Thousand Oaks City Council
March 24, 2026

{10797724.5}
Project, which includes the parking of approximately 60 garbage trucks but also the onsite maintenance, fueling and washing of the trucks, which goes far beyond a mere “contractor storage yard”. Accordingly, the Project is not compatible with the M-1 zoning designation or the use of the surrounding properties and should not be permitted to proceed at the currently contemplated site. Additionally, please note that when our client purchased its property, and presumably when owners of other properties in the vicinity of the Project purchased their properties as well as when the various tenants in the area made the decision to operate from the area, they relied on the rules and guidelines of the City’s municipal code and zoning ordinance to ensure the long-term protection of their substantial investment and/or property values, and to that end reasonably assumed that all of their future neighbors (particularly those contiguous to their property) would, like them, be required to strictly adhere to such rules and guidelines. As such, approval of the Project at this site despite its failure to comply with the site’s M-1 zoning designation would erode property owners’ and tenants’ trust in the protections they believed were offered by these rules and guidelines and could have adverse impacts on investment within the City.

Related to the zoning concern referenced above, the anomalous use of the Project in this area would unavoidably result in varied and significant adverse impacts on neighboring owners, occupants and operations. These impacts include the following:
x The presence of under- and/or above-ground CNG tanks in the quantities required to fuel 60 large garbage trucks, as well as oil and other materials used and stored onsite in connection with the maintenance and repair of the trucks, will create significant safety and environmental risks.

Natural gas is flammable and CNG tanks are kept under extreme pressure, creating dangers not posed by typical operations at surrounding properties. Leaks from underground CNG tanks could result in the migration of hazardous materials to neighboring properties and leaks from aboveground tanks could also result in environmental contamination, with potential adverse impacts on workers and environmental liability risks that owners would not otherwise encounter.

Additionally, the runoff of wastewater from the onsite washing of trucks and stormwater runoff threatens to pollute and/or overwhelm storm water drainage systems with leachate from both waste from the trucks and onsite truck maintenance operations. Environmental contamination from the foregoing sources also poses a threat of contamination to groundwater that could be detrimental to drinking water. Finally, the operation of the trucks, even though they run on CNG, will also unavoidably increase greenhouse gas emissions in the area. x The ingress and egress of 60 large garbage trucks will, on days when all of the trucks are active, result in a minimum of 120 daily comings and goings from the Project. The repeated comings and goings of these large and heavy trucks on the surrounding roads can be expected to result in increased traffic and wear and tear on the roads and related infrastructure. Additionally, during times of peak activity the simultaneous presence of a large number of these trucks will be dangerous to other drivers, who will encounter decreased visibility, road noise and other dangerous driving conditions.
x Garbage trucks are, for good and obvious reasons, notorious for their odor. The operation and parking of 60 such trucks at the Project will unavoidably create noxious odors that will spread throughout the area and be encountered by neighboring businesses. These odors are inherent to these trucks and no amount of regular washing will alleviate them. 7 March 23, 2022

{10797724.5}
x Much like the aforementioned odors, garbage trucks are also inherently and necessarily very loud due to their size and purpose. The frequent comings and goings of 60 trucks at the Project will create rumblings that will be heard throughout the surrounding area, creating further disturbances to business operations.
x The presence of trucks on the surrounding roads, combined with the onsite parking, maintenance and washing of dirty trucks, will inevitably lead to litter on surrounding roads and properties and introduces the potential for the spread of vector (e.g., rodents and insects) throughout the area.

While it is our understanding that all trucks onsite at the Project will be required to dump all waste prior to returning to the Project and that the Project will not be used for the onsite storage of waste, it is not feasible to expect every bit of waste from every single truck to be dumped, so the spread of waste to the Project and surrounding areas is inevitable. x The visible presence of a large garbage truck parking lot will be an eyesore for surrounding properties and a constant reminder of all of the other adverse impacts associated with the trucks.

It is evident that the foregoing adverse impacts of the Project (i) will disturb and interfere with business operations at surrounding properties and (ii) are inherent to the purpose of the Project and cannot be avoided or significantly mitigated. These adverse impacts on business operations can be expected to have the knock-on effect of lowering the value of the impacted properties and rendering the neighboring properties less attractive to potential industrial tenants, leading to decreased rental income and increased vacancies. None of these significant adverse impacts would be acceptable under any circumstances, and certainly not in this case where the Project is incompatible with the M-1 zoning designation of the site and the zoning and use of the surrounding properties.

Despite the myriad adverse impacts of the Project, the City’s staff report indicates that the City supports approval of the Project at this site. The staff report includes 146 conditions of approval, many of which are intended, to varying degrees, to address several of the adverse impacts described above. The staff report also attaches numerous letters and emails from, among other parties, neighboring commercial property owners, businesses and residents, objecting to the Project for many of the same reasons set forth in this letter. The community disapproval of the Project coupled with fact that the City feels the need to impose such an expansive set of conditions on the Project serve as strong evidence that the Project is not suited to this site, which is consistent with our argument that the Project does not fit within the stated purpose or permitted uses of the M-1 zone. It is also troubling that the conditions set forth in the staff report do not adequately, or sometimes at all, address the Project’s adverse impacts. One consistent issue with the staff report is that the City is taking a reactionary approach to what are certain to be significant adverse impacts of the Project, rather than taking proactive measures to mitigate against those impacts.

Numerous deficiencies in the staff report are described below. x No protections would be put in place to confirm that all garbage trucks at the site have emptied their waste prior to returning to the Project and that the Project is not used for the onsite storage of any waste (including inside of the trucks). The City should be actively monitoring the Project to ensure that no waste is stored onsite.
x Trucks are only required to be washed once per week. This is inadequate, as the remnants of garbage left in trucks to fester for an entire week will result in foul odors and attract vector (e.g., rodents and insects). Trucks should be washed at the end of each day they leave from and return to the Project.
8 March 23, 2022

{10797724.5}
x Protections should be put in place to ensure that the operator of the Project is required to upgrade its truck fleet to reduce emissions and noise in accordance with standard industry practice, including upgrading to electric trucks.
x Consistent with points made in several objection letters attached to the staff report, we have concerns regarding whether the City’s conclusion that the Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA is accurate. Given the nature of the Project and its adverse environmental impacts referenced above, CEQA compliance, including the City’s preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR), is of utmost importance. x It does not appear that any controls are in place to ensure that truck routing patterns and the timing of peak ingress and egress of trucks to and from the Project have been established in a manner to minimize adverse traffic impacts. It also does not appear that the City factored in an accelerated capital improvement plan to address the earlier replacement of the streets serving the area associated with the Project’s extensive trucking operation. The Project owner and/or operator should be responsible for increased wear and tear on the surrounding roads and related infrastructure resulting from the operation of its truck fleet. x The conclusions in the staff report relating to the what are described as the minimal traffic and noise impacts of the Project appear to treat the garbage trucks operating from the site the same as regular passenger automobiles, with no distinction or special treatment warranted based on the unique nature of garbage trucks, which by their nature are extremely large and loud. Having 60 passenger cars drive by your building is entirely different than 60 garbage trucks, and the staff report entirely fails to take into account the disturbance to neighboring businesses that will inevitably result from these extreme noise levels and traffic impacts. x There are no specific conditions or requirements imposed to mitigate against adverse noise or odor impacts. Rather, Conditions of Approval 58 and 59 of the staff report take an entirely reactive approach by merely requiring the Project owner to take measures to respond to verified complaints received by the City. The City should instead take a proactive approach and impose the potential measures referenced in these conditions now to mitigate against future adverse impacts, rather than inviting their occurrence and dealing with them after-the-fact. Specifically, the volume reduction and sound blocking/defection measures referenced in Condition of Approval 58 should be imposed as well as the commissioning of a professional odor study and mitigation plan as referenced in Condition of Approval 59. x It is not clear from the staff report if the Project site plan, including the location of any buildings and other improvements, has been oriented in a manner to minimize the spread of odor and noise pollution and litter into surrounding properties, including if any additional screening and/or buffering is required to minimize the spread of odor and noise pollution or litter and/or if the effects of prevailing winds have been analyzed to determine how they will impact the spread of odor and noise pollution and litter. The Project owner should be required to proactively study these concerns and to take appropriate measures to address them now rather than leaving them to chance to be addressed after-the fact. There are also no conditions in place requiring the Project owner to minimize the spread of litter into the surrounding roads and properties, to remove any litter which is released and/or to minimize the presence and spread of vector. The burden of increased litter and vector removal cannot fall on the surrounding owners and businesses. 9 March 23, 2022

{10797724.5}
We and our client request that the City reconsider the detrimental impacts that the Project will have on neighboring properties and urge the City to not approve or otherwise move forward with the Project at the current site. If the City is inclined to approve and move forward with the Project at this site, then, as described above, additional measures must be taken to ensure that the inevitable adverse impacts of the Property are proactively mitigated against. We request that this letter be made part of the public record relating to the Project and made available at the administrative public hearing alongside the staff report.

Regards,
Brent Weiss
10 From: Community Development Department
To: Lori Goor
Subject: FW: Development Permit (DP) 2021-70408 - Support Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:49:23 PM
Attachments: Outlook-e42ki55l.png
Development Permit (DP) 2021-70408 - Support.pdf
From: Adam Haverstock <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 3:27 PM
To: Community Development Department <[email protected]> Cc: Danielle Borja <[email protected]>
Subject: Development Permit (DP) 2021-70408 - Support
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
Please see the attached letter from Greater Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce President/CEO Danielle Borja on behalf of the Chamber's Executive Committee. We are in support of the approval of Development Permit (DP) 2021-70408.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Adam
--
Adam Haverstock
Director of Government Affairs & Tourism
Greater Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce
Helping Businesses Succeed and Conejo Valley Thrive!
805-370-0035 | [email protected]
11 12
2022 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Jill Haney
Chair
Montecito Bank & Trust
Ed Sahakian
Chair Elect/Treasurer
Ventura County Credit Union
Natalie Yanez
Chair Emeritus
eXp Realty
Matt Midura
Chair Emeritus / Secretary
Good Cause Marketing
Partners
Lisa Safaeinili
Director-at-Large
Westminster Free Clinic
Eva Gomez
Director-at-Large
California State University Channel
Islands
Dianne Mckay
Director-at-Large
Mustang Marketing
David Barnett
Director-at-Large
Hyatt Regency Westlake
Danielle Borja
President / CEO
Greater Conejo Valley
Chamber of Commerce

DIRECTORS
Monique Corridori
Corwin
Jake Demirchyan
Caruso
Stacy Diaz
PennyMac
Elizabeth Dritz
Takeda
Mike Dutra
Candu Graphics
Darla Everett
Amgen
Kinsie Flame
Jacob Flame’s Tang Soo Do
University
Johnathan Franklin
Los Angeles Rams
Jason Herbison
HUB International
Vikas Kaushik
TechAhead
William Koehler
Law Offices of William D. Koehler
Austin Manning
Los Robles Health System
Andrea McClellan
Boy Scouts of America
Michelle Menzel
GreatWay Roofing
Eddie Moore
Oaks Christian School
Marja Price
Janss Marketplace
Niki Richardson
TOArts
Milla Shaposhnik
Union Bank
Candice Shehorn
Key Pointe Asset Management
Ryan Van Ommeren
California Lutheran University
Felix Wang
Best Western Plus Thousand Oaks Inn
600 Hampshire Road # 200 • Westlake Village, CA 91361
T: (805) 370-0035 • F: (805) 370-1083
conejochamber.org
March 22, 2022
Mr. Kelvin Parker
Community Development Director
City of Thousand Oaks
2100 Thousand Oaks Blvd
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Re: DP 2021-70408 Administrative Hearing Comments - Support Dear Mr. Parker,
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of the proposed project at 2498 and 2550 Conejo Center Drive. On behalf of the Executive Committee of the Greater Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce, I am writing in support of the permit approval.

As you are aware, Athens Services was awarded the long-term contract to provide waste hauling services for the City of Thousand Oaks. As part of their investment in the local community, Athens agreed to identify and develop a site to park their trucks and provide operations services within the city. This dramatically cuts down on the number of truck trips on our roads and freeway, providing both an environmental benefit, but also reducing the impact on local roads and generating less traffic.

This project is unlike many under the city’s review. First, the type of use being proposed is appropriate for the M-1 zoning of the project site. There is no change requested. Second, the use is compatible with neighboring uses. The city is not being asked to put a high-impact use next to residential. The neighboring uses are also industrial. Additionally, as the staff report mentions, the parking created by the site is more than adequate and a traffic study showed impact of this project on traffic to not be significant.

This project is an appropriate use for the project site and neighboring parcels. It will generate fewer truck trips as trucks will not have to leave the city every day and return in the morning.

Athens Services is doing its part to fulfill the requirements of their contract for service with the City and also to be a good community partner. Please approve Development Permit (DP) 2021- 70408.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this project.

Sincerely,
Danielle Borja, MBA
President/CEO
Greater Conejo Valley Chamber of Commerce
13 From: Jun Dong
To: Justine Kendall
Subject: Supplemental Packet for the March 24th hearing Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 5:32:54 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Justine,
WE live in the Rancho Conejo HOA community on Oak
Trail St and are against the idea of having a fleet of garbage trucks parked near our home.

We are concerned about an increase in the amount of industrial traffic on nearby roads. We know of a family whose daughter was killed by an industrial vehicle while out walking around the outside of our community on Rancho Conejo Blvd.

We are concerned about the smell wafting through the air from the garbage trucks during the evening after they have been parked for the day.

We are also concerned about the impact on property values due to the increased industrial traffic and the smell of the garbage trucks.

We are very much against having the Athens parking and maintenance facility near where we live.

Jun Dong and Nan Zhang
14 From: Tian Wang
To: Justine Kendall
Subject: March 24 3:00 pm hearing
Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 5:48:21 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Mr. Kendall,
WE live in the Rancho Conejo HOA community and are against the idea of having a fleet of garbage trucks parked near our home.

We are concerned about an increase in the amount of industrial traffic on nearby roads. We know of a family whose daughter was killed by an industrial vehicle while out walking around the outside of our community on Rancho Conejo Blvd.

We are concerned about the smell wafting through the air from the garbage trucks during the evening after they have been parked for the day.

We are also concerned about the impact on property values due to the increased industrial traffic and the smell of the garbage trucks.

We are very much against having the Athens parking and maintenance facility near where we live.

Thank you
Tian
15 From: Robin Yi
To: Justine Kendall
Subject: Most strongly against having Athens Parking and Maintenance Facility near where we live Date: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 6:11:03 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mr. Kendall,
Good evening!
I and my family have been living happily at Rancho Conejo HOA community for about 17 years. I have three children, the youngest one is a lovely 8-year girl. Recently our happy life has been severely disrupted by the idea of having a fleet of garbage trucks parked near our home. My young daughter is especially worried about the safety and keeps asking me what we can do after she heard a girl was killed on Rancho conejo Blvd by a industrial vehicle years ago. We cannot be more strongly AGAINST the idea of having a fleet of garbage trucks parked nearly our community which will surely destroy the quiet and happy life of thousands of families.

We are concerned about an increase in the amount of industrial traffic on nearby roads. We know of a family whose daughter was killed by an industrial vehicle while out walking around the outside of our community on Rancho Conejo Blvd.

We are concerned about the smell wafting through the air from the garbage trucks during the evening after they have been parked for the day.

We are also concerned about the impact on property values due to the increased industrial traffic and the smell of the garbage trucks.

We are most strongly against having the Athens parking and maintenance facility near where we live.

Thank you for your kind consideration in advance!
Robin Yi and his family
Sent from my iPhone
16 From: Community Development Department
To: Lori Goor
Subject: FW: DP 2021-70408 Administrative Hearing Comments”.

Date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 6:55:37 AM
From: Barbara A. Sponsler <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 5:37 PM
To: Community Development Department <[email protected]> Subject: DP 2021-70408 Administrative Hearing Comments”.

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Sent from the all new AOL app for Android
Thanks for allowing me to comment on the proposed Athens truck dispatch center. My name is Barbara Sponsler and I live in Thousand Oaks. I see this project as very non-controversial and, in fact, a very sensible and necessary part of Athens Services scope of hauling waste in our city.

None of the common obstacles to permitting projects are even present here. This is a basic, essential facility that poses no negative impacts to the community and instead solves several problems. It is my hope that the City of Thousand Oaks will continue its record of facilitating economic development and working in good faith with business partners and service providers.

Essentially we can “help them help us” which is a win-win for everyone involved. Please take the necessary actions to approve this project so we can move forward with all the necessary components for top notch waste hauling service in our great city. 17 From: Stephen Kearns
To: Lori Goor; Justine Kendall
Subject: Fwd: Request for Denial and/or CEQA review - ARC (AKA Athens Services) Development Permit Request Date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 7:36:17 AM
Attachments: Request for CEQA review and Denial of DP 2021-70408 - Signature Signs - Lavery Ct..pdf Get Outlook for iOS
From: Mark Leaf - Signature Signs <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 6:24:38 AM
To: Stephen Kearns <[email protected]>; Justine Kendall <[email protected]> Cc: 'Eric Rose' <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Request for Denial and/or CEQA review - ARC (AKA Athens Services) Development Permit Request
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Steve:

Thank you for emailing us previously with regard to the Administrative Public Hearing scheduled today for Application DP 2021-70408.

I will unfortunately be unable to attend the Hearing as I will be engaged in installation of signage for one of our Clients that has been on the calendar for several months and cannot be rescheduled.

In lieu of an in-person statement, please accept and enter into the record of public comment, the attached letter expressing our concerns and opposition to the proposed application.

Please also reply to confirm receipt thereof and advise if you have specific questions in this regard.

Thank you for your kind attention in this regard.

Mark Leaf
Signature Signs Inc.

CA Lic #891120
2635 Lavery Ct., Unit 1
Newbury Park, CA 91320
(805) 499-3343
(805) 499-4636 Fax
[email protected]
18 visit us online at sigsigns.com
From: Stephen Kearns [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:44 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Administrative Hearing - ARC Development Permit Request Good Afternoon,
Thank you for your interest in the subject Case.

The Administrative Hearing staff report and agenda for the March 24th hearing can be found here:
https://www.toaks.org/departments/community-development/planning/administrative-hearings The virtual hearing link is below.

You are invited to a Zoom webinar.

When: Mar 24, 2022 03:00 PM Pacific Time (US and Canada) Topic: Administrative Public Hearing - March 24, 2022
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_MNlJbIcnQ4iAv1TeHlEouw Stephen Kearns, Planning Manager
Community Development Department
[email protected] 805-449-2315
19 2635 Lavery Ct., Unit 1
Newbury Park CA 91320 (Business)
and
1464 Sappanwood Ave.

Newbury Park, CA 91320 (Residence)
Justine Kendall
City of Thousand Oaks
2100 Thousand Oaks Blvd.

Thousand Oaks CA 91362
RE: REQUEST FOR DENIAL AND/OR CEQA REVIEW OF
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2021-70408
We are longtime business owners with operations on Lavery Court, near the proposed site for a waste-collection truck dispatch center. Our family also resides in Rancho Conejo Village, close to the proposed site. (The proposed facility is approx. halfway between our home and business.)
We became very concerned when learning of this project as proposed from a neighboring business. Ten years ago, Lawrence Drive and surrounding streets were only a thruway for local residents, small business and the UPS Depot. Over the past decade, commercial development has been progressing at a fever pitch, with multiple office and industrial buildings being constructed on Lawrence Drive, Rancho Conejo, Conejo Center Drive, etc.

This has increased traffic dramatically, particularly that of heavy trucks. As just one case in point, Amazon established a base of operations adjacent Rancho Conejo Blvd. several years ago but parks its vans in a leased lot on Lawrence Dr. Their move into the area has greatly increased truck traffic, air pollution, wear & tear on our local streets and the potential for traffic accidents (many have occurred).

We understand that the availability of the undeveloped parcels near our business and primary residence is attractive to developers, but urge you to consider the impact of constructing additional facilities, and specifically, those that continue to increase heavy truck traffic. Further, a “waste collection” facility is arguably among the worst possible uses of the subject property given the potential environmental and aesthetic impact, as well as odor and pest concerns.

Importantly, “service” businesses like Amazon and a waste collection truck depot add very little, if any, revenue to the local tax base, vs. manufacturing and sales-oriented business (like ours) that do. Accordingly, there will likely be minimal financial offset 20 to the additional damage and wear on the infrastructure, as well as consumption of utilities, created by these other types of businesses.

What is being proposed as a truck depot is, in reality, a waste transfer station, and should be clearly disclosed and evaluated as such. It is readily apparent, albeit not clearly disclosed by the applicant, that waste will be stored at the facility, whether left overnight(s) in trucks or offloaded “temporarily” to transfer between vehicles. As far as I am aware there is NO requirement that Athens only park EMPTY, CLEAN and DRY vehicles at the property. Without this condition it is inevitable that odors, pests, birds and other negative affects will become problematic.

We further object to the lack of transparency in the disclosure of this application; i.e., with such a wide geographic impact, to notify only those within a 500 ft. radius. In addition, “Arc Investment’ is noted as the applicant, which screens us from knowing the name of the intended operator, Athens Services. With such an impactful project, why were the applicants given a potential “free pass” to go without a public hearing if no objecting responses were received?
We also wonder why a tiny notification placard was posted on the property as opposed to the 4’ x 8’ sign that the City typically requires to be installed for larger projects. Was this an attempt to avoid notice rather than inform in full faith? (As a point of reference, one of our clients is a Doggy Day Care Center far up on Grande Vista Dr. They were required to post a 4’x 8’ sign; in contrast, theirs is a business with minimal public impact and a more “remote” location.”) The lack of City outreach regarding the Athens project to the neighboring business and residents in itself seems highly irregular.

We were advised by a neighbor who was apparently notified by mail of the Application; we will be severely affected but were not directly informed, apparently as we are located outside the 500 feet notification radius. While I object to the countercompetitive tactics of Waste Management, at least they took the initiative, and spent their own funds, to inform the public of this permit application so the parties that will be adversely affected could voice their concerns.

Given the above concerns, we respectfully request that the Community Development Department of Thousand Oaks REJECT the permit application for the project at 2498 and 2550 Conejo Center Drive outright. If unwilling or unable to do so outright, to perform a full CEQA analysis and to improve transparency and public outreach with regard to this proposed project. You may call me directly at (805) 279-0574 should you have questions or wish to discuss further.

Sincerely,
Mark H. Leaf

COO & VP
Signature Signs Inc.
21 From: Justine Kendall
To: Lori Goor
Subject: FW: Against the proposal of having a waste-collection truck dispatch center close to Rancho Conejo Community Date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 8:20:26 AM
Attachments: image.png
image001.png
Justine Kendall, AICP | Associate Planner
She/ Her
Community Development Department
Planning Division
2100 Thousand Oaks Boulevard
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Email: [email protected]
Office: (805) 449-2355
City of Thousand Oaks
*Please Note:

Effective Monday May 10, 2021 City Hall Public Counter services will be available to walk-in traffic for those services that cannot be conducted remotely. Public Counters will be open Monday - Thursday from 7:30am-5pm and alternate Friday’s 8am to 5pm. Public Counter services are also available remotely via phone, email, or videoconference. Additionally, City of Thousand Oaks Planning Division only accepts digital submittals via the online Virtual Counter. Please visit www.toaks.org/cdd for more information.

From: haining wang <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 12:10 AM
To: Justine Kendall <[email protected]>
Subject: Against the proposal of having a waste-collection truck dispatch center close to Rancho Conejo Community CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To whom it may concern,
My name is Haining Wang. My husband and I with three kids moved into Rancho Conejo neighborhood in August 2021. We love our new home very much, friendly, safe, quiet and peaceful. We against the proposal of having a waste-collection truck dispatch center close to our home.

We are concerned about an increase in the amount of industrial traffic on nearby roads. We know of a family whose daughter was killed by an industrial vehicle while out walking around the outside of our community on Rancho Conejo Blvd.

We are concerned about the smell wafting through the air from the garbage trucks during the evening after they have been parked for the day.

We are also concerned about the impact on property values due to the increased industrial traffic and the smell of the garbage trucks.

We are very much against having the Athens parking and maintenance facility near where we live.

Best Regards,
Haining Wang
cell phone: (805)300-6653
22 23
From: Community Development Department
To: Lori Goor
Subject: FW: 3/24/22 Administrative Hearing Public Comments re Agenda Item No. 2 - DP 2021-70408 Date: Thursday, March 24, 2022 12:04:10 PM
Attachments: 00628442.pdf
From: Kathryn A. Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 11:59 AM
To: Community Development Department <[email protected]> Cc: Andee Leisy <[email protected]>; Veronika Morrison <[email protected]>; David Womack <[email protected]> Subject: 3/24/22 Administrative Hearing Public Comments re Agenda Item No. 2 - DP 2021-70408 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good Morning,
Attached, please find correspondence from Ms. Leisy, on behalf of G.I. Industries dba Waste Management.

Sincerely,
Kathryn A. Ramirez
Paralegal
R E M Y | M O O S E | M A N L E Y LLP
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800 | Sacramento, CA 95814
P (916) 443-2745 x 221 | F (916) 443-9017
24 March 24, 2022

Via E-mail
[email protected]
Geoff Ware, Administrative Hearing Officer
Community Development Department
City of Thousand Oaks
2100 E Thousand Oaks Blvd.

Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Re: Development Permit (DP) 2021-70408 - 2498 and 2550 Conejo Center Drive (APNs 667-0-080-015 and 667-0-080-035)

Dear Mr. Ware:

We submit these comments on behalf of our client G.I. Industries, dba Waste Management (WM), in opposition to the above referenced proposed project, which would allow the construction of a 21,440 square foot waste-collection truck dispatch center, offices, truck maintenance and storage area, and compressed natural gas (“CNG”) re-fueling facility (the “Project”). WM maintains that the Project was, and remains, a foreseeable consequence of the City’s decision to award Arakelian Enterprises, dba Athens Services (“Athens”), the City’s Exclusive Franchise Agreement (“FA”) on March 9, 2021, the details of which were known by City staff and Athens at the time yet withheld from the public and, presumably, the City Council for consideration. The FA and local hauling yard were therefore required to be considered as part of the “whole of the action” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.), as summarized below. 1
1 Our client challenged the City’s FA award because the City failed to comply with the noticing requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, § 54950 et seq.) (“Brown Act”). That case is pending on appeal. WM also challenged the City’s March 9, 2021, decision to rely, once again, on exemptions from environmental review under CEQA. A decision on the merits of the CEQA case remains pending in Ventura County Superior Court. A decision also remains pending from the Second District Court of Appeal on the scope of the CEQA record. (See Exhibit E [excerpts from petition detailing the history of the City’s FA process and Athens extraordinary attempts to keep the Conejo Property concealed].)
Andrea K. Leisy
[email protected]
25 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

Staff and Athens now recommend approval of the local hauling yard Project in reliance on the Class 32 In-Fill exemption under CEQA. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15332 (“CEQA Guidelines”).) This is a reversal from the City’s September 2021 decision to contract with an environmental consultant to conduct a full environmental review of the Project, via a negative declaration, and allow for the public to review and comment on that analysis for a minimum of 30-days. (See Exhibit E [executed contract with Envicom].) The Community Development Staff Report is silent as to why the City and Athens changed course. Now, only 72-hours have been provided for review and comment on the nearly 300-page staff report, including technical studies, prepared for the Project. 2
As explained herein and in the attached expert comment letters, the City lacks substantial evidence supporting adoption of the Project in reliance on the Class 32 categorical exemption and must therefore prepare and circulate - for public review and comment - either a mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) as originally contracted by the City, or an environmental impact report (“EIR”). Absent such effort, the City will once again risk running afoul of CEQA’s requirements.

I. Because the Conejo Property has value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, the Class 32 Exemption is Inapplicable.

The Class 32 categorical exemption applies only to projects that meet the conditions described in this section:
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. (c) The project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15332.)
2 This letter reflects our best efforts to review and comment on the information contained within the staff report which was made publicly available, for the first time, on the City’s website at 3:00 p.m. on March 22, 2022. We reserve the right to provide additional comments, including in response to information provided at or after today’s hearing. 26 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

Because the vacant Conejo Project site retains some potential habitat value for endangered, rare or threatened plant and animal species, despite having been graded, the Class 32 exemption does not apply. Because the Project site is immediately adjacent to open space containing habitat and the known presence of protected species that will be disturbed by construction and operation of the Project, reliance on the Class 32 exemption is also subject to an exception under CEQA from reliance on the exemption.

Specifically, CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2, subdivision (c), prohibits reliance by a public agency on a categorical exemption where there is a “reasonable possibility” that significant environmental impacts will result due to “unusual circumstances”].)Unusual circumstances include the potential for a project to significantly impact, either directly or indirectly, endangered, rare or threatened species as defined by CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15380, subds. (a)-(d).)
As explained by Mr. Scott Cashen, an independent biological resources consultant in the letter attached as Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference, the biological resources assessment prepared for Athens (Staff Report, Attachment # 6), and proposed to be relied on by the City, lacked focused surveys for the presence or absence of specialstatus species. Instead, the analysis assumed the Project Site is a graded pad with no potential for special status [species] to occur. (Exhibit B, p. 1.) In contrast to the suspiciously brown Conceptual Site Plan provided by Athens as Attachment #1 to the Staff Report, a photo taken yesterday of the Project Site entrance shows grasses and other vegetation existing both on site and directly adjacent to the Project site, thereby supporting Mr. Cashen’s determination that the Project Site provides potential habitat for threatened, rare or endangered plant and animal species. (See Exhibit C; see also Exhibit B, p. 3 [finding “plants undoubtedly have already begun to repopulate the site from the seedbank” thereby providing some habitat value].) 3 Without access granted to the site by Athens, the building pad is not visible to the public from the street given its elevated nature, vegetation and existing oak trees. The photo from yesterday nevertheless indicates vegetation has already begun to grow on and around the site consistent with Mr. Cashen’s conclusion.

The Elevated Entitlement’s analysis commissioned by Athens therefore ignores the reasonable possibility that endangered, rare or threatened species, including plant species, have the potential to exist on the Project site. In fact, as explained by Mr. Cashen, disturbance events such as grading may benefit protected plant species with potential to occur in the area, including the Lyon’s pentachaeta. This is because “special-status plant propagules (e.g. seeds, roots, bulbs) may persist in the soils at the Project Site,” given the 3 See Exhibit B, p. 3 – finding “many of these [plant] species are critically imperiled (at high risk of extinction) and are found nowhere else on earth. Therefore, even if the Project Site does not currently support special-status plants, it is one of the few places on earth that could be restored to promote recovery of plants dependent on Conejo Volcanics. For this reason alone, the Project Site has “value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.”
27 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

undisputed presence of the volcanic bedrock soils endemic only to the Conejo area. (Exhibit B, at p. 3.) Development of the Property could therefore result in potentially significant adverse impacts to threatened, rare or endangered plant species and their related habitat. 4
In addition to the Project site’s potential for occurrence and habitat for the protected plant species outlined in Mr. Cashen’s letters, two special-status animal species—the coast horned lizard and silvery legless lizard—also have potential to occur in a variety of non-native vegetation communities in and around the Project site. (Id. at p.

2.) Furthermore, the coastal California gnatcatcher (a federally listed species that occurs adjacent to the Project Site) is known to use non-native grasslands as habitat and could therefore use the Project site for foraging if not nesting habitat. Noise from the Project construction would negatively impact the gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, grasshopper sparrow, and other special-status bird species that occur (or may occur) in the surrounding areas. (Exhibit B, pp. 3-4.) The Project site and the immediately surrounding area therefore have potential value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, precluding the City from making the findings necessary for reliance on the Class 32 exemption and warranting preparation of an environmental document that is subject to public review and comment and contains appropriate mitigation measures.

Curiously, Conditions of Approval (“COA”) numbers 26 and 27 in the City’s staff report appear to be improper “de facto mitigation” by requiring “nesting bird surveys by a qualified biologist” (COA # 26) and that a “qualified biologist shall be on-site during grading activities to perform focused surveys to verify that no special-status wildlife occurs on-site” (COA # 27). These COA conflict with the recommended finding that the Project site has entirely “no value” as habitat. (See also Salmon Protection and Watershed Network v. County of Marin (2015) 125 Cal.App.4th 1098, 1102-1108 (“SPAWN”) [requiring environmental review after county improperly attempted to mitigate its way into the Class 32 categorical exemption in approving a single family residence with potential to impact protected salmon species]; Azusa Land Reclamation Co. v. Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 1165.) II. Reliance on the Class 32 exemption would conflict with General Plan policy CO-32, precluding adoption of the exemption under CEQA Guidelines section 15332, subdivision (a).

The City General Plan requires that “[t]he City shall encourage and promote the conservation and protection of all rare, threatened, endangered or sensitive species listed by State and Federal agencies (United States Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), the 4 See https://www.cnps.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/policy-mitigation-guidelines.pdf; see also Scott Cashen letter dated October 13, 2021, previously provided to the City and incorporated by reference herein.
28 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

County of Ventura and the City of Thousand Oaks.” (City of Thousand Oaks General Plan, Conservation Element, p. 46 [Policy CO-32].) Should the City adopt the proposed exemption, it will conflict with this mandatory and specific General Plan policy for the reasons explained in Mr. Cashen’s letters. (See Families Unafraid to Uphold Rural El Dorado County v. El Dorado County Bd. of Sup'rs (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1332, 1341- 1342 [agencies must comply with general plan policies that are “fundamental, mandatory and specific”].) The Project, therefore, is not “consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies” as required for purposes of relying on the Class 32 exemption.

III. Because the Conejo Property is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and Landslide Hazard Zone, the Class 32 exemption is inapplicable.

