Draft Final IS-MND (available in the City Clerk's Reading File) — Santa Clarita City Council, July 12, 2022 (part 2 of 2)

List of Special Vascular Plants, Bryophytes, and Lichens, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 2020;
National Park Service. 1998. National Park Service Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area Land Protection Plan, Parkwide GIS Analysis.

MacArthur, R. M. and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press: Princeton, New Jersey.

Penrod, K., C. Cabanero, P. Beier, C. Luke, W. Spencer, E. Rubin, R. Sauvajot, S. Riley, and D.

Kamradt. 2006. South Coast Missing Linkages Project: A Linkage Design for the Santa MonicaSierra Madre Connection. Produced by South Coast Wildlands, Idyllwild, CA. www.scwildlands.org, in cooperation with National Park Service, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, California State Parks, and The Nature Conservancy.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. M. Evens, A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed., California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California, 2009.

Soulé, M. E. 1987. Viable Populations for Conservation. Sinaur Associates Inc., Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Special Animals, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 2020.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS Critical Habitat Mapper for Threatened and Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, data as of May 24, 2020.

Wasner, A. 2006. Soil Survey of Santa Monica Mountains Natural Recreation Area, California.

Natural Resources Conservation Service.

Appendix 1
Site Plans

2)2,1,&+(6
Appendix 2
Plant Species Observed
October 8 & 24, 2020
Eternal Valley Cemetery Plant Species Observed
GROUP
Family
Scientific Name Common Name

FLOWERING PLANTS -- DICOTS
Adoxaceae
Sambucus nigra ssp. caerulea blue elderberry
Anacardiaceae
Rhus ovata sugar bush
Apocynaceae
Asclepias fascicularis narrow-leaf milkweed
Asteraceae
Ambrosia acanthicarpa annual bursage
Artemisia californica California sagebrush
Baccharis pilularis Coyotebush
Baccharis salicifolia mulefat
*Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle
*Centauria melitensis tocalote
*Cirsium vulgare bull thistle
Encelia farinose Brittlebush
Ericameria nauseosa rubber rabbitbrush
*Erigeron bonariensis flax-leaved horseweed
Heterotheca grandiflora telegraph weed
Malacothrix saxatilis var. tenuifolia cliff aster
Pseudognaphalium californicum California everlasting
*Sonchus oleraceus common sow-thistle
Stephanomeria virgata rod wirelettuce
*Taraxacum officinale common dandelion
Boraginaceae
Amsinckia intermedia common fiddleneck
Eriodictyon crassifolium thick leaved yerba santa
Phacelia cicutaria caterpillar phacelia
Brassicaceae
*Hirschfeldia incana short-pod mustard
Chenopodiaceae
*Salsola australis Russian thistle
Euphorbiaceae
*Euphorbia maculate spotted spurge
Fabaceae
Acmispon glaber deerweed
Acmispon micranthus small flowered lotus
Lupinus sp. lupine species
Grossulariaceae
Ribes aureum golden currant
Lamiaceae
*Marrubium vulgare white horehound
Salvia mellifera black sage
Phrymaceae
Diplacus aurantiacus bush monkeyflower
Polygonaceae
GROUP
Family
Scientific Name Common Name
Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat
Rhamnaceae
Ceanothus crassifolius Hoaryleaf ceanothus
Rosaceae
Adenostoma fasciculata chamise
Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon
Solanaceae
*Lycopersicon esculentum tomato
*Nicotiana glauca tree tobacco
FLOWERING PLANTS Ȃ MONOCOTS
Agavaceae
Hesperoyucca whipplei chaparral yucca
Poaceae
*Avena barbata slender wild oat
*Bromus madritensis rubens red brome
*Bromus tectorum cheat grass
Appendix 3
Wildlife Species Observed
October 8 & 24, 2020
Vertebrate Species Observed, Detected or Expected to Occur on the Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Area
Scientific Name Common Name

REPTILES
Iguanidae Iguanid Lizards
Sceloporus occidentalis Western fence lizard
Uta stansburiana Side-blotched lizard
Viperidae Viper Snakes
Crotalus oreganus helleri Southern pacific rattlesnake
BIRDS
Cathartidae New World Vultures
Cathartes aura Turkey vulture
Sylviidae Sylviid Warblers
Chamaea fasciata Wrentit
Accipitridae Hawks
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk
Phasianidae Grouse, Pheasants & Quails
Callipepla californica California Quail
Charadrilidae Lapwings and Plovers
Charadrius vociferus Killdeer
Cuculidae Cuckoos, Roadrunners, and Anis
Geococcyx californicus Greater roadrunner
Columbidae Pigeons & Doves
Zenaida macroura Mourning dove
Apodidae Swifts
Aeronautes saxatalis White-throated swift
Trochilidae Hummingbirds
Calypte anna Anna's hummingbird
Selasphorus sasin $OOHQ¶VKXPPLQJELUG
Passerellidae New World Sparrows
Zonotrichia leucophrys White-crowned sparrow
Parulidae Wood-warblers
Setophaga coronate Yellow-rumped warbler
Picidae Woodpeckers
Colaptes auratus Northern flicker
Tyrannidae Tyrant Flycatchers
Sayornis saya Say's phoebe
Corvidae Jays & Crows
Aphelocoma californica California Scrub-jay
Corvus brachyrhynchos American crow
Corvus corax Common raven
Aegithalidae Bushtits
Psaltriparus minimus Bushtit
Troglodytidae Wrens
Thryomanes bewickii Bewick's wren
Mimidae Thrashers
Mimus polyglottos Northern mockingbird
Toxostoma redivivum California thrasher
Emberizidae Emberizids
Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spotted towhee
Pipilo crissalis California towhee
Fringillidae Finches
Carpodacus mexicanus House finch
Carduelis psaltria Lesser goldfinch
Spinus lawrencei /DZUHQFH¶VJROGILQFK

MAMMALS
Cervidae Hoofed Mammals
Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer
Cricetidae New World Rats and Mice
Neotoma sp. woodrat sp.

Leporidae Hares & Rabbits
Sylvilagus audubonii Desert cottontail
Sciuridae Squirrels
Spermophilus beecheyi California ground squirrel
Sciurus niger* Eastern fox squirrel
Canidae Wolves & Foxes
Canis familiaris* Domestic (feral) dog
Canis latrans Coyote
KEY:
* Non-native or introduced species
Appendix 4
Special Status Plant Species Potential for Occurrence
Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Appendix 4
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Ȃȱ¡¢
Acanthoscyphus parishii var. parishii
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, Lower montane
coniferous forest. Sandy or gravelly
1220Ȯ2600m
AH
June-September
Not expected [Project site is below
known elevation range for the
species and not observed during
site survey.]
Ȃȱ-vetch
Astragalus brauntonii
FE -- 1B.1 Chaparral, coastal scrub valley and
foothill grassland/ recent burns or
disturbed areas, usually sandstone
with carbonate layers
4Ȯ640m
PH
JanuaryȮAugust
Low potential [LA, Orange,
Ventura counties - occurrences in
the Simi Hills and Santa Monica
Mountains. This species lives up to
3 yrs following fire (USFWS Jan
1997).]
Ȃȱ¢
Berberis [Mahonia] nevinii
FE CE 1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, riparian scrub/ sandy
or gravelly
274Ȯ825m
S (e)
MarchȮJune
Low potential [Marginal habitat
present on site. Fewer than 1000
plants remaining as of 1992.]
Catalina mariposa lily
Calochortus catalinae
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland.
15Ȯ700m
PH(b)
FebruaryȮJune
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
club-haired mariposa lily
Calochortus clavatus var. clavatus
-- -- 4.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland.
75Ȯ1300m
PH(b)
MarchȮJune
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys. Known from nine
occurrences.]
Slender mariposa lily
Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis
-- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and
foothill grassland
320Ȯ1000m
PH(b)
MarchȮJune
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys. Known from nine
occurrences.]
late-flowered mariposa lily
Calochortus fimbriatus
-- -- 1B.3 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
riparian woodland.
275Ȯ1905m
PH(b)
June-August
Not expected [No habitat exists on
site. No plants were observed
during site surveys. Known from
nine occurrences.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Ȃȱȱ¢
Calochortus palmeri var. palmeri
-- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, lower montane
coniferous forest, meadows and
seeps/ mesic.
1000Ȯ2390m
PH (b)
AprilȮJuly
Not expected [No habitat exists on
site. No plants were observed
during site surveys. Known from
Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside,
Santa Barbara, San Bernardno, San
Luis Obispo, and Ventura
counties.]
Ȃȱȱ¢
Calochortus plummerae
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodlands,
coastal scrub, Lower montane
coniferous forests, valley and
foothill grassland/ granitic, rocky.
100Ȯ1700m
PH (b)
MayȮJuly
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys. Known from Los
Angeles, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and Ventura Counties.

Less common at higher
elevations.]
Ȃȱ-glory
Calystegia peirsonii
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, chenopod scrub,
cismontane woodland, coastal scrub,
lower montane coniferous forest,
valley and foothill grassland.
30Ȯ1500m
PH (r)
AprilȮJune
Low potential [Occurs from the
northern base of the San Gabriel
Mountains to the Castaic Lagoon
region. The USFWS conducted a
status review of this species in
1993 in which they determined
that federal listing was not
warranted.]
White pygmy poppy
Canbya candida
-- -- 4.2 Joshua tree woodland, Mojavean
desert scrub, pinyon and juniper
woodland/ gravelly, sandy, granitic.
600Ȯ1460m
AH
MarchȮJune
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site. Known from Kern,
Los Angeles, and San Bernardino
Counties.]
Mt. Gleason paintbrush
Castilleja gleasoni
-- CR 1B.2 Chaparral, Lower montane
coniferous forest, Pinyon and
juniper woodland
665Ȯ2170m
PH (p)
MayȮSeptember
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site. Occurrences in Los
Angeles county near marsh land at
lower elevation.]
Southern tarplant
Centromadia parryi ssp. australis
-- -- 1B.1 Marshes and swamps (margins),
valley and foothill grassland
(vernally mesic), vernal pools.
0Ȯ480m
AH
MayȮNovember
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site. Occurrences in Los
Angeles county near marsh land at
lower elevation.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Island mountain-mahogany
Cercocarpus betuloides var. blancheae
-- -- 4.3 Closed cone coniferous forest,
chaparral
30-600m
PE(s)
February-May
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
San Fernando Valley spineflower
Chorizanthe parryi ssp. fernandina
FC CE 1B.1 Coastal scub (sandy), valley and
foodhill grassland.
150Ȯ1220m
AH
AprilȮJuly
Low Potential [Historically
reported in the Newhall/Santa
Clarita/Chatsworth area in. It is
believed to have been extirpated
from the area by urbanization
CNDDB, 1995. Apparently always
rare, this plant has not been
collected since 1940, and most
historic records date from before
1920. The USFWS conducted a
status review of this taxon in 1993
in which they determined that
federal listing was not warranted.]
Parry's spineflower
Chorizanthe parryi ssp. parryi
-- -- 1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland/ sandy or roacky,
openings.
275Ȯ1220m
AH
AprilȮJune
Not expected [Known from about
20 occurrences. Often
misidentified as c. procumbens.]
monkey-flower savory
Clinopodium mimuloides
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, North Coast coniferous
forest
305Ȯ1800m
PH
June-October
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
small-flowered morning glory
Convolvulus simulans
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral (openings), Coastal scrub,
Valley and foothill grassland
30Ȯ740m
AH
March-July
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
Santa Susana tarplant
Deinandra minthornii
-- CR 1B.2 Chaparral, coastal scrub/ rocky. 280Ȯ760m
S (d)
JulyȮNovember
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Paniculate tarplant
Deinandra paniculata
-- -- 4.2 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, vernal pools. Usually
vernal mesic
25-950m
AH
MarchȮNovember
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Mt. Pinos larkspur
Delphinium parryi ssp. purpureum
-- -- 4.3 Chaparral, Mojavean dester scrub,
pinyon and juniper woodland
1000-2600m
PH
MayȮJune
Not expected [Project site is below
known elevation range for the
species and not observed during
site survey.]
Slender-horned spineflower
Dodecahema leptoceras
FE CE 1B.1 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub (alluvial fan)/ sandy
200Ȯ760m
AH
AprilȮJune
Low Potential [It has recently been
observed along six drainages:

Lytle Creek, Santa Ana River,
Temescal Creek, San Jacinto River,
Bee Canyon, and Big Tujunga
Wash. Historic records exist from
the Newhall region, but it has not
been found in the area for years
and is believed to have been
extirpated by urbanization.]
Ȃȱ¢
Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae
-- -- 1B.1 Coastal bluff scrub, Chaparral,
Coastal scrub, Valley and foothill
grassland
5-450m
PH
April-June
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Agoura Hills dudleya
Dudleya cymosa ssp. agourensis
-- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, Cismontane woodland 200-500m
PH
May-June
Not expected [ no suitable habitat
on site.]
many-stemmed dudleya
Dudleya multicaulis
-- -- 1B.1 Chaparral, Coastal scrub, Valley and
foothill grassland
15-790m
PH
April-July
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Palmer's grapplinghook
Harpagonella palmeri
-- -- 4.2 Coastal scrub, chaparral, valley and
foothill grassland/ clay
20Ȯ955m
AH
MarchȮMay
Low potential [Known from San
Diego and San Bernadino counties.

Local occurrences from Santa
Clara River.]
Newhall sunflower
Helianthus inexpectatus
-- -- 1B.1 Marshes and swamps, riparian
woodland
305-305m
PH(r)
Aug-Oct
Not expected [ no suitable habitat
on site.]
vernal barley
Hordeum intercedens
-- -- 3.2 Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub, Valley
and foothill grassland (saline flats
and depressions), Vernal pools
5-1000m
AH
MarchȮJune
Low potential [Known from San
Diego and San Bernadino counties.

Local occurrences from Santa
Clara River.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Mesa horkelia
Horkelia cuneata var. puberula
-- -- 1B.1 Sandy or gravelly. Chaparral
(maritime), Cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub.
70Ȯ810 M
PH
FebȮSept
Not expected [Most occurrences in
coastal foothills of Los Angeles
county. Marginal habitat present
on site.]
¢Ȃȱ
Horkelia cuneate var. puberula
-- -- 4.3 Lower montane coniferous forest,
pinyon and juniper woodland,
upper montane coniferous forest
1370-2895m
PH
April-August
Not expected [Project site is below
known elevation range for the
species and not observed during
site survey.]
Southern California black walnut
Juglans californica var. californica
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub/ alluvial
50Ȯ900m
T (d)
MarchȮAugust
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Ȃȱ
Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri
-- -- 1B.1 Marshes and swamps (coastal salt),
Playas, Vernal pools.
1-1220m
AH
February-June
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
Robinson's pepper-grass
Lepidium virginicum var. robinsonii
-- -- 4.3 Chaparral, coastal scrub. 1Ȯ885m
AH
JanuaryȮJuly
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
Ocellated Humboldt lily
Lilium humboldtii ssp. ocellatum
-- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, lower montane
coniferous forest
30-1800m
PH(b)
March-August
Low potential [Known occurrences
in coastal foothill region of Los
Angeles county. Not observed
during site visits.]
¢Ȃȱȱ
Lupinus paynei
-- -- 1B.1 Coastal scrub, riparian scrub, valley
and foothill woodland
50Ȯ525m
S
MarchȮJuly
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Ȃȱȱ
Malacothamnus davidsonii
-- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, riparian woodland
10Ȯ300m
S (d)
June-January
Not expected [Project site is above
known elevation range for the
species and not observed during
site survey.]
Spreading navarretia
Navarretia fossalis
FT -- 1B.1 Chenopod scrub, Marshes and
swamps (assorted shallow
freshwater), playas, vernal pools.
30Ȯ655m
AH
AprilȮJune
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Ojai navarretia
Navarretia ojaiensis
- -- 1B.1 Chaparral (openings), Coastal scrub
(openings), Valley and foothill
grassland.
275-620m
AH
May-July
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Piute Mountains navarretia
Navarretia setiloba
-- -- 1B.1 Cismontane woodland, pinyon and
juniper woodland, valley and
foothill grassland
285-2100m
AH
AprilȮJuly
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
chaparral nolina
Nolina cismontana
- -- 1B.2 Chaparral, Coastal scrub 140-1275m
S (e)
March-July
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Short-joint beavertail
Opuntia basilaris var. brachyclada
-- -- 1B.1 Chaparral, Joshua tree woodland,
Mojavean desert scrub, pinyon and
juniper woodland.
425Ȯ1800
PC
AprilȮAugust
Not expected [no suitable habitat
on site.]
California Orcutt grass
Orcuttia californica
FE CE 1B.1 Vernal pools. 15Ȯ660m
AH
AprilȮAugust
Not expected [no suitable habitat
on site.]

¢Ȃȱ
Phacelia hubbyi
-- -- 4.2 Chaparral., coastal scrub, valley and
foothill woodland
0-1000m
AH
April-July
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Mojave phacelia
Phacelia mohavensis
-- -- 4.2 Cismontane woodland, lower
montane coniferous forest, meadows
and seeps
1400-2500m
AH
April-August
Not expected [no suitable habitat
found on site.]
White rabbit-tobacco
Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum
-- -- 2B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub, riparian woodland
0-2100m
PH
July-December
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Chaparral ragwort
Senecio aphanactis
-- -- 2B.2 Chaparral, cismontane woodland,
coastal scrub/ alk
15Ȯ800m
AH
JanuaryȮMay
Moderate potential [Marginal
habitat exists on site and nearby.

No plants were observed during
site surveys.]
Appendix 4 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Plant Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name
Scientific Name
Status
Habitat Requirements
Elevation Range,
Life Form, and
Federal State CNPS Flowering Period Potential Occurrence Ȃȱ
Stylocline masonii
- -- 1B.1 Chenopod scrub, Pinyon and
juniper woodland.
100-1200m
AH
March-May
Not expected [No suitable habitat
present on site.]
Ȃȱ
Symphyotrichum greatae
-- -- 1B.3 Broadleafed upland forest,
chaparral, cismontane woodland,
lower montane coniferous forest,
riparian woodland
300-2010m
PH(r)
June-October
Not expected [no suitable habitat
on site and not known from area.]
All status listings are from the July 2020 CNPS database KEY:

Federal
FE: Federally Endangered
CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1A: Plants presumed extirpated in
California and either rare or extinct
elswhere
1B: Plants rare, threatened, or
endangered in California and elsewhere
2A: Plants presumed extirpated in
California, but common elsewhere
2B: Plants rare, threatened, or
endangered in California, but more
common elsewhere
3: Plants about which more information
is needed
4: plants of limited distribution ± a watch
list
State
CE: State Endangered
Threat Ranks

0.1 Seriously threatened in California (over 80% o
foccurrences threatened/high degree and
immediacy of threat)

0.2 Moderately threatened in California (20-80% of
occurrences threatened/moderate degree and
immediacy of threat)

0.3 Not very threatened in California (less than 20%
of occurrences threatened/low degree and
immediacy of threat or no current threats
known)
LIFE FORM KEY:

AH: Annual Herb (b): bulb
AG: Annual Grass (d): deciduous
PG: Perennial Grass (e): evergreen
PH: Perennial Herb (p): parasitic
PC: Perennial Cactus (r):
rhizomatous
S: Shrub (s): stoloniferous
Ss: Subshrub *
T: Tree
Appendix 5
Special Status Plant Species Potential for Occurrence
Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Appendix 5
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site

INVERTEBRATES
California floater (mussel)
Anodonta californiensis
-- sa Lakes, small rivers Not expected. This species requires perennial source of water and drainage in
project site is often dry. No current
records in vicinity.

Vernal pool fairy shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
FT -- Vernal pools with clear
to tea-colored water in
grass or mud-bottomed
swales.

Not expected. No suitable habitat on site.

Monarch butterfly (wintering sites)
Danaus plexippus
-- sa Winter roost sites
located in windprotected tree groves
(gum trees, Monterey
pine, and cypress
trees), with nectar and
water sources nearby.

Not expected. No suitable roosting
habitat on site.

Quino checkerspot butterfly
Euphydryas editha quino [wrighti]
FE -- Open sage scrub &
grasslands containing
the host plant species
Plantago erecta.

Not expected. No suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
&URWFK¶V bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
-- CE Grassland and scrub Not expected. No suitable habitat on site.

FISHES
Arroyo chub
Gila orcutti
-- SSC Slow-moving or
backwater sections of
warm to cool streams
with mud or sand
substrates.

Not expected; does not occur in this
portion of the Santa Clara River
watershed.

Santa Ana speckled dace
Rhinichthys osculus ssp. 3
-- SSC Permanent flowing
streams with summer
water temps of 17-
20C.

Not expected; limited to headwaters of
Santa Ana and San Gabriel Rivers.

Recently extirpated from Los Angeles
River drainage.

Santa Ana sucker
Catastomus santaanae
FT -- Occupies small-to
medium-sized
perennial streams with
water ranging in depth
from a few centimeters
to a meter or more.

Not expected; does not occur in this
portion of the Santa Clara River
watershed.

Steelhead rainbow trout (So. CA DPS)
Oncorhynchus mykiss
FE -- Cold fresh water
draining to ocean
Not expected; does not occur in this
portion of the Santa Clara River
watershed.

Resident threespine stickleback
Gasterosteus aculeatus
microcephalus
(South of Point Conception only)
sa Slow-moving and
backwater areas
Not expected; does not occur in this
portion of the Santa Clara River
watershed.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Unarmored threespine stickleback
Gasterosteus aculeatus williamsoni
FE CE, CFP Slow-moving and
backwater areas
Not expected; does not occur in this
portion of the Santa Clara River
watershed.

AMPHIBIANS
Coast range newt
Taricha torosa torosa
-- SSC
(Monterey
Co. south)
Grasslands and
woodlands; breeds in
ponds, reservoirs, and
slow-moving streams.

Not expected; no suitable year-round
habitat.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Western spadefoot
Scaphiopus hammondii
-- SSC Open areas in lowland
grasslands, chaparral,
and pine-oak
woodlands; require
temporary rainpools
that last approximately
three weeks and lack
exotic predators.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Arroyo toad
Anaxyrus californicus
FE SSC Restricted to rivers that
have shallow, gravely
pools adjacent to
sandy terraces that
have a nearly complete
closure of
cottonwoods, oaks, or
willows
Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
California red-legged frog
Rana draytonii
FT SSC Permanent water
sources such as
ponds, lakes,
reservoirs, streams,
and adjacent riparian
woodlands.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.
southern mountain yellow-legged frog
Rana muscosa
FE CE; WL Permanent water
sources such as
ponds, lakes,
reservoirs, streams,
and adjacent riparian
woodlands.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

REPTILES
Western pond turtle
Emys marmorata
-- SSC Streams, ponds,
freshwater marshes,
and lakes with growth
of aquatic vegetation.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Coast horned lizard
Phrynosoma blainvillii
-- SSC Relatively open
grasslands,
scrublands, and
woodlands with fine,
loose soil.

Low potential; site disturbance and
surrounding development likely precludes
this species from occurring.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Coastal whiptail
Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri
-- SSC Open areas in semiarid
grasslands,
scrublands, and
woodlands.

Low potential; very limited suitable
habitat in upland vegetation.

California legless lizard
Anniella spp.
-- SSC Stabilized dunes,
beaches, dry washes,
pine, oak, and riparian
woodlands, and
chaparral; associated
with sparse vegetation
with sandy or loose,
loamy soils.

Low potential; site disturbance and
surrounding development likely precludes
this species from occurring.

Northern CA legless lizard
Anniella pulchra
-- SSC Stabilized dunes,
beaches, dry washes,
pine, oak, and riparian
woodlands, and
chaparral; associated
with sparse vegetation
with sandy or loose,
loamy soils.

Low potential; site disturbance and
surrounding development likely precludes
this species from occurring.

California glossy snake
Arizona elegans occidentalis
-- SSC Arid scrub, roacky
washes, grassland,
chaparral
Moderate potential. Some suitable habitat
present, but disturbance history may
preclude species from occurring in project
limits.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
San Bernardino ringneck snake
Diadophis punctatus modestus
-- -- Woodlands, grassland,
chaparral, and scrub
habitats; often found in
mesic areas under
rocks, logs, and debris.

Low potential; site disturbance and
surrounding development likely
dissuades this species from occurring.

Coast patch-nosed snake
Salvadora hexalepis virgultea
-- SSC Shrublands with low
structure and minimum
density. Generally,
occurs with whiptails
(primary prey item)
Low potential; site disturbance and
surrounding development likely
dissuades this species from occurring.

Two-striped garter snake
Thamnophis hammondii
--
SSC Perennial and
intermittent streams
having rocky or sandy
beds and artificiallycreated aquatic
habitats (man-made
lakes and stock
ponds); requires dense
riparian vegetation.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

South Coast garter snake
Thamnophis sirtalis ssp.
-- SSC Restricted to marsh
and upland habitats
near permanent water
that support riparian
vegetation.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
BIRDS
American white pelican (nesting colony)
Pelecanus erythrorhynchos
-- SSC Large bodies of fresh
or saltwater. Rests
and nests on the
shore, sandbars, or
islands with sparse
vegetation.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Double-crested cormorant (nesting
colony)
Phalacrocorax auritus
-- WL Inland lakes, fresh, salt
and estuarine waters.

Overnight roosts on
humanly inaccessible
areas without
vegetation.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Great blue heron (nesting colony)
Ardea herodias
-- sa Shallow, open water
and open fields; nests
in secluded groves of
tall trees.

Not expected; no suitable rookery habitat
on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Great egret (nesting colony)
Ardea albus
-- sa Shallow water and
along shores of
estuaries, lakes,
ditches, and slowmoving streams, in salt
ponds and mudflats,
and in irrigated
croplands and
pastures; requires
groves of trees that are
relatively isolated from
human activities for
nesting and roosting.

Not expected; no suitable rookery habitat
on site.

Snowy egret (nesting colony)
Egretta thula
-- sa Shallow water or
shores of wetlands or
aquatic habitats;
requires dense
emergent wetland or
trees near water for
roosting.

Not expected; no suitable rookery habitat
on site.

Black-crowned night heron (rookery)
Nycticorax nycticorax
-- sa Forages in freshwater
and saltwater marsh
habitats, margins of
lakes, and mudbordered bays. Roosts
in dense groves of
trees, usually near
water.

Not expected; no suitable rookery habitat
on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
White-faced ibis (nesting colony)
Plegadis chihi
-- WL Feeds in freshwater
emergent wetlands,
wet meadows, and
irrigated or flooded
pastures. Requires
large marsh areas for
nesting in that are near
foraging areas.

Not expected; no suitable rookery habitat
on site.

California condor
Gymnogyps californianus
FE CE, CFP Require vast expanses
of open savanna,
grasslands, and foothill
chaparral in mountain
ranges of moderate
altitude. Deep
canyons containing
clefts in the rocky walls
provide nesting sites.

Forages up to 100
miles from roost/nest.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

White-tailed kite (nesting)
Elanus leucurus
-- CFP Open vegetation and
uses dense woodlands
for cover.

Moderate potential; known from and may
periodically forage in the project area and
that provides very limited suitable nesting
for this species.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Bald Eagle (nesting & wintering)
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Delisted CE, CFP Lakes, reservoirs,
rivers, offshore islands,
and some rangelands
and coastal wetlands
in southern California;
no longer breeds on
the mainland in
southern California.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Northern harrier (nesting)
Circus cyaneus
-- SSC Coastal salt marsh,
freshwater marsh,
grasslands, and
agricultural fields.

Low potential; could be an infrequent
visitor to the area but the site does not
provide suitable nesting habitat for this
species.

Sharp-shinned hawk (nesting)
Accipiter striatus
-- WL Woodlands and
forages over dense
chaparral and
scrublands.

Low potential; may occur as a seasonal
migrant, but not expected to nest in the
area.

Cooper's hawk (nesting)
Accipiter cooperi
-- WL Dense stands of live
oaks and riparian
woodlands.

Moderate potential; this species is known
from the area and the nearby trees
provide some limited suitable nesting
habitat.
6ZDLQVRQ¶VKDZN (nesting)
Buteo swainsoni
-- CT Open riparian habitat,
in scattered trees or
small groves in
sparsely vegetated
flatlands; typical
habitat is open desert,
grassland, or cropland.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable nesting habitat
for this species.

In addition to forested
areas, they may also
use shrublands and
open areas while
foraging, migrating, or
overwintering.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable nesting habitat
for this species.

Osprey (nesting)
Pandion haliaetus
-- WL Can be found near
oceans, rivers, lakes,
mangroves, coastal
wetlands, lagoons,
reefs, estuaries and
marshes.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable foraging or
nesting habitat for this species.

Golden eagle (nesting & wintering)
Aquila chrysaetos
-- CFP Mountains, deserts,
and open country.

Low potential; could be an infrequent
visitor to the area but the site does not
provide suitable nesting or wintering
habitat for this species.

Merlin (wintering)
Falco columbarius
-- WL Coastlines, wetlands,
woodlands, agricultural
fields, and grasslands.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable wintering
habitat for this species.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Prairie falcon (nesting)
Falco mexicanus
-- WL Grasslands, savannas,
rangeland, agricultural
fields, and desert
scrub; requires
sheltered cliff faces for
shelter.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable nesting for this
species.

American peregrine falcon (nesting)
Falco peregrinus anatum
Delisted Delisted,
CFP
Occurs most frequently
along the coast and
over other large bodies
of water.

Moderate potential; known to be a
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable nesting for this
species.

California gull (nesting colony)
Larus californicus
-- sa Alkali and freshwater
lacustrine, riverine, and
cropland areas inland;
along coast prefers
sandy beaches,
mudflats, rocky
intertidal, and pelagic
areas; also fresh and
salt water emergent
wetlands.

Not expected; no suitable nesting habitat
on site.

Caspian tern (nesting colony)
Sterna caspia
-- sa Nests on undisturbed
islands, levees, and
shorelines. Barren
sites preferred
Not expected; no suitable nesting habitat
on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Western yellow-billed cuckoo (nesting)
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis
FT CE Riparian forest nester,
along the broad, lower
flood-bottoms of larger
river systems. Nests in
riparian jungles of
willow, often mixed
with cottonwoods, with
understory of
blackberry, nettles, or
wild grape.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Western burrowing owl (burrow sites)
Athene cunicularia hypugea
-- SSC Grasslands and open
scrub.

Low potential; suitable ground squirrel
burrows and discarded pipes are present
on site that could be used as nesting
habitat.

California spotted owl
Strix occidentalis occidentalis
-- SSC Moist, dense
coniferous old-growth
forests of redwood,
Douglas fir, western
red cedar and other
conifers. Nest in old
raptor nest cavities or
natural cavities in
trees.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Short-eared owl (nesting)
Asio flammeus
-- SSC Open areas, including
grasslands, prairies,
dunes, meadows,
irrigated lands, and
saline and freshwater
emergent wetlands.

Low potential; very limited habitat on site
and proximity to development reduces
potential.
9DX[¶VVZLIW (nesting)
Chaetura vauxi
-- SSC Redwood and Douglas
fir forests with old
snags or tall, burnedout stubs.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Rufous hummingbird (nesting)
Selasphorus rufus
-- sa Open areas, yards,
parks, forests up to
treeline.

Moderate potential; some suitable
foraging habitat, not known to nest in
project vicinity.

Costa's hummingbird
Calypte costae
-- sa Desert scrub,
chaparral, sage scrub
Moderate potential; some suitable
foraging and nesting habitat present.

Red-breasted sapsucker (nesting)
Sphyrapicus ruber
-- sa Coniferous forests,
riparian, orchards
Low potential; very limited suitable
habitat.

Olive-sided flycatcher (nesting)
Contopus cooperi
-- SSC Montane coniferous
forest, burned or boggy
areas
Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Willow flycatcher (nesting)
Empidonax traillii
-- CE Willows or other
shrubby habitat near
streams, ponds, or wet
meadows.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

California horned lark
Eremophila alpestris actia
-- WL Grasslands, disturbed
areas, agriculture
fields, and beach
areas.

Low potential; very limited suitable
foraging habitat on site. No suitable
nesting habitat present.

Oak titmouse (nesting)
Baeolophus inornatus
-- sa Strongly associated
with oak trees. Low potential; limited suitable habitat present on site.

Clark's marsh wren
Cistothorus palustris clarkae
-- SSC Marshes and wetlands Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

California gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica
FT SSC Coastal sage scrub in
areas of flat or gently
sloping terrain.

High potential; suitable old growth coastal
sage scrub habitat present on a portion of
the project site.

Loggerhead shrike
(nesting)
Lanius ludovicianus
-- SSC Grasslands with
scattered shrubs,
trees, fences or other
perches.

Moderate potential; species uncommon
in the area, but some limited foraging and
nesting habitat is present in the project
limits.

Least Bell's vireo (nesting)
Vireo bellii pusillus
FE CE Riparian vegetation
with extensive willows
below 2,000 ft.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Yellow warbler (nesting)
Dendroica petechia brewsteri
-- SSC Riparian thickets and
woodlands.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Yellow-breasted chat (nesting)
Icteria virens
-- SSC Riparian thickets and
riparian woodlands
with a dense
understory.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Hepatic tanager (nesting)
Piranga flava
-- WL Forests Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Summer tanager (nesting)
Piranga rubra
-- SSC Cottonwood-willow
riparian habitats,
especially older, dense
stands along rivers and
streams.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

S. California rufous-crowned sparrow
Aimophila ruficeps canescens
-- WL Coastal sage scrub. Moderate potential; species occurs in the vicinity and suitable habitat occurs within
the project limits.

Bell's sage sparrow (nesting)
Amphispiza belli belli
-- WL Coastal sage scrub
and chamise
chaparral.

Moderate potential; species occurs in the
vicinity and suitable habitat occurs within
the project limits.

Grasshopper sparrow (nesting)
Ammodramus savannarum
-- SSC Tall grasslands Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Gray-headed junco (nesting)
Junco hyemalis caniceps
-- WL Woodland from
montane hardwoodconifer up to alpine
dwarf-shrub, coastal
foothill hardwood to
redwood and woodland
riparian.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Tricolored blackbird (nesting colony)
Agelaius tricolor
-- SSC Freshwater marshes
and riparian scrub.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.
/DZUHQFH¶VJROGILQFK (nesting)
Spinus lawrencei
-- sa Open woodlands Low potential; present during the site visit but the site does not provide suitable
nesting habitat for this species.
northern cardinal (nesting)
Cardinalis cardinalis
-- WL Woodland edges and
grassland landscapes
with thickets and
shrubbery to nest in.

Low potential; known to be an infrequent
seasonal visitor to the area but the site
does not provide suitable nesting habitat
for this species.
bank swallow (nesting)
Riparia riparia
-- CT Fields, marshes,
streams, and lakes.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

MAMMALS
California leaf-nosed bat
Macrotus californicus
-- SSC Desert riparian, desert
wash, desert scrub,
desert succulent scrub,
alkali desert scrub, and
palm oasis.

Not expected; very limited suitable habitat
on site and species is very rare in the
region.

Hoary bat
Lasiurus cinereus
-- sa Foliage of mature
deciduous and
coniferous trees,
typically near clearings
Not expected; very limited suitable habitat
nearby and species is very rare in the
region.

Cave myotis
Myotis velifer
-- SSC Caves, mines, rock
crevices, under bridges
Not expected; no suitable habitat on site
and very few known occurrences in the
region.
7RZQVHQG¶VELJ-eared bat
Corynorhinus townsendii
-- SSC Variety of habitats from
pine forests to arid
desert scrub.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Spotted bat
Euderma maculata
-- SSC Deserts, scrublands,
chaparral, and
coniferous woodlands.

Not expected; extremely rare in the area
and very limited suitable habitat.
silver-haired bat
Lassionycteris noctivagans
-- sa Reliant on old growth
forests for roosting
habitat.

Low potential; very limited suitable
habitat on or near the site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Pallid bat
Antrozous pallidus
-- SSC Arid habitats, including
grasslands,
shrublands,
woodlands, and
forests; prefers rocky
outcrops, cliffs, and
crevices with access to
open habitats for
foraging.

Low potential, no suitable roosting habitat
on site, but species may occur in the
area.

Western mastiff bat
Eumops perotis
-- SSC Primarily arid lowlands
and coastal basins with
rugged, rocky terrain,
along with suitable
crevices for day-roosts.

Low potential, no suitable roosting habitat
on site, but species may occur in the area
San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit
Lepus californicus bennettii
-- SSC Chaparral and coastal
sage scrub.

Low potential; limited suitable habitat and
very few occurrences documented in the
region.

Los Angeles pocket mouse
Perognathus longimembris
brevinasus
-- SSC Lower elevation
grassland, alluvial
sage scrub, and
coastal sage scrub.

Low potential; limited suitable habitat and
very few occurrences documented in the
region.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
Common Name Status
Scientific Name Federal State Habitat
Requirements
Potential Occurrence on the
Project Site
Southern grasshopper mouse
Onychomys torridus ramona
-- SSC Alkali desert scrub,
desert riparian areas
and a variety of other
desert habitats; also
succulent scrub, wash,
riparian, mixed
chaparral, coastal
scrub, and sage
habitats.

Low potential; limited suitable habitat and
very few occurrences documented in the
region.

San Diego desert woodrat
Neotoma lepida intermedia
-- SSC Chaparral and coastal
sage scrub.

Low potential, known from the area but
limited suitable habitat on site.

American badger
Taxidea taxus
-- SSC Drier open stages of
shrub, forest, and
herbaceous habitats
with friable soils.

Not expected; no suitable habitat on site.

Appendix 5 (continued)
Summary of Special Status Wildlife Species: Eternal Valley Cemetery Project Eternal Valley Cemetery Project
KEY:

Status
All status listings are from the September &'):³6SHFLDO$QLPDOV/LVW´ Federal -- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
FE: Federally Endangered
FT: Federally Threatened
FPE: Federally Proposed Endangered
FPT: Federally Proposed Threatened
FC: Federal Candidate for listing as threatened or
endangered
(nesting) = For most taxa the CNDDB is interested in sightings for the presence of resident populations. For some species (primarily birds), the CNDDB only tracks certain parts of the species range or life history (e.g., nesting locations). The area or life stage is indicated in parenthesis after the common name.

State -- California Department of Fish and Game
CFP: California Fully Protected
CE: California Endangered
CT: California Threatened
CCE: California Candidate (Endangered)
CCT: California Candidate (Threatened)
WL: CDFW Watch List:

SSC: California Species of Special Concern
sa : California Special Animal: species with no official federal or VWDWHVWDWXVEXWDUHLQFOXGHGRQ&')*¶V6SHFLDO$QLPDOVOLVW APPENDIX C-2
Biological Inventory for Extended Grading Area
June 23, 2021
Hunsaker & Associates
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 23
Valencia, CA 91355
RE: Eternal Valley Cemetery, Santa Clarita California -- Biological Inventory for Extended Grading Area
To Whom It May Concern:

The following is an update to the existing Biological Assessment for the Eternal Valley Cemetery due to an increased proposed grading area beyond the previously surveyed area. The proposed project includes an application to permit the construction of a future cemetery burial site and major grading. The Applicant intends to construct additional lawn space for cemetery burials, a road, and a mausoleum. A proposed site plan prepared by Hunsaker & Associates dated June 8, 2021 is provided as an appendix.

The project survey area encompasses a partially graded area just west of the Eternal Valley Cemetery in Santa Clarita, California. The project site is located north of the intersection of Sierra Highway and Needham Ranch Parkway. The newly added grading area is partially undeveloped with sage scrub habitat. The site is surrounded by commercial and residential development and marginal open space to the west. There is significant open space to the south and east of the project site.

Summary
Senior biologist Courtney McCammon conducted a biological survey on June 18, 2021 between 0907 – 1215 hours. Survey conditions ranged from 72 – 85°F, sunny skies, and wind from 5 – 10 mph. No rare or sensitive plants were found or expected onsite. No rare or sensitive animals were found onsite including coastal California gnatcatcher. However, various bird species were observed and may use the site for nesting. Photographs and a Vegetation Map of the site are attached.

Existing Conditions
The study area includes a large, partially graded, multi-level site that consists of heavy nonnative plant influence. Natural vegetation, consisting primarily of coastal sage scrub occurs in the northern portion of the study area. The project is accessed from Needham Ranch Road through a paved street but appears to also be accessed from the Eternal Velley Cemetery. The work area is gently sloping. Beyond the proposed work areas, natural and invasive plant communities exist up and down the canyon with single family residential homes and commercial buildings in the immediate vicinity as well as the Eternal Valley Cemetery to the east.

The project site is situated within the inland foothills of the Angeles National Forest, at elevations ranging from approximately 1610 to 1653 feet (491 – 504 m) above mean sea level.

The site is generally dry and exposed. The average high/low summer temperatures in the lower elevation inland foothills of the Angeles National Forest are 90/50°F, average high/low winter temperatures are 68/40°F, and precipitation is approximately 18 inches per year. The soils are of the Saugus loam association, 30 to 50 percent slopes, which are comprised of weakly consolidated alluvium, well drained soils that formed in paralithic bedrock.

