**DRAFT Supplemental Environmental Assessment: FEMA-1203-DR-CA\
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX**

**Project Name:** Laguna Creek Pipeline Access Road Repair Project

**Subgrantee:** City of Santa Cruz\
**DSR or HMGP Number(s)**: DSR #02174

**Date:** August 6, 2002\
**Project Location:** Smith Grade Road within the Upper Laguna Creek
watershed in the County of Santa Cruz, California.

# **1.0 Introduction**

# The City of Santa Cruz (the City), through the California Office of Emergency Services (OES), has applied to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Public Assistance (PA) Program for funding to repair an access road that was damaged in three sections during the winter storms of 1998. The project site is located within the upper Laguna Creek watershed on an existing dirt roadway adjacent to Laguna Creek. The road is used to access and maintain a 14-inch diameter water supply pipeline, which is located beneath the road right-of-way. The pipeline is part of the "North Coast" water supply component of the City's water supply, which provides nearly 25 percent of the raw water supply for the City of Santa Cruz. The storm event caused two sections of the dirt roadway to fail and a third with the potential to fail. Consequently, the road can no longer accommodate vehicular traffic, including maintenance vehicles, and the supply line has been exposed and is vulnerable to failure. The roadway is approximately 8 to 10 feet in width and is elevated approximately 20 to 50 feet above the Laguna Creek streambed. The project site is within the Laguna Creek drainage, a fairly steep-sided drainage, which flows south to the Pacific Ocean.

# Components of the Proposed Action include the following: repair of the damaged sections of the access road, temporary shoring of two wooden bridges to provide safe passage for construction equipment, and the installation of drainage improvements to prevent future damage to the access road. The Proposed Action area is located on an easement within a privately owned parcel in the western portion of Santa Cruz County (Figure 1 and Figure 2).

**1.1 Scope of Document**

This Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) tiers from the Final
Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Typical Recurring Actions
Resulting from Flood Disasters in California as Proposed by FEMA (PEA)
(FEMA 1998b) and hereby incorporates the PEA by reference, in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 1508.28.

**1.2 Purpose of and Need for Action**

The purpose of and need for the action is described in Section 1.4 of
the PEA. As discussed previously, the Laguna pipeline access road failed
in two sections during the storm event in 1998, making the roadway
unusable for vehicular traffic, including maintenance vehicles, and
making a third section of roadway and the water supply line vulnerable
to failure. Therefore, the City of Santa Cruz has determined that action
is needed to repair the roadway to protect public health and safety and
address the risk of future flood damage, as the steep and unprotected
slopes are vulnerable to continued erosion and failure.

**[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}**

**2.0 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS**

As discussed in Section 2.5.2.1 of the PEA, under the No Action
Alternative, the repairs to the failed bank slopes would not be
conducted along the dirt roadway adjacent to Laguna Creek. The banks in
this part of the creek would continue to be vulnerable to continued
failure and erosion.

The Proposed Action Alternative is described in Section 2.5.2.3 of the
PEA. The Proposed Action Alternative would involve roadway repair in
three locations along the Laguna Creek pipeline roadway. Details of
project repairs are described below:

The Proposed Action Alternative consists of four components: (1)
construct three (two downhill and one uphill) soldier pile retaining
walls; (2) repair the two sections of roadway that have already failed;
(3) install temporary shoring of two bridges along the access road in
order to bring equipment to the repair sites; and (4) provide overall
drainage improvements at all three damaged locations. The three repair
sites are referred to as Sites C, B, and A, with Site C at the northern
portion of the project area and Site A at the southern end. Because Site
A would be inaccessible until repairs are made at Sites B and C, the
repairs for Site A would be conducted last.

*[Site C]{.underline}*

Site C has experienced some erosion to the downhill side of the road,
and is at risk of further failure due to lack of drainage and subsequent
ponding on the uphill edge. The proposed repair at this location
includes construction of a rock-lined V-ditch along the uphill side of
the road along with some minor grading of the road to ensure proper
drainage. The V-ditch at this location would extend from Site C
southward to approximately 80 feet past Site B. The total length of the
V-ditch to be constructed for both Sites B and C is approximately 290
feet (see Figure 3).

*[Site B]{.underline}*

Repairs proposed for Site B include the following: (1) construction of
two soldier pile retaining walls (one on the uphill side and one on the
downhill side of the roadway); (2) installation of a rock-lined V-ditch
on the uphill side of the road (described above under Site C); (3)
installation of a slope drain (approximately 40 feet long and 18-inches
in diameter) beneath and perpendicular to the roadway (downslope); (4)
installation of a gabion mattress energy dissipater at the toe of the
slope to prevent scour from the new slope drain discharge; (5)
installation of a new inlet and discharge structure at the southern end
of the V-ditch; and (6) backfilling of the road to provide a drivable,
unpaved surface (see Figure 3).

