described above, are subject to compliance with Best Management Practices (BMPs), as detailed in Appendix C of this document.
7.3.5 Planned Roads Within the Criteria Area
Planned roadways are defined as either existing facilities that require improvements (i.e., widening) or as new facilities to be constructed. Planned roadways include seven types of roadways, freeways, CETAP Corridors and other major facilities that have been identified as part of the General Plan circulation element (Figure 7-1). Planned roadways are depicted in a general fashion on the County Circulation Element (Figure 7-1).
Roads with special environmental issues due to their location within particularly sensitive areas are listed in Table 7-4, which identifies specific considerations for design and alignment of these roads.
Evaluations of planned roadways with respect to Conservation of biological resources have been conducted throughout the MSHCP planning process. As a result, only those planned roadways identified in this section are Covered Activities within the Criteria Area. Roadways other than those identified in this section are not covered without an amendment to the MSHCP in accordance with the procedures described in Section 6.10 of this document. Design and siting guidelines for planned roadways, presented in this section will be implemented to ensure that planned roadways are sited, designed, and constructed in a manner consistent with MSHCP conservation objectives.
Planned roadways, which include improvements to existing roadways and construction of new roadways, are proposed to occur within the Criteria Area to serve future Development anticipated under the General Plans of the Permittees, including planned state and federal highway improvements.
Four categories of planned roadways are depicted on Figure 7-1: (1) circulation element roadways, (2) SR-79 North Corridor, (3) freeways, and (4) CETAP Corridors. These facilities are generally described as follows:
Circulation Element Roadways
Seven types of roadways are proposed as part of the General Plan Circulation Element: expressways (184' ROW), urban arterials (152' ROW), arterials (128' ROW), major roads (118' ROW), mountain arterials (110' ROW), secondary roads (100' ROW) and collector roads (74' ROW). The improvement/ construction of circulation element roadways shown on Figure 7-1 are Covered Activities within the Criteria Area, as well as the operation and Maintenance Activities conducted for these facilities. The Circulation element roads included in Figure 7-1 and that are analyzed in this section include a composite of County and Cities General Plan Circulation Elements.
Approximately 5,840 acres of roadways will be improved/constructed within the Criteria Area. Table 7-5 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of circulation element roadways within the Criteria Area.
State Route 79 Realignment (Newport Road to Gilman Springs Road)
The RCTC intends to preserve right-of-way and construct an improved State Route 79 (SR-79) Transportation facility. As previously identified, improvements to the portion of SR-79 south of Domenigoni Parkway are covered under the MSHCP as part of the proposed circulation element of the County General Plan. The northerly segment, from Newport Road to Gilman Springs Road, includes construction activities between Newport Road and the southern approach to the Sanderson Avenue bridge over the San Jacinto River. As construction is not proposed north of the San Jacinto River, impacts will not occur to Existing Linkage C and Proposed Core 3. However, this project has the potential to impact portions of Proposed Non-contiguous Habitat Blocks 6 and 7 and Existing Constrained Linkage B, as described in the discussion of Cores and Linkages (Section 3.2.3 of this document). Species proposed for Conservation within these areas are associated with vernal pool and alkali playa Habitats. Any impacts to these Habitats resulting from the road alignment will be required to demonstrate equivalent conservation value. The project is in the early planning phase and specific alignment Corridor alternatives have not been fully developed. The cross section for this project has not been defined, but is anticipated to conform to state standards for right-of-way requirements, thereby exceeding the County standards outlined in Section 7.3.5. Therefore, coverage for the northerly segment of SR-79, depending on impacts, may be subject to a determination of biologically equivalent or superior Conservation. The following outlines the proposed process to include the improvements and realignment of the northerly segment of State Route 79 as a Covered Activity:
If the project will not impact the Criteria Area, it would be considered a Covered Activity and would be subject to the design guidelines and BMPs outlined for circulation element roads, thus not requiring any further analysis.
If the alignment would result in impacts within the Criteria Area, a technical study will be provided by RCTC, for review and concurrence by the Wildlife Agencies, in narrative and graphic form identifying plant and wildlife impacts associated with the selected alignment of the SR-79 northerly segment. Also within the technical study, project proposals to replace habitat values from project impacts to Planning Species for Proposed Non-contiguous Habitat Blocks 6 and 7 and Existing Constrained Linkage B will be presented. An analysis in the technical study (equivalency analysis) will evaluate the replacement value of the project proposals against the project impacts. The project will consider specific project design features, including consideration of the siting and design guidelines, and guidelines for construction of wildlife crossings contained in Section 7.5.3, as well as the Best Management Practices contained in Appendix C of this document. If the alignment results in measurable impacts to the Criteria Area, the technical study will address the following categories:
- Effects on Habitats
- Effects on Planning Species for Proposed Non-contiguous Habitat Blocks 6 and 7 and Existing Constrained Linkage B
- Effects on Core Areas (as identified on the MSHCP Schematic Cores and Linkages Map, Figure 3-2)
- Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages (as identified on the MSHCP Schematic Cores and Linkages Map)
- Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area configuration and management (such as increases or decreases in edge)
RCTC will meet and confer with the Wildlife Agencies to discuss road alignment and design issues and subsequently submit the technical study, including the equivalency analysis, in writing to the Wildlife Agencies for their review. If the Wildlife Agencies do not concur with the technical study, the project will be subject to a Major Amendment. If the Wildlife Agencies concur, or if they fail to respond within the 60-day period, the project will be permitted as a Covered Activity.
Criteria for Determining Equivalency
The following criteria will be incorporated into the alignment selection and design process for the SR-79 northerly segment. Compliance with these criteria shall demonstrate compliance with the MSHCP.
• Determination of biological equivalency must be demonstrated and achieved within the area affected. Specifically, it must be demonstrated that the Conservation/mitigation proposed to achieve biological equivalency is within Subunit 4 of the San Jacinto Area Plan (Section 3.3.13 of this document) and/or Subunit 2 of the Harvest Valley/Winchester Area Plan (Section 3.3.4 of this document).
• The analysis of the effects on species will address:
• Parameters for analyzing effects on vernal pool/alkali playa Habitats will consider the pool area, hydrology, water quality issues, and the presence of species listed in these criteria.
• Potential means for achieving equivalency may include restoration of existing Habitats within the Area Plan Subunits, which may include the removal of existing uses including, land-use disturbances, ditches and drainage canals, and transportation and other types of infrastructure. Recognition will be provided to RCTC for the direct benefit(s) of implementing these activities, as well as to the secondary benefit(s) that result within and adjacent to Proposed Non-contiguous Habitat Block 7.
• Efforts to maintain and/or improve habitat conditions may include maintenance of existing conditions, natural generation or enhancement, or actual habitat creation, associated with a wide-range of effort and cost. The selection of the approach and method will be determined with technical merit and negotiated with RCTC. Typical definitions for this range of potential actions are provided in Section 5.2.1 of this document, and include maintenance, natural regeneration, enhancement, revegetation, restoration, and creation.
• The project will maintain hydrology to existing vernal pool/alkali playa Habitat to provide for the Conservation of the species listed in these criteria by either (1) maintaining natural hydrologic processes; or (2) designing/ implementing an engineered hydrologic solution that maintains the necessary hydrologic processes.
• The project will maintain Existing Constrained Linkage B, as identified on the Cores and Linkages Map (Section 3.2.3 of this document).
• The project will not preclude the ability to assemble Proposed Core 3 at the northern terminus of the alignment, as identified on the Cores and Linkages Map (Section 3.2.3 of this document).
• The project will maintain Existing Constrained Linkage C, as identified on the Cores and Linkages Map (Section 3.2.3 of this document).