The project site does not appear to support any formal water features though there are some sloped canyons potentially producing canyons that could convey water in extreme weather events.

Dominate Species
The vegetation at the site generally consists of sage brush, ceanothus shrubland, and bare/disturbed habitats. The vegetation within the project area was correlated with the Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains Natural Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties, California (CDFW/CNPS, January 2006) and the List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (Natural Communities List) (CDFW, September 2010). These documents provide lists of plant communities occurring in Los Angeles County environs in the State of California, respectively. In each of these documents plant communities are assigned a conservation status rank (also known as “rarity rank”), which is used to determine the sensitivity of the plant community. The plant communities within the project areas are shown on Figure 1.

There are no sensitive communities within the study area.

Barren or Sparsely Vegetated (Ruderal)
Areas mapped in this classification are barren or consist primarily of sparse cover of non-native ruderal species. These areas have been graded or cleared of vegetation and may be mowed or otherwise disturbed on a regular basis. This includes much of the newly proposed grading area directly adjacent to the cemetery. Selected species observed include tocalote (Centauria melitensis), bromes, deerweed (Euphorbia maculate), and black mustard (Brassica nigra). These areas generally lack native species. These areas appear to be used as storage of construction materials as well for the current project along Needham Ranch Road and the Eternal Valley Cemetery.

Artemisia californica – Salvia mellifera Shrubland Alliance This shrubland alliance occurs in the northern portion of the project site and includes some of the newly added grading area (approximately 0.5 acres). The vegetation is somewhat thick and appears to be old-growth sage scrub habitat. Scrub species including black sage (Salix mellifera) and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) are the primary cover in this plant community.

Chaparral yucca (Hesperoyucca whipplei), Sugar bush (Rhus ovata), and bush monkeyflower (Diplacus aurantiacus) are sporadic throughout the vegetation community and present at low cover.

Protected Trees
The City of Santa Clarita defines protected trees as any oak tree of the genus Quercus, including, but not limited to, valley oak (Quercus lobata), California live oak (Quercus agrifolia), canyon oak (Quercus chrysolepis), interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii) and scrub oak (Quercus dumosa), regardless of size.

USFWS Critical Habitat
The project is within USFWS Designated Critical Habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher and the polygon encompasses the entire site. Suitable sage scrub habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher exists primarily in the northern half of the project site including the additional grading area. The vegetation is healthy enough to support foraging and nesting by coastal California gnatcatcher. Protocol-level gnatcatcher surveys were conducted by biologist, Brian Karpman, in the winter of 2021 and included the additional grading area. Therefore, we are not recommending additional protocol-level surveys at this time.

Wildlife Observed or Likely to Occur
Rodents common to urban areas are likely to frequent this property, including: gopher (Thomomys bottae), black rat (Rattus rattus), California mouse (Peromyscus californicus) and California pocket mouse (Perognathus californicus). Western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) and side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana) likely utilize the site. Birds expected to frequent the site include: red-tailed hawk, turkey vulture, California quail, Anna's hummingbird, great-horned owl, black phoebe, northern mockingbird, scrub jay, common raven, whitecrowned sparrow, California towhee and lesser goldfinch. Striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), coyote (Canis latrans) and raccoon (Procyon lotor) are also expected. A complete Potential for Occurrence table can be found in the Biological Assessment submitted by CJ Biomonitoring.

Impacts
Should there be any vegetation disturbing activities during the nesting bird season, there could be potential to result in removal or disturbance to trees or shrubs that could contain active bird nests. Birds nesting in the vicinity of project activities may potentially be disturbed by noise, lighting, dust, and human activities associated with the project, which could result in nesting failure and the loss of eggs or nestlings. Nesting bird surveys shall be conducted prior to any of the above listed activities within the nesting bird season (February 1 through August 31). A full impact analysis is included in the Bio Assessment provided by CJ Biomonitoring.

Please feel free to call with any questions.

Sincerely,
Courtney McCammon
attachments: Figure and Photographs
References
Baldwin, B. G., D.H. Goldman, D.J. Keil, R. Patterson, T.J. Rosatti, and D.H. Wilken, editors. 2012. The Jepson manual: vascular plants of California, second edition. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Baker, R. J., L. C. Bradley, R. D. Bradley, J. W. Dragoo, M. D. Engstrom, R. S. Hoffman, C. A.

Jones, F. Reid, D. W. Rice, and C. Jones. 2003. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2003. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers 229:1-23.

Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife, data as of May 24, 2020;
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5 Element Occurrence Report for Point Dume and the five surrounding USGS quadrangles, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, data as of May 24, 2020;
California Department of Fish and Game, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations. September 2010. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/vegcamp/natural_comm_list.asp CNPS, Rare Plant Program. 2020. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition) California Native Plant Society, Sacramento, CA. Website http://www.rareplants.cnps.org [accessed May 24, 2020].

Evens, J. and T. Keeler-Wolf. 2006 (January). Vegetation Classification of the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area and Environs in Ventura and Los Angeles Counties, California. California Department of Fish and Game and California Native Plant Society.

MacArthur, R. M. and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press: Princeton, New Jersey.

Penrod, K., C. Cabanero, P. Beier, C. Luke, W. Spencer, E. Rubin, R. Sauvajot, S. Riley, and D.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J. M. Evens, A Manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed., California Native Plant Society Press, Sacramento, California, 2009.

Soulé, M. E. 1987. Viable Populations for Conservation. Sinaur Associates Inc., Publishers, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Special Animals, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, May 2020.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS Critical Habitat Mapper for Threatened and Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, data as of May 24, 2020.

Wasner, A. 2006. Soil Survey of Santa Monica Mountains Natural Recreation Area, California.

Natural Resources Conservation Service.

PHOTO #1 Looking northeast at the existing
cemetery showing the ruderal vegetation where the proposed mausoleum will be.

PHOTO #2 View southeast showing ruderal
vegetation in the expanded grading footprint immediately adjacent to the cemetery.

PHOTO #3 Looking north at the scrub habitat in
the northern portion of the extended grading footprint.

2)2,1,&+(6
Vegetation Communities
Figure 1
[ Biological Assessment I Eternal Valley Cemetery Project I June 2021 0 3,625 7,250 14,500
Feet
Project Site
Artemisia californica-Salvia mellifera
Shrubland Allinace
Ceanothus oliganthus Shrubland
Alliance
Ruderal Vegetation
Coast live oak tree
Legend
nm
mn

APPENDIX D
Oak Tree Report
ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138 August 6, 2021
Mr. Michael A. Green
Principal
Clark & Green
15420 Laguna Canyon Rd., Ste 210
Irvine, CA 92618
Re: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Revised Report Dear Mr. Green,
Thank you for asking Arborgate Consulting to check for oaks in the new area on the provided map. The City of Santa Clarita requires a report with protection measures for all oaks in the project area.

Observations
Two small scrub oaks, Quercus dumosa (Q. berberidifolia?) were found, naturally existing, near the northeast edge of the new area. A small Quercus agrifolia was found near the north west site of the new area. A map can be found in the appendix of this report. Both scrub oaks and the coast live oak are mixed and intertwined with other native shrubs, like Rhus integrifolia, and ruderal herbaceous plants. Without a GPS location, they would be easy to miss.

Measured at 6 inches above grade, one scrub oak has two trunks, one trunk is 1.2" in diameter the other is 1.5" diameter. It is located at 34⁰21.376 N; 118⁰20.858 W. The overall height is about six feet and the dripline is about 5 feet wide. The two trunks are codominant with included bark, and wrapped around each other. The bark on one side is scraped. The foliage is small and sparse. Its health is fair. This oak appears to be an exception to needing a permit for removal.

Under B. Oak Tree Permit.2.a
“2. Exemptions. Notwithstanding the provisions of this code, a permit is not required under the following circumstances:
a. For trees that do not exceed six (6) inches in circumference when measured at a point four and one-half (4 1/2) feet above the tree’s natural grade….” It has no trunk at that height.

The second oak has many trunks, several are 3" diameter and several others are about 2" diameter. It is located at 34⁰21.867 N; 118⁰20.857 W. The overall height is about 9 feet and the

8/6/2021 Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Page | 2 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138 dripline is about 10 feet across. For a scrub oak the structure is good. The leaves are small, but the health is good. The fairly smooth bark gives it the appearance of rapid growth.

The coast live oak has a single trunk 8-inches in diameter, measured at 3-feet above grade. The main trunk forks at about 3.5 feet above grade. It is located at 34⁰21’53.12 N; 118⁰30’54.51W.

The overall height is about 18 feet and dripline is about 14 feet across. The structure is fairly good (C). The low branching and codominant trunk are the main defects. The leaves are small, and the health is fair (C) The fairly smooth bark gives it the appearance of rapid growth’ Appraisal
The following appraisal is a short form, but using all the fields from the 10 Edition of the “Guide for Plant Appraisal”. A full set of the approach, guiding principles, and reconciliation are available on request. In this appraisal all elements are weighted equally.

Tree # Species DBH Health% Structural
Condition Form Average
1 Quercus dumosa 1.2+1.5 50% 40% 50% 47%
2 Quercus dumosa 3,3,3,2,2,2 80% 80% 90% 83%
3 Quercus agrifolia 8 65% 60% 90% 72%
Tree
# DBH
Genetic qual
pest/disease
tolerance
Litter or
invasive?
Canopy
space,
wires
Functional
limitations
life span
Root
space,
density
Functional
limitations
1 1.2+1.5 90% 100% 100% 90% 100% 96%
2 333222 90% 100% 100% 90% 100% 96%
3 8 90% 90% 70% 90% 70% 82%
Tree
#
Trunk
area
Replace
diameter
Replace
cost
Unit
cost Basic cost Condition Functional limits
External
limits
Appraised
value
1 2.9 4 $1,700 $135. $391.50 47% 96% 100% $177
2 22.12 4 $1,700 $135. $2,986.11 83% 96% 100% $2,379
3 50.24 5.5 $1,700 $71.58 $3,596. 72% 82% 100% $2,123
The calculations for scrub oak #2 include adjustments for measuring height for each trunk and then the addition of cross-sectional areas (22.12 sq inch.

Discussion of Preservation Options
Due to the planned grading and future cemetery use, neither scrub oak is suitable for preservation in place, considering the planned use of this site. The smaller oak is not in good health or condition, and it is not suitable for life in the cemetery grass. The larger oak is full and round to 8/6/2021 Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Page | 3 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138 the ground. It is growing in a small narrow ravine, and grading to level it out would probably end its life. The place where they are growing has varied rough terrain. The City mandate of having a minimum 15 foot clearance would make joining the surrounding grade very difficult.

Changing the surrounding conditions to turf grass culture would also eventually lead to their demise.

Transplanting is not a reasonable solution either. The smaller oak is not healthy enough to survive. In my 50 years in the tree industry, I have never seen or known of any successful or even attempted transplants of scrub oaks. The low limb/trunk structure of the second oak would make boxing very difficult or impossible. Even if they could be transplanted, the shock of losing 90% of their roots would set back their health and growth for years. Transplanting the coast live oak does not make sense for the same reason.

It would be much more reasonable to remove and plant mitigation tree type oaks. New nursery grown coast live oaks, Shumard oaks, holly oaks or southern live oaks would be much more suitable trees for a cemetery. But all trees suffer to some degree, including oaks, when grown in turf.

Recommendations
Remove both scrub oaks and mitigate the second oak, if required.

Protect the coast live oak in place, providing a 20’ protection radius from the trunk.

Seek written permission from the Director to remove the second scrub oak. See exception B.

Oak Tree Permit 2. f. “When the property owner has received written permission from the Director for the removal of a maximum of three (3) scrub oaks (Quercus dumosa)….” If required, select a City approved mitigation species, size and quantity.

Mitigation
Mitigation requirements appear to be up to the Director’s discretion. Mitigation requirements based on trunk diameter are difficult to calculate for scrub oaks.

Respectfully submitted,
Arborgate Consulting, Inc.

Greg Applegate, ASCA, ASLA
Registered Consulting Arborist #365
Tree & Plant Appraisal Qualified
Enclosures: tree map, photographs
8/6/2021 Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Page | 4 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138 Tree Map
The project grading is well under way and had changed since this map was prepared. Most of the area indicated as “Artemisia californica-Salvia mellifera Shrubland Allinace” (sic) is graded and mulched, except the north edge. See below.
8/6/2021 Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Page | 5 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138 Overall area at the north end. The scrub oaks are at the far right end.

#1 Small scrub oak. #2 Large scrub oak
8/6/2021 Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Oaks Page | 6 ARBORGATE CONSULTING, INC.

Arboriculture & Horticulture
1131 Lucinda Way, Tustin, CA 92780, Ph. 714.731.6240, Cell: 714.292.7184, Fax 714.731.6138

#3 Coast live oak structure Coast live oak foliage
I believe #3 oak is slightly left of where its shown

APPENDIX E
Phase I Archeological Resources Assessment
1531 Pontius Ave. Suite 200 (424) 248-3316 office
Los Angeles, CA 90025 (424) 248-3417 fax
ArchaeoPaleo Resource Management, Inc.

A full-service Archaeology and Paleontology company
SBE/WBE/WOSB/DBE/UDBE/EBE/LBE/SLBE/CBE/VSBE/MicroBE Certified Phase I Archaeological Resources Assessment for the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary, City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California
Prepared for:

Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary
23287 North Sierra Highway
Santa Clarita, California, 91321
And
Hunsaker & Associates
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 23
Valencia, CA 91355
Authors:

Robin Turner, M.A.

Miguel A. Miguel, B.S.

Edited by:

Robin Turner, M.A.

Date: February 2020
Updated March 2022
Key Word(s): CEQA, City of Santa Clarita, Lyons Station, Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary, USGS 7.5’ Topographic Quadrangle: Oat Mountain, CA 2015 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 2 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This document contains sensitive or confidential information regarding the location of archaeological sites which should not be disclosed to the general public or other unauthorized persons. Archaeological and other heritage resources can be damaged or destroyed through uncontrolled public disclosure of information regarding their location. Therefore, information regarding the location, character, or ownership of archaeological or other heritage resources is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act pursuant to 16 USC 470w-3 (National Historic Preservation Act) and 16 USC Section 470(h) (Archaeological Resources Protections Act). This report and records that relate to archaeological sites information maintained by the Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Historical Resources Commission, or the State Lands Commission are exempt from the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250 et seq., see Government Code Section 6254.19). In addition, Government Code Section 6254 explicitly authorizes public agencies to withhold information from the public relating to Native American graves, cemeteries, and sacred places maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ArchaeoPaleo Resource Management, Inc. (APRMI) was contracted by Hunsaker and Associates to perform a Phase I Archaeological Assessment of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary burial expansion (Project). The Project proponents plan to expand the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary property, located in the western portion of the cemetery, for additional burial use. The Project is located in the City of Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County, California within Township 3 South, Range 16 West, Section 12 as denoted on the Oat Mountain, California 7.5’ United States Geological Survey topographic quadrangle (2015 edition).

The original pedestrian field survey of the Project area was conducted on October 18, 2020, to evaluate the presence of any cultural or tribal resources to determine if the proposed development will have any significant adverse impact on such resources. The Project area has been determined to be an open space natural environment with native oak trees, sagebrush scrub, and other flowering plants. Wildlife tracks observed included black-tailed jackrabbit, deer, coyote, and cougar. Some areas of the Project were observable and accessible, while others were covered in dense sagebrush scrub which did not allow for pedestrian access. No cultural or tribal resources were observed during the field reconnaissance, but there still exists a potential for uncovering such resources at the time of the Project related ground disturbing activities due to known Native American sites nearby. APRMI conducted an amended field reconnaissance survey on June 15, 2021, after it was determined that the Project will include an additional area for a new mausoleum situated above the current Our Lady of Lourdes section of the cemetery and will include additional areas to be developed as well. The additional areas extend the previous Project boundary limits to the north and south. Two additional plant types were observed, which were the California Scrub Oak and chaparral yucca. Additionally, a California Horn-Tailed lizard was observed as part of the local fauna in the additional area. APRMI staff observed that the neighboring development, located on the western side of Needham Ranch Parkway, has been graded and extends into the Eternal Valley Project. This work was conducted without the presence of a qualified archaeologist.

On December 2, 2020, a cultural records search was conducted by the South Central Coastal Information Center to identify the presence of any previously recorded (prehistoric/tribal/historic) cultural resources that are located within the Project area or within a ¼ mile radius. The results of the record search include 1 historic structure, located within the ¼ mile radius, which is the Southern California Edison (SCE) Big Creek East and West Transmission Line (Primary #19- 186861) constructed in 1913. On December 24, 1993, the California State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred that the SCE Big Creek East and West Transmission Line is a contributing element to the Big Creek Hydroelectric System Historic District listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on July 26, 2016. This structure will not be affected by the Project. APRMI requested a Sacred Lands File Search and a Native American Contacts list for the proposed Project from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on November 4, 2020.

The NAHC’s search of the Sacred Lands File and information on the Native American Contact List of tribal interested parties was received by APRMI on December 7, 2020. No Native American sites were identified within the direct Project area, but a total of 4 responses were received from the tribes, individuals, and organizations contacted by APRMI from the Native American Contact List that was provided due to the proximate nature of two Native American villages nearby. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 4 A paleontologic assessment for the Project was not required by the City of Santa Clarita, but APRMI has extensive knowledge of the local paleontological history of the region and has added brief recommendations in this document. This amended Phase I Archaeological Assessment outlines the methods, results, and recommendations for the Project to assure the proper management of cultural resources at the time of development. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 5 ACRONYMS
AF Artificial Fill
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
APRMI ArchaeoPaleo Resource Management, Inc.

ARC Archives & Resource Center
BERD Built Environment Resources Directory
BP Before Present
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CHL California Historic Landmarks
CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System CPHI California Points of Historical Interest
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CRM Cultural Resource Management
GIS Geographic Information Systems
HCM Historic Cultural Monument
HTMC Historic Topographic Map Collection
HRI Historic Resources Inventory
HSC California Health and Safety Code
MLD Most Likely Descendant
mya Million Years Ago
NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NHMLA Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
OVOV One Valley One Vision
PBDB Paleobiology Database
PRC Public Resources Code
RPA Registered Professional Archaeologist
SOI Secretary of the Interior
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SVP Society for Vertebrate Paleontology
USGS United States Geologic Service
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................3 ACRONYMS................................................................................................................................................5

1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................8

1.1 Project Description..............................................................................................................................8

1.2 Project Location..................................................................................................................................9

1.3 Natural Setting ..................................................................................................................................12

1.4 Project Personnel ..............................................................................................................................13

2.0 REGULATORY SETTING..................................................................................................................14

2.1 Federal Laws.....................................................................................................................................14

2.2 State Laws.........................................................................................................................................15

2.3 Local Laws and Policies ...................................................................................................................21

3.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING ........................................................................................................................23

4.0 CULTURAL SETTING........................................................................................................................26

4.1 Prehistoric Background.....................................................................................................................26

4.2 Ethnographic Background ................................................................................................................30

4.3 Historic Background .........................................................................................................................33

5.0 METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................................................................43

5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search ..................................................................................................43

5.2 Archival Research.............................................................................................................................44

5.3 Field Reconnaissance........................................................................................................................44

5.4 Amended Field Reconnaissance .......................................................................................................44

6.0 RESULTS OF RECORDS SEARCHES ..............................................................................................45

6.1 Cultural Resources Records Search ..................................................................................................45

6.2 Archival Research.............................................................................................................................49

7.0 RESULTS OF FIELD RECONNAISSANCE......................................................................................50

7.1 Results from the Amended Field Reconnaissance Area ...................................................................52

8.0 NATIVE AMERICAN CONTACT......................................................................................................55

9.0 ASSEMBLY BILL 52 NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION ....................................................56

10.0 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................................................................56

11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................................57

12.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................60 Appendix A: SCCIC Results Letter
Appendix B: NAHC Results and Correspondence Letter
Appendix C: Original Field Reconnaissance Photographs
Appendix D: Amended Field Reconnaissance Photographs
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 7 List of Figures
Figure 1. Topographic regional overview of the Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, 2013 United States Geological Survey, National Geographic ...............................................................................9 Figure 2. Topographic overview of the Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, 2013 United States Geological Survey, National Geographic.........................................................................................10 Figure 3. Satellite overview of Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community........................................11 Figure 4. Satellite overview of Project area that is highlighted in red and original boundaries of the Proejct area prior to amendments is outlined in blue. Source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community .....................................................................12 Figure 5. 1992 Geologic Map of the Oat Mountain and North ½ Canoga Park Quadrangles with Project outlined in red (Dibblee, T.W., and Ehrenspeck, H.E., ed. 1992). .............................................................25 Figure 6. Gabrieleño women outside the San Gabriel Mission (early 20th century)..................................31 Figure 7. Tataviam territory shaded in gray and general Project vicinity circled in red (King and Blackburn, 1978)...........................................................................................................................................................32 Figure 8. Spanish and Mexican ranchos of Los Angeles County (Eddy, Gerald A. 1937)........................36 Figure 9. Reconstructed image of the asistencia built on the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property (Kingsley and Gates, 1969).........................................................................................................................39 Figure 10. View toward the southeast of the Lyon/Devendorf family headstone at Eternal Valley..........41 Figure 11. View of the Mark T. and Margaret Gates crypt located at Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park mausoleum..................................................................................................................................................43 Figure 12. Historic topographic maps from 1903 to 1933 with approximate location of the Project area outlined in red. ............................................................................................................................................46 Figure 13. Historic topographic maps from 1952 to 1975 with approximate location of the Project area outlined in red. ............................................................................................................................................47 Figure 14. Historic aerial photographs from 1952 to 1975, provided by the Google Earth Pro software, with location of the Project area outlined in red. ................................................................................................48 Figure 15. Historic aerial photographs from 1952 to 1975, provided by the Google Earth Pro software, with location of the Project area outlined in red. ................................................................................................48 Figure 16. Map of previously existing Native American Villages in the Santa Clarita Valley by Richard F.

Van Valkenburgh, 1937, with approximate Project location highlighted in red and villages outlined in green. ....................................................................................................................................................................50 Figure 17. View north of sloped terrain and concrete gutter system .........................................................51 Figure 18. View west of neighboring development and hill like topography............................................51 Figure 19. View east of dense sagebrush scrub that limited accessibility in some areas...........................52 Figure 20. View north of California Scrub Oak present in Project area ....................................................53 Figure 21. (top) View west of Needham Ranch Parkway and hill topography (outlined in green), western boundary of the Project area, prior to unmonitored excavation. (bottom) View south of same area but now excavated within Project area without the presence of a cultural resource monitor. ..................................54 List of Tables
Table 1. Divisions of Recent Geologic Time (after U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Names Committee, 2007)………………………………………………………………………………...24
Table 2. Results of SCCIC Built Environment…………………………………………………...45 Table 3. Results of SCCIC Cultural Reports and Studies Identified……………………………...46 Table 4. Mitigation Monitoring Plan for Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Project….55 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description
The Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary was founded in 1958 by Mark T. Gates, Sr. on an area of 220 acres within the City of Santa Clarita, California. Prior to the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary use, as early as 1855, the area was used as a stagecoach stop known as Lyon’s Station. The stop was founded by Sanford Lyons, an early settler of the Santa Clarita Valley. This station also served as a store, stage depot, post office, telegraph office, tavern, and a cemetery for local families and passersby. Currently, the owners of the cemetery seek to expand its current burial capacity through the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary burial expansion project (Project). Development for this expansion will require grading and excavation in the western extent of the cemetery property, located east adjacent of the Needham Ranch Parkway dirt road. Amendments to this Project have been developed to now include additional areas for grading or excavation. Additionally, development of a new mortuary has been added to the scope of the Project. The new mortuary will be located on the slope directly above the current Our Lady of Lourdes section of the cemetery.

To facilitate the CEQA requirements for the Project, ArchaeoPaleo Resource Management, Inc. (APRMI) was contracted by Hunsaker and Associates to perform a Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment that would determine the potential archaeological and tribal resource sensitivity of the Project area. As part of the Project CEQA generated assessment, APRMI conducted field reconnaissance to document and photograph the current state of the Project area’s vegetative cover, identification of disturbed soils, record any prehistoric or historic archaeological sites, and record the built environment. An amended field reconnaissance was required and conducted after the completion of the original survey to account for the newly added areas that include the new mausoleum and burial areas that will extend the previous limits for grading/excavation.

Other research required an in depth review of various archaeological and tribal resources databases. A cultural resource record search of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) was conducted by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC). This search was assessed by APRMI to identify the presence of any previously recorded (prehistoric/tribal/historic) cultural resources that are located within the direct area of the Project or within a ¼ mile radius. Additional databases which included the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD), United States Geological Society (USGS) Historical Topo Collection, and Historic Aerial Photographs were also assessed.

APRMI contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request a search of the Scared Lands File records and to receive a Native American Contacts list. The Native American contact list was used to request information from the Native American interested parties to see if they wanted to inform us of their ancestral homeland and what information was significant to them to give us for the Project.

This Phase I Archaeological Assessment report outlines the methods, results, and mitigation recommendations for the Project to assure the proper management of cultural resources at the time of development.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 9 1.2 Project Location
The Project area is located in the City of Santa Clarita, a city in the northwestern area of the County of Los Angeles, California. Specific locality for the Project, as denoted on the Oat Mountain, California 7.5’ United States Geological Survey topographic quadrangle (2015 edition) is Township 3 South, Range 16 West, Section 12 (Figure 1-3). The Project area consists of undeveloped land at the western margin of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary property. The Project is bounded by the California State Route 14 approximately 0.4 miles to the east, Newhall Avenue approximately 0.4 miles to the north, and Newhall Ranch Parkway approximately 0.08 miles to the west and 0.4 miles to the south. Originally, the Project location boundaries were anticipated for the expansion of new burial plots, but recently in June 2021, new amendments have expanded those boundaries and added a new structure to be developed in the southwest corner of the Project area. Boundaries to the original Project may be seen in Figure 4 highlighted in blue with an overlay of the new boundaries highlighted in red.

Figure 1. Topographic regional overview of the Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, 2013 United States Geological Survey, National Geographic
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 10 Figure 2. Topographic overview of the Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, 2013 United States Geological Survey, National Geographic
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 11 Figure 3. Satellite overview of Project area that is highlighted in red. Source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 12 Figure 4. Satellite overview of Project area that is highlighted in red and original boundaries of the Project area prior to amendments is outlined in blue. Source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community

1.3 Natural Setting
The City of Santa Clarita is within the Santa Clarita Valley, by the San Gabriel Mountains to the east, the Santa Susana Mountains to the south and west, and the Sierra Pelona Mountains to the north, all part of the Transverse Ranges. Chamise Chaparral, Coastal Sage Scrub, Interior Live Oak Chaparral comprises the ecological setting of the Santa Clarita Valley (Holland 1986: 9, 22, and 29). Faunal species expected in this valley include large and small-medium sized mammals, such as rodents, rabbits, deer, mountain lions, quail, perching birds and raptors, and reptiles, to include lizards and snakes. One of the large river systems within the Santa Clarita Valley includes the Santa Clara River, which receives drainage from four ranges in the Transverse Ranges System, then flows west onto the Oxnard Alluvial Plain and into the Santa Barbara Channel of the Pacific Ocean.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 13 1.4 Project Personnel
Robin Turner, M.A. is the Principal Investigator and President for APRMI. She holds a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology, with an emphasis on Public Archaeology, from California State University, Northridge. Ms. Turner has over 30 years of experience in the Cultural Resource Management (CRM) and the paleontological fields and has conducted major field and technical investigations throughout southern California. She meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology and is a qualified professional paleontologist per the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s guidelines. Ms. Turner is a Research Associate at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and at the George C. Page Museum of La Brea Discoveries, as well as a Scientific Advisor to the Buena Vista Museum of Natural History and Sciences in Bakersfield. She is also a past Planning Commissioner for the City of Culver City and is a past museum chair for the Culver City Historical Society. Ms. Turner served as the Principal Investigator and Project Manager for this project as well as section writer and the final editor of this report.

Miguel Angel Miguel, B.S. is a Staff Paleontologist with APRMI. Mr. Miguel has 3 years of experience excavating, analyzing, and monitoring archaeological and paleontological materials.

His work includes conducting research on Agnostid trilobite hypostomes with use of systematics, with 3D microscopes for appendage identification of Agnostid trilobites. His field and laboratory work emphasized archaeological and paleontological contexts, such as basic map analysis, rock/mineral identification, invertebrate fossil identification, and a Bachelor of Science in Geology from California Lutheran University. Mr. Miguel has extensive experience with GIS mapping, lithic identification, and sedimentary analysis. Mr. Miguel performed the field reconnaissance, the amended field reconnaissance, and contributed to the writing of this report.

John (Jack) Flynn, B.A. is a Staff Archaeologist for APRMI. Mr. Flynn has a Bachelor of Arts in Anthropology from the University of California, Merced, and has four years of experience excavating, analyzing, and monitoring archaeological and paleontological materials. His work includes participating as a student researcher in the Heritage, Interpretation, Visualization, and Experience (HIVE) lab at UC Merced, collecting historical, cultural, and natural data through archival research and fieldwork for the John Muir Geotourism Application Project, and participated in an archaeological field school in Belize, Central America, studying Maya Archaeology. His field and laboratory work emphasized archaeological and paleontological contexts, such as historic and prehistoric architecture, osteology, ceramics, lithic analysis, site mapping, and reconnaissance. Mr. Flynn performed the original field reconnaissance and contributed to the writing of this report.

Viridiana M. Garcia, M.A. is a Staff Archaeologist with APRMI. She holds a Master of Arts degree in Anthropology, with an emphasis in bioarchaeology, from George Mason University. Ms. Garcia has 5 years of experience excavating and analyzing archaeological materials and human remains.

Her work includes serving as an intern at the Smithsonian Department of Anthropology rehousing and cataloging Neolithic archaeological materials and was a lab assistant for the George Mason University zooarchaeological lab. Her field and laboratory work emphasized archaeological and bioarchaeological contexts such as, prehistoric architecture, human osteology, ceramics, and reconnaissance. Ms. Garcia performed the amended field reconnaissance and contributed to the writing of this report.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 14 2.0 REGULATORY SETTING

2.1 Federal Laws
As federal funds will not be used on this Project, equivalent and often more stringent city, county, and state regulations supersede the federal regulations in this instance. However, professional standards for cultural and paleontological resources are still guided by these federal laws which is why they are included in this report as a reference. Any discovery of human remains, and Native American burials during construction may trigger the implementation of these laws.

2.1.1 Antiquities Act of 1906
The Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 USC § 431 et seq.) provides for the establishment and preservation of national monuments, historic landmarks, and historic or prehistoric structures, or other items of interest on federally owned lands. Additionally, Section 433 of this act prohibits the purposeful taking, excavation, damage, and destruction of historic or prehistoric ruins, monuments, or other objects of antiquity on federally owned lands. Other “objects of antiquity” are interpreted to include paleontological remains.

2.1.2 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, specifically P.L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 852, 42 USC §§ 4321-4327, mandates the preservation of “important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage” (§101.b4). In addition, NEPA is interpreted as providing for the protection and preservation of paleontological remains.

2.1.3 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) mandates the following:

The head of any Federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking in any State and the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking shall, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, as the case may be, take into account the effect of the undertaking on any district, site, building, structure or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register [of Historic Places (NRHP)]. The head of any such Federal agency shall afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation [The Council], established under Title II of this Act, reasonable opportunity to comment with regard to such an undertaking. [16 U.S.C. § 470f]
An effect, or “adverse effect,” as defined by 36 CFR § 800.5 (a)(1), occurs when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register [NRHP] in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 15 To further clarify the meaning of what constitutes an adverse effect, 36 CFR § 800.5 (a)(2) identifies the following: physical destruction, alteration that is not in keeping with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties per 36 CFR §68, removal, change of use, alteration of property setting, relocation, application of intrusive elements, neglect, and change of ownership (federal to non-federal).

The NHPA (16 U.S.C. § et seq.) defines a historic resource as significant if eligible for inclusion in the NRHP as defined by one of four eligibility criteria set forth in 36 CFR § 60.4A.

Determination of historic resource significance is carried out via implementation of the Section 106 process of the NHPA, as set forth by the Council per 36 CFR § 800 “Protection of Historic Properties.” Such significant historic resources can include archaeological sites of pre-historic or historic context, historic buildings, structures, or objects of state, local, or federal importance that retain integrity of location, design, setting, feeling, association, material, and/or workmanship and (A) Are associated with events which have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history, or
(B) Are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past, or (C) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or are representative of significant and distinguishable entity of which the component may lack individual distinction, or (D) Yield, or are likely to yield, data important to our understanding of prehistory and/or history.

2.1.4 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 USC Section 3001 et seq.) The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during construction-related disturbances.

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA, was enacted November 16, 1990. It states that the “ownership or control of Native American cultural items,” which include human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony, that are “excavated or discovered on Federal or tribal lands” after the law went into effect is held by the lineal descendants of the Native American (or Hawaiian) to whom the objects originally belonged. If the lineal descendants cannot be found then their ownership is conferred to the “Indian” tribe or Native Hawaiian organization on whose land the objects or remains were discovered or that has the closest cultural affiliation.

2.2 State Laws

2.2.1 California Register of Historical Resources (PRC §5024.1) The California State Historical Resources Commission enacted Public Resources Code §5024.1, which established the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The statute encourages public recognition and protection of resources of architectural, historical, archaeological, and cultural significance. The register itself is a listing of all properties considered to be significant historical resources in the state. Resources are considered significant (and thus eligible for the register) if they retain integrity and meet one of the following criteria:
1) Associated with events which have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and historical heritage
2) Associated with the lives of persons significant in California’s past 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 16 3) Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic value, or
4) Yield, or are likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The California Register specifically provides that historical resources listed, determined eligible for listing on the California Register by the State Historical Resources Commission, or resources that meet the California Register criteria are resources, which must be given consideration under CEQA (see below). Other resources, such as resources listed on local registers or in local surveys, may be listed if they are determined by the State Historic Resources Commission to be significant in accordance with criteria and procedures to be adopted by the Commission and are nominated; their listing in the California Register is not automatic.

According to the federal laws to which the State of California defers when its own laws do not apply to a situation, historical resources are evaluated if they are 50 years or older, unless they are exceptional according to a set of criteria considerations. The Instructions for Recording Historical Resources (California Office of Historic Preservation [OHP] 1995:2) states that “[a]ny physical evidence of human activities over 45 years old may be recorded for purposes of inclusion in the OHP’s filing system.” This five-year difference is to compensate for the amount of time that usually occurs between a resource’s discovery and its official documentation as well as the implementation of any mitigation procedures.

2.2.2 California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is a statute that requires state and local agencies to identify significant environmental impacts of their actions, including damages to cultural or historical resources, in order to avoid or mitigate those adverse impacts or changes. §5020.1 of CEQA establishes “substantial adverse change” as the “demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of an historical resource would be impaired” (see below for the definition of historical resource). The “threshold of significance” is the level at which a lead agency finds the effects of a Project to be significant.

The destruction of unique, non-renewable cultural resources is a significant impact on the environment that requires mitigation of the impact. Construction excavation in archaeologically sensitive deposits that underlie a Project Area is a significant impact that could be prevented, minimized, or mitigated through the development of project alternatives (e.g., avoidance of the cultural resource) or mitigation measures for the purpose of recovering data that might otherwise be destroyed (e.g. archaeological excavation prior to construction excavation and archaeological monitoring of construction excavation of a known site; or archaeological monitoring of construction excavation of an archaeologically sensitive area). Even if a historical resource, an archaeological site, or human remains cannot be identified within a project area before project implementation (i.e., if the resources are not visible on the surface during a Phase I survey, or if Extended Phase II testing does not reveal subsurface archaeological material), the area may still be archaeologically sensitive, based on the characteristics of the environmental background of the area or its current environmental setting, and that said resources are predicted to exist within the project area/remains could be present within the project area. Mitigation measures to avoid project impacts to as-yet undiscovered historical resources or human remains may be employed by the Lead Agency, even if these resources have not been identified within or adjacent to the project 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 17 area. A study must consider a project’s current baseline environmental setting and physical conditions so that the lead agency can determine whether project impacts would cause a significant change to that environment.
§15091(a) and (d) of the CEQA Guidelines require the Lead Agency to adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes—that it has either required for the project or has made a condition of approval—in order to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects.

A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) provides for the monitoring of mitigation measures that may be required by a project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR), if the EIR identifies potentially significant adverse impacts and mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to a less-than-significant level. An archaeological resources/built environment data recovery or monitoring plan may be part of an MMRP if archaeological resources/built environment will be affected.

A significant historical resource, as defined by CEQA, is referred to as a “Historical Resource.” Such Historical Resources have been determined eligible for inclusion in the CRHR per Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR), §15064.5(a)(3), and include historic properties eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) per PRC §5024.1, or are historically significant at a local level, such as a city, town, community, or county.

Paleontological resources are protected by Appendix G (Part V) of CEQA, which indicates that the destruction of unique, non-renewable paleontological resources is a significant impact on the environment that requires mitigation of the impact. It specifically asks whether a project would “directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature.” Excavations in paleontologically sensitive deposits that underlie a project area is a significant impact that can be mitigated via the salvage and identification of excavated fossils from the deposit.

2.2.3 California Administrative Code
Title 14, Section 4307 of the California Administrative Code states that “no person shall remove, injure, deface, or destroy any object of paleontological, archaeological, or historical interest or value.”

2.2.4 Public Resources Code
Section 5097.5 and Section 30244. of the California Public Resources Code (PRC) protects both cultural and paleontological resources. Section 5097.5 states that “a person shall not 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, rock art, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over the lands.” Section 5097.5 also states that “a violation of this section is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.” This section defines public lands as “lands owned 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 18 by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.”
Section 30244 states that “where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required.”

2.2.5 Native American Heritage Act
The Native American Heritage Act, passed by California in 1976, established the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of protecting Native American religious values on state property (PRC §5097.9). The NAHC not only protects the heritage of California Native Americans, but also ensures their participation in matters concerning heritage sites. The commission’s duty is to assist both federal and state agencies in protecting Native American sacred places and provide recommendations concerning Native American heritage in accordance with environmental law and policy. As required by Government Codes §65352.3 and §65562.5, for purposes of consultation with California Native American Tribes, the NAHC maintains a list of California Native American Tribes with whom local governments and public agencies must consult.

The act also protects burials from disturbance, vandalism, and accidental destruction. It stipulates what specific procedures, laid out in the California Health and Safety Code (HSC), must be implemented if a Native American burial is uncovered during project construction or archaeological data recovery.

2.2.6 Senate Bill 18
The California Senate Bill 18, passed in 2004, establishes a procedure to help California indigenous tribes and jurisdictions define tribal cultural resources and sacred areas more clearly as well as incorporate their protection into a General or Specific Plan prior to its adoption or amendment. The law also requires that California cities and counties contact and consult with California Native American tribes prior to designating land as open space. By involving tribes in local land use decisions, impacts to sites of cultural significance can be mitigated.

2.2.7 Assembly Bill 52
Assembly Bill (AB) 52, was approved and passed on September 25, 2014 by California State Governor Gerry “Jerry” Brown, Jr. The act has amended California PRC Section 5097.94, and added PRC Sections 21073, 21074, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083.09, 21084.2, and 21084.3, relating to California’s Native American populations. Assembly Bill 52 applies to projects in which a Notice of Preparation (NOP) or a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) would be filed on or after July 1, 2015.

This bill recognizes California Native American tribes’ expertise regarding cultural resources and provides a method for agencies to incorporate tribal knowledge into their CEQA environmental review and decision-making processes. California Native American tribes can now establish a standing request to consult with a lead agency regarding any proposed project subject to CEQA in the geographic area with which the tribe is traditionally and culturally affiliated. The definition of 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 19 tribal cultural resources, as per PRC Section 21074(a)(1) and (2), are considered as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” that are included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register or included in a local register of historical resources. A tribal cultural resource may also be determined by a lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence. PRC section 21080.3.1(a-e) outlines and defines the initial consultation process required from the lead agency as follows:
21080.3.1(a): The Legislature finds and declares that California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with a geographic area have expertise concerning their tribal cultural resources. 21080.3.1(b): Prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report for a project, the lead agency shall begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project if:
(1) The California Native American tribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed by the lead agency through formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe, and
(2) The California Native American tribe responds, in writing, within 30 days of receipt of the formal notification, and requests the consultation. When responding to the lead agency, the California Native American tribe shall designate a lead contact person. If the California Native American tribe does not designate a lead contact person, or designates multiple lead contact people, the lead agency shall defer to the individual listed on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.

For purposes of this section and Section 21080.3.2, “consultation” shall have the same meaning as provided in Section 65352.4 of the Government Code.
21080.3.1(c): To expedite the requirements of this section, the Native American Heritage Commission shall assist the lead agency in identifying the California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area.
21080.3.1(d): Within 14 days of determining that an application for a project is complete or a decision by a public agency to undertake a project, the lead agency shall provide formal notification to the designated contact of, or a tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have requested notice, which shall be accomplished by means of at least one written notification that includes a brief description of the proposed project and its location, the lead agency contact information, and a notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation pursuant to this section.
21080.3.1(e): The lead agency shall begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving a California Native American tribe’s request for consultation.