The downhill soldier pile wall is approximately 60 linear feet and the
uphill wall is approximately 50 linear feet. The downhill wall consists
of nine concrete piers/soldier piles. Wood lagging would be installed
between the soldier piles from the existing road surface, and the
roadway would be backfilled with engineered fill to approximately 6
inches below the top of the wall. The uphill wall consists of seven
concrete piers/soldier piles. Wood lagging would be installed between
the piles and the final wall would be approximately 10 feet above the
road surface. The new slope drain, which would capture runoff from the
V-ditch described above, would be installed beneath the roadway at Site
B, and would discharge to a new gabion mattress energy dissipater
installed approximately 35 feet downslope of Site B. The new inlet and
discharge structure at the southern end of Site B would also capture
runoff from the V-ditch, and would discharge downslope to a second, new
energy dissipator. Both energy dissipaters would be located outside of
the 100-year floodplain elevation, and would not require work within
Laguna Creek. Once the retaining walls and drainage structures are in
place, the roadway would be backfilled using clean imported fill to
provide an unpaved, drivable surface. Laguna Creek is approximately 50
feet below the roadway at Site B.

*[Site A]{.underline}*

Repairs at Site A would consist of a similar soldier pile retaining wall
as used for Site B. Eight soldier piles/concrete piers with wood lagging
would be constructed on the downhill side of the road for a distance of
approximately 50 linear feet. Approximately 120 feet of rock-lined
V-ditch would be also be constructed at Site A, along the uphill side of
the roadway. Water from this collection system would discharge through
an existing culvert onto a new energy dissipator. The energy dissipator
at Site A would be located outside of the 100-year floodplain, and would
not require work within Laguna Creek. Laguna Creek is approximately 25
feet below the roadway at Site A (see Figure 4).

*[Temporary Bridge Shoring]{.underline}*

Currently, there are two wood bridges over Laguna Creek that provide
access to the repair sites. Both of these bridges would be temporarily
shored in order to provide equipment access. The first bridge is located
approximately 1,100 feet south of the Smith Grade Road access gate and
is a single span of approximately 25 feet supported on two steel I
beams. One of the steel beam flanges is deformed (Mesiti-Miller
Engineering, Inc., June 2000). The second bridge is located
approximately 1,900 feet south of the Smith Grade Road gate and is
supported by wooden members with 12 by 12-inch wooden piles and pile
caps. The spans are approximately 12 and 26 feet. One of the bridge
abutments appears to have rotated and moved, requiring replacement
(Ibid.).

The bridges would require shoring near the center to reduce the span
length and provide support to the center of the bridge. Shoring would
include one large timber or footer slightly wider than the bridge to be
placed at mid-span in the creek perpendicular to the bridge, and two or
three vertical members or posts resting on this footer to support a
horizontal beam directly under the bridge structure. Most of this would
be delivered to the site in a small truck and placed by hand with
several workers. None of the wood to be placed in Laguna Creek would be
treated, and the shoring would be completely removed when the project is
complete. The area of the creek that would be temporarily affected by
the shoring is approximately 28 square feet. Access and staging for the
project would be along the existing dirt roadway.

# **3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES**

## **3.1 Geology, Geohazards, and Soils**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.1 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.1.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of Proposed Action Alternative are described in Sections
4.2.1.3 of the PEA.

Two soil types are predominant within the project area. Ben Lomond sandy
loam and Felton sandy loam. The Ben Lomond and Felton soils are deep and
well drained, and located on 30 to 50 percent slopes. These soils
support timber growth, and provide recreation, wildlife habitat, and
watershed benefits. These soils present a high erosion hazard due to the
occurrence of rapid runoff (USDA 1980).

Under the No Action Alternative, roadway bank repairs along Laguna Creek
would not be performed. If the roadway banks are not repaired, future
failure to the roadway and pipeline may be exacerbated and could result
in soil erosion and aggravated bank instability along this area of
Laguna Creek.

The Proposed Action Alternative is not anticipated to have any adverse
impacts to geology or geohazards, however, these activities have the
potential to cause the disruption and displacement of soils. To minimize
erosion impacts associated with the Proposed Action Alternative, the
project applicant would develop and implement erosion control measures
during and after construction to prevent inadvertent erosion and offsite
transport of sediment into Laguna Creek. The initial study prepared by
Strelow Consulting in 2001 proposed the following control measures
including, but not limited to:

-   Install well-anchored silt fences below the retaining wall
    construction zones at each slipout site to contain sandy soil from
    the construction zone before it reaches Laguna Creek;

-   Limit ground disturbance and vegetation removal during construction;

-   Complete work prior to the onset of the rainy season (generally
    November 1); and

-   After construction and prior to November 1, all disturbed soils at
    each site should undergo erosion control treatment consisting of
    temporary seeding, straw mulch or other measures. Any disturbed
    slopes over 30% should also have an erosion control blanket
    installed. Permanent revegetation or tree replanting should then
    take place in small openings in the erosion control blanket, with
    suitable species that are compatible with existing native
    vegetation.