• Impacts related to the fragmentation of vernal pool/alkali playa Habitat, due to the removal of surface hydrology and the inability of the project to meet the criteria identified above, may be mitigated through the acquisition and Conservation of lands that are in addition to the 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands at an appropriate ratio to support the findings of biological equivalency for the project.
Freeways
State freeways are also shown on Figure 7-1 and they include I-215, I-15, I-10, SR-60, and SR-91. Freeways are operated and maintained by Caltrans and include interchanges that connect these facilities to other freeways, state highways and local roads. Caltrans has identified preliminary improvements for these facilities that have been included in the analysis as Covered Activities.
Interstate 215 Improvements
Interstate 215 is currently a 4-lane facility from the I-215 interchange to the San Jacinto River crossing, and a 6-lane facility from that point to the SR-60 interchange. Ultimate improvements include widening to 8 regular travel lanes, with 4 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes and 2 auxiliary lanes from I-215 to SR-60. Additional improvements may include 75 feet of rail Corridor within the alignment.
Interstate 15 Improvements
Interstate 15 is currently an 8-lane facility from the San Diego County Line to the San Bernardino County Line. Improvements include addition of 4 HOV lanes and 2 auxiliary lanes, with an additional 75 feet of rail Corridor within the alignment.
Interstate 10 Improvements
Within the Plan Area, I-10 is an 8-lane facility. The ultimate improvements will result in the addition of 4 HOV lanes, 2 auxiliary lanes and a 75-foot wide rail Corridor.
State Route 60 Improvements
From the San Bernardino County line to the I-215 separation, SR-60 is currently a 6-lane facility. To the east of I-215, SR-60 is a 4-lane facility. Improvements will include widening the facility through the Plan Area to 8 lanes, with 4 additional HOV lanes, 2 auxiliary lanes and a 75-foot wide rail Corridor.
State Route 91 Improvements
SR-91 ranges from 6 to 12 lanes within the Plan Area, including HOV lanes from the Orange County line to Magnolia Street. Proposed improvements will include widening and lane reconfigurations that will result in 8 regular travel lanes, 4 HOV lanes and 2 auxiliary lanes, with an additional 75-foot wide rail Corridor.
Approximately 360 to 400 acres of freeways are proposed to occur within the Criteria Area. Table 7-6 presents the Vegetation Communities that will be impacted by the improvement/construction of freeways within the Criteria Area. Since the precise right-of-ways widths and alignments for these facilities are not currently known, potential impacts are presented as acreage ranges.
In addition to the freeways listed, Caltrans maintains jurisdiction over other state highway facilities including the following: SR-74, SR-79, SR-371 and SR-71. Impacts associated with these facilities are included with the circulation element roadways.
CETAP Corridors
Two CETAP transportation Corridors are proposed to be located within the MSHCP Plan Area: a north-south CETAP transportation Corridor from Winchester to Temecula and an east-west transportation Corridor from Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore. Two additional "out-of-county" Corridors are also contemplated, but their connections outside of the MSHCP Plan Area have not been confirmed or analyzed in the MSHCP. Multiple alternatives for the Winchester to Temecula and the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore transportation Corridors are currently being contemplated; however, only one east-west Corridor and one north-south Corridor will be selected and built. Several of the alternatives include multiple options; however, only one of the options will be selected. Alternatives that are not ultimately selected may remain as part of the General Plan Circulation Element if an underlying designation, such as expressway or urban arterial, exists for the alignment.
The estimated width of right-of-way for the CETAP Corridors ranges between approximately 500 and 1,000 feet. The facilities will potentially include the following elements:
The general alignments of the Winchester to Temecula and the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore CETAP transportation Corridors and the San Bernardino to Moreno Valley Corridor are described below:
Winchester to Temecula
Two north-south CETAP alternatives for the Winchester to Temecula transportation Corridor have been selected for further analysis: Alternatives 1 and 7. Alternative 7 includes two options, 7a and 7b. The northern terminus of both Alternatives 1 and 7 is located at Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road. As mentioned previously, only one north-south Corridor, either Alternative 1, 7a or 7b, will be ultimately constructed. The alternatives that are not selected will be constructed as a circulation element roadway if such underlying designation exists for the alternative.
• Alternative 1 continues south along Winchester Road until Scott Road. The alignment then proceeds west along Scott Road to I-215.
• From the Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road intersection, Alternative 7a will generally proceed west and southwest to the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue. Alternative 7a continues west along Craig Avenue to I-215, approximately 1.0 mile south of Newport Road.
• Alternative 7b will generally proceed west and southwest to the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue from the Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road intersection. From the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue, Alternative 7b continues in a southwest direction to Scott Road and then along Scott Road to I-215.
Table 7-7 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities occurring within the Criteria Area for Winchester to Temecula Alternative 1.
Alternatives 7a and 7b proceed along a common alignment from the intersection of Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road to the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue. Approximately 535 to 555 acres of this common alignment occurs outside of the Criteria Area and approximately 10 to 15 acres, comprised of Agricultural lands, occur in Public/Quasi-Public Land.
From the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue, Alternative 7a continues west along Craig Avenue to I-215, approximately 1.0 mile south of Newport Road. Alternative 7b continues in a southwest direction to Scott Road, from the intersection of Craig and Leon Avenue, and then along Scott Road to I-215. Neither of these segments of Alternative 7a or 7b will occur in Public/Quasi-Public Land or the Criteria Area.
In summary, for the Winchester to Temecula transportation Corridor alternatives, Alternative 1 will impact approximately 130 acres within the Criteria Area; Alternative 7a will impact 10 to 15 acres within Public/Quasi-Public Land; and Alternative 7b will impact 10 to 15 acres within Public/Quasi-Public Land. Only one north-south Corridor will be covered under the MSHCP.
Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore
Two east-west CETAP alternatives for the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore transportation Corridor have been selected for further analysis: Alternatives 1 and 5. Alternative 1 includes two options, 1a and 1b, and Alternative 5 includes three options, 5a, 5c and 5e. In addition, there are two hybrid options that involve portions of alignment segments from various alternatives. Only one of these east-west CETAP alternatives will be chosen to be constructed.
• The eastern terminus of Alternative 1a for the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore Corridor is located at Sanderson Avenue and Ramona Expressway. This alignment generally follows Ramona Expressway west to the I-215. West of I-215, the alignment continues along Cajalco Road to El Sobrante Road. The alignment proceeds along El Sobrante Road to La Sierra Avenue. From El Sobrante Road and La Sierra Avenue, Alternative 1a will follow new alignment to the I-15/Cajalco Road interchange. The new alignment between El Sobrante Road and La Sierra Avenue and the I-15/Cajalco Road interchange will be located north and west of Lake Mathews. As shown on Figure 7-1, Alternative 1a traverses northwest from the El Sobrante Road/La Sierra Avenue interchange towards Eagle Valley and the Home Gardens communities, before heading south near Corona and staying east of El Cerrito to Cajalco Road and I-15.
• The eastern terminus of Alternative 1b for the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore Corridor is located at Sanderson Avenue and Ramona Expressway. This alignment generally follows Ramona Expressway west to the I-215. West of I-215 the alignment continues along Cajalco Road to El Sobrante Road. The alignment proceeds along El Sobrante Road to La Sierra Avenue. From El Sobrante Road and La Sierra Avenue, Alternative 1b will follow new alignment to the I-15 and Cajalco Road interchange. The new alignment between El Sobrante Road and La Sierra Avenue and the I-15/Cajalco Road interchange will be located north and west of Lake Mathews. As shown on Figure 7-1, Alternative 1b includes an option to continue along Eagle Canyon Road from La Sierra Avenue and El Sobrante Road to I-15 and Cajalco Road.
• The eastern terminus of Alternative 5a is located at Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road. The alignment continues west along Domenigoni Parkway, northwest along the San Jacinto Branch rail line to Ethanac Road, and west along Ethanac Road. At Ethanac and SR-74, the alignment proceeds southwest along SR-74 to I-15.
