Coronado Bay Bridge Eelgrass Mitigation Project

Status Completed County San Diego
Project Type Compensatory mitigation Location 32.68678° N, -117.15588° W Map
Project Area (Acres) 1.15 Last Updated 27 September 2016

Project Identification

150316SWR2008HC_N1645.01 NMFS - Record Number
not recorded USACE - File Number

Habitat Plan

ActivityHabitatSubHabitatAcresActivity StatusWater Regime
Restoration Estuarine Wetland Submerged aquatic vegetation 0.63 Construction completed

Related Habitat Impacts

HabitatAcres LostType of Loss
Estuarine Wetland 1.04 Lost Permanent


Mitigation Site 1 Construction completed 0.19
Mitigation Site 2 Construction completed 0.16
Mitigation Site 3 Construction completed 0.80


DateTypeDescriptionSite Name
2013-03-14 Project entered Project entered into database
2006-02-08 Monitoring end Actual date
2003-06-19 Groundwork end Estimated date
2003-06-19 Monitoring start Actual date
2003-06-15 Groundwork start Estimated date


Contact Chris White California Department of Transportation Not applicable/Unknown
Contact Kevin Hovel San Diego State University Not applicable/Unknown


No Data

Related CRAM Assessments

Visit DateVersionSite NameWetland TypeIndex Score
No Data

Performance Criteria

StatusDetailsEvaluation Date
Less than 50% criteria met See plan in Files & Links 2006-02-08

Project Description

Caltrans modified piers in shallow, soft sediments to increase their capability of withstanding seismic disturbance.; Mitigation Type: Onsite
Upload files or links
Name File Type Submitted On Submitted By
AMEC Post Construction Eelgrass Survey Other 2013-03-14 SFEI, SFEI
AMEC Post Construction Eelgrass Survey.PDF

CalTrans Post Construction Eelgrass Report Other 2013-03-14 SFEI, SFEI
CalTrans Post Construction Eelgrass Report.PDF

Merkel Mitigation Assessment Other 2014-03-24 Christopher Solek, SCCWRP
Merkel Mitigation Assessment.pdf

A MS powerpoint presentation explaining the mitigation process for the Coronado Bridge Retrofit project.

Mitigation Plan Other 2013-03-14 SFEI, SFEI
Mitigation Plan.PDF

Pre-project Eelgrass Survey Other 2013-03-14 SFEI, SFEI
Pre-project Eelgrass Survey.PDF

Tracker Data Form Other 2013-03-14 SFEI, SFEI
S Ca Tracker Data Form_v5_CoronadoBridge.doc

How to Use the Habitat Development Curve

Habitat Development Curves (HDCs) are used to determine the developmental status and trajectory of on-the-ground projects to create, restore, or enhance California wetland and stream habitats. Each HDC is based on assessments of habitat condition for different age areas of one habitat type that in aggregate represent the full spectrum of habitat development. The assessments of condition are provided by expert applications of the California Rapid Assessment Method (CRAM). Visit the CRAM website for more information about CRAM.

For each HDC, reference condition is represented by areas of a habitat that consistently get very high CRAM scores, have not been subject to disruptive management practices, and exist within landscapes that are protected and managed for their natural conditions. The horizontal lines intersecting the top of an HDC represent the mean CRAM score and standard deviation of scores for 25 qualifying reference areas.

The age of a project is estimated as the elapsed time in years between the groundwork end date for the project and the date of the CRAM assessment. To add or update a groundwork end date, use the Project Events form in Project Tracker ( The minimum age in years of a non-project area, including any natural reference area, is estimated from all available local information, including historical maps and imagery, historical written accounts, and place-specific scientific studies of habitat development.

An HDC can be used to address the following questions:

  1. At what time in the future will the area of assessed habitat achieve the reference condition or other milestones in habitat development? The HDC can answer this question if the CRAM score for the assessed area is within the confidence interval of the HDC. The answer is the time in years along the HDC between the current age of the assessed area and the future date corresponding to the intersection of the HDC and the reference condition or other milestone.
  2. Is the area of assessed habitat likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace as most other areas of the same habitat type? The habitat area is likely to develop faster, slower, or at the same pace if the CRAM score for the area is above, below, or within the confidence interval of the HDC, respectively.
  3. What can be done to improve the condition of the habitat area or to increase its rate of development? HDCs by themselves cannot answer this question. Possible answers can be inferred by the following analysis that involves HDCs:
    1. Examine the HDC for each of the four CRAM Attributes;
    2. Identify the Attribute(s) scoring below the HDC;
    3. For any low-scoring Attribute, examine the component Metric Scores (note: the Metric Scores for any public CRAM assessment in the CRAM database can be obtained through EcoAtlas);
    4. Assume the low score of an Attribute is due to its low-scoring Metric(s);
    5. Consider modifying the design or management of the habitat area in ways that will sustainably increase its score(s) for the low-scoring Metric(s).

For more information about CRAM Attributes and Metrics, including their scientific rationale, see the CRAM Manual.

Display Habitat Development Curves For Wetland Type:

CRAM Site Scores