Agenda packet, closed session, first session — Inglewood City Council, July 8, 2025 (part 22 of 22)

further information. For copies of manifests, please send an email to [email protected].

Many of our records are available on EnviroStor, an online database that provides non- confidential, public access to DTSC’s data management system. It tracks our cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known or suspected contamination issues. EnviroStor is available 24/7, 365 days a year. The data reflects the latest updates as they are entered in the system. Access it from your computer or smartphone, the local library – anywhere Internet access is available. Just go to www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov. You’ll find a step-by-step tour of EnviroStor under the "How to Use EnviroStor" menu on the website.

If you have any questions or would like further information regarding your request, please contact me at 818-938-8620 or via email at [email protected].

Respectfully,
Nicole Griffin
Nicole Griffin
Records Mgmt. Asst. Coordinator

N: Forms/PublicRequestForm

CITY OF INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC DOCUMENT

Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 6250-6276 California Public Records Act

I request to view the following public document(s):

I request to obtain copies of the following public document(s):

Please list the SPECIFIC public document(s) being requested:

Date of document(s):

Please list your contact information:

Print Name: Signature:

Company:

Address: City: State: Zip:

Business Phone Number: ( ) -
Home or Cell Phone Number: ( ) -
Email Address:

STAFF USE ONLY:

Date and Time Requested Documents Were Made Available:

Remarks:

Number of Copies: Charge (10 cents per page plus postage):

Staff Member Signature:

*RequiredInformation
Name*
Address*
City*
State*
Zip*
TelephoneNo.*
FaxNo.

Website/Email
Name
TelephoneNo.
Address
City
Zip
Apartment,Condo,Home
BeachesInspections AnimalBiteReport
Apartment,Condo,Homeand
LandfillsInstitutionLeadInspections MedicalMarijuanaID PublicSwimmingPoolsFoodBorneOutbreak
RecycledWaterFoodPoisoning
ResidentialPoolsFoodVehicles
SepticTanksMotelsandHotelInspection
SewageRetailFoodInspection
SchoolsandDayCare
WaterWellsInspection
StreetVendor
OtherTypeofRecord:

IncidentDate/Time
Incident/FoodBorne
Illness/OutbreakSummaryNo.

TypeofDisease
InspectorName(Ifknown)
IncidentLocation
OwnerName
Victim/Patient/Complainant
Name
DateofBirth
MedicalRecordNo.
LocationofRecords
RECORDINFORMATIONTypeofRecord*(Chooseonlyoneperrequest) SubmityourrequesttoPublicHealthInvestigation,CustodianofRecordsOfficetoFaxNumber(323)728-0217,Emailto [email protected],ormailto:

PublicHealthInvestigation
5555FergusonDriveSuite120-04
Commerce,CA90022
REQUESTORINFORMATION
REQUESTINFORMATION(Provideasmuchinformationpossible) ENVIRONMENTALHEALTH
DISTRICTSURVEILLANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL
HEALTHPROTECTION
ALLOTHERS
DELIVERYOFRECORDS(IfdifferentfromRequestor)
CONTACTPERSONINFORMATION(IfdifferentfromRequestor) TravisStansbery
1172SaranapAve.Apt22B
WalnutCreek
CA
94595
949)302-4403
866)345-4484
[email protected]
Undeveloped Parcels: 355 La Colina Dr., and 338-358 E Beach Ave., Inglewood, CA 90302 1/1/1900-12/14/2023

California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Los Angeles Region
320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013 Jared Blumenfeld
Secretary
for
Main Phone ( 213) 576-6600
Records Review FAX (213) 576-6676 E-Mail: [email protected] Gavin Newsom Governor
Environmental Protection
Records Review Request Form
In order to respond to your request for review of public records, your assistance in identifying the subject matter of the request is appreciated. Please limit your request to one facility or one site address for each request form. If you know the type of case or file that is being requested, please check the appropriate programs, or indicate if you would like to review all records:

Y
our contact information:

Name: Date:

Company:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Phone Number: Fax Number: E-Mail Address
:

R
equested Record Type:
NPDES permitting
Individual permits
General permits
Contaminated Sediment
Total Maximum Daily Loads (If known, specify the TMDL of interest) Basin Planning (specify amendment or Resolution No. of interest, if appropriate) Enforcement
(If known, specify the case or site)
Storm Water
Municipal Permits
Ventura
Los Angeles
Cal Trans
Other
General Industrial Stormwater Permit
General Construction Stormwater Permit
Underground Tanks
Remediation \
Groundwater Permitting
Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR)
WDR for Groundwater Remediation at Petroleum Hydrocarbon Fuel, Volatile Organic Compound or Hexavalent Chromium Impacted Sites
WDR for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems or land discharge Land Disposal
All Records
Time Period of Documents Requested: All From: To:

Requested Facility/Site Information
Facility Name:

Facility Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Facility WDID No. (if known): NPDES Permit No. (if known):

Case No./C.I. No. (if known) File No. (if known)
California Environmental Protection Agency
Recycled Paper
Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit of present and future generations.

Clear Form
Clear Form
Print
Print

Y
our contact information:

Name: Date:

Company:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Phone Number: Fax Number: E-Mail Address
:

Requested Facility/Site Information
Facility Name:

Facility Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Facility WDID No. (if known): NPDES Permit No. (if known):

Clear Form
Clear Form
Print
Print

Y
our contact information:

Name: Date:

Company:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Phone Number: Fax Number: E-Mail Address
:

Requested Facility/Site Information
Facility Name:

Facility Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Facility WDID No. (if known): NPDES Permit No. (if known):

Clear Form
Clear Form
Print
Print

FILE REVIEW INFORMATION

BUILDING PERMITS (SELECTED)

FIRE DEPT. FILES (SELECTED)

This Page Is Intentionally Left Blank

COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
DEPT.

FILES (SELECTED)

This Page Is Intentionally Left Blank

AQMD FILE INFORMATION (SELECTED)
Search Again
Facility ID
Facility Name
Facility Address

RECLAIM
Title V
Facility Status
10582

AAA METAL FABRICATORS
250 W BEACH , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
190608

BIG DADDY'S ANTIQUES
124 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90302
ACTIVE
57317

FARRAR GRINDING COMPANY
347 E BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
ACTIVE
44012

GOODMAN FOOD PROD INC
200 E BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
ACTIVE
128119

HALLMARK MOTORS
124 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90302
ACTIVE
47709

HALLMARK MOTORS
124 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90302
12582

INGLEWOOD CITY
222 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90301
ACTIVE
25063

INGLEWOOD CITY ,PUB WKS DEPT
(RULE 012582
222 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90302
163424
IRVINE VALLEY A/C MARVIN ENGG.
261 N BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
ACTIVE
146098

LA CO, SANITATION DIST/BCH AVE

PUMP PLAN
366 E BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
ACTIVE
6886

MARVIN ENGINEERING CO INC
251-80 W BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA
90302
ACTIVE
19637
SO CAL GAS CO.

BEACH & INGLEWOOD BLVD ,
INGLEWOOD, CA 90051
122432

SUPREME PLATING & COATING, L DE

LA ROSA
330 E BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
ACTIVE
6902

SUPREME PLATING CO
330 E BEACH AVE , INGLEWOOD, CA 90302

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page
Export To Excel
Facility INformation Detail (FIND)

FARRAR GRINDING COMPANY
Address
347 E BEACH AVE
INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
Appl_Nbr
Permit_Nbr
Issued_Date
Permit_Status
Eq_Type
Equip_Description
Appl_Date
Appl_Status
157550
D02693
10/4/1988
ACTIVE
Basic

FLUID ELIMINATION - WASTE
WATER
6/10/1987

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page
Export To Excel
Facility INformation Detail (FIND)

LA CO, SANITATION DIST/BCH AVE PUMP PLAN
Address
366 E BEACH AVE
INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
Appl_Nbr
Permit_Nbr
Issued_Date
Permit_Status
Eq_Type
Equip_Description
Appl_Date
Appl_Status
449426
F83541
8/4/2006
ACTIVE
Basic
I C E (50-500 HP) EM ELEC GEN-
DIESEL
10/4/2005

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page
Export To Excel
Facility INformation Detail (FIND)

SUPREME PLATING & COATING, L DE LA ROSA
Address
330 E BEACH AVE
INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
Appl_Nbr
Permit_Nbr
Issued_Date
Permit_Status
Eq_Type
Equip_Description
Appl_Date
Appl_Status
496132
G10310
10/8/2010

EXPIRED
Control

MIST ELIMINATOR, HEPA
2/12/2009

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED
496131
G10309
10/8/2010

INACTIVE
Basic

TANK CHROME PLATING HEXAVALENT
2/11/2009

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED
430724
Basic
PLAN-RULE 1469, HEX CHROME

COMPLIANCE
6/1/2004

INACTIVE PLAN,

BILLABLE
367227
F31923
6/20/2000

INACTIVE
Basic

TANK CHROME PLATING HEXAVALENT
3/21/2000

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED
367264
F31924
6/20/2000

INACTIVE
Basic

TANKS, NICKEL PLATING LINE
3/20/2000

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page
Export To Excel
Facility INformation Detail (FIND)

SUPREME PLATING CO
Address
330 E BEACH AVE
INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
Appl_Nbr
Permit_Nbr
Issued_Date
Permit_Status
Eq_Type
Equip_Description
Appl_Date
Appl_Status
A12068
A11730
12/6/1961

INACTIVE
Basic

TANK CHROME PLATING

HEXAVALENT
1/1/1990

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED
A12068
A11730
12/6/1961

INACTIVE
Control

MIST CONTROL
1/1/1990

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED
182090
D28849
7/5/1990

INACTIVE
Basic

TANKS, NICKEL PLATING LINE
1/18/1989

PERMIT TO OPERATE

GRANTED

Page 1 of 1 ends

Page
Export To Excel
Facility INformation Detail (FIND)

State of California - Environmental Protection Agency
California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Los Angeles 320 West 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90013, (213) 576-6600

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 1 of 6

CONSTRUCTION

STORM WATER INSPECTION REPORT
(State Board Order 2009-0009, NPDES No. CAS000002)

WDID NUMBER:
419CN607736,
COMP-56086 INSPECTOR(S): Sean Lee

INSPECTION
DATE: 3/29/2023

WEATHER
CONDITION: Raining

ARRIVAL
TIME: 9:30 am

DEPARTURE
TIME: 10:00 am

NAME OF LRP REP. PRESENT
DURING THE INSPECTION: None TITLE:

PHONE
NO:

WAS CONSENT GIVEN?: TO ACCESS THE SITE: N/A
TO TAKE PHOTOS: N/A
Staff took photos from public area.

NAME OF PERSON GIVING CONSENT IF DIFFERENT FROM THE LRP REP.ABOVE

DESIGN STORM (5 YR/24 HR): PHOTOS ATTACHED: Yes IF "NO", WHY?:

355 La Colina Drive 355 La Colina Drive, Inglewood, CA 90302

CONSTRUCTION SITE NAME CONSTRUCTION SITE ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE

PERMITTED CONST. AREA: DISTURBED AREA:

Unknown

COMPANY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY'S NAME (LRP) PHONE NO

PRIMARY DEVELOPER DEVELOPER CONTACT NAME PHONE NO IS QSD CERTIFICATION ACTIVE?: Yes

NAME OF QSD CERTIFICATION NO IS QSP CERTIFICATION ACTIVE?:

NAME OF QSP CERTIFICATION NO

COI NEEDED?: EXPLAIN
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: Residential - IF LUP, WHAT TYPE: (Select)

PURPOSE OF INSPECTION

Construction Complaint

CONCLUSION/COMMENTS

Based on the inspection findings, referral to the City is needed. See more details next page.

RECOMMENDATION
ISSUE NTC ISSUE NNC ISSUE NOV OTHER NEXT INSPECTION DATE :_ _

Sean Lee

4/3/2023

INSPECTOR'S NAME

REPORT DATE

REVIEWER'S NAME

REVIEW DATE
RISK LEVEL:

A. Have you verified the risk level?
B. Is it correct?
C. If "NO", what is the correct risk level?
D. Has the LRP been notified?
PREVIOUSLY INSPECTED?: No IF "YES", WHEN?:

PREVIOUS ENFORCEMENT
ACTION: No IF "YES", WHEN?:

State of California - Environmental Protection Agency
California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Los Angeles 320 West 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90013, (213) 576-6600

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 2 of 6

RESULTS OF INSPECTION
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ATTACHMENT
Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS

1. Is the SWPPP on site during the construction? Order-XIV (C) X

2. Is SWPPP prepared prior to start of soil
disturbance? Order-II (B) X

3. Are the PRDs documents included in the
SWPPP?
Attachment
B.(J) X

4. Has LRP listed in the SWPPP the name of any
Approved Signatory with a copy of the written
agreement or other mechanism that provides this
authority from LRP?
Order-VII (B)(4)
X

5. Is the SWPPP written and certified by a QSD? Order-VII (B)(1) X

6. Is the QSD information included? Order VII (B)(2) X

7. Is the QSP information included?? Order VII (B)(3) X

8. Are all the information listed about the
contractors, subcontractors? Order VII (B)(5) X

9. Does calculation in Appendix 1 support the risk
assessment? Order VIII X

10. Are Post-Construction Requirements included
in the SWPPP? Order I.(L) X

11. Is the SWPPP amendments (if any) signed by
the QSD? Order VII (B)(6) X

12. Is the SWPPP complete? Order XIV (A) X

Are the following site specific BMPs (listed in the SWPPP) implemented? Erosion Control:

ATTACHMENT Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U
N

COMMENTS
LUP Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3
Wind
A.(j)(4) C.(D) D.(D) E.(D)
X
Effective soil cover X
Solar resistant plastic
cover material X

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 3 of 6

Sediment Control:

ATTACHMENT Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS
LUP Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3
Perimeter control
A.(J) C.(E) D.(E) E.(E)
X Ineffective silt fence.

Tracking X
Sediment basin X
Linear sediment
controls along the toe,
face and at grade
breaks of exposed
slopes
Type
2 & 3
(Table
2)
N/A
(Table 1) X
Traffic limited to
protected entrances
and exits
Type
2 & 3
(5) X
Are immediate access
roads free of sediment
and other construction
materials
(7) X
Run-On and Run-off
Controls
Type
2 & 3* C.(F) D.(F) E.(F) X
Good Site
Management
“Housekeeping”:

ATTACHMENT
Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U
N
COMMENTS LUP Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3
A.(J)
(2) C.(B) D.(B) E.(B)

Are all the inspection,
maintenance repair and
sampling performed or
supervised by the
QSP?
A.(J)
(7)
C.(G)
(1-3)
D.(G)
(1-3)
E.(G)
(1-3) X
Are good
housekeeping
documents in
REAP(s)?
N/A N/A D.(B)
(7) E.(B) X

* Run-on and runoff controls are not required for Type 1 LUPs unless the evaluation of quantity and quality of run-on and runoff deems them necessary or visual inspections show that the site requires such controls.

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 4 of 6

Monitoring
Requirements:

Attachment Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS
LUP Risk
1 Risk
2 Risk
3 1 2 3
Routine daily and
weekly inspections A. (M) C. (I) D. (I) E. (I) X
Storm Event
inspection:

Pre
N/A
A.

A.
(M)

C.(I) D. (I) E. (I)
X

During X

After X
Sample Collection:

Storm water
discharge
N/A
A.
(M)
C.(I) D. (I) E.
(I)X
X
Receiving
water
N/A A.
(M) X
Non-visible
pollutants
A.
(M)
A.
(M) X
Bioassessment N/A N/A N/A E(I)
(17) X
Non-storm
water
management :

Order - III
Order – V.(A).(1)
Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS
Attachment
LUP Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3

X A C(C) D(C) E(C)
Reporting
Requirements:

Order. - XVI
Order – V.(B) Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U
N COMMENTS Attachment
LUP Risk 1 Risk 2 Risk 3
NAL exceedances: F(3) N/A D(I)(15) E(I)(15) X
Quarterly non-SW
discharge reporting N/A C(I)(6)
(a) D(I) E(I) X
Annual reporting Order.
- XVI
Order.
- XVI
Order.
- XVI
Order.
- XVI X .

Effluent Standards
(numeric):
2-3
A. (F) N/A D. (A) E. (A)
X
REAP:

Attachment Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS
Risk 2 Risk 3
Are REAPs prepared by the QSP for all
phases of the construction? D(H) E(H) X

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 5 of 6

Post-construction:

Order
Y
e
s
N
o
N
/
A
U

N COMMENTS

Phase I

A. Have LIDs been implemented?
XIII
X Project is inactive.

B. Are the LIDs effective/adequate?
C. If “NO”, has LRP or City/County
been contacted?
D. Final stabilization:
70%
RUSLE/RUSLE2
Custom

Phase II

A. Is the water balance calculation
included
XIII

B. Is the post-const runoff volume
equal or less than pre-const runoff
volume?

C. Final stabilization
70%
RUSLE/RUSLE2
Custom

TMDL

Appendix 4
VERIFY THE SITE’S STORMWATER DISCHARGE ROUTE (CHECK NOI):

X STORM DRAIN: ENTER SYSTEM’S OWNER NAME: City of Inglewood DIRECTLY TO WATERS OF U.S.: NAME WATER BODY:

INDIRECTLY TO WATERS OF U.S: N A M E T R I B U T A R Y :

ON 303 (D) LIST? YES NO
IF YES, WHAT POLLUTANTS:

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 6 of 6

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

On January 19, 2023, a complaint (COMP-56086) wa s received indicating more than 1 acre construction site keeps cutting trees and clearing the ground.

On March 29, 2023, a complaint inspection was conducted onsite by Sean Lee, Regional Board Staff (Staff). At the site, Staff observed inactive construction site which appeared less than 1 acre. During the inspection, Staff found trees cutting and clearing the ground were done. (Photographs 1-4).

On April 3, 2023, this complaint was referred to the City of Inglewood for ineffective silt fence as ineffective perimeter control and investigating the site’s size as a potential non-filer.

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 7 of 6

Photograph 1
Construction project street name.

Photograph 2
Ineffective silt fence.

WDID 4 19CN607736 March 29, 2023 Construction Inspection Report

Form RB4-SWCU-CGP-Rev4, 010319 Page 8 of 6

Photograph 3
Inactive construction project.

Photograph 4
Outside street of the site.

Facility Registry Service Links:

Facility Registry Service (FRS) Overview
FRS Facility Query
FRS Organization Query
EZ Query
FRS Physical Data Model
FRS Geospatial Model
Last updated on September 24, 2015
Related Topics:

Envirofacts
FRS
FRS Facility Detail Report

LA COLINA DRIVE
EPA Registry Id:
110071410005
355 LA COLINA DRIVE
INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
There is no valid (quality assured) locational data currently available in the FRS database for this facility.

Environmental Interests
Information System
System Facility
Name
Information System Id/Report
Link
Environmental Interest
Type
Data
Source
Last Updated
Date
Supplemental Environmental
Interests:

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (ICIS-
NPDES)

LA COLINA DRIVE
CAW560036

ICIS-NPDES

UNPERMITTED
ICIS
Additional EPA Reports:

Enforcement and Compliance
Standard Industrial Classification Codes (SIC)
No SIC Codes returned.

Facility Codes and Flags
EPA Region:
09 Duns Number:

Congressional District Number:

Legislative District Number:

HUC Code/Watershed:

US Mexico Border Indicator:

Federal Facility:

NO
Tribal Land:

Alternative Names
No Alternative Names returned.

Organizations
No Organizations returned.

National Industry Classification System Codes (NAICS)
No NAICS Codes returned.

Facility Mailing Addresses
No Facility Mailing Addresses returned.

Contacts
No Contacts returned.