• The eastern terminus of Alternative 5c is located at Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road. The alignment continues west along Domenigoni Parkway and then northwest along the San Jacinto Branch rail line to Ethanac Road. The alignment proceeds along Ethanac Road until SR-74/Ethanac Road intersection, where the alignment turns southwest along SR-74 to the extension of Nichols Road. Alternative 5c follows Nichols Road to I-15.
• The eastern terminus of Alternative 5e is located at Domenigoni Parkway and Winchester Road. The alignment continues west along Domenigoni Parkway, northwest along the San Jacinto Branch rail line to Ethanac Road, and west along Ethanac Road. From Ethanac Road, Alternative 5e will continue along new alignment paralleling SR-74 approximately 1 mile to the east. This alternative will cross SR-74 at the extension of Nichols Road and then continue along Nichols Road to I-15.
Tables 7-8 and 7-9, summarize the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of Alternative 1b and the shared alignment portion of Alternatives 5a, 5c and 5e, respectively, within the Criteria Area.
From approximately 1 mile east of the SR-74 and Ethanac Road interchange, the alignment for Alternatives 5a and 5c diverge from Alternative 5e. Alternatives 5a and 5c continue west along Ethanac Road and then southwest along SR-74. The alignment for Alternative 5a diverges from 5c at the intersection of the extension of Nichols Road and SR-74. Alternative 5a follows SR-74 to I-15, while Alternative 5c continues along Nichols Road to I-15.
Alternative 5a traverses portions of the Criteria Area. Table 7-10 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of Alternative 5a within the Criteria Area.
Table 7-11 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of Alternative 5c within the Criteria Area.
Alternative 5e proceeds along new alignment paralleling SR-74, approximately 1 mile to the east. This alternative will cross SR-74 at the extension of Nichols Road and then continue along Nichols Road to I-15. Table 7-12 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of Alternative 5e within the Criteria Area.
In summary, fewer acres within the Criteria Area are anticipated to be impacted if the Winchester to Temecula transportation Corridor Alternatives 7a or 7b and the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore transportation Corridor Alternative 5a are ultimately selected. Greater impacts are anticipated if the Winchester to Temecula transportation Corridor Alternative 1 and the Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore transportation Corridor Alternative 1b are ultimately selected. Only one east-west transportation Corridor will be covered under the MSHCP.
San Bernardino to Moreno Valley Corridor
The San Bernardino to Moreno Valley Corridor will be located in the vicinity of I-215 and Ironwood Avenue, Riverside County and extend to California Street in San Bernardino County. This facility will be tunneled under the Box Springs Reserve. The tunnel portals will be sited outside of the Criteria Area. The Corridor will proceed east from Box Springs Reserve generally along Center Street and span Reche Canyon Road before entering San Bernardino County.
This facility is covered under the MSHCP for direct, indirect and cumulative impacts within the MSHCP Plan Area. However, coverage is conditioned upon impacts outside of the MSHCP Plan Area being addressed. These include direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the facility in San Bernardino County. In the absence of a mechanism to comprehensively address the impacts outside of the Plan Area, an amendment to the MSHCP may be required to permit this facility within the MSHCP Conservation Area. The type of amendment, major or minor, will be determined once additional information is assembled regarding the design location of the facility and its relationship to potential impacts within San Bernardino County.
Table 7-13 summarizes the impacts to Vegetation Communities as a result of development of the San Bernardino to Moreno Valley Corridor within the Criteria Area.
Orange County - Riverside County Corridor
A transportation Corridor linking Orange County with Riverside County is currently under study by RCTC and OCTA. The Corridor is not currently contemplated in the Draft General Plan Circulation Element, but has been identified as a mitigation measure in the Draft EIR for the General Plan as a mitigation measure to reduce the significant traffic impacts associated with the General Plan.
There are six alternative alignment/location concepts (Alternatives A through F) under study. Only one alignment alternative would be selected. The selected alignment would be considered a Covered Activity under the MSHCP, subject to the criteria and conditions contained in this section. The MSHCP coverage applies only within the MSHCP Plan Area. In addition, it is acknowledged that if the selected alignment requires actions of the USFS, a separate FESA Section 7 consultation process between the USFS and the USFWS will be required.
The direct, indirect, cumulative and growth inducing impacts of the facility within the MSHCP Plan Area are addressed in the MSHCP Plan. In addition, for Alternatives A through D, indirect, cumulative and growth inducing impacts are considered to be addressed in the Orange County Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP, subject to satisfaction of the criteria contained in this section. This assumption is made due to the fact that the Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP addresses buildout within its planning area. Alternatives A through D of the proposed facility are not anticipated to affect buildout assumptions within the NCCP planning area because the primary impact of the facility would be on employment centers in the developed/non-preserve portions of the NCCP planning area.
For Alternatives E and F, direct, indirect, cumulative and growth inducing impacts of the facility outside of the MSHCP Plan Area are currently not addressed, but are required to be addressed and mitigated through the proposed Orange County Southern Subregion NCCP. Approval of the Southern Subregion NCCP Plan is required as a condition of coverage for these two alternatives, as further detailed in this section.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVES
Alternative A (I-15 to SR-241, North Expressway)
This alternative would be an elevated facility starting at the junction of I-15 and SR-91, following the BNSF Railroad alignment through North Corona then joining the SR-91 alignment in the vicinity of Prado Dam, then following the alignment of the SR-91 with elevated grade separation above the existing SR-91 and then directly joining the SR-241 There would be no direct connections to SR-91 after departing the I-15/SR-91 junction. This Corridor would follow existing transportation alignments. Based on this preliminary description, it is estimated that between approximately 130 and 170 acres of the facility would be located within the Criteria Area. Of that area, approximately 20 to 40 acres are comprised of natural Habitats, primarily grassland and riparian scrub/woodland.
Alternative B (SR-91 Expressway)
This alternative would be an elevated facility above and following the alignment of SR-91 from the I-15 connecting to the SR-241. This alignment would follow the exact alignment of SR-91. There would be no direct connections to SR-91 after departing the I-15/SR-91 junction. This alternative is expected to occupy between approximately 80 to 120 acres within the Criteria Area, containing approximately 20 to 40 acres of mostly grassland and riparian scrub/woodland.
Alternative C (I-15 to SR-91 to SR-241)
This alternative start near the junction of the I-15 and Cajalco Road. The road would head west following the outskirts of Corona in the south. Prior to entering the Cleveland National Forest, the facility would enter a tunnel section, and prior to joining the SR-91 alignment near Green River the Corridor daylights and joins the SR-91 alignment as an elevated facility, and then would follow the SR-91 alignment to the SR-241. There would be no direct connections to SR-91 after departing the I-15/Cajalco junction. Approximately 140 to 180 acres of the impact area of this alternative is expected to be within the Criteria Area. Of that area, approximately 80 to 100 acres of sensitive Habitats exist, consisting of mostly coastal sage scrub and grasslands.
Alternative D (I-15/Cajalco to SR-241/133)
This alternative start at the I-15 near Cajalco Road, and heads southwest. Prior to entering the Cleveland National Forest, the facility would enter a tunnel section. The facility would daylight past the forest and would intersect near the junction of SR-241 and SR-133. The non-tunnel bore sections, on both sides of the forest; would maximize use of viaducts for wildlife movement. Alternative D is anticipated to have approximately 80 to 120 acres of impact within the Criteria Area, including approximately 40 to 60 acres of grassland, coastal sage scrub and riparian scrub communities.