## **3.2 Air Quality**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.2 of the PEA. Impacts
of the Proposed Action Alternative and the No Action Alternative are
described in Section 4.1.2 of the PEA. The use of construction vehicles,
including backhoes, graders, and trucks, would increase air pollutants;
however, their impacts would be temporary and negligible.

The project area is located within the Monterey Bay Air Pollution
Control District (MBUAPCD), which has jurisdiction over the North
Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB) that includes Santa Cruz, Monterey and
San Benito Counties. The NCCAB is in attainment for the federal PM~10~
(particulate less than 10 microns in diameter) standards and state and
federal nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide standards.
In March 1997, the air basin was redesignated from a "moderate
non-attainment" area for the federal ozone standards to a
"maintenance/attainment" area. The NCCAB is classified as a
non-attainment area for the state ozone and PM~10~ standards (Strelow
Consulting 2001)

## **3.3 Hydrology and Water Quality**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.3 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.2.3.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.2.3.3 of the PEA.

Under the No Action Alternative, hydrology and water quality has the
potential to be negatively affected by future erosion and sedimentation
in Laguna Creek if no action is taken to repair the damage roadway.

Under the Proposed Action Alternative, hydrology is not anticipated to
be adversely impacted as a result of project activities. Planned project
erosion controls, as referenced in Section 3.1, will prevent erosion and
sedimentation into Laguna Creek during and after construction. The
proposed drainage improvements would improve water quality and aquatic
habitat due to decreased sedimentation associated with erosion along the
roadway.

## **3.4 Floodplain Management**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.4 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.2.4.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.2.4.3 of the PEA.

The project area is shown on panels 195 and 215 of the Flood Insurance
Rate Map for unincorporated Santa Cruz County, dated April 15, 1986. The
map does not show an identified Special Flood Hazard Area for Laguna
Creek within the project area. The area is shown as Zone C, defined as
an area of minimal flood risk, and is outside the 100-year floodplain.
Therefore, neither the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action
Alternative would have any impact on a floodplain.

## **Biological Resources**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.5 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.2.5.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.2.5.3 of the PEA.

The project site is within the Laguna Creek drainage, which is a fairly
steep-sided drainage that flows south to the Pacific Ocean. At the time
of the site reconnaissance survey on November 6, 2001, the active
channel bed ranged from approximately 6- to 12-feet in width, and the
water depths varied from approximately 4-inches to 4-feet. The substrate
in Laguna Creek is dominated by boulders and large cobbles, with a few
of the lower flow areas containing a higher fraction of smaller cobbles
and silt. A natural sandstone ledge approximately 15-20 feet high exists
approximately 500 feet downstream of the project area.

The project area is characterized as a second-growth redwood
forest-alder riparian community, intermixed with a coast live oak-mixed
evergreen woodland community. The coast live oak community is found
primarily on the upper slopes and ridgelines above the Laguna Creek
riparian corridor. Dominant plant species in the project area include
redwood, red alder (*Alnus rubra*), big leaf maple (*Acer
macrophyllum*), tan oak (*Lithocarpus densiflora)*, bay laurel
(*Umbellularia californica*), coast live oak (*Quercus agrifolia*),
hedge nettle (*Stachys bullata*), Solomon's seal (*Smilacina stellata*),
California blackberry (*Rubus ursinus*), thimbleberry (*Rubus
parviflorus*), swordfern (*Polystichum munitum*), giant chain fern
(*Woodwardia fimbriata*), redwood sorrel (*Oxalis oregana*), and
horsetail (*Equisetum arvense*). Vegetative cover in the project area
was approximately 70 to 75 percent, with a heavy litter layer covering
most of the ground surface.

The City of Santa Cruz will obtain a streambed alteration agreement
prior to the commencement of work. In compliance with Executive Order
11990, Protection of Wetlands, and 44 CFR Part 9, no alternatives
involve the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands. Therefore, no
wetlands would be impacted by any alternative and the City of Santa Cruz
would not be required to obtain a Section 404 Permit from the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE).

# **3.6 Threatened and Endangered Species**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.6 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.2.6.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.2.6.3 of the PEA.

Information concerning threatened, endangered, or other special status
species that may occur in the project area was obtained from the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Ventura Office on December 26, 2001.
Additionally, the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG's)
Natural Diversity Database was searched for known occurrences of special
status species within the USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles of Felton,
Davenport, and Santa Cruz (CDFG 2001).

A field reconnaissance survey of the project area was conducted on
November 6, 2001, to identify habitats in the study area and vicinity.
Finally, a literature review was conducted to identify habitat
requirement/distribution for listed species, and persons knowledgeable
about the project area and species were contacted for information
regarding selected species.

