Supplemental 

Environmental Impact 

Statement/ 

Supplement to the 

Subsequent Environmental 

Impact Report 

State Clearinghouse No. 2010051001 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Transit Administration 

and the 

San Diego Association of Governments 

July 2014 

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

July 2014 

Prepared by: 

The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 

San Diego, California 

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 

PREPARED PURSUANT TO: 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, §102 (42 United States Code [USC] §4332 et seq.), 

40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §1502.9, 23 CFR §771.130, Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended, 16 USC §1531 et seq., and 50 CFR §402.06. 

The Federal Transit Administration may issue a single Final Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement and Record of Decision document pursuant to Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 

405, Section 1319(b) unless the Federal Transit Administration determines statutory criteria or 

practicability considerations preclude issuance of the combined document pursuant to Section 

1319. In that case, Federal Transit Administration would issue a Final Supplemental Impact 

Statement followed by a Record of Decision, as needed. 

by the

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

and the 

SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS 

 _________________________________________ ______________________ 

Leslie T. Rogers Date of Approval 

Regional Administrator, Region IX 

Federal Transit Administration 

 _________________________________________ ______________________ 

Gary Gallegos Date of Approval 

Executive Director 

San Diego Association of Governments 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

ABSTRACT 

The Federal Transit Administration and the San Diego Association of Governments 

(SANDAG) have prepared this Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the MidCoast Corridor Transit Project in San Diego, San Diego County, California. Pursuant to 23 

Code of Federal Regulations 771.130, this document was prepared to supplement the MidCoast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) 

(SANDAG, 2013a), which was circulated for review and comment from May 17, 2013 to July 

17, 2013. This document provides for review and comment of an impact that was not 

evaluated in the Draft SEIS. This is a limited-scope document that evaluates a previously 

unidentified impact to San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), a federally listed 

endangered species, and discusses the proposed mitigation. 

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS DOCUMENT, CONTACT: 

Alexander Smith 

Community Planner 

Federal Transit Administration, Region IX 

201 Mission Street, Suite 1650 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

415-744-3133 

Leslie Blanda 

Mid-Coast Project Development Program 

Manager 

San Diego Association of Governments 

401 B Street, Suite 800 

San Diego, CA 92101 

619-699-6907 

This document is being made available to the public for a 45-day comment period in accordance 

with the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments during this review period must be limited 

to the analysis of impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp as presented in this document only. 

Visit the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project website (www.sandag.org/midcoast) where you can 

view and download this document and the Draft SEIS and request a compact disc of the 

documents. Printed copies of the documents are available for review and purchase at the 

SANDAG offices at the address listed above; compact discs are available free of purchase. 

Printed copies of this document have been placed for review in the following public libraries: 

Balboa Branch Library; City of San Diego Central Library; Clairemont Branch Library; KensingtonNormal Heights Branch Library; La Jolla/Riford Branch Library; Linda Vista Branch Library; Mesa 

College Library; Mission Hills Branch Library; Mission Valley Branch Library; North Clairemont 

Branch Library; North Park Branch Library; North University Community Branch Library; Ocean 

Beach Branch Library; Pacific Beach/Taylor Branch Library; Point Loma/Hervey Branch Library; 

San Diego County Public Law Library; Serra Mesa-Kearny Mesa Branch Library; University 

Community Branch Library; University Heights Branch Library; University of California, San Diego 

Geisel Library; and University of San Diego Copley Library. 

Comments may be submitted in writing during the 45-day comment period. Written comments 

should be submitted to Ms. Leslie Blanda, Mid-Coast Project Development Program Manager, at 

the address above or submitted via e-mail at midcoast@sandag.org. Responses to comments 

received on this document will be included in the Final SEIS for the project. 

 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

SUPPLEMENT TO THE MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT DRAFT 

SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

LEAD AGENCY: San Diego Association of Governments 

STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO.: 2010051001 

TITLE OF PROPOSED ACTION: Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 

ABSTRACT: 

The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) has prepared this supplement for the 

Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project in San Diego, San Diego County, California. This document 

was prepared to supplement the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Subsequent 

Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) (SANDAG, 2013a), which was circulated for public 

review from May 17, 2013 to July 17, 2013. This document provides for review and comment 

of an impact that was not evaluated in the Draft SEIR. This is a limited-scope document that 

evaluates a previously unidentified potentially significant impact to San Diego fairy shrimp 

(Branchinecta sandiegonensis), a federally listed endangered species, and discusses proposed 

mitigation. 

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THIS DOCUMENT, CONTACT: 

Alexander Smith 

Community Planner 

Federal Transit Administration, Region IX 

201 Mission Street, Suite 1650 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

415-744-3133 

Leslie Blanda 

Mid-Coast Project Development Program 

Manager 

San Diego Association of Governments 

401 B Street, Suite 800 

San Diego, CA 92101 

619-699-6907 

This document is available for a 45-day comment period in accordance with the California 

Environmental Quality Act. Comments during this review period must be limited to the analysis 

of impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp as presented in this document only. 

Visit the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project website (www.sandag.org/midcoast) where you can 

view and download this document and the Draft SEIR and request a compact disc of the 

documents. Printed copies of this document are available for review and purchase at the 

SANDAG offices at the address listed above; compact discs are available free of purchase. 

Printed copies of this document have been placed for review in the following public libraries: 

Balboa Branch Library; City of San Diego Central Library; Clairemont Branch Library; 

Kensington-Normal Heights Branch Library; La Jolla/Riford Branch Library; Linda Vista Branch 

Library; Mesa College Library; Mission Hills Branch Library; Mission Valley Branch Library; 

North Clairemont Branch Library; North Park Branch Library; North University Community 

Branch Library; Ocean Beach Branch Library; Pacific Beach/Taylor Branch Library; Point 

Loma/Hervey Branch Library; San Diego County Public Law Library; Serra Mesa-Kearny Mesa 

Branch Library; University Community Branch Library; University Heights Branch Library; 

University of California, San Diego Geisel Library; and University of San Diego Copley Library. 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

Comments may be submitted in writing during the 45-day comment period. Written comments 

should be submitted to Ms. Leslie Blanda, Mid-Coast Project Development Program Manager, 

at the address above or submitted via e-mail at midcoast@sandag.org. Responses to 

comments received on this document will be included in the Final SEIR for the project. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Table of Contents

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 i 

Table of Contents 

S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. S-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Purpose and Scope of this Document ................................................................ 1-1

1.3 Environmental Review Process .......................................................................... 1-2

1.4 Next Steps .......................................................................................................... 1-2

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................................. 2-1

3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 No-Build Alternative ............................................................................................ 3-1

3.2 Build Alternative ................................................................................................. 3-1

3.3 Refined Build Alternative .................................................................................... 3-3

3.3.1 Addition of Veterans Administration Medical Center Station Option ....... 3-6

3.3.2 Elimination of the Genesee Avenue Design Option ................................ 3-6

3.3.3 Refinements to LRT Alignment ............................................................... 3-6

3.3.4 Refinements to Stations .......................................................................... 3-7

3.3.5 Refinements to Traction Power Substations ........................................... 3-8

3.3.6 Refinements to Construction Staging Areas ........................................... 3-8

3.3.7 Other Engineering Refinements ............................................................. 3-9

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, CONSEQUENCES, AND MITIGATION .................... 4-1

4.1 Surveys and Impact Assessment ....................................................................... 4-1

4.1.1 Surveys ................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1.2 Impacts Assessment ............................................................................... 4-4

4.2 Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 4-6

4.2.1 Study Area and Surrounding Land Uses ................................................ 4-6

4.2.2 Soils ........................................................................................................ 4-9

4.2.3 Drainages/Hydrology ............................................................................ 4-11

4.2.4 Vegetation Communities and Land Covers .......................................... 4-11

4.2.5 San Diego Fairy Shrimp ........................................................................ 4-15

4.3 Environmental Impacts, Avoidance Analysis, and Mitigation ........................... 4-15

4.3.1 No-Build Alternative .............................................................................. 4-15

4.3.2 Refined Build Alternative ...................................................................... 4-15

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures .............................................................................. 4-19

5.0 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION ......................... 5-1

6.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .............................................................................................. 6-1

6.1.1 No-Build Alternative ................................................................................ 6-1

6.1.2 Refined Build Alternative ........................................................................ 6-1

7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 7-1

8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS .................................................................................................. 8-1
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Table of Contents 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

ii July 2014 

List of Appendices 

APPENDIX A AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE ................................................................... A-1

APPENDIX B SECTION 7 CONSULTATION BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ...................... B-1

APPENDIX C USFWS NOTIFICATION CORRESPONDENCE ........................................... C-1

List of Figures 

Figure 3-1. No-Build Alternative Transportation Improvements ............................................ 3-2

Figure 3-2. Build Alternative ................................................................................................. 3-4

Figure 3-3. Refined Build Alternative .................................................................................... 3-5

Figure 4-1. Fairy Shrimp Survey Area .................................................................................. 4-2

Figure 4-2. Affected Environment ......................................................................................... 4-7

Figure 4-3. Basin II Inundated .............................................................................................. 4-8

Figure 4-4. Basin II Dry ......................................................................................................... 4-9

Figure 4-5. Soils Map .......................................................................................................... 4-10

Figure 4-6. Basin II Hydrology ............................................................................................ 4-13

Figure 4-7. San Diego Fairy Shrimp ................................................................................... 4-15

Figure 4-8. Refined Build Alternative at Basin II ................................................................. 4-16

Figure 4-9. Avoidance Design at Basin II ........................................................................... 4-17

List of Tables 

Table 4-1. 2013-2014 Schedule of Surveys ........................................................................ 4-3
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Table of Contents

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 iii 

Abbreviations 

The following acronyms, initialisms, and short forms are used in this report. 