Query executed on: JAN-25-2024

Calif. Waste Code
Description
1994
1996
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2009
2010
2011
2013
2014
2016
135
UNSPECIFIED AQUEOUS SOLUTION (2 < PH <

12.5)
0 0
0 1.155
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
141

OFF-SPEC, AGED, OR SURPLUS INORGANICS
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0.22935
0 0.22935
171

METAL SLUDGE
0 1.5
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
181

OTHER INORGANIC SOLID WASTE

2.25 2.3275

2.2 1.15

3.95 2

0.8 0.45

0.8 1.8837

0.45 0.175

0.48935

0.63 0.45
0 0.475

0.04 331

OFF-SPEC, AGED, OR SURPLUS ORGANICS
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0.099
352

OTHER ORGANIC SOLIDS
0 0.3
0 0
0 0.025
0 0
0 0

0.6 0

0.125
0 0
0 0
0 726
LIQUIDS WITH NICKEL >= 134 MG/L

0.9174
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 792
LIQUIDS W PH<=2 W METALS
0 0
0 0
0 1.6054
0 0
0 0.4587

0.15 0.22935

1.3761
0 0.22935
0 0
0 Grand Totals

3.1674

4.1275

2.2 2.305

3.95 3.6304

0.8 0.45

0.8 2.3424

1.2 0.40435

1.99045

0.63 0.67935

0.22935

0.475

0.36835
RCRA
Description
1994
1996
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2009
2010
2011
2013
2014
2016
Blank/Unknown
0 3.05
0 1.355
0 0.025
0 0
0 0

0.75 0.175

0.41435

0.03 0.45
0 0.3

0.04 D002
Corrosives
0 0.0275
1 0.175

0.5 1.6054

0.4 0

0.4 0.4587

0.15 0.22935

0.22935
0 0.22935

0.22935
0 0.22935
D006
Cadmium
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

0.3 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
D007
Chromium
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

1.14675
0 0
0 0

0.099
D008
Lead

0.9174
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0.2
0 0
0 0
0 F006
Wastewater treatment sludge

2.25 1.05

1.2 0.775

1.2 2

0.4 0

0.4 1.0587
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
F007
Spent cyanide plating bath solutions
0 0
0 0

2.25 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
P029
Copper cyanide
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0.45
0 0.825
0 0
0 0.6
0 0

0.175
0 Grand Totals

3.1674

4.1275

2.2 2.305

3.95 3.6304

0.8 0.45

0.8 2.3424

1.2 0.40435

1.99045

0.63 0.67935

0.22935

0.475

0.36835
No results for RCRA, as a Transporter 1, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for RCRA, as a Transporter 2, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for RCRA, as a TSDF, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for RCRA, as a Alternate TSDF, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 Results for California Waste Codes, Supreme Plating, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for California Waste Codes, as a Transporter 1, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for California Waste Codes, as a Transporter 2, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for California Waste Codes, as a TSDF, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 No results for California Waste Codes, as a Alternate TSDF, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277 Results for RCRA, as a Generator, for EPA-ID: CAD055509277

KEY SITE MANAGER

QUESTIONNAIRE

MISCELLANEOUS

This Section Intentionally Left Blank

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D
Appendix
May 2025
Appendix G Paleontological Resources
Assessment

2061 N. Los Robles Avenue, Ste. 205 Pasadena, California 91104 / www.southenvironmental.com

December 12, 2024

Addie Farrell, Principal
Placeworks, Inc.
700 South Flower Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, California 90017
[email protected]
RE: Paleontological Resources Assessment for the Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project, Inglewood, Los Angeles County, California Dear Addie:

South Environmental conducted a paleontological resources assessment for the Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project in the City of Inglewood, Los Angeles County, California (project).

The purpose of this assessment is to describe the results of a paleontological resources literature review and records search, summarize the paleontological sensitivity of the geologic units within the project site, assess the potential for the project to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources, describe and summarize the results of the field survey conducted to examine the project site for geologic exposures and potential fossil remains, and provide management recommendations for avoiding or reducing project-related impacts to paleontological resources.

Project Location
The project site contains two sites proposed for redevelopment known as the 300 East Beach Avenue and 338 East Beach Avenue sites in the City of Inglewood consisting of 7.12 acres (Figure 1).

These sites comprise the following properties:
300 East Beach Avenue
• 200 E. Beach Avenue (Assessor Parcel Number [APN] 4015-018-004) • 300 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-011)
• 308 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• 316 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• 322 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• No Address (APNs 4015-017-012, 4015-017-013, 4015-018-005) 338 East Beach Avenue
• 338 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-025), vacant

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

2 • 358 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-003), vacant
• No address (APN 4015-017-017), vacant
The project is depicted on the U.S. Geological Survey Inglewood, California 7.5-minute topographical quadrangle map within Section 28 of Township 02 South and Range 14 West of the San Bernardino Principal Meridian.

Project Description
The Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights Transit Oriented Development Plan (TOD Plan) was approved on October 18, 2016 (Approved Project). The TOD Plan provides concept plans, zoning, development standards, and design guidelines to be considered by applicants for new construction or rehabilitation within the Downtown Inglewood TOD Plan Area and the Fairview Heights TOD Plan Area.

An Addendum to the Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights TOD Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is being prepared for the approval of the rezoning of 20 parcels within the project site, construction of a new residential development, and improvements to existing industrial buildings at 300 East Beach Avenue, and construction of a new residential development at 338 East Beach Avenue (Modified Project). The Modified Project is located within the Beach Avenue District of the Downtown Inglewood Plan and consists of the following three components:

Proposed Rezoning
The Modified Project would rezone 18 of the 20 parcels within the project site from Light Manufacturing (M-1) and Residential Limited Multiple Family (R-2) to TOD Mixed Use 1 (MU-1). 300 East Beach Avenue Site
The 300 East Beach Avenue Site currently includes Don Lee Farms and light manufacturing properties.

Proposed development at 300 East Beach Avenue Site, the Modified Project , would result in approximately 64,639 square feet of new development. Parcel 1 would include 35,237 square feet of industrial uses to support the existing operations at Don Lee Farms, and Parcel 2 would be developed with a mixed-use development within two separate buildings.

Implementation of the Modified Project within the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would require approximately 11,942 square feet of demolition for the removal of six existing buildings on the site that are currently owned and operated by Don Lee Farms.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

3 The proposed industrial development at the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would include the development of a new 21,858 square foot dry storage facility, a 1,007 square foot loading dock, and a 12,372 square foot freezer within the existing APNs 4015-017-004, and -005.

The proposed residential development at the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would include the construction of one new mixed -use building and one residential building within the existing APNs 4015-017-010, -011, -012, and -013. Overall, the proposed residential development at the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would include 24 town homes, one ground-level commercial establishment, and two roof decks. The proposed residential development would provide affordable housing near the existing warehouse for employees of Don Lee Farms.

A portion of the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would include a 34,230 square foot parking lot with 59 new parking spaces to better serve existing employees, in addition to the 20 existing parking spaces on the west part of the site.

Vehicular access to the proposed residential development at the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would be provided via a new driveway from Beach Avenue to the north. Additionally, emergency access to the site would be provided via La Colina Drive to the south, and the site would include one 20-foot- wide fire lane and a 26-foot-wide truck aisle that connects to Don Lee Farms. This portion of the 300 East Beach Avenue Site would include a 16,771 square foot parking lot (3,727 square feet for commercial and 13,044 square feet for residential) with 22 new parking spaces, in addition to the 20 existing parking spaces on the site. Pedestrian access to this portion of the site would be provided via Beach Avenue only.
338 East Beach Avenue Site
The 338 East Beach Avenue Site is located on the eastern portion of the project site and would encompass approximately 1.54 acres within three parcels. The 338 East Beach Avenue Site is currently vacant; thus, no demolition or removal of structures would be necessary.

Proposed development at the 338 East Beach Avenue Site, the Modified Project, would result in approximately 200,412 square feet of new development, and would include two five-story buildings, connected by a two -story community room and an outdoor courtyard with a pool. The residential development would include multiple roof decks and a two-story parking garage.

The 338 East Beach Avenue Project Site would include a total of 115 dwelling units, each with private outdoor space by way of exterior balconies. It would include 102 one-bedroom/one-bathroom units and 13 two-bedroom/two-bathroom units. The proposed new building would have a total height of 57 feet and 9 inches from grade level.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

4 The 338 East Beach Avenue Site would include approximately 58,626 square feet of community areas and open space, including lobbies, interior corridors, one community room, one courtyard with a pool, and four roof decks; as well as new sidewalks and a semi-circular dedicated fire access driveway along La Colina Drive.

Vehicular access to the proposed residential development at the 338 East Beach Avenue Site would be provided via a new driveway to the underground parking garage from Beach Avenue to the north.

Additionally, emergency access to the site would be provided via La Colina Drive to the south, and the site would include a 96-foot-diameter Fire Department turn around.

The 338 Beach Avenue Site would include 130 total parking spaces withing a two -story parking garage. The entrance and exit to the parking garage would be located on the northeast corner of the site, along Beach Avenue. Pedestrian access to the site would be provided via La Colina Drive.

Source: ESRI USA Topo Maps and World Topo Map 2024 Grevillea/Imperial Hotel Project Figure 1. Project Location Map
¯ 0 2,0001,000 Feet
Project Site is within the City of Inglewood, California, in Los Angeles County on the USGS Inglewood 7.5-minute quadrangle map
in Section 28 of Township 02 South and Range 14 West
Center Coordinate (Decimal Degrees):

Latitude: 33.9691664N Longitude: -118.3502531W
Scale: 1:24,000Overall Project Site
338 Beach Avenue Project Site
300 Beach Avenue Project Site

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

6 Regulatory Context
Paleontological resources are generally considered non-renewable scientific resources because they cannot be replaced once damaged or destroyed, and considerable scientific information can be lost should they be disturbed or displaced from their original l ocation and geologic context without a proper record of their original placement and arrangement in their natural sediments. For this reason, fossils are typically protected under a variety of federal, state, and local laws and regulations to ensure that t hese basic scientific considerations are made and carried out whenever paleontological resources will be disturbed. The pertinent laws and regulations governing paleontological resources are discussed in this section.

State Laws and Regulations
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
CEQA requires that public agencies and private interests to identify the potential environmental impacts of their projects on any object or site of significance to the scientific annals of California (Division I, California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 5020.1 [j]). Appendix G in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15023 provides an Environmental Checklist (Section 15023, Appendix G, Section XIV, Part A) that includes the following: "Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?" California Public Resources Code (PRC)
Section 5097.5 of the PRC states:

No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure, or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological, or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this PRC section, 'public lands' means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.

Therefore, public agencies are required to comply with PRC Section 5097.5 for their activities including construction and maintenance as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

7 Local Laws, Regulations and Guidelines
The project is part of a larger development plan known as the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Plan for Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights, which is an amendment to the Inglewood General Plan. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) ( Metis Environmental Group, 2016 ) portion of the T OD addresses paleontological resources in Section 4.D Environmental Resources.

Specifically, the DEIR contains Mitigation Measure 4.D-3 which states:

Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or action that would permit site disturbance in native ground (below soils that were disturbed by previous development activities), (whichever occurs first, the applicant/developer shall provide written evidenc e to the City Planning Division that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to respond on an as - needed basis to address unanticipated paleontological discoveries, and the paleontological requirements shall be incorporated into all development plans s ubmitted and include as conditions of approval. In the even that paleontological resources are encountered during grading and construction operations, all construction activities shall be halted or redirected to provide for a qualified paleontologist to as sess the find for significance and, if necessary, develop a paleontological resources impact mitigation plan (PRIMP) for the review and approval by the City prior to resuming construction activities.

Projects that would not encounter previously undisturbed soils would not be required to retain a paleontologist. However, the projects shall demonstrate non-disturbance to the City through the appropriate construction plans or geotechnical studies prior to any earth disturbing activities.

Implementation: A qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the applicant/developer to respond on an as -needed basis to address unanticipated paleontological discoveries. In addition, the paleontological requirements shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.D -3, impacts related to the destruction of a unique paleontological resource or unique geologic feature would be less than significant.

Paleontological Resource Definitions
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
Toward the goal of providing guidance to federal, state, and local agencies in carrying out environmental assessments, the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) has created a set of definitions to determine the significance of paleontological resources. Significant paleontological resources are defined as follows:

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

8 Fossils and fossiliferous deposits consisting of identifiable vertebrate fossils, large or small, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils, and other data that provide taphonomic, taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, stratigraphic, and/or biochronologic information. Paleontological resources are considered to be older than recorded human history and/or older than middle Holocene (i.e., older than about 5,000 radiocarbon years) (SVP, 2010).

By this definition, significant paleontological resources are fossils (or fossil assemblages) that are unique, unusual, rare, diagnostically important, or even common with the potential to provide additional scientific information about evolutionary patterns or the paleoenvironmental conditions of a site. This includes fossils that may enhance our understanding of depositional histories, evolutionary trends and patterns within lineages, information regarding palaeoecological environments, that can be used to identify the sedimentary rock units they are within, or fossils that are unique to a particular geologic region. For this reason, even common or unidentifiable invertebrate and vertebrate fossil remains may be considered scientifically significant, particularly within the larger context of a geologic area from which many specimens have previously been collected and examined.

Because CEQA does not define a “unique paleontological resource or site ,” the definitions set forth by SVP are used for all paleontological projects that are subject to CEQA.

For additional information relating to the determination of the potential significance of paleontological resources based on SVP guidelines , please see A ttachment A : Paleontological Resource Potential Classifications . These definitions have been used to determine the potential paleontological sensitivity of the project site.

TOD DEIR
Section 4.D of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Metis Environmental Group, 2016) portion of the Transit Oriented Development Plan for Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights defines paleontological resources as follows:

Paleontological resources include any fossilized remains, traces, or imprints of organisms, preserved in or on the earth’s crust, that are of paleontological interest and that provide information about the history of life on earth, except that the term does not include any materials associated with an archaeological resource or any cultural item defined as Native American human remains. Significant paleontological resources are defined as fossils or assemblages of fossils that are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, or important to define a particular time frame or geologic strata, or that add to an existing body of knowledge in specific areas, in local formations, or regionally.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

9 Paleontological Sensitivity Determination Methods
To assess the paleontological sensitivity of the project site and determine its placement within the definitions provided by the SVP, several sources of recorded data were examined:
1) Published geologic maps of the project site and surrounding vicinity. 2) A collections record search was performed by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA) to identify previously collected localities within one mile of the project site. 3) Searches of the following on -line databases were performed to determine additional fossil sites recorded within one mile of the project site:
a. University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) Collections b. The Paleobiology Database
c. iDigBio
4) Additional published and unpublished paleontological literature pertaining to the project site and the surrounding vicinity.

Geological Context
Geologic Setting
The project site sits within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Ranges is a region that is approximately 125 miles in length and bound to the north by the Transverse Ranges, stretching to Baja California in the south. It contains northwest trending valleys and is bordered on the east by the Colorado Desert (California Geological Survey, 2002).

Specifically, the project site is located within the Los Angeles Basin, an area that is approximately 20 miles wide and 50 miles long. It is bound in the north by the Santa Monica Mountains, in the east by the Elysian, Puente and Repetto Hills, to the southeast by the San Joaquin Hills and Santa Ana Mountains, to the northeast by the Coyote Hills, and to the southwest by the Palos Verdes Peninsula.

The basin is broken into four major blocks, the central, northwest, southwest and northeast blocks (Yerkes et al., 1965). The project is located on the border between the southwestern and central blocks, sitting almost directly on the Newport-Inglewood Fault System that separates the two blocks.

The San Andres transformation zone has played a large part in the formation of the Los Angeles Basin, affecting it tectonically (Hauksson, 1990; Wright, 1991), resulting in discontinuous deposition starting in the Late Cretaceous. In the late Miocene to the early Pliocene, the basin went through a period of subsidence that led to extensive deposition of sediments. These sediments were primarily derived from turbidity currents, resulting in the basin filling more rapidly than it was subsiding. This is where much of the present day marine and fluvial sediments that can be observed on the surface originated from (Hauksson, 1990). There have been at least three cycles of marine transgression and regression

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

10 that have created embayments and flood plains along the ancient coastline (Yerkes et al., 1965). This was just one of several basins formed during the Miocene and Plioecene as a result of the San Andres transformation taking place along the western margin of North America (Fuis et al., 2001; Hauksson, 1990). Today, the Los Angeles Basin consists mostly of marine and fluvial sediments that are known to be up to 10 kilometers thick (Hauksson, 1990).

Site Specific Geology and Paleontology
The geology of the project site has been mapped as Quaternary Nonmarine Terrace Deposits (Qt) in geology maps maintained by the California Department of Conservation (Jennings, 1962), and as Older Alluvium (Qoa) by more recent ly published geology maps maintained by the Un ited States Geological Survey in the National Geologic Map Database (Dibblee and Minch, 2007). Both describe the rocks in the area as being Pleistocene-age and consisting of sand and silty sand with minor amounts of gravel and clay.

Pleistocene-age deposits in the area are well known to contain scientifically significant vertebrate fossils (Miller, 1971), including the world famous La Brea Tarpits of Rancho La Brea, which are located just 6.5 miles north of the project site. Vertebrate remains of an incredibly wide variety have been collected from the La Brea Tarpits including owls , dire wolf, timber wolf, American lion, Columbian mammoth, horse, and saber-toothed cat, among others (Harris, 2015).

Additionally, there have been a number of significant fossil discoveries made within one mile of the project site including sloth, camel, weasel, bison, deer, saber-toothed cat, pronghorn antelope, hare, mammoth, mastodon, peccary, horse, various birds, and an invertebrate shell bed (Bell, 2024).

Summary of Geologic Units in the Project Site and their Paleontological Sensitivity Geologic Units Map Abbr.1 Age Fossils2 Sensitivity
Quaternary Older
Alluvium /
Nonmarine
Terrace Deposits
Qoa / Qt Pleistocene
Sloth, camel, weasel, bison, deer, saber-
toothed cat, pronghorn antelope, hare,
mammoth, mastodon, peccary, horse,
various birds, various invertebrate shells
High
1Dibblee and Minch, 2007; Jennings, 1962
2Bell, 2024; iDigBio, 2024; PBDB, 2024; UCMP, 2024

Source: ESRI World Topographic Map 2024 Grevillea/Imperial Hotel Project Figure 2. Project Geology Map
¯ 0 2,0001,000 Feet
Scale: 1:24,000Overall Project Site
300 Beach Avenue Project Site
338 Beach Avenue Project Site
Qal
Qm
Qt

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

12 Records Search Results
The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA) conducted a search of its paleontological records (Bell, 2024) for all fossil localities recorded within one mile of the project site, finding eight within its records. South Environmental also performed a records search of several online databases for all fossil localities recorded within one mile of the project site including the University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP) collections, the Paleobiology Database (PBDP), and iDigBio. The results of the records and online database searches are summarized below:

Source Localities Age/Formation Taxa Depth Distance
NHMLA 8
LACM VP 1170,
3252,
3789,
4942

LACM IP 21051,
21042-21044
Pleistocene Sloth, camel, weasel, bison, deer,
sabertoothed cat, pronghorn
antelope, hare, mammoth,
mastodon, peccary, horse, various
birds, various invertebrate shells
14-16
feet
below
ground
surface
1 mile
UCMP 22 Pleistocene Various vertebrate fossils (not
identified in records)
- 1 mile
PBDB 0 - - - -
iDigBio 0 - - - -

Results
Paleontological Sensitivity Analysis
The project site is located atop Pleistocene-aged alluvial deposits (Qoa/Qt) (Dibblee and Minch, 2007; Jennings, 1962), which are considered to be of high sensitivity for scientifically significant paleontological resources (Harris, 2015; Miller, 1971). This is further supported by the number of previously recorded fossil localities identified within a one -mile radius of the project site by the NHMLA, which are considered to be scientifically significant (Bell, 2024). Therefore, following the guidelines prepared by the SVP (2010), the project site and its underlying sediments are considered to be of High Potential for yielding scientifically significant fossil materials.

Findings and Recommendations
Findings
The sediments underlying the project site are considered to be of High Potential for yielding scientific fossils, based on the records search and literature review performed by the NHMLA (Bell, 2024) and online sources by South Environmental . The project will include mass excavation below current infrastructure, which will require the disturbance of new sediments. These ground-disturbing activities

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

13 have the potential to result in significant impacts under CEQA including destruction, damage, or loss of scientifically significant paleontological resources.

Recommendations
A qualified paleontologist (SVP, 2010) should be retained to develop and implement the recommended measures below to reduce impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant. The proposed measures have been developed in accordance with SVP guidelines and, if implemented, would satisfy the requirements of CEQA.

Paleontological Mitigation Plan
Pre-Construction Personnel Training
Prior to the beginning of any ground disturbing activities, a Society of Vertebrate Paleontology - qualified paleontologist shall conduct a Paleontological Awareness Training Program for all personnel. The program shall include descriptions of potential fossil resources that may be encountered in the project site during earth-moving activities, a discussion of the pertinent laws and regulations relating to said paleontological resources in the area, and a review of the steps that should be taken if a fossil d iscovery is made. The program should be developed by the qualified paleontologist and delivered simultaneously with any other sensitivity trainings, safety reviews and other matters of concern.

Paleontological Monitoring
Due to the high potential for the discovery of scientifically significant fossil materials during ground disturbance activities, f ull-time paleontological resource monitoring shall be performed by a paleontological monitor under the direction of the qualified paleontologist. Monitoring shall involve the visual inspection of all earth-moving activities, graded areas, trench sidewalls and spoils piles. If the project paleontologist determines that full -time monitoring is no longer required based on the geologic conditions of the site, the paleontologist may recommend that monitoring be reduced or stopped entirely.

Paleontological monitors shall prepare daily logs describing the activities of the construction crew, the types of excavation work being done, the equipment being used, recordings of the geology observed during these activities, and records of any fossil discoveries made, whether they be determined to be significant or not. Paleontological monitors should also attempt to record the stratigraphy of the rock that is exposed by construction activities, whether or not fossils were discovered within the exposed sediments.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

14 Fossil Discoveries
Should fossil materials be discovered, either by the paleontological monitor or the construction field crew, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert construction activities and equipment in a 50 -foot radius around the site to further assess the discovery. Should the fossils be determined to be of scientific significance, they should be collected as soon as possible.

Occasionally, more extensive efforts may be required to properly salvage a fossil specimen, particularly for larger skeletal elements, entire skeletons or large collections of smaller fossil remains.

Should this be the case, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt, divert, or redirect construction activities to ensure that the fossil can be salvaged in a safe and timely manner. The paleontological monitor should work directly with the field crew to clearly communicate their intentions and determine the best way to safely protect and recover the fossils, with minima l disruption to construction efforts.