Alternative E (I-15/SR-74 to SR-241/133)
This alternative begin at I-15 off the SR-74 and head west. Prior to entering the Cleveland National Forest, the facility would enter a tunnel section. The facility would daylight below the junction of SR-241 and SR-133. Impacts within the Criteria Area from this alternative are anticipated to be in the range of 500 to 550 acres, including approximately 400 to 450 acres of impact to primarily coastal sage scrub, but also including grassland and riparian scrub communities.
Alternative F (SR-74 Expressway, I-15/SR-74 to SR-241/133)
This alternative follow the existing SR-74 alignment and improve the facility, straightening and widening the existing road. The facility enter a tunnel section immediately east of the Riverside/Orange County line. Approximately 550 to 600 acres of this alternative would be located within the Criteria Area, including approximately 540 to 560 acres of sensitive Habitats, consisting primarily of coastal sage scrub, but also containing chaparral, grassland and riparian scrub communities.
PROCESS FOR DETERMINING CONSISTENCY WITH THE MSHCP
The RCTC shall provide to the Wildlife Agencies a consistency analysis, in narrative and graphic form, of plant and wildlife impacts associated with the selected alignment for the Orange County Transportation Corridor. The analysis shall include specific alignment and design features, including consideration of the relevant species objectives in Section 9.0 of this document and Core and Linkage guidelines contained in Section 3.0 of this document, as well the siting and design criteria identified in Section 7.5.3, guidelines for wildlife corridors contained in Section 7.5.2, construction guidelines contained in Section 7.5.3, and the Best Management Practices Guidelines contained in Appendix C of this document. The analysis will address the following categories:
- Effects on Habitats
- Effects on Covered Species
- Effects on Core Areas (as identified on the Schematic Cores and Linkages Map contained in Section 3.2.3 of this document)
- Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages (as identified on the Schematic Cores and Linkages map contained in Section 3.2.3 of this document)
- Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area configuration and management
The County of Riverside shall submit the analysis in writing to the Wildlife Agencies for their review. The Wildlife Agencies shall respond in writing within 60 days as to their concurrence with the analysis. If the Wildlife Agencies do not concur, the project will require an amendment in order to become a Covered Activity under the MSHCP. If the Wildlife Agencies concur, or if they fail to respond in writing within the 60-day period, the project will be permitted as a Covered Activity.
GENERAL CRITERIA/CONDITIONS
The following criteria shall be incorporated into the alignment selection and design process for the Orange County Corridor. Compliance with these criteria, in addition to the specific criteria listed below for each conceptual alternative, shall demonstrate compliance with the MSHCP.
• In all of the potential alternatives, the proposed facility shall be a six-lane roadway (three lanes each direction).
• For any portion of the selected alignment that impacts Public/Quasi-Public Lands, replacement of equivalent conservation lands shall be required. Such replacement lands shall be in addition to Additional Reserve Lands.
• For any portion of the selected alignment that may enter the Cleveland National Forest and the existing Orange County Central and Coastal and Southern Subregion NCCP areas, tunneling shall be maximized to the greatest extent Feasible to avoid impacts to sensitive Habitats and species and to avoid fragmentation of conservation areas identified in the Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP. Actual tunnel length shall vary, depending on location, but may be a total of approximately seven to twelve miles. Tunnel sections shall consist of two to three bored, or mined, tunnels.
• Tunnel sections shall not daylight in the National Forest. Ventilation shafts may be required, but these shafts would be constructed to minimize impacts to the National Forest. Existing truck trails may be utilized for construction, where possible to minimize impacts. Helicopter use shall be maximized to bring in construction equipment to reduce the need for construction of access roads in the National Forest, but it may be necessary to provide all-weather surfacing on the roadways due to life safety issues regarding the emergency access shafts. Tunnel monitoring facilities shall be located outside the National Forest.
• For Alternatives A through D, the analysis for consistency with the MSHCP shall also include an analysis of effects of the facility on the Orange County Central and Coastal Subregion NCCP. The alignment and design features of the facility must demonstrate consistency with the NCCP, and must fully mitigate any direct impacts that may result from the facility within the NCCP planning area. Habitat fragmentation shall be a primary consideration of the consistency analysis. Fragmentation shall be avoided through the use of tunnels. Where tunnel sections daylight, limited impacts to existing reserve edges, and/or to the North Ranch Policy Plan Area may be accommodated through specific project mitigation.
• For Alternatives E and F, coverage under the MSHCP would be conditional upon approval by the Wildlife Agencies of an NCCP Plan for Southern Subregion Orange County that includes consideration of these alignments. The Southern Subregion NCCP must address all cumulative and growth-inducing impacts of the facility within the NCCP planning area. Demonstration that the Southern Subregion NCCP adequately addresses impacts to species covered under the plan, and their Habitats, shall satisfy this condition. Coverage of Alternatives E and F also assumes that access to the existing Ortega Highway would be restricted primarily to USFS and local traffic.
SPECIFIC CRITERIA/CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS FOR EACH CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVE
The following criteria are based on information contained in the individual Species Accounts (Appendix B, MSHCP Volume II) and on the discussion of Cores and Linkages contained in Section 3.2.3 of this document. Those sections should be referenced for guidance in determining consistency.
Alternatives A and B
Alternatives C and D
Alternatives E and F
7.3.6 State Park Facilities
➤ Laborde Canyon Off-Highway Vehicle Park/State Vehicle Recreation Area
An Off-Highway Vehicle Park/State Vehicle Recreation Area (SVRA) may be constructed within Sections 12, 13, 24 T3S.R2W and Sections 18, 19 and 20 T3S.R1W and access developed to the site through sections 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 T3SR1W. The SVRA may utilize up to 1,200 acres within the Criteria Area including the active riding area, access roads, parking areas and other ancillary facilities. In addition, the SVRA may utilize up to 500 acres outside the Criteria Area in Sections 7 and 8 T3S.R1W for access, staging and support facilities. The siting of the facilities must comply with the terms of the MSHCP. The development of the SVRA is also required to comply with the following:
- Establishing an endowment with CDFG that is adequate to fund one (1) position for the management of the Additional Reserve Lands associated with the SVRA and one (1) position for the MSHCP Monitoring Program; or
- Transferring to CDFG and permanently funding two (2) positions to carry out the management and monitoring activities in Item 1 above; or
- Dedicating and funding two (2) DPR positions to carry out the management and monitoring in Item 2 above.
The management and monitoring obligations in Items 1-3 are based on the 3,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands and would be increased as the number of acres of Additional Reserve Lands increased above 3,000 acres.
➤ Other State Park Facilities
Existing State Park facilities within the MSHCP Conservation Area include the Lake Perris State Recreation Area, Chino Hills State Park, Mount San Jacinto State Park, San Timoteo State Park and Anza-Borrego State Park. The following is a description of existing and future activities and acreages (including brush management areas) within these State Park facilities that are Covered Activities under the MSHCP. Recreational activities allowed within the campgrounds and day use areas include hiking, horseback riding, bicycling, camping, picnicking, swimming, boating and hunting (at Lake Perris SRA).
Lake Perris State Recreation Area
Existing visitor use facilities are primarily located along the north shore of the lake and on the south shore in the Bernasconi Pass area. The main administrative facility is located below the dam. Existing use areas consist of approximately 220 acres of campgrounds, 120 acres of parking areas, 200 acres of day use areas, 10 acres of administrative uses, 5 acres of water treatment and storage facilities, a 5-acre museum, 54 acres of roads and 10 acres of trails. Future uses/expansions of existing uses are anticipated to include a 2-acre visitor center, 15 additional acres of parking, a 15-acre swim lagoon, 1-acre campfire center, 7 additional acres of campgrounds, 1 additional acre of trails/bridges, and 4 additional acres of roads.
Chino Hills State Park
Existing improvements within portions of the Chino Hills State Park that are within the MSHCP Plan Area are limited to two acres of existing roads. Future improvements will include two acres of parking, and one acre of campgrounds.
