HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/7/2021 Item 7b, Schroeter
Delgado, Adriana
From:Schroeter Family <schroeters617@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:WESTMONT AVENUE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP – DATED APRIL 2021 (STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: 2021040701)
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Dear City Council Members, September 7, 2021
Robert Schroeter 617 Jeffrey Drive
COMMENTS ON BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
(TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON AN EXISTING 4.98-ACRE SITE
WITHIN THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR 468-500 WESTMONT AVENUE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP –
DATED APRIL 2021 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: 2021040701)
I am writing to you in regard to the planned 468-500 Westmont Avenue Project:
Although the planning commission has voted to approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project, there are
still several issues that, in many of our neighbor’s opinion, have been left unresolved. Although some planning
commissioners did attempt to address and seek clarification on the points of concern (Biological assessment not
adequate; Health and Safety Concerns not adequately addressed for conditions present when college and elementary
school students are active), the Community Director made it clear that he did not support any further delay in the
project approval.
In our opinion it is literally impossible to have full clarity of the impact of this project without knowing exactly what
structures and size of structures are to be built. Furthermore, the City appears to have gone out of their way to
accommodate a single property owner (Meinholds) at the expense of over 60+ other adjacent property owners. The
concerns we have are all in line with the City of San Luis Obispo’s vision and priorities including Open Space, Biological
Life, Biological Corridors, and Aesthetics.
The city and project failed to reach out to the community during this projects design to see if there was some way to
minimize community and wildlife impact. We are now quite literally playing catch-up as we try to minimize the harm to
our community and surrounding wildlands. This lack of outreach to the community was notably mentioned by
Commissioner Wulkan who characterized the Westmont Project as “a missed opportunity to consider a more flexible
design to better protect the riparian corridor, reduce grading, and preserve more trees.” Commissioner Dandekar
further commented that it’s a beautiful site and we pride ourselves of the scenic qualities of our city and wonders why
we could not have incorporated ways in the riparian corridor to provide enhanced access for the public to enjoy the area
without damaging the ecology. We wholeheartedly agree with these sentiments.
th
During the July 28 meeting I requested that the planning commission, at the very least, adopt a mitigation measure to
ensure adequate protection for the red-legged frog, which would have consisted of nothing more than a thorough
sampling of the stream and surrounding habitat with USFW approved protocols, to ensure that the Project would not
jeopardize this ESA species and its habitat, something that should have been done over the last two years. This is
still necessary because the biological assessment carried out by the Project biologist failed to identify potential habitat
1
for this species along Twin Ridges Creek, even though it is present and has sustained other amphibian species with
similar life history constraints and biological requirements. The suitable pools for the red-legged frog are all located
within the known migration distance of this species, thus increasing the likelihood of use of the Project by the red-legged
frog. The resolution was not even mentioned by the planning commission, despite concern by the USFWS. Since the full
extent of possible habitat for the red-legged frog has not been established via accepted sampling methodologies, the
biological assessment for this project is at the very least, inadequate for declaring a mitigated negative declaration.
Furthermore, the project, despite what the commission has been led to believe, is a living thriving remnant of intact
riparian forest. I have literally hundreds of videos of wildlife using this riparian corridor including coyote, blacktailed
deer, raccoons, opossums, dozens of birds including have a dozen birds of prey and a yet to be identified species of
wood rat, perhaps a species of special concern.
I strongly request that the city council re-evaluate this project and take a much-needed break before approving to fill in
many of the information gaps that are present at this time.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
FYI, I have included my last letter to the planning commission July 28, 2021, below.
July 28, 2021
Mr. Kyle Van Leeuwen
Associate Planner
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
kvanleeuwen@slocity.org
COMMENTS ON BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - REVIEW OF A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
(TRACT 3157) TO CREATE 23 RESIDENTIAL LOTS ON AN EXISTING 4.98-ACRE SITE
WITHIN THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ZONE AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR 468-500 WESTMONT AVENUE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP –
DATED APRIL 2021 (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER: 2021040701)
Dear San Luis Obispo City Council Members:
As members of the community, we sincerely appreciate the Planning Commission’s
diligence to understand and address the comments and concerns of the residents affected
by the Westmont Project. At the May 26, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting,
Commissioner Wulkan characterized the Westmont Project as “a missed opportunity to
consider a more flexible design to better protect the riparian corridor, reduce grading, and
preserve more trees.” Commissioner Dandekar further commented that it’s a beautiful site
and we pride ourselves of the scenic qualities of our city and wonders why we could not
have incorporated ways in the riparian corridor to provide enhanced access for the public
to enjoy the area without damaging the ecology. We wholeheartedly agree with these
sentiments. As described by City staff and the Planning Commissioners, the Project area
provides a unique natural resource for the community. The City’s General Land Use Plan
contains many policies related to biological resources that prioritize actions to respect the
2
natural environment and incorporate and protect natural features and special habitats.