Evidence in the City’s files identifies the Project Site as being located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Exhibit E [Disclosure Source NHD]), another unusual circumstance that the Project could exacerbate because of the CNG facility should a wildfire occur in the area. There is no evidence in the record of the Project’s potential to exacerbate wildfire risks or expose people in the area to pollutants or explosion from the Project site in the event of a wildfire. (See CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, XX, subds. (b)-(c).)
IV. The staff report lacks substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that the Project will not result in significant VMT impacts.

The Staff Report erroneously concludes that the Project will have no significant impact on vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”). (Staff Report, p. 7.) There is no substantial evidence to support this claim, as the City’s traffic screening analysis methodology is legally flawed.

As explained in Mr. Neal Liddicoat’s comment letter, the City’s screening criteria improperly considers the projected number of total “peak-hour trips” instead of the total “daily trips” when determining whether a VMT analysis is required. (Exh. A, pp. 2–3; see also Office of Planning and Research, 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts Under CEQA, p. 12.) Such a basis fails to consider the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from the traffic increase of the Project. The point of changing CEQA analysis of transportation impacts away from level of service to VMT was to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1), italics added.) If most of the vehicle trips resulting from this Project will occur during off-peak hours, then this methodology would not accurately record the substantial bulk of GHG emissions resulting from the Project overall. (See Exh. A, p. 3.) Therefore, the City’s conclusion that “[a]pproval of the project would not 29 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

result in any significant effects relating to traffic” is not supported by substantial evidence for purposes of relying on the Class 32 exemption.5
V. The Conejo Property is Being Developed as a consequence of the Exclusive Franchise Agreement.

Although Athens did not own the Project Site (2498/2550 Conejo Center Drive) at the time of the FA award on March 9, 2021, the acquisition and development of the Property was well underway, including details of the proposed use by Athens as a local hauling yard, when the FA was approved. (See Exhibit D [emails to/from ARC/Athens representatives, City and Conejo Valley Unified School District staff acknowledging linkage between the Conejo Property site and the FA award]; see also Attachment 1 [regarding incorporation of documents contained within the City’s files as part of this record of proceeding].)
Absent a local hauling yard, Athens lacks the local infrastructure required and necessary to serve the FA, particularly for re-fueling its collection fleet with CNG as required by the Agreement with the City. (See Exhibit E [Declaration of Doug Corcoran, ¶ 8.) 6 This explains why Athens misled the public and, presumably, the City Council at the March 9, 2021, hearing by claiming that Athens had the right to “immediately” expand a different site on Corporation Street in the City of Santa Paula as a local hauling yard to service the FA (when it did not), and why Athens took great lengths to keep acquisition of the Conejo property for the local hauling yard secret until October 2021. (See Exhibit E [detailed excerpts of petition over contents of the CEQA record pending review before the court of appeal], Exhibit F [Acorn newspaper articles].) Environmental review pursuant to CEQA is intended “to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made.” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564, original italics.) Accordingly, agencies are required to consider, early in the process, “‘the 5 The previously letter authored by Mr. Liddicoat, dated October 14, 2021, and submitted by WM is incorporated by reference into the comments herein. In that letter, Mr. Liddicoat identifies the potential long-term transportation related impacts of the FA, including the additional VMT resulting from Athens’s storage of itstrucks in Sun Valley until development of a local hauling yard facility, thereby documenting the conditions existing before the FA’s January 1, 2022, effective date. Mr. Liddicoat found that “a reasonable potential for significant impacts exists” in the areas of VMT and traffic safety as a result of the FA approval. Should the trial court of Court of Appeal find in WM’s favor on the merits, this pre-FA award baseline must also be considered by the City in any future environmental review.
6 The City has not at any point during the ongoing litigation contested the statement in the Corcoran Declaration that, but for the FA, Athens would not need a local hauling yard facility at the Conejo Property.
30 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment . . . .’” (Tuolumne County Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Sonora (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 1214, 1222, original italics, quoting CEQA Guidelines, § 15378, subd. (a).) In general, a lead agency must fully analyze each “project” in a single environmental analysis and not perform “piecemeal” review by chopping a large project into two or more segments to minimize the potential impacts. (Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263, 283–284.)
As such, an agency must analyze a future expansion or other action as part of the initial project “if (1) it is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of that initial project and (2) the future expansion or action will be significant in that it will likely change the scope or nature of the initial project or its environmental effects.” (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 396; see also Pub.

Resources Code, § 21065 [defining “project”].) The determination that an agency did not improperly piecemeal its review of a project is not governed by property ownership alone, as Athens’ counsel emphasizes. (Staff Report Attachment #11.) As the City and Athens have acknowledged in their own attached emailed correspondence, some of which predate the March 9, 2021, FA approval, the Conejo Property was acquired and is being developed by Athens to service the FA. (See Exh. D:

January 7, 2021, email from Jason Morgan, Perspective Law Group, on behalf of ARC, to Dr. Victor Hayek, Deputy Superintendent, discussing purpose and details of the purchase of the Conejo Property]; see also January 20, 2021, email from Helen Cox, City of Thousand Oaks, to Haider Alawami, City of Thousand Oaks, indicating that Athens is interested in buying the Conejo Property “for fleet storage/service yard”; February 26, 2021, email from Jason Morgan to Victor Hayek stating that Athens will use the Conejo Property “pursuant to a long-term waste hauling franchise contract with the City of Thousand Oaks”; March 24, 2021, email from Stephen Kearns, City Planning Division Manager, to Cesar Torres, Athens’s Executive Vice President, and including Helen Cox, the City’s Sustainability Division Manager, thanking Mr. Torres for “following up” and explaining that Mr. Kearns had “completed the research” needed to provide direction to Athens to continue processing its proposed uses for the Property].) The local hauling yard now proposed as the DP Project was, and remains, a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the initial FA project approval. The proposed development and operation of the DP Project will be significant in that it changes the scope and nature of the initial FA approval. The City was required to consider the two actions as part of the “whole” of the action. It did not. The City violated CEQA in approving the FA and remains poised to do so once again. / / /

31 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

VI. The City’s Public Agenda and Notice of the March 24, 2022, hearing violates the Brown Act by not including the recommended reliance on the Class 32 CEQA exemption.

As the failure to identify reliance on a CEQA exemption is the exact issue pending resolution on the merits before the Court of Appeal in WM’s Brown Act challenge to the City’s decision finding adoption of the FA exempt from CEQA, we preserve the same issue here by raising it here. Specifically, the City’s failure, once again, to provide notice that it would rely on a CEQA exemption – this time the Class 32 In-Fill exemption – as part of the agenda noticed for this hearing and the DP Project approval violates the Brown Act.

The Brown Act requires that “[a]t least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting . . . .” (Gov. Code, § 54954.2, subd. (a)(1) [emphasis added].) This requirement is designed to ensure that “[e]very agenda for regular meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public . . . .” (Id., § 54954.3.) “No action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda . . . .” (Id., § 54954.2, subd. (a)(2).) The City’s Municipal Code similarly requires that: “[a]n agenda shall be prepared and, as required by State law, posted for all meetings. No Council substantive action shall be taken on any matter unless that matter appears on the agenda or such non-agenda action is authorized under the Brown Act.” (City of Thousand Oaks Municipal Code, § 1-8.106.) Moreover, CEQA requires compliance with the Brown Act where CEQA determinations are made at a regular meeting of the City Council. (See Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21003, subd. (a), 21177, subd. (e); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15004, subd. (c), 15202, subd. (d); Defend Our Waterfront v. California State Lands Commission (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 570, 580–586 (Defend Our Waterfront) [providing notice of CEQA exemption in Staff Report or at meeting did not comply with notice requirements of Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, which is analogous to the Brown Act].) Here, the notice and agenda for today’s (March 24, 2022) administrative hearing omitted any reference to the recommendation to find the DP Project approval exempt from CEQA in reliance on the Class 32 exemption. Instead, this information was first disclosed in the Staff Report posted at approximately 3:00 p.m. on March 21, 2022 (Staff Report, pp. 2–3.)
The City’s failure to include specific reference to the Class 32 CEQA exemption in the public notice for today’s Administrative Hearing “failed to give the notice required by law” within the meaning of the Brown Act and CEQA. (Gov. Code, § 54954.2, subd. (a)(1); Defend Our Waterfront, supra, 240 Cal.App.4th at p. 582, citing Pub. Resources Code, § 21177, subd. (e).) Therefore, the City’s inadequate notice – while consistent with past practices involving approvals sought by Athens - violated the Brown Act. 32 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

Thank you in advance for your consideration of these comments and attached evidence in support.

Very truly yours,
Andrea K. Leisy
Cc (via email): David Womack, Assistant City Attorney
33 Geoff Ware
Administrative Hearing Officer
March 24, 2022

ATTACHMENT 1
WM incorporates by reference all documents previously delivered to the City in connection with the City Council’s March 9, 2021 hearing for approval of the FA and as part of the still pending resulting litigation (G.I. Industries v. City of Thousand Oaks, et al. (Ventura Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 56-2021-00553340-CU-WM-VTA), as evidence that the City should consider in its decision of whether to approve the DP Project. (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21167.6, subd. (e)(7); Consolidated Irrigation Dist. v. Superior Court (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 697, 723–724 (Consolidated Irrigation).) WM requests that these documents also be included as evidence in the administrative record of proceedings for any litigation in connection with the approval of the DP Project. (See ibid. [documents are “made readily available for use by [agency] personnel and, therefore, . . . part of the record of proceedings under section 21167.6, subdivision (e)(7)” where copies were previously delivered to the agency in connection with another project, a party’s comment letter offers to provide additional copies if requested by the agency and also asks that the documents be included in the record of proceedings].) These documents include but are not limited to:
x The City Council March 9, 2021 Hearing Transcript
x The City of Thousand Oaks City Council (“City Council”) March 9, 2021, 3:30 p.m. Supplemental Information Packet
x The City Council March 9, 2021 Meeting Agenda
x The Collection Services Agreement for the Provision of Residential and Commercial Solid Waste, Recyclable Materials and Organic Waste Collection Services (“Franchise Agreement” or “FA”)
x Athens’s Services, Inc.’s RFP Response
x WM’s RFP Response
x The City of Thousand Oaks’s Request for Proposals (“RFP”) x The Notice of Exemption (“NOE”) for the Franchise Agreement x Secretary of State’s business information for ARC
All of these documents are in the City’s possession and are readily available for use by City personnel. (Consolidated Irrigation, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at p. 724.) Any City personnel reviewing this comment letter can obtain the documents by referring to the City’s files for the previous Franchise Agreement award. If the City deems this to be too inefficient, WM will provide the City with additional copies of any of these documents upon request. (See ibid. [court holding that the burden of such steps is minimal and counterbalanced by the benefit to the City of not receiving the same documents again and again with each new development project].)
34 MARCH 24, 2022 REMY MOOSE

MANLEY, LLP COMMENTS

EXHIBIT A
35 P.O. Box 1596 ƒ Mackinac Island, MI 49757 ƒ Phone: (906) 847-8276 Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
March 23, 2022
Ms. Andrea K. Leisy
Remy Moose Manley LLP
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: Waste Collection Dispatch Center – Thousand Oaks, California Dear Ms. Leisy:

Arc Investment Group has applied to the City of Thousand Oaks, California, for approval of Development Permit No. 21-70408 to allow construction of a 21,440 square foot (SF) waste collection truck dispatch center for Athens Services, the City’s current waste hauler. Included within the site would be outdoor vehicle storage, maintenance facilities (13,440 SF), offices (8,000 SF), automobile and truck parking, and a compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling facility.

The city has prepared a staff report describing various findings regarding the project and presenting conditions of approval. That report recommends approval of the project. Included within the staff report is a memorandum report developed by the Thousand Oaks Public Works Department documenting the results of a traffic impact analysis for the proposed project. That analysis determined that the project would have no traffic impacts, based on application of the city’s screening criteria for traffic impact analyses.

Our review of the city’s traffic impact analysis memorandum reveals that it is substantially flawed, however, as it fails to address the project’s potential impacts with respect to vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT), as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Further, the estimate of project-generated trips presented in the analysis is incorrect. Other relevant flaws were also identified in the city staff report.

Public Works Department Traffic Impact Analysis Review
As noted above, city staff prepared a traffic impact analysis, which was documented in a December 22, 2021 memorandum report. That analysis primarily consisted of development of an estimate of the volume of traffic to be generated by the project and comparison of those results to the city’s criteria for requiring detailed traffic studies.

We note that the traffic impact analysis memorandum misstates the size of the proposed project.

Specifically, it describes the project as consisting of approximately 17,600 SF, while the actual building area is 21,440 SF, according to the project site plan.

Project Trip Generation Estimate
According to city staff, the project will generate 194 daily trips, 92 AM peak-hour trips , and 48 PM peak-hour trips. These estimates are based on the following assumptions:
36 Ms. Andrea K. Leisy
Remy Moose Manley LLP
March 23, 2022

Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
• Each waste collection truck will depart the facility once each day and return once each day. • Each employee will travel to the site once each day at the beginning of his/her shift and depart once each day at the end of that shift.

These assumptions result in understatement of the volume of project-generated traffic, however, as they fail to consider the possibility that any other form of trip might be made to and from the site. As a basic example, it is likely that mail will be delivered to the site daily. Given the role of the project as a maintenance facility, it is likely that various parts and mechanical supplies will be delivered to the facility. It is not unreasonable to expect that on-site employees will travel to and from the site at times other than their commute to and from work. Perhaps they will go off-site for lunch or to perform service-related inspections or evaluations of waste collection vehicles and employees. Maintenance employees might find it necessary to go off-site on service calls in the event of mechanical issues with the waste collection trucks.

In short, the city’s trip generation estimate is unreliable as it fails to fully address the types of trips that would occur at the site on a regular basis.

Traffic Impact Analysis Screening Criteria
According to the city traffic analysis (p. 3):
“City policy is to require a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) study when a proposed project is projected to generated [sic] more than 100 P.M. peak hour trips per that [sic] attached VMT Administrative Policy.”
The analysis concludes that, since the project generates fewer than 100 peak-hour trips, no detailed VMT analysis is required. However, as noted above, the analysis underestimated the volume of traffic associated with the project. Consequently, this conclusion is called into question.

The city’s screening criteria are not consistent with those identified as being presumptively legitimate by the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in its 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts Under CEQA. That document acknowledged that projects with 110 total daily trips, not 110 peak-hour trips might have less than significant transportation impacts:
“Many local agencies have developed screening thresholds to indicate when detailed analysis is needed. Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-thansignificant transportation impact.” (OPR, p. 12 [italics added; footnote omitted].) More generally, we question the validity of using peak-hour trip generation as the basis for determining whether a VMT analysis should be conducted, given that VMT analyses are properly based on daily travel, not peak-hour travel. Focusing solely on peak-hour trip generation is 37 Ms. Andrea K. Leisy
Remy Moose Manley LLP
March 23, 2022

Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
inconsistent with the purpose of VMT analysis, which by statute, is intended to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1).) In theory and in practice, a proposed project might have relatively low numbers of trips during the morning and evening peak hours but enormous numbers of total daily trips, with most of them coming during non-peak conditions. Such projects could have very high levels of GHG-producing emissions while escaping any kind of VMT analysis under the city’s approach.

Further, basing this determination solely on trip generation without consideration of the lengths of the projected trips is erroneous. In general, the calculation of VMT is based on two components:
(1) the number of trips, and (2) the average length of those trips. Multiplying these two elements provides the number of vehicle-miles associated with a given project. The city’s criterion ignores the key trip length component of the calculation. Total VMT cannot possibly be quantified without numbers regarding trip lengths. In theory and in practice, projects could have relatively small numbers of trips, but those trips could be very long. By ignoring such possibilities, the city’s approach does nothing to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” In short, it is improper (and, in fact, impossible) to base a judgment about VMT solely on the project’s estimated trip generation.

The city’s policy is additionally deficient in that it provides no criteria for determining the level of significance of a potential VMT impact. While it states that the project’s VMT must be determined using the Ventura County travel demand model, it provides no guidance as to what constitutes a significant VMT impact. Thus, the City’s policy is virtually worthless from a CEQA perspective.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
The city staff report repeatedly states that the project will have a less than significant traffic impact, based on the flawed analysis described above. Beyond this fallacious assertion, the staff report states (p. 17):
“The project is consistent with CEQA Section 15064.3 subdivision (b), which is responsive to Senate Bill 743 (SB 743).”
Of course, this statement is erroneous, as no meaningful analysis of project VMT was undertaken.

And the city’s approach, as noted above, does nothing to “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” The question of project-related VMT is left to the public imagination. Further, no information is provided as to background or area-wide VMT, either current or projected. which would provide perspective with regard to the relative impact of the project.

CONCLUSION
Our review of city staff report associated with the proposed waste collection truck dispatch center at 2498 and 2550 Conejo Center Drive in Thousand Oaks, California raised significant questions 38 Ms. Andrea K. Leisy
Remy Moose Manley LLP
March 23, 2022

Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
regarding the validity of the conclusion that the project will have a less than significant traffic impact. Specifically, the key screening criterion employed to reach this conclusion is seriously flawed, in that it fails to reflect understanding of the concept of vehicle-miles-traveled. First, it is based on a fabricated estimate of peak-hour project trips, while VMT relates to daily traffic volumes. Second, no consideration was given to the length of project-generated trips, a key element of any VMT calculation. In summary, the city has conducted no technical analysis on the subject of VMT, but instead has relied on a legally dubious screening criterion that differs from the one acknowledged by OPR, in that the city’s criterion focuses on peak-hour trips rather than daily trips. The city’s conclusion, then, is not supported by any kind of evidence, much less substantial evidence.

We hope this information is useful. If you have questions concerning any of the items presented here or would like to discuss them further, please feel free to contact me at (906) 847-8276.

Sincerely,

GRIFFIN COVE TRANSPORTATION CONSULTING, PLLC
Neal K. Liddicoat, P.E.

Principal
Attachment
39 Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC

ATTACHMENT A
Professional Resume for Neal K. Liddicoat, P.E.

40 NEAL K. LIDDICOAT, P.E.

PRINCIPAL
Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
Education
BSCE / Michigan State University, 1977
Graduate Studies, University of Tennessee,
1977 – 1980
Professional Affiliations
Institute of Transportation Engineers – Fellow
American Society of Civil Engineers – Member
Registrations
California – Civil Engineer C35005
Michigan – Professional Engineer 6201037605
Mr. Liddicoat has 44 years of experience in the analysis of a broad range of traffic engineering, parking, and transportation planning issues, for both public and private sector clients. He has conducted traffic and parking analyses for a wide variety of development proposals, including office buildings, retail/ commercial centers, multiplex cinemas, and residential projects. He has a particular expertise in the analysis of unique development proposals, including stadiums, arenas, convention centers, theme parks, and other facilities where large numbers of vehicles and pedestrians converge in a short period of time.

Mr. Liddicoat has developed and presented seminars on technical procedures and quality control in the conduct of traffic impact analyses, both in-house and as a co-instructor for the UCLA Extension Public Policy Program. For several years, he served as instructor for the traffic engineering portion of the Civil Engineering licensing exam review course conducted by the Sacramento chapter of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Significant traffic impact analysis experience includes the following selected projects:
• Folsom, CA – Over 50 traffic analyses, including:
o Folsom Heights Mixed-Use
o Broadstone Estates
o Bidwell Pointe Residential
o Serenade Senior Housing
o Commons at Prairie City
o Country House Memory Care
o Prospect Ridge Residential
• STAPLES Center Traffic Impact Analysis, Los
Angeles, CA
• Sacramento City College Transportation Master
Plan Analysis, Sacramento, CA
• Raley Field Traffic and Parking Analysis, West
Sacramento, CA
• Convention Center Traffic & Parking Studies,
Sacramento, Los Angeles, and Anaheim, CA
• Disney’s “California Adventure” Preliminary
Traffic Analysis, Anaheim, CA
• Warner Bros. Studios Master Plan, Burbank, CA
• Elk Grove Boulevard Master Plan, Elk Grove, CA
• CSUS Bicycle/Pedestrian Study, Sacramento, CA
• SR 99/Twin Cities Road Traffic Operations, Galt, CA
• Thunder Valley Casino, Placer County, CA
Mr. Liddicoat is frequently called upon to serve as an expert “peer reviewer” for traffic impact analyses prepared by others. In that role, he has commented on the technical adequacy of traffic studies for a variety of projects, including retail centers, office complexes, and mixed-use master plans. His recent experience as a peer reviewer includes the following selected projects:
• Materials Recovery Facility, Irwindale, CA
• LAX Landside Access Modernization, Los Angeles, CA
• Granite Bay Circulation Study, Placer County, CA
• Oil Exploration Zoning Ordinance, Kern County, CA
• State Route 85 Express Lanes, Santa Clara Co., CA
• Vacaville General Plan, Vacaville, CA
• Martis Valley West Specific Plan, Placer County, CA
• LAX Terminals 2/3 Modernization, Los Angeles, CA
• Town & Country Hotel/Convention Ctr, San Diego,
CA
• University Community Plan, San Diego, CA
• Canyon Springs Residential, Truckee, CA
• Fresno General Plan, Fresno, CA
• Saddle Crest Homes, Orange County, CA
• Brentwood Manor Hotel, Los Angeles, CA
• Highway 43/198 Retail Center, Hanford, CA
• Village at Squaw Valley, Placer County, CA
• Bridgepointe Master Plan Amendment, San Mateo, CA
• Frog’s Leap Winery, Napa County, CA
41 NEAL K. LIDDICOAT, P.E.

PRINCIPAL
Griffin Cove Transportation Consulting, PLLC
Additional recent peer reviewer experience includes the following projects:
• Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Airfield
and Terminal Modernization, Los Angeles, CA
• Scarlett Winery, Napa County, CA
• Terra Vi Lodge Yosemite, Tuolumne County, CA
• Church of the Woods Evacuation Plan, Rimforest,
CA
• Otay Ranch Village 14 and Planning Areas 16/19,
San Diego County, CA
• Warner Ranch Evacuation Plan, San Diego County,
CA
• Harmony Grove Village South, San Diego County,
CA
• The Ranch Project, Antioch, CA
• Rancho La Habra Specific Plan, La Habra, CA
• Safari Highlands Ranch and Citywide Sphere of
Influence Update, Escondido, CA
• El Toro, 100-Acre Parcel Development Plan -
Irvine, CA
• Trails at Carmel Mountain Ranch, San Diego, CA
• Staglin Family Vineyards, Napa County, CA
• Yosemite Under Canvas Project, Tuolumne County,
CA
• Fanita Ranch Project, Santee, CA
• Otay Ranch Resort Village 13 Alternative H Project,
San Diego County, CA
• Estero Trail Easement Project, Sonoma County, CA
• Faria/Southwest Hills Annexation, Pittsburg, CA
• The Village Student Housing Project, Arcata, CA
• Tulare Pilot Flying J, Tulare, CA
• Davidon/Scott Ranch General Plan Amendment,
Rezoning, and Vesting Tentative Map, Petaluma,
CA
• John Adams Academy, El Dorado Hills, CA
• Centennial Project Draft Environmental Impact
Report, Los Angeles County, CA
• VillaSport Athletic Club and Spa Project,
Roseville, CA
42 MARCH 24, 2022 REMY MOOSE

MANLEY, LLP COMMENTS

EXHIBIT B
43 Scott Cashen, M.S.—Independent Biological Resources Consultant 1 March 24, 2022
Ms. Andrea K. Leisy
Remy Moose Manley, LLP
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Comments on the Staff Report for Development Permit No. 21-70408 (Arc Investment Group)
Dear Ms. Leisy:

Arc Investment Group proposes development of a 21,440 square foot waste-collection truck dispatch center with outdoor vehicle storage, maintenance facilities, associated parking, retaining walls, and a compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling station (collectively referred to as the “Project”) at 2498 and 2550 Conejo Center Drive in Thousand Oaks, California (APNs 667-0- 080-015 and 667-0-080-035) to serve the City’s current waste hauler, Athens Services. On 13 October 2021, I prepared a comment letter that discussed sensitive biological resources that may be affected by development of the site. The subsequent comments included in this letter address the Biological Resources Assessment that was prepared for the now identified Project, and the Staff Report’s claim that “the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species” in recommending that City decisionmakers rely on the class 32 categorical exemption from having to conduct environmental review under CEQA.1 Staff’s argument that the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species was derived from the Biological Resources Assessment that was prepared by Elevated Entitlements after submittal of my 13 October 2021 comment letter. According to the Biological Resources Assessment:
“The findings and opinions conveyed in this report are based on a suitability analysis level only and did not include focused surveys for the presence or absence of special-status species. The majority of the Project Site is a graded pad and the potential for special status [species] to occur on the site is based on this condition.”2
Importantly, Elevated Entitlement’s determinations on the potential for special-status species to occur at the Project Site (and thus the site’s value as habitat) was based solely on the fact that the site was graded. The fact that the Project Site was graded (sometime between 1989 and 1994) does not eliminate the potential for special-status species to occur at the site. For example, there are California Natural Diversity Database records of Lyon’s pentachaeta (a federally and state listed species known to occur near the Project Site) occurring within a graded dirt roadway, 1 Staff Report for Meeting of March 24, 2022, from Community Development Department to Geoff Ware, Administrative Hearing Officer, re Development Permit (DP) No. 21-70408 (Staff Report), p. 3. 2 Staff Report, Attachment #6, p. 4.
44 2
within a scraped area, and along trails.3
Indeed, there is scientific evidence that disturbance
events may benefit Lyon’s pentachaeta.4
According to the Staff Report: “[t]he assessment found that the site is highly disturbed and lacks natural vegetative habitats to support endangered, rare, or threatened species and concluded there is no potential for special status plants or wildlife to occur within the project site.”5 Although the
special-status species that have the potential to occur at the Project Site are more common in “natural vegetative habitats,” they also may occur in vegetation communities dominated by nonnative plants. For example, the coast horned lizard and silvery legless lizard (two of the specialstatus species addressed in the Elevated Entitlement’s Biological Resources Assessment) occur in a variety of non-native vegetation communities containing appropriate substrates and cover conditions.6
Furthermore, the coastal California gnatcatcher (a federally listed species that occurs adjacent to the Project Site) is known to use non-native grasslands as habitat,7 and Lyon’s pentachaeta occurs in grassland habitat largely dominated by introduced species of grasses and herbs.8
The botanical survey protocols issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) state the following:

Evaluate the need for botanical field surveys prior to the commencement of any activities that may modify vegetation, such as clearing, mowing, or groundbreaking activities. It is appropriate to conduct a botanical field survey when:
x Natural (or naturalized) vegetation occurs in an area that may be directly or indirectly affected by a project (project area), and it is unknown whether or not special status plants or sensitive natural communities occur in the project area; x Special status plants or sensitive natural communities have historically been identified in a project area; or
3 California Natural Diversity Database. 2022. RareFind 5 [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [Feb 27, 2022].
4 Fotheringham CJ, Keeley JE. 1998. Ecology and Distribution of Braunton's milkvetch (Astragalus brauntonii) and Lyon's pentachaeta (Pentachaeta lyonii). Unpublished report prepared for California Department of Fish and Game, Region 5 [Long Beach, CA]; Contract # FG5636-R5. Available at:
<https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=3154>. 5 Staff Report, p. 17.
6 California Natural Diversity Database. 2022. RareFind 5 [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [Feb 27, 2022]. See also Thomson RC, Wright AN, Shaffer HB. 2016. California Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. University of California Press, Oakland, California.

Available at: <https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/SSC/Amphibians-Reptiles>. 7 Campbell KF, Erickson RA, Haas WE, Patten MA. 1998. California gnatcatcher use of habitats other than coastal sage scrub: conservation and management implications. Western Birds 29:421-33. Available at:
<https://sdmmp.com/upload/SDMMP_Repository/0/r64zk9y7f5pgb2mscdxv00n13hwt8jq.pdf>. 8 California Natural Diversity Database. 2022. RareFind 5 [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [Feb 27, 2022]. See also U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1999. Recovery Plan for Six Plants from the Mountains Surrounding the Los Angeles Basin. Portland, Oregon. p. 3. Available at:
<https://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery_plan/990930a.pdf>.
45 3
x Special status plants or sensitive natural communities occur in areas with similar physical and biological properties as a project area.9

Based on the photographs provided in the Biological Resources Assessment (Staff Report Attachment #6), it is obvious that all vegetation was cleared from the Project Site shortly before Elevated Entitlement’s 19 November 2021 site assessment, thus artificially manipulating habitat conditions and removing any aboveground evidence of native plants. The lack of vegetation at the Project Site was a temporary condition, as plants undoubtedly have already begun to repopulate the site from the seedbank. Because Elevated Entitlement did not conduct appropriately-timed, protocol surveys to document vegetation at the Project site, there is no scientific basis for its statement that “[n]o native plants or vegetation community occurs within the Project Site.”10
All of the special-status plant species that have potential to occur at the Project Site are herbs.

Therefore, although vegetation was scraped from the Project Site prior to Elevated Entitlement’s site visit, special-status plant propagules (e.g., seeds, roots, bulbs) may persist in the soils at the Project Site. Under the circumstances, there is no ability for the City to make the required factual determination that the Project Site “has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species” until appropriately-timed botanical surveys have been conducted in accordance with CDFW protocols.

As reported in the City’s General Plan, the Project area contains Conejo Volcanic bedrock, which provides habitat for a number of Rare, Endangered or Sensitive plant species.11 Many of these species are critically imperiled (at high risk of extinction) and are found nowhere else on earth.
12 Therefore, even if the Project Site does not currently support special-status plants, it is one of the few places on earth that could be restored to promote recovery of plants dependent on Conejo Volcanics. For this reason alone, the Project Site has “value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.”
Edge Effects
The Staff Report acknowledges that edge effects created by the Project (e.g., due to night lighting, noise, dust, altered hydrology, pollution, and increased human presence) have the potential to significantly impact plants and animals in the adjacent open space areas.13 For example, the Project would generate noise levels up to 90 dBA (at 50 feet from the source) during construction, and 74 to 79 dBA during operations.14 Noise at these levels would negatively impact the coastal California gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, grasshopper sparrow, and other special-status bird species that occur 9 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. [emphasis added]. Available at:
<https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=18959>. 10 Staff Report, Attachment #6, p. 3. 11 City of Thousand Oaks. 2013. Conservation Element, Thousand Oaks General Plan. p. 24. Available at:
<https://www.toaks.org/departments/community-development/planning/general-plan>. 12 Ibid. 13 For example, Staff Report, Attachment 6, p. 3. 14 Staff Report, Attachment 8, Table 5 and pp. 12 and 13. 46 4
(or may occur) in surrounding areas.15,16 Furthermore, shielding lights downward, as required in Condition of Approval #54, may reduce “astronomical light pollution” (whereby stars and other celestial bodies are washed out by light that is either directed or reflected upward), but it would not reduce impacts from “ecological light pollution” (artificial light that alters the natural patterns of light and dark in ecosystems).17
The Project’s edge effects, in conjunction with edge effects from other nearby proposed projects (e.g., the Conejo Summit Project for which the City is currently processing for approval pursuant to a mitigated negative declaration), are likely to create a “zone of depression” that extends into the adjacent open space (i.e., open space habitat adjacent to the Project Site would become a population sink or would be functionally eliminated). Therefore, even if the Project Site itself does not currently support endangered, rare or threatened species, it has value as habitat for those species because it buffers them from edge effects caused by existing development.18 At a minimum, edge effects created by the Project may have significant impacts on the coastal California gnatcatcher territories that occur immediately west of the Project Site.19 Cumulative Impacts
The Project Site is located approximately 0.25 miles south of the proposed Conejo Summit Project.20 Similar to the proposed Project, the Conejo Summit Project involves development of vacant land adjacent to the Conejo Canyons Open Space.

I found no evidence supporting Staff’s statement that: “[s]pecific environmental assessment studies have been conducted to determine that the project will not result in cumulative impacts detrimental to the environment.”21 Neither the Staff Report nor the Biological Resources Assessment report addresses cumulative impacts to biological resources. However, according to 15 California Natural Diversity Database. 2022. RareFind 5 [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife [Feb 27, 2022]. See also eBird. 2022. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available at: <http://www.ebird.org>. (Accessed: March 22, 2022).
16 Kaseloo PA, Tyson KO. 2004. Synthesis of Noise Effects on Wildlife Populations. US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Publication No. FHWA-HEP-06-016. Available at:
<https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/16221>. See also Reijnen R, Foppen R, Veenbaas G. 1997. Disturbance by traffic of breeding birds: evaluation of the effect and planning and managing road corridors. Biodiversity and Conservation 6:567-581. Available at:
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226983114_Disturbance_by_traffic_of_breeding_birds_Evaluation_of_t he_effect_and_considerations_in_planning_and_managing_road_corridors >. See also Ortega CP. 2012. Effects of Noise Pollution on Birds: A Brief Review of Our Knowledge. Ornithological Monographs 74:6-22. Available at:
<https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/om.2012.74.1.6.pdf>. 17 Longcore T, Rich C. 2004. Ecological Light Pollution. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2:191-198.

Available at: <https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1890/1540- 9295%282004%29002%5B0191%3AELP%5D2.0.CO%3B2>.
18 See Campbell KF, Erickson RA, Haas WE, Patten MA. 1998. California gnatcatcher use of habitats other than coastal sage scrub: conservation and management implications. Western Birds 29:421-33. Available at:
<https://sdmmp.com/upload/SDMMP_Repository/0/r64zk9y7f5pgb2mscdxv00n13hwt8jq.pdf>. 19 See Staff Report, Attachment 6, Figure 3. 20 The Conejo Summit Project entails development of 15 industrial buildings on 49.83 acres of land adjacent to Conejo Canyons Open Space.
21 Staff Report, p. 3.
47 5
the Final EIR for Specific Plan 7, development of the Specific Plan would have unavoidable, significant impacts on vegetation and wildlife.22
Sincerely,
Scott Cashen, M.S.