After the literature review, site reconnaissance, communication with
experts, and consideration of the activities associated with the
Proposed Action, it was determined that two species have the potential
to be impacted:

-   California red-legged frog (*Rana aurora draytonii*)

-   Marbled murrelet (*Brachyramphus marmoratus*)

# [California Red-Legged Frog]{.underline}

The California red-legged frog is a federally listed species within the
jurisdiction of the USFWS. The proposed project area is not located
within designated Critical Habitat for California red-legged frog (USFWS
2001), nor is it located within a Core Recovery Area identified in the
Draft Recovery Plan for the species (USFWS 2000a). A detailed
description of California red-legged frog and its habitat requirements
are provided below.

Within approximately 2-miles from the project area, red-legged frogs
have been documented in Wilder Creek, Baldwin Creek, and various farm
ponds on the lower agricultural benchlands on the north coast (Mori 1997
*[in]{.underline}* John Gilchrist & Associates 2001). Red-legged frogs
have also been observed on several coastal streams in the Santa Cruz
area including Wilder, Liddell, and Waddell Creeks. In 1997, Entrix,
Inc. conducted a red-legged frog survey for the Santa Cruz Water
Department along part of Laguna Creek. This survey extended from 0.75
mile down stream and 1.25 miles upstream of the project area. No
red-legged frogs were detected during the survey, and Entrix biologists
indicated there was no breeding habitat in Laguna Creek due to the high
flow velocities during winter months (John Gilchrist & Associates 2001).
However, due to the presence of California red-legged frogs in the lower
reaches of coastal streams in the vicinity of Laguna Creek, it is
possible that red-legged frogs could utilize the project area as
dispersal or summer foraging habitat. Therefore, FEMA has determined
that the project could potentially affect red-legged frogs or their
habitat.

Due to the Proposed Action's potential to adversely affect red-legged
frogs, FEMA initiated formal consultation with USFWS under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as amended). Potential impacts to
red-legged frogs include death, injury, or displacement from
construction-related activities. No permanent/post-construction impacts
are expected.

On July 16, 2002, USFWS issued a Biological Opinion (BO) and Incidental
Take Statement (Appendix B) in response to FEMA's request. The City of
Santa Cruz would be responsible for ensuring that all avoidance and
minimization measures and terms and conditions of the BO would be
implemented to avoid, to the extent possible, adverse effects to
California red-legged frogs under the Proposed Action. USFWS issued the
opinion that the Proposed Action "is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the California red-legged frog and that it would
not adversely modify critical habitat," provided the stipulations and
minimization measures described below are implemented. A summary of the
terms and conditions for the California red-legged frog from the BO and
the Incidental Take Statement are provided below:

-   At least five (5) days prior to the onset of activities, the City of
    Santa Cruz shall submit the name(s) and credentials of the
    biologist(s) who will conduct activities specified in the following
    measures. No project activities shall begin until the City of Santa
    Cruz has received approval from the USFWS that the biologist(s) are
    qualified to conduct the work.

-   A USFWS-approved biologist shall conduct one nighttime survey the
    evening preceding the beginning of construction activities. The
    biologist shall also conduct one daytime survey of the project site
    on the morning construction begins.

-   If California red-legged frogs are identified during the
    pre-construction survey, USFWS and the City of Santa Cruz Water
    Department would be notified, and a USFWS-approved biologist would
    move red-legged frogs to a suitable location in the project
    vicinity. Sufficient time to move the red-legged frogs shall be
    allowed before work activities begin.

-   A training session for all construction workers shall be conducted
    by a USFWS-approved biologist prior to the onset of construction
    activities. At a minimum, the training would include a description
    of red-legged frogs and their habitat, the importance of red-legged
    frogs and their habitat, the general measures that are being
    implemented to conserve red-legged frogs as they relate to the
    project, and the boundaries within which the project will be
    accomplished.

-   A USFWS-approved biologist shall be present at the work site until
    such time as all removal of red-legged frogs, instruction of
    workers, and red-legged frog habitat disturbance has been completed.
    After this time, the contractor or project proponent shall designate
    a person to monitor on-site compliance with all minimization
    measures. The USFWS-approved biologist shall ensure that this
    individual receives the training outlined above and in the
    identification of California red-legged frogs. The monitor and the
    USFWS-approved biologist shall have the authority to halt any action
    that might result in impacts that exceed the levels anticipated by
    FEMA and the USFWS during review of the proposed action. If work is
    stopped, the City of Santa Cruz, FEMA and the USFWS shall be
    notified immediately by the biological monitor.

-   Upon locating dead or injured California red-legged frogs, initial
    notification must be made by telephone and writing to the Ventura
    Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura,
    California 93003, (805) 644-1766, within three working days of its
    finding. The report shall include the date, time, location of the
    injured or dead animal, a photograph, cause of injury or death, if
    known, and any other pertinent information. Care shall be taken in
    handling dead specimens to preserve biological material in the best
    possible state for later analysis. The remains of red-legged frogs
    shall be placed with the California Academy of Sciences Herpetology
    Department (Contact: Jens Vindum, Collections Manager, California
    Academy of Sciences Herpetology Department, 55 Concourse Drive,
    Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, California 94118, (415) 750-7037.