With proactive, thoughtful community engagement to incorporate the values of the
neighbors and affected residents, it would be possible to implement a multi-benefit project
that represents a win-win solution for the Project proponent, as well as many stakeholders.
Without such engagement, this is indeed a missed opportunity.
While we are not opposed to the development proposed by the Project, we find that the
Project significantly undervalues the substantial natural features of the area and does not
go far enough to protect the riparian area and associated sensitive species. For example,
the Project could have avoided development adjacent to the riparian area altogether or
reduced development near the riparian area to allow for a more intact and useable riparian
corridor for wildlife. Even after public comment, the Project proponents made no attempt to
adjust the Project to reduce impacts to species associated with the riparian area. In
particular, I believe that the Initial Study fails to adequately protect the California red-
legged frog.
The California red-legged frog is federally listed under the Endangered Species Act as a
threatened species throughout its range in California and currently, the coastal drainages
of San Luis Obispo County support the greatest amount of remaining habitat – including
known populations in nearby Brizzolara Creek. In fact, the Initial Study (p. 24) states that
“the project site is considered designated critical habitat for the California red-legged frog
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).” As noted by commenters and described
in more detail below, many pools exist that may be potential habitat for the California red-
legged frog. Furthermore, the USFWS documents that the “California red-legged frog may
use wetted habitat under logs, in small mammal burrows, or in soil cracks, provided ample
moisture is available in the shelter area” (USFWS 2002). New edits to the Initial Study
describe a recent site visit by the Project Biologist (Kevin Merk Associates, KMA) on June
10, 2021, concluding that “pools are too shallow and do not provide enough overhanging
riparian vegetation in contact with the water or banks to provide necessary shelter from
the elements and predation for red-legged frog tadpoles to develop into young adults.” I
disagree with this conclusion, based upon my recent discussions with USFWS regarding
the observations described below.
In communication with staff from the USFWS Ventura Field Office, they confirmed that this
project is in their jurisdiction, but there has been no agency consultation to date to discuss
potential impacts. Per USFWS recommendation, this issue can be resolved by conducting
an accurate site assessment and field survey for the California red-legged frog using
standard methods by a qualified specialist with demonstrated experience surveying for
California red-legged frog. If the results of the site assessment and field survey conclude
that the Project does not pose any risk to the California red-legged frog, then the Project
may proceed as planned, without substantial cost or delay.
If the Planning Commission chooses to move forward with the Initial Study, we
respectfully request the inclusion of the following mitigation measure to ensure
adequate protection of the California red-legged frog:
Mitigation Measure BIO-XX: Prepare Project-Specific California Red-Legged Frog Habitat
Assessment. Prior to any work in the riparian area, vegetation removal or tract
improvements, an accurate assessment shall be prepared in coordination with, and
submitted for review to, the USFWS Ventura Field Office. The California red-legged frog
habitat assessment shall be prepared and processed in accordance with the USFWS
3
Revised Guidance on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-Legged
Frog (USFWS 2005), or the most recent applicable guidance. The assessment shall
identify California red-legged frog aquatic and upland habitat on the project site and in the
larger connected stream channel.
BACKGROUND
In a May 25, 2021 letter to the Planning Commission, I formally requested that a detailed
amphibian survey be conducted for the Project and the relevant streams that shared a
border with the Project “so the true level of impact can be determined prior to an MND
determination”. The Project Biologist (KMA) responded that the pools with perennial flow
were not of sufficient depth and condition to provide habitat for the California red-legged
frog. KMA further concluded that, “there is “no downstream habitat for this species as Twin
Ridges Creek goes into an open concrete channel downstream from Highland Drive.”
These conclusions are not supported by any formal survey to assess California red-legged
frog habit using standard methodology and is absent any consultation or review by the
USFWS.
Such assessments are required by USFWS when California red-legged frog breeding
locations are present within 1.6 km. KMA does indicate that suitable ponds are present to
the northeast of the project on the west side of Highway 101. The close proximity to the
known population of California red-legged frog in Brizzolara Creek (within 1.6 km of the
Project) warrants a more detailed survey using standard USFWS methodology to confirm
the Project presents no risk to the California red-legged frog.
Within the last week, I had the opportunity to traverse the entire length of stream from
downstream of the concrete channel on Highland Drive to the Patricia Road, Bishop’s
Peak Trailhead to survey for possible instream pools that may be providing critical habitat
to the California red-legged frog and other amphibians in this extreme drought year. In
contrast to the conclusions presented by KMA, the results of my observations indicate that
there is sufficient potential for California red-legged frog to warrant a formal assessment
and survey.