Senior Biologist
22 City of Thousand Oaks. 1981. Final Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 7, Vol 1. p. 157. 48 Scott Cashen, M.S.

Senior Wildlife Biologist
Education
x Master of Science, Wildlife and Fisheries Science, Pennsylvania State University (1998) x Bachelor of Science, Resource Management, University of California at Berkeley (1992) Areas of Expertise
x Impacts of development projects on biological resources x Impacts of renewable energy projects
x CEQA/NEPA compliance
x Biological resource assessments
x Scientific field studies (design, implementation, and management) x Fish and wildlife surveys
x Habitat restoration
x Invasive species
x Scientific writing and technical editing
x Forest management
x Fire ecology
Professional Experience
x Independent Biological Resources Consultant, Walnut Creek, CA (2007 – present). x TSS Consultants, Senior Biologist, Walnut Creek, CA (2005 –2007). x ECORP Consulting, Senior Biologist, Oakland, CA (2000 –2005). x Pt. Reyes Bird Observatory, Field Ornithologist, SF Bay Area (2000). x National Park Service, Field Ornithologist, Alaska (1999). x Penn State University – Instructor of Wildlife Management (1998). x Penn State University – Graduate Research Assistant/Teaching Assistant (1995-1998). x Pacific Meridian Resources, Consulting Forester, Emeryville, CA (1992 –1995). x University of California, Biological Resources Technician, Tahoe National Forest (1992). 49 SCOTT CASHEN COMMENTS

ATTACHMENT
50 Sources:

BRA99S0002 BRANDEGEE - BRANDEGEE SN F (AS CITED IN VAN73A0001) 1899-05-XX FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
JOH10S0003 JOHNSON - JOHNSON SN NY (AS CITED IN VAN73A0001) 1910-03-21 PEI08S0003 PEIRSON, F. - PEIRSON #1223 RSA #93284 & #8517 1908-04-18 PEI08S0004 PEIRSON, F. - PEIRSON #1221 RSA #93287 & #8516 1908-04-18 USF99R0001 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE - RECOVERY PLAN FOR SIX PLANTS FROM THE MOUNTAINS SURROUNDING THE LOS ANGELES BASIN. 1999-09-30
VAN73A0001 VAN HORN, G. - THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF PENTACHAETA & CHAETOPAPPA W/ A REVISION OF PENTACHAETA. UNIV OF CALIF PUBLICATION IN BOTANY 65:1-41. 1973-XX-XX
Map Index Number: 01943 EO Index: 16675
Key Quad: San Pedro (3311863) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 1 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-24 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1910-03-21 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Unknown
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Location:

POINT FERMIN, SAN PEDRO.

Detailed Location:

A 1899 BRANDEGEE COLLECTION FROM "SAN PEDRO" ALSO ATTRIBUTED TO THIS SITE. A 1999 USFWS REPORT MENTIONS THAT THE PLANT WAS LAST COLLECTED HERE IN 1931; CNDDB HAS NO INFORMATION TO SUPPORT THIS DATE.

Ecological:

Threats:

General:

SITE MAPPED ACCORDING TO TWO 1908 PEIRSON COLLECTIONS & A 1910 JOHNSON COLLECTION. FOTHERINGHAM UNABLE TO LOCATE IN 1997, PRESUMED EXTIRPATED. NEEDS FIELDWORK. INCLUDES FORMER OCCURRENCE #41.

PLSS: T05S, R13W, Sec. 30 (S) Accuracy: 1/5 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3730352 E380142 Latitude/Longitude: 33.70639 / -118.29341 Elevation (feet): 100 Los Angeles San Pedro (3311863)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Query Criteria: Species<span style='color:Red'> IS </span>(Pentachaeta lyonii) Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 1 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
51 Sources:

LYO84S0001 LYON, W. - LYON #685 DS #72301, CAS #905, CAS-BOT-BC #6555 & #26672 1884-04-XX LYO84S0002 LYON, W. - LYON SN GH #11005 & #11007 1884-07-XX THO89U0001 THOMAS, T. - CONVERSATION BETWEEN TIM THOMAS AND SANDRA MOREY REGARDING SEVERAL EOS. 1989-08-22 THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
VAN77U0001 VAN HORN, G. - CNPS RARE PLANT STATUS REPORT FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1977-XX-XX Map Index Number: 34591 EO Index: 48785
Key Quad: San Pedro (3311863) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 2 Occurrence Last Updated: 2012-10-02 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1884-07-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Decreasing
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Location:

PALOS VERDES MT (=SAN PEDRO HILLS).

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED AT SAN PEDRO HILL AND SURROUNDINGS BY CNDDB.

Ecological:

Threats:

AREA HAS BEEN OVER-RUN BY ANNUAL GRASSES AND THISTLES. THE MAJORITY OF THIS AREA IS URBANIZED.

General:

TYPE LOCALITY. ONLY SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR THIS OCCURRENCE ARE TWO 1884 LYON COLLECTIONS. THOMAS MENTIONS THAT HE SAW NO PLANTS IN THIS AREA IN 1989 OR 1994. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T05S, R14W, Sec. 15 (S) Accuracy: 1 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3734781 E376250 Latitude/Longitude: 33.74588 / -118.33602 Elevation (feet):

Los Angeles San Pedro (3311863), Torrance (3311873)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 2 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
52 Map Index Number: 72343 EO Index: 13809
Key Quad: Malibu Beach (3411816) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 3 Occurrence Last Updated: 2018-06-20 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2017-04-14 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2017-04-14 Occurrence Rank: Poor
Owner/Manager: UCNR-STUNT RANCH RESERVE Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

STUNTS RANCH, SOUTH AND WEST OF COLD CREEK, APPROXIMATELY 4.5 AIR MILES NNE OF MALIBU BEACH.

Detailed Location:
3 POLYGONS. NW POLY MAPPED ACCORDING TO A HAND-DRAWN MAP FROM THOMAS (1984). SE POLY MAPPED ACCORDING TO GPS COORDINATES FROM JENSEN (2008). MIDDLE POLYGON MAPPED ACCORDING TO 2017 BIELFELT COORDINATES.

Ecological:

IN NASSELLA PULCHRA GRASSLAND ON PREHISTORIC LAND SLIDE OF CLAY SOIL. GRASSLAND DOMINATED BY NON-NATIVE PLANTS WITH HEMIZONIA RAMOSISSIMA, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, RUMEX CRISPUS, EXOTIC GRASSES.

Threats:

MUCH GOPHER DISTURBANCE, WEED INVASION, AND FIRE DISTURBANCE.

General:

NW POLYGON: <1000 PLANTS IN 1982, <100 IN 1984, 6 IN 1987, 12 IN 1988, 3 IN 1989, 0 IN 1990, 1994, 1995, & 1997; NEEDS FIELDWORK TO DETERMINE IF EXTIRPATED. SE POLYGON: 12 PLANTS SEEN IN 2008. MIDDLE POLYGON: 3 PLANTS SEEN IN 2017.

PLSS: T01S, R17W, Sec. 10, SW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 6 UTM: Zone-11 N3773866 E347265 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09445 / -118.65565 Elevation (feet): 1,225 Los Angeles Malibu Beach (3411816)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 3 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
53 Sources:

BIE17F0003 BIELFELT, B. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2017-04-14 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
JEN08F0004 JENSEN, N. (CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2008-05-30 MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO77S0099 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #95 VVC #3231 1977-05-05 THO79S0074 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #256 VVC #3121 1979-05-14 THO82F0001 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1982-05-XX THO84F0006 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1984-05-XX THO87F0004 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-06-10 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX USF99R0001 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE - RECOVERY PLAN FOR SIX PLANTS FROM THE MOUNTAINS SURROUNDING THE LOS ANGELES BASIN. 1999-09-30
YOR88U0002 YORK, R. & H. TOWNSEND - ANNOTATED PRINTOUT FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII - SEVERAL OCCS PER CONVERSATION WITH T.

THOMAS AND OTHERS. 1988-XX-XX
Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 4 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
54 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 MUD63S0001 MUDD, H. - MUDD SN RSA #191947 1963-06-XX
RAV64S0003 RAVEN, P. & R. THORNE - RAVEN #19017 RSA #176439, #167628, #8519, DS #504653, CAS-BOT-BC #327976 1964-05-07 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0001 THOMAS, T. - CONVERSATION BETWEEN TIM THOMAS AND SANDRA MOREY REGARDING SEVERAL EOS. 1989-08-22 THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
YOR88U0002 YORK, R. & H. TOWNSEND - ANNOTATED PRINTOUT FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII - SEVERAL OCCS PER CONVERSATION WITH T.

THOMAS AND OTHERS. 1988-XX-XX
Map Index Number: 00391 EO Index: 16676
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 4 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-24 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1964-05-07 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Extirpated
Location:

SADDLE ROCK RANCH, NEAR SEMINOLE HOT SPRINGS.

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED BY CNDDB ACCORDING TO A NOTE BY THOMAS THAT THE SITE WAS LOCATED IN THE "FLAT AREA NEAR SECTION LABEL 12" (SEE MOR94U0003).

Ecological:

ALONG SIDES OF FIRE BREAK IN CHAPARRAL.

Threats:

SITE IS NOW AN AVOCADO ORCHARD.

General:

SITE BASED UPON A 1963 MUDD COLLECTION AND A 1964 RAVEN & THORNE COLLECTION. THOMAS MENTIONS IN 1989 THAT SITE HAS BEEN EXTIRPATED BY AN AVOCADO ORCHARD. FOTHERINGHAM WAS UNABLE TO LOCATE SITE IN 1997; PRESUMED EXTIRPATED.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 12 (S) Accuracy: 1/5 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3774439 E331690 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09723 / -118.82452 Elevation (feet): 1,800 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 5 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
55 Map Index Number: 00300 EO Index: 12610
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 5 Occurrence Last Updated: 2017-11-07 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2015-04-30 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2015-04-30 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ALONG UPPER WESTLAKE BLVD, 0.1 TO 0.8 AIR MILE NORTH OF MULHOLLAND HWY, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:

MOSTLY FOUND ON WEST SIDE OF WESTLAKE BLVD. 5 POLYGONS MAPPED BY CNDDB. 2005 BURGESS COLLECTION FROM "W SIDE OF WESTLAKE BLVD, TOP OF 1ST HILL S OF VEN CO LINE, ~1500 FT" IS ALSO ATTRIBUTED HERE; POSSIBLY REFERENCING OCC #10 TO THE NORTH.

Ecological:

PLANT IN POCKET GRASSLANDS (NASSELLA PULCHRA & EUROPEAN ANNUALS) AMONG CHAPARRAL-CEANOTHUS MEGACARPUS/QUERCUS BERBERIDIFOLIA. SOILS DERIVED FROM CONEJO VOLCANIC SUBSTRATE. CLEARED AREAS OF ANNUAL GRASSLAND AND COASTAL SAGE SCRUB SPECIES.

Threats:

POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, EXOTIC PLANTS, GOPHER ACTIVITY, DEBRIS DUMPING, ROAD MAINTENANCE, HORSE GRAZING, FUEL CLEARANCE.

General:

POPULATION NUMBERS ARE FOR PORTIONS OF SITE: <100 PLANTS SEEN IN 1982, <50 PLANTS IN 1984, 100S OF PLANTS IN 1993, <1000 IN 1994, 1000 IN 1998, 200 IN 2001, 50 IN 2012, 400 IN 2015. INCLUDES FORMER OCCURRENCE #17.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 3 (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 17 UTM: Zone-11 N3776037 E328723 Latitude/Longitude: 34.11115 / -118.85699 Elevation (feet): 1,800 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 6 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
56 Sources:

AND12F0003 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-30 BUR05S0002 BURGESS, R. & P. MUNRO - BURGESS #6848 SBBG #134032 2005-05-18 DEC15F0002 DECRUYENAERE, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-04-30 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
HOV93M0001 HOVORE & ASSOCIATES - MAP OF PENTACHAETA LYONII ON TYSON PROPERTY 1993-05-XX HOV93U0001 HOVORE, F. - LETTER TO DAN TYSON REGARDING PENTACHAETA LYONII SURVEY ON THE MALIBU QUADRANGLE. 1993-05-17 KOU92S0001 KOUTNIK, D. - KOUTNIK SN UCR #80039 1992-10-25 MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO82F0002 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1982-05-21 THO84F0008 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1984-05-10 THO87F0003 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-06-03 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS01F0001 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2001-11-17 WIS92F0001 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-12-01 WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 WIS98F0002 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1998-05-19 YOR88U0002 YORK, R. & H. TOWNSEND - ANNOTATED PRINTOUT FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII - SEVERAL OCCS PER CONVERSATION WITH T.

THOMAS AND OTHERS. 1988-XX-XX
Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 7 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
57 Map Index Number: 00409 EO Index: 15205
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 6 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2012-05-22 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2012-05-22 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: NPS-SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NRA Trend: Decreasing Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

AT JUNCTION OF KANAN AND MULHOLLAND HWY, ROCKY OAKS UNIT OF SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NATIONAL RECREATION AREA.

Detailed Location:

SITE IS PART OF SANTA MONICA MTNS NRA. NPS DEVELOPING RECOVERY PLAN. IN 2004 PART OF THIS SITE HAD P. LYONII SEEDS (FROM LARGER POPS ON SITE) ADDED TO IT AS PART OF A STUDY ON THE EFFECTS OF NON-NATIVE PLANTS ON P. LYONII (BRIGHAM 2007).

Ecological:

IN CLAY SOIL IN NASSELLA PULCHRA GRASSLAND ASSOCIATED WITH CHORIZANTHE STATICOIDES AND EUROPEAN ANNUALS.

Threats:

REC USE, EXOTIC SPP, SOIL DUMPING & TRAMPLING THREATEN. 2 REMAINING COLONIES FENCED. DRAINAGE DITCH DUG IN 1996/1997.

General:
5,500-10,000 PLANTS IN 1982, <10,000 IN 1984, <100 IN 1987, <1000 IN 1988. IN 1994, 2 OF 4 COLONIES REMAIN HERE; 2 WERE EXTIRPATED BY EQUESTRIAN ACTIVITIES. 450 PLANTS IN 2003, UNKNOWN # IN 2004 & 2005, AND 635 PLANTS IN 2012.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 07, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 18 UTM: Zone-11 N3774678 E332670 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09954 / -118.81395 Elevation (feet): 1,750 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 8 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
58 Sources:

AGU12F0013 AGUILAR, L. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-22 AGU12F0014 AGUILAR, L. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-22 BRI07R0001 BRIGHAM - BRIGHAM REPORT ON PENTACHAETA 2007-XX-XX FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO82F0003 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1982-05-XX THO83S0041 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #577 VVC #2774 1983-05-19 THO84F0009 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1984-05-10 THO87F0002 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-06-23 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 9 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
59 Sources:

BRANDS0024 BRANDEGEE - BRANDEGEE SN UC (CITED IN VAN73A0001) XXXX-XX-XX FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
VAN73A0001 VAN HORN, G. - THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF PENTACHAETA & CHAETOPAPPA W/ A REVISION OF PENTACHAETA. UNIV OF CALIF PUBLICATION IN BOTANY 65:1-41. 1973-XX-XX
Map Index Number: 39864 EO Index: 48741
Key Quad: Long Beach (3311872) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 7 Occurrence Last Updated: 2002-09-06 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: XXXX-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: XXXX-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Unknown
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Location:

WILMINGTON.

Detailed Location:

Ecological:

Threats:

General:

LOCATION BASED UPON OLD (UNDATED) BRANDEGEE COLLECTION. POPULATION PRESUMABLY EXTIRPATED ACCORDING TO FOTHERINGHAM. HISTORIC SITE. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T04S, R13W, Sec. 33 (S) Accuracy: 1 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3739572 E384477 Latitude/Longitude: 33.79001 / -118.24785 Elevation (feet):

Los Angeles Long Beach (3311872), Torrance (3311873)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 10 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
60 Sources:

BRANDS0025 BRANDEGEE - BRANDEGEE SN UC #206185 & POM #11841 XXXX-XX-XX BRANDS0040 BRANDEGEE, T. - BRANDEGEE SN UC #88030 XXXX-XX-XX DIX15D0003 DIXON, P. - SHAPEFILE OF PENTACHAETA LYONII IN NORTHERN SANTA CATALINA ISLAND. 2015-06-15 DIX15F0012 DIXON, P. (CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-02-18 FOS31S0028 FOSBERG, F. - FOSBERG #S5416 POM #351585 1931-07-15 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
LYO85S0001 LYON, W. - LYON SN GH #11006 (ALSO CITED IN VAN73A0001) 1885-XX-XX RAT11F0001 RATAY, S. (CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2011-05-27 THO89U0001 THOMAS, T. - CONVERSATION BETWEEN TIM THOMAS AND SANDRA MOREY REGARDING SEVERAL EOS. 1989-08-22 VAN73A0001 VAN HORN, G. - THE TAXONOMIC STATUS OF PENTACHAETA & CHAETOPAPPA W/ A REVISION OF PENTACHAETA. UNIV OF CALIF PUBLICATION IN BOTANY 65:1-41. 1973-XX-XX
Map Index Number: 86847 EO Index: 48742
Key Quad: Santa Catalina North (3311844) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 8 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2015-02-18 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2015-02-18 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

EAST OF TWO HARBORS, ALONG RIDGE APPROXIMATELY 0.5 AIR MILE SOUTHEAST OF SUMMIT RESERVOIR, SANTA CATALINA ISLAND.

Detailed Location:

RIDGE JUST E OF DEER VALLEY PUSH BUTTON GATE. POPULATION IS ON RIDGE TOP, 250 FT N OF TELEPHONE LINES THAT CROSS THE RIDGE, IN BARE SOIL PATCH 60 FT S OF ROCK OUTCROPPING. POPULATION NICKNAME: TWO HARBORS RIDGE.

Ecological:

COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, DOMINATED BY ARTEMISIA CALIFORNICA AND OPUNTIA LITTORALIS. VERY SLIGHT SLOPE E, BASICALLY FLAT.

ASSOCIATED WITH BROMUS HORDEACEUS, VULPIA MYUROS, HORDEUM INTERCEDENS, HEMIZONIA FASCICULATA, BRACHYPODIUM DISTACHYON, ETC.

Threats:

SMALL TRAIL TO E OF POPULATION. NON-NATIVE SPECIES (ANNUAL GRASS, ICEPLANT). DEER/BISON TRAMPLING.

General:

GENERAL HISTORIC COLLECTIONS FROM CATALINA ISLAND ATTRIBUTED HERE, INCLUDING A 1931 COLLECTION FROM ISTHMUS. NO PLANTS FOUND ON ISLAND DURING AN INTENSIVE SEARCH IN 1989. 112+ PLANTS IN 2011, 0 IN 2012, 15 IN 2015. INCLUDES FORMER EO #42.

PLSS: T99X, R99X, Sec. UN (X) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3700277 E362838 Latitude/Longitude: 33.43311 / -118.47548 Elevation (feet): 952 Los Angeles Santa Catalina North (3311844)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 11 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
61 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO84F0007 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1984-05-24 THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Map Index Number: 00612 EO Index: 16670
Key Quad: Malibu Beach (3411816) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 9 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-10-03 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1990-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: DPR-MALIBU CREEK SP Trend: Decreasing
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Location:

JUST EAST OF ENTRANCE TO UDELL GORGE, MALIBU CREEK STATE PARK.

Detailed Location:

AT THE EDGE OF AN EQUESTRIAN TRAIL. SE1/4 OF SW1/4 SEC 2.

Ecological:

ALONG EDGE OF TRAIL THROUGH GRASSLAND WITH NASSELLA PULCHRA STAND NEARBY. ON CLAY SOIL DERIVED FROM SHALE ASSOCIATED WITH NAVARRETIA PUBESCENS.

Threats:

TRAIL CONSTRUCTION AND EQUESTRIAN AND FOOT TRAFFIC ARE THREATS. NO PLANTS SEEN AFTER HORSES USED TRAIL WHEN STILL WET.

General:

FEWER THAN 100 PLANTS IN 1983, FEWER THAN 50 IN 1984, 3 IN 1988, 11 IN 1989, 40 IN 1990, NONE SEEN 1992-1994. ACCORDING TO FOTHERINGHAM, POPULATION EXTIRPATED BUT HABITAT REMAINS. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 02, SW (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3775220 E339677 Latitude/Longitude: 34.10553 / -118.73812 Elevation (feet): 800 Los Angeles Malibu Beach (3411816)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 12 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
62 Map Index Number: 00291 EO Index: 8882
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 10 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2006-06-01 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2012-05-31 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AG, PVT Trend: Decreasing Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTERSECTION OF DECKER ROAD AND CARLISLE ROAD, SSW OF LAKE ELEANOR, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED BY CNDDB AS 9 POLYGONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEN/LAX COUNTY LINE. MAPPED TO ENCOMPASS MAP INFO FROM THOMAS 1983, WESTEC SERVICES (DATE UNK), A 1990 VANDER MAP, A 1992 KEELEY MAP, A 1999 WELTER MAP, & 2006 GPS INFO FROM WARNIMENT.

Ecological:

FOUND IN SMALL GRASSY OPENINGS OF COASTAL SAGE SCRUB/CHAPARRAL ALONG FIRE ROAD CUTS AND IN SOME NATURAL OPENINGS.

CLAY DERIVED FROM VOLCANICS WITH OCCASIONAL BOULDERS. ASSOCIATES INCLUDE NASSELLA PULCHRA, CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE, ETC.

Threats:

DEV HAS EXTIRPATED PORTIONS IN LA CO. THREATENED BY FURTHER DEV, RD CONSTRUCTION, RECREATION, GRAZING, INVASIVE PLANTS.

General:
>1000 IN 1983, 1000 IN '87, 1000 IN '88 & '90. PORTIONS IN LAX HAD 1000+ IN '90, 6000-9000 IN '91 & '92, 14,000 IN '95, 80,000 IN '98, MUCH HAS SINCE BEEN EXTIRP BY DEV. 20 IN W POLY IN '06. NO PLANTS IN MIDDLE AREA IN '12. INCL FRMR EO#28.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 34 (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 34 UTM: Zone-11 N3777802 E328993 Latitude/Longitude: 34.12710 / -118.85441 Elevation (feet): 1,000 Los Angeles, Ventura Point Dume (3411817), Thousand Oaks (3411827) County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 13 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
63 Sources:

AGU12F0010 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-31 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
KEE92F0011 KEELEY, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-05-20 KEE92R0001 KEELEY, J. & M. BAER-KEELEY - MITIGATION PLAN FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII ON THE LAKE ELEANOR HILLS PROJECT SITE.

INCLUDES LARGE BLUE LINE MAP. 1992-08-XX
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 NAK81S0003 NAKAI, K. ET AL. - NAKAI #763 SD #116680, CAS #982732, CAS-BOT-BC #327975 1981-05-21 THO83F0004 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII & CALOCHORTUS PLUMMERAE 1983-05-XX THO87F0001 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-06-02 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO91S0002 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #1435 UCR #240545, VVC #1903 1991-05-20 VAN90F0001 VANDER PLUYM, D. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1990-05-09 WAR06F0003 WARNIMENT, A. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2006-06-01 WEL99R0001 WELTER, R. - INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT NO. 2081-1999-023-5 JOHN LAING HOMES, WESTLAKE VILLAGE (LAKE ELEANOR HILLS) 1999-12-15
WESNDU0001 WESTEC SERVICES, INC - MAP OF THE LAKE ELEANOR OPEN SPACE AREA. XXXX-XX-XX WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 14 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
64 Sources:

AND15F0006 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-04-15 AND16F0004 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-05-17 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
PAR99F0002 PARIKH, A. & N. GALE - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1999-05-16 PAR99S0013 PARIKH, A. & N. GALE - PARIKH #VEN-02 SBBG #7622 1999-05-13 THO83F0003 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1983-06-XX THO83S0043 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #567.1 VVC #3200 1983-04-19 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS98F0001 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1998-05-XX Map Index Number: 00315 EO Index: 8226
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 11 Occurrence Last Updated: 2018-06-20 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-05-17 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-05-17 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AG, PVT Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

RIDGE EAST OF LAKE ELEANOR DAM, EAST OF WESTLAKE BLVD, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:

THREE COLONIES ALONG AND EAST OF RIDGE. MAPPED ACCORDING TO A 1983 THOMAS MAP, A 1998 WISHNER MAP, AND 2015/2016 ANDERSON MAPS.

Ecological:

ON RIDGETOP IN NARROW STRIP OF GRASSLAND IN CHAMISE AND RED-SHANK CHAPARRAL IN THIN SOIL ON VOLCANIC BRECCIA.

ASSOCIATED WITH ORTHOCARPUS PURPURASCENS, STYLOCLINE GNAPHALOIDES, BROMUS HORDACEUS, BROMUS MADRITENSIS, & TRIFOLIUM TRIDENTATUM.

Threats:

PENDING DEVELOPMENT (2016). ORVS, FOOT TRAFFIC, NON-NATIVE GRASSES/FORBS, & FUEL ABATEMENT ALSO THREATEN.

General:

N POLY: 1000 PLANTS SEEN IN 1998. SW POLY: <100 PLANTS SEEN IN 1983, 0 IN 1987, <100 IN 1992. SE POLY: 8000-9000 PLANTS IN 1999, 69,230 IN 2015, 9,136 IN 2016.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 26, SW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 24 UTM: Zone-11 N3778874 E330021 Latitude/Longitude: 34.13694 / -118.84348 Elevation (feet): 1,100 Los Angeles, Ventura Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 15 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
65 Sources:

BUR85S0008 BURGESS, R. - BURGESS #419 RSA #795618, UCSB #71875 1985-03-22 BUR87F0010 BURGESS, R. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-03-21 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
SMI85U0002 SMITH, G.P. - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR WILDWOOD PARK AREA NEAR THOUSAND OAKS. 1985-XX-XX THO84F0010 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII & DUDLEYA PARVA & ERIOGONUM CROCATUM 1984-06-19 THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
VAN94U0001 VANDER PLUYM, D. - LETTER AND ANNOTATED CNDDB PRINTOUTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII, EO #12 & 24 1994-06-13 Map Index Number: 00189 EO Index: 5249
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 12 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AGENCY Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WILDWOOD PARK, NEAR THE SW END OF MOUNTCLEF RIDGE.

Detailed Location:

FIVE COLONIES ALONG SOUTHWEST PART OF RIDGE. MAPPED ACCORDING TO A 1984 THOMAS MAP AND A 1985 SMITH MAP.

Ecological:

HABITAT IS AN INTERFACE BETWEEN DISTURBED GRASSLAND (AVENA BARBATA, BROMUS HORDACEUS, B. MADRITENSIS, BRASSICA NIGRA, ET AL) & CACTUS SAGE SCRUB W/ THIN ROCKY SOIL (DUDLEYA PARVA, OPUNTIA PROLIFERA, O. BASILARIS, & ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM).

Threats:

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (INCL TRAMPLING) MAY THREATEN. DEVELOPMENT ONCE THREATENED AREA BUT IT IS NOW IN AN OPEN SPACE.

General:

BETWEEN THIS OCCURRENCE AND OCCURRENCE #46: OVER 1000 PLANTS SEEN IN 1984, 1987, & 1988; APPROXIMATELY 1200 IN 1997.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 31, N (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 19 UTM: Zone-11 N3788154 E323782 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21955 / -118.91300 Elevation (feet): 700 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 16 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
66 Sources:

JON26S0022 JONES, M. - JONES SN POM #123113 1926-04-26
Map Index Number: 00589 EO Index: 16664
Key Quad: Malibu Beach (3411816) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 13 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-19 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1926-04-26 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1926-04-26 Occurrence Rank: Unknown
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

MALIBU HILLS, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED VERY GENERALLY IN AREA OF MALIBU HILLS; COLLECTION LOCATION NOT PRECISE.

Ecological:

Threats:

General:

ONLY SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS SITE IS A 1926 JONES COLLECTION. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 27 (S) Accuracy: 1 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3768800 E338668 Latitude/Longitude: 34.04750 / -118.74787 Elevation (feet):

Los Angeles Malibu Beach (3411816), Point Dume (3411817) County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 17 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
67 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
WIS89F0005 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-08-11 WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Map Index Number: 22703 EO Index: 8205
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 14 Occurrence Last Updated: 2002-09-10 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1992-12-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1992-12-XX Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ABOUT 0.3 MILE NORTH OF WOOD RANCH RESERVOIR JUST EAST OF VENTURA COUNTY SHERIFF'S SUBSTATION ON OLSON ROAD.

Detailed Location:

ABOVE CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT FACILITY.

Ecological:

FLAT AREA OF DISTURBED COASTAL SCRUB/CACTUS SCRUB. IN COARSE SOILS WITH LITTLE VEGETATION. FESTUCA MEGALURA, GILIA ANGELENSIS, HEMIZONIA FASCICULATA, STYLOCLINE GNAPHALOIDES, LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA, ARTEMISIA CALIFORNICA, ET AL.

Threats:

PVT LANDS PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT. SITE OFTEN USED AS A TURNAROUND AREA BY VEHICLES. EXOTICS AND DUMPING ALSO THREATEN.

General:
400 PLANTS SEEN IN 1989. 20% OF POPULATION IMPACTED IN 1992 BY EARTHMOVING OPERATIONS RELATED TO WATER DISTRICT'S EXPANSION. OWNED/MANAGED BY CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 24, NW (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3791087 E331524 Latitude/Longitude: 34.24727 / -118.82957 Elevation (feet): 1,060 Ventura Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 18 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
68 Sources:

DEA38S0002 DEARING, H. & M. DEARING - DEARING #1953 UC JEPS SBBG #7904 1938-05-22 ENV90U0002 ENVICOM CORPORATION - RARE PLANT SURVEY REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 4192 & 4408, LAKE SHERWOOD, VENTURA COUNTY 1990-06-19
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS90F0003 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1990-05-01 WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 WIS98R0001 WISHNER, C. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - BOTANICAL RESOURCE INVENTORY AND UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF LYON'S PENTACHAETA (WITH INFO ON CALOCHORTUS CATALINAE, C. PLUMMERAE & LILIUM HUMBOLDTII SSP. OCELLATUM) 1998-10- 09 Map Index Number: 22706 EO Index: 8228
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 15 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-26 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1998-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1998-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: Excellent Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ADJACENT TO CARLISLE INLET AND DRAINAGE ON BOTH SIDES OF PARK ROAD, SOUTH OF LAKE SHERWOOD.

Detailed Location:

ON BOTH SIDES OF INLET. MAPPED AS 7 POLYGONS ACCORDING TO A 1998 WISHNER MAP.

Ecological:

ON SLOPES IN OPENINGS IN CHAPARRAL WITH CEANOTHUS CUNEATUS, C. CRASSIFOLIUS, ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATA. (OPENINGS CAUSED BY BRUSH CLEARANCE IN 1986 AND FIRE IN 1988).

Threats:

APPROVED FOR DEVELOPMENT (1993). ANNUAL GRASSES & "GOPHER-TILLING" THREATEN. FIRE FUELS MANAGEMENT ALSO THREATENS.

General:
3700-4400 PLANTS IN 1990, <4000 IN 1993, 3300-3600 PLANTS IN 1998. ONE SUB-POP'N (EST. SIZE 500 PLANTS) DISKED AS PART OF FIRE MGMNT IN 1993; <10 PLANTS REMAINED IN THIS SUBPOP IN 1994, RECOVERED TO 400 IN 1998.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 34, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 12 UTM: Zone-11 N3778184 E327979 Latitude/Longitude: 34.13038 / -118.86547 Elevation (feet): 1,100 Ventura Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 19 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
69 Sources:

ENV90U0002 ENVICOM CORPORATION - RARE PLANT SURVEY REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 4192 & 4408, LAKE SHERWOOD, VENTURA COUNTY 1990-06-19
MEY02U0002 MEYER, M. - EMAIL TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING POPULATIONS OF PENTACHAETA LYONII AT EO #16 2002-01-07 MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 WIS01R0001 WISHNER, C. - FIRST ANNUAL REPORT FOR INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT #2081-2000-018-5 SHERWOOD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. TRACT 4408 "THE MEADOWS" 2001-12-20
WIS04R0001 WISHNER, C. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - INCIDENTAL TAKE PERMIT #2081-2000-018-5 SHERWOOD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. TRACT 4408 "THE MEADOWS" 2004-12-10
WIS90F0004 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1990-06-12 WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Map Index Number: 22705 EO Index: 8229
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 16 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-28 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2003-07-17 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2003-07-17 Occurrence Rank: Unknown
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Decreasing
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ON SLOPES ADJACENT TO MAJOR TRIBUTARY TO LAKE, NORTH OF LAKE SHERWOOD.

Detailed Location:
3 POLYS MAPPED ACCORDING TO 1990 WISHNER MAP & 2004 WISHNER LAT/LONG. W POLY: BULLDOZED (2000?), UNKNOWN IF EXTIRPATED. E POLY: SEVERE DECLINE AND NOW CONTAINS A MIX OF NATURAL AND TRANSPLANTED INDIVIDUALS. N POLY: "SADDLE POPULATION." Ecological:

IN OPENINGS IN CHAPARRAL DOMINATED BY GRASSES AND NATIVE ANNUAL HERBS. ALSO ASSOCIATED WITH CEANOTHUS CUNEATUS AND ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATUM.