-   Exclusion fencing should not be used in the attempt to keep
    California red-legged frogs out of the project area. Exclusion
    fencing has been shown to cause undue harm to California red-legged
    frogs that may be moving through the project area.

-   If a work site is to be temporarily dewatered by pumping, intakes
    shall be completely screened with wire mesh not larger than 5
    millimeters (mm) to prevent California red-legged frogs from
    entering the pump system. Water shall be released or pumped
    downstream at an appropriate rate to maintain downstream flows
    during construction. Upon completion of construction activities, any
    barriers to flow shall be removed in a manner that would allow flow
    to resume with the least disturbance to the substrate.

-   A USFWS-approved biologist shall permanently remove from the wild
    any individuals of exotic species, such as bullfrogs, crayfish, and
    centrarchid fishes. The City of Santa Cruz shall have the
    responsibility to ensure that their activities are in compliance
    with the California Fish and Game Code.

-   For the effects to the California red-legged frog, the City of Santa
    Cruz shall provide a report to the USFWS within 30 days after the
    project is implemented that includes the following details about the
    project: 1) total acres of California red-legged frog habitat
    impacted with description of habitat; 2) start and end dates of
    project activities; 3) list of measures implemented to prevent
    impacts; 4) the number of California red-legged frogs that were
    killed, injured, or otherwise disturbed during the completion of the
    project; 5) a description of the relative success in meeting project
    minimization and compensation measures; and 6) a description of
    where the project was unsuccessful at meeting avoidance,
    minimization and compensation measures.

Other potential impacts to red-legged frogs from project implementation
include a temporary increase in turbidity and downstream sedimentation
during bridge shoring activities. Localized sedimentation and turbidity
are particularly likely when workers are in the wetted channel for
installation or removal of the footers and vertical supports for the
bridges. Similarly, turbidity and sediment could occur from construction
and backfilling of retaining walls at Sites A and B, or from
transporting uncovered soil to the repair sites. If these sources are
not contained, soil and debris could move downslope into the Laguna
Creek drainage, impacting water quality and red-legged frog habitat.
Sediment and turbidity can adversely affect red-legged frog by impacting
gills and respiratory functions, burying food sources, altering
pool-riffle habitats, and impacting smaller riparian and instream
vegetation.

To minimize the impacts of increased turbidity and introduced sediment
to Laguna Creek from the proposed project, the City (or the City's
contractor) would implement the following minimization measures:

-   The only work that would be allowed in the Laguna Creek channel is
    the installation and removal of temporary bridge shoring. During
    shoring activities, the City would require the use of wooden planks
    across Laguna Creek in areas where workers will access the creek to
    minimize channel bottom disturbance.

-   Well-anchored silt fences would be installed below the retaining
    wall construction zones at each slipout site to contain any soil
    from the construction zone before it reaches Laguna Creek.

-   All construction materials and fill will be stored and contained in
    a designated area that is located away from channel areas to prevent
    inadvertent transport of materials into the adjacent stream channel.

-   Fueling, cleaning or maintenance of equipment would be prohibited
    except in designated areas located at least 25 yards from any
    riparian habitat or water body. The City of Santa Cruz shall ensure
    that contamination of habitat does not occur during such operations.
    Prior to the onset of work, the City of Santa Cruz shall prepare a
    plan to allow a prompt and effective response to any accidental
    spills. In addition, the contractor would maintain adequate
    materials onsite for containment and cleanup of any spills. All
    workers shall be informed of the importance of preventing spills and
    of the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur.

-   A USFWS-approved biologist shall ensure that the spread or
    introduction of invasive, exotic plant species shall be avoided to
    the maximum extent possible. When practicable, invasive, exotic
    plants in the project areas shall be removed.

-   Stream contours shall be returned to their original condition at the
    end of project activities, unless consultation with the USFWS has
    determined that it is not beneficial to the species or feasible.

-   The number of access routes, number and size of staging areas, and
    the total area of the activity shall be limited to the minimum
    necessary to achieve the project goal. Routes and boundaries shall
    be clearly demarcated. Where impacts occur in these staging areas
    and access routes, restoration shall occur as identified in the
    previous two measures.

-   To control erosion during and after project implementation, the City
    of Santa Cruz shall implement best management practices, as
    identified by the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board.

-   Ground disturbance and vegetation removal would be limited during
    construction.

-   Work would be completed prior to the onset of the rainy season
    (November 1). Should the City of Santa Cruz demonstrate a need to
    conduct activities outside this period, FEMA may authorize such
    activities after obtaining approval from the USFWS.

-   After construction and prior to November 1, all disturbed soils at
    each site should undergo erosion control treatment consisting of
    temporary seeding, straw mulch, or other measures pursuant to an
    approved erosion control plan. Any disturbed soils on a gradient of
    over 30 percent should also have an erosion control blanket
    installed. Permanent revegetation or tree replanting should then
    take place in small openings in the erosion control blanket, with
    suitable species that are compatible with native vegetation.