2030 RTP 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future 

BMPs Best Management Practices 

Caltrans California Department of Transportation 

CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EMI Electromagnetic Interference 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FTA Federal Transit Administration 

I- Interstate 

LOSSAN Los Angeles—San Diego—San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency 

LRT light rail transit 

MSCP Multiple Species Conservation Program 

MTS Metropolitan Transit System 

OTTC Old Town Transit Center 

ROD Record of Decision 

SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments 

Scripps Hospital Scripps Memorial Hospital, La Jolla 

SEIS/SEIR Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Subsequent 

Environmental Impact Report 

Supplement Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Supplement to the 

Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

TPSSs traction power substations 

Trolley San Diego Trolley 

UCSD University of California, San Diego 

USC United States Code 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

UTC University Towne Centre 

VA Veterans Administration 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Table of Contents 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

iv July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

S.0 – Executive Summary

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 S-1 

S.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the San Diego Association of 

Governments (SANDAG) have prepared this Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement/Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Supplement) 

for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project in San Diego, California. Pursuant to Title 23 

of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 771.120, and the California Code of 

Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15088.5, this document was prepared to 

supplement the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) (SANDAG 

2013a), which was circulated for review and comment from May 17, 2013 to July 17, 

2013. This is a limited-scope document that evaluates a previously unidentified impact 

to San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), a federally listed 

endangered species protected pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), 

and discusses the proposed mitigation. 

The scope of this Supplement is limited to the evaluation of direct, indirect, and cumulative 

impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp; the discussion of formal Section 7 consultation with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to the ESA; and the identification of 

mitigation measures. Potential impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp are described for a 

No-Build Alternative and the Refined Build Alternative. The Refined Build Alternative was 

approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors on November 15, 2013, and amended by 

the Board of Directors on May 9, 2014, for evaluation in the Final SEIS/SEIR. The Refined 

Build Alternative is described in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Final Refined Build 

Alternative Report (SANDAG, 2014). The project alignment under the Refined Build 

Alternative at the location of the potential impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp is the 

same as the Build Alternative evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. The No-Build Alternative 

in this Supplement also is the same as that presented in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. 

San Diego fairy shrimp were identified as present within an ephemeral basin (referred to 

as Basin II), which is approximately 76 feet long and 5.5 feet wide (approximately 425 

square feet). Direct impacts would occur to the basin and San Diego fairy shrimp as a 

result of grading and filling activities associated with at-grade track construction to 

accommodate the new San Diego Trolley tracks. Impacts to ephemeral basins occupied 

by San Diego fairy shrimp, such as Basin II, are proposed to be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio 

through restoration and/or enhancement of vernal pools within west Otay Mesa on 

property purchased for vernal pool mitigation or within another approved mitigation area 

acceptable to the USFWS. Restoration would be conducted at a minimum 1:1 ratio to 

achieve a no-net-loss of San Diego fairy shrimp habitat; a combination of restoration and 

enhancement would make up the remaining mitigation. 

Formal consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA was initiated by the FTA 

and SANDAG on June 12, 2014. Documentation of correspondence with the USFWS 

regarding San Diego fairy shrimp is provided in Appendix A. The Mid-Coast Corridor 

Transit Project Section 7 Consultation Biological Assessment is provided in Appendix B. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

S.0 – Executive Summary 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

S-2 July 2014 

This Supplement will be available for a 45-day review and comment period prior to the 

issuance of a combined Final SEIS and Record of Decision (ROD) by FTA, and prior to 

certification of the Final SEIR by SANDAG. Any comments on this Supplement should 

be limited to the scope of analysis of this document. Responses to comments received 

on this Supplement will be provided with the Final SEIS/SEIR for the project. SANDAG, 

in coordination with the FTA, will complete the Final SEIS/SEIR and associated 

documents. The FTA will continue Section 7 consultation with the USFWS, which will 

conclude with the USFWS issuing a Biological Opinion. The FTA may issue a single 

Final SEIS and ROD pursuant to Public Law 112-141, 126 Statute 405, Section 1319(b) 

unless the FTA determines statutory criteria or practicability considerations preclude 

issuance of the combined document pursuant to Section 1319. In that case, FTA would 

issue a Final SEIS followed by the ROD. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 1-1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background 

This Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Supplement to the Subsequent 

Environmental Impact Report, referred to herein as the Supplement, has been 

prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), in cooperation 

with the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project in San Diego, San Diego County, California. The proposed project would 

extend the San Diego Trolley Blue Line from the Santa Fe Depot in Downtown San 

Diego to the University Towne Centre Transit Center in University City, providing 

continuous service from the San Ysidro Transit Center at the U.S.–Mexico international 

border to University City. SANDAG is serving as lead agency under the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the FTA the lead agency under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

(SEIS/SEIR) (SANDAG, 2013a) for the project was completed and distributed for a 60-

day review and comment period from May 17 through July 17, 2013. 

On November 15, 2013, the SANDAG Board of Directors approved the Refined Build 

Alternative for evaluation in the Final SEIS/SEIR. The development of the Refined Build 

Alternative is described in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Final Refined Build 

Alternative Report (SANDAG, 2014). Refinements were developed based on 

consideration of a summary of the comments received on the Draft SEIS/SEIR, 

additional coordination with agencies and stakeholders, and further evaluation of the 

project design. All refinements were either beneficial (i.e., impacts are reduced or 

eliminated) or impact-neutral (i.e., no new impacts would occur or no previously 

identified impacts would become more severe). The Refined Build Alternative approved 

by the SANDAG Board of Directors on November 15, 2013, was amended by the 

SANDAG Board of Directors on May 9, 2014, to retain the Interstate 5 crossing south of 

Nobel Drive at the location in the Build Alternative as evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. 

1.2 Purpose and Scope of this Document 

The FTA’s “Environmental Impact and Related Procedures” (23 Code of Federal 

Regulations [CFR] part 771) regulation prescribes the policies and procedures of the 

FTA for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. This regulation 

states (Section 771.130, Supplemental environmental impact statements) that a draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), final EIS, or SEIS may be supplemented at any 

time. An EIS will be supplemented whenever the FTA determines that changes to the 

proposed action would result in specific environmental impacts that were not evaluated 

in the EIS or that new information or circumstances relevant to environmental concerns 

and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts would result in significant 

environmental impacts not evaluated in the EIS. Consistent with 23 CFR 771.130(f), this 

Supplement addresses issues of limited scope, such as the extent of proposed 

mitigation for a limited portion of the overall project. 

Guidelines for the implementation of CEQA are provided in the State CEQA Guidelines 

in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 et seq. CEQA 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 1.0 – Introduction 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

1-2 July 2014 

Guidelines Section 15088.5, subdivision (a) provides that “[a] lead agency is required to 

recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after...public 

review ...but before certification....Examples of “significant new information” requiring 

recirculation include a “new significant environmental impact” or a “substantial increase 

in the severity of an environmental impact.” “If the revision is limited to a few chapters or 

portions of the EIR, the lead agency need only recirculate the chapters or portions that 

have been modified” and “may request that reviewers limit their comments to the revised 

chapters or portions of the recirculated EIR” (Section 15088.5, subdivisions (c) and 

(f)(2)). 

This Supplement is a limited-scope document that evaluates a previously unidentified 

impact to San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), a federally listed 

endangered species, and discusses the proposed mitigation. It supplements Chapter 

4.0, Sections 4.8, 4.17, and 4.19 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft 

SEIS/SEIR (SANDAG, 2013a) as well as Sections 4.7, 5.1.2, 5.2.2, 5.3.2, 6.2, 7.1.1, 

7.2.2, and 7.3.1 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Biological Resources 

Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013b) and Sections 5.7, 6.6, and 7.2 of the Mid-Coast 

Corridor Transit Project Construction Impacts Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013c) 

(these reports are available on the project website at www.sandag.org/midcoast). This 

document provides for review and comment of an impact that was not evaluated in the 

Draft SEIS/SEIR. Impacts to this federally listed endangered species require 

consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to Section 7 of 

the federal Endangered Species Act. 

Potential impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp are described for a No-Build Alternative 

and the Refined Build Alternative that was approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors 

on November 15, 2013 (and amended on May 9, 2014) for evaluation in the Final 

SEIS/SEIR. The Refined Build Alternative is described in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project Final Refined Build Alternative Report (SANDAG, 2014). The project alignment 

under the Refined Build Alternative at the location of the potential impacts to the San 

Diego fairy shrimp is the same as the Build Alternative evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. 

The No-Build Alternative in this Supplement also is the same as that presented in the Draft 

SEIS/SEIR. 

1.3 Environmental Review Process 

This Supplement is being made available for a 45-day review and comment period. 

Comments should be limited to the analysis contained in this Supplement only. 

Responses to comments received on this Supplement will be provided with the Final 

SEIS/SEIR for the project. 

1.4 Next Steps 

SANDAG, in coordination with the FTA, will prepare responses to comments received on 

this Supplement and complete the Final SEIS/SEIR and associated documents. The 

FTA will continue Section 7 consultation with the USFWS, which will conclude with the 

USFWS issuing a Biological Opinion. FTA will issue a Notice of Availability of the Final 

SEIS in the Federal Register. SANDAG will submit a Notice of Completion of the Final 

SEIR to the State Clearinghouse and will hold a public hearing to certify the document. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 1-3 

The FTA may issue a single Final SEIS and Record of Decision pursuant to Public Law 

112-141, 126 Statute 405, Section 1319(b) unless the FTA determines statutory criteria 

or practicability considerations preclude issuance of the combined document pursuant to 

Section 1319. In that case, FTA would issue a Final SEIS followed by the Record of 

Decision. 