Fossil Preparation and Curation
An accredited local repository (typically a museum) should be identified for the long-term storage and care of any fossil specimens discovered during paleontological monitoring. Upon completion of the project, collected fossil specimens should be prepared to the standards required by the repository that has agreed to take them and delivered as soon as is feasible upon completion of the preparatory work. Preparatory work should include the removal of excess sedimentary matrix, as well as any steps necessary for the repair and stabilization of the specimens. The specimens should be identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, and copies of all field notes and information related to the fossil should be kept and provided to the repository as well upon delivery of the specimen. The cost of curation will be determined by the repository, and the costs of preparation and curation will be the responsibility of the project owner.

Final Paleontological Mitigation Report
Upon completion of paleontological monitoring, the qualified paleontologist shall prepare a final monitoring and mitigation report to be submitted to all interested parties. This report should detail the monitoring activities and methods used during construction, a description of the construction activities that took place, stratigraphic sections created during monitoring, a review of any fossils discovered (whether or not they were deemed significant and collected), a detailed description of the fossils that were collected including their scientific significance, and information relating to the repository where the fossils will be curated.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

15 Thank you for working with South Environmental on this project. If you have any questions about this paleontological resources assessment, please feel free to call me at (626) 314-2961 or email me at [email protected].

Respectfully Submitted,

_______________________
Justin J. Strauss, MS
Principal Paleontologist

Attachments:

Attachment A. Paleontological Resource Potential Classifications Attachment B. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Records Search

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

16 References
Bell, A., 2024, Unpublished paleontological collections data: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California, 2 p.

California Geological Survey, 2002, CGS Note 36: California Geomorphic Provinces, Electronic document, https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/documents/publications/cgs-notes/CGS- Note-36.pdf (accessed August 2024).

Diblee, T.W. and J.A. Minch, 2007. Geologic Map of the Venice and Inglewood Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California. Dibblee Geological Foundation Map DF-322, scale 1:24,000.

Fuis, G.S., Ryberg, T. Godfrey, N.J., Okaya, D.A., and Murphy, J.M., 2001. Crustal structure and tectonics from the Los Angeles basin to the Mojave Desert, southern California: Geology, v. 29, no. 1, p. 15-18.

Harris, J.M., ed., 2015, La Brea and Beyond: The Paleontology of Asphalt-Preserved Biotas, Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series no. 42, 176 p.

Hauksson, E. 1990. Earthquakes, Faulting and Stress in the Los Angeles Basin, Journal of Geophysical Research. 95 (B10, p. 15,365-15394.
iDigBio, 2024, iDigBio: Integrated Digitized Biocollections: iDigBio Specimen Portal, http://portal.idigbio.org/portal (accessed September 2024).

Jennings, C.W., 1962, Geologic map of California Long Beach Sheet, California Geological Survey, California Department of Conservation, Geologic Atlas of California, No. 7, scale 1:250,000.

Los Angeles County, 2024, Los Angeles County Property Assessment Information System, https://maps.assessor.lacounty.gov/m/ (accessed September 2024).

Metis Environmental Group, 2016, Draft Environmental Impact Report Transit Oriented Development Plan for Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights. Prepared for the City of Inglewood. Electronic document,
https://www.cityofinglewood.org/DocumentCenter/View/19491/DTFairview-Heights-TOD- Draft-EIR-2016 (accessed November 2024).

Miller, W.E., 1971, Pleistocene Vertebrates of the Los Angeles Basin and Vicinity (Exclusive of Rancho La Brea): Bulletin of the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History No. 10, p. 43-47.

Paleobiology Database (PBDB), 2024, The Paleobiology Database: About the PBDB, https://paleobiodb.org/#/ (accessed September 2024).

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

17 Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), 2010, Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources: Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee, https://vertpaleo.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines-1.pdf (accessed May 2024).

University of California Museum of Paleontology (UCMP), 2024, UCMP Specimen Search: University of California Museum of Paleontology, https://ucmpdb.berkeley.edu/ (accessed September 2024).

Wright, T.L., 1991. Structural Geology and Tectonic Evolution of the Los Angeles Basin, California.

Active Margin Basins: AAPG Memoir 52, p. 135-184.

Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoelhamer, J.E., and Vedder, J.G., 1965. Geology of the Los Angeles Basin, California – An Introduction. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A, 57p.

Yerkes, R.F., Campbell, R.H., Alvarez, Rachel, and Bovard, Kelly. 2005. Preliminary geologic map of the Los Angeles 30' X 60' quadrangle, southern California. U.S. Geological Survey.

Attachment A:

Paleontological Resource Potential Classifications

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

Paleontological Resource Potential Classifications
When specific agency guidelines are not provided regarding the protection and preservation of paleontological resources, professional paleontologists in California refer to the guidelines set for th by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) in order to determine the level of mitigation activities necessary for a particular project. These assessments are made by examining the geologic units in the area, known paleontological sites and localities recorded in the vicinity, and references made to the area by published literature. Based on the results of these analyses, the paleontological resource potential of the geology in the area can be classified into one of four categories: High Potential, Low Potential, Undetermined Potential, and No Potential.

Although these guidelines were created specifically for vertebrate fossil remains, they have generally been adopted for use in all fields of paleontology. The definitions for these categories are listed below:

High Potential
Rock units from which vertebrate or significant invertebrate, plant, or trace fossils have been recovered are considered to have a high potential for containing additional significant paleontological resources. Rocks units classified as having high potenti al for producing paleontological resources include, but are not limited to, sedimentary formations and some volcaniclastic formations (e. g., ashes or tephras), and some low -grade metamorphic rocks which contain significant paleontological resources anywhe re within their geographical extent, and sedimentary rock units temporally or lithologically suitable for the preservation of fossils (e. g., middle Holocene and older, fine -grained fluvial sandstones, argillaceous and carbonate -rich paleosols, cross -bedded point bar sandstones, fine-grained marine sandstones, etc.). Paleontological potential consists of both (a) the potential for yielding abundant or significant vertebrate fossils or for yielding a few significant fossils, large or small, vertebrate, invertebrate, plant, or trace fossils and (b) the importance of recovered evidence for new and significant taxonomic, phylogenetic, paleoecologic, taphonomic, biochronologic, or stratigraphic data. Rock units which contain potentially datable organic remains ol der than late Holocene, including deposits associated with animal nests or middens, and rock units which may contain new vertebrate deposits, traces, or trackways are also classified as having high potential.

Low Potential
Reports in the paleontological literature or field surveys by a qualified professional paleontologist may allow determination that some rock units have low potential for yielding significant fossils. Such rock units will be poorly represented by fossil spe cimens in institutional collections, or based on general scientific consensus only preserve fossils in rare circumstances and the presence of fossils is the exception not the rule, e.g. basalt flows or recent colluvium. Rock units with low potential typically will not require impact mitigation measures to protect fossils.

Paleontological Resources Assessment: Beach Avenue/La Colina Drive Development Project

Undetermined Potential
Rock units for which little information is available concerning their paleontological content, geologic age, and depositional environment are considered to have undetermined potential. Further study is necessary to determine if these rock units have high o r low potential to contain significant paleontological resources. A field survey by a qualified professional paleontologist to specifically determine the paleontological resource potential of these rock units is required before a paleontological resource impact mitigation program can be developed. In cases where no subsurface data are available, paleontological potential can sometimes be determined by strategically located excavations into subsurface stratigraphy.

No Potential
Some rock units have no potential to contain significant paleontological resources, for instance high- grade metamorphic rocks (such as gneisses and schists) and plutonic igneous rocks (such as granites and diorites). Rock units with no potential require no protection nor impact mitigation measures relative to paleontological resources.

Reference:

Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP), 2010, Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources: Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee, https://vertpaleo.org/wp - content/uploads/2021/01/SVP_Impact_Mitigation_Guidelines-1.pdf (accessed May 2024).

Attachment B:

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles Records
Search

Research & Collections

e-mail: [email protected]

September 1, 2024

South Environmental LLC
Attn: Justin Strauss

re: Paleontological resources records search for the 23-184 Beach-Colina-Inglewood Project

Dear Justin:

I have conducted a thorough search of our paleontology collection records for the locality and specimen data for proposed development at the 23-184 Beach-Colina-Inglewood Project area as outlined on the portion of the Inglewood USGS topographic quadrangle map that you sent to me via e-mail on August 23, 2024. We do not have any fossil localities that lie directly within the proposed project area, but we do have fossil localities nearby from the same sedimentary deposits that may occur in the proposed project area, either at the surface or at depth.

The following table shows the closest known localities in the collection of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLA).

Locality
Number Location Formation Taxa Depth

LACM VP
1170
Centinella Park
(north of Florence
Ave.; between
Centinella Ave. &
East Park; bounded
on north by Warren
Ln.)
Unknown formation
(Pleistocene)
Sloth (Megalonyx), camel
(Camelops), weasel (Mustela
frenata), bison (Bison), deer
(Odocoileus), sabertooth cat
(Smilodon), pronghorn antelope
(Capromeryx), Mastodon
(Mammut), peccary
(Platygonus), horse (Equus),
coot (Fulica), unidentified birds
(Aves) Unknown

LACM VP
3252
3140 Hyde Park
Blvd, Hyde Park
School
Unknown formation
(Pleistocene)
Bison (Bison), Camel
(Camelops) Unknown

LACM IP
21051, 21042 -
21044
Corner Crenshaw
Blvd & Slauson Ave
Pleistocene;
unknown formation
Invertebrates (uncatalogued
shell bed) Unknown

LACM VP
3789
8734 Bellanca
Avenue,
Westchester
Unknown
(Pleistocene;
pebbly gray-green
to brown mud that
directly overlies a Mammoth (Mammuthus)
14 feet
bgs

Locality
Number Location Formation Taxa Depth
gray-green fine
sand)

LACM VP
4942
Southeast corner of
Airport Blvd. &
Manchester Ave
Unknown formation
(Pleistocene,
massive sandy
mudstone with
scattered pieces of
gravel)
Mammoth (Mammuthus); bison
(Bison); hare (Lepus)
16 feet
bgs
VP, Vertebrate Paleontology; IP, Invertebrate Paleontology; bgs, below ground surface

This records search covers only the records of the NHMLA. It is not intended as a paleontological assessment of the project area for the purposes of CEQA or NEPA. Potentially fossil-bearing units are present in the project area, either at the surface or in the subsurface. As such, NHMLA recommends that a full paleontological assessment of the project area be conducted by a paleontologist meeting Federal (43 Code of Federal Regulations Part 49.110) or Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.

Sincerely,

Alyssa Bell, Ph.D.

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County

enclosure: invoice

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D
Appendix
May 2025
Appendix H Biological Resources Report

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project
300 and 338 E. Beach Avenue
City of Inglewood, California

October 2024

Prepared For:

Addie Farrell, Principal
Placeworks, Inc.
700 South Flower Street, Suite 600
Los Angeles, California 90017
Email: [email protected]

Prepared By:

Dana Briggs - Associate Biologist
Matthew South – Principal Biologist
South Environmental
2061 N. Los Robels Ave, #205
Pasadena, California 91104
[email protected]
Phone: 303.818.3632
Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental i October 2024
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 3 2 Project Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Project Location ........................................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Site History .................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.3 Existing Physical & Natural Geographic Site Features ............................................................... 12

2.4 Proposed Development ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.5 Characteristics of the Surrounding Area ......................................................................................... 13 3 Flora Assessment................................................................................................................................................. 14

3.1 Flora Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 14

3.2 Flora Field Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Flora Data Analysis .................................................................................................................................. 14

3.4 Project Impacts to Flora ......................................................................................................................... 19 4 Wildlife Assessment ........................................................................................................................................... 20

4.1 Wildlife Literature Review ..................................................................................................................... 20

4.2 Wildlife Field Methodology .................................................................................................................. 20

4.3 Wildlife Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 21

4.4 Project Impacts to Wildlife ................................................................................................................... 22 5 Wildlife Movement ............................................................................................................................................. 24

5.1 Wildlife Movement Literature Review .............................................................................................. 24

5.2 Wildlife Movement Field Methodology ........................................................................................... 24

5.3 Wildlife Movement Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 24

5.4 Impacts to Wildlife Movement ............................................................................................................ 25

5.5 Cumulative Impacts to Wildlife Movement .................................................................................... 25 6 Water Resources.................................................................................................................................................. 26

6.1 Water Resources Literature Review ................................................................................................... 26

6.2 Water Resources Field Methodology ............................................................................................... 26

6.3 Water Resources Data Analysis........................................................................................................... 26

6.4 Impacts to Water Resources ................................................................................................................ 26

6.5 Cumulative Impacts to Water Resources ........................................................................................ 26 Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental ii October 2024
7 Applicable Regulations and Permits ............................................................................................................ 27

7.1 Regulations ................................................................................................................................................. 27 8 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................... 30 9 References ............................................................................................................................................................. 32

Figures
Figure 1 – Regional Location ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2 – Project Vicinity ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 3 – Proposed Development ........................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 4 - Plant Communities and Cover Types ............................................................................................... 16

Appendices
Appendix A: Photograph Exhibit
Appendix B: Special-Status Species Assessment
Appendix C: Literature Search
Appendix D: Biologist's Resume
Appendix E: Site Plan

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 3 October 2024

1 Executive Summary
Introduction: This report includes findings of a biological resources assessment conducted by South Environmental at two sites known as the 300 and 338 E. Beach Avenue sites in the City of Inglewood, California for a proposed for a zone change from Multi-Family Residential to Transit- Oriented Development (TOD) Mixed-Use 1, and new commercial and residential development are proposed. The parcels (project site) are in Inglewood Council District 2. This report identifies and assesses the potential impacts to s ensitive or protected biological resources on the parcel, indicates the regulations governing these resources, and discusses recommendations for avoiding or mitigating these impacts. The biological resources of these parcels were assessed based on a literature review and a field site survey.

Proposed Development: The Project Site encompasses approximately 6.92 acres within the Beach Avenue District of the Downtown Inglewood TOD Plan Area as shown in Figure 3 and in the Site Plan in Appendix E . The Modified Project would include three components including (1) the rezoning of all 20 parcels in the Project Site to TOD Mixed Use 1(MU -1); (2) construction of new industrial and residential developments within the 300 Beach Avenue Site to support Don Lee Farms; and (3) construction of a new residentia l development within the 338 Beach Avenue Site. Implementation of all three components have been analyzed as one whole project.

Plant Communities/Sensitive Natural Communities/Wildlife Habitat: The development footprint would occur on 3.99-acre of Developed/Ornamental Landscaped cover type and 1.54 - acres of the Mixed Non -Native Grassland. There are no native plant communities or sensitive natural communities in the study area. Therefore, the project would have no impact on sensitive natural plant communities on the site and would avoid impacts to native habitat. The developed areas and ruderal vegetation found in the non-native grasslands would not be considered habitat for special-status species due to the developments and lack of native plant cover. This is an urban area devoid of native habitats and impacts to habitat for special-status species or sensitive natural communities would not occur because it is not present.

Special-Status Plants: No special-status plants were observed on the project site, and it was determined that none of the 66 special -status plants known to occur in the region are expected to occur within the project site or study area due to a lack of suitable habitat. The non-native grassland and developed/ornamental landscaping regions in the study area are not suitable for special-status plants that are typically found in native habitats.

Protected Trees: There are several species of trees protected under the City of Inglewood Protected Tree Ordinance (City of Inglewood 2024), including coast live oak ( Quercus agrifolia), which was observed on the project site in the Mixed Non -Native Grassland plant community.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 4 October 2024

However, the diameter and height of this tree do not meet the requirements for protection.

Therefore, there are no protected trees on the project site and no impact to protected trees would occur.

Special-Status Wildlife: No special-status wildlife species were observed during the field visit, and none are expected to occur on the project site and through the study area due to the lack of high-quality native habitat, surrounding residential/ commercial developments, human disturbances, and distance to high-quality habitat in the region. Because the project impacts will occur on areas that are already heavily degraded that lack high-quality native habitat, no impacts would occur to special-status wildlife.

There is the potential for nesting birds — including migratory Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) to occur on the site. Regulatory Compliance Measure #1 includes nest surveys and bird nest avoidance prior to construction to avoid any impacts. Following the measure would avoid impacts to nesting birds and would achieve compliance with the MBTA, MBPA, and the Fish and Game Code.

Wildlife Movement: The project site is not within any designated critical habitat for threatened and endangered species or California Protected Areas. The surrounding study area is also heavily disturbed by developments , roadways, and human disturbance that lack s native habitat and movement corridors for wildlife. The proposed construction footprint consisting of 5.53-acres will be on Developed or Mixed Non -Native Grassland where wildlife movement is not expected to occur. Because the project impacts will occur on areas that are already heavily degraded movement areas, no impacts would occur to wildlife movement in the region.

Water Resources: No water resources are present within the study area, and none would be impacted by the project as a result. Because the project would not impact water resources, it would not contribute to the cumulative impacts to water resources in the region.

Cumulative Impact: There is no other project known to be currently proposed within 500 feet of the project site. Therefore, the impacts from the project would not be greater than those described in this report as no other impacts to biological resources within proximity to the project site would be impacted by other projects. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts beyond the impacts described in this report.

Conclusions: The project would avoid i mpacts to biological resources protected by CEQA because none occur on the site . With the implementation of the Regulatory Compliance Measures #1 in this report the project would be in compliance with the MBTA, MBPA, and Fish and Game Code.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 5 October 2024

2 Project Overview
This report includes findings of a biological resources assessment conducted by South Environmental at two sites known as the 300 and 338 E. Beach Avenue sites in the City of Inglewood, California for a proposed for a zone change from Multi-Family Residential to Transit- Oriented Development (TOD) Mixed-Use 1, and new commercial and residential development are proposed. The parcels (project site) are in Inglewood Council District 2. This report identifies and assesses the potential impacts to sensitive or protected biological resources on the parcel, indicates the regulations governing these resources, and discusses recommendations for avoiding or mitigating these impacts. The biological resources of these parcels were assessed based on a literature review and a field site survey.

2.1 Project Location
The project site is 6.92-acres and contains two sites proposed for development known as the 300 E. Beach Ave. site and 338 E. Beach Ave. site in the City of Inglewood (Figure 1). There are also 10 parcels within the project site that will not be affected by the construction and will remain as is (Figure 2). These sites comprise the following parcels:
300 E. Beach Ave Site
• 200 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-018-004)
• 300 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-011)
• 308 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• 316 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• 322 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-010)
• No Address (APNs 4015-017-012, 4015-017-013, 4015-018-005) 338 E. Beach Ave. Site
• 338 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-025), vacant
• 358 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-003), vacant
• No address (APN 4015-017-017), vacant

Source: ESRI USA Topo Maps and World Topo Map 2024 Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project Figure 1. Regional Location
¯ 0 2,0001,000 Feet
Project Site is within the City of Inglewood, California, in Los Angeles County on the USGS Inglewood 7.5-minute quadrangle map
in Section 28 of Township 02 South and Range 14 West
Center Coordinate (Decimal Degrees):

Latitude: 33.9691664N Longitude: -118.3502531W
Scale: 1:24,000Study Area (200-Foot Buffer)
Project Site
Vincent
Park
Source: BING Aerial Map 2024 Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project Figure 2. Project Vicinity
¯ 0 400200 Feet
Scale: 1:4,000Study Area (200-Foot Buffer)
Project Site
California Protected Area Database (CPAD)
Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 8 October 2024

Parcels in the Project Site Where No Development is Proposed • 334 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-007)
• 330 E Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-008)
• 326 E. Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-009)
• 333 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-014)
• 337 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-015)
• 341 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-016)
• 367 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-018)
• 373 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-019)
• 375 La Colina Drive (APN 4015-017-020)
• 366 E Beach Avenue (APN 4015-017-900)

The project is within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Inglewood Quad 7.5” topographical quad, and within Section 00 of Township 02 South and Range 14 West of the San Bernardino Principal Meridian. The area is within Inglewood Council District 2.

According to the Los Angeles County Property Assessment Information System (Los Angeles County 2024), the parcel s are zoned as Commercial/Industrial, Vacant Land, Single Family Residential, and Multi-Family Residential. As shown in Figure 2, the project site is in a high-density urban area. The study area (project site and a 200-ft buffer) is entirely developed with roadways, public transit, and residential/commercial developments surrounding the project site. The developed areas include single- and multi-family houses, and roadways including E. Beach Ave, La Colina Dr, and E. Florence Ave . The project site is entirely developed at the 300 E. Beach Ave. site with a commercial development; the 338 E. Beach Ave. site curre ntly has no developments but has been developed in the past and contains some remains of the former developments (foundations, retaining walls, etc.). Photographs of the study area are shown in Appendix A.

The project area is within 200 -feet of existing buildings and therefore is partially subject to Los Angeles Fire Department brush clearance to reduce wildfire fuel around structures. Thus, there is a legal requirement to maintain the plants by removal of groundcover including periodic mowing/ weed whacking and pruning of trees up to 6-feet.

2.2 Site History
The project site is entirely developed at the 300 E. Beach Ave. site with a commercial development (Don Lee Farms). The 338 E. Beach Ave. site currently has no developments but has been developed in the past and contains some remains of the former developments (foundations, retaining walls, etc.). The area between these two sites is also entirely developed with residential Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 9 October 2024

and commercial developments with minimal spacing and ornamental landscaping between developments.

2.3 Proposed Development
The Project Site encompasses approximately 6.92 acres within the Beach Avenue District of the Downtown Inglewood TOD Plan Area as shown in Figure 3 and in the Site Plan in Appendix E. The Modified Project would include three components including (1) the rezoning of all 20 parcels in the Project Site to TOD Mixed Use 1(MU -1); (2) construction of new industrial and residential developments within the 300 Beach Avenue Site to support Don Lee Farms; and (3) construction of a new residential development within the 338 Beach Avenue Site. Implementation of all three components have been analyzed as one whole project.