Under PRC section 21080.3.2 (a) the following topics are potential consultation discussions:
x The type of environmental review necessary
x The significance of tribal cultural resources
x The significance of the project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources x Project alternatives
x Appropriate measures for preservation
x Mitigation measures
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 20 Consultation is considered complete if the parties agree to measure(s) to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significant effect exists, on a tribal cultural resource, or if a party acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that a mutual agreement cannot be reached (PRC 2108.3.2(b) (1-2)). This section does not limit the ability of a California Native American tribe or the public to submit information to the lead agency regarding the significance of the tribal cultural resources, the significance of the project’s impact on tribal cultural resources, or any appropriate measures to mitigate the impact. This section also does not limit the ability of the lead agency or project proponent to incorporate changes and additions to the project as a result of the consultation, even if not legally required. If the project proponent or its consultants participate in the consultation, those parties shall respect the principles set forth in this section. The City of Santa Clarita will conduct the Consultation.

PRC section 21082.3(a)(b) requires any mitigation measures agreed upon in the consultation conducted pursuant to PRC section 21080.3.2 shall be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document and in an adopted mitigation monitoring and reporting program, if determined to avoid or lessen the impact of tribal cultural resources. If a project may have a significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency’s environmental document shall discuss both of the following: (1) Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource. (2) Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, including those measures that may be agreed to pursuant to subdivision (a), avoid or substantially lessen the impact on the identified tribal cultural resource.

Any information including, but not limited to, the location, description, and the use of the tribal cultural resources, that is submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public without the prior consent of the tribe that provided the information. If the lead agency publishes any information submitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process, that information shall be published in a confidential appendix to the environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public (PRC section 21082.3(c). If a California Native American tribe has requested consultation pursuant to PRC section 21080.3.1 and has failed to provide comments to the lead agency, failed to engage in the consultation process, or if the lead agency has complied with PRC section 21080.3.1(d) and the California Native American tribe has failed to request consultation within 30 days, the lead agency may certify an Environmental Impact Report or adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Suggested mitigation measures after lead agencies determine that a project may cause a substantial adverse change to tribal cultural resources are outlined under PRC section 21084.3 as follows:
x Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to, planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context, or planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.
x Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
x Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 21 x Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
x Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
x Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places. x Protecting the resource.

2.2.8 California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 of the HSC states that if human remains are found, construction and/or excavation must cease within the general vicinity, and the remains must be inspected by the county coroner.

If the coroner determines that they are Native American in origin, then the coroner must contact the NAHC. The NAHC will then determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD must complete inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Sections 8010-8011 of the HSC establish a state repatriation policy that is consistent with and facilitates implementation of NAGPRA. NAGPRA was passed in 1990 and required that museums and federal agencies document all Native American human remains within their collections, or uncovered on projects, as well as their cultural ties. These agencies must then notify any tribe that may be affiliated with the remains and provide the opportunity for their repatriation along with any associated cultural items (grave goods). The California state version (Cal NAGPRA) mandates publicly funded agencies (state and local government agencies) and museums to repatriate human remains and associated cultural items to California Native American Tribes, not just federally recognized tribes within California, and establishes penalties for noncompliance.

2.3 Local Laws and Policies

2.3.1 County of Los Angeles General Plan
Los Angeles County considers its “historic, cultural, and paleontological resources [as] nonrenewable and irreplaceable” (County of Los Angeles 2014:155). In order to protect these resources, the County is guided by federal and state laws regarding such resources. The County’s goal (C/NR 14) is to “[m]itigate all impacts from new development on or adjacent to historic, cultural, and paleontological resources to the greatest extent feasible” and to “[e]nsure proper notification and recovery processes are carried out for development on or near historic, cultural, and paleontological resources.” The County also has policies to “[s]upport the preservation and rehabilitation of historic buildings” and to “[e]nsure proper notification procedures to Native American tribes in accordance with Senate Bill 18 (2004)” (County of Los Angeles 2014:159).

One method the County has employed to successfully preserve historic, cultural, and paleontological resources is maintaining a “local registry or landmarks commission” that identifies historic, cultural, and paleontological resources that are not identified by state and federal programs (County of Los Angeles 2014:158). This registry, known as the Los Angeles County Historical Landmarks and Records Commission “reviews and recommends cultural heritage resources in the unincorporated areas for inclusion in the State Historic Resources Inventory” (County of Los Angeles 2014:155).
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 22 2.3.2 City of Santa Clarita General Plan
Review of the General Plan did not indicate specific policies, goals, or reference to ordinances with respect to paleontologic resources, therefore, Los Angeles County paleontologic policies apply. However, the City of Santa Clarita also complies with the preservation measures put forth in the CEQA for paleontologic and cultural resources. The policies, mitigation measures, and management strategies employed by the City of Santa Clarita for paleontologic and cultural resources are provided below. These policies and mitigation measures are located within Chapter 5 of the General Plan, as well as incorporated in the Preservation of Natural Resources policies and Goals of the Open Space and Conservation Element.

Policy 10.1 to promote the preservation and rehabilitation of significant historic structures and architectural amenities through implementation of the Historic Preservation/Cultural Resources Ordinance.

Policy 10.2 which considers relocation of valuable historic structures to Heritage Park whenever they are unavoidably endangered by incompatible development.

Policy 10.3 to continue to support implementation programs established by the Santa Clarita Historical Society and others to identify and preserve historical sites.

Policy 10.4 to establish development guidelines to identify and preserve significant archeological sites.

Policy 10.5 to integrate historic sites with recreational and open space areas whenever possible.

Policy 10.6 to incorporate historic sites into proposed development whenever possible in such a manner as to preserve the integrity of the site whenever possible.

2.3.3 One Valley One Vision General Plan
The Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan is a component of the Los Angeles County General Plan and is intended to provide focused goals, policies, and maps to guide the regulation of development within the unincorporated portions of the Santa Clarita Valley (City of Santa Clarita. Municipal Code. Title 17 Zoning Section 17.15.020). This updated Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan replaces in its entirety the Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan adopted by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on February 16, 1984 and subsequently amended on December 6, 1990, which had previously served as the basic planning tool for the unincorporated portions of the Santa Clarita Valley. Review of the proposed One Valley One Vision (OVOV) General Plan did not identify specific goals, objectives, and policies related to paleontological resources. However, the OVOV General Plan did identify goals, objectives, and policies pertaining to historical resources and archeological resources. These goals, objectives, and policies are located within Chapter 4:

Conservation and Open Space Element, Section 5.2, Cultural Resources, of the OVOV General Plan and identified below.

Goal CO 5: Protection of historical and culturally significant resources that contribute to community identity and a sense of history.

Objective CO 5.2: Protect and enhance the historic character of Downtown Newhall. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 23 Policy CO 5.2.1: In keeping with the Downtown Newhall Specific Plan policies, ensure that the scale and character of new development is compatible with and does not detract from the context of historic buildings and block patterns.

Policy CO 5.2.3: Ensure that all aspects of community design in Newhall, including street furniture, lighting, trash collection and storage areas, seating, and other accessory structures, are of a design and scale appropriate for the historic character of the district, while maintaining a sense of authenticity.

Objective CO 5.3: Encourage conservation and preservation of Native American cultural places, including prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, and ceremonial sites on both public and private lands, throughout all stages of the planning and development process.

Policy CO 5.3.2: For any proposed development project that may have a potential impact on Native American cultural resources, provide notification to California Native American tribes on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission that have traditional lands located within the City’s jurisdiction, and consider the input received in the development decision.

Policy CO 5.3.3: Review and consider a cultural resources study for any new grading or development in areas identified as having a high potential for Native American resources, and incorporate

2.3.4 City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code
Found within the Santa Clarita Municipal Code is the Property Development Standards for the City of Santa Clarita which includes the requirement that all historical points of interest, as identified in the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Santa Clarita General Plan. It states that any development that would detrimentally affect the historical point of interest shall comply with the requirements of city, state, and federal law and conduct a Historic Preservation Review (City of Santa Clarita. Municipal Code. Title 17 Zoning Section 17.15.020 and Section 17.03.145).

The purpose of the Historic Preservation Review is to promote the economic and general welfare of the City of Santa Clarita by preserving and protecting public and private historic, cultural, and natural resources which are of special historic or aesthetic character or interest or relocating such resources where necessary for their preservation and for their use, education, and view by the general public.

3.0 GEOLOGIC SETTING
Stratigraphic divisions found in rock sequences reflect geologic changes, and thus have provided the basis for determining geologic time scales. Geologic eons are divided into eras, which are divided into periods, which are divided into series or epochs. Table 1 outlines the geologic eras, periods, and series discussed in this report and is based on one created by the USGS Geologic Names Committee (2007). Geologic eras previous to those discussed in this report are not included in the table.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 24 Table 1. Divisions of Recent Geologic Time (after U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Names Committee, 2007) Eon Era Period or Subperiod Series or Epoch Phanerozoic (543 mya to present) Cenozoic 65.5 mya to Present Quaternary

1.5 million years ago (mya) to the
Present
Neogene
Holocene
11,477 years ago (+/- 85 years) to the Present
Pleistocene ("The Great Ice Age")

1.5 million to approximately 11,477 (+/- 85 years) years ago Tertiary

65.5 to 1.5 mya
Pliocene

5.3 to 1.5 mya
Miocene
23 to 5.3 mya
Paleogene
Oligocene

33.9 to 23.0 mya
Eocene

55.8 to 33.9 mya
Paleocene

65.5 to 58.8 mya
Approximately 17 to 18 million years ago in the early Miocene, the North American tectonic plate collided with the Pacific Plate due to the constant movement of plate tectonics. Prior to this collision, Los Angeles County was once above water, but the movement of the Pacific plate northward relative to the North American plate caused the area to submerge (Quinn 2001). In the middle Miocene Epoch, the Los Angeles County area was part of a deep submarine basin that quickly divided into the Ventura Basin, the San Gabriel Basin, the San Fernando Basin (now Valley), and the Los Angeles Basin. These deep, narrow, rapidly subsiding basins were formed when the tectonic blocks that make up today’s Transverse Ranges rotated up to 90 degrees clockwise in response to a shear along the San Andreas Fault called the Big Bend (Luyendyk et al. 1985). The Transverse Ranges, which are oriented west to east, include the Orocopia Mountains, the San Gabriel Mountains, the Santa Ynez Mountains, the Santa Monica Mountains, and the Channel Islands, although the San Gabriel Mountains actually lie east of the San Andreas.

As crustal blocks pivoted, they separated in places to create fault-bounded chasms. These steepsided basins accumulated huge thicknesses of deep-water marine shales and sandstones, as well as deposits of siliceous shale and diatomites (formed from diatoms, or single-celled algae with cell walls made of silica) (Conrey 1967; Crowell 1981; Fritsche et al. 2001; Luyendyk et al. 1985; Schwartz and Colburn 1987; Woodford et al. 1954). Marine sediment over 6 miles deep accumulated in what is now the Los Angeles County, in only 6 million years (Luyendyk et al. 1985) and would become to be known as the Los Angeles Basin.

This basin continued to subside through the early Pliocene but was still separated from the open ocean by a submarine ridge (Quinn 2001). Most of the buildup of mountains and marine sediments occurred in the last two million years, since the Pliocene (Schoenherr 1992). The sediment buildup continued through the Pleistocene, but sea level fluctuated due to the alternating glacial and interglacial episodes (Quinn 1992). During these phases, the area under water expanded and contracted, and the inland stratigraphic layers (not including the coast and the Santa Monica Plain) alternate between marine and continental sediments (Woodford et al. 1954). There was also an overall decrease in local oceanic depth over time during the interglacial periods. This decrease, coupled with increasing deposition, resulted in the eventual termination of the submarine central 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 25 Los Angeles Basin. Continuous non-marine deposition commenced in the later Quaternary period whereby alluvial stream deposits accumulated on top of the earlier marine deposits and was only interrupted by erosion (Quinn 1992). These alluvial stream deposits originated from the floodwaters that were transported from the surrounding mountains by the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana rivers (Schoenherr 1992). The Los Angeles Basin experienced one last (shallow) marine episode during the late Pleistocene prior to the most recent glaciation period.

This glaciation period saw an increase in precipitation and subsequent acceleration in erosion of the Santa Monica Mountains. The resultant increased deposition of fluvial sediments in the basin constitutes the latest stage of the Pleistocene and is often referred to as the Rancholabrean age (Quinn 1992). This designation is named after the fauna recovered from Rancho La Brea and is applied to the later Pleistocene epoch of North America.

The City of Santa Clarita is located in the Transverse Range Geomorphic Province of California, which is characterized by east-west trending mountains and faults. Sedimentary basins within the Transverse Range Geomorphic Province include the Ventura, Soledad, and Ridge Basins, and the San Fernando Valley that continue to accumulate alluvial sediments as a result of the continuous shifting of the San Andreas Fault and the Transverse Range fault systems. These large fault systems have highly influenced the geomorphic region of the Santa Clarita Valley such that the intricate folding of stratified rock layers has provided the necessary naturally occurring traps to allow for oil and gas production.

Figure 5. 1992 Geologic Map of the Oat Mountain and North ½ Canoga Park Quadrangles with Project outlined in red (Dibblee, T.W., and Ehrenspeck, H.E., ed. 1992). 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 26 As denoted on the 1992 Geologic Map of the Oat Mountain and North ½ Canoga Park Quadrangles (Figure 5), the Project site is located within a sub-anticline of the larger Pico Anticline, which is considered a down-warped folding of stratified rock layers that form an “A” shape (Dibblee, T.W., and Ehrenspeck, H.E., ed. 1992). The predominant rock and soil type underlying the surface of the Project site is considered to be part of the 1.8-million-year-old marine deposited PliocenePleistocene aged Saugus Formation composed mostly of sandstone, conglomerate deposits, with rare occurrences of limestone and laminated mudstone (White 1985). The formation is about 2,130 feet thick and was deposited in a shallow-marine environment adjacent to a wave-dominated river delta. The Sandstone layers within the formation noted on this project are very rich in invertebrate fossils, especially shallow-marine snails and clams. Vertebrate fossilized specimens of bison, mastodon, horse, deer, and a rare species of tapir have been uncovered within this formation at various depths (Turner 2010). The extent of grading and excavation depth related to this Project is currently unknown. However, the contextual paleontological history of the general Project vicinity indicates the potential to uncover such resources within the previously mentioned geologic sediment and deposits.

4.0 CULTURAL SETTING
The cultural record for Southern California has been divided into two general time periods: the prehistoric and the historic. The prehistoric period is the time prior to written documentation and colonization. The historic period represents the time from which written documentation was kept for this area: from the first Spanish explorers in the 1500s to the 1950s.

4.1 Prehistoric Background

4.1.1 Western Fluted Point Tradition or the Paleo-Indian Period (±12,000 - 11,000 BP [±10,000 - 9,000 BCE])
Prehistoric human land use for the region of the Project area potentially dates as far back as approximately 12,000 years ago. Evidence of this early habitation comes from the neighboring City of Los Angeles, California which has two of the earliest sites that contains human remains in all of the Americas: “La Brea Woman” and “Los Angeles Man”. Found in 1914, the “La Brea Woman” site is comprised of the osteological remains of a young Native American woman discovered in Pit 10 at the La Brea Tar Pits (located at the George C. Page Museum, also known as the La Brea Tar Pits) within Hancock Park. Her remains were found in association with extinct ice age fauna and a small, possibly domestic, dog (Canus sp.). Artifacts associated with her remains include shell and stone artifacts and a mano (hand grinding stone) fragment. At the time of discovery, her remains were dated to approximately 40,000 years ago based upon associated fossils (Stock and Harris 1992). The presence of the mano fragment, though, as well as the type of shell and stone artifacts, call into question this early date. Artifacts such as these are not present within the archaeological record of southern California until approximately 8,500 to 9,000 BP (see Moratto 1984: 53-54; Stock and Harris 1992: 21-23). Additionally, radiocarbon dates of treated samples (to decontaminate the bones of intrusive carbon) from her remains yielded a date of 9000 +/- 80 B.P. Another discovery at The La Brea Tar Pits, indicating the early presence of humans in the Americas, and specifically California, comes from long bones from three Pleistocene animal species. These bones include one tibia and three femora from saber-tooth cats (Smilodon fatalis), 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 27 one radius from a bison (Bison spp.), and one femur from a California lion (Felis atrox). All of these bones appear to have cut marks and grooves on them, likely the result of human activity.

They have been radiocarbon dated to 15,200 +/- 800 B.P. (Moratto 2004).

The “Los Angeles Man” site contained several human skull fragments found in 1936 by Work Projects Administration (WPA) workers excavating a storm drain along a former route of the Los Angeles River, north of Baldwin Hills by La Cienega Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard. The site is approximately 3.4 meters deep situated in an ancient streambed (Moratto 1984). Approximately, 350 meters away at the same depth as the human bone discovery, two teeth and several bones of an Imperial Mammoth (Mammuthus imperator) were also unearthed. Both the mammoth bones and the human remains were dated, using a fluorine-based dating method, to approximately 20,000 years old. Other early evidence of Los Angeles human habitation has dated the Los Angeles Man to 8,000 to 10,000 B.P. (Moratto 2004).

4.1.2 San Dieguito Tradition or Western Pluvial Lakes/Paleo-Coastal Tradition (11,000 - 7,500 BP [9,000 ± 5,500 BCE])
Other prehistoric human archaeological records date to as early as 11,000 B.P. near the beginning of the Archaic Period in coastal southern California with the San Dieguito Tradition. The San Dieguito Tradition denotes an archaeological period that is found throughout Southern California, described as a generalized hunting tradition dating from 9,000 to 10,000 years ago. It has since been subsumed into the longer Western Pluvial Lakes Tradition, which is characterized by adaptations to inland lake, marsh, and grassland environments, as well as its coastal variant (PaleoCoastal Tradition) distinguished by adaptations to estuary and bay shores. The tradition ended about 8000-7000 B.P. when the climate deteriorated and lakes started drying up. The people from this period were possibly descended from Paleo-Indians who inhabited the desert regions of southeastern California (Moratto 2004; Warren 1968).

The San Dieguito people that inhabited the shores of pluvial lakes and marshes exploited the chaparral zone environments and resources, possibly depending upon a broad array of vegetative resources. They subsisted primarily on chaparral-related resources such as mule deer, rabbits, and plants, but were not known to have harvested the hard seeds of the chaparral plants and moved often as they depleted the local resources (Bean and Smith 1978; Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004). Their toolkits included foliate knives and points (Lake Mojave and Silver Lake points), lanceolate bifaces, lithic crescents, scrapers, choppers, planes, hammerstones, and several types of cores, drills, and gravers. Along the coast, diets included not only land animals and plants, but also mollusks, waterfowl, and limited amounts of sea mammals and fish. Coastal toolkits included additional items such as pitted stones, asphaltum, pointed-bone objects, and shell spoons and ornaments (Moratto 2004).

Early Archaic populations consisted of small, band level in size, groups of people approximately totaling a dozen individuals, or one or two families. The artifact assemblages associated with the “La Brea Woman” and “Los Angeles Man” sites bear similarities with this small band level size groups. During the late San Dieguito Tradition, bone awls and needles became common, and used to make baskets, nets, and clothing (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984). Evidence also suggests that the northern Channel Islands (Santa Rosa and San Miguel islands) were inhabited approximately 9,000 years ago, indicating a sophisticated means of ocean travel, perhaps via plank canoes (Raab 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 28 and Yatsko 1990; Bean and Smith 1978; Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004).

4.1.3 Encinitas Tradition or Milling Stone Horizon, Topanga I Phase (7,500 - 5,000 BP [5,500 ± 3,000 BCE])
Between 8,000 and 6,000 BP, regional exploitation of food resources in California became more systematic and efficient resulting in environmental niche specialization and greater regional difference, as evidenced by the variety in tool kit assemblages. Flourishing between 7,500 and 5,000 BP, the individuals of the Encinitas Tradition continued to exploit game and vegetation in the same traditions devised by their San Dieguito predecessors but added seasonal foraging strategies that yielded protein rich plant material, such as the hard seeds of chaparral plants, to their diet. Midden deposits evinced slightly different subsistence patterns between groups depending on local ecology. The people inhabiting the coastal shoreline harvested vast amounts of shellfish and sea mammals, although not fish. Other groups practiced seasonal exploitation of resources by moving between the coastal littoral (shoreline) and chaparral zones. As the groups became more efficient in their hunting and gathering strategies, the populations of the groups increased to two to three times as large as they had been earlier in the Archaic (Wallace 1955; Warren 1968; Moratto 2004; Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984). Encinitas Tradition tool kits became more specialized, with more regional variation than seen with their San Dieguito predecessors.

Certain tool types were retained, such as basic heavy-duty choppers and scrapers (core tools). New tool forms appeared as well, including large numbers of milling slabs and handstones (metates and manos) used to grind hard seeds, and a modest number of projectile points were added, such as the Pinto Point, that were somewhat smaller than those of previous eras. The Encinitas people also manufactured enigmatic items such as gear-like “cogwheels” and stone disks, for which there is no known utilitarian purpose. These “cogwheels” or “cogstones” required great investment of manufacturing time and energy, seemingly with no relationship to subsistence. When associated with formalized (but rudimentary) differential burials, these items suggest that the Encinitas lifeway was more socio-culturally complex than that of the San Dieguito Tradition (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004; Sutton and Gardner (2006:8) characterize human burials from this phase as secondary burials often consisting only of long bones, with some inhumations but no cremations.

4.1.4 Campbell Tradition or Intermediate Horizon, Topanga II and III phases (5,000 ± 1,000 BP [3,000 BCE ± 1000 CE (Common or Current or Christian Era)]) During the Campbell Tradition, ca. 5,000-4,500 BP, new forms of subsistence procurement and technology, as well as increasing societal changes, began to emerge throughout southern California. Core settlements increased in physical size and population. Many Native American settlements were located in transitional ecological zones, which provided these groups with a broad-spectrum of subsistence without extensive migration, resulting in village-style communities surrounded by peripheral settlements. Faunal remains and numerous projectile points (including harpoon points and arrowheads) demonstrate the renewed reliance on hunting, with both land and sea mammals that were exploited. Fish were incorporated into the diet again, though at low levels, at this time. Acorns became part of the subsistence base, as evidenced by the increased presence of the mortar and pestle. Other tools present include flake scrapers and a variety of shell and bone ornaments (Warren 1968; Wallace 1955; Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004). 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 29 The stabilization of seasonal settlement patterns, due to the onset of a semi-sedentary residence, led to socio-cultural changes in the communities that provided new forms of social and political relationships and trade networks. These changes are seen archaeologically through the presence of exotic items, such as marine shell beads at inland archaeological sites, and the development of more formal mortuary customs that involved both cremations and various burial forms, as well as the inclusion of grave goods. These “advances” demonstrate that societies were becoming increasingly complex (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004). Sutton and Gardner characterize human burials from this time as mostly flexed inhumations with some continuation of secondary long bone interment burials (2006:8). Cremations are present during these phases, but extremely rare.

4.1.5 Late Prehistoric (1,000 ± 400 BP [1,000 ± 1542 CE]) During the Late Prehistoric, regional differences throughout California fully developed, resulting in the tribal groups that are currently known (Wallace 1955). Populations of these culturally distinct groups continued to rise as did territorially defined sedentary settlement patterns. Resource exploitation, including fishing, intensified while large-scale hunting and gathering operations provided varied sources of subsistence on the other. The diversity and quantity of trade increased with the development of a shell-bead money system. Linked to the development of these trade networks was the establishment of non-egalitarian political systems that increased social complexity within the cultures, as evinced by marked differences in access to goods and services both within and between local Native American communities. Societies became highly stratified with hierarchies based upon wealth, occupation, and/or lineage. The increased subsistence intensification, sedentism, and complexity are documented in the archaeological record of the Gabrieleño people and their linguistically distinct Chumash neighbors to the west (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; Moratto 2004). Though these are two examples observed by Chartkoff and Moratto, other mission Native Americans that mirrored the similar advances of recorded complexity included the Gabrieleno Tongva, the Kizh people, the Tataviam people, the Kitnanemuk people, and the Vanyume people which also inhabited the various regions in the Project vicinity.

Other changes that occurred during this period include the increased use of the bow and arrow, the application of asphaltum to various items, and the manufacture of many new types of artifacts such as shell tools (fishhooks) and ornaments (beads and pendants), stone bowls, animal effigies, bone tools and ornaments (awls, scepters, hairpins, fishhooks, whistles, and tubes), and pottery vessels in the south. Burials are formally marked and the remains face in a particular direction. While some of these practices started along the coast in earlier times, their occurrence at interior locations was a new development (Moratto 2004).

Prior to the Late Prehistoric, the “Shoshonean Tradition” way of life infused (or intruded) into the southern California region, mainly through immigration but also through trait diffusion from the interior to the coast. It is theorized that the immigration originated from the environmental decline that in turn affected substance procurement in the Great Basin. Long-term droughts forced people to migrate from the Great Basin region southwestward into the southern California interior and finally towards the coast. These migrants at first inhabited the less-desirable, sparsely inhabited areas. They brought with them new traditions and artifacts including cremation, pottery, and small triangular arrow points. The result of this immigration event is often referred to as the “Shoshonean 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 30 Wedge” (Moratto 2004; Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984).

While the social complexity of these groups began to increase within these migrating populations during the Late Archaic Period [3,000 to 1500 BP (1,000 BCE to 500 CE)], it was particularly apparent during the Late Prehistoric Horizon. When the “Shoshoneans” migrated to the coast, they quickly adapted to the surroundings, their success the result of borrowing the technologies and economic practices of their new neighbors including a maritime subsistence base (Moratto 2004).

Bull (1977) theorizes that the Shoshonean groups actually replaced and intermarried with the indigenous groups. This contact has resulted in a complex archaeological record, characterized by defined cultural territories for hunting and sea exploitation.

4.2 Ethnographic Background
Since physical borders did not exist between tribes and other entities, the Project area and surrounding vicinity included many tribal groups. While the Chumash and Kitanemuk generally lived outside the Project area’s territory, many of the people from those tribes have been listed by the NAHC as part of their ancestral homeland. The tribal groups that lived, and still do, around the Project area are listed in this section. The Project property is located in a region where prehistoric cultural history is historically minimally documented and/or understood (Kroeber 1925; Hanks 1971; Moratto 1984; King 1994; Sutton 1996). At the time of the arrival of the Spanish, the Native American people, named the Tataviam, occupied various locals in the Project vicinity which included the Santa Clara River Valley and northward to the southern Antelope Valley. However, other Native American culture groups, including the Chumash to the west, and the Gabrieliño/Tongva/Kizh Nation to the south and southeast, include this area as part of their territory.

The name Gabrieleño was given to the local Native Americans by the Spaniards at the time of European contact. While the Gabrieleño people have been mostly associated with the San Gabriel Mission, their territory was much larger. In fact, the name Gabrieleño was derived from the name of the first Spanish Catholic Mission established in the Los Angeles area (Figure 6) (Pitt and Pitt 1997; Street 2008). The Gabrieleño people, at the time of European contact, were regarded as the richest, largest, and most dominant group in southern California aside from the Chumash, in part due to the abundance of resources available to them in the general Los Angeles area (Figure 7).

They were not agriculturists since their economy was based on hunting and gathering, including fishing and acorn processing, as well as trade. One object of trade was steatite or soapstone, an easily carved metamorphic talc-schist rock useful for cookware, containers, and art. The local Southern Californian source of steatite is located on Santa Catalina Island, part of a locally unique geological terrain. Additional tribes in the Los Angeles area lived near the watersheds of the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana Rivers, along the Pacific Coast, as well as the offshore islands of Santa Catalina, San Clemente, and San Nicolas. The Gabrieleño groups that lived near the ocean were believed, along with their northwestern neighbors the Chumash, to have regularly navigated the ocean near the shore. Less frequent ocean goers included the San Diegan groups to the south.

The Gabrieleño constructed ocean-going canoes, called ti'at, which were built using planks sewn together edge to edge with plant and sinew material, and subsequently caulked with either pine pitch or, more commonly, asphaltum that washed ashore from oil seeps or was imported to the coastal locations from the area associated with the present-day La Brea Tar Pits. (Blackburn 1978; 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 31 Bean and Smith 1978).

Figure 6. Gabrieleño women outside the San Gabriel Mission (early 20th century) 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 32 Figure 7. Tataviam territory shaded in gray and general Project vicinity circled in red (King and Blackburn, 1978)
Kroeber states that little data exists describing the life way of the Tataviam, named after a remnant Takic language group, ethnographically identified as a Serrano division of the Shoshonean (Kroeber 1925). Originally, the anthropological literature referenced these groups as using the name that the Hokan speaking Chumash people used: Alliklik or I’alliklik (Kroeber 1925). Early 20th Century ethnography Alfred Kroeber (1925) states that at some later point in their history, the name Alliklik was changed to the name Tataviam. Nowadays, much more is known about the Tataviam, and their rich history that has been documented. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 33 At the time of European contact Tataviam territory may have ranged east of Piru, within the entire upper Santa Clara River region, northwards to Pastoria Creek and east to Mt. Gleason (Figure 3).

It appears that the Tataviam lived in close contact with their eastern-Chumash and Gabrieleño/Tongva neighbors to the south (Hanks 1971; King and Blackburn 1978; Moratto 1984) as hunter and gatherers. Like many Californian culture groups known as hunter/gatherers, the Tataviam lived in small villages and satellite camps near water sources originating in the local mountains, foothills, and adjacent desert areas. More specifically, Newhall is the general location of the Tataviam village Tochonanga, “a name linguistically associated with the Late Prehistoric Gabrieliño territories” (Johnston 1962; Merriam 1968, as cited in McKenna et al. 2003: 5).

Hunter/Gatherer subsistence consisted primarily of plants and animals found in the foothills, such as acorns, seeds, berries, deer and rabbit. Many other plants were also utilized, such as yucca, cactus, and screw beans (Moratto 1984; Robinson 1987; King 1994; Sutton 1996). Seasonal settlement and resource exploitation rounds may have included natural spring areas as well as the foothill creeks that drain into the Santa Clara River. These hunter/gatherer groups were prolific lithic tool manufacturers and basket makers, as evinced in the archaeological record.

The Tataviam people were a socially complex hunter/gatherer group that occupied the area.

Culturally, they were very similar to their Chumash and Gabrieleño/Tongva neighbors.

Unfortunately, most of the culturally significant information, such as religious beliefs, traditions, oral histories, and folklore of the Tataviam and Gabrieleño/Tongva people was lost during the Mission Period. This was the result of forced cultural assimilation by the Spanish, and the decline of population due to the introduction of European diseases to the region. The Tataviam lived in various villages within the upper regions of the Santa Clara River and extended over the Sawmill Mountains to the north and included the southwestern areas of the Antelope Valley (Figure 6). The Tataviam also lived where Saugus, Agua Dulce and Lake Elizabeth are located today and those that live today are currently working with the Native American Heritage Commission to become a federally recognized tribe. Many of the tribal members live and work in the Santa Clarita area.

4.3 Historic Background
The Historic Period begins when the first Spanish explorers recorded in writing their observations of the area and its inhabitants. The Historic Period in California is divided into four general phases:

The Exploration Period (1542 to 1769 CE), the Spanish Period (1769 to 1821 CE), the Mexican Period (1821 to 1846 CE), and the American Period (1846 CE to Present).

4.3.1 Exploration Period (1542 to 1769 CE)
European explorers made sporadic visits into the general Los Angeles area during the 16th Century. For example, Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, an ethnic Portuguese explorer working for the Spanish crown, arrived at San Pedro Bay in 1542 (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984), although the bay was not named until 1602 by Sebastian Vizcaíno during his survey of the Pacific shore between Acapulco and Oregon (Gumprecht 1999). Extensive Spanish interaction with the Gabrieleño began in 1769 when Gaspar de Portolá led an overland expedition from San Diego across southern California with Franciscan Padre Juan Crespí as part of a plan to affirm Spanish control over California that was threatened by the Russians and the British. Juan Crespí recorded this particular expedition in diaries and records. According to interpretations of these documents, the expedition party traveled through present day Elysian Park during the beginning of August and was awed by 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 34 a river that flowed from the northwest, past Elysian Park, and southward. It was Portolá who named the river El Rio de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Angeles de Porciúncula, which translates to “The River of Our Lady Queen of the Angels of Porciúncula.” (The river Porciúncula is the present-day Los Angeles River, now mainly a concrete waterway.) The expedition travelers camped in that area. It is documented that they crossed the San Gabriel and Santa Ana Rivers as well. While much of the water of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers flows underground, the waters of the Los Angeles River were forced above the river sands at Griffith Park and Elysian Park by underground geological formations before they dropped again below the sands south of what is now downtown Los Angeles. Only during severe winter floods would there be substantial aboveground water that would appear in the riverbeds of all three rivers. Crespí described the Los Angeles River as only slightly smaller than the two other rivers. The Los Angeles River’s main riverbed, downstream from the Los Angeles area and Bunker Hill, may well have been near what is now Washington Boulevard and Ballona Creek as it was during the early 1800s, though Crespí’s chronicle indicates it following its more currently known southerly flow. A major flood in 1825 shifted its main course southward to join the San Gabriel River at one of that river’s old course alignments (Gumprecht 1999). The Portola expedition returned to Los Angeles during the winter on its way back to San Diego from the San Francisco Bay area, having missed its initial destination, Monterey Bay. Portolá would head another expedition through Los Angeles in the spring of 1770, again on the way to Monterey Bay (Starr 2005).

4.3.2 Spanish Period (1769 to 1821 CE)
Twelve years after Portola’s voyages, an expedition organized by the Spanish Governor of California, Felipe de Neve, established a pueblo on the coastal plain of the Los Angeles River.

This new town was one day’s ride north of San Pedro and was dedicated on September 4, 1781.

The town, like the river, was named after St. Francis of Assisi’s first church, St. Mary of the Angels, or El Pueblo de (Nuestra Señora) la Reina de los Angeles (de Porciúncula). The company of settlers was recruited by de Neve from the Mexican states of Sonora and Sinaloa and was known as Los Pobladores (the “townspeople” or “populators”). The original group was led by Captain Fernando Javier Rivera y Moncada and was comprised of eleven families made up of 11 men, 11 women, and 22 children. The settlers were of various ethnicities including those of Spanish, African, and Native American descent, as well as some of mixed race (mulattos and mestizos).

Over time, the area known as the Ciudad de Los Angeles became the “City of Angels,” and on April 4, 1850, it became known as the City of Los Angeles (Mason 2004; Pitt and Pitt 1997).

The goal of the Spanish colonization effort was not only to create local populations of settling peasants and merchants, but also to include native peoples who already occupied the region into those populations. In order to incorporate the indigenous tribes, efforts were made to educate them and convert them to Christianity, turning them from “savages” into “intelligent beings—gente de razón” (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984: 258). It is for this reason that religious missions became the cornerstone of colonization. Padre Junípero Serra, who founded 21 missions in 52 years, directed the missionization of California (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984). Two of those missions were in Los Angeles: Misión del Santo Arcángel San Gabriel de los Temblores (San Gabriel Mission) now known as Mission Vieja established on September 8, 1771, by the Padres Angel Somera and Pedro Bonito Cambon, and San Fernando Rey de España Mission on September 8, 1797, by Padre Fermín Lasuén (Pitt and Pitt 1997). In order to support the Spanish settlements, missions did not just attempt to convert California Indians, but also used them to work on the farms 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 35 and ranches present on mission grounds. Many of the Gabrieleño were gradually forced to move to the San Gabriel or San Fernando Missions to provide labor, and many of the Native Americans living on the coastal plains and inland valleys at the time were also transported here, though small groups did escape this confinement (Bean and Smith 1978).

The forced interaction with the Spanish marked the beginning of the decline of the indigenous population, as a powerful force shaping the nature of the Los Angeles area. Their population was already declining, even before the arrival of a large number of Spanish, from diseases introduced by earlier explorers (Bean and Smith 1978). Mass conversions of the Gabrieleño people began in 1778 when certain village chiefs turned to Catholicism. These Gabrieleño assisted the Spanish, even though many other Gabrieleño resisted the colonization and started revolts. In 1796, the recruits used traditional Gabrieleño subsistence practices to feed the general population of the missions. By 1800, the original Gabrieleño villages were empty and the Gabrieleños and other Native Americans provided much of the labor for the European ranches, farms, and communities.

The shift from hunting and gathering to a sort of feudal existence led to dietary deficiencies that eventually caused population reduction. The local population greatly suffered from the European epidemics as their population dwindled rapidly (Bean and Smith 1978). During this time, only fragmentary ethnographic information was recorded. Because of the lack of collected data, the Tongva, a group that once flourished in the rich Los Angeles environment, is one of the Native American groups that is least known ethnographically (Gumprecht 1999).

4.3.3 Mexican Period (1821 to 1846 CE)
The start of the Mexican Period began when Mexico gained its independence from Spain in 1821.

At the same time, the Mission system began to break down, and eventually, around 1834, the secularization of the Mission system in Alta California ended. After Mexico gained independence from Spain, California experienced a period of thriving ranchos between the years of 1821-1848.

The word rancho was a general term covering farms, ranches, and settlements. The term was also used to denote a specific time frame (the Rancho Period) that encompassed the authorization of land grants in Alta California by King Carlos III of Spain (1784) as well as its redefinition with the acceptance of the state of California in the United States (1850). Some researchers restrict the Rancho Period to the time from 1824 to 1847 when the Mexican governors awarded some 800 land grants (Figure 8), most of which were former mission lands in which the Native Americans at the time were supposed to have some legal claim. The Spanish authorities had only made some 20 land grants before Mexico’s Independence in 1821. Many of the land grants were or became cattle ranches, a major economic activity at that time. The Native American tribes supplied most of the labor (Starr 2005; Wlodarski 1998).
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 36 Figure 8. Spanish and Mexican ranchos of Los Angeles County (Eddy, Gerald A. 1937)

4.3.4 American Period (A.D. 1848 to Present)
American military forces were present within California during the summer of 1846 as a result of the Mexican American War. Mexican resistance deteriorated, and the United States occupied Mexico City in 1848, marking the beginning of the American Period (1848 to Present). In February 1848, California became a U.S. holding with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This treaty ended the Mexican American War and ceded much of the southwest (California, Nevada, Utah, and portions of Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Wyoming) to the United States. A month earlier, on January 24, 1848, gold was discovered along the American River, near 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 37 Sacramento. The following year resulted in over 150,000 miners, known as “49-ers,” descending upon California. That same year, 1849, California petitioned Congress for admission to the Union as a “free state.” As a result of the Compromise of 1850, California was admitted to the Union as the 31st state on September 9, 1850 and was slave-free (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984; State of California 2015b). In 1862, the Homestead Act was passed, allowing individuals to claim up to 160 acres of undeveloped federal land for freehold title, provided that the claimant filed an application, improved the land, and then filed for title within five years (U.S. Congress 1863).

While the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo required the United States to grant citizenship to the Indians of former Mexican territories, the Constitution of California did not offer Indians protection under the law, considering them non-persons (Cook 1971). At the first State Constitutional Convention, California Indians’ right to vote was denied, and in 1850, the Act for the Government and Protection of Indians was passed by the State Legislature that greatly reduced the rights of Indians and enacted harsh punishments for any crimes committed by Indians. The Act practically legalized Indian slavery by allowing city officials to arrest Indians for vagrancy (drunkenness) and then sell them to ranchers and other people to serve as a private “labor force.” The law was not repealed until 1866 in order to comply with the 14th Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution. However, Native Californians did not gain citizenship until 1917 when the California Supreme Court declared them citizens. Subsequently, the Indian Citizenship Act was passed in 1924 granting Indians the right to vote, but it would be more than 50 years before Indians were guaranteed their “constitutional right of religion” (OHP 1988).

In 1851, the United States Congress authorized a commission to create treaties with California Indians with the goal of extinguishing all Indian land titles and instead establishing reservation land, as had been done in many other states. However, the State Senate objected to the treaties as the land that was to be used for reservations was good for agriculture and rich in minerals. As a result, the U.S. senators from California convinced the U.S. Senate to not ratify the treaties that were drawn. They were then filed with an injunction of secrecy that was not removed until 1905.

The signed treaties became known as the “Lost 18 Treaties of 1852” (Castillo 1978; Johnston 1962; OHP 1988). Reservation land was still set up in California, under the leadership of Edward F. Beale and Benjamin D. Wilson, superintendent and sub-agent of Indian Affairs for California, but no new treaties were negotiated. In addition, after the treaties were “rediscovered,” legislation was passed to purchase small tracts of lands, later known as rancherías, in central and north central California for “landless Indians” in those areas. Therefore, some California Indians did manage to obtain reservation land by agreeing to move to specific locations. The quality of life on reservations, though, was sometimes poor because of limited resources. There was often a lack of water, and squatters were sometimes allowed to graze their cattle on reservation land, thereby destroying crops that were supposed to feed and support the Indians (OHP 1988).