 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 1.0 – Introduction 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

1-4 July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 2.0 – Purpose and Need

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 2-1 

2.0 PURPOSE AND NEED 

The Purpose and Need for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project is presented in 

Chapter 1.0 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SANDAG, 2013a). As 

stated in that chapter, the purpose of the proposed project is to provide for the 

implementation of transit improvements that improve transit service in the Mid-Coast 

Corridor between Downtown San Diego, Old Town, and University City. Although the 

Mid-Coast Corridor is currently served by transit, the existing transit system does not 

offer the level of service needed to meet the region’s goals for mobility, accessibility, 

reliability, and efficiency, as defined in the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation 

Plan: Pathways for the Future (SANDAG, 2007). The COASTER commuter rail service 

passes through the corridor, but its stations are widely spaced and it does not have a 

station in close proximity to the University of California, San Diego or University Towne 

Centre. The existing San Diego Trolley (Trolley) Blue Line currently terminates at the 

Old Town Transit Center. While transit mobility and accessibility to northern portions of 

the corridor are provided by express and local buses, the speed and reliability of bus 

service are constrained by roadway congestion, and many transit riders are required to 

transfer in Downtown San Diego or at the Old Town Transit Center to reach destinations in 

University City. With congestion projected to increase in the future, the level of service, 

reliability, and efficiency of the transit system will all decrease.

To meet the region’s goals most effectively, the Mid-Coast Corridor needs a transit system 

that is better able to serve the major travel destinations of the University of California, San 

Diego and the University Towne Centre Transit Center in University City. This transit 

system must provide a frequency of service, speed, and reliability that would better serve 

existing transit riders and attract new riders. The project, which extends the Trolley Blue 

Line north and connects with the other Trolley lines using an exclusive right-of-way for 

transit, would shorten travel times, improve reliability, and reduce the number of transfers 

required for travel to destinations in University City. This would improve service for existing 

riders and attract new riders. In addition, one-seat rides (trips that do not require a 

transfer) would be available from the U.S.–Mexico international border to University City, 

and between communities in South San Diego County, Downtown San Diego, and 

University City, making transit an attractive alternative to travel by automobile. 

 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 2.0 – Purpose and Need 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

2-2 July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 3-1 

3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 

Chapter 2.0 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental 

Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) (San Diego 

Association of Governments [SANDAG], 2013a) documents the development of 

alternatives and the description of the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative that 

were evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. This section provides a summary of the NoBuild and Build Alternatives. Additionally, this section describes the Refined Build 

Alternative, which reflects refinements made to the Build Alternative subsequent to the 

Draft SEIS/SEIR comment period. The Refined Build Alternative was approved by the 

SANDAG Board of Directors on November 15, 2013, for evaluation in the Final 

SEIS/SEIR and was amended on May 9, 2014. 

3.1 No-Build Alternative 

The No-Build Alternative is evaluated in the context of the existing transportation 

facilities and services in the Mid-Coast Corridor (as characterized in 2010) and other 

future facilities and services identified in the Revenue Constrained Scenario of the 2030 

Regional Transportation Plan (2030 RTP) (SANDAG, 2007). Figure 3-1 identifies the 

location of the major transportation projects included in the 2030 RTP within the MidCoast Corridor and assumed to exist in the No-Build Alternative. The No-Build 

Alternative also assumes other San Diego Trolley (Trolley) system improvements, 

including 7.5-minute service frequencies during peak (i.e., 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 

6:00 p.m.) and off-peak midday (i.e., 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) periods on the Trolley Blue 

Line. 

Because the No-Build Alternative provides the background transportation network 

against which the Build Alternative’s impacts are identified and evaluated, the No-Build 

Alternative excludes the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project but does include 

continuation and enhancement of bus Route 150 (as show in Figure 3-1) that is planned 

for elimination in the 2030 RTP when the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project becomes 

operational. The route would operate in the proposed high-occupancy vehicle lanes on 

Interstate (I-) 5 from the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC) north to Nobel Drive. 

3.2 Build Alternative 

The Build Alternative evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIS would extend the Trolley Blue Line 

from Santa Fe Depot in Downtown San Diego to the University Towne Centre (UTC) 

Transit Center in University City. The project would use the existing Trolley tracks for 

approximately 3.5 miles, from the Santa Fe Depot to north of the OTTC and south of the 

San Diego River. The Trolley Blue Line trains would share the existing tracks with the 

Trolley Green Line trains. The project also would include construction of 10.9 miles of new 

double track that would extend from south of the San Diego River to the terminus at the 

UTC Transit Center. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

3-2 July 2014 

Figure 3-1. No-Build Alternative Transportation Improvements

Source: SANDAG, 2012 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 3-3 

The new extension would follow the Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo 

(LOSSAN) tracks within existing Metropolitan Transit System and City of San Diego 

right-of-way from the Santa Fe Depot to north of the I-5/State Route 52 interchange. 

The alignment would then leave the LOSSAN right-of-way and parallel the east side of 

the I-5 corridor traveling north partially within California Department of Transportation 

right-of-way and partially on private property. South of Nobel Drive, the alignment would 

transition to an aerial structure and cross over to the west side of I-5. From Nobel Drive, 

the alignment would continue north along the west side of I-5 to the University of 

California, San Diego (UCSD) West Campus, cross back over to the east side of I-5, and 

proceed along Voigt Drive to Genesee Avenue, and then south in the median of 

Genesee Avenue to the UTC Transit Center. 

The Build Alternative included 8 new stations (3 at grade and 5 elevated); 5 park-andride facilities with 1,070 parking spaces; 14 new and 4 upgraded traction power 

substations (TPSSs); and 36 new low-floor light rail transit (LRT) vehicles. No new 

maintenance facilities would be needed. New stations would be located at Tecolote 

Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, Nobel Drive, UCSD West, UCSD East, 

Executive Drive, and the UTC Transit Center. 

The Build Alternative included two options—one provided for an optional at-grade station 

at the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center and the other provided for an 

alternative design for the proposed Genesee Avenue aerial alignment in University City. 

Figure 3-2 shows the project alignment and station locations, as well as the VA Medical 

Center Station Option and the Genesee Avenue Design Option. 

With the extension of the Trolley Blue Line, continuous service would be provided 

from the San Ysidro Transit Center at the U.S.–Mexico international border to 

University City. The service would be provided every 7.5 minutes during peak and 

off-peak periods in 2030. 

3.3 Refined Build Alternative 

Refinements were proposed to the Build Alternative based on comments received on the 

Draft SEIS/SEIR, additional analysis of impacts identified in the Draft SEIS/SEIR, and 

coordination with agencies and stakeholders. The proposed refinements included the 

addition of the VA Medical Center Station; refinements to the LRT alignment, stations, 

TPSSs, and construction staging areas; and further engineering refinements. The 

Genesee Avenue Design Option was proposed to be eliminated from further 

consideration. These refinements are discussed in the following sections. 

The Refined Build Alternative was approved by the SANDAG Board of Directors on 

November 15, 2013, and amended on May 9, 2014. The Refined Build Alternative 

would include 9 new stations (4 at grade and 5 elevated); 5 park-and-ride facilities with 

1,170 parking spaces; 14 new and 2 upgraded TPSSs; and 36 new low-floor LRT 

vehicles. Figure 3-3 shows the project alignment and station locations. 

 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

3-4 July 2014 

Figure 3-2. Build Alternative 

Source: SANDAG, 2012 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 3-5 

Figure 3-3. Refined Build Alternative 

Source: SANDAG, 2014
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

3-6 July 2014 

3.3.1 Addition of Veterans Administration Medical Center Station Option 

The option for an additional station at the VA Medical Center was evaluated in the Draft 

SEIS/SEIR. Inclusion of this station in the Refined Build Alternative was recommended 

based on station ridership, improved access to hospital and medical facilities, and 

favorable public comment. No adverse or significant environmental impacts were 

identified for the VA Medical Center Station in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. The VA Medical 

Center Station is included in the Refined Build Alternative approved by the SANDAG 

Board of Directors on November 15, 2013. 

3.3.2 Elimination of the Genesee Avenue Design Option 

The option for incorporating straddle bents in place of center columns to support the 

aerial structure along Genesee Avenue west of Regents Road was developed and 

evaluated for the purpose of reducing right-of-way acquisitions. As stated in the Draft 

SEIS/SEIR, the option would result in significant and unavoidable visual impacts 

along Genesee Avenue, would adversely affect the character of the community, and 

would not result in a substantial reduction in property acquisition. Elimination of the 

Genesee Avenue Design Option reduces visual and community character impacts and 

addresses public comments opposing the use of straddle bents. The Genesee Avenue 

Design Option is excluded from the Refined Build Alternative approved by the SANDAG 

Board of Directors on November 15, 2013. 

3.3.3 Refinements to LRT Alignment 

The refinements to the LRT alignment under the Build Alternative include changes to the 

design of the crossing of I-5 south of Nobel Drive and a shift in the Voigt Drive alignment 

in the vicinity of Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla (Scripps Hospital), west of I-5. 

 I-5 Crossing South of Nobel Drive—The Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR 

included straddle bents to support the aerial structure over the northbound and 

southbound lanes on I-5. A refinement to the Build Alternative was developed that 

improves the visual aesthetics of the aerial structure through the elimination of the 

straddle bents. Several comments on the Draft SEIS/SEIR expressed opposition to 

the use of straddle bents along the alignment. The elimination of the straddle bents 

at the I-5 crossing improves aesthetics and is included in the Refined Build 

Alternative. 

 Voigt Drive Alignment—Under the Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR, the LRT 

alignment in the vicinity of Scripps Hospital would be located on the north side of 

Voigt Drive. Comments from Scripps Hospital on the Draft SEIS/SEIR identified the 

location of sensitive medical equipment that could be susceptible to vibration and 

electromagnetic interference (EMI) in the XiMed medical office building located on 

the south side of the hospital campus, which is closest to the alignment. The 

comments requested that an alignment south of Voigt Drive, away from the XiMed 

building, be considered and evaluated. Further analysis of electromagnetic field 

impacts on the XiMed building determined that the project could affect the equipment 

located in the XiMed building even with the proposed mitigation at the source 

evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. Based on these findings and the comments from 

Scripps Hospital, a refinement to the Build Alternative was developed that shifts the 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 3-7 

LRT alignment to the south side of Voigt Drive. With this shift, the project-related 

EMI at the XiMed building would be substantially reduced to the extent that mitigation 

of electromagnetic fields at the source (i.e., through design of the project) would be 

sufficient to avoid adverse effects to sensitive medical equipment. The refinement to 

the Voigt Drive alignment was reviewed with UCSD and Scripps Hospital, and is 

included in the Refined Build Alternative. 