2.3.1 Proposed Rezoning
The Modified Project would rezone 18 of the 20 parcels within the Project Site from Light Manufacturing (M-1) and Residential Limited Multiple Family (R-2) to TOD Mixed Use 1 (MU -1).

Development standards for 18 of the 20 parcels on the Project Site would change to comply with the permitted uses and development standard of the TOD Mixed Use 1(MU-1) zoning district for maximum height, minimum lot size, public street setback, public alley setback, and parking requirements.

2.3.2 300 Beach Avenue Site
The 300 Beach Avenue Site is located on the western portion of the Project Site, and would encompass approximately 3.99 acres within six parcels. The 300 Beach Avenue Site currently includes Don Lee Farms and light manufacturing properties. The Modified Project would result in approximately 64,639 square feet of new development. The development would include 35,237 square feet of industrial uses to support the existing operations at Don Lee Farms, and the other areas would be developed with a mixed use development within two separate buildings.

Implementation of the Modified Project within the 300 Beach Avenue Site would require approximately 11,942 square feet of demolition, for the removal of six existing buildings on the site that are currently owned and operated by Don Lee Farms.

The proposed industrial development at the 300 Beach Avenue Site would include the development of a new 21,858 square foot dry storage facility, a 1,007 square foot loading dock, and a 12,372 square foot freezer within the existing APNs 4015 -017-004, and -005. The purpose of these structures is to centralize cold and dry storage within the Don Lee property, as they currently utilize an offsite location approximate 8 miles to the northeast at 4010 Compton Avenue, near Downtown Los Angeles, for cold and dry storage. Development of these facilities would not Source: BING Aerial Map 2024
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project
Figure 3. Proposed Development
¯
0 200
100
Feet
Scale: 1:2,000
Project Site
300 Beach Avenue Site
338 Beach Avenue Site
Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 11 October 2024

increase the operational capacity of the existing uses, but rather would more efficiently use space onsite for their current operations.

The proposed residential development at the 300 Beach Avenue Site would include the construction of one new mixed -use buildings and one residential building within the existing APNs 4015-017-010, -011, -012, and -013. Overall, the proposed residential development at the 300 Beach Avenue Site would include 24 town homes, one ground -level commercial establishment, and two roof decks. The proposed residential development would provide affordable housing, near the existing warehouse, for employees of Don Lee Farms.

Building 1 would be located along Beach Avenue, and would be four stories (maximum 44 feet in height above grade) with one roof deck, with a total height of approximately 44 feet. Building 1 would include 3,727 square feet of space for ground floor commercial uses; and approximately 11,178 square feet of residential living space within 12 total units, including nine town homes of approximately 907 square feet per unit, and three town homes of approximately 1,005 square feet per unit. The roof deck would be approximately 3,727 square feet.

Building 2 would be located within the interior of the 300 Beach Avenue Site, and would include three stories and one roof deck, with a total height of approximately 33 feet. Building 2 would include approximately 7,308 square feet of residential living space within 12 total units, including three town homes of approximately 498 square feet per unit, three town homes of approximately 717 square feet per unit, three town homes of approximately 590 square feet per unit, three town homes of approximately 631 square feet per unit . The roof deck would be approximately 3,516 square feet.

Overall construction at the 300 Beach Avenue Site would occur in two phases, which would last approximately 24 months, from June 2027 to June 2029.

2.3.3 338 Beach Avenue Site
The 338 Beach Avenue Site is located on the eastern portion of the Project Site and encompass approximately 1.54 acres within three parcels. The 338 Beach Avenue Site is currently vacant and previously disturbed, with trees and vegetation . The Modified Project would result in approximately 200,412 square feet of new development, and would include two five -story buildings, connected by a two-story community room and an outdoor courtyard with a pool. The residential development would include multiple roof decks and a two-story parking garage.

The 338 Beach Avenue Project Site would include a total of 115 dwelling units, each with private outdoor space by way of exterior balconies. It would include 102 one-bed/one-bath units and 13 two-bed/two-bath units. The proposed new building would have a total height of 57 feet and 9 Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 12 October 2024

inches from grade level. The 338 Beach Avenue Site would include approximately 58,626 square feet of community areas and open space, including lobbies, interior corridors, one community room, one courtyard with a pool, and four roof decks; as well as new sidewalks and a semi-circular dedicated fire access driveway along La Colina Drive.

2.4 Existing Physical & Natural Geographic Site Features Regionally, the project site is in southern Los Angeles County and 5.60-miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean. Locally, the site is located 0.17-miles west of Vincent Park, 0.35 -mile west of Inglewood Park Cemetery, and 0.46-mile east of Rogers Park. The area to be developed at 330 E.

Beach Ave. is relatively flat and entirely developed with a commercial development (Don Lee Farms) and associated parking lots and structures. The area to be developed at 338 E. Beach Ave. is relatively flat and level with La C olina Ave to the south and has an inclining slope from Beach Ave to the north that plateaus approximately halfway across the site. There are no developments currently present at 338 E. Beach Ave site, but there are remains of prior developments such as retaining walls, steps, and some foundations. The undeveloped site has signs of frequent fuel modification (mowing, weed whacking, etc.) and is dominated by ruderal herbaceous vegetation as well as eucalyptus (Eucalyptus gunnii) saplings and other ornamental species that remain from previous developments. The elevation ranges from approximately 125 ft. above mean sea level (amsl) in the lowest areas near E. Beach Ave to 145 ft. amsl in the eastern region near La Colina Ave. There are no other unique or exceptional natural features (e.g., caves, thickets, rocky outcrops, etc.) on the site that may provide habitat for specific plants or animals.

The geology of the site is comprised of two formations:
• Surficial Sediments. The Surficial Sediments are alluvial sediments, unconsolidated, and contain alluvial gravel, sand, and clay derived mostly from the Santa Monica Mountains. • Older Surficial Sediments. The Older Surficial Sediments are unconsolidated to weakly consolidated alluvial sediments from the late Pleistocene and contain older alluvium of gray to light brown pebble gravel, sand, and silt-clay.

According to the USDA NRCS Soils Database (USDA 2019), two soil types occur in the study area:
• Urban Land-Wildfetch-Centinela complex (0 to 5 percent slopes) . This soil type is comprised of Urban land (45%), Windfetch (25%), Centinela (15%), Thums (5%), Sepulveda (5%), Typic Calcixerolls (3%), and Typic Haploxerolls (2%). It is found within fan remnants and is well drained.
• Urban Land-Ballona-Typic Xerothents, fine substratum complex (0 to 5 percent slopes). This soil type is comprised of Urban land (45%), Typic Xerorthents (20%), Ballona Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 13 October 2024

(20%), Cropley (5%), Arbolado (5%), Azuvina (3%), and San Emigdio (2%). It is found within alluvial fans or fan remnants and is well drained.

The project site is part of the Ballona Creek Watershed, however there are no records of any stream or riverine habitats that occur through the parcel or study area (USGS 2024). During the South Environmental field visit, no evidence of water features was observed on the project site or study area.

2.5 Characteristics of the Surrounding Area
The surrounding study area is entirely developed with commercial/ residential developments, roadways, and the Downtown Inglewood Metro Station to the east.

The project site is embedded in the densely developed city of Inglewood. The surrounding study area is entirely developed with a mix of commercial and residential developments, roadways, and the Downtown Inglewood Metro Station to the east. The zoning in the area is a mix of commercial/ industrial, residential, and some vacant land. The closest native habitat would be in the adjacent coastal regions, but the project site and surrounding areas lack open space and native, high- quality habitat. There are a few parks in the vicinity of the parcel including Vincent Park to the northeast, Inglewood Cemetery to the east, and Rogers Park to the west. The closest highways are Interstate 405 1.02-miles to the west, State Route 42 0.34-miles to the south, Interstate 110 3.97- miles to the east, and Highway 10 4.53-miles to the north.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 14 October 2024

3 Flora Assessment

3.1 Flora Literature Review
The assessment of the flora of the project site began with a review of literature relating to the flora that is known to occur near the study area. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database online was reviewed to identify special-status plants and natural communities (CDFW 2024a) that have previously been recorded in the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Inglewood 7.5” quad that the project site is located within, and the eight surrounding USGS 7 .5” quads: Venice, Beverly Hills, Hollywood, Los Angeles, South Gate, Long Beach, Torrance, and Redondo Beach. Additional resources that were included in the review:
• A Manual of California Vegetation Online. California Native Plant Society CNPS 2024a) • Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California online (CNPS 2024b) • Google Earth online (Google 2024)

3.2 Flora Field Methodology
South Environmental conducted a field reconnaissance of the 300 and 338 E. Beach Ave project sites to identify biological resources including plant communities and plant species. A 200 -ft radius from the project site was drawn in ARCGIS to clearly delineate the project site and surrounding buffer study area. Sufficient time was allotted to collect data on the most prevalent plant species present on the project site and the overall study area. The most important plants were observed and recorded on the study area and identified to species except for species that could not be identified because of condition (dried out), lack of floral parts, or lack of access to an area (e.g., private property). Plant communities were identified according to the California Natural Communities List (last updated June 1, 2023) and mapped in ARCGIS.

When applicable, the field surveys complied with the Survey of California Vegetation (SCV) Classification and Mapping Standards (CDFW 2022) and the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018). Species that could not be identified in the field were identified with digital photos and plant specimens using the Jepson Manual Vascular Plants of California (Baldwin et al., 2012) and other botanical sources.

3.3 Flora Data Analysis
The survey for biological resources at the 300 and 338 E. Beach Ave project sites was conducted on September 4, 2024, from 1:00PM-2:00PM by Associate Biologist Dana Briggs. The weather was Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 15 October 2024

sunny with a temperature of 84° F, no precipitation, and 5 mph wind. The plants observed in the study area are listed in Table 1. Species with an asterisk (*) are considered as non-native invasive plants by the California Invasive Plant Council.

Table 1. Summary of Plants in Study Area
Common name Scientific name CRPR On parcel?
Belladonna lily Amaryllis belladonna -- Yes
*Giant reed Arundo donax -- Yes
*Australian saltbush Atriplex semibaccata -- Yes
Bougainvillea Bougainvillea glabra -- Yes
Rough small reed Calamagrostis arundinacea -- Yes
Lemon-scented gum Corymbia citriodora -- Yes
Buffalo gourd Cucurbita foetidissima -- Yes
*Bermuda grass Cynodon dactylon -- Yes
Horseweed Erigeron canadensis -- Yes
Cider gum Eucalyptus gunnii -- Yes
*English ivy Hedera helix -- Yes
Bristly oxtongue Hellminthotheca echioides -- Yes
Primrose jasmine Jasminum mesnyi -- Yes
Prickly lettuce Lactuca serriola -- Yes
*Glossy privet Ligustrum lucidum -- No
Baby sun rose Mesembryanthemum cordifolium -- Yes
Golden bamboo Phyllostarchys aurea -- No
Western sycamore Platanus racemosa -- No
Oriental arborvitae Platycladus orientalis -- No
Cape leadwort Plumbago auriculata -- Yes
Pomegranate Punica granatum -- Yes
Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia -- Yes
Purple nightshade Solanum xanti -- Yes
Purpletop tridens Tridens flavus -- Yes
Nasturtium Tropaeolum majus -- Yes
* = Non-native invasive species

3.3.1 Plant Communities
The study area is made up of one cover type and one plant community as shown in Figure 4. Table 2 below summarizes the plant communities and cover types and their respective coverage in acres on the project site and study area.

Source: BING Aerial Map 2024 Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project Figure 4. Plant Communities and Land Cover
¯ 0 300150 Feet
Scale: 1:3,000Project Site
Study Area (200-Foot Buffer)
Proposed Development Footprint
Developed / Ornamental Landscaped
Mixed Non-Native Grassland
Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 17 October 2024

Table 2. Summary of Plant Communities and Cover Types
Plant Community/
Cover Type
Acres
on
Study
Area
Acres
on
Project
Site
Acres
Impacted
by Project
Impacts from
New Fuel
Modification
Global/State
Rank
Developed/ Ornamental
Landscaped

22.71 5.38 3.99 0 N/A
Mixed Non-Native
Grassland

1.54 1.54 1.54 0 N/A
Total 24.25 6.92 5.53 0 -

3.3.1.1 Developed/ Ornamental Landscaped
A Developed/Ornamental cover type occurs on 22.71-acres of the study area, including 3.99-acres of the proposed project impact areas. The Developed Area within the project site includes residential developments at the north and central region of the project site, as well as commercial building developments (Don Lee Farms) and paved areas within the 300 Beach Ave project site to the south. The study area also has Developed Areas including residential single- and multi-family housing, commercial developments, and roadways such as E. Beach Ave, La Colina Dr, E. Florence Ave, and Edgewood St. The Ornamental Landscaped cover type has a diversity of ornamental trees, shrubs, and forbs throughout the limited landscaped portions of the surrounding housing developments. Although most of the ornamental vegetation was on private properties or behind fences, ornamental species observed included lemon -scented gum, bougainvillea, ornamental arborvitae, and English ivy. These areas are highly disturbed due to the presence of human development, frequent landscaping maintenance, and high presence of non-native and invasive plants. Therefore, special-status species are not expected to occur in this cover type.

3.3.1.2 Mixed Non-Native Grassland
A Mixed Non-Native Grassland plant community occurs on 1.54-acres of the study area including

1.54-acres of the project site. This non-native habitat is found throughout the 338 E. Beach Ave project site that currently has no developments and contains ruderal vegetation and ornamental species that undergoes frequent mowing/ weed whacking. There are stumps and saplings from eucalyptus trees on the project site, but no mature trees are currently present. Non -native vegetation observed included Bermuda grass, bristly oxtongue, Australian saltbrush, belladonna lily, prickly lettuce, rough small reed, buffalo gourd, spineless yucca, giant reed, primrose jasmine, nasturtium, baby sun rose, cape leadwort, pomegranate, cider gum, and lemon -scented gum. A few native species were observed on the project si te including horseweed, purpletop tridens, purple nightshade, and one coast live oak sapling not large enough to meet requirements for protection. This plant community is highly disturbed by non-native/ invasive species, frequent fuel Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 18 October 2024

modification, and prior developments. Additionally, Mixed Non-Native Grassland is not native or considered a sensitive plant community. Therefore, this plant community is not expected to host special-status species. The area is within 200-ft of structures it is subject to fuel modification as per Los Angeles Fire Department regulations to reduce fuel load around structures.

3.3.2 Special-Status Plants
According to the literature analysis presented in Appendix B, there are 66 special-status plants known to occur in the region, but none are expected to occur on the project site due to a lack of suitable native habitat and the dense urban development surrounding the project site and study area. In addition, the study area is not connected to any high-quality native habitat where special- status plants may occur, and from where seeds would originate that could colonize the site. One special-status plant species , southern tarplant ( Centromadia parryi ssp. australis), has been recorded for the site previously and included in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB).

However, the project site an d study area lack marshes/ swamps, vernally mesic grassland, and vernal pools that this species requires and it would not occur as a result . The site is not within designated Critical Habitat for any plant species (USFWS 2024b).

3.3.3 Sensitive Plant Communities
CDFW 2018 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities defines sensitive natural communities as those that are “of limited distribution statewide or within a county or region and are often vulnerable to environmental effects of projects.” CDFW considers a natural community sensitive if it has a Global or Stat e rarity rank of 1 -3, which includes communities that are vulnerable (G3/S3), imperiled (G2/S2), and critically imperiled ( G1/S1). CDFW uses the alliances and groups described in the Manual of California Vegetation Online to characterize California’s natural communities and provides the California Natural Communities List online (most current is dated June 1, 2023) to list the current global and state rarity rank for each natural community characterized in the Manual.

The Mixed Non-Native Grassland plant community is not a native plant community and is not considered a sensitive natural community by the CDFW.

3.3.4 Protected and Significant Trees/Shrubs
There are several species of trees protected under the City of Inglewood Protected Tree Ordinance (City of Inglewood 2024), including coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), which was observed on the project site in the Mixed Non -Native Grassland plant community. However, the diameter and height of this tree do not meet the requirements for protection. Therefore, there are no protected trees on the project site.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 19 October 2024

3.4 Project Impacts to Flora

3.4.1 Impacts to Native Plant Communities/Sensitive Natural Communities The development footprint would occur on 3.99-acre of Developed/Ornamental Landscaped cover type and 1.54 -acres of the Mixed Non -Native Grassland. There are no native plant communities or sensitive natural communities in the study area. Therefore, the project would have no impact on sensitive natural plant communities on the site and would avoid impacts to native habitat. The developed areas and ruderal vegetation found in the non -native grasslands would not be considered habitat for special-status species due to the developments and lack of native plant cover. This is an urban ar ea devoid of native habitats and impacts to habitat for special - status species or sensitive natural communities would not occur because it is not present.

3.4.2 Impacts to Special-Status Plants
No special-status plants were observed on the project site, and it was determined that none of the 66 special-status plants known to occur in the region are expected to occur within the project site or study area due to a lack of suitable habitat . The non-native grassland and developed/ornamental landscaping regions in the study area are not suitable for special-status plants that are typically found in native habitats.

3.4.3 Impacts to Protected and Significant Trees and Shrubs There are no protected trees or shrubs within the project site. Therefore, the project would not impact any protected trees or shrubs.

3.4.4 Cumulative Impacts to Flora
There is no other project known to be cu rrently proposed within 500 feet of the project site.

Therefore, the impacts from the project would not be greater than those described in this report as no other impacts to special-status flora within proximity to the project site would be impacted by other projects. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts beyond the impacts described in this report.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 20 October 2024

4 Wildlife Assessment

4.1 Wildlife Literature Review
The assessment of the wildlife of the study area began with a review of literature relating to the fauna that is known to occur near the study area. The CDFW California Natural Diversity Database online (CDFW 2024a) was reviewed to identify special -status animals that have been previously recorded in the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Inglewood 7.5” quad that the project site is located within, and the eight surrounding USGS 7 .5” quads: Venice, Beverly Hills, Hollywood, Los Angeles, South Gate, Long Beach, Torrance, and Redondo Beach. Additional resources that were included in the review:
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) (USFWS 2024a) • CDFW California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) life history accounts and range maps online (CDFW 2024b)
• Bird species protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)

4.2 Wildlife Field Methodology
South Environmental conducted a field visit of the 300 and 338 E. Beach Ave project sites to identify any biological resources present including endangered and threatened wildlife. A 200 -ft radius from the project site was drawn in ARCGIS to clearly delineate the project site and surrounding buffer study area. Data were collected on the most prevalent animals present on the project site and the overall study area.

Wildlife including mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and birds was observed and recorded on the study area and identified to species. Animals were detected and identified via direct sighting, scat, calls, or based on discussion with people living in the area. Direct sightings of animals were with the naked eye or with binoculars when necessary. Binoculars were used to try and view wildlife in private areas where access was prohibited. Since wildlife moves swiftly, observation time of the animal was limited in some cases. In these instances, identification of the wildlife at the taxonomic level of species was not always possible and the wildlife was identified at the level of genus or animal group (e.g., hummingbird). When a special-status animal was detected, habitat conditions were documented including characterization of the animal’s associated vegetative community and abiotic factors (e.g., soils).

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 21 October 2024

4.3 Wildlife Data Analysis

4.3.1 Wildlife Field Survey
During the field visit by South Environmental on September 4, 2024, wildlife species known to inhabit the Los Angeles are a were observed (or evidence of their presence was observed) in the study area and are summarized in Table 2 below. Due to the surrounding dense urban development, few wildlife species were observed.

Table 2. Summary of Wildlife on Study Area
Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic Group Status
California scrub jay Aphelocoma californica Bird --
*European honeybee Apis mellifera Insect --
Common raven Corvus corax Bird --
*Eucalyptus leaf beetle Paropsisterna cloelia Insect -- * Indicates non-native species

4.3.2 Special-Status Wildlife
No special-status animals were observed during the field visit. According to the literature analysis using the CNDDB database and presented in Appendix B, there are 55 special-status animals known to occur in the region. Of the 55 special-status animals known to occur in the region, none are expected to occur on the project site due to a lack of native habitat and the dense urban development on and surrounding the project site and study area.

Nesting birds . There is the potential for nesting migratory birds to use the survey area for foraging, cover, or even nesting. A few bird species were observed during the field survey and migratory birds may be passing through and temporarily nest on the site. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) assesses migratory birds and ranks those that are considered Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC). Some migratory birds assessed by the U.S. FWS are also year-round residents in southern California. The following birds considered to be migratory and BCC by th e U.S. FWS have some potential to utilize the site. Moderate potential to occur. • Allen’s hummingbird (Selasphorus sasin)
• Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi) • Bullock’s oriole (Icterus bullockii)
• Nuttall’s woodpecker (Picoides nuttallii)
• Olive-sided flycatcher (Contopus cooperi)
Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 22 October 2024

4.4 Project Impacts to Wildlife

4.4.1 Impacts to Wildlife Habitat
The proposed construction footprint consisting of 5.53-acres will be on Developed or Mixed Non- Native Grassland where special-status species are not expected to occur and these areas would not be considered native habitats . The surrounding areas within the study area are also heavily disturbed by developments and roadways that lack suitable native habitat for sensitive wildlife species. No new fuel modification is proposed. Because the project impacts will occur on areas that are already heavily degraded that lack high-quality native habitat, no impacts would occur to sensitive wildlife habitat.