In addition to implementing the avoidance and minimization measures
listed above for the red-legged frog, the City shall notify FEMA to
re-initiate consultation if any of the following occur: (1) the amount
or extent of incidental take is exceeded; (2) new information reveals
that the Proposed Action may affect a listed species or critical habitat
in a manner or to an extent not considered in the BO; (3) the Proposed
Action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the
listed or critical habitat that was not considered in the BO; or (4) a
new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be
affected by the action. In instances where the amount or extent of
incidental take is exceeded, any operation causing such take must cease
pending reinitiating with USFWS.

# [Marbled Murrelet]{.underline}

The marbled murrelet is a federally listed species within the
jurisdiction of USFWS. The proposed project area is not located within
the designated critical habitat for marbled murrelet. The nearest
delineated critical habitat to the project area is located within Unit
CA-15, at Township 10S, Range 02W, Section 20, which is approximately 2
miles north northeast of the project area.

Recently, marbled murrelets have been observed within Henry Cowell
Redwoods State Park, which is approximately 4 miles north and northeast
of the project area. In addition, there is documentation of a Fall 1993
detection of murrelet vocalizations within the Laguna Creek drainage
upstream of Smith Grade Road (Mori 2002). The nearest recorded
occurrence of marbled murrelet in the California Department of Fish and
Game Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) is located in Big Basin Redwoods
State Park, which is approximately 7 miles northwest of the project
area. No occurrences of murrelet have been recorded within 4 miles of
the project area.

A preliminary evaluation of the project area by Mr. Bryan Mori, a
biologist with approximately 10 years of experience with marbled
murrelet, found that the project area only provides marginal habitat for
the species due to the structure and composition of the forest. Focused
surveys for murrelets were not recommended. The distribution of
coniferous trees in the project vicinity is patchy, and is primarily a
second growth stand intermixed with oak-bay woodland.

Nonetheless, because marbled murrelets have been detected in the
vicinity of the project area, it is feasible that marbled murrelet could
utilize the area as a dispersal corridor. Thus, construction noise could
disturb murrelets passing through or resting within the immediate
project area. In addition, human presence in the project area could
potentially attract opportunistic wildlife to the area, thereby
increasing the risk of predation on murrelets if they are nearby.

In addition to disturbance associated with construction noise and
attraction of murrelet predators, one large redwood, approximately 44
inches diameter breast height (dbh), is proposed for removal as part of
the project. However, this tree is located immediately adjacent
(upgradient) of the roadway, and the roots are considerably undercut and
exposed. Therefore, the tree poses a safety hazard to construction
workers and must be removed. This tree contains a platform suitable for
murrelet nesting activities, and no data exists to state whether or not
the tree is being utilized by murrelet for nesting this season. However,
Bryan Mori has concluded, "in the overall context of murrelet nesting
habitat, this tree occurs within a stand that does not appear to be
suitable for nesting murrelets, due to the patchy distribution of
conifers and general lack of old-growth and mature second-growth
trees.". After careful analysis, the City, FEMA, and USFWS concluded
that the City of Santa Cruz cannot avoid potential impacts to murrelet
due to the removal of the tree, therefore they will provide mitigation
for the tree at a ratio of 3:1 with 5-gallon saplings upon completion of
the construction activities. The replacement trees would be planted in
the area where the tree is to be removed, and would be irrigated during
the dry season during the first 2 to 3 years.

Due to the proposed Action's potential to adversely affect marbled
murrelet, FEMA initiated consultation with USFWS under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (as amended). On July 16, 2002, USFWS issued a BO
and Incidental Take Statement (Appendix B) in response to FEMA's
request. The City of Santa Cruz would be responsible for ensuring that
all avoidance and minimization measures and terms and conditions of the
BO would be implemented to avoid, to the extent possible, adverse
effects to marbled murrelet under the Proposed Action. USFWS issued the
opinion that the Proposed Action "is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the Marbled murrelet and that it would not
adversely modify critical habitat," provided the stipulations and
minimization measures described below are implemented. To minimize
potential impacts to marbled murrelet from construction noise and
increased predation, the City of Santa Cruz Water Department would
implement the following avoidance and minimization measures:

-   Work conducted during the later portion of the breeding season (July
    15 -- September 15) would not begin until two (2) hours after
    sunrise, and would end two (2) hours before sunset each day to avoid
    the time period when murrelets would be most likely to travel
    through the project area (dawn and dusk).

-   All trash and construction-related debris shall be properly
    contained and regularly removed from the project site to avoid
    opportunistic predators of murrelets (e.g., ravens, jays). Following
    construction, all trash and construction debris shall be removed
    from work areas.

-   When not in use, motorized equipment shall be shut down.