3.3.4 Refinements to Stations 

The refinements to stations include changes to the configuration of the Clairemont Drive 

Station park-and-ride lot and removal of the pedestrian ramps, reconfiguration of the 

parking structure at the Nobel Drive Station, relocation of the UCSD East Station to 

accommodate the change in alignment on Voigt Drive, and acquisition of parking spaces 

at the UTC Transit Center instead of construction of a parking structure for transit 

patrons. The stations at Tecolote Road, Balboa Avenue, UCSD West, and Executive 

Drive as defined in the Draft SEIS/SEIR are included in the Refined Build Alternative 

without substantial changes. No comments were received that would affect the UCSD 

West Station or the Executive Drive Station. 

 Clairemont Drive Station—Under the Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR, bus 

transfers at the Clairemont Drive Station would be accommodated by on-street bus 

stops on Clairemont Drive east of Morena Boulevard. Pedestrian ramps were 

provided for access to the station from Clairemont Drive to Morena Boulevard. 

Comments on the Draft SEIS/SEIR noted that the on-street bus stops on Clairemont 

Drive would be inconvenient for passengers transferring to and from the Trolley. The 

refinement to the Clairemont Drive Station included in the Refined Build Alternative 

provides for bus transfers within the Clairemont Drive Station parking lot. The 

relocation of the bus transfer location eliminates the need for pedestrian ramps from 

Clairemont Drive to Morena Boulevard and makes transfers between a bus and 

Trolley more convenient. Transit passengers transferring between a bus and the 

Trolley would be able to cross Morena Boulevard at the existing signalized crosswalk 

at Ingulf Street located at the southern end of the station platform. 

 Nobel Drive Station—Under the Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR, the Nobel 

Drive Station provided for a 600-space joint-use parking structure to be constructed 

at the La Jolla Village Square shopping center. Coordination with the property owner 

and further engineering refinements resulted in a change in the layout of the parking 

structure, which would include replacement parking spaces and 260 transit parking 

spaces. The existing surface parking lot also would be reconfigured with 

construction of the parking structure. These modifications do not result in new or 

increased impacts. 

 UCSD East Station—A refinement to the location of the UCSD East Station was 

necessary to accommodate the shift in the LRT alignment to the UCSD campus on 

the south side of Voigt Drive to avoid potential EMI impacts. With the shift in the LRT 

alignment, the station was relocated to the east to accommodate the alignment and 

avoid conflict with the planned future UCSD track and field facility. The station 

location would accommodate the planned realignment of Campus Point Drive. The 

refinement does not result in new or increased impacts. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

3-8 July 2014 

 UTC Transit Center—The UTC Transit Center platform would be located in the 

center of Genesee Avenue, south of Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway. Under the 

Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR, the station was proposed to include 260 

transit parking spaces in a joint-use parking structure at the Westfield UTC shopping 

center. The parking structure would be constructed by Westfield as part of the 

planned expansion of the shopping center. The transit parking spaces would be 

constructed as an additional level on the parking structure. Comments received on 

the Draft SEIS/SEIR indicated concerns regarding the timing of the parking structure 

construction by Westfield and commitment of funds by SANDAG. Design of the 

shopping center parking structure is currently underway, with construction scheduled 

to begin in mid-2014, prior to the scheduled date of the Record of Decision for the 

project. Because SANDAG cannot commit funds for construction prior to the Record 

of Decision, the 260 transit parking spaces would be provided by acquisition of 

parking spaces from the Westfield UTC shopping center. This change does not 

result in new or increased impacts. 

3.3.5 Refinements to Traction Power Substations 

The Build Alternative presented in the Draft SEIS/SEIR was anticipated to require 18 

TPSSs, including 3 replacement substations on existing sites between Santa Fe Depot 

and the OTTC and 15 new substations. Refinements to the number and location of the 

TPSSs were made based on the results of a load-flow analysis, which analyzed the 

power distribution system required for operation of the LRT system. 

The load-flow analysis identified a requirement for 16 TPSSs, 2 fewer than the Build 

Alternative presented in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. The TPSSs proposed at the OTTC and on 

Anna Street north of the San Diego River were determined to be unnecessary based on the 

results of the load-flow analysis. Other refinements to the TPSS locations include the 

following: 

 Relocation of the substation at the Wright Street Yard to the south within the 

Metropolitan Transit System property 

 Relocation of the substation at Baker Street to the Clairemont Drive Station parking lot 

 Relocation of the substation within the City Yard site north of Balboa Avenue 

 Relocation of the substation on Charmant Drive to the west side of I-5 within the 

California Department of Transportation right-of-way at the southern end of the La 

Jolla Village Square shopping center property 

 Relocation of the substation on Voigt Drive from north of the UCSD baseball field to 

east of I-5 and south of Voigt Drive 

 Relocation of the substation at Genesee Avenue and La Jolla Village Drive to the east 

of Genesee Avenue to the San Diego Gas & Electric substation facility on Fez Street 

3.3.6 Refinements to Construction Staging Areas 

The Build Alternative in the Draft SEIS/SEIR included 15 construction staging areas. 

Some of these were located at future park-and-ride lots, station areas, existing parking 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 3-9 

lots, or portions of vacant private property. Comments were received on three of the 

identified staging areas that noted a conflict between the use of the property as a staging 

area and future approved development. By eliminating these areas as staging areas, 

these conflicts and any associated short-term impacts (e.g., loss of off-street parking) were 

avoided. Refinements were made to the number and location of construction staging 

areas based on comments received on the Draft SEIS/SEIR or due to refinements to the 

LRT alignment. The following four construction staging areas were eliminated: 

 The site on Charmant Drive on the east side of I-5 

 The site at the parking lot of Scripps Hospital located east of I-5 and north of Voigt 

Drive 

 The site on the Monte Verde property at La Jolla Village Drive and Genesee Avenue 

 The site on the Westfield UTC shopping center property 

To address the shift in the alignment from the north to the south side of Voigt Drive, an 

additional construction staging site was identified. This site is on the UCSD parking lot 

located east of I-5 and south of Voigt Drive, where the new TPSS would be located. All 

other staging area sites identified in the Draft SEIS/SEIR are retained under the Refined 

Build Alternative. 

3.3.7 Other Engineering Refinements 

Other engineering refinements, as a result of further engineering studies, include 

changes in retaining walls and bridges. The most notable change in the Refined Build 

Alternative is the elimination of two retaining walls and the addition of two bridges north 

of La Jolla Colony Drive near the La Paz condominiums. 

 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives Considered 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

3-10 July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-1 

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, CONSEQUENCES, AND MITIGATION 

This chapter evaluates the impact of the No-Build and Refined Build Alternatives on a new 

location of the federally endangered San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 

sandiegonensis) recently detected in the study area during the 2013-2014 wet season 

focused survey. The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Section 7 Consultation Biological 

Assessment, included as Appendix B, provides specific information regarding federally 

listed threatened and endangered species. For additional information on other biological 

resources in the study area, refer to the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Biological 

Resources Technical Report (San Diego Association of Governments [SANDAG], 2013b) 

and the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement and Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) (SANDAG, 2013a). 

The Biological Assessment covers the analysis of impacts to all federally listed threatened 

and endangered species for the Refined Build Alternative; however, the impacts to the 

threatened and endangered species, except for the San Diego fairy shrimp, are consistent 

with the discussion in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. As such, the environmental analysis in this 

Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ Supplement to the Subsequent 

Environmental Impact Report is limited to the potential impact to the San Diego fairy 

shrimp in Basin II. 

At the time the Draft SEIS/SEIR was prepared, and based on the results of wet season 

focused surveys conducted in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012, San Diego fairy shrimp had 

been observed in only one location within the study area (referred to as Basin BB), which 

was to the west of the existing Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor 

Agency (LOSSAN) tracks and outside the project impact area. Accordingly, the analysis in 

Chapter 4.0, Sections 4.8, 4.17, and 4.19 of the Draft SEIS/SEIR concluded that no longterm, construction, or cumulative impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp would occur as a 

result of the project. However, an ongoing wet season focused survey conducted in 2013-

2014 to support regulatory permitting with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and 

the California Department of Fish and Wildlife identified San Diego fairy shrimp in a new 

location, which is within the project impact area. 

Formal consultation with USFWS under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act 

was initiated by the Federal Transit Administration and SANDAG on June 12, 2014. 

Documentation of correspondence with USFWS regarding San Diego fairy shrimp is 

provided in Appendix A. 

4.1 Surveys and Impact Assessment 

4.1.1 Surveys 

The survey area for biological resources, including the San Diego fairy shrimp, generally 

included all areas within 500 feet of the alignment from the Old Town Transit Center 

north to the University Towne Centre Transit Center1. Figure 4-1 shows the areas 

surveyed for vernal pool branchiopods. 

 

1

 Exceptions to the 500-foot survey areas are further described in Chapter 4.0, Section 4.8.1.2 of the Draft SEIS/SEIR 

(SANDAG, 2013a). 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-2 July 2014 

Figure 4-1. Fairy Shrimp Survey Area 

Sources: DigitalGlobe, 2008; SANDAG, 2014 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-3 

Wet season focused surveys were conducted according to the Interim Survey Guidelines 

to Permittees for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered 

Species Act for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods (USFWS, 1996). In accordance 

with the survey guidelines, a complete survey for vernal pool branchiopods consists of 

sampling for two full wet season surveys within a 5-year period or two consecutive 

seasons of one wet season survey and one dry season survey. Following the first major 

rain event of the wet season, the study area was visited approximately every 2 weeks, 

until all inundated basins were observed dry. With any subsequent rains, ground 

surveys were reinitiated. All suitable basins (i.e., inundated greater than 3 centimeters) 

were sampled for the presence of vernal pool branchiopods. The survey included areas 

adjacent to the existing tracks from Rose Canyon in the north to Tecolote Road in the 

south (refer to the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Biological Resources Technical 

Report [SANDAG, 2013b]). 