4.4.2 Impacts to Special-Status Wildlife
No special-status wildlife species were observed during the field visit , and none are expected to occur on the project site and through the study area due to the lack of high-quality native habitat, surrounding residential/ commercial developments, human disturbances, and distance to high- quality habitat in the region. Because the project impacts will occur on areas that are already heavily degraded that lack high -quality native habitat, no impacts would occur to special-status wildlife.

4.4.3 Impacts to Nesting Birds
The proposed development may require the removal of shrubs or trees that could provide potential nesting habitat for common urban birds, and migratory BCC birds protected by the MBTA, MBPA, and the Fish and Wildlife Code. If present at the time of vegetation removal there could be direct impacts on active nests, eggs, or young. These could be destroyed or otherwise disturbed to a point at which the young do not survive, which would be a violation of the MBTA, MBPA, and the Fish and Wildlife Code. In addition, indirect impacts from noise or vibration have the potential to disturb an active bird nest to the point of failure if the nest is within immediate proximity to project activities, and this would also be a violation of the MBTA and Fish and Wildlife Code. To avoid direct and indirect impacts to active bird nests, eggs, or young, preconstruction nesting bird surveys and monitoring is required as described in Regulatory Compliance Measure #1 below.

Regulatory Compliance Measure #1- Preconstruction Nesting Bird Survey

• If possible, ground disturbing activities and vegetation removal (including tree trimming) should be timed to occur outside the bird nesting season (September 1 – January 31).

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 23 October 2024

• If ground disturbing activities or vegetation removal (including tree trimming) are scheduled during the bird nesting season (February 1 – August 31) a preconstruction survey for nesting birds should be conducted within 72 hours prior to construction activities. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist with prior experience conducting nesting bird surveys for construction projects. The study area should include the project site and suitable habitat within a 300 -foot buffer, or a buffer size d etermined by the qualified biologist based on level of proposed disturbance and access. If no active nests are found, no additional measures are required.

• If active nests are found the biologist will map the location and document the species and nesting stage. A no-work buffer will be established around the active nest as determined by the qualified biologist and based on the species sensitivity to disturbance and the type and duration of the disturbance. No construction activities shall occur within the no-work buffer until the biologist has determined the nest is no longer active.

4.4.4 Cumulative Impacts to Wildlife
There is no other project known to be currently proposed within 500 feet of the project site.

Therefore, the impacts from the project would not be greater than those described in this report as no other impacts to special -status wildlife within proximity t o the project site would be impacted by other projects. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts beyond the impacts described in this report.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 24 October 2024

5 Wildlife Movement

5.1 Wildlife Movement Literature Review
The assessment of the potential for wildlife movement to and from the project site consisted of consulting the following resources:
• Google Earth online (Google 2024)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) (USFWS 2024a) • USFWS Designated and Proposed Critical Habitat GIS data online (USFWS 2024b) • California Protected Areas Database Map online (CPAD 2024) • South Coast Missing Linkages: A Wildland Network for the South Coast Ecoregion (SC Wildlands 2006).

Google Earth online was used to assess the level of connectivity of habitat to the site. The foremost considerations were whether there was a direct connection of high -quality habitat to the site — without interference from development — and whether the connecting habitat linked to large habitat tracts.

5.2 Wildlife Movement Field Methodology
During the South Environmental field reconnaissance on September 4, 2024, the project site and surrounding 200-ft study area were assessed for their potential use as a wildlife corridor or habitat linkage. The level of disturbance of the site and surrounding areas by way of development including roads, house and commercial structures, fences, and lighting were noted as they pertain to the connectivity of the site to high-quality habitat. The study area was assessed for the presence of a corridor of linkage of habitat that connects the site to adjacent high-quality habitat. Included in this assessment of a corridor were stream areas or those with unique natural features (e.g., rock outcrops) which wildlife are known to frequently use as habitat linkages.

5.3 Wildlife Movement Data Analysis
The project site contains Mixed Non -Native Grassland (1.54 -acres) and Developed/Ornamental Landscaped cover (5.53-acres) which also dominates the study area (22.71 -acres) in the form of roadways and residential/commercial developments within a dense ly populated area. There are no native habitats or unique natural features within the study area that could be utilized as a movement corridor by wildlife. Additionally, there is no high-quality habitat adjacent to the study area. According to CPAD (2024), Vincent Park is a 50.7-acre open access California Protected Area that lies approximately 0.17 -mile northeast of the project site . H owever, this park contains Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 25 October 2024

ornamental landscaping and low -quality habitat that special -status species are not expected to use. Additionally, the project site is not near any critical habitat for threatened and endangered species (USFWS 2024a, USFWS 2024b). The project site is within a dense urban area with human movement and noise, which wildlife and special-status species tend to avoid. Therefore, the project site and study area lack wildlife movement areas.

5.4 Impacts to Wildlife Movement
The project site is not within any designated critical habitat for threatened and endangered species or California Protected Areas. The surrounding study area is also heavily disturbed by developments, roadways, and human disturbance that lack s native habitat and movement corridors for wildlife. The proposed construction footprint consisting of 5.5 3-acres will be on Developed or Mixed Non -Native Grassland where wildlife movement is not expected to occur .

Because the project impacts will occur on areas that are already heavily degraded movement areas, no impacts would occur to wildlife movement in the region.

5.5 Cumulative Impacts to Wildlife Movement
There is no other project known to be currently proposed within 500 feet of the project site.

Therefore, the impacts from the project would not be greater than those described in this report as no other impacts to wildlife movement within proximity to the project site would be impacted by other projects. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts beyond the impacts described in this report.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 26 October 2024

6 Water Resources

6.1 Water Resources Literature Review
The assessment of the potential for water resources on the project site consisted of consulting the following resources:
• National Wetlands Inventory online (USFWS 2024c)
• National Hydrography Dataset online (USGS 2024)

6.2 Water Resources Field Methodology
During the South Environmental field visit on September 4, 2024, the study area was inspected for the presence of potential jurisdictional features such as wetlands, streams, lakes, or other water features. No formal delineation of jurisdictional waters was performed, only a preliminary investigation was conducted. The survey was con ducted by observing the landscape across the study area and looking for the presence of water and topographic depressions that are associated with dense vegetation.

6.3 Water Resources Data Analysis
The literature search indicated no water features on the site or within the study area (USFWS 2024c, USGS 2024), And d uring the field visit no features were visible on the parcel or in the surrounding areas.

6.4 Impacts to Water Resources
No water resources occur on the project site. Therefore, project development will have no impact to water resources on the site.

6.5 Cumulative Impacts to Water Resources
There is no other project known to be currently proposed within 500 feet of the project site.

Therefore, the impacts from the project would not be greater than those described in this report as no other impacts to water resources within proximity to the project site would be impacted by other projects. Therefore, the project would not result in cumulative impacts beyond the impacts described in this report.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 27 October 2024

7 Applicable Regulations and Permits

7.1 Regulations

7.1.1 Federal Regulations

7.1.1.1 Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) protects individuals as well as any part, nest, or eggs of any bird listed as migratory. In practice, federal permits issued for activities that potentially impact migratory birds typically have conditions that require pre -disturbance surveys for nesting birds.

In the event nesting is observed, a buffer area with a specified radius must be established, within which no disturbance or intrusion is allowed until the young have fledged and left the nest, or it has been determined that the nest has failed. If not otherwise specified in the permit, the size of the buffer area varies with species and local circumstances (e.g., pr esence of busy roads, intervening topography, etc.), and is based on the professional judgment of a monitoring biologist. A list of migratory bird species protected under the MBTA is published by USFWS.

7.1.2 California Regulations

7.1.2.1 State of California Fish and Wildlife Code Section 3500 Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Wildlife Code states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Activities that result in the abandonment of an active bird of prey nest may also be considered in violation of this code. In addition, California Fish and Wildlife Code, Section 3511 prohibits the taking of any bird listed as fully protected, and California Fish and Wildlife Code, Section 3515 states that is it unlawful to take any non -game migratory bird protected under the MBTA.

7.1.2.2 California Migratory Bird Protection Act
The California Migratory Bird Protect Act (MBPA) was enacted in September 2019 to reinforce the MBTA at the state level. The Act states:
• “It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 703 et seq.) before January 1, 2017, any additional migratory nongame bird that may be designated in that federal act after that date, or any Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 28 October 2024

part of a migratory nongame bird described in this section, except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the United States Secretary of the Interior under that federal act before January 1, 2017, or subsequent rules or regulations adopted pursuan t to that federal act, unless those rules or regulations are inconsistent with this code.” This section is inactive on January 20, 2025, and the following language below will be adopted. • “It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 703 et seq.), or any part of a migratory nongame bird described in this section, except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the United States Secretary of the Interior under that federal act.” This section is operative starting on January 20, 2025.

7.1.3 Local and Regional Regulations

7.1.3.1 City of Inglewood Tree Preservation Ordinance (#12-06 5-8-12) No person shall remove, destroy, perform cutting of branches over one inch in diameter, or disfigure or cause to be removed or destroyed or disfigured any protected tree without having first obtained a permit to do so. Trees located on a developed single -family residential lot that cannot be further subdivided are exempt unless they have been required or protected as a condition of approval. All protected trees shall require a permit for removal, relocation, cutting or reshaping. All removed or disfigured trees shall also require replacement with like-size, like-kind trees or an equal value tree or trees as determined by the City's Master Plan or the Parks, Recreation and Library Services Department. If a replacement tree is unavailable in like size or kind, the value of the original protected tree shall be determined using the latest edition of "Guide for Plant Appraisal" by the International Society of Arboriculture. The valuation shall be used to determine the number and size of replacement trees required.

The following trees, when located on properties to which this Article applies as set forth in Section 12-111, shall be protected trees:
(A) Trees having a minimum trunk diameter of eight inches measured fifty -four inches above the ground. When measuring a multi-trunk tree, the diameters of the largest three trunks shall be added together.
(B) Street trees or other required trees such as those required as a condition of approval, Use Permit, or other zoning requirement, regardless of size. (C) All memorial trees dedicated by an entity recognized by the City, and all specimen trees that define a neighborhood or community.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 29 October 2024

(D) Trees of the following species that have reached a minimum of four inches diameter trunk size:

1. Big Leaf Maple Acer macrophyllum

2. California Buckeye Aesculus californica

3. Madrone Arbutus menziesii

4. Western Dogwood Cornus nuttallii

5. California Sycamore Platanus racemosa

6. Coast Live Oak Quercus agrifolia

7. Canyon Live Oak Quercus chrysolepis

8. Blue Oak Quercus douglassii

9. Oregon White Oak Quercus garryana

10. California Black Oak Quercus kelloggii

11. Valley Oak Quercus lobata

12. Interior Live Oak Quercus wislizenii

13. California Bay Umbellularia californica
(E) A tr ee or trees of any size planted as a replacement for a protected tree (City of Inglewood 2024).

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 30 October 2024

8 Conclusions
Based on the analysis in this report, the proposed project at the two sites known as the 300 and 338 E. Beach Avenue sites would not result in significant impacts to biological resources in the City of Inglewood according to CEQA . With the implementation of Regulatory Compliance Measure #1 regarding protection and avoidance of nesting birds , the proposed development would be in compliance with the MBTA, MBPA, and Fish and Game Code.

However, the diameter and height of this tree do not meet the requirements for protection.

Therefore, there are no protected trees on the project site and no impact to protected trees would occur.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 31 October 2024

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 32 October 2024

9 References
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2006. Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties California.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities Accessed online: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959&inline CDFW. 2022. Survey of California Vegetation (SCV) Classification and Mapping Standards.

Accessed online: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=102342&inline CDFW. 2024a. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (available by subscription) and RareFind. Sacramento, California. Accessed online: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB CDFW. 2024b. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) life history accounts and range maps. Accessed online: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Life-History-and-Range CDFW. 2024c. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS). Accessed online:
https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios6/
CNPS. 2024a. A Manual of California Vegetation Online. Accessed online:
http://vegetation.cnps.org/
CNPS. 2024b. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California. California Native Plant Society. Accessed online: http://cnps.web.aplus.net/cgi-bin/inv/inventory.cgi California Protected Areas Database (CPAD). 2024. Database Map. Accessed online:
https://www.calands.org/
City of Inglewood. 2024. City of Inglewood Protected Tree Ordinance (#12-06 5-8-12). Accessed online September 2024. https://ecode360.com/43789135
Google. 2024. Google Earth online. Accessed online: https://earth.google.com Los Angeles County. 2024. Los Angeles County Property Assessment Information System.

Accessed online: https://maps.assessor.lacounty.gov/m/
SC Wildlands. 2008. South Coast Missing Linkages: A Wildland Network for the South Coast Ecoregion.

Biological Resources Report
Downtown/Fairview Heights TOD EIR Project

South Environmental 33 October 2024

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Web Soil Survey Mapper. Accessed online:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024a. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). Accessed online:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
USFWS. 2024b. Dedicated and Proposed Critical Habitat GIS Data. Accessed online:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/critical- habitat#critical-habitat-designations,-maps,-and-gis-data USFWS. 2024c. National Wetlands Inventory Online Wetlands Mapper. Accessed online:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html
United States Geological Service (USGS). 2024. National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) The National Map Viewer. Accessed online: https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/services/ Yerkes, R.F., Campbell, R.H., Alvarez, Rachel, and Bovard, Kelly. 2005. Preliminary geologic map of the Los Angeles 30' X 60' quadrangle, southern California. U.S. Geological Survey.

Appendix A:

Photograph Exhibit

Image 1.) View of northernmost section of 23-184 Beach – La Colina Project site at the corner of E. Beach Ave.

Image 2.) View of northern section of 338 Beach Ave. project site from La Colina Dr., facing north.

Image 3.) View of 338 Beach Ave. project site from La Colina Dr., facing northwest. The site contains a large empty lot with ruderal herbaceous vegetation, eucalyptus saplings, and evidence of prior developments.

Image 4.) View of 338 Beach Ave. project site and residential developments in background beyond empty lot, facing northeast. The empty parcel is relatively flat on the La Colina Drive side.

Image 5.) View of 338 Beach Ave. project site and residential developments in background, facing west.

Image 6.) View of 338 Beach Ave. project site and residential developments beyond, facing west. The empty parcel begins a slight downward slope from central region of parcel into Beach Ave. below.

Image 7.) View of 338 Beach Ave. featuring slope on Beach Ave. side with previous development footprints and commercial/ industrial developments beyond, facing north.

Image 8.) View of 338 Beach Ave. empty lot from far north end, facing southwest.

Image 9.) View of 300 Beach Ave. project site adjacent to Don Lee Farms commercial development, facing southwest.

Image 10.) View of 300 Beach Ave. project site with commercial developments throughout entire site, facing southeast.

Image 11.) Depicts residential developments in study area across from 300 Beach Ave project site, facing west.

Image 12.) View of commercial/ residential developments between 300 and 338 Beach Ave project sites, facing east.

Image 13.) View of commercial/ residential developments between 300 and 338 Beach Ave project sites, facing east.

Image 14.) View of commercial/ residential developments between 300 and 338 Beach Ave project sites, facing east.

Image 15.) View of commercial/ residential developments between 300 and 338 Beach Ave project sites, facing east.

Image 16.) View of residential developments between 300 and 338 Beach Ave project sites with 338 Beach Ave Project site on left, facing east.

Image 17.) View of 338 Beach Ave Project site from Beach Ave. (north end), facing east.

Appendix B:

Special-Status Species Analysis

Special-Status Species Analysis
Special-status species are those plants and animals that, because of their recognized rarity or vulnerability to various causes of habitat loss or population decline, are recognized by federal, state, or other agencies as under threat from human -associated developments. Some of these species receive specific protection that is defined by federal or state endangered species legislation. Others have been designat ed as special -status based on adopted policies and expertise of state resource agencies or organizations with acknowledged expertise, or policies adopted by local governmental agencies such as counties, cities, and special districts to meet local conservation objectives. Special-status species include:
• Plants or wildlife listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered, or are candidates for possible future listing as threatened or endangered, under the federal Endangered Species Act or the California Endangered Species Act; • Plants or wildlife that meet the definitions of rare or endangered under CEQA Guidelines Section 15380.
• Plants or wildlife covered under an adopted NCCP/HCP; • Plants considered by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) to be rare, threatened, or endangered (List 1A, 1B and 2 plants) in California;
• Plants listed by the CNPS as plants in which there is limited information about distribution (List 3);
• Plants listed as rare under the California Native Plant Protection Act (Fish and Wildlife Code 1900 et seq.);
• Wildlife designated by CDFW as species of special concern; • Wildlife "fully protected" in California (California Fish and Wildlife Code Sections 3511, 4700, and 5050); and
• Wildlife protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MTBA).

9.1.1 Federally-Protected Status
All references to Federally-protected species in this BRA include the most current published status or candidate category to which each species has been assigned by USFWS. For purposes of this assessment the following acronyms are used for Federal status species, as applicable:

FE Federally-listed as Endangered

FT Federally-listed as Threatened
FPE Federally proposed for listing as Endangered
FPT Federally proposed for listing as Threatened
FPD Federally proposed for delisting
FC Federal candidate species (former C1 species)

9.1.2 State-Protected Status
For the purposes of this BRA, the following acronyms are used for State status species, as applicable:

SE State-listed as Endangered
ST State-listed as Threatened
SR State-listed as Rare
SCE State candidate for listing as Endangered
SCT State candidate for listing as Threatened
SFP State Fully Protected
SSC California Species of Special Concern

9.1.3 California Rare Plant Rank
The CNPS is a private plant conservation organization dedicated to the monitoring and protection of special -status species in California. CNPS has compiled an inventory comprised of the information focusing on geographic distribution and qualitative characterization of Rare, Threatened, or Endangered vascular plant species of California (CNPS 2018). The list serves as the candidate list for listing as Threatened and Endangered by CDFW. CNPS has developed six categories of rarity known as the California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR), of which Ranks 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B are particularly considered sensitive:

Rank 1A Presumed extinct in California.

Rank 1B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere.

Rank 2A Presumed extinct in California, but more common elsewhere.

Rank 2B Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere.

Rank 3 Plants about which we need more information – a review list.

Rank 4 Plants of limited distribution – a watch list.

The CNPS recently added “threat ranks” which parallel the ranks used by the CNDDB. These ranks are added as a decimal code after the CNPS List (e.g., Rank 1B.1). The threat codes are as follows:

.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat);
.2 Moderately threatened in California (20-80% occurrences threatened); .3 Not very threatened in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known).

9.1.4 Potential to Occur Assessment
Special-status species that are present or are high or medium potential to occur within the parcel are a based on one or more of the following:
• the direct observation of the species within the parcel during any field survey; • a record reported in the CNDDB; and
• the parcel is within known distribution of a species and contains appropriate habitat. • present means the species is known to occur, high potential indicates the habitat is ideal and near known occurrences of the species, and medium indicates that the habitat may be less than ideal due to some lacking element but still usable by the species a nd within the known range.

Special-status species that are low potential) to occur are based on one of the following:
• the parcel has the general habitat types but lacks necessary habitat elements such as suitable microhabitat or soils; or
• the parcel is outside the known elevation range or distribution of the species, and has otherwise suitable habitats;
Special-status species that have no potential to occur on the parcel are labeled as none due to the absence of suitable habitat.

Special-Status Plants
Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
red sand-verbena Abronia maritima None None 4.2 Feb-Nov 0 330 Coastal dunes None. The project site and study area lack coastal dunes.
aphanisma Aphanisma
blitoides
None None 1B.2 Feb-Jun 5 1000 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub
Gravelly
(sometimes),
Sandy
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
marsh sandwort Arenaria
paludicola
FE CE 1B.1 May-Aug 10 560 Marshes and swamps
(brackish, freshwater)
Openings,
Sandy
None. The project site and study
area lack marshes/ swamps.

Braunton's milk-
vetch
Astragalus
brauntonii
FE None 1B.1 Jan-Aug 15 2100 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland
Burned areas
(sometimes),
Carbonate,
Disturbed areas
(sometimes),
Sandstone
(usually)
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Horn's milk-vetch Astragalus hornii
var. hornii
None None 1B.1 May-Oct 195 2790 Meadows and seeps,
Playas
Alkaline, Lake
Margins
None. The project site and study
area lack alkaline meadows and
seeps.

Ventura Marsh
milk-vetch
Astragalus
pycnostachyus var.
lanosissimus
FE CE 1B.1 (Jun)Aug-
Oct
5 115 Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Marshes and
swamps (edges, coastal
salt, brackish)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
coastal dunes
milk-vetch
Astragalus tener
var. titi
FE CE 1B.1 Mar-May 5 165 Coastal bluff scrub
(sandy), Coastal dunes,
Coastal prairie (mesic)
Mesic (often),
Vernally Mesic
(often)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Coulter's saltbush Atriplex coulteri None None 1B.2 Mar-Oct 10 1510 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland
Alkaline
(sometimes),
Clay
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
south coast
saltscale
Atriplex pacifica None None 1B.2 Mar-Oct 0 460 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Playas
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Parish's
brittlescale
Atriplex parishii None None 1B.1 Jun-Oct 80 6235 Chenopod scrub, Playas, Vernal pools
Alkaline None. The project site and study
area lack alkaline habitat.