Mount San Jacinto State Park and State Wilderness
This park facility includes 20 acres of campgrounds, five acres of parking areas, 10 acres of day use areas, one acre of administrative facilities, one acre of water facilities, 15 acres of roads and nine acres of trails. Future improvements will include a two-acre visitor center, five additional acres of parking, 15 additional acres of campgrounds, two additional acres of trails, and two additional acres of roads.
San Timoteo Park
Land is currently being acquired to establish a State Park. Existing improvements to the land include one acre of administrative facilities and eight acres of roads. Future improvements include a two-acre visitor center, five acres of parking areas, 15 acres of campgrounds, two acres of trails, and two additional acres of roads.
Anza-Borrego State Park
Within the MSHCP Plan Area this facility has five acres of administrative uses, 18 acres of roads, and five acres of trails. No future uses are proposed.
7.3.7 Flood Control Facilities
Within the Criteria Area, flood control facilities (improvements and new construction) that are undertaken by a Permittee are Covered Activities. Maintenance of existing flood control facilities within Public/Quasi Public Lands or the Criteria Area that is subject to an MOU or agreement with CDFG for such activities would be covered pursuant to those MOUs or agreements. Table 7-14 contains a list of flood control facilities that have been identified as Covered Activities within the Criteria Area. It should be noted that some of the County Flood Control District lands have been included in the Public/Quasi-Public Lands database. Flood control activities within Public/Quasi-Public Lands are also Covered Activities pursuant to this section. As discussed in Section 7.1, facilities that are located outside of the Criteria Area are also Covered Activities.
The locations for these facilities is largely dictated by drainage features and topography. Therefore, in many cases, options for the siting of the facilities are limited. Therefore, implementation is subject to the construction guidelines as detailed in Section 7.5.3, as well as the Best Management Practices contained in Appendix C.
➤ San Jacinto River Flood Control Project
The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District ("County Flood Control") intends to implement flood control measures (including channelization or some other form or forms of engineered flood control) on the San Jacinto River between the Ramona Expressway and the mouth of Railroad Canyon ("San Jacinto River Project'). The County Flood Control anticipates the development of a flood control project for the San Jacinto River which is expected to reduce the flow to approximately 6,000 cubic feet per second at the Ramona Expressway during 100 year flood events. Other Covered Activities within the vicinity of the San Jacinto River include Ramona Expressway bridge and culvert, Nuevo Road bridge, San Jacinto Avenue crossing, I-215 bridge and levee, Case Road bridge, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad bridge, Goetz Road bridge, Ethanac Road bridge, Perris Valley Storm Drain Channel and Romoland Channel.
The following criteria shall apply to the San Jacinto River Project.
- Conserve land ("Mitigation Lands") and provides hydrology for the continued survival of the following Covered Species: San Jacinto Valley crownscale, Davidson's saltscale, thread-leaved brodiaea, smooth tarplant, vernal barley, Coulter's goldfields, spreading navarretia, and Wright's trichocoronis. Mitigation Lands may include acreage located outside the Lakeview/Nuevo and Mead Valley Area Plans if the Wildlife Agencies determine that such acreage provides the same or greater Conservation value and acreage to the MSHCP Conservation Area.
- Conserve the two thread-leaved brodiaea populations located downstream of I-215 at Case Road and Railroad Canyon. One of these populations may be transplanted to a suitable receiver site, in accordance with a mitigation and monitoring program that includes success criteria and requirements to ensure that the population has been established.
- Establish a minimum 1,000-foot wide multi-species Linkage between the Ramona Expressway and the th of Railroad Canyon, which includes the San Jacinto River channel and other land acquired for the Corridor. This Linkage shall be within those Mitigation Lands located adjacent to the San Jacinto River channel. The Linkage width may be reduced with the concurrence of the Wildlife Agencies: (1) to accommodate existing facilities and operations at the Perris Valley Airport; (2) to accommodate Covered Activities; or (3) if a reduced width elsewhere would provide adequate Linkage.
The District and the Wildlife Agencies anticipate that development of the San Jacinto River Project may involve adjustments to the Cell Criteria or Area Plan assumptions set forth in other sections of the MSHCP which may be implemented through Criteria Refinements or Minor Amendments, as set forth in Section 6.0 of this document. If a Minor Amendment is needed, it shall be submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for review and concurrence. If the Wildlife Agencies concur with the minor amendment or if they fail to respond within a 60-day period, the project may be approved by the County Flood Control.
7.3.8 Waste Management Facilities
The following Table 7-15 provides a list of existing County Waste Management facility sites.
The locations of these facilities are shown on Figure 7-2, Existing Waste Management Facilities. Facilities located outside the Criteria Area are covered as outlined in Section 7.1. Operations, maintenance and expansion activities at existing active waste management facilities within the Criteria Area and Public/Quasi-Public Lands will be Covered Activities if performed within the existing boundaries (ownership or lease area) of these facilities. Coverage for these activities is subject to satisfaction of all obligations identified in Section 13.6 of the Implementing Agreement. Although El Sobrante Landfill may be located within the MSHCP Conservation Area, activities at El Sobrante Landfill will be dictated by its approved HCP. Landfill operations and maintenance activities will be carried out in a manner consistent with regulatory authorizations and/or permits. Covered Activities also include development of waste related activities within the existing disturbed use areas at inactive landfill sites. County Waste shall maintain maps of such existing disturbed use areas. Waste related activities include energy production (such as gas-to-energy operations), transfer and recycling facilities and state-mandated maintenance activities.
7.3.9 Future Facilities
Future facilities are facilities that are necessary to support planned Development. Certain future facilities have been preliminarily identified by the agencies responsible for their construction, operation and maintenance, while others have not been or cannot be identified and/or located at present. Future facilities that are carried out by a Permittee, Participating Special Entities and/or Third Parties Granted Take Authorization will be considered Covered Activities. The process for mitigation and/or contribution to Reserve Assembly for future facilities is described in Section 6.1.6.
There are three general categories of future facilities that may need to be located within either the Criteria Area, due to the fact that such facilities are linear, or involve engineering constraints that make avoidance of Criteria Areas not Feasible. Such constraints may also require location of these facilities within Public/Quasi-Public Lands. If such is the case, all of the conditions described in this section for coverage of future facilities apply, with the addition of a requirement that impacts to Habitats within existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands shall be compensated by purchase and dedication into the MSHCP Conservation Area of land that is in addition to the Additional Reserve Lands.
The three categories include:
The following is a discussion of all the reported known future facilities within the Criteria Area for each of the four categories.
Water/Wastewater Facilities
Water and wastewater facilities generally include by but are not limited to pipelines, pump stations, lift stations, force mains, reservoirs, wastewater treatment plants, filtration plants and appurtenant facilities.
Electric Utilities
There are several potential future subtransmission projects planned by electric utility purveyors that may need to be located within the Criteria Area. These include new or upgraded/replacement transmission lines, and electrical generation facilities that require specific locations (e.g., water, and wind power facilities).
Natural Gas Facilities
Activities related to gas facilities will largely be comprised of operation and maintenance at the of gas utility purveyors' existing and planned facilities and pipelines. The following are examples of activities that may be conducted to install, test and maintain pipeline:
LOCATING FUTURE FACILITIES
For facilities proposed within the Criteria Area where the area proposed for the facilities has not yet been assembled into the MSHCP Conservation Area, the facilities will be subject to the Criteria contained in Section 3 of this document. If the facilities are determined to meet the Criteria, construction of the facilities will proceed as a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area. If the facilities were determined not to be consistent with the Criteria, the facilities may still proceed as a Covered Activity within the Criteria Area, provided that either the location and/or characteristics of the facilities are modified to meet the Criteria, and/or the Criteria Area is amended through the Criteria Refinement Process identified in Section 6.5 of this document.