Protocol-level sampling for the 2010–2011 wet season was initiated approximately 2 

weeks following the major rain event on February 4, 2011, and was completed on June 

6, 2011. A total of 42 basins were present. Protocol-level sampling for the 2011–2012 

wet season was initiated on November 17, 2011, and was completed on July 23, 2012. 

A total of 54 basins were present, including the 42 basins that were surveyed the 

previous year. Protocol-level sampling for the 2013–2014 wet season was initiated on 

October 18, 2013, and was determined to be complete in May 2014. A total of 8 basins 

were present within the survey area, of which one (Basin MMM) was not present during 

previous surveys. In total, 55 basins were identified during the course of the surveys. A 

schedule of the 2013-2014 survey season is presented in Table 4-1. 

Table 4-1. 2013-2014 Schedule of Surveys 

Survey Number Biologist Date 

1 PML October 18, 2013 

2 PML December 2, 2013 

3 PML December 16, 2013 

4 PML January 2, 2014 

5 PML February 13, 2014 

6 PML February 26, 2014 

7 PML March 10, 2014 

8 PML March 24, 2014 

9 PML March 31, 2014 

10 PML April 10, 2014 

11 PML April 23, 2014 

12 PML April 30, 2014 

 Source: Dudek, 2014 

 Note: PML = Paul Lemons 

Surveys for the 2013-2014 wet season were conducted by Dudek biologist Paul Lemons 

(PML; Permit # TE051248). All identified basins within the survey area (see Figure 4-1) 

were evaluated during each site visit to determine inundation levels, and sampling was 

performed where appropriate. Daily precipitation was monitored for weather station 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-4 July 2014 

KCASANDI58 near Morena Costco, San Diego, California (Weather Underground Inc., 

2013-2014). 

Protocol-level sampling was performed within all basins that were deemed suitable for 

use by fairy shrimp and any depressions meeting the USFWS inundation requirement 

(ponding at least 3 centimeters deep). The locations of detected basins sampled were 

recorded using a Global Positioning System unit and were alphabetically labeled. 

During each survey all depressions were inspected for depth, surface area of water, air 

and water temperature, level of disturbance, and presence of aquatic wildlife. An 

aquarium net was passed through every basin that met the USFWS inundation 

requirement. All portions of ponded water were surveyed from the bottom to the surface. 

Samples were collected, when needed, using the aquarium net and a 40 milliliter glass 

vial. Specimens were stored in the vial with water collected from where the specimen 

was found. Specimens were taken to the laboratory within 24 hours of collection and 

placed in a 90 percent ethyl alcohol solution for preservation. Each specimen was 

inspected thoroughly using a dissecting microscope. Eriksen and Belk (1999) was used 

to determine the species of each specimen collected. 

4.1.2 Impacts Assessment 

The assessment of impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp includes an evaluation of the 

project’s long-term direct and indirect, construction (short-term) direct and indirect, and 

cumulative effects. For the purposes of evaluating these effects, long-term impacts and 

construction effects are analyzed for both the occupied habitat (i.e., occupied basin area) 

and the associated basin watershed. This section provides definitions of the potential 

effects that could occur. Impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp are described in Section 4.3. 

The California Environmental Quality Act significance determination is described in 

Chapter 5.0. Cumulative impacts are described in Chapter 6.0. 

In Section 4.3 the impacts on San Diego fairy shrimp were analyzed under the No-Build and 

Refined Build Alternatives in the Mid-Coast Corridor. The No-Build, Build, and Refined Build 

Alternatives are described in Chapter 3.0 of this document. As stated in Section 1.1 of this 

document, the Refined Build Alternative is the same as the Build Alternative in the location 

of San Diego fairy shrimp basin (Basin II) identified during the 2013-2014 wet season 

surveys. 

4.1.2.1 Long-Term Impacts 

Direct Impacts 

Long-term, direct impacts refer to the permanent loss of vegetation, land covers, and 

plant and animal species within a designated impact footprint and direct impacts to 

biological resources that would result from ongoing project operations. 

Direct impacts typically occur during vegetation clearing, grading, or excavation 

associated with project implementation. Direct impacts to wildlife refer to loss of habitat 

and/or loss of, or harm to, individuals that can be immediately attributed to the project. 

Loss of, or harm to, individuals may vary by wildlife species, but the result is a net loss of 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-5 

a portion of a species population. For example, equipment used for excavation or 

grading can cause direct wildlife mortality. For San Diego fairy shrimp, direct impacts to 

habitat include the permanent loss of all or a portion of an occupied basin. During the 

dry season, direct, physical disturbances to the soil in an occupied basin could result in 

the loss of, or harm to, San Diego fairy shrimp cysts that exist in the soil. During the 

wet-season, direct, physical disturbances to an occupied basin could cause adult fairy 

shrimp to be crushed or buried by sediment. 

Indirect Impacts 

The Council on Environmental Quality defines indirect impacts as “effects which are 

caused by the [proposed] action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but 

are still reasonably foreseeable...” (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1508.8). Indirect 

impacts also may affect areas within or outside of the defined project area (e.g., outside 

the construction disturbance zone), including undeveloped areas outside the project area. 

Indirect impacts may result from the proximity of development to biological resources 

following construction. Examples of typical long-term indirect impacts associated with 

development include light, noise, the introduction or spread of exotic and/or invasive 

plants and animals, increased human activity, trampling, vandalism, trash, urban runoff, 

and shading. Long-term indirect impacts can alter essential behaviors and cause stress 

in wildlife, increase predation of native species, and degrade habitat. 

4.1.2.2 Short-Term Construction Impacts 

Short-term or temporary impacts to biological resources that occur during construction 

can be direct or indirect. Short-term construction activities would impact biological 

resources until construction activities have ceased or, in some instances, until vegetation 

communities or other affected resources are reestablished or restored. 

Construction of the overall project is estimated to take up to 4.5 years to complete. 

However, the estimated duration of construction activities in the vicinity of the occupied 

basin is not known at this time. 

Direct Impacts 

Direct construction impacts would be associated with construction access and ground 

improvements. Specifically, direct construction impacts would occur within the limits of work 

during clearing and grubbing and grading operations and from falsework and ground 

improvements. These activities would displace the resources dependent upon the existing 

vegetation community or land cover. This impact is considered temporary for locations 

where no permanent structures or other permanent disturbance would occur that would 

preclude restoration of the affected areas to pre-construction conditions. If construction 

impacts involve direct, physical disturbance to a species’ habitat and restoration to preconstruction conditions is not possible, then the impacts are considered permanent. 

Indirect Impacts 

Indirect construction impacts on adjacent biological resources located outside the limits 

of construction work typically include noise, vibration, dust, lighting, increased human 

activity (e.g., construction workers), erosion and sedimentation, pollutants, and chemical 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-6 July 2014 

spills. These kinds of impacts can cause behavioral disruptions and stress in wildlife 

and degrade habitat adjacent to construction areas. 

4.1.2.3 Cumulative Impacts 

Cumulative impacts refer to the combined environmental effects of the project and other 

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects that would take place generally within 

the same geographic area. In some cases, the impact from a single project may not be 

adverse, but when combined with other projects, the cumulative impact may be substantial. 

4.2 Affected Environment 

For the purposes of this report, the affected environment includes the ephemeral basin2

within the project impact area where San Diego fairy shrimp were detected (Basin II), as 

well as surrounding areas within approximately 500 feet (Figure 4-2). The occupied 

ephemeral basin, Basin II, is located within the exiting Metropolitan Transit System 

(MTS) right-of-way to the east of the existing LOSSAN tracks approximately 2,800 feet 

south of Clairemont Drive and 2,500 feet to the north of Tecolote Road. Photographs of 

Basin II inundated and dry are provided in Figure 4-3 and Figure 4-4, respectively. 

Although San Diego fairy shrimp occur in Basin II, the ephemeral basin does not contain 

vernal pool plant indicator species. As stated in the San Diego Municipal Code Land 

Development Code—Biology Guidelines (City of San Diego, 2012), road ruts and other 

seasonal depressions that are not vernal pools may contain wildlife associated with vernal 

pools, such as fairy shrimp, but will not contain vernal pool plant indicator species. Seasonal 

depressions not containing vernal pool indicator plant species are usually not considered 

vernal pools by the City of San Diego. In addition, the ephemeral basin is not considered an 

aquatic resource under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to 

Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act; the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code; the Regional Water Quality 

Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act; or the City of San 

Diego pursuant to their Environmentally Sensitive Lands Regulations. The ephemeral basin 

is located within the Coastal Zone and meets the California Coastal Act definition of an 

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area due to the presence of a rare wildlife species; 

therefore, the basin is a coastal resource regulated by the California Coastal Commission. 

4.2.1 Study Area and Surrounding Land Uses 

Land uses in the affected environment consist of transportation uses. Morena Boulevard 

occurs within 100 feet east of Basin II. The existing MTS and California Department of 

Transportation (Caltrans) rights-of-way, along with a portion of the Interstate 5 north 

freeway, occur within 100 feet to the west. Additional land uses adjacent to the affected 

environment include single- and multifamily residential and commercial uses. 

 

2

 An ephemeral basin is one that appears after a rain event and dries up shortly after the conclusion of the rain event. 