The General Allotment Act of 1887, or the Dawes Act, was meant to provide California Indian families or individuals with lands. These lands were held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs for 25 years, and if, after 25 years, the Indians had cultivated the land and become self-sufficient, they would gain title to the land. While the act appeared to benefit the Indians, it was designed to weaken the power of tribal governments. Many California Indians recognized the Act’s ultimate goal and instead chose to either purchase land or fight for the lands they believed to be theirs in the courts. Most court cases eventually sided with American settlers, though, and most Indians 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 38 were evicted (OHP 1988). As for the lands of which Indians did manage to gain ownership, most of them were taken away by laws enacted since 1900 (Chartkoff and Chartkoff 1984). The California Indian Jurisdictional Acts, or Lea Act, was passed in 1928 that allowed California Indians to either lay claim to certain lands in court or gain recompense, however Indians gained few victories and were often left homeless (OHP 1988).

One of the reasons that it was difficult for California Indians to obtain land was due to the arrival of the railroads in the late 1800s and early 1900s, which brought in a new influx of immigrants.

The rail lines initially only connected the Los Angeles area to the Pacific Ocean, but California would be connected to the rest of the country when Central Pacific and other major railroad companies started working on a southern transcontinental route across the United States known as the Sunset Route. This route was completed in 1883 and connected San Francisco to New Orleans.

The portion of the route built through the Los Angeles area was constructed by Southern Pacific in the 1870s (see below). The Southern Pacific enjoyed a railroad monopoly in California until 1885 when the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe (AT&SF) completed a line into southern California.

The two railroads then “engaged each other in a fierce rate war” that drove passenger ticket prices to as low as one dollar (Tang 2003:5). This competition resulted in significant immigration to southern California, which was a large factor in the southern California land boom in the 1880s.

New towns emerged on newly acquired land and on former cattle ranches both along the coast and in the valleys. With the advent of refrigerated cars, the railroads were able to transport perishable produce, including fresh fruit, to distant eastern cities. This development enabled southern California to become a major agricultural center (Tang 2003, 2009), thus further depleting the land available to California Indians.

Native Americans faced dangers beyond what they had experienced through missionization and loss of territory. Vigilante groups and militias were established to kill Indians and to kidnap their children. As a result, close to 100,000 Californian Indians perished and much of the tribal continuity throughout the state was extinguished (Castillo 1978). The last comprehensive survey of the Gabrielino occurred in 1852. It found that most of the traditional communities had disappeared, the use of the indigenous language had declined, and many traditional ceremonies and practices had been abandoned (McCawley 1996). By 1900, they had “ceased to exist as a culturally identifiable group” (Bean and Smith 1978:540).

4.3.5 History of the Project Vicinity
A 1769 expedition, led by Father Junipero Serra led to the observation of the Native American villages that once existed near what would become the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property and the surrounding regions (Kingsley and Gates, 1969). As previously mentioned, in section 4.2 various Native American tribes did not have physical borders therefore the Project area and surrounding vicinity included many tribal entities. At the time of the arrival of the Spanish, the Native American people, named the Tataviam, primarily occupied various locals in the Project vicinity which included the Santa Clara River Valley and northward to the southern Antelope Valley. Though it is important to note that various other Native American people lived in this same region which included the Chumash to the west, and the Gabrieleño/Tongva/Kizh Nation to the south, and also the Kitanemuk, as stated in the last section. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 39 Father Juan Crespi, a spiritual leader in the expedition led by Father Serra, observed and recorded the property that is now the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property and considered it a "very suitable site for a mission." However, Father Serra’s vision did not come to be since the San Fernando Mission was established in 1797 in another location instead (Kingsley and Gates, 1969).

This mission quickly sought to force cultural assimilation among all the Native American people of the area which led to the decline of population due to the introduction of European diseases to the region. After the establishment of the mission, many of the California Missions began developing extensions, sub-missions (asistencias), or ranchos (estancias), intended to extend their reach and provide more areas for livestock and agriculture (Worden 1996). In 1804, an asistencia was established for the San Fernando Mission, at the junction of Castaic Creek and the Santa Clara River (Figure 9). This asistencia served as a headquarters for local activities of the mission and a training school for local trade students who provided labor force for the mission’s maintenance and operation.

Figure 9. Reconstructed image of the asistencia built on the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property (Kingsley and Gates, 1969).

The mission system quickly begun to decay upon Mexico’s independence from Spain in 1821.

Soldiers, rancheros, and farmers desired the coastal lands that the missions controlled, but between 1834 and 1836, the Mexican government confiscated these California mission properties. This quickly began the efforts to secularize the missions by breaking up the properties through selling or given away to private citizens. Secularization was started with the goal to return the land to the Native Americans that occupied the mission properties. In actuality, most Native Americans were 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 40 put to work on ranchos or went to live among Native American people in the interior of the state.

Lieutenant Antonio del Valle was commissioned by the Governor of California, Jose Figueroa, to oversee the San Fernando Mission inventory, in 1834 in order to begin secularization proceedings.

He was then appointed as administrator for the mission and urged Governor Figueroa that a military presence was necessary to stop ex-mission Native Americans from stealing horses and cattle (Kingsley and Gates, 1969). By 1839, California's new governor, Juan B. Alvarado granted Antonio del Valle the rights and property of Rancho San Fernando consisting of the western Santa Clarita Valley and portions of Ventura County. This decision quickly angered the Native Americans (stated in local literature as the Tataviam) since this land was not returned under their ownership. Under this grant, Antonio del Valle’s family was the first to own Rancho San Fernando, but upon his death in 1841, it was divided among his children.

Francisco Lopez, a cousin of Antonio del Valle, made the first discovery of gold in California which ultimately led to the first gold mining camp located at Placerita Canyon. The discovery also led to interest from people in all parts of California and Mexico to visit the region in search of gold and by 1849, the California Gold Rush was in full effect. Pioneer merchants in the neighboring Pueblo de Los Angeles quickly received notice of the opportunities that existed north of their area and then sought a way to travel between the pueblo, gold mining areas, and the newly established Fort Tejon. A toll road, known as the San Fernando Pass, was being developed over the hills that divided the gold mining camps from the southern regions of Pueblo de Los Angeles. The road was not opened until 1855 but constant road improvements were required such that in 1861, the California State Legislature hired Andres Pico’s franchise to make major improvements to the road. Eventually, General Edward F. Beale was granted the rights for road improvements after a storm in 1862 washed away Pico’s infrastructure. Beale was charged with collecting tolls for this road and his men deepened the cut of the road using only shovels and pickaxes.

With the advent of this new pass and gold mining still prominent, traffic quickly increased between Los Angeles and the northern territories which meant there was a higher need for stage stops. As a result, Henry C. Wiley and Jose Ygnacio del Valle established the first stage depot on what would eventually become the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property. Two twin pioneer brothers known as Sanford and Cyrus Lyons were so enticed to leave the east coast by the talk of the California Gold Rush that they emigrated to the west in 1849. They settled down in Los Angeles and worked as clerks in a mercantile store to save money to buy a business. In 1855, the brothers quickly purchased the stage depot from Wiley and del Valle and renamed it Lyons Station.

Remnants of this old stop can still be seen near the entrance of the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property and has been recognized as California Registered Historical Landmark No. 688. The station included a main building which contained a store, post office, and tavern that served all pioneers who visited. There was also a large stable for horse care and a cottage home. Within the same property of Lyons Station, the first burial grounds for deceased locals and pioneers were developed. This location became the first burial plots of what would later become the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park. In honor of these first pioneers that worked in the gold mines and visited Lyons Station, the early burials were moved to a garden within the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property and named it "The Garden of the Pioneers". Sanford Lyon and some of his family members can be found in this section of the Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park property as seen in Figure 10.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 41 Figure 10. View toward the southeast of the Lyon/Devendorf family headstone at Eternal Valley Henry Mayo Newhall, an early pioneer of Santa Clarita, emigrated from Saugus Massachusetts to the area in 1850 after selling his auction firm to join the Gold Rush in California. However, when reaching the State of California, he realized that most of the gold mining sites had already been claimed, so he proceeded to focus on railroad manufacturing. Through his financial success, he invested in rail companies, specifically in 1857, for the rail systems that would connect San Francisco to other cities. Through this work he became president of the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad, but then decided to resell the railroad company to the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1868, where he joined its Board of Directors. After much success in his railroad investments, Newhall returned to auctioneering and began to focus on real estate. Newhall’s largest purchase in the area was the acquisition of Rancho San Francisco which was later renamed after his death as Newhall Ranch. At that time of the Rancho San Francisco acquisition, construction had begun for the San Fernando railroad tunnel through the Newhall Pass. This construction effort of the railroad tunnel was met with cave-ins and explosions which led to a number of victims to be buried in the early Lyon Station Cemetery. Additionally, this construction also led to approximately 1,500 workers to establish a new town near the Southern Pacific Railroad construction and near the mouth of Soledad Canyon. However, upon completion of the railroad, many of this new town’s occupants departed and left a gap in the town’s economy. As a result, this forced the preliminary workers town to move in 1878 three miles south and officially became known as the town of Newhall in 1878. Of additional interest, Henry Newhall named the town of Saugus after his Massachusetts birthplace. This location was where the first station that was built on the rail line. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 42 The Kentuckian native Henry Clay Needham began to establish the prohibition Kansas laws that he wrote, enacted by then Kansas governor John St. John, when he arrived in downtown Newhall in 1888. In order to expand on and achieve their ideas of prohibition, St. John, along with George B. Katzenstein of Sacramento and James Yarnell of Los Angeles, combined their finances in 1887 to purchase 10,000 acres of land from the town of Newhall. Their goal was to establish a subdivision of the Newhall property as a “dry” colony, so they hired Henry Needham to supervise the establishment of the St. John Subdivision. Needham plotted out the subdivision and, in his design, the area included Lyons Station and Lyons Station Cemetery and ran all the way north through the present Circle J tract to Soledad Canyon Road. Needham also decided to settle on approximately a 700 acre lot, known as Needham Ranch, within this subdivision. The property is located southwest of today's intersection of Newhall Avenue and Sierra Highway. As part of his 700 acre lot, the property for the Lyons Station and Cemetery was included, in which the Lyons Station Cemetery became known as the Needham Family Cemetery. Under the terms of the grant deeds, anyone caught in possession of alcohol in the property was subject to foreclosure. Under his leadership, Needham attempted to build up the area through land sales by attracting people from the Los Angeles area. Most of the settlers were chicken ranchers, fruit tree growers and vineyard keepers. One of Needham’s supporters was Alex Mentry, famous of his own right regarding the Pico Canyon oil field. Alex Mentry would not allow liquor in his own town of Mentryville. The penalty for drinking was the loss of the individual’s land and property deed. In 1957 Needham’s heirs sold the property to Louis Visco, known as the San Fernando Valley trash king. Visco proposed plans to turn the Railroad Canyon into a large landfill. However, the town officials of Newhall placed a moratorium on constructing on any unclassified land which would impact Viscos plans so, he sold the property to Mark T. Gates Sr., a renown funeral director.

Born on December 29, 1907, in Nebraska, Mark T. Gates Sr. eventually become a prominent businessman in Los Angeles. He established Gates, Kingsley, and Gates Funeral Home in Santa Monica and even served as mayor of Santa Monica from March 1947 to April 17, 1951, after the Santa Monica city charter reform switched to a council-manager form of government. Previously, the city was run by three elected commissioners. As part of his mortuary business, Gates Sr. eventually purchased the 750-acre Needham Ranch in 1957 to develop the Eternal Valley Memorial and Mortuary Park within the northeastern corner of the property. The cemetery was originally established as a non-profit by leaders in the community in the same location as Lyons Station and was established on a 220 acre section of the property that included the old Pioneer Cemetery. Since the cemetery was established in the same local as Lyons Station, developers of the cemetery decided to pay tribute to the earlier pioneers that were laid to rest at the station by moving all headstones into one central area known as the "The Garden of the Pioneers". In the early 20th Century, Mark Gates Jr., son of Mark Gates Sr., together with the new cemetery owner and local landowner Hank Arklin, developed part of the old Needham Ranch property and part of Arklin’s own property into the Gate-King Industrial Park. The crypt of Mark T. Gates Sr. and his wife Margaret is located inside the mausoleum at Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Park (Figure 11). When he had died in 1972, his company sold most of the Eternal Valley property, but retained 584 acres of the ex-Needham Ranch.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 43 Figure 11. View of the Mark T. and Margaret Gates crypt located at Eternal Valley and Mortuary Park mausoleum.

5.0 METHODOLOGY

5.1 Cultural Resources Records Search
On December 16, 2020, APRMI requested a cultural resource records and literature search from the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), the local repository for the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), located on the campus of California State University Fullerton, in Fullerton, California, to identify any cultural resources on or near the Project site. A quarter-mile search radius was utilized around the Project. This records search reviews current inventories of the NRHP, California Historical Landmarks (CHL), California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD), for Los Angeles County, and the CRHR to determine any local resources that have been previously evaluated for historic significance.

The National Map’s Historical Topographic Map Collection (HTMC) provides a digital repository of USGS 1:250,000 scale and larger maps printed between 1884, the inception of the topographic mapping program, and 2006. This database was used to observe the historic land uses of surrounding Project vicinity and to observe the development of the built environment within the Project area itself. Analysis of the Historic Aerial Photographs provided by the Google Earth Pro software were also used to conduct a similar assessment of the Project area. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 44 For the purposes of this assessment, the OHP’s definition of historic resources was used in that any building or object that is 45 years of age or older is considered historic (OHP 1995).

5.2 Archival Research
Additional research was conducted through different inventory databases and/or historic societies to acquire more information or knowledge of cultural resources within the Santa Clarita Valley.

The Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society is a nonprofit volunteer organization dedicated to preserving the heritage of the Santa Clarita Valley. Archival records of the Project site found within the Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society data base were reviewed for additional background information of cultural resources.

5.3 Field Reconnaissance
On October 18, 2020, Ms. Robin Turner, Mr. John Flynn, and Mr. Miguel Miguel conducted a field reconnaissance of the Project area to evaluate the presence of any cultural resources to determine if the development of the Project would have any significant direct or indirect adverse impacts on such resources. The survey began atop the highest elevation point of the Project area and continued down to the lower elevations for further evaluation. Pedestrian survey methods were conducted in undeveloped areas with clear brush access and high ground visibility. The Project area was surveyed in transects approximately 10 feet (3 m) apart towards a northern direction.

Vegetation, topography, and fauna observations were photographed and noted for any potential significant adverse impacts that may be caused by the development of the Project. All photos, and field notes are stored in the APRMI office.

5.4 Amended Field Reconnaissance
On June 15, 2021, APRMI was requested to conduct an amended field reconnaissance of the Project area due to amended plans of the areas that will be graded/excavated and the addition of a proposed development for a new mausoleum servicing the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary. Ms. Robin Turner, Ms. Viridiana Garcia, and Mr. Miguel Miguel conducted this second amended field reconnaissance to assess if the new additions to the Project will have any significant direct or indirect adverse impacts on cultural or tribal resources. This survey began at the northern most areas that would slightly extend the boundary of the original Project and then extended to the southeast and eastern boundaries of the Project area that will include the new mausoleum.

Surveyors walked only in areas that were accessible due to vegetation absence in transects approximately 10 feet (3 m) apart towards a southern direction. Some areas were not accessible due to an adjacent development that was conducting mass grading along the Needham Ranch Parkway road that serves as the western most boundary for the Project area. Other areas were not accessible due to dense vegetation and topography that restricted APRMI surveyors. New vegetation and fauna not observed in the previous field reconnaissance were noted. Updated photographs of this amended field reconnaissance are stored in the APRMI office. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 45 6.0 RESULTS OF RECORDS SEARCHES

6.1 Cultural Resources Records Search
Results of the cultural records search are discussed in detail below as catalog numbers assigned by the SCCIC. Any building assessment discussed below that state NRHP, CRHR, or HCM criterion determinations are made by the author or investigators of the report studies or site record and not made by APRMI. Criterion requirements may be viewed in Regulatory Setting section.

6.1.1 Prehistoric Sites and Isolate(s)
No previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites or isolates were identified within the Project property or within a quarter-mile radius of the Project alignment.

6.1.2 Historic Sites and Isolate(s)
No previously recorded historic sites or isolates were identified within the Project property or within a quarter-mile radius of the Project alignment.

6.1.3 Built Environment
Historic property results include 1 primary record for the Southern California Edison (SCE) Big Creek East & West Transmission Line located outside of the Project area but is still within a quarter mile radius. The SCE Big Creek East & West Transmission Line consists of two parallel electrical transmission lines, labeled as the West Line and East Line. Construction for this structure occurred between 1912-1913 which makes it approximately 107-108 years old. The original purpose for this structure is known as a 241-mile long electric transmission line that was originally used to transfer power from the Big Creek Powerhouses in the Sierra National Forest to the Eagle Rock Substation in Los Angeles, California. Initially constructed by the Pacific Light and Power Company (PLPC), in 1917, PLPC conveyed all Big Creek rights and property to SCE. Once construction was complete, the transmission lines were regarded as the longest spanning and highest voltage transmission line at 150kV in the world. The structure is considered as a contributing element to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed district of the Big Creek Hydroelectric System Historic District (BCHSHD). The BCHSHD was listed on the National Register on July 26, 2016. Despite this structure to be located within a quarter-mile radius of the Project, it will not be directly or indirectly affected by the Project. Primary Records and the results of the SCCIC records search can be viewed in Table 2 and Appendix B.

Table 2. Results of SCCIC Built Environment
Primary
Number
Resource
Type
Description Recorder(s)
and Year(s)
NRHP/CRHR Status Location
P-19-
186861
Historic
Structure
SCE’s Big Creek
East & West
Transmission Line
2002 (June A.

Schmidt)
Listed in the National
Register as Contributor
to a listed district
Outside of
Project area
Upon independent review of the California Historical Landmark registry, it has been determined that the Lyons Station Stagecoach Shop is considered a significant historical landmark. This site 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 46 was the location of a store, post office, telegraph office, tavern, and stage depot that accommodated travelers during the California Gold Rush in the early 1850s. A regular stop for Butterfield and other early California stage lines, it was purchased by Sanford and Cyrus Lyons in 1855, and by 1868. Only one building remains is marked by a plaque with the California Historical Landmark No. 688, sited in front of the Eternal Valley Memorial and Mortuary Park. Though this landmark is registered as a California Historical Landmark, it is located a quarter mile outside of the actual Project area and will not be directly or indirectly affected by Project development.

6.1.4 Historic Topographic Maps
APRMI’s independent review of the USGS HTMC did not identify any buildings or structures within the immediate property of the Project area between 1903 to 1933 (Figure 12). Development of the surrounding community did include the San Francisco and New Orleans Rail line that extended on a north to south trend, west of the Project area. By the year 1933, this rail line was observed in topographic maps as the Southern Pacific Railroad. This rail line is still actively in service and operated by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Amtrak. Suburban sprawl was also observed in the vicinity, but no buildings or structures were located within the Project boundaries at this time. The SCE Big Creek East & West Transmission Line, discussed in the previous section, can be seen in the 1929 topographic map and onwards. It is located approximately southwest of the Project area as indicated by the dashed lines that intersect the railroad.

Figure 12. Historic topographic maps from 1903 to 1933 with approximate location of the Project area outlined in red.
1903 1929 1933
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 47 Figure 13. Historic topographic maps from 1952 to 1975 with approximate location of the Project area outlined in red.

Per the historic topographic maps, from 1952 to 1975 there were no buildings or structures identified in the Project area, but urban development of the surrounding vicinity rapidly increased (Figure 13). The 1952 topographic map revealed a “historic refinery” located northwest of the Project area near the intersection of San Fernando Road and the Southern Pacific Railroad. This refinery is known as the Pioneer Oil Refinery that was located on Pine Street beginning in 1877 and first encountered by oil driller Alex Mentry. The City of Santa Clarita acquired this property as a gift from Chevron USA in 1997. The city intended to restore the property into a public park for the community in conjunction with the development of the Gate-King Industrial Park, also known as Needham Ranch business park. In early 2021, while grading for Phase II of the Needham Ranch business park was underway, the City of Santa Clarita began physical work on the restoration of the refinery, beginning with temporary removal of original refinery features to proceed their soil stabilization. Additionally, roads for the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary are visibly present in the 1969 topographic map. Upon conclusion of this review, no buildings or structures were observed directly on the Project property. It is important to note that the scale of these maps can affect the observed built environment as some may not meet the criteria for structures to be observed.

6.1.5 Historic Aerials Photographs
Historic aerial photographs provided by the Google Earth Pro software spans the timeline between 1985 to 2022 (Figure 14 and Figure 15). From 1985 to 2008, no buildings or structures were observed within the Project boundaries. Over this span of years, no disturbance of the Project area was observed except for minimal fire road maintenance associated with the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary property. However, the neighboring development of the Needham Ranch business park that began in 2017, located directly west adjacent of the Project area, did 1952 1969 1975
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 48 cause land disturbance. It was observed that the lower southern portion of the Project area was slightly graded to allow for construction staging. This type of work typically involves surficial grading and minor excavation. Therefore, cultural resources that were present on the surface may have been lost, but buried resources may still be present and encountered at the time of earth disturbing activities related with the development of the Project.

Figure 14. Historic aerial photographs from 1952 to 1975, provided by the Google Earth Pro software, with location of the Project area outlined in red.

Figure 15. Historic aerial photographs from 1952 to 1975, provided by the Google Earth Pro software, with location of the Project area outlined in red.
1994 2003 2008
2011 2017 2018
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 49 6.1.5 Reports and Studies
Two studies and assessments (see Table 3) were conducted within a quarter-mile radius from the Project area, but no significant cultural resources were documented that would be directly or indirectly be affected by the proposed Project development. A list of identified Cultural Reports and Studies can be viewed in Appendix A. Cultural Reports and Studies that state NRHP, CRHR, or HCM criterion determinations are made by the author or investigators of the reports and studies and not determined by APRMI.

Table 3. Results of SCCIC Cultural Reports and Studies Identified Report
Number
Author(s) Year Title Location
LA-02317 McKenna,
Jeanette A.
1991 A Class I Cultural Resources Investigation for the Proposed Elsmere Canyon Solid Waste
Management Facility, Newhall, Los Angeles
County, California
Within ¼
mile radius
LA-03829 Metcalf, Neil 1996 Archaeological Reconnaissance Report: Tanbark Fuelbark, LA County
Within ¼
mile radius

6.2 Archival Research
Research obtained from the Santa Clarita Historical Society archival database, determines that the Project area was first established in the year 1888 by Mark T. Gates Senior. This extensive historic context is described in detail in section 4.3.5 History of the Project Vicinity. After careful examination of the history of the Project area, it is important to mention that early cemeteries often would exclude certain members from the community to be buried on their premises. This exclusionary tactic forced some community members to bury their deceased on the outskirts of the fenced cemetery boundaries specifically in the back of these properties, due to lack of funds that were needed to bury their family/associates within the cemetery boundary, or to bury people considered “undesirables” to be buried within the cemetery. Some of these people may have been buried at these locations in secrecy and without the knowledge of cemetery officials. The Project area studied is in the western most extent of the larger cemetery property, but the date of acquisition of this portion of the property is unknown. Therefore, there is a potential to uncover these informal burials at the time of Project related earth disturbing activities. APRMI recommends that full time on-site archaeological construction monitoring be conducted.

Additional research identified two potential Native American village sites, north of the Project area, as denoted on the Map of Indian Villages in the Santa Clarita Valley by Richard F. Van Valkenburgh, 1937 (Figure 16). The two villages identified are known as Nuhubit to the east and Apebit to the west. No extensive information could be recovered regarding the significance, origin, or type of villages identified, due to the confidentiality that the Native American tribes hold regarding their ancestral homeland. Van Valkenburgh’s identification of village locations are considered approximations by the Santa Clarita Historical Society and therefore more information regarding the exact location of these villages is required by the Native American tribal Chairmen/woman themselves.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 50 Figure 16. Map of previously existing Native American Villages in the Santa Clarita Valley by Richard F.

Van Valkenburgh, 1937, with approximate Project location highlighted in red and villages outlined in green.

7.0 RESULTS OF FIELD RECONNAISSANCE
Results of the original field reconnaissance, as seen in Figures 13-15, has determined the area to be sloped terrain, and covered in naturally occurring native oak trees, sagebrush scrub, and other flowering plants. Wildlife tracks observed included black-tailed jackrabbit, deer, coyote, and cougar. Some areas of the Project area were observable and accessible, but other areas were covered in dense sagebrush scrubs which did not allow for easy pedestrian access and/or observation. These areas were still noted and photographed but ground visibility was considered low within these sections. In areas where ground visibility was high, sediments observed on the surface included unconsolidated, light brown to tan colored, alluvial silts, and sand with gravels of various origin. No cultural or tribal resources were observed or identified on the current surface of the Project area. Despite these negative results for finding significant cultural or tribal resources, there is the potential, during Project related ground disturbing activities, for unknown cultural resources to be uncovered. No known paleontological sites were found on the surface during the field reconnaissance of the of the Project. However, in conjunction with the analysis for the uncovering of cultural resources, there is potential for older alluvium and sediments from the fossiliferous Saugus Formation (see geologic setting) to be present at greater depths that may yield significant fossil remains.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 51 Figure 17. View north of sloped terrain and concrete gutter system Figure 18. View west of neighboring development and hill like topography 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 52 Figure 19. View east of dense sagebrush scrub that limited accessibility in some areas

7.1 Results from the Amended Field Reconnaissance Area
Updated information from the amended field reconnaissance completed in the expanded areas of the Project include the observation of two new vegetation specimens, the California Scrub Oak and chaparral yucca plants, that were not observed or noted in the previous survey. The California Scrub Oak is a small oak that can grow up to 6 meters in height and has yellow flowers. Most importantly, the California Scrub Oak (Figure 16) can produce solitary or paired brown acorns that are 1-3 centimeters long and 1-2 centimeters broad, and pointed or egg-shaped with thin caps when mature. It is a native tree in the scrubby hills throughout California. Oaks are considered an important tool used by many Native American cultures due to the acorns they produced and the various materials it provided. Not only were the acorns an essential food source, but Native Americans carved bows, wove baskets, derived medicines for treating illnesses, and built fires for warmth, cooking, and firing pottery from the wood these trees provided.

Chaparral yucca plants were observed throughout the amended Project area within the dense sagebrush. These plants produce a stemless cluster of long, rigid leaves which end in a sharp point.

This plant can also grow elliptically with (bell shaped) white to purplish flowers about 3 cm in diameter. The plant can take several years to reach maturity and flower. Native Americans used this plant in their daily lives too. The new fauna that was observed during the amended field reconnaissance which included a California Horn-tailed lizard that isroughly 3.4 inches from snout to vent and very flat and wide with a long, broad tail and a dark stripe running down the middle of the back.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 53 Figure 20. View north of California Scrub Oak present in Project area The newly added Project areas expanded the western boundary to include the section outlined in green in Figure 17, which shows the original undisturbed hill topography covered in dense vegetation. However, APRMI made note that the western margin of the Project boundary, the same area outlined in green in Figure 17, has now been graded by the neighboring development. This work could have potentially damaged, altered, or destroyed possible cultural or tribal resources because no qualified on site archaeological construction monitor or Native American monitor was present to assess this work. Additionally, since grading was currently being conducted along Needham Ranch Parkway, we were not able to survey this location due to safety concerns. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 54 Figure 21. (top) View west of Needham Ranch Parkway and hill topography (outlined in green), western boundary of the Project area, prior to unmonitored excavation. (bottom) View south of same area but now excavated within Project area without the presence of a cultural resource monitor.

Upon conclusion of the amended field reconnaissance, APRMI did not observe or identify and cultural or tribal resources within the newly surveyed areas of the Project. As previously stated, despite these negative results for finding significant cultural or tribal resources, there is still a potential, during Project related ground disturbing activities, for unknown cultural resources to be uncovered. No known paleontological sites were observed on the surface during the amended field reconnaissance. Similar to the initial field reconnaissance, a potential still exists for older alluvium and sediments from the fossiliferous Saugus Formation (see geologic setting) to be present at greater depths below the current surface grade that may yield significant fossil remains. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 55 8.0 NATIVE AMERICAN CONTACT
APRMI requested a Sacred Lands File Search and a Native American Contacts list for the proposed Project area from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on November 4, 2020. The NAHC’s search results were received on December 7, 2020, and it stated negative results for known sites in the Project area. The NAHC also provided APRMI with a Native American Contacts list to obtain further tribal knowledge of the Project area from associated tribe members of those associated with the larger Santa Clarita area (see Appendix C). APRMI contacted the tribes, individuals, and organizations listed on the Contact List by phone to confirm that the mailing information is correct and to let them know that an informational package regarding the Project, including a project description, will be sent to them for comment. The Project informational package along with an accompanying letter was sent to them by mail, on December 10, 2020. All letters sent to Native American correspondents and accompanying responses can be viewed in Appendix C.

On December 24, 2020, Chairperson Kenneth Kahn of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians responded to APRMI through personal letter communication and states he is interested in consulting with the City of Santa Clarita regarding the state of tribal resources sensitivity near the Project area.

On December 28, 2020, Jairo F. Avila, Tribal Historic and Cultural Preservation Officer for the Fernandeno Tataviam Band of Mission Indians responded to APRMI through personal email letter of communication, states he is interested in the opportunity to provide tribal resources sensitive information for the proposed Project. The Tribal Historic and Cultural Preservation Department will provide cultural information for this Project during consultation with the City of Santa Clarita and Eternal Valley.

On January 8, 2020, Chairperson Robert Dorame of the Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council responded to APRMI through personal (verbal telephonic) communication with Robin Turner and stated he wants to be involved in all Project related updates and interested in being a Native American monitor for the Project regarding any Native American resources within the Project area.

On January 22, 2020, Chairperson Anthony Morales of the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians responded to APRMI through personal (verbal telephonic) communication with Robin Turner and stated he wants to be involved in all Project related updates and interested in being a Native American monitor for the Project regarding any Native American resources within the Project area.

On January 29, Chairperson Andrew Salas of the Gabrieleño Band Of Mission Indians – KIZH Nation, responded to APRMI through personal (verbal telephonic) communication with Robin Turner and stated he wants to be involved in all Project related updates and interested in being a Native American monitor for the Project regarding any Native American resources within the Project area.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 56 9.0 ASSEMBLY BILL 52 NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION
The City of Santa Clarita will conduct the consultation process with the individuals listed in the previous section, and/or through their own consultation list, as required by Assembly Bill 52, and prepare the documentation that takes place between the City of Santa Clarita and Native American interested parties. APRMI will help in the process if requested by the City of Santa Clarita.

10.0 CONCLUSIONS
Both field reconnaissance’s of the Project area yielded negative results for archaeological and paleontologic resources, but there still is the potential to uncover subsurface sites or features. The Project area is considered to be an open space natural environment, that consists of native oak trees, sagebrush scrub, and flowering plants. Part of the surveyed areas were highly accessible, but other areas were covered in dense sagebrush scrub which did not allow for pedestrian access or observation. In areas where ground visibility was high, the soil type that was observed included unconsolidated, light brown to tan colored alluvial silts, and sand with gravel presumably deriving from the fossiliferous Saugus Formation.

The development changes and additions to the original Project required an amended field reconnaissance that was conducted eight months after the initial reconnaissance. During the amended field survey, APRMI only observed the newly added areas and noted additional vegetation and faunal species that included the California Scrub Oak, Chaparral yucca plants, and the California Horn-Tailed Lizard. The California Scrub Oak trees was considered a valuable resource to local Native Americans for its acorns, an essential food source, and raw materials to make bows, baskets, medicine, and to build fires for warmth, cooking, and firing pottery. The presence of California Scrub Oak within the Project area suggests that local Native Americans may have traveled through these areas in search of this this highly valuable resource, especially since it is close to the two village sites nearby. APRMI also noted that the area along the western margins of the Project was graded without the presence of a cultural or tribal resource construction monitor. The neighboring developmental work on the Needham Ranch property to the west of our Project has excavated an area of an unknown depth, and graded part of our Project hillside to widen the roadway, which could have potentially contained significant cultural or tribal resources. During both reconnaissance surveys, no cultural, tribal, or paleontologic resources were identified surficially. Despite these negative results, there is still the potential to encounter cultural resources during Project related grubbing, grading, and excavation activities.

During the cultural resource’s records search, one historic structure was identified within a quartermile of the Project area. This structure, known as the SCE Big Creek East & West Transmission Line, was built between 1912-1913 and consists of two parallel electrical transmission lines that extends 241-mile long. The NRHP qualifications, this structure is considered as a contributing element to the historic district of the Big Creek Hydroelectric System Historic District. Despite this structure to be located within a quarter-mile radius of the Project, it will not be directly or indirectly affected by the development of this Project. The historic structures and cemetery in general that is part of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary property is currently not listed as California Historical Landmarks, but they may fit the Criteria for consideration by the City of Santa Clarita as a local Landmark or Points of Interest. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 57 The Project location has an unknown potential for paleontological resources since no paleontological assessment was required for this Project. APRMI has extensive knowledge of the paleontological history of the region, therefore provided some background information in this document regarding such resources. The predominant rock and soil type underlying the surface of the Project site is part of the 1.8-million-year-old marine deposit of Pliocene-Pleistocene age named the Saugus Formation, which is composed mostly of sandstone, conglomerate deposits, with rare occurrences of limestone and laminated mudstone (White 1985). Sandstone layers within this formation are very rich in invertebrate fossils especially producing shallow-marine snails and clams. Vertebrate fossilized specimens of bison, mastodon, horse, deer, and a rare species of tapir have been uncovered within this formation at various depths (Turner 2010). Although the field reconnaissance yielded negative results for paleontological resources, this does not preclude the possibility to uncover paleontological sites or fossil remains within the Project area.

11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following mitigation measures are recommended by APRMI to reduce the impacts to cultural resources at the time of Project development and is summarized in Table 4.

Prior to the onset of construction, a qualified archaeologist and should be retained for the Project.

Project archaeologist should provide a construction personnel training classes and develop a procedure and protocol pamphlet, known as a Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program (WEAP), which will be provided at each class. The training classes will include examples of cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric, Native American, and historical) to be aware of what could be found on site and what protocols and procedures are required to follow if discoveries are made.

The Contractor or Subcontractor(s) will ensure that all construction personnel are made available for and attend the training and retain documentation demonstrating attendance.

Under the direction of the qualified Project archaeologist, archaeological monitoring will be required during any construction-related activities (excavation) within native soil to help assure that if any archaeological resources are uncovered, or historic properties are impacted, each will be mitigated to a less-than-significant effect. If archaeological resources (i.e., isolated artifacts, sites, features, and historic burials outside of current cemetery use) are located during Project construction, all activity within fifty (50) feet of the find will stop and the qualified Project archaeologist will assess the significance of the find to determine the appropriate avoidance measures and mitigation. For any archaeological resources found at the time of monitoring, laboratory preparation, analysis, cataloging, curation, and final acceptance to a legal repository will be required. Once archaeological resource construction monitoring is completed, and the resources found have been processed in the laboratory, a final Report of Findings or Negative Findings document (if no resources are collected or observed) that summarizes the monitoring efforts, will be submitted to the implementing agency. The final report will be submitted to the City of Santa Clarita and the South Central Coastal Information Center.

As determined by the qualified Project archaeologist, a qualified local Native American monitor should also be retained during ground disturbing activities, per the list of tribal contacts provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and the Native American responses to initial contact, for any sensitive Tribal cultural resources that may be uncovered. If Tribal cultural 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 58 resources are found at the time of monitoring, all construction related excavation activity within fifty (50) feet of the find would stop, and the qualified Project archaeologist with the Native American monitor will assess the significance of the find to determine the appropriate avoidance measures and mitigation. Upon completion of cultural resource construction monitoring, a compliance report that summarizes the monitoring efforts will be prepared. This report will be submitted by the qualified Project archaeologist.

Table 4. Mitigation Monitoring Measures for Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Project Impact Mitigation Measure Impact after
Mitigation Measure
CR-1 Construction associated
with the proposed Project would
result in the destruction or
alteration of the character of
known historically significant
buildings and properties.

No known historically significant buildings and
properties have been identified within or adjacent to
the project site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant an no mitigation is required. If building
foundations are uncovered, this Mitigation Measure
will become effective.

Less than Significant.

CR-2 Ground disturbing
activities associated with
Project construction could
uncover significant prehistoric
or historic archaeological
deposits that qualify as cultural
resources as defined in Section
15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines. Damage or
destruction of such resources
would be a potentially
significant impact.

MM-CR-2a Prior to the commencement of
construction, a qualified archaeologist shall create a
Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program
(WEAP) pamphlet that will be provided as training to
construction personnel to understand regulatory
requirements for the protection of cultural resources.

This training shall include examples of cultural
resources to look for and protocols to follow if
discoveries are made. The archaeologist shall develop
the training and any supplemental materials necessary
to execute said training.

MM-CR-2b Archaeological resources monitoring
shall be conducted by an archaeological resource
monitor, during Project related earth-disturbing
activities, per OHP standards, under the supervision
of a qualified Lead Archaeologist. Monitoring will
entail visual inspection Project related earthdisturbing activities (i.e. trenching, shoring, mass grading, utility installation, etc.)
MM-CR-2c An approved Native American
monitor(s), with documented ancestral ties to the area
consistent with the standards of the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be present for all
ground disturbing activities that involve excavation of previously undisturbed soil. Monitoring will entail
visual inspection Project related earth-disturbing
activities.

MM-CR-2d If an archaeological resource is
encountered during construction when an
archaeological monitor is not on site, all construction shall cease within at least 50 feet of the discovery and the Principal Investigator and Lead Archaeologist
must be notified. Work cannot resume in the direct
area of the discovery until the it is assessed by the
Principal Investigator and/or Lead Archaeologist and
Less than Significant
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 59 indicates that construction may resume.

MM-CR-2e If an archaeological discovery cannot be
preserved in situ and requires an excavation team or
requires additional time to collect cultural resources, a Discovery and Treatment Plan (DTP) will be
developed and the area will be cordoned off and
secured so that an archaeological resources
excavation team, led by the Principal Investigator and
Lead Archaeologist, may recover the cultural
resources out of that contained area. Once the
Principal Investigator has determined that the
collection process is complete for a given area or
locality, construction activity will resume in that
localized area. If human remains are encountered at
any point during Project construction, the local Native American most likely descendent (MLD) must be
notified if not already on site and the procedures
dictated by law must be implemented.

MM-CR-2f All significant cultural resources
collected will be prepared in a properly equipped
laboratory to a point ready for curation. Following
laboratory work, all cultural resources will be
identified, catalogued, analyzed, and delivered to an
accredited museum repository for permanent curation
and storage. Any cultural resources collected shall be
donated to a public, non-profit institution with a
research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.

Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs shall
also be filed at the repository. The cost of curation is assessed by the repository and is the responsibility of the Project proponent. At the conclusion of laboratory
work and museum curation, a final report will be
prepared describing the results of the cultural
mitigation monitoring efforts associated with the
project. The report will include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the cultural
background within the project vicinity, a list of
cultural resources recovered (if any), an analysis of
cultural resources recovered (if any) and their
scientific significance, and recommendations. A copy
of the report will also be submitted to the designated
museum repository (if applicable).

CR-4 Native American human
remains may be inadvertently
uncovered during project
construction.

MM-CR-4a In the event of Native American human
remains being inadvertently uncovered during Project
construction, the Project proponent would
immediately cease activity in the vicinity of the
discovery and notify the local Native American most
likely descendent (MLD) if not already on site and the
procedures dictated by law must be implemented.

Less than Significant
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 60 12.0 REFERENCES
Academia
2013 Metabolic Seam, Combinatorial Space in the Whitnall High-Tension Power Line Corridor.

Available at
http://www.academia.edu/4104886/Metabolic_Seam_Combinatorial_Space_in_the_Whit nall_High-Tension_Utility_Corridor, accessed January 2020.

Arnold, J.E.
1995 Transportation Innovation and Social Complexity among Maritime Hunter-Gatherer Societies. American Anthropologist 97: 733-747.

Bailey, Thomas L. and Richard H. Jahns
1954 Geology of the Transverse Range Province, Southern California. In Geology of Southern California, edited by Richard H. Jahns, Chapter II: Geology of the Natural Provinces, pp. 83-106. State of California, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines, Bulletin 170 Volume 1.

Bean, Lowell J. and Charles R. Smith
1978 Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 8: California, edited by Robert F. Heizer (volume editor) and William C. Sturtevant (general editor), pp. 538-549.

Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Bearchell, Charles A. and Larry D. Fried
1988 The San Fernando Valley: Then and Now, An Illustrated History. Windsor Publications, Inc., Northridge.

Blackburn, T.C.
1963 Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrieleño Material Culture. UCLA Archaeological Survey Annual Report 5: 1-50.