Threats:

DEVELOPMENT UNDERWAY (WISHNER, 1994). WEST POLY DISKED DURING FUELS MANAGEMENT. EAST POLY THREATENED BY GOPHERS & WEEDS.

General:
2 S POLYS: 330 PLANTS SEEN IN 1990. IN 2001, W POLY BULLDOZED AND E POLY IN SEVERE DECLINE AND ENHANCED WITH TRANSPLANTS (110 OF 230 TRANSPLANTS SURVIVED AS OF JULY 2001). E POLY: 113 PLANTS IN 2002, 387 IN 2003. UNK # IN N POLY IN 2002.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 28, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 13 UTM: Zone-11 N3779954 E327533 Latitude/Longitude: 34.14627 / -118.87067 Elevation (feet): 1,050 Ventura Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 20 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
70 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 WIS89F0006 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-07-18 WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Map Index Number: 22108 EO Index: 25763
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 18 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-24 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1989-07-18 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1989-07-18 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

NEAR "GUESTHOUSE" AT THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT "EAGLE'S NEST" HOMESITE, MULHOLLAND HIGHWAY.

Detailed Location:

POPULATION ABOUT 300 FT SSW OF GUESTHOUSE. SE1/4 OF NW1/4 SEC 11.

Ecological:

SPARSELY VEGETATED CONEJO VOLCANIC SOILS ALONG RIDGELINE FUELBREAK IN CHAMISE CHAPARRAL W/CORETHROGYNE FILAGINIFOLIA, FESTUCA MEGALURA, & AVENA BARBATA. SUBDIVIDED AREA INCLUDES GOOD QUALITY NASSELLA PULCHRA GRASSLAND & RED SHANK CHAPARRAL.

Threats:

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION (1989) & FIRE FUELS MGMT THREATENS. POPULATION MAY HAVE BEEN DISKED (1997).

General:
200 PLANTS SEEN IN 1989. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 11, NW (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3774505 E330042 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09756 / -118.84240 Elevation (feet): 2,060 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 21 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
71 Sources:

THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX WIS87F0004 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-04-20 WIS87F0005 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-07-23 WIS88U0002 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO C. BAUMAN REGARDING PENTACHAETA LYONII AT THE LAKE SHERWOOD RANCH. 1988-01-29 WIS89U0001 WISHNER, C. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH J. HORENSTEIN REGARDING LAKE SHERWOOD GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION (EO #19 PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1989-01-26
WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 WIS94U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO T. THOMAS REGARDING PENTACHAETA LYONII AT THE SHERWOOD COUNTRY CLUB. 1994-06-29 Map Index Number: 22132 EO Index: 18658
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 19 Occurrence Last Updated: 1995-10-30 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: None
Owner/Manager: PVT-MURDOCK DEV CO Trend: Unknown
Presence: Possibly Extirpated
Location:

ON THE LAKE SHERWOOD RANCH AT THE SW END OF LAKE SHERWOOD.

Detailed Location:

MOST OF OCCURRENCE ALONG DIRT ROAD. ALSO IN NW 1/4 OF SECTION 33. SOME SEEDS FROM THIS SITE WERE TRANSPLANTED IN CARLISLE CYN BURN AREA; UNKNOWN WHERE SEEDS WERE PLANTED BUT APPARENTLY 30 PLANTS WERE PRODUCED FROM THIS EFFORT.

Ecological:

BROAD VALLEY WITH GRASSLAND, OAK SAVANNAH, SYCAMORE RIPARIAN WOODLANDS. PENTACHAETA IN OPEN GRASSY AREA OF A FUELBREAK. PLANTS FOUND IN DISTURBED SITES (BRUSH CLEARANCE).

Threats:

IMPACTED BY GOLF COURSE CONSTRUCTION-1989. ANNUAL GRASSES AND ERODIUM THREATEN. ONLY NATURAL POPULATION IS AT "HOLE 10".

General:
3200+ PLANTS IN 1987 IN 4 COLONIES, 200 IN 1988. POP DECLINED TO 40 PLANTS BY 1992, 7 IN 1993, AND 1 IN 1994 AT "HOLE #10". PLANTS IN AN AREA 50'X100'. ATTEMPT TO AUGMENT POP BY SEEDING NEAR "HOLES 15-16" HAS MET WITH REPEATED FAILURE.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 32, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 9 UTM: Zone-11 N3777839 E325615 Latitude/Longitude: 34.12688 / -118.89103 Elevation (feet): 1,000 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 22 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
72 Sources:

THO84F0010 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII & DUDLEYA PARVA & ERIOGONUM CROCATUM 1984-06-19 THO88F0001 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1988-04-27 THO88S0016 THOMAS, T. - THOMAS #1233 VVC #2814 1988-04-27 Map Index Number: 22707 EO Index: 28531
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 20 Occurrence Last Updated: 2018-06-20 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1988-04-27 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1988-04-27 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

RIDGE NEAR MOUNTCLEF VILLAGE, SOUTH OF OLSON ROAD, JUST WEST OF CAL LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, S OF MOUNTCLEF RIDGE.

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED IN VICINITY OF HILL WEST OF CAL LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY AND SOUTH OF OLSON ROAD. NEED MAP DETAIL.

Ecological:

TOP OF HILL IN CONEJO VOLCANICS WITH CACTUS SCRUB ON E AND S-FACING SLOPES. PLANTS IN SHORT GRASS (MOSTLY FESTUCA MEGALURA). ALSO WITH ERODIUM, AVENA BARBATA, BRASSICA, BROMUS RUBENS, AND DUDLEYA ABRAMSII PARVA. NESTING CACTUS WREN NEARBY.

Threats:

HILL COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. ALSO ORV ACTIVITY & DUMPING THREATEN.

General:
2 SMALL POPULATIONS WITH A TOTAL OF 225 PLANTS SEEN IN 1988. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 29, SE (S) Accuracy: 1/5 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3788274 E326331 Latitude/Longitude: 34.22106 / -118.88535 Elevation (feet): 900 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 23 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
73 Sources:

BOW91F0004 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-05-08 BOW91F0005 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-05-08 MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS93U0001 WISHNER, C. - LETTER TO R. BITTMAN REGARDING UPDATES FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII. 1993-05-25 Map Index Number: 22133 EO Index: 9226
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 21 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-26 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT-CAL LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

0.6 MILE NORTH OF OLSON ROAD, ABOUT 0.3 AIR MILE EAST OF MOUNT CLEF PEAK.

Detailed Location:

MOSTLY WITHIN BOUNDARY FOR CAL LUTHERAN UNIVERSITY. MAPPED ACC TO A 1991 BOWLAND MAP. WISHNER (1993) MENTIONS THAT IN 1992 THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHER POCKETS OF PLANTS LOCATED IN "SADDLES" TOWARD THE WEST OF THIS LOCATION; NEED MAP DETAIL.

Ecological:

NEAR AN OCCURRENCE OF DUDLEYA ABRAMSII SSP. PARVA. N-FACING SLOPES.

Threats:

POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (1991). RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES COULD THREATEN (INCLUDING EQUESTRIAN & OHV USE).

General:
2 POPULATIONS WITH A TOTAL OF 35 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 1991. "GOOD NUMBERS OF PLANTS" OBSERVED IN 1992. 3 SUBPOPULATIONS OBSERVED HERE IN 1994 WITH A TOTAL OF 200 PLANTS. NEEDS FIELDWORK. INCLUDES FORMER OCCURRENCE #25.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 28, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 14 UTM: Zone-11 N3789712 E326852 Latitude/Longitude: 34.23410 / -118.87999 Elevation (feet): 910 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 24 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
74 Map Index Number: 22709 EO Index: 28591
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 22 Occurrence Last Updated: 2017-11-06 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-05-27 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-05-27 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

NORTHWEST OF NEWBURY PARK ACADEMY, CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED AS 2 POLYGONS. NORTH POLYGON IS ALONG MARGINS OF A DIRT ROAD ON SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST PROPERTY. SOUTH POLYGON IS LOCATED WITHIN USFWS-DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR THIS SPECIES.

Ecological:

IN SPARSELY VEGETATED COASTAL SAGE SCRUB/ANNUAL GRASSLAND PLANT COMMUNITIES. ASSOCIATED SPECIES INCLUDE AVENA FATUA, STIPA LEPIDA, LASTHENIA CHRYSOSTOMA, LAMARCKIA AUREA, ETC. HEAVY CLAY SOILS APPARENTLY DERIVED FROM CONEJO VOLCANIC ROCKS.

Threats:

RD RUNS THROUGH POP & RECEIVES HORSE, MTN BIKE, ORV USE, POSSIBLE SCRAPING, AVENA INVASION, GOPHERS, DEVELOPMENT.

General:

N POLY: 50-100 PLANTS IN 1991, 200 IN 1993, ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION DUE TO ORV USE, SCRAPING, & AVENA INVASION (1998), SEEN IN 2014, 591 IN 2016. S POLY: 200 IN 1991, >1000 IN 1993, 4000 IN 2010, 10,000S IN 2016. INCL FRMR EO #23.

PLSS: T01N, R20W, Sec. 2, E (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 12 UTM: Zone-11 N3785860 E321412 Latitude/Longitude: 34.19847 / -118.93824 Elevation (feet): 850 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 25 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
75 Sources:

AND14F0001 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR DUDLEYA PARVA & PENTACHAETA LYONII & DUDLEYA BLOCHMANIAE SSP. BLOCHMANIAE & NAVARRETIA OJAIENSIS 2014-06-15 AND16F0007 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-05-27 BOW91F0007 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-04-30 BOW91F0008 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-04-30 BOW93F0001 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1993-05-19 BOW93F0002 BOWLAND, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1993-05-19 EDW10F0002 EDWARDS, A. (BONTERRA CONSULTING) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII & CALOCHORTUS CATALINAE 2010-05-05
EDW10S0003 EDWARDS, A. & L. MESSETT - EDWARDS #2010-1 RSA #758394 & #8520 2010-05-05 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 26 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
76 Sources:

AGU12F0015 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-24 AGU12F0016 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-24 BUR03F0008 BURGESS, R. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2003-03-12 BUR91F0001 BURGESS, R. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-04-26 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 Map Index Number: 22708 EO Index: 5248
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 24 Occurrence Last Updated: 2012-10-02 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2012-05-24 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2012-05-24 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AGENCY Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WEST OF SIDLEE STREET OFF OF LYNN ROAD, WILDWOOD-LYNNMERE NORTH OPEN SPACE.

Detailed Location:

ON AND ADJACENT TO OLD DIRT ACCESS ROAD. SITE IS DEDICATED OPEN SPACE ADMINISTERED BY COSCA (CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION AGENCY). COSCA RANGERS ARE AWARE OF THE PLANTS AND THE TRAIL IS INFREQUENTLY USED.

Ecological:

ON LEVEL AREAS AND GENTLE W-FACING SLOPES IN CLAY LOAM DERIVED FROM CONEJO VOLCANICS. ASSOC WITH CEANOTHUS MEGACARPUS, ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, SALVIA MELLIFERA, ERODIUM CICUTARIUM, HEMIZONIA SP., LAMARCKIA AUREA, & CENTAUREA MELITENSIS.

Threats:

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (INCL MTN BIKES & TRAMPLING) & TRAIL MAINTENANCE COULD THREATEN. ALSO THREATENED BY INVASIVES.

General:

ABOUT 500 PLANTS SEEN IN 3 SUBPOPS IN 1991. 1997: PLANTS ARE RESTRICTED TO WITHIN 5 METERS OF THE PATH DUE TO COMPETITION WITH NON-NATIVE GRASSES. 384 PLANTS SEEN IN 4 SUBPOPS IN 2003. 450 PLANTS SEEN IN 2 SUBPOPS IN 2012.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 32, SE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 4 UTM: Zone-11 N3787084 E325793 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21024 / -118.89096 Elevation (feet): 700 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 27 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
77 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WIS92F0002 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-05-29 Map Index Number: 22760 EO Index: 18655
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 26 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-24 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1992-05-29 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1992-05-29 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: NPS-SANTA MONICA MTNS NRA, PVT Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

PART OF "BALDWIN WESTLAKE PROPERTY"; ABOUT 0.8 MI E OF DECKER ROAD, JUST W OF LAS VIRGENES RESERVOIR, SANTA MONICA MTNS.

Detailed Location:

ALONG THE ENTRANCE ROAD TO THE RESERVOIR FACILITIES COMPLEX. OWNERSHIP IS LVMWD & PVT. OVER 95% OF OCCURRENCE MANAGED BY SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY, REMAINDER IS ON PRIVATE HOLDINGS.

Ecological:

GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL ECOTONES IN AREAS OF RECENT DISTURBANCES WITH LITTLE COMPETITION FROM SHRUBS AND ANNUAL GRASSES. ASSOCIATES INCLUDE BROMUS HORDEACEUS, B. MADRITENSIS, AVENA BARBATA, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, PLANTAGO ERECTA, ETC.

Threats:

SITE RECEIVES HEAVY RECREATIONAL PRESSURE, PVT OWNED PORTION MAY BE SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT.

General:

OVER 5000 TOTAL PLANTS SEEN HERE AND AT OCCURRENCE #27 IN 1992.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 35 (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 7 UTM: Zone-11 N3777968 E330272 Latitude/Longitude: 34.12881 / -118.84058 Elevation (feet): 1,100 Los Angeles Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 28 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
78 Map Index Number: 22761 EO Index: 8204
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 27 Occurrence Last Updated: 2017-11-09 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2017-04-15 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2017-04-15 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: NPS-SANTA MONICA MTNS NRA, PVT Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

TRIUNFO PARK; 1.7-2.5 MILES E OF DECKER ROAD, E OF LAS VIRGENES RESERVOIR, SANTA MONICA MTNS.

Detailed Location:

OWNERSHIP IS LAS VIRGENES MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT & PVT; MORE THAN 95% OF OCCURRENCE IS MANAGED BY THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY. NW-MOST POLY MAY BE ERRONEOUS; MAPPED ACC TO A WALL MAP BUT MAP DOES NOT MATCH COORDINATES.

Ecological:

GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL ECOTONES; IN AREAS SUCH AS ROADWAYS AND RECENT DISTURBANCES, WITH LITTLE COMPETITION FROM SHRUBS AND ANNUAL GRASSES. ASSOCIATES INCLUDE ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, BLOOMERIA CROCEA, DICHELOSTEMMA CAPITATUM, ETC.

Threats:

THREATENED BY RECREATION, TRAIL, AND NON-NATIVE SPECIES. PRIVATELY OWNED PORTION MAY BE SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT.

General:
>5000 PLANTS TOTAL SEEN IN 1992 BETWEEN HERE & EO #26. 1997: "NUMEROUS DENSE PATCHES IN DISTURBED AREAS, SPARSE POPULATIONS IN GAPS BTW SHRUBS IN CHAPARRAL." 5000 PLANTS IN 2005, 18,600 PLANTS IN 2012, 1000 PLANTS IN 2017.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 36, N (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 48 UTM: Zone-11 N3778065 E332051 Latitude/Longitude: 34.12997 / -118.82132 Elevation (feet): 900 Los Angeles Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 29 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
79 Sources:

AGU12F0017 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-31 AGU12F0018 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-30 AGU12F0019 AGUILAR, L. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-06-05 AGU12F0020 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-31 AGU12F0021 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-31 BIE17F0002 BIELFELT, B. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2017-04-14 CHA03I0002 CHARTERS, M. - PHOTOS OF PENTACHAETA LYONII, CALPHOTOS ID: 0000 0000 0503 0219-0221, 0272 2003-05-08 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
GAM17I0001 GAME, J. - PHOTOS OF PENTACHAETA LYONII, CALPHOTOS ID: 0000 0000 0417 1161-1164 2017-04-15 GIB03S0001 GIBSON, A. - GIBSON SN LA #201529 2003-06-03 GIB03S0002 GIBSON, A. - GIBSON #4900 LA #209931 2003-06-03 MAT17I0002 MATSON, S. - PHOTOS OF PENTACHAETA LYONII, CALPHOTOS ID: 0000 0000 0617 0118-0122, 0124-0127 2017-04-15 MEY02M0001 MEYER, M. - MAP REGARDING EO #27 & EO #26 FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2002-09-XX MOR11A0001 MORONEY, J. ET AL. - INVASIVE EUROPEAN ANNUAL PLANTS IMPACT A RARE ENDEMIC SUNFLOWER. MADRONO 58 (2): 69-77. 2011-XX-XX
THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WAL05F0010 WALL, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2005-05-26 WIS92F0002 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-05-29 Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 30 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
80 Sources:

BOW93M0001 BOWLAND, J. - MAP OF PENTACHAETA LYONII REAGAN LIBRARY SITE 1993-XX-XX BUR88S0002 BURGESS, R. - BURGESS #608 UCSB #71927 1988-04-02 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MCC89R0002 MCCLELLAND CONSULTANTS - RARE PLANT RECOVERY PLAN: PENTACHAETA LYONII & DUDLEYA (ABRAMSII) PARVA 1989-XXXX MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO89U0001 THOMAS, T. - CONVERSATION BETWEEN TIM THOMAS AND SANDRA MOREY REGARDING SEVERAL EOS. 1989-08-22 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
Map Index Number: 24356 EO Index: 26999
Key Quad: Simi (3411837) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 29 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1994-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: Poor
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Decreasing
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

RONALD REAGAN PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY SITE, ALONG PRESIDENTIAL DRIVE, WEST OF SIMI VALLEY.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED BY CNDDB ACCORDING TO A 1989 MCCLELLAND MAP. A 1998 FOTHERINGHAM REPORT MENTIONS THAT THERE ARE STILL POPULATIONS SOUTH OF THE LIBRARY THAT ARE IN YET-TO-BE-BUILT LOTS; NEED MAP DETAIL. INCLUDES 1988 BURGESS COLLECTION.

Ecological:

SHALLOW VOLCANIC-DERIVED SOILS WITH DUDLEYA ABRAMSII PARVA (ALSO RARE).

Threats:

ROAD BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE THREATENS.

General:

IN 1994, THOMAS MENTIONS THERE WERE 2 SUBPOPS, ONE WAS DESTROYED BY THE RD & MITIGATION PLANTING HAS FAILED; THE OTHER SUBPOP LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE RD HAD 500 PLANTS IN 1994. UNSURE WHICH SUBPOPS THOMAS IS REFERENCING. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 13, E (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 8 UTM: Zone-11 N3792157 E332702 Latitude/Longitude: 34.25710 / -118.81698 Elevation (feet): 1,200 Ventura Simi (3411837)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 31 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
81 Sources:

BUR90S0002 BURGESS, R. - BURGESS #744 UCSB #72400 1990-05-24 DEL08F0003 DELLITH, C. (U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2008-06-25 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MEY91F0001 MEYER, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-04-XX MOR11A0001 MORONEY, J. ET AL. - INVASIVE EUROPEAN ANNUAL PLANTS IMPACT A RARE ENDEMIC SUNFLOWER. MADRONO 58 (2): 69-77. 2011-XX-XX
MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 MRC08R0001 MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY - SIXTH ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT, TIERRA REJADA VERNAL POOL PRESERVE 2008-02-XX
THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
WOO11S0012 WOOD, J. - WOOD #4209 RSA #794270 2011-06-21 Map Index Number: 25140 EO Index: 28650
Key Quad: Simi (3411837) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 30 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2011-06-21 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2011-06-21 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: MTNS REC & CONS AUTHORITY Trend: Decreasing Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

CARLSBERG DEVELOPMENT; IMMEDIATELY NW OF THE INTERSECTION OF THE HWY 23 FREEWAY AND TIERRA REJADA RD, CLOVERLEAF.

Detailed Location:

BETWEEN VERNAL POOL AND TIERRA REJADA. MAPPED BY CNDDB TO ENCOMPASS MULTIPLE YEARS WORTH OF SURVEY DATA FROM MOUNTAINS RECREATION AND CONSERVATION AUTHORITY (LAST SURVEY IN 2007).

Ecological:

IN THIN ROCKY CONEJO VOLCANICS, ON NE SIDE OF A COASTAL SAGE SCRUB STAND. WITH SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA, ENCELIA CALIFORNICA, BACCHARIS PILULARIS, LASTHENIA CALIFORNICA, PECTOCARYA LINEARIS. ADJACENT VERNAL POOL SUPPORTS ORCUTTIA CALIFORNICA.

Threats:

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT; MINIMAL BUFFER. POSSIBLY THREATENED BY FUEL MODIFICATION, DUMPING, TRENCHING, & NON-NATIVE SPECIES.

General:
1000 PLANTS IN 1991. 230,000 PLANTS PRESENT IN 1997 PER FOTHERINGHAM (LARGEST KNOWN POPULATION). UNKNOWN NUMBER OF PLANTS SEEN IN 2004 AND 2005. <1000 INDIVIDUALS OBSERVED IN 2007. 4 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2008. "UNCOMMON" IN 2011.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 10, SE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 8 UTM: Zone-11 N3793138 E329222 Latitude/Longitude: 34.26538 / -118.85495 Elevation (feet): 675 Ventura Simi (3411837)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 32 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
82 Sources:

MEY91F0002 MEYER, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-05-XX MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
Map Index Number: 25971 EO Index: 5250
Key Quad: Simi (3411837) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 31 Occurrence Last Updated: 1998-06-02 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1991-05-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1991-05-XX Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

CLOVER CAST DEVELOPMENT; VICINITY OF SIMI VALLEY, EAST OF HWY 23, NORTH OF TIERRA REJADA ROAD.

Detailed Location:

SUMMIT OF RIDGELINE IN SECTION 11; ONE IN A SADDLE AND ONE NEAR THE TOP OF THE SECOND HIGHEST KNOB.

Ecological:

IN SPARSELY VEGETATED, GRASSY OPENINGS IN VOLCANIC CLAY SOILS WITHIN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB. CALOCHORTUS CATALINAE COMMON NEARBY AND ON NORTH-FACING SLOPES.

Threats:

RECREATIONAL USE OF THIS OPEN SPACE A POSSIBLE THREAT FROM NEARBY RESIDENTIAL AREAS. APPROVED DEVELOPMENT HERE.

General:
60 PLANTS IN 1991. TO BE INCLUDED IN "RARE PLANT PRESERVE" OF ABOUT 50 ACRES AS MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. MAY NEED ACTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN SOON.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 11, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 12 UTM: Zone-11 N3794087 E330469 Latitude/Longitude: 34.27414 / -118.84160 Elevation (feet): 1,100 Ventura Simi (3411837)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 33 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
83 Sources:

FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
MEY91F0003 MEYER, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1991-11-XX MOR94U0003 MOREY, S. - RECOVERY WORKSHOP SUMMARY FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII (10/20/94). 1994-10-20 THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
Map Index Number: 25972 EO Index: 5262
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 32 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-25 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1991-11-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1991-11-XX Occurrence Rank: Excellent Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AGENCY? Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

AT NORTHWEST TERMINUS OF BRIDGEGATE STREET; WEST OF THORNHILL AVENUE, THOUSAND OAKS.

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED AT THE END OF BRIDGEGATE STREET AT CNDDB. MAP DETAIL NEEDED. THIS AREA WAS ONCE PRIVATE BUT NOW APPEARS TO BE OWNED BY CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION AGENCY (COSCA).

Ecological:

ASSOCIATED WITH FRITILLARIA BIFLORA, LEWISIA REDIVIVA, & DUDLEYA CYMOSA OVATIFOLIA.

Threats:

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THREATENS. IT IS ALSO SUSCEPTIBLE TO BEING REMOVED FOR FUELS MANAGEMENT & INCREASE IN REC USE.

General:
11,050 IN 1991 IN 4 GROUPS: 10,000 ON E-FACING SLOPE OF WESTERNMOST RIDGE; 500 JUST SOUTH OF THAT; 500 ON WEST FACE ON NORTH PORTION; AND 50 JUST NORTH OF THE LATTER. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 22 (S) Accuracy: 1/5 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3781106 E328589 Latitude/Longitude: 34.15681 / -118.85944 Elevation (feet): 1,100 Ventura Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 34 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
84 Sources:

THO92F0001 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-05-XX ZYL16F0002 ZYLSTRA, J. & S. THOMAS - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-05-16 Map Index Number: 26105 EO Index: 5210
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 33 Occurrence Last Updated: 2018-06-20 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-05-16 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-05-16 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

CORNELL ROAD BEHIND THE MALIBU FIRE STATION, SOUTH OF MALIBU JUNCTION.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED AS 2 POLYGONS ACCORDING TO A 2016 ZYLSTRA MAP, IN THE SW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 27.

Ecological:

GROWING IN DISTURBED GRASSLAND AND BUCKWHEAT SCRUB. ON CLAY LOAM ASSOCIATED WITH ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATUM,

CEANOTHUS CRASSIFOLIUS, CERCOCARPUS BETULOIDES, CHORIZANTHE STATICOIDES, DEINANDRA FASCICULATA, PLANTAGO ERECTA, & SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA.

Threats:

SITE HAD FORMERLY BEEN PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT; SITE IS HEAVILY GRAZED AND POUNDED BY HORSES.

General:

POPULATION NUMBERS BETWEEN THIS SITE AND OCCURRENCE #34: 4,000 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 1992, 1458 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2016. SITE ORIGINALLY OBSERVED IN 1988 BUT NEVER REPORTED.

PLSS: T01N, R18W, Sec. 27, SE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 3 UTM: Zone-11 N3778465 E338373 Latitude/Longitude: 34.13458 / -118.75287 Elevation (feet): 870 Los Angeles Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 35 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
85 Sources:

AND15F0003 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-05-15 RCI14R0001 RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. - AGOURA ROAD WIDENING STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LYON'S PENTACHAETA RESTORATION PLAN. 2014-12-XX
THO92F0001 THOMAS, T. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1992-05-XX ZYL16F0002 ZYLSTRA, J. & S. THOMAS - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-05-16 Map Index Number: 26104 EO Index: 5211
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 34 Occurrence Last Updated: 2018-06-20 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-05-16 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-05-16 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT, CITY OF AGOURA HILLS Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

NORTH AND EAST SLOPES OF LADYFACE, FROM 0.45 MILE WEST TO 0.5 MILE SOUTH OF INTERSECTION OF KANAN ROAD AND AGOURA ROAD.

Detailed Location:
9 POLYGONS MAPPED BY CNDDB ACCORDING TO A 1992 THOMAS MAP, 2014 RINCON CONSULTANTS INC MAP, A 2015 ANDERSON MAP, AND A 2016 ZYLSTRA MAP.

Ecological:

GROWING IN DISTURBED GRASSLAND AND BUCKWHEAT SCRUB, CHAPARRAL OPENINGS, AT THE EDGES OF CHAPARRAL AND NON-NATIVE GRASSLAND, AND ON DIRT ROADBEDS AND TRAILS. ASSOC W/ QUERCUS BERBERIDIFOLIA, CEANOTHUS CUNEATUS, CERCOCARPUS BETULOIDES, ETC.

Threats:

GRAZING/TRAMPLING, ORVS, NON-NATIVES, DISKING/MOWING, PROXIMITY TO DEVELPMENT. 2 PLANTS ELIMINATED BY ROAD WIDENING.

General:
2 SE POLYGONS: OBSERVED IN 1988, 4,000 PLANTS BETWEEN THESE POLYGONS AND EO #33 IN 1992. THOUSANDS OF PLANTS IN N-MOST POLYGON IN 2014. 7,630 PLANTS IN 6 N POLYGONS IN 2015. 1458 PLANTS SEEN IN 2016 BETWEEN PART OF THIS SITE AND EO #33.

PLSS: T01N, R18W, Sec. 28, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 25 UTM: Zone-11 N3779194 E337389 Latitude/Longitude: 34.14099 / -118.76367 Elevation (feet): 900 Los Angeles Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 36 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
86 Sources:

AGU12F0011 AGUILAR, L. & T. SAGAR - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-21 MAS96F0001 MASLACH, B. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1996-05-17 Map Index Number: 28019 EO Index: 20868
Key Quad: Malibu Beach (3411816) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 35 Occurrence Last Updated: 2012-10-02 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2012-05-21 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2012-05-21 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: DPR-MALIBU CREEK SP, PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

EITHER SIDE OF MALIBU LAKE DAM, ~0.5 AIR MILE SSE OF THE JCT OF MULHOLLAND HWY AND LAKE VISTA DR, SE END OF MALIBU LAKE.

Detailed Location:
2 POLYGONS. EASTERN POLYGON GROWS ALONG A RIDGE AND AN ANIMAL (POSSIBLY HUMAN) TRAIL BISECTS THE POPULATION. MALIBOU LAKE MOUNTAIN CLUB LTD. COMMUNITY HAS DESIGNATED THIS PARCEL FOR RECREATIONAL USE.

Ecological:

OPENING ON SLOPING RIDGELINE IN CHAPARRAL. ASSOCIATED SPECIES INCLUDE NASSELLA PULCHRA, BROMUS HORDEACEUS,

NAVARRETIA PUBESCENS, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, ERIGERON FOLIOSUS, CERCOCARPUS BETULOIDES, CEANOTHUS MEGACARPUS, CLARKIA PURPUREA, ETC.

Threats:

E POLY: FOOT TRAFFIC & RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES. W POLY: NON-NATIVE SPECIES, DISTURBED BY FIRE CLEARANCE AND POWER LINE.

General:
~2000 PLANTS OBSERVED IN EASTERN POLYGON IN 1996. 1340 PLANTS OBSERVED IN WESTERN POLYGON IN 2012.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 10, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 9 UTM: Zone-11 N3775063 E338662 Latitude/Longitude: 34.10395 / -118.74909 Elevation (feet): 850 Los Angeles Malibu Beach (3411816), Point Dume (3411817) County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 37 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
87 Sources:

HAR96F0003 HARRISON, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1996-05-17 HAR96S0002 HARRISON, J. - HARRISON SN RSA #591510 1996-05-17 WEH00F0001 WEHTJE, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2000-05-14 Map Index Number: 35323 EO Index: 19825
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 36 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-23 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2000-05-14 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2000-05-14 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

0.9 MI WEST OF HILL CYN SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, WEST FORK OF ARROYO CONEJO CREEK, 1.2 MI NORTH OF NEWBURY PARK ACADEMY.

Detailed Location:
2 COLONIES MAPPED IN NE1/4 OF SE1/4 SEC 35.

Ecological:

IN ANNUAL GRASSLAND/CHAPARRAL ECOTONE. ASSOCIATED W/ SALVIA MELLIFERA, LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA, VULPIA MYUROS, AVENA SP., BROMUS MADRITENSIS RUBENS, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, NASSELLA PULCHRA, & ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATUM. ON ROCKY VOLCANIC SOIL.

Threats:

POTENTIAL GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT; CURRENTLY THREATENED BY ORV USE.

General:
30 PLANTS OBSERVED IN SOUTH COLONY IN 1996. UNKNOWN NUMBER OF PLANTS OBSERVED IN NORTH COLONY IN 2000.

PLSS: T02N, R20W, Sec. 35, SE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 10 UTM: Zone-11 N3787299 E321375 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21143 / -118.93893 Elevation (feet): 500 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 38 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
88 Sources:

ENV95R0001 ENVICOM CORPORATION - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL DEVICES, INC.

MOORPARK FACILITY SITE 1995-06-28
WIS95F0002 WISHNER, C. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1995-05-22 Map Index Number: 38849 EO Index: 33856
Key Quad: Simi (3411837) Element Code: PDAST6X060
Occurrence Number: 37 Occurrence Last Updated: 1998-05-29 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1995-05-22 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1995-05-22 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ABOUT 4000 FT ESE OF INTERSECTION OF HWY 23 AND NEW LOS ANGELES AVE, EAST OF MOORPARK, TIERRA REJADA HILLS.

Detailed Location:

PLANTS FOUND WITHIN GRADED DIRT ROADWAY AND MARGINS.

Ecological:

COASTAL SCRUB/GRASSLAND ECOTONE. IN SOME PLACES HIGHLY DISTURBED AND DOMINATED BY STUNTED GROWTH OF CENTAUREA MELITENSIS.

Threats:

COMPETITION W/ CENTAUREA AND MUSTARDS, AND GRAZING. PROPOSED COMMERCIAL AND MANUFACTURING FACILITY FOR PORTION OF SITE.

General:
1200 PLANTS IN 1995.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 03, SE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 2 UTM: Zone-11 N3794849 E329776 Latitude/Longitude: 34.28090 / -118.84928 Elevation (feet): 920 Ventura Simi (3411837)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 39 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
89 Sources:

BUR96F0001 BURGESS, R. & T. BURGESS - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1996-05-09 Map Index Number: 38868 EO Index: 33875
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 38 Occurrence Last Updated: 1998-06-03 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1996-05-09 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1996-05-09 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO RECREATION & PARK DIST Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WILDWOOD REGIONAL PARK; JUST SOUTH OF THE NORTH FORK OF ARROYO CONEJO, ABOUT 0.8 MILE SOUTH OF MOUNTCLEF RIDGE.

Detailed Location:

ON AND ABOUT DIRT ACCESS ROAD TO LYNNMERE DEVELOPMENT. SOUTH SIDE OF WILDWOOD CREEK, SOUTH OF WILDWOOD NATURE CENTER.

Ecological:

CHAPARRAL DOMINATED BY QUERCUS BERBERIDIFOLIA, SALVIA LEUCOPHYLLA, RHUS OVATA, ARTEMISIA CA, NASSELLA LEPIDA, ERIOPHYLLUM CONFERTIFLORUM, PLANTAGO ERECTA, LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA, DAUCUS PUSILLUS & VULPIA SP. ON CONEJO VOLCANICS SOILS.