According to the USFWS criteria, a pool/swale (or basin) is considered to be inundated when it holds greater than 3 

centimeters of standing water 24 hours after a rain event (USFWS, 1996). 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-7 

Figure 4-2. Affected Environment 

Source: SANDAG, 2014
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-8 July 2014 

Figure 4-3. Basin II Inundated 

Source: SANDAG, 2014 

Note: Photo taken March 10, 2014 by P. Lemons 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-9 

Figure 4-4. Basin II Dry 

Source: SANDAG, 2014 

Note: Photo taken April 10, 2014 by P. Lemons 

4.2.2 Soils 

Soils in the affected environment consist of Huerhuero-Urban land complex, 2 percent to 

9 percent slopes, as shown on Figure 4-5. The Huerhuero series consists of moderately 

well-drained loams formed in sandy marine sediments. The surface layer is brown and 

pale brown, strong acid and medium acid loam approximately 12 inches thick. The 

subsoil is brown, moderately alkaline clay becoming mildly alkaline clay loam and sandy 

loam with depth. This series occurs on slopes that range from 2 to 9 percent. This 

complex occurs on marine terraces at elevations that range from sea level to 400 feet. 

The landscape has been altered through cut and fill operations and leveling for building 

sites; the slope was 2 to 9 percent prior to cut and fill operations. The material exposed 

in the cuts consists of unconsolidated sandy marine sediments. The materials in the fill 

are a mixture of loam and clay loam and sandy marine sediments. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-10 July 2014 

Figure 4-5. Soils Map 

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2010; SANDAG, 2014; San Diego Geographic Information 

Source, 2011 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-11 

4.2.3 Drainages/Hydrology 

The limits of the ephemeral basin containing San Diego fairy shrimp on March 10, 2014 

(Basin II), at the time the species was observed, measured approximately 76 feet long by 

5.5 feet wide, with a total area of approximately 425 square feet and a maximum depth of 

approximately 10 inches. Soils in this area belong to hydrologic soil group D (as defined 

by the Natural Resource Conservation Service), which provide poor infiltration. Surface 

water in this area has a short period of infiltration before it begins to sheet flow as runoff. 

Refer to Figure 4-3 and Figure 4-4 for photographs of Basin II inundated and dry, 

respectively. 

Specifically, Basin II is located within a low point of an existing graded earthen drainage 

ditch west of Morena Boulevard, east of the existing LOSSAN Main Track 1 and 

approximately 150 feet north of the intersection of Morena Boulevard and Napier Street 

(Figure 4-6). The low point (or maximum ponding depth) is approximately 2 feet, and the 

basin is approximately 2,950 cubic-feet (0.039 acre-feet) in volume. 

Basin II lies within an existing low point along a drainage ditch flowing to the south to a 

48-inch culvert. Figure 4-6 provides a profile of the drainage ditch taken from project 

topography. Based upon project topography and field investigation, the Basin II 

watershed is 0.71 acre. The source of runoff to Basin II consists solely of accumulated 

precipitation (storm-water runoff) from the 0.71-acre watershed. There are no storm 

drain pipe discharges that provide an additional source of runoff to Basin II. 

Accumulated storm-water runoff within the Basin II watershed collects at the low point 

(elevation 13 feet) until such time that the water-surface elevation tops the southerly 

watershed boundary (elevation 15 feet) and continues flowing southerly to the 48-inch 

culvert. 

Based upon an evaluation of average rainfall and evapotranspiration, this area would not 

typically pond for prolonged (monthly) periods of time. Instead, this area ponds due to 

individual rain events and likely dries within 1 to 2 weeks due to evaporation and 

infiltration. Extended ponding may occur if another storm event producing runoff occurs 

within the following 1 to 2 weeks. 

Two other ephemeral basins (Basin GG and Basin JJ) within the affected environment 

(defined as the area within 500 feet of Basin II) were sufficiently inundated to be 

surveyed for vernal pool branchiopods during the 2010-2011 wet season, while a third 

ephemeral basin (Basin KK) was sufficiently inundated to be surveyed during the 2010-

2011 and 2011-2012 wet seasons. These basins were not sufficiently inundated to be 

surveyed during the 2013-2014 wet season. No vernal pool branchiopods or vernal pool 

plant indicator species have been observed in these basins. 

4.2.4 Vegetation Communities and Land Covers 

The affected environment includes four vegetation communities and land covers: 

disturbed habitat, eucalyptus woodland, ornamental, and urban/developed. Except for 

eucalyptus woodland, which is categorized as a non-native woodland community, 

these communities can be categorized as “Disturbed and Developed Areas,” as 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-12 July 2014 

described by Holland (1986), and revised by Oberbauer et al. (2008). These 

vegetation communities and land covers are considered Tier IV3

 in the San Diego 

Municipal Code Land Development Code—Biology Guidelines (City of San Diego, 

2012), meaning they have limited habitat value. No native vegetation communities 

occur in the affected environment. 

Disturbed habitat refers to areas that are not developed yet lack vegetation or are 

sparsely vegetated, and generally are the result of severe or repeated mechanical 

perturbation. Disturbed habitat in the affected environment includes areas without 

vegetation or areas composed of ruderal, non-native species, including sweet fennel 

(Foeniculum vulgare), crowndaisy (Glebioinis coronaria), black mustard (Brassica nigra), 

sacred thorn-apple (Datura wrightii), and blue jacaranda (Jacaranda mimosifolia). 

Evidence of grading or other human disturbance is common. 

Eucalyptus woodland is not recognized by Holland (1986) but is recognized by 

Oberbauer et al. (2008). This “naturalized” vegetation community is fairly widespread in 

Southern California and is considered a woodland habitat. It typically consists of 

monotypic stands of introduced Australian eucalyptus trees. The understory is either 

depauperate or absent owing to shade and the possible allelopathic (toxic) properties of 

the eucalyptus leaf litter. 

Ornamental refers to areas where non-native ornamental species and landscaping have 

been installed. Ornamental is not described by Holland (1986) and is included in 

disturbed habitat in Oberbauer et al. (2008). Ornamental areas are not typically 

regulated by environmental resource agencies unless they include jurisdictional 

wetlands. Other agencies, such as Caltrans or local governments, may require that 

disturbed or damaged ornamental plantings be replaced to restore aesthetics or 

function, such as screening or erosion control. Ornamental plantings occur throughout 

the affected environment and are common adjacent to the freeway and within the 

freeway median. These areas are dominated by planted non-native iceplant 

(Carpobrotus spp.), peppertree (Schinus spp.), acacia (Acacia spp.), and other nonnative planted shrubs and trees. 

Urban/developed land consists of buildings, structures, homes, parking lots, paved 

roads, and maintained areas. These areas do not support native vegetation. 

Urban/developed land occurs throughout the affected environment and includes the 

existing LOSSAN tracks, Morena Boulevard, and developed areas to the east, and the 

Interstate 5 freeway. 

 

3

 Tiers represent the sensitivity status of upland vegetation as defined by the City of San Diego, with Tier I being most 

sensitive and Tier IV being least sensitive. Wetland vegetation communities do not have a tier classification and are 

considered sensitive. 
MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 

Figure 4-6. Basin II Hydrology 

Source: SANDAG, 2014 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-14 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-15 

4.2.5 San Diego Fairy Shrimp 

San Diego fairy shrimp is a small aquatic 

crustacean (Figure 4-7) typically restricted 

to vernal pools and other non-vegetated 

ephemeral basins 2 to 12 inches in depth. 

The San Diego fairy shrimp occurs in the 

Great Central Valley and Coastal Mesa 

Systems (Eriksen and Belk 1999). The 

geographic range of the species extends 

from coastal Orange and San Diego 

Counties in southern California and in 

northwestern Baja California, Mexico 

(USFWS, 2007). This species is usually 

observed from January to March when 

seasonal rainfall fills vernal pools and 

initiates cyst (egg) hatching (USFWS, 2008). This species may also occasionally occur 

in ditches and road ruts. The shrimp hatch from cysts when cool water (5-20° Celsius 

for hatching) fills the pool and are mature in 10-20 days in the field (Eriksen and Belk, 

1999). At maturity, mating takes place and cysts are dropped. Water characteristics of 

pools where this species is found include moderate pH (6.5-8) and alkalinity (40-55 parts 

per million); total dissolved solids (mean of 75 parts per million, as measured by 

conductivity) are low (Eriksen and Belk, 1999). 

Three males and one female San Diego fairy shrimp were collected from Basin II on 

March 10, 2014, and were positively identified in the lab on March 13, 2014. Refer to 

Section 4.2.3 for a description of Basin II on March 10, 2014. The habitat surrounding 

the basin is developed land. Water pools in this area as a result of graded slopes from 

the LOSSAN tracks as well as graded slopes from Morena Boulevard (Figure 4-2). In 

accordance with USFWS protocol requirements, notification was sent via e-mail to the 

USFWS on March 18, 2014, within 10 days of positive identification (Appendix C). 

4.3 Environmental Impacts, Avoidance Analysis, and Mitigation 

The following sections describe impacts on San Diego fairy shrimp in Basin II under the 

No-Build and Refined Build Alternatives, consideration of impact avoidance and 

minimization through design modifications, and mitigation measures. 

4.3.1 No-Build Alternative 

Under the No-Build Alternative, the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project would not be 

constructed and bus Route 150 service would be continued and enhanced. Physical 

changes associated with the No-Build Alternative would not result in direct or indirect 

impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp. 

4.3.2 Refined Build Alternative 

Implementation of the Refined Build Alternative would result in long-term and 

construction (short-term) impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp in Basin II and the 

watershed in which it occurs. As described in Section 4.2.3, Basin II is located in an 

Figure 4-7. San Diego Fairy Shrimp 

Source: Chaparral Lands Conservancy, 2012
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-16 July 2014 

existing graded earthen drainage ditch west of Morena Boulevard, east of the existing 

LOSSAN Main Track 1, and approximately 150 feet north of the intersection of Morena 

Boulevard and Napier Street (see Figure 4-6). Basin II would be directly impacted 

through grading and/or filling associated with at-grade track construction to 

accommodate installation of the new Trolley tracks. 