➤ Facilities Siting Criteria
In addition to meeting the requirements addressed in Section 6.1.6 and 6.6.2 E(2) of this document, future facilities will be located in the least environmentally sensitive Feasible location, and use existing roads, trails and other disturbed areas to the greatest extent Feasible. Facilities will be routed through developed or developing areas where Feasible. If no other routing is Feasible, alignments will follow previously existing roads, easements, rights of way, and disturbed areas, minimizing habitat fragmentation.
In addition to the Facilities Siting Criteria, construction activities for future facilities within the Criteria Area will proceed in accordance with the BMPs contained in Appendix C of this document.
7.4 ALLOWABLE USES IN MSHCP CONSERVATION AREA
7.4.1 Compatible Uses
The following uses are considered to be compatible with the overall conservation goals and objectives of the MSHCP and are covered within the MSHCP Conservation Area:
➤ Reserve Management, Monitoring and Scientific Research Activities
Certain activities associated with management on New Reserve Lands or Public Quasi Public Lands may result in Incidental Take of Covered Species Adequately Conserved (e.g., fuel modification, fire management, weed control, access control, habitat enhancement). Moreover, some activities undertaken during monitoring (e.g., capture, relocation to prevent injury or death trapping, handling, enhancement of propagation, use of recorded vocalizations, marking) likely will result in the non-incidental take, or take for scientific purposes, of Covered Species Adequately Conserved. Take for scientific purposes of listed species needs to be authorized under FESA and CESA.
Take of Covered Species Adequately Conserved resulting from management activities is authorized under the MSHCP provided that:
- Such take occurs during activities specifically described in the General Management Measures, Adaptive Management Plan, or Annual Work Plans approved by the Wildlife Agencies representatives on the RMOC; and
- Such take occurs during activities conducted by the agents or employees of the FWS, CDFG, RCA, or any person acting under the direct guidance or authority of these entities.
Take of Covered Species Adequately Conserved resulting from monitoring activities or for scientific purposes is authorized under the MSHCP provided that:
- Such take occurs during activities specifically described in the Monitoring Annual Work Plans approved by the Wildlife Agencies representatives on the RMOC;
- The person(s) undertaking such activities successfully completed the training program(s) designed by the Monitoring Program Administrator and approved by the Wildlife Agencies representatives on the RMOC to ensure consistent data collection, uniform implementation of protocols, handling procedures, and appropriate experience with the subject Covered Species Adequately Conserved or similar species;
- The person(s) undertaking such activities carry out their duties in conformance with the protocols and procedures specified in the training; and
- The names and certification of training for the person(s) are provided to the RMOC and on file at the RCA.
These provisions are consistent with the FWS policy as described in the FWS "Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook" (USFWS, 1996). In addition, the FESA Section 10(a)(1)(B) and Fish and Game Code Section 2835 Permits issued in accordance with the MSHCP authorize Take resulting from management and monitoring as stated above only on duly established New Reserve Lands. Take resulting from management activities directed by the RMOC on non-federal Public/Quasi Public Lands is authorized if the owner or manager of the Public/Quasi-Public lands have entered into a management agreement with the Wildlife Agencies, and the RCA for cooperation in habitat conservation and management, as identified in Section 18.0 of the IA. Take resulting from monitoring activities directed by the RMOC on non-federal Public/Quasi Public Lands is authorized if the owner or manager of the Public/Quasi-Public lands have granted access to the monitoring team and record of such permission is on file at the RCA. Monitoring and management activities need to be otherwise lawful and such appropriate authorizations, as necessary, may need to be obtained from Federal or State agencies.
➤ Emergency, Safety and Police Services
Local, state and federal law enforcement entities will be allowed access to the MSHCP Conservation Area as necessary to enforce the law. Medical, rescue, fire fighting operations, and other emergency service providers will be allowed access to the MSHCP Conservation Area to carry out operations necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the public. Local law enforcement agencies and other entities such as the National Guard or Immigration and Naturalization Service operating within the MSHCP Conservation Area are subject to existing state and federal laws. The MSHCP will not create additional permit requirements for these entities beyond those of existing state and federal laws.
➤ Emergency Repairs
Public infrastructure facilities and utilities are currently located in areas anticipated to be included within the MSHCP Conservation Area and may be constructed in the future in the MSHCP Conservation Area in accordance with the Covered Activities described in this section. From time to time, emergency repairs may be required to these facilities as necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the public. Such activities carried out by Plan Participants will be covered within the MSHCP Conservation Area. The following procedures will be employed for emergency repairs that occur outside the boundaries of existing cleared areas:
7.4.2 Conditionally Compatible Uses
The following uses are considered conditionally compatible with the overall conservation goals and objectives of the MSHCP and are covered within the MSHCP Conservation Area subject to the guidelines and criteria incorporated in this section.
Public Access and Recreation
➤ Introduction
Although the main goal of the MSHCP Conservation Area is to protect biological resources, another primary objective is to provide recreational and educational opportunities within the MSHCP Conservation Area, while providing adequate protection for the biological resources. Section 7.3.6 identifies State Park facilities and recreational activities that are covered by the MSHCP. The following addresses non-State Park recreation and access within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Public access is a very important part of the MSHCP because it gives the public an opportunity to experience and appreciate the natural environment that is being protected. The MSHCP Conservation Area will function as a living laboratory so that visitors can learn about their local environment. By increasing awareness and appreciation for the natural resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area, local residents and visitors can learn the importance of and practice environmental stewardship.
First, this section discusses covered public access and recreational activities within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Next, anticipated impacts resulting from these public access activities are quantified and discussed. Finally, this section outlines the guidelines that will regulate the covered public access uses to provide sufficient protection for biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
➤ Covered Public Access Activities
The covered public access uses within the MSHCP Conservation Area will be comprised of trails, facilities, and passive recreational activities. This section describes those facilities and quantifies the anticipated impacts within the MSHCP Conservation Area for construction of those facilities.
The primary public access component within the MSHCP Conservation Area will be trails. There are two types of trails that are expected within the MSHCP Conservation Area. The first type is existing community trails, which are primarily used by equestrian users (see Figure 7-3). No impacts will be covered and no improvements will be allowed on any of these existing community trails under the MSHCP. The second type of trail is existing adopted regional trails and future proposed regional trails (see Figure 7-3). Covered uses on these existing and proposed regional trails will include hiking, mountain biking, and equestrian use. Construction of and improvements to these trails will be covered under the MSHCP.
In addition to these trails, three other types of public access facilities will be located within the MSHCP Conservation Area. This includes fourteen trailheads, five interpretive centers, and four maintenance facilities. Trailheads are access points to trails and resource areas for day use activities and can be selectively specialized to accommodate different types of trail users. Within the MSHCP Conservation Area, trailheads will serve as access points for mountain biking, and equestrian use as well as hiking uses. Interpretive centers will be environmentally and culturally oriented facilities that help to interpret and
explain natural, historic, and cultural resources of the region. They can include a K-12 oriented classroom, laboratory facilities, meeting rooms and permanent displays. Maintenance facilities serve as stations for rangers to coordinate maintenance activities.
In order to quantify the anticipated impacts within the MSHCP Conservation Area for the new regional trails and facilities described above, the following method was used. First, maps were prepared showing the approximate locations of proposed trails and facilities (see Figure 7-4). Then assumptions were made regarding trail widths and facility sizes (see Table 7-16). A disturbance width of 20 feet was assumed for the existing adopted and future proposed regional trails. Although a 20 foot disturbance width was assumed, the actual width of these trails will be determined by County regulations and will range between 10 and 20 feet. For the acreage of impact from the other public access facilities, twenty acres for the interpretive centers, five acres for trailheads, and ten acres for the maintenance facilities was assumed.