Threats:

TRAIL WIDENING ACTIVITIES THREATEN.

General:
3000 PLANTS ESTIMATED IN 1996.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 31 (S) Accuracy: 1/10 mile Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3787463 E324536 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21345 / -118.90468 Elevation (feet): 480 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 40 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
90 Sources:

BRA98F0001 BRAMLET, D. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1998-05-07 BRA98S0013 BRAMLET, D. - BRAMLET #2612 RSA #655024 1998-05-07 Map Index Number: 40420 EO Index: 35427
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 39 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-22 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1998-05-07 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1998-05-07 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WEST SIDE OF DIRT ACCESS ROAD AND ARROYO CONEJO, 2.73 KM S OF SANTA ROSA RD ALONG HILL CANYON RD, W OF MOUNTCLEF RIDGE.

Detailed Location:

Ecological:

IN OPENINGS & UNDERSTORY OF VENTURAN SAGE SCRUB ON E-FACING SLOPE. W/ ARTEMISIA CA, YUCCA WHIPPLEI, LOTUS SCOPARIUS, ERIOGONUM CINEREUM, LESSINGIA FILAGINIFOLIA, VULPIA MYUROS, V. MICROSTACHYS, PLANTAGO ERECTA, DAUCUS PUSILLUS, & FILAGO CA.

Threats:

PROPOSED GOLF COURSE IN THIS AREA; PLANS ARE TO AVOID SITE WITH A 100 FT BUFFER ZONE.

General:
43 PLANTS IN 1998.

PLSS: T02N, R20W, Sec. 36, NW (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3787866 E322227 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21669 / -118.92981 Elevation (feet): 280 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 41 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
91 Sources:

MEY03F0002 MEYER, M. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2003-05-16 SAG11U0001 SAGAR, T. (SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS NATIONAL RECREATION AREA) - SUMMARY OF COLLECTION OF STATE-DESIGNATED THREATENED AND RARE PLANTS BY SMMNRA BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE TECHNICIAN, MIKE MCGRAW IN 2003 AND 2004 UNDER CDFG RESEARCH PERMIT 03-06-RP 2011-08-22
Map Index Number: 72370 EO Index: 73306
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 43 Occurrence Last Updated: 2012-10-02 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2004-04-01 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2004-04-01 Occurrence Rank: Excellent Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

IMMEDIATELY WEST OF SEMINOLE HOT SPRINGS IN LA SIERRA CANYON, NORTHWEST OF MULHOLLAND HWY.

Detailed Location:
4 POLYGONS MAPPED ACCORDING TO A 2003 MEYER MAP AND 2011 COORDINATES FROM SAGAR. NE POLYGON: MOBILE HOME PARK, CLEARED AREA JUST NORTH OF MANMADE LAKE.

Ecological:

A SERIES OF GRASSY HERBACEOUS OPENINGS IN CHAPARRAL, ALONG EDGE OF FOOT TRAIL ON A SPARSELY VEGETATED OLD SCRAPED AREA. ASSOCIATED WITH BROMUS HORDEACEUS, VULPIA MYUROS, HEMIZONIA FASCICULATA, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, ETC. ON CONEJO VOLCANICS.

Threats:
61 ACRE SITE APPROVED FOR 6 PARCELS; COULD BE LOST TO DEVELOPMENT & FUEL MODIFICATIONS. EFFORT TO PURCHASE IN PROGRESS.

General:
3 WESTERN POLYGONS:10,000+ PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2003. AT LEAST 14 PLANTS OBSERVED IN NORTHEASTERN POLYGON IN 2004. MEYER MENTIONS THAT CARL WISHNER ALSO SAW THIS SITE SOMETIME IN 2001 OR 2002.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 05, SW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 16 UTM: Zone-11 N3775530 E334353 Latitude/Longitude: 34.10748 / -118.79588 Elevation (feet): 950 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 42 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
92 Sources:

TER06F0028 TERACOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2006-06-13 Map Index Number: 72371 EO Index: 73307
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 44 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-23 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2006-06-13 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2006-06-13 Occurrence Rank: Poor
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

E SIDE OF BROOKINS TRAIL, APPROX 0.6 RD MI S OF THE INTERSECTION OF MULHOLLAND HWY & BROOKINS TRAIL, SANTA MONICA MTNS.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED ACCORDING TO GPS COORDINATES PROVIDED BY TERACOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.

Ecological:

LOCATED ON EXPOSED SOILS ADJACENT TO A ROCK OUTCROP WITHIN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB. SITE COMPRISED OF SEVERAL VEGETATION COMMUNITIES INCLUDING COASTAL SAGE SCRUB, CHAMISE CHAPARRAL, SOUTHERN WILLOW SCRUB, MULEFAT SCRUB, ETC.

Threats:

General:
3 PLANTS SEEN IN 2006.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 10, NE (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-11 N3774795 E329140 Latitude/Longitude: 34.10002 / -118.85222 Elevation (feet): 1,700 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 43 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
93 Sources:

KEE92S0006 KEELEY, J. - KEELEY #15186 RSA #606381 1992-05-21 Map Index Number: 72372 EO Index: 73308
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 45 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-23 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1992-05-21 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1992-05-21 Occurrence Rank: Unknown
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

POTRERO ROAD, 3 MILES WEST OF WESTLAKE BLVD, SANTA MONICA MTNS.

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED BY CNDDB AS BEST GUESS ALONG POTRERO ROAD APPROXIMATELY 3 ROAD MILES WEST OF WESTLAKE BLVD.

Ecological:

Threats:

General:

ONLY SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS SITE IS A 1992 KEELEY COLLECTION. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01N, R19W, Sec. 29, N (S) Accuracy: non-specific area Area (acres): 70 UTM: Zone-11 N3779658 E324993 Latitude/Longitude: 34.14317 / -118.89813 Elevation (feet): 1,312 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 44 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
94 Sources:

BUR87F0010 BURGESS, R. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1987-03-21 FOT98R0001 FOTHERINGHAM, C. & J. KEELEY - ECOLOGY AND DISTRIBUTION OF BRAUNTON'S MILK-VETCH (ASTRAGALUS BRAUNTONII) AND LYON'S PENTACHAETA (PENTACHAETA LYONII) 1998-04-01
SMI85U0002 SMITH, G.P. - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR WILDWOOD PARK AREA NEAR THOUSAND OAKS. 1985-XX-XX THO87U0001 THOMAS, T. & C. WISHNER - PROPOSED STATUS CHANGE 1987-XX-XX THO89U0002 THOMAS, T. - TABLE SHOWING ABUNDANCE AND MONITORING RESULTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 1989-XX-XX THO94U0001 THOMAS, T. - RECORD OF PHONE CONVERSATION WITH TIM THOMAS BY RONNIE GLICK (FORWARDED TO R. BITTMAN) 1994- 07-07
VAN94U0001 VANDER PLUYM, D. - LETTER AND ANNOTATED CNDDB PRINTOUTS FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII, EO #12 & 24 1994-06-13 Map Index Number: 72381 EO Index: 73341
Key Quad: Newbury Park (3411828) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 46 Occurrence Last Updated: 2008-09-26 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1997-XX-XX Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: CONEJO OPEN SPACE CONS AGENCY Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WILDWOOD PARK, JUST WEST OF WESTERN TERMINUS OF AVENIDA DE LOS ARBOLES, SOUTH OF MOUNTCLEF RIDGE.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED BY CNDDB ACCORDING TO A 1985 SMITH MAP.

Ecological:

HABITAT IS AN INTERFACE BETWEEN DISTURBED GRASSLAND (AVENA BARBATA, BROMUS HORDACEUS, B. MADRITENSIS, BRASSICA NIGRA, ET AL) & CACTUS SAGE SCRUB W/ THIN ROCKY SOIL (DUDLEYA PARVA, OPUNTIA PROLIFERA, O. BASILARIS, & ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM).

Threats:

RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES (INCL TRAMPLING) MAY THREATEN. DEVELOPMENT ONCE THREATENED AREA BUT IT IS NOW IN AN OPEN SPACE.

General:

BETWEEN THIS OCCURRENCE AND OCCURRENCE #12: OVER 1000 PLANTS SEEN IN 1984, 1987, & 1988; APPROXIMATELY 1200 IN 1997.

PLSS: T02N, R19W, Sec. 31, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 4 UTM: Zone-11 N3788142 E324662 Latitude/Longitude: 34.21959 / -118.90344 Elevation (feet): 650 Ventura Newbury Park (3411828)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 45 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
95 Sources:

AGU12F0012 AGUILAR, L. & C. MENEGHIN - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2012-05-24 BAI15U0001 BAILEY, J. - OBSERVATION RECORD FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII, CALFLORA ID: PO1595 2015-04-06 Map Index Number: 86852 EO Index: 87812
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 47 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2015-04-06 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2015-04-06 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: NPS-PARAMOUNT RANCH Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

PARAMOUNT RANCH, JUST S OF HACIENDA TRAIL, ABOUT 0.4 AND 0.6 AIR MILE NW OF THE JCT OF MULLHOLLAND HWY AND CORNELL RD.

Detailed Location:
2 POLYGONS. NORTHERN POLYGON: APPROXIMATELY 400 M NORTH OF WESTERN TOWN, MAPPED ACCORDING TO 2012 COORDINATES PROVIDED BY AGUILAR. SOUTHERN POLYGON IS MAPPED ACCORDING TO 2015 BAILEY COORDINATES.

Ecological:

COASTAL SAGE SCRUB - CHAPARRAL TRANSITION. ASSOCIATED WITH CORETHROGYNE FILAGINIFOLIA AND ADENOSTOMA FASCICULATUM.

Threats:

DISTURBED BY TRAIL AND THREATENED BY NON-NATIVE GRASSES/CENTAUREA MELITENSIS.

General:
300 PLANTS OBSERVED IN NORTHERN POLYGON IN 2012. FEWER THAN 50 PLANTS OBSERVED IN SOUTHERN POLYGON IN 2015.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 3, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 10 UTM: Zone-11 N3776591 E337765 Latitude/Longitude: 34.11759 / -118.75911 Elevation (feet): 850 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 46 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
96 Sources:

AGU15F0001 AGUILAR, L. & T. SAGAR - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-06-18 Map Index Number: A2662 EO Index: 104254
Key Quad: Malibu Beach (3411816) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 48 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-21 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2015-06-18 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2015-06-18 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: DPR-MALIBU CREEK SP Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

SOUTH SIDE OF MALIBU CREEK, ABOUT 0.7 AIR MILE SOUTHEAST OF THE MALIBU LAKE DAM, MALIBU CREEK STATE PARK.

Detailed Location:

MASH SITE. MAPPED IN THE NW 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 11.

Ecological:

NATIVE/NON-NATIVE HERBACEOUS COMMUNITY. DOMINANT SURROUNDING SPECIES INCLUDE CEANOTHUS CUNEATUS, QUERCUS BERBERIDIFOLIA, AND WILLOWS.

Threats:

POPULATION EXISTS IN AN AREA OF HIGH RECREATIONAL USE.

General:
100 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2015.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 11, SW (S) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 5 UTM: Zone-11 N3774188 E339057 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09612 / -118.74466 Elevation (feet): 700 Los Angeles Malibu Beach (3411816)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 47 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
97 Sources:

AND16F0003 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-06-01 DEC15F0003 DECRUYENAERE, J. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2015-04-30 Map Index Number: A2687 EO Index: 104281
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 49 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-23 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-06-01 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-06-01 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ALONG BODLE PEAK MOTORWAY, RIDGELINE LOCATED 1 AIR MILE NW FROM SADDLE ROCK IN THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:
2 POLYGONS MAPPED IN THE SE 1/4 OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 2 ACCORDING TO 2015 DECRUYENAERE COORDINATES AND 2016 ANDERSON DIGITAL DATA.

Ecological:

CLEARED AREA ALONG A SHALLOW RIDGE. IN AREAS OF LOW SCRUB SURROUNDING THE CLEARED AREA. ASSOCIATED WITH ERIOGONUM FASCICULATUM, CORETHROGYNE FILAGINIFOLIA, ACMISPON GLABER, CENTAUREA MELITENSIS, HYDEPNOIS CRETICA, AVENA FATUA, ETC.

Threats:

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, FUEL MODIFICATION, VEHICLE/BIKE/FOOT TRAFFIC, INVASIVE GRASSES & FORBS.

General:
400 PLANTS OBSERVED IN EASTERN POLYGON IN 2015. 370 PLANTS OBSERVED IN WESTERN POLYGON IN 2016.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 2, SW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 4 UTM: Zone-11 N3775457 E329894 Latitude/Longitude: 34.10611 / -118.84419 Elevation (feet): 2,260 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 48 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
98 Sources:

KAP44S0001 KAPPLER, O. - KAPPLER #677 LA #88592 1944-06-11 Map Index Number: A2688 EO Index: 104282
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 50 Occurrence Last Updated: 2016-11-23 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 1944-06-11 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1944-06-11 Occurrence Rank: Unknown
Owner/Manager: UNKNOWN Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

WEST FORK LAS TRANCAS CANYON, SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS.

Detailed Location:

EXACT LOCATION UNKNOWN. MAPPED AS BEST GUESS BY CNDDB AROUND GIVEN ELEVATION OF 1200 FEET, NEAR WHERE A WESTERN FORK SPLITS FROM THE MAIN FORK OF THE CANYON.

Ecological:

SUNNY MEADOW.

Threats:

General:

ONLY SOURCE OF INFORMATION FOR THIS SITE IS A 1944 KAPPLER COLLECTION. NEEDS FIELDWORK.

PLSS: T01S, R19W, Sec. 15 (S) Accuracy: 1/5 mile Area (acres): 70 UTM: Zone-11 N3772725 E328463 Latitude/Longitude: 34.08125 / -118.85916 Elevation (feet): 1,200 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 49 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
99 Sources:

TER16F0016 TERMONDT, S. - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2016-04-08 Map Index Number: A7078 EO Index: 108857
Key Quad: Point Dume (3411817) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 51 Occurrence Last Updated: 2017-11-06 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2016-04-08 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2016-04-08 Occurrence Rank: Good
Owner/Manager: DPR-MALIBU CREEK SP Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

NEAR THE JUNCTION OF MODOC TRAIL, BULLDOG MOTORWAY, AND LOOKOUT DRIVE; SOUTH OF MALIBU LAKE.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED ACCORDING TO 2016 TERMONDT COORDINATES, IN THE SE 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 10.

Ecological:

ON DISTURBED DIRT ROAD- POPULATION CONFINED TO ROADWAY WITHIN COASTAL SAGE SCRUB. ASSOCIATED WITH PLANTAGO ERECTA AND DICHELOSTEMMA CAPITATUM.

Threats:

General:
1000+ PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2016.

PLSS: T01S, R18W, Sec. 10, NW (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 6 UTM: Zone-11 N3774498 E338062 Latitude/Longitude: 34.09877 / -118.7555 Elevation (feet): 1,160 Los Angeles Point Dume (3411817)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 50 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
100
Sources:

AND17F0006 ANDERSON, J. (ENVICOM CORPORATION) - FIELD SURVEY FORM FOR PENTACHAETA LYONII 2017-06-16 Map Index Number: A7079 EO Index: 108858
Key Quad: Thousand Oaks (3411827) Element Code: PDAST6X060 Occurrence Number: 52 Occurrence Last Updated: 2017-11-06 Scientific Name: Pentachaeta lyonii Common Name: Lyon's pentachaeta Listing Status: Federal: Endangered Rare Plant Rank: 1B.1 State: Endangered
CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G1
State: S1
Other Lists: SB_CalBG/RSABG-California/Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Garden
General Habitat: Micro Habitat:

CHAPARRAL, VALLEY AND FOOTHILL GRASSLAND, COASTAL SCRUB. EDGES OF CLEARINGS IN CHAPARRAL, USUALLY AT THE ECOTONE

BETWEEN GRASSLAND AND CHAPARRAL OR EDGES OF
FIREBREAKS. 30-670 M.

Last Date Observed: 2017-06-16 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 2017-06-16 Occurrence Rank: Fair
Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown
Presence: Presumed Extant
Location:

ON LOWER SLOPES OF LADYFACE MTN, 0.24 MILE SW OF INTERSECTION OF AGOURA RD AND REYES ADOBE RD, CITY OF AGOURA HILLS.

Detailed Location:

MAPPED ACCORDING TO 2017 ANDERSON DIGITAL DATA, IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NE 1/4 OF SECTION 29.

Ecological:

GROWING IN ROCKY OPENING WITH NATIVE AND NON-NATIVE GRASSES AND FORBS NEAR MARGINS OF SCRUB OAK CHAPARRAL.

ASSOCIATES INCLUDE ERIOPHYLLUM CONFERTIFLORUM, BROMUS MADRITENSIS SSP. RUBENS, ANAGALLIS ARVENSIS, AVENA, FESTUCA MYUROS, ETC.

Threats:

NON-NATIVE GRASSES AND FORBS.

General:
38 PLANTS OBSERVED IN 2017.

PLSS: T01N, R18W, Sec. 29, NE (S) Accuracy: specific area Area (acres): 1 UTM: Zone-11 N3779446 E335491 Latitude/Longitude: 34.14297 / -118.7843 Elevation (feet): 1,055 Los Angeles Thousand Oaks (3411827)
County Summary: Quad Summary:

Report Printed on Tuesday, March 22, 2022
Commercial Version -- Dated February, 27 2022 -- Biogeographic Data Branch Page 51 of 51 Information Expires 8/27/2022
Occurrence Report
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
California Natural Diversity Database
101
MARCH 24, 2022 REMY MOOSE

MANLEY, LLP COMMENTS

EXHIBIT C
102
DP No. 21Ͳ70408
2498/ 2550 Conejo Center Drive
Photo taken on March 23, 2022
103
MARCH 24, 2022 REMY MOOSE

MANLEY, LLP COMMENTS

EXHIBIT D
104
Office (424) 371-6730 | FAX (424) 316-5796 | Address: 11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780, Los Angeles, CA 90025 www.perspectivelg.com
January 7, 2021

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, Deputy Superintendent
Conejo Valley Unified School District
1400 E. Janss Road
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
Email: [email protected].

RE: That certain real property commonly known as 2498 Conejo Center Drive, Newbury Park, CA 91320 (the “Property”) owned by Conejo Valley Unified School District, a political subdivision of the State of California (“Seller”)
Dear Dr. Hayek:

This firm represents ARC Investment Group LLC, a California limited liability company (“Buyer”). We have been engaged to assist Buyer with completing its due diligence review of the Property and its proposed acquisition of the Property. For your reference, we’ve represented Buyer for over seven (7) years and have assisted Buyer with numerous real estate acquisitions in Southern California. Accordingly, we are uniquely qualified to opine on Buyer’s qualifications and ability to perform on any transaction with Seller for the acquisition of the Property.

We are writing you to update you on our client’s continued interest in the Property and the terms under which Buyer is willing to proceed with the acquisition of the Property. Since your office previously received our client’s letter of intent to purchase the Property from Pinnacle Estate Properties, Inc. (“Pinnacle”), at your direction our client has continued to actively pursue all necessary due diligence investigations related to the Property prior to execution of a binding purchase agreement. To date, Buyer, has, with the assistance of our firm, completed its due diligence review of the Property.

Additionally, Buyer has obtained a letter from one of its primary business banks, Wells Fargo Bank, which we’ve enclosed herewith as Exhibit A, which states that our client has more than sufficient cash on deposit to purchase the Property without the need for any financing. Based on information received from the architect, civil engineer and geotechnical engineer engaged or consulted by our client regarding the Property, the usable acreage of the Property is 7.38 acres (or 321,711 usable square feet). Accordingly, based on that information, our client is prepared to expediently proceed with the purchase of the Property without any due diligence-related contingencies for an amount equal to $9,651,330, which amounts to a per square foot price of $30/per usable square foot. Furthermore, Buyer will pay a sales commission at closing to Pinnacle pursuant to a separate written agreement with Pinnacle.

We are hopeful that Seller will appreciate the strength and seriousness of this offer and our client’s continued interest in purchasing the Property. Accordingly, we respectfully request your prompt input and direction on the next steps in connection with our client’s desired acquisition of the Property. Our client is anxious to receive direction from your office on the disposition process for Seller and is willing to quickly CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002272105
Accordingly, based on that
information, our client is prepared to expediently proceed with the purchase of the Property without any due diligence-related contingencies f
January 7, 2021
Our client is
anxious to receive direction from your office on the disposition process for Seller and is willing to quickly Office (424) 371-6730 | FAX (424) 316-5796 | Address: 11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780, Los Angeles, CA 90025 www.perspectivelg.com
proceed as directed. Our office is more than happy to prepare a market-standard “as-is” initial draft purchase agreement if that is preferable for Seller. We look forward to engaging with you further so please feel free to direct any response or questions related to this correspondence to our office or to A.J. Ahearn of Pinnacle.

Please do let me know if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. We look forward to your favorable reply. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Jason R. Morgan of
Perspective Law Group, P.C.
cc Mr. Lindsay Jones (via email)
Mr. James Petrilli (via email)
Mr. A.J. Ahearn (via email)
Ms. Maria Neff (via email)
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002273106
proceed as directed. Our office is more than happy to prepare a market-standard “as-is” initial draft purchase agreement if that is preferable for Seller.

CTO-000460107
Thanks,
Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
On 3/3/21, 9:28 AM, "Hayek, Victor" <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
If we do move forward, is your offer going to have any contingencies (Use Permit or pending approval of any contracts with the City, etc.)?
Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
On 2/26/21, 4:53 PM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dr. Hayek,
Thank you for your note and apologies for the delay in responding. As we previously noted, CD ARC Investment Group is a family office that owns and operates various real estate assets in Southern California. Some of ARC’s properties are occupied or leased by one of its affiliate companies, Athens Services (https://athensservices.com).

If ARC is able to acquire the property, it will likely be used by Athens Services pursuant to a long-term waste hauling franchise contract with the City of Thousand Oaks. While properly CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002863108
If ARC is able to acquire the property, it will likely be used by Athens Services pursuant to a long-term waste hauling franchise contract with the City of Thousand Oaks. zoned for this use, the property would require a Conditional Use Permit, which must be approved through the planning department process. We look forward to better understanding the next steps with your office. Thank you for your kind attention and patience.

Jason
Jason R. Morgan
Partner
O (424) 371-6730 |
M|
11100 Santa Monica Blvd. |
Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 |www.perspectivelg.com On Feb 26, 2021, at 1:10 PM, Hayek, Victor <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
Following up one more time. If there is concern about confidentiality, just let me know.

Thanks,
Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image001[20].jpg>
On 2/23/21, 1:39 PM, "Hayek, Victor" <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002864109
the property would require a Conditional Use Permit,
I haven’t heard back, is there still interest?
Thank you,
Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image002[52].jpg>
On 2/10/21, 6:35 PM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dr. Hayek,
My apologies, as I did receive your email. I have not yet been able to connect with my client to provide you with a response but will do so as soon as possible and get back you. Thank you for your patience.

Jason
<image003[93].png>
Jason R. Morgan
Partner
**PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS**
Office (424) 371-6730 | Mobile | Fax (424) 316-5706
11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 | http:/perspectivelg.com VCARD

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US

IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: Hayek, Victor <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2021 3:43 PM
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002865110
To: Jason Morgan <[email protected]>; A. J. Ahearn <[email protected]> Cc: James Petrilli <[email protected]>; Lindsay Jones <[email protected]>; Neff, Maria <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 2498 Conejo Center Drive
Jason,
Wanted to make sure you got this.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image004[85].jpg>
On 2/5/21, 4:47 PM, "Hayek, Victor" <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
The Board has asked me to ask you about the buyer and intended use.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image005[42].jpg>
On 1/27/21, 9:44 AM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002866111








 !###

%%!($#'

!###
%%!($#'($ '$&


 $#+
)#

 




 
#
!

 %(& $"#
)

(
#'
&*
'$"

!###

 

 

&
%%
)"''$#


/

"
'

%2$$
'
#"

&
&(!
''
'
%#(

'


%'(
#("'%
"
$%#&&/

*

&"
"
!

*
'


"&'%('
#"&

*
'



"
#%
$,!"'1

$'

&/

&'%%/
"
2

'
%#(

#(%

9#)
$#%' 1


 &

)
&
'
'
'
)

( ,
8/
9798/
$ ""
"
$$
'
#"
&
*


"%&1

$%2$$
'
#"
 






#%
"2#2(&
"&&
#"

("
:7/
9798

&
5=/9?<1771
 







("
:7/
9798/
'



"%&&

'#
5>/7771771



"
,#(/

%
""






$ ""
"$$
'
#"&3'#&1#%
***1'#&1#%
*#0#
,-1#
,#4
*,,',%
'3'0'-,
$'*',%
$##0
4'**
%-
',1-
#$$#!1
-,
2*5

 
*'!)
 1-
3'#4
1&#
,#4
$##
0!&#"2*#
..*'!1'-,0
02 +'11#"
-,
-/
$1#/
2*5

 
/#
02 (#!1
1-
1&#
,#4
$##0

!!
.$0
-,"5
5

 
$.2

''
/
'$

*/). ,
- ,0$
-
1$''



0 $'

'
.*
1
'&$)
.,
!!$
!*,
.#*-

- ,0$
-
.#
.

))*.



*)/
. 
, (*. '2
/
'$

*/). ,-
1$''


*+ )
-,"5


&2/0"5
$/-+


+

.+
,"
*1#/,1#
/'"560

+
1-

.+
/
'$

*/). ,
- ,0$
-

,

'-*

0 $'

'
, (*. '2
0$

+#*) 

(
$'
*,
0$ *
*)! , )

$.$*)
''2
$.2
*!
#*/-
)

&-
'
))$)"
$0$-$*)
*)'2

+.-
$"$.
'

-/
($..
'-
0$

.#
*)'$)

'/12*
-2,1#/
'
-
0$-$.
111.*
&-*,"

!*,
(*,
$)!*,(
.$*)




"


@"
3
%!1#!A



%
,/

("
9</
9798
;0<>




 ""
"
@ ""
"3'#&1#%A



'%

#!
"(
@'%
#!
"(3'
"&&%)
&1#!A

 


%2$$
(!
&&
#"







0


&
!

#%

"'
%#!
#('&

#
'

#%"
-'
#"1
#
"#'



"&
#%
#$"
''
!"'&
(" &&
,#(
%#"
-
'


&"%
"
"#*
'

#"'"'

&
&1

 #/
*
%
$ ""
"
#"
&(!
''
"

%2$$
'#
'


',
"+'
%
,/

( ,
9"1
$#"
&(!
&&
#"
'
%#(

'


%'(

#("'%/
*
'
#%!
#
$,!"'
*


$'.
"
$,!"'


&&(
,
&#!#"
 &
&
&
'

$$
"'.



 112



'!&-*0


,'%*'




,*%
.

)
" ,
3
*'$

-.



./,)
., .
,













3 
"
%,(

*(

















%"
# $

# $
%!
$!#




#


%
  





$#
!##$

!##$
% $$#&
$!




&

#
#

#
#
%!
$!#





(



(
%!
$!#




!'


!'
%!
$!#



















 
%# 
$#,

$
 #


(
&!.



'

!
%
%
#$#


%
!# '
#% .

%
!!#$
%%
%


* 
$
#
%
#


%

!

,
&%
$%

!!

.



'
%
$%
# &%
%
%$

%

$
%

%# &


#!!
% 
#'(.


(


) &
%
$&
%
%
!!
% 
 #

%# &

&#
#%&

 &%#

!)
%


.

# &
%$
!# $$,
(
(




%
&#$%



%

 %
!
%
$%

% $

!#% $

!# '

#
#% 

%
 #


!# $$,


&
%
* 

#"&#
%

&%&#
'#
%

#'(
!# $$.



%
) &

%# &
%$
!# $$
(%


#

,
&
,

&

 #
$,
#

#'% ,





 &%
<9
)$.



(
%
%$
$%

%%

* 



!

$

#
%
(


#"&#.
$



%
$
) &
%
%

#!!
% 

 #
-

%%!$-11(((.% 
$. #1
1$ (!&
$ &
%+B:=9
$



%
$
) &
%
#%&

 &%#
3$
%
%
/
&
%



!!
% 0


-

%%!$-11(((.% 
$. #1!#%
%$1

&%)2'
!
%1'#%&
 &%#

&##%



 #


#!!
% 
$

6?,;A>

$

%



(

) &
'
"&$% $.

#
),

%'

%!
#$,


'$ 

#


&%)
'
!
%
!#%
%
@9>2==A2;<:>

#$4% 
$. #



 113

$
 #


(
&!.



'

!
%
%
#$#


%
!# '
#% .




(
%
%$
$%

%%

* 



!

$

#
%
(


#"&#.
"

#



From: Jason Morgan
To: Hayek, Victor
Cc: James Petrilli; Lindsay Jones; Neff, Maria; A. J. Ahearn Subject: RE: 2498 Conejo Center Drive
Date: Monday, March 15, 2021 12:26:53 PM
Attachments: image003.png
Dr. Hayek,
Thank you again for your email. Our client’s affiliated company’s proposed use of the property is currently being reviewed by the City of Thousand Oaks. Can you please help me understand how the contract and sale process would proceed assuming the parties agree to move forward with the acquisition? Please let me know if you would like to set up a call. Thank you.

Jason
Jason R. Morgan
Partner
**PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS**
Office (424) 371-6730 | Mobile | Fax (424) 316-5706
11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 | http:/perspectivelg.com VCARD

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER

OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: Hayek, Victor <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 9:01 AM
To: Jason Morgan <[email protected]>
Cc: James Petrilli <[email protected]>; Lindsay Jones <[email protected]>; Neff, Maria <[email protected]>; A. J. Ahearn <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 2498 Conejo Center Drive
Jason,
I saw that Athens has been awarded the City contract. We are mostly complete on our end here with the follow up info for the Board. We will further discuss on Tuesday night. Shall I proceed to let them know we are ready to move forward with the sale and contract preparation? CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002862
LeisyDec000652
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 11-10-2021 at 03:40:36 PM  114
To: Jason Morgan <[email protected]>; A. J. Ahearn <[email protected]> Cc: James Petrilli <[email protected]>; Lindsay Jones <[email protected]>; Neff, Maria <[email protected]> Subject: Re: 2498 Conejo Center Drive
Jason,
Wanted to make sure you got this.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image004[85].jpg>
On 2/5/21, 4:47 PM, "Hayek, Victor" <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
The Board has asked me to ask you about the buyer and intended use.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image005[42].jpg>
On 1/27/21, 9:44 AM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002866
LeisyDec000656
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 11-10-2021 at 03:40:36 PM  115
Thank you for the update, Dr. Hayek. Please let us know if you or the BOE have any questions about our client’s proposal or qualifications.

Jason
<image006.png>
Jason R. Morgan
Partner
**PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS**
Office (424) 371-6730 | Mobile | Fax (424) 316-5706
11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 | http:/perspectivelg.com VCARD

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US

IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.

From: Hayek, Victor <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 7:50 PM
To: A. J. Ahearn <[email protected]>
Cc: James Petrilli <[email protected]>; Jason Morgan <[email protected]>; Lindsay Jones <[email protected]>; Neff, Maria <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 2498 Conejo Center Drive
Mr. Morgan,
The BOE met last night and discussed your proposal. There is some due diligence that we have to do on our side. We ask for a little more time before we get back to you.

Thank you,
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image007[81].jpg>
On 1/20/21, 3:07 PM, "A. J. Ahearn" <[email protected]> wrote:

CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002867
LeisyDec000657
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 11-10-2021 at 03:40:36 PM 
116
Good Afternoon Dr. Hayek,
Thank you for providing us with the update. We look forward to hearing from you following the rescheduled meeting. Please let us know if you have any questions that we may be able to answer between now and then.

A.J. Ahearn
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 1:14 PM Hayek, Victor <[email protected]> wrote:

Mr. Morgan,
Our Board meeting yesterday was cancelled due to the fierce winds. We are trying to reschedule for next Tuesday. I will keep you apprised.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image002[52].jpg>
On 1/8/21, 8:57 AM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you.

Jason R. Morgan
Partner
O (424) 371-6730 |
M |
11100 Santa Monica Blvd. |
Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 |www.perspectivelg.com On Jan 8, 2021, at 8:54 AM, Hayek, Victor <[email protected]> wrote:

Jason,
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002868
LeisyDec000658
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 11-10-2021 at 03:40:36 PM  117
Received thank you – I will discuss with our Board and get back to you on January 20.

Victor
Dr. Victor P. Hayek, SFO
Deputy Superintendent, Business Services
Conejo Valley Unified School District
750 Mitchell Road
Newbury Park, CA 91320
Office: 805-498-4557 ext. 7502
<image001.jpg[93].jpg>
On 1/7/21, 6:02 PM, "Jason Morgan" <[email protected]> wrote:

Dr. Hayek,
Please see attached, sent on behalf of our client, ARC Investment Group, LLC. We look forward to connecting with soon to discuss the attached. Thank you and Happy New Year.

Jason
<image002.png[87].png>
Jason R. Morgan
Partner
**PLEASE NOTE OUR NEW ADDRESS**
Office (424) 371-6730 | Mobile | Fax (424) 316-5706
11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 780 | Los Angeles, CA 90025 | http:/perspectivelg.com
VCARD

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE DESIGNATED RECIPIENTS. THIS MESSAGE MAY BE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION, AND AS SUCH IS PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE

IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, FORWARDING OR COPYING OF THIS MESSAGE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US

IMMEDIATELY BY REPLY E-MAIL OR TELEPHONE, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE AND ALL ATTACHMENTS FROM YOUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU.
--
A.J. Ahearn
Associate
Commercial and Investment Division
CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 002869
LeisyDec000659
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 11-10-2021 at 03:40:36 PM  118
MARCH 24, 2022 REMY MOOSE

MANLEY, LLP COMMENTS

EXHIBIT E
119
Case No. __________
Ventura Superior Court Case No. 56-2021-00553340-CUWM-VTA

COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX
G.I. INDUSTRIES, a Utah corporation, dba WASTE

MANAGEMENT,
Petitioner,
vs.