Davidson's
saltscale
Atriplex serenana
var. davidsonii
None None 1B.2 Apr-Oct 35 655 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub
Alkaline None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Nevin's barberry Berberis nevinii FE CE 1B.1 (Feb)Mar-
Jun
230 2705 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Riparian scrub
Gravelly
(sometimes),
Sandy
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
Catalina mariposa
lily
Calochortus
catalinae
None None 4.2 (Feb)Mar-
Jun
50 2295 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Valley and foothill
grassland
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Plummer's
mariposa-lily
Calochortus
plummerae
None None 4.2 May-Jul 330 5580 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Lower montane coniferous
forest, Valley and foothill
grassland
Granitic, Rocky None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
lucky morning-
glory
Calystegia felix None None 1B.1 Mar-Sep 100 705 Meadows and seeps (sometimes alkaline),
Riparian scrub (alluvial)
Alkaline
(sometimes),
Loam
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack meadows and seeps or
riparian scrub.

Peirson's
morning-glory
Calystegia
peirsonii
None None 4.2 Apr-Jun 100 4920 Chaparral, Chenopod
scrub, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Lower montane coniferous
forest, Valley and foothill
grassland
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Lewis' evening-
primrose
Camissoniopsis
lewisii
None None 3 Mar-
May(Jun)
0 985 Cismontane woodland,
Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal
dunes, Coastal scrub,
Valley and foothill
grassland
Clay
(sometimes),
Sandy
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
southern tarplant Centromadia parryi
ssp. australis
None None 1B.1 May-Nov 0 1575 Marshes and swamps
(margins), Valley and
foothill grassland (vernally
mesic), Vernal pools
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
smooth tarplant Centromadia
pungens ssp. laevis
None None 1B.1 Apr-Sep 0 2100 Chenopod scrub,
Meadows and seeps,
Playas, Riparian woodland,
Valley and foothill
grassland
Alkaline None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Orcutt's
pincushion
Chaenactis
glabriuscula var.
orcuttiana
None None 1B.1 Jan-Aug 0 330 Coastal bluff scrub
(sandy), Coastal dunes
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
coastal goosefoot Chenopodium
littoreum
None None 1B.2 Apr-Aug 35 100 Coastal dunes None. The project site and study area lack coastal native habitat.
salt marsh bird's-
beak
Chloropyron
maritimum ssp.
maritimum
FE CE 1B.2 May-
Oct(Nov)
0 100 Coastal dunes, Marshes
and swamps (coastal salt)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
San Fernando
Valley spineflower
Chorizanthe parryi
var. fernandina
None CE 1B.1 Apr-Jul 490 4005 Coastal scrub (sandy),
Valley and foothill
grassland
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal scrub or valley
and foothill grassland.
seaside cistanthe Cistanthe maritima None None 4.2 (Feb)Mar- Jun(Aug)
15 985 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland
Sandy None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
monkey-flower
savory
Clinopodium
mimuloides
None None 4.2 Jun-Oct 1000 5905 Chaparral, North Coast coniferous forest
Mesic,
Streambanks
None. The project site and study
area lack chaparral or forest.
small-flowered
morning-glory
Convolvulus
simulans
None None 4.2 Mar-Jul 100 2430 Chaparral (openings),
Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland
Clay, Seeps,
Serpentine
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
paniculate
tarplant
Deinandra
paniculata
None None 4.2 (Mar)Apr-
Nov
80 3085 Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland, Vernal
pools
Sandy
(sometimes),
Vernally Mesic
(usually)
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
western dichondra Dichondra
occidentalis
None None 4.2 (Jan)Mar-
Jul
165 1640 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Valley and foothill
grassland
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
beach
spectaclepod
Dithyrea maritima None CT 1B.1 Mar-May 10 165 Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub (sandy)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
many-stemmed
dudleya
Dudleya
multicaulis
None None 1B.2 Apr-Jul 50 2590 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland
Clay (often) None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
island green
dudleya
Dudleya virens ssp.
insularis
None None 1B.2 Apr-Jun 15 985 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub
Rocky None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

San Diego button-
celery
Eryngium
aristulatum var.
parishii
FE CE 1B.1 Apr-Jun 65 2035 Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland, Vernal
pools
Mesic None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
island wallflower Erysimum insulare None None 1B.3 Mar-Jul 0 985 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
suffrutescent
wallflower
Erysimum
suffrutescens
None None 4.2 Jan-
Jul(Aug)
0 490 Chaparral (maritime),
Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal
dunes, Coastal scrub
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Santa Barbara
bedstraw
Galium
cliftonsmithii
None None 4.3 May-Jul 655 4005 Cismontane woodland None. The project site and study area lack woodland.

Los Angeles
sunflower
Helianthus nuttallii
ssp. parishii
None None 1A Aug-Oct 35 5005 Marshes and swamps
(freshwater, coastal salt)
None. The project site and study
area lack marshes and swamps
woolly rose-
mallow
Hibiscus
lasiocarpos var.
occidentalis
None None 1B.2 Jun-Sep 0 395 Marshes and swamps
(freshwater)
None. The project site and study
area lack marshes and swamps.

Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
vernal barley Hordeum
intercedens
None None 3.2 Mar-Jun 15 3280 Coastal dunes, Coastal
scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland (depressions,
saline flats), Vernal pools
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
mesa horkelia Horkelia cuneata
var. puberula
None None 1B.1 Feb-
Jul(Sep)
230 2660 Chaparral (maritime),
Cismontane woodland,
Coastal scrub
Gravelly
(sometimes),
Sandy
(sometimes)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
decumbent
goldenbush
Isocoma menziesii
var. decumbens
None None 1B.2 Apr-Nov 35 820 Chaparral, Coastal scrub (often disturbed areas,
sandy)
None. The project site and study
area lack chaparral or coastal
scrub.

Southern
California black
walnut
Juglans californica None None 4.2 Mar-Aug 165 2955 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland, Coastal scrub,
Riparian woodland
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
southwestern
spiny rush
Juncus acutus ssp.
leopoldii
None None 4.2 (Mar)May-
Jun
10 2955 Coastal dunes (mesic),
Coastal scrub, Marshes and
swamps (coastal salt),
Meadows and seeps
(alkaline seeps)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Coulter's
goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata
ssp. coulteri
None None 1B.1 Feb-Jun 5 4005 Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt), Playas, Vernal
pools
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Robinson's
pepper-grass
Lepidium
virginicum var.
robinsonii
None None 4.3 Jan-Jul 5 2905 Chaparral, Coastal scrub None. The project site and study area lack chaparral or coastal
scrub.

Santa Catalina
Island desert-
thorn
Lycium brevipes
var. hassei
None None 3.1 Jun(Aug) 215 985 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

California box-
thorn
Lycium
californicum
None None 4.2 Mar-
Aug(Dec)
15 490 Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

California
spineflower
Mucronea
californica
None None 4.2 Mar-
Jul(Aug)
0 4595 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal dunes,
Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland
Sandy None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
mud nama Nama stenocarpa None None 2B.2 Jan-Jul 15 1640 Marshes and swamps (lake margins, riverbanks)
None. The project site and study
area lack marshes and swamps.

Gambel's water
cress
Nasturtium
gambelii
FE CT 1B.1 Apr-Oct 15 1085 Marshes and swamps
(brackish, freshwater)
None. The project site and study
area lack marshes and swamps.
spreading
navarretia
Navarretia fossalis FT None 1B.1 Apr-Jun 100 2150 Chenopod scrub, Marshes and swamps (shallow
freshwater), Playas, Vernal
pools
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
prostrate vernal
pool navarretia
Navarretia
prostrata
None None 1B.2 Apr-Jul 10 3970 Coastal scrub, Meadows
and seeps, Valley and
foothill grassland (alkaline),
Vernal pools
Mesic None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
coast woolly-
heads
Nemacaulis
denudata var.
denudata
None None 1B.2 Apr-Sep 0 330 Coastal dunes None. The project site and study area lack coastal native habitat.

California Orcutt
grass
Orcuttia californica FE CE 1B.1 Apr-Aug 50 2165 Vernal pools None. The project site and study area lack vernal pools.

Lyon's
pentachaeta
Pentachaeta lyonii FE CE 1B.1 (Feb)Mar-
Aug
100 2265 Chaparral (openings),
Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland
Clay, Rocky None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Hubby's phacelia Phacelia hubbyi None None 4.2 Apr-Jul 0 3280 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland
Gravelly, Rocky,
Talus
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
south coast
branching
phacelia
Phacelia
ramosissima var.
austrolitoralis
None None 3.2 Mar-Aug 15 985 Chaparral, Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub, Marshes and
swamps (coastal salt)
Rocky
(sometimes),
Sandy
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Brand's star
phacelia
Phacelia stellaris None None 1B.1 Mar-Jun 5 1310 Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Ballona cinquefoil Potentilla
multijuga
None None 1A Jun-Aug 0 5 Meadows and seeps
(brackish)
None. The project site and study
area lack meadows and seeps.
white rabbit-
tobacco
Pseudognaphalium
leucocephalum
None None 2B.2 (Jul)Aug-
Nov(Dec)
0 6890 Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Coastal scrub,
Riparian woodland
Gravelly, Sandy None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Nuttall's scrub oak Quercus dumosa None None 1B.1 Feb-
Apr(May-
Aug)
50 1310 Chaparral, Closed-cone
coniferous forest, Coastal
scrub
Clay, Loam,
Sandy
None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Parish's
gooseberry
Ribes divaricatum
var. parishii
None None 1A Feb-Apr 215 985 Riparian woodland None. The project site and study area lack riparian woodland.
salt spring
checkerbloom
Sidalcea
neomexicana
None None 2B.2 Mar-Jun 50 5020 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Lower montane coniferous
forest, Mojavean desert
scrub, Playas
Alkaline, Mesic None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.
estuary seablite Suaeda esteroa None None 1B.2 (Jan-
May)Jul-
Oct
0 15 Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.
woolly seablite Suaeda taxifolia None None 4.2 Jan-Dec 0 165 Coastal bluff scrub, Coastal dunes, Marshes
and swamps (coastal
margins)
None. The project site and study
area lack coastal native habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name FESA CESA CRPR Blooming
Period
Elevation
Low (ft)
Elevation
High (ft)
Habitat Micro Habitat Potential to Occur on the Study
area
San Bernardino
aster
Symphyotrichum
defoliatum
None None 1B.2 Jul-Nov 5 6695 Cismontane woodland,
Coastal scrub, Lower
montane coniferous forest,
Marshes and swamps,
Meadows and seeps,
Valley and foothill
grassland (vernally mesic)
Streambanks None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Greata's aster Symphyotrichum
greatae
None None 1B.3 Jun-Oct 985 6595 Broadleafed upland forest, Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Riparian
woodland
Mesic None. The project site and study
area lack suitable native habitat.

Special-Status Animals
Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
southwestern pond
turtle
Actinemys pallida Reptiles Proposed
Threatened
None BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_VU-Vulnerable |
USFS_S-Sensitive
Freshwater Ponds, lakes, and other
freshwater bodies of water
None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
tricolored blackbird Agelaius tricolor Birds None Threatened BLM_S-Sensitive | CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_EN-Endangered |
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
Highly colonial species, most
numerous in Central Valley
and vicinity. Largely endemic
to California.

Requires open water,
protected nesting substrate,
and foraging area with
insect prey within a few km
of the colony.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
southern California
rufous-crowned
sparrow
Aimophila
ruficeps
canescens
Birds None None CDFW_WL-Watch List Resident in Southern California coastal sage scrub
and sparse mixed chaparral.

Frequents relatively steep,
often rocky hillsides with
grass and forb patches.

None. The project site
and study area lack
coastal sage scrub or
chaparral habitat.

Southern California
legless lizard
Anniella stebbinsi Reptiles None None CDFW_SSC-Species of Special Concern | USFS_S-
Sensitive
Generally south of the
Transverse Range, extending
to northwestern Baja
California. Occurs in sandy
or loose loamy soils under
sparse vegetation. Disjunct
populations in the
Tehachapi and Piute
Mountains in Kern County.

Variety of habitats; generally
in moist, loose soil. They
prefer soils with a high
moisture content.

None. The project site
and study area lack
native habitat with
sandy, moist soils.
pallid bat Antrozous
pallidus
Mammals None None BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern |
USFS_S-Sensitive
Deserts, grasslands,
shrublands, woodlands and
forests. Most common in
open, dry habitats with
rocky areas for roosting.

Roosts must protect bats
from high temperatures.

Very sensitive to disturbance
of roosting sites.

None. The project site
and study area lack
open, dry habitat with
rocky areas.

California glossy
snake
Arizona elegans
occidentalis
Reptiles None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Patchily distributed from the
eastern portion of San
Francisco Bay, southern San
Joaquin Valley, and the
Coast, Transverse, and
Peninsular ranges, south to
Baja California.

Generalist reported from a
range of scrub and grassland
habitats, often with loose or
sandy soils.

None. The project site
and study area lack
native scrub or
grassland habitat.
coastal whiptail Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
Reptiles None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Found in deserts and semi-
arid areas with sparse
vegetation and open areas.

Ground may be firm soil,
sandy, or rocky.

None. The project site
and study area lack

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
Also found in woodland and
riparian areas.
desert, riparian, or
woodland habitats.
burrowing owl Athene cunicularia Birds None None BLM_S-Sensitive | CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern |
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
Open, dry annual or
perennial grasslands,
deserts, and scrublands
characterized by low-
growing vegetation.

Subterranean nester,
dependent upon burrowing
mammals, most notably, the
California ground squirrel.

None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable habitat with
burrowing mammals.

Crotch's bumble bee Bombus crotchii Insects None Candidate Endangered
IUCN_EN-Endangered Coastal California east to the
Sierra-Cascade crest and
south into Mexico.

Food plant genera include
Antirrhinum, Phacelia,
Clarkia, Dendromecon,
Eschscholzia, and
Eriogonum.

None. The project site
and study area lack
native habitat with
food genera.

American bumble
bee
Bombus
pensylvanicus
Insects None None IUCN_VU-Vulnerable Coastal prairie, Great Basin grassland, Valley & foothill
grassland
Long-tongued; forages on a
wide variety of flowers
including vetches (Vicia),
clovers (Trifolium), thistles
(Cirsium), sunflowers
(Helianthus), etc. Nests
above ground under long
grass or underground.

Queens overwinter in rotten
wood or underground.

None. The project site
and study area lack
native habitat with
food genera.

Belkin's dune
tabanid fly
Brennania belkini Insects None None IUCN_VU-Vulnerable Sand obligate species known from coastal dunes
near Playa del Rey and El
Segundo south to Ensenada,
Mexico. One of few tabanids
not requiring a blood meal
for successful egg
production; adults taken on
flowers.

Larvae collected 50 cm
beneath surface of sandy
soil; presumably burrowing
predators with
undetermined hosts, likely
beetle larvae. Adult flight
generally May - July.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sand dunes.

Swainson's hawk Buteo swainsoni Birds None Threatened BLM_S-Sensitive | IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Breeds in grasslands with
scattered trees, juniper-sage
flats, riparian areas,
savannahs, and agricultural
or ranch lands with groves
or lines of trees.

Requires adjacent suitable
foraging areas such as
grasslands, or alfalfa or grain
fields supporting rodent
populations.

None. The project site
and study area lack
grasslands with
scattered trees and
foraging areas.
western snowy
plover
Charadrius
nivosus nivosus
Birds Threatened None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Sandy beaches, salt pond
levees and shores of large
alkali lakes.

Needs sandy, gravelly or
friable soils for nesting.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitats.

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
sandy beach tiger
beetle
Cicindela
hirticollis gravida
Insects None None Inhabits areas adjacent to
non-brackish water along
the coast of California from
San Francisco Bay to
northern Mexico.

Clean, dry, light-colored
sand in the upper zone.

Subterranean larvae prefer
moist sand not affected by
wave action.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
western beach tiger
beetle
Cicindela
latesignata
Insects None None Mudflats and beaches of
coastal estuaries from San
Diego County to Los
Angeles County.

Typically inhabit wet or dry
sandy beaches and mud,
sand, or salt flats.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
senile tiger beetle Cicindela senilis
frosti
Insects None None Inhabits marine shoreline,
from Central California coast
south to salt marshes of San
Diego. Also found at Lake
Elsinore.

Inhabits dark-colored mud
in the lower zone and dried
salt pans in the upper zone.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
western yellow-
billed cuckoo
Coccyzus
americanus
occidentalis
Birds Threatened Endangered BLM_S-Sensitive | USFS_S-
Sensitive
Riparian forest nester, along
the broad, lower flood-
bottoms of larger river
systems.

Nests in riparian jungles of
willow, often mixed with
cottonwoods, with lower
story of blackberry, nettles,
or wild grape.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
globose dune beetle Coelus globosus Insects None None IUCN_VU-Vulnerable Inhabitant of coastal sand dune habitat; erratically
distributed from Ten Mile
Creek in Mendocino County
south to Ensenada, Mexico.

Inhabits foredunes and sand
hummocks; it burrows
beneath the sand surface
and is most common
beneath dune vegetation.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sand dunes.
yellow rail Coturnicops
noveboracensis
Birds None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern |
USFS_S-Sensitive |
USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
Summer resident in eastern
Sierra Nevada in Mono
County.

Freshwater marshlands. None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
monarch - California
overwintering
population
Danaus plexippus
plexippus pop. 1
Insects Candidate None IUCN_EN-Endangered |
USFS_S-Sensitive
Winter roost sites extend
along the coast from
northern Mendocino to Baja
California, Mexico.

Roosts located in wind-
protected tree groves
(eucalyptus, Monterey pine,
cypress), with nectar and
water sources nearby.

None. The project site
and study area are
not within coastal
zone and lack
milkweed or wind-
protected groves.
southwestern willow
flycatcher
Empidonax traillii
extimus
Birds Endangered Endangered Riparian woodlands in
Southern California.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Busck's gallmoth Eugnosta
busckana
Insects None None Coastal southern California. Tiny micro-moth (1 cm) with larva forming galls on host
plant Encelia californica
None. The project site
and study area lack
required host plant.

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
(California brittlebush). Adult
flight period is during winter,
generally from November to
February, and have been
reported at UV lights and
porch lights.
western mastiff bat Eumops perotis
californicus
Mammals None None BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Many open, semi-arid to
arid habitats, including
conifer and deciduous
woodlands, coastal scrub,
grasslands, chaparral, etc.

Roosts in crevices in cliff
faces, high buildings, trees
and tunnels.

None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable roosting
locations, a water
nearby water
resource, and has
high human presence.

El Segundo blue
butterfly
Euphilotes allyni Insects Endangered None Restricted to remnant coastal dune habitat in
Southern California.

Host plant is Eriogonum
parvifolium; larvae feed only
on the flowers and seeds;
used by adults as major
nectar source.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sand dunes.

Palos Verdes blue
butterfly
Glaucopsyche
lygdamus
palosverdesensis
Insects Endangered None Restricted to the cool, fog-
shrouded, seaward side of
Palos Verdes Hills, Los
Angeles County.

Host plant is Astragalus
trichopodus var. lonchus
(locoweed).

None. The project site
and study area are
not within known
range on seaward
side of Palos Verdes
Hills.

San Gabriel chestnut Glyptostoma
gabrielense
Mollusks None None Terrestrial. None. The project site and study area lack
native habitat with
moist soils.
western ridged
mussel
Gonidea angulata Mollusks None None IUCN_VU-Vulnerable Aquatic Primarily creeks and rivers and less often lakes.

Originally in most of state,
now extirpated from Central
and Southern California.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
western tidal-flat
tiger beetle
Habroscelimorpha
gabbii
Insects None None Inhabits estuaries and
mudflats along the coast of
Southern California.

Generally found on dark-
colored mud in the lower
zone; occasionally found on
dry saline flats of estuaries.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
silver-haired bat Lasionycteris
noctivagans
Mammals None None IUCN_LC-Least Concern Primarily a coastal and montane forest dweller,
feeding over streams, ponds
and open brushy areas.

Roosts in hollow trees,
beneath exfoliating bark,
abandoned woodpecker
holes, and rarely under
rocks. Needs drinking water.

None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable roosting
locations, a water
nearby water

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
resource, and has
high human presence.
hoary bat Lasiurus cinereus Mammals None None IUCN_LC-Least Concern Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access
to trees for cover and open
areas or habitat edges for
feeding.

Roosts in dense foliage of
medium to large trees. Feeds
primarily on moths. Requires
water.

None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable roosting
locations, a water
nearby water
resource, and has
high human presence.

California black rail Laterallus
jamaicensis
coturniculus
Birds None Threatened BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_FP-Fully Protected |
IUCN_EN-Endangered
Inhabits freshwater marshes,
wet meadows and shallow
margins of saltwater
marshes bordering larger
bays.

Needs water depths of
about 1 inch that do not
fluctuate during the year
and dense vegetation for
nesting habitat.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
south coast marsh
vole
Microtus
californicus
stephensi
Mammals None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Tidal marshes in Los
Angeles, Orange and
southern Ventura counties.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
pocketed free-tailed
bat
Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
Mammals None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Variety of arid areas in
Southern California; pine-
juniper woodlands, desert
scrub, palm oasis, desert
wash, desert riparian, etc.

Rocky areas with high cliffs. None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable roosting
locations, a water
nearby water
resource, and has
high human presence.
big free-tailed bat Nyctinomops
macrotis
Mammals None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Low-lying arid areas in
Southern California.