-   Upon locating dead or injured marbled murrelets, initial
    notification must be made by telephone and writing to the Ventura
    Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura,
    California 93003, (805) 644-1766, within three working days of its
    finding. The report shall include the date, time, location of the
    injured or dead animal, a photograph, cause of injury or death, if
    known, and any other pertinent information. Injured marbled
    murrelets should be taken by the USFWS-approved biologist to the
    nearest state-licensed wildlife rehabilitation center with
    experience in caring for marbled murrelets. Injured animals may be
    released to the wild only after receipt of concurrence from the
    USFWS. Care shall be taken in handling dead specimens to preserve
    biological material in the best possible state for later analysis.
    The remains of marbled murrelets shall be placed with the California
    Academy of Sciences Department of Ornithology and Mammology
    (Contact: Lise Thomsen, Senior Preparator, California Academy of
    Sciences Department of Ornithology and Mammology, 55 Concourse
    Drive, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, California 94118,
    (415)750-7176).

-   For the effects of the project to marbled murrelets, the City of
    Santa Cruz shall provide a report on the following details about the
    completed project to the USFWS within 30 days after the project is
    implemented: 1) total acres of marbled murrelet habitat disturbed
    (any suitable marbled murrelet habitat within 0.25 mile of an
    activity generated noise); 2) assessment of the quality of suitable
    habitat disturbed; 3) summary of the amount of time motorized
    equipment was used at each site within 0.25 mile of suitable marbled
    murrelet habitat; and 4) the existence and nature of any evidence of
    marbled murrelets using the 44 inches diameter breast height (bdh)
    redwood tree that was removed (described below). Such evidence may
    consist of egg shell fragments, feathers, bones, prey items, or
    bodies of fledgling or adult marbled murrelets.

In addition to implementing the avoidance and minimization measures
listed above for the marbled murrelet, the City would notify FEMA to
re-initiate consultation if any of the following occur: (1) the amount
or extent of incidental take is exceeded; (2) new information reveals
that the Proposed Action may affect a listed species or critical habitat
in a manner or to an extent not considered in the BO; (3) the Proposed
Action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the
listed or critical habitat that was not considered in the BO; or (4) a
new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be
affected by the action. In instances where the amount or extent of
incidental take is exceeded, any operation causing such take must cease
pending reinitiating with USFWS.

## **3.7 Cultural Resources**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.7 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.7.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in
Sections 4.1.7.3 of the PEA.

FEMA has reviewed the Proposed Action Alternative as required under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), as
amended, and the Programmatic Agreement for FEMA-1203-DR-CA (PA; FEMA
1998b).

FEMA conducted an archaeological field survey for the area of potential
effect (APE). FEMA did not identify any prehistoric archaeological
resources or built environment features within the project area. Heidi
Luckenbach, an Associate Engineer with the City of Santa Cruz Water
Department reports that the roadway and bridges were constructed in the
early 1960s (Heidi Luckenbach, personal communication 11/19/01).
Therefore, FEMA determined that no effect to historic properties would
be expected from the Proposed Action. No records search or Native
American consultation was conducted since the project repairs constitute
a replacement in kind. Pursuant to the provisions of the Programmatic
Agreement for Disaster 1203, Appendix 1: Programmatic Exclusions, I.A
and B, the proposed action does not require review by the SHPO or the
Council. The information and resulting conclusions were placed in a memo
to file dated December 11, 2001.

In the event of an unanticipated discovery, the City of Santa Cruz would
stop work and notify FEMA immediately. FEMA would then consult with the
SHPO in accordance with Section VII of the Programmatic Agreement for
Disaster FEMA-1203-DR-CA. Should human remains be encountered, work in
the vicinity would halt and the City of Santa Cruz would also notify the
County Coroner immediately. If the remains were determined to be Native
American, the coroner would contact the NAHC.

## **Socioeconomics and Public Safety**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.8 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.8.1 of the
PEA. Impacts of Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.1.8.3 of the PEA.

In compliance with Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice), FEMA
determined that neither the implementation of the No Action Alternative
nor the Proposed Action Alternative is expected to result in any adverse
and/or disproportionate impacts on minority or low-income persons.

## **3.9 Land Use and Zoning**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.9 of the PEA. Impacts
of the No Action Alternative are described in Sections 4.1.9.1. Impacts
of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.9.3 of
the PEA.

No impact to land use or zoning would result from the Proposed Action
Alternative. All project activities would occur within the existing City
of Santa Cruz property boundaries.

## **3.10 Public Services**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.10 of the PEA.
Impacts of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.10.1.
Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.1.10.3 of the PEA.

Under the No Action Alternative, no reparations to the roadway along
Laguna Creek would be performed. While the No Actin Alternative is not
anticipated to cause any immediate and direct impacts to public
services, it is possible that future erosion could result in failure of
the pipeline and continued failure of the roadway. Due to the current
roadway failures the pipeline is difficult to access for repairs and
maintenance, which could disrupt the water supply to the City of Santa
Cruz if the pipeline failed.

The Proposed Action Alternative is anticipated to prevent adverse
impacts by reducing the risk of pipeline failure. No impacts to police,
fire, emergency services, or public utilities are anticipated as a
result of the Proposed Action Alternative.