The SUPERIOR COURT of the State of California, in and for the County of Ventura,
Respondent.

CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS and CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS
CITY COUNCIL, and
ARAKELIAN ENTERPRISES, INC., a California corporation,
dba ATHENS SERVICES,
Real Parties in Interest.

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE, PROHIBITION, OR
OTHER APPROPRIATE RELIEF; VERIFICATION;

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
from an Order of the Superior Court of the State of
California, in and for the County of Ventura, Dept. 41 The Hon. Ronda McKaig, presiding, Phone: (805) 289-8790 JAMES G. MOOSE, SBN 119374
* ANDREA K. LEISY, SBN 206681
VERONIKA S. MORRISON, SBN 333288

REMY MOOSE MANLEY, LLP
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 443-2745
Facsimile: (916) 443-9017
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
JOEL FRANKLIN, SBN 69705

LAW OFFICES OF JOEL FRANKLIN
225 Crossroads Blvd., Ste. 407
Carmel, CA 93923
Telephone: (831) 649-2545 Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Petitioner
G.I. INDUSTRIES dba WASTE MANAGEMENT
&RXUWRI$SSHDO6HFRQG$SSHOODWH'LVWULFW
'DQLHO33RWWHU
(OHFWURQLFDOO\5(&(,9('RQDW

30
&$6(
%'LY

&RXUWRI$SSHDO6HFRQG$SSHOODWH'LVWULFW
'DQLHO33RWWHU
(OHFWURQLFDOO\),/('RQE\6KHUU\&ODERUQ'HSXW\&OHUN 120
- 11 -
I. INTRODUCTION
G.I. Industries dba Waste Management (“Petitioner” or
“WM”) presents this Petition for Writ of Mandate, Prohibition, or Other Appropriate Relief (“Petition”), asking this Court to direct the Ventura County Superior Court to vacate its Order denying WM’s Motion to Augment the Record of Proceedings (“Motion”) and to enter an Order granting the Motion.

The issuance of a writ will ensure that the merits of the superior court proceedings in this case are resolved based on a full and complete record of the “whole of the action” required by the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000) (“CEQA”), 1 relating to the award of an Exclusive Franchise Agreement (“FA”) to a different company requiring construction and use of a new local hauling/refueling yard that was not considered.

The trial court erred as matter of law, by (i) preventing Petitioner from making its case based on important relevant evidence, and (ii) rewarding both the inadequate notice of a key public hearing and the failure of agency staff to forthrightly reveal to the public and decisionmakers the true adverse environmental consequences of the FA. Petitioner therefore respectfully requests this Court to intervene in the name of fairness and equity.

This Petition, like other appellate petitions addressing issues relating to administrative records in CEQA cases, is 1 All unspecified statutory citations are to the Public Resources Code.
121
- 12 -
encouraged by case law. The appellate courts have explained why aggrieved parties ought not to await formal appeals in order to seek review of erroneous trial court decisions requiring trials on the merits based on inadequate or incomplete CEQA records. (See, e.g., Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 296, 309–311 (“Lodi”); County of Orange v. Superior Court (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 1, 13 (“Orange County”).)
In Orange County, the Court of Appeal, in granting a
peremptory writ on a CEQA evidentiary issue, explained that the absence of writ intervention into trial court proceedings on evidentiary issues could lead to inefficient outcomes involving two sets of separate proceedings in the trial court: one before an appeal, and the other after the appeal:

Realistically, we expect an appeal from whatever
decision the trial court makes. . . . That appeal is part of the rules of the game. But it is not within the rules to build into the legal process the probability of two
appeals—one from a decision without the excluded
materials, and one from the decision after the first
one is ostensibly corrected.
(113 Cal.App.4th at pp. 12–13.)
Here, the administrative decision directly challenged by Petitioner in the underlying case is the “informal” determination, by the City Council for the City of Thousand Oaks (“City”) on March 9th, to find the FA approval exempt from any
environmental review under CEQA; thus, allegedly complying with CEQA for purposes of the Council’s quasi-legislative determination to award the FA to Real Party Arakelian
Enterprises, Inc. dba Athens Services (“Athens”).
122
- 13 -
The March 4, 2021 agenda posted by the City under the
Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code, § 54950 et seq.) (“Brown Act”) for the March 9, 2021 meeting omitted any reference to CEQA compliance for the FA project. Instead, at 3:30 p.m. on the day of the meeting the City released a “Supplemental Information Packet” disclosing City staff’s recommendation that the City Council find the FA award exempt from environmental review and identifying the specific recommended CEQA exemptions. The City Council voted to adopt staff’s recommendation.2
The City provided no other notice or opportunity for public review and comment on the CEQA determination. The Council found the FA approval exempt from environmental review under CEQA pursuant to the Class 1 (Existing Facilities) categorical exemption (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15301 [“CEQA
Guidelines”]), the Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) categorical exemption (CEQA Guidelines, § 15308), and the “common sense” exemption (CEQA Guidelines, §15061, subd. (b)(3)) (collectively the “CEQA exemption determination”).
2 WM appealed the trial court’s decision to sustain Real Parties’ joint demurrer without leave to amend in a related matter under the Brown Act (Ventura Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 56-2021- 00554581-CU-WM-VTA), currently pending on appeal (Second Dist., Div. 6, Case No. B317201, filed Dec. 22, 2021). Before filing the appeal, WM filed a petition for writ of mandate (Second Dist., Div. 6, Case No. B316954) that was summarily denied on
December 17, 2021, without prejudice. The Brown Act appeal challenges the City’s failure to provide notice in its posted meeting agenda of the recommended CEQA exemption
determination which was independently discussed and approved as an item of business relating to the FA approval.
123
- 14 -
Petitioner contends that, due to the lack of formal notice and opportunity for comment, the City’s CEQA exemption
determination was “informal” and subject to an exception from the general prohibition excluding the admission of “extra-record” evidence in a traditional mandamus case. (Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559, 576 (“WSPA”); Carrancho v. California Air Resources Bd. (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 1255, 1270 (“Carrancho”) [agency action providing no opportunity for public input is an informal one].) Deprived of adequate notice, Petitioner was denied an opportunity to introduce meaningful comment and factual evidence into the record supporting its case.

For this reason, Petitioner was not required to exhaust its administrative remedies before challenging the CEQA exemption determination in this CEQA matter. (See Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power v. County of Inyo (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 1018, 1025, 1032-1034 (“LADWP”) [exhaustion of administrative remedies on applicability of CEQA exemption excused where agencies reveal their bases for asserting exemptions from environmental review at virtually the last minute]; Tomlinson v.

County of Alameda (2012) 54 Cal.4th 281, 291 (“Tomlinson”) [no exhaustion required on exemption determination unless notice and meaningful opportunity at public hearing to object provided]; § 21177, subds. (a), (e) [no exhaustion requirement when public agency holds no public hearing or otherwise provides opportunity for the public to raise objections before project approval].) 124
- 15 -
Excusal from the general duty to exhaust in this highly unusual case is meaningless if Petitioner is barred, as the trial court concluded, from presenting any extra-record evidence demonstrating the foreseeable environmental impacts of the FA project, which the City Council failed to consider as part of the CEQA exemption determination—including documents
suggesting that material information was withheld by City staff and Athens.

After filing, on August 11, 2021, the First Amended
Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Injunctive Relief (“FAP”), Petitioner, on October 7, 2021, discovered efforts by Athens—beginning in January 2021— through different entities and representatives acting on Athens’s behalf, to acquire a 10.7-acre undeveloped parcel, located at 2498 Conejo Center Drive (the “Property” or “School District Property”), from the Conejo Valley Unified School District (“School District”), for use as a local collection truck storage, refueling and maintenance yard (“local hauling yard”), among other uses, needed by Athens to service the awarded FA. Absent a local hauling yard, Athens must store and maintain the collection truck fleet needed to service the FA at its existing facility in Sun Valley, approximately 38 miles from the City.

Athens’s efforts before the March 9, 2021, City Council hearing included consultations with high level City staff regarding the allowed uses of the Property and intended use as a local hauling yard to service the FA. City staff nevertheless failed to inform the public and, presumably, the City Council about 125
- 16 -
Athens’s foreseeable acquisition and use of the Property as a local hauling yard for the FA. Instead, the focus of discussion at the March 9, 2021, Council meeting was on the “immediate” ability of Athens to expand a different site—in the City of Santa Paula— for use as the local hauling yard.

The City’s reliance on the two categorical exemptions and the “common sense” exemptions from CEQA environmental
review was erroneous. Moreover, the City’s CEQA exemption determination omitted any reference to the need for, or development of, a local hauling yard. In making its CEQA exemption determination, the City therefore failed to consider “the whole of the action” as required by CEQA. (Bozung v. Local Agency Formation Com. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 263, 283-284; CEQA Guidelines, § 15378, subd. (a).)
Even with reasonable diligence, Petitioner could not have discovered or included within the City’s record of proceedings for the case the relevant evidence, as put forward in the Motion and reply, regarding Athens’s planned use of the Property or, as represented, the Santa Paula local hauling yard site. Although some of the evidence presented in Petitioner’s Motion existed at the time of the FA approval and CEQA exemption determination, such evidence could not have been discovered prior to March 9 because of: (i) the City’s confidential Request for Proposals (RFP) process, including the City’s withholding of the RFP responses received by the City until after award of the FA; (ii) the lack of notice or disclosure by Athens or City staff of Athens’s intention to use the School District Property as its hauling yard to service 126
- 17 -
the FA; (iii) the lack of any notice or articles in the press, until October 2021, of the acquisition of the Property by Athens; and (iv) the ongoing production of documents by the City and School District after October 2021 through December 2021, in response to Petitioner’s requests for information under the Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6250 et seq.) (“PRA”), as well as other reasons discussed below.

Writ relief is appropriate because the trial court’s Order is erroneous as a matter of law and is severely prejudicial to Petitioner. Absent the requested writ relief, the trial court will make its decision in the CEQA case based on an administrative record (“AR”) that is incomplete and inaccurate regarding the true scope of the FA project and its reasonably foreseeable environmental effects (i.e., the “whole of the action”). The AR would also be devoid of evidence demonstrating agency
misconduct that obfuscated the need for, and location of, a local hauling yard for Athens’s implementation of the FA as awarded.

Absent intervention from this Court, the record will remain onesided as created by the City and Athens, thus rewarding both for withholding information and failing to provide notice of the CEQA exemption determination under the Brown Act.

The unusual facts of this case would also warrant reversal and remand of the trial court’s decision, upon appellate review, which would require re-litigation of the entire matter. This very problem was noted by the court in Orange County, supra, 113 Cal.App.4th at p. 13, as justification for issuance of a writ, rather than waiting to consider the issues on appeal after a decision on 127
- 18 -
the merits of an inadequate record. Moreover, CEQA review is intended to be expedited. (§ 21167.1, subd. (b).) Review of court orders regarding the content of an AR in a CEQA case should be reviewed on a petition for an extraordinary writ. (Lodi, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at pp. 309–311; Orange County, supra, at p. 13.) Thus, now is the appropriate time for this Court to determine whether the trial court erred by denying the inclusion of relevant extra-record evidence in the AR. To move forward at this time with briefing on the merits without a complete AR that reflects the true environmental impacts of the FA will result in a waste of both the Parties’ and the court system’s limited resources.

II. PETITION ALLEGATIONS
By this Petition, Petitioner alleges:

1. This lawsuit involves a challenge to the City’s
violation of CEQA by determining that its award of the FA was exempt from environmental review under CEQA and by failing to consider the “whole of the action”.

A. Parties and Beneficial Interest of Petitioner

2. Petitioner filed the underlying case, G.I. Industries v.

City of Thousand Oaks, et al. (Ventura Co. Super. Ct. Case No. 56-2021-00553340-CU-WM-VTA), pursuant to CEQA.

3. Respondent is the Superior Court of the State of
California, in and for the County of Ventura (“trial court” or “Respondent Court”), which entered the November 18, 2021, Minute Order denying the Motion to Augment the Record of Proceedings (“Motion”) that is challenged in this Petition. 128
- 20 -
Minute Order on November 19, 2021. Because there is no
statutory deadline for filing this Petition, the Petition is timely.

D. The Confidential RFP Process and Athens’s
Response

8. In July 2020, the City issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”), beginning a confidential process to determine the City’s future solid waste service provider. (Ptn.Exh. 1039.) By the terms of the RFP, proposers were required to attest to the truthfulness of the information provided. (Ptn.Exh. 1046–1048, 1062–1474 [attestation by Athens].) The RFP explicitly required proposers to disclose any “unbuilt/proposed” facilities anticipated to be used to service the FA, and barred proposers from relying on future facilities in their proposals without providing an alternative. (Ptn.Exh. 1043–1044.)

9. In October 2020, four companies, including WM,
submitted responses to the RFP. The RFP responses were kept confidential and released only after the March 9 award. (Ptn.Exh. 1045.) Petitioner received Athens’s RFP response then. (See Ptn.Exh. 994, 996–1004, 1045.)

10. In Athen’s October 15, 2020, RFP response, Mr. Gary Clifford, Athens’s Executive Vice President, stated that “we are currently in negotiations to expand our Santa Paula operations to include a transfer station and a compressed natural gas (CNG) fueling station.” Although unclear, Petitioner believes the site Mr. Clifford referenced to be located at 905 Corporation Street (the “Corporation Street Site” or “Santa Paula Hauling Yard”). (Ptn.Exh. 1049–1054.)
129
- 21 -

11. Athens’s RFP detailed the demolition and new
construction at the Corporation Street Site required to service the FA (see D2 Operations Plan), including, the construction of the following new facilities: a Processing/Transfer Facility; a maintenance building; an Office/Parts/Dispatch Building; a Collection Truck Parking Area with 81 parking spaces; and a Compressed Natural Gas (“CNG”) re-fueling station for use by Athens trucks and the public, among other actions. (Ptn.Exh. 1060–1061.)

12. Athens’s RFP response stated that Athens leased the “hauling facility” and that “the property has a conditional use permit (“CUP”) (PROJECT NO. 2012-CUP-03) to develop a
transfer station at the location.” (Ptn.Exh. 1055–1056, 1060.)

13. Although the Corporation Street site was granted a
CUP in 2012 by the City of Santa Paula (Project No. 2012-CUP03) (Resolution No. 3701), the mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) prepared and adopted by that jurisdiction for the “Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Facility Project” stated that no new construction would occur, that the project would generate limited traffic trips, and that additional CEQA review would be required for any future development. (Ptn.Exh. 614–615, 622, 630.)

14. Petitioner obtained a copy of Resolution No. 3701 and the Final Initial Study – MND (June 2012), as referenced above, from the City of Santa Paula in April 2021 after the City released the redacted RFP Response from Athens. (See Ptn.Exh. 99 [¶¶18–19].)
130
- 22 -
E. The City’s Lack of Notice and FA Approval
Process

15. On March 4, 2021, the City posted a Revised Agenda
(“Agenda”) to add a new unrelated item to the City Council’s March 9, 2021, regular meeting agenda. The Agenda identified the project at issue as Item 9(A), describing it as a “Solid Waste Franchise Agreement Award” and including the following
additional language: “RECOMMENDATION: Approve Exclusive Solid Waste Franchise Agreement (Agreement) with Arakelian Enterprises, Inc. dba Athens Services (Athens), City of Industry, CA, for residential and commercial services for a 15-year term from January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2036.” The posted agendas omitted any reference to CEQA. (Ptn.Exh. 992–994 [Revised Agenda], 988–991 [Agenda].)

16. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, participants were
required to submit a request to speak (remotely) no later than 5:00 p.m. the day of the meeting, or to submit written comments.

The City Council meeting started at 6:00 p.m. (Ptn.Exh. 992.)

17. On March 5, 2021, Petitioner submitted a letter to
the City expressing concern with staff’s recommendation to award the FA to Athens, and with the City’s lack of any environmental review pursuant to CEQA. (Ptn.Exh. 1068–1074.)

18. On March 9, 2021 at approximately 3:30 p.m. the
City issued a “Supplemental Information Packet” containing a two-page memorandum authored by Clifford G. Finley, Public Works Director, with an additional recommendation to find the award of the FA to Athens exempt from CEQA pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines sections 15301 [Class 1 categorical exemption], 131
- 23 -
15308 [Class 8 categorical exemption] and 15061, subdivision (b)(3) [“common sense” exemption]. (Ptn.Exh. 982–987, 1005– 1007 [meeting minutes].)
F. The March 9, 2021, City Council Meeting

19. On March 9, 2021, the City Council heard staff’s
presentation, accepted public comment, and heard explanation from the City Attorney explaining the basis for the CEQA exemption determination and why notice was not required to be included in the City’s posted agenda under the Brown Act. (Ptn.Exh. 1024–1026.)

20. Questions from several City Council members
focused on Athens’s ability to establish and use a local hauling yard to park and fuel the various collection trucks required to service the City under the FA. The discussion focused on Athens’s proposed use of the Santa Paula Hauling Yard. (Ptn.Exh. 1009– 1013, 1026, 1029–1030, 1033–1036.) Mr. Cesar Torres, Athens’s Executive Vice President, stated that: “[we] have the option to expand immediately in Santa Paula, and we will be doing that after this contract is awarded.” (Ptn.Exh. 1027–1029, 1031– 1032.) Members of the public expressed concern about the potential impacts of a local hauling yard and confusion as to where, exactly, the yard would be built. (Ptn.Exh. 1009–1013, 1014–1017, 1018–1019, 1020–1023.)

21. The City Council voted to award the FA to Athens
and, as part of an amendment to the motion, to find the award exempt from CEQA. (Ptn.Exh. 1037–1038.)
132
- 24 -

22. The City filed a Notice of Exemption (“NOE”) with
the Ventura County Clerk on March 15, 2021. (Ptn.Exh. 965– 967.) The NOE described the Project as the “Award of exclusive franchise agreement for the collection and hauling of solid waste, recyclable materials, and organic waste from commercial and residential units within the City of Thousand Oaks” (Ptn.Exh. 965), with no mention of the development of a local hauling yard. (Ptn.Exh. 965–967.) In fact, the NOE states: “no modifications to any buildings or other facilities are being made” and “awarding the new Franchise Agreement to a different operator does not expand or materially change the current operation.” (Ptn.Exh. 966.)

23. Although meetings were held on the RFP responses
received by the City, the City provided no notice or opportunity for members of the public or affected parties to comment on the CEQA exemption determination until release of the
“Supplemental Information Packet” at 3:30 p.m. on March 9, 2021.

G. Athens’s Need for a Local Hauling Yard

24. The executed FA requires, among other items, that
Athens adhere to the Operations Plans attached as Exhibits 13– 15 to its RFP Response, including the use of Renewable Natural Gas (“RNG”)3 fueled collection trucks. (Ptn.Exh. 970–981, 1058– 1059.)
3 RNG is a low carbon renewable fuel. RNG is considered a type of Compressed Natural Gas (“CNG”), so the terms are often used interchangeably. (Ptn.Exh. 1057, 1066, 1067.)
133
- 25 -

25. Before being awarded the FA, Athens’s only service
contract in the area was with the City of Santa Paula, where Athens used a one-acre site to store its trucks. (Ptn.Exh. 742–743 [Declaration of Douglas E. Corcoran in Support of Motion to Set Aside Order Denying Petitioner’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ¶¶8, 10] (“Corcoran Declaration”).) On March 9, 2021, Athens lacked any property interest in a local hauling yard of sufficient size to accommodate the various collection trucks and RNG refueling infrastructure necessary to comply with the FA. (Ptn.Exh. 740–745 [Corcoran Declaration].)
H. CEQA Petition

26. Petitioner timely filed a Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate on April 16, 2021, pursuant to CEQA. (CEQA
Guidelines, § 15112, subd. (c)(2).) On August 11, 2021, Petitioner filed the FAP. (Ptn.Exh. 13–37.)

27. The City certified the AR on September 3, 2021.

I. The Undisclosed School District Property

28. On October 7, 2021, through an article published by the local “Acorn” newspaper, Petitioner became aware of Athens’s purchase of a previously unknown site for development and use as a local hauling yard. (Ptn.Exh. 96 [¶3], 104–106.) The article described the site (previously described herein as the “School District Property” or “Property”) purchased in June 2021 “to secure a local site to park its trucks before Jan[uary] 1, when it will start providing trash and recycling services to the city.” (Ptn.Exh. 105.)
134
- 26 -

29. On October 7, 2021, after reading the Acorn article, Petitioner’s counsel accessed the official website of the School District and obtained all relevant documents referencing the negotiations and purchase agreement of the Property by ARC Investment Group (“ARC”), dated June 15, 2001, and amended on October 5, 2021. (See Ptn.Exh. 96–97 [¶¶3–6], 108–274, 294–454 (collectively, “School District Documents”).) Some of the School District Documents reflect negotiations with ARC beginning in early January 2021. (See Ptn.Exh. 294–454.)

30. Because the School District’s Agenda for its October 5, 2021, Board meeting identified Perspective Law Group, P.C. (“PLG”) as the negotiating party to advance the close of escrow “on behalf of ARC Investment Group LLC and other potential parties to be determined” (Ptn.Exh. 228–230), Petitioner’s counsel researched the Secretary of State’s website, comparing business searches of ARC and Athens (Ptn.Exh. 97–98 [¶¶11– 13].) The Secretary of State’s business information for ARC showed that Ron Arakelian, Jr. is a manager and member of the LLC and its agent for service of process listed in the company’s Statement of Information. (Ptn.Exh. 98 [¶13], 456–467.) ARC/PLG acted on behalf of Athens to purchase the School District Property. (Ptn.Exh. 97–98 [¶¶11–13].)

31. The School District agendas relating to the
negotiation and sale of the Property identify the Property by street address only and were primarily held as closed session agenda items. Only the approval of the sale, on June 15, 2021, and amendment thereof, on October 5, 2021, to expedite the 135
- 27 -
closure of escrow, were disclosed as consent items, listing the Property by address and the buyer as ARC/PLG. (See Ptn.Exh. 169, 831–832 [¶5].) No substantive public discussion or staff presentation occurred during the School District Board meetings about the sale of the Property, including ARC’s intention that Athens use the Property as a local hauling yard. (Ibid.)

32. On October 8, 2021, Petitioner served PRA requests
on the City and School District attempting to obtain additional information about the purchase, sale, and development of the Property. (Ptn.Exh. 99 [¶17], 833 [¶8], 853–855 [expanding timeframe of documents requested].)
J. Expert Evidence of Potential Environmental Impacts

33. On October 8, 2021, Petitioner retained Scott Cashen, M.S., an independent biological resources consultant, to consider the potential environmental effects of developing and using the School District Property as a local hauling yard. Cashen found, among other items, that several endangered or threatened plant and animal species exist or are likely to exist on the Property, and any impacts caused by habitat loss or direct harm to these species during construction and operation of the Property would be deemed significant under CEQA. (Ptn.Exh. 98–99 [¶15], 474– 486.)

34. On October 8, 2021, Petitioner retained Mr. Neal
Liddicoat, P.E., an independent transportation consultant, to consider the potential interim and long-term transportationrelated impacts of the FA, including the additional vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) that will result from Athens’s storage of its 136
- 28 -
trucks in Sun Valley until development of a local hauling yard, as well as from development of the School District Property as contemplated in the Purchase and Sale Agreement. Mr. Liddicoat found, among other items, that “a reasonable potential for significant impacts exists in the areas of vehicle-miles-traveled and traffic safety” as a result of the Project. (Ptn.Exh. 99 [¶16], 506–518.)

35. Petitioner also presented declaratory evidence from WM Vice President Douglas E. Corcoran, incorporated into the Motion, explaining how implementation of the FA will result in nearly a half million additional annual VMT to transport nonmunicipal waste to Athens’s facility in Sun Valley over existing baseline conditions, among other foreseeable impacts. (Ptn.Exh. 717–719.)
K. Documents Obtained from the School District
Website and Produced in Response to Petitioner’s PRA
Requests

36. Petitioner’s Motion included all agendas, meeting
minutes, and related documents obtained from the School District’s website relating to the negotiation and sale of the Property to ARC/PLG acting on behalf of Athens. (Ptn.Exh. 75–93 [Motion], 96–97 [¶¶4–10], 107–342.)

37. From October 28, 2021, through December 23, 2021,
the City and School District produced additional documents in response to Petitioner’s PRA requests, some of which were included with Petitioner’s Motion and Reply. (Ptn.Exh. 99 [¶17], 832–834 [¶¶6–11], 957–958 [¶¶4, 6].)
137
- 29 -

38. Extra-record evidence included in the Motion and
produced in response to Petitioner’s PRA requests reflect the facts described below.

L. PRA Documents Existing Prior to March 9, 2021

39. On October 28, 2021, the School District’s production included an email dated January 7, 2021, from Jason Morgan, PLG, on behalf of ARC, to Dr. Victor Hayek, Deputy
Superintendent, wherein Mr. Morgan: (i) introduces himself as a representative of ARC who has “continued interest in the Property,” since previously providing (via Pinnacle Estate Properties), the District with a “letter of intent to purchase the Property”; and (ii) explains (a) that his firm had “completed its due diligence review of the Property,” (b) that the “usable acreage of the Property is 7.38 acres,” and (c) that his client is prepared to “expediently proceed with the purchase of the Property without any due diligence-related contingencies for an amount equal to $9,651,330 . . . .” (Ptn.Exh. 832 [¶6], 837–838 [Letter attachment from PLG].)

40. On November 9, 2021, the School District produced
an email dated February 26, 2021, from Jason Morgan, to Dr.

Victor Hayek, in response to the School District Board’s February 5, 2021, question “about the buyer and intended use” of the Property, to which Mr. Morgan replied that: “If ARC is able to acquire the property, it will likely be used by Athens Services pursuant to a long-term waste hauling franchise contract with the City of Thousand Oaks.” (Ptn.Exh. 834, 865–866, emphasis added.)
138
- 30 -

41. On November 19, 2021, after the trial court denied
WM’s Motion, the City produced an email exchange between senior level City staff on January 20, 2021, regarding the “Parcel at 2498 Conejo Center Drive” (the School District Property”), sent by Helen Cox (City Sustainability Division Manager/Public Works Department and point person for its RFP process) to Haider Alawami (Economic Development Manager) with cc’s to Kelvin Parker (Community Development Director), Cliff Finley (Public Works Director), Nader Heydari (Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer), and Stephen Kearns (Planning Division Manager), wherein Ms. Cox stated that “[o]ne of the proposers on the City’s new waste hauling contract is interested in
buying/leasing the two parcels for a fleet storage/service yard and is inquiring whether that would be a permitted use. Below are the parcel maps.” (Ptn.Exh. 957–958 [¶¶3–4], 961–963.) The City improperly failed to produce and include this email in the certified AR despite it relating to the City’s RFP process and FA award. (§ 21167.6, subds. (e)(7), (e)(10).)

42. Because the January 20, 2021 staff email was not
produced by the City until November 19, 2021, Petitioner was unable to include it in the Motion or before the trial court’s denial of the Motion. (Ptn.Exh. 958 [¶5].)
M. PRA Documents Created and Produced After March
9, 2021

43. On October 18 and 28, 2021, the City produced
emails and documents that were generated after the City Council’s March 9, 2021 CEQA exemption determination and FA award, which reflect knowledge by City staff of Athens’s 139
- 31 -
foreseeable acquisition and use of the School District Property to service the FA, as well as the potential for adverse environmental impacts. The documents included in the Motion contain:
(i) an email sent on March 24, 2021, from Stephen Kearns to Cesar Torres, and including Helen Cox, thanking Mr.

Torres for “following up” and explaining that Mr. Kearns had “completed the research” needed to provide direction to Athens to continue processing its proposed uses for the Property (Ptn.Exh. 851);
(ii) an email on June 25, 2021, from Nick Caniglia, JRMA Architects, to the City Planning Department, and including Mr. Patrick Dominque of Athens, regarding submission of a pre-application to the City (Ptn.Exh. 850), and redacted conceptual site plans submitted to the City in June-July 2021, for a proposed “Athens Services Hauling Facility” on the Property, including redacted grading, landscaping,
drainage, and utility plans. (Ptn.Exh. 845–849);
(iii) City Land Use Committee agendas describing the Property first, on August 10, 2021, as “Athens Storage Facility” (Exh. G, p. 520) and later as the “ARC Parking lot 2498 Conejo Center Drive.” (Ptn.Exh. 521, 526);
(iv) executed contract with an environmental consulting firm to prepare a MND for Athens’s use of the Property (Ptn.Exh. 529–540); and
(v) evidence of the Property being located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Ptn.Exh. 567).
140
- 32 -

44. Prior to March 9, 2021, with the exercise of
reasonable diligence, Petitioner could not have presented into the AR the then-existing evidence of Athens’s proposed acquisition and use of the School District Property as a local hauling yard. (Ptn.Exh. 831–832 [¶¶4–5].)

45. If, pursuant to the Brown Act, the City had provided proper, adequate notice of the City’s intention to rely on the CEQA exemption determination and Athens’s foreseeable
acquisition and proposed use of the School District Property to service the FA, if awarded, Petitioner would have had an opportunity to prepare and present factual evidence into the AR to support its claims.

46. Both the School District and the City have informed counsel for Petitioner that they have concluded production under the PRA requests. However, Petitioner is reserving its rights to inquire further into the completeness of the PRA production, particularly by the City, and, if further relevant documents are obtained, to offer them to this Court for consideration in connection with this Petition and to offer them to the trial court to augment the AR. (Ptn.Exh. 958 [¶6].)
N. Motion to Augment the Record and Trial Court’s
Denial

47. On October 11, 2021, Petitioner filed its Motion to Augment the Record with additional documents discovered from October 7 through 11, 2021, after publication of the October 2021 newspaper article mentioned herein, and as a result of
researching the School District’s website. (Ptn.Exh. 74–757.) 141
Case No. __________
Ventura Superior Court Case No. 56-2021-00553340-CUWM-VTA

COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SIX
G.I. INDUSTRIES, a Utah corporation, dba WASTE

MANAGEMENT,
Petitioner,
vs.

The SUPERIOR COURT of the State of California, in and for the County of Ventura,
Respondent.

CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS and CITY OF THOUSAND OAKS
CITY COUNCIL, and
ARAKELIAN ENTERPRISES, INC., a California corporation,
dba ATHENS SERVICES,
Real Parties in Interest.

EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT OF

MANDATE, PROHIBITION, OR OTHER APPROPRIATE
RELIEF, VOL. 3 OF 4, PAGE NOS. 490-781
from an Order of the Superior Court of the State of
California, in and for the County of Ventura, Dept. 41 The Hon. Ronda McKaig, presiding, Phone: (805) 289-8790 JAMES G. MOOSE, SBN 119374
* ANDREA K. LEISY, SBN 206681
VERONIKA S. MORRISON, SBN 333288

REMY MOOSE MANLEY, LLP
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 443-2745
Facsimile: (916) 443-9017
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
JOEL FRANKLIN, SBN 69705

LAW OFFICES OF JOEL FRANKLIN
225 Crossroads Blvd., Ste. 407
Carmel, CA 93923
Telephone: (831) 649-2545 Email: [email protected]
Attorneys for Petitioner
G.I. INDUSTRIES dba WASTE MANAGEMENT
&RXUWRI$SSHDO6HFRQG$SSHOODWH'LVWULFW
'DQLHO33RWWHU
(OHFWURQLFDOO\5(&(,9('RQDW


30
&$6(
%'LY

&RXUWRI$SSHDO6HFRQG$SSHOODWH'LVWULFW
'DQLHO33RWWHU
(OHFWURQLFDOO\),/('RQE\6KHUU\&ODERUQ'HSXW\&OHUN 142





LeisyDec000399
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 529 143





LeisyDec000400
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 530 144





LeisyDec000401
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 531 145





LeisyDec000402
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 532 146





LeisyDec000403
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 533 147





LeisyDec000404
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 534 148





LeisyDec000405
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 535 149





LeisyDec000406
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 536 150






LeisyDec000407
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 537 151






LeisyDec000408
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 538 152





LeisyDec000409
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 539 153





LeisyDec000410
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 540 154




 




 




  















  

 


!

"#$
%#&$

'

(
)#* +
(,
( +&$ )

- $'
$.

(
$.) +
#(
+#
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%
'.
*$
/.'
/#2.3
1).
.

2.$
"%

+$..+
''$.

('#$

.

#$4

! $*.)
(&/.$
"#$
**&$ *%3

.
!

(+.('.'
"#$

("#$ +
#( )
!&$!#
.

#()%3

.
*#! (%

&.

(#
)
/
)
+%

5.6!$.

#$

!)
.'7
"#$
(%
)#

#**&$$
(,
/%
$.".$.(*.

(+.$!$.+ +
#(

&
.
#$

#).
$.)
(*.
+
.$.#(3



 
 

 
 







  

  !"




# 
 

   
 
$
$
$
$
$
$
$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

8#* +.'

(

9:
!.*
)
9)##'
 - $'
$. 3
8#* +.'

(


;(&(' +
#(
$. 3
8#* +.'

(

<.$%

,

9 $.
 - $'
.2.$
+%
=#(.3
8#* +.'

(

>
)') ('
9 $.
$. 3
8#* +.'