The trail and facility maps were then intersected with the MSHCP vegetation map and the Criteria Area. Using the assumptions described above, anticipated impacts within the MSHCP Conservation Area were quantified. The results of this analysis are presented in Tables 7-17 and 7-18. Results are reported as a range of acres by Vegetation Community for each public access component to reflect the regional, landscape level of the analysis and to provide flexibility in the eventual design and construction of facilities. As discussed later in this section, it is also assumed that design, construction, and operation of public access facilities will avoid and minimize impacts to MSHCP Conservation Area resources.
In addition to the trails and facilities that directly affect land within the MSHCP Conservation Area , passive recreational activities will also be covered within the MSHCP Conservation Area. These include activities that do not impact land within the MSHCP Conservation Area and cause minimal disturbance to resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Passive recreation includes hiking, bird watching, photography, and under specified locations identified in the following guidelines, mountain biking, horseback riding, picnicking, sun bathing, scientific research, swimming, fishing, hunting and boating. Other activities associated with public access and recreation that will be covered include maintenance-related activities for adopted and proposed trails, facilities, signs and barriers.
➤ Guidelines for Public Access and Recreation in the MSHCP Conservation Area
Excessive or uncontrolled access within the MSHCP Conservation Area can result in habitat degradation and disruption of breeding and other critical wildlife functions at certain times of the year. In order to provide sufficient protection for natural and biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area, the following policies and guidelines have been developed to regulate the covered public access activities described above. These guidelines are separated into two categories: Siting and Design and Operations and Maintenance.
➤ Guidelines for the Siting and Design of Trails and Facilities
The construction of trails and facilities will impact biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area. Therefore, the following guidelines address ways to avoid and minimize impacts from the placement and design of these trails and facilities on the MSHCP Conservation Area's natural resources.
- Trails and facilities will be sited and designed to be compatible with resource protection and in a manner that minimizes impacts to sensitive resources and Habitat types covered by the MSHCP. All decisions relating to public access will be made in a manner that is most protective of biological resources.
- Trails and facilities will be located in the least sensitive areas of the MSHCP Conservation Area so that they avoid Habitat occupied by species covered by the MSHCP.
- Prior to design and construction of public access facilities, biological surveys will be conducted within the study area for the facility including vegetation mapping and species surveys and/or wetland delineations based on field conditions as recommended by the project biologists. The results of the biological resources investigation will be mapped and documented. The documentation will include preliminary conclusions and recommendations regarding potential effects of facility construction on MSHCP Conservation Area resources and methods to avoid and minimize impacts to MSHCP Conservation Area resources in conjunction with project siting, design, construction, and operation. The project biologist will work with facility designers during the design and construction phase to ensure implementation of Feasible recommendations.
- Recreational activities and the construction of trails and facilities on highly erosive soils will be avoided.
- Trails and facilities will be designed to discourage and prevent intrusion into adjacent environmentally sensitive areas.
- New trails and facilities will avoid using wildlife crossing points.
- New trails and facilities will be accessible from existing and planned public roads.
- New facilities will minimize impacts from lighting.
- Environmentally sensitive grading techniques, drainage management and vegetation buffers will be used for trail and facility runoff absorption and filtration.
- When landscaping is required, only native species will be used. The use of nonnative invasive plant species will be prohibited.
- Trails
- Whenever possible, trail alignments in the MSHCP Conservation Area will use existing dirt roads.
- Trails will be kept along the edges of large sensitive areas of habitat such as meadows and riparian areas.
- The type, width, and intensity of trail uses will be consistent with protection of the resources being traversed.
- When determined to be appropriate, trails will be constructed to any prominent features or viewpoints that are likely to attract hikers in order to prevent off-trail access and extensive trampling of adjacent Habitat by hikers.
- Water breaks will be installed on steep trails to prevent accelerated runoff and erosion.
- Dog-friendly trails will be located in areas of relatively low habitat value or edges.
- Interpretive Centers
- Interpretive centers will be constructed to display and interpret the natural resources. Exhibits will emphasize the need to conserve natural resources in MSHCP Conservation Area.
- Interpretive centers will not be separated from the resource area since its purpose is directly related to explaining the values of the resource. In sensitive Habitat , minimization methods such as buffers will be used.
- Trailheads
- Trail access points to the MSHCP Conservation Area (e.g., parking lots and staging areas) that are consistent with resource protection goals will be identified.
- Entry controls and signage at trailhead sites will be used to convey proper resource usage.
- In most cases, trailheads will be sited at the edge of the resource area.
Guidelines for Operations and Maintenance
Passive uses can generate noise and litter, trails are vulnerable to erosion and gullying, and vegetation off trails may be trampled by hikers, mountain bikers and equestrian users. To protect the MSHCP Conservation Area's resources during operations and maintenance activities, the following guidelines have been developed:
1. Passive recreation uses may include:
2. The following recreational uses and activities will be prohibited within the MSHCP Conservation Area:
3. Effects of passive recreational uses shall be addressed in Reserve Management Plans described in Section 5.2.2.
4. Motorized vehicular access by the public to the MSHCP Conservation Area will be prohibited except as necessary by emergency personnel or for operations and maintenance activities.
5. Appropriate daily and seasonal limits on trail use will be established. When necessary, trails will be closed on a temporary basis to minimize disruption of nesting and other wildlife functions for species covered by the MSHCP, or if public access has resulted in, or is expected to result in, significant negative impacts to sensitive species. Passive recreational uses will be limited or restricted in critical wildlife areas during breeding season, as determined appropriate.
6. Public access may be restricted within and adjacent to wetlands, vernal pools, restoration areas, and sensitive wildlife Habitat (e.g., during the breeding season) at the discretion of the Reserve Manager.
7. In the event that public access policies and other policies conflict, the conflict will be resolved in a manner that's most protective of the biological resources within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
8. Access to the MSHCP Conservation Area will be controlled through properly maintained fencing and signs.
9. Fencing or other barriers will be used to restrict access to basically sensitive areas when protection of biologically sensitive resources is required.
10. Public access information packets and guides will be developed for users of the MSHCP Conservation Area.
11. Education and outreach will be used to increase public awareness and appreciation for Habitat and wildlife values.
12. The MSHCP Conservation Area will be patrolled on a regular basis in order to ensure that visitors to the MSHCP Conservation Area stay on trails and observe all other rules and guidelines established to protect the natural resources on site.
13. Feeding of all wildlife will be prohibited.
14. Firearms will be prohibited from patrol and maintenance sites, except for those used by authorized law enforcement and security personnel.
Maintenance
15. The trails and other facilities within the MSHCP Conservation Area require proper maintenance to ensure the protection of biological resources. Trails, facilities, signs and barriers will be maintained to appropriate conditions to discourage and prevent intrusion into adjacent environmentally sensitive areas.
Hiking
16. Hikers must always stay on designated trails and must not stray into adjacent areas to prevent trampling of vegetation and erosion.
Equestrian Use
17. Equestrian use will be limited to designated trails.
18. Following heavy rains, the use of equestrian trails will be prohibited for appropriate periods to avoid trail damage and impacts to adjacent Habitat.
Mountain Biking
19. Mountain bike trails will be limited to areas with low susceptibility to erosion and out of wetlands and other sensitive areas.
20. If use becomes heavy and problematic, an access control system will be developed and permits may be required.
21. Mountain bike trails will be constructed wider than foot trails to prevent trail edge disturbance and on grades no greater than 25 percent.
Litter and Trash Control Measures
22. Litter control measures will be implemented within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
23. Closed garbage cans and recycling bins will be provided at trailheads and access points.
24. Litter and trash will be collected and removed on a regular basis. Garbage cans and recycling bins will be maintained appropriately.
25. Penalties will be imposed for littering and dumping within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
26. Permanent storage of materials (e.g., hazardous and toxic materials) outside of maintenance facilities within the MSHCP Conservation Area will be prohibited.