Bolton, Herbert Eugene (editor, translator)
1930 $Q]D¶V&DOLIRUQLD([SHGLWLRQV. Volume IV: )RQW¶V&RPSOHWH'LDU\ RIWKH 6HFRQG$Q]D Expedition. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Braje, Todd J., Julia G. Costello, Jon M. Erlandson, Michael A. Glassow, John R. Johnson, Don P. Morris, Jennifer E. Perry, and Torben C. Rick
2010 Channel Islands National Park Archaeological Overview and Assessment. Compiled and edited by Michael A. Glassow. Department of the Interior, National Park Service.

Bull, Charles Stuart
1977 Archaeology and linguistics: coastal Southern California. M.A. thesis. Department of Anthropology, San Diego State University, San Diego.

Bureau of Land Management
2013 Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Arizona. National System of Public Lands.

Available at
http://www.blm.gov/az/st/en/prog/blm_special_areas/hist_trails/anza.html, accessed March 30, 2015.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 61 California State Parks
2010 Santa Susana Pass State Historic Park. Brochure. Available from http://www.parks.ca.gov.

Castillo, Edward D.
1978 The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and Settlement. In Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 8: California, edited by Robert F. Heizer (volume editor) and William C. Sturtevant (general editor), pp. 99-127. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
1998 Short Overview of California Indian History. California Native American Heritage Commission. Available at http://www.nahc.ca.gov/califindian.html, accessed November 4, 2014.

Chartkoff, Joseph L. and Kerry Kona Chartkoff
1984 The Archaeology of California. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

City of Glendale
2018 Glendale Design Guidelines for Residential Buildings in Adopted Historic Districts. https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showdocument?id=12904, accessed August 20, 2018.

City of Los Angeles
2001 Conservation Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan. City Planning Commission. Available at http://planning.lacity.org/cwd/gnlpln/ConsvElt.pdf.

City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning
2014 Historic-Cultural Monument (HCM) List: City Declared Monuments.

City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks
2014 Sepulveda Basin Wildlife Reserve. Available at
http://www.laparks.org/dos/horticulture/sepulvedabasin.htm, accessed March 23, 2015.

Cook, Sherburn F.
1971 The Aboriginal Population of Upper California. In The California Indians: A Sourcebook, 2nd ed., edited by R.F. Heizer and M.A. Whipple. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Conrey, B.L.
1967 Early Pliocene Sedimentary History of the Los Angeles Basin, California. California Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco.

County of Los Angeles
2014 Chapter 9: Conservation and Natural Resources Element. Los Angeles County General Plan 2035 Public Review Draft. Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning.

Available at http://planning.lacounty.gov/generalplan/draft2014, accessed January 23, 2015.

County of Los Angeles Public Library
2015a Agoura Hills: Frequently Asked Questions. Available at http://www.colapublib.org/history/agourahills/faq.html, accessed March 30, 2015. 2015b San Fernando: Frequently Asked Questions. Available at http://www.colapublib.org/history/sanfernando/faq.html, accessed March 26, 2015. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 62 Dibblee, T.W., and Ehrenspeck, H.E.
1996 Geologic map of the Newhall quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation
Driver, H. E.
1969 Indians of North America, 2nd ed., rev., University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

Dumke, Glenn S.
1944 The Boom of the Eighties in Southern California. Huntington Library, San Marino.

Elliot, John F.
1979 Part II: History. In Historical Report on the Encino Roadhouse ± Privy by Scientific Resources Survey, pp. 11-32. Available at SCCIC.

Ewing-Toledo, Kelly
2007 Historic Resources Evaluation Report for the Southbound Interstate 405 Freeway (San Diego Frwy) to US Highway 101 (Ventura Frwy) Connector Improvement Project, Los Angeles County, California. In Historic Property Survey Report for the Southbound Interstate 405 (San Diego Fwy) to US Highway 101 (Ventura Fwy) Connector Improvement Project, Los Angeles County, California. Available at SCCIC.

Fritsche, A. Eugene
1998 Miocene Paleogeography of Southwestern California and Its Implications Regarding Basin Terminology. International Geology Review 40(5):452-470.

Gates, Kingsley
1969 Eternal Valley Memorial Park: California's Pioneer Cemetery, 1969.

Gazzar, Brenda
2014 Campo de Cahuenga re-enactment recalls pact that helped create California. Los Angeles Daily News, January 12, 2014. Available at
http://www.dailynews.com/lifestyle/20140112/campo-de-cahuenga-re-enactment-recallspact-that-helped-create-california.

Gumprecht, Blake
1999 The Los Angeles River: Its Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Hoover, Mildred Brooke, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Grace Rensch, and William N. Abeloe 2002 Historic Sports in California, 5th edition. Revised and updated by Douglas E. Kyle.

Stanford University Press, Stanford.

Johnson, John
1997 The Indians of Mission San Fernando. In Mission San Fernando Rey de España, 1797- 1997: A Bicentennial Tribute, edited by Doyce B. Nunis, Jr, pp. 249-290. Historical Society of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Johnston, Bernice Eastman
1962 &DOLIRUQLD¶V *DEULHOLQR ,QGLDQV. F.W. Hodge Anniversary Publication Fund: VIII.

Southwest Museum, Los Angeles. Reprinted 1964.

Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc.
1999 Cultural Resources Inventory Report for Williams Communications, Inc. Proposed Fiber 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 63 Optic Cable System Installation Project, Los Angeles to Anaheim, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California. Prepared for Williams Communications, Inc. Report LA-4834 and OR-2094 at SCCIC.

Jorgensen, Lawrence C. (editor)
1982 The San Fernando Valley: Past and Present. Pacific Rim Research, Los Angeles.

KCET
2013 Phantom Fast Lanes: Whitnall Highway and the Footprint of Best Laid Plans. Available at https://www.kcet.org/history-society/phantom-fast-lanes-whitnall-highway-and-thefootprint-of-best-laid-plans, accessed January 10, 2019.

Kielbasa, John R.
1997 Historic Adobes of Los Angeles County. Dorrance Publishing Company.

Kroeber, A.L.
1925 A Handbook of the Indians of California. Republished 1976 by Dover Publications, Inc., New York.

Las Pilitas Nursery
1992 The Southern Oak Woodland. Updated 2013. Available at https://www.laspilitas.com/nature-of-california/communities/southern-oak-woodland, accessed January 10, 2019.

Laylander, Don
2000 Early Ethnography of the Californias: 1533-1825. Coyote Press Archives of California Prehistory, no. 47.

Logan, W. B. & Ochshorn, S.
1998 The Smithsonian Guide to Historic America: The Pacific States. Stewart, Tabori & Chang.

Los Angeles Times
1903 Romantic Day, Pathetic End: Sad Burial of Once Wealthy Scion of Spain. Mass Intoned for Sr. De Celis, Who Died in Poverty. Los Angeles Man Who Once Loaned Sixty Thousand Dollars to Mexico. Los Angeles Times, 26 May 1903, p. 7. Available at ProQuest Historical Newspapers: Los Angeles Times (1886-1922), Los Angeles Public Library, accessed March 27, 2015.

Los Encinos State Historic Park
1942 San Fernando Valley: Ex Mission de San Fernando. Title insurance map archived by Los Encinos Docents Association. Electronic document available at http://historicparks.org/data/title-map.

Lozano, Carlos V.
1990 Stage Trail Has Dust of History: Santa Susana Pass: The 1861 road followed a rocky Indian footpath that ran from Chatsworth to Simi Valley. It served as the main overland commercial route to San Francisco. Los Angeles Times, June 18, 1990. Available at http://articles.latimes.com/1990-06-18/local/me-20_1_santa-susana-pass.

Luyendyk, B.P., M.J. Kamerling, R.R. Terres, and J.S. Hornafius 1985 Simple Shear of Southern California during Neogene Time Suggested by Paleomagnetic 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 64 Declinations. Journal of Geophysical Research 90(B14): 12454-12466.

Mayers, Jackson
1976 The San Fernando Valley. John D. McIntyre, Walnut, CA.

Mayflower Club
2018 Welcome ± Mayflower Club. (2018, December 04). Accessed December 2018, from http://mayflowerclub.com/welcome/
McCawley, William
1996 The First Angelinos: the Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum Press (Novato, CA) and Ballena Press (Banning, CA).

Mision Vieja
2012 The Kizh/Gabrieleño People and Misión Vieja. La Misión Vieja: First LA European Settlement. Posted December 21, 2012. Available at
http://misionvieja.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-kizhgabrieleno-people-and-mision.html, accessed October 24, 2014.

Moratto, Michael J.
1984 California Archaeology. Academic Press, Inc., Orlando. Reprinted 2004 by Coyote Press, Salinas.

Nadeau, Remi A.
1965 7KH&LW\0DNHUV
7KH 6WRU\ RI 6RXWKHUQ&DOLIRUQLD¶V )LUVW %RRP. Trans-Anglo Books, Corona del Mar.

National Park Service
2015 EXPLORE – Follow the Anza Expedition. Juan Batista de Anza National Historic Trail.

Available at http://www.anzahistorictrail.org/visit/explorer, accessed March 30, 2015.

Neuerburg, Norman
1997 The Indian Via Crucis from Mission San Fernando: An Historical Exposition. In Mission San Fernando Rey de España, 1797-1997: A Bicentennial Tribute, edited by Doyce B.

Nunis, Jr, pp. 329-382. Historical Society of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Nunis, Doyce B., Jr.
1997 The Franciscan Friars of Mission San Fernando, 1797-1847. In Mission San Fernando Rey de España, 1797-1997: A Bicentennial Tribute, edited by Doyce B. Nunis, Jr, pp. 217-248.

Historical Society of Southern California, Los Angeles.

OHP (Office of Historic Preservation)
1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Site Survey for California. California Department of Parks and Recreation. On-line book available at
http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/5views/5views.htm. 1995 Instructions for Recording Historical Resources. Electronic document, http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1054/files/manual95.pdf.

Pitt, Leonard and Dale Pitt
1997 Los Angeles A to Z: An Encyclopedia of the City and County. University of California Press, Berkeley.
2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 65 Quinn, James P.
1992 Rancho La Brea: Geologic Setting, Late Quaternary Depositional Patterns and Mode of Fossil Accumulation. In The Regressive Pleistocene Shoreline: Coastal Southern California. South Coast Geological Society Annual Field Trip Guide Book No. 20, pp. 221-232.
2001 The Geologic Setting of Rancho La Brea. In Rancho La Brea: Death Trap and Treasure Trove, edited by John M. Harris, Terra 38(2): 46-49. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County.

Raab, L.M., and A. Yatsko.
1990 Prehistoric Human Ecology of Quinquina: A Research Design for Archaeological Studies on San Clemente Island, Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 26(2 & 3):10-37.

Rand McNally
2008 The Thomas Guide: Los Angeles & Orange Counties street guide. Rand McNally & Company, Chicago.

Reid, Hugo and Robert F. Heizer (editor, annotator)
1968 7KH ,QGLDQV RI /RV $QJHOHV &RXQW\
+XJR 5HLG¶V /HWWHUV RI . Southwest Museum
Papers Number Twenty-one, Los Angeles.

Roberts, L. and J. Brock
1987 Cultural Resources Archival Study: Whittier Narrows Archaeological District, Report prepared by Archaeological Advisory Group, Newport Beach, for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles district.

Robinson, W.W.
1961 The Story of San Fernando Valley. Title Insurance and Trust Company, Los Angeles.

Roderick, Kevin
2003 The San Fernando Valley: America's Suburb. Second Edition. Angel City Press, Santa Monica.

Rozaire, Charles E.
1960 The Archaeology at Encino, California. Annual Report, Archaeological Survey, Department of Anthropology-Sociology, University of California, Los Angeles. Report LA-2408 at SCCIC.

Ruby, J. W.
1970 Culture Contact between Aboriginal Southern California and the Southwest, Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, CA.

Ruzicka, Denise M., and Turner, Robin D.
2018. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Phase I Assessment Donald C. Tillman Water Reclamation Plant Lease Renewal Project, Sepulveda Dam Basin, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California.

Scott, Eric and Kathleen Springer
2003 CEQA and Fossil Preservation in California. The Environmental Monitor, Fall 2003, AEP 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 66 2004 Conference: AEP Spring 2004 CEQA Workshop Series, pp. 4-10. Association of Environmental Professionals.

Schoenherr, Allan A.
1992 A Natural History of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Schwartz, D.E. and Colburn, I.P.
1987 Late Tertiary to Recent Chronology of the Los Angeles Basin, Southern California. In Geology of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and San Pedro Bay, edited by P.J. Fischer, pp. 5-

16. Pacific Section SEPM (Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists).

Signor, John R.
2003 History of Construction and Operation of the former Pacific Electric Santa Monica Air Line and a Survey of the Physical Plant from Alameda St. to Vermont Ave. in the City and County of Los Angeles, California. On file at APRMI.

Starr, Kevin.
2005 California: A History, The Modern Library (Random House), New York.

State of California
2015c Los Encinos State Historic Park. California Department of Parks and Recreation. Available at http://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=619, accessed March 11, 2015.

Stewart, Marie
1958 History of Los Encinos State Historic Monument. Encino Historical Committee, Inc.

Street, Nick.
2008 Heavenly Bodies and the People of the Earth. Search Magazine, July/August issue.

Supernowicz, Dana
2010 Architectural Study of the 405 Freeway/Victory Boulevard Project, AT&T Site No.

LAT026, 15900 Victory Boulevard, Van Nuys, Los Angeles County, California 91406.

Prepared for ATC Associates, Inc. Available at SCCIC.

Sutton and Gardner
2006 Sutton, Mark Q. and Jill K. Gardner. 2006. Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, 42(4):1-

64. SVP (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology)
1995 [2014] Assessment and mitigation of adverse impacts to nonrenewable paleontological resources: standard guidelines. Society of Vertebrate Paleontology News Bulletin 163.

Conformable Impact Mitigation Guidelines. Available at http://vertpaleo.org/TheSociety/Governance-Documents/Conformable-Impact-Mitigation-GuidelinesCommittee.aspx. 2009 Members Ethics: Member Bylaw on Ethics Statements, Article 12 – Code of Ethics.

Available at http://vertpaleo.org/Membership/Member-Ethics/Member-Bylaw-on-EthicsStatement.aspx. 2010 Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources. Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 67 Tang, Bai “Tom” and Josh Smallwood
2009 Historical Resources Evaluation Report: Third Main Track and Grade Separation Project, Segments 6, 7, and 8, Pico Rivera (MP 150.7) to La Mirada (MP 158.8), BNSF/Metrolink East-West Mainline, Los Angeles County, California. Prepared for Caltrans District 7.

Report LA-10391 on file at SCCIC.

Tang, Bai “Tom” and Teresa Woodard
2003 Historical Resources Evaluation Report: Third Main Track and Grade Separation Project Hobart (MP 148.9) to Basta (MP 163.3), BNSF/Metrolink East-West Main Line Railroad Track, Vernon to Fullerton, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, California. Prepared for Caltrans District 7. Report LA-7871 and OR-3298 on file at SCCIC.

Tobar, Christian n.d.

The Pacific Electric Railway and Its History in the San Bernardino Valley. Pacific Electric Railway: Arrowhead Hot Springs Line Archive updated 2008. Electronic document, http://www.oocities.org/gatewaycityca/History_of_PE_in_SB.html.

Turner, Robin
2005 RE: MWD West Valley Feeder No.1 Repair Project Findings Letter, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California.

Turner, R., Loren-Webb, B., and Ruzicka D.
2009 Cultural and Paleontological Research and Survey Report for Jensen Solids Handling Facility Project, In the Community of Granada Hills, In the City of Los Angeles, California Underwood, Todd
2000 Butterfield Overland Stage Route. Frontier Trails of the Old West. Available at http://www.frontiertrails.com/oldwest/butterfield.htm, accessed March 30, 2015.

U.S. Congress
1851 Acts of the Thirty-first Congress of the United States. Statute II—1850-1851. In The Statutes at Large and Treaties of the United States of America from December 1, 1845 to March 3, 1851. Edited by George Minot. Vol. IX. Charles C. Little and James Brown, Boston.
1863 Acts of the Thirty-seventh Congress of the United States. Statute II—1861-62. In The Statutes at Large, Treaties, and Proclamations, of the United States of America from December 5, 1859 to March 3, 1863. Edited by George P. Sanger. Vol. XII. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.

USGS (United States Geological Survey)
1896 California (Los Angeles Co.): Santa Monica Sheet. Scale 1/62500. 1898 California (Los Angeles Co.): Santa Monica Sheet. Scale 1/62500. 1902 California (Los Angeles County): Santa Monica Quadrangle. Reprinted 1906. Scale 1/62500.
1903 California: Calabasas Quadrangle. Scale 1/62500. Reprinted 1937. 1921 Santa Monica Quadrangle, Grid Zone “G.” Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Tactical Map. Scale 1/62500.
1924 California: Van Nuys Quadrangle. Scale 1/24000.
1926 California (Los Angeles County): Van Nuys Quadrangle. Reprinted 1932 and 1949. Scale 1/24000.
1928 California (Los Angeles County): Reseda Quadrangle. Scale 1/24000. 1952 Canoga Park Quadrangle, California—Los Angeles Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series 2020-10
Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary Phase 1 Archaeological Assessment 68 (Topographic). NE/4 Calabasas 15’ Quadrangle. Photorevised 1967. Scale 1:24000. 1953 Van Nuys Quadrangle, California—Los Angeles Co., 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic).

NW/4 Santa Monica 15’ Quadrangle. Scale 1:24000.
1966 Van Nuys Quadrangle, California—Los Angeles Co., 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic).

Photorevised 1972. Scale 1:24000.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Geologic Names Committee
2007 Divisions of Geologic Time – Major Chronostratigraphic and Geochronologic Units. U.S.

Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2007-3015.

Vintage LA
2016 The Victory Drive-In North Hollywood California. Available at https://employeelawca.com/vintagela/victorydrivein
accessed January 10, 2019.

W & S Consultants
1996 Phase I Archaeological Survey/Class III Inventory, San Fernando Valley East-West Transportation Corridor Study Area, Los Angeles, California. Prepared for Myra L. Frank & Associates, Inc. Report L-3789 at SCCIC.

Wallace, William
1955 Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11:214–230.

Walker, Jim
2006 Images of Rail: Pacific Electric Red Cars. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston.

Warren, Claude N.
1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by C. Irwin-Williams, pp. 1-14. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology No. 1. Portales.

Woodford, A.O., J.E. Schoellhamer, J.G. Vedder, and R.F. Yerkes 1954 Geology of the Los Angeles Basin. In Geology of Southern California, edited by Richard H. Jahns, Chapter II: Geology of the Natural Provinces, pp. 65-81. State of California, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mines, Bulletin 170 Volume 1.

Yerkes, R.F. (compiler)
1996 Preliminary Geologic Map of the Van Nuys 7.5’ Quadrangle, Southern California. U.S.

Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

APPENDIX F
Fuel Consumption by Construction Phase
Worksheet
Eternal Valley Fuel Consumption by Construction Phase Worksheet Demolition Site Preparation
diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 off road 0 worker trips 0 off road 16.8549 worker trips 0.8236 hauling 0 hauling 0
Subtotal 0 Subtotal 0 Subtotal 16.8549 Subtotal 0.8236
Grading Building Construction
diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 off road 82.4633 worker trips 2.7452 off road 349.7272 worker trips 51.3891 hauling 0 vendor 43.666
Subtotal 82.4633 Subtotal 2.7452 Subtotal 393.3932 Subtotal 51.3891 Paving Architectural Coatings
diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 diesel MT CO2 gasoline MT CO2 off road 20.1888 worker trips 1.3358 off road 2.5571 worker trips 0.7124 hauling 0
Subtotal 20.1888 Subtotal 1.3358 Subtotal 2.5571 Subtotal 0.7124 MT CO2 lbs CO2 lbs per gallon
Total Diesel CO2 515.4573 1,136,389 22.4
(assumes vendors use diesel)
Total Gasoline CO2 57.0061 125,677 19.6
Total Diesel Gallons 50,732
Total Gasoline Gallons 6,412
MTCO2 emissions for each phase as reported in CalEEMod "Annual" output sheets from CalEEMod.2020.4.0 for Eternal Valley Expansion Project from Impact Sciences, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report, September 2021. lbs per gallon factors from U.S. Energy Information Administration, Environment Carbon Dioxide Emissions Coefficients, Release date: February 2, 2016.

APPENDIX G
Geotechnical & Geological Investigation
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097

Page 1 ends

GEOTECHNICAL & GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION

FOR PROPOSED LAWN BURIAL AREAS, WEST AND SOUTHEAST

OF MEMORIAL PARK
(KNOWN AS AREAS 6 W/ LOOP ROAD & 7)

ETERNAL VALLEY MEMORIAL PARK

SANTA CLARITA

CALIFORNIA
Prepared for
Clark & Green Associates
15420 Laguna Canyon Road, Suite 210
Irvine, CA 92618
Geotechnical Soilutions, Inc.

Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097

Page 2 ends

Table of Contents
Introduction: ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Proposed Development: ...................................................................................................................... 3 Site Description:.................................................................................................................................. 3 Purpose and Scope of Services: .......................................................................................................... 4 Field Exploration: ............................................................................................................................... 4 Regional Geology/Site Soil Conditions: ............................................................................................. 4 Earthquake Induced Landslides: ......................................................................................................... 5 Laboratory Testing: ............................................................................................................................. 5 Stability Analyses: .............................................................................................................................. 5 Conclusions: ........................................................................................................................................ 6 Area 6 (West of Memorial Park) ........................................................................................................ 7 Area 7 (Southeast of the Memorial Park) ........................................................................................... 7 Recommendations: .............................................................................................................................. 7 Lawn Burial Sites Grading: ................................................................................................................ 7 Fill Placement in Areas 6 &7: ............................................................................................................. 7 Existing Fills in Area 6: ...................................................................................................................... 8 Loop Roadway: ................................................................................................................................... 8 Pavement Design: ............................................................................................................................... 8 Temporary Excavations: ..................................................................................................................... 8 Flatwork and Walkways: .................................................................................................................... 9 Site Drainage:...................................................................................................................................... 9 Utility Trenches: ................................................................................................................................. 9 Limitations: ....................................................................................................................................... 10 References: ........................................................................................................................................ 11 Grading Specifications: ..................................................................................................................... 12 Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097

Page 3 ends

Introduction:

This report presents the results of a geotechnical and geologic investigation performed at Eternal Valley Memorial Park in the Santa Clarita area of Los Angeles, California. The study contemplates an expansion of the existing memorial park into undeveloped areas west and southeast of existing lawn burial sites. The site location is shown on Figure 1 and the area investigated is shown on Figure

2. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate existing geologic and soil conditions at the site and to provide recommendations for the planned grading and development.

Our investigation was based on grading plans prepared by Hunsaker & Associates. The following plans have been utilized as base maps for our Geotechnical Maps, Plates 1-3:

Plate 1 – Geologic Map, Existing & Proposed Topographic Contours with Loop Road for Area 6, Plate 2 – Geologic Cross Sections,
Plate 3 – Geologic Map, Existing & Proposed Topographic Contours for Area 7, with Cross Sections; Proposed Development:

Area 6:

Area 6 is west and adjacent to the existing Eternal Valley Memorial Park and will represent an expansion to re-contour the property for construction of lawn burial sites, loop road, and a water feature. Grading will include creation of cut slopes with slope ratio of 5:1, except for a small section along Needham Ranch Parkway and downhill side of the loop road where the slope ratio is 2:1.

Existing and proposed topographic contours are indicated on the Geologic Map on Plate 1, and Cross Sections on Plate 2. As indicated on the plans, the memorial park expansion will adjoin a proposed industrial project to the west that will include construction of Needham Ranch Parkway near the memorial park property line, as well as building pads and related improvements. The memorial park grading will co-ordinate with the industrial park grading primarily at a west-facing slope above the proposed Needham Ranch Parkway, and at other graded slopes in areas to the south where the projects adjoin.

Area 7:

Area 7 is southeast of Eternal Valley Memorial Park, and represents an expansion to re-contour the area for construction of lawn burial sites. This area was previously graded as part of Needham Ranch Development. The memorial park is proposing to raise the grade by maximum of approximately 15 feet with fill slopes with gradient of 7:1, except along its south boundary adjacent to Needham Ranch building pad, where the slope ratio will be 2:1. Existing and proposed topographic contours are indicated on the Geological Map and Cross Section on Plate 3.

Site Description:

The area to be developed is bordered on the north, west, and south by natural and graded, hillside terrain with a few dirt roads and a water tank on the highest portion of the ridgeline to the west. The existing memorial park borders the site to the east. Much of the area to be developed has been previously graded by placement of fill soils from memorial park grading, which apparently took place over the course of Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097

Page 4 ends

many decades. The remainder of the area consists of natural hillside terrain with native, chaparral type vegetation.

Area 7 southeast of the Memorial Park was part of Needham Ranch Development and consists of a large graded pad area with a slight gradient to the east.

Purpose and Scope of Services:

The purpose of our investigation was to explore and evaluate the existing soil and geologic conditions at the site, and based on our findings, provide our conclusions and recommendations regarding grading and construction of the proposed improvements. The scope of services utilized to conduct our investigation included the following tasks:
1 Review of published and unpublished maps and reports pertinent to the site including Needham Ranch Development by RTFA reports (see References at the end of text). 2 Field investigation including 12 backhoe pits and 4 bucket auger borings to evaluate soil and bedrock conditions.
3 Laboratory testing of representative soil and bedrock samples to evaluate the stability of proposed slopes, the characteristics and depths of existing fill soils, and provide recommendations for proposed lawn burial areas.
4 Geologic and geotechnical analyses.
5 Preparation of the following report to present our findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

Field Exploration:

Our field investigation was performed in 2008 for Area 6, and consisted of excavation of 12 backhoe pits, to depths ranging from 3 to 17 feet, and drilling and downhole logging of 4-bucket auger borings ranging in depth from 20 to 45 feet. The locations of the test pits and borings are indicated on the Geological Map, Plate I. Logs of the test pits and borings are presented in Appendix B. The test pits and borings were logged by an engineering geologist. Samples were obtained of representative soil and bedrock for laboratory testing.

We did not perform field exploration for Area 7, since it was part of the Needham Ranch development. This area is addressed in the referenced reports.

Regional Geology/Site Soil Conditions:

The project site is located in hilly terrain near the western margin of the Santa Susana Mountains, just west of Sierra Highway and the Antelope Valley Freeway (See Figure 1 and 2). Published geologic maps (Dibblee, 1992), indicate that the site is underlain by Quaternary age, terrestrial sedimentary rocks of the Saugus formation (See Figure 2, Regional Geologic Map). The rocks consist primarily of sandstone, conglomerate, and conglomeratic sandstone that strikes nearly north-south and dips homoclinally to the west at moderate inclinations. Our subsurface investigation encountered sandstone and conglomeratic sandstone generally consistent with the published geologic maps.

Previous grading at the site, which apparently occurred over the span of several decades, resulted in a significant volume of fill soil being placed on the native slopes and in canyon areas in the expansion area Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097

Page 5 ends

and the offsite area to the west. Based on our and RTFA’s field investigations, the fill deposits are up to 69 feet thick and generally consist of silty sand with varying amounts of fine to coarse gravel and cobbles. The fills were generally placed over native residual soil and colluvium, apparently without benefit of benching or removals. The limits of the existing fill soils are shown on Plate 1. More recently, gravesite spoils and a limited amount of construction debris has been placed in an area of hummocky terrain labeled as a stockpile fill on the enclosed Plate 1.

Area 7 was graded as a cut in Saugus Formation bedrock during grading of the Needham Ranch Project.

As a result, the pad and slope areas are underlain by Saugus Formation bedrock as indicated on Plate 3.

Earthquake Induced Landslides:

According to the map entitled “State of California Seismic Hazard Zone, Oat Mountain 7.5 Quadrangle” the site is not within a zone requiring an evaluation of earthquake induced landslides.

Laboratory Testing:

Laboratory tests were performed in 2008 on selected soil and bedrock samples to determine their relative physical and engineering properties. The results of these tests are presented in Appendix C.

Laboratory testing consisted of the following tests:

1. Maximum Dry Density

2. Direct Shear, undisturbed and remolded

3. Consolidation

4. Moisture Density Determination
Stability Analyses:

The following are shear strength parameters of the bedrock and soil taken from our laboratory tests.

The locations of the borings and test pits are shown on Plate 1 in Appendix A.

Material Cohesion Friction Location
(psf) (deg.)
Fill 0 39 B-1 @ 5' Fill Evaluation Area (Remolded)
Fill 700 27 B-1 @ 5' Fill Evaluation Area
Fill 200 39 B-1 @ 10' Fill Evaluation Area
Fill 0 44 B-1 @ 20' Fill Evaluation Area
Fill 220 43 B-1 @ 15' Fill Evaluation Area
Fill 720 37 B-1 @ 25' Fill Evaluation Area
Fill 330 37 B-1 @ 35' Fill Evaluation Area
Bedrock 200 38 Maintenance Area
Bedrock 572 33 Adjacent property on Site
Bedrock 310 43 Adjacent property on Site
Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 6 The following are shear strength parameters taken from RTFA Report dated January 30, 2020 (see reference).

Material Cohesion Friction
(psf) (deg.)
Compacted Fill 300 32
Terrace Deposits 300 32
Alluvium 250 30
We selected the following shear parameters for the stability analyses:

Material Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle (Degrees)
Fill 200 30
Bedrock 200 38
Stability analysis of the proposed 5:1 fill slope (with a small section of 2:1 slope along Needham Ranch Parkway and downhill side of the loop road) was performed along section A-A.

The analyses were performed using the GEOSTASE Program. The critical surfaces having the lowest safety factors and the print outs are included in Appendix D. The Modified Bishop Method was used to compute the safety factor of circular failure surfaces.

The following analyses were performed:

EternalValleyArea6A1: Gross rotational analysis which initiates at Needham Ranch Parkway / the toe of the proposed 2:1 slope, and terminates on the 5:1 slope at the lawn burial area. A safety factor of 3.41 was calculated.

EternalValleyArea6A2: Localized rotational analysis within the proposed 2:1 slope along Needham Ranch Parkway. A safety factor of 2.49 was calculated.

EternalValleyArea6A1Q: Similar to EternalValleyArea6A1 but using pseudo-static analysis. A safety factor of 1.9 was calculated.

The results of the stability analysis including the proposed slopes have a minimum safety factor of

1.5 against static failure, and 1.1 against pseudo-static failure, the minimums acceptable by the Building Codes.

Conclusions:

The proposed grading is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented in design and construction.

Our gross slope stability analysis indicates that the proposed slopes have a minimum gross safety factor of 1.5 for static conditions.

Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 7 Area 6 (West of Memorial Park)
Needham Ranch Parkway Grading:

Grading of the Needham Ranch Parkway adjacent to the west margin of the memorial park was already done by others, see references. Trimming the toe of the slope (west-facing slope shared by the memorial park) to 2:1, as shown on Plates 1 and 2 will be performed as part as the Needham Ranch development.

Existing Fill Slopes:

Our laboratory testing indicates that the existing fill soils have a relative compaction ranging from 85 percent to 93 percent, except for the upper few feet which has a relative compaction of 80 percent.

Laboratory testing also shows that the existing fill soils have a medium to low potential for consolidation.

The existing fill soils are suitable for lawn burial and memorial park roadways and slopes, except for the upper about 5 feet of the existing soils which should be removed and recompacted.

The 5:1 grading will remove much of the upper 5 feet of the existing fill soils, exposing denser material. Since the memorial park fill is undocumented, settlement may occur, however these settlements would not be detrimental to the lawn burial areas. Proposed roadways should be supported on at least 5 feet of compacted fill.

Existing Stockpile Fill:

Stockpile fills, as indicated on the Geological Map, are end dumped fills placed with no compaction effort. These fills should be removed and recompacted, if not removed by the planned grading.

Area 7 (Southeast of the Memorial Park)
Newly Constructed Pad:

This area was previously graded as part of Needham Ranch Development. The memorial park is proposing to raise the grade by a maximum of approximately 15 feet with fill slopes with gradient of 7:1, except along its south boundary adjacent to Needham Ranch building pad, where the slope ratio will be 2:1.

The existing pad (recently cut) exposes bedrock, and is suitable to receive compacted fill to create lawn burial areas and slopes.

Recommendations:

Lawn Burial Sites Grading:

Fill Placement in Areas 6 &7:

All fill materials must consist of clean soils that are free of vegetation and other debris. The compaction standard for fill materials placed in cemeteries can be less than the 90 percent relative Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 8 compaction standard used for other engineered grading. Accordingly, fill placed in lawn burial and other such areas must be compacted to at least 85 percent of the maximum dry density. Fill placed to construct 2:1 slopes and roadways, should be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction, see the following sections for detailed recommendations. All fill must be placed in 6 to 8-inch-thick lifts at near optimum moisture content and compacted.

Existing Fills in Area 6:

The relative compaction of the existing fill averages above 85 percent, except in the upper 5 feet which is less than 80 percent and is dry and loose. The relative densities of the fill materials are shown in Appendix C. Since the relative compaction of the fill is 85 percent relative compaction or above, the minimum for cemeteries, the existing fill could be left in place.

The existing fill soils are suitable for lawn burial and memorial park roadway and slopes, except for the upper about 5 feet of the existing soils which should be removed and recompacted to 85 percent relative compaction, if not removed by the planned grading. Some settlement of the existing fill may occur; however, these settlements would not be detrimental to the lawn burial areas.

Loop Roadway:

Fill below proposed roadways to a depth of 5 feet, and to a distance of 5 feet beyond the edge of pavement should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. The subgrade (the upper 2 feet) and the base should be compacted to 95 percent.

Pavement Design:

For preliminary design purposes we suggest an R-Value of 25. The pavement section should not be less than 4 inches of asphalt concrete (AC) over 4 inches of aggregate base (AB). During grading of the site R-Value tests should be performed for various types of soils within the upper 5 feet of the roadways. If the R-Value is less than 25 as assumed in this report, the section of the pavement must be revised accordingly.

Temporary Excavations:

All temporary excavations should be observed by the geologist to evaluate the possible hazard posed by adverse conditions. Temporary excavations in soil may be made up to 4 feet in height. Excavation over 4 feet in height should be laid back to 1:1.

Earthen berms or other methods should be used during wet weather construction in order to prevent runoff water from entering the excavations. All runoff water should be collected and disposed of outside the construction limits to appropriate drainage systems.

All excavations must comply with applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the Contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. Excavations and temporary slopes should be protected from surficial erosion and the effects of inclement weather by the project contractor. Protective measures such as plastic or jute mesh may be used to protect against the potential for surficial sloughing Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 9 Flatwork and Walkways:

Flatwork and walkways should be supported either on native soil and/ or at least two feet of compacted fill to 90 percent relative compaction. As a minimum, flatwork and walkways in areas with heavy traffic, should be 4 inches thick, and reinforced with No. 3 bars placed at mid-height at 18 inches on-center. Exterior flatwork should be kept a minimum of 5 feet from nearby slopes.

Walkways and slabs should be provided with joints. These joints and separations should be filled with plastic joint filler and should be maintained.

Site Drainage:

Water should not be allowed to sheet flow freely over the slope surfaces. All surface and drainage water should be collected and drained to a suitable location using non-erodible drainage devices.

Utility Trenches:

All utility trenches should be backfilled and compacted to 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D1557-91, depending on the compaction of the area the trench traverses.

This section describes the limits of our liability and warranties for data contained in this report. The report, exploration logs, and other materials resulting from Geotechnical Soilutions Inc., efforts were prepared exclusively for use by Clark & Green Associates and his consultants in designing the proposed development. The report is not intended to be suitable for reuse on extensions or modifications of the project or for use on any project other than the currently proposed development, as it may not contain sufficient or appropriate information for such uses. If this report or portions of this report are provided to contractors or included in specifications, it should be understood that they are provided for information only. This report cannot be utilized by another entity without the express written permission of GSI. This report is an instrument of our services and remains the property of GSI.

This office shall be promptly notified if any conditions substantially differing from those exposed by the exploratory excavations are encountered during construction. Soil deposits may vary in type, strength, and many other important properties between points of exploration due to non-uniformity of the geologic formations or to man-made cut and fill operations. While we cannot evaluate the consistency of the properties of materials in areas not explored, the conclusions drawn in this report are based on the assumption that the data obtained in the field and laboratory are reasonably representative of field conditions and are conducive to interpolation and extrapolation.

Our recommendations were developed with the assumption that a proper level of field observation and construction review will be provided during excavation and foundation construction by GSI. If construction phase services are performed by others, they must accept full responsibility (as Project Geotechnical Engineer of record) for all geotechnical aspects of the project including this report. Our investigation and evaluations were performed using generally accepted engineering approaches and principles available at this time and the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable Geotechnical Engineers practicing in this area. No other representation, either express or implied, is included or intended in our report.

Respectfully Submitted,
Geotechnical Soilutions, Inc.,
Mesrop A. Mesrop Tom Hill
RGE 2561 CEG 1100

Dibblee, T.W.Jr., 1992 Geologic Map of the Oat Mountain and Canoga Park (North ½) Quadrangles.

Dibblee Geotechnical Foundation Map # DF-36. Scale 1:24,000.

D.M.G February, 1, 1998 Seismic Hazard Zone, Oat Mountain Quadrangle. Scale 1:24,000.

CDMG Seismic Hazard Zone Report 005, entitled ASeismic Hazard Zone Report for the Oat Mountain 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California,@ dated 1998.

RTFA; Geotechnical Review of Rough Grading Plan for Tentative Tract No. 50283-01 Santa Clarita, California for Gate-King Partners, Volume I of IV, dated May 26, 2006, Job No. 99-500-21.

RTFA; Geotechnical Plan Review – Grading Plan, Needham Ranch, Phase 2, Tract Nos. 50283-03, - 04, Santa Clarita, California, for TC LA Industrial Development, Inc., A Delaware Corporation.

Dated January 30, 2020, Job No. 99-506-021R.

1.1 General Description

1.11 These specifications have been prepared for the grading and site development of the proposed structures. The geotechnical engineer should be consulted prior to any site work connected with site development to ensure compliance with these specifications.

1.12 The geotechnical engineer should be notified prior to any site clearing or grading operations on the property in order to coordinate the work with the grading contractor in the field.

1.13 This item shall consist of all clearing, excavating or grubbing, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, spreading, compaction and control of the fill, and all subsidiary work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines and grades, as shown on the accepted plans. The geotechnical engineer is not responsible for determining line, grade elevations, or slope gradients. The property owner, or his representative shall designate the person or organizations that will be responsible for these items of work.

1.14 Contents of these specifications shall be integrated with the geotechnical report of which they are a part, therefore, they shall not be used as a self-contained document.

2.1 Tests

2.11 The standard test used to define maximum densities of all compaction work shall be the ASTM Procedure D1557-91. All densities shall be expressed as a relative compaction in terms of the maximum dry density obtained in the laboratory by the foregoing standard procedure.

3.1 Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled

3.11 All fill, roots, and debris shall be removed from all structural areas. The depth of the excavations will be determined in the field by the geotechnical engineer.

4.1 Materials Used for Fill

4.11 The soils existing on the site are suitable for use as compacted engineered fill after removal of the debris and after the approval of the geotechnical engineer.

4.12 Should import material be required, it must be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to transporting it to the project and should meet the following requirements.

1. R-Value not less than 25

2. Should not contain rocks larger than 8 inches maximum size

3. Expansion index less than 20.

Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 13 5.1 Placing, Spreading and Compacting Fill Material

5.11 The fill materials shall be p laced in uniform lifts of not more than 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material in each layer. Before compaction begins, the fill shall be brought to a water content that will permit proper compaction by either (i) aerating the material if it is too wet; or (ii) spraying the material with water if it is too dry.

5.13 Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot rollers, multiple pneumatic tired rollers or other types of acceptable compacting rollers. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is within the specified moisture content range. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the required density has been obtained. No ponding or jetting will be permitted.

5.14 Field density tests shall be made in each compacted layer by the geotechnical engineer in accordance with ASTM Test Procedure D1556-91. When sheepsfoot rollers are used for compaction, the density tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the surface disturbed by the roller.

When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the required compaction, the particular layer, or portion thereof, shall be reworked until the required compaction has been obtained.

5.15 No soil shall be placed or compacted during periods of rain nor on ground which is not drained of all free water. Soil which has been soaked and wetted by rain or any other cause, shall not be compacted until completely drained and until the moisture content is within the limits herein before described or approved by the geotechnical engineer. Prior approval by the geotechnical engineer shall be obtained before continuing the grading operations.