(
(
)?&

+1$
#)#
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.3
8#* +.'

(

.

*
 - $'
=#(.3
%
%
%
%
%
%
#
#


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B



CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000478
LeisyDec000437
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
567 155




 




 




  















  

 
&'   !"




(

&!!)..(+ )
9)##'
 - $'
=#(.3

(

&!!)..(+ )
9 $.
 - $'
=#(.3

(

&!!)..(+ )
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.3

(

&!!)..(+ )
.

*D.#)#,
*
 - $'
=#(.3
$
$
$
$
$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 



!

"#$
%#&$

'

(
)#* +
(,
( +&$ )

- $'
$.

(
$.) +
#(
+#
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%
'.
*$
/.'
/#2.3
1).
.

2.$
"%

+$..+
''$.

('#$

.

#$4

! $*.)
(&/.$
"#$
**&$ *%3

.
!

(+.('.'
"#$

("#$ +
#( )
!&$!#
.

#()%3

.
*#! (%

&.

(#
)
/
)
+%

5.6!$.

#$

!)
.'7
"#$
(%
)#

#**&$$
(,
/%
$.".$.(*.

(+.$!$.+ +
#(

&
.
#$

#).

$.)
(*.
+
.$.#(3


 
 

 
 






 
  

# 
 

   
 
%
%
%
#
#
%


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B



CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000479
LeisyDec000438
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
568 156
THE RECIPIENT(S) SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE EXPLANATION OF SERVICES, KE/d/KE^͕LIMITATIONS & DISCLAIMERS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT.

PAYMENT POLICY: FULL PAYMENT FOR THIS REPORT IS DUE UPON CLOSE OF ESCROW. THE LIABILITY PROVISIONS OF THE REPORT DO NOT APPLY UNTIL FULL PAYMENT IS RECEIVED.

CANCELATION POLICY: OUR REPORT CAN ONLY BE CANCELLED IF ESCROW IS CANCELLED, OR THE SELLER TAKES THE PROPERTY OFF THE MARKET. SIGNED ESCROW CANCELLATION INSTRUCTIONS ARE REQUIRED.

Page
Natural Hazard Reference Maps i-ii
In Out Not Mapped Statutory Natural Hazard Disclosures
X Special Flood Hazard Area designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency 1 X Dam Inundation / Area of Potential Flooding 1
X Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone 1
X Wildland Area That May Contain Substantial Forest Fire Risks And Hazards 1 X Earthquake Fault Zone 2
X Seismic Hazard - Landslide Zone 2
X Seismic Hazard - Liquefaction Zone 2
In Out Not Mapped Local/Supplemental Natural Hazard Disclosures X Supplemental Flood Hazard Zone 3
X Supplemental Fire Hazard Zone 3
X Supplemental Earthquake Fault Hazard Zone 4
X Supplemental Seismic/Geologic Hazard Zone 4
In Out Additional Disclosures
X Airport Influence Area 5
X Airport Proximity 5
X Right to Farm 6
X Mining Operations 6
Property Address:

Parcel Number:

Date:

Order Number:

California Commercial Disclosure Report
2498 CONEJO CENTER DR
THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320
667-0-080-015
6/23/2021
210623-00407
Disclosure Source® Copyright 2021 https://www.DisclosureSource.com Phone: 800-880-9123 Table Of Contents CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000480
LeisyDec000439
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
569 157
Yes No Environmental Information
X Identified sites with known or potential environmental concerns 7 Environmental Sites Map and details 8
Databases Researched 15
Notices and Advisories
Transfer Fee Notice 19
Notice of “Supplemental” Property Tax Bill 19
Toxic Mold Notice 19
Gas and Hazardous Liquid Transmission Pipelines Notice 20 Flood Insurance Notice 20
Water-Conserving Plumbing Fixture Notice 20
Megan’s Law Notice 21
Methamphetamine or Fentanyl Contaminated Property Notice 21 Military Ordnance Location Notice 21
California Land Conservation (Williamson) Act Notice 22 Mudslide / Debris Flow Advisory 22
Oil, Gas Wells & Methane Advisory 22
Habitat Sensitivity Area/Endangered Species Advisory 23 Naturally Occurring Asbestos Advisory 23
Radon Advisory 23
Disclaimers - Read Carefully 24
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR RECEIPT OF DISCLOSURES, NOTICES AND ADVISORIES* 28 *Signatures Required
Property Address:

Parcel Number:

Date:

Order Number:

California Commercial Disclosure Report
2498 CONEJO CENTER DR
THOUSAND OAKS, CA 91320
667-0-080-015
6/23/2021
210623-00407
Disclosure Source® Copyright 2021 https://www.DisclosureSource.com Phone: 800-880-9123 Table Of Contents CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000481
LeisyDec000440
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
570 158




 




 




  















  

 

+
( 

+
& !
,
 $ & +*


*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.2
.C

!.*
"
*
!&/)
*
$.*#$'

+#
'.+.$
(.

C
.+
.$
+
.$&
!$#!.$+%

)#* +.'

(
(%
#"

6 + +&+#$
)%
'."
(.'
( +&$ )

- $'
$.

'.
*$
/.'
/.)#C3
*$
& -& !
,

*

1&$
& (+
+#
".'.$ )
) C
+
.

9.'.$ )
.$,.(*%
: ( ,..(+
,.(*%
59:7

$.?&
$.'
+#

'.(+
"%
('
'.

,( +.
$.

+
+
$.

&/0.*+
+#
")##'
(,

! $+

#"
+
.
 +
#( )
9)##'
;(
&$ (*.
1$#,$ 3

J!.*
)
9)##'
 - $'
$. J
5 (%
+%!.
=#(.

KL
#$
K<L7

'.+.$
(.'
/%
9:

(
$.

C
.$.
))
#$

!#$+
#(

#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%

M
*
(*.
. *

%. $
#"
/.
(,

(&(' +.'
/%
")##'
C +.$
3 ;"

!$#!.$+%

)#* +.'

(

!.*
)
9)##'
 - $'
$. 
+
.
*#
+
('

2 ) /
)
+%
#"
")##'

(
&$ (*.
%
/.
"".*+.'3
1$#!.$+
.

(#+
)#* +.'

(

!.*
)
9)##'
 - $'
$.
$.
(#+
$.)
.2.'
"$#
+
.
!#

/
)
+%
#"

&
+
(
(,
")##'

'  ,.3

".C
$.

$.
(#+
*#2.$.'
/%
#""
*
)
9)##'
;(
&$ (*.
 +.
: !
3 ;"

("#$ +
#(

(#+
2 ) /).


*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*#.('

+
+
+
.
/&%.$

*#(+ *+
+
.
)#* )
0&$

'
*+
#(4

!) ((
(,
('
/&
)'
(,
'.! $+.(+
+#
'.+.$
(.
+
.
!#+.(+
)
"#$
")##'
(,
+
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%3
.
/ 


+).

(
+.'
+ +.

#'.
.*+
#(


H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
9)##'
;(
&$ (*.
 +.
: !5
7 &.'
/%
9:
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
; %

;
 )#* +.'

(

!.*
)
9)##'
 - $'
$.
#
(#+
@(#C
('

("#$ +
#(
(#+
2 ) /).

) $+

$ '
*
- 
*
$
& -&$0

.
+ +.
#"
 )
"#$(

""
*.
#"
.$,.(*%
.$2
*.

$.?&
$.'
+#
$.2
.C
!!$#2.
('

(+
(
*#!
.

#"
+
.
!

+
+

2. /..(
!$.! $.'
('

&/
++.'

+#
+
.
/%
)#* )
,#2.$(.(+ )
#$, (
- +
#(

&+
)
+
.

#$
#+
.$
#C(.$

#"
(%
'

(
+
.

+ +.3

.
!

'.)
(. +.
$.

#"
!#+.(+
)

(&(' +
#(
('
")##'
(,

+
+
*#&)'
$.
&)+
"$#

&''.(
! $+
)
#$
+#+ )
'
"
)&$.3


(
(%
! $+

#"
+
.

C#$)'

2. "
).'
'&$
(,

,(
"
* (+
. $+
?& @.

* &

(,
")##'
(,
#"

+
#
.
$.

(
+
.
! +
C %
#"
+
.
$.).
.'
C +.$3

.
*+& )
$

@
#"
'
"
)&$.

(#+
'."
(.'
/%
+
.
! 5
73 8.,

) +
#(
)
#
$.?&
$.

!!$#!$
+.
!&/)
*

".+%
,.(*
.

#"
(%
*
+%
*#&(+%
#$
+.$$
+#$%
#"
C

*

)#* +.'

(

&*

(
$. 
+#
'#!+ 
!)..(+
'.?& +.
..$,.(*%
!$#*.'&$.

"#$
+
.
.2 *& +
#(

('
*#(+$#)
#"
!#!&) +.'
$.

(. $/.)#C

&*

'
3 .
/ 

D#2.$(.(+
#'.
.*+
#(

33
H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
#""
*
)
!5
7 2
) /).
+
$#&,

+
.
+ +.
#"
 )
"#$(

""
*.
#"
.$,.(*%
.$2
*.

+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
; %
;
 )#* +.'

(


;(&(' +
#(
=#(.
#
(#+
@(#C
('

("#$ +
#(
(#+
2 ) /).
1*( !$0! -$* !
,
 *1*$
( ,*

.
 )
"#$(

8.,

) +&$.

'.*) $.'
+
+

! *.
('

+$&*+&$.
'.".(

/
)
+%

.

.(+
)
+#
'
)
,.(+
"
$.
!$.2.(+
#(3
9&$+
.$
+
.

$.*+#$
#"
9#$.
+$%
('
9 $.

1$#+.*+
#(

'.(+
"
.'
<.$%

,

9 $.
 - $'
.2.$
+%
=#(.

(
8#* )
.
!#(

/
)
+%
$.
/
.'
#(
*#(

+.(+

+ +.C
'.
*$
+.$

('
/
.'
#(
+
.

.2.$
+%
#"
"
$.

- $'
+
+

.6!.*+.'
+#
!$.2
)

(
+
#
.
$.
3 .+.$
(
(,

("#$ +
#(

(*)&'.

/&+

(#+
)

+.'
+#B
9&.)
)# '
(,
+.$$
(
5 )#!.7
"
$.

C. +
.$
*#('
+
#(

('
#+
.$
$.).2 (+
" *+#$
3 .
/ 

 )
"#$(

D#2.$(.(+
#'.
.*+
#(

('


H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
#""
*
)
!5
7 &.'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
9#$.
+$%
('
9 $.
1$#+.*+
#(
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
% ;
;
 )#* +.'

(

<.$%

,

9 $.
 - $'
.2.$
+%
=#(.
2$&&

*

!

)
( 

$ +3


$
& -*
-$* $ 4
 !
,
 '

* *  $3$&$
(

*


.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
9#$.
+$%
('
9 $.
1$#+.*+
#(
'.

,( +.

+ +.
.
!#(

/
)
+%
$.

57
('
/. $

+
.
!$
$%
"
( (*
)
$.
!#(

/
)
+%
"#$
+
.

!$.2.(+
#(
('#$

&!!$.

#(
#"
"
$.

(
+
.
.
$.
3 

.)).$
#"
$. )
!$#!.$+%
)#* +.'
C
+

(


&
+
'

*)#
.
+
.
" *+
+
+
+
.$.
%
/.

"#$.
+
"
$.

$

@
('

- $'
#(
+
.
!$#!.$+%
('
+
.
" *+
+
+
+
.
!$#!.$+%
#C(.$
%
/.

&/0.*+
+#
+
.

!#

+
#(
#"
"
$.

+
, +
#(
.
&$.

.+
"#$+

(
1&/)
*

.
#&$*.

#'.
.*+
#(

3

.
+ +.
#"
 )
"#$(

*#)).*+

(
((& )
K"
$.
!$.2.(+
#(
"..L
"$#
+
.
.
#C(.$
3 
.
*#)).*+.'
#(
.

C
))
,#
+#C $'

"&('
+
+
C
))
"
( (*.
"
$.
!$.2.(+
#(
*+
2 +
.

/.(."
+
(,
+
.
.
#C(.$
3 5#+.


#"
&)%


+
.
9 $.
1$.2.(+
#(

9..

/..(

&
!.('.'
+
$#&,

+
.

%. $

7
:#$.

("#$ +
#(
/#&+
+

"..
%
/.
"#&('
+

++!
BCCC3"
$.3* 3,#2,$ (+
"
$.!$.2.(+
#(,$ (+

+ +.$.
!#(

/
)
+% $. "
$.!$.2.(+
#("..3
.
/ 

 )
"#$(

1&/)
*
.
#&$*.

#'.
.*+
#(

 
H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
#""
*
)
!5
7 &.'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
9#$.
+$%
('
9 $.
1$#+.*+
#(
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
; %
;
 )#* +.'

(

+ +.
.
!#(

/
)
+%
$.


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B





CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000482
LeisyDec000441
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
571 159




 




 




  















  

 

&5+$
6$& *

!5+
4* -
+&
,*
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.
!

$.
'.)
(. +.'
('
*#!
).'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

+ +.

D.#)#,

+
!&$
& (+
+#
+
.
)?&

+ 1$
#)#
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(
(,
*+3
&$
(,

(
. $+
?& @.

+$&*+&$.

)#* +.'
'
$.*+)%
#2.$
" &)+
-#(.

5 &$" *.
" &)+
+$ *.
7 *#&)'

&
+
(
'  ,.

$.
&)+
#"

.

*
.2.(+
$.
&)+
(,
"$#
,$#&('

" &)+
$&!+&$.
5 &$" *.
*$ *@
(,73
9#$
+
.
!&$!#
.

#"
+

$.!#$+
(
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.

,.(.$ ))%
'."
(.'

(
$.
!!$#6
+.)%


).

(
+#+ )
C
'+

5

"..+7
)#* +.'
)#(,

@(#C(
*+

2. . $+
?& @.
" &)+3
(
K *+

2.L
" &)+

'."
(.'
/%
+
.
+ +.
#"
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(

2 #(
#"

:
(.

('
D.#)#,%

(
. $+
?& @.
" &)+
+
+

!$#'&*.'
,$#&('

&$" *.
'

!) *..(+
5,$#&('

&$" *.
$&!+&$.7
C
+

(
+
.
)
+
.).2.(
+
#&
('
%. $
3 .
/ 

 )
"#$(

1&/)
*
.
#&$*.

#'.
.*+
#(


H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
#""
*
)
!5
7 &.'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(

2 #(
#"
:
(.

('
D.#)#,%
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
; %
;
 )#* +.'

(
(
)?&

+1$
#)#
9 &)+
=#(.
*$ )$ !
,
 ,*

.

(+.(+
#"
+
.
.

*
 - $'

: !!
(,
*+
#"




+#
!$#2
'.
"#$

+ +.C
'.

.

*

- $'
!!
(,
('
+.*
(
* )
'2

#$%
!$#,$
+#

+
*
+
.

('
*#&(+
.

(
"&)"
))
(,
+
.
$
$.
!#(

/
)
+
.

"#$
!$#+.*+
(,
+
.
!&/)
*

. )+

('

".+%
"$#
+
.
."".*+

#"

+$#(,
,$#&('

@
(,
)
?&." *+
#(
5"
)&$.
#"
C +.$
+&$ +.'

#
)7
) ('
)
'.

('
#+
.$

.

*

- $'

* &
.'
/%
. $+
?& @.
3 ('.$
+

*+

.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(

(' +.'

+#

'.(+
"%
('
!
+
.

+ +.4

#
+
!$#
(.(+
. $+
?& @.

- $'
3 ;("#$ +
#(
!$#'&*.'
/%
+
.
.
!

&+
)
-.'
5 (
! $+7
/%
*
+
.

('
*#&(+
.

+#
$.,&) +.

"&+&$.
'.2.)#!.(+3
.2.)#!.(+#(
+$&*+
#(
!.$
+

%
/.

C
+

.)'
&(+
)
'.?& +.
,.#)#,
*
#$

#
)

(2.
+
, +
#(

$.
*#('&*+.'
"#$

!.*
"
*

+.

('

+
, +
#(
.
&$.

$.

(*#$!#$ +.'

(+#
'.2.)#!.(+
!) (
3 .

*
 - $'
=#(.
!

'.)
(. +.
$.

&/0.*+
+#
. $+
?& @.

- $'
3 .C
'.2.)#!.(+

(

.

*
 - $'
=#(.

#()%
!.$
++.'

"

+
* (
/.

#C(

+
+

+
, +
#(
@.

+
.

+.
**.!+ /)%

".3
: !

$.
#()%
2 ) /).
"#$
)

+.'
$.

(#C
/&+
C
))
.2.(+& ))%
*#2.$
))
#"
 )
"#$(
3  $+
?& @.;('&*.'
8 ('
)
'.
 - $'
=#(.
$.
$.

C
.$.
+
.$.

/..(

$.*.(+
) ('
)
'.
#$
C
.$.
+
.
)#* )

)#!.
,.#)#,
* )
,.#+.*
(
* )
('

,$#&('
#

+&$.
*#('
+
#(

('
* +.

!#+.(+
)
"#$
) ('
)
'.

$.
&)+
#"
. $+
?& @.

@
(,3
8 ('
)
'.

-#(.

$.
'.
*$
/.'

$.

(
C

*

.

#"
$#*@

#
)
#$
'./$

2. /..(
'

!) *.'
'#C(

)#!.
/%
")#C
(,

)
'
(,
#$
" ))
(,3

.

.2.$
+%
#"

) ('
)
'.
'.!.('

#(
+
.
&('.$)%
(,
,.#)#,%

)#!.

('

#
)

(
+
.
$. 3
8 ?&." *+
#(
 - $'
=#(.
$.
$.

C
.$.
+
.$.

!#+.(+
)
"#$
#$
(

+#$
*
#**&$$.(*.
#"
)
?&." *+
#(3
8 ?&." *+
#(

)
?&
' )
@.
*#('
+
#(
#"

#
)

C

*

#.+
.

#**&$

'&$
(,

+$#(,
. $+
?& @.

@
(,
C
.$.
+
.
,$#&('C +.$

))#C
('

#
)

$.
)##
.
('
,$ (&) $
5 ('

"#$
.6 !).73

.
.

" *+#$

* (
*#/
(.
+#
!$#'&*.
)
?&." *+
#(

(
)#* )
-.'
$.
3 >
.(
)
?&." *+
#(
#**&$

+
.

#
)
+.!#$ $
)%
/.*#.

)
?&
' )
@.
('

+$&*+&$.

%

.++).
&(.2.()%3


*#('
+
#(
* (
* &
.
) +.$ )

!$. '
(,
#"
).2.)
,$#&('
('
,$#&('
"
)&$.
('

)
'
(,
#(

)#!.
3 8
?&." *+
#(
* (
* &
.

+$&*+&$ )
'  ,.

&('.$
*.$+
(
,.#)#,
*
*#('
+
#(
3 
.
+%!.
#"

.'
.(+ $%
'.!#

+
!.(.+$ +
#(
$.

+ (*.
('
'.!+

+#
,$#&('
C +.$
$.
+
.
@.%
" *+#$

+
+
,#2.$(
(

$. 4

&
*.!+
/
)
+%
+#
)
?&." *+
#(3
.
/ 

 )
"#$(

1&/)
*
.
#&$*.

#'.
.*+
#(




H
.'
#(

$.2
.C
#"
+
.
#""
*
)
!5
7 &.'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

.! $+.(+
#"
#(
.$2 +
#(

2 #(
#"
:
(.

('
D.#)#,%
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
% ;
;
 )#* +.'

(

8 ('
)
'.
 - $'
=#(.
: !
(#+
$.).
.'
/%

+ +.
; %
;
 )#* +.'

(

8 ?&." *+
#(
 - $'
=#(.
: !
(#+
$.).
.'
/%

+ +.
01*)*

& 0+$*
7!)*2*8 9))*$
& *
( 2*8 : 0+$*
 *

!5+
4*
-*
(; +3&$ !* 3(
!*

&$-$
*$ )$
-*
( ))$ $ 

$$0 $)


$-)

$ *0
$0 *

!5+
4*
 0*&0$ !
,

!*(

*
1 $&
3&* - 2&


!


''222$ & +* +*)'2&
 <5+
4*
%


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B



CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000483
LeisyDec000442
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
572 160




 




 




  















  

 
&
&' +&*)*

& 

+
& !
,
 $ & +*


*)#
&$.
#&$*.

#/+
(.'
!

+
+
$.
/#+

#""
*
)
('
!&/)
*)%
2 ) /).
"$#
*
+%
*#&(+%
('

+ +.

#&$*.

C

*

&!!)..(+
+
.

+ +&+#$%
( +&$ )

- $'

("#$ +
#(3


*)#
&$.
#&$*.

#()%
$.2
.C.'
!

+
+
$.
2 ) /).

(

&
/).
"#$ +
('
+
(
!!$#!$
+.

* ).
+#
'.)
(. +.

C
.$.

- $'

%
.6

+
#(

(,).
! $*.)
/

3 

*)#
&$.
#&$*.
$.*#.('

+
+
+
.
/&%.$
*#(+ *+
+
.
)#* )
/&
)'
(,
('
!) ((
(,
'.! $+.(+

+#

.)!

*.$+
(
C
+

"
(%

!.*
)
$.?&
$..(+

+
.$.

,
+
/.
"#$
*#(
+$&*+
#(
#$
$.(#2 +
#(
('
/&
)'
(,
*#'.
$.?&
$..(+

"#$
+

!$#!.$+%3

.
"#$.,#
(,

+ +..(+

#&)'
/.

*#(

'.$.'

! $+
#"
+
.


*)
.$

#"
+



*)#
&$.
.!#$+
('
+
#
.


*)
.$

!!)%
+#
+

+ +..(+3
1).
.
$.".$
+#
+
.
"#$
"&$+
.$

("#$ +
#(3
+&*)*

& -& !
,
 ,*
&!!)..(+ )
")##'
-#(.

(*)&'.

("#$ +
#(

(
''
+
#(
+#
#$
'
"".$.(+
"$#
+
.
$.

!!.'
#(
9)##'
;(
&$ (*.
 +.
: !

/%
+
.

9.'.$ )
.$,.(*%

: ( ,..(+
,.(*%
#$

;(&(' +
#(
-#(.

$.!#$+.'
/%
+
.
 )
"#$(

+ +.
""
*.
#"
.$,.(*%
.$2
*.
3 
.
.
* (

(*)&'.
+
&(



.
*
.

5 () ('
) @.
+
&(

7
$&(#""

- $'


+#$
* )
")##'
' +
('
''
+
#( )
'
@.
"
)&$.

- $'
3 ;"

!#$+
#(
#$
))
#"
+
.
!$#!.$+%

)#* +.'
C
+

(
#(.
#"
+
.
.

- $'
$.

+
.
).('
(,

(
+
+&+
#(
%
$.?&
$.
")##'

(
&$ (*.3


*)#
&$.
#&$*.

$.*#.('

+
+
+
.
/&%.$B
7
*#(+ *+
+
.
).('
(,

(
+
+&+
#(
+#

*.$+
(
(%
''
+
#( )
$.?&
$..(+

"#$
")##'

(
&$ (*.
7 *#(+ *+
+
.

(
&$ (*.
*#! (%

+#

*.$+
(
+
.
2 ) /
)
+%
('
*#
+
#"
+
.
")##'

(
&$ (*.3

H
.'
#(
+
.
!

#/+
(.'
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B

; %
;
 )#* +.'

(

&!!)..(+ )
9)##'
 - $'
=#(.
#
(#+
@(#C


("#$ +
#(

(#+
2 ) /).
;;8
;9:;B

+&*)*

& -$* !
,
 ,*
8#* )
,.(*
.

%
+
+
.
$
'

*$.+
#(

(*)&'.
#$
.6*)&'.
*.$+
(
$.

"$#
+
.
$.?&
$..(+

#"
 )
"#$(

D#2.$(.(+
#'.
.*+
#(

5 !#

+
#(
#"
"
$.
!$.2.(+
#(
.
&$.

#(
!$#!.$+%
#C(.$
7
"#))#C
(,

"
('
(,

&!!#$+.'
/%

&/
+ (+
)
.2
'.(*.

(
+
.
$.*#$'
+
+
+
.
$.?&
$..(+

#"
.*+
#(


.
+
.$
$.
#$
$.
(#+
'.?& +.
#$
(.*.

$%
"#$
."".*+

2. "
$.
!$#+.*+
#(
C
+

(
+
.
$. 3
(%
''
+
#(

+#
+
.
.
!

+
+
+
.
*#! (%

/..(
/).
+#

'.(+
"%
('

&/
+ (+
+.
$.

(*)&'.'

(
+

. $*
3 
.$.
%
/.
!

#"
#+
.$

&/
+ (+
)
"
$.

- $'

&*

/$&

"
$.

+
+
$.
(#+

&/0.*+
+#
.*+
#(
 3


*)#
&$.
#&$*.

(*)&'.'
+
.
.
!

(
+

. $*
3 9
$.

- $'
-#(.

)

+.'

.$.

"
(%
$.
$.

C

*

*#(+
(
+
.
*#('
+
#(
('
+%!.
#"
+#!#,$ !
%
C. +
.$

2.,.+ +
#(
('

+$&*+&$.
'.(

+%
+#

(*$.
.

+
.

&
*.!+
/
)
+%
+#
"
$.
3 ;(
+
.
.
$.

+
.

+%
#$
#&(+%
%

!#
.

+$ +.,
.

+#
.("#$*.
"
$.

+
, +
#(
.
&$.


(*)&'
(,
"
$.
#$
"&.)
/$. @

/$&

*). $ (*.
('
"&.)
)# '
( ,..(+
.
&$.
3 9#$
.6 !).
.!

#(
$##"
+%!.
('
"
$. $.

+

2. +.$
)

%
/.
(.*.

$%
"#$
(.C
*#(
+$&*+
#(
#$

$##"
$.!) *..(+3
;(
''
+
#(
#+
.$
"
$.
'.".(
.

!$#2..(+

%
/.
'. ('.'

(*)&'
(,

!.*
)
C..'
/ +..(+
/$&

( ,..(+
('

(
&

*). $ (*.
$#&('

+$&*+&$.
3 ;(
#
+
*
.


"

!$#!.$+%

(

9 $.
 - $'
$. 

(
&$ (*.
$ +.

%
/.
"".*+.'3
H
.'
#(
+
.
!

#/+
(.'
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
%
;
;
 )#* +.'

(

&!!)..(+ )
9 $.
 - $'
=#(.
#
(#+
@(#C


("#$ +
#(

(#+
2 ) /).
;;8
;9:;B
;(
(
$.
#"

,

1#+.(+
)
"#$
9 $.
 - $'3


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B



CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000484
LeisyDec000443
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
573 161




 




 




  















  

 
+&*)*

& *

!5+
4* -
+&
!
,
 ,*
: (%
)#* )
0&$

'
*+
#(

2. '
"".$.(+
#$

,
.$

+ (' $'

+
(
+
.
+ +.
"#$
+
.

'.(+
"
* +
#(
#"
. $+
?& @.
" &)+
3 
#
.
0&$

'
*+
#(

2. *$. +.'
+
.
$

#C(
!

C

*

('
* +.
*+

2. #$
!#+.(+
))%
*+

2. " &)+

**#$'
(,
+#
+
#
.

+ (' $'
3 : (%
*
+
.

('
*#&(+
.

$.?&
$.
,.#)#,
*

+&'
.

/."#$.
(%

,(
"
* (+
*#(
+$&*+
#(

"

!$#!.$+%

(
#$
(. $
(
. $+
?& @.
" &)+
-#(.
@(#C(
+#
+
.
('

*.$+
(
+%!.

#"
*#(
+$&*+
#(
%
/.
$.
+$
*+.'

(
+
.
.
$.
3 

*)#
&$.
#&$*.

(*)&'.'
#""
*
)
('
!&/)
*)%
2 ) /).
!

('
* +
(,
. $+
?& @.

" &)+

@(#C(
/%
+
#
.
0&$

'
*+
#(
3 ;(

#.
*
.

+
.
*#! (%

&
.'
+
.
'.
*$
!+
#(
#"
(
 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.
.
+ /)

.'
/%
+
.
)?&

+ 1$
#)#

 $+
?& @.
9 &)+
=#(.
*+
#"
!!$#6
+.)%


"..+
C
'.
+#
'."
(.

&!!)..(+ )
9 &)+
 - $'
=#(.3
H
.'
#(
+
.
!

#/+
(.'
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B

; %
;
 )#* +.'

(

&!!)..(+ )
9 &)+
 - $'
=#(.
#
(#+
@(#C


("#$ +
#(

(#+
2 ) /).

;;8
;9:;B

+&*)*

& *$ )$'0*&0$ !
,
 ,*

.
 )
"#$(


2 #(
#"
:
(.

('
D.#)#,%
5:D7

(#+
*#!).+.'
+
.
!$#0.*+

,(.'
/%
.*+
#(




#"
+
.
 )
"#$(

1&/)
*
.
#&$*.

#'.
+#

'.(+
"%
$.

#"
!#+.(+
)

.

*

- $'
C
+

(
+
.
+ +.
#"
 )
"#$(
3 
.
:D
('
+
.

D.#)#,
*
&$2.%
5D7

2. !.$"#$.'
(%
2 )& /).

+&'
.

+
+

&!!)..(+
+
.
.*+
#(




!

('
"
))

(
(%

(,
$.
3 
.
.
!

$.

(*)&'.'

(
+

. $*
3 )
#

(*)&'.'

(
+

. $*

$.
!

+
+

('
* +.
(%

- $'

+
+
%
#$
%
(#+
/.

.

* ))%
$.) +.'

(*)&'
(,
/&+
(#+
)

+.'
+#
)
?&." *+
#(
) ('
)
'.

'./$

")#C

&'
)
'.

*#
+ )
*)
""

(
+ /
)
+%
2#)* (
*

- $'

('
2 ) (*
.
3 
(&/.$
#"
2 $
#&

,.#)#,
*
" *+#$

%

(")&.(*.
+
.
+%!.

#"
,.#)#,
*

- $'

!$.
.(+B
$
(" ))
#&(+


$.#2 )
#"

2.,.+ +
#(
.$#

#(

.

*
*+
2 +%
#$
.2.(

& (
*+
2 +%3

.

.2.$
+%
#"

,.#)#,
*

- $'
'.!.('

#(
+
.
&('.$)%
(,
,.#)#,%

)#!.

!$#6

+%
+#
. $+
?& @.
" &)+

('

#
)
+%!.

(
+
.
$. 3 : (%
*
+
.

('
*#&(+
.

$.?&
$.
,.#)#,
*

+&'
.

/."#$.
(%

,(
"
* (+
*#(
+$&*+
#(

"

!$#!.$+%

(
#$
(. $

,.#)#,
*

- $'
@(#C(
+#
+
.
('
*.$+
(
+%!.

#"
*#(
+$&*+
#(
%
/.
!$#

/
+.'3

H
.'
#(
+
.
!

#/+
(.'
+
.

&/0.*+
1$#!.$+%B
%
;
;
 )#* +.'

(

&!!)..(+ )
D.#)#,
*
 - $'
=#(.
#
(#+
@(#C


("#$ +
#(

(#+
2 ) /).
;;8
;9:;B
;(
(
$.
#"
;D
!#+.(+
)
"#$
8 ('
)
'
(,3
;(

8 ('
)
'.

- $'
$. 3

.
!!.'
$.

(*)&'.

.6

+
(,
) ('
)
'.

('
$.

#"
&('."
(.'
!#+.(+
)
"#$
) ('

)
'
(,3


*)#
&$.
#&$*.A
#!%$
,
+
 

++!
BCCC3

*)#
&$.#&$*.3*# 1
#(.B



CVUSD CPRA 10.8.21 000485
LeisyDec000444
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
574 162
LeisyDec000470
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 600 163
LeisyDec000471
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 601 164
LeisyDec000472
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 602 165
LeisyDec000473
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 603 166
LeisyDec000474
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 604 167
LeisyDec000475
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 605 168
LeisyDec000476
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 606 169
LeisyDec000477
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 607 170
City of Santa Paula
Crown Disposal Vehicle
Storage and Maintenance
Project
Final
Initial Study -
Mitigated
Negative
Declaration
June 2012
LeisyDec000479
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 609 171
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and
Maintenance Facility Project
Final
Initial Study – Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for:

City of Santa Paula
970 Ventura Street
Santa Paula, California 93061
Prepared by:

Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
June 2012
LeisyDec000480
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
610 172
This report is printed on 50% recycled paper.