## **3.11 Transportation**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.11 of the PEA.
Impacts of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.11.1.
Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.1.11.3 of the PEA.

The Proposed Action Alternative is not anticipated to have any permanent
adverse impacts to transportation in the project vicinity. The access
road would have a temporary increase in traffic related to construction
equipment and workers. Since the work would be performed on private
property, there would be no need for road closures or traffic detours
during construction activities. The Proposed Action Alternative would be
expected to have a long-term beneficial impact for maintenance of the
pipeline by making the access road safe and accessible.

## **3.12 Noise**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.12 of the PEA.
Impacts of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.12.1.
Impacts of the Proposed Action Alternative are described in Section
4.1.12.3 of the PEA.

The Proposed Action Alternative would result in temporary noise impacts
during construction not exceeding safe levels. However, construction
activities would be restricted to daylight hours, and the project area
is located in an undeveloped area. There are no residential or other
uses in the immediate vicinity that would be affected by the short-term,
temporary noise increases. There are 1 to 2 houses located at least one
quarter to one half mile away (Strelow Consulting, 2001).

## **3.13 Hazardous Materials and Wastes**

The affected environment is described in Section 3.13 of the PEA.
Impacts of the No Action Alternative are described in Section 4.1.13.1
of the PEA. Impacts of Proposed Action Alternative are described in
Section 4.1.13.3 of the PEA.

Hazardous materials and wastes are not expected to be present in the
project area because the project does not involve the transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials or wastes and would not result in
creation of a public health hazard (Strelow Consulting 2001). Neither
the No Action Alternative nor the Proposed Action would result in any
new impacts to hazardous materials and wastes at the project site.

# **4.0 References**

\_\_\_\_\_. 2001. Rarefind 2, a program allowing access to the
California Natural Diversity Database. Visited November 6.

Entrix Inc. 1997. Red-Legged Frog habitat Surveys for the City of Santa
Cruz Diversion Sites. Prepared for City of Santa Cruz Water Dept.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 1998b. Final Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (PEA) for Typical Recurring Actions Resulting
from Flood Disasters in California as Proposed by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. April 16, 1998. FEMA 1203-DR-CA.

John Gilchrist & Associates. 2001. Biotic Assessment Laguna Creek
Pipeline Repair. Prepared for Stephanie Strelow. September.

Luckenbach, Heidi. 2001. Personal communication with Heidi Luckenbach,
City of Santa Cruz Water Department. November 19, 2001.

Mesiti-Miller Engineering, Inc. 2000. *Letter to City of Santa Cruz
Water Department regarding: Laguna Creek Pipeline Access Roadway. June.*

Mori, B.M. 1997. Terrace Point California Red-Legged Frog Assessment,
Santa Cruz, CA. Prepared for ATC Realty Sixteen.

\_\_\_\_\_. 2002. Laguna Creek Pipeline -- Marbled Murrelet Habitat
Assessment. Prepared for Santa Cruz Water Department. May.

Strelow Consulting. 2001. Laguna Creek Pipeline Access Road Storm Damage
Repair Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration. October.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA 1980). Soil Survey of
Santa Cruz County, California. United States Department of Agriculture.
Soil Conservation Service in Cooperation with California Agricultural
Experiment Station.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2000a. Draft Recovery Plan for
the California Red-Legged Frog (*Rana aurora draytonii*). Region 1.
Portland, Oregon. January.

\_\_\_\_\_. 2001. Notice of Final Designation of Critical Habitat for
the Threatened California Red-legged Frog. Correspondence to interested
parties. March 14.

# **5.0 LIST OF PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONSULTED**

### 

### Diane Noda, Amy Deweerd and Debra Kirkland

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office

# U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

2493 Portola Rd., Suite B

Ventura, California 93003

Bryan M. Mori

Biological Consulting Services

1016 Brewington Avenue

Watsonville, CA 95076

Heidi Luckenbach

Associate Engineer

City of Santa Cruz Water Department

809 Center Street, Room 102

Santa Cruz, CA 95060

# **Appendix A -- Figures** 

#####  Figure 1 Project Vicinity

Figure 2 Project Area

#  Figure 3 Repair "Site B" and "Site C" Site Plan

#  Figure 4 Repair "Site A" Site Plan

![](media/image1.jpeg){width="5.225in" height="7.625in"}

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="6.231944444444444in"
height="8.703472222222222in"}

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="12.03125in" height="7.885416666666667in"}

> ![](media/image4.jpeg){width="8.125in" height="5.263194444444444in"}

# **Appendix B -- Agency Correspondence**

To review correspondence from the Fish and Wildlife Service, including
letters received on December 21, 2001 regarding the species list in
Santa Cruz County, and the Biological Opinion dated July 16, 2002, as
well as Bryon Mori's Marbled Murrelet Habitat Assessment, please contact
Sandro Amaglio, Region IX Environmental Officer, at (510) 627-7027 to
request a hard copy.