6.1 Trench Backfill

6.11 Trench backfill should be compacted to the same relative compaction as the fill.

FIGURES AND PLATES

STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
2:1
1609
1610
1611
1612
1613
1620
1619
1618
1617
1616
1615
1614
BE
01 BE
02 BE
03 BE
04 BE
05 BE
06 OFOI NICHES
SPE
QTS
AF 32.5'
TP-10
24 AF
AF TO 17'
B-2
TD35'
TP-4
AF TO 15'
AF TO 15'
TP-5
TP-6
QTS
AF 14'
TP-9
TP-7
QTS
QTS TP-8
20 QTS QTS
AF
B-1TD29'
QTS
AF 27' QTS AF 15'
TP-12
QTS
TP-3
QTS
21 QTS
AF 9'
TP-11
TP-1
AF TO 15'
B-4
TD35'
QTS
AF 34'
B-3TD45'
QTS
AF 43'
AF
AF
QTS
TP-14
QTS
TP-15
QTS
25 12
QTS
TP-17
AF
TP-18
QTS1.5
AF TO 14.5'
TP-16
QTS
AF TP-2 5'
10 AF QTS
AF
QTS
QTS
AF
TP-13
QTS
A
A'
HS-3
2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
5:1

PROPOSED

CONTOURS

EXISTING

CONTOURS

PROPOSED

CONTOURS
5:1
2:1
2:1
2:1
5:1 5:1
KEY: AF - FILL DEPOSITS
QTS - SAUGUS FORMATIONT-26 - EXPLORATORY TEST PIT
B-9 - BUCKET AUGER BORING TOTAL DEPTH,
DEPTH OF SOIL / GEOLOGIC CONTACTS, AND STRIKE AND DIP OF BEDDING OR SHEAR INDICATED. - STRIKE AND DIP OF BEDDING- GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION
A A'
24 SCALE: 1" = 100'

SITE TOPOGRAPHY / GEOLOGIC MAP

GRAPHIC SCALE
SCALE: 1" = 100'
PLATE No.

DATE: 7 - 20 - 21 JOB No. GS 8324
1 ETERNAL VALLEY MEMORIAL PARK
LAWN BURIAL AREA (6)
PROPOSED GRADING 5:1 & 2:1 / GEOLOGIC MAP

SANTA CLARITA, CA
11080 TUXFORD STREET,
Geotechnical Soilutions, Inc.

SUN VALLEY, CA 91352
HS-3 - BORING BY RTFA REPORT,
JANUARY 30, 2020

LOGS OF BORINGS & TEST PITS

LABORATORY TESTING
Page
Eternal Valley
Project No. GS 8324
July 26, 2021
__________________________________________________________________________________ 11080 Tuxford Street, Sun Valley, CA 91352 - Phone (323) 937-1097 17 LABORATORY TESTING
Maximum Density - Optimum Moisture Content:

A bulk soil sample was tested in the laboratory to determine the dry density and optimum moisture content using the ASTM D1557-02 compaction test method. This test is made on the minus four (-4) fractions of the sample in a four-inch diameter mold having 1/30-cubic foot volume, with 25 blows of a ten-pound hammer falling 18 inches on each of five layers. The results of the test are presented below and on the following Plates.

Soil Sample Maximum Optimum
tested description dry density moisture content
(pcf) (% of dry weight)
B-5 at 2’– 3’ Sandstone 129.5 9.5 Maintenance Area
B-1 at 2’– 5’ Fill 128.5 9.0 Fill Evaluation
B-2 at 2’– 5’ Fill 128.0 9.5 Fill Evaluation
Direct Shear:

Direct shear tests (ASTM D 3080) were performed on relatively undisturbed and remolded 2.5-inch diameter samples to determine the strength of the soils. The samples were placed in water for at least 24 hours before testing and then sheared under normal loads. Direct shear tests were also made on remolded 2.5-inch diameter samples of the fill to determine the strength at 90 percent relative compaction. The samples were sheared at a rate of 0.01 inch per minute. The test results were plotted on the following plates.

Consolidation:

The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive relatively undisturbed specimens in the field condition. Porous stones were placed in contact with the top and bottom of the specimen to permit the ready addition and release of water. Successive load increments were applied to the top of the specimen, and progressive final settlements under each load increment were recorded to an accuracy of 0.001 inch. The maximum stress during testing was nine ksf. The sample was unloaded to one ksf to check the rebound characteristics. The test was performed to the (ASTM D 2435). The final settlements obtained were plotted to determine the curves shown on the following plates.

The moisture-density information provides a summary of soil consistency for each stratum. The dry unit weight and field moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed samples. The results of the moisture-density tests are shown on the shear graphs. The results of the relative densities of the existing fill are presented in the table below:

Sample location Density (pcf)/ Moisture % Max. Dry Density (pcf) Relative Compaction % B-1@ 5’ 103 / 11 128.5 80
B-1@10’ 118 / 9.2 128.5 92
B-1@15’ 109 / 17 128.5 85
B-1@20’ 109 / 14 128.5 85
B-1@25’ 120 / 11.8 128.5 93
B-1@35’ 108.7 / 7.3 128.5 85

STABILITY ANALYSES
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
Eternal Valley Sec A1
GROSS STATIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A1.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method

GEOSTASE PROFILE PREVIEW
PLATE C.1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
Segment
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 Eternal Valley Sec A1
GROSS STATIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A1.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 No. FS
1 3.41 2 3.43 3 3.43 4 3.44 5 3.46 6 3.46 7 3.46 8 3.46 9 3.47 10 3.47
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 3.41
8 6 9 10 5 4 7 2 3 1
B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 No. FS
1 3.41 2 3.43 3 3.43 4 3.44 5 3.46 6 3.46 7 3.46 8 3.46 9 3.47 10 3.47
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 Eternal Valley Sec A1
GROSS STATIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A1.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method
PLATE C.1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 No. FS
1 3.41 2 3.43 3 3.43 4 3.44 5 3.46 6 3.46 7 3.46 8 3.46 9 3.47 10 3.47
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 3.41
8 6 9 10 5 4 7 2 3 1
B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 No. FS
1 3.41 2 3.43 3 3.43 4 3.44 5 3.46 6 3.46 7 3.46 8 3.46 9 3.47 10 3.47
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 *** GEOSTASE(R) ***
** GEOSTASE(R) (c)Copyright by Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D., P.E.,D.GE ** ** Current Version 4.30.30-Double Precision, January 2019 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited)
*********************************************************************************

SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SOFTWARE
Simplified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or General Equilibrium (GE) Options. (Spencer, Morgenstern-Price, USACE, and Lowe & Karafiath) Including Pier/Pile, Planar Reinf, Nail, Tieback, Line Loads Applied Forces, Fiber-Reinforced Soil (FRS), Distributed Loads Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Strength Envelope, Anisotropic Strengths, Water Surfaces, 3-Stage Rapid Drawdown 2- or 3-Stage Pseudo-Static & Simplified Newmark Seismic Analyses. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Date: 7/ 21/ 2021
Analysis Time:

Analysis By: Geotechnical Soilutions Inc
Input File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A1.gsd
Output File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A1.OUT
Unit System: English
PROJECT: Eternal Valley Sec A1
DESCRIPTION: GROSS STATIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD

BOUNDARY DATA
8 Surface Boundaries
11 Total Boundaries
Boundary X - 1 Y - 1 X - 2 Y - 2 Soil Type
No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd
1 0.000 80.000 95.000 80.000 1
2 95.000 80.000 110.000 90.000 1
3 110.000 90.000 205.000 105.000 1
4 205.000 105.000 225.000 115.000 1
5 225.000 115.000 250.000 115.000 1
6 250.000 115.000 470.000 160.000 1
7 470.000 160.000 530.000 165.000 1
8 530.000 165.000 600.000 165.000 2
9 0.000 20.000 210.000 60.000 2
10 210.000 60.000 490.000 140.000 2
11 490.000 140.000 530.000 165.000 2
User Specified X-Origin = 0.000(ft)
User Specified Y-Origin = 0.000(ft)

MOHR-COULOMB SOIL PARAMETERS
2 Type(s) of Soil Defined
Soil Number Moist Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Water Water
and Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface Option
Description (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Ratio(ru) (psf) No. 1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.00 30.00 0.000 0.0 0
0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.00 38.00 0.000 0.0 0
0 DISTRIBUTED LOAD(S)
1 Load(s) Specified
Load BND No. X - 1 Y - 1 Stress X - 2 Y - 2
Stress Deflection
No. (ft) (ft) (psf) (ft) (ft)
(psf) (deg from Vert)
1 5 225.000 115.000 200.000 250.000 115.000
200.000 0.00
NOTE - Load Stress Varies Linearly Within Specified Range.

TRIAL FAILURE SURFACE DATA
Circular Trial Failure Surfaces Have Been Generated Using A Random Procedure. 500 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
500 Surfaces Generated at Increments of 1.0822(in) Equally Spaced Within the Start Range
Along The Specified Surface Between X = 50.00(ft)
and X = 95.00(ft)
Each Surface Enters within a Range Between X = 205.00(ft) and X = 530.00(ft)
Unless XCLUDE Lines Were Specified, The Minimum Elevation To Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft)
Specified Maximum Radius = 5000.000(ft)

15.000(ft) Line Segments Were Used For Each Trial Failure Surface.

The Simplified Bishop Method Was Selected for FS Analysis.

Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 500
Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 500
Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values:

FS Max = 6.301 FS Min = 3.415 FS Ave = 4.845
Standard Deviation = 0.849 Coefficient of Variation = 17.51 % Critical Surface is Sequence Number 56 of Those Analyzed. *****BEGINNING OF DETAILED GEOSTASE OUTPUT FOR CRITICAL SURFACE FROM A SEARCH***** BACK-CALCULATED CIRCULAR SURFACE PARAMETERS:

Circle Center At X = 144.400343(ft) ; Y = 849.923096(ft); and Radius = 775.100744(ft)
Circular Trial Failure Surface Generated With 32 Coordinate Points Point X-Coord. Y-Coord.

No. (ft) (ft)
1 54.960 80.000
2 69.876 78.413
3 84.820 77.116
4 99.786 76.107
5 114.768 75.389
6 129.762 74.961
7 144.762 74.822
8 159.761 74.975
9 174.754 75.417
10 189.736 76.149
11 204.702 77.172
12 219.644 78.483
13 234.558 80.084
14 249.439 81.973
15 264.280 84.149
16 279.077 86.612
17 293.823 89.361
18 308.513 92.395
19 323.141 95.713
20 337.703 99.313
21 352.192 103.194
22 366.603 107.355
23 380.931 111.794
24 395.171 116.510
25 409.317 121.500
26 423.363 126.763
27 437.305 132.296
28 451.137 138.099
29 464.854 144.168
30 478.452 150.501
31 491.924 157.097
32 502.914 162.743
Factor Of Safety For The Critical or Specified Surface = 3.415 ***Table 1 - Geometry Data on the 37 Slices***
Slice Width Height X-Cntr Y-Cntr-Base Y-Cntr-Top Alpha Beta Base Length No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (deg) (ft)
1 14.92 0.79 62.42 79.21 80.00 -6.07 0.00 15.00
2 14.94 2.24 77.35 77.76 80.00 -4.96 0.00 15.00
3 10.18 3.23 89.91 76.77 80.00 -3.85 0.00 10.20
4 4.79 5.33 97.39 76.27 81.60 -3.85 33.69 4.80
5 10.21 10.73 104.89 75.86 86.60 -2.75 33.69 10.23
6 4.77 14.87 112.38 75.50 90.38 -2.75 8.97 4.77
7 14.99 16.76 122.27 75.17 91.94 -1.64 8.97 15.00
8 15.00 19.41 137.26 74.89 94.30 -0.53 8.97 15.00
9 15.00 21.77 152.26 74.90 96.67 0.58 8.97 15.00
10 14.99 23.84 167.26 75.20 99.04 1.69 8.97 15.00
11 14.98 25.62 182.25 75.78 101.41 2.80 8.97 15.00
12 14.97 27.11 197.22 76.66 103.77 3.91 8.97 15.00
13 0.30 27.79 204.85 77.18 104.98 5.02 8.97 0.30
14 14.64 30.82 212.32 77.84 108.66 5.02 26.57 14.70
15 5.36 34.89 222.32 78.77 113.66 6.13 26.57 5.39
16 9.56 35.43 229.78 79.57 115.00 6.13 0.00 9.61
17 14.88 33.97 242.00 81.03 115.00 7.23 0.00 15.00
18 0.56 32.99 249.72 82.01 115.00 8.34 0.00 0.57
19 14.28 33.36 257.14 83.10 116.46 8.34 11.56 14.43
20 14.80 34.05 271.68 85.38 119.43 9.45 11.56 15.00
21 14.75 34.47 286.45 87.99 122.46 10.56 11.56 15.00
22 14.69 34.59 301.17 90.88 125.47 11.67 11.56 15.00
23 14.63 34.41 315.83 94.05 128.46 12.78 11.56 15.00
24 14.56 33.94 330.42 97.51 131.45 13.89 11.56 15.00
25 14.49 33.17 344.95 101.25 134.42 15.00 11.56 15.00
26 14.41 32.10 359.40 105.27 137.38 16.10 11.56 15.00
27 14.33 30.74 373.77 109.57 140.32 17.21 11.56 15.00
28 14.24 29.09 388.05 114.15 143.24 18.32 11.56 15.00
29 14.15 27.14 402.24 119.00 146.14 19.43 11.56 15.00
30 14.05 24.89 416.34 124.13 149.02 20.54 11.56 15.00
31 13.94 22.36 430.33 129.53 151.89 21.65 11.56 15.00
32 13.83 19.53 444.22 135.20 154.73 22.76 11.56 15.00
33 13.72 16.41 458.00 141.13 157.54 23.87 11.56 15.00
34 5.15 14.11 467.43 145.37 159.47 24.98 11.56 5.68
35 8.45 11.82 474.23 148.53 160.35 24.98 4.76 9.32
36 13.47 7.47 485.19 153.80 161.27 26.08 4.76 15.00
37 10.99 2.37 497.42 159.92 162.28 27.19 4.76 12.36
***Table 2 - Force Data On The 37 Slices (Excluding Reinforcement)*** Ubeta Ualpha Earthquake
Force Force Force Distributed
Slice Weight Top Bot Hor Ver Load
No. (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 1420.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 4008.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 3942.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4 3058.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 13155.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 8510.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
7 30159.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
8 34941.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 39191.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
10 42902.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
11 46068.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
12 48686.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
13 995.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
14 54160.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
15 22424.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
16 40637.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1911.7
17 60662.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2976.1
18 2220.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 112.2
19 57164.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
20 60464.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
21 60992.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
22 60971.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
23 60404.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
24 59300.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
25 57668.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
26 55516.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
27 52855.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
28 49700.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
29 46062.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
30 41958.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
31 37403.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
32 32416.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
33 27014.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
34 8710.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
35 11987.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
36 12071.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
37 3119.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 1252929.48(lbs)
EFFECTIVE WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 1252929.48(lbs)
TOTAL AREA OF SLIDING MASS = 10441.08(ft2)
***TABLE 2A - SOIL STRENGTH & SOIL OPTIONS DATA ON THE 37 SLICES*** Slice Soil Cohesion Phi(Deg) Options
No. Type (psf)
1 1 200.00 30.00
2 1 200.00 30.00
3 1 200.00 30.00
4 1 200.00 30.00
5 1 200.00 30.00
6 1 200.00 30.00
7 1 200.00 30.00
8 1 200.00 30.00
9 1 200.00 30.00
10 1 200.00 30.00
11 1 200.00 30.00
12 1 200.00 30.00
13 1 200.00 30.00
14 1 200.00 30.00
15 1 200.00 30.00
16 1 200.00 30.00
17 1 200.00 30.00
18 1 200.00 30.00
19 1 200.00 30.00
20 1 200.00 30.00
21 1 200.00 30.00
22 1 200.00 30.00
23 1 200.00 30.00
24 1 200.00 30.00
25 1 200.00 30.00
26 1 200.00 30.00
27 1 200.00 30.00
28 1 200.00 30.00
29 1 200.00 30.00
30 1 200.00 30.00
31 1 200.00 30.00
32 1 200.00 30.00
33 1 200.00 30.00
34 1 200.00 30.00
35 1 200.00 30.00
36 1 200.00 30.00
37 1 200.00 30.00
SOIL OPTIONS: A = ANISOTROPIC, C = CURVED STRENGTH ENVELOPE (TANGENT PHI & C), F = FIBER-REINFORCED SOIL (FRS), N = NONLINEAR UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, R = RAPID DRAWDOWN OR RAPID LOADING (SEISMIC) SHEAR STRENGTH NOTE: Phi and C in Table 4 are modified values based on specified Soil Options (if any).
***TABLE 3 - Effective and Base Shear Stress Data on the 37 Slices*** Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) (psf)
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 103.36 259.67 76.04
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 103.36 259.67 76.04
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 277.50 360.21 105.49
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 277.50 360.21 105.49
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 395.80 428.51 125.49
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 395.80 428.51 125.49
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 650.65 575.65 168.58
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 650.65 575.65 168.58
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 1301.40 951.36 278.60
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 1301.40 951.36 278.60
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 1802.35 1240.59 363.30
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 1802.35 1240.59 363.30
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 2022.97 1367.96 400.60
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 2022.97 1367.96 400.60
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 2333.77 1547.40 453.15
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 2333.77 1547.40 453.15
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 2607.81 1705.62 499.49
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 2607.81 1705.62 499.49
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 2845.33 1842.75 539.64
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 2845.33 1842.75 539.64
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 3046.59 1958.95 573.67
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 3046.59 1958.95 573.67
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 3211.86 2054.37 601.62
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 3211.86 2054.37 601.62
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 3280.70 2094.12 613.26
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 3280.70 2094.12 613.26
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 3638.80 2300.86 673.80
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 3638.80 2300.86 673.80
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 4105.36 2570.23 752.69
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 4105.36 2570.23 752.69
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 4365.25 2720.28 796.63
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 4365.25 2720.28 796.63
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 4178.65 2612.54 765.08
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 4178.65 2612.54 765.08
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 4048.42 2537.36 743.06
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 4048.42 2537.36 743.06
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 3896.88 2449.87 717.44
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 3896.88 2449.87 717.44
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 3964.03 2488.63 728.79
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 3964.03 2488.63 728.79
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 3998.09 2508.30 734.55
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 3998.09 2508.30 734.55
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 3997.49 2507.95 734.45
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 3997.49 2507.95 734.45
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 3962.55 2487.78 728.54
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 3962.55 2487.78 728.54
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 3893.61 2447.98 716.88
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 3893.61 2447.98 716.88
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 3791.03 2388.75 699.54
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 3791.03 2388.75 699.54
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 3655.16 2310.31 676.57
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 3655.16 2310.31 676.57
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 3486.41 2212.88 648.03
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 3486.41 2212.88 648.03
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 3285.16 2096.69 614.01
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 3285.16 2096.69 614.01
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 3051.84 1961.98 574.56
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 3051.84 1961.98 574.56
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 2786.88 1809.01 529.76
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 2786.88 1809.01 529.76
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 2490.75 1638.03 479.69
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 2490.75 1638.03 479.69
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 2163.90 1449.33 424.43
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 2163.90 1449.33 424.43
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 1806.83 1243.18 364.06
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 1806.83 1243.18 364.06
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 1542.79 1090.73 319.42
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 1542.79 1090.73 319.42
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 1288.41 943.86 276.41
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 1288.41 943.86 276.41
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 800.24 662.02 193.87
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 800.24 662.02 193.87
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 233.04 334.54 97.97
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 233.04 334.54 97.97
***Table 4 - Base Force Data on the 37 Slices***
Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Shear Force Shear Force * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 1550.38 3895.11 1140.67
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 1550.38 3895.11 1140.67
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 4162.47 5403.20 1582.31
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 4162.47 5403.20 1582.31
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 4038.54 4372.36 1280.43
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 4038.54 4372.36 1280.43
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 3120.80 2761.08 808.58
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 3120.80 2761.08 808.58
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 13308.28 9728.76 2849.04
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 13308.28 9728.76 2849.04
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 8604.21 5922.42 1734.36
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 8604.21 5922.42 1734.36
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 30344.54 20519.43 6009.06
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 30344.54 20519.43 6009.06
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 35006.58 23211.06 6797.29
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 35006.58 23211.06 6797.29
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 39117.12 25584.28 7492.28
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 39117.12 25584.28 7492.28
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 42679.92 27641.26 8094.66
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 42679.92 27641.26 8094.66
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 45698.83 29384.23 8605.09
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 45698.83 29384.23 8605.09
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 48177.84 30815.49 9024.23
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 48177.84 30815.49 9024.23
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 982.80 627.33 183.71
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 982.80 627.33 183.71
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 53491.88 33823.63 9905.15
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 53491.88 33823.63 9905.15
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 22114.06 13844.89 4054.43
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 22114.06 13844.89 4054.43
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 41964.77 26151.05 7658.26
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 41964.77 26151.05 7658.26
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 62679.69 39188.13 11476.13
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 62679.69 39188.13 11476.13
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 2295.09 1438.45 421.25
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 2295.09 1438.45 421.25
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 56244.05 35359.14 10354.82
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 56244.05 35359.14 10354.82
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 59460.42 37329.49 10931.83
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 59460.42 37329.49 10931.83
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 59971.42 37624.52 11018.23
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 59971.42 37624.52 11018.23
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 59962.42 37619.32 11016.71
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 59962.42 37619.32 11016.71
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 59438.31 37316.72 10928.09
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 59438.31 37316.72 10928.09
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 58404.19 36719.67 10753.25
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 58404.19 36719.67 10753.25
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 56865.38 35831.24 10493.08
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 56865.38 35831.24 10493.08
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 54827.42 34654.62 10148.51
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 54827.42 34654.62 10148.51
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 52296.08 33193.15 9720.52
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 52296.08 33193.15 9720.52
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 49277.38 31450.31 9210.13
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 49277.38 31450.31 9210.13
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 45777.60 29429.71 8618.40
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 45777.60 29429.71 8618.40
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 41803.26 27135.12 7946.44
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 41803.26 27135.12 7946.44
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 37361.19 24570.49 7195.40
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 37361.19 24570.49 7195.40
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 32458.47 21739.91 6366.47
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 32458.47 21739.91 6366.47
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 27102.51 18647.64 5460.91
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 27102.51 18647.64 5460.91
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 8757.35 6191.32 1813.11
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 8757.35 6191.32 1813.11
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 12012.72 8800.29 2577.14
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 12012.72 8800.29 2577.14
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 12003.63 9930.30 2908.06
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 12003.63 9930.30 2908.06
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 2879.17 4133.29 1210.42
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 2879.17 4133.29 1210.42
SUM OF MOMENTS = -0.528378E-01 (ft/lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = -

0.4217140E-07
Sum of the Resisting Forces = 811988.41 (lbs)
Average Available Shear Strength = 1756.20(psf)
Sum of the Driving Forces = 237788.46 (lbs)
Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 514.30(psf)
Total length of the failure surface = 462.36(ft)
Factor of Safety Balance Check: FS = 3.41475
CAUTION - Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Bishop Method. This Method Is Valid Only If The Failure Surface Approximates A Circular Arc.
**** END OF GEOSTASE OUTPUT ****
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
Eternal Valley Sec A2
LOCALIZED STATIC ANALYSIS 2:1 TOE OF SLOPE
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A2.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method

GEOSTASE PROFILE PREVIEW
PLATE C.1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
Segment
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 Eternal Valley Sec A2
LOCALIZED STATIC ANALYSIS 2:1 TOE OF SLOPE
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A2.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 No. FS
1 2.49 2 2.49 3 2.49 4 2.50 5 2.56 6 2.57 7 2.59 8 2.59 9 2.59 10 2.60
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 2.49
1 4 3 2 5 6 7 9 8 10
B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 No. FS
1 2.49 2 2.49 3 2.49 4 2.50 5 2.56 6 2.57 7 2.59 8 2.59 9 2.59 10 2.60
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 Eternal Valley Sec A2
LOCALIZED STATIC ANALYSIS 2:1 TOE OF SLOPE
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A2.gsd
Simplified Bishop Method
PLATE C.1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 No. FS
1 2.49 2 2.49 3 2.49 4 2.50 5 2.56 6 2.57 7 2.59 8 2.59 9 2.59 10 2.60
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
GEOSTASE FS = 2.49
1 4 3 2 5 6 7 9 8 10
B 1 S 1
B 2 S 1
B 3 S 1
B 4 S 1
B 5 S 1
B 6 S 1
B 7 S 1
B 8 S 2
B 9 S 2
B 10 S 2
B 11 S 2
DL 1
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
0 75
150225300375
075150225300375 No. FS
1 2.49 2 2.49 3 2.49 4 2.50 5 2.56 6 2.57 7 2.59 8 2.59 9 2.59 10 2.60
Soil Moist Wt Sat Wt c Phi ru Pconst Piez Surf Soil
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) (ratio) (psf) No. Options
1 Fill 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.000 0.0 0 2 Bedrock 126.0 126.0 200.0 38.0 0.000 0.0 0 *** GEOSTASE(R) ***
** GEOSTASE(R) (c)Copyright by Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D., P.E.,D.GE ** ** Current Version 4.30.30-Double Precision, January 2019 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited)
*********************************************************************************

Analysis By: Geotechnical Soilutions Inc
Input File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A2.gsd
Output File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A2.OUT
Unit System: English
PROJECT: Eternal Valley Sec A2
DESCRIPTION: LOCALIZED STATIC ANALYSIS 2:1 TOE OF SLOPE

TRIAL FAILURE SURFACE DATA
Circular Trial Failure Surfaces Have Been Generated Using A Random Procedure. 500 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated.
500 Surfaces Generated at Increments of 0.0000(in) Equally Spaced Within the Start Range
Along The Specified Surface Between X = 95.00(ft)
and X = 95.00(ft)
Each Surface Enters within a Range Between X = 120.00(ft) and X = 170.00(ft)
Unless XCLUDE Lines Were Specified, The Minimum Elevation To Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft)
Specified Maximum Radius = 5000.000(ft)

3.000(ft) Line Segments Were Used For Each Trial Failure Surface.

The Simplified Bishop Method Was Selected for FS Analysis.

Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 500
Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 500
Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values:

FS Max = 5.318 FS Min = 2.492 FS Ave = 3.857
Standard Deviation = 0.747 Coefficient of Variation = 19.36 % Critical Surface is Sequence Number 383 of Those Analyzed. *****BEGINNING OF DETAILED GEOSTASE OUTPUT FOR CRITICAL SURFACE FROM A SEARCH***** BACK-CALCULATED CIRCULAR SURFACE PARAMETERS:

Circle Center At X = 98.653030(ft) ; Y = 105.755686(ft); and Radius =

26.013458(ft)
Circular Trial Failure Surface Generated With 11 Coordinate Points Point X-Coord. Y-Coord.

No. (ft) (ft)
1 95.000 80.000
2 97.990 79.751
3 100.988 79.847
4 103.955 80.288
5 106.852 81.068
6 109.640 82.176
7 112.282 83.598
8 114.742 85.315
9 116.989 87.303
10 118.991 89.537
11 120.490 91.656
Factor Of Safety For The Critical or Specified Surface = 2.492 ***Table 1 - Geometry Data on the 11 Slices***
Slice Width Height X-Cntr Y-Cntr-Base Y-Cntr-Top Alpha Beta Base Length No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (deg) (ft)
1 2.99 1.12 96.49 79.88 81.00 -4.77 33.69 3.00
2 3.00 3.19 99.49 79.80 82.99 1.84 33.69 3.00
3 2.97 4.91 102.47 80.07 84.98 8.46 33.69 3.00
4 2.90 6.26 105.40 80.68 86.94 15.07 33.69 3.00
5 2.79 7.21 108.25 81.62 88.83 21.68 33.69 3.00
6 0.36 7.61 109.82 82.27 89.88 28.29 33.69 0.41
7 2.28 7.20 111.14 82.98 90.18 28.29 8.97 2.59
8 2.46 6.10 113.51 84.46 90.55 34.90 8.97 3.00
9 2.25 4.62 115.87 86.31 90.93 41.51 8.97 3.00
10 2.00 2.84 117.99 88.42 91.26 48.12 8.97 3.00
11 1.50 0.94 119.74 90.60 91.54 54.73 8.97 2.60
***Table 2 - Force Data On The 11 Slices (Excluding Reinforcement)*** Ubeta Ualpha Earthquake
Force Force Force Distributed
Slice Weight Top Bot Hor Ver Load
No. (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 402.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
2 1149.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3 1749.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
4 2175.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
5 2411.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 328.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
7 1970.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
8 1800.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
9 1244.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
10 682.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
11 169.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTAL WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 14084.08(lbs)
EFFECTIVE WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 14084.08(lbs)
TOTAL AREA OF SLIDING MASS = 117.37(ft2)
***TABLE 2A - SOIL STRENGTH & SOIL OPTIONS DATA ON THE 11 SLICES*** Slice Soil Cohesion Phi(Deg) Options
No. Type (psf)
1 1 200.00 30.00
2 1 200.00 30.00
3 1 200.00 30.00
4 1 200.00 30.00
5 1 200.00 30.00
6 1 200.00 30.00
7 1 200.00 30.00
8 1 200.00 30.00
9 1 200.00 30.00
10 1 200.00 30.00
11 1 200.00 30.00
SOIL OPTIONS: A = ANISOTROPIC, C = CURVED STRENGTH ENVELOPE (TANGENT PHI & C), F = FIBER-REINFORCED SOIL (FRS), N = NONLINEAR UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, R = RAPID DRAWDOWN OR RAPID LOADING (SEISMIC) SHEAR STRENGTH NOTE: Phi and C in Table 4 are modified values based on specified Soil Options (if any).
***TABLE 3 - Effective and Base Shear Stress Data on the 11 Slices*** Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) (psf)
1 -4.77 96.49 3.00 144.02 283.15 113.60
1 -4.77 96.49 3.00 144.02 283.15 113.60
2 1.84 99.49 3.00 377.83 418.14 167.76
2 1.84 99.49 3.00 377.83 418.14 167.76
3 8.46 102.47 3.00 558.44 522.42 209.60
3 8.46 102.47 3.00 558.44 522.42 209.60
4 15.07 105.40 3.00 686.50 596.35 239.27
4 15.07 105.40 3.00 686.50 596.35 239.27
5 21.68 108.25 3.00 762.88 640.45 256.96
5 21.68 108.25 3.00 762.88 640.45 256.96
6 28.29 109.82 0.41 773.23 646.42 259.36
6 28.29 109.82 0.41 773.23 646.42 259.36
7 28.29 111.14 2.59 729.39 621.12 249.20
7 28.29 111.14 2.59 729.39 621.12 249.20
8 34.90 113.51 3.00 581.77 535.89 215.01
8 34.90 113.51 3.00 581.77 535.89 215.01
9 41.51 115.87 3.00 400.86 431.44 173.10
9 41.51 115.87 3.00 400.86 431.44 173.10
10 48.12 117.99 3.00 199.86 315.39 126.54
10 48.12 117.99 3.00 199.86 315.39 126.54
11 54.73 119.74 2.60 85.10 49.13 19.71
11 54.73 119.74 2.60 85.10 49.13 19.71
***Table 4 - Base Force Data on the 11 Slices***
Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Shear Force Shear Force * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 -4.77 96.49 3.00 432.05 849.45 340.81
1 -4.77 96.49 3.00 432.05 849.45 340.81
2 1.84 99.49 3.00 1133.49 1254.42 503.29
2 1.84 99.49 3.00 1133.49 1254.42 503.29
3 8.46 102.47 3.00 1675.33 1567.25 628.81
3 8.46 102.47 3.00 1675.33 1567.25 628.81
4 15.07 105.40 3.00 2059.51 1789.06 717.80
4 15.07 105.40 3.00 2059.51 1789.06 717.80
5 21.68 108.25 3.00 2288.63 1921.34 770.87
5 21.68 108.25 3.00 2288.63 1921.34 770.87
6 28.29 109.82 0.41 315.99 264.17 105.99
6 28.29 109.82 0.41 315.99 264.17 105.99
7 28.29 111.14 2.59 1890.11 1609.52 645.77
7 28.29 111.14 2.59 1890.11 1609.52 645.77
8 34.90 113.51 3.00 1745.32 1607.66 645.02
8 34.90 113.51 3.00 1745.32 1607.66 645.02
9 41.51 115.87 3.00 1202.58 1294.31 519.30
9 41.51 115.87 3.00 1202.58 1294.31 519.30
10 48.12 117.99 3.00 599.57 946.16 379.62
10 48.12 117.99 3.00 599.57 946.16 379.62
11 54.73 119.74 2.60 220.92 127.55 51.17
11 54.73 119.74 2.60 220.92 127.55 51.17
SUM OF MOMENTS = -0.152286E-01 (ft/lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = -

0.1081261E-05
Sum of the Resisting Forces = 13230.89 (lbs)
Average Available Shear Strength = 447.05(psf)
Sum of the Driving Forces = 5308.46 (lbs)
Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 179.36(psf)
Total length of the failure surface = 29.60(ft)
Factor of Safety Balance Check: FS = 2.49242
CAUTION - Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Bishop Method. This Method Is Valid Only If The Failure Surface Approximates A Circular Arc.
**** END OF GEOSTASE OUTPUT ****
GEOSTASE® by GREGORY GEOTECHNICAL SOFTWARE
Eternal Valley Sec A1Q
GROSS SEISMIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD
Geotechnical Soilutions Inc \Eternal Valley Sec A1Q.gsd Simplified Bishop Method

Analysis By: Geotechnical Soilutions Inc
Input File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A1Q.gsd
Output File Name: C:\Users\Sylva\Desktop\GEOSTASE Backup\GSI Analyses \Eternal Valley\Eternal Valley Sec A1Q.OUT
Unit System: English
PROJECT: Eternal Valley Sec A1Q
DESCRIPTION: GROSS SEISMIC ANALYSIS 5:1 & 2:1 WITH PROPOSED ROAD

SEISMIC (EARTHQUAKE) DATA
Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (PGA) = 0.000(g) Default Velocity = 0.000(ft) per second
Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.1500(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) (NOTE:Input Velocity = 0.0 will result in default Peak
Velocity = 2 times(PGA) times 2.5 fps or 0.762 mps)
Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000
Horizontal Seismic Force is Applied at Center of Gravity of Slices

15.000(ft) Line Segments Were Used For Each Trial Failure Surface.

The Simplified Bishop Method Was Selected for FS Analysis.

Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 500
Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 500
Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values:

FS Max = 3.533 FS Min = 1.899 FS Ave = 2.739
Standard Deviation = 0.474 Coefficient of Variation = 17.30 % Critical Surface is Sequence Number 56 of Those Analyzed. *****BEGINNING OF DETAILED GEOSTASE OUTPUT FOR CRITICAL SURFACE FROM A SEARCH***** BACK-CALCULATED CIRCULAR SURFACE PARAMETERS:

Circle Center At X = 144.400343(ft) ; Y = 849.923096(ft); and Radius = 775.100744(ft)
Circular Trial Failure Surface Generated With 32 Coordinate Points Point X-Coord. Y-Coord.