In consultation with USFWS, the presence of suitable amphibian habitat along with the
presence of associated aquatic species is sufficient justification to warrant an accurate site
assessment for California red-legged frog. The USFWS scientist confirmed that the
presence of bull frog adults and larvae in Twin Ridges Creek indicates that habitat
conditions are suitable for the California red-legged frog within Twin Ridges Creek, since
the California red-legged frog has an even shorter developmental time-period and can
more easily adapt to seasonal drought. This provides further justification to conduct an
accurate site assessment in consultation with USFWS.
STANDING WATER OBSERVATIONS FOR TWIN RIDGES CREEK
The following is a summary of the pools with standing water found along Twin Ridges Creek from July 21
and July 26, 2021 with additional information provided from earlier time periods, when available. The
observed stretch of stream was approximately 0.3 km downstream of Highland Drive Bridge up to Patricia
Drive. In summary, there were 8 pools with sufficient water to be of value to amphibians in late July, 2021.
In addition, there were dozens of pools and complex habitat including undercut banks, large woody debris
4
and stream bank burrows that could further provide adult and juvenile red legged frog habitat when away
from the standing water sources These findings indicate that there is more potential habitat available to
California red-legged frog than indicated in the Project Biologist’s report and the follow up memorandum
provided by KMA, even in this extreme drought year and after many consecutive years of drought. I have
included the site locations (Figure 1) and photos and a short summary for each pool with standing water in
the late July sampling period.
Figure 1- Pools of sufficient flow to provide habitat for amphibians into Late July. Project area is delineated by the orange rectangle.
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 1:
Pool 1 is located immediately upstream of the concrete lined channel that begins at the Highland Drive
overcrossing. I did not have access to the pool and creek channel on July 12, 2021, but I did view the pool
from the bridge at Highland Drive and the wetted edge of the creek spanned nearly the entire stream
width. On 7/21/21, I was able to gain access to the creek through a residence on Stanford Drive and
observed that Pool 1 had considerably declined in size and was now approximately 1 foot by 2 feet (Figure
2). The entire creek bottom in this area was covered in saturated organic matter indicating that the water
level in this pool had recently dropped. Based upon the channel dimensions observed on 7/21/21, I
estimate that the size of Pool 1 on July 12, 2021 was approximately 12 feet long and 6 feet wide. Much of
the bank lining both sides of Pool 1 was undercut and very damp, providing potential habitat for California
red-legged frog.
Figure 2- Pool 1. Photo taken on 7/21/21. The line of concrete indicates the beginning of the concrete lined stream channel that
continues South under Highland Drive.
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 2:
Pool 2 is located approximately 0.07 km upstream of Highland Drive and 0.22 km downstream of the
confluence of East Fork Twin Ridges Creek (the primary Project stream). The pool is 6 feet wide by 13 feet
long and it is partially shaded by willow and ivy growing up into the canopy (Figure 3). There are undercut
banks along a majority of the pool edge and ivy and willow roots also provide instream cover. On the east
side of the pool, there was an undercut stacked concrete structure wall that also had the opening of a large
drainage pipe. This pipe appears to receive stormwater from the east side of Stanford Drive. It is important
to note that this pool is <20 meters upstream of Pool 1, which had a large amount of water in it up until at
least July 12, 2021.
Figure 3- Pool 2 Photo A and B showing max width and length dimensions. Photo taken on 7/21/21
5
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 3:
Pool 3 is located approximately 0.13 km upstream of Highland Drive and 0.18 km downstream of the
confluence of East Fork Twin Ridges Creek (the primary Project stream). The approximate length and width
were 5 feet by 3 feet. There was limited cover in this pool, as there was almost no undercutting of the
banks and only limited vegetative cover (ivy) along the margins (Figure 4).
Figure 4- Pool 3. Photo taken July 21, 2021.
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 4, 5, 6:
Pools 4-6 (Figure 5) are located just upstream of the confluence of East Fork Twin Ridges Creek and
downstream of the Culvert and were reported on in my earlier comment letter (5/25/21) and by KMA. The
pools have filled in considerably with sediment since the winter of 2017/2018. Adult bullfrogs were
observed in these pools in 2017 and tadpoles and adult tree frogs are observed annually.
Figure 5-Pools 4, 5 and 6 from right to left. Photos taken in late May 2021
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 7:
Pool 7 is situated approximately 10 meters upstream (North) of the culvert that passes under Westmont
Drive and it is located approximately 0.21 km upstream of the East Fork Twin Ridges Creek confluence
(Figures 6). The pool measures 13.7 feet by 5.6 feet. The banks of the pool are undercut with additional
cover provided by roots. There are a large number of aquatic insects in this pool indicating its long-term
persistence.