LeisyDec000481
Ventura Superior Court Accepted through eDelivery submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM 611 173
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Initial Study

1. Project title ........................................................................................................................... 1

2. Lead agency name and address ....................................................................................... 1

3. Contact person and phone number ................................................................................. 1

4. Project location ................................................................................................................... 1

5. Project VSRQVRU·VQDPHDQGDGGUHVV ............................................................................... 1

6. General Plan designation .................................................................................................. 1

7. Zoning .................................................................................................................................. 1

8. Project Description ............................................................................................................. 1

9. Surrounding land uses and setting ................................................................................. 2

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required ....................................................... 2

Environmental Factors Affected .............................................................................................. 3 Determination ............................................................................................................................. 4 Environmental Checklist .......................................................................................................... 5

Discussion
I. Aesthetics .................................................................................................................. 5 II. Agricultural Resources ........................................................................................... 6 III. Air Quality ................................................................................................................ 7 IV. Biological Resources .............................................................................................. 10 V. Cultural Resources................................................................................................. 13 VI. Geology and Soils .................................................................................................. 14 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................. 16 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................... 19 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................. 21 X. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................ 23 XI. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................. 25 XII. Noise ........................................................................................................................ 25 XIII. Population and Housing ...................................................................................... 31 XIV. Public Services ........................................................................................................ 32 XV. Recreation ............................................................................................................... 33 XVI. Transportation/Traffic .......................................................................................... 34 XVII. Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................... 36 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................... 39 References ................................................................................................................................. 40

List of Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location
Figure 2 Project Site and Vicinity
LeisyDec000482
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
612 174
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
ii
Figure 3 Existing Land Use
Figure 4 Project Site Photographs
List of Tables
Table 1 Project Operational Emissions ............................................................................... 9 Table 2 Special Status Species in Project Vicinity ............................................................ 11 Table 3 Estimated Annual Mobile Emissions of Greenhouse Gases ............................ 18 Table 4 Land use Compatibility for Noise Environments ............................................. 27 Table 5 City of Santa Paula Sound Level Limits ............................................................. 27 Table 6 Significance of Changes in Operational Roadway Noise Exposure ............... 28 Table 7 Noise Monitoring Results ..................................................................................... 28 Table 8 Project Contribution to Roadway Noise Levels, dBA ....................................... 30 Table 9 Existing Weekday Intersection Level of Service ................................................ 35

Appendices
Appendix A Air Quality / Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling Results Appendix B Noise Monitoring Data Sheets
Appendix C Comments and Responses
Appendix D Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
LeisyDec000483
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
613 175
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
1 INITIAL STUDY

1. Project title: Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Facility Project

2. Lead agency name and address: City of Santa Paula
970 Ventura Street
Santa Paula, CA 93061

3. Contact person and phone number: Stratis Perros, Deputy Planning Director (805) 933-4214

4. Project location: The project site is located in the City of Santa Paula, at 901, 903, 905, and 911 Corporation Street.

The project site is south of State Route (SR) 126 and
west of Peck Road. The following parcel comprises
the project site:

APN 099-0-040-625 ² 9.88 acres, owned by City
of Santa Paula, used as a city yard and
developed with the former wastewater
treatment facility.

Figure 1 shows the regional location of the project
site, and Figure 2 shows the project site and its
vicinity.

5. Project VSRQVRU·VQDPH
and address: Crown Disposal Co. Inc.

PO Box 1081
Sun Valley, California 91352

6. General Plan designation: Industrial

7. Zoning: Industrial (I)

8. Project Description:

The proposed project
WKH´projectµ
would involve the sale of the City owned property to
Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The City of Santa Paula currently has its vehicle fleet maintenance operations on the property and Crown Disposal would share these facilities with the City. Use of the property would be limited to storage and maintenance of vehicles. Vehicles to be stored would include five side loaders, three front loaders, two roll-offs, and several delivery and maintenance vehicles. The vehicles would be parked at the yard overnight and go out on scheduled routes each day. About ten to twelve personnel would work at the facility LeisyDec000484
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
614 176
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
2 Monday through Friday, about four to five personnel would work at the facility on Saturday, and one to two personnel would occasionally work at the facility on Sunday.

The currently proposed project involves no new construction. The applicant may consider additional onsite construction at some point in the future, but such future development has not been defined at this point. Any future development would be subject to separate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review.

9. Surrounding land uses and setting:

The project site is located on the western edge of the developed part of Santa Paula. It is bordered by the following uses: light industrial uses north of the project site, SR 126 (the Santa Paula Freeway) is located further north of the light industrial uses, commercial and uses are located north of SR 126, the new Calpipe industrial building and agricultural uses are located west of the project site, east of the project site is primarily light industrial uses, and single-family residences adjacent to the southeast corner of the project site. The Santa Clara River is located about 1,250 feet (about one quarter mile) southeast of the site. The closest residences are located approximately 400 feet south of the vehicle storage and maintenance area (Figure 2). Additional residential uses are located further east on the other side of Peck Road. The Santa Paula Public Works Department is located directly across Corporation Street and is visible from the project site. Generally south of the vehicle storDJHDQGPDLQWHQDQFHDUHDLVWKH&LW\·VQHZZDVWHZDWHUWUHDWPHQWIDFLOLW\, further south are agricultural uses and the Santa Clara River. The project site is surrounded on all sides by light industrial, institutional/ civic, and agricultural land uses.

Figure 3 shows the existing land uses surrounding the project site as well as the specific location of the project site. Photos of the project site and its surroundings are shown on Figure 4.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:

The City of Santa Paula is the only public agency with discretionary approval over the project and is the lead agency.

LeisyDec000485
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
615 177
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impaFWWKDWLV´3RWHQWLDOO\6LJQLILFDQWµRU´3RWHQWLDOO\6LJQLILFDQW8QOHVV MLWLJDWLRQ,QFRUSRUDWHGµDVLQGLFDWHGE\WKHFKHFNOLVWRQWKHIROORZLQJSDJHV Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water
Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population/Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Utilities/Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
LeisyDec000486
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
616 178
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
4 DETERMINATION:

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed Project 0$<KDYHD´SRWHQWLDOO\VLJQLILFDQWLPSDFWµRU´SRWHQWLDOO\ VLJQLILFDQWXQOHVVPLWLJDWHGµLPSDFWRQWKHHQYLURQPHQWEXWDWOHDVWRQHHIIHFW 
KDVEHHQ
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potential significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project, nothing further is required.
______________________________ _________________________ Signature Date
______________________________ _________________________ Printed Name Date
LeisyDec000487
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
617 179
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
5 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS ± Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
a-c) The project site is developed with the former City owned wastewater treatment facility.

The project site is essentially flat and contains no identified scenic resources, such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. The proposed project WKH´SURMHFWµ
would involve the sale
of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. One older, boarded up residence is located on the southern portion of the project site. However, this boarded up residence would not be affected by the proposed uses. State Route 126 (SR 126) is an eligible scenic highway according to the City of Santa Paula General Plan Conservation Element (1998). However, as the proposed project would not involve any physical development, the project would not have the potential to alter views from this roadway. Further more, the City of Santa Paula currently has its vehicle fleet maintenance operations on the property and Crown Disposal would share these facilities with the City. These uses would be consistent with current operations performed by the City of Santa Paula. Therefore, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, damage scenic resources, or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings. These impacts would be less than significant. d) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project would not include development that would create new sources of light and glare beyond existing conditions. Any outdoor lighting included in the project would be governed by Section

16.42.050, Light and Glare, of the Santa Paula Municipal Code (SPMC). Furthermore, surrounding areas already have other sources of light and glare such as SR 126 and other nearby roads. Therefore, no impact would occur with respect to light and glare.

LeisyDec000488
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
618 180
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
6 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST
RESOURCES -- In determining whether
impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by
the California Dept. of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. In
determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are
significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to information
compiled by the California Department of
Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the
VWDWH¶VLQYHQWRU\RIIRUHVWODQGLQFOXGLQJ
the Forest and Range Assessment Project
and the Forest Legacy Assessment
Project; and forest carbon measurement
methodology provided in Forest Protocols
adopted by the California Air Resources
Board. -- Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code Section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code Section
51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
LeisyDec000489
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
619 181
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
7 a, b, e) As previously mentioned, the project site is developed with the former City owned wastewater treatment facility. The project site is within the Santa Paula city limits, is zoned IN (Institutional/Civic), DQGGHVLJQDWHGRQWKH&LW\·V*HQHUDO3ODQ/DQG8VH3ODQ0DSDV Institutional and Civic. The California DHSDUWPHQWRI&RQVHUYDWLRQ·V map of Ventura County Important Farmland (California Department of Conservation, March 30, 2011) shows that the project site is within an area RI´XUEan and built-XSODQGµDQGQRWZLWKLQDQDUHDRI ´SULPHIDUPODQG.µ
The project site is not under Williamson Act contract (California Department of Conservation, April 2012). The project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project site is not located on agricultural land and project would not involve any development that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. For these reasons, tKHSURMHFW·V potential to convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use; conflict with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contract; or otherwise result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use is less than significant.
c, d) The project site is not located on or near forest land or timberland, and would have no impact on such resources.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY -- Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
Ambient air quality standards have been established to represent the levels of air quality considered sufficient, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. 7KH\DUHGHVLJQHGWRSURWHFWWKDWVHJPHQWRIWKHSXEOLFUHIHUUHGWRDV´VHQVLWLYHUHFHSWRUVµ LeisyDec000490
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
620 182
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
8 most susceptible to respiratory distress, such as children under 14; the elderly over 65; persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise; and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Sensitive receptors include health care facilities, retirement homes, school and playground facilities, and residential areas. Santa Paula is located in the Ventura County portion of the South Central Coast Air Basin (Basin). The Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) is the designated air quality control agency in the Ventura County portion of the Basin. $FFRUGLQJWRWKH9&$3&'·VODWHVW$LU4XDOLW\0DQDJHPHQW3ODQ 9HQWXUD&RXQW\
Air Pollution Control District, May 2008), the Ventura County portion of the Basin is a state and federal non-attainment area for ozone (1-hour) and a state non-attainment area for suspended particulates (PM10 & PM2.5). Additionally, although the Ventura County portion of the Basin is in attainment for the state and federal CO standards, CO can potentially be a problem at heavily congested intersections. 9HQWXUD&RXQW\ZDVOLVWHGDV´PRGHUDWHQRQDWWDLQPHQWµIRU the federal eight-hour ozone standard in 2004, with a required attainment date of June 2010. In 2008, ARB formally requested that EPA reclassify Ventura County up one classification level to a serious 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This means that Ventura County must meet the federal 8-hour ozone standard by June 15, 2013. Although Ventura County will have more time to attain the 8-hour standard, the serious classification requires the County to meet the requirements for that higher classification, many of which are more stringent than for moderate areas. Accordingly, in anticipation of becoming a serious area, the 2007 AQMP was prepared to satisfy the CAAA planning requirements for that classification. a) Vehicle use, energy consumption, and associated air pollutant emissions are directly related to population growth. The population forecasts upon which the Ventura County Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is based are used to estimate future emissions and devise appropriate strategies to attain state and federal air quality standards. The VCAPCD adopted an updated AQMP in May 2008. When population growth exceeds the forecasts upon which the AQMP is based, emission inventories could be surpassed, which could affect attainment of standards. However, the project does not include residential uses that would increase population. Therefore, the project would not conflict with implementation of the AQMP and no impact would occur.
b-d) The current driveway to the project site is in significant disrepair. Therefore, repaving and striping of parking lot spaces would likely be required as part of the proposed project.

However, emissions as a result of repaving and striping would be minimal, temporary in nature and the applicant would be required to comply with standard APCD requirements.

Operation of the proposed project would generate emissions that could affect air quality. Such emissions could potentially exceed significance thresholds established by the VCAPCD, and also affect nearby sensitive receptors. The sensitive receptors closest to the project site are several residences located approximately 400 feet south of the vehicle maintenance and storage area, along the east side of the southerly extension of Corporation Street.

Operational emissions from the project would derive primarily from employee vehicular trips to and from the site, as well as from the scheduled routes generated by the project. As previously mentioned, the vehicles being stored would go out on scheduled routes each day.

As these operations are already being occurring elsewhere in the City, the scheduled routes and employee trips would not result in a net increase in vehicle trips. Therefore, this analysis reflects a conservative estimate of impacts to regional air quality emissions.

LeisyDec000491
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
621 183
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
9 The Ventura County Air Quality Assessment Guidelines (October 2003) recommend significance thresholds for projects proposed in Ventura County. Under these guidelines, projects that generate more than 25 pounds per day of ROC (reactive organic compounds) or NOx (oxides of nitrogen) are considered to individually and cumulatively jeopardize attainment of the federal ozone standard and thus have a significant adverse impact on air quality. A project that could cause an exceedance of any ambient air quality standard, or substantially exacerbate an existing exceedance of an air quality standard would have a significant impact. ´6XEVWDQWLDOµLVGHILQHG as making measurably worse an existing exceedance. The VCAPCD's 25 pounds per day thresholds for ROC and NOx do not apply to construction emissions since such emissions are temporary. Nevertheless, the VCAPCD recommends implementation of mitigation for construction impacts if emissions of either pollutant exceed 25 pounds per day. The VCAPCD also recommends use of dust control measures on all construction projects. As the project would not involve any construction activity, construction emissions were not included in the model and are not discussed in this analysis. Project emissions for operation of the project have been modeled using the CalEEMod air quality modeling program (version 2011.1), based on the total square footage of the project site and the number of employee vehicle trips to and from the site.

The estimate of operational emissions includes emissions from vehicle trips. Traffic generated by the proposed project was estimated using CalEEMod, based on the number of employee vehicle trips to and from the site.

Although the IQVWLWXWHRI7UDIILF(QJLQHHUV·Trip Generation manual lists a rate of 0.32 trips per day, this analysis assumes an employee vehicle trip rate of four trips per employee per day and a scheduled route trip rate of two trips per stored vehicle. This is a conservative estimate based on employee trips to and from work, employee trips to and from lunch, and one scheduled route to the project site and one scheduled route away from the project site for each of the stored vehicles. A trip rate of four employee trips per employee, per day would generate approximately 68 average daily vehicle trips.

Table 1 summarizes projected emissions associated with operation of the vehicle storage and maintenance uses proposed under the project. As shown in Table 1, overall emissions would not exceed the VCAPCD thresholds for either ROG and NOX. &RQVHTXHQWO\WKHSURMHFW·V regional air quality impacts would be less than significant.

Table 1
Project Operational Emissions
Emission Source
Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 0.42 0.72 3.68 0.63 0.03
VCAPCD Threshold 25 25
Exceeds Threshold? No No
See Appendix A for CalEEMod v.2011.1 model output.

LeisyDec000492
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
622 184
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
10 e) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As such, the project would not be enclosed and would not be anticipated to generate objectionable odors.

Additionally, because the project site is not in the immediate vicinity of odor-sensitive receptors, the project would have a less than significant impact related to objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --
Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
LeisyDec000493
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
623 185
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
11 a-c) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project site is located on the western edge of the developed part of Santa Paula. The site has been previously disturbed and graded for the City of Santa 3DXOD·V wastewater treatment plant.

Due to the previously disturbed nature of the site, the project site lacks significant native vegetation that would provide habitat for any unique, rare, or endangered plant or animal species (see Photos 1 and 3 in Figure 4). The Santa Clara River and Santa Paula Creek are identified as the two drainages of regional iPSRUWDQFHWUDYHUVLQJ6DQWD3DXODLQWKH&LW\·V General Plan Final EIR (City of Santa Paula, February 1998). The project site is located over two miles from and downstream of Santa Paula Creek, and would therefore have no effect on it.

A search of the California Natural Diversity Database was conducted for any special-status species within a five-mile radius of the project site. The search revealed the potential for several special-status species in the project site vicinity. Table 2 provides the results of the CNDDB search, including the common name of the species and the status of these species. The CNDDB search indicates that there is no critical habitat within the vicinity of the proposed project.

Additionally, the potential of the project site being flooded and potentially carrying sediment downstream into/through habitat for sensitive species is low since the project site is outside the 100-year flood zone. Given the distance of the project site from riparian habitats and the primary channel of the Santa Clara River, and the low potential for flooding onsite, the project would have less than significant indirect impacts on sensitive aquatic wildlife species or habitat in the Santa Clara River. The project would not involve any physical development or construction activity that would have a substantial adverse effect on sensitive species, riparian habitat or federally protected wetlands.

Table 2
Special Status Species in Project Vicinity
Scientific Name Common
Name
G-Rank
S-Rank
Fed.

List/
Cal List
CDFG
Fish
Catostomus santaanae Santa Ana
sucker
G1
S1 T/- SC
Eucyclogobius newberryi Tidewater goby G3
S2S3 E/- SC
Gasterosteus aculeatus
williamsoni
Unarmored
threespine
stickleback
G5T1
S1 E/E -
Gila orcuttii Arroyo chub G2
S2 -/- SC
Oncorhynchus mykiss
irideus
Southern
steelhead -
southern
California DPS
G5T2Q
S2 E/- SC
Reptiles
Anniella pulchra pulchra Silvery legless
lizard
G3G4T3T4Q
S3 -/- SC
Emys marmorata Western pond
turtle
G3G4
S3 -/- SC
Phrynosoma blainvillii Coast horned
lizard G4G5 -/- SC
LeisyDec000494
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
624 186
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
12 Table 2
Special Status Species in Project Vicinity
Scientific Name Common
Name
G-Rank
S-Rank
Fed.

List/
Cal List
CDFG
S3S4
Rana boylii Foothill yellowlegged frog
G3
S2S3 -/- SC
Spea hammondii Western
spadefoot
G3
S3 -/- SC
Thamnophis hammondii Two-striped
garter snake
G3
S2 -/- SC
Thamnophis sirtalis ssp. South coast
garter snake
G5T1T2
S1S2 -/- SC
Birds
Athene cunicularia Burrowing owl G4
S2 -/- SC
Charadrius alexandrinus
nivosus
Western snowy
plover
G4T3
S2 T/- SC
Coccyzus americanus
occidentalis
Western yellowbilled cuckoo G5T3Q
S1 C/E -
Elanus leucurus White-tailed kite G5
S3 -/- -
Empidonax traillii extimus Southwestern
willow flycatcher
G5T1T2
S1 E/E -
Gymnogyps californianus California
condor
G1
S1 E/E -
Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
%HOGLQJ¶V
savannah
sparrow
G5T3
S3 -/E -
Polioptila californica
californica
Coastal
California
gnatcatcher
G3T2
S2 T/- SC
Riparia riparia Bank swallow G5
S2S3 -/T -
Sternula antillarum browni California least
tern G4T2T3Q E/E -
Vireo bellii pusillus Least Bell's
vireo
G5T2
S2 E/E -
Mammals
Antrozous pallidus Pallid bat G5
S3 -/- SC
Chaetodipus californicus
femoralis
Dulzura pocket
mouse
G5T3
S2 -/- SC
Neotoma lepida intermedia San Diego
desert woodrat
G5T3
S3 -/- SC
Taxidea taxus American
badger
G5
S4 -/- SC
Source:California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) search of Rarefind3 (April 23, 2012; expires September 30, 2012).

G-Rank = Global Rank; S-Rank = State Rank
Fed. List/Cal. List: E = Endangered; T = Threatened; C = Candidate &')*
6& &DOLIRUQLD6SHFLHVRI6SHFLDO&RQFHUQ
µ--µ QRVWDWXV
LeisyDec000495
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
625 187
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
13 d) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project would not involve any construction activities or physical development that would interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish, wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, no impact would occur with respect to local wildlife movement.
e) The City of Santa Paula has an established Tree Preservation Ordinance, which regulates the preservation, cutting and removal of trees on public property. The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project would not involve any construction activities or physical development that would conflict with any local policies or ordinances SURWHFWLQJELRORJLFDOUHVRXUFHVLQFOXGLQJWKH&LW\·V7UHH3UHVHUYDtion Ordinance (Santa Paula Municipal Code, Chapter 156, Section 156.580). Therefore, no impacts would occur in this regard.
f) The project site is not located within an area that is subject to an adopted conservation plan.

No impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES --
Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource as defined in §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
a) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. The project would not involve any construction activities or physical development that would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Additionally, the project site is not within thH&LW\·V+LVWRULF'LVWULFW]RQHVDVLGHQWLILHGE\WKH&LW\RI6DQWD3DXOD=RQLQJ0DS The proposed project would have no impact in this regard.

LeisyDec000496
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
626 188
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
14 b-d) Construction activities that involve substantial ground disturbance would be required to comply with the State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, which regulate disturbance and disposition of cultural resources and human remains. However, the project would not involve any construction activities, physical development or substantial ground disturbance. The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As such, no impact would occur with respect to archaeological resources, paleontological resources, geologic features or human remains.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ±
Would the Project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known
fault?
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable as a result of the Project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code,
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
LeisyDec000497
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
627 189
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
15 a.i and ii) Similar to all of Southern California, active and/or potentially active faults in the region could generate strong groundshaking on the project site. The active Oak Ridge Fault is located approximately ½ mile southeast of the project site. This fault could produce strong groundshaking onsite, with a Maximum Magnitude Earthquake of 6.9 on the Richter Scale, according to Safety Element of the City of Santa Paula General Plan. An earthquake of this magnitude could produce seismic shaking effects of X-XI MMI (Modified Mercalli Intensity), which are characterized by the following effects (Bolt, 1993):

X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Water splashed, slopped over banks.

XI. Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissures in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.

Other, more distant faults capable of producing similar shaking include the San Andreas, San Cayetano, Ventura, and Santa Susana Faults (City of Santa Paula Safety Element, 1998). The California Geological Survey estimates there is a 10% probability of this area experiencing an earthquake with a peak ground acceleration of 0.8g (0.8 times the force of gravity) in the next fifty years (California Geological Survey, April 2012). This level of acceleration would be consistent with producing shaking of X or XI MMI. However, the project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zone (California Department of Conservation Santa Paula Quadrangle, May 1, 1998), so the probability of seismic surface rupture is considered low.

Additionally, the project would not involve physical development or any construction activity.

The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a vehicle storage yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As such, no impact related to seismically-induced surface rupture or ground shaking would occur. . a.iii) The project site is located on a relatively flat site in an area of potentially high liquefaction hazard (City of Santa Paula General Plan Safety Element, 1998). The General Plan Safety Element states that, to more accurately determine the potential for liquefaction at specific sites within these areas, site specific geologic studies are required. However, the project would not involve construction activities or physical development that would expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard. a.iv, c, d) Landslide impacts would not occur as no hillsides are located near the project site.

Other than the already-identified potential for seismically-induced liquefaction, the project site is not located on expansive soils or a geologic unit or soil that is or would become unstable as a result of the project, potentially resulting in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse (City of Santa Paula General Plan Safety Element, 1998). Furthermore, the project would not involve construction activities or physical development that would have the potential to expose people or structures to these hazards. The project would therefore have a less than significant impact related to these hazards. b) Soil erosion is the removal of soil by water, wind, and gravity. The proposed project would not involve construction of physical development that would involve soil-disturbing activities, LeisyDec000498
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
628 190
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
16 which could create soil erosion or the loss of top soils. No impact would result. e) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As previously mentioned, the City of Santa Paula currently has its vehicle fleet maintenance operations on the property and Crown Disposal would share these facilities with the City. Use of the property would be limited to storage and maintenance of vehicles. The project would generate wastewater, but the site is already connected to WKH&LW\·VVHZHUDQGZDVWHZDWHUGLVSRVDO system and would not require the use of septic tanks. Therefore, no impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -
Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
The accumulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere naturally regulates the earth·VWHPSHUDWXUH. However, it is believed that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) are the GHGs that are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are largely by-products of fossil fuel combustion, whereas CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills.

Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21st century than were observed during the 20th century. According to the Air Resources Board (ARB), some of the potential impacts in California of global warming may include loss of snow pack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, more high ozone days, more large forest fires, and more drought years (ARB, October 2007). While these potential impacts identify the possible effects of climate change at a global and potentially statewide level, in general, scientific modeling tools are currently unable to predict what impacts would occur locally.

In response to an increase in man-made GHG concentrations over the past 150 years, California KDVLPSOHPHQWHG$%WKH´&DOLIRUQLD*OREDO:DUPLQJ6ROXWLRQV$FWRIµ$% requires achievement by 2020 of a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to 1990 emissions LeisyDec000499
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
629 191
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
17 (essentially a 25% reduction below 2005 emission levels) and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emissions reductions. Based upon the California Air Resources Board (ARB) California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000-2008 (http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm), California produced 478 MMT CO2E in 2008.

GHG emissions contributing to climate change have only recently been addressed in CEQA documents. Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. In December 2009, the California Resources Agency adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHG and climate change impacts.
a, b)
Although the VCAPCD has not adopted significance thresholds for GHGs, for this analysis, the proposed project is evaluated based on a project-based threshold of 1,100 metric tons (MT) of CO2E per year, which has been adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and is listed as one threshold the VCAPCD is considering for adoption.

The proposed project does not involve construction of any buildings or other facilities that would use water or energy or generate wastewater or solid waste. In addition, the vehicle storage and maintenance activities that would occur onsite are currently being conducted elsewhere in the City or region; therefore, emissions associated with such activities would not be new. Therefore calculation of project-related emissions was restricted to that associated with project-generated vehicle trips.

Emissions of CO2 and CH4 from transportation sources for the proposed project were quantified using the CalEEMod computer model. Because CalEEMod does not calculate N2O emissions from mobile sources, N2O emissions were quantified using the California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol (January 2009) direct emissions factors for mobile combustion (see Appendix A for calculations). The estimate of total daily trips associated with employee vehicle trips was based on a conservative estimate of four vehicle trips per employee per day (round trip vehicle trips to and from work, as well as round trip vehicle trips to and from lunch). The estimate of total daily trips associated with the scheduled routes was based on a conservative estimate of two vehicle trips per stored vehicle per day (one to the project site and one trip away from the project site). Project-generated vehicle trips were calculated and extrapolated to derive total annual mileage in CalEEMod. Emission rates for N2O emissions were based on the vehicle mix output generated by CalEEMod and the emission factors found in the California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol. Based on the CalEEMod model estimate, potential development would generate approximately 131,631 annual VMT.

Table 3 shows the estimated mobile emissions of GHGs for the project based on the estimated annual VMT. As noted above, the CalEEMod model does not calculate N2O emissions related to mobile sources. As such, N22HPLVVLRQVZHUHFDOFXODWHGEDVHGRQWKHSURMHFW·V907XVLQJ calculation methods provided by the California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol (January 2009). As shown in Table 3 below, the project would result in approximately

61.14 metric tons of CO2E units associated with mobile emissions.

LeisyDec000500
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
630 192
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
18 Table 3
Estimated Annual Mobile Emissions of Greenhouse Gases
Emission Source Annual Emissions
(Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2E)
Mobile Emissions (CO2 & CH4) 1 58.14 metric tons
Mobile Emissions (N2O) 2 3 metric tons
Total 61.14 metric tons
1 See Appendix A for calculations in CalEEMod Model output. 2 See Appendix A for calculations according to California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol, Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1,January 2009, page 30-35.

As shown in Table 3, the proposed project would generate an estimated 61.14 metric tons of CO2E per year. Because the total amount of GHG emissions would be lower than the threshold of 1,100 metric tons CO2E per year, impacts associated with GHG emissions would be less than significant.
&DO(3$·V&OLPDWH$FWLRQ7HDP
&$7
SXEOLVKHGWKH2006 CAT Report which includes GHG
emissions reduction strategies intended for projects emitting less than 10,000 tons CO2E/year.

In addition, the California Attorney *HQHUDO·V2IILFHKDVGHYHORSHG*OREDO:DUPLQJ0HDVXUHV


DQG235·V&(4$DQG&OLPDWH&KDQJH
&DOLIRUQLD$LU3ROOXWLRQ&RQWURO2IILFHrs
Association, 2008) document includes greenhouse gas reduction measures intended to reduce GHG emissions in order to achieve statewide emissions reduction goals.

All of these measures aim to curb the GHG emissions through suggestions pertaining to land use, transportation, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. Several of these actions are already required by California regulations, such as:

AB 1493 (Pavley) requires the state to develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of climate change emissions emitted by passenger vehicles and light duty trucks.

In 2004, ARB adopted a measure to limit diesel-fueled commercial motor vehicle idling.

The Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, (AB 939, Sher, Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989) established a 50% waste diversion mandate for California.

Public Resources Code 25402 authorizes the CEC to adopt and periodically update its building energy efficiency standards (that apply to newly constructed buildings and additions to and alterations to existing buildings).
&DOLIRUQLD·V5HQHZDEOH3RUWIROLR6WDQGDUG
536
HVWDEOLVKHGLQUHTXLUHVWKDWDOO
load serving entities achieve a goal of 33 percent of retail electricity sales from renewable energy sources by 2020, within certain cost constraints.

Green Building Executive Order, S-20-04 (CA 2004), sets a goal of reducing energy use in public and private buildings by 20 percent by the year 2015, as compared with 2003 levels.

The proposed project would not involve new development and would comply with applicable regulatory requirements; therefore, the project ZRXOGQRWFRQIOLFWZLWKWKH6WDWH·VGHG-related legislation and would not hinder the ability to meet GHG reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant.

LeisyDec000501
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
631 193
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
19 For the reasons discussed above, project impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS - Would the Project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an
existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within 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 result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the Project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the Project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the Project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
LeisyDec000502
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
632 194
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
20 a, b) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As previously mentioned, the City of Santa Paula currently has its vehicle fleet maintenance operations on the property and Crown Disposal would share these facilities with the City.

Operation of the proposed project would not involve the use or transport of hazardous materials that could create the potential for hazardous material release. Furthermore, Rincon Consultants, Inc. conducted a site visit on April 27, 2012 and found no evidence of hazardous material use or storage. Therefore, no impacts would occur with respect to these issues. c) The project site is not within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school. No impact would occur.
d) The following databases were checked on April 27, 2012 for known hazardous materials contamination at the project site:

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) database;
Environmental Protection Agency EnviroMapper database;
California State Water Quality Control Board GeoTracker database; and California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor database The project site does not appear on any of the above lists. Therefore, no impact would occur. e, f) The project site is located about 2.3 miles west of Santa Paula Airport. The project site is not located within the KI Airport Safety Zone (Airport Influence/Traffic Pattern Zone) of the Santa Paula Airport Land Use Plan. This corresponds to the area labeled KI Airport-Influenced Area Overlay RQWKH&LW\·V=RQLQJ0DS. Furthermore, the proposed project would not involve the construction of buildings or physical development, which would interfere with air traffic in this area. Therefore, no impacts related to airport safety would occur. g) The proposed project would generate employee vehicle trips to the project site. As described in Section XVI, Transportation/ Traffic, the project would generate approximately 76 vehicle trips per day, which would not cause congestion on local roadways that would interfere with established evacuation procedures. Therefore, project impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.
h) As shown on Figure S-5 of the Santa Paula General Plan Safety Element (1998), the project is within a low fire hazard area, and the project site is surrounded by urban and agricultural uses, not wildlands. The project would have no impact from exposure to wildland fires.

LeisyDec000503
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
633 195
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
21 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
± Would the Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering or the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation onor off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including the
alteration of the course of a stream or
river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
LeisyDec000504
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
634 196
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
22 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
± Would the Project:
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
a, c-f) The project site is located in close proximity to an agricultural drainage channel. Water carried in this channel flows to the southeast along Todd Lane until it empties into the Santa Clara River, which is located about 1,250 feet (about ¼ mile) away. The proposed project could have impacts on water quality and drainage during operation. Hydrological impacts from operation of the project could result if the project led to increased runoff resulting from an increase in impervious surfaces on-site. However, as on-site hydrological conditions would not be altered as a result of the proposed project, no change in the existing drainage pattern or surface runoff as a result of the project would occur. Therefore, the project would have no impact with respect to these issues.
b) The proposed project would involve the sale of the City owned property to Crown Disposal, for its initial use as a collection vehicle yard and vehicle maintenance facility. As previously mentioned, the City of Santa Paula currently has its vehicle fleet maintenance operations on the property and Crown Disposal would share these facilities with the City. The proposed project would EHFRQQHFWHGWRWKH&LW\RI6DQWD3DXOD·VZDWHUVXSSOy system, and would consume potable water. The incremental increase in water demand associated with the proposed project could be accommodated by WKH&LW\·V\HDUO\DOORFDWLRQ. Additionally, the project would not interfere with groundwater recharge because the project would not involve construction activities that would alter existing drainage patterns or result in an increase of impervious surfaces. Therefore, WKHSURMHFW·V potential to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge would be less than significant. g-h) The project site is located approximately 1,250 feet (about ¼ mile) from the Santa Clara River. Per FEMA flood zone maps (#06111C0779E), the site is located in Zone X. Part of the site is located in Zone X, ´2WKHU$UHDVµZKLFKDUHoutside both the 100-year flood zone (the area with a 1% chance per year of flooding) and the 500-year flood zone (the area with a 0.2% chance per year of flooding). However, the western end of the project site is located in Zone X, ´2WKHU )ORRG$UHDVµ7KHVHDUHDVDUHHLWKHUwithin the 500-year flood zone; within areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depths of one foot or with drainage areas less than one square mile; or within areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance flood. Development in these areas may be subject to shallow flooding during a 500-year storm. However, the proposed project would not involve construction activity or physical development that would tend to impede LeisyDec000505
Ventura Superior Court Accepted throu
gh eDeliver
y submitted 10-22-2021 at 02:40:21 PM
635 197
Crown Disposal Vehicle Storage and Maintenance Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Santa Paula
23 flood flows or expose people to significant flood-related safety impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
i) According to the Safety Element of the Santa Paula General Plan (City of Santa Paula, )HEUXDU\


´$WOHDVWIRXUGDPVQRUWKHDVWRIWKH6DQWD3DXODDUHDKDYHWKHhypothetical potential to result in dam inundation to the City or surrounding environs: Lake Pyramid Dam, Lake Castaic Dam, Bouquet Canyon Dam, and SDQWD)HOLFLD'DP /DNH3LUX
µWhile potential
failure of any of these dams could cause catastrophic damage in parts of Santa Paula near the Santa Clara River, including the project site, the Safety Element concluded that this possibility is remote, and that the dams in question have been engineered to withstand reasonably expected seismic shaking, which would be the most likely cause of such failure. Furthermore, the project site is within the City of Santa Paula and is designated and zoned for Institutional/Civic uses, which would be consistent with the existing and proposed vehicle storage and maintenance operations. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. j) A tsunami is a tidal wave produced by off-shore seismic activity; seiches are seismicallyinduced waves that occur in large bodies of water, such as lakes. According to the California Department of Conservation, the project site is not located within a tsunami hazard zone (2012).