No. (ft) (ft)
1 54.960 80.000
2 69.876 78.413
3 84.820 77.116
4 99.786 76.107
5 114.768 75.389
6 129.762 74.961
7 144.762 74.822
8 159.761 74.975
9 174.754 75.417
10 189.736 76.149
11 204.702 77.172
12 219.644 78.483
13 234.558 80.084
14 249.439 81.973
15 264.280 84.149
16 279.077 86.612
17 293.823 89.361
18 308.513 92.395
19 323.141 95.713
20 337.703 99.313
21 352.192 103.194
22 366.603 107.355
23 380.931 111.794
24 395.171 116.510
25 409.317 121.500
26 423.363 126.763
27 437.305 132.296
28 451.137 138.099
29 464.854 144.168
30 478.452 150.501
31 491.924 157.097
32 502.914 162.743
Factor Of Safety For The Critical or Specified Surface = 1.899 ***Table 1 - Geometry Data on the 37 Slices***
Slice Width Height X-Cntr Y-Cntr-Base Y-Cntr-Top Alpha Beta Base Length No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (deg) (deg) (ft)
1 14.92 0.79 62.42 79.21 80.00 -6.07 0.00 15.00
2 14.94 2.24 77.35 77.76 80.00 -4.96 0.00 15.00
3 10.18 3.23 89.91 76.77 80.00 -3.85 0.00 10.20
4 4.79 5.33 97.39 76.27 81.60 -3.85 33.69 4.80
5 10.21 10.73 104.89 75.86 86.60 -2.75 33.69 10.23
6 4.77 14.87 112.38 75.50 90.38 -2.75 8.97 4.77
7 14.99 16.76 122.27 75.17 91.94 -1.64 8.97 15.00
8 15.00 19.41 137.26 74.89 94.30 -0.53 8.97 15.00
9 15.00 21.77 152.26 74.90 96.67 0.58 8.97 15.00
10 14.99 23.84 167.26 75.20 99.04 1.69 8.97 15.00
11 14.98 25.62 182.25 75.78 101.41 2.80 8.97 15.00
12 14.97 27.11 197.22 76.66 103.77 3.91 8.97 15.00
13 0.30 27.79 204.85 77.18 104.98 5.02 8.97 0.30
14 14.64 30.82 212.32 77.84 108.66 5.02 26.57 14.70
15 5.36 34.89 222.32 78.77 113.66 6.13 26.57 5.39
16 9.56 35.43 229.78 79.57 115.00 6.13 0.00 9.61
17 14.88 33.97 242.00 81.03 115.00 7.23 0.00 15.00
18 0.56 32.99 249.72 82.01 115.00 8.34 0.00 0.57
19 14.28 33.36 257.14 83.10 116.46 8.34 11.56 14.43
20 14.80 34.05 271.68 85.38 119.43 9.45 11.56 15.00
21 14.75 34.47 286.45 87.99 122.46 10.56 11.56 15.00
22 14.69 34.59 301.17 90.88 125.47 11.67 11.56 15.00
23 14.63 34.41 315.83 94.05 128.46 12.78 11.56 15.00
24 14.56 33.94 330.42 97.51 131.45 13.89 11.56 15.00
25 14.49 33.17 344.95 101.25 134.42 15.00 11.56 15.00
26 14.41 32.10 359.40 105.27 137.38 16.10 11.56 15.00
27 14.33 30.74 373.77 109.57 140.32 17.21 11.56 15.00
28 14.24 29.09 388.05 114.15 143.24 18.32 11.56 15.00
29 14.15 27.14 402.24 119.00 146.14 19.43 11.56 15.00
30 14.05 24.89 416.34 124.13 149.02 20.54 11.56 15.00
31 13.94 22.36 430.33 129.53 151.89 21.65 11.56 15.00
32 13.83 19.53 444.22 135.20 154.73 22.76 11.56 15.00
33 13.72 16.41 458.00 141.13 157.54 23.87 11.56 15.00
34 5.15 14.11 467.43 145.37 159.47 24.98 11.56 5.68
35 8.45 11.82 474.23 148.53 160.35 24.98 4.76 9.32
36 13.47 7.47 485.19 153.80 161.27 26.08 4.76 15.00
37 10.99 2.37 497.42 159.92 162.28 27.19 4.76 12.36
***Table 2 - Force Data On The 37 Slices (Excluding Reinforcement)*** Ubeta Ualpha Earthquake
Force Force Force Distributed
Slice Weight Top Bot Hor Ver Load
No. (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 1420.0 0.0 0.0 213.0 0.0 0.0
2 4008.8 0.0 0.0 601.3 0.0 0.0
3 3942.6 0.0 0.0 591.4 0.0 0.0
4 3058.9 0.0 0.0 458.8 0.0 0.0
5 13155.3 0.0 0.0 1973.3 0.0 0.0
6 8510.5 0.0 0.0 1276.6 0.0 0.0
7 30159.0 0.0 0.0 4523.9 0.0 0.0
8 34941.9 0.0 0.0 5241.3 0.0 0.0
9 39191.8 0.0 0.0 5878.8 0.0 0.0
10 42902.2 0.0 0.0 6435.3 0.0 0.0
11 46068.2 0.0 0.0 6910.2 0.0 0.0
12 48686.3 0.0 0.0 7302.9 0.0 0.0
13 995.2 0.0 0.0 149.3 0.0 0.0
14 54160.8 0.0 0.0 8124.1 0.0 0.0
15 22424.3 0.0 0.0 3363.6 0.0 0.0
16 40637.9 0.0 0.0 6095.7 0.0 1911.7
17 60662.6 0.0 0.0 9099.4 0.0 2976.1
18 2220.3 0.0 0.0 333.0 0.0 112.2
19 57164.7 0.0 0.0 8574.7 0.0 0.0
20 60464.4 0.0 0.0 9069.7 0.0 0.0
21 60992.9 0.0 0.0 9148.9 0.0 0.0
22 60971.2 0.0 0.0 9145.7 0.0 0.0
23 60404.8 0.0 0.0 9060.7 0.0 0.0
24 59300.9 0.0 0.0 8895.1 0.0 0.0
25 57668.0 0.0 0.0 8650.2 0.0 0.0
26 55516.0 0.0 0.0 8327.4 0.0 0.0
27 52855.9 0.0 0.0 7928.4 0.0 0.0
28 49700.2 0.0 0.0 7455.0 0.0 0.0
29 46062.8 0.0 0.0 6909.4 0.0 0.0
30 41958.6 0.0 0.0 6293.8 0.0 0.0
31 37403.9 0.0 0.0 5610.6 0.0 0.0
32 32416.2 0.0 0.0 4862.4 0.0 0.0
33 27014.2 0.0 0.0 4052.1 0.0 0.0
34 8710.8 0.0 0.0 1306.6 0.0 0.0
35 11987.2 0.0 0.0 1798.1 0.0 0.0
36 12071.1 0.0 0.0 1810.7 0.0 0.0
37 3119.0 0.0 0.0 467.9 0.0 0.0
TOTAL WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 1252929.48(lbs)
EFFECTIVE WEIGHT OF SLIDING MASS = 1252929.48(lbs)
TOTAL AREA OF SLIDING MASS = 10441.08(ft2)
***TABLE 2A - SOIL STRENGTH & SOIL OPTIONS DATA ON THE 37 SLICES*** Slice Soil Cohesion Phi(Deg) Options
No. Type (psf)
1 1 200.00 30.00
2 1 200.00 30.00
3 1 200.00 30.00
4 1 200.00 30.00
5 1 200.00 30.00
6 1 200.00 30.00
7 1 200.00 30.00
8 1 200.00 30.00
9 1 200.00 30.00
10 1 200.00 30.00
11 1 200.00 30.00
12 1 200.00 30.00
13 1 200.00 30.00
14 1 200.00 30.00
15 1 200.00 30.00
16 1 200.00 30.00
17 1 200.00 30.00
18 1 200.00 30.00
19 1 200.00 30.00
20 1 200.00 30.00
21 1 200.00 30.00
22 1 200.00 30.00
23 1 200.00 30.00
24 1 200.00 30.00
25 1 200.00 30.00
26 1 200.00 30.00
27 1 200.00 30.00
28 1 200.00 30.00
29 1 200.00 30.00
30 1 200.00 30.00
31 1 200.00 30.00
32 1 200.00 30.00
33 1 200.00 30.00
34 1 200.00 30.00
35 1 200.00 30.00
36 1 200.00 30.00
37 1 200.00 30.00
SOIL OPTIONS: A = ANISOTROPIC, C = CURVED STRENGTH ENVELOPE (TANGENT PHI & C), F = FIBER-REINFORCED SOIL (FRS), N = NONLINEAR UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, R = RAPID DRAWDOWN OR RAPID LOADING (SEISMIC) SHEAR STRENGTH NOTE: Phi and C in Table 4 are modified values based on specified Soil Options (if any).
***TABLE 3 - Effective and Base Shear Stress Data on the 37 Slices*** Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Stress Shear Strength Shear Stress * (ft) (ft) (psf) (psf) (psf)
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 109.59 263.27 138.65
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 109.59 263.27 138.65
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 284.51 364.26 191.83
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 284.51 364.26 191.83
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 402.23 432.23 227.63
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 402.23 432.23 227.63
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 659.29 580.64 305.78
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 659.29 580.64 305.78
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 1311.51 957.20 504.09
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 1311.51 957.20 504.09
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 1815.53 1248.20 657.34
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 1815.53 1248.20 657.34
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 2031.58 1372.93 723.03
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 2031.58 1372.93 723.03
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 2336.89 1549.21 815.86
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 2336.89 1549.21 815.86
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 2604.04 1703.44 897.09
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 2604.04 1703.44 897.09
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 2833.56 1835.96 966.87
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 2833.56 1835.96 966.87
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 3025.98 1947.05 1025.38
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 3025.98 1947.05 1025.38
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 3181.82 2037.03 1072.76
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 3181.82 2037.03 1072.76
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 3241.58 2071.53 1090.93
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 3241.58 2071.53 1090.93
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 3595.81 2276.04 1198.64
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 3595.81 2276.04 1198.64
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 4046.99 2536.53 1335.82
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 4046.99 2536.53 1335.82
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 4303.47 2684.61 1413.80
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 4303.47 2684.61 1413.80
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 4108.86 2572.25 1354.63
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 4108.86 2572.25 1354.63
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 3970.55 2492.40 1312.58
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 3970.55 2492.40 1312.58
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 3821.70 2406.46 1267.32
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 3821.70 2406.46 1267.32
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 3877.82 2438.86 1284.38
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 3877.82 2438.86 1284.38
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 3901.33 2452.43 1291.53
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 3901.33 2452.43 1291.53
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 3890.92 2446.42 1288.37
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 3890.92 2446.42 1288.37
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 3847.11 2421.13 1275.05
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 3847.11 2421.13 1275.05
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 3770.48 2376.89 1251.75
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 3770.48 2376.89 1251.75
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 3661.58 2314.02 1218.64
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 3661.58 2314.02 1218.64
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 3520.99 2232.85 1175.89
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 3520.99 2232.85 1175.89
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 3349.30 2133.72 1123.69
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 3349.30 2133.72 1123.69
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 3147.10 2016.98 1062.21
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 3147.10 2016.98 1062.21
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 2915.02 1882.99 991.64
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 2915.02 1882.99 991.64
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 2653.68 1732.10 912.18
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 2653.68 1732.10 912.18
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 2363.73 1564.70 824.02
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 2363.73 1564.70 824.02
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 2045.83 1381.16 727.36
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 2045.83 1381.16 727.36
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 1700.66 1181.88 622.41
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 1700.66 1181.88 622.41
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 1445.32 1034.46 544.78
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 1445.32 1034.46 544.78
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 1204.06 895.16 471.42
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 1204.06 895.16 471.42
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 738.45 626.34 329.85
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 738.45 626.34 329.85
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 200.47 315.74 166.28
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 200.47 315.74 166.28
***Table 4 - Base Force Data on the 37 Slices***
Slice Alpha X-Coord. Base Effective Available Mobilized No. (deg) Slice Cntr Leng. Normal Force Shear Force Shear Force * (ft) (ft) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 1643.80 3949.05 2079.70
1 -6.07 62.42 15.00 1643.80 3949.05 2079.70
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 4267.64 5463.92 2877.48
2 -4.96 77.35 15.00 4267.64 5463.92 2877.48
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 4104.18 4410.26 2322.59
3 -3.85 89.91 10.20 4104.18 4410.26 2322.59
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 3162.25 2785.01 1466.68
4 -3.85 97.39 4.80 3162.25 2785.01 1466.68
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 13411.62 9788.43 5154.91
5 -2.75 104.89 10.23 13411.62 9788.43 5154.91
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 8667.12 5958.74 3138.07
6 -2.75 112.38 4.77 8667.12 5958.74 3138.07
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 30473.66 20593.97 10845.46
7 -1.64 122.27 15.00 30473.66 20593.97 10845.46
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 35053.39 23238.08 12237.93
8 -0.53 137.26 15.00 35053.39 23238.08 12237.93
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 39060.62 25551.66 13456.34
9 0.58 152.26 15.00 39060.62 25551.66 13456.34
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 42503.38 27539.34 14503.11
10 1.69 167.26 15.00 42503.38 27539.34 14503.11
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 45389.63 29205.71 15380.68
11 2.80 182.25 15.00 45389.63 29205.71 15380.68
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 47727.32 30555.38 16091.46
12 3.91 197.22 15.00 47727.32 30555.38 16091.46
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 971.08 620.57 326.81
13 5.02 204.85 0.30 971.08 620.57 326.81
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 52860.01 33458.82 17620.51
14 5.02 212.32 14.70 52860.01 33458.82 17620.51
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 21799.63 13663.35 7195.57
15 6.13 222.32 5.39 21799.63 13663.35 7195.57
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 41370.85 25808.15 13591.41
16 6.13 229.78 9.61 41370.85 25808.15 13591.41
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 61632.88 38583.76 20319.47
17 7.23 242.00 15.00 61632.88 38583.76 20319.47
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 2250.94 1412.97 744.11
18 8.34 249.72 0.57 2250.94 1412.97 744.11
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 55158.94 34732.65 18291.35
19 8.34 257.14 14.43 55158.94 34732.65 18291.35
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 58167.24 36582.87 19265.74
20 9.45 271.68 15.00 58167.24 36582.87 19265.74
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 58519.97 36786.52 19372.98
21 10.56 286.45 15.00 58519.97 36786.52 19372.98
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 58363.74 36696.32 19325.48
22 11.67 301.17 15.00 58363.74 36696.32 19325.48
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 57706.72 36316.99 19125.71
23 12.78 315.83 15.00 57706.72 36316.99 19125.71
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 56557.23 35653.33 18776.21
24 13.89 330.42 15.00 56557.23 35653.33 18776.21
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 54923.74 34710.24 18279.54
25 15.00 344.95 15.00 54923.74 34710.24 18279.54
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 52814.89 33492.69 17638.34
26 16.10 359.40 15.00 52814.89 33492.69 17638.34
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 50239.49 32005.78 16855.29
27 17.21 373.77 15.00 50239.49 32005.78 16855.29
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 47206.56 30254.72 15933.12
28 18.32 388.05 15.00 47206.56 30254.72 15933.12
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 43725.31 28244.82 14874.64
29 19.43 402.24 15.00 43725.31 28244.82 14874.64
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 39805.21 25981.55 13682.73
30 20.54 416.34 15.00 39805.21 25981.55 13682.73
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 35455.93 23470.49 12360.33
31 21.65 430.33 15.00 35455.93 23470.49 12360.33
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 30687.42 20717.39 10910.45
32 22.76 444.22 15.00 30687.42 20717.39 10910.45
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 25509.91 17728.15 9336.22
33 23.87 458.00 15.00 25509.91 17728.15 9336.22
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 8204.07 5871.88 3092.33
34 24.98 467.43 5.68 8204.07 5871.88 3092.33
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 11226.29 8346.24 4395.40
35 24.98 474.23 9.32 11226.29 8346.24 4395.40
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 11076.68 9395.12 4947.78
36 26.08 485.19 15.00 11076.68 9395.12 4947.78
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 2476.78 3900.97 2054.38
37 27.19 497.42 12.36 2476.78 3900.97 2054.38
SUM OF MOMENTS = -0.962109E-01 (ft/lbs);Imbalance (Fraction of Total Weight) = -

0.7678876E-07
Sum of the Resisting Forces = 793475.91 (lbs)
Average Available Shear Strength = 1716.16(psf)
Sum of the Driving Forces = 417870.32 (lbs)
Average Mobilized Shear Stress = 903.79(psf)
Total length of the failure surface = 462.36(ft)
Factor of Safety Balance Check: FS = 1.89886
CAUTION - Factor Of Safety Is Calculated By The Simplified Bishop Method. This Method Is Valid Only If The Failure Surface Approximates A Circular Arc.
*** SEISMIC SLOPE DISPLACEMENT DATA ***
(Note: kv is set = zero for displacement calculations)
Seismic Yield Coefficient (ky) = 0.4615(g)
Calculated Newmark Seismic Displacement = 0.000(ft)
Non-Symmetrical Sliding Resistance Has Been Specified
for Downhill Sliding.
**** END OF GEOSTASE OUTPUT ****

APPENDIX H
Soils Investigation

%
%
%
$
$

/(*(1'
$3352;%25,1*/2&$7,21
(7(51$/9$//(<0(025,$/3$5.
1257+6,(55$:$<
1(:+$//&$/,)251,$
7(67%25,1*/2&$7,213/$1
(QFORVXUH5SW1R

)LOH1R
6

u
6&$/(

APPENDIX I
Drainage Plans

2)2,1,&+(6

APPENDIX J
Noise and Vibration Technical Report
Prepared for:

Hunsaker & Associates
26074 Avenue Hall, Suite 23
Valencia, CA 91355
Prepared by:

Impact Sciences, Inc.
811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Eternal Valley Project
Noise and Vibration
Technical Report
Impact Sciences, Inc. i Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Project Location .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Project Description......................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................................. 3

2.1 Fundamentals of Noise & Vibration............................................................................................ 3

2.2 Noise Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................. 9

2.3 Existing Conditions........................................................................................................................ 9

3.0 Regulatory Framework..............................................................................................................................12

3.1 State Regulations ..........................................................................................................................12

3.2 Local Plans and Policies ..............................................................................................................12

4.0 Noise Analysis ............................................................................................................................................17

4.1 Thresholds of Significance ..........................................................................................................17

4.2 Methodology................................................................................................................................. 17

4.3 Impact Analysis............................................................................................................................18

5.0 References....................................................................................................................................................24 Attachment
A – Noise and Vibration Technical Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Project Site ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Noise Sensitive Receptors .........................................................................................................................11

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 A-Weighted Decibel Scale ........................................................................................................................... 4 2 Building Noise Reduction Factors.............................................................................................................. 5 3 Construction Vibration Damage Criteria .................................................................................................. 9 4 Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments ...........................................................12 5 Construction Noise Impacts at Off-Site Sensitive Receptors................................................................18 6 Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction ..............................................21 Impact Sciences, Inc. 1 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Study 1366.001 March 2022

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This study describes the existing noise and vibration environment of the proposed development at the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary in the City of Santa Clarita (City). This study evaluates potential impacts from construction and operation of this proposal. This report has been prepared by Impact Sciences, Inc., in support of the environmental documentation being prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located at 23287 Sierra Highway in the City of Santa Clarita. The project is located within Newhall neighborhood area in the southern portion of the City. The site is on the western portion of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary, bounded by Needham Ranch Parkway on the west, open space brush areas to the north, previously developed areas of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary to the east, and industrial warehouses to the south.

The project site is approximately 17 acres, zoned OS – Open Space, and is currently undeveloped, see Figure 1, Project Site.

1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project consists of rough grading, future lawn burials, and the construction of a community mausoleum. The project includes approximately 17 acres of grading for the project site. The project would be graded with a volume totaling 92,600 cubic yards of cut and fill to be balanced on site. An additional 100,300 cubic yards of dirt will be removed and recompacted onsite in accordance with the project’s soils report recommendations for remedial grading. No soil import or export is anticipated at this time.

The 3,665 square foot mausoleum will be set into the hillside and would have a capacity of 780 caskets. A central room would include housing niches for the inurnment of cremated remains. The structure will lie below the ridgeline elevation.

The project would also include traditional lawn burial gardens consistent with the overall cemetery appearance and a private cemetery loop road for access by cemetery visitors and will include an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking stall. Shade trees would also be placed in the same density and pattern of the existing Eternal Valley developed cemetery areas.

Project Site
Project Site
FIGURE 1
1366.001•09/2021
SOURCE: Google Earth, 2021
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Study 1366.001 March 2022

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 FUNDAMENTALS OF NOISE & VIBRATION
Noise
Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound that is an undesirable byproduct of society’s normal day-today activities. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, and/or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). The human ear does not respond uniformly to sounds at all frequencies. For example, the human ear is less sensitive to low and high frequencies than medium frequencies, which more closely correspond with human speech. In response to the sensitivity of the human ear to different frequencies, the A-weighted noise level (or scale), which corresponds better with people’s subjective judgment of sound levels, has been developed. This A-weighted sound level, referenced in units of dB(A), is measured on a logarithmic scale such that a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB(A) increase in noise level. Typically, changes in a community noise level of less than 3 dB(A) are not noticed by the human ear.
1 Changes from 3 to 5 dB(A) may be noticed by some individuals who are sensitive to changes in noise. A greater than 5 dB(A) increase is readily noticeable, while the human ear perceives a 10 dB(A) increase in sound level to be a doubling of sound.

On the A-weighted scale, the range of human hearing extends from approximately 3 to 140 dB(A). Table 1, A-Weighted Decibel Scale, provides examples of A-weighted noise levels from common sources. Noise sources occur in two forms: (1) point sources, such as stationary equipment or individual motor vehicles; and (2) line sources, such as a roadway with a large number of point sources (motor vehicles). Sound generated by a point source typically diminishes (attenuates) at a rate of 6 dB(A) for each doubling of distance from the source to the receptor at acoustically “hard” sites and 7.5 dB(A) at acoustically “soft” sites.2 For example, if a noise source produces a noise level of 89 dB(A) at a reference distance of 50 feet, the noise level would be 83 dB(A) at a distance of 100 feet from the noise source, 77 dB(A) at a distance of 200 feet, and so on. Noise generated by a mobile source will decrease by approximately 3 dB(A) over hard surfaces and 4.5 dB(A) over soft surfaces for each doubling of distance. 1 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013. 2 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Fundamentals, (1980) 97. Examples of “hard” or reflective sites include asphalt, concrete, and hard and sparsely vegetated soils. Examples of acoustically “soft” or absorptive sites include soft, sand, plowed farmland, grass, crops, heavy ground cover, etc.

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Table 1
A-Weighted Decibel Scale
Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels Sound Level (dB(A), Leq) Threshold of Pain 140
Jet Takeoff at 100 Meters 125
Jackhammer at 15 Meters 95
Heavy Diesel Truck at 15 Meters 85
Conversation at 1 Meter 60
Soft Whisper at 2 Meters 35
Source: United States Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Noise and Hearing Conservation Technical Manual, 1999.

Sound levels also can be attenuated by man-made or natural barriers (e.g., sound walls, berms, ridges), as well as elevational differences. Noise is most audible when traveling by direct line-of-sight, an interrupted visual path between the noise source and noise receptor. Barriers, such as walls or buildings that break the line-of-sight between the source and the receiver, can greatly reduce noise levels from the source since sound can only reach the receiver by diffraction. However, if a barrier is not high or long enough to break the line-of-sight from the source to the receiver, its effectiveness is greatly reduced.

Solid walls and berms may reduce noise levels by 5 to 10 dB(A) depending on their height and distance relative to the noise source and the noise receptor.3 Sound levels may also be attenuated 3 dB(A) by a first row of houses and 1.5 dB(A) for each additional row of houses.4 The minimum noise attenuation provided by typical structures in California is provided in Table 2, Building Noise Reduction Factors. 3 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Mitigation, (1980) 18. 4 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013.

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 5 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Table 2
Building Noise Reduction Factors
Building Type
Window
Condition
Noise Reduction Due to
Exterior of the Structure
(dB(A))
All Open 10
Light Frame
Ordinary Sash
(closed) 20
Storm Windows 25
Masonry Single Glazed 25
Double Glazed 35
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. December 2011.

Sound Rating Scales
Various rating scales approximate the human subjective assessment to the “loudness” or “noisiness” of a sound. Noise metrics have been developed to account for additional parameters, such as duration and cumulative effect of multiple events. Noise metrics are categorized as single event metrics and cumulative metrics, as summarized below.

In order to simplify the measurement and computation of sound loudness levels, frequency weighted networks have obtained wide acceptance. The A-weighted scale, discussed above, has become the most prominent of these scales and is widely used in community noise analysis. Its advantages are that it has shown good correlation with community response and is easily measured. The metrics used in this analysis are all based upon the dB(A) scale.

Equivalent Noise Level
Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) is the sound level corresponding to a steady-state A-weighted sound level containing the same total energy as several single event noise exposure level events during a given sample period. Leq is the “acoustic energy” average noise level during the period of the sample. It is based on the observation that the potential for noise annoyance is dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise. The equivalent noise level is expressed in units of dB(A). Leq can be measured for any period, but is typically measured for 15 minutes, 1 hour, or 24 hours. Leq for a 1-hour period is used by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for assessing highway noise impacts. Leq for 1 hour is referred to as the Hourly Noise Level (HNL) in the California Airport Noise Regulations and is used to develop Community

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 6 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Noise Equivalent Level values for aircraft operations. Construction noise levels and ambient noise measurements in this section use the Leq scale.

Community Noise Equivalent Level
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24-hour, time-weighted energy average noise level based on the A-weighted decibel. It is a measure of the overall noise experienced during an entire day. The term “time-weighted” refers to the penalties attached to noise events occurring during certain sensitive periods.

In the CNEL scale, 5 dB are added to measured noise levels occurring between the hours of 7 P.M. and 10 P.M. For measured noise levels occurring between the hours of 10 P.M. and 7 A.M., 10 dB are added. These decibel adjustments are an attempt to account for the higher sensitivity to noise in the evening and nighttime hours and the expected lower ambient noise levels during these periods. Existing and projected future traffic noise levels in this section use the CNEL scale.

Day-Night Average Noise Level
The day-night average sound level (Ldn) is another average noise level over a 24-hour period. Noise levels occurring between the hours of 10 P.M. and 7 A.M. are increased by 10 decibels (dB). This noise is weighted to take into account the decrease in community background noise of 10 dB(A) during this period. Noise levels measured using the Ldn scale are typically similar to CNEL measurements.

Adverse Effects of Noise Exposure
Noise is known to have several adverse effects on humans, which has led to laws and standards being set to protect public health and safety, and to ensure compatibility between land uses and activities. Adverse effects of noise on people include hearing loss, communication interference, sleep interference, physiological responses, and annoyance. Each of these potential noise impacts on people is briefly discussed in the following narrative.

Hearing Loss
Hearing loss is generally not a community noise concern, even near a major airport or a major freeway. The potential for noise-induced hearing loss is more commonly associated with occupational noise exposures in heavy industry, very noisy work environments with long-term exposure, or certain very loud recreational activities (e.g., target shooting and motorcycle or car racing). The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies a noise exposure limit of 90 dB(A) for 8 hours per day to protect from hearing loss (higher limits are allowed for shorter duration exposures). Noise levels in neighborhoods, even in very noisy neighborhoods, are not sufficiently loud enough to cause hearing loss.

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 7 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Communication Interference
Communication interference is one of the primary concerns in environmental noise. Communication interference includes speech disturbance and intrusion with activities such as watching television. Noise can also interfere with communications such as within school classrooms. Normal conversational speech is in the range of 60 to 65 dB(A) and any noise in this range or louder may interfere with speech.

Sleep Interference
Noise can make it difficult to fall asleep, create momentary disturbances of natural sleep patterns by causing shifts from deep to lighter stages, and cause awakening. Noise may even cause awakening that a person may or may not be able to recall.

Physiological Responses
Physiological responses are those measurable effects of noise on people that are realized as changes in pulse rate, blood pressure, and other physical changes. Studies to determine whether exposure to high noise levels can adversely affect human health have concluded that, while a relationship between noise and health effects seems plausible, there is no empirical evidence of the relationship.

Annoyance
Annoyance is an individual characteristic and can vary widely from person to person. Noise that one person considers tolerable can be unbearable to another of equal hearing capability. The level of annoyance depends both on the characteristics of the noise (including loudness, frequency, time, and duration), and how much activity interference (such as speech interference and sleep interference) results from the noise.

However, the level of annoyance is also a function of the attitude of the receiver. Personal sensitivity to noise varies widely. It has been estimated that 2% to 10% of the population is highly susceptible to annoyance from any noise not of their own making, while approximately 20% are unaffected by noise.5 Attitudes may also be affected by the relationship between the person affected and the source of noise, and whether attempts have been made to abate the noise.

Vibration
Vibration consists of waves transmitted through solid material. Groundborne vibration propagates from a source through the ground to adjacent buildings by surface waves. Vibration may comprise a single pulse, a series of pulses, or a continuous oscillatory motion. The frequency of a vibrating object describes how 5 Wayne County Airport Authority. Background information on noise & its measurement, 2009

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 8 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
rapidly it is oscillating and is measured in hertz (Hz). Most environmental vibrations consist of a composite, or “spectrum” of many frequencies, and are generally classified as broadband or random vibrations. The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be felt generally starts from a low frequency of less than one Hz to a high of about 200 Hz. Vibration is often measured in terms of the peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec) when considering impacts on buildings or other structures, as PPV represents the maximum instantaneous peak of vibration that can stress buildings.

Because it is a representation of acute vibration, PPV is often used to measure the temporary impacts of short-term construction activities that could instantaneously damage-built structures. Vibration is often also measured by the Root Mean Squared (RMS) because it best correlates with human perception and response. Specifically, RMS represents “smoothed” vibration levels over an extended period of time and is often used to gauge the long-term chronic impact of a Project’s operation on the adjacent environment.

RMS amplitude is the average of a signal’s squared amplitude. It is most commonly measured in decibel notation (VdB).

Vibration energy attenuates as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration amplitude to decrease with distance away from the source. High frequency vibrations reduce much more rapidly than low frequencies, so that in the far-field from a source, the low frequencies tend to dominate. Soil properties also affect the propagation of vibration. When groundborne vibration interacts with a building, there is usually a ground-to-foundation coupling loss (i.e., the foundation of the structure does not move in sync with the ground vibration), but the vibration can also be amplified by the structural resonances of the walls and floors. Vibration in buildings is typically perceived as rattling of windows or items on shelves, or the motion of building surfaces. At high levels, vibration can result in damage to structures.

Manmade groundborne vibration is generally limited to areas within a few hundred feet of certain types of construction activities, especially pile driving. Road vehicles rarely create enough groundborne vibration to be perceptible to humans unless the road surface is poorly maintained and there are potholes or bumps.

If traffic induces perceptible vibration in buildings, such as window rattling or shaking of small loose items (typically caused by heavy trucks in passing), then it is most likely an effect of low-frequency airborne noise or ground characteristics. Human annoyance by vibration is related to the number and duration of events.

The more events or the greater the duration, the more annoying it will be to humans.

Construction vibration damage criteria are assessed based on structural category (e.g., reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber). The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) guidelines consider 0.2 inch/sec PPV to be the significant impact level for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings. Structures or buildings constructed of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber have a vibration damage criterion of 0.5 inch/sec PPV

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 9 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
pursuant to FTA Guidelines.6 The FTA Guidelines include a table showing the vibration damage criteria based on structural category and is presented below in Table 3, Construction Vibration Damage Criteria.

Table 3
Construction Vibration Damage Criteria
Building/Structural Category PPV, in/sec
I. Reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3
III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2
IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018.

2.2 NOISE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels.

Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses. The project site is relatively isolated from noise sensitive receptors.

The closest noise-sensitive receptors surrounding the project site include the Faith Community Church approximately 800 feet to the northeast; and LA North Studios (movie studios) approximately 950 feet to the south.

2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Transportation noise is the main source of noise in urban environments, largely from the operation of internal combustion engines and frictional contact between vehicles and ground and air.7 The City of Santa Clarita’s General Plan Noise Element identifies noise contours based on traffic volumes and other noise 6 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018. 7 World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/docstore/peh/noise/Comnoise-2.pdf. Accessed July 2, 2020.

2.0 Environmental Setting
Impact Sciences, Inc. 10 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
sources identified from field measurements.8 The noise contour maps indicate that traffic noise at the project location would be below 60 dBA CNEL. To the east of the project site, SR-14 and Sierra Highway are shown to have noise contours of 60 dBA CNEL approximately 250 feet west of the centerline of Sierra Highway and up to 70 dBA CNEL 150 feet west of the centerline of Sierra Highway. To the north along Newhall Avenue, the noise contour map also shows roadway noise reaching up to 70 dBA CNEL.

However, these noise contours do not reach the project site on the western portion of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park and Mortuary. Therefore, existing noise levels based on the noise contour maps are shown to be below 60 dBA CNEL.

The site is relatively isolated from noise sensitive receptors, which are located approximately 700 feet away or farther. Figure 2, Noise Sensitive Receptors, maps the closest sensitive receptors relative to the project site.

The primary sources of ground borne vibration in the project site vicinity are heavy-duty vehicles (e.g., refuse trucks, delivery trucks, and school buses) traveling on local roadways. Trucks and buses typically generate groundborne vibration velocity levels of around 63 VdB, and these levels could reach 72 VdB where trucks and buses pass over bumps in the road.9
8 City of Santa Clarita. 2011. General Plan Noise Element. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/5%20-%20Noise%20Element.pdf 9 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013. 3LQH 6 W
(WHUQDO 9DOOH\
0HPRULDO 3DUN
+LV /LWWOH /DPEV
3UHVFKRRO
3LQH 6 W
1HHGKDP 5DQFK 3NZ\
6LHUUD +Z\
1HZKDOO &UHHN
6LHUUD +Z\
ŗ
Ř

± 86)HHW
(VUL
ȱ¢ȱ
ȱȱȱǻȱǼ
ȱ
ŗŘ
Noise Sensitive Receptors
FIGURE 2
1366.001•02/22
SOURCE: Esri, 2022
Impact Sciences, Inc. 12 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Study 1366.001 March 2022

3.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

3.1 STATE REGULATIONS
Title 24, California Code of Regulations
The California Noise Insulation Standards of 1988 (California Code of Regulations Title 24, Section 3501 et seq.) require that interior noise levels from the exterior sources not exceed 45 dBA Ldn/community noise equivalent level (CNEL)10 in any habitable room of a multi-residential use facility (e.g., hotels, motels, dormitories, long-term care facilities, and apartment houses and other dwellings, except detached singlefamily dwellings) with doors and windows closed. Where exterior noise levels exceed 60 dBA CNEL/Ldn, an acoustical analysis is required to show that the building construction achieves an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL/Ldn or less.

3.2 LOCAL PLANS AND POLICIES
City of Santa Clarita General Plan Noise Element
The City of Santa Clarita General Plan Noise Element is a comprehensive program for including noise management in the planning process, providing a tool for planners to use in achieving and maintaining land uses that are compatible with existing and future environmental noise levels. The Noise Element identifies current noise conditions within the planning area, and projects future noise impacts resulting from continued growth allowed by the Land Use Element. Table 4, Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments, shows the land use compatibility guidelines established by the California Department of Health Services which is recognized by the Noise Element. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of “normally acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types.

Table 4
Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential - – Low Density, Single-Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes 50 - 60 55 - 70 70 – 75 75 - 85
Residential – Multiple Family 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 75 75 – 85 Transient Lodging - Motel, Hotels 50 – 65 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 10 Measurements are based on Ldn or CNEL.

3.0 Regulatory Framework
Impact Sciences, Inc. 13 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing
Homes 50 – 70 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50 – 70 NA 65 – 85 Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50 – 75 NA 70 – 85 Playgrounds, Neighborhood Park 50 – 70 NA 67.5 – 75 72.5 – 85 Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries 50 – 75 NA 70 – 80 80 – 85
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional 50 – 70 67.5 – 77.5 75 – 85 NA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 50 – 75 70 – 80 75 – 85 NA

Notes: NA = Not Applicable; Ldn = Day/Night Average; CNEL = community noise equivalent level; dBA = A-weighted decibels Normally Acceptable - Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements.

Conditionally Acceptable - New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning will normally suffice.

Normally Unacceptable - New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.

Clearly Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.

Source: California Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines and Technical Advisories. Appendix D: Noise Element Guidelines.

Available at: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_Appendix_D_final.pdf The Noise Element identifies noise-sensitive land uses and noise sources and defines areas of noise impact for the purpose of developing programs to ensure that residents in the City’s planning area will be protected from excessive noise intrusion. As development proposals are reviewed in the future, the City will evaluate each proposal with respect to the Noise Element to ensure that noise impacts are reduced through planning and project design. Through implementation of the policies and programs of the Noise Element, current and future adverse noise impacts will be reduced or avoided in order to protect the general health, safety, and welfare of the community.

The following goals and policies from the Noise Element would be applicable to the project:

Goal N 1: A healthy and safe noise environment for Santa Clarita Valley residents, employees, and visitors.

Objective N 1.1: Protect the health and safety of the residents of the Santa Clarita Valley by the elimination, mitigation, and prevention of significant existing and future noise levels.

Policy N 1.1.1: Use the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines (see Table 4), which are consistent with State guidelines, as a policy basis for decisions on land use and development proposals related to noise.

3.0 Regulatory Framework
Impact Sciences, Inc. 14 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Policy N 1.1.2: Continue to implement the adopted Noise Ordinance and other applicable code provisions, consistent with state and federal standards, which establish noise impact thresholds for noise abatement and attenuation, in order to reduce potential health hazards associated with high noise levels.

Policy N 1.1.3: Include consideration of potential noise impacts in land use planning and development review decisions.

Policy N 1.1.4: Control noise sources adjacent to residential, recreational, and community facilities, and those land uses classified as noise sensitive.

Goal N 2: Protect residents and sensitive receptors from traffic-generated noise.

Objective N 2.1: Prevent and mitigate adverse effects of noise generated from traffic on arterial streets and highways through implementing noise reduction standards and programs.

Policy N 2.1.1: Encourage owners of existing noise-sensitive uses, and require owners of proposed noise sensitive land uses, to construct sound barriers to protect users from significant noise levels, where feasible and appropriate.

Policy N 2.1.2: Encourage the use of noise absorbing barriers, where appropriate.

Goal N 3: Protect residential neighborhoods from excessive noise.

Objective N 3.1: Prevent and mitigate significant noise levels in residential neighborhoods.

Policy N 3.1.1: Require that developers of new single-family and multi-family residential neighborhoods in areas where the ambient noise levels exceed 60 CNEL provide mitigation measures for the new
residences to reduce interior noise levels to 45 CNEL, based on future traffic and railroad noise levels.

Policy N 3.1.2: Require that developers of new single-family and multi-family residential neighborhoods in areas where the projected noise levels exceed 65 CNEL provide mitigation measures (which may

3.0 Regulatory Framework
Impact Sciences, Inc. 15 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
include noise barriers, setbacks, and site design) for new residences to reduce outdoor noise levels to 65 CNEL, based on future traffic conditions. This requirement would apply to rear yard areas for single-family developments, and to private open space and common recreational and open space areas for multifamily developments.

Policy N 3.1.3: Through enforcement of the applicable Noise Ordinance, protect residential neighborhoods from noise generated by machinery or activities that produce significant discernable noise exceeding recommended levels for residential uses.

Policy N 3.1.4: Require that those responsible for construction activities develop techniques to mitigate or minimize the noise impacts on residences and adopt standards that regulate noise from construction activities that occur in or near residential neighborhoods.

City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code
The City of Santa Clarita Municipal Code (SCMC) Noise Ordinance provides exterior noise standards within the City, which are applicable to the proposed Project:

11.44.040 Noise Limits
A. It shall be unlawful for any person within the City to produce or cause or allow to be produced noise which is received on property occupied by another person within the designated region, in excess of the following levels, except as expressly provided otherwise herein:

Region Time Sound Level dB
Residential Zone Day 65
Residential Zone Night 55
Commercial and Manufacturing Day 80
Commercial and Manufacturing Night 70
At the boundary line between a residential property and a commercial and manufacturing property, the noise level of the quieter zone shall be used.

B. Corrections to Noise Limits. The numerical limits given in subsection (A) of this section shall be adjusted by the following corrections, where the following noise conditions exist:

3.0 Regulatory Framework
Impact Sciences, Inc. 16 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Noise Condition Correction (in dB)
(1) Repetitive impulsive noise -5
(2) Steady whine, screech or hum -5
(3) Noise occurring more than 5 but less than 15
minutes per hour
+5
(4) Noise occurring more than 1 but less than 5
minutes per hour
+10
(5) Noise occurring less than 1 minute per hour +20

11.44.070 Special Noise Sources – Machinery, Fans, and Other Mechanical Devices Any noise level from the use or operation of any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, refrigerating equipment, motor vehicle, or other mechanical or electrical device, or in repairing or rebuilding any motor vehicle, which exceeds the noise limits as set forth in SCMC Section 11.44.040 at any property line, or, if a condominium or rental units, within any condominium unit or rental unit within the complex, shall be a violation of this chapter.

11.44.080 Special Noise Sources – Construction and Building No person shall engage in any construction work which requires a building permit from the City on sites within three hundred (300) feet of a residentially zoned property except between the hours of seven a.m. to seven p.m., Monday through Friday, and eight a.m. to six p.m. on Saturday.

Further, no work shall be performed on the following public holidays: New Year’s Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas, Memorial Day, and Labor Day.

Emergency work is permitted at all times. As defined in SCMC 11.44.020: Emergency work shall mean work made necessary to restore property to a safe condition following a public calamity, or work required to protect persons or property from an imminent exposure to danger, or work by private or public utilities when restoring utility service.

The Department of Community Development may issue a permit for work to be done “after hours”; provided, that containment of construction noises is provided.

Impact Sciences, Inc. 17 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Study 1366.001 March 2022

4.0 NOISE ANALYSIS

4.1 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impacts of the proposed Project related to noise would be considered significant if they would exceed any of the following Standards of Significance, in accordance with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines:
x Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project Site in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
x Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels; and x For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels.

4.2 METHODOLOGY
Noise levels associated with project-related construction activities were calculated using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). Noise levels were compared to the City’s noise ordinance which includes provisions regarding construction noise levels.

An analysis of traffic noise was conducted to determine if the project would have a perceptible increase in traffic related noise. Studies have shown that a 3 dB(A) increase in sound level pressure is barely detectable by the human ear. A 3 dB(A) increase in roadway noise levels requires an approximate doubling of roadway traffic volume, assuming that travel speeds and fleet mix remain constant.11 The project’s potential to result in significant noise impacts from on-site operational noise sources was assessed by identifying sources of on-site noise sources and considering the impact that they could produce given the nature of the source (i.e., loudness and whether noise would be produced during daytime or more-sensitive nighttime hours), distances to nearby sensitive receptors, surrounding ambient noise levels, the presence of similar noise sources in the vicinity, and maximum allowable noise levels permitted by the SCMC.
11 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Protocol. September 2013.

4.0 Noise Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. 18 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022

4.3 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact NOI-1 Would the proposed Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project Site in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (Less than Significant).

Construction Impacts
Temporary On-Site Construction Activity Noise
Construction activities are anticipated to include rough grading, with 92,600 cubic yards of cut and fill to be balanced on site. An additional 100,300 cubic yards of dirt will be removed and recompacted onsite. No soil import or export is anticipated at this time. The primary construction equipment noise sources used during construction would be during earthwork activities (use of graders, excavators, dozers), and building construction (use of forklifts, tractors/loaders/backhoes, and a crane). Graders typically generate the highest noise levels, emitting approximately 85 dBA at a distance of 50 feet (pile driving would not be required for this project).

During all construction phases, noise-generating activities could occur at the project site between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 7:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, and 8:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. on Saturday in accordance with Section 11.44.080 of the SCMC. The shielding of buildings, topography, and other barriers that interrupt line-of-sight conditions further reduce noise levels from point sources.

The projected noise impact from construction activity is shown in Table 5, Construction Noise Impacts at Off-Site Sensitive Receptors, and summarized below.

Table 5
Construction Noise Impacts at Off-Site Sensitive Receptors Receptor
Distance to
Sensitive
Receptor (feet)
Maximum
Construction
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)

1. Faith Community Church 700 62.1

2. LA North Studios (movie studio) 950 59.4
Source: Impact Sciences, Inc. 2022. See Appendix A to this report.

The City has established noise standards for construction activity in SCMC Section 11.44.080 Special Noise Sources – Construction and Building. Pursuant to SCMC Section 11.44.080, construction noise is prohibited

4.0 Noise Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. 19 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Saturday, and/or any time on Sunday or a federal holiday. However, the Project Site is located more than 300 feet from any residential area and therefore would not expose residential uses to temporary excessive noises associated with construction activity from the project site. As such, the project would comply with applicable regulations of the SCMC and impacts from construction activities on the nearest sensitive receptors would be less than significant.

Temporary Off-Site Construction Activity Noise
Construction haul trucks would generate noise off-site during construction activities at the project site. This would include removal of materials from the project site, base materials, and demolished materials. While this vehicle activity would increase ambient noise levels along the haul route, ambient noise levels would not be expected to significantly increase ambient noise levels by 3 dBA or greater at any noise sensitive land use. Studies have shown that a 3 dBA increase in sound level pressure is barely detectable by the human ear. A 3 dBA increase in roadway noise levels requires an approximate doubling of roadway traffic volume, assuming that travel speeds and fleet mix remain constant.12 While this vehicle activity would marginally increase ambient noise levels along the haul route, it would not be expected to significantly increase ambient noise levels by 5 dBA or greater at any noise sensitive land uses.

Though the addition of haul trucks would alter the fleet mix of the Project haul route, the addition of these trucks to local roadways would be de-minimis. Specifically, construction related traffic would not be doubled on the local roads; thus, traffic volumes and would not produce 5 dBA or more ambient noise increases. As a result, off-site construction noise impacts related to haul trips would be considered less than significant.

Operational Impacts
Permanent Operational Traffic Noise
As discussed above, a 3 dBA increase in roadway noise levels requires an approximate doubling of roadway traffic volume, assuming that travel speeds and fleet mix remain constant. A 3 dBA noise level increase is the minimum noise level increase required for a human to perceive a change in ambient noise.

The project is not anticipated to significantly increase the amount of overall traffic going to and from the project site.13 Therefore, it is unlikely that there would be an increase in traffic volumes significant enough 12 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Protocol. September 2013. 13 While a detailed project traffic analysis has not been conducted for the Project, according to estimates from the Project’s CalEEMod data, the Project would only generate an average of approximately 50 daily vehicle trips.

4.0 Noise Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. 20 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
to cause an audible increase in traffic noise. As such, any noise increase would be imperceptible and impacts would be less than significant.

Permanent Operation Stationary Noise
Regulatory compliance with SCMC Sec. 11.44.070 would ultimately ensure that noises from sources such as heating, air conditioning, and ventilation systems not increase ambient noise levels at neighboring occupied properties by more than 5 dBA. Given this regulation, ambient noise levels, and the relatively quiet operation of modern HVAC systems, these on-site noise sources would not be capable of causing the ambient noise levels of nearby uses to increase above the noise limits set forth in SCMC Sec. 11.44.040 and impacts would be less than significant.