Figure 6- Pool 7. Photo taken July 22, 2021.
Pools upstream of Pool 7 and before Clover Drive:
6
Upstream from pool 7 and before Clover Drive, there are numerous large creek pools that retained water
through June this year. The pool pictured on the left side of Figure 7 had many aquatic snails crowded into
the wetted space on a large clump of organic matter (Figure 7 – Middle). The pools in this area are mostly
bedrock bound (Figure 7 – Right), but there were also pools bounded by loose fill (Figure 7 – Left). In late
May, there was significant use of these pools by amphibians, as there were large number of tadpoles
present. I have several videos that show the pools and tadpole use of this area. The tadpoles were not
identified. Several neighbors in the area reported that frog tadpoles have been observed in these pools for
over 40 years.
Figure 7- Pools located upstream of Pool 7 and below Clover Drive. Photos were taken July 22,2021.
Pools to the north and upstream of Clover Road:
There are multiple pools upstream of Clover Road. The largest pool measuring 11 feet in length and 6 feet
in width was dry by July 26, 2021. However, the pool was full of water as late as July 5, 2021. No photo of
the pool was taken at that time, but the photo below shows this same pool on May 26, 2021 (Figure 8). At
the time the photo was taken, there was surface water connecting multiple pools in this area. By July 5,
2021, the surface flow between pools had stopped and there was only standing water in the larger pools.
Large bullfrog tadpoles were observed in this pool in 2017.
Figure 8 – Large pool to the north and upstream of Clover Drive. Photo taken 5/26/21.
West Fork Twin Ridges Creek Pool 8:
Pool 8 is situated approximately 0.13 km upstream of the Clover Road bridge crossing and 0.5 km upstream
of the confluence with East Fork Twin Ridges Creek and less than 20meters upstream of Pool 7. Pool 8 is an
odd shape (Figure 9). It is over 16 feet long and 28 inches wide, including an almost 12” undercut bank at
the upstream end (7/26/21). Pool 8 is located in a large willow grove and the roots of the willow provide
additional cover for amphibians.
Figure 9- Pool 8. Photo taken July 26,2021.
7
Streamflow Downstream of Highland Drive:
It is important to point out that there is flow in Twin Ridges Creek downstream of Highland Drive in the
concrete channel. In fact, the stream appears to pick up flow after the first major bend to the east and
again as it bends back to the south. The lower portion of this stream was not observed beyond the second
major bend, but given the increasing flow, it is not unrealistic that additional habitat is available
downstream of this point, particularly in the area where the stream enters a natural (non-concrete) stream
channel on the other side of Foothill Road. This area should be further investigated for potential California
red-legged frog habitat. In this wetted section of this channelized creek, there was considerable algae
growth and very large numbers of invertebrate species, thus food and moist conditions are available if
frogs were to migrate through this area in an upstream or downstream direction (Figure 12).
Figure 3 - Water flow in concrete channel downstream of Highland Drive (Left) and invertebrates riding on water surface (Right).
CONCLUSION
The presence of 8 pools with standing water in a 1 km stretch of Twin Ridges Creek
indicates there is available amphibian habitat, including for the California red-legged frog.
The lack of a formal survey of the available habitat in Twin Ridges Creek for California
red-legged, prevents an accurate assessment of the potential impact to this species, as a
result of the Project. As discussed above and also recommended by the USFWS, this
issue can be resolved by conducting an accurate site assessment and field survey for the
California red-legged frog using standard methods by a qualified specialist with
demonstrated experience surveying for California red-legged frog. If the results of the site
assessment and field survey conclude that the Project does not pose any risk to the
California red-legged frog, then the Project may proceed as planned without substantial
cost or delay.
As discussed above, if the Planning Commission chooses to move forward with the
Initial Study and associated resolution, we respectfully request the inclusion of the
following mitigation measure to protect the California red-legged frog:
Mitigation Measure BIO-XX: Prepare Project-Specific California Red-Legged Frog
Habitat Assessment. Prior to any work in the riparian area, vegetation removal or
tract improvements, an assessment shall be prepared in coordination with, and
submitted for review to, USFWS. The California red-legged frog habitat assessment
shall be prepared and processed in accordance with the USFWS Revised Guidance
on Site Assessments and Field Surveys for the California Red-Legged Frog (USFWS
2005), or the most recent applicable guidance. The assessment shall identify
California red-legged frog aquatic and upland habitat.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study. If you have any questions
regarding this letter, please contact me via email at schroeters617@gmail.com.
Sincerely,
8
Robert Schroeter, PhD
617 Jeffrey Drive, San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse
State.Clearinghouse@opr.ca.gov
9