Need high cliffs or rocky
outcrops for roosting sites.

Feeds principally on large
moths.

None. The project site
and study area lack
suitable roosting
locations, a water
nearby water
resource, and has
high human presence.

Lange's El Segundo
Dune weevil
Onychobaris
langei
Insects None None Known from El Segundo
Dunes.

None. The project site
and study area are
outside of known
range at El Segundo
Dunes.
wandering
(=saltmarsh) skipper
Panoquina errans Insects None None IUCN_NT-Near
Threatened
Southern California coastal
salt marshes.

Requires moist saltgrass for
larval development.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Belding's savannah
sparrow
Passerculus
sandwichensis
beldingi
Birds None Endangered USFWS_BCC-Birds of
Conservation Concern
Inhabits coastal salt
marshes, from Santa Barbara
Nests in Salicornia on and
about margins of tidal flats.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
south through San Diego
County.

California brown
pelican
Pelecanus
occidentalis
californicus
Birds Delisted Delisted BLM_S-Sensitive | USFS_S-
Sensitive
Colonial nester on coastal
islands just outside the surf
line.

Nests on coastal islands of
small to moderate size which
afford immunity from attack
by ground-dwelling
predators. Roosts
communally.

None. The project site
and study area are
not coastal islands.

Henne's eucosman
moth
Pelochrista hennei Insects None None Coastal sand dunes with host Phacelia ramosissima.

Originally believed to be
endemic to the El Segundo
sand dunes of Los Angeles
County where the type
specimen was collected.

Also collected from coastal
San Luis Obispo County.

Larval foodplant is Phacelia
ramosissima var
austrolitoralis; larvae can be
found on woody stems and
upper root parts.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sand dunes.

Pacific pocket mouse Perognathus
longimembris
pacificus
Mammals Endangered None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Inhabits the narrow coastal
plains from the Mexican
border north to El Segundo,
Los Angeles County.

Seems to prefer soils of fine
alluvial sands near the
ocean, but much remains to
be learned.

None. The project site
and study area are
not within coastal
plains.
coast horned lizard Phrynosoma
blainvillii
Reptiles None None BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Frequents a wide variety of
habitats, most common in
lowlands along sandy
washes with scattered low
bushes.

Open areas for sunning,
bushes for cover, patches of
loose soil for burial, and
abundant supply of ants and
other insects.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sandy washes with
scattered low bushes.
coastal California
gnatcatcher
Polioptila
californica
californica
Birds Threatened None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Obligate, permanent
resident of coastal sage
scrub below 2500 ft in
Southern California.

Low, coastal sage scrub in
arid washes, on mesas and
slopes. Not all areas
classified as coastal sage
scrub are occupied.

None. The project site
and study area lack
coastal sage scrub.

El Segundo flower-
loving fly
Rhaphiomidas
terminatus
terminatus
Insects None None Presumed extinct but
recently discovered on
Malaga Dunes, Los Angeles
County.

Perched dunes. None. The project site
and study area lack
perched dunes.
bank swallow Riparia riparia Birds None Threatened BLM_S-Sensitive | IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Colonial nester; nests
primarily in riparian and
other lowland habitats west
of the desert.

Requires vertical banks/cliffs
with fine-textured/sandy
soils near streams, rivers,
lakes, ocean to dig nesting
hole.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
Mohave tui chub Siphateles bicolor
mohavensis
Fish Endangered Endangered AFS_EN-Endangered |
CDFW_FP-Fully Protected
Endemic to the Mojave River
basin, adapted to alkaline,
mineralized waters.

Needs deep pools, ponds, or
slough-like areas. Needs
vegetation for spawning.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Gertsch's
socalchemmis spider
Socalchemmis
gertschi
Arachnids None None Coastal scrub Known from only 2 localities in Los Angeles County:

Brentwood (type locality)
and Topanga Canyon.

None. The project site
and study area lack
coastal scrub.
southern California
saltmarsh shrew
Sorex ornatus
salicornicus
Mammals None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Coastal marshes in Los
Angeles, Orange and
Ventura counties.

Requires dense vegetation
and woody debris for cover.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
western spadefoot Spea hammondii Amphibians Proposed
Threatened
None BLM_S-Sensitive |
CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern |
IUCN_NT-Near
Threatened
Occurs primarily in grassland
habitats, but can be found in
valley-foothill hardwood
woodlands.

Vernal pools are essential for
breeding and egg-laying.

None. The project site
and study area lack
grassland habitat or
valley-foothill
hardwood woodlands.

California least tern Sternula
antillarum browni
Birds Endangered Endangered CDFW_FP-Fully Protected Nests along the coast from San Francisco Bay south to
northern Baja California.

Colonial breeder on bare or
sparsely vegetated, flat
substrates: sand beaches,
alkali flats, land fills, or
paved areas.

None. The project site
and study area are
not within a sandy
beach, alkali flat, land
fill, or paved area.

Riverside fairy
shrimp
Streptocephalus
woottoni
Crustaceans Endangered None IUCN_EN-Endangered Endemic to Western Riverside, Orange, and San
Diego counties in areas of
tectonic swales/earth slump
basins in grassland and
coastal sage scrub.

Inhabit seasonally astatic
pools filled by winter/spring
rains. Hatch in warm water
later in the season.

None. The project site
and study area lack
swales or coastal sage
scrub.

American badger Taxidea taxus Mammals None None CDFW_SSC-Species of Special Concern |
IUCN_LC-Least Concern
Most abundant in drier open
stages of most shrub, forest,
and herbaceous habitats,
with friable soils.

Needs sufficient food, friable
soils and open, uncultivated
ground. Preys on burrowing
rodents. Digs burrows.

None. The project site
and study area lack
native shrub, forest, or
herbaceous habitat
with burrowing
animals.
south coast
gartersnake
Thamnophis
sirtalis pop. 1
Reptiles None None CDFW_SSC-Species of
Special Concern
Southern California coastal
plain from Ventura County
to San Diego County, and
from sea level to about 850
m.

Marsh and upland habitats
near permanent water with
good strips of riparian
vegetation.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitats.

Dorothy's El
Segundo Dune
weevil
Trigonoscuta
dorothea
dorothea
Insects None None Coastal sand dunes in Los
Angeles County.

None. The project site
and study area lack
sand dunes.

Common Name Scientific Name Taxonomic
Group
Federal
Listing
State
Listing
Other Status General Habitat Microhabitat Potential to Occur on Study area
mimic tryonia
(=California
brackishwater snail)
Tryonia imitator Mollusks None None IUCN_DD-Data Deficient Inhabits coastal lagoons, estuaries and salt marshes,
from Sonoma County south
to San Diego County.

Found only in permanently
submerged areas in a variety
of sediment types; able to
withstand a wide range of
salinities.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.
least Bell's vireo Vireo bellii
pusillus
Birds Endangered Endangered Summer resident of
Southern California in low
riparian in vicinity of water
or in dry river bottoms;
below 2000 ft.

Nests placed along margins
of bushes or on twigs
projecting into pathways,
usually willow, Baccharis,
mesquite.

None. The project site
and study area lack
aquatic habitat.

Appendix C:

Literature Review

The Special-Status Flora and Wildlife that are subject to the legislation, policies, or assessments indicated in Appendix B (Special -Status Species) are queried for each project site using several online literature resources:

Special-Status Flora and Wildlife
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), RareFind 5 link CNDDB Maps and Data (ca.gov)

• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) link https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/

Special-Status Flora

• Online database of the California Native Plant Society, Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants link CNPS Rare Plant Inventory.

Special-Status Wildlife

• CDFW. 2023b. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships (CWHR) life history accounts and range maps link https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Life-History-and-Range

The designation of Plant Communities is dependent on the geographic area where the project site occurs. In Southern California, there are two primary vegetation community classification systems. These community classifications also indicate whether the community is considered a sensitive nat ural community by the CDFW. These two main literature sources area as follows:

• Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties California (CDFW, CNPS 2006)

• California Native Plant Society (CNPS), A Manual of California Vegetation Online link http://vegetation.cnps.org/

The potential for Wildlife Movement at a project site is assessed with several sources that cover geographic connectivity in terms of current development, established wildlife corridors, critical habitat established by the Fish and Wildlife Service, and federal, state, and local protected areas including parks, forests, and reserves. The sources queried for wildlife movement are listed below:
• California Protected Areas Database (CPAD) online link https://www.calands.org/ • GreenInfo Network, Park Information online link https://www.greeninfo.org

• Google Maps, online link https://maps.google.com

• SC Wildlands, South Coast Missing Linkages: A Wildland Network for the South Coast Ecoregion.

• US Fish and Wildlife Service Dedicated and Proposed Critical Habitat GIS Data online link https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/critical- habitat#critical-habitat-designations,-maps,-and-gis-data

The potential for Water Resources, for example wetlands, streams, rivers, marshes, on the project site was assessed with two literature sources. These water sources may be U.S. jurisdictional water resources subject to state and federal regulations or not.
• US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory Online Wetlands Mapper link https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html
• US Geological Survey. National Wetlands Inventory Online Wetlands Mapper link https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html

Appendix D:

Biologist’s Resume
Email: [email protected]
Mobile: 303-818-3632

EDUCATION
B.S., Wildlife Ecology, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, 2004

CERTIFICATIONS
Certified Wildlife Biologist, The
Wildlife Society 2014
Certified Technical Service
Provider (TSP) for Fish and
Wildlife Management Plans,
USDA NRCS 2017
Authorized Desert Tortoise
Biologist – Numerous BOs
Unmanned Aircraft System Pilot
Certification, FAA #4177603

TRAINING
Wetland Delineation Training
Course – The Wetland Institute
(2014)
Southwest Willow Flycatcher
Workshop, 2017
USGS Desert Tortoise Health
Assessment and Tissue
Collection Techniques Training,
2009

Matthew South

PRINCIPAL BIOLOGIST
Matthew South founded South Environmental in 2018. He is a certified wildlife biologist with over 18 years of professional experience providing natural resources consulting services for a wide variety of clients that include residential, commercial, government, utility, infrastructure, research, and non-profit projects. For the last 15 years, Mr. South has been an environmental consultant in southern California acting as a Wildlife Biologist and Geographic Information System (GIS) Analyst. In early 2018 he started South Environmental and has since been supporting clients in Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties.

Mr. South’s background in ecology has led to a passion for conservation planning and resources assessments for the purpose of preservation and management. The integration of the latest technologies such as advanced GIS systems, mobile computing, and drone sensing allows him to innovate new data collection, analysis, and collaboration tools for the environmental sciences that produce more accurate data and better-informed resource managers.

EXPERTISE
• Conservation and Management P lanning. Mr. South’s has extensive experience preparing mitigation and monitoring plans, habitat conservation plans, and technical biological resources management plans that are compliant with federal, state, and local regulations. Mr.

South is the only active NRCS TSP for Fish and Wildlife Plans Certified in California.
• Biological Resources Assessment. Mr. South has completed dozens of biological resources assessments throughout southern California. • Rare Plants and Arborist Services . Mr. South has surveyed and assessed thousands of native and landscaped trees in southern California. He is a certified arborist with 5 -years of tree survey experience working closely with some of the most experienced arborists in California. In addition, h e has performed hundreds of hours of rare plant surveys and habitat assessments.
• Wetland & Jurisdictional Delineations . Mr. South has conducted dozens of jurisdictional and wetland delineations per the guidelines and methods from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the state Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB).
• GIS. Mr. South is an expert at spatial data collection and analysis using ESRI mobile and desktop software products and Trimble hardware.

Matthew South Resume, Page 2

SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
St. Andrews Recreation Center Project , City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks , California (2023). South Environmental was retained to conduct a Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) and Tree Survey Report for the St. Andrew’s Recreation Center at 8701 S St. Andrew’s Place in the City of Los Angeles, California for development on one parcel (Assessor’s Identification Number [AIN] 6036 -009-900) owned by the City of Los Angeles and administered by the Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP). The parcel (study area) is in the Empowerment Congress Southwest Area Neighborhood Council in the south - central part of the City and within the South Los Angeles Community Plan Area. This report identified sensitive or protected biological resources on the parcel and indicated the regulations governing these resources. The biological resources of the parcel was assessed based on a literature review and a field site survey. The Tree Report included a description of the survey area; methods used to survey the trees involving assessment of tree structure, health, and mapping; and the results of the survey including photographs of each tree.

Bronson Canyon Playground Project, City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks , California (2023). South Environmental was retained to prepare a BRA, jurisdictional delineation, and rare plant survey for the City of Los Angeles RAP Bronson Canyon Playground Project located at 3200 Canyon Drive in the City of Los Angeles, California, for the proposed construction of a playground and access improvements including a new pedestrian walkway on a parcel owned by the City of Los Angeles in Griffith Park with the Assessor’s Identification Number [AIN] 5583-025-900. The BRA identified and assessed the potential impacts to sensitive or protected biological resources on the project site (development areas and associated work areas), indicated the regulations governing these resources, and discussed recommendations for avoiding or mitigating these impacts. The biological resources of the project site were assessed based on a literature review and a field site survey.

Bell Creek Brush Clearance Project, City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks, California (2023). South Environmental was retained to prepare an Invasive Plant Treatment and Monitoring Plan (plan) detailing the proposed actions to compensate for the temporary impacts to plant communities from the Bell Creek Brush Clearance Project under a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement. The implementation of the plan was consistent with measures included in that agreement, including measure 2.22 regarding invasive species management being conducted to ensure protection of the existing wildlife habitat. Implementation of clearance activities under the plan were designed to reduce the presence of and prevent the spread of non - native and invasive plant species within the Bell Creek area. The plan outlined monitoring and treatment methods to control the spread of non -native and invasive plant species in the project treatment areas and identified priority species and priority treatment areas to focus efforts and resources toward achieving the final success criteria. The biological resources of the parcel were assessed based on a literature review and a field site survey.

Various Locations, WEAP Trainings and Nesting Bird Surveys, City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks , California (2023) . South Environmental was retained to provide Worker Environmental Awareness and Protection (WEAP) Trainings, field survey, monitoring, and reporting, for several City of Los Angeles RAP locations. South Environmental prepared a contractor education brochure in English and Spanish that provided information on protecting nesting birds and include d pictures of sensitive plants and wildlife (particularly bats) occurring within the project area s. South Environmental also conducted environmental awareness training to Department inspectors, contractors, and subcontractors at the project site prior to the start of brush clearance activities. South Environmental also conducted as-needed nesting bird surveys, established buffer zones, and performed biological monitoring in response to the presence of active Matthew South Resume, Page 3

nests. A brief letter report to RAP was prepared to document field observations, protective measures implemented, and the overall success of the measures.

Sepulveda Basin Prescribed Burn Project, City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation, Los Angeles, California (2022). South Environmental was retained to prepare a burrowing owl survey report for use by the City of Los Angeles RAP for the proposed prescribed burning of approximately 86.49 acres of undeveloped areas on the Sepulveda Basin Apollo XI/Valley Fliers Airfield and adjacent lands. Several active burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) burrows were identified in October 2021 (survey area) during general surveys conducted to support the project in the early planning phase. This report was prepared according to Appendix C and Appendix D of the 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. The report include d a description of the project, biological setting, vegetation communities, survey methodology, and survey results that include burrowing owl behavior observations, and recommendations for project implementation that would avoid impacts to burrowing owls and active burrows.

Various Biology Reports within City of Los Angeles (2019-present). Mr. South has prepared and overseen the preparation of dozens of biological resources assessment reports within the City of Los Angeles. These reports are prepared within the range of the population of mountain lions that is the target of the listing status, in the Santa Monica Mountains, San Gabriel Mountains, Simi Hills, and Verdugo Hills. Numerous other projects have been completed that are not listed. Select Projects include:

• Baseline Road in LaVerne
• Altadena Hills Project
• 16 Beverly Park
• 64 Beverly Park
• 74 Beverly Park
• 79 Beverly Park
• Toyopa Drive
• Mapleton Drive
• Tigertail
• 680 Sarbonne
• 777 Sarbonne
• Stradella Road
• Tower Grove
• Bella Drive
• Chautauqua Boulevard
• Benedict Canyon
• Haslam Terrace
• Summitridge Drive
• Rial Lane
• Outpost Ave
• Pasquera
• Beverly Grove
• Multiple Granito Drive Projects
• Floral and Electra Drive Project
• Hillside
• Magnolia
• Swallow
• Sierra Mar
• Beverly Grove
• Stradella
• Chalon Road
• Moraga
• Brentridge
• Viewcrest
• Old Chimney Road
• Multiple Developments on
Mulholland Highway
• Berkley Hall School Project
• Charmel Lane
• Paseo Miramar Roadway Project
• Posetano-Revello Project
• Palmera
• Shadow Mountain Drive
• Astral Project
• Nofral Road Projects
• San Onofre Drive
• Crescent Drive

Email: [email protected]
Mobile: 714-330-6290

EDUCATION
B.S., Ecology, Evolution, &
Organismal Biology, California
State University, Monterey Bay,
2017

M.S., Conservation and
Restoration Science, University
of California, Irvine, 2022
SKILLS
-Scientific collection and
management of field data

-Technical writing

-Project management and
risk assessment

-Plant and animal
identification through
dichotomous keys, field
guides, and experience

-Statistical analyses through
R Studio

CERTIFICATIONS
-Wilderness First Aid
Certification

Dana Briggs Wyler

BIOLOGIST
Dana Briggs Wyler is a current environmental professional and recent graduate from University of California, Irvine's Masters in Conservation and Restoration Science program. Here, she specialized in project management, restoration design, and field monitoring in areas with sensitive species. She has extensive field data collection and r estoration experience in central and southern California learned while in school. While at UCI, she was involved with a project monitoring a fuel modification zone using native plant species to support regional biodiversity, especially Least Bell’s Vireo and California Gnatcatcher. She also participated in a restoration and monitoring program of native grasslands in Irvine aimed to provide data for community resilience to fire. More recently, she worked for Southern California Coastal Water Research Project as a toxicologist where she conducted research and assessments of southern California’s water resources.

EXPERTISE
• Field Data Collection. Dana has extensive experience collecting data in diverse terrestrial and aquatic habitats in both southern and central California.
• Biological Monitoring. Dana has diverse experience identifying wildlife species throughout the Southern California region.
• Plant Identification. Dana is proficient in identifying native, non-native, and invasive plant species throughout southern California, specifically in coastal, wetland, riparian, and chaparral.
• Technical Writing. Dana has prepared numerous biological resou rce assessments reports for the city of Los Angeles. Reports include detail- oriented descriptions of biological resources, surveys for special - status species, biological resources maps, and assess ments of potential impacts to biological resources from development. • Data Management and Analysis . Dana has significant expertise in statistical analyses as well as producing statistical figures through R Studio. She has extensive experience working with both single data sets as well as large databases.

Dana Briggs Wyler Resume, Page 2

SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
South Environmental, Monitoring Biologist. Ramona Expressway (2023-present). As a Biologist for South Environmental, Dana’s responsibilities were to provide WEAP trainings and biological monitoring for the Ramona Expressway project with First Carbon. Duties included:
• Conduct Worker Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP) training to all onsite construction personnel to describe species of concern and requirements to protect them under the Endangered Species Act and the Western Riverside Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan and mitigation measures being implemented on the project site to conserve the species of concern. • Monitoring construction activities for the duration of project activities to ensure that all practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and species :
o establish environmentally sensitive areas around sensitive biologic al resources on the project site during the construction phase.
o ensure that vegetation clearance activities limit disturbance to the smallest practical area and that construction personnel and activities do not enter environmentally sensitive areas. o perform daily pre -construction sweeps of work areas prior to initiation of daily construction activities.
o inspect open trenches, pits, and pipes or other materials within which a covered species or other sensitive species may become entrapped or hide within.
o Summarize relevant findings in a letter report that will be prepared at the completion of ground disturbing activities.

Aliso Canyon Emergency Monitoring Project Southern California Gas (2023-present). Dana is the lead monitor for a long-term project that includes the removal of sediment from catch basins where sensitive wetlands and wildlife such as coast range newt occurs. Dana is responsible for overseeing the monitoring effort, daily reports, and overall project compliance.

City of LA Recreation and Parks City Park Brush Clearance Monitoring within Riparian Areas (2023).

Dana was the primary monitor that conducted nesting bird surveys and compliance monitoring at White Point Park where brush clearance is performed annually to meet LA Fire Department requirements. The work was within and near riparian areas and wetland and riparian vegetation and wildlife were the target species. Also, Dana monitored nesting coastal California gnatcatchers at this site and protected the nest during the project.

City of Los Angeles Biological Resources Assessments (2023 – present). Dana conducts site assessments for biological resources, surveys for special -status plants and animals, maps and characterizes plant communities and wetlands/streams, and assesses potential impacts to biological resources from proposed developments. Dana has worked on the following reports:
• 41 Mar Vista Biological Resources Report in the Santa Monica Mountains Local Coastal Program (LCP) • 4801 Knob Hill Drive Biologist’s Statement of Biological Resources • 1746 Mandeville SB9 Statement of Habitat
• 2460 Sunset Plaza SB9 Statement of Habitat
• 21050 San Miguel SB9 Statement of Habitat
• 11496 Orum SB9 Statement of Habitat & California Wildlife Habitat Relationship (CWHR) Assessment Dana Briggs Wyler Resume, Page 3

• 230 Carolwood Biologist’s Statement of Biological Resources • 2383 Mandeville Canyon Biologist’s Statement of Biological Resources • 4960 Calvin SB9 Statement of Habitat
• 8152 Ellenbogen SB9 Statement of Habitat
• 10826 Tuxford Statement of Habitat
Dana has also conducted the following monitoring projects:
• Ramona Expressway monitoring biologist
• Glenoaks/ SoCal Edison compliance monitoring
• White Point nesting bird survey and monitoring
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (2021 – 2022). Dana was a laboratory and field assistant for coastal wetlands project. Dana later was promoted to r esearch technician in the toxicology department where she coordinated and implemented a water toxicology experiment that support southern California wetlands and waters.