27. Wildlife Corridor undercrossings will be kept free of all debris, trash, and other obstructions.
28. Signs will be posted to prevent and report littering.
Pets
29. Pets will be restrained by leashes at all times.
Signage
Signs can educate, provide direction, explain rules, and promote the sensitive use and enjoyment of natural areas.
30. An adequate number of signs will be provided at appropriate locations to clearly identify public access to and within the MSHCP Conservation Area.
31. Interpretive signs will be provided to explain the value of the MSHCP Conservation Area's natural resources.
7.5 GUIDELINES FOR FACILITIES WITHIN THE CRITERIA AREA AND PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC LANDS
7.5.1 Guidelines for the Siting and Design of Planned Roads Within the Criteria Area and Public/Quasi-Public Lands
The following guidelines for planned roadways that are Covered Activities within the Criteria Area and Public/Quasi-Public Lands provide suggestions to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive species and Habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the planned roadway. If there is a dispute over a project's consistency with these Guidelines or the Siting Criteria, the dispute resolution process described in Section 6.2.2 will be employed.
The specific location for the planned roads, bridges and interchanges depicted on Figure 7-1 are not exact; the ultimate alignment and design will be determined during project level engineering and approval for the alignment which will include appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA . The ultimate alignment and design of the facility will be subject to the following design, siting and construction guidelines.
7.5.2 Guidelines for Construction of Wildlife Crossings
Pursuant to Section 6.6.2 E(2) of this document, roads that have the potential to result in impediments to wildlife movement will include both general considerations and specific design guidelines for the construction of wildlife crossings where appropriate. The following guidelines constitute a basic framework for wildlife crossing recommendations and are to be applied where there is either known wildlife movement, and/or in portions of the MSHCP Conservation Area that are assembled to provide for wildlife movement. For purposes of this discussion: an underpass is any bridge structure under a road or freeway that may be used by wildlife as a crossing point; an overpass is any bridge structure over a road or freeway that is only intended for wildlife usage as a crossing point; and, culvert includes enclosed concrete or metal structures under roads or bridges that may direct wildlife under a road or freeway.
Avian Wildlife
It is not anticipated that most avian wildlife will require specialized wildlife crossing facilities or measures to ensure movement across potential impediments. However, some species (e.g., California gnatcatcher, greater roadrunner, California quail) may require assistance to maintain linkages due to assumed poor flight ability or ground-dwelling aspect. For these species, facilities such as wide road undercrossings or naturalized land bridges over roadways/impediments (overpasses), and to a lesser extent, culverts, may be required to assure movement of the species and resulting genetic flow.
Large Mammalian Wildlife
For large wildlife (e.g., mountain lion, mule deer) and medium-sized wildlife (e.g., bobcat, coyote) some form of wildlife crossing facilities will be requisite to assure consistent movement and genetic flow throughout the MSHCP Conservation Area. Though it may seem inappropriate to design a crossing for both a predatory species (mountain lion) and prey species (mule deer), studies have shown (Foster and Humphrey 1995) that mountain lions typically use crossings nocturnally, while deer typically use crossings diurnally. Carnivores typically use underpasses close to major drainages and specifically, coyotes tend to use older and more open culverts (preferring culverts greater than 1.5 meters tall). Carnivore use of underpasses are correlated to landscape variables. For ungulates, crossing dimensions are most important. Ungulates use of underpasses are correlated to structural variables. Road undercrossings may be used by all species as long as the undercrossing meets certain minimal dimensions. Mule deer for example, require wider and taller undercrossings than do coyotes and bobcats. Where initial research seemed to indicate that large carnivores where adverse to using underpasses, it has been shown recently that they can adapt and use underpasses, even when overpasses are available. Sometimes, overcrossings may be the preferred method of conveying wildlife, particularly to satisfy the needs of a variety of species. However, this method may require an inordinate amount of funding which may detract from other equally important goals and objectives. Overcrossing installation will be well thought-out prior to implementation and a cost-benefit analysis completed to determine if rare economic resources are best spent on the venture. Culverts may be used by coyotes, bobcats, and potentially mountain lions, if they are large enough, straight, and short enough. Regardless of the type of facility used to convey wildlife, the location of the device will be well researched in order to make the most beneficial use of ridges, valleys, normal movement routes, or other natural (or manufactured) funneling mechanisms. Finally, the influence of humans is the most significant factor affecting the effectiveness of crossings for larger mammals (Clevenger and Waltho 2000). Underpasses designed around topography, habitat quality, and location will be minimally successful if human activity is not managed. Therefore, careful management of human uses in critical crossing areas will be employed.
Another consideration for these species includes allowing them to cross over intervening properties within the Core/Linkage network. Solid, wire, chain-link, or other similar types of fencing will not be encouraged within the Core/Linkage area. Instead, smooth-wire strand or barb-wire strand, post and rail, or some other similar method will be employed so that large wildlife is still able to maintain normal movement routes. Care will be taken when deploying wire-strand fences to keep them tight and to follow strict wire spacing guidelines to reduce the likelihood of mule deer strangulation or entrapment. Where solid or other similar fencing is deployed, wildlife movement gates or one-way wildlife doors will be installed to allow wildlife movement.
Small Mammalian, Reptile and Amphibian Wildlife
For smaller terrestrial species, road undercrossings, overcrossings, and culverts may also provide adequate movement opportunities. However, some small mammals are adverse to using open culverts. These species are usually prey species which prefer cover. The dimensions of these facilities do not need to be as robust for the smaller species, however the length of the facilities (particularly culverts) may need to be reduced to accommodate them. For example, small mammals (vole sized) have been shown to use culverts as long as 64 meters. Under road crossings and overpasses pose less of a length constraint on smaller species because of their general wide-open aspect but may pose a greater predation risk. In some cases, these types of crossings may be large enough to form home ranges for some species. Studies have shown that increased traffic volume and road width results in greater use of culverts by most small mammal species, but this is more likely due to the openness of the large roadway and not to necessarily avoid vehicles. Undercrossings and culverts will be situated to allow use by the primary species or suite of species'. For example, culverts intended to provide movement access for primarily wetland species (e.g., pond turtle, garter snakes, toads, frogs) will not be situated great distances from the primary water source. Although upland connections a short distance from the water body may be appropriate in some cases. All undercrossings and culverts which are intended to get wildlife usage, will be designed in a manner which allows a dry crossing under nearly all circumstances. This will include designing an elevated bench above the normal high water line or providing a textured gentle slope up the side of the culvert/undercrossing. Barriers to small terrestrial wildlife movement will be encouraged along new and modified roadways, so that they are guided toward appropriate undercrossings, culverts, and viaducts.
Insects
Insects (i.e., Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, Quino checkerspot butterfly) will require individualized and specific movement facilities in order to safely convey them across roadways and highways. Intervening residences within the Core/Linkages will not pose a movement constraint under most circumstances (unless fencing or ornamental plantings preclude movement), however residences may provide inhospitable life history conditions.
The location of crossing facilities will be situated to account for known key movement routes while making the best use of natural topography and other effective movement barriers/funnels. In some cases it may be prudent to plant dense ornamental vegetation in windrows or install tall fencing to "guide" or funnel Quino checkerspot toward the intended crossing areas and away from potentially disastrous conflicts with vehicles.
Little to nothing is known about movement requirements for Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, but it is reasonable to assume that similar considerations will apply to it.
Specific Initial Guidelines for Wildlife Movement Design Considerations within the Criteria Area
The following guidelines are provided for road construction and widening projects within the Criteria Area. These guidelines will be considered as applicable, in circumstances where wildlife movement considerations are noted in the Criteria. Where multiple species movement considerations apply, techniques to combine movement requirements shall be pursued.
7.5.3 Construction Guidelines