Parking noise typically generates noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet. The isolated parking areas from parking at Eternal Valley would ensure that parking noise would be virtually imperceptible to nearby sensitive land uses. Therefore, parking noise would result in a less than significant impact.

Impact NOI-2 Would the proposed Project result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (Less than Significant).

The Federal Transit Administration provides ground-borne vibration impact criteria with respect to building damage during construction activities. PPV, expressed in inches per second, is used to measure building vibration damage. Construction vibration damage criteria are assessed based on structural category (e.g., reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber). FTA guidelines consider 0.2 inch/sec PPV to be the significant impact level for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings. Structures or buildings constructed of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber have a vibration damage criterion of 0.5 inch/sec PPV pursuant to FTA guidelines.14 The vibration velocities at nearby sensitive receptors are shown below in Table 6, Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction. 14 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018.

4.0 Noise Analysis
Impact Sciences, Inc. 21 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Report 1366.001 March 2022
Table 6
Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction Sensitive Uses Off-Site
Distance to Project
Site (ft.)
Receptor
Significance
Threshold PPV
(in./sec)
Estimated PPV
(in/sec) a

1. Faith Community Church 700 0.2 0.001

2. LA North Studios (movie studio) 950 0.2 0.000
Source: Impact Sciences, Inc. 2022. See Appendix A to this report.

As shown in Table 6 above, the distances from the project site to the nearest sensitive receptors would ensure that any vibration impact would be virtually non-existent. These nearby structures are considered to be a non-engineered timber or masonry buildings and would not experience a PPV groundborne vibration level that exceed the 0.2 in/sec PPV threshold. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with building damage due to construction activities would result in a less than significant impact.

Impact NOI-3 For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise? (No Impact).

The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip or airport land use plan. The Project Site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport.

Whiteman Airport in the community of Pacoima is located approximately 8.56 miles southeast of the project site. As such, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive airport-related noise levels. No impact would occur from the proposed Project and no further analysis is required.

Impact Sciences, Inc. 22 Eternal Valley Noise and Vibration Technical Study 1366.001 March 2022

5.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013.

California Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines and Technical Advisories. Appendix D: Noise Element Guidelines. Available at: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_Appendix_D_final.pdf City of Santa Clarita. 2011. General Plan Noise Element. Available at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaClarita/html/SantaClaritaGP/5%20- %20Noise%20Element.pdf
Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Fundamentals, (1980).

Federal Highway Administration, Highway Noise Mitigation, (1980).

Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. December 2011.

Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. September 2018 Wayne County Airport Authority. Background information on noise & its measurement, 2009 World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/docstore/peh/noise/Comnoise-2.pdf

ATTACHMENT A
Noise and Vibration Technical Appendix
Project Site
Project Site
FIGURE 1
1366.001•09/2021
SOURCE: Google Earth, 2021
3LQH 6 W
(WHUQDO 9DOOH\
0HPRULDO 3DUN
+LV /LWWOH /DPEV
3UHVFKRRO
3LQH 6 W
1HHGKDP 5DQFK 3NZ\
6LHUUD +Z\
1HZKDOO &UHHN
6LHUUD +Z\
ŗ
Ř

± 86)HHW
(VUL
ȱ¢ȱ
ȱȱȱǻȱǼ
ȱ
ŗŘ
Noise Sensitive Receptors
FIGURE 2
1366.001•02/22
SOURCE: Esri, 2022
Eternal Valley Construction Noise - Unmitigated
Reference Noise Distance 100Reference Noise Level 79Sensitive Receptor Distance
(feet)
Attenuation
Factors
Maximum
Construction
Noise Level
(RCNM)

1. Faith Community Church 700 0 62.1

2. LA North Studios 950 0 59.4

3. Reference at 100 feet 100 0 79.0
A 6 dBA attenuation was given for hard ground surfuce.

Ref= Reference vibration level (PPV)
RefD= Reference distance for Reference vibration level (Feet) Vibration PPV
Ref= 0.089 Based on type of equipment
RefD= 25
D= 700 Distance from equipment to sensitive receptor
Equip= 0.001
Annoyance VdB
Ref= 87 Based on type of equipment
RefD= 25
D= 700 Distance from equipment to sensitive receptor
Equip= 44
Peak demolition vibration based on utilizing a large bulldozer.

Source: FTA Tranist Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, 2006. 0 Ref= Reference vibration level (PPV)
RefD= Reference distance for Reference vibration level (Feet) Vibration PPV
Ref= 0.089 Based on type of equipment
RefD= 25
D= 950 Distance from equipment to sensitive receptor
Equip= 0.000
Annoyance VdB
Ref= 87 Based on type of equipment
RefD= 25
D= 950 Distance from equipment to sensitive receptor
Equip= 40
Peak demolition vibration based on utilizing a large bulldozer.

Source: FTA Tranist Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, 2006.

APPENDIX K
Traffic Memorandum
Lic. # CA 2311, 4233
15420 Laguna Canyon Road, Suite 210, Irvine, California 92618 (714) 434-9803

M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Andy Olson and Ian Pari
FROM: Michael Green, Clark & Green Associates
SUBJECT: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Traffic Review
DATE: August 23, 2021
Andy and Ian,
We have worked on cemetery entitlement projects across the U.S. and several in Southern California including two very recent parks that need to consider a VMT analysis requirement.

We have had to prepare formal traffic studies only twice, once in Florida and once in Oceanside, California at Eternal Hills. Although all of these cemetery expansions were larger than the 15 acres in Eternal Valley Area 6, it was determined in each case that the level of traffic generation was less than significant.

1. Cemeteries are very low traffic generators in general with the largest visitation traffic levels on Sundays and certain holidays such as Memorial Day when burial services are absent. When burial services do occur during the weekdays and occasionally on Saturday, they are purposely scheduled between the hours of 9 am and 3 pm outside peak traffic periods and when visitation is lower. The occasional large funeral processions are tightly controlled and scheduled to not overlap with each other. As such, the city should have no history of traffic problems related to Eternal Valley.

2. In terms of overall volume or volume growth, as cemeteries expand, traffic does not increase but shifts from older areas where visitation is decreasing with the passing of time to newer areas with more recent sales, funeral services and, hence, visitations. The death rate is steady in any given geographic area (except for this past year) so when a cemetery expands, there is not additional business to be gained. Fortunately, as we enter late 2021, the death rate has already settled back down to closer to the average number of annual interments and inurnments at Eternal Valley. Another factor in the reduction of visitations and larger attendance at funeral services from past years is the shift from traditional lawn burials to cremation inurnments. Cremation placements are lightly attended compared to traditional lawn burials due to the smaller available areas to accommodate people just as mausoleum entombments are also lightly attended due to much less room to accommodate a mausoleum service. The family and the funeral service provider will opt to have the large gathering at the offsite or onsite chapel or church or other celebration center and not at both the chapel and the cemetery as often occurred in the past years.
2 3. It seems that traffic analyses can never say there will be no additional traffic, so they usually settle on a number. In the City of Los Angeles, the Bureau of Engineering does have a formula for VMT for cemeteries. We are processing a 28-acre expansion to an existing cemetery, Eden Memorial Park. This is twice the size of the Eternal Valley project site. The city’s formula indicated less than 250 daily vehicle trips. They did not give an estimated number just that it fell below the 250-trip threshold that would require a traffic assessment. The initial study describing this is attached as Attachment A with highlighted sections.

4. In Loma Linda, a proposed expansion of 18 acres to the Montecito Memorial Park was reviewed by a traffic engineer for that initial study preparation. He concluded the daily trip generation for that 18-acre site would be less than 100 peak hour trips and was exempt from a traffic impact analysis for level of service based on County of San Bernardino criteria. See Attachment B with highlighted sections.

5. In the City of San Jose, a zoning application for the remaining 40 acres of undeveloped land to Cemetery Use was approved and the traffic description similar to that in item 1 and 2 above was accepted by staff as part of the environmental clearance for the project.

This is a very old and famous 200-acre cemetery in the city (the Donner Party members are interred there) and there was no history of traffic related issues in spite of the huge number of annual burials. See Attachment C with highlighted sections.

6. In Oceanside, the proposed 20-acre expansion of Eternal Hills Memorial Park had a complete traffic analysis completed. As mentioned, this level of analysis has been the exception not the rule. This included taking traffic counts and other analyses. At the conclusion of all of this, this expansion was determined to only add a 79 ADT increase in and out, which was noted as a relatively small increase with less than significant impact and no mitigation measures. See Attachment D with highlighted sections.

The key with all of these projects is that there was a long history of cemetery use and related traffic issues if any available for review and in every case there was no record of traffic problems. Historically, cemeteries had a much larger visitation rate particularly on key holidays as mentioned above such as Memorial Day for remembering the past sacrifices of service members and others. With the changes in society and the increased distance from events such as WWI and WWII, these kinds of special situations have declined in frequency and volume.

Cemeteries are still incredibly important to the community and this has been amplified by the events of the past year, but not at the frequency we once witnessed. Even then the traffic generation was easily absorbed into the local street network and the park itself.

Please let us know what questions you have.

We hope this will suffice for the traffic review.

ENV-2019-1539-MND PAGE 69 City of Los Angeles
Initial Study April 2021
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b. Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision
(b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur if the project conflicts with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) has reviewed the proposed project, and on August 7, 2019, determined that no traffic study is required since daily vehicle trips are expected to be less than 250. LADOT verified this information in an email dated February 25, 2020. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision (b) Less Than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 describes specific considerations for evaluating a project's transportation impacts. Generally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts; “vehicle miles traveled” refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel. The City of Los Angeles Transportation Assessment Guidelines state that a transportation assessment is required under the following circumstances:
x If the Development Project is estimated to generate a net increase of 250 or more daily vehicle trips and requires discretionary action, a transportation assessment for a Development Project is required.

ENV-2019-1539-MND PAGE 70 City of Los Angeles
Initial Study April 2021
x If a Transportation Project is likely to either: (1) induce additional vehicle miles traveled by increasing vehicle capacity; or (2) reduce roadway through-lane capacity on a street that exceeds 750 vehicles per hour per lane for at least two (2) consecutive hours in a 24- hour period after the project is completed, a transportation assessment is generally required.
x A transportation assessment is required by City ordinance or regulation.

According to information provided by LADOT on August 7, 2019, and more recently, on February 25, 2020, no LADOT review is required since total vehicle trips are expected to be less than 250.

Therefore, the proposed project does not conflict with and is not inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, and any impacts are less than significant. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would substantially increase an existing hazardous design feature or introduce incompatible uses to the existing traffic pattern. The proposed project would not include unusual or hazardous design features and the proposed project is compatible with existing uses. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The nearest emergency route is Brand Boulevard, approximately 0.8 mile to the south of the project site (City of Los Angeles, Safety Element of the Los Angeles City General Plan, Critical Facilities and Lifeline Systems, Exhibit H, November 1996.) The proposed project would not require the closure of any public or private streets and would not impede emergency vehicle access to the project site or surrounding area. Additionally, emergency access to and from the project site would be provided in accordance with requirements of the Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD). Therefore, the proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and no impact would occur.

Initial Study for the City of Loma Linda
Expansion of Montecito Memorial Park Project Page 42
collection of developer impact fees would ensure impacts to parks are reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVI. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
( ) ( ) ( ) (9)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
( ) ( ) ( ) (9)
Impact Discussion:
a, b) No Impact. The Proposed Project consists of the expansion of an existing memorial park and does not include any housing. The Proposed Project does not include recreational facilities, or will increase the use of existing parks, or will require the construction or expansion of existing recreation facilities. Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVII. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
( ) ( ) (9) ( )
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)?
( ) ( ) ( ) (9)
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
( ) ( ) (9) ( )
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ( ) ( ) (9) ( ) Initial Study for the City of Loma Linda
Expansion of Montecito Memorial Park Project Page 43
Impact Discussion:

VMT measures how much actual auto travel (additional miles driven) a proposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact.
a) Less than Significant Impact. A Trip Generation and Vehicle Miles Travelled Screening Analysis, dated April 13, 2021, was completed by Ganddini Group (available at City offices for review) to assess the potential project Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) impact for compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Senate Bill 743 requirements. The VMT Screening predicted project trip generation based upon rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017) based on ITE Land Use Code 566 ± Cemetery. Through a comprehensive program of transportation and land use planning, the City will ensure that there is sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate traffic generated by planned future development.

According to the VMT, the Proposed Project is forecast to generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips and it is not located within 300 feet of an intersection of two streets designated as Collector or higher. Assuming roadway any roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City of Loma Linda Public Works Department as a standard condition of approval, there are no apparent safety or operational concerns with implementation of the project. Therefore, further traffic analysis is not required for the Proposed Project.

The City of Loma Linda Measure V requires that long-term traffic Levels of Service should be maintained at Level of Service C (or better), except where the current level is lower than Level of Service C. At locations where the Level of Service is below Level of Service C, the Project shall be required to provide improvements that maintain Levels of Service that are no worse than those existing at the time an application for development is filed. Measure V does not specify criteria for determining the need to prepare a transportation impact analysis for Level of Service evaluations; however, based on the relatively low Project trip generation, as demonstrated by exemption under the County of San Bernardino criteria, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to appreciably contribute Level of Service degradation. Additionally, the Proposed Project would contribute to any applicable City and Regional development impact fees for transportation improvements.

Therefore, the Proposed Project is anticipated to have a negligible effect on Levels of Service and would not conflict with Measure V requirements.

Existing bike facilities occur north of the Project Site, along Barton Road. The Project Site does not intersect or connect to any bike facilities within the City. Omnitrans is the primary provider of public transportation within the western portion of San Bernardino County, including the City of Loma Linda. Omnitrans operates five routes that traverse Loma Linda. The Riverside Transit Authority also operates one route that connects Loma Linda to downtown Riverside. There are about 60 bus stops in the City. The City facilitates pedestrian travel through the design of pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods with well-connected streets and sidewalks. The City also provides convenient and safe sidewalk routes to shopping, schools and recreation areas. One such route connects Hulda Crooks Park to Beaumont Avenue thus encouraging pedestrian travel. In addition, the City provides an off-road trail system designed for walking and hiking activities.

Initial Study for the City of Loma Linda
Expansion of Montecito Memorial Park Project Page 44
The Proposed Project is not anticipated to require additional bike facilities, public transportation, pedestrian facilities, or any additional circulation. The Proposed Project consists of a quasi-public land use and the Proposed Project¶V VMT characteristics are comparable to those of a public park. Therefore, the Proposed Project can be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact. No significant impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) No Impact. According tR WKH 907 WKH 3URSRVHG 3URMHFW¶V 907 LPSDFW KDV EHHQ assessed in accordance with guidance from the County of San Bernardino TIS Guidelines for CEQA. The County of San Bernardino TIS Guidelines identify screening criteria for certain types of projects that typically reduce VMT and may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact.

Since the City of Loma Linda does not have City-specific criteria for the preparation of transportation impact studies, the VMT refers to the County of San Bernardino criteria.

The criteria for assessing the need to prepare a transportation impact study is specified in the County of San Bernardino Transportation Impact Study Guidelines (July 2019) >³7,6 *XLGHOLQHV´@ $V specified in the County of San Bernardino TIS Guidelines, the requirement to prepare a transportation impact study (with Level of Service analysis) should be based upon one or more of the following criteria:
x If a project generates 100 or more trips without consideration of pass-by trips during any peak hour.
x If a project is located within 300 feet of:
o The intersection of two streets designated as Collector or higher in the &RXQW\¶V*HQHUDO3ODQRUWKH'HSDUWPHQW¶V0DVWHU3ODQ
RU
o An impacted intersection as determined by the Traffic Division. x If this project creates safety or operational concerns. x The project has the potential to generate VMT that could result in a transportation impact as noted in the significance criteria presented later in this memorandum. x If a project generates less than 100 trips without consideration of pass-by trips during any peak hour, a study maybe required if there are special concerns.

The Proposed Project is forecast to generate fewer than 100 peak hour trips. The Proposed Project is exempt from preparation of a transportation impact analysis for Level of Service based on the County of San Bernardino criteria as adopted for use by the City of Loma Linda. The Proposed Project is anticipated to have a negligible effect on Levels of Service and would not conflict with Measure V requirements. As such, the Proposed Project shall not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 Subdivision (b)(1). Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.
c, d) Less than Significant Impact. Final Project site plans would be subject to City review and approval to ensure that the Proposed Project would not create substantial hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. Primary access to the site would continue to be provided via Waterman Avenue. A new entry is also proposed from Oakwood Drive, Initial Study for the City of Loma Linda
Expansion of Montecito Memorial Park Project Page 45
an existing cul-de-sac within the jurisdiction of the City of Colton, that would be extended to allow for a second entry point that would be equipped with a security gate. An emergency fire access only point is also proposed from Sierra Vista Drive located east of Oakwood Drive and within the jurisdiction of the City of Loma Linda. The site plan design is not expected to cause a substantial increase in hazards or provide inadequate emergency access. Plans will be subject to review and approval by the City Fire and Police Departments. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.

Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21704 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
( ) (9) ( ) ( )
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
( ) (9) ( ) ( )
Impact Discussion:
a,b) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section V of this document, a Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation, dated December 4, 2020, was prepared by McKenna et al. (McKenna) for the Project Site and is available for review at the City of Loma Linda Community Development Department. The report was prepared to determine impacts to historical resources that may occur on the Project Site, including Native American cultural resources.

McKenna consulted with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for determining the presence/absence of sacred or religious sites in the vicinity of the project area. A response waVUHFHLYHGRQ6HSWHPEHUQRWLQJ³SRVLWLYH´ILQGLQJV

Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic

4.6 Traffic
KFM Engineering, Inc. conducted a traffic analysis of the Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion project and prepared a traffic impact report dated December 2006.1 The complete Traffic
Impact Report is included in Appendix F.

The following discussion summarizes the contents of the report. The traffic analysis is focused on Sunday traffic because that day of the week has the highest volume of cemetery traffic, and represents the worst case scenario.

4.6.1 Existing Conditions
On-Site Parking
Existing on-site parking adjacent to the mortuary building consists of 66 regular stalls, 2 handicapped curb spaces, and one green curb space for the elderly, expectant or new mothers.

An additional 16 spaces are located at the Administration building in the center of the cemetery.

Visitors to cemetery plots normally park along the internal roadway network. Eternal Hills Memorial Park has a long-standing informal shared parking agreement with the church directly across Fire Mountain Road. On some occasions, the cemetery uses the church parking lot for funerals attended by an unusually large number of people.

Funeral Processions and Memorials
The Oceanside Police Department and/or the California Highway Patrol are notified when a funeral procession involves a deceased officer, city official, etc. The agency notified depends upon the travel route of the funeral procession. Eternal Hills Memorial Park requires that private traffic escorts accompany funeral processions from off-site churches or funeral homes.

Memorial Day services are an annual evening ceremony at the cemetery. These services are coordinated with the Oceanside Police Department Traffic Control Division. Eternal Hills also contracts with a private security firm to assist in traffic control for this event. The Eternal Hills staff-training program includes on-site traffic management.

Existing Traffic Conditions
The existing local circulation network includes El Camino Real and Fire Mountain Road. El Camino Real is designated by the General Plan Circulation Element as a north-south prime arterial with three travel lanes in each direction. The speed limit is posted at 45 miles per hour.

Fire Mountain Road is an east-west local collector with one travel lane in each direction. The speed limit is posted at 30 miles per hour. The El Camino Real/Fire Mountain Road/Skyline Drive Intersection is signalized (see Figure 4.6.1). The intersection approach legs are comprised of the following:
x Northbound
One left-turn lane.

Two through lanes.

One shared through/right-turn lane.
x Southbound
One left-turn lane.

Two through lanes.

4.6-1 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
One shared through/right-turn lane.
x Eastbound
One left-turn lane.

One shared through/right-turn lane.
x Westbound
One shared left-turn/through lane.

One right-turn lane.

Existing Traffic Volumes
Table 4.6.1 summarizes the existing plus project ADT volumes; for a full discussion of traffic volumes please see Appendix F. The 20.54-acre project would add 70 ADT to El Camino Real north of Fire Mountain Road, 80 ADT to El Camino Real south of Fire Mountain Road, and 10 ADT to Fire Mountain Road west of the cemetery entrance. Figure 4.6.1 depicts the existing ADT for the street segments and the Sunday peak-hour turning movements at the intersection.

The Sunday peak-hour occurs between noon and 2:00 p.m.

Existing Operations
Table 4.6.2 summarizes the existing Level of Service (LOS) operations at the El Camino Real/Fire Mountain Road/ Skyline Drive intersection. This table shows that the intersection operates at LOS B. Table 4.6.3 summarizes the existing LOS operations on El Camino Real and Fire Mountain Road. This table shows that the affected street segments operate at LOS A.

For a full discussion of LOS, please see Appendix F.

4.6.2 Thresholds of Significance
Thresholds for significant traffic impacts are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, and the policies and regulations of the City of Oceanside. A significant traffic impact would occur if the proposed project would:
x Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections). x Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. x Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. x Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). x Result in inadequate emergency access.
x Result in inadequate parking capacity.
x Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks).

4.6.3 Impact Analysis
Parking and Funeral Processions
The existing parking lot and internal roadways are used for parking by visitors to the cemetery and for graveside services as noted above. Additional on-site parking would be available as the

4.6-2 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
internal roadway network is expanded. The additional roadway parking will provide an adequate number of parking spaces for visitors to gravesites and mausolea in the cemetery expansion area.

As discussed in Section 2.3.1, 98% of the existing grave spaces have been sold and the cemetery expansion project would not result in an increased number of internments on an annual basis, but would allow Eternal Hills to continue operating for a longer period of time.

Consequently, the demand for on-site funeral parking in the future will be essentially the same as the existing demand. No change in the funeral processions would occur as a result of the cemetery expansion.

Project Traffic Generation
As shown in Table 4.6.4, the proposed 20.54-acre project would generate 158 ADT (79 in and 79 out). The peak-hour trips are based on Sunday trips by gravesite visitors entering and leaving the cemetery. Twenty-two peak-hour trips are expected during the peak-hour. The Sunday peak-hour of noon to 2:00 p.m. is based on manual traffic counts taken at the site.

Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Traffic generated by the cemetery project was distributed to the local circulation network based upon engineering judgment and discussions with the City of Oceanside staff. Figure 4.6.2 depicts the project’s traffic percentage distribution. Figure 4.6.3 depicts the assignment of project trips to the local circulation network. Existing and project traffic volumes are depicted on Figure 4.6.4 and in Table 4.6.1. In Figure 4.6.4, peak-hour turning movements are shown at the intersection; ADT’s are shown for the street segments.

Existing Plus Project Operations
Table 4.6.2 shows that the El Camino Real/Fire Mountain Road/Skyline Drive intersection will continue to operate at LOS B. Thus, the cemetery traffic will not result in a significant impact because the LOS will remain the same.

Table 4.6.3 shows that with or without the project, El Camino Real north and south of Fire Mountain Road, and Fire Mountain Road, will continue to operate at LOS A. Thus, the cemetery traffic will not result in a significant impact because the LOS will remain the same.

Table 4.6.5 shows that with or without the project the intersection delay time for the El Camino Real/Fire Mountain/Skyline Drive intersection will be 11.8 seconds. Thus, the cemetery traffic will not result in a significant impact because the delay time will remain the same.

Table 4.6.6 summarizes the change in volume-to-capacity ratio that would occur as a result the project traffic. The greatest increase (0.002) would occur on El Camino Real south of Fire Mountain Road. This increase in volume-to-capacity ratio is not a significant impact because the street segments operate at LOS A as shown in Table 4.6.3.

Design Features and Access
The proposed project would not result in any traffic hazards because no off-site roadway improvements are required and traffic patterns associated with the cemetery operation would remain unchanged. Similarly, the existing ingress and egress to the cemetery would remain the same. No additional emergency access points are required to serve the cemetery expansion.

The project would not affect air traffic patterns because no flight-path obstructions would be constructed.

4.6-3 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
Conclusion
Based on the significance thresholds, the relatively small amount of traffic generated by the Eternal Hills Memorial Park project would not result in significant direct or indirect impacts at the El Camino Real/Fire Mountain/Skyline Drive intersection or on the street segments in the area.

The intersection and street segments would continue to operate at LOS B or better following project implementation.

4.6.4 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required for the expansion of the cemetery because no significant traffic impacts have been identified for the Eternal Hills Memorial Park expansion project.

4.6.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
No significant unavoidable adverse traffic impacts would result from the cemetery expansion project.

4.6-4 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
Table 4.6.1
Traffic Volumes
Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
Street Segment Existinga Existing
+
Projectb Change
El Camino Real
North of Fire Mountain Road 27,800 27,870 70
South of Fire Mountain Road 28,230 28,310 80
Fire Mountain Road
West of El Camino Real 4,480 4,490 10
Notes
a
Twenty-four hour machine counts were conducted by KFM Engineering, Inc. on Sunday August 4, 2002 and Sunday November 3, 2002 to identify daily traffic volumes, peak-hour, and the peak-hour factor.

The Sunday peak-hour was identified to be between noon and 2:00 p.m. KFM conducted manual counts on Sunday August 18, 2002 to identify intersection turning movements and the Sunday peakhour. b The project ADT have been adjusted to reflect the currently proposed cemetery expansion of 20.54 acres.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

Table 4.6.2
Intersection Operations
Intersection Existing Existing + Projecta,b
El Camino Real-Fire Mountain
Road & Skyline Drive B B
Notes: a
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology (1997) was utilized in the existing and existing + project Level of Service (LOS) analysis for the El Camino Real/Fire Mountain Road/Skyline Drive Intersection. b
The original 55.05-acre project.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

4.6-5 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
Table 4.6.3
Street Segment Operations
Street Segments Existinga Existing + Projectb
El Camino Real
North of Fire Mountain Road
South of Fire Mountain Road
A
A
A
A
Fire Mountain Road
West of El Camino Real A A
Notes
a
City of Oceanside Level of Service criteria was utilized in the existing and existing + project LOS analysis for the street segments. b
The original 55.05-acre project.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

Table 4.6.4
Trip Generation Data
ADTb Peak-hourc
Area Acres
Trip
Generation
Ratea Total In Out In Out
Eternal Hills Expansion 20.54 7.62 158 79 79 11 11
Notes a

7.62 ADT/acre for cemetery land use as stated in the “Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation Manual.” b ADT = Average Daily Trips.
c
Peak-hour trips are 14% of ADT with 50% in and 50% out.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

4.6-6 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
Table 4.6.5
Intersection Delay Time Summary
Delay Time (seconds)
Intersection
Existing Existing +
Projecta Change
El Camino Real/Fire Mountain Road/Skyline Drive 11.8 11.8 No Change
Notes:
a The original 55.05-acre project.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

TABLE 4.6.6
Road Segment Volume To Capacity (V/C) Ratio Summary
Volume to Capacity Ratio
Road Segment Existing Conditions Existing + Project
ADT PCPHPLa V/C ADT PCPHPLa V/C
Change
El Camino Real north of Fire
Mountain Road 27,800 649 0.324 27,870 650 0.325 +0.001
El Camino Real south of Fire
Mountain Road 28,230 659 0.329 28,310 661 0.331 +0.002
Fire Mountain Road west of El
Camino Real 4,480 314 0.224 4,490 315 0.225 +0.001
Notes
a Passenger car per hour per lane.

Assuming a 50 mph free flow speed, 2000 passenger cars per hour per lane (PCPHPL) is the capacity for a multilane highway (Highway Capacity Manual Chapters 7 & 8).
2,800 passenger cars per hour, both directions, is capacity for a two-lane street.

Project’s peak-hour factor is 14%.

Source: KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006.

4.6-7 1/31/08
Source: KFM Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006, Figure 3.

A.D. Hinshaw Associates Existing Traffic Volumes Figure 4.6.1

4.6-8 12/19/06
Source: KFM Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006, Figure 4.

A.D. Hinshaw Associates Traffic Distribution Figure 4.6.2

4.6-9 1/31/08
Source: KFM Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006, Figure 5.

A.D. Hinshaw Associates Project Traffic Volumes Figure 4.6.3

4.6-10 1/31/08
Source: KFM Engineering, Inc. Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, December 2006, Figure 6.

A.D. Hinshaw Associates Existing and Project Traffic Volumes Figure 4.6.4

4.6-11 1/31/08
Eternal Hills Memorial Park CUP Amendment Traffic
References

1 KFM Engineering, Inc., Traffic Impact Report Eternal Hills Cemetery Expansion, Oceanside, County of San Diego, California, December 2006.

4.6-12 1/31/08

APPENDIX L
Tribal Consultation
AO:ao
February 2, 2022
Jairo Avila, Tribal Historic and Cultural Preservation Officer Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
1019 Second Street, Suite 1
San Fernando, CA 91340
Subject: Master Case 20-231: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project Assembly Bill (AB) 52 Tribal Consultation
Dear Mr. Avila:

In accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, Public Resources Code (PRC) § 21080.3.1, the City of Santa Clarita (City) is contacting all groups that have previously requested formal notification of projects for which a Notice of Preparation, Notice of Mitigated Negative Declaration or Notice of Negative Declaration is filed on or after July 1, 2015 (Stats. 2114, ch. 532, § 11 (c)). This correspondence is intended as formal notification of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project (proposed project; Master Case 20-231) pursuant to AB 52.

Eternal Valley Memorial Park is an existing cemetery located in the southern portion of the City of Santa Clarita.

The site is located at 23287 Sierra Highway and has served as a cemetery for decades. The proposed project is a

13.6-acre expansion onto undeveloped land adjacent to the top of the existing cemetery. The project site is generally bounded on the north by undeveloped land, on the east by the existing cemetery, on the south by the Needham Ranch fire station pad and helipad, and on the west by Needham Ranch Parkway. The project area was originally identified for cemetery use by Los Angeles County in 1969, but has yet to be developed. A site plan showing the overall cemetery and project location is attached for your reference.

The applicant has applied for the following permits: a Ridgeline Alteration Permit, a Hillside Development Review (Class 4) Permit, an Architectural Design Review Permit, a Development Review Permit, an Oak Tree Permit (Class II), and Initial Study. The project site would be developed as cemetery grounds, including a new loop road and landscaping as well as burial plots. In addition, the project would construct a new 3,665 square-foot mausoleum with capacity for 780 caskets and with a 260 square-foot room with niches for urns at the top of the existing cemetery. The project would cut and fill 92,600 cubic yards of earth, to be balanced on site, and would also remove and recompact 100,300 cubic yards of earth for remedial grading. A grading plan is attached for further reference.

The City is interested in knowing if you have any knowledge of tribal cultural resources (TCRs) as defined in PRC § 21074 (a)(1)(A)-(B), that may be impacted by the proposed project. If you have any comments or concerns regarding potential impacts to TCRs, please contact me within 30 calendar days from receipt of this letter to notify us in writing that you wish to consult (PRC § 21080.3.1 (b)(1). I can be reached by phone at 661.255.4973 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Andy, AICP, Associate Planner

29(5$//$(5,$/
6,7(3/$1
6
0 100' 200' 400'
352-(&7 %< 6+((77,7/( 5(9,6,216
'5$:1
&+(&.('
'$7(
-2%12
6+((7
2) 6+((76
7KHXVHRIWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOEHUHVWULFWHGWRWKHRULJLQDOVLWHIRUZKLFKWKH\ZHUHSUHSDUHGDQGSXEOLFDWLRQWKHUHRILVH[SUHVVO\OLPLWHGWRVXFKXVH5HSURGXFWLRQSXEOLFDWLRQRUUHXVHE\DQ\PHWKRGLQZKROHRULQSDUWZLWKRXWWKHH[SUHVVFRQVHQWRI&ODUN *UHHQ$VVRFLDWHVLVSURKLELWHG7LWOHWRWKHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVUHPDLQLQ&ODUN *UHHQ$VVRFLDWHVZLWKRXWSUHMXGLFH9LVXDOFRQWDFWZLWKWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOFRQVWLWXWHSULPDIDFLHHYLGHQFHRIWKHDFFHSWDQFHRIWKHVHUHVWULFWLRQV &%(&
0*

$5($$1'0$862/(806,7(3/$1
(7(51$/9$//(<0(025,$/3$5.
/RF

1257+6,(55$+:<
1(:+$//&$

352-(&7 %< 6+((77,7/( 5(9,6,216
'5$:1
&+(&.('
'$7(
-2%12
6+((7
2) 6+((76
7KHXVHRIWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOEHUHVWULFWHGWRWKHRULJLQDOVLWHIRUZKLFKWKH\ZHUHSUHSDUHGDQGSXEOLFDWLRQWKHUHRILVH[SUHVVO\OLPLWHGWRVXFKXVH5HSURGXFWLRQSXEOLFDWLRQRUUHXVHE\DQ\PHWKRGLQZKROHRULQSDUWZLWKRXWWKHH[SUHVVFRQVHQWRI&ODUN *UHHQ$VVRFLDWHVLVSURKLELWHG7LWOHWRWKHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVUHPDLQLQ&ODUN *UHHQ$VVRFLDWHVZLWKRXWSUHMXGLFH9LVXDOFRQWDFWZLWKWKHVHSODQVDQGVSHFLILFDWLRQVVKDOOFRQVWLWXWHSULPDIDFLHHYLGHQFHRIWKHDFFHSWDQFHRIWKHVHUHVWULFWLRQV &%(&
0*

$5($$1'0$862/(806,7(3/$1
(7(51$/9$//(<0(025,$/3$5.
/RF

1257+6,(55$+:<
1(:+$//&$

NEEDHAM RANCH
PROJECT PHASE 2

PROPOSED MAUSOLEUM -

CREMATION URN DISPLAY

COLUMBARIUM

NEEDHAM RANCH
PROJECT PHASE 1

PROPOSED

LOOP ROAD

EXISTING COMMUNITY

GARDEN MAUSOLEUMS
8,000 S.F. TOTAL

EXISTING

FUNERAL HOME
15,000 S.F. TOTAL

EXISTING

ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICES
5,600 S.F. TOTAL

CEMETERY ENTRY

AT SIERRA HIGHWAY

SIERRA HIGHWAY

PROPOSED
AREA 6 AND

MAUSOLEUM
(;,67,1*$1'352326('
&(0(7(5<*5281'6
FRQVLVWRIWUDGLWLRQDO/DZQ
%XULDO$UHD&UHPDWLRQ
,QXUQPHQW*DUGHQV
5HOLJLRXV7KHPHG*DUGHQV
)DPLO\%XULDO(VWDWHV
6SHFLDO)HDWXUHVDQG
6WDWXDU\DQG&RPPXQLW\
DQG)DPLO\0DXVROHXPV
Approximate
boundary line
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723

2)2,1,&+(6
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723
6723

%(

%(

%(

%(

%(
%(
2)2,1,&+(6
63(

RETAININGWALL WITHBARRIERRAILING

STAIRWAY WITHRETAINING CHEEKWALL
From: Andy Olson [email protected]
Subject: RE: AB52 Consultation - MC20-231: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project Date: February 3, 2022 at 6:15 PM
To: Laura Kaufman [email protected], Dan Kaufman [email protected] Good evening,
The Tribe responded and requested formal consultation. I will forward this to you for your records. Once the Cultural report is updated per Wayne’s peer review and you verify it is satisfactory, I will provide it to the Tribe.

Thank you,
Andy
From: Andy Olson
Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 4:01 PM
To: 'Laura Kaufman' <[email protected]>; Dan Kaufman <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: AB52 Consultation - MC20-231: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project
Good afternoon,
We have sent our formal consultation letter to the Tataviam Tribe today. I will keep you informed if the Tribe requests formal AB52 consultation.

Thank you,
Andy
From: Andy Olson
Sent: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 3:24 PM
To: 'Jairo Avila' <[email protected]>
Cc: Patrick Leclair <[email protected]>
Subject: AB52 Consultation - MC20-231: Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project Good afternoon Jairo,
I hope this email finds you well. Attached is our letter providing formal notification of the Eternal Valley Memorial Park Expansion Project (proposed project; Master Case 20-231) pursuant to AB 52.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thank you,
Andy
__________________________
Andy Olson, AICP
Associate Planner
Planning Division
City of Santa Clarita
Phone: (661) 255-4973
Email: [email protected]
Web: http://www.santa-clarita.com
MM CUL-1 Archaeological Monitoring
Prior to the commencement of construction, a qualified archaeologist shall create a separate Worker’s Environmental Awareness Program pamphlet that will be provided as training to construction personnel to understand regulatory requirements for the protection of cultural resources. This training shall include examples of cultural resources to look for and protocols to follow if discoveries are made. The archaeologist shall develop the training and any supplemental materials necessary to execute said training.

Archaeological resources monitoring shall be conducted by an archaeological resource monitor, during project related earth-disturbing activities, per the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) standards, under the supervision of a qualified Lead Archaeologist. Monitoring will entail visual inspection of project related earth- disturbing activities (i.e. trenching, shoring, utility installation, etc.)
The project proponent shall retain a professional Native American Monitor procured by the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians or consulting Tribes under AB52 to observe all ground-disturbing activities An approved Native American monitor(s), with documented ancestral ties to the area consistent with the standards of the NAHC shall be present for all ground disturbing activities that involve excavation of previously undisturbed soil. Monitoring will entail visual inspection project related earth-disturbing activities.

If an archaeological resource is encountered during construction when a monitor is not on site, all construction shall cease within at least 50 feet of the discovery and the Principal Investigator and Lead Archaeologist must be notified. Work cannot resume in the direct area of the discovery until the it is assessed by the Principal Investigator and/or Lead Archaeologist and indicates that construction can resume.

If an archaeological discovery cannot be preserved in situ and requires an excavation team or requires additional time to collect cultural resources, a Discovery and Treatment Plan (DTP) will be developed and the area will be cordoned off and secured so that an archaeological resources excavation team, led by the Principal Investigator and Lead Archaeologist, may recover the cultural resources out of that contained area. Once the Principal Investigator has determined that the collection process is complete for a given area or locality, construction activity will resume in that localized area. If human remains are encountered at any point during project construction, the local Native American most likely descendent (MLD) must be notified if not already on site and the procedures dictated by law must be implemented.

The Lead Agency and project proponent shall, in good faith, consult with the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians on the disposition and treatment of Tribal Cultural Resources encountered during Project implementation.

All significant cultural resources collected will be prepared in a properly equipped laboratory to a point ready for curation. Following laboratory work, all cultural resources will be identified, catalogued, analyzed, and delivered to an accredited museum repository for permanent curation and storage. Any cultural resources collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs shall also be filed at the repository. The cost of curation is assessed by the repository and is the responsibility of the project proponent. At the conclusion of laboratory work and museum curation, a final report will be prepared describing the results of the cultural mitigation monitoring efforts associated with the project. The report will include a summary of the field and laboratory methods, an overview of the cultural background within the project vicinity, a list of cultural resources recovered (if any), an analysis of cultural resources recovered (if any) and their scientific significance, and recommendations. A copy of the report will also be submitted to the designated museum repository (if applicable).

MM CUL-2 Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains
In the event of Native American human remains being inadvertently uncovered during project construction, the project proponent would immediately cease activity in the vicinity of the discovery and notify the local Native American most likely descendent (MLD) if not already on site and the procedures dictated by law must be implemented.

The inadvertent discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbances; State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 addresses these findings. This code section states that in the event human remains are uncovered, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The Coroner must be notified of the find immediately, together with the City and the property owner.

If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a MLD. The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials and an appropriate re-internment site.

The City, as Lead Agency, and a qualified archaeologist shall also establish additional appropriate mitigation measures for further site development, which may include additional archaeological and Native American monitoring or subsurface testing.

MM PAL-1 Paleontological Discovery Protocol
If potentially significant intact deposits are encountered that are within an undisturbed context, then a fossil “discovery” protocol will be followed, which will be developed prior to project grading. If project excavation is in native soil or bedrock, then a paleontological monitor should be on site to watch for fossil resources. Such monitoring will be outlined in the “discovery” protocol, developed prior to grading.

If significant prehistoric or larger fossil materials are recovered in native original context, then all work in that area shall be halted or diverted away from the discovery to a distance of 50-feet until a qualified senior archaeologist or paleontologist can evaluate the nature and/or significance of the find(s). If a senior archaeologist or paleontologist (not the field monitor) confirms that the discovery is potentially significant, then the Lead Agency will be contacted and informed of the discovery.

Construction will not resume in the locality of the discovery until consultation between the senior archaeologist or paleontologist, the owner’s project manager, the City, and all other concerned parties, takes place and reaches a conclusion approved by the City. If a significant resource is discovered during earth-moving, complete avoidance of the find is preferred. However, if the discovery cannot be avoided, further survey work, evaluation tasks, or data recovery of the significant resource may be required by the City. The City may also require changes to the Monitoring Plan, based on the discovery, if fossil material is encountered.

All costs for the additional monitoring, discovery assessment, discovery evaluation, or data recovery of will be the responsibility of the applicant, within the cost parameters outlined under CEQA. All individual reports, including the final project Monitoring Report, will be submitted to the NHM at the conclusion of the project.

Santa Clarita City CouncilJuly 12, 2022

Santa Clarita City Council
July 12, 2022