The Trolley alignment as presented in the Draft SEIS/SEIR Plan Set would be located 

directly over the basin (Figure 4-8). At this location, the MTS right-of-way is 

approximately 10 feet from the curb line and Basin II is located entirely within the MTS 

right-of-way. The new Trolley tracks in the vicinity of the basin would be constructed at 

grade with new stations located approximately 0.5 mile north and 0.85 mile south of the 

basin at Clairemont Drive and Tecolote Road, respectively. 

Figure 4-8. Refined Build Alternative at Basin II 

Source: SANDAG, 2014 

4.3.2.1 Impact Avoidance Analysis 

As described in detail below, SANDAG evaluated whether impacts to San Diego fairy 

shrimp within Basin II could be avoided through design modifications. Both direct and 

indirect impacts to Basin II could adversely affect the San Diego fairy shrimp within the 

basin. Impacts to the basin watershed would result in indirect impacts to Basin II. The 

evaluation concluded that even with design modifications, long-term direct and indirect 

impacts to the basin watershed would be unavoidable, resulting in long-term indirect 

impacts to Basin II, and direct impacts to Basin II also would occur during construction. 

Therefore, adverse impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp could not be completely avoided. 

The evaluation identified design modifications that would be needed to avoid direct and 

indirect impacts to Basin II, including avoiding direct impacts to the basin watershed. To 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-17 

accomplish this, the Trolley tracks proposed under the Refined Build Alternative would 

need to be realigned to avoid placing the Trolley tracks immediately over Basin II and 

the basin watershed. Realignment of the Trolley tracks in this area would be challenging 

and constrained due to existing facilities on each side of the Trolley tracks. 

To the east, a 72-inch trunk line sewer is located just outside of the MTS right-of-way 

(Figure 4-9) and is roughly parallel to the tracks. The sewer line flows at 0.15 percent 

slope and its relocation is not feasible. Thus, it is not feasible to avoid impacts to Basin 

II by shifting the Trolley tracks to the east. 

Figure 4-9. Avoidance Design at Basin II 

Source: SANDAG, 2014 

To realign the Trolley tracks to the west, the existing LOSSAN tracks would have to be 

moved to the west by 20 feet in the vicinity of Basin II. This would require realigning the 

LOSSAN tracks along approximately 1.75 miles, adjacent to the westerly MTS right-ofway. In addition, two existing crossovers, together with their associated overhead 

signals and signal cabinets located approximately 1,000 feet north of Basin II, would 

have to be relocated. 

Even with the LOSSAN tracks shifted to the west, there is insufficient area within the 

MTS right-of-way to accommodate the Trolley tracks while completely avoiding the basin 

watershed. Thus, a retaining wall next to Basin II would also be required (Figure 4-9) 

due to the proximity of the Trolley tracks. The retaining wall and its footing could be 

designed to avoid encroaching into the basin, but would be within the basin watershed. 

The face of the retaining wall would be located about 2 feet from the edge of the basin. 

Because of the proximity of the alignment to the westerly MTS right-of-way, a retaining 

wall would be required for approximately 1.25 miles to provide sufficient area for the 

relocated LOSSAN tracks. For more than one-half of the length of retaining wall, the 

wall footing would be located outside of the MTS right-of-way, requiring the relocation of 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-18 July 2014 

existing gas, sewer, and fiber optics lines. A portion of these facilities may have to be 

relocated to Caltrans right-of-way, which would require additional coordination. 

The realignment of the LOSSAN tracks would result in schedule impacts to existing rail 

operations. Relocation of the LOSSAN tracks and crossovers would require single-track 

operation under slow orders for approximately 2 miles for approximately 8 to 9 months. 

Single tracking of LOSSAN operation in this location, together with construction activities 

along the LOSSAN tracks in other locations of the corridor (as described in Chapter 3.0, 

Section 3.4.7.1 of the Draft SEIS/SEIR), would increase the magnitude of the 

construction impact to Amtrak and COASTER schedules. 

Construction cost for this design modification would be approximately $15 million, in 

2013 dollars. The costs associated with planning, permitting, design, and construction 

management is estimated at $5 million, for a total of $20 million. Escalation and finance 

costs add approximately 40 percent to the cost, making the total probable cost of this 

design modification approximately $28 million in year of expenditure. 

These design modifications would avoid long-term, direct impacts to Basin II; however, 

the proximity of the retaining wall and the northbound Trolley tracks immediately behind 

it would directly affect the basin watershed, which would have significant long-term 

indirect impacts on the basin as a result of changes to hydrology. As a result, long-term 

adverse impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp could not be avoided. 

With respect to construction impacts, establishing a buffer to protect the basin and its 

watershed from indirect impacts is not feasible due to the constrained width of the rightof-way and the intensive construction activities required (e.g., grading, placing ballast, 

and constructing retaining walls). The proximity of substantial soil-disturbing activities in 

the immediate vicinity of the basin would result in substantial indirect impacts due to 

dust, erosion, sedimentation, and chemicals or pollutants. The construction of the 

retaining wall within 2 feet of Basin II would require excavation, which would result in 

short-term direct construction impacts to the basin. Standard construction best 

management practices (BMPs) to control construction dust, erosion, and runoff, 

including pollutants and chemical spills, would be incorporated as part of the project 

design and would substantially reduce these impacts. Typical BMPs include reducing 

erosion through soil stabilization, watering for dust control, and installing perimeter 

controls (e.g., silt fencing, straw wattles, gravel bags). All project construction would be 

subject to the typical restrictions and requirements that address erosion and runoff, 

including the federal Clean Water Act, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System, and preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. 

Even with standard construction BMPs designed to minimize these impacts, substantial 

indirect impacts would still occur to the basin and its watershed due to the proximity of 

the basin to intensive construction activities. 

In conclusion, the design modification would not avoid direct and indirect impacts to the 

San Diego fairy shrimp in Basin II, would add substantial cost to the project, would 

increase the duration of construction and associated impacts, and would result in other 

environmental impacts associated with relocating the LOSSAN tracks, constructing 

retaining walls, and relocating utilities. Based on this evaluation of the design 

modifications, avoiding direct and indirect impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp, Basin II, 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 4-19 

and the associated watershed is considered to be infeasible. As such, the design 

modifications were not carried forward and the potential long-term and construction 

(short-term) impacts of the project are analyzed for the Refined Build Alternative without 

the incorporation of the avoidance measures described above. 

4.3.2.2 Long-term Impacts 

With implementation of the Refined Build Alternative, San Diego fairy shrimp present in 

Basin II and the associated basin watershed would be directly impacted by the Refined 

Build Alternative through grading and/or filling associated with at-grade track 

construction in this location. The project would result in the loss of an ephemeral basin 

occupied by San Diego fairy shrimp as a result of improvements within the existing MTS 

right-of-way associated with new track construction. Basin II is located to the east of the 

existing tracks and measured approximately 76 feet long and 5.5 feet wide at the time 

San Diego fairy shrimp were observed, with an area of approximately 425 square feet 

and a maximum depth of 10 inches. In addition to the basin area itself, the basin 

watershed would also be directly impacted by grading and other improvements 

associated with new track construction. This impact would be considered adverse 

without mitigation. 

Although 54 other ephemeral basins have been documented in the project study area 

during focused surveys for vernal pool branchiopods in the 2010-2011, 2011-2012, and 

2013-2014 wet seasons, San Diego fairy shrimp have only been recorded in one other 

location (Basin BB) to the west of the existing LOSSSAN tracks and outside of the 

project impact footprint. As described in Chapter 4.0, Section 4.8.3 of the Draft 

SEIS/SEIR (SANDAG, 2013a) and Chapter 5.0 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 

Biological Resources Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013b), San Diego fairy shrimp in 

Basin BB would not be adversely affected by the project. There are no new impacts to 

this basin. 

Surveys to date have not detected San Diego fairy shrimp or vernal pool habitats in 

other ephemeral basins, ditches, or ruts within the project alignment; therefore, there is a 

low potential for the discovery of additional San Diego fairy shrimp locations in the 

future. With the incorporation of mitigation (described in Section 4.3.3), impacts 

associated with any future discoveries would be reduced. 

4.3.2.3 Construction Impacts 

Under the Refined Build Alternative, grading and filling associated with at-grade track 

construction would result in the permanent loss of San Diego fairy shrimp and the 

occupied Basin II. No additional short-term construction impacts would occur. 

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures 

Impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp would be mitigated through the following: 

BIO5 Impacts to ephemeral basins occupied by San Diego fairy shrimp, including 

Basin II, would be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio through restoration and/or 

enhancement of vernal pools within west Otay Mesa on the 40-acre Anderprizes 

parcel, which was previously acquired for future mitigation of vernal pools and 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 4.0 – Environmental Analysis, Consequences, and Mitigation 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

4-20 July 2014 

which has been approved by the USFWS for mitigation of impacts to San Diego 

fairy shrimp, or within another approved mitigation area acceptable to the 

USFWS. Restoration would be conducted at a minimum 1:1 ratio to achieve a 

no-net-loss of San Diego fairy shrimp habitat; a combination of restoration and 

enhancement would make up the remaining mitigation. Restoration would be 

conducted in accordance with a vernal pool restoration plan to be developed by 

SANDAG and subject to approval by the USFWS prior to project construction. 

The 40-acre Anderprizes parcel has sufficient mitigation areas to offset the impacts 

associated with the project. However, in the event that other mitigation locations are 

identified, mitigation at such sites also would include the implementation of a vernal pool 

restoration, enhancement, and/or preservation plan subject to the approval of USFWS 

prior to project construction. SANDAG would ensure that the mitigation areas would be 

conserved in perpetuity, including providing financial assurances and/or securing 

conservation easements, as necessary for USFWS approval. 