Appendix E:

Site Plan
GSPublisherVersion 279.40.49.4

NOT FOR

CONSTRUCTION
NO. ISSUES/REVISIONS DATE
G0.02
Preposed
KEY PLAN:

STAMP:
11/28/23

PRE-DESIGN
300 E BEACH
CONSULTANT:

ALL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE

INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE
PROPERTY OF THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. COPIES

OF DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS RETAINED BY

THE CLIENT MAY BE UTILIZED ONLY FOR HIS USE AND

FOR OCCUPYING THE PROJECT FOR WHICH THEY

WERE PREPARED, AND NOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF ANY OTHER PROJECTS. ANY USE OR

REPRODUCTION OF THIS DRAWING IN WHOLE OR IN

PART BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER IS STRICTLY

PROHIBITED EXCEPT WITH WRITTEN CONSENT OF

AERO COLLECTIVE
209 S MARKET ST
323.553.2376
INGLEWOOD , CA 90301
SHEET TITLE:

SHEET NO:

CLIENT:
300 E BEACH AVE
INGLEWOOD , CA 90302
#23013

DON LEE FARMS, DONALD

GOODMAN, CLIENT ADDRESS,

CITY, STATE ZIP
PROJECT NO. #23013
PLOT DATE 11/28/23

SCALE AS SHOWN
300 BEACH - PRE DESIGN (Preposed)
11/28/2023

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
- REDEVELOP EXISTING DON LEE FARMS PRODUCTION FACILITY AND WAREHOUSE SPACES. - CREATE TWO NEW PARCELS
PARCEL 1 TO BE ZONED M-1
- ADD NEW DRY AND COLD STORAGE WAREHOUSEA ND CREATE ADDTIONAL PARKING ALONG WITH FIRETRUCK ACCESS PARCEL 2 TO BE ZONED MU-1
- CREATE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT OF 8 RESIDENTIAL TOWN HOMES AND 3,727 SF NEIGHBORHOOD

SERVING RETAIL COMMERCIAL SPACE WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING

GENERAL SUMMARY
PROJECT ADDRESS 300 E BEACH AVE, INGLEWOOD, CA 90302
PARCEL 1

PREPOSED USE LIGHT MANUFACTURING
ZONING DISTRICT M-1

SPECIFIC PLAN DOWNTOWN TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

SUBAREA NORTH STATION
MINIMUM LOT SIZE 120,000 SF (MU-1, DOWNTOWN TOD, NORTH STATION) GROSS LOT AREA 152,477 SF (PRE-DEDICATION)
(E) WAREHOUSE 57,123 SF
(N) DRY STORAGE 21,858 SF
(N) FREEZE 12,372 SF
PARKING SUMMARY (IMC TOD FIG. 4.3) REQ. PARKING PROVIDED (E) PARKING (W/ MANUFACTURING FACILITY): 57,123 SF (E) 20 (N) DRY STORAGE WAREHOUSE 21,858 SF @ 2.5 /1,000 SF 9 SPACES (N) 30 (N) FREEZE WAREHOUSE 12,372 SF @ 2.5 /1,000 SF 5 SPACES (N) 29 TOTAL 14 SPACES 79 SPACES
PARCEL 2

PROPOSED USE MIXED-USE
ZONING DISTRICT MU-1

SPECIFIC PLAN DOWNTOWN TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

SUBAREA NORTH STATION
MINIMUM LOT SIZE 120,000 SF (MU-1, DOWNTOWN TOD, NORTH STATION) GROSS LOT AREA 22,233 SF (PRE-DEDICATION)
(N) TOWNHOMES 13,044 SF
(N) GROUND FLOOR COMMERICAL 3,727 SF
TOTAL 16,771 SF
PARKING SUMMARY (IMC TOD FIG. 4.3) ` REQ. PARKING PARKING PROVIDED (N) NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL 3,727 SF @ 2/1,000 SF 2 SPACES (N) RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOMES 13,044 SF @ 1 /8 UNITS 8 SAPCES TOTAL 10 SPACES 22 SPACES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
123456789
1 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 1234567891011
1 1
1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3
12345
26'-0"
FIRE

TRUCK AISLE
20'-0"
1 G0.01
22,233 sq ft
152,477 sq ft
(E) POWER POLE

DRY STORAGE
21,858 sq ft

LOADING DOCK
1,007 sq ft

FREEZER
12,372 sq ft

LW TOWN HOME (A)
907 sq ft

LW TH (A)
907 sq ft

LW TH (B)
1,005 sq ft
TOWN HOME RES. (C)
498 sq ft
TH RES. (F)
631 sq ft
TH RES. (D)
717 sq ft
TOWN HOMES RES. (E)
590 sq ft

LW TH (A)
907 sq ft

GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIALGROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL

FIRE LANE
C L

METRO K LINE
(CRENSHAW)

EDGEWOOD ST

E IVY AVE

DOWNTOWN

INGLEWOOD STATION

E BEACH AVE
P L
P L
P L
P L
P L
P L

LA COLINA DR
C L
PL
LIGHT

MANUFACTURING
(M-1)
MIXED USE - 1
(MU-1)
PARCEL 1
PARCEL 2

LW TH (A)
907 sq ft
11'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0"
44'-0"

GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL
3,727 sq ft

FIRE TRUCK LANE

ROOF DECK
3,727 sq ft

ROOF DECK
3,516 sq ft
BEACH AVE.

LW TOWN HOME (A)
907 sq ft

LW TOWN HOME (A)
907 sq ft
TOWN HOME RES. (C)
498 sq ft
TOWN HOME RES. (C)
498 sq ft
TOWN HOME RES. (C)
498 sq ft
TOWN HOMES RES. (E)
590 sq ft
TOWN HOMES RES. (E)
590 sq ft
TOWN HOMES RES. (E)
590 sq ft

METRO LINE
PL PL
OPEN SPACE - 7243 SF
RESIDENTIAL - 16,771 SF
COMMERCIAL - 3,727 SF
SCALE: 1:512 12nd Floor Plan (Proposed)
SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 3Building Section A
300 BEACH
338 EAST BEACH
3 3 8 E A S T B E A C H A V E I N G L E W O O D C A 9 0 3 0 2

SIT E P L A N
3 5 % D E N S I T Y B O N U S
A0.00
DATE : 5.08.2019

L E G E N D

U N I T S

C O M M U N I T Y R O O M

E L E V A T O R

R O O F D E C K

S T A I R S

P O O L
15'
13'
272'-1"
13'
40'
298'-1"
215'-5"
5"
14'-7"
245'-11"
35'50'
15'
21'-1"
25'-8"
15'
(E) FIRE HYDRANT
(E) FIRE HYDRANT
(E) FIRE HYDRANT
(E) ALLEY
E. BEACH AVE.

LA COLINA DR.
(E) RIGHT OF
WAY

SIDEYARD

SETBACK

SIDEYARD

SETBACK

REAR YARD

SETBACK
(E) METRO

RAILWAY
335 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
321 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
351 E. BEACH
AVE.
(1-STORY)347 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
355 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
330 E. BEACH
AVE.
(1-STORY)
334 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
374 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
375 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
337 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
341 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
362 E.

BEACH
AVE.
(1-STORY)
367 LA
COLINA DR.
(2-STORY)
373 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
377 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
381 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
375 LA
COLINA DR.
(1-STORY)
366 E.

BEACH AVE.
(1-STORY)
POOL
ROOF
DECK
ROOF
DECK
ROOF
DECK
ROOF
DECK

COMMUNITY
ROOM
(E) RIGHT OF
WAY

FRONT YARD

SETBACK
96' DIAMETER
FIRE DEPT. TURN
AROUND

COURTYARD
1 A2.00
1 A2.00
2 A2.00
2 A2.00
SCALE: 1/64" = 1'-0" 1SITE PLAN
N

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D
Appendix
PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.

May 2025 | Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program
State Clearinghouse No. 2016041011

BEACH AVENUE/LA COLINA DRIVE

REZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
for City of Inglewood
Prepared for:

City of Inglewood
Contact: Bernard McCrumby Jr., Planning Manager
Development Services Department
One Manchester Boulevard
Inglewood, California 90301

Prepared by:

PlaceWorks
Contact: Alen Estrada-Rodas, Senior Associate
700 Flower Street
Los Angeles, California 90017
213.623.1443
[email protected]
www.placeworks.com

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

May 2025 Page 1-1
Section Page

1. MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................... 1-1

1.1 CATEGORIZED MITIGATION MEASURES/MATRIX ...................................................................... 1-1

List of Tables
Table Page
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements ............................................................................................. 1-3

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

1. Introduction

Page 1 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

May 2025 Page 1-1

1. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

1.1 CATEGORIZED MITIGATION MEASURES/MATRIX
Project-specific mitigation measures have been categorized in matrix format, as shown in Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring Requirements. The mitigation measures were included in the Certified EIR, with minor modifications made in the Adopted Addendum. The matrix identifies the environmental factor, specific mitigation measures, schedule, and responsible monitor. The mitigation matrix will serve as the basis for scheduling the implementation of and compliance with all mitigation measures.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

Page 1 ends

This page intentionally left blank.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
May 2025 Page 1-3
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)

5.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.D-1 Prior to issuance of any permits for projects or demolition activities that would physically affect any listed or potentially eligible historic buildings, structures, or features aged 50 years old or older or negatively affect their historic setting, a cultural resource professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History shall be retained to determine of the proposed activities would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The investigation shall include, as determined appropriate by the cultural resource professional and City of Inglewood, the appropriate archival research, including, if necessary, a reco rd search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and a pedestrian survey of the proposed project or activity area to determine if any significant historic period resources would Be adversely affected by the proposed action. The results of the investigation shall be documented in a technical report or memorandum that identifies and evaluates any historical resources within the project area and includes recommendations and methods for eliminating or reducing impacts on historical resources. Methods would include, but are not limited to, written and photographic recordation of the resource in accordance with the level of Historical American Building Survey (HBAS) documentation that is appropriate to the significance (local, state, national) of the resource. Methods determined to reduce historic impacts, pursuant to the Secretary of the Interiors standards to a less than significant level shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval. In addition, a qualified cultural resource professional shall monitor development activities to ensure that recommended site -specific historic related design measures are followed during construction.

Implementation: A qualified cultural resource professional shall be retained to identify potential historic resources on any site -specific development project containing one or more buildings more than 50 years old. Designers and contractors shall comply with the recom mended historic design standards and other measures identified by the historic evaluation. In addition, the qualified cultural resource professional shall monitor development activities to ensure that Applicant/Developer and
Qualified Cultural
Resource Professional
Prior to the issuance
of any building or
demolition permits
City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division
Completed in March
2024 with preparation of
the Cultural Resources
Technical Report,
Prepared by South
Environmental

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

Page 1 ends

Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)
recommended site-specific historic related design measures are followed during construction. The historic recommendations shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval. The City Planning Division shall re view all historic assessment reports and the design features of development projects prior to approval of any demolition, grading, or construction permit.

4.D-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or action that would permit site disturbance (whichever occurs first), the applicant/developer shall provide written evidence to the City Planning Division that a qualified archaeologist has been retained to re spond on an as -needed basis to address unanticipated archaeological discoveries and any resulting archaeological requirements shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and also included as conditions of approval. In the event that archaeol ogical materials, including stone tools, shells, bones, glass shards, ceramics, or other materials older than 50 years in age, are encountered during ground -disturbing activities, work within 100 feet in the immediate vicinity of the resource shall cease until a qualified archaeologist has assessed the discovery and appropriate treatment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 is determined.

If archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeologist shall determine, in consultation with the City and any local Native American groups expressing interest following notification by the City, appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate mitigation. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 (b)(3), preservation in place shall be the preferred means to avoid impacts to archaeological resources qualifying as historical resources. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 (b)(3)(C), if it is demonstrated that resources cannot be avoided, the qualified archaeologist shall develop additional treatment measures, such as data recovery or other appropriate measures, in consultation with the implementing agency and any local Native Americ an representatives expressing interest in prehistoric or tribal resources. If an archaeological site does not qualify as an historical resource but meets the criteria for a unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2, then the site shall b e treated in accordance with the provisions of Section 21083.2.

Applicant/Developer and
Qualified Archaeologist

Prior to the issuance
of any grading permits

City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
May 2025 Page 1-5
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)

Implementation: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the applicant/developer to respond on an as -needed basis to address unanticipated archaeological discoveries. In addition, any archaeological requirements established by the archaeologist evaluating the discovery shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval.

5.6 AIR QUALITY

4.F-2a All on-site vehicles and equipment used in construction that has horsepower equal to or greater than 50 shall meet, at a minimum, USEPA Tier IV interim-engine certification requirements. If Tier IV final equipment is not available, the contractor may apply other available technologies available for construction equipment such that it would achieve a comparable reduction in NO X and PM emissions comparable to that of Tier IV construction equipment. Where alternatives to USEPA Tier IV are utilized, the contrac tor shall be required to show evidence to the City that these alternative technologies would achieve comparable emissions reductions. Certifications or alternative reduction strategies shall be required prior to receiving a construction permit.

Implementation: Conditions of approval for site -specific development shall include the requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.F -2a to be incorporated into construction contract documents. These contract documents shall be reviewed by the City prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and construction contracts.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction Manager

Prior to the issuance
of demolition, grading,
and construction
contracts

City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.F-2b All active construction areas shall be watered at least three times daily to reduce fugitive dust emissions from grading, excavation, and other ground preparation.

Watering shall be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site.

Increased watering frequency may be necessary whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour. Reclaimed water shall be used whenever it is available.

Implementation: Conditions of approval for site -specific development shall include the requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.F -2b to be incorporated into Applicant/Developer and
Construction Manager
Prior to the issuance
of demolition, grading,
and construction
contracts.

City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

Page 1 ends

Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)
construction contract documents. These contract documents shall be reviewed by the City prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and construction contracts.

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
May 2025 Page 1-7
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)

5.9. NOISE

4.I-1 Each site-specific development project that includes residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour of LAX or within 500 feet of the Metro line shall be designed to meet the City's interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL, as well as meet exterior standards for the applicable zoning designation in outdoor areas, as provided by Inglewood Municipal Code, Section 5-30. Measures may include, but are not limited to, the erection of noise walls, glass noise barriers, double pane windows, insulated doors, roofing, and siding, and landscaping.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
Prior to the submittal
of development
applications.

City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-2a Use of construction vibratory rollers, hoe rams, large bulldozers, loaded trucks, and caisson drills on construction sites shall be prohibited within 45 feet of existing residential structures and 35 feet of institutional structures. Instead, small rubber- tired bulldozers shall be used within this area during demolition and/or grading operations to reduce vibration effects.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-2b The operation of jackhammers shall be prohibited within 25 feet of existing residential structures and 20 feet of institutional structures.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4a All noise-producing construction and demolition activities shall be restricted to the hours from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm on weekdays and on Saturdays between the hours of 9:00 am and 5:00 pm. In order to reduce potential annoyance to persons using the nearby church and cemetery facilities, no noise -producing construction and demolition activities shall take place on Sundays and holidays.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4b Stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors nearest the project site.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood
Planning Division

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

Page 1 ends

Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)

4.I-4c Internal combustion engine-driven equipment shall be equipped with appropriate sound muffling devices, which are properly maintained and used at all times such equipment is in operation.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4d Quiet models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources shall be employed where such technology is commercially available.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4e On-site equipment staging areas shall be located so as to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors nearest the project site during construction.

Applicant/Developer and
Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4f Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines shall be prohibited.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During construction City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

4.I-4g During demolition and site preparation phases of construction, the temporary sound barriers a minimum of 8 feet in height shall be placed around the property boundary project property lines to block the and line of sight between on -site stationary construction equipment and any adjacent residential or school uses.

These temporary sound barriers shall have a minimum Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 32 STC.

Applicant/Developer and
Construction manager
During demolition and
site preparation
phases of construction
City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

5.12 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
May 2025 Page 1-9

4.D-3 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or action that would permit site disturbance in native ground (below soils that were disturbed by previous development activities), (whichever occurs first, the applicant/developer shall provide written evidenc e to the City Planning Division that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to monitor all ground disturbing activities for paleontological discoveries, and the paleontological requirements shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval.

In the event that paleontological resources are encountered during grading and construction operations, all construction activities shall be halted or redirected to provide for a qualified paleontologist to assess the find for significance and, if necessary, develop a paleontological resources impact mitigation plan (PRIMP) for the review and approval by the City prior to resuming construction activities.

Thus, a paleontological mitigation plan would be implemented for the Modified Project, as described below.

Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Plan

Pre-Construction Personnel Training

Prior to the beginning of any ground disturbing activities, a Society of Vertebrate Paleontology-qualified paleontologist shall conduct a Paleontological Awareness Training Program for all personnel. The program shall include descriptions of potential fossil resources that may be encountered in the project site during earth- moving activities, a discussion of the pertinent laws and regulations relating to said paleontological resources in the area, and a review of the steps that should be taken if a fossil d iscovery is made. The program should be developed by the qualified paleontologist and delivered simultaneously with any other sensitivity trainings, safety reviews and other matters of concern.

Paleontological Monitoring

Due to the high potential for the discovery of scientifically significant fossil materials during ground disturbance activities, full -time paleontological resource monitoring shall be performed by a paleontological monitor under the direction of the qualified paleontologist. Monitoring shall involve the visual inspection of all earth-moving activities, graded areas, trench sidewalls and spoils piles. If the project paleontologist determines that full -time monitoring is no longer required Applicant/Developer and
Qualified Paleontologist

Prior to the issuance
of
demolition/grading/buil
ding permits.

City of Inglewood,
Development Services
Department – Planning
Division

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

Page 1 ends

based on the geologic conditions of the site, the paleontologist may recommend that monitoring be reduced or stopped entirely.

Paleontological monitors should also attempt to record the stratigraphy of the rock that is exposed by construction activities, whether or not fossils were discovered within the exposed sediments.

Fossil Discoveries

Should fossil materials be discovered, either by the paleontological monitor or the construction field crew, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert construction activities and equipment in a 50-foot radius around the site to further assess the discovery. Should the fossils be determined to be of scientific significance, they should be collected as soon as possible.

Standard field procedures should be used in the collection of the fossils to ensure that no scientific data is lost in the recovery process. Fossil specimens discovered during construction can typically be collected by a single qualified paleontologist within a single day, usually in less than one hour. Occasionally, more extensive efforts may be required to properly salvage a fossil specimen, particularly for larger skeletal elements, entire skeletons or large collections of smaller fossil remains.

Should this be the case, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt, divert, or redirect construction activities to ensure that the fossil can be salvaged in a safe and timely manner. The paleontological monitor should work directly with the field crew to clearly communicate their intentions and determine the best way to safely pro tect and recover the fossils, with minimal disruption to construction efforts.

Fossil Preparation and Curation

An accredited local repository (typically a museum) should be identified for the long-term storage and care of any fossil specimens discovered during paleontological monitoring. Upon completion of the project, collected fossil specimens should be prepared to the standards required by the repository that has agreed to take them and delivered as soon as is feasible upon completion of the preparatory work. Preparatory work should include the removal of excess

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
May 2025 Page 1-11
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring Requirements
Mitigation Measure Responsibility for
Implementation Timing Responsibility for
Monitoring
Monitor
(Signature Required)
(Date of Compliance)
sedimentary matrix, as well as any steps necessary for the repair and stabilization of the specimens. The specimens should be identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, and copies of all field notes and information related to the fossil should be k ept and provided to the repository as well upon delivery of the specimen. The cost of curation will be determined by the repository, and the costs of preparation and curation will be the responsibility of the project owner.

Final Paleontological Mitigation Report

Upon completion of paleontological monitoring, the qualified paleontologist shall prepare a final monitoring and mitigation report to be submitted to all interested parties. This report should detail the monitoring activities and methods used during construction, a description of the construction activities that took place, stratigraphic sections created during monitoring, a review of any fossils discovered (whether or not they were deemed significant and collected), a detailed description of the fossils th at were collected including their scientific significance, and information relating to the repository where the fossils will be curated.

Implementation: A qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the applicant/developer to be onsite to monitor all ground -disturbing activities to address unanticipated paleontological discoveries. In addition, the paleontological requirements shall be incorporated into all development plans submitted and included as conditions of approval.

5.16 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure 4.D-2 shall apply. See Mitigation Measure

4.D-2
See Mitigation
Measure 4.D-2
See Mitigation Measure

4.D-2

D O W N T O W N I N G L E W O O D A N D F A I R V I E W H E I G H T S E I R A D D E N D U M M M R P

C I T Y O F I N G L E W O O D

2. Mitigation Monitoring Requirements

May 2025 Page 1-12
This page intentionally left blank

Inglewood City CouncilJuly 8, 2025

Inglewood City Council
July 8, 2025