As stated in Section 4.2.3, due to the presence of San Diego fairy shrimp, Basin II is a 

coastal resource subject to California Coastal Commission (CCC) regulation. Additional 

mitigation requirements may be identified by the CCC for impacts to Basin II during the 

permitting process for the Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The requirement for a 

CDP for the project is presented in the Draft SEIS/SEIR in Chapter 4.0, Sections 4.1.2 

and 4.22, including the need to satisfy Coastal Act policies relating to habitat protection. 

Regardless of any additional permit requirements for the CDP, with implementation of 

mitigation measure BIO5, impacts to the San Diego fairy shrimp would not be adverse. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 5.0 – California Environmental Quality Act Determination

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 5-1 

5.0 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION 

Based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Environmental Checklist 

(Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines) and the City of San Diego CEQA Significance 

Determination Thresholds (City of San Diego, 2011), SANDAG has developed CEQA 

thresholds of significance for use in evaluating the impacts of the Mid-Coast Corridor 

Transit Project to the biological resources discussed below. 

No Impact (No-Build Alternative). Under the No-Build Alternative, bus Route 150 would 

not result in short-term or long-term impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp. Thus, the 

analysis below focuses on the Refined Build Alternative. 

Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat 

modifications, on any species identified as being a candidate, sensitive, or special-status 

species in the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) or other local or regional 

plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(CDFW) or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 

Significant Impact (Refined Build Alternative). The Refined Build Alternative would have 

significant impacts on the federally listed endangered San Diego fairy shrimp, both 

through long-term direct impacts on the species and through the loss of occupied habitat 

(i.e., Basin II). However, mitigation measures are proposed to reduce these impacts to 

below significance, as described in Section 4.3.3. 

Would the project have a substantial adverse4

 effect on any Tier I Habitats, Tier II 

Habitats, Tier IIIA Habitats, or Tier IIIB Habitats, as identified in the San Diego Municipal 

Code Land Development Code—Biology Guidelines (City of San Diego, 2012) or other 

sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, 

or by the CDFW or the USFWS? 

No Impact (Refined Build Alternative). As described in Section 4.2.4, only Tier IV 

habitats occur in the affected environment, meaning these communities have limited 

habitat value and do not require mitigation under the San Diego Municipal Code Land 

Development Code—Biology Guidelines (City of San Diego, 2012). 

Would the project have a substantial adverse5

 impact on wetlands (including, but not 

limited to, marsh, vernal pool, riparian, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological 

interruption, or other means? 

No Impact (Refined Build Alternative). As stated in Section 4.2, the ephemeral basin is 

not considered an aquatic resource under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers pursuant to Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act; the California 

Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game 

Code; the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the federal 

 

4

 Impacts of less than 0.1 acre are not considered significant (City of San Diego, 2011). 5

 Substantial adverse impacts on wetlands include any direct loss of wetlands. Total wetland impacts less than 0.01 acre 

are not considered significant, except for vernal pools or wetlands within the Coastal Zone (City of San Diego, 2011). 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 5.0 – California Environmental Quality Act Determination 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

5-2 July 2014 

Clean Water Act; or the City of San Diego pursuant to its Environmentally Sensitive Lands 

Regulations. 

Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or 

migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife 

corridors, including linkages identified in the MSCP, or impede the use of native wildlife 

nursery sites? 

No Impact (Refined Build Alternative). Basin II does not function as a wildlife movement 

corridor or linkage. 

Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, 

natural conservation community plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat 

conservation plan, either within the MSCP area or in the surrounding region? 

Less-Than-Significant Impact (Refined Build Alternative). The project would be 

consistent with adopted plans, as discussed in Chapter 4.0, Section 4.8.3.2 of the MidCoast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SANDAG, 2013a). 

Would the project introduce land use within an area adjacent to the Multi-Habitat 

Planning Area that would result in adverse edge effects? 

No Impact (Refined Build Alternative). The improvements that would affect the San 

Diego fairy shrimp (Basin II) are not located adjacent to the Multi-Habitat Planning Area; 

therefore, no edge effects would occur within or adjacent to the affected environment. 

Would the project introduce invasive species of plants into a natural open space area? 

No Impact (Refined Build Alternative). The improvements that would affect the San 

Diego fairy shrimp in Basin II are not located adjacent to or within natural open space; 

therefore, there are no impacts to natural open space that would occur within or adjacent 

to the affected environment. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 6.0 – Cumulative Impacts

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 6-1 

6.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

This chapter evaluates the cumulative impacts of the No-Build and Refined Build 

Alternatives on the San Diego fairy shrimp. Cumulative impacts refer to the combined 

environmental effects of the project and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

projects that would take place generally within the same geographic area. 

6.1.1 No-Build Alternative 

As described in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SANDAG, 

2013a), Chapter 2.0 of this document, and in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 

Biological Resources Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013b), the No-Build Alternative 

assumes implementation of the planned transportation improvements committed to be 

implemented by 2030, as identified in the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: 

Pathways for the Future (SANDAG, 2007) under the Revenue Constrained Scenario, 

except for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. The No-Build Alternative would 

include the continuation and enhancement of bus service by Route 150 operating 

between Downtown San Diego, the Old Town Transit Center, and University City. This 

would not result in any adverse impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp. As such, the NoBuild Alternative would not result in or contribute to cumulative impacts to the San Diego 

fairy shrimp. 

6.1.2 Refined Build Alternative 

As stated in Chapter 5.0, Section 5.2.2 of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 

Biological Resources Technical Report (SANDAG 2013b), the majority of the projects 

included in the cumulative impact analysis are located within or adjacent to existing 

developed rights-of-way in urbanized areas. Regional growth and development is also 

expected to affect areas primarily within urbanized areas. The cumulative impact of the 

Refined Build Alternative on regional biological resources is expected to be limited. 

Future projects would undergo separate environmental review and would be permitted 

for construction consistent with federal, state, and local regulations, plans, and policies. 

These regulations, plans, and policies are in place to protect biological resources. 

Although San Diego fairy shrimp was observed in the study area, the affected basin is 

located within the existing Metropolitan Transit System right-of-way in an otherwise 

developed area with limited long-term conservation value for the species. The hydrology 

of the occupied basin consists solely of accumulated precipitation (storm-water runoff) 

from the 0.71-acre watershed. With implementation of the proposed mitigation, habitat 

for San Diego fairy shrimp would be restored in areas with greater long-term 

conservation value. As such, the project would not result in or contribute to cumulative 

impacts on San Diego fairy shrimp within the corridor. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 6.0 – Cumulative Impacts 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

6-2 July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 7.0 – References

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 7-1 

7.0 REFERENCES 

City of San Diego. 2011. California Environmental Quality Act: Significance 

Determination Thresholds. San Diego, California: City of San Diego 

Development Services Department. January 2011 

City of San Diego. 2012. San Diego Municipal Code Land Development Code—Biology 

Guidelines. June 2012. 

DigitalGlobe. 2008. GIS data for the project area. 

Eriksen, Clyde and Denton Belk. 1999. Fairy Shrimps of California’s Puddles, Pools, 

and Playas. Eureka: Mad River Press, Inc. 

Holland, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of 

California. Nongame-Heritage Program, California Department of Fish and 

Game. 156 pp. 

Oberbauer, T., M. Kelly, and J. Buegge. 2008. Draft Vegetation Communities of San 

Diego County. Based on “Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural 

Communities of California.” Robert F. Holland, Ph.D. (October 1986). March 2008. 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2007. 2030 San Diego Regional 

Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future. 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2013a. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent 

Environmental Impact Report. 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2013b. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project Biological Resources Technical Report. 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2013c. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project Construction Impacts Technical Report. 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2014. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit 

Project Final Refined Build Alternative Report.

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2010. GIS data for regional soils. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Interim Survey Guidelines to Permittees 

for Recovery Permits under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act 

for the Listed Vernal Pool Branchiopods. April 19, 1996. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. Designation of Critical Habitat for the 

San Diego Fairy Shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis); Final Rule. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2008. San Diego Fairy Shrimp: 5-Year 

Review: Summary Evaluation. Carlsbad, CA. 82 pp. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 7.0 – References 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

7-2 July 2014 

Weather Underground, Inc. 2013-2014. Weather Station KCASANDI58. Data accessed 

periodically from October 2013 through spring/summer 2014 (ongoing efforts). 

Accessed website at: http://wunderground.com. 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report

Chapter 8.0 – List of Preparers

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

July 2014 8-1 

8.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Region 9 

 Raymond Sukys, Director, Office of Planning and Program Development 

 Alexander Smith, Community Planner 

 Mary Nguyen, Environmental Protection Specialist 

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 

 John Haggerty, P.E., Division Director of Rail Implementation 

 Leslie Blanda, Project Manager, Environmental/New Starts/Planning 

Project Management Consultant Team 

 Tom Jenkins, P.E., Project Manager, InfraConsult/HDR, Inc. 

 Adrianne Beazley, Environmental Manager/Technical Reviewer, LSA Associates, 

Inc. 

Parsons Brinckerhoff 

 Dennis Henderson, Environmental/New Starts Project Manager 

 Reddy Chidananda, P.E., Engineering Project Manager 

 Hadi Samii, P.E., Engineering Manager 

 Matt Moore, P.E., CPESC, CPSWQ, Water Resources 

 Kristin M. Carlson, AICP, Transportation and Final SEIS/SEIR Manager 

 Jeannie Pham, Engineering and Right-of-Way 

 Sharon Henderson, Document Production/Graphics 

 Ed Reynolds, Editor 

Dudek 

 Paul Lemons, Biologist 

 Thomas S. Liddicoat, Biologist 

 Kamarul J. Muri, TWS, CNPS, Biology Manager 

 Melissa Blundell, DFW SCP, Environmental Analyst 

 Brock A. Ortega, Senior Biologist/Technical Reviewer 

 Patricia C. Schuyler, CNPS, Environmental Analyst 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/

Supplement to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 

Chapter 8.0 – List of Preparers 

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 

8-2 July 